# Why is diesel singled out



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

so all cars with internal combustion release harmful emissions into the atmosphere. gasoline is clean in most respects now a days but we do all to reduce its CO2. As we all know diesel has a major NOX contributor. both cars in 2015 have emissions systems to scrub away as much harmfull elements as possible. i like this since it keeps our air cleaner then open headers. 

My complaint is why do we the people, owning diesels allow our goverment to single us out? when a gas car has a bad catalytic converter a CEL comes on but no harm or penalty to the driver. a gas driver can drive this pouting 2015 Gasser until the wheel falls off. when our new modern diesels ( CTD, pickups/big rigs too) have a emissions malfunction the goverment insisted on us being limited to a max of 45mph for x amount of miles; at this point then continues to basically slow you to a crawl and that's it. at this point your only option is the dealer. 

why have we the people, owning diesels let this hypocrisy go on? im for making smart emissions systems, but all or nothing. if a Gasser has a malfunctioning emissions system they should suffer the same consequences as us diesel owners. it doesn't seem smart to limit a cars capacity due to a emissions malfunction. hope your near a town with a chevy dealer when this happens or your sold in the middle on no where.

what do you all here think? are we being singled out as "polluters" and thus must suffer huge consequences of emissions CEL or do i have a point


----------



## Jim Frye (Mar 16, 2011)

"Citizens United" Big Oil money tells the government what they want and you (and I) get what they want. You have no say in what our government does anymore. Get used to it. 

"Save your strength for things that you can change
Forgive the ones you can't
You gotta let 'em go" Zac Brown


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

where was the outrage in 2004 when this was done to big rigs?

eggsactly


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Agreed boraz. either have them all the same or none. its not fair the epa gets to nit pick as we have allowed it to. gas should be under the same scrutiny as diesel.



> "Citizens United" Big Oil money tells the government what they want and you (and I) get what they want. You have no say in what our government does anymore. Get used to it.


if we the people and i mean all this great nations citizens and patriots took to our elected now non representing representatives and gave them a piece of our mind then the peoples will would be enforced. unfortunatly we as a people have become complacent and sole divided over the dumbest things.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

It's worse that you think. Gas SUVs and other light duty trucks are allowed significantly higher emissions limits and their safety standards are lower than those of cars. Also, in most states with emissions inspections, a CEL will automatically fail the vehicle - gas or diesel. Even if the CEL is related to the ABS or other safety system.

If you want change the only way to do so is to literally vote out the bums and vote in a different set and hope to heaven and **** that you don't get Fooled Again.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

i have heard that before. that a manufacturers will allow the big $ making suv and pick ups less efficient and more powerful WHILE THEY USE THE LITTLE CARS SUCH AS THE CRUZE AND SPARK TO GET FLEET EMISSIONS IN CHECK


----------



## CruzeDan (May 17, 2015)

Here in NJ once May hits vehicles older than OBDII won't even have to go through emission testing.


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

I hear your concern, VW did more to perhaps give Diesel a bad reputation recently than anything else. I think when GM comes out with 2nd generation diesel Cruze they need to advertise it and how clean it is. Should be doing it for the Colorado and I don't see it. I personally have more important issues to worry about. Just drive your car and enjoy it.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

well this is way before th Vw scandal. the moment all these emissions got stuck onto diesels, the diesel owners should have acted. why do we get more cost, more forced complexity, more cost of ownership, more head aches. why do gasoline owners get a pass


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> well this is way before th Vw scandal. the moment all these emissions got stuck onto diesels, the diesel owners should have acted. why do we get more cost, more forced complexity, more cost of ownership, more head aches. why do gasoline owners get a pass


If it concerns you so much, buy a gas car. There are a lot of things in life that may not be 100% fair. You knew all of this before you bought the CTD, why complain now? I was well informed by being on the forum prior to buying a CTD so I am not bitching about what could happen. Seems like not a good use of my time, and having said that, shared my view. Best of luck.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

i knew these issues before buying but im 100% trouble free since 0 miles to today, and i drive 80% city. its not about the Ctd issues you misunderstood me. im curious why we allowed elected legislators to allow the epa to place such restrictions on a diesel but not gas. its not fair that we allow one fuel type superb leniency and condemn the other.


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> i knew these issues before buying but im 100% trouble free since 0 miles to today, and i drive 80% city. its not about the Ctd issues you misunderstood me. im curious why we allowed elected legislators to allow the epa to place such restrictions on a diesel but not gas. its not fair that we allow one fuel type superb leniency and condemn the other.


Legislators don't just vote one issue so it's not as simple as you are implying. I have had zero issues as well. Not that many years ago diesel trucks and cars were awful with pollution so they have worked on that issue on both sides of the aisle. I like clean air to breathe so this is a part of the price to be paid. I think we are going to continue to do things to have clean air. Gas cars have emissions issues as well. I am done commenting on this issue. It's a waste of time to think the issue is as simple as people we elect on one issue. There are some issues with some diesel cars but honestly GM has done a decent job on the CTD. I sure don't want to go back to diesel trucks and cars spewing all the pollution they use too. To me if you can't fix the emission issues if they ever happen maybe it would be better to just ride a bike, no pollution there and no expensive issues there. Your in Florida so maybe a bike would be better solution? Obviously you probably don't want to ride a bike.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

I can say I am not a fan of the potential, but I bought the car knowing it, and fortunately never had an issue that caused the "limited speed" message to be displayed in 163K miles. 

I do think it's strange that it's mandatory on diesels which only are a small fraction of the total cars out there.


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

pandrad61 said:


> well this is way before th Vw scandal. the moment all these emissions got stuck onto diesels, the diesel owners should have acted. why do we get more cost, more forced complexity, more cost of ownership, more head aches. why do gasoline owners get a pass


We don't. What we do have however is an engine that doesn't emit nearly as much NOx to start with. The flip side is that gasoline engines emit far more carbon based emissions without special work. This was dealt with in the 70s via catalytic converters, which greatly increased the complexity of gasoline emissions systems and had their own technical and non-technical issues (remember grass fires).


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

I wonder if the speed limitation on the CTD with an emissions problem is more to protect the engine from excessive back pressure in the DEF system. Internal combustion engines are designed for a specific range of exhaust back pressure - what happens to this pressure when the DEF system is clogged?


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

There are pluses and minuses to everything. I don't have a spare tire either, if I have a flat and the inflate thing in trunk does not fix it I have a problem to deal with. My main issue is complaining and or talking about it doesn't change anything in my view. Electing a different person probably won't change it. If something happens we all just have to make the best decisions at the time. It's kinda like debating day light savings time, yes we can have a debate but if it doesn't change anything it's just all for not in my view. Unless you do a delete on emissions which is illegal don't see much there is to do about it.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

IndyDiesel said:


> Legislators don't just vote one issue so it's not as simple as you are implying. I have had zero issues as well. Not that many years ago diesel trucks and cars were awful with pollution so they have worked on that issue on both sides of the aisle. I like clean air to breathe so this is a part of the price to be paid. I think we are going to continue to do things to have clean air. Gas cars have emissions issues as well. I am done commenting on this issue. It's a waste of time to think the issue is as simple as people we elect on one issue. There are some issues with some diesel cars but honestly GM has done a decent job on the CTD. I sure don't want to go back to diesel trucks and cars spewing all the pollution they use too. To me if you can't fix the emission issues if they ever happen maybe it would be better to just ride a bike, no pollution there and no expensive issues there. Your in Florida so maybe a bike would be better solution? Obviously you probably don't want to ride a bike.


I like clean air so that's why i do own a motorcycle, to keep my fuel consumption low and impact as well. again your missing my point. i know gas have emissions too, ive had to replace cats on a few of my vehicles. MY POINT IS WHY DO WE GET THE 45MPH RESTRICTIONS and GAS DON'T. doesn't that seem unfair? my cruze gets a emissions CEL im sol untill the dealer, my jeep gets a emissions CEL and i can keep going as long as the jeep runs.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

obermd said:


> I wonder if the speed limitation on the CTD with an emissions problem is more to protect the engine from excessive back pressure in the DEF system. Internal combustion engines are designed for a specific range of exhaust back pressure - what happens to this pressure when the DEF system is clogged?


i would love to know if this is the case, then at lease i know its not big brother mucking it up but to protect the environment and our engine


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> I like clean air so that's why i do own a motorcycle, to keep my fuel consumption low and impact as well. again your missing my point. i know gas have emissions too, ive had to replace cats on a few of my vehicles. MY POINT IS WHY DO WE GET THE 45MPH RESTRICTIONS and GAS DON'T. doesn't that seem unfair? my cruze gets a emissions CEL im sol untill the dealer, my jeep gets a emissions CEL and i can keep going as long as the jeep runs.


I get your point, and you do have one. I just don't get my underwear in a knot on what could happen and 99.99% of the time doesn't happen. I don't make the darn emissions stuff on gas or diesel, just a guy that loves a car that isn't perfect. Never owned a perfect car and you haven't either.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

obermd said:


> I wonder if the speed limitation on the CTD with an emissions problem is more to protect the engine from excessive back pressure in the DEF system. Internal combustion engines are designed for a specific range of exhaust back pressure - what happens to this pressure when the DEF system is clogged?


nope

its there to make you not ignore it


----------



## CruzeDan (May 17, 2015)

obermd said:


> I wonder if the speed limitation on the CTD with an emissions problem is more to protect the engine from excessive back pressure in the DEF system. Internal combustion engines are designed for a specific range of exhaust back pressure - what happens to this pressure when the DEF system is clogged?


You are confusing two different emission components. The speed limitations kick in when you are running out of diesel exhaust fluid, or there is a fault in the diesel exhaust fluid system (or the fluid itself is bad or not correct). DEF is sprayed into the SCR, a catalyst that cuts down on the NOx emissions, which are the main harmful pollutants emitted from diesels (next to particulate matter). The speed restrictions are for the sole purpose of making sure this system has fluid, and is functioning properly, since it would be easy for vehicle owners or truckers to just not bother filling the system with DEF, defeating this crucial emissions component. What can clog up is your Diesel Particulate Filter, DPF, which filters out particulate matter. This is what goes through a regeneration cycle to burn off the collected particulate matter. When this filter is in danger of clogging, you get the DIESEL PARTIC FILTER IS FULL CONTINUED DRIVING MANDATORY DIC message. If this message is ignored and the vehicle cannot complete a regen, you get a CEL along with a ENGINE POWER IS REDUCED message. This is "limp mode", which is activated in an attempt to prevent additional damage to the DPF (while you are hopefully in route to the dealer for a manual regen/filter cleaning).


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

CruzeDan, thank you for the explanation. It appears that while I tagged the wrong part of the system being protected that the car is indeed trying to protect itself.


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

boraz said:


> nope
> 
> its there to make you not ignore it


that's a typical response when you are pissed off on the side of the road, but in reality, ask yourself this question. why would mfgs want their engines to be less reliable and/or

leave you stranded? The reduced power mode does in fact need to operate properly to protect the engine from damage, that's why all the newer diesels have this technology.

a clogged dpf will result in increased backpressure, possibly causing soot to back up into the engine causing damage to the turbo, fuel injectors, egr etc. also if the engine has

an issue where it tries, but unsuccessfully regens, you get fuel in the crankcase and therefore stopping the oil from doing its job causing major damage. that's why there are so many sensors on both sides of the dpf filter, def fluid level and pressure sensors and

so on. there is a reason and its not just to aggravate people. imagine replacing an engine because you just kept driving, mfgs don't want huge warranty claims and you think people are pissed now?

they are just doing the best they can with the epa rules I would hope. it does seem like they are playing catch up and doing the r & d on our dime

which is extremely discouraging. I bet the military isn't using this crap seeing how reliability is mandatory for a vendor. government says do as I say not as I do lol


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

as to answer the op, gas burns cleaner so diesels aren't being singled out, they need a dpf and def to meet emission standards. give it time, I read an article in motor trend recently where the editor was claiming gasoline engines will be restricted further and having dpf filters themselves. time will tell. god help us lol


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

boraz said:


> where was the outrage in 2004 when this was done to big rigs?
> 
> eggsactly


You are on the wrong forum and probably not in a job dealing with big rigs. there are many class action lawsuits, chronic problems, caterpillar dropped its truck engine division 

in 2010, they still work on them, but they were once a top producer then just gave up due to epa regs. parts cost so much more, towing is many times more, then you have unhappy customers, you pay penalties for late deliveries, paying drivers to sit in a hotel or renting another truck, or lose customers all together. commercial diesels are 

affected so much more than us cruze drivers, this is nothing. go on the semi truck forums, people are at their wits end and I cant stress enough what a huge epidemic this is. In short, its the exact opposite of what you said. I'm in the trucking industry and own a ctd. our local freightliner dealer told me 90% of their work is emission related. for the record, 2007 was the dpf year


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

Black20cruze said:


> that's a typical response when you are pissed off on the side of the road, but in reality, ask yourself this question. why would mfgs want their engines to be less reliable and/or
> 
> leave you stranded? The reduced power mode does in fact need to operate properly to protect the engine from damage, that's why all the newer diesels have this technology.
> 
> ...


lol

then why does it show on the software as 'regulatory fault ignored...derate on' ???


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

Black20cruze said:


> You are on the wrong forum and probably not in a job dealing with big rigs. there are many class action lawsuits, chronic problems, caterpillar dropped its truck engine division
> 
> in 2010, they still work on them, but they were once a top producer then just gave up due to epa regs. parts cost so much more, towing is many times more, then you have unhappy customers, you pay penalties for late deliveries, paying drivers to sit in a hotel or renting another truck, or lose customers all together. commercial diesels are
> 
> affected so much more than us cruze drivers, this is nothing. go on the semi truck forums, people are at their wits end and I cant stress enough what a huge epidemic this is. In short, its the exact opposite of what you said. I'm in the trucking industry and own a ctd. our local freightliner dealer told me 90% of their work is emission related. for the record, 2007 was the dpf year


driven and fixed big rigs since 1999.

thanks.


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

Class action lawsuits for big rigs IS outrage, compared to a handful of complainers on a Cruze forum.


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

Regulatory has to mean government? Lol. Every owners manual for a diesel with a dpf states damage will occur.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

i know 80% of CTd owners wont have an issue, i certainly have not. am i furious of our restrictions not really. whats some inconvenience for the air we breath. would i rather the vehicle not have the restriction yes; but since mathematically you wont get to that point its not a huge issues. im glad to see its a mixed bag here.hopefully in the next 10-20 years major manufacturing will sort all this stuff out to be as easy as gassers. for now im happy with my great CTD


----------



## GlennGlenn (Nov 27, 2015)

Jim Frye said:


> "Citizens United" Big Oil money tells the government what they want and you (and I) get what they want. You have no say in what our government does anymore. Get used to it.
> 
> "Save your strength for things that you can change
> Forgive the ones you can't
> You gotta let 'em go" Zac Brown



Watched the movie V again on Netflix.....you do have a great point^^^^^



obermd said:


> It's worse that you think. Gas SUVs and other light duty trucks are allowed significantly higher emissions limits and their safety standards are lower than those of cars. Also, in most states with emissions inspections, a CEL will automatically fail the vehicle - gas or diesel. Even if the CEL is related to the ABS or other safety system.
> 
> If you want change the only way to do so is to literally vote out the bums and vote in a different set and hope to heaven and **** that you don't get Fooled Again.


i was thinking more Eminence Front or Styx " Borrowed Time." Or 
"Suite Madam Blue"


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

pandrad61 said:


> I like clean air so that's why i do own a motorcycle, to keep my fuel consumption low and impact as well. again your missing my point. i know gas have emissions too, ive had to replace cats on a few of my vehicles. MY POINT IS WHY DO WE GET THE 45MPH RESTRICTIONS and GAS DON'T.


The type of emissions a diesel produces is far worse than that of a gas engine. Even with bad emissions system/cat on a gas engine it would not come close to the level of pollution a diesel makes. Also These diesel regulations was more about cleaning up the entire heavy truck segment more than consumer cars. *FACT: Your so called clean diesel still puts out more CO2 than the 1.4T gas model cruze. 

*BTW Motor Cycles may save your money MPG wise, they are not good for the environment at all. If everyone ditched cars for bikes we would have a pollution nightmare(see China). Think of it this way, group of 15 bikes getting 45mpg each, reality is they could be driving a school bus and be more efficient. With 15 engines running at 45mpg that would be like 3mpg based on your overall hourly fuel burn rate. Even if you look on a smaller scale 2 bikes getting 45mpg, is equal to them driving a truck getting 22.5MPG!!!!


----------



## Kexlox (Nov 4, 2014)

spacedout said:


> *FACT: Your so called clean diesel still puts out more CO2 than the 1.4T gas model cruze.
> *


That's a bold claim. 

According to the EPA, at estimated MPG, it's very close. That's at 55% stop and go driving. At 15%, which is more like what I drive, the 1.4T produces 252 grams CO2/mile, and the 2.0TD produces 244.


----------



## spacedout (Dec 7, 2010)

Kexlox said:


> That's a bold claim.
> 
> According to the EPA, at estimated MPG, it's very close. That's at 55% stop and go driving. At 15%, which is more like what I drive, the 1.4T produces 252 grams CO2/mile, and the 2.0TD produces 244.


You can try to skew the facts but your 15% city is far from average.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

Black20cruze said:


> Regulatory has to mean government? Lol. Every owners manual for a diesel with a dpf states damage will occur.





> This diagnostic refers to Regulatory Fault Ignored - Final Action (Speed Limit).This is a regulatory mandated code which informs the user that a fault code has been active for longerthan a government specified time interval and that no corrective action has taken place to address thecode. Fault codes which activate SPN 5246 FMI 0 are listed below. Follow the appropriate procedureto correct these faults.


yep, gubment


----------



## obermd (Mar 3, 2012)

Kexlox said:


> That's a bold claim.
> 
> According to the EPA, at estimated MPG, it's very close. That's at 55% stop and go driving. At 15%, which is more like what I drive, the 1.4T produces 252 grams CO2/mile, and the 2.0TD produces 244.


And my ECO MT, from the same web-site using 15% puts out 227 grams of CO2/mile. The CTD and ECO trims use some of the same fuel efficiency design features so they are better trims for comparison. By the way, the ECO AT puts out 246 grams of CO2/mile. Oh, and the ECO MT consumes 0.7 barrels of oil less per year.

If you boost the city usage to 80% the CTD is worse across the board, which I think most of us will agree is not the CTD's strong suit. Point is, you need to look at each car individually and at how the vehicle is being used.


----------



## Kexlox (Nov 4, 2014)

spacedout said:


> You can try to skew the facts but your 15% city is far from average.


It's probably not that far from average for people that buy diesel passenger cars, but in either case, my point was that the difference is 8-11 grams per mile, or approximately 4%. Driving style will have a much larger impact on CO2 emissions than engine type, for the Cruze.

(Just for giggles, I set my city driving to 100%, still less than 10% difference in CO2 emissions, at 34 g/m.)


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Well yes, public transportation and car pooling would be best. here in America it wont happen, we love our v8 suvs too much to carry one person to the store. if all the people driving the huge f350-escalades- big sedans would switch to car pooling or reasonable vehicles it would be best, but the next best thing is motorcycles. a motorcycle will pollute less per distance then a huge suv will. i work 10 miles from home, why do i need my 4 door cruze when my motorcycle will pollute less and use less natural resources.

i think the point is we as a county should help reduce pollutants across the board, a motorcycle may not be as clean but it uses less natural resources


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> Well yes, public transportation and car pooling would be best. here in America it wont happen, we love our v8 suvs too much to carry one person to the store. if all the people driving the huge f350-escalades- big sedans would switch to car pooling or reasonable vehicles it would be best, but the next best thing is motorcycles. a motorcycle will pollute less per distance then a huge suv will. i work 10 miles from home, why do i need my 4 door cruze when my motorcycle will pollute less and use less natural resources.
> 
> i think the point is we as a county should help reduce pollutants across the board, a motorcycle may not be as clean but it uses less natural resources


I think the motorcycle idea is fine for those that want to ride, I for one about smoked a motorcycle in my truck several years ago, I just took my eye off the road for a couple seconds and slammed on my brakes and went sliding by the motorcycle at 45miles per hour, had I hit him he would be dead. I feel much safer personally in a car or truck. For those that like to ride glad you do.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

even if you don't want to ride on 2 wheels, we as Americans can down size.i see it all day. lady driving a 4x4 suburban, 1 kid, and lives all pavement. do you really need a huge suv or could a smaller suv or sedan get the job done. ill see guys in a f350 diesel 4x4- never tows, never hauls a bed load... why did you need a massive resource waster such as that? a long bed f150 or a ranger would have served the same, while wasting less fuel and pollutants.


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

I get what you're upset about, but I guess understanding it a bit makes it more palatable for me.

In reality, from what I understand, there are three separate emissions related "limp" mode causes.




DEF running out. This one I don't even consider an issue. It gives you so much warning that if you truly take it to the point of limp mode, it's just pure negligence. It gives you over 1,000 miles of warning. There's nowhere in North American civilization you can't get at least little DEF in 1,000 miles. Also, unlike gasoline catalytic converters, it would be far to easy to just ignore it if there were no consequences for doing so effectively making the system pointless. With gasoline cars, a system that doesn't work is easy to ignore (unless you live in a emissions testing area), but it I more rare - a result of a system failure rather than just not filling the tank. My bet is if there were no consequences for running out of DEF, less than half of people would bother to refill it if they even understood what it does.
DEF quality bad. This one is a bit more complex. The general purpose is to prevent folks from just putting something like water in the DEF tanks. However, the current system is an indirect way of measuring DEF quality (by measuring drop in NOx levels over the SCR), so it is not without fault. Yes, it could strand you, but a more reliable system with direct DEF quality sensors should help.
Plugged (or plugging) DPF. This one could strand you as well, but it is to protect the car, which ultimately is a good thing. It stinks, but is a reality of owning/driving a modern diesel and should be quite rare.


----------



## BU54 (Nov 24, 2014)

Guys you better get used to the government regulating and controlling everything we do. It's not going away...ever. Our forefathers knew this 250ish years ago then created the constitution. Now that's even become political toilet paper.


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> even if you don't want to ride on 2 wheels, we as Americans can down size.i see it all day. lady driving a 4x4 suburban, 1 kid, and lives all pavement. do you really need a huge suv or could a smaller suv or sedan get the job done. ill see guys in a f350 diesel 4x4- never tows, never hauls a bed load... why did you need a massive resource waster such as that? a long bed f150 or a ranger would have served the same, while wasting less fuel and pollutants.


What is it any of your business what someone else drives? We live in a free country and we all are free to make our own decisions. I respect your decisions, please respect others. Yikes it is very dangerous view in my opinion you have. I have various size vehicles for my own taste.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Here is the thing. i know where my rights end and start. i have no right on imposing others to drive a certain vehicle but im entitled to my opinion. could we all use less resources, absolutely, do we have to no.

if that lady wants to waste extra resources and cash on a vehicle she will never need or use its her right, may not be logical. seems to me you think i am trying to forcing others to do this, i would suggest it but i have no authority to impose it.

I bought my CTD to save my financial and world resources because my 95 5.2 jeep zj isent great on either, my motorcycle is great in city but i needed a small 4 door. thought about a big sedan but i dont need it. your welcome to guzzle gas or not but i try to save fuel when able.


----------



## IndyDiesel (May 24, 2015)

pandrad61 said:


> Here is the thing. i know where my rights end and start. i have no right on imposing others to drive a certain vehicle but im entitled to my opinion. could we all use less resources, absolutely, do we have to no.
> 
> if that lady wants to waste extra resources and cash on a vehicle she will never need or use its her right, may not be logical. seems to me you think i am trying to forcing others to do this, i would suggest it but i have no authority to impose it.
> 
> I bought my CTD to save my financial and world resources because my 95 5.2 jeep zj isent great on either, my motorcycle is great in city but i needed a small 4 door. thought about a big sedan but i dont need it. your welcome to guzzle gas or not but i try to save fuel when able.


I like to save fuel as well or I wouldn't own a CTD, I really don't care what anyone else drives, just not my business. If someone wants to drive a 100k Cadillac I don't care, not my place to worry what others drive or do. Not every one thinks like I do, that's ok too.


----------



## pandrad61 (Jul 8, 2015)

Agreed, now when they ask my opinion ill give it lol


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

boraz said:


> Black20cruze said:
> 
> 
> > Regulatory has to mean government? Lol. Every owners manual for a diesel with a dpf states damage will occur.
> ...


That's a reliable source "unknown" lol


----------



## Black20cruze (Mar 8, 2015)

Boraz, you picked the easy one of two points I challenged you on, it's simply irresponsible to say "nope" to the question of damage to engine if not de rated. People have been bypassing sensors since they were created. It's not a lawnmower seat, someone could destroy a motor based on your "nope". Prove me wrong


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

pandrad61 said:


> if that lady wants to waste extra resources and cash on a vehicle she will never need or use its her right, may not be logical.


I think in this example the lady is going with the big vehicle because they are inherently safer and "feel" safer due to the size. I think in many cases that's why they get the big SUV.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

Black20cruze said:


> That's a reliable source "unknown" lol


plug in your oem diagnostic software and youll find it


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

Black20cruze said:


> Boraz, you picked the easy one of two points I challenged you on, it's simply irresponsible to say "nope" to the question of damage to engine if not de rated. People have been bypassing sensors since they were created. It's not a lawnmower seat, someone could destroy a motor based on your "nope". Prove me wrong


I did

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/64-d...578-why-diesel-singled-out-2.html#post2386978

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/64-d...578-why-diesel-singled-out-3.html#post2389986

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/64-d...578-why-diesel-singled-out-4.html#post2390434

http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/64-d...578-why-diesel-singled-out-5.html#post2392314


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

PanJet said:


> but a more reliable system with direct DEF quality sensors should help.


ive yet to meet a field mechanic with a DEF tester other than a clear water bottle, some shops have em cuz they got them at the start, then realized they dont need em

ive yet to meet a mechanic that knows of an instance where DEF quality was the issue....the problem has always been elsewhere


----------



## PanJet (Jun 18, 2013)

boraz said:


> ive yet to meet a field mechanic with a DEF tester other than a clear water bottle, some shops have em cuz they got them at the start, then realized they dont need em
> 
> ive yet to meet a mechanic that knows of an instance where DEF quality was the issue....the problem has always been elsewhere


That's kind of the point. The current system assumes bad DEF if it doesn't see the appropriate NOx level drop over the SCR. Several people have been hobbled by "DEF Quality Poor" CELs when in fact there was nothing at all wrong with the DEF. Something else was wrong, but it sends folks on a wild goose chase. If there was a sensor in the tank that could directly detect that rather than assume it based on affect, that variable could be eliminated when something else is wrong.


----------



## diesel (Jun 8, 2013)

PanJet said:


> That's kind of the point. The current system assumes bad DEF if it doesn't see the appropriate NOx level drop over the SCR. Several people have been hobbled by "DEF Quality Poor" CELs when in fact there was nothing at all wrong with the DEF. Something else was wrong, but it sends folks on a wild goose chase. If there was a sensor in the tank that could directly detect that rather than assume it based on affect, that variable could be eliminated when something else is wrong.


Like this Fluid Property Sensors, Urea Quality Sensors—Measurement Specialties


----------

