# Gen2 diesel manual trans for Equinox



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Sure, youll just need to get a flywheel, clutch, clutch release parts, trans, trans mounts, axles, shift cables, shifter, console , ECM and BCM tunes, wiring harness mods. You can get the Equinox manual specific parts from Australia/NZ, Caribbean, Central America and Europe.
It's a pretty big undertaking. And AWD even more so.

I'd rather have a Terrain with a stick. I think the Equinox is hideous.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

The only SUVs anyone ever considers buying with a manual (and hence the reason they're the only ones really made with it) are...you guessed it...the Jeep Wrangler.


----------



## chevrasaki (May 1, 2015)

Don't forget about Subaru. I respect them for offering many manual transmission options to stubborn folk like myself.

EDIT: Nevermind, even they have discontinued many of the offerings I was remembering. Very sad indeed. Soon they will stop selling them altogether, and I will be reduced to purchasing used vehicles only.


----------



## froyofanatic (Jul 16, 2018)

Mazda CX-5s come in manuals. Some CX-7s too.


----------



## snowwy66 (Nov 5, 2017)

I"m an american man that only drives chev's.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

froyofanatic said:


> Mazda CX-5s come in manuals. Some CX-7s too.


Gone. No one bought it. And the 2 liter was slow AF 

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## resurgent cineribus (Feb 26, 2019)

Yes the manual options are dying off rapidly which is a big part of why I pulled the trigger on my 2018. The Cruze in its final year has no manual available which is a shame. 

Difficult for me to believe but the BMW 3 series doesn't even offer a manual anymore! I get that automatics keep getting better and faster but some people still really prefer the stick especially on a sports sedan like that. Unfortunately not enough of us to keep them available though. It looks like the 2019 Mazda 3 sedan is also automatic only.


----------



## MRO1791 (Sep 2, 2016)

armillner said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a 2018 Cruze "pepperdust" HB, diesel, 6-sp manual... and love it! Just wanted to see if anyone has the diesel Equinox and if anyone has thought of swapping the manual trans into the Equinox. I think it would be an awesome AWD with a 6-sp manual trans.
> 
> any thoughts?


This would be a very difficult and expensive project. I have a 2004 Land Rover Discovery and considered a similar swap, parts are not the difficulty, the ability to program the computers requires specific tools that are quite cost prohibitive. It will be even more so for a 2018 car. I too would love to see more manual transmission options. That said the DMF on the Diesel is a weak link, and I don't think there is a single mass conversion out there yet for this application... 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk


----------



## armillner (Sep 6, 2018)

I have not come across a Mazda CX-7 manual.... that sweet. Were they available in the US?


----------



## armillner (Sep 6, 2018)

was looking forward to the CX-5 diesel... but its auto only...


----------



## froyofanatic (Jul 16, 2018)

armillner said:


> I have not come across a Mazda CX-7 manual.... that sweet. Were they available in the US?


I know someone who has one, so they exist here in some limited capacity.


----------



## sailurman (Sep 29, 2016)

armillner said:


> was looking forward to the CX-5 diesel... but its auto only...


and this:

2018 CX-5 diesel at 28 mpg city and 31 mpg highway for the front-wheel drive version and 27/30 mpg with all-wheel drive.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

sailurman said:


> and this:
> 
> 2018 CX-5 diesel at 28 mpg city and 31 mpg highway for the front-wheel drive version and 27/30 mpg with all-wheel drive.


Weird...that seems super low for a diesel, even if it is a crossover. The Equinox is rated at 28/38, almost in-line with a gasoline powered regular sedan.

Wonder if they had to richen it up a lot for the US NOx emissions standards...


----------



## chevrasaki (May 1, 2015)

jblackburn said:


> Weird...that seems super low for a diesel, even if it is a crossover. The Equinox is rated at 28/38, almost in-line with a gasoline powered regular sedan.
> 
> Wonder if they had to richen it up a lot for the US NOx emissions standards...


It might just be Mazda being modest. They claim 27/34 and 30 combined for the Miata but I've averaged 33 MPG driving like a manic, it boggles my mind. It doesn't even have overdrive, 6th gear is a 1:1 ratio and the engine hates revving under 2,300RPM thanks to the high compression ratio. 

I'd bet any money that the people who buy those diesel CX5s will frequently see tank averages in the 40s.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

chevrasaki said:


> It might just be Mazda being modest. They claim 27/34 and 30 combined for the Miata but I've averaged 33 MPG driving like a manic, it boggles my mind. It doesn't even have overdrive, 6th gear is a 1:1 ratio and the engine hates revving under 2,300RPM thanks to the high compression ratio.
> 
> I'd bet any money that the people who buy those diesel CX5s will frequently see tank averages in the 40s.


Maybe on the highway, but tank averages? Nah. Then they'll release their Skyactiv-X gasoline engine and blow the numbers of their diesel out of the water. 

My sister's CX-5 (with the 2.5) seems to do right around 30 mpg highway (70-75) and low to mid 20's in the city - right on the EPA numbers. So about the same as our 2.5 Jetta, which isn't bad at all for a CUV.

I do hope their next generation of engines is more refined. They have done super nice things with the Mazda lineup, but the Skyactiv 2.5 is quite a noisy, thrashy motor - especially in the 3/6 with less insulation. The new Miata 2.0 with the 7500 RPM redline sounds like a hoot to drive.


----------



## froyofanatic (Jul 16, 2018)

A friend works for Mazda...I've actually seen a CX-5 diesel, 6 months or so ago. From my understanding they had the choice of crazy mileage numbers or the refinement levels people expect of a Mazda, and they chose the latter. I'm not sure how / what the difference is but even he doesn't know the timetable for the diesel release.

The Mazda 6 diesel never came out even though they ran it in the NASA 25 two or three years ago.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

Manual transmissions are nice when you are young. I'm getting older and regretting buying one. Sometimes it's nice to be in traffic and forget about all the clutch pedal use.


----------



## chevrasaki (May 1, 2015)

Barry Allen said:


> Manual transmissions are nice when you are young. I'm getting older and regretting buying one. Sometimes it's nice to be in traffic and forget about all the clutch pedal use.


Maybe one day I'll understand, but I've exclusively owned manual transmission vehicles only for the last 11 years, and I still don't want an automatic. Traffic doesn't bother me at all, hydraulic clutches are so light now and if you're not 2 feet away from the car in front, you can coast in one gear without a lot of shifting pretty easily. 

I just don't understand why this country has no interest in driving anymore. Less than 5% of new cars in the US are sold with a manual. In the rest of the world, it's 45%. There's some weird cultural thing here about avoiding manuals. And it's worse than that, most of my friends wouldn't even own a car if they didn't have to.


----------



## jblackburn (Apr 14, 2012)

chevrasaki said:


> Maybe one day I'll understand, but I've exclusively owned manual transmission vehicles only for the last 11 years, and I still don't want an automatic. Traffic doesn't bother me at all, hydraulic clutches are so light now and if you're not 2 feet away from the car in front, you can coast in one gear without a lot of shifting pretty easily.
> 
> I just don't understand why this country has no interest in driving anymore. Less than 5% of new cars in the US are sold with a manual. In the rest of the world, it's 45%. There's some weird cultural thing here about avoiding manuals. And it's worse than that, most of my friends wouldn't even own a car if they didn't have to.


In a daily driver, I don't want a manual anymore. It was such a pain in DC traffic, and it wasn't even that fun to drive in the Cruze. The reliability of the GM automatic vs the manual was another consideration for me - the M32 is a piece of junk and you can't convince me otherwise. Automatics used to be pretty slow and terribly programmed, with huge ratio spreads between the gears (it is painful for me to drive a 4-speed auto anymore), and that has also improved a LOT in the past 5-7 years.

In a sporty car, like your Miata, or something like a Camaro/Corvette/Moostang, I'd absolutely have the manual.

Maybe it's because I grew up driving cable-operated clutches (74 BMW, 85 Saab, 72 VW Bug, 88 Honda), but I freaking hate most hydraulic clutch setups - they feel lifeless. My mom's 07 Accord - and Honda is supposed to do manual transmissions "right" - is one of the numbest clutch pedals in anything I've ever driven.


----------



## chevrasaki (May 1, 2015)

jblackburn said:


> In a daily driver, I don't want a manual anymore. It was such a pain in DC traffic, and it wasn't even that fun to drive in the Cruze. The reliability of the GM automatic vs the manual was another consideration for me - the M32 is a piece of junk and you can't convince me otherwise. Automatics used to be pretty slow and terribly programmed, with huge ratio spreads between the gears (it is painful for me to drive a 4-speed auto anymore), and that has also improved a LOT in the past 5-7 years.
> 
> In a sporty car, like your Miata, or something like a Camaro/Corvette/Moostang, I'd absolutely have the manual.
> 
> Maybe it's because I grew up driving cable-operated clutches (74 BMW, 85 Saab, 72 VW Bug, 88 Honda), but I freaking hate most hydraulic clutch setups - they feel lifeless. My mom's 07 Accord - and Honda is supposed to do manual transmissions "right" - is one of the numbest clutch pedals in anything I've ever driven.


Yeah, you definitely won't hear me arguing over the M32. It's the reason I bought a whole other car, I'm sure my post history is littered with animosity toward the Cruze gearbox. The Cruze was a real bummer after the F23 5-speed in the Cobalt which had solid rod linkages connecting the shifter to the trans instead of cables and it felt amazing. I hated the cruze so much I bought a Miata. Then I promptly dumped the Cruze at a young 51K miles for the Tacoma. The clutch in all my vehicles have been kind of numb as you described. But I don't think you can have both: a mechanical clutch that provides tons of feel and feedback, and a clutch that's light and won't kill your leg in traffic. People claim the clutch is the reason they don't buy manuals, so automakers made it as un-intrusive as possible in an attempt to save it. But then the people actually interested in buying them complain it feels like nothing, it's a lose-lose. 

But even when I was shopping for a truck, I couldn't bring myself to buy an automatic. The Tacoma's transmission is the opposite of what you would call sporty. It's a long throw truck shifter with tall gearing. 1st gear gets me to 25mph, 2nd gets me to 60mph. But I, personally, still love driving it, and I can't explain why I love it so much, I just do. And there's no way you can convince me otherwise.


----------



## resurgent cineribus (Feb 26, 2019)

Even if the Cruze is dead I'm happy to see the Diesel getting put into the Equinox. Curious to see how many of those they sell with the Diesel, seems like the Equinox is selling pretty well and the EPA MPG is pretty impressive for a small SUV. 

If nothing else hopefully it will help with parts availability down the road to get some more of these engines out there. 

BTW: I've found my 6 speed to be pretty easy to drive but I can understand why some higher performance cars especially would be hard to live with especially once you get a bit older. This clutch, however, is pretty easy to work. My commute traffic isn't too horrific but I do get my share of bumper to bumper and even as a fairly inexperienced manual driver it hasn't been that bad. YMMV; I'm 33 so I'm not too old yet and maybe I'll think differently in 30 years but then in 30 years a manual will probably be very rare (they already are getting there)


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Given that GM has made it their business to apparently not tell a living soul about the Diesel Equinox or Terrain (or Cruze, for that matter), I'd guess about six people have bought them.


----------



## plano-doug (Jul 1, 2015)

MP81 said:


> Given that GM has made it their business to apparently not tell a living soul about the Diesel Equinox or Terrain (or Cruze, for that matter), I'd guess about six people have bought them.


When we bought our first Cruze a few years ago, I checked into the diesel. The premium was about 5,000 dollars. No doubt, the diesel gets better mileage. And, even with the higher price of diesel, it still gets better dollar mileage. But it's a small difference. It will take a long time to get the added cost back. 

For highway use, based on 38mpg at $2.63/gal of regular versus 48mpg at $3.02/gal of diesel, these numbers work out to be 6.9 cents/mile for regular versus 6.3 cents/mile for diesel. 

At 0.6 cents (ie, 0.006 dollars) per mile difference, it takes roughly 800,000 highway miles to get that $5k back 


Doug

.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

$5k more? I guess maybe to an LS, but the 1st gen CTD was a 2LT level, so a lot of that would have been the additional equipment (leather, 7" MyLink, etc).


----------



## sailurman (Sep 29, 2016)

MP81 said:


> $5k more? I guess maybe to an LS, but the 1st gen CTD was a 2LT level, so a lot of that would have been the additional equipment (leather, 7" MyLink, etc).


Can't remember the exact bump for the diesel, but I'm thinking it was closer to 3K over the highest LT model.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Based on MSRP in 2014, it looks like the CTD was $2,135 more than a 2LT.


----------



## plano-doug (Jul 1, 2015)

MP81 said:


> $5k more? I guess maybe to an LS, but the 1st gen CTD was a 2LT level, so a lot of that would have been the additional equipment (leather, 7" MyLink, etc).


I think you're right, packaging may have been a factor in the 5k difference. If it were available, a stripped down diesel may have been only 2-3k higher (than a stripped down gas burner).

I've seen this elsewhere. Years ago, my folks bought a motor home. The diesel option was a $20k adder, but it was packaged with a different frame, so there were other (hidden) differences than just the motor and fuel system.

That said, even if the price were only $2k more for the diesel Cruze instead of $5k, using the numbers from before, the payoff on the diesel would still be over 300k miles. I doubt most folks would ever see it.

I don't want to dis the diesel - as indicated, I too was interested in getting one - but using these numbers, it's hard to justify the added cost. 

Doug

.


----------



## boraz (Aug 29, 2013)

plano-doug said:


> I think you're right, packaging may have been a factor in the 5k difference. If it were available, a stripped down diesel may have been only 2-3k higher (than a stripped down gas burner).
> 
> I've seen this elsewhere. Years ago, my folks bought a motor home. The diesel option was a $20k adder, but it was packaged with a different frame, so there were other (hidden) differences than just the motor and fuel system.
> 
> ...


but its not $2k for the diesel

totally different suspension, transmission brakes as well

different driving experience, better door seals, thicker windshield etc

different car altogether


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Yep, from a straight-forward fuel economy standpoint, it definitely is not something that pays itself off that quickly (though it's known to absolutely clobber its EPA ratings, as well, so that should be factored in), but as @boraz said, you definitely get a lot more with the engine as well - the torque totally transforms the car.

And I totally forgot about the NVH package on that thing - it's a **** bank vault inside the car, as they used all the Verano silencing materials.


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

boraz said:


> but its not $2k for the diesel
> 
> totally different suspension, transmission brakes as well
> 
> ...


What?
It's not a "totally different" suspension, or brakes. 

Different driving experience, come on...It's a different driving experience between an LS and a Redline too...But the car cost more because it has a diesel engine and diesel emissions systems which are far more expensive than the standard gas engine. It's not a premium because they made all these changes to make the car 'better' or more premium. 

Wasn't aware of a windshield or door seal difference either...Reference?

It's not a different car altogether..It's just a Cruze with a diesel engine in it. And it's a ~$3000 option that will virtually never pay itself back in fuel savings, especially if you have out of warranty diesel specific failures.

EDIT: just noticed you guys appear to be tslkimg about Gen1s also. Which changes things a bit, but not much. 
It's still A LOT of money that you're highly unlikely to ever recoup, if that's what you're buying it for. If you're buying it because you're a diesel fan, and you want the extra power, and can deal with the extra maintenance, then go for it. But it's hard to make a case purely on dollars.


----------



## firehawk618 (Feb 24, 2013)

Ma v e n said:


> Sure, youll just need to get a flywheel, clutch, clutch release parts, trans, trans mounts, axles, shift cables, shifter, console , ECM and BCM tunes, wiring harness mods. You can get the Equinox manual specific parts from Australia/NZ, Caribbean, Central America and Europe.
> It's a pretty big undertaking. And AWD even more so.
> 
> I'd rather have a Terrain with a stick. I think the Equinox is hideous.


Sounds like a piece of cake! *roll eyes*


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Ma v e n said:


> What?
> It's not a "totally different" suspension, or brakes.
> 
> Different driving experience, come on...It's a different driving experience between an LS and a Redline too...But the car cost more because it has a diesel engine and diesel emissions systems which are far more expensive than the standard gas engine. It's not a premium because they made all these changes to make the car 'better' or more premium.
> ...


The Cruze Diesel gets all the suspension goodies - the rear Z-link, the lowered, stiffer, sport suspension. But those are available on *some* (but not all) other trim levels.

The driving experience is *completely* different. Having driven both a 1.4T Cruze and a 2.0TD Cruze, it's quite easy to see how different it is. I mean, you're talking nearly double the torque.

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/chevrolet/cruze/2014/2014-chevrolet-cruze-diesel-first-drive/



Motor Trend said:


> Sound-deadening techniques used on the Buick Verano -- the Cruze's posh sister -- are ported over


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

MP81 said:


> Ma v e n said:
> 
> 
> > What?
> ...


You're talking about Gen1 cars. This is the gen2 forum. There were more changes on the gen1 than the gen2, still doesn't make the case on a dollar amount. You need to want the diesel and accept it could end up costing more to own it. 

Fuel economy is an added bonus, you're paying for all the bits. And not many people bought the idea of it. It wasn't different enough for the regular populace to justify the expense. The diesel Cruzes (both gens) are "nicer" than the direct gas equivalent. (You need to add the convenience a pack to an LT to make it even)And get better fuel economy. But I think a Cruze SS (think Cobalt SS/TC)would have outsold the diesel versions, even if it was a $7000 premium over an LT. I would've bought a 250+hp 2.0T, 6M, big brake, limited slip version of my HB RL if it was another $3000 more money (it's already $4kbmore than an LT sedan) in a heartbeat.

The diesel would have to be a $1500 tops option and come with a 150k diesel specific warranty to get me to have spent my money on one when I bought my hatch. It was $3000 more, has same warranty, and I had to give up Redline package.


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

It may be a Gen 2 forum, but the discussion has shifted, at this point, to discussion of gen 1 cars, as well, if you read the previous posts. That's what this was all related to.

And no, from a fuel economy standpoint it does not, unless you drive your car 200-300k miles...which some of the diesel owners here have. But you get a different experience, so in my mind, part of the cost is going to that, as well.


----------



## Barry Allen (Apr 18, 2018)

plano-doug said:


> When we bought our first Cruze a few years ago, I checked into the diesel. The premium was about 5,000 dollars.


Are you one of those people that believes anyone pays MSRP for a Chevy?!

The price premium on the diesel is maybe $5,000... if you don't have rebates, incentives, and discounts. Keep in mind the base price of the Cruze was $17,995 for the L trim, and every dealership has exactly one of them that they park in the very back of the sales showroom and tell sales staff they will be fired if they ever actually sell it! All the rebates and incentives come with fine print that it doesn't apply to the L, so when Chevy offers $4,500 in rebates (as they did when I bought my car) it doesn't mean you can get a Cruze L for $13,495.

My diesel LT was $19,171. For about $1,200 more than the L trim I got a diesel engine and all the stuff that comes on the LT model.


----------



## Z71 (Jan 1, 2019)

plano-doug said:


> When we bought our first Cruze a few years ago, I checked into the diesel. The premium was about 5,000 dollars. No doubt, the diesel gets better mileage. And, even with the higher price of diesel, it still gets better dollar mileage. But it's a small difference. It will take a long time to get the added cost back.
> 
> For highway use, based on 38mpg at $2.63/gal of regular versus 48mpg at $3.02/gal of diesel, these numbers work out to be 6.9 cents/mile for regular versus 6.3 cents/mile for diesel.
> 
> ...


This comparison of course assumes that nothing goes wrong with either car. I bet the diesel would require $ 5k more in repair costs by the time you covered those 800k miles.


----------



## DarylB (Feb 3, 2011)

armillner said:


> Hi,
> 
> I have a 2018 Cruze "pepperdust" HB, diesel, 6-sp manual... and love it! Just wanted to see if anyone has the diesel Equinox and if anyone has thought of swapping the manual trans into the Equinox. I think it would be an awesome AWD with a 6-sp manual trans.
> 
> any thoughts?


Have you driven an Equinox with the diesel yet? I was surprised. I own both, a 2018 Cruze Diesel Manual and a 2019 Equinox AWD premier. I can assure you the shifting is better on the automatic than I expected. It is not a slouch either. Plenty of power. Avg 34-37 hwy in it.


----------



## plano-doug (Jul 1, 2015)

Z71 said:


> This comparison of course assumes that nothing goes wrong with either car. I bet the diesel would require $ 5k more in repair costs by the time you covered those 800k miles.


I wasn't assuming so much as I was just making the standard first order approximation, looking at fuel cost only. But you are correct, a more accurate cost model for the miles per dollar figure would include repair costs amortized over the period of ownership.

I agree, I suspect the repair costs are higher for the diesel, too. If not for being less reliable, then simply because diesel diagnosis, labor and parts cost more, I suppose. 

If I am going to put up with the clattering, smoke and temperamental nature of a diesel, there needs to be a payoff in economy, no? Too bad there wasn't a big block option 

Doug

.


----------



## armillner (Sep 6, 2018)

DarylB said:


> Have you driven an Equinox with the diesel yet? I was surprised. I own both, a 2018 Cruze Diesel Manual and a 2019 Equinox AWD premier. I can assure you the shifting is better on the automatic than I expected. It is not a slouch either. Plenty of power. Avg 34-37 hwy in it.


I haven't, the diesel versions aren't readily available where i live, they don't have stock of diesel equinox or cruze. I actually got my '18 Cruze from western PA as "used" from a Chevy dealer and drove back to GA. I'm keeping my eyes open for a local diesel equinox... sigh


----------



## armillner (Sep 6, 2018)

evevryone.... news update Mazda CX-5 diesel https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/aut...is-it-impressive-enough/ar-BBW2rFk?li=BBnb4R5


----------



## MP81 (Jul 20, 2015)

Pretty disappointing on the mileage ratings, honestly. The more powerful (both HP and torque) 2.5T is barely behind it, and costs less.


----------



## ganthc (May 25, 2018)

Why even make that diesel if it doesn't accomplish the things a diesel is supposed to, like fuel/range mileage and torque power?


----------



## sailurman (Sep 29, 2016)

plano-doug said:


> I wasn't assuming so much as I was just making the standard first order approximation, looking at fuel cost only. But you are correct, a more accurate cost model for the miles per dollar figure would include repair costs amortized over the period of ownership.
> 
> I agree, I suspect the repair costs are higher for the diesel, too. *They are not. * If not for being less reliable, then simply because diesel diagnosis, labor and parts cost more, *I suppose**(meaning you guess).*
> 
> ...


Never been in or around one huh?


----------



## Ma v e n (Oct 8, 2018)

Sailurman .....
Repair costs on a diesel aren't higher? Come on. The 1.6D is more complex and difficult to work on than the 1.5T, and has thousands of additional dollars worth of sensors and exhaust after treatment systems, not to mention that the components it has that a gas 1.5T also has are more expensive than the gas versions...
Some examples of labor times alone(these are GM warranty times, expect out of warranty repairs to be 25-40% higher)....

Alternator:

1.5T: 0.9hrs
1.6D: 3.3hrs

High pressure fuel pump
1.5T: 0.6hrs
1.6D: 2.6hrs

Fuel injectors:
1.5T: 2.1hrs
1.6D: 0.8hrs. A diesel win!

Thermostat
1.5T: 1.5hrs
1.6D: 3.0hrs

Water pump
1.5T: 0.7hrs
1.6D: 3.2hrs

Radiator
1.5T: 2.5hrs
1.6D: 3.2hrs. 

Serpentine Belt Tensioner
A tie! Both are 1.0hrs



1.5T has two sensors in the exhaust....1.6D has no less than SEVEN.


1.6D has Reductant tank, pump, heaters, sensors, pipes, injectors....EGR system....Etc. all components the 1.5T doesn't. 

I love oil burners, I like working on them, I like driving them... I just don't see the upside besides the torque. I don't see the case being made for them being a fiscally advantageous option. Unless diesel fuel is notably cheaper where you operate it 

In my area diesel is $.50/gallon MORE than gasoline. So the money never catches up, especially if you need to rack up any diesel specific repair out of warranty, and as I showed non diesel specific repairs are costing you more as well. And that's not even dealing with the fact that most shops do the have someone actually certified or experienced in working on the little diesels.


----------

