Caterpillar light truck engine?

[Dawes]

Since Cummins seems to be successful with their light-truck diesels (primarily in Dodge pickups), why didn't Caterpillar try to enter this market? Would it have entailed designing a suitable engine from scratch, or maybe an existing engine could have been adapted for this application?

Or is that particular market already saturated? If so, too bad since Caterpillar seems to have a good reputation for their diesels. This wouldn't seem to have presented any engineering stretch for them.

 

[franzh]

One thing Cat investigated is that there is already a market saturation of suitable engines in the 4.5 to 6 liter range (US applications). Look at the Navistar 366 and the Mercedes 360, the real market players who may play a chance, especially since the Mercedes 360 is used in many other parts of the world in the same platform as the Cummins B series.

Why enter the market when there is already an established foothold? Consider also that why is the Dodge brand using the Cummins engine, when Daimler-Chrysler are jointly owned? There is a considerable royalty to Cummins for each application, and who do you think owns a large percentage of Cummins?
Franz

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[rmw]

I believe there must be some contractual obligations too, either between cummins/dodge, or ford/IH that possibly predated the cummins-ford marriage, otherwise, why wouldn't ford just use cummins in their own products?

rmw

 

[franzh]

To make things even more interesting, I was a contractor to Detriot Diesel around 1997 and was introduced to the series 30 V-8 engine, otherwise known as the Navistar, or more commonly known as the PowerStroke! That's a fascinating marriage! Now that Daimler/Chrysler owns DD, we'll see how that plays out.
More than once in the last 5 years have I heard that Dodge is going to drop Cummins and install the MB engine which makes more power, quieter, and more economical too. I heard that the American public probably would not buy them if they were foreign content, pity.
Franz

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[rmw]

Most of the american vehicles I drive have more foreign content than domestic anyway.

Is the Series 30 the 7.3, or the newer 6.0 (I am guessing on the exact displacement of the newer one)?

I have encountered MB products overseas, and I would not hesitate to own one.

I have also owned some cummings in 18 wheelers in the past, as well as taking care of busses for a church that all had 2 cycle DD's in them, and I wouldn't cross the street for either of them.

I have the 7.3 PowerStroke in my personal PU truck, as well as some other church vehicles that I travel several thousand miles per year in, and have the utmost of respect for them and their capabilities.

I think cummins gets a bum rap in the Dodge, because Dodge, (at least this was several years ago, when I made my last PU purchase) only intended for their vehicle to be a work truck, something for Farmer Brown to go to town in and load to the gunwales with seed or fertilizer and transport back to the farm, not for comfortable cross country transportation like I was looking for, so it was rough and noisy. But, it had power.

rmw

 

[ivymike]

I was a contractor to Detriot Diesel around 1997 and was introduced to the series 30 V-8 engine, otherwise known as the Navistar, or more commonly known as the PowerStroke!

huh? I don't get it. Are you saying that Detroit Diesel makes the International (Navistar) Powerstroke that Ford uses?

 

[franzh]

Detriot built the V-8 diesel engines which were the 7.3 used in the Fords. From what I gather, Navistar could not build them fast enough and contracted with DD to build the rest. I suppose there is some numbering convention on the block somewhere which would identify the manufacturer.
I remember walking down one of the pre-delivery lines and all I could see was the green engines, all banded to pallets! My host there told me that was not uncommon for DD to carry some of the load other manufacturers could not handle.
Now for some confusion: I was told that they were identified as the Series 30 engine, but I also have seen other Series 30 engines which were not V-8's. Since the V-8's were not marketed by DD, that may have been some internal coding. I do know that DD was experimenting with a SI Natural Gas variant of that engine and saw a few in mule R&D trucks.
Franz

eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[NeilDS]

As a former Caterpillar Fuel System Engineer, I can say that it was looked at a few years ago using the then 3126 or now C7 engines. There was going to be a joint venture between Dalimer-Chrysler and Cat Fuel Systems that fell apart. With to move of many light-diesel trucks being used as every day drivers, I am not sure that engine would have done that great.

 

[Rob45]

Two more points:
As noisy as it is, the Cummins engine is still FAR quieter than the Cat C7, and I don't see Cat spending the money to make their engine any quieter.

M-B, for all their vaunted engineering reputation, seem to have a hard time making a quality product, and based on JD Powers surveys, seem to be getting worse rather than better.

 

[spdingtkts]

I have been out of the diesel stuff for a few years. I got out of it when CAT was just starting to introduce their electronically injected engines.

Back in the old days CAT engines always burned dirty. A light truck would have more stringent emission regulations than heavy trucks and equipment do.

 

[Rob45]

Light truck manufacturers get around the emissions laws by making their Diesel trucks 8500 lbs and up, so they're classified as heavy trucks. Class 4, maybe?
But passcar emissions rules don't apply, and I'm not sure EPA Diesel standards are very strict anyway.

 

[ivymike]

EPA diesel standards are certainly tough enough to be challenging for the OEMs to meet. CAT, et al. are up to their eyeballs in alligators trying to meet the 2007 requirements for on-road diesels.

 

[tbuelna]

GM DuraMax Diesel = Isuzu

 

[ivymike]

the point = ?

 

[JayMaechtlen]

"series 30"
hmm...
DD used to identify series of engines based on displacement of a single cylinder.
the 71 series had 71 cubic inches per cylinder, and you have heard of 6-71, 8-71, and so forth.
4-53, 6-53, etc.
8-92 (or V8-92, and lots of revisions and suffexes...)

Jay


Jay Maechtlen

 

[optimum]

Detriot built the V-8 diesel engines which were the 7.3 used in the Fords. From what I gather, Navistar could not build them fast enough and contracted with DD to build the rest. I suppose there is some numbering convention on the block somewhere which would identify the manufacturer.
I remember walking down one of the pre-delivery lines and all I could see was the green engines, all banded to pallets! My host there told me that was not uncommon for DD to carry some of the load other manufacturers could not handle.

7.3's would have been grey, are you sure they were not going to mack?

 

[optimum]

Cat is used in the GM medium trucks and now in the medium fords

 

[j2bprometheus]

Franzh says above "More than once in the last 5 years have I heard that Dodge is going to drop Cummins and install the MB engine which makes more power, quieter, and more economical too."

The assertion about the MB engine having more power is completely off-base. The Cummins engine in Dodge application is limited by torque limits on the transmission / rear end. Cummins could supply a more powerful version of the engine but the Dodge truck's transmission and / or rear end would fail.

I don't have any data on the quieter or more economical. However, my engineering judgement says with 90 % certainty that the more economical claim is false just like the power assertion. Quieter? Maybe.

 

[patprimmer]

I don't know the specifics, but if the MB put out more power at higher RPM but less torque, the transmission might still hold up, as it is torque rather than power that breaks gearboxes.

Regards
pat pprimmer@acay.com.au
eng-tips, by professional engineers for professional engineers
Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips Fora.

 

[j2bprometheus]

patprimmer is correct that torque breaks gear boxes, not power.

The MB engine might be a high reving Vee engine with lower torque but higher peak power.

Lower torque is bad for many applications.

Higher reving is definitely bad for fuel economy.