GM KILLS It's New 4.5 V8 Duramax Midsize Diesel!

[eightballsidepocket]

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/11/gm-4-5l-light-duty-diesel-v8-indefinitely-postponed/
Just read on Autoblog.com, that the 4.5 V8 Duramax diesel for the 1/2 ton Chevy/GMC P.U.'s, will not be offered and GM is even offering the possible tooling or manufacturing/design to any possible takers.

Earlier in the year or late last year, Ford put on hold their 4.x liter diesel destined for it's F-150 line.

This just leaves Chrysler with it's upcoming 5.0 liter Cummins V8 diesel destined for the 1500 Dodge Ram, and possibly as an option in the 3/4 - 1 ton Rams.

If I was Chrysler, I would not follow suit with Ford and GM and I'd stay on pace to offer that small Cummins.  They have that market "locked" with Ford and GM backing out.

[S204STi]

Ah damn!

[Galaxy]

If developing a diesel is to expensive perhaps they can buy one externally. The VW V10 TDI might fit.

[SVT666]

If developing a diesel is to expensive perhaps they can buy one externally. The VW V10 TDI might fit.

Ford and Dodge already buy their diesels externally.

[S204STi]

The thing that sucks is that they already developed the engine...now it's not going to see the light of day, which is a bummer.

[eightballsidepocket]

Ford and Dodge already buy their diesels externally.

Ford's next large diesel to replace the current Navstar 6.4 developed diesel, is an "In House" diesel, called the "Scorpion".

Word is, that Ford will be moving away from Navstar and their engines, ASAP. 

So the new 6.4 diesel will be a rare bird/commodity in the near future, as I've heard that the Scorpion is due very soon.

In road tests and dyno test done by magazines or automotive publications, the 6.4 powerstroke has consistently lagged the 6.7 Cummins, and 6.6 Duramax diesels in fuel mileage, H.P. and Torque numbers even though Ford advertises H.P. and Torque numbers very close to GM's Duramax, and Dodge's Cummins.

Only problem as I have gathered from sources is that the 6.0 Navstar diesel that gave Ford fits in it's first few years(2003-05) of production, was only problematic when Ford set it up with it's in-house ECU emissions, fuel delivery systems.  The Navstar 6.0 when used in non-Ford platforms or heavy equipment was not plagued with the myriads of warranty problems that cost Ford millions of dollars.

I learned my lesson a few years back when I bought a new vehicle that was a brand new platform for that year, as well as engine and drivetrain.  I spent so much time at the dealer getting warranty work done, it made my head spin.  When I traded that car in, some lucky owner got a car that had all the bugs worked out by the first owner/me. 

So I'd be hesitant to lay down my hard earned pesos on a first year Scorpion diesel powered F-series P.U..

[Jus2shy]

I think GM is still reeling from the stigma of diesels from the early 80's and late 70's, a stigma that they helped create by bringing marginal diesels to market back then. They need to pull their heads out of their @$$. There is a market for these trucks. I was planning on trading my little roadster for a truck since I will be needing the practicality soon. If Chrysler survives and begins to thrive, I may be owning a mopar once again.... or maybe a new Superduty with the Scorpion V8. But I really just want a half ton Diesel.... Maybe a new Mahindra???

[68_427]

This bums me out, I was really looking forward to this engine and so was my dad.

[GoCougs]

I was always skeptical - it'd take almost forever to recoup the additional cost premium on such a relatively light-duty rig.

[eightballsidepocket]

I was always skeptical - it'd take almost forever to recoup the additional cost premium on such a relatively light-duty rig.

As I understood, the cost premium wasn't going to be nearly as much as the premiums for the large displacement diesels used in the 3/4-1 ton P.U. platforms.

Cummins hasn't really botched up their engines that they've provided to Dodge over the years starting with their 12 valve 5.9 then the 24 valve 5.9, and now the 2010 CAFE qualified 6.7 24 valve Cummins.

By the way, only the 6.7 Cummins meets the 2010 emissions requirements in it's present configuration.  The Ford Powerstroke 6.4, and GM/Duramax 6.6 have not.

The only Cummins problem back a few years ago was a batch of bad foundery blocks on the 12 valve early 5.9 line that were cracked.  I think they were Mexican foundery blocks too.

[S204STi]

I think GM is still reeling from the stigma of diesels from the early 80's and late 70's, a stigma that they helped create by bringing marginal diesels to market back then. They need to pull their heads out of their @$$. There is a market for these trucks. I was planning on trading my little roadster for a truck since I will be needing the practicality soon. If Chrysler survives and begins to thrive, I may be owning a mopar once again.... or maybe a new Superduty with the Scorpion V8. But I really just want a half ton Diesel.... Maybe a new Mahindra???

I think it has little to do with diesels of the 80s.  I mean hell, the Duramax et al are so powerful and so clean, and have been that way for something like almost 10 years now, that most new truck buyers would have no idea they were so bad.

The real problem is that truck sales are falling through the floor, and it makes little to no sense for a dying company to invest more money in that segment.

[cawimmer430]

The thing that sucks is that they already developed the engine...now it's not going to see the light of day, which is a bummer.

Think of all that MONEY that went into researching and designing this engine and producing prototypes.

[Jus2shy]

I still think they have some old executives and businessmen that "Think" the common car and truck buyer would like to have nothing to do with Diesels. I mean they produce some extremely clean small displacement diesels that we don't see in the US. If a diesel can meet the new European emissions standards that are in place in 2010 or 2012 (I can't remember), then they can easily transplant those motors to the US, since the emissions standards are nearly the same. I'm sure that if Trucks were nearly as economical as cars (which I think they're getting close to), that they'd have more consumers. In the part where I live, Diesel is usually around the same price as Premium Unleaded. I believe the slowing demand for Diesel from China and India have greatly relieved pressure on the market. I also think that our biostocks will pick up in regards to diesel. I certainly have more faith in Biodiesel than ethanol right now (Although the new gas ford engines that are E85 compatible produce more power on Ethanol now). I love the idea of using the deserts to grow some fatty algae to make fuel. Oh well, I'm jumping onto a whole new subject here.

I love the Duramax, but I really don't have any use for a vehicle that big/powerful. I'd like to get something lighter duty if possible... that Mahindra is starting to look nice... All I would need out of a truck is around 250HP and 350+lbft of torque. A rig with those figures can comfortably pull anything around 10,000 lbs. Today's diesel 3/4's can scream up a mountain with 14,000 lbs, but again I don't need that capability.

[hotrodalex]

Think of all that MONEY that went into researching and designing this engine and producing prototypes.

Exactly. It makes no sense to develop this and not even give it a chance to sell. But GM wants to continue their habit of not giving things a chance. Either it sells 100k units a year or it's gone. They give nothing a chance at growth.

[Soup DeVille]

I still think they have some old executives and businessmen that "Think" the common car and truck buyer would like to have nothing to do with Diesels. I mean they produce some extremely clean small displacement diesels that we don't see in the US. If a diesel can meet the new European emissions standards that are in place in 2010 or 2012 (I can't remember), then they can easily transplant those motors to the US, since the emissions standards are nearly the same. I'm sure that if Trucks were nearly as economical as cars (which I think they're getting close to), that they'd have more consumers. In the part where I live, Diesel is usually around the same price as Premium Unleaded. I believe the slowing demand for Diesel from China and India have greatly relieved pressure on the market. I also think that our biostocks will pick up in regards to diesel. I certainly have more faith in Biodiesel than ethanol right now (Although the new gas ford engines that are E85 compatible produce more power on Ethanol now). I love the idea of using the deserts to grow some fatty algae to make fuel. Oh well, I'm jumping onto a whole new subject here.

I love the Duramax, but I really don't have any use for a vehicle that big/powerful. I'd like to get something lighter duty if possible... that Mahindra is starting to look nice... All I would need out of a truck is around 250HP and 350+lbft of torque. A rig with those figures can comfortably pull anything around 10,000 lbs. Today's diesel 3/4's can scream up a mountain with 14,000 lbs, but again I don't need that capability.

I used to drive a rig certified to 155,000 pounds that had a 425 HP straight six. Yet still, I have a lot of people tell me they need that V10 Duramax with the Bully Dog high pressure- hack to haul around their 5000 lb camper trailer.

[93JC]

Exactly. It makes no sense to develop this and not even give it a chance to sell. But GM wants to continue their habit of not giving things a chance. Either it sells 100k units a year or it's gone. They give nothing a chance at growth.

Every product has a break-even point, and if it probably won't be met there's no point in selling it.

Putting a 4.5 diesel V8 in a full-size pickup truck will not win over many new customers.

[93JC]

I used to drive a rig certified to 155,000 pounds that had a 425 HP straight six. Yet still, I have a lot of people tell me they need that V10 Duramax with the Bully Dog high pressure- hack to haul around their 5000 lb camper trailer.

There's more tolerance for big-rigs moving slowly than pickup trucks with trailers. I agree with the point you're making, just saying.

[Soup DeVille]

There's more tolerance for big-rigs moving slowly than pickup trucks with trailers. I agree with the point you're making, just saying.

There's also no need to be hauling ass in the fast lane while towing the bass boat, but I get what you're saying.

[93JC]

There's a large gap between what people need and what people want.

[Soup DeVille]

There's a large gap between what people need and what people want.

Sure, but there's "wanting" and "being absolutely convinced they have to have way more than they really do."

[giant_mtb]

Most of the people I know (females, mind you) still think diesels are noisy, smelly, crapboxes.  Then I mention someone in town that they know that drives a diesel and say "did you know so-and-so's car is a diesel?"  They're usually shocked.

[J86]

Sure, but there's "wanting" and "being absolutely convinced they have to have way more than they really do."

Which is why I get so much joy out of seeing peoples' reaction to my tow 'trucks'!

[93JC]

People are dumb, that's all that really needs to be said.

[Jus2shy]

Every product has a break-even point, and if it probably won't be met there's no point in selling it.

Putting a 4.5 diesel V8 in a full-size pickup truck will not win over many new customers.

I was thinking that the 4.5 would be able to meet its break-even point. That engine was developed to meet 2010 emissions in the U.S. which surpasses any other country's emissions standards. That engine is small enough to fit in any car that can take the chevy small block. That's a whole lot of cars. Corvette, Camaro, Solstice & Sky (with a little hacking LOL), Suburban, Silverado, H2, H3, GMC Pickup, Tahoe, G8, Just about anything made by Holden. Cadillac CTS, DTS, STS, XLR, Escallade, SRX, etc... I mean the engine was really small, compact, and light weight as they had designs to use this in cars. I can imagine Cadillac becoming a real European competitor with this V8. The 6.6 is already extremely refined, and I can imagine the 4.5 being better.

Very sad that they won't give this product a try.

[GoCougs]

As I understood, the cost premium wasn't going to be nearly as much as the premiums for the large displacement diesels used in the 3/4-1 ton P.U. platforms.

Cummins hasn't really botched up their engines that they've provided to Dodge over the years starting with their 12 valve 5.9 then the 24 valve 5.9, and now the 2010 CAFE qualified 6.7 24 valve Cummins.

By the way, only the 6.7 Cummins meets the 2010 emissions requirements in it's present configuration.  The Ford Powerstroke 6.4, and GM/Duramax 6.6 have not.

The only Cummins problem back a few years ago was a batch of bad foundery blocks on the 12 valve early 5.9 line that were cracked.  I think they were Mexican foundery blocks too.

That would be good - IIRC the diesel $$ premium is about $7k.

I agree - the Cummins is a superior power plant to either the Ford or Chevy mills.

[93JC]

I was thinking that the 4.5 would be able to meet its break-even point. That engine was developed to meet 2010 emissions in the U.S. which surpasses any other country's emissions standards. That engine is small enough to fit in any car that can take the chevy small block. That's a whole lot of cars. Corvette, Camaro, Solstice & Sky (with a little hacking LOL), Suburban, Silverado, H2, H3, GMC Pickup, Tahoe, G8, Just about anything made by Holden. Cadillac CTS, DTS, STS, XLR, Escallade, SRX, etc... I mean the engine was really small, compact, and light weight as they had designs to use this in cars. I can imagine Cadillac becoming a real European competitor with this V8. The 6.6 is already extremely refined, and I can imagine the 4.5 being better.

Very sad that they won't give this product a try.

In Europe a 4.5 L engine is enormous: the market for this sort of engine is very, very small.

In North America... quite frankly no one wants a diesel Camaro, Corvette, G8, etc. The only vehicles this thing would end up in would be trucks and truck-based SUVs, and the market for them is getting smaller. A diesel that gets 20 mpg vs. a gasser getting 14 or whatever is a huge improvement in relative terms, but in the grand scheme of things it's a big-ass engine in big-ass trucks.

[S204STi]

I also think that our biostocks will pick up in regards to diesel. I certainly have more faith in Biodiesel than ethanol right now (Although the new gas ford engines that are E85 compatible produce more power on Ethanol now). I love the idea of using the deserts to grow some fatty algae to make fuel. Oh

Biodiesel is a sham. Manufacturers only approve something like 10% biodiesel (last I heard, maybe not?), and they say it should be no more than 50% of the fuel in the vehicle.  Otherwise it just turns rancid and plugs the fuel system.

Though honestly the diesel cycle was originally capable of burning all kinds of crap (and it still is... read an article about people burning used ATF), modern diesels are too picky for that to last long.

[Soup DeVille]

In Europe a 4.5 L engine is enormous: the market for this sort of engine is very, very small.

In North America... quite frankly no one wants a diesel Camaro, Corvette, G8, etc. The only vehicles this thing would end up in would be trucks and truck-based SUVs, and the market for them is getting smaller. A diesel that gets 20 mpg vs. a gasser getting 14 or whatever is a huge improvement in relative terms, but in the grand scheme of things it's a big-ass engine in big-ass trucks.

OK, I'm a little weird, but the prospect of a diesel Camaro intriques me.

[S204STi]

OK, I'm a little weird, but the prospect of a diesel Camaro intriques me.

With the specs the 4.5 was promising it would have lit up its tires easily.

[hotrodalex]

Every product has a break-even point, and if it probably won't be met there's no point in selling it.

Putting a 4.5 diesel V8 in a full-size pickup truck will not win over many new customers.

Say you spend $100 in developing something. The market isn't that good anymore and you aren't sure if you will make that $100 back by selling the product. Would you rather dump the product and lose the whole $100 or try to sell it and maybe get $40 of those dollars back?