Common Rail Engine

Thanks Notso, I have been wondering the same thing but was too lazy to Google it!

Awww, come on, 128 Kilowatts and 400 odd Newton Metres out of a 2.5 litre. What about the deisel that won Le Mans this year.

I like turbo diesels too, but let's make sure we attribute plenty of those kilowatts and newton metres to the turbo charger and not only the 'engine' part. Petrol engines do pretty good themselves when turbocharged too.

Too right but I, didn"t call pertrol engines crappy did I!

My CRD in standard form - 2.7L, 120kw, 400nm and 7.5L/100km on the freeway at 110kmh with a rooftop tent on and the back full of gear. Tell me about a petrol vehicle, turbo'd or not, that'll match that economy and go factor.......

Yes Member Number 1

Cummins and Detroit diesel engines have been running this type of fuel system for years. Know as a PT fuel injection system PT = pressure timed

you have and extra cam lobe, push rod and rocker to firer the injector

But to day with good electronics we can now firer the injector by a solenoid to inject the fuel

furthermore we can firer the injector as many times during the power cycle allowing more power and better fuel economy,

I love this stuff and could go on for hours and hours ... but wont.
unless you want to LOL.

Richard

for goodness sake...you cant beat hp....torque is great but check out top fuelers etc etc...ya need big blocks with blowers?...when they get diesels spinning to
10-12k+ then they might have some real power:))))

Oh "for goodness sake". You've mis-read my statements. Who NEEDS that sort of horsepower in a family 4WD? You reckon that 120kw at 2900rpm isn't adequate? You seem to think that we are claiming that diesels out-perform petrol engines of equivalent size and turbo configurations. We aren't!! What I'm saying is that my common-rail diesel has MORE than enough horsepower and torque to do the job at hand - and only costs 7.5L/100 to run on the freeway. Off-road I'm really scraping the barrel at 11L/100km - on sand. Read what I say next time ;) I don't give a rats how much potential power you get out of your top-fueler - it isn't going to get you up that 45 degree rutted hill without tearing up the surrounding area....

Notso, I never implied that you said petrols were crappy.
Omaroo, I never said there would be a petrol engine, turbo or not, that would match the economy of deisels. And I certainly can't show you one, like you asked.

I didn't mean any insult to deisel engines and I've only got complete praise for the latest technology turbo deisels.

I was only trying to highlight that 128kw and 400odd Nm from 2.5L is acheived with turbo technology too.

Sorry if my original post sounded argumentative - not the intention at all.

We all actually agree - I own a 2.5L (300Tdi) Discovery and I reaps the benefits of it's economy all the time. But it certainly doesn't have 400Nm and it's starting to show its age!!!

"I own a 2.5L (300Tdi) Discovery and I reaps the benefits of it's economy all the time. But it certainly doesn't have 400Nm and it's starting to show its age!!!"

Oh! Didn't realise that you were a Landy owner. Cool! I run a Td5 in my Defender - an early example of near-common-rail technology. It get's around 10L/100km wherever you go and whatever you drive over.... but it doesn't have the sparkling performance of the Merc 2.7 CRD in the Jeep. Be nice to swap it one day.......... ;)

yes Omaroo, diesels have better torque and better fuel economy...but they are still the same old engine with a upmarket name, with some additional bolt on goodies

who gives a toss about fuel economy...when you want grunt

Yep - I'm a Landy owner. I love it.

Mine always got 10-11L per 100km, but I went out the Orange on the weekend with a roof rack and a little bit of gear on top. I haven't filled up yet, but I think it would have used almost 12L/100km...also got 245/70 BFGs (instead of 235/70) a couple of weeks ago, so the tiny bit bigger tyres might have made it seem a little worse (ie underestimating odometer, and speed).

But I can't complain...pretty good fuel consumption.

"who gives a toss about fuel economy...when you want grunt"

LOL! Thick wallets help... ;)

or a company car

Not so concerned about type of engine here , but rather how the total end product actually performs.

Any vehicle that can't realistically get to 100 in around 12 or 13 seconds loaded is a bit to unsafe for me.

This usually means 150kw or so is needed in 2.5T cars and more often than not means petrol engines are the way to go.

Its not worth saving the hundreds of dollars on fuel, if you can't safely get out of some situations.

Robin Miller

Merc CRD 2.7L (standard form): 0-100 in 11.2 seconds (chipped: in 9.8 seconds)
Merc CRD 3.0L (standard form): 0-100 in 8.9 seconds

So... not so slow...

or what about touareg......100 km/h in 7.8 seconds), for 2470kgs mmmm not such a crappy diesel, but you wont see these in a drag car/rail

Hi Omoroo

Some good diesels and bad petrols out there all right, I'll have to stay away from those Merc CRD's at the lights , but I'm not so it would have followed my petrol patrol thru the trackless part of the North simpson quite so well last week.

Robin Miller

No1...
"for goodness sake...you cant beat hp....torque is great but check out top fuelers etc etc...ya need big blocks with blowers?...when they get diesels spinning to
10-12k+ then they might have some real power:)))) "

Top fuelers are dieseling by the end of the quarter, spark plugs crapped out the exhaust long before they cross the line... So there's an example of a high rpm, high Hp diesel for ya... ;-))

scary part is that fiat designed and owns the paintent on crd. every manufacturer that uses it pays a royalty fee to them.. as for speed, jump in a new alfa, fiat,renault diesel passenger car and take it for a spin.. you will be suprised

Right on member No 1.
Drag engines in 4wds.

Now a drag 4wd, didn't I see some one at Willowbank with a mk1 landy drag car?
Or was it at Sydney in the magazine?
I think it already has been done.

Found it, Chad Taylor has a slammed mk 1 landy, 393ci cleveland in it.

Pic in Street Machine.

Site Link

Not too sure about the ground clearance though, looks a bit low. :-(

laying on down on the job ..again...or have you bin out drinkin again Thomas

Well at least I have all the track down.. Now for the wiring :(
I wont work with the Foam base again either..

truskster...the front of the loco looks like thomas on his side

You dont like my GS4 :*(

is that what it is...
sorry ...i just thought you were into Thomas and his friends..hehehe

how big is the set up...is it yours or your kid's?

Our shed gets finished today.

Next week the trainset gets resurrected ...

(and then I'll probably pull it apart again and line the walls like I know that I should...)

Its only 8x4 and its 1:160th N scale.

www.railimages.com/gallery/brucecremonesi few more pics

And I just can't resist one more comment.

A Diesel Won Le Mans

I think that was just a few female drivers getting confused :)

On a slightly different note I have heard stories of common rail diesels being very difficult when trying to suppress the electrical noise generated by the solenoids particularly in the HF region of the radio spectrum - comments from real world owners?

Mike Harding

Merc CRD fires each injector five or so times per cycle, depending on requirements at the time. They don't use typical "solenoids" to open the injector on these engines. They use piezo-controlled valves that react far more quickly and accurately than any normal injector - and that goes for the Land Rover Td5 too - which still uses electro-mechanics to to initiate a squirt.

6 cylinders

~3,500 rpm or so

5 x 6 x 3,500 = 105,000 firings per minute.

Div by 60 (sec) = 1,750Hz

I can't say that I've ever heard any RF interference at around that frequency (2kHz - a very audible tone) in my car, but I guess that all depends on how well the electronics are isolated and the injector solenoids damped on those with electro-mechanical devices. I've certainly heard interference over the radio after going past a modern truck or two on the highway.

The RF energy will be generated during the switching (on and off) of the solenoid and the level of that energy is a function of the amount of energy being switched and the speed it is switched at. So if you switched a heavy load very gradually over, say, a one second period there would be virtually no RF produced but if you switched the same load in one micro second (1/1000000 sec) you would produce heaps of RF. Piezo valves probably don't need much energy to switch so they may be fairly quiet but, I imagine, a solenoid system would need a fair amount of power and as it has to be switched quite quickly would generate some noise, probably, well into the HF spectrum ie. 1.5MHz to 30MHz.

Mike Harding