bwv
Well-known member
Hmmm... a diesel FJR.... I wonder how the rods and bottom end would hold up....
SPLIT: Off-Topic Crap About Diesel
- Thread starter bwv
- Start date
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
hppants
Well-known member
At the risk of jacking the thread, why isn't clean diesel being highly considered for motorcycle engines?
A diesel would do really well in a cruiser, as that is the way the big, long stroke 45 degree twins produces power now anyway. Gobs of torque, but with no rpms to speak of, so somewhat limited in HP.
Don't think too many of us would be happy with one in an ST bike due to the latter.
Don't think too many of us would be happy with one in an ST bike due to the latter.
ionbeam
2 FUN
How many diesel racing cars and bikes have you seen? I though so
Linkie. Then stuff like this starts to happen.
Last year I saw a diesel motorcycle at the Whitehorse Press open house. When we first arrived the owner was trying to get it to start. Five hours later, when we were leaving he was still trying to get it to run (while his friends were standing around saying something about he should just give up and call his wife to come over with the trailer).
Last edited by a moderator:
Spud
Well-known member
How many diesel racing cars and bikes have you seen? I though soDiesels make great torque but without some positive pressure help they just don't rev quickly or very high. One big drawback is the inability to controlsparkignition timing. Everything that needs to be done to hot rod a diesel adds weight to an already heavy engine as well as complexity, and both of these are not motorcycle friendly.
Linkie. Then stuff like this starts to happen.
Last year I saw a diesel motorcycle at the Whitehorse Press open house. When we first arrived the owner was trying to get it to start. Five hours later, when we were leaving he was still trying to get it to run (while his friends were standing around saying something about he should just give up and call his wife to come over with the trailer).
Yeah, a diesel race car would never work...except for those two Audis I saw at Miller Motorsports park in '07 that destroyed the American Le Mans Series field....
Last edited by a moderator:
ionbeam
2 FUN
Ok, 2 diesel race cars, how common is that? Plus, the R10 was the most expensive car project ever for Audi. Were these cars 100% straight up equal to the field or were provisions made in the rules to accommodate them? I know in drag racing HD, Buel and other 2 cylinder motorcycles run heads-up with other 4 cylinder bikes but they were granted weight and displacement waivers to make them equal. Point taken that there were/are a fractional percentage of diesel race cars but that tiny amount makes me wonder why nobody else has bought in like they tend to do when they see something successful.
lnewlf
Well-known member
rollin' coal
now these are fun to watch- hate to meet one at a light with the feej...or a 'busa for that matter
now these are fun to watch- hate to meet one at a light with the feej...or a 'busa for that matter
mcatrophy
Privileged to ride a 2018 FJR1300AS
The UK (possibly NATO?) military were considering a diesel powered motorcycle simply to allow it to run on the diesel fuel more commonly supplied to the battlefield, to ease logistics. My "source" rode a prototype, said it was terrible.
Last edited by a moderator:
HotRodZilla
GOD BLESS AMERICA
If I could get my FJR to have turbo-diesel whine, I'd never stop riding it. Nothing makes power like a diesel, but I just donno how practical it really is. Like Alan, I figure if it was, everybody would be jumping on that bandwagon.
Remember, the diesel engines in Fords, Chevys and Dodges weigh around 4k. The 6.7 liter Scorpion Powerstroke is making 400 horses and around 400lbft of torque. But...A 6.7L gas engine would probably make more HP...Just less torque and at a helluva drop in gas mileage. Figure the 5.0L gas engines are making upwards of 350BHP.
Remember, the diesel engines in Fords, Chevys and Dodges weigh around 4k. The 6.7 liter Scorpion Powerstroke is making 400 horses and around 400lbft of torque. But...A 6.7L gas engine would probably make more HP...Just less torque and at a helluva drop in gas mileage. Figure the 5.0L gas engines are making upwards of 350BHP.
Spud
Well-known member
I just drank beer and watched them walk away from everything else. Never got to wrapped up in the details
They sounded cool but nothing like the C6R monster vettes....
As for diesel bikes, don't they make a diesel KLR 650 for military use already?
Top_Speed1
Panama Canal Crosser
Yeah weight and low RPM's. I got 2 diesel pickups and a 9K diesel generator, all dependable awesome powerplants w torque galore (at low Rips). And good thing my genset is on 4 wheels! ming-yamollie it would be hernia city scoochen that around the garage.
I know they are getting a bit lighter than the "all cast iron block" days. My beef is that diesel fuel costs more (than gasoline). You get more diesel oil (product) from a barrel of crude than you do vs. gasoline and it also take less refining to make it. So the government can tax the crap out of it as they know the users can/do benefit from this.
Maybe someday with some more refinements to the engine itself.
I know they are getting a bit lighter than the "all cast iron block" days. My beef is that diesel fuel costs more (than gasoline). You get more diesel oil (product) from a barrel of crude than you do vs. gasoline and it also take less refining to make it. So the government can tax the crap out of it as they know the users can/do benefit from this.
Maybe someday with some more refinements to the engine itself.
Last edited by a moderator:
Spud
Well-known member
Make? Barely..... About 200 of them, but never made it to service IIRC. It was more in the research [hase and then they bailed. Nobody's seem them surplus to this point.
Redfish Hunter
Gone Fishing
Gosh, I am sorry now for posting the bio-diesel comment that got all this jumpstarted. I was still on the whole ethanol/renewable fuels subject at the time.
The "ignition timing" problems have largely been overcome. A modern diesel has several injection pulses per combustion cycle. This allows for the ultra quiet and smooth operation of modern diesels as well as increased power and fuel economy. Any of the new truck diesels from Ford, GM, or Dodge will be able to inject diesel 4-5 times per combustion cycle at 36,000 psi. With modern turbo chargers WOT intake pressures can exceed 25psi positive.
The Audi diesels were so dominant at the 24 hours of LeMans and the 12 hours of Sebring that the rules were changed to make it more difficult for them. The R10 won 36 of the 48 races it entered. The R10 won the 24 hours of LeMans 3 years in a row and the American Lemans Race. It was the most expensive race car ever for Audi, costing $15 million per year.
The diesel engine's efficiency lends itself well to endurance races such as the 12 hours of Sebring and the 24 Hours of LeMans. It's drawbacks (weight mostly) do not allow it to be competitive in shorter races.
The newest diesel engine prototypes that were developed for the 1/2 ton pickup market have UCG (Ultra Compacted Graphite) blocks and are seriously addressing the whole weight issue. The superior torque and excellent fuel efficiency make these engines very desirable. Sadly while all Ford, GM, and Dodge all have running prototypes, they all say there is no market for such trucks.
The high cost of diesel is supposedly due to the Ultra Low Sulfur requirement. Less than 15ppm of sulfur makes the refining process more difficult and more expensive. If we could run the same diesel we had 15 years ago, the cost would be much lower.
The "ignition timing" problems have largely been overcome. A modern diesel has several injection pulses per combustion cycle. This allows for the ultra quiet and smooth operation of modern diesels as well as increased power and fuel economy. Any of the new truck diesels from Ford, GM, or Dodge will be able to inject diesel 4-5 times per combustion cycle at 36,000 psi. With modern turbo chargers WOT intake pressures can exceed 25psi positive.
The Audi diesels were so dominant at the 24 hours of LeMans and the 12 hours of Sebring that the rules were changed to make it more difficult for them. The R10 won 36 of the 48 races it entered. The R10 won the 24 hours of LeMans 3 years in a row and the American Lemans Race. It was the most expensive race car ever for Audi, costing $15 million per year.
The diesel engine's efficiency lends itself well to endurance races such as the 12 hours of Sebring and the 24 Hours of LeMans. It's drawbacks (weight mostly) do not allow it to be competitive in shorter races.
The newest diesel engine prototypes that were developed for the 1/2 ton pickup market have UCG (Ultra Compacted Graphite) blocks and are seriously addressing the whole weight issue. The superior torque and excellent fuel efficiency make these engines very desirable. Sadly while all Ford, GM, and Dodge all have running prototypes, they all say there is no market for such trucks.
The high cost of diesel is supposedly due to the Ultra Low Sulfur requirement. Less than 15ppm of sulfur makes the refining process more difficult and more expensive. If we could run the same diesel we had 15 years ago, the cost would be much lower.
Last edited by a moderator:
bwv
Well-known member
...ooops... someone typed the word diesel (maybe ..uh.. i dunno...um... RFH?) and I got a little wooded up about it... it actually started when we were talkin about CR and turbos...
I have to admit, I was gonna type "3 letters... T D I " before when someone said diesels dont make power... when this was still part of the other thread.. but i was afraid of breakin it or going off topic... it broke anyway....
This isn't a cone of shame thing is it ?
I just had images of an FJR with a turbo whine, the clattering idle of a diesel, black smoke with a roll on the throttle, and the smooth electric motor like torque only a diesel can create... and just couldn't control myself.
I personally prefer gasoline for lighter vehicles... but some of the Audi, Volk, and BMW diesels show major promise.
I have a freind with a Volks TDI wagon... it does not lack power, and it gets 50+mpg... some of the Iron butt guys might like the benefits a diesel could provide.
I have to admit, I was gonna type "3 letters... T D I " before when someone said diesels dont make power... when this was still part of the other thread.. but i was afraid of breakin it or going off topic... it broke anyway....
This isn't a cone of shame thing is it ?
I just had images of an FJR with a turbo whine, the clattering idle of a diesel, black smoke with a roll on the throttle, and the smooth electric motor like torque only a diesel can create... and just couldn't control myself.
I personally prefer gasoline for lighter vehicles... but some of the Audi, Volk, and BMW diesels show major promise.
I have a freind with a Volks TDI wagon... it does not lack power, and it gets 50+mpg... some of the Iron butt guys might like the benefits a diesel could provide.
hppants
Well-known member
I think I started this by asking "why?". I'm trying to encourage myself to get out of this stale smelling box that I've lived in my entire life. It's therapeutic. Thanks for helping, friends.
The "diesel engine weighs too much" argument seems logical to me.
I suppose cost should be discussed as well. For light duty pickup trucks, adding 15-20% to the overall cost of the truck for additional towing capacity is a big decision for most consumers, I imagine. One could infer that adding 20% to the cost of an FJR for benefits that don't matter much to the consumer would be a hard sell to make. But that argument doesn't seem to hold as much weight for cages over seas? Most cage manufacturers make a diesel power plant for every conceivable vehicle platform. And they do sell very well in Europe, Asia, and India - not at all in North America. Obviously, no one cares if their Ford Focus has another 1500 pounds of towing capacity (don't know if this example is factual BTW). So why make the additional investment?
And if that investment is worthwhile to the consumer for cages, would it also be worthwhile for motorcycles?
Hey.... it's kind of nice out here. Not as claustrophobic.
The "diesel engine weighs too much" argument seems logical to me.
I suppose cost should be discussed as well. For light duty pickup trucks, adding 15-20% to the overall cost of the truck for additional towing capacity is a big decision for most consumers, I imagine. One could infer that adding 20% to the cost of an FJR for benefits that don't matter much to the consumer would be a hard sell to make. But that argument doesn't seem to hold as much weight for cages over seas? Most cage manufacturers make a diesel power plant for every conceivable vehicle platform. And they do sell very well in Europe, Asia, and India - not at all in North America. Obviously, no one cares if their Ford Focus has another 1500 pounds of towing capacity (don't know if this example is factual BTW). So why make the additional investment?
And if that investment is worthwhile to the consumer for cages, would it also be worthwhile for motorcycles?
Hey.... it's kind of nice out here. Not as claustrophobic.
Last edited by a moderator:
bwv
Well-known member
Eh... the benefits of diesel engines as i see them: (in no particular order)
1. Torque for heavy loads (I consider myself a heavy load)
2. Longevity of the powerplant for "working" vehicles (OTR trucks often see a million miles or more on the same powerplant)
3. fuel economy
4. environmentally freindlier than gasoline engines. (more soot.. but less of the bad stuff you cant see..and.. better mileage=less fuel burned)
I'm sure theres more... but... for the fjr (in reference to the above)
1. Does the FJR really need more torque? umm... I'm gonna go ahead and say... Not for me it doesnt...
2. If you guys are regularly pulling 150-200k out of these engines... maybe we dont need to address longevity...I'm gonna get bored with it long before i wear it out.(maybe... I dunno)
3. again.. the 47mpg i see regularly(even driving like a ********) is not too shabby...
4. hmmm... ya got me on this one, Im imagining the FJR isnt hurting things too bad right now in stock form with the convertors and o2 sensored FI system...
So for me... the cool factor would be the only real calling... the turbo sound, the clatter.. etc... But.. it would be really cool to see someone build a head to go on this block, an injection system, and strap on a little turbo or super charger...
For you iron butt guys... you might see 80 or 90 mpg, torque lower in the rpm range, way longer service intervals(dont really need that), and truckers would like you better...
1. Torque for heavy loads (I consider myself a heavy load)
2. Longevity of the powerplant for "working" vehicles (OTR trucks often see a million miles or more on the same powerplant)
3. fuel economy
4. environmentally freindlier than gasoline engines. (more soot.. but less of the bad stuff you cant see..and.. better mileage=less fuel burned)
I'm sure theres more... but... for the fjr (in reference to the above)
1. Does the FJR really need more torque? umm... I'm gonna go ahead and say... Not for me it doesnt...
2. If you guys are regularly pulling 150-200k out of these engines... maybe we dont need to address longevity...I'm gonna get bored with it long before i wear it out.(maybe... I dunno)
3. again.. the 47mpg i see regularly(even driving like a ********) is not too shabby...
4. hmmm... ya got me on this one, Im imagining the FJR isnt hurting things too bad right now in stock form with the convertors and o2 sensored FI system...
So for me... the cool factor would be the only real calling... the turbo sound, the clatter.. etc... But.. it would be really cool to see someone build a head to go on this block, an injection system, and strap on a little turbo or super charger...
For you iron butt guys... you might see 80 or 90 mpg, torque lower in the rpm range, way longer service intervals(dont really need that), and truckers would like you better...
Denver_FJR
Well-known member
The reason they all drive diesels in Europe is cost of operation. The ~30% fuel economy improvement versus petrol saves a huge amount of money. Diesel and gasoline are roughly the same price over there - though it does vary a bit from country to country. This summer in England and Scotland I paid roughly $2 per liter for petrol. It cost about $60 to fill up the two Triumph Tigers the wife and I were riding. In a car, getting 30% more miles out of a $100 tank of fuel really adds up.
I own a late model Mercedes sedan with a current technology diesel under the hood. It is a 3.0 liter, 24 valve DOHC v6, turbocharged and intercooled of course. It makes roughly 210HP and 400lb-ft of torque. In the MB E-class sedan it provides 6.6 second 0-60 acceleration. Top speed in the US is limited to 130MPH, Euro models will reach well into the 140s. Over the Holiday weekend we drove it out to west Texas. On 75MPH roads it delivered right at 35MPG, which provides just over 700 miles range on a tank of fuel. So it is a very capable automobile.
The downside is primarily cost and complexity. The emissions controls required to meet current standards are extensive. Heavy EGR, including intake throttle valves to generate vacuum and increase flow, for NOX control. Catalyst and Diesel Particulate Filter to clean up the exhaust. The DPF requires the engine to inject fuel during the exhaust stroke to heat the DPF and incinerate particulates. This hurts fuel economy and the heavy parts of the diesel fuel condense in the crankcase, diluting the oil. The DPF also requires low ash oil - 9 quarts at $10/each is the best price I have found. Newer cars also have urea injection, though mine is a few model years old and didn't require it. On the plus side, all this stuff really works. The diesel has no exhaust smell or smoke - absolutely none.
In Europe all this technology and expense make sense because of the cost savings. In the U.S. where diesel fuel is more expensive than petrol and both generally are not all that pricey - not so much.
I own a late model Mercedes sedan with a current technology diesel under the hood. It is a 3.0 liter, 24 valve DOHC v6, turbocharged and intercooled of course. It makes roughly 210HP and 400lb-ft of torque. In the MB E-class sedan it provides 6.6 second 0-60 acceleration. Top speed in the US is limited to 130MPH, Euro models will reach well into the 140s. Over the Holiday weekend we drove it out to west Texas. On 75MPH roads it delivered right at 35MPG, which provides just over 700 miles range on a tank of fuel. So it is a very capable automobile.
The downside is primarily cost and complexity. The emissions controls required to meet current standards are extensive. Heavy EGR, including intake throttle valves to generate vacuum and increase flow, for NOX control. Catalyst and Diesel Particulate Filter to clean up the exhaust. The DPF requires the engine to inject fuel during the exhaust stroke to heat the DPF and incinerate particulates. This hurts fuel economy and the heavy parts of the diesel fuel condense in the crankcase, diluting the oil. The DPF also requires low ash oil - 9 quarts at $10/each is the best price I have found. Newer cars also have urea injection, though mine is a few model years old and didn't require it. On the plus side, all this stuff really works. The diesel has no exhaust smell or smoke - absolutely none.
In Europe all this technology and expense make sense because of the cost savings. In the U.S. where diesel fuel is more expensive than petrol and both generally are not all that pricey - not so much.
