Last summer fuel was $4.00/gal. When you look at the trade mags, it seems that noone is talking about fuel efficient machines anymore. Is it because of tier 3 engines or because we in the US don't care?
probably we as americans just dont care, if the price of fuel goes up so do the rates for the equipment...thats what we do at work
Beg to differ... starting with the D7E. Every single manufacturer out there is working on technology that will reduce some machine's fuel consumption. The serious projects are all looking in the 15-20% reduced consumption range; some minor improvements (such as the 345D) were around 5%. The market isn't particularly tolerant of nice shiny new metal at this point, so some of the hype has died down, but the movement to reduce fuel consumption has not wavered.
My work with heavy equipment is limited, but I use lawn equipment daily and fuel consumption is a definite concern. My market is extremely competitive right now, to the point that profits are at a minimum. I'm looking for any way I can to cut expenses including fuel consumption. I'm replacing two stroke equipment with 4 stroke as it wears out, the 4 strokes are much better on gas. I also run a diesel powered riding mower vs. gas powered for both better fuel economy and the ability to use some alternate fuels sources. I've replaced old flat head type small engines with overhead cam types, they get about double the fuel rate as the old style. It's very important to me.
I would think it is a huge selling point especially when you think how long equipment last and how high the price could be in 5-20 years. Like pickup trucks in their diesel wars that is rediculous now. 600+ FT TQ then I hear the milage of the new ones compared to mine an 01 Dodge it's nuts with pollution stuff and all the power which most never use much.
I think anyone who buys fuel to feed machines does cars about efficiency to an extend. However trading a perfectly good machine on a newer more efficient model does not make much sense if all you are trying to do is save a few dollars on fuel, remember that this efficiency comes at a price of more complex fuel injection systems. For instance I have an 86 Mitsubishi FK415 truck, which burns ~150 liters every 600kmhs which works out at about 25L/100kmhs. Now a more modern common rail Diesel will do better but how much? Let's say 22liters, that's 3 liters every hundred K's or given current fuel prices about AU$3.60. AU$36 every 1000k's. AU$3600 every 100,000K's. A newer common rail truck with a tipper will probably set me back AU$40,000. Obviously if the truck was worn out and needed major dollars spend on it, it would be a different story but to trade it just to save a few dollars on fuel is silly. A lot of people did trade their full size 6 cylinder cars in on small ones back when fuel prices went through the roof but are probably regretting it now that they have to squeeze the family into the small car.
My dozers are my biggest fuel consumers.The past few years on bigger dirt jobs I have quit spending alot of time finishing with them.Insted I use a farm tractor and 8 foot box blade.Its faster and it uses about 1/3 of the fuel that my dozer would burn.I get the grade made with the dozer then pickup the small windrows of dirt and rock & debris with the tractor & box blade.
Still an Issue! In our area we are seeing the use of small dozers and track loaders absolutely be replaced by Skids and Track machines. It's all due to fuel and maintenance costs. I also think this is still the single biggest issue facing all manufacturers. With Tier IV looming in the not-so-distant future everyone is going to have to figure out how to be productive with so many horsepower limiting technologies on the engines. Look at any family of excavators and you will see tremendous increases in operating weight and horsepower (and price) as emissions requirements increase. When you have to start using DPF Mufflers and After-Treatment engines are going to lose power or get upsized and all that means more fuel and higher prices. I think there is less press because frankly no one is buying new equipment. Right now deals are available on rental fleet and used stuff that has low hours and Tier I / II engines. With Cat's standardization of product link on most machines the biggest benefit has been real-time fuel consumption information. It's still incredibly important and is a huge difference maker with customers I'm speaking with. Long story short... it's hear to stay... the economy is just a better headline right now.
I also care about fuel efficiency. I have 2 VW TDI's cause they get 45 mpg min and go like stink. I also have a Dodge Cummins. I have owned diesel cars since the late 80's for their fuel mileage. Dean
Gotta love them VW TDI's. I bought an 02 last year. I have put 32,000 miles and average around 55mpg Compare that to the 15mpg with my 04 psd.
I used to idle my machines if I was off of them with a set of plans in my hand and a grade rod.Now if I am going to be off a machine for more than 5 minutes I shut them down. My pickup as well I would let the power stroke idle..Now I shut it down as well.Every penny counts right now.So the owner tells me...
In my latest gig driving over the road, fuel economy and price are extremely important. I use an 08 3/4 ton Chev with Duramax and Allison to tow a 28' Haulmark cargo trailer about 500 miles a day delivering auto parts and tires to various places in southeastern Arizona. There is some mountain driving involved and some city driving too. Lots of stops. With ambient air temps here in the +100's, the AC is always on -- as much to dry me off as to cool me down. With heavy loads in the trailer I average 9.5 to 10.5 miles per gallon though it can go lower with high wind conditions. If I use Biodiesel B99.9, the miles per gallon go down to around 8.5 to 9.5. The Biodiesel has been price competitive here, but in the last ten days regular ULSD has been cheaper by up to 20 cents a gallon. During a re-gen, the exhaust smells a hell of a lot better with the Biodiesel than with ULSD. As soon as the hauler passes the hundred thousand mile warranty mark, the re-gen system comes off and economy should improve. The Haulmark trailer is a blunt nosed tank, sorta like dragging a boat anchor around. We tried to find a similar size trailer with a V-nose, but none were available in our area nor in fact, within 700 miles. I'm told that V-noses ad maybe a mile to a mile and a half better fuel economy. They also pull better because they do not wag their tail so much at higher speeds. Honestly, after a long day on the road, I feel like a sailor getting off a ship after a long sea voyage, the world seems shaky for a while. If I stay under 65 MPH, economy is not so bad, maybe in the 10.5 to 11.5 range. Without the trailer and with a full load of tires in the bed, I can reach around 16 MPG. Empty and running at 65, the truck will easily do an average of 16 to 17.5 MPG. On flat land the hauler will achieve 22.5 MPG at 65 MPH. I put in a long day so thankfully I'm not running under CDL rules. The work is not exceptionally hard -- worst day was unloading 182 tires and about 50 other items. I've lost thirty pounds and regained some muscle strength, so it's been a pretty good deal so far. Not much money in it however. I think most Americans care a lot about fuel economy, but we do what we have to do to make a living and go about our private lives as we want to. If that means a SUV is needed to haul the kids and dogs around, then you just can't complain about high fuel prices. In my case, a 3/4 ton crewcab pickup is needed to haul trailers. Yes, it's big and it intimidates other drivers a bit, but it's comfortable, cool, and it works hard and is still quite reliable. If the speculators will stay out of betting on oil futures and let the consumer market work, I believe fuel prices will stay reasonable this year. If the speculators get involved again like they did last year, we're sunk!
In today’s fuel saving system, the age of technology has finally arrived. Today’s fossil fuel converter, that are just hitting the market, are going to make a greater inroad than the additive we add today to the fuel. Just think one time cost for the life of the engine. The best part, the catalytic converter extends engine life, reduces emissions, maintenance cost and adds power. Happy new year to all
Most people are concerned with cost per mile/cost per hour and fuel certainly factors in there. But considering all the problems caused by emissions regulations and the manufacturers inability to build equipment that lasts and has low maintenance costs, many are hanging on to their old reliable serviceable fuel guzzlers. Who can blame them? The new junk simply has too much electronics and complexity that must be serviced at the dealer at ridiculous costs.
By any chance do you work for a company that sells these catalytic converters? You just joined here and every post is in reference to them.
While the post above check's is certainly a spammer it's just a question of what the spammers intentions/goals are??? maybe just to get their 'text' in as many search engines as possible??? maybe add links later??? maybe their spamming software isn't aware the links were stripped at the time of posting....
somebody is smoking weed. A catalytic converter does nothing but reduce engine life, decrease fuel mileage, rob power, and make equipment more expensive!
You forgot to mention: adds more parts that breakdown more often thereby lowering the overall reliability of the engine as a whole. Could be the OP's real name starts with greta....
Hey... I got some fuel line magnets you really need...
Already got some of them around here somewhere too...
I sure would do that sooner than let restrictive garbage in the exhaust that does nothing but cost an honest, hard working man more money some days than he makes!!!! the magnets might do some good!!!=)
So I have a 20 year old backhoe that I run with my brand new Deeres that cat will run 2 hard days on a tank of fuel and I barely get a day and a half out of the deeres on fumes Emissions hurt fuel economy as much as better injection systems and engine design helped With what I have heard read and conversed with engineers at the factory it will be at least 5 more years before fuel economy will overcome the added load of emissions Along with more complex systems now backhoes are being manufactured with load sense pumps witch cost a fortune to replace compared to good old gear pumps not saying it's bad but at additional cost there is no money saved only more money spent and that's before paying dealer service rates to fix anything just the price of parts is ridiculous
I won't bother repeating myself here, but I shared my thoughts on this member's post in another thread: I hadn't seen this set of replies before posting there. I will add here, digging up 10 year old threads to add content that is of no real value is pretty annoying too...
Haven't ouimet somewhere before?