DaimlerChrysler to Show Tier 2 Bin 5 BLUETEC Diesel SUV in Detroit
03 January 2007
 |
| The Vision GL 420 BLUETEC. |
DaimlerChrysler will introduce a new BLUETEC concept vehicle that meets EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 emissions standards at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit next week: the Vision GL 420 BLUETEC.
The diesel SUV packs a V-8 engine which develops 216 kW (290 hp) and 700 Nm (515 lb ft) of torque with anticipated fuel efficiency of 9.8 litres per 100 kilometers (24 mpg US) and a range of up to 1,000 kilometers (600 miles) on a single tank. Tier 2 Bin 5 compliance would allow this to be sold in all 50-states.
DaimlerChrysler is using the concept to highlight its position that BLUETEC vehicles—especially in the SUV segment—are suited to the American market, where heavy customer demand for vehicles with torquey, large-displacement engines is coupled with the need to comply with stringent exhaust-emission regulations. Higher fuel prices also make diesel’s fuel economy advantage relative to gasoline more attractive.
The latest J.D. Power study “Global Outlook For Diesel” forecasts that diesels will account for more than 15% of new registrations in North America by 2015. On this basis, Mercedes-Benz plans to expand its BLUETEC range.
The company has announced that it will offer three new Tier 2 Bin 5 compliant BLUETEC models (the R, ML and GL Class) in all 50 US states by as early as 2008. (Earlier post.)
BLUETEC is a modular emissions control system that reduces nitrogen oxides in particular. In the E Class, an oxidation-type catalytic converter and particulate filter are combined with an improved, extremely durable NOx storage catalytic converter and an additional SCR catalytic converter. For the larger vehicles—including the Vision GL 420 BLUETEC—a different BLUETEC configuration uses AdBlue injection for urea-based Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR).
In November, DaimlerChrysler, Volkswagen and Audi officially announced that they intend to establish the BLUETEC brand name as the designation for particularly clean, highly fuel-efficient passenger cars and SUVs with diesel engines. (Earlier post.)
I'd imagine this would be geared towards those who have boats to tow, and ski homes to visit, yearly, in the snowy mountains.
Posted by: allen_Z | 03 January 2007 at 10:37 AM
With the price of diesel priced higher than premium. how does this make any sense? And, the only reason diesel out performs gasoline is because of it's higher potental energy. How about developing more effecient ICEs that will use the energy for work instead of creating more wasted heat! Detroit, and the world, needs to start building zero rpm idle engines, low friction engines, lean-burn engines etc. to sell their products to the more informed car owners of today. Pure electric cars with improved battery performance is the future, not the ICE.
Posted by: Ladson | 03 January 2007 at 11:41 AM
216 kW (290 hp) and 700 Nm (515 lb ft) of torque
They're going after the Gangsta vehicle market.
Posted by: DS | 03 January 2007 at 11:44 AM
umm Ladson, sounds like you have a good idea here? So when r u going to act on it or r u just another talking head? Good ideas without any action doesn't help!
Posted by: JD | 03 January 2007 at 12:23 PM
JD:
Thank you for the challenge but my engineering efforts are spent because of age. However, I see great things coming from the new generation; For example, Honda's approach to insert a brushless starter/generator between the ICE and the transmission is a zero rpm idle car; Now if it is feasible to apply that to the larger cars, then we have a great device to help save foreign oil, lots of foreign oil, especially in areas like the bay area where the traffic is more stop than go. I wonder why all these good ideas never seem to come from Detroit?
Posted by: Ladson | 03 January 2007 at 01:24 PM
Diesel higher than premium? Where the heck do you live? Nowhere in the northeast is diesel even matching premium, and this is the biggest home heating oil market (same as diesel BTW).
Diesel does fluctuate, but on average it is only 10% more than RUG and you get 30% better mileage. Even right now, nationally, diesel is just over 10% more than RUG. Premium does not even factor into any of this:
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip.asp
Posted by: Anon | 03 January 2007 at 01:54 PM
Ladson,
Detroit does come up with ingeneous designs and innovations, but fail to capitalise on many of them. Management often sits on them, not wanting to take risks that could jeopardise their careers. That is until someone squeezes them. Then they rush out and have to play catchup.
_With the 90's, it was SUV/pickup envy. As Dodge scored big with their truck heavy strategy, GM and Ford rushed to join. Low gas prices of 1997-1999, and the booming (bubble) economy made them apealing to American consumers. Then came the recession, deep vehicle rebates/incentives, and high gas prices. They worked to either saturated the market for new, and used trucks, or crimp demand. The Big 3 are caught out in the cold, and part of it is due to their leadership's decisions.
Posted by: allen_Z | 03 January 2007 at 02:51 PM
As far as "why bother?", diesel engines are arguably the best platform for biofuels, at least if enough biodiesel can be produced to meet the demand as suggested by the University of New Hampshire (http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html).
Posted by: Carl | 03 January 2007 at 03:12 PM
This possible '08 offering from MB may attain 80-90% of the mpg of Toyota's existing 400h or Highlander hybrid, and at what additional cost?
Hopefully, MB will comply with our lenient clean air act with bluetec-
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/12/mercedesbenz_fi.html
Posted by: FYI co2 | 03 January 2007 at 05:08 PM
Anon:
California prices; in Auburn, CA: D-fuel cost $2.99 and regular is $2.47. Middle grade runs about 10 cents more and high test runs about 20 cents higher. and, that's an economic station. for fuel cost nation wide, see Gasbuddy.com
Posted by: Ladson | 03 January 2007 at 06:39 PM
I was just in Colorado for Christmas and saw the same thing.. regular was around $2.50 while diesel was $3/gal. Looks like maybe the southwest just has a different pricing structure than the northeast for diesel fuel.
Posted by: Sid Hoffman | 03 January 2007 at 11:56 PM
Diesel engine has an advantage of low-temperature exhaust, which allows it to be great towing workhorse. Now, direct injection gasoline engine working in lean mode also has low-temperature exhaust. Both engines have to employ advanced exhaust aftertreatment, SCR or adsorbtion NOx cat. I am not sure which one will win the competition for heavy SUV market in US.
Posted by: Andrey | 04 January 2007 at 12:49 AM
Comparing fuel prices per gallon is not useful, you should focus on $/mile driven. Diesel engines are inherently lean-burn concepts that do no need throttles, plus they feature high compression ratios. These two factors are the principal reasons for their superior thermodynamic efficiency. The lower fuel consumption by volume overcompensates the higher price per gallon in the US, where it roughly reflects each fuel's energy density.
The most recent annual ADAC study compared the total cost of ownership of similarly powered gasoline and diesel variants of 500 models of car. Since gasoline is taxed even more heavily than gasoil in Europe, the diesel options of larger cars and SUVs turned out to be 15-20% cheaper to own and operate at 12,000 miles/year in that country. Small wonder diesel vehicles enjoy a 50% share of the total European LDV market. Subcompacts are pretty much the only category in which diesels are marginal or inferior propositions in financial terms.
Substituting US fuel prices for the German ones and accounting for the additional emissions control equipment, the financial advantage shrank to 7-10%. There are some unknowns, such as the novelty premium manufacturers will charge early on and the resale values of B2T5 diesels. However, once diesels capture say, 5% market share, this is a reasonable guess for how much money you'll save by opting for a diesel instead of a comparable gasoline variant for any given model. This is especially true for pick-up trucks and SUVs.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/11/german_total_co.html
Ladson does have one valid point: any powerful engine would benefit from stop/start functionality in city driving, yielding approx. 5% in vehicle fuel economy in the standardized test cycles. This is especially true for large, powerful powerplants that guzzle a lot of gas when idling. Engineers at Robert Bosch GmbH are working on a combustion-assisted rapid warm start procedure, which would permit adding stop/start to virtually any engine with nothing more than software changes.
http://www.all4engineers.com/index.php;/lng=en/do=show/alloc=3/id=5139
Posted by: Rafael Seidl | 04 January 2007 at 01:21 AM
Ladson, I provided you with a real link for national gas prices. Gasbuddy is not a real link. Its uncontrolled, anecdotal nonsense, (but helpful at times).
Now, let's try this again, shall we?
Go HERE: http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/twip/twip.asp
So granted, there are odd markets like yours, but on a national average, at the height of home heating season, diesel is a hair over 10% more expensive than RUG (regular, if you didn't get it)
Posted by: Anon | 04 January 2007 at 06:01 AM
I wonder did DaimlerChrysler get EPA and CARB approval for the separate "AdBlue" urea injection system. If they did, then we may see a lot of Mercedes-Benz, VW and Audi models with turbodiesel power coming by calendar year 2008. Imagine driving even in California a Mercedes-Benz C-Series (new W204 model) with a turbodiesel engine getting 40 mpg on freeway travel.
Posted by: Raymond | 04 January 2007 at 07:59 AM
who the hell needs 290 hp and 500+ ft/lbs. of torque?? The whole point of using a diesel engine is to achieve efficiency. Once again, defeat is snatched from the jaws of victory.......... does anyone in these car companies have a brain?
Posted by: Jay Tee | 04 January 2007 at 08:13 AM
Tnx guys for the comments; I'm learning lots from this site even at my advanced age.
Anon:
Tnx for the link; I use GasBuddy when I'm on the road and looking for best price.
Jay Tee:
America has been sold on the idea that large, heavy, SUVs are safer for the family and there's lots of room to load up the family needs..all true! Except the higher CG causes them to roll over easily and they burn large amounts fuel. Kind of begs the question: What is is the safest car to use to move the family around practically?
Posted by: Ladson | 04 January 2007 at 01:34 PM
Hopefully this engine will trickle down to the Dodge Ram. A 2WD 1500 series would easily get the same mileage and tow a trailer much easier than the Hemi(which gets about 12mpg).
Posted by: John Ard | 04 January 2007 at 07:45 PM
Dodge is planning to introduce a 5.4L V8 turbo diesel from Cummins in the Ram 1500 for 2009. Also a 4.2L V6 version for the Durango, and hopefully the Dakota. You can see it here, just search for Cummins V8 or V6.
Posted by: gjb | 10 January 2007 at 01:11 PM
Mercedes and other German automakers are trying to position fuel-efficient diesels as a time-tested alternative to popular gas-electric hybrids for more effecient Mercedes engine parts. Mercedes first built diesel cars in 1936. In Europe, diesels are popular and account for half of new car sales. But the German automakers have been handicapped in the United States, which has stricter regulations than Europe on diesel emissions but had comparatively lax norms for diesel fuel -- until now.
Posted by: Mercedes Parts Blog | 01 March 2007 at 09:12 PM