Go Back   iRV2 Forums > MOTORHOME FORUMS > Class A Motorhome Discussions
Click Here to Login
Join iRV2 Today

Mission Statement: Supporting thoughtful exchange of knowledge, values and experience among RV enthusiasts.
Reply
  This discussion is proudly sponsored by:
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about their products on iRV2
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-10-2006, 02:11 AM   #1
Member
 
mjoemort's Avatar
 
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: canfield,ohio,usa
Posts: 35
we have been looking at used pushers and are concerned with the 2010 fuel issue. can these pre 2007 engines be updated or are you out of luck?
__________________

__________________
mjoemort is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 RV Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

iRV2.com RV Community - Are you about to start a new improvement on your RV or need some help with some maintenance? Do you need advice on what products to buy? Or maybe you can give others some advice? No matter where you fit in you'll find that iRV2 is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with other RV owners, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create an RV blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 11-10-2006, 02:11 AM   #2
Member
 
mjoemort's Avatar
 
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: canfield,ohio,usa
Posts: 35
we have been looking at used pushers and are concerned with the 2010 fuel issue. can these pre 2007 engines be updated or are you out of luck?
__________________

__________________
mjoemort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2006, 01:20 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Texas Bubba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Rio Grande Valley, Texas
Posts: 125
What fuel issue are you worried about? Both Cat and Cummins have said that ultra low sulfur fuel is ok in pre 07 engines. No issues that I know of.
__________________
Bubba
2001 40' Beaver Thunder
2007 Chevy Silverado
Texas Bubba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2006, 03:13 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Arcadia, FL
Posts: 183
Have heard the new diesel may be better than the Low Sulfer we have been using.
__________________
Richard and Babs

and a Bob Tail Cat
Richard and Babs and a Bob Tail Cat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-11-2006, 06:10 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Fred and Bonnie's Avatar
 
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pacific Northwest or SoCal
Posts: 2,835
Send a message via ICQ to Fred and Bonnie
I was reading an engineering magazine the other day; the major concern in the maintenance arena will be leaking seals on older engines due to the change in fuels. The fleet operators, who have cash on hand, are buying up all the '06 standard units they can afford, again due to the anticipated increase in upkeep on the '07 engines. The real concern seems to be fuel injectors operating under increased pressures.

I think time will tell, however I feel the change will be painful, just like the switch was to unleaded gas.

Fred
__________________
Fred and Bonnie
2005 Dolphin LX 6375
Abby, Ruffles & Scarlett, "The Cats"
Fred and Bonnie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2006, 04:59 AM   #6
Moderator Emeritus
 
Gary RVRoamer's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Silver Springs, FL. USA
Posts: 18,060
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">however I feel the change will be painful, just like the switch was to unleaded gas. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And as I recall the unleaded change-over, there was the same rash of "oh my god" articles generating much FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt)but few, if any,documented cases where any actual harm came from the change in fuel blend. It was pretty much a non-event for the average vehicle owner.

Yes, there is a slight reduction in lubricity in the ULSD fuel. And refiners are adding chemicals to ULSD compensate. And if there is any harmful effect, it will take many thousands of miles to see it. Few Rvers ever put enough miles on to be concerned, assuming there is any need to be concerned at all. Just my $0.02...

Fleets are buying pre-2007 spec engines mostly because there will a significant price increase to meet the new emission standards that also go into effect for 2007 production engines - estimates are in the $5,000-$10,000 range for big diesels.
__________________
Gary Brinck
Former owner of 2004 American Tradition
Home is in the Ocala Nat'l Forest near Ocala, FL
Summers in Black Mountain, NC
Gary RVRoamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2006, 02:32 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Fred and Bonnie's Avatar
 
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Pacific Northwest or SoCal
Posts: 2,835
Send a message via ICQ to Fred and Bonnie
Gary, ask ex-military jet engine mechanics what happens when fuel types are changed. It's called "Leaks".

While there were horror stories in the unleaded fuel switch, do you remember how many aftermarket changes were mandated to "clean-up" the older models? I haven't heard of any so far, but change is in the air. The Sunday LA times ran an article on stepped-up enforcement of diesel emission standards, seems the number of deaths attributed to diesel particulate emissions is climbing.

Yes the fleet people are beating the price increase, but they are also buying all the injectors they can get their hands on, anticipating problems.

Time will tell

Fred
__________________
Fred and Bonnie
2005 Dolphin LX 6375
Abby, Ruffles & Scarlett, "The Cats"
Fred and Bonnie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2006, 12:21 AM   #8
Member
 
mjoemort's Avatar
 
Ford Super Duty Owner
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: canfield,ohio,usa
Posts: 35
just read your comments, and i thank you. given this info and after some other research, we are going to keep our gasser, with a wait and see attitude
__________________
mjoemort is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2006, 04:19 AM   #9
Moderator Emeritus
 
Gary RVRoamer's Avatar


 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Silver Springs, FL. USA
Posts: 18,060
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">do you remember how many aftermarket changes were mandated to "clean-up" the older models? I haven't heard of any so far, but change is in the air. The Sunday LA times ran an article on stepped-up enforcement of </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mandated? By whom? Sorry, but I recall a lot of scare stories and hype for products that supposedly would correct for the lack of lead, but in practice there were very few problems. Of course, for the next several years anybody with an engine problem blamed it on the new fuel blend, but few had any proof. And with all due respect, these are not jet engines - an internal combustion engine is a far different animal.

So yes, time will tell and there will no doubt be a lot written and re-hashed on this subject. But my bet is that this will be equivalent to the Y2K scare - much ado about nothing.
__________________
Gary Brinck
Former owner of 2004 American Tradition
Home is in the Ocala Nat'l Forest near Ocala, FL
Summers in Black Mountain, NC
Gary RVRoamer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2006, 04:27 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Roland's Avatar
 
Monaco Owners Club
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: On top of Windy Hill - Florida
Posts: 141
In the "For what it's worth column".
Chevron Tech Bullitin FTB-2-1 dtd August/2005 discusses fuel leaks from some vehicle owners using ultra low sulfur (S15)diesel fuel.This is similar to occurrences in the early 1990's when "S500" low sulfur was introduced. It has occurred at "O" ring seals, mostly fuel pump and injector seals. Sporadic failures are anticipated.

One explanation is many of the S15 fuels are expected to contain lower levels of aromatics. This reduction is due to increased hydrotreating to reduce the fuel's sulfur level to 15PPM. Fuel additives do not seem to be the answer -- as they do not change the aromatic content of the fuel.
GOOD NEWS: problem is expected to affect nitrile rubber seals (Buna N) that have seen "long service at high temperatures". Seal failure is not related to lubricity.
BAD NEWS: If you are so lucky as to develope leaks - it isn't cheap.
__________________
Roland, Diane & Katie - the furry 4-footed kid
'01 Diplomat - ISC330 - Allison MD3060 - Progressive Ind. EMS-50C - Hughes Autoformer - '06 Jeep Liberty CRD
Roland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2006, 07:25 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Workhorse Chassis Owner
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Northwestern Montana
Posts: 3,138
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RV Roamer:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">do you remember how many aftermarket changes were mandated to "clean-up" the older models? I haven't heard of any so far, but change is in the air. The Sunday LA times ran an article on stepped-up enforcement of </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Mandated? By whom? Sorry, but I recall a lot of scare stories and hype for products that supposedly would correct for the lack of lead, but in practice there were very few problems. Of course, for the next several years anybody with an engine problem blamed it on the new fuel blend, but few had any proof. And with all due respect, these are not jet engines - an internal combustion engine is a far different animal.

So yes, time will tell and there will no doubt be a lot written and re-hashed on this subject. But my bet is that this will be equivalent to the Y2K scare - much ado about nothing. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


FWIW I agree with Gary. Having worked as an automotive engine mechanic for many years, and during the "Low lead", and Unleaded transition period mentioned above. In my expierience very little problems occurred as a result of going unleaded. Most problems at the very beginning of this period were caused by a drop in fuel octane,rather than absense of lead. Remember there were still lots of vehicles in the 9.5 and even 10 to 1 compression range that were manufactured in the 1960's and first three years of 70's. These required some changing of ignition timing. Engine valve lubrication, and valve seat wear as feared, simply did not occur.

I worked for Mercedes Benz as Diesel engine technician when S500 low sulpher was introduced, and fears of damage to injection system, and seal leaks proved unfounded also.

My two cents worth.

Dieselclacker
__________________

__________________
Dieselclacker
dieselclacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Selling Used Diesels Jean & Leroy Winnebago Industries Owner's Forum 9 02-21-2006 05:27 PM
WH,passing Diesels?? lwmuddy Workhorse and Chevrolet Chassis Motorhome Forum 41 08-29-2005 02:17 PM
Ya think diesels are slow???? Don (W5IT) Trailer Towing and Tow Vehicles Discussion 9 02-01-2005 04:35 PM
Class C Diesels Ford Motorhome Chassis Forum 3 12-31-1969 07:00 PM
WH,passing Diesels?? MH-General Discussions & Problems 41 12-31-1969 07:00 PM

» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.