Find Reviews by Make:
Developing. Actually, not.
37 Comments on “GM Cancels 4.5-Liter Diesel Engine...”
Read all comments
Latest Car Reviews view all
Latest Product Reviews view all
Recent Comments
- Lou_BC: @Carlson Fan – My ’68 has 2.75:1 rear end. It buries the speedo needle. It came stock with the...
- theflyersfan: Inside the Chicago Loop and up Lakeshore Drive rivals any great city in the world. The beauty of the...
- A Scientist: When I was a teenager in the mid 90’s you could have one of these rolling s-boxes for a case of...
- Mike Beranek: You should expand your knowledge base, clearly it’s insufficient. The race isn’t in...
- Mike Beranek: ^^THIS^^ Chicago is FOX’s whipping boy because it makes Illinois a progressive bastion in the...
Car Reviews By Make view all
New Car Research
Who We Are
- Tim Healey
Managing Editor - Matt Posky
News and Social Media Contributor - Timothy Cain
Sales Analyst - Murilee Martin
Junkyard Finds Author - Matthew Guy
Contributor - Chris Tonn
Contributor
- Adam Tonge
- Bozi Tatarevic
- Corey Lewis
- Jo Borras
- Mark Baruth
- Ronnie Schreiber
Off course. It makes sense to spend millions of dollars developing something, only to can it at the last minute. And to think, this company is going under.
It just seems like every manufacturer except Ford has their product plan in flux. We have seen lots of plans come and go and come again. And even Ford has changed their plans to put the small diesel in the F150.
It is nice to know they both have the new engines waiting for the market to be right. They might be ahead for once when gas prices go up again.
GM has been doing the toggle switch development management thing for years now, and it doesn’t work. RWD large cars. New V-8. New Diesel. All heavily invested in, then ash canned.
Some MBA types seem to think that R&D projects can be turned on and off like water faucets and that you can just shift resources around to chase today’s CEO hot idea. It doesn’t work.
God DAMN it…so sick and tired of America’s backwards state when it comes to diesel adoption.
What I would give today for a mint 1981 Buick Park Avenue with a GM diesel in, wow what a pile of steaming dung that was.
Who would need a 4.5 Liter Engine?
I am doing just fine with my 2.0 in a 5 Series Touring ..
Who cares?
The benefits to be found in Diesels are not at the large end of the scale, but the small. Putting a smaller-than 2L engine into a compact-to-small size car is where the market has shown the best results. There are plenty of 4-to-6 liter Diesels out there for the trucks that need them. What the USA needs are some small-displacement Diesels that can take a Malibu are have it pull 40 MPG.
Of course this is all moot because GM will be dead soon anyway.
–chuck
RF: “GM Cancels 4.5-Liter Diesel Engine”
They no longer need it because their hybrid program is going like gangbusters.
Cool – now they can pull in their Hydrogen Fuel Cell stuff in a hundred years or so……..
Yes, once again the GM beancounters have determined that American Consumers are not sophisticated enough to buy a diesel powered truck or car. Maybe, next year they will think the same about ‘plug-in-electrics’ too.
This is a TTAC scoop, GM psychics have determined that the future holds, cheap gas(forever), the EPA rules will be forgotten, and CAFE will only be a small restaurant that serves mainly coffee.
Leaving the single best V8 diesel in the Toyota Landcruiser which I don’t think the USA gets either….. It can be dropped into the Tundra in a heartbeat.
Man, I really liked this diesel… they found a way to really maximize packing efficiency. It’s a tight angle V8 and had the intake and exhaust ports reversed so it ran the exhaust down the center of the V. Interesting stuff.
I had heard rumbles this was possibly the government’s doing.
Probably because it was a truck engine, and trucks are bad, and since it isn’t a prius, the government concluded it was not the right engine, nor the right product, and the only thing GM should build is a Prius.
Thats what I HEARD anyway….will see if I can dig that up somewhere.
They would have sold decently well in the 1/2 tons, if the price premium wasn’t too high. Good torque is what you want in a truck. It would have also helped with their CAFE ratings for these trucks.
It went the same road as the “high feature” V8. Apparently CAFE didn’t work well for the smaller higher efficiency engine. No 7.2L pushrod motors are what will get GM into 35mpg CAFE ratings.
Pretty simple.. Diesel is dirty, so Nancy P. canned it.
Stands to reason that GM will do whatever they think Congress will like to get that next check…
GM needs another engine about as much as it needs to bring back the LaSalle and Oakland brands.
The Silverado line already offers something like eight different engines.
lw: Pretty simple.. Diesel is dirty, so Nancy P. canned it.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/4237945.html
Let me restate my point…
The average voter thinks diesel is dirty, so it must go.. 2010 elections are right around the corner!
Facts are really irrelevant at this point..
No, what you fail to see is that this engine was supposed to (and I say that referring to GM, of course…so take it with a grain of salt)…but it was supposed to “push the envelope”.
I was actually looking forward to this engine in a half-ton truck. Not that I’d have purchased one…but then again, who knows. I like the idea of being able to drive something for 300,000-400,000 miles…I find it very appealing. How else can you fight inflation when it comes to cars/trucks?
Anyway…so much for GM taking the lead. I guess retrospective, backward-looking mullet mobiles (Camaros) are the way to go.
Back to the future. I wonder if GM is taking a second look at 4-barrel carbs.
I know for a fact this would have sold well…based upon where I live, it’s the “guy” thing to do…go into the mini-mart w/ your diesel idling outside…etc…I see it all the time.
I liked the idea of being able to buy a diesel enging in a half-ton pickup back when diesel was about the same price as regular unleaded gasoline. Today diesel is about 18% more expensive than regular unleaded gasoline here. Not as bad as a few months ago, but still significantly more expensive. Not so interested in paying extra both up front for the diesel engine and every time I fill up. Considering GM’s financial condition and the unfavorable economics for diesel vs. gasoline, cutting diesel engine development is one of GM’s more sane decisions.
I think people who spring for a diesel do so not always based upon price advantages/disadvantages. I already mentioned one big item…longevity. There are others too…such as the aforementioned torque.
And guess what? They don’t “have” to be dirty. Thus my interest in seeing what they could do w/ this one.
Oh well… my interest of late is simply watching the finances….more fun than watching monkeys destroy a Coupe De Ville.
lw
“Facts are really irrelevant at this point..”
You mean politicians actually used to care about them? Guess that’s from before my time…
And this sucks, because I was looking forward to dropping one of these engines into a an early ’80s B- or C-body that was born with the Olds 350 diesel.
Fact and common sense.. All gone… Their return is doubtful. I assume that they won’t come back in my lifetime..
Imagine GM making a small, dirt simple / reliable car with a small diesel. Sell it for $15K, make the replacement parts dirt cheap and sell it as a car that will go 300K miles and get 40MPG..
Instant MEGA hit, but noooo.. we need Hydrogen powered head rests and head lights that won’t make our landfills dirty….
This is due to low fuel prices. Slap a $10/gal tax on gasoline and these things start flying off the shelf.
Yes diesel is more expensive, but you still get more bang for the buck. At 18% more cost, you still get into the 30%s in mileage and power per gallon. A diesel in a truck just makes sense, probably the ultimate reason GM is killing it.
I know for a fact this would have sold well…based upon where I live, it’s the “guy” thing to do…go into the mini-mart w/ your diesel idling outside…etc…I see it all the time.
I agree with that. Where I live in oil field country, trucks are THE vehicle to have – that is if you’re a workin’ man. Only women and pencil dicks drive cars.
The diesel option is a macho badge of honor, complete with dual chrome vertical stacks, Yosemite Sam mud flaps, dualies, and a stick. The apartment complexes and trailer parks are full of these freakin’ things, whether Ford, GM, or Dodge.
I have been hoping/waiting for a diesel option in a 1500/150 series truck for years. At times it is necessary for me to pull horse trailers or haul round bales. My Chevy Avalanche with 5.3 & 4.10 rear end is certainly capable, but nothing special. I also have to use my truck as daily driver. 250/350 class trucks are a nuisance in most parking lots & many covered parking garages are off limit. An honest 300,000 mile lifespan diesel would solve lots of problems for me, You should also know I’m still upset my 1977 & 1988 Landcruisers were not available with diesels.
lw:
Imagine GM making a small, dirt simple / reliable car with a small diesel. Sell it for $15K, make the replacement parts dirt cheap and sell it as a car that will go 300K miles and get 40MPG..
They already did this sans oil burner…it was called Saturn. Plenty of 1st and 2nd Gen Z bodies still on the road with high mileage. Given the emissions control required to meet 07+ emissions you could not make the price point.
It is too bad they killed this. 95% of the people who have 1ton pickups could just as easily get something like this. Of course it might undermine the case for the hybrids when it gives comparable mileage and better performance.
GM has to focus on building cars and trucks that people will want to replace every couple of years. They don’t want to build engines that get their first rebuild at half a million miles. Where is the profit in that!
GM has determined that 100,000 is the number. Make the car last that long (with crossed fingers) and the chumps will buy another. A diesel would last too long. It’s comparing buying 1 truck or 5.
GM wants you to buy 5.
It is official now, Wagoner is GM’s worse CEO ever. Mr. no-innovation should be his new name.
Awesome. They’re already failing miserably, I see no reason to offer anything unique. What a stupid fucking idea. Makes me think of Ford’s decision not to make the F100 because it couldn’t tow enough (let alone the fact that most pickup owners tow NOTHING). Half tons will likely replace a large amount of 3/4 and 1 tons when fuel prices go back up (which will happen sooner than later)and if GM were to offer a diesel in theirs, they’d have a leg up on the competition. I guess they’re just going to wait for Toyota to offer a diesel Tundra first. Way to go Rick, you stupid ass. Glad I gave you some of my money so you could ride out another 30 seconds of destroying what was the largest automaker in the world.
GM Meeting Room:
Guy 1: “Hey, I have an idea. In order to save some money, lets delay all products that might give us a competitive edge!”
Guy2: “Yeah, and help us meet CAFE standards”
Guy3: “Let’s not forget meeting several goals outlined in our Bailout Plan.”
Chairman: “OK, let’s do that. We’ll use the money we save to launch the Cruze in every other corner of the world except our own!”
Look, I like me some diesel as much as anybody, I used to have a Mercedes diesel and still have a diesel boat, but you have to demonstrate a real economic or operational advantage to consumers if you expect them to buy one. The fuel economy advantage for truck diesels has shrunk due to the new emissions regs, and that combined with the generally higher diesel fuel price and the premium you have to pay for the engine put the break even point so far out that most buyers would never own the vehicle long enough to get there. Operationally, gas engines will do anything you need to in a light duty pickup; you don’t “need” a diesel. Heavy duty 3/4 ton pickups are a different story, because some owners tow very big loads and need the torque that turbodiesels can generate.
And ya’ll spare me the “diesels will last 500k miles” line. That may well have been true for the old tech, lightly stressed chunks of iron they used to build, but the new engines have multiple turbos, elaborate emission controls. and put out levels of power unheard of back in those days. And even if they did last that long, you aren’t just buying an engine, you’re buying a whole truck, and GM hasn’t exactly proven they can build a truck that would be durable enough to take advantage of that longeveity.
Sad news. I heard a lot of good about this engine. If you need a small diesel in a truck application there still is Cummins.
“Grand Cherokees will get a 4.2 liter Cummins V6 built in a new factory 2010, with the next generation (rated at 190 hp, over 400 lb-ft). This and a 5.0-liter Cummins V8 diesel will be used in Dodge Ram pickups as well.”
http://www.allpar.com/model/upcoming.html
interesting note: BlueTec technology was originally developed by KonTec of Germany. DCX bought them up and Mercedes now takes credit for it.
All is not lost yet since GM execs change plans on a weekly basis. As of a couple of days ago Buicks were going to come from Opel, but I thought a week before that GM was willing to let Opel go for free.
Not that the market is very big, but this engine in full-sized vans and cutaways would be a winner for utility companies and contractors.
As for diesel prices, I think I saw signs last week showing diesel within a few cents of gas; like less than a dime difference. Either Wagoner will go within weeks or GM will go within months. If he goes first, hopefully the new leadership will take another look at this stupid move. Some serious shit is happening in the diesel truck market. Ford parting ways with International, Mahindra advertising for dealers, and the continuing Cummins/Dodge whatever. If/when Chrysler goes, it seems the Cummins products will be up for grabs. Best case IMO would be a Cummins/Ford hookup. Otherwise a deal with Cummins would go a long way in boosting the credibility of Nissan for example.
http://wot.motortrend.com/6481157/auto-news/more-bad-news-gm-shelving-plans-to-build-new-45l-diesel-truck-engine/index.html
Haha, at the bottom of the link they say “thousands of diesel fans.” Pretty much sums up why it’s getting nixed.
Windswords: At the top of the linked page, they note that the V6 diesel introduction has been postponed to 2011. My guess is that includes the diesel GC as well.
I guess neither GM nor Chrysler is interested in producing a replacement for my 15 y/o Cummins, and I wouldn’t buy a Ford.