Is jon thompson on the blow again? lol  Diesel is better.  I have a 98 tj lifted with 33s etc.  i have a 4.0L and i wish i had a diesel.  I hate the liberty IFS! yuck!  But with that diesel motor and mileage i think i might buy one.  and by the way jon, here in wisconsin i can get an extended cab 4X4 diesel dodge ram for a relatively reasonably price.  the 5.9 cummins is rated for 300,000 miles so here in wi. I can pay the same price for a 1/2 ton low mileage ram, or a mid too high mileage 3/4 ram with diesel and get 20-26 miles to the gallon in the diesel.  My buddy has a 97 5.9 cummins in his ext. cab 4X4 and gets from 22- 26 usually 24 though.  that sure beats 13-17 I'd say. Jeep should throw in a diesel in the wrangler, I'd buy one!  

Yea but there are a lot of hidden costs with a Diesel. Frequent oil changes with a lot more oil per change, shorter battery life (especailly in cold climates) Hard starting in very cold climate if not pre heated (plugged in and even then there is fuel gelling when well below zero if it is not properly mixed) Fuel filter that require frequent replacement. As far as life expentancy, I have gotten over 200,000 and several gas engines with no real extra effort other than regular oil changes around 3500 miles or so and I am sure 300,000 or more is possible on a gas too. Bear in mind though you run that cummins or power stroke at full boost all the time, you will not get 300,000 miles out of it plus it is pretty much a sure thing that injector pump will not last that long and it will set you back at least a cool couple of thousand when it does. Any lets not forget the emmisions side of them. Turbo charged diesels (they have to run 20 to 25lbs of boost and more to make any power) put out far more tons of Nitrous Oxides (because they are not regulated yet) and green house gas (carbon dioxide) than any gas engine. (put a mild 6 or 7 lb boost on a big gas V8 with a super charger and easily get well over 500 hp and well over 600lbs of torque over a very wide USABLE RPM range (3000 to 4000 rpm range vs 300 to 500 RPM range with a diesel) with unbelievable throttle responce) And finally, get stuck behind one under load going up a hill (Dodge, Chevy or Ford diesel), man can they ever stink too!!!  

While it is true that older diesels produced excessive HYDRO-CARBONS than gas motors, that is not true today.  Newer diesel engines are far more efficient, and have computor regulated fuel delivery which helps them produce less emmissions.  I have no comment about mileage endurance as I'm sure millions of Dodge Cummins can dispute your opinion.  Diesels may have a narrow powerband, but that powerband is in the perfect spot for heavy towing.  The gas motor may make it to the top faster, but the diesel will get the job done reliably and for a lot longer life span than a supercharged gas motor.  Finally, loaded or unloaded, diesels get better fuel mileage than gas motors.  Higher maintenence costs are the price you pay for that power and fuel efficiency.

Hydro Carbons have never been a problem with Diesels (I guess you are not too informed) Suspend particulates have long been a problem and NOX (Nitrous Oxides) and CO and CO2. Diesels are very big NOX producers and even worse when boosted and they produce more CO2 (green house gas) per mile than gas trucks by a wide margin too. Starting around 2008 or so you will start to see catalytic converters on light Diesels and later on heavy one too. You will alos start to see CO2 limits placed on vehical sometime in the future and when this happens turbocharger Diesel will take a big hit. You do not have to super charge a gas engine to keep up with a diesel but the point I was making is that Diesel needs 20 to 25 pound of boost or more to make as mush power as a big block does with no boost. The power kits you see for them raise boost further in increase CO2, suspended particulates and NOX big time and reduces life span if you use that extra boost a lot and you have to watch EGT so you do not destroy engine.  Throw in a mild boost (5 to 7 PSI) on a big block and it will eat the Diesel alive. Do it to a small block and it will easily match or exceed a stock Diesel. Properly maintained a gas motor will last as long as a Diesel and be cheaper to maintain too. Neglect them both on maintainance and  the Diesel will die first as they are harder on oil than a gas engine and as noisy as a diesel is you will not know you have a problem until you destroy engine. Diesel fleet operators and owner are more aware of maintainance requirements so they take care of them better than the average gas engine owner does hence the longer projected life expectancy but a gas engine can last as long or longer "IF" you maintain it properly. Also direct injection gas engines are coming soon in masses (there are a few out there now in imports) and that will further level the playing field between them efficency wise.  Detroit likes Diesels and SUV's becauses it lets them skirt emission laws with the Diesel and the gas SUV lets them skirt safty standards and they have lower emmision and economy standards too and higher profits to boot. The best Cummins where the early ones with low boost, reliable mechanical pumps, flatter torque curve and good economy even maxed out. Those are long gone and these new high tech ones will not go the distance without several costly trips to the shop for its drive by wire controls. You will not run them 10 or 15 years trouble free like you maybe could with older ones.  

Like all engines, diesels require looking after, if you don't service them; they can eat themselves. The main problems are kept at bay with proper maintenance, ie: clean filters, keep your injecters clean & checked for spray patten, keep the fuel distribution pump adjusted (timing), as well as the timing of the engine itself.

Nobody has mentioned the main advantage of diesels, which is that they are inherently more waterproof than the petrol (gas) equivalent. It might not matter in sunny California, but it does when the cold fog comes down.

Also when the vehicle is used as a power source for P.T.O.'s, or run as a generator to charge batteries (which are used as a power source); the carberetter will develop a "flat spot", which can make the vehicle undrivable (read DANGEROUS).

No I was not informed on the dangers of nitrogen oxides.  Not until I read the chapter you wrote and a couple of others that I browsed just to see what the heck you were talking about.  Aside from the information on the greenhouse gases everything else is pure opinion.  You obviously have an intense love for gas engines and a great hatred for diesels.  I on the other hand I have a realistic view of things and understand that both engines destroy the environment equally when not encumbered by emmissions reducing devices.  My only question is this.  If diesels are so much more expensive to maintain and don't live as long as gas engines, and make less power; then why are there so many fleet vehicles that use them?  Why do many individuals own diesel powered vehicles? These are not questions that require a response.  They are meant for you to think about.  It's obvious that you're set in your opinions.  You could probably debate this forever, but I won't.  In the end it's all opinion and personal preference.

No, actually I have a intensive love for clean air for me and my yet to come grand kids.  We have done more damage to our envirionment in last 100 years than the 10,000 years before it. Diesel can be very dirty and smell bad too. Get stuck behind on going up a hill with a load (Chevy, Dodge or Ford) with the wind right and you will see what I mean. Also we are not talking about fleets of OTR trucks. We are talking about light diesels here at the moment. Beside, you will see big changes in them too as since the EPA has finailly order the sulpher out of diesel fuel by 2011, engine manufactures no longer have an excuse as to why they cannot put converters on light and heavy diesel to clean them up too!  

"Like all engines, diesels require looking after, if you don't service them; they can eat themselves. The main problems are kept at bay with proper maintenance, ie: clean filters, keep your injecters clean & checked for spray patten, keep the fuel distribution pump adjusted (timing), as well as the timing of the engine itself."

This is somewhat true but the high tech they get the more that can go wrong with them, the less likely they will go the distance and the more they will cost to fix.

"Nobody has mentioned the main advantage of diesels, which is that they are inherently more waterproof than the petrol (gas) equivalent. It might not matter in sunny California, but it does when the cold fog comes down."

I have never had a a water problem with any gasser I have had in fog or driving rain. Plus injest the tinyest water slug in a Diesel and you will destory the motor (it take far less swallowed water with a diesel than a gaaser to destroy it)

"Also when the vehicle is used as a power source for P.T.O.'s, or run as a generator to charge batteries (which are used as a power source); the carberetter will develop a "flat spot", which can make the vehicle undrivable (read DANGEROUS)."

Not sure where you are getting this BS. If you have a "flatspot" it is because of a carborator or injector problem, not because it is a gasser as I have seen big flatspots on diesels too, especailly turbo charged ones before boost spools up. My old 79 J20 has excellant throttle responce still and my 49 year old John Deere tractor that I bush hog with a use PTO a lot for other thing too does not have flat spots either at any rpm it will run at! If you have a "flat Spot" it is because you have a problem with adjustment or the enrichment circuit, not because it is a carborator!!

 

This certainly seems to be a heated debate of gas vs. diesel. 

I've never owned a diesel, but I did drive one for 2 yrs while fighting wild fires with the BLM.

As far as the gas engine pro's and con's go these are the things I've noticed.  Pro's are that gas is everywhere, there are loads of upgrades, you can do all kinds of whack conversions and atleast the older ones are generally easier to work on (pure opinion).  Con's are that your distributor (if you have one) is never safe from water.  Points or magnetic pickup, it doesn't matter, they just don't like moisure.  In order to get good torque and HP to turn those big meats and low gears you almost always have to have a big V8 or souped up V6 which nearly always means pretty crappy mpg on the road, and with gas prices on the rise that is not a good thing. 

In the 2 yrs. that I drove and did minor maintance on a 01 F-550 with the 7.3 liter Powerstroke I noticed a number of pros and cons.   Pro's, Diesel fuel is generally cheaper or as cheap as regular unleaded gas.  A diesel V-8 will get you the mpg of a toyota 22re but will get you more torque and hp.  It will pull hills all day long with any load and never give you any problems.  The aftermarket industry is really opening up with some serious HP, torque, and mpg increasing upgrades for all diesels.  And last, but not least dependability.  Diesel engines have been the choice of folks who haul and tow really heavy loads because they will out tow, out haul, and will last much longer than a gas engine.  A lot of your older big rigs out there are running million mile engines.  Ranchers, farmers, contracotrs, etc. almost always use diesels because they'll keep going when others wear out.  Cons, diesel fuel is often harder to find and is most commonly found around highways/freeways.  They are initially more expensive and repairs are usually going to cost a bit more.  The old ones are really noisy, and with the exception the cummins (which is really loud) the others have a sound resembling that of glass packs.  Diesels emit visible exhaust and their exhaust does smell.  When pulling a big hill, momentum is everything, if you have to downshift because of someone else, then you'll be going a bit slower.  In cooler climates or open plains where the wind chill factor is a factor, you have to keep that thing plugged in at night.  There is also a lot more oil to buy per oil change.

These are simply my observations.  That doesn't mean that they apply across the board.  Keep in mind that the diesel I drove was a fully loaded 17,000 lb. F-550 fire truck. 

So then the question isn't which engine is better, but which one suits your needs more and are you willing to live with the quirks that it may have?  I want an engine that will deliver mileage in the 18-20 something range, and has lots of HP and torque.  The Powerstroke seems like the choice for me right now and since I live in AZ a lot of the negative issues aren't an issue for me. =)

Happy wheeling!

Scoutnut

So...why not run Bio-Diesel!
100% less carbon dioxide
100% less sulfur dioxide
40-60% less soot
10-50% less carbon monoxide
10-50% less hydrocarbons
5-10 % less nitrous oxide
Figures from the book "From the Fryer to the Fuel Tank" by Joshua Tickell

not to mention it is completely renewable. could be made right her in the U.S.A. by U.S. farmers. The $ would stay in our economy rather than going to the Middle East. And it doesn't stink...smells like french fries. SVO (straight vegetable oil) can also be ran in a diesel engine if it is pre heated to the proper viscosity. It's definitly not the answer to a clean renewable energy source, but it is a Big logical step in the right direction.

 just my 2¢

"So...why not run Bio-Diesel!

100% less carbon dioxide

100% less sulfur dioxide

40-60% less soot

10-50% less carbon monoxide

10-50% less hydrocarbons

5-10 % less nitrous oxide"

100% less CO2? Yeah right when it is not running. Only a hydrogen powered fuel cell produces no CO2.

100% less sulfur, yeah thats possible

40 to 60% less soot. I think this is over stated as it will depend a lot on engine calibration.

10 to 50% lees CO?  I think less, it is over stated as again it depends on engine.

10 to 50% less hydro carbons, this is a tuffy and not sure ion this.

5 to 10% less NOX,  There is a lot of room for improvement here as turbo diesel are foar worse than gassers in this area.

Now renewable, that is nice!  Problem is for farmer to grow enough grain for fuel to feed country there would be not enough room for food crops too.

I think our future may lay with coal gasifaction. (making methonal and mixing it with gas in larger amounts) We have 3 to 500 years of coal but problem is big oil does not control coal and current admin is not freindly toward coal.

I think all those #'s may be stretched toward going to happen under perfect conditions. The carbon dioxide figure is based on a study done in Europe. apparently they studied everything from growing the plant to refining the oil to making bio-diesel even transporting it to a filling station then using it in personal vehicles. they found that overall "for each kilogram of biodiesel fuel burned in a diesel engine, up to three kilograms of carbon dioxide are consumed, not produced, during the life-cycle of bio-diesel fuel." as for the NOx thats created when nitrogen is burned since the atmosphere has a lot of nitrogen there is no way of getting around that with an internal combustion engine. Unless you wanna carry around your own oxygen supply. It can be reduced by retarding engine timing this reduces combustion temperature. & you could always slap on your own catalytic converter. Most newer diesel engines produce less NOx than a lot of gas engines anyways.http://www.dieselnet.com

As for the farmers, every year about "60 million acres of U.S. cropland are left fallow" because of government programs to keep our farmers from over producing farming products.
Bio-diesel can also be made from used cooking oil, which is a huge waste product in our country.

No internal combustion engine run on any bio or oil based fuel will produce anywhere near zero CO2. Yes there is some acreage in land bank but a lot of that land is in rotation too and is being rested for a year before being used again while other lands are rested. This resting cycle helps keep from depleting soil and improves yeild as you can only do so much with fertilizer. I aggree we waste a lot of protuct that would be used for fuel or energy but current admin is in bed with big oil and they want to maintian big profit and cannot get then  through conservation or recycling.  

krawzcyk, Tom. "Biodiesel Alternative Fuel Makes Inroads But Hurdles Remain." in INFORM (International News on Fats, Oils, and Related Materials), Vol. 7, no. 8, August 1996, P. 801-815. American Oil Chemists' Society.

This study doesn't state the engine emits no carbon dioxide it states that the plants grown to make the bio-diesel capture the same CO2 being emitted from using bio-diesel. So it makes a cycle that balances the CO2 in the atmosphere. fossil fuels can't do this. We don't grow plants to specifically compensate CO2 being emitted from fossil fuels being burnt... 

Okay, but I question the 100% cycle. Beside any plant can capture CO2, even a shade tree on could use the same logic for a fossil fuel diesel and say they planted a few trees. Corney by same logic basically.