Archives

WHAT WERE THEY? 1978-85 General Motors full-size diesel sedans.. (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/automobiles/collectibles/18RUST.html?_r=1&ref=automobiles&oref=slogin)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Toronado.jpgRobb Sass - NY Times - May 18, 2008

THE POINT WAS? The second energy crisis that came with the Iranian revolution put the heat on Detroit to improve its corporate fuel economy numbers. The diesel was seen as a way of having one’s cake and eating it, too — good fuel economy without sacrificing the size and cushy ride that American luxury car buyers expected.

REALITY CHECK G.M.’s 5.7-liter diesel V-8 was a train wreck, having come to market dreadfully under-engineered. Offered by Oldsmobile in the downsized Delta 88 sedan, it spread like a virus through Oldsmobile, Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac and Chevrolet. While it was the same size as a G.M.’s gasoline V-8 of the time, the engines shared almost no common parts. Blocks and cylinder heads had to be upgraded to handle the more than 20:1 compression ratio of the diesels. The cars also required different fuel injection systems.

THE ADS SAID Oldsmobile asked, “Can We Build One For You?” In light of the diesel’s ghastly repair record, “Can We Rebuild One For You” would have been more appropriate.

THE OWNERS SAID Neal Caudle, an Atlanta software executive, remembers his family’s 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass diesel.

“When it was cold, it wouldn’t start,” he said. “When it was hot, it overheated.

“It suffered from water in the fuel and it couldn’t maintain a steady 55 m.p.h. even up a mild hill. Eventually, the head gasket blew. That was fixed under warranty, and then the engine seized altogether within the first year we had it.”

DAMAGE CONTROL...http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/18/automobiles/collectibles/18RUST.html?_r=1&ref=automobiles&oref=slogin

My parents bought a 1980 Diesel Cadillac Seville in the early 80's. I tried to warn them off but at least I talked them into buying an extended warranty. Many tows and lifter, alternator and starter replacements later they finally dumped it. When they were offered a Seville with the V8-6-4 as a trade-in in exchange for the Diesel Seville + 10k my parents listened to me on this one and walked away.

Dealer: You can have this beautiful Seville with the innovative V8-6-4 for your seville and 10

Dad: My seville and $1000?

Dealer: No, your car and $10,000

Dad: You must think I am an idiot!!! (stomps out of dealership)

I've heard that GM engineers actually did manage to fix most of the problems by the end of the run, but of course it was too late at that time (besides, they did have proper engineering talent in other parts of the company that could have gotten it right the first time, but I guess they didn't use those resources).

I have to report a quite different experience. My dad had a diesel Olds 88 company car that he later bought from the company. It did sound like a Metro bus when it ran but the engine didn't suffer any mechanicle problems. It also ran smooth and it didn't suffer from failure to start in cold or overheat in hot weather. It also was easily able to maintain highway speeds. That didn't change the fact that it sounded like a bus and smelled like one to.

Do you happen to know if it was that infamous 5.7L in the story?

As I've said before, academically I understand that there have been new, wonderful and much needed advances in diesel engine technology. However, I have so much prejudice built up against them that it would take one hell of a paradigm shift for me to ever purchase one.

My personal awareness of diesel engines has been limited to solely negative experiences. From the under performing, dirty and pingy VW engines of the 1980s to the larger and even dirtier engines put in big rigs starting in the 1990s to the larger, louder and even dirtier engines recently put into the over-sized passenger trucks like the Ram 2500 and F-350 I have been deafened, smoked out and choked out for years.

In other words, even without the GM diesel engines of the 1970s diesel has never been good to me.

I love diesels. My hope is that i can buy a Mazda3 or Mazda2 with one circa 2011 or so. The amazing thing is the torque and the acceleration. In terms of noise or smell or drivability, the diesels in Europe are indistinquishable from gas engines.

The GM diesel fiasco was unfortunate, but rebuilt properly, they can last. Main problem is the head bolts and use of improper oil. I still see one every once in awhile when I am back home. My step-grandmother had a big Buick Electra with one, and it was cool, but she didn't have it long enough to experience problems. A friend in school had an Olds Delta 88 that they didn't have problems with, and I know for a fact that car was not driven lightly.

Car and Driver had an interesting article "Battle of the Diesel Beaters" a couple years ago, which was interesting but I wish it had been more technical.

I try to not let my prejudice affect my judgement.

The GM 5.7 Diesel did have a terrible record reliability wise.On the bright side it did deliver Hy mpg in the Suburban that is just matched by the Hybrid Tahoe-22mpg.It wasn't turboed,and was very slow, but it delivered the mpg.The current non hybrid Suburbans-gas-can get about 24 mpg hy.

The latest Big 3 Diesel pickups are not as noisy as they were,and don't produce the horrible stench and smoke they once did.On the downside many folks bought them who aren't using them as work trucks.They are now trying to bail out of $500/mo fuel bill and $800 month notes. They aren't FE except as tow vehicles,and that is a pretty narrow niche.Around town they probably get 12 mpg-maybe 17 mpg on the highway at 60 mph.Many buyers thought"diesels get good mpg,so I'll spend an extra $10,000 for better FE and buy it instead of the lighter,cheaper 1/2 ton pickup" Big mistake,since they get poorer mpg than the best 1/2 ton V-8 pickups in non towing use.There is the 25% fuel preminum also.

Charlie

Charlie

We had a 1/2 ton chevy with the 5.7l diesel. It was one of the last years they put them out. It got 22 to 24 hwy with AC. It took off quick and cold bark the tires on take off. But it was a b- problem to start when it was cold. I personal melted the battery cable ends more than once.

The new diesel trucks got into the who can take off quickest and produce the most torque game.

Jamtee,
Yep, many folks-early mid 80's) claimed that the 5.7 Diesel in their pickup or Suburban gave them 25 mpg-spectacular back then when the gasoline version gave maybe 16 mpg highway with an emasculated V-8(they manu hadn't figured out how to please the EPA and still get hp-EFI with mass air sensors,O2 sensors,and knock sensors allowed them to make power,and please the EPA sniffers,and lately get good mpg(good considering the power-they would do better smaller, or cyl shutdown on the 5.3).

A buddy of mine had to put a HUGE water filter in his fuel line on his 5.7 diesel since water contamination of diesel was common,and apparently water kills expensive injectors.All in all they were a big pain.

Right about the HP/Torque wars.The current diesel pickups are waaaay overpowered for what they are usually called to do.They could probably tow anything with a 4 liter Diesel with 400 lb-ft and 240 hp.Instead they make 650 lb feet and 325 or more hp with their very heavy motors. The diesel moto mags really demonstrate that many folks bought them for fun-I can understand that-but now the piper has to be paid with $4.50 fuel(at least $400/mo),and $800/mo note.Someone making $50,000-$75000 family income with kids can't afford $1200/mo for fuel/note and another $150 mo for insurance.Heck most houses have note much lower than $1350/mo.That is almost 40% of a $60,000/yr take home pay!!

7000 lb vehicles get poor mpg-.

I'm kinda wondering if the 25% fuel preminum will kill the second coming of diesels?? What would be the point in paying $2500 more for a Diesel Civic when actual FE is the same as a standard gasoline Civic??

Charlie

J I'm kinda wondering if the 25% fuel preminum will kill the second coming of diesels?? What would be the point in paying $2500 more for a Diesel Civic when actual FE is the same as a standard gasoline Civic??

Charlie

Been wondering that myself. I love the better mpg but is it enough to make up for the cost of diesel fuel?

When discussing GM's dreadful engines, let's not forget the aluminum block Chevy Vega 4 cylinder engine.

They somehow took their successful Corvair aluminum block technology and improved it, GM-style, into the laughably inept Vega aluminum block. The Vega was the first car I ever bought new (notice it was a small, 4-cyl car), and had been car of the year. My luck, it turned into a lemon as soon as I bought one.

I burned a valve and needed a new head, and then the cylinder bores wore out. I was using a quart of oil every 200 miles @ 70,000 miles.

Thank you, GM, but no thanks. That was the last GM product I have ever purchased.

Harry

As I've said before, academically I understand that there have been new, wonderful and much needed advances in diesel engine technology. However, I have so much prejudice built up against them that it would take one hell of a paradigm shift for me to ever purchase one.

My personal awareness of diesel engines has been limited to solely negative experiences. From the under performing, dirty and pingy VW engines of the 1980s to the larger and even dirtier engines put in big rigs starting in the 1990s to the larger, louder and even dirtier engines recently put into the over-sized passenger trucks like the Ram 2500 and F-350 I have been deafened, smoked out and choked out for years.

In other words, even without the GM diesel engines of the 1970s diesel has never been good to me.

Every time you get deafened, smoked and choked by a monster pickup, take a close look at the VWs around you and notice how many VW TDIs are now sharing the roads with you now that are NOT deafening, smoking or choking you. Just look at the back of any post-1999 Jetta or Golf -- if there's a "TDI" badge on the back it's a diesel. Start noticing and you will see they are EVERYWHERE around you. These are about as far removed from the old crappy GM diesels or obnoxious HD pickup diesels as you can get.

I have one. My 2000 Golf diesel runs great, is barely any noisier than my gas Jetta (and is slightly quicker around town), burns clean after a tiny puff of smoke on startup, gets low 40s with my wife driving it on mostly 1-2 mile trips, 50-ish on the highway, and 61.8 mpg in the recent Lacey fuel economy challenge.

I am worried about the current high price of diesel though, and whether it will kill the upcoming diesel comeback. Running about $4.69 right now, and biodiesel is $5.09 (minus a 50c tax credit from the state). Despite the high mpg, at these prices our diesel Golf is barely any cheaper to operate than our gas Jetta.

Bailout,roll your window down when you are behind one of the later models of the BIG 3 Diesel pickups-from about 2005 on THERE IS NO STENCH AND NO SOOTY SMOKE!! The latest Ford and Chevy diesels don't even have the horrible clatter/death rattle anymore.You can still tell they are diesels-some clatter is still there-but no stench no soot.

Make sure it is a fairly new shiny one before you roll down that window-the mid 90's ones were still extremely noisy,and occasionally sooty stinky.

Still,I don't picture diesel cars making a big comeback here in the USA-not with diesel being so expensive,and the Prius being so good.The only reason to buy a diesel car is to save money on fuel-no savings, no diesels! Work trucks are a different story-maybe.The Big 3 have pushed the Diesels in their 3/4 ton and 1 ton vehicles claiming they are so much better towing etc.Yes,they get much better mpg towing than gas motors, but once again-25% fuel preminum?? Does the $6000 more you pay for that diesel,and the 14 qts of oil it requires(and generally more expensive maintenance) really get paid off in fuel savings??I have my doubts.

Charlie

When they were offered a Seville with the V8-6-4 as a trade-in in exchange for the Diesel Seville + 10k my parents listened to me on this one and walked away.

The owner of the condo next to me has one of those V8-6-4s and he loves it. He uses it almost like an El Camino, and can slide 4x8 lumber in the trunk past the fold down rear seats.

Don't know what his FE is but the old beast is still running well, against conventional wisdom.

Believe it or not there is a guy near me with an Olds 5.7 diesel with over 400,000 miles on it. Yes it is a late model and he uses glow plugs from a 6.5 to speed up starting.

GM has always been daring in their engineering. They have had some spectacular success and some flops. Like my old football coach said: "If you haven't lost, you haven't played enough."

At least GM tried. Nobody else did. A few years later Ford and Chrysler outsource way oversized engines and GM came back with a 6.2 and later a 6.5 diesel. My old 6.2 was a good if slow engine and it got 23 MPG in a 4x4 pickup, but it was murder on automatics.

GM is sort of the opposite of Toyota. GM is daring but often puts out products with bugs. Toyota is conservative to the point of stodgy, but they develop stuff to death.

I do think the EPA has done their best to torpedo the diesel with ULSD which now cost 75 cents a gallon more than RUG and the Tier II regs that rob MPG and force everyone to use the dreaded $4500 barrier filter things. You. they cost $4500 for the filter/afterburner thing. and the EPA cannot tell you what parameters they can use to ascertain whether these regs are efective or not.

One good thing about GM vehicles. Every engine they ever made will fit into every car they ever made. I'm looking at a project to put a 6.5 liter GM pickup diesel and a T-56 stick in a 96 Caprice. The conversion looks like a bolt-up.

BTW, I never see soot come out of my 7.3 diesel.

Jamtee,
.....

I'm kinda wondering if the 25% fuel preminum will kill the second coming of diesels?? What would be the point in paying $2500 more for a Diesel Civic when actual FE is the same as a standard gasoline Civic??

Charlie

Actually my department at work just traded a diesel heavy duty pickup for a gasser because they thought the winter diesel drivability issues weren't balanced by cheaper fuel costs anymore. Of course people are already whining that the new truck doesn't tow as well:rolleyes:.

That Caprice sounds perverse. I love it!

Personally, a pimpin' 80's Coupe De Ville bio-diesel would be just my style.

Believe it or not there is a guy near me with an Olds 5.7 diesel with over 400,000 miles on it. Yes it is a late model and he uses glow plugs from a 6.5 to speed up starting.

GM has always been daring in their engineering. They have had some spectacular success and some flops. Like my old football coach said: "If you haven't lost, you haven't played enough."

At least GM tried. Nobody else did. A few years later Ford and Chrysler outsource way oversized engines and GM came back with a 6.2 and later a 6.5 diesel. My old 6.2 was a good if slow engine and it got 23 MPG in a 4x4 pickup, but it was murder on automatics.

GM is sort of the opposite of Toyota. GM is daring but often puts out products with bugs. Toyota is conservative to the point of stodgy, but they develop stuff to death.

I do think the EPA has done their best to torpedo the diesel with ULSD which now cost 75 cents a gallon more than RUG and the Tier II regs that rob MPG and force everyone to use the dreaded $4500 barrier filter things. You. they cost $4500 for the filter/afterburner thing. and the EPA cannot tell you what parameters they can use to ascertain whether these regs are efective or not.

One good thing about GM vehicles. Every engine they ever made will fit into every car they ever made. I'm looking at a project to put a 6.5 liter GM pickup diesel and a T-56 stick in a 96 Caprice. The conversion looks like a bolt-up.

BTW, I never see soot come out of my 7.3 diesel.