Why Diesel Engines Lose Power & Efficiency Over Time

Why Do Diesel Engines Lose Power And Efficiency Over Time?
Sponsored by ExxonMobil Synergy Diesel Efficient Fuel

Modern diesel engine development has increased engine efficiency and decreased NOx and particulate matter emissions. This video will focus on several questions: What is diesel fuel? How do diesel engines work, and how are diesels different from gasoline engines? Why are diesel engines typically more efficient than gasoline engines? Why do diesel engines continue to move towards higher fuel pressures and finer injector holes? How do fuel injector properties affect efficiency and emissions? Why are diesel engines susceptible to injector deposits? How do injector deposits affect engine performance characteristics?

With regards to deposits, ExxonMobil has developed Synergy Diesel Efficient fuel, which has a proprietary additive package designed and proven to reduce deposits on injectors. By removing injector deposits, the goal is to restore the original spray pattern. I was able to visit one of the research facilities where this new fuel was tested, and results proved a 2% improvement in average fuel economy, a 2% reduction in CO2 emissions, and an 11% reduction in NOx emissions. This video will dive into the details of how this is all possible, and how testing was performed.

Don't forget to check out my other pages below!

NEW VIDEO EVERY WEDNESDAY!

[RDMusic]

I think it’s safe to say every engine loses power and efficiency over time...

[peterlast]

They should have outsourced the testing to VW for even better results.

[boostedM]

Pretty remarkable how much engineering is behind dinosaur boom juice

[tuuletingrilli]

My stock Mercedes 300d was dynoed at 495k kms and it made 134hp. It left the factory with 136hp

[richardwessels]

I just watched a 13 minute Exxon commercial. You win.

[Telogor]

I can't believe I just voluntarily watched an infomercial.

[gerardvanhardeveld]

Hi, marine engineer here with a suggestion!


I understand that your channel is about the engineering inside a car, howerver I suggest for your channel to take a field trip to a producer of marine diesel engines, eg. Wärtsilä. These typically are very large diesel or BI-fuel engines. With the engines being a lot larger than the ones found in a car, all the components are too. This can really help as a visual aid for your audience. For example:
I used to work on a vessel using 4 Wärtsilä Sulzer 8 in-line 400mm in diameter making more than 4000KW per engine for propulsion use only, running on IFO360, MDO & MGO. Normally each cylinder has 1 fuel injection pump delivering the fuel at +/- 380 bar at a viscosity of 2-4 cst. However, the new type of BI-fuel engines have multiple fuel injection pumps per cylinder. These fuel injection pumps are actuated by the camshaft and are about 50 cm tall. If you want more info on marine application engines, feel free to contact me.

[PintilieVasile]

9:26 200k? In Romania we treat a 200k second hand vehicle as new.

[krustykrabpizzzza]

I always find it funny when a title is not what the entire video is about, only part of it, because then you can scroll down to the comments and see easily who commented before actually watching the video.


Great video, Jason!

[colinstu]

Take a shot every time he says "Synergy Diesel Efficient Fuel"

[gpm]

When Rudolph Diesel introduced his engine in 1900, at the World's Fair in Paris, it was running on peanut oil.

[cozza]

Actually, remember this from school. Only stayed in my head because it had to do with cars

[neddyladdy]

This video was proudly brought to you by Exon.

[henrent]

2% is a very small margin to work with. When you consider the additional cost of the fossil fuels used to make these additives (both in energy and materials), this leaves even a smaller margin than 2%. Also, just replacing the volume of additives with diesel fuel itself might be enough to make up a 2% difference. I also understand that the additives are not just to improve fuel economy but also stabilize the fuel from degrading and other functions as well. However, in my line of business, if I were to propose adding a whole new, complicated process (that requires additional facilities to develop it, factories to produce it, storage facilities, distribution (to all of the refineries), etc) to improve <2%, I would be laughed out of the room and then later asked to resign. Saving the fossil fuels by not having these facilities (fossil fuels to build to begin with), not having people driving to and from them daily, and not producing this product may in itself be enough to off-set a 0.1- 2% difference globally. To me the best justification for these additives is cumulative effect. If you can prove that without these additives the fuel efficiency would gradually decline (and eventually plateau) due to the accumulation of deposits (especially in the injectors) to say 30% less over the life span of a vehicle then this would be a substantial argument. Sometimes these fuel "solutions" seem to have a smaller net effect in reality than the small amount they are supposed to help. So are we really doing the right thing and are these solutions really worth it?

[viktortulbya]

I work in a diesel shop on semis, modern engines and high pressure fuel has ruined so many people's engines its not even funny, drivers O/O report no fuel economy increase, but maintenance and repair costs of the emissions systems are unsustainable, go buy a semi Nox sensor or dpf filter, and youll see what im talking about, not counting the time in diagnostics, that is its own nightmare.

[Lemanoftherusss]

Do you have a video on the effects of the diesel exhaust systems causing additional fuel economy losses?

[DersimLondon]

How much extra do they charge for 2% improvement

[mychevysparkevdidntcatchfi]

NOx is far bigger problem for people than CO2 since CO2 doesn't cause SMOG. 11% reduction in NOx is HUGE, sounds way too big of a claim. Is there another independent source that verify this? Another question, what combustion toxic emissions are produced by the detergent?

[HarrisonCountyStudio]

1999 7.3 turbo diesel mated to a six speed manual.

20 years and 380, 000 miles later, all she needs are glow plugs, a front universal joint and some body work. Still hauling 5th wheels and hay trailers. This is one hell of a truck!

[RolandCaston]

Another inefficiency is happening in the air intake stream due to sludge accumulation. This sludge is caused by egr and pcv mixing oil and exhaust soot. A 3 inch air stream can be significantly reduced withing 150, 000 miles.