LPi I6 delayed until 2011

[XR Martin]

Probably related to sub zero environments, something LPG has always has trouble with.

[PoweredByCNG]

With Liquid LPG, the opposite is true about temperatures. The systems work great in the cold as they do not require coolant to expand the fuel prior to metering into the engine. In hot temperatures, people have reported slow refuelling times and lower than expected usable tank capacity. There's also the issue of purging the system to eliminate vapour 'bubbles' forming in the system prior to the injectors.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by jpd80

2) Holden's LPG system is not the same as Ford's old mixer thing,
pretty sure the dual fuel already complies with at least Euro IV.
by switching between petrol and electric as needed, Holden might
overcome some of the hurdles Falcon E GAS is now facing for compliance.

It makes me think that Holden looked at dedicated LPG and saw it was too hard,
Ford on the other hand probably felt they could simply solve the problems...

Holdens LPG V6 is still the old 3.6 Alloytec, not SIDI, so its not Euro 4.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Fairlane

Christ what is with Ford, it seriously is not that hard for a full sized auto manufacturer to shove decent LPG in their top selling car.

Aftermarket has been able to do it for the best part of two years and fomoco Australia cant do with their hundreds of engineers and full test facilities :

But Ford are doing something aftermarket LPG makers haven't done, make a single fuel LPG engine that runs solely on LPG, not starting on petrol and switching to LPG when its ready.

They are in unchartered territory.

Better off getting any potential reliability problems sorted now rather than later on when they could end up with a stack of warranty claims. Same thing happened with the BA E Gas motors that had to have the stronger rods fitted to prevent them bending after a backfire, something that happened quite a bit in early testing. Maybe this time they did not have the luxury of time to fix whatever problems they may have because it was only picked up late in the program.

[PoweredByCNG]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Holdens LPG V6 is still the old 3.6 Alloytec, not SIDI, so its not Euro 4.

The Alloytec in its standard form will comply with Euro 4 easier than any direct-injected engine...

[Bossxr8]

In terms of particle emissions then yes, but in other forms no. You can't say an engine that uses something like 1.3 L of petrol less per 100 km than a previous engine would be harder to get emissions compliant, it just requires a bit of extra work to make sure particle emissions are ok. Its simple science that for every extra litre of petrol you burn you get a corresponding increase in emissions out the tailpipe. And GM have already done the R&D on SIDI considering its already used both the 3.0 and 3.6 DI engines in the US. Wouldn't have been too hard for Holden to get it to pass Euro 4 as the engine was designed in the US to surpass those levels already, something the old 3.6 doesn't have.

I'd say its a simple case for Holden of not selling enough of them to justify getting it Euro 4 compliant, considering its the only model that uses the old 3.6. Just like the Territory Turbo come July.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Holdens LPG V6 is still the old 3.6 Alloytec, not SIDI, so its not Euro 4.

Pretty sure that Holden were crowing back in 2008 that the Alloytec already complied to Euro 6,
something to do with corporate engine and US Tier 2 Bin 5 Emission for petrol already being
tougher than Europe's standards...

Here you go from Holden themselves in October 2008:

LINK
The upgraded all-alloy V6 engine reduces noxious tailpipe emissions* assisting petrol Commodore Omega and Berlina variants achieve the highest Green Vehicle Guide noxious emissions score possible (8.5 points out of 10), excluding electric vehicles.

The noxious emission levels meet Euro VI certification, a standard which does not come into effect in Europe until 2014.

[PoweredByCNG]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

In terms of particle emissions then yes, but in other forms no. You can't say an engine that uses something like 1.3 L of petrol less per 100 km than a previous engine would be harder to get emissions compliant, it just requires a bit of extra work to make sure particle emissions are ok. Its simple science that for every extra litre of petrol you burn you get a corresponding increase in emissions out the tailpipe.

That's simply not true.

Fuel consumption only has a direct correlation with CARBON DIOXIDE emissions and that's it.

Leaner air/fuel mixtures (i.e. excess of air), as used in direct injection engines, result in a significant increase in Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions compared to engines running at stoichiometry. Since three-way catalytic converters are only efficient at neutralising NOx when there is no oxygen present in the exhaust stream, it is much more difficult to make a 'lean-burn' engine comply with NOx limits.

The other issue with lean operation is that hydrocarbon (HC - unburned fuel) emissions are higher because the engine runs close to misfire. HC emissions are reliant on the state of the ignition system and catalytic treatment.

[CAMS290]

Originally Posted by PoweredByCNG

With Liquid LPG, the opposite is true about temperatures. The systems work great in the cold as they do not require coolant to expand the fuel prior to metering into the engine. In hot temperatures, people have reported slow refuelling times and lower than expected usable tank capacity. There's also the issue of purging the system to eliminate vapour 'bubbles' forming in the system prior to the injectors.

I heard that this and something to do with the new plastic inlet manifold was causing some grief.

[PoweredByCNG]

Originally Posted by CAMS290

...and something to do with the new plastic inlet manifold was causing some grief.

If the plastic manifolds are a problem, Orbital wouldn't be selling their FG dual fuel kits to the aftermarket!

[jpd80]

Could it be that Ford is trying to bundle production line changes to suit itself?
Thinking the new Territory arrives then, I thought about the possibilities:
- eliminate all 4-speed autos from Falcon/Terry at one time
- change over all LPG and trans package at same time
- possibly drop BF 4.0 and make FG engine common across range?

I remember Burela said something in an article last year about bundling changes...
Government looking to bring forward Euro 5 and 6, maybe they triggered this?

[ratter]

Originally Posted by PoweredByCNG

That's simply not true.

Fuel consumption only has a direct correlation with CARBON DIOXIDE emissions and that's it.

Leaner air/fuel mixtures (i.e. excess of air), as used in direct injection engines, result in a significant increase in Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) emissions compared to engines running at stoichiometry. Since three-way catalytic converters are only efficient at neutralising NOx when there is no oxygen present in the exhaust stream, it is much more difficult to make a 'lean-burn' engine comply with NOx limits.

The other issue with lean operation is that hydrocarbon (HC - unburned fuel) emissions are higher because the engine runs close to misfire. HC emissions are reliant on the state of the ignition system and catalytic treatment.

Lean burn does not happen on our SIDO cars at the momment in australia.
It happens overseas, but the cars that doe it have nox convertors in the exhaust systems, sort of like a cat convertor to eliminate the excess nox. The nox convertors will not work on our cars because of the sulphur content in our fuel, this sulphur will stop the nox convertor operating.
The gov has not stood up to the fuel companies and demand change at this point of time. If the sulphur was reduced we could start to get proper lean burn engines.

[jpd80]

I has less to do with lean/rich and more to do with droplet size, high pressure direct injection
is able to spray much finer mist with smaller droplet size for better mixing. The result is
more power and better fuel economy depending on how the engine is tuned.

[XR Martin]

Apparently oil sludging is becoming a big problem with DI engines, as the fuel is injected directly into the cylinders, it isnt washing the oil residue from the back of the intake valves.

[prydey]

the LI lpg engine isn't direct injection.

as mentioned earlier, what ford are doing different to the aftermarket is making a dedicated (single fuel) liquid injection system. from what i gather from snippets of info from blownba and others, there are rules relating to 'purging' of the lines with engine not running?? obviously this is why the dual fuel applications start on petrol and flick over to lpg at a set point.

putting 2 and 2 together, personally i think the delay is something to do with this.

[Bobman]

Anyone know if the LPi systems will be across the range or only G6 - XR6?

Shame about the delay!