It quotes a lower operating cost but that is because LPG is cheaper than diesel, not more economical. And given that it is only a 10% reduction even though the price is 50% lower, its not going to be because it has a higher MPG is it?
And it is Australia which is hardly reknown for being hilly.
It’s all about the emissions advantages and pre tax price and supply situation of the fuel itself v diesel.No one is saying that compression ignition diesel fuelled engines aren’t a more fuel efficient way to power a truck than petrol/LPG etc etc fuelled spark ignition ones.
In Oz the advantages won’t be as much because there isn’t such a large price difference between LPG v Diesel as there is in Europe.As a rough guide it’s like comparing a 4.6 V8 Range Rover running on LPG with a V8 diesel powered one even though the old 4.6 is just an old fashioned pushrod lump.Whereas the fuel efficiency of the LPG powered choice could be made a lot better using the latest up to date forced induction spark ignition engine technology.The fact is technology is narrowing the fuel consumption gap,between diesel engines and spark ignition ones,to an ever greater degree.If you then factor in the supply/price/emissions advantages of alternative fuels v diesel the choice would be a no brainer as time goes on.
We use to have petrol powered trucks and armoured people carriers in the Dutch army. The famouse Daf 616 and 818 and also the Daf driven YP & YPR who al had a Continental Red Seal Engine, running on petrol. The reason was that the army wanted in the 50’s a standard fuel, when I came up for my number in 1980 they where still in daily use.
On LPG we run a Volvo FH13-400 on a combination of LPG and diesel as a pilot lighter, it’s a test which is running now for it’s 3rd year with mixed results.
LPG technologie is realy gone as a rocket, in cars they do now direct liquid injection, this is what we use in this truck but it need a little diesel to ignite it.
Torq is a bit less as we are used now, but still miles better as the torq we use to have on the old trucks (2800, F10, F88, etc.)
THe availibility of LPG in Holland is not a problem, nearly every fillingstation does also LPG, and the Dutch petrol stations have general a standard height of 4.20 mtrs.
We run it with a tipper in commodities, doesn’t smell, when running while tipping.
Safety of a LPG tank is more than 100 times better than any diesel of petrol tank, there are no known accidents to me where a LPG tank blew up or ruptured, there is a safety valve on the tank that release the pressure at 17 bar so in a fire you will eventualy get some burst of gas, a petrol or diesel tank rupture at any contact and will soak you nicely in the stuff. Diesel and petrol tanks are not pressure tested, LPG tanks are.
I don’t think the future is in LPG, but I believe that CNG and LNG wil be the fuel for the future, while LPG use to be wasted, a lot is now used to make “Synthetic diesel” (V-power for example) via the "Fisher-Throps process.
So Yes Phil it can be done a truck on petrol/ LPG and it wil happen, but let say not in the way we know.
caledoniandream:
We use to have petrol powered trucks and armoured people carriers in the Dutch army. The famouse Daf 616 and 818 and also the Daf driven YP & YPR who al had a Continental Red Seal Engine, running on petrol. The reason was that the army wanted in the 50’s a standard fuel, when I came up for my number in 1980 they where still in daily use.
On LPG we run a Volvo FH13-400 on a combination of LPG and diesel as a pilot lighter, it’s a test which is running now for it’s 3rd year with mixed results.
LPG technologie is realy gone as a rocket, in cars they do now direct liquid injection, this is what we use in this truck but it need a little diesel to ignite it.
Torq is a bit less as we are used now, but still miles better as the torq we use to have on the old trucks (2800, F10, F88, etc.)
THe availibility of LPG in Holland is not a problem, nearly every fillingstation does also LPG, and the Dutch petrol stations have general a standard height of 4.20 mtrs.
We run it with a tipper in commodities, doesn’t smell, when running while tipping.
Safety of a LPG tank is more than 100 times better than any diesel of petrol tank, there are no known accidents to me where a LPG tank blew up or ruptured, there is a safety valve on the tank that release the pressure at 17 bar so in a fire you will eventualy get some burst of gas, a petrol or diesel tank rupture at any contact and will soak you nicely in the stuff. Diesel and petrol tanks are not pressure tested, LPG tanks are.
I don’t think the future is in LPG, but I believe that CNG and LNG wil be the fuel for the future, while LPG use to be wasted, a lot is now used to make “Synthetic diesel” (V-power for example) via the "Fisher-Throps process.
So Yes Phil it can be done a truck on petrol/ LPG and it wil happen, but let say not in the way we know.
It’s probably then just a question between the advantages of LPG availablity v other alternatives and if using LPG the issue of using spark ignition and lower compression ratios compared to the compromised idea of using the compression ignited diesel pilot and LPG idea which obviously still requires diesel and it’s obvious that using spark ignition together with the correct compression ratio for the fuel type would obviously allow the optimum combustion characteristics as in the Australian idea.
If it was my bet I’d go for a supercharged and turbocharged spark ignition engine running on dedicated LPG only which seems to provide the best of all worlds of emissions,fuel availablity/supply and efficient running.Maybe even using the old Gardner name.
billybigrig:
Does LPG nead adblue and scr to meet euro 5/6 ■■?
No, not at all, LPG doesn’t have soot or other particules, it’s the cleanest fossil fuel.
Even with the “pilot diesel ignition” it exceed Euro 6 big style.
The problems are in the range and availibility of LPG, also conversion price, added weight don’t do it any favours.
LPG has only approx 0.7 densisty of Petrol, so to speak roughly; the same amount brings your only 0.7 far against petrol.
so for the same distance you would need a 30% bigger tank (don’t forget an LPG tank can only be 80% filled, to leave space for expansion when it warms up.
i used to own an ex pilot boat, it had a two cylinder kelvin diesel.
to start it, you wound a thread to engage the magnito, then put some petrol in a bowl on top of the engine, on top of the engine were two compression levers, you put these into the low compression setting, then cranked the handle.
once it started to fire you kept on topping up the petrol bowl, then moved one lever to high compression then a short time later you moved the other.
after that you wound out the magnito thread, then ran on diesel alone.
so it can be done, this boat was built in 1940. a bugger to start, but it didn’t break down.
It’s just then a case of using forced induction which none of those have got to get more power at as low rpm as possible which is what most of the flawed comparisons between the efficiency of diesel v petrol engines are based on.
As someone who’s involved in this trial believe you me in will cost Stobarts if they decide
To go for the biomethane biogas option at the minute they are using LNG fuel stations which supply Fosill LNG which comes from a refinery in avonmouth which is the best quality LNG in Europe 98% methane which is mapped out to suite the volvos engine management system the biogas is landfill gas which is what Stobarts want to use as its supposed to be a greener fuel but it comes mainly from landfill sites the quality issues with this fuel are shocking which can cause engine knocking and possible engine failure I’ve seen hard evidence of this so going green with biogas may not yet be the answer unless the suppliers can get the quality of the fuel as good as LNG good luck Stobarts go green yes but go LNG not biogas
Why don’t we just design a simple N2O system that can be retro fitted to help along an existing & traditionally fuelled engine when it needs to make power?
The possibilities are endless, but there are usually bloody good reasons why they don’t do them.
Why doesn’t my 6cyl truck drop down to 3cyl when I’m idling?
Personally, I’d like to see the return of steam power before LPG or CNG becomes popular.
Santa:
As I understand it a nearly empty petrol tank is the worst option. Remember that for all three fuels it is the vapour that burns not the liquid. F1 cars have a fuel tank that collapses internally as the fuel gets used - this is so that it stays a liquid and, in the event of a collision stays where it is and doesn’t burn.
There’s been no major fuel tank fire at an F1 race since Berger Imola crash in 1989 and no fire related deaths since Ricardo Palletti in Canada in 1982, or in testing with Elio De Angelis in 1986. And their fuel is much more flammable than petrol.
Neither Paletti or De Angelis died from burns either; Palettis’ chest was crushed from ramming Pironis’ stalled Ferrari (Palettis’ car blew up while they were rescuing him). De Angelis crashed during a private test and suffocated because his oxygen ran out.
Google Roger Williamson crash or Lorenzo Bandini and see how safety has improved…
That tribute to Sid Watkins the other week was fascinating whilst a little tragic. Amazing to see how what is a minor bump these days was a killer back then Some of the survivable ones of late have been quite unbelievable. Nico over CarthaMiniCab driver the other week for instance and GrosJunk’s idiocy at Spa too
Seems almost unbelievable these days when we lose a man
LMP cars built like tanks and make miracles happen.
Carryfast:
Petrol or diesel can also both make a reasonably good job of being a flammable liability in the event of an accident.
Which car in a 3 car pile up do you want to be a passenger in?
The one with a full tank of Diesel, the one with a full tank of Petrol, or the one carrying 20kg’s of pressurised LPG?
Niether but I wouldn’t differentiate on that basis. An LPG tank takes a lot more to puncture.
which car would you rather be in if the for example the cars were a 106 petrol, a Focus diesel or a Range Rover with LPG ■■? To many variables really to make such a drama laden decision as yours ■■?
Will you not allow your family on the road when Hydrogen cars appear ■■
Ford Focus. It has the higher Euro Encap rating. Diesel will only ignite with a wick. Drop matches in a bucket of the stuff, and nothing will happen. The other 2 will go bang. Diesel injectors atomise the fuel to make it burn. Also Diesel engines usually have much higher compression to make the mixture rich. (In cars, about 22:1 diesel, 7:1 petrol. The Fuel tank in a focus is under the back seats. In a 106 and Range Rover, they are under the rear. Depending on the Rangerover, you will either have the LPG tank fitted in the spare wheel well, or have it fitted in between the chassis outriggers. Both are vulnerable areas in a collision. (That is if you decide against the split tank option)
So out of your options, the Focus would come out best.
Carryfast:
Petrol or diesel can also both make a reasonably good job of being a flammable liability in the event of an accident.
Which car in a 3 car pile up do you want to be a passenger in?
The one with a full tank of Diesel, the one with a full tank of Petrol, or the one carrying 20kg’s of pressurised LPG?
Niether but I wouldn’t differentiate on that basis. An LPG tank takes a lot more to puncture.
which car would you rather be in if the for example the cars were a 106 petrol, a Focus diesel or a Range Rover with LPG ■■? To many variables really to make such a drama laden decision as yours ■■?
Will you not allow your family on the road when Hydrogen cars appear ■■
Ford Focus. It has the higher Euro Encap rating. Diesel will only ignite with a wick. Drop matches in a bucket of the stuff, and nothing will happen. The other 2 will go bang.
In the real world it’s a bit more complicated than that.The type of fire situations resulting from most road accidents involve a much hotter and larger source of ignition than just a match.As for NCAP I don’t think the test involves a Focus being run into by a petrol,or diesel,or LPG powered Range Rover with a big speed differential between them let alone head on with a combined speed of around 100 mph.
John Lewis are running quite a few CNG and LNG Merc Actros, (old model) but its dual fuel and one assumes that the gas is used for crusing and the DERV is used for grunt. It’s not like a full load of JLP stock is going to be that heavy, even on a decker.
I would think about getting one as a used unit, but they are all daycabs. Cheap as chips but who would want one?
ZIL-130, 6l petrol v8, hundreds of thousands made (the wikipedia article is somewhat incorrect)
and a truck I have fond childhood memories of, as my father owned one in the early nineties - GAZ-53, 4.3l petrol v8. they never had a working handbrake and due to a faulty (sometimes from the factory) starter you had to crank it manually, there was a crank similar to the one found on trailer legs and a corresponding hole in the front bumper. or you could always get it going by parking on a slope.
Some of the survivable ones of late have been quite unbelievable. Nico over CarthaMiniCab driver the other week for instance and GrosJunk’s idiocy at Spa too 
