Is it possible that Paccar
Inc. will develop a 15-litre heavy-duty truck diesel engine for the North
American market, one that can match Cummins' ISX15?
The
question is relevant because Paccar, like Daimler North American Trucks and
Volvo Truck, have been marginally increasing their market share of Class 8
trucks at the expense of Navistar International.
With both Daimler and Volvo having the
potential to offer customers diesel engines up to 600 bhp and beyond, it is
conceivable that Paccar would like to be 'up with the giants' also.
In 2014, Daimler North American Trucks
had a 35.8 per cent share of the North American Class 8 truck market, followed
by Paccar (Kenworth Trucks had a 14.1 per cent share and Peterbilt Motors a
similar 13.5 per cent) giving a total of 27.6 per cent.
With Volvo Trucks sitting at 12.0 per
cent and Mack Trucks at 8.9 per cent this gave that group a total of 20.9 per
cent. Navistar International enjoyed a 14.1 per cent, leaving Daimler’s Western
Star with 1.7 per cent.
As to engine makers' market shares, the latest 2015 figures show that Cummins held 35.9 per cent (down from 38.4 per cent in 2014); Daimler on 30.0 per cent (27.5 per cent in 2014); Volvo with 19.1 per cent (as opposed to 18.6 per cent in 2014); Paccar with 10.8 per cent (10.2 per cent) and finally Navistar International with 4.3 per cent (5.3 per cent in 2014).
As to engine makers' market shares, the latest 2015 figures show that Cummins held 35.9 per cent (down from 38.4 per cent in 2014); Daimler on 30.0 per cent (27.5 per cent in 2014); Volvo with 19.1 per cent (as opposed to 18.6 per cent in 2014); Paccar with 10.8 per cent (10.2 per cent) and finally Navistar International with 4.3 per cent (5.3 per cent in 2014).
Increased gross train weights
There
is talk that higher engine powers may be required in North America in the wake
of growing pressure for US Federal gross train weights of articulated Class 8
rigs to be raised to 91,000lb, compared with the current limit of 80,000lb.
On the other hand, there is other talk
too, that North American Class 8 truck users are not “power hungry”; they just
like their engines to be big. One excuse for more powerful engines lies in
longevity. As operators tend to keep their trucks longer than their
counterparts in Europe, it is argued that a 15-litre diesel could offer greater
durability (a longer life) than a 13-litre engine operating the same duties.
To meet higher power requests, Daimler
has its Detroit Diesel DD16 of 15.6-litres which can develop between 475bhp and
600bhp. In Europe, where higher powers are more desirable, Volvo can put
forward its D16 engine with an output of 750bhp. Scania, by the same token, can
offer a V8 truck diesel able to give 730bhp.
But Paccar has no 15-litre engine; at present it has to take in the ISX15 engines from Cummins.
Cummins Inc. on the other hand does: it
has the ISX15. Cummins – “the industry's favourite engine builder" – offers
this six-cylinder turbocharged engine in two modes: in the peak power category
of 485bhp to 605bhp (362kW to 451kW) for high pulling powers and as a fuel
economy version of 400bhp to 500bhp. The high horsepower version suggests
Cummins has something in reserve for future requirement growth.
But again, the US’s second largest
Class 8 truck builder has no 15-litre engine. Agreed the Bellevue, Washington
based truck builder takes its 11-litre MX11 and 13-litrte MX13 engines from Daf
in Eindhoven, The Netherlands, to power its Kenworth and Peterbilt nameplate
trucks. But it has no engine capable of giving 600bhp and over.
Vertical integration is in vogue
The
top rating for the MX13 is 510bhp, although in the past the company’s engineers
have tried to encourage more from the same engine – even to the point of
touching 540bhp. But this is stretching things too far.
Cummins Inc., for all its muscle and
links with Navistar International, has seen its market share shrink this past
year as vertical integration takes hold in both Daimler and Volvo. And, one
suspects, Cummins will see share will continue to slide.
However, the question for Paccar is
straightforward: Can a financial justification be made for developing a new
engine for what would be (compared with Cummins’ output) a relatively small
annual volume?
This is probably the question that will
have been raised in the boardroom in of Paccar Inc. more than once. The first investment
could be significant. The bean counters will have a good idea for of the
numbers involved.
Much depends on volumes. But there is
probably not much change from at the very least $200 million to develop a new
engine, with possibly more required for investment in machine tools and vehicle
homologation, depending how much Paccar has already committed to its Columbus,
Mississippi engine manufacturing facility.
Would it be worth rolling the dice out
to buy back market share from Cummins?
Paccar executives will have watched
with more than passing interest as majors like Daimler and Volvo intensify
their efforts in vertical integration. Should Paccar do the same?
Global
technology leader
And
where would design of the 15- or 16-litre engine be conducted? Paccar has no
North American experience of designing and developing heavy-duty truck diesel
engines even though Paccar describes itself a global technology leader which
designs and manufactures "advanced diesel engines" for use in light-,
medium- and heavy- duty applications.
To fully justify this description one
might expect that Paccar Engine Company would need to have a range that
extended to 15-litres, or even beyond
In recent years, Paccar has relied heavily
for its powertrain technology on European know-how from Daf in Eindhoven, the
company it acquired to enter the diesel engine business.
Before the arrival of Daf, Paccar
relied on the diesel offerings of Caterpillar, Cummins and Detroit Diesel. But
times have changed. Caterpillar quit making on-highway diesels while Detroit
Diesel fell under the spell of Daimler AG. Only Cummins remains, as at one time
Mack also built its own engines.
Daf does however use some
Cummins diesel engines but only for its lighter XF and CF trucks built in
Europe. In the main Cummins sources these needs for its six-cylinder engines
from its engine plant in Darlington, UK. Other diesel engines, like its
four-cylinder models, are sourced from Cummins’ joint venture business in China.
Is something happening in a quiet corner?
Some
might have thought when Paccar acquired Daf, that the Bellevue-based company
would out-source all its engines. Had that happened, Cummins executives would
not have been able to believe their luck. But it didn't and now there is the
prospect of a third engine family at Paccar.
Agreed, creating a diesel in the size
range of 15-litre to 16-litres is a tall order, but it could nevertheless be
happening in some quiet corner of a forward project office in Eindhoven. Even
single cylinder trials could have been under way for some time.
Dutch engineers, never keen to stand
still for long, would relish the opportunity to have a go at designing and
building a "big one".
They would, if they have not already
done so, pitch their engine at the top end of Cummins' range, namely in the
peak power band of 600 bhp plus, but with some power in reserve for future
growth.
It is conceivable, when manufacturing,
engineering and product planning experts at Paccar put together their proposals
for their new $400 million engine manufacturing plant in Columbus, Mississippi,
they looked to the future and inked in the capability of building larger
engines in future. They would be silly not to do have done so.
It will be interesting to see what
happens in future and, if the MX15 emerges, what materials will it use for
critical components. The MX11 and MX13 engines use compacted graphite iron (CGI)
for cylinder block construction. It might be reasonable to suppose that if there
is an MX15, it too will have a CGI block, and even a CGI head as well.
2 comments:
If you think "there is no replacement for displacement" it will come a Paccar 15 liter.
BUT
If you compare the ISX 15 with Paccars MX-13 the later is 20 % lighter and also has 20% less horsepower.
BUT the MX-13 is less than 10% behind when it comes to torque, and that whats you drive.
Not likely due to the huge investments in a low volume engine.
It might be remembered that Caterpillar had a long-established and well-respected 15 litre engine which the company attempted to upgrade to meet EPA 2010 emission rules. At the behest of its OEM customer and effective partner Navistar and the latter's pig-headed CEO Dan Ustian, Cat tried to achieve that upgrade relying on EGR alone (as did Navistar itself with its MAN-derived 12.4 litre diesel). But it proved impossible without an excessively complicated turbocharger installation and subsequently horrendous reliability problems. So the 15 litre Cat engine was knocked on the head, except for off-highway applications less restricted by emission laws.
However, Paccar, as another erstwhile prime user of Cat engines, might well consider the Cat design as a potential subject for 'adoption' as a lower-cost means of entry to the '15 litre club'.
Paccar is better placed financially than Navistar was to invest in a successful technology upgrade needed for EPA 2010 compliance. Such funding, in combination with DAF's unquestionable diesel expertise - as evidenced by the progressive evolution, over four or five decades of its currently largest engine, the MX-13 - could yield a 15 litre Paccar in-house power unit to hold its own against the Cummins ISX15 and vertically-integrated rivals.
Post a Comment