11-,12-Liter Engines Growing Up

[kscarbel2]

Transport Topics  /  April 15, 2016

Not that long ago, the mindset of many fleet operators was to get as much muscle power in engines as they wanted or could afford. That often meant 15-liter engines that could deliver a whole lot of horsepower. But times have changed.

With evolving technology and additional greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions and fuel-economy regulations pending, smaller engines are becoming more common — not just 13-liter models but also those in and around the 11- to 12-liter range.

In early January, Paccar Inc. upped the ante by installing in the United States its first production MX-11 engine, a 10.8-liter power station. It went into a Peterbilt Model 567 for North Dakota-based fleet Knife River, one of the largest aggregate producers and suppliers of concrete and asphalt in the United States.

The move by Paccar followed the 2013 launch of the MX-11 in Europe, where it has installed more than 10,000 of these engines in trucks made by its European operation DAF. The MX-11 is built at Paccar’s engine manufacturing facility in Columbus, Mississippi, along with the MX-13.

Paccar isn’t alone when it comes to having engines in and around 11 to 12 liters, with offerings in the United States from Cummins, Navistar, Volvo and Mack.

So what’s driving the trend toward smaller engines? Several factors.

These engines aren’t new, but the power they deliver is much more than it was, even just a few years ago, said Charlie Cook, marketing manager for vocational products at Peterbilt, which is owned by Paccar.

“We are able to achieve more horsepower and torque with less displacement,” he said. “We are getting 430 horsepower and 1,550 pound-feet of torque out of the new MX 11-liter engine, something that a few years ago would have required a much larger engine.”

More technically, this means several things, said Mario Sanchez-Lara, director of on-highway marketing communications for Cummins, which makes the 11.9-liter ISX12 model engine.

“Increased power density is the objective, which drives adoption of aggressive compression ratios, increased injection pressures and higher fresh air induction,” he said. “Similar to what we have seen in passenger cars, truck engines are adopting dual overhead cams, variable timing, high-pressure fuel systems, multistage turbocharging and sophisticated materials like compacted graphite iron on the blocks and head castings,” the latter making the engines lighter.

The increasing sophistication of engine control software is helping. Mack Trucks offers the 11-liter MP7 with 325 to 405 hp and torque ratings from 1,200 to 1,560 pound-feet, which maintains what Stu Russoli, highway and powertrain products marketing manager, calls “good efficiency numbers.”

“Integration plays a role, too, particularly in the case of our mDRIVE automated manual transmissions,” Russoli said. “Our MP engines are fully integrated with mDRIVE, sharing 100% of the information 100% of the time.

“Together, they sense factors like the load on the truck, incline, decline, speed and more to get the most performance and efficiency out of a smaller engine displacement.”

In other words, a lot of the move to smaller engines has to do with efficiency. This is why there also are many more 13-liter engines in use today compared with 15-liter ones, said Mike Evans, senior consultant at Rhein Associates.

“The race to add more horsepower has really slowed down over the last 15 to 20 years,” he said. “So now we can do more with less. In the past, you would see lots of 15-liters, and then the 13-liters came in and we saw a trend into 13-liters. That doesn’t mean the 15-liters went away, but a large proportion of that business has moved to 13-liters.”

It’s largely about fuel efficiency, said John Moore, powertrain product marketing manager for Volvo Trucks, which offers a 10.8-liter D11 engine.

“The fuel maps on these engines are optimized for regional haul, less-than-truckload and diminishing-load applications running on flat to rolling hills,” Moore said. ”You can post excellent miles-per-gallon numbers, if set up correctly.”

In addition to technology advancements, helping to drive this trend toward smaller engines are increasing federal emissions regulations, Moore said.

He believes future advances in horsepower and torque will allow these smaller engines to cross even further into their larger-displacement counterparts’ applications zone at increased efficiency.

“Future GHG regulations are requiring dramatic reductions in aerodynamic drag, along with more efficient engines,” Moore said. “Because the hood slopes are more aggressive to lower drag, engine installations at higher displacements become a greater challenge to install within limited space and still have enough space available for technicians to service them.”

Weight savings is another main driver, especially in certain vocational applications “where they are looking to get every pound of payload,” Rhein Associates’ Evans said.

If an 11-liter can do the job and save 400 pounds of weight for a regional or bulk hauler or vocations such as refuse, that helps productivity.

That weight savings is attractive to any operation concerned about grossing out before cubing out, such as bulk and tanker haulers. They also are a fit for local and regional operations as well as construction and refuse.

“I think the regional haulers look to buy the most efficient truck they can,” Evans said. “They don’t need the absolute power perhaps they get from a 13, definitely not from a 15.” When you look at the horsepower and torque ranges the 11-liter engines provide, they get well into the 13-liter applications, he said.

“If the customer is hauling high-cost freight, such as fuel, they will see an immediate payback for the extra 390 pounds they can now haul,” said Volvo’s Moore, who noted the D11 engine is 390 pounds lighter than the company’s 12.8-liter D13 engine. “There aren’t many options on the truck that cost less and save this much weight.”

This is what drove Walpole Inc. to check out the 11-liter Paccar engine, said Keith Walpole, president of the company, a 240-tractor bulk hauler, which also has been running the 13-liter Paccar MX-13 model engine in some of its trucks.
“We have never been afraid of running a smaller cube engine,” he said. “We’re in the bulk-hauling commodity movement business, and weight is our dollars.”

This weight savings with the MX-11 versus the MX-13 is about 400 pounds, which Walpole said has translated into a 5.1% improvement in fuel economy — and more than 12% when compared with larger engines from other makers just a few years ago.

If you worry about not having enough power with an 11-liter engine, but you don’t want the weight of a 13-liter engine, some 13-liters are actually smaller — such as Navistar’s 12.4-liter N13 model, said Steve Gilligan, vice president of product marketing.

The current N13 weighs 2,400 pounds installed in chassis, about 565 pounds lighter than a Cummins ISX15 engine, about 200 pounds less than the Paccar MX-13 engine and 200 pounds heavier than the new MX-11, he said.

“Right-sizing” the engine, as it is called, can be part of an overall “lightweighting” strategy. The North American Council for Freight Efficiency advocates selecting equipment and components that are lighter, allowing for better fuel efficiency and more freight per truck.

“Getting a big number, like hundreds and hundreds of pounds, like you can with these engines, allows you to add some other fuel-economy technologies that are adding weight,” NACFE Executive Director Mike Roeth said, such as aerodynamic add-ons and idle reduction systems.

Looking ahead, those interviewed said that engines in and around the 11-liter to 12-liter range offer more horsepower and torque than ever and are likely to get even stronger. These engines can save you weight, allowing for greater payloads and improved fuel efficiency.

Thus far, they seem best for regional and local operations, depending on the geography, and for bulk and tanker applications, they said.

But these engines aren’t for everybody. Planning on trucking across the Rockies or the Appalachians while loaded up to 80,000 pounds? Chances are your drivers may be cursing your name and thinking about quitting to work as a Wal-Mart greeter.

However, the most crucial thing to consider may be what Keith Walpole said: “The strongest advice I would have is to analyze your current fleet’s data and just see how much horsepower you have been using and how much torque you have been using versus what you are buying, moving forward.”

[kscarbel2]

Engines: Is smaller the next big thing?

Fleet Owner  /  April 7, 2016

Rightsized—not oversized—engines are getting the job done for fleets seeking efficiency and performance

If you’ve ever heard the saying “go big or go home” and shook your head thinking there are many situations where it really doesn’t apply, welcome to the evolution of heavy-duty trucking in North America. Engine and power­train technology has progressed to a point where more is possible with less, and there are a number of other factors also coming into play. It’s all helping drive a move by more trucking companies away from a 14-15L engine standard toward a 13L sweet spot, and increasingly to the 9-12L range.

“The old bread and butter isn’t the bread and butter anymore,” says Frank Trzaska, director of maintenance support at third-party logistics company NFI Industries, one of three fleets Fleet Owner spoke with on the topic. In an industry where companies have been finding ways to shave off little slices of excess and chase down incremental gains in efficiency, particularly when it comes to fuel consumption and mpg, is it any surprise fleets are considering smaller-displacement engines?

And you don’t have to look far for options: Cummins Inc. calls its 11L ISM “one of the flagship engines” of its heavy-duty product line; Paccar launched its MX-11 of that same displacement in North America last fall; Mack says its MP7 11L is “the light engine that packs a punch”; and Volvo notes that its D11 can minimize costs of operation, to name several heavy-duty powerplants south of the 12L mark. All four of those, incidentally, can be spec’d with upwards of 400 hp. and 1,500 lbs.-ft. of torque.

More than meets the eye

“We call it ‘powertrain downsizing’ or ‘engine downsizing,’ if you may,” notes Sandeep Kar, global director of commercial vehicle research at economic consulting group Frost & Sullivan. With technology advancements, he tells Fleet Owner, “what’s happening is we’re creating a foundation where engines will be smaller in displacement yet will not compromise on power output, which means power density is increasing.”

Kar is quick to point out, however, that 15L engines aren’t going anywhere. “On the contrary, 15L engines will remain the industry leader in terms of installations, but the share they hold will decline.”

And why is that?

First, smaller engines can offer higher fuel efficiency, lower acquisition cost,  and essentially the same power bandwidth as larger engines, Kar contends, especially when paired with today’s automated manual transmissions. But beyond that, what “doesn’t meet the eye” is that OEMs like Daimler, Volvo and Paccar are introducing engines in ranges like 12-13.5L in efforts toward vertical integration, he says. In other words, they’re looking to gain market share with their own products against Cummins’ widely popular ISX15.

“So fleets can carry more freight and more payload because of the light weight, and the trucks are more fuel-efficient because of the OEM proprietary engines married with OEM proprietary transmissions that give interesting fuel economy benefits,” says Kar. “And fleets love that.”

Frost & Sullivan has also found that more fleet managers of the nation’s top 100 fleets say they’re “okay with the idea” of same-sized trucks with smaller-sized engines—that was 20% of fleet managers surveyed in 2012 and 33% in 2014. “But had I asked this question 10 years ago, the figure probably would’ve been 2-3%,” Kar says.

Another factor is the Panama Canal expansion project, which started in 2007 but is now mostly complete. “All those mega container ships that used to come to the Western Seaboard will now come to the Eastern Seaboard; hence, we will not need to rely on long haul as much,” Kar explains.

“We’re looking at the rise of regional haul at the expense of long haul,” he adds. “So the long-term outlook for smaller-sized engines is definitely promising.”

One size doesn’t fit all

Start with a less-than-truckload (LTL) carrier fleet operating in the Northeast like A. Duie Pyle, where all you’ll find are 11L and 13L diesels in single- and tandem-axle tractors, respectively. The 11L tractors are used primarily in a pickup-and-delivery operation and occasionally in line haul, says director of fleet maintenance Dan Carrano, while the larger-engine tractors are used both for line haul and pickup-and-delivery operations.

“Aside from being an LTL carrier, we also have a liquid bulk operation where we must achieve a precise load capacity,” he notes. In that operation, the Pyle trucks have a gross combination weight (GCW) of about 100,000 lbs., Carrano says, “and we’re more than able to move that load with a 13L engine.

“But we have not had one experience where we’re underpowered, even with our 11Ls,” he continues. The 11L trucks run a GCW up to 66,000 lbs., “and that 11L is more than powerful enough to meet our expectations. Our goal is to spec the right equipment for the right application—it’s not a 'one size fits all' in our eyes.”

NFI Industries, on the other hand, operates nationally and has found more of a sweet spot with 13L engines, which you’ll find in nearly all the fleet’s tractors along with “a handful” of 9L CNG-powered engines. “Everything we could think of, for every avenue we went down, a 13L worked for us, and it worked well,” says NFI’s Trzaska. “We have a 450-hp. 13L, where 20 years ago we were running 350-hp. 15Ls,” he points out.

“Today, there’s plenty of horsepower and torque in those 13Ls, and it’s in the low rpms—it’s in a great range—to power 80,000-lb. gross vehicle weight down the road all day,” Tzaska explains. NFI also specs direct-drive, automated manual transmissions, “and these 12-speeds can shift all day long, up and down, constantly, where a driver would be worn out come the end of the day from all that shifting.

“So today we can have a smaller engine with a smaller powerband and less horsepower [compared with the latest 15Ls], and it does the exact same work,” Trzaska adds. “And our driver is  just as fresh when he’s done with his day as when he started it. That transmission will keep that engine in that tight power­band he needs and operate the truck efficiently for mpg, engine life, and proper speed. For our fleet, there’s no sense in thinking about a larger engine for any of our operations anymore.”

Or take a company with very diverse equipment like Ryder, where “we have every possible configuration of engine and chassis out there in our fleet,” according to Scott Perry, vice president of supply chain management. Among its heavy-duty trucks, Ryder has some 9L and 11L engine variants as “pretty rare exceptions,” he notes, with “the vast majority” sporting 13L, 14L and 15L configurations.

“We’re seeing really good performance out of our 13L platforms, but we’re still very disciplined in making sure that we’re putting them into the right applications,” Perry says. “We generally don’t put a 13L engine in a sleeper tractor. We stick to a 14-15L heavier, higher-displacement engine in those just based on the types of duty cycles that those trucks could end up in. 

“We’re also very conscious of the GCW limits, and that probably applies more to our Canada operation,” he continues. “We make sure we don’t put a 13L engine in anything higher than an 80,000-lb. GCW application.”

Pros and cons

Geography and type of trucking application—e.g., the A. Duie Pyle LTL, Northeast-region model—are primary considerations when considering how to rightsize engines for your equipment, but there’s more to it than that. More heavy trucks are ending up having to go through local communities and neighborhoods, for instance.

“A lot of areas we deliver in were designed for 40- and 45-ft. trailers,” Carrano notes. “So we always consider the length of the trailer and the size of the tractor. We’re looking for the right piece of equipment for the right application, and you have to consider things like infrastructure and roads; we’re always looking to help set our drivers up for success.”

Smaller engines and the tractors to house them also are a factor at NFI, both in terms of agility and lighter weight of equipment, which means more freight/payload capacity and better mpg. “A shorter hood on a tractor also gives the driver better visibility and maneuverability when he’s parking behind a warehouse or pulling in to a storefront,” Trzaska tells Fleet Owner. “It’s just much easier and safer to drive around all the other things on the road.”

Lighter, smaller-displacement heavy-duty engines in the 9-13L range today can have plenty of horsepower and torque —in some cases surpassing the larger-displacement engines of yesterday—thanks to things like better oils and the use of new materials like compacted graphite iron. They even have maintenance intervals and life expectancies similar to or equal to their bigger siblings.

“Like the Paccar MX-13 engine, the MX-11 has a rated B10 life of 1 million mi.,” says Charles Cook, marketing manager for vocational products at Peterbilt. “This means the MX-11 engines are designed and tested that 90% of the engines produced will reach 1 million mi. without a major overhaul.”

Those smaller engines may even offer a few maintenance advantages, points out Mario Sanchez-Lara, director of on-highway marketing communications at Cummins. With the company’s medium-bore, heavy-duty engines like the ISL9, ISM and ISX12, “in general, their maintenance intervals are shorter [vs. 13L and larger engines], but the cost of some aspects of it is more cost-effective. Smaller engines on a big chassis offer lots of space with great serviceability,” he says.

However, smaller engines still don’t hold up quite as well in terms of residual value in the secondary market, Fleet Owner heard. That was once the case for 13L engines, though the market largely has warmed to those now, but it remains the situation for smaller engines like 11Ls, according to Trzaska. Owner-operators shopping the used-truck market once “didn’t believe that a 13L could do everything, because they had to have a truck that could do anything at any time—those guys were always looking for the high horsepower, big engine that would last forever.”

“You get a 13L, and it’s 300 lbs. lighter than a 15L; an 11L could be 400 lbs. lighter than that,” he adds. “Owner-operators figured that out. They’re businessmen today. They figured out that by rightsizing their engine, they can shed hundreds of pounds that they can put into payload and charge somebody for.”

The green argument

The three fleets we spoke with all said a smart strategy is to know your application, location and duty cycle, and rightsize—not oversize—your engines for the job. Like Ryder does now, NFI and A. Duie Pyle said they wouldn’t hesitate to spec larger 14-16L engines if the job called for them.

And while NFI’s Trzaska said that in its experience and real-world use, the company wasn’t able to get more fuel economy out of an 11L vs. a 13L engine, there’s also the argument of lower overall emissions. For some companies, Ryder’s Perry points out, smaller-displacement engines could be a differentiator in a highly competitive industry.

“There’s organizations that will definitely leverage that and will focus on that to differentiate themselves with regard to how they’re designing their distribution networks and making sure they have the most efficient powertrain available,” Perry says. “So private fleets with their brand on the truck, for example, if that’s part of their messaging to the marketplace, they definitely will want to pay attention to that and make sure they’re making those good, informed decisions.” 

.