GM doesn’t really know HOW to build light vehicle Diesels. Their record on this goes back to trying to convert the big-block V8’s to Diesel, a bad job of engineering to start with. The most experienced of all automobile Diesel manufacturers, Mercedes, started with a clean drawing board when they designed their first Diesel-fueled engines, and built them from the inside out to withstand the additional demands of the Diesel combustion cycle.
There was a 1.8 liter four that was produced back in the early 1950’s, widely used in taxis all around the world, that had impressive records for durability, often racking up a million kilometers of more, without major engine overhaul. The Mercedes four-cylinder Diesel had an exhaust note that was unique in all the world, and while it was probably a low performer in terms of acceleration or top speed, it could run all day with seemingly no signs of strain, and make impressive mileage under most conditions, whether sitting idling in traffic, or out on the highway. On the minus side, it did stink, and had a tendency to coat the back of the vehicle with soot. Both these objections have been met in recent years with the improvements made in the Diesel fuel available, and with the application of urea injection, and the relatively leisurely throttle response has been much improved with the addition of turbocharger boost.
But don’t rely on GM to take advantage of all this newer engineering. Their engineers still have a hate for Diesel that is almost palpable.
That’s why they can’t compete anymore.
And to think they were the founder of Detroit Diesel, too; they could have developed a diesel for passenger cars if not for that bizarre aforementioned corporate culture. That division was sold off to Daimler AG (Mercedes-Benz) back in 2000.
When Detroit Diesel was part of GM, I thought those screaming 2 strokes were super durable motors, but in context of this article, I’m probably comparing oranges to clothes dryers.
Europe seems to have embraced diesels in cars........America not so much.