91��Ƶ

This story appears in the Aug. 3 print edition of Transport Topics.

Navistar Inc.’s 2010-compliant engines will sell for $6,000 to $8,000 more than its previous generation of engines, the company said last week.

Prices for “vehicles with heavy-duty diesel engines, including the MaxxForce 11 and MaxxForce 13, will increase by $8,000,” Navistar said on a July 28 conference call. Prices for “vehicles with midrange diesel engines, including the MaxxForce 7, MaxxForce DT, MaxxForce 9 and MaxxForce 10, will increase by $6,000.”

Navistar’s announcement last week makes the company only the second U.S. engine manufacturer to put a price tag on slashing NOx emissions to the near-zero level mandated by EPA 2010.

Earlier this year, Volvo AB said that it would level a “non-negotiable surcharge” of more than $9,000 to cover the costs of its U.S. 2010 emissions technology.

Also on the call, Navistar, the only engine maker to rely solely on exhaust gas recirculation to meet the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 2010 emission standards, lashed out at competitors planning to use selective catalytic reduction.

Navistar challenged claims by manufacturers using SCR that their vehicles offer superior fuel economy and reiterated its stance that these companies conspired with EPA and exploited a loophole in the federal Clean Air Act to get SCR approved as a 2010 engine technology.

“We expect our fuel economy performance to be equal to our competitors moving into 2010,” said Jack Allen, president of Navistar’s North American truck business. “Fuel economy in the engine itself is just one of the many factors that affect total fuel economy,” Allen told reporters on the call.

Allen said that a truck’s engine accounts for about 35% to 40% of total vehicle fuel economy, and that aerodynamics “make up the other two-thirds of the fuel-economy equation.” He said that Navistar’s flagship ProStar tractor, and other models, give the company’s vehicles an aerodynamic edge over competitors.

In a July 29 interview with Transport Topics, a representative of Navistar rival Mack Trucks fiercely disputed Navistar’s contention that EGR-only trucks could match SCR trucks for fuel efficiency.

“It’s physically impossible for a massive EGR engine to get the same type of fuel economy as any type of SCR platform,” said Dave McKenna, director of powertrain sales and marketing for Mack, Allentown, Pa.

As for Navistar’s claims of aerodynamic superiority, McKenna told TT that Mack has “advanced aerodynamics ourselves, as has the rest of the industry.”

“There are us folks that believe that the world is round and that SCR is good technology, and there are those that believe the earth is flat and that massive EGR is the best technology,” McKenna said. “I challenge anyone that thinks the Earth is still flat to a fuel economy test.”

Other engine makers using SCR also rallied behind their chosen technology.

“The reasons we chose SCR to meet EPA 2010 standards are SCR’s superior fuel economy and lower operating cost,” said Jim McNamara, a spokesman for Volvo Trucks North America. “We have seen nothing to indicate otherwise.”

“Detroit Diesel’s BlueTec SCR will deliver up to 5% better

fuel efficiency than today’s . . . DD15 engines,” said David Siler, director of marketing for Daimler Trucks North America’s Detroit Diesel Corp. subsidiary.

“Our truck brands are continuously working to improve chassis-related efficiencies, such as aerodynamics, [and] those im-provements will be added to the BlueTec improvements,” he said.

Engine maker Cummins Inc., Columbus, Ind., countered Navistar’s claim that the cost of diesel exhaust fluid, the urea-based additive used by SCR engines, would equalize operating costs between SCR and EGR engines.

“We expect our ISX-15 to deliver a 5% improvement in fuel economy,” said Christy Nycz, a spokeswoman. “Our test results also indicate that DEF will be consumed at a 2% rate relative to fuel. At DEF pricing equal to diesel prices, customers will realize a 3% net improvement in operating costs.”

Navistar’s Allen has said that “urea today currently costs significantly more than diesel.”

Paccar Inc., which will use SCR in its Peterbilt and Kenworth brand trucks, did not respond to requests for comment.

Meanwhile, Navistar last week reiterated its claim, put forth in a March lawsuit, that EPA is illegally allowing Navistar’s competitors to use SCR to meet the 2010 emission standard (click here for previous story).

“Really, what [EPA has] done is to create a loophole for SCR manufacturers,” Allen said.

In filings with a federal ap-peals court, Navistar accused the Engine Manufacturers Association of creating a document “in secret collaboration with certain engine makers” that eventually became EPA’s official SCR guidance.

Navistar contends that because EPA’s guidance allows SCR trucks to exceed 2010 emission levels in certain circumstances — such as cold weather starts — that SCR systems are unfairly and illegally permitted to run out of compliance.

Navistar has said its EGR-only technology cannot, by itself, meet the 2010 standard. Using EGR, the company can lower an engine’s nitrogen oxide emissions to 0.5 grams per brake-horsepower hour. Navistar has said it will use emissions credits earned by exceeding earlier EPA standards to meet the 2010 standard of 0.2 g/bhp-hr of NOx.

While some SCR engines are capable of meeting the 2010 standard without credits, some will use credits. Cummins will use emission credits in 2010.