Navistar’s Spiral of Despair. A Response.
Not a particularly clear one it has to be said, but congratulations to Today’s Trucking for pinning down RW and getting some words from Warrenville. Today’s Trucking, btw, is based in Canada, where SCR appears – says Navistar – to be OK, just so long as you wear a respirator. We digress.
Granted, Wiley’s response has the sort of utility normally associated with a chocolate teapot, but there are some standouts:
In the seemingly endless war of words between the SCR and EGR camps, Navistar has been vocally critical of SCR as a North American emissions solution. But Wiley says such a characterization is ‘unfair’, adding that the company has only ‘discussed’ the use of ‘urea’ in 2010 engines. ‘There’s a big difference’.
This discussion – soon to take place before the Federal Court of Appeals – might be regarded by others as something rather more formal and less relaxed, but litigation is in the eye of the beholder and so on. However, as a real twist, here’s a suggestion that MWM may be producing SCR equipped engines (deemed lethal in the US, and usually employing a substance described as ‘toxic and volatile’ by Navistar) without the need for Urea:
Wiley couldn’t confirm whether Urea – or more accurately the urea-based NOx-busting chemical Diesel Exhaust Fluid (AdBlue in Europe) required in most SCR engines – will be used in the Brazilian NGD engines as well.
Suggesting that not only has Navistar achieved the seemingly impossible, and produced a EGR-based engine that will prove to be compliant and competitive at EPA 10 – in itself a stellar achievement given both that its tenure within the HD market can still be measured in minutes and that many long term market participants – not least the designer of Navistar’s rebadged engine gave up on this sometime ago – but it has also – possibly – produced a SCR engine without recourse to …. er …… SCR. Read More
Posted by Oliver Dixon in Brazil , NAFTA on August 26, 2009 3:54 PM