Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?

1225226228230231473

Comments

  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited October 2013
    100,000 miles per year is really not a good metric to use for the passenger vehicle fleet. The tried and true 12,000 to 15,000 miles yearly AVERAGE (American driver) might even go down further, if they keep increasing the auto operational , acquisition and carry costs. Indeed the AVERAGE AGE of the passenger vehicle fleet has already gone up to 10.5 years.

    Honda Civic natural gas is one very small production example. IF diesel passenger cars are a $ wise "challenge" (it really is not), going from a gasser Civic to a natural gas Civic is pricey at best.

    Again not a scant 10 years ago, 1 in four stations carrying diesel was considered "scary". Again, it wasn't. The natural gas infrastructure is practically non existent.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited October 2013
    NG does seems more suitable for transport, not passenger rigs. So we're back to wondering if, say, 20% extra diesel supply hurts or helps your price at the pump.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    IF it were a FREE market, the answer is CHEAPER price per gal.

    But then we would really be back to that old running joke. Anything happens, the price goes UP !!!! :) We are awash in diesel, PRICE goes UP. We have a shortage of diesel, PRICE goes UP. We solved the debt crisis, PRICE goes UP! You can produce diesel fuel @ the corner fuel station, PRICE goes UP. Break through in algae biodiesel production, PRICE goes UP.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Here are a lot of interesting stats on NG and possible uses.

    Vehicle cost. CNG vehicles are nearly 25 percent more expensive than conventional gasoline or diesel vehicles and nearly 10 percent more expensive than hybrids, based on equivalent models. For example, a CNG-powered passenger car available in the United States costs about $5,600 more than a similarly equipped conventional model, and a CNG-powered 18- wheeler costs an additional $60,000. Even with today’s low natural gas prices, it would take years for motorists to recoup these extra costs.

    In a 2010 study, IHS-CERA estimated it would cost between $8 and $12 billion to have CNG facilities installed in just 10 percent of existing U.S. fueling stations. A single CNG station costs anywhere from $300,000 to $3 million more than a regular gas station.

    http://www.exxonmobilperspectives.com/2012/03/22/natural-gas-cars-a-look-under-t- he-hood/?gclid=CNSIrdq2w7oCFUGd4AodqDUAiQ&gclsrc=aw.ds
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The ex-Alaskan down in lower Michigan was selling them for terminal use for ~$100k but his were refurbs. Just a big tank or two on a skid-pack that you'd hook up to a natural gas pipeline, plus some controls and connectors. Lost track of that crowd so no idea what they cost now.

    There's also scuttlebutt around that the gas supplies found from fracking are short-lived relative to the usual reservoirs found by drilling, so the NG boom could bust in a decade.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    I know this is off topic, but I recall when buying the 2004 Civic and comparing hybrid AND Natural Gas options, the Hybrid AND Natural Gas models were a minimum of 61% MORE.

    In 2003, I remember people wringing their hands because diesels (VW TDI's) were a $236. PREMIUM to the gassers !!! This @ the time was app 1.3% MORE ?????

    Needless to say 100,000 miles per year @ almost ANY savings CAN come at one VERY fast.

    I think it almost makes no sense for a fleet operator to switch thinking the government will NOT rain on that parade. Indeed a fleet operator needs to take a lot of IRS tax credits and write offs to even be TEMPTED to switch. Right now it sounds great right NOW, simply because the Government has not gotten involved (in the normal negative way) .
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    This is just an update to the MACRO environment of natural gas.

    So for example, Natural gas ( for furnace and water heater) for the month of October cost $10.26 to heat/hot water the house. !! ?? If I may say so, it was a COLD October. This converts to $.35 cents a day. The vendor's cost was $.43296 per therm, used 10 therms. Taxation was 15.24% of the vendor's cost.

    So evidently, the (monopoly) vendor is not making enough (gross profit 137%) and is applying for multiple RATE increases. :(
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Upon reflection, the natural gas use was not accurate. Add gas range and oven, to the furnace and water heater. Way Way Way off topic, given the choice, I would never want an electric range and oven.
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,756
    Bleh. Electric makes a far better oven than gas, but I completely agree with you on the range! We bought a "dual fuel" unit back in 2005 that allows us the best of both worlds. :cool:

    Sure would be nice to have LNG here rather than relying on #1 heating oil (diesel). I paid $3.96 a gallon for my winter's supply this year (650 gallons). I have it good, though. Very few people (locally) who solely use heating oil come anywhere near using as few gallons as I do for the square footage.

    I'd much rather burn my diesel in a car than in my house, though. :P
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    While I haven't researched this, I almost can swag that natural gas is FAR cheaper than heating oil to heat ones house per month. Just using your bill vs my bill, that (your bill (3/4 months?) would give me app 200+ (250 actually) months of heating ! aka 20.8 YEARS for your ONE winter . This is with an @ least 28 year old gas furnace standard (80 %) . Not to say the current standard is much better (@ 90%)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    I miss my JennAir and my electric heat pump. Burning gas in the home is unhealthy. (LA Times)
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    The article is strictly straw man ! It is too bad the article didn't post the electrical out put of air pollution due to cooking. It would be not hard to make the( WRONG) assumption jump that cooking with electricity is pollution free.

    It might be instructive to mention that minimum (building) codes for (both/either or) an electric & gas cooking installation are EXACTLY the same. So the question is: why would one NOT use proper (coded) ventilation when cooking with gas OR electric?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    Read the blurb - even when the fans "work", half the time people don't bother to turn them on.

    And we're talking about combustion inside your home - furnace, water heater, stove. Having had a cracked heat exchanger on a gas furnace before, I'd much prefer having electric appliances and let the power company deal with the combustion by-products at their plant, hopefully with their SOTA scrubbing equipment.

    And it wasn't like I was charring stuff on the electric JennAir or getting my cast iron skillet red hot all that often. Just be careful sautéing those hot little peppers!

    Fireplaces and wood stoves aren't any better for indoor air quality.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Blurb was read BEFORE the response. It doesn't change a thing (anything), now that seemingly it was an issue to you. Now I wish it did, for I would not have had to put in a ventilation system, if electrical was pollution FREE..., NOT NOT NOT !! Ventilation for electrical (Jenn Air in yours/my case, last one I had was new 33 years ago) was ventilated to the outside (again by building CODE).

    Now I keep (sensitive) carbon monoxide detectors in the kitchens (gas stoves and ovens) and they have not gone off ONCE !!
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I don't know a single person I would consider a good cook that likes electricity stove tops. Not to mention how inefficient electric stoves and heat pumps are. I wish we had natural gas instead of Propane. That about triples the cost to heat our home. And that would be cheap compared to heating and cooking with electricity. I agree stoves should be vented properly. I imagine the PM from searing those peppers is much more unhealthy than the gas burners.

    Diesel is not a bad way to go for cooking either. I have friends with boats in AK and they only use diesel cook stoves. Nothing else as safe.

    http://www.reddenmarine.com/dickinson-00-ber-bering-diesel-stove-with-fan-12v.ht- ml?gclid=CNasqZb-07oCFaU5QgodMmMAZQ
  • xwesxxwesx Member Posts: 16,756
    Yes, for sure! The vast difference in heating-degree-days between our locations aside, cost per BTU on LNG vs. #1 HO is not even on the same scale. Except here in Fairbanks. Gas would definitely be a more expensive option for me. But, one 100# propane tank will last me approximately fifteen months for stove-top cooking, so I don't mind the ~$130 cost to refill the tank, nor lugging it into town and back.

    It costs me nearly $3,000 just to heat my home every year, and that doesn't include other things like hot (tap) water. My condensing oil-fired furnace is ~93% efficient as installed, too, which far exceeds the typical 80% efficiency of standard modern furnaces. Even so, I used 75 gallons between 9/29 and 11/3.

    Not to take us away from this enjoyable conversation, but I came across a fairly comprehensive sales figure report on "alternative fuels," so I thought I would share it here. I was specifically looking at the adoption trend for the new Cruze, but the links contain information on all lines:

    June: 188 units
    July: 347 units
    Aug: 430 units
    Sept: 479 units
    Oct: 510 units
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Like Xwes says, cream of the crop is a convection electric for baking. Studies on three continents show indoor gas burning is bad for you (kids, esp.). Link, link and link.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The Surprisingly Violent Story Of How The Trucking Industry Killed Fair Prices For Great Diesel Cars (businessinsider.com)

    This is the most interesting part of the story to me:

    "The diesel tax is a fair way to account for the impact trucks have on the road, Darrin Roth, director of highway operations at the American Trucking Associations, said in an interview. “We think it should be even higher than it is.”

    “It’s clear,” he said, “that there isn’t enough money going into highways” for necessary repairs and expansions, both of which help truckers."
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Too funny, if you listen to the environmentalists, they would have everybody (but themselves) stop eating meals that were cooked. While we are at it, ban beer wine and spiritsfor its release of "poison gases" (C02). Don't make bread, gas ovens and C02 release and transportation costs. :)
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    My wife is the worst to forget to turn the kitchen fan on, and she's the one with the inhalers around the house. Go figure.

    Okay, back to cars....
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    No real noticeable change due to fall/winter onslaught. Last SOS/DD trip was a 32 mpg R/T, 12 VW T TDI. The one leg of the trip, coming down out of the mountains (from 7382 ft ) that I had no one in front of me nor had to wait for the passing lanes to pass. That leg posted 37.7 mpg on the computer. Gorgeous but COOL weather with GREAT visibility. Overnight temperatures hit 20-25 degrees F.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    OK, Time for me to call BS bigtime. I just drove cross country. Much of it was on back roads of TX. The TX back roads are WELL MAINTAINED. Most are 70-75 MPH. You do slow to 55 through most towns. We drove from Texarkana to Sonora, TX without hitting the Interstates. Wonderfully smooth secondary highways. And they do it on 38.4 cents per gallon. Compared to the 3rd World roads in CA where we are paying 71.6 cents per gallon. Like most taxes Californians get the sticky end of the sucker. Not to mention TX has a LOT more highways to maintain than CA. CA diesel tax is at 76.2 cents per gallon and most stations are right at $4 per gallon. Indiana has very high diesel tax at 74.6 cents per gallon. Yet I filled twice at $3.51 per gallon. Best price of the trip. Don't get me wrong. Diesel would have to be over $5 per gallon to get close to the cost of driving a comparable gas SUV. Fuel savings paid my hotels going.

    The higher tax on diesel to cover road usage is just passed onto the consumer. I don't see it as good for the country. Good, would be to use the fuel tax for what it was intended, instead of stealing it for other uses. Less than 15% of the high CA fuel tax is used for infrastructure.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    Sounds like the same problems there as elsewhere. Funding shortfalls, new toll road in risk of default, proposals to convert some rural roads back to gravel, general funds appropriations to the transportation department. (Good summary at texastribune.org).
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I have criss crossed TX twice this year. Never on the same road. They may have problems. Not even close to CA ratty roads.

    California may be home to the Tesla, one of the most glamorous electric cars on Earth, but it also has the worst roads and highways in a country where roads and highways are falling apart, according to a report released this month by TRIP, a non-profit in Washington, D.C., whose backers include insurance companies, labor unions and other businesses with an interest in transportation.

    http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/thinking-tech/americas-roads-are-falling-apart/5- 357
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    CA has 8 out of the 20 worst highways in the USA. So where did all that Stimulus go that was supposed to fix our infrastructure? I will tell you, it was given away as welfare and unemployment. A good leader would have put people to work with that money. Read about the CCC and WPA. Both programs that spent our tax dollars wisely to help those that needed it.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Your assertions are spot on. As one that travels regularly in 4 of the top 5 "worse" areas (mentioned in your linked article) , it gives me no great pride nor pleasure to almost totally agree with you. Indeed if one is not careful, damage due to poor roads can cost one dearly, up to and includings ones' life. In fact, in CA good faith estimates by CA accident statistics and insurance entities and state agencies estimate INXS of $2 B in damage related to poor road conditions.

    Further, the really HARD part, as one who was involved in getting $1.75 B for the top and #5 "worst" areas (seems like a life time ago), the monies were advertised to one and all for "SPECIFIC TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS ONLY. " While I look back to it and would like to believe it was true, truly on 20/20 hindsight, that is suspect ...@ BEST.

    Yes , years later the improvements are now apparent. Anyone can the results of the monies applied to these specific projects. But the truth is once the monies were "secured", I or those known to me had no functional or audit controls (bang for the buck if one will)
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    Fireplaces and wood stoves aren't any better for indoor air quality.

    Maybe some fireplaces, especially older designs that used flues that were much too large in diameter and consequently allowed exhaust gases that were too cool, but a properly designed air tight wood stove, designed within apprx the last 20 years, surely doesn't fall into this poor indoor air quality class? What is wrong with a device that constantly pulls in outdoor air through cracks around bases of doors and windows (the most common leaks, which reside low in relation to the usual height of a chimney exit point) while expelling burnt gases out the chimney? Only very very occasionally will we get a west like wind that is twirling and try to force occasional smoke back down the chimney here. I heat almost exclusively with wood, even though my backup is electric BB. ($$$$$$, if they are used) Mind you...given how badly the ol' bod is beat up from the work involved (not to mention the literal and significant risk) to get firewood from forest to stove..when the process literally starts with a tree standing in the forest, sometimes I too question the rationale behind my committment to wood heat.

    So...I FINALLY was able to get out to actually demo a car yesterday! After much showrm seat time (well...not 'much', but a lot more of that than actual driving time) I took an LX trim Rondo out. Very impressed on a number of levels. No, it is not available as a diesel, and has no AWD option either, so I must be crazy to even consider it, but I have my reasons still. As for it not being a diesel, I have been sole searching this quandary for literally a full half year. (longer, but fully a half year as I come to more conclusive evidence that with the politics, $ and emission restrictions of NEEDLESSLY restrictive and complicated electronic and chemical tech involved (and did I mention $?) in order to have one clean enough to satisfy the corrupt gvt as**s who make these decisions in the first place, that I am too intimidated by the present pendulum state of trying to clean a diesel to meet the unfair and unrealistic demands made on them. It costs too much to buy, to own, to maintain, and I fear that even in those (many) cases where a STRONG case can be made to have one...(Gagrice's new choice as only one example), that it's almost a given that there will be more hand-tieing-behind-your-backs for this tech, in the future, not less. In the longterm future however, (there's that pendulum swing I was referring to, only on its way to the end of its present swing transition point) hopefully a reasonable happy medium can be met and accepted as to how complex and restrictive we make diesel's emission systems and the consequent ramifications on the internal operation of the oil burner itself because of those parameters, when the powers-at-be realize that if you want to extend the time with which we can expect to have the use of oil (and exploit its many benefits) as a form of mobile energy, that allowing the use of diesel will be one way to buy more time...but all that said, I still hold out hope for a more modern diesel ICE that is allowed to breath and flex its muscle more unencumbered with political anchors constantly holding it back. Let's just hope that if we truly do have a (relative to our generation and the next) limit to oil reserves...they don't use it all up in the form of gasoline, before that happens. Meanwhile, I think it will be long after I'm probably either dead, or too old to safely drive any longer..
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited November 2013
    Plenty of links out there. Bet your woodstove doesn't have a remote like my electric fireplace either. :D
  • Washington DC roads are awful. When commuting in from Virginia, as soon as you cross the bridge it becomes pothole hell. It will kill your car twice as fast in DC than in VA or MD. Most people in the know will not buy a DC car.

    It is like night and day. Virginia roads are well maintained and there are new parkways and interchanges are being built all the time.

    The DC government keeps wondering why their budget is under federal control, but without federal oversight nepotism would run even more wild and work crews would do even more standing around and doing nothing.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    edited November 2013
    Just as I expected, that entire link info is all related to breathing in smoke. You're not suppose to be hanging around the exit to your chimney! Like I said in the beginning, all bets are off if people spend more time atop their roof smelling wood smoke, than living comfortably warm inside the home with nary a hint of wood smoke.

    Properly running wood stoves I dare say provide for a healthier air environment in the home because it is proactively pulling in fresh air which is burned and exhausted through the chimney with the wood smoke. A quite a bit more efficient than many might realize, ATAHER (air-to-air-heat-exchanger).Certainly healthier than a closed up tight R2000 like home (minus the ATAHER) which uses electric BB. Now you have a home with all the occupants breathing out tons of old spent air with no procative source of new air getting in, save when a door is opened etc.

    This reminds me (altho not a pefect example by any means) of someone complaining about the smell of diesel burning cars and they would NEVER buy one, yet comically (not really of course)...THEY are the ones not benefitting as they still have to breath the diesel car in front of them..

    edit..also there is something in there that is simply not even accurate at all!
    This: "In milder weather, burn smaller fires."

    Absolutely bad advice! The BEST fire to have in this situation is a full sized BIG fire, but with the crucial difference that you use many many interlocking smaller pieces of firewood. I use 'pick-up-branches' from beech trees around here during the fall before the rains start, for that very purpose. This creates a big hot fire, that burns out fast and relies on the insulation of the house and its contents to absorb that fast burn heat. If the temp is too warm for comfort, from that big (short) fire, then open a window and let some fresh air in.

    This big, but short fire(s plural if needed every couple hours), create a lot of heat in the chimney and that reduces the accumulation of creosote and also emits much less harmful emissions than a slow burning smouldering fire that most households will have ignorantly cuz they don't want to "get too hot".
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Oh, you find lots of other links if you don't like that one (and yeah, about.com links are often lousy). And don't forget that the smoke winds up in my backyard too. Just ask Xwes how Fairbanks manages with all the outdoor wood furnaces. No arguments up that way. ;)
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    To be fair, that really wasn't all that bad a link. It had a lot of good info and my only real beef was related that one piece of advice they had, that in a way it too was somewhat good advice, but, IMO, and as an experience wood burner from way back, lacked the one important tidbit that while the fire should be hot, it can be big but as long as it is made from small volume (in size) sticks, so that it'll burn hot (good) but for a short time (if off season fires are the goal.

    As for the neighbour's smoke, yes..can't disagree with that one at all. I think in past I have even mentioned that when picking a property where neighbours burn wood, pick a place up wind from prevailing winds. Problem is...not everyone can be up wind.

    Essentially, burning wood for heat, does work best for rural home owners where space is everyone's friend.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited November 2013
    Wood stoves cannot possibly cause pollution. If they did Obama would not have given me a 30% tax credit on the wood stove insert I put in my fireplace. With the high price of propane and electricity in CA more and more people are cutting up wood for heat. I expect to start smelling the wood smoke any day now as fall has set in on us. Thanks to the waste on alternative energy scams.

    Got my new grill installed today on the Touareg. I will be much more aware of turkey vultures from here on out. That one cost me $290. Very easy to install. Better design than my Nissan or brother in laws Escape.

    PS
    the current tax credit is $300 for a wood stove. You missed the good one.

    In early 2009, the new Obama Administration and the new 111th Congress proposed the massive stimulus package, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. Working with our allies in the Congress, HPBA was able to get language inserted into the ARRA draft language that expanded the 2008-passed tax credit to become a 2-year credit with the same requirements (75% efficiency), but with a much-increased value for the tax credit (30%, up to $1500).
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    There you go making me hungry again.

    Grilled vulture on the wood stove. Got fries with that?
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    You'll be in good shape if you're a fan of dark meat, Steve!
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Member Posts: 16,373
    Gagrice - I continue to be impressed with your Toureg TDI FE numbers as well as how well you speak of how great it drives.

    I just returned from a short 24 our road trip from my house in Stamford, CT to my cousin's place in Salem, NH. I filled up on Friday night before I left, so my wife did some in ten driving while I was at work yesterday AM. I filled up again this AM because I wouldn't be able to make it back home on a single tank. I had the cruise set at 75 mph for most of the 215 mile trip up there. I averaged 18.2 mpg on RUG which I paid $3.659 for here in CT.

    The city MPG I get when my wife drives it around during the week is almost embarrassing. I filled her up 5 x between 9/29/2013 & 11/2/2013. Here are those mpg results: 14.0, 15.5, 15.1, 14.5, 14.9, 14.6. When I filled up on Friday night before the trip, FE was 16.8.

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I can tell you no matter how aggressive I drive 25 MPG is the low end. I wish I could get a tank up around 32 MPG, so far that has not happened. The best tank at 29.9 MPG was mostly 65-75 MPH. That was driving on US 60 from Amarillo across OK, MO into KY. Getting 700 miles on a tank would be easy. I usually fill after a day driving. Most days were 530 to 585 miles. I will post my trip route on Road Trips when I get a chance. I am getting a feel for the best routes from CA to Indiana. I avoid large cities best I can.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    ..."no matter how aggressive I drive 25 MPG is the low end. "...

    Your post has to be one of my favorite things (in comparison to gassers) about TDI's !

    Combine with the newer M/T's and A/T's, one can also be as involved and/or deliberate to as "automatic pilot" as one cares to be. (this is not to say this can't be done in a gasser: it most certainly can be: BUT......., but I think most folks know that)

    Just did a SOS/ DD R/T, for 30 mpg (much lower than more normal 31 to 33 R/T).

    (I probably should not talk about this trip as much as I do, as it is a HOOT being one of the few on the (mountain) roads to/from this area. ) I do have to say that with more folks using those roads, counterintuitively I know the mpg would be.... BETTER ! ? :)

    Rather than let the computer program and A/T do the "correct gears" and rpm calculating work, I opted instead to keep FULL torque UP/DOWN the mountains. (middle of rpm range, giving full torque, using the sequential shifter gate a LOT more) . One goal that I firmly have in mind is to use the brakes as LITTLE as possible.

    As a matter of further TMI, the difference in tire size between your 19 in and (my) 18 in could be a partial explanation for the differences in mpg. Also you are still on the lower end of break in miles(meaning your mpg will gradually get better.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    A Pilot with MB's 2.1 twin turbo 4 cyl diesel (369 ft lbs...at only a few revs up from idle) !!! combined with Aisin's 8 speed auto sure would make for one helluva fine Pilot. It'd be perfectly ok with MB's 7 speed too of course. That MB motor is what they put in the GLK...so similarly sized and weight. The Aisin is the superb tranny in the Touareg. Except for Honda's A/C, it'd be the best of the best. That could get me back interested in a diesel premium again, cuz while I'm a bit sheepish to admit it, while I love the MB engine, I trust Honda a bit more with the chassis etc. Mind you, a Pilot equipped with that powertrain, would be almost as much moola as the GLK, altho along with the A/C, the seats too would probably not measure up to the Benz's.

    I have to say, while I like the GLK a lot on many levels, the look of it sorta doesn't hit me quite right. I think it's the exaggerated slope in from the beltline up, which must use up some valuable elbow and shoulder room. I prefer the look of the ML and Touareg much more. They seem to be sized proportionately better. I actually prefer the look of the ML better although prefer the slightly smaller size of the VW T. It's about perfect. In fact, the Pilot is also sized just right. Has really good, clean..almost handsome lines.

    Like I say tho..it lacks an engine choice and your FE findings supports every past stat whenever I read about how thirsty they are.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Honda has demonstrated time after time (since the promise of a 2004 Honda TDI) they are NOT ready for ONE prime time (US market) TDI, let alone a specific niche model (Pilot/Acura MDX). The upcoming 14 MY would POST @ least a DECADE of NO ( US market) Honda diesels.

    Now the nexus of a 2004 Honda TDI( and teaser of a US market offering) was a Honda concept to market in less than 4 years (? not sure anymore of the exact project milestones) . Now unless they are willing and able to do it again, any "diesel" they come out with will be at best a "me 2" offering. Honda has not done well in European markets, competing head to head against more advanced diesel offerings. Indeed the real reason why they did come up with a 2004 Honda diesel was to survive the dual competitiveness in the European markets of gas/diesel (50/50 as a starting point) , when they mainly offered gassers. US markets, of course have had no such motivation and in that sense "disadvantage".

    Given my experiences with Honda's (gassers), they would have a LONG way to go to catch up to even VW quality (as vilified as VW has been) to even come close. MB? LIGHT years. My 04 Civic is light years behind the 03 Jettta (TDI) in that regard.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    edited November 2013
    True enough, except that I'm not sure "specific niche model" applies as purely as you suggest, primarily because none of the competition have diesels either in their respective classes (Escape, Tucson, Sportage, Sante Fe, Sorrento etc) yet Pilot sized vehicles do have diesels now (GLK, ML, VW T, BMW, Audi)

    I would think that this is a category where Honda could really flex its muscle, and the Pilot and Ridgeline are such gas guzzlers (unlike a gasser CRV for example...both being AWD capable SUVs of fairly usable size) that, IMO, they would be ideal candidates for a diesel....once and for all..

    The Ridgeline could then compete a little with the new 1/2 ton Ram diesel if it ever gets here...for those who want 4 doors, on a shorter more maneuverable WB than other car-like p/u trucks.

    Why not get the jump on Ford too, since they will eventually have to succumb to the torque and FE of the Rams new VM?

    They can only sit in denial for so long..

    Anyway..all that said..I will admit that the Ridgeline and its price of admission even on a gas job, does sorta make it niche..
    But the Pilot is such an obvious choice to burn oil. get it happening Honda!

    edit: I see you did some extensive editing so not sure if my post makes much sense now..
    Actually, what I would hope for Honda, is if they could arrange a licencing deal with MB, to use their (2.1) engine and tranny. We already know it's good, and passes emissions..ready to go. But I really don't know if Honda has good relations with MB or not.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    You do of course know the Pilot is the Honda Odyssey platform. So no, most of those you mentioned are not even close. The 14 Acura MDX was taken off the (Honda) Odyssey platform. It now shares the platform with the Acura RDX. (smaller) Some pundits only see the mpg advantage.

    I would also scratch my head as (IF I was responsible for) Honda would want to sell as many diesels as it possibly could. So really they would need 2 TDI's.

    The 2.1 L with 369 # ft would seriously put the Civics/Accords into serious upgrade and actually be almost marginal for the Odyssey platform, meaning one would need the 3.0 L engine !! But then you would have to seriously upgrade the Odyssey underpinnings.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    yes, but still, with a bit of front end chassis strengthening, I think that 2.1 would be an ideal fit.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    That may or may not be true. But in the case of my wanting a 2004 CIVIC TDI (52+ mpg vs 38-42), I am not holding my breath.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Much lower fuel prices"

    $3.77 ULSD
    $3.51 PUG
    $3.31 RUG

    Prices of (futures WSJ 11/12/13) barrels of oil are down.

    C/O = $93.10,
    B/C = $105.55.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    Another slow diesel news day, but this might have a great effect on RUG/PUG users, as well !!!

    ..."This week, the EPA is expected to announce changes to the ethanol mandate, a 2007 law that requires energy companies to mix billions of gallons of ethanol into gasoline and diesel fuels. After six years in the mix, corn-based ethanol has lost its popularity, and a diverse group of critics is calling for the law's repeal."...

    ..."though ethanol fuel releases less carbon dioxide than other kinds of gas, many question if the side effects of production are worth it. "[I]n the president's push to reduce greenhouse gases and curtail global warming, his administration has allowed so-called green energy to do not-so-green things," says the AP."...

    http://news.yahoo.com/why-everybody-hates-ethanol-mandate-060400105.html
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Hopefully the EPA and Congress get their hands out of the Mega Farmer's pockets and start doing what is good for the environment. I refuse to buy another RUG/PUG vehicle as long as they are using ethanol laced gas. Of course the advantages of diesel far outweigh anything they do to gasoline.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    The WSJ did an unrelated "tag team" article that I just read in passing.

    UPSHOT : we are AWASH in RUG/PUG and prices (less than $3 bux) have not been as low since 2010.

    The refiners are in profit. (funny words for a WSJ article "FAT" profits, aka their time in the sun) The inventories (fuel inventories in storage) are pretty closed to maxed out. One energy talking head puts gasoline at almost a BYPRODUCT of diesel for EXPORT.

    I am glad to hear that you are having good experiences with your choice of TDI !!

    At this time, when I would need to replace a (gasser) car, I wouldn't be inclined to get a gasser. Now I could get curious with a Chevrolet IMPALA 3.0 L diesel !! CR rates the gasser Impala pretty high @ app 92 to 94/100.

    Speaking of road trips.... How far is Santa Monica to you? Union 76, 1776 Cloverfield Blvd. http://santamonica.patch.com/groups/events/p/audi-clean-diesel-day

    Might be time to go see one of my clients there. Friends too !? Unrelated, I heard an aural news story crediting George Clooney with having numerous stranding problems with his $99,000 Tesla. I am assuming he was not a happy camper.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Our friend Rocky has a new job in a machine shop. He likes the job and he likes the company car. A 2009 Jetta TDI. He delivered some parts at the other end of the state and got 43 MPG. Says the car has 249k miles and drives like a new car.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited November 2013
    WOO Hoo !! I am sure a lot of us who have shared a few boards are glad for him!

    The fact that he likes the "company car" gives me a heads up ! I'd be interested in some of the tidbits of the shop's 09 VW Jetta TDI on its way to 250,000 miles ! Just time alone puts shop use @ 62,250 miles per year !!!!!

    Our commute posts between 39 to 44 mpg and of late more like 41/42 mpg. We anticipate a total of three commuters, so the mpg MAY drop 1 or 2 mpg. After app 1 years ownership time, I stuck my swag out there and said I thought it was going to be a great used car also. Seems they are having good history with it so far?

    Did an early morning run to South Lake Tahoe. Ran into the Sacramento area commute morning rush hour. I think all these people are glad they have jobs, they drive like the employers are actually paying them !! :) So I ran into only the same couple of choke points. I was going my usual 85 mpg in the slow lane just with way more TRAFFIC !! These guys would fit right in LA LA Land ! After I turned off to the mountains, the roads were literally deserted. Just gorgeous road and weather conditions, albeit colder: 50 highs to 19 degrees, overnight, no real snowfall.
This discussion has been closed.