Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





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

1239240242244245460

Comments

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    Duly noted and accepted both times.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    "In Oregon the challenges of funding infrastructure are pretty similar to what we're seeing across the rest of the country. They're looking to close the funding gaps caused by a rise in fuel efficiency and a decline in gas tax revenue.

    So, they're testing, for now, a new system that replaces the state's gasoline tax with a tax per mile driven. "...

    The above is just another data point for the points I have been making.

    OR? next USA?

    Not to pick on CA, but the CA state legislators have long since past laws to use the funds marked by law for (roads) infrastructure maintenance and improvement ONLY, for their petty cash for anything BUT ROADS !!!! We already have the highest fuel taxes, fuel prices , and state income taxes AND they are going to go up to a max of 13% from 9% or 44% HIGHER still !!!!! Oh and I forgot we have some of the worst roads in the NATION.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Taxing people on a per-mile basis, instead of taxing the fuel, would be a disaster for fuel efficient vehicles.

    The current system rewards diesels and hybrids naturally. Use less, pay less.

    Switch to pay per mile and every one will be driving a full-size pickup or SUV, and OPEC will rule the world.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    .."Use less, pay less"...

    While it sounds great and I actually wish it so, it is more like use less, pay a LOT MORE. Again, using grade school math, I have posted verification more than once. It is approaching a MGAP (mudderhood, God and apple pie) type of issue. Actually it is more like religious doctrine; than .... religious ..... doctrine.

    Yes, all fuel taxation should stop. This would mean that the price per gal would plummet !! So for example, the USLD I bought for $4.00 would be a minimum of .75 cents cheaper or 3.75. Can't have that can we !? ;) :lemon:
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I can't argue when diesel is $0.76 more per gallon. Obscene.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    So basically using ULSD @ the end of that "greedy" oil man's term. 1.85 MINUS .75 cents CA taxation that would mean ULSD would (should have been) be $1.10 per gal.

    Slow news diesel day. I had to do a rolling parking lot bumper to bumper commute today. Mpg dropped to 29.5 mpg (VW Touareg TDI) for the ordeal.

    Corner store prices 3.59 R, 3.79 P, 3.99 D2.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Slow news diesel day

    This may help pass the time:

    http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/05/2014-audi-a3-sportback-first-drive-review/

    This redone A3 model weighs between 100 and 165 pounds less than last generation
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    the USLD I bought for $4.00 would be a minimum of .75 cents cheaper or 3.75

    New math or California public schools? ;) Just kidding, no offense.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    I was beginning to think you all were falling asleep ! Nothing like an obvious mistake to: .. ;) press to test.

    Actually it is a national obsession. Funny how cutting government spending is seen as jumping off the fiscal cliff.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,056
    Forget the A3, I want the Allroad with that TDI installed. Or maybe the SQ5 would be nice in my garage.

    In conjunction with the 24 Hours of Le Mans, Audi is presenting the new top model of its recently revised Q5 model series - the Audi SQ5 TDI. Boosted by two turbochargers, its 3.0 TDI produces a brawny 230 kW (313 hp) and 650 Nm (479.42 lb-ft) of torque between 1,450 and 2,800 rpm. The Audi SQ5 TDI will roll into dealerships in the first quarter of 2013 and is the first S model in the history of Audi with a diesel engine.

    The Audi SQ5 TDI sprints from zero to 100 km/h (62.14 mph) in 5.1 seconds; top speed is 250 km/h (155.34 mph). Fuel consumption is on average just 7.2 liters per 100 km (32.67 US mpg). Innovative thermal management, the start-stop system and the regulated oil pump all contribute to this top figure. A fast and smooth-shifting eight-speed tiptronic and quattro permanent all-wheel drive with torque vectoring transfer the power of the brawny V6 diesel to the road.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The A3 would come with an attainable price tag.

    SQ5 would be in the 50s easily, once equipped.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    It was interesting @ 5,000 ft and above ( UPGRADE trip up to Tahoe terminal altitude was app 7,300 ft) that I became the outlier, even in the slow lane and in a driving rain.( I got passed once by an Escalate with a 6.2 L gasser 430 hp/417 # ft and an EPA of 18 mpg) This 3.0 L TDI has only a single turbo and 225 hp/406 # ft of torque. . MPG posted 30 (computer). Coming out of the mountains was interesting with the no fuel draw on the TDI and the 8 speed A/T: with little brake usage.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,056
    Oregon started working on this system several years ago. CA looked at it and did not get involved. Looks like Oregon's neighbor to the North is now interested. About time they make those Prius drivers pay their fair share. Probably won't do it with diesel as most truckers pay more with per gallon tax. Too small a number of diesel cars to put in the expensive equipment.

    The state is taking a serious look at possibly charging drivers for every mile they drive as a way to boost transportation coffers that are drying up while cutting gas taxes at the same time.

    Transportation Secretary Paula Hammond told KIRO Radio’s Ross and Burbank show Wednesday that the so-called “road usage charge” could replace Washington’s gas tax altogether, which is one of the highest in the country.

    A 2010 report found that vehicle miles traveled in the Puget Sound region more than doubled between 1980 and 2009. But, Hammond said the increase in the number of fuel-efficient cars that can go farther on a gallon of gas has cut into gas tax revenues across the country.

    The Washington State Road Usage Charge Assessment Steering Committee issued a report last week which found that a road usage charge (also known as a Vehicle Mileage Tax) is a feasible way to wean the state off gas taxes.


    http://www.king5.com/news/local/road-usage-charge-study-washington-182245901.htm- l
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    CA is very opaque about how the taxation is calculated. I have never seen the formula's. So a swag on $4.00 fuel is along the lines of 10% sale tax .40 cents, Seventy nine. 5 cents combined or $1.195/$4.00 = 29.9% I have of course missed a few of the smaller taxation categories.

    link title

    Full court press by government agencies to drastically CUT fuel use and now they are crying the blues because they make less monies even as fuel prices go up a min of 29 % per year and the actual taxes PAID for the last 4 years. This is absolutely perverse.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    Just the Facts:
    BMW is recalling 29,800 2009-'12 BMW X5 xDrive 35d diesel vehicles because they may unexpectedly lose power-assisted steering, according to NHTSA.
    BMW also ordered a delivery stoppage of the vehicles in the U.S.
    The recall is expected to begin in January.

    link title
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    Well, this recall doesn't really have anything to do with the fuel used does it? Just a bad batch of bolts.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,586
    edited December 2012
    That's one heck of a batch! :surprise:

    It's pretty far down the list in terms of danger to the drivers, but it's nice to see them taking a highly proactive measure to address it. Ten years ago (actually, I should probably just re-write that as "in the past"), that was not the order of the day!
    2010 Subaru Forester, 2011 Ford Fiesta, 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup, 1974 Ford Pinto Wagon
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    Yeah, but all cars have recalls. Shouldn't be a reason to sway you from buying a diesel.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    Absolutely not! However, both BMW and Edmunds.com ("affected") specified the BMW X5 35 D, aka. DIESEL.

    IF it only affects the bolts used on diesels, I am sure the BMW dealers will get a lot of recall inquires from the "unaffected" BMW X5 35 owners. (non diesels)
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Posts: 4,085
    edited December 2012
    You are correct in saying that *ALL* cars have recalls...The difference is how the automakers approach the process.

    I once had a Honda Cvicc Wagon 4X4. It had several recalls...but Honda made it a point to proactively perform the repairs when it was in the shop. (They offer FREE annual Vermont State inspections to all customers!!!) No other dealership in the state offers that. (yes - I have asked them)

    I had a Dodge once too.... I had to complain loudly and often before they would agree to fix a recalled issue.

    The difference between the 2 automakers was STRIKING!!

    Not only that... I once asked to look at the Honda shop manual for a few minutes... the dealership INSISTED that I take it home for the weekend and copy the pages I needed. I realize this is more of a DEALERSHIP difference - but this also shows how hard they work to keep customers. (Too bad Honda does not offer a diesel in the USA.)
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    edited December 2012
    I'm still having trouble with the diesel angle. The news may say X5's diesels have a recall, but to me that's just narrowing the audience. Kind of like saying Avalon V6s have a recall or Chrysler Sebring convertibles have a recall.

    It's not exactly a ding on diesel engines. Would it really influence someone to buy the gasser X5 instead of the diesel (all other things being equal) based on one recall for balky bolts?

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited December 2012
    The engine belt idler pulley bolt could loosen and break over time

    That particular external assembly is apparently different on the diesel vs. the gas. Not really related to the engine, fuel or internal design. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying, but the gas and diesel use different belts as well, if one or the other had a belt recall, instead of a bolt recall, same conclusion for me. Now if the recall was for engine block cracking, whole different story.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    Well yes and no. Since the piece was not written for or at the technical level, they were probably addressing D consumers/ owners. I would almost be willing to bet those affect bolts have different part numbers for the (various) diesel (/s in other than US diesel models) and various gassers.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    Your differentiation would really seem to be beside the point. The sense I am getting is if you bring in your gasser for the recall it is not going to get the recall.

    But because you do have a BMW Z5 35D, let us know the details come January 2013.
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    They probably got a load of bolts intended for the gasser by mistake and didn't catch it in time.

    After all, every part of a diesel engine is rougher, tougher, more robust and better engineered than anything on a crummy old gasser, right? :D

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • After all, every part of a diesel engine is rougher, tougher, more robust and better engineered than anything on a crummy old gasser, right?

    Careful, in trying to be a smarta$$, you might have hit it right. There was a previous debate on the 6 vs. 8 speed automatics in the diesel vs. gas. Part of that is related to the strength of the transmission. The amount of an manner in which low end torque on a X5d and Cayenne diesel gets transferred through the transmission creates greater stresses than their M and Turbo counterparts. I suspect that BMW kept/is keeping their 6-speed transmission in the X5d because they deem it more capable of handling the stress. Trying to add more gears in the same amount of space and weight by definition either requires a compromise on strength, or more expensive/stronger alloys to compensate.

    I run my company, but we have enough young metallurgists and mechanical engineers - several with automotive engineering backgrounds - that I pick up a lot at the lunch table.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    There are probably a number of ways to answer both comments.

    From a consumer 's point (POV), I would look to habitat1's response after the dealership's experience; from an auto writings point of view, Edmunds.com. It does sound like a simple R/R the (probable lower specification) part with the probable higher specification part with a specific (probably the same) torque value. I get the feeling the paperwork and ancillary tasks will probably be more of the task than the actual R/R. :blush:
  • steverstever Viva Las CrucesPosts: 41,309
    edited December 2012
    Sometimes I can't resist the easy targets. :blush:

    Pretty much the same argument has been used (and pretty successfully I think) for the rash of minivan transmission failures that happened the last decade across a wide range of brands. The bigger vans needed beefier parts or better cooling than the stuff borrowed from sedans.

    Sounds like it should be an easy fix for the X5s at least.

    Moderator
    Minivan fan. Feel free to message or email me - stever@edmunds.com.

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,979
    edited December 2012
    Indeed.

    I have posted this for the VW Touareg, but the TDI engine puts out 406 # ft.

    By a few references, the BMW X5 35 D puts out 425 # ft (4.7% more).

    (Several references put) The Aisin 8 speed TDI transmission capacity @ 627# ft, or app 54.4% safety factor. The torque is 35.2% below capacity or safety factor.

    For a host of reasons, I do not know what 6 speed transmission BMW uses (ZF I assume) or the counter part pieces of information.

    This is just an FYI, but I have read that BMW implies a macro new design and mcicro new (ZF) 8 speed transmission for its new model 2013 X5 35 D.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited December 2012
    macro new design and mcicro new (ZF) 8 speed transmission for its new model 2013 X5 35 D.

    I will be stopping my dealership later today and will check that out. But at least as far as the macro new design, that's not the case with the new 2013 X5d's they are ordering now. The 2013 X5d's that you would order today - as has been the case for a few months on the gas models - is still the current body style/interior. That apparently won't change until sometime in 2013, perhaps as an early 2014 model release. I'll ask about the transmission, but that appears to still be the same 6-speed as well. If you look at BMW's website specifications, that's what they list. And if you then click to the build your own, a 2013 MY comes up

    BMW USA X5d.
Sign In or Register to comment.