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?

1281282284286287441

Comments

  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,136
    edited March 2013
    Thanks for the morning laugh. :D Reminds me of the time one of the limos tried to exit a parking lot and got high centered on the curb apron and stuck.

    (And Yahoo says it was a diesel they put gas in - but I thought diesels would burn most anything from coal tar to Jack Daniels, so what's problem? :P )

    Moderator
    Need help navigating? stever@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,755
    No that option is specifically AGAINST the law !! The EPA will not even allow an engine specified for up to 100% bio diesel. Bio diesel is as low as ZERO % ppm sulfur !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (for for conversation purposes 1 ppm sulfur) Why have no to lower ppm emissions when you can have RUG emissions that are 30 to 60 to 90 TIMES greater !!! Just as long as one can say how "clean" things are even when they are far dirtier !!!! :lemon: :shades: ;)
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,890
    but I thought diesels would burn most anything from coal tar to Jack Daniels, so what's problem?

    Even diesels have limitations on the crap they will burn.
  • houdini1houdini1 Kansas City areaPosts: 5,870
    Even diesels have limitations on the crap they will burn.

    Or the crap they have to haul around.

    2013 LX 570 2010 LS 460 2002 Tacoma 4x4

  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,392
    Hahaha! Touche!!!!!
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    I wonder if the emissions from that class of useless moneywasters could be counted as a biofuel. Could probably fuel a million vehicles for a million years.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,755
    edited March 2013
    ... and that's the way it is ! Good night. ;) :lemon: 95% RUG/PUG passenger vehicles is solid evidence of this brain washing.

    Diesels are way dumbed down also, ala 43 mpg vs 71 to 78 mpg?
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,428
    Almost all cars are dumbed down by the EPA - especially stick shifts.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,527
    yeah but first off that's an imperial gallon, and second of all, it's a 1.6L engine that quite frankly some of my fellow Americans would not be happy driving here in the states.

    Me, I'm all for it----just sayin'.................

    MODERATOR

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    If you live in Seattle or SF, maybe doable. In suburban ATL or similar, not so much.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,527
    why's that?

    MODERATOR

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    People here don't accelerate fast. People drive faster in more wide open areas.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,527
    Sort of like driving a 1.6L diesel in the twisty streets of Florence vs. on the German autobahn?

    MODERATOR

  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    Somewhat, yes. Some areas really need good sustained acceleration, suburban roads where jackrabbit starts are practiced by everyone. Around here, I can drive my fintail in virtually every traffic situation and have no problems keeping up - but I remember in the other places, it seems like everyone floors it off the line at every opportunity.
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    You solve acceleration at slow speeds by adding more mass. Now, you can do it via physical mass or by having more cylinders so that you don't have as many times where you aren't developing power.

    There's no reason we couldn't build a 2.0L V8 engine. Oh, wait, Ferrari did that already in 1975. Before computers were being used to design them, or direct injection or... or... or... 180HP without even fuel injection. I hear it was very fun to drive.
  • flightnurseflightnurse 35K feetPosts: 1,596
    There's no reason we couldn't build a 2.0L V8 engine. Oh, wait, Ferrari did that already in 1975.

    I believe it was a 3L V8, and it was fun to drive once past 3K RPM, under that the webber carbs were on the rich side and the engine wasn't happy...
  • plektoplekto Posts: 3,738
    Ferrari 208 GT4.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_GT4
    Only sold in Europe (as usual, the bums), but a sweet little ride.

    The 308 GT4 did 0-60 in 6.7 seconds, while the 208 with 50 less HP(vs the U.S. model with smog) did it in 7.7. But there was a massive difference in fuel economy. Almost 10mpg in actual driving since that power difference really was only felt if you flogged the 308 hard.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xk4JWVLMvvM
    The video quality is terrible, but it does have a lovely sound and handles, well, like a Ferrari should :)

    Small engines don't have to be 3 and 4 cylinder lumps. IIRC, the smallest V8 engine you can buy (more for toys and go-karts) weights about 12 pounds and puts out 9hp.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,527
    You do need displacement for torque however.

    MODERATOR

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    I agree. And best way to get it, is by length of stroke which is not conducive to high revs and in some cases, FE.

    I did like the sound of that little V8, but it actually sounded more like a 4 cyl to me, so I would be curious to see the firing order...I almost think that it is firing two cylinders at a time using a...what..180¼ crank??..thinkin' outloud here..
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    Funny thing, the 3.0 diesel 6 in my E350 also does 0-60 in a claimed 6.7 - but is capable of 40mpg under the right conditions, in a fairly heavy car.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,890
    I imagine when that turbo kicks in hard it puts you back in the seat. I know the GL350 Bluetec I drove had more than enough kick to get up to freeway speed quickly. And the GL weighs 1500 lbs more than the E.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    The car has the ability to break traction anyway, I've tried that. Around here, one rarely needs to push it while merging, as someone in front of you will be going 46mph - but it has no problems. It's a very mellow engine, I find my driving style is a lot less hurried in it.
  • eliaselias Posts: 1,903
    2014 VW Golf GTD . :) manual transmission.
    I may reserve the first one in USA (October if we're lucky?) .
    Anyone got a deposit on one yet?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    Saw diesel for 3.99 today - premium was something like 4.10. Nice.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,890
    You should find that the case most of the Summer. Winter they raise diesel slightly. In cold places they mix with Number one to keep it from gelling.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright CaliforniaPosts: 44,527
    Still .09 cents higher for diesel in northern Cal.

    MODERATOR

  • flightnurseflightnurse 35K feetPosts: 1,596
    Living in Phoenix, and traveling around the US for work I see prices all over the place. In San Diego, Diesel averages 3 cents more a gallon then Premium unleaded. Here in Phoenix, Diesel is less than regular currently, our gas prices have spiked up quickly here in the last 3 months, Seattle diesel is less than Premium unleaded by 5 cents.

    I'm very interested in getting a diesel engine car, I'm very much interested in the new BMW 3 series wagon and 3 series GT diesel when they make it over here, I just wish the prices of gas/fuel would stabilize some.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,755
    edited March 2013
    I am sure you would agree that the only thing we can count on to remain the same is CHANGE itself. On a certain repetitive (210 miles) trip, I can (routinely) fuel in any of 4 (usual) places. Each of the 4 stations has their going rates for any of 3 products, D2, RUG, PUG.

    So for D2 this weekend, it ranged from $4.15, $4.09, 3.99, 3.89. I got a minus -. 10 cent discount per gal.

    If I get off the beaten path, say wander into the high desert in NV, that dynamic has its own set of ranges :D . (NV's D2 tax is WAY cheaper than CA's and sales tax)

    Another is because of the TDI's range, I can literally chose any of the above to... fuel not at all. :shades: This past trip, I got 31 mpg (R/T). So a 26.4 gal tank would let me range 818 miles.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 8,392
    And, in still colder places, it's straight #1. :P
Sign In or Register to comment.