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?

1320321323325326477

Comments

  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,456
    edited June 2013
    You were curious about a similar gas sized car on a similar trip. 2013 Accord I4 6MT - actually slightly bigger than the MB at 101 ft3 vs 97 ft3.

    60 mile trip over rolling hills at 55-60 mph. Starting elevation about 200 ft above finish and with a 10-15 mph tailwind/crosswind. Averaged 51.1 on trip computer which has been pessimistic for 9 of my 10 fillups. Was 51.4 pulling into town, but had a hill to climb and a few lights.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    How would the Accord do at Western speeds and big elevation changes. That is where small diesel engines have it over small gassers. I go from about Sea level to over 2000 feet with several drops back to 700'. And you will get run over going 55-60 unless you stay in the left lane behind the big trucks going 45-55. Even the cops all drive 70 in the 65 zone and 75-80 in the 70 MPH zones. Most of the interstate 8 grades heading out of San Diego are in the 7% range. From sea level to 4500 ft in about a 45 minute drive.

    No screaming 4 cylinder gassers for me. I don't even like the V8 gassers in our driving conditions. They gear them for better mileage on flat land.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,456
    Can't think of many situations where the Accord would not do better than the diesels talked about mostly here (E class, SUV's etc). The 2.1 in a C or E class would certainly change that.

    Can it touch a TDI Passat or Jetta under similar conditions - no. Can it get astounding mpg under certain conditions - absolutely.

    Current tank is about 37 mpg. That is after 4 weeks of small trips (.5 - 3 miles) around town and 3 short highway trips (60, 60 and 40 miles). Nearly 300 miles on tank and range shows just under 400 miles remaining.

    Itching for a long highway trip - took my '07 on my last one and averaged 42 mpg for 1,200 miles. And yes that was with big elevation changes. Started in SD at 1,500 ft and wound up in Wyoming at 7,100 ft. The '13 should do 2 or 3 mpg better.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    You are comparing a I 4 gasser 6 speed M/T vs a 6 cylinder diesel A/T! ? I am not clear what you are comparing, given equalization variables? It would seem to me the V6 Accord CVT would be more in line? (EPA H of 34)

    Like I said in one post IF mpg is the gig...... Indeed you and I know why they keep 73 mpg Golf TDI's off the American markets (can you imagine what the Taylors could do with that puppy?) . The closer comparo to your I4 Accord would be the 84 mpg (set by Taylor's) Passat TDI 6 speed manual (EPA H of 43 of course) vs the 2013 I4 6 sp M/T (EPA H )36. Part of their protocol is @ the speeds you mention. For them it is 5 under the speed limit. (65 mph)

    Indeed the older 09 Jetta TDI I 4 easily gets between 42 to 44 on the road and if I keep it under 90 mph (DSG, so even I wonder how much better for a 6 speed M/T.!!??) I really do not know what it will do @ 55 to 60 mph. I do know I will not meet target legs or it will take far longer. ;) :shades: :lemon:

    @ steady 65 mph in the 03 Jetta TDI (only 5 speed M/T) the tank refills consistently posted 62 mpg and that was with the A/C blasting.

    Geez those speeds and distances were almost painful and certainly mind numbing.

    I have done any number of close to a 550+ mile leg @ 75 mph with bursts to 85 and with consistent posts of 59 mpg. The reason for the speeds were across a 3 state multiple HP car crack down. So I picked a speed (75 mph) that I was not likely to be stopped for doing. I was gunned muliple times till finally it was so frequent and annoying I just turned the radar detector OFF. So seemingly, that speed is relatively non magnetic to LEO's. By way of explanation speed limits out west can sometimes be 65/70 (rural). At those speeds I am in the extreme right lane with fully loaded tractor trailers looking to pass and normally LEO's have far more and bigger fish to fry.

    Now for my .02 cents your posting is certainly good for an Accord (gassers) . On a 04 Honda Civic we routinely post 38 to 42 mpg with its 4 speed slush box.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,456
    edited June 2013
    Ruking - you wondered what a gasser might post under condtions similar to fintails recent drive. I consider the Accord to be similar sized ( yes it is lighter and has a smaller engine ) as they are in the same EPA size class. That is why I posted my numbers.

    TDI's do very well - and I have always maintained that I can't match their mpg.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    I also said a few other things (and multiple times) that you are conveniently ignoring ! But hey, its all good.

    So if we use YOUR logic, you may have missed an opportunity, not getting a 2013 Civic 4 cylinder with a 6 speed? ;) But then the other logic is.... this is a TDI thread?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,310
    Are those interior dimensions or something? For 2013 models, a diesel E weighs about 4059 lbs, 191.7" long, 73" wide, 113.2" wheelbase. For the Accord, 3192lbs, 191.4" long, 72.8" wide, 109.3" wheelbase. They are pretty much a wash, but the MB is heavier due to the diesel engine and all of the gadgetry. Honda probably has more interior room being FWD. Automatic vs manual probably does a lot, too - I can't lug it in 6th at 50mph while drafting a semi even if I wanted to :P

    Speaking of gas E350 mpg, I rented one last year and went on a few road trips. Here are two results:

    This was between Jacksonville and the eastern Atlanta suburbs, a leisure drive where I did not touch an interstate (a very enjoyable and relaxing drive):

    image

    And this was an interstate drive between Macon GA and Gainesville FL:

    image
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    ??? ..."For the Accord, 3192lbs, 191.4" long, 72.8" wide, 109.3" wheelbase. They are pretty much a wash, but the MB is heavier due to the diesel engine and all of the gadgetry..".

    Perhaps I am confused about the 867# weight difference? It is common knowledge (perhaps not so common given the post) that weight affects mpg a lot more on gassers than diesels. Be that as it may, so in effect to equalize the weight, all one needs do is to put an extra 4.335 persons weighing 200#s each for 5 to 6 people in an Accord against one driver in a MB E350 Bluetech and let the tests begin !? ;) With that "equalization" are we thinking the Accord would get even better mpg or....?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,310
    All of the toys MB loads into NA market cars, and the heavier engine is probably enough to do it.

    Loaded up and with a skilled driver, the 6MT Accord still probably would do at least a little better, due to less displacement. It might not be as responsive when at that weight, though.

    I don't try to hyper-mile or anything, either. I just drive, and check my mpg at the end of the trip.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,456
    Fintail. Yes - interior dimensions - I got the interior ft3 off of the EPA website. Actually they list the Accord at 103 but that is without the sunroof so I looked up the sunroof model and it is 101.

    Not putting down the MB. Very nice vehicle. The diesel model is the clear choice for the E class. Looks like 10+ mpg better than the gas V-6. I just require a stick shift and the nearest MB dealer is 230 miles away. I would absolutely love an E with the 2.1 and a stick shift. Stripped down like a European taxi. Would probably be 5-600 lbs less as well.

    Ruking - Don't know why you would want to make the weight equal. Not Honda's problem the MB weighs more, but there are two ways to look at equalizing. We could also equalize the speed ;). An Accord 4 cyl. 6MT hits 60 mph in 6.6 seconds. Two seconds faster than the E. :)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    Indeed, that (your point) really gets to the point of why I have liked and continue diesels (even as how most diesels are "neutered to butchered" for the US market) , one can drive it how one likes (given understanding of diesels parameters of course) and like for like it will do better than (again like for like for the broader audience) gassers.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    ..."Ruking - Don't know why you would want to make the weight equal. Not Honda's problem the MB weighs more, but there are two ways to look at equalizing. We could also equalize the speed . An Accord 4 cyl. 6MT hits 60 mph in 6.6 seconds. Two seconds faster than the E. "...

    We should move on, we are beyond the beating of a dead horse. Given your logic ,you did miss the boat not getting the Civic. Shame, you could have gotten even better mpg. ;)
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,338
    Heck, almost every Direct Injection engine is going to tap at startup. My Hyundai built 2.4 liter does it for about 2 mins on a cold start. In other words it only does it in the morning. Some Sonata and Optima customers thought the engine was bad or the valves were tapping. Nope, just the hi-pressure fuel injection system working just as it was designed.

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,338
    edited June 2013
    Well, since the Dart is really a Alfa Romero Giulietta, shouldn't Dodge be offering a Fiat made TD to compete with the Cruze TD? The Cruze outsold the Dart 4 to 1!!! Chrysler was banking on 100,000 sales in 2012, but got 25,000 instead. OOOOPPPS! They thought it was going to be another Neon to magically restore them as small car champs. I dunno, I am not really a Chrysler hater, but they can't rely on 300, Charger, and Challenger sales much longer. They aren't getting any younger. I hope they succeed to be honest. -Chris

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    An Accord 4 cyl. 6MT hits 60 mph in 6.6 seconds. Two seconds faster than the E.

    I think you got some bum scoop from somewhere. The E350 Bluetec with 7 speed auto does 0-62 MPH in 6.2 Seconds.

    http://www.carpages.co.uk/guide/mercedes-benz/mercedes-benz-e-class-350-cdi-blue- efficiency-sport.asp

    The E250 Bluetec not sold here is about a second slower. But delivers 48 MPG US combined. That said comparing an Accord to a MB E is kind of silly. I rented an Accord and HATED the way it rode. Noisy and averaged 28 MPG for the two weeks I was stuck with it. And I say stuck because Budget promised me an Altima and sold it the day we flew in. I ended up with the Accord. I have rented a Camry and while it is nothing great, it did ride & drive better.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,456
    http://autos.aol.com/cars-Mercedes_Benz-E_Class-2013-Base__E350_BlueTEC_4dr_Seda- n/overview/

    8.8 seconds above - first one that came up on google.

    http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1012_2011_mercedes_benz_e350_bluetec/- viewall.html

    Guess this is better at 7.5.

    I will believe the 7.5 by motor trend which is decent, but not feeling 6.2.
  • cskicski West Springfield, VAPosts: 1,338
    I had a blowout the other day :cry: , and since the Optima EX has no spare tire, those run flats would have come in handy. I realize they are hard as a rock, but BMW has done a good job of tuning their suspensions to keep out most of the jarring hard stuff.

    Why does my car have no spare? Weight and MPG wars. Also, it's cheap!

    Chris Skalski: Network Engineer 2012 Kia Optima EX

  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,310
    edited June 2013
    Per the brochure 0-60 is 6.7, per the German press (Auto Motor und Sport) 0-100kmh is 7.8. I suspect the adaptive transmission is at play here - if you drive it like a grandma for awhile, it will learn this, and then if you make a speed run, it will continue to act like grandma - where a new fresh car or one that has been reset will be faster. Somewhat like the variances one can find in 0-60 claims of MT cars, where one little miscue by the driver can easily add a second.

    E350 CDi is actually different from a Bluetec, and German press gives it an entire 1.6 second advantage in 0-100kmh (they rate it at 6.2 as well). They rate the E250 CDi at 7.7, but there was no E250 Bluetec at the time my magazine was printed. German press also rates the CDi to be about 20% more efficient.

    IMO, E350 Bluetec 0-60 is around 7 seconds - the car will get up and move, but you have to put some right foot into it, diesels don't like to rev, and MB accelerators are historically like stepping on a brick.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,310
    If only the 6-speed manual readily available on the 4cyl diesel E in Europe would come here. Especially as a 4Matic wagon, that would be a cool car. However, it's been 25 years since a manual E has been sold in NA, and I don't see that changing.

    Oh yeah, no diesel E wagon for 2014 from what I have recently been told - I had been told earlier that there would be a diesel wagon. Mistake by MB, as old diesel wagons are cult cars and a new one would sell.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 34,310
    That is a benefit - you don't have to hypermile it. Just go, and as long as you don't drive like a complete idiot, the mileage will be decent. For some cars, you have to get the manual and then obsess over driving to eke out the mileage.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    I am not sure why you make a big deal of the zero to 60 metric, when doing that is almost anathema to getting the good fuel mileage (for a gasser) that you crave? That is the GOOD news !

    Chevrolet even had published an article about the( Z06 Corvette) 4 sec, zero to 60 metric. It was engineered to be able to do (survive) 100 of those, that is the GOOD news. The bad news? Most oems would never let IT be known what their product can really do. (much shorter than 100 cycles) Then after that, THINGS have a propensity to BREAK. :sick: :lemon: Needless to say, that is NOT GOOD NEWS.

    You, of all folks should know that diesels are not designed to be drag racers !! 1,750 rpm for a diesel and most times that means torque is all in (FULL). But then you know that. It is hard for me to believe that (YOU) as a former TDI owner have forgotten that? ! So 3,000 rpm for any sustained amount of time and I am advertising for a customer service stop from the local LEO's. This kind of attention is NOT on my bucket list.

    Now 40 mph-100 mph? THAT metric can be used every day, all day, every month, for years, etc, etc. Mine is exceeding a decade old and 180,000 miles and still runs like the proverbial top: albeit run this way. In fact, the diesel thrives when you drive it "slightly aggressively" ;) :shades:

    You don't happen to be a fan boy of that Cable TV STREET DRAG race show where 30,40,50,60 something year old guys from Oklahoma vie for the top ten ratings? Not a damn one uses a diesel. :surprise: :P
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    Not sure why we are having this debate. Diesels are not my idea of stoplight racers. Have nothing to do with the diesel driving experience I have enjoyed.

    It looks like every Magazine has a different number on the 0-60 for the E350 diesel. I would imagine a more practical parameter would be 30 to 80 MPH, which is needed entering our freeways on a regular basis. It also sounds like having a manual transmission is a higher priority than the engine pushing it. Better find the one you can live with a long time as they are going the way of the buggy whip.

    The answer is: 0-60 in 6.7 seconds
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    I had a blowout the other day , and since the Optima EX has no spare tire, those run flats would have come in handy.

    Couple questions? Why no spare tire? And what if the dealer did not have the oddball RFT you blew out. You could have been without a vehicle for several days. It reminds me of the early days of the Prius when they used LRR tires that were special order. I ran into a guy at Firestone that waited two weeks to get a replacement tire.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    ..." It also sounds like having a manual transmission is a higher priority than the engine pushing it. Better find the one you can live with a long time as they are going the way of the buggy whip."...

    I would agree. One perspective wishes a 6/7/8 speed ROBUST M/T were available with the Touareg TDI.

    As a practical and intellectual perspective a properly geared and operated M/T offers the least parasitic waste. It of course is totally dependent on the drivers judgement once the gearing and spread is determined.

    As another practical and intellectual perspective the A/T (like the Touareg TDI's 8 speed Aisin ) does not offer up the least parasitic waste: but by software and computer design AND drivers input offers up ("semi automatically " good management of different variables within operational parameters, albeit at higher acquisition and operational costs.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    edited June 2013
    I enjoy driving a stick as much as the next guy. Just sometimes I would rather let the transmission do the work. The newer 7-8 speeds are pretty darn smooth. And like you say they are programmed to fit the torque curve of the engine. Worst part is too many people ride the clutch and wear them out prematurely. I got a feeling the Feds will legislate the manual transmission out of cars with various mandated electronics. Think of all the interacting mnemonics in our vehicles. ABS, ESC, traction control etc etc. Will the automakers continue to offer those features with a MT? I did not have the Touareg long enough to try out the Step mode on the transmission. I did try it with the paddle shifters on the GLK. I think I would just as soon have the shift lever control all that. I really don't like the shifter on the column like the Mercedes and my Sequoia. I am used to shifters being on the floor console.

    The dealer emailed me and said no White with saddle brown in CA. I would imagine that means within his dealer network. There are several around. Told him to keep me posted when new shipments arrive. I'm not in a compromising mood.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    By the way I went by a VW dealer today and sat in the driver's seat of a Touareg LUX again. They are the most comfortable seats in the class. Now to find the one I am willing to buy.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    Thats GREAT I was glad to hear that metric is a GO ! Good to great longer trip seat comfort seems to be a make or break metric for you. I am swaging the dealer is working to get you what you want on the exterior and interior color combinations.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    The dealer I visited for another seat comfort check was very pleasant. He has driven the Touareg TDI several times and that would be his choice if he could afford it. Did not even try to sell me his white Lux gasser. He took my name and email and will let me know if he locates one.

    It looks like there are a couple at a dealer in Utah. That is an easy drive home. I always find it exhilarating jumping in a new car at the dealers and heading out on the highway back home. Makes a little vacation out of it. Over night in Mesquite and a leisurely trip home the second day.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 15,160
    edited June 2013
    From what I can glean, the dealers have an official/unofficial "chit" system working together to get units sold. They of course would rather sell units in their current inventory and their own /area inbound units first.

    Indeed, a road trip breaking in the VW T TDI is THE ticket !

    So for example I took a fancy to a MB GLK 250 "Diamond Metallic Silver" (it is really more of a grayish metallic blue, but had the sunroof delete premium package and almond interior, more to what I exactly wanted, etc. ) available @ an out of state dealership (NV, NM, AZ?) I would have had to pay app $600 to get it from there to here, or .... go pick it up.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,166
    Hope this did not show up before. This one statement says why the Touareg stands out for me:

    For $54,595 as tested, the Touareg TDI didn't represent a must-buy value. Our more petite evaluators felt the driver's seat base cushion needs to be shortened so their legs would hinge less awkwardly over the edge. Associate online editor Karla Sanchez logged, "I kept shifting positions to try and find a sweet spot, but it was just impossible to get comfortable."

    Let the short people buy one of the other 3 and leave the VW seats just as they are.

    Comparison:
    Luxury Diesel SUV
    Jeep Grand Cherokee vs. Mercedes-Benz ML350 vs.Porsche Cayenne vs. Volkswagen Touareg


    Emailed to me by the Jeep salesman. I like the looks of the JGC, just not ready to be their guinea pig. Plus they keep pushing out the delivery date. Probably trying to get the dope smoking UAW workforce back from lunch.

    http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1307_luxury_diesel_suv_comparison/viewa- ll.html
Sign In or Register to comment.