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?

1369370372374375442

Comments

  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,153
    They seemed to like the "old" engine better but it would be nice to test it. I could live with the speed and slalom numbers just fine, but like you say, it's a bit big. Be perfect for my guide friend though.

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

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    by Jeff Bennett, WSJ, pg B1, Wed, Oct. 2, 2013.

    An interesting financial slanted (but car related ) article.

    Basically there are 4 four macro situations:

    1. CPR to a prolonged bad market situation in European and spotty world markets

    2. IMPROVE poor financial decision making that continues into post bankruptcy

    3. SLASH vehicle development costs to boost profits

    4. BOOST profit margins closer to Ford's

    Behind the scenes, there are so called 4 lieutenants (one a woman) all in the horse race to ascended to the CEO position. One each taking one of the 4 points.

    Now if they are not all (in one way or the other) high level bean counters, the article hints broadly at their abilities to wax their own areas, work together with the others in bean counting priorities and work as a part and parcel toward the greater good of GM. (code for higher profits) while they didn't say it, I would assume a huge shareholder with board member representation (labor unions and pensions) are fully onboard. They might just want to leave the lieutenants in place and go outside for a new CEO.

    Long story short, given TRUCKS are still the KEY to GM's fortunes (US), it is hard to see where a new diesel would have any place, given the issues presented.

    Now I know the "Game of Thrones" is a cable TV fantasy series. I just don't get the nexus to the article presented.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    Well, I just learned that my friend who finally retired his 86 Jetta TD for a new (2011) JGW TDI, just dealt it in on a '13 2.5 Passat with a 6 sp Tiptronic. Is that the name for their non DSG auto? Doesn't look right for some reason.. Anyway..this sure is interesting although I knew he was not nearly as confident in the TDI as he was in his 86. He said there is just way too much tech going on to continue to make the TDI emissions friendly. The device that uses raw diesel fuel to burn off particulates in the PF, when too many trips that do not create enough natural heat in the system, add up. He said that it basically was doing "its thing" (the burning/cleaning cycle) every 100km! (62 miles) And that it had gone from 17, gradually increasing burn time, and the last time just the other day, it took 22 min. It is not advised to turn the car off during this cycle as all that will do is reset it, and it will have to start again, only adding additional time penalty. This waiting around for it to cycle started to own him, you might say. I sure can see how that would be annoying. And certainly reduce some of the fuel savings, due to idling etc.

    So to top it off, this particulate filter has a LIFESPAN...as in...it is a maintenance replaceable part of the exhaust system, due to the ash created from each burn cycle. The ash has nowhere to go, so it literally starts to build up and plug the system. Both fixes (an expensive dealer only servicing/cleaning) or re and re NEW filter...about $2000.00 !

    The bottom line is, he simply did not trust to own the car out of wty. So dealt it after 3 years and only 8800 km. It was as close to brand new condition as you can get inside and out, so pulled incredible resale. In fact, he drove a new car for 3 years, with only $4100. (tax in) out lay to get into a new gas Passat. I told him he won't do that well if he were to deal the Passat in another 3 years/8800 km. Of course he knows that.

    I think that we are at the point though that some significant running cost news is going to start to hurt resale on some of these TDIs for those owners who did not really fall into a very narrow demographic of the ideal small diesel engine owner. (the ones who do not drive an hour at a time each time they climb in...explained below..

    So...IMO, this is starting to really emphasize the importance of the type of use a prospective Golf/Jetta/Passat TDI owner intends to do. My friend said (and it is with quite a lot of detailed diesel engine and emission tech knowledge) that in his opinion and judging by what his car burn cycles were doing given his actual use of the car, is that anyone who does not really drive the car a full HOUR, each time they take it out, is probably going to be faced with a greater incidence of this expensive PF maintenance/ or replacement requirement. So to anyone who hasn't had a diesel before and have finally been convinced to give one a try, may regret that decision because of the ridiculous emission hoops that NA has made mfgrs like VW jump through in order to get certification for our countries. What this also tells me, is that maybe AdBlue is the most practical way to help these oil burners meet emission standards. It also makes me curious if Cruze diesel (which uses AdBlue unlike VW TDI 2.0s) and GLK250 etc have been designed to be a little more $dependable regarding addressing such maintenance requirements as this 2000$ regular expenditure on the TDI Golf's etc.

    What this all boils down to, IMO, is sure, diesels can be made clean enough to satisfy these handrubbing greenies (CARB etc) who deliberately saunter backwards in slowing/delaying/creating new and improved (ugh) hoops.. any certification process (just think Mazda SkyActive diesel delays here in NA) but bottom line, just because something 'can' be done, if you have to kiss the ar** of white shirts behind a desk and all the extra bucks that that whole fiasco creates does it really make sense in the end? What these ridiculous emission regs for diesel in NA means, is it just eliminates that many more potential purchasers because just too few owners would drive the diesel the way it needs to be driven in order to have the long term longevity and hassle-free motoring/dollar invested experience they think they are going to get. That said of course, owners who commute LONG commutes, or traveling sales who do 35 and 40k+ miles per year are ideal candidates to still go with the diesel. But in the grand scheme of things, they represent such a small number of purchasers that why should mfgrs continue to jump through newly and constantly more restrictive emission hoops and all the extra $ tech to make the cars meet the regs (which naturally gets passed onto the consumer both at time of purchase and ongoing after)?

    Diesel economy as we once knew it, will never be quite the same unfortunately, here in NA at least. It is such a shame too, cuz we just nicely have the ability to reverse old way negative diesel engine impressions created in the 70s and 80s, and instead now it will just be replaced with new negative impressions due to fuel saving costs being whittled down to basically par, due to the expensive demands of the new emission tech required in order to satisfy the collusive agendas within gvt and regulators.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,153
    edited October 2013
    The only problem with "ridiculous emission regs for diesel" is that there's not enough of them on the whole transportation sector. The current crop of diesel school buses is a good case in point.

    Clean 'em all up I say.

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

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    I've found myself behind the odd full sized school bus here and I gotta say, according to the nose and visual test only, they seem to run extremely clean. And on that same sorta theme, even the majority of dump trucks in my area, both private and company owned, run so much cleaner than in years past, (as in only 15 let's say) that it is noticeable. The scenes in which gagrice and fintail describes about the smokey Mexican trucks coming up all the time, just isn't happening here. Yes, you will see the very odd smoker on the 401 sometimes, but our weigh scales do checks often and usually those trucks don't stay out there very long doing that before they are skimmed off the road until they are cleaned up. If it needs a rebuild to do that, then so be it.

    But I'm pretty sure we have dif categories of emissions allowed, and the ones for light duty cars like the VW TDI class (basic car class) are much stricter than for commercial vehicles weight classes. My friend with the new Passat although also retired from trucking, says that there is still a PILE of cleanup gizmos even on the heavy trucks, but because of their more longhaul use, seems to work behind the scenes more invi$ibly.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    I think the 11/13's really do not have enough miles (to me, more important) and time to really say.

    Indeed one of mine, 09 Jetta TDI was the first (new VW) to have one of the new/er emissions design you are speaking about. (made in NY state@ the time represented by SENATOR Hillary Clinton). Indeed it was married to the so called questionable??? 6 speed DSG. I was skeptical also and as I was also trying to weight the consequences of 52.3% more torque and at the stated price of MINUS - 22.5% fuel mileage (from 49 to 40, sidebar as it is turning out 50 mpg to more like 41/42 mpg ). The question was: WHY go back ward? Another was was higher torque worth the cost? Longer story short @ 65k miles, I swag it to be pretty problem free going forward (to 120k or first major tune up) We have had two rear brake lamps and one drivers side low beam go out. Other than that, I do not think these oem tires will last 120,000 miles, like in my 03 TDI did (113,000 actually) :)

    Now what he decided to do and at pretty advantageous cost figures are actually what presented itself to me at various times, for all three diesels and @ multiple times in ownership !! If it were not for a few other posters who had the same experiences, I would not really care to mention it as it appeared to me (in isolation) to be an outlier experience. BUT as others and your friend will attest, it seems NOT to be an outlier experience. So I would count his experience as an advantage of diesels. Now it would probably be natural to say hope he has a bad experience with the new gasser, but the truth is otherwise !! All the best to him !

    The emissions compliance is truly the indicator how anti diesel our systems have been and truly remain. The thing to remember is European diesel already meet a way more stringent emissions standard ALREADY. As you have said, US emissions standards extract more mpg losses than the already strict European standards (03 Jetta TDI 2/3 mpg, 09 Jetta TDI 3 mpg, 12 Touareg TDI 3 to 5 mpg (even with ad blue). It is truly meant as a penalty. So as you can see diesels mpg would be much higher than already high.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,153
    edited October 2013
    they seem to run extremely clean.

    Good to hear. Now let's don't start going backward. (businessgreen.com)

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

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    I really do not think that unless one operates a "truck," most passenger car drivers are literally CLUELESS as to how "BIG BRO" monitors truck traffic. In that sense EVERY "truck" goes through inspections almost all the time. So truly the ones that almost everybody complains about has been "blessed" by the authorities and multiple times. Even the "pollution FREE" Mexican trucks running who knows what kind of D2 (min of 500 ppm sulfur or LSD.) Might this NAFTA treaty be code for freedom to pollute? :( :)

    Now most folks know that older vehicles get "grandfathered ." Just the fact most to all run on ULSD, that is a HUGE HUGE HUGE improvement.

    Be that as it my (tea party folks don't seem to mention this) but a truck (in CA) can be pulled over merely to spot check items like smog compliance. There are specialty CHPs that handle this as a specialized task.
  • cooterbfdcooterbfd Posts: 2,770
    Ironically, I just bought one 2 weeks ago. The only one on the lot. Listed for $26,100. Got it for $24,300.

    So far, about 35 mpg in mixed driving. Nice little car.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    Pray tell ?? I am not sure what to make of ..." the only one" (my sic) on the lot".... Not that it is any of my business, but why are you so quiet about it? You seem to be the first one, on this board anyway! Any 411 on the percentage of Cruze TDI's sold, etc.?

    As you probably know mpg during break in is really a "work in progress". But yes out of the gate interesting.

    Off topic of your new diesel and diesels in general: just got a CA "STAR" station "smog certification" on a 13 year old 385 hp/385 # ft of torque vehicle. Essentially the pollution figures were literally ZERO: needless to say PASS. Not that anything less was expected. To bring the vehicle up to operating temperatures (for an hour) I entered the freeway @ 77% of redline (this thing SCREAMS @ 5,000+ rpm), hitting 75 mph in ah VERY short order. That of course was the good and bad news. If I was going any slower, I would have been in time to upset the mojo of a CHP and a large posse of civilians (15 ship) passing me in the numbers 1,2,3, lanes. :) Good thing I was in the SLOW lane, as a swarm overtook and passed me. I passed another CHP actively shooting a radar gun.

    My take on why they do not put diesels on the computer sniffer is because the numbers are probably BELOW ZERO, albeit immeasurable !
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 40,153
    How can you dislike diesels if you get one that burns gas?

    “Literally, don’t try this at home!” he says. “It certainly is not a natural thought to run gasoline in a diesel engine, but when you control it properly, then not only can it be done, but you can achieve very impressive efficiency numbers, across the board. The emissions signature is significantly lower.”

    The lab pushing petrol car engines to new extremes (BBC)

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

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    LOL! :) So what do you think the legislative and regulatory agencies like the EPA are going to say to real world (certified) engines that can do this ?

    Keep in mind there is no passenger (DIESEL) engine yet certified to run 100% BIODIESEL !!! ????

    So do you think we would get this diesel hybrid 261 mpg VW to our shores? Heaven forbid ! We got the 50 mpg Prius! :)

    http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20130701-a-german-time-machine
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    So what was it?
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    Just saw a BMW print advertisement 5 series diesel. Optional is xDrive intelligent all-wheel drive.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    I think BMW is serious about catching MB. My local dealer has on their inventory seven of the new 535D models. They also show 19 X5 diesels and 15 of the new 4 cylinder 328Ds. Edmunds does not even show the 2014s being available. The 328D is highway rated at 45, not sure anyone beats that do they?

    I don't think any Mercedes dealer has that kind of inventory on diesels.

    http://www.bmwofelcajon.com/searchnew.aspx?model=X5&trim=xDrive35d
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    It certainly sounds like they have gotten so ! When I went to test drive the 12 BMW X5 35 D, there were two (diesel) units between 2 BMW dealerships, aka in the silicon valley, ca. This was interesting in itself, as they are "imported", made in South Carolina, albeit for world wide sales. So Kudos to BMW for making that US plant part of the strategic vision (if one will). But then for a host of reasons, Germany and the EU promises to be depressed for @ least the foreseeable future (5 years). Sort of a side/Side bar, China likes stuff oemed in both Germany & the US. Part of the answer of course may have been the inventory matched the areas' "real world" interest. :( :) The best deal at the time "seemed" to be .... take it, or... leave it.

    MB @ the time wanted to line me up for a test drive, (no inventory between again 2 dealerships). For the 13 MY, they seemed very aggressive in selling the MB GLK 250 blue tec. In line with that, they seemed to have competitive discounts. However, no ZERO down & percentage.

    BMW's 45 mpg H EPA seems to be the current MPG leader. It is good to see BMW go from one of the leading gas guzzler lines, to a very competitive mpg market leader.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 17,206
    I'm not sure I understand what car you bought. Was it a Cruze diesel?? An employee here has a Cruze Eco and is getting that kind of mileage (also a fairly new car), so if that's all the diesel has to offer, that really sucks.

    '13 Stang GT; '86 Benz 300E; '98 Volvo S70; '12 Leaf; '14 Town&Country

  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    What I find interesting is Mercedes is still the Luxury leader in the USA with just under 25k units sold in September. WW Mercedes sold 142,000 vehicles in September. With China leading the pack. We truly are becoming a second rate market.

    I am thrilled to see BMW bring more diesel models to the US. Audi slipped several in but to me the high mileage 4 cylinders from MB and BMW are the most exciting. The 328D wagon is a good option as well. MB better get there small wagon on the lots to compete. The BMW does not have the torque of the MB 4 cylinder. It is claiming 280 ft lbs vs the MB at 369 ft lbs.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 33,567
    China also has something like 4.5x the population of the US. Its socio-economic model is nothing the US needs to emulate.

    C250 4Matic wagon, please.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    If it was the diesel, then only 35 mpg combined seems odd to me too. Doesn't matter that it is a new engine being broken in, still should be doing better than that. Unless 'combined' involves Chicago-like freeway 'parking lots' where more time is spent idling and stopped than moving anywhere.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    just got a CA "STAR" station "smog certification" on a 13 year old 385 hp/385 # ft of torque vehicle.

    What vehicle was this? It couldn't have been the TLCs.. and the VW T doesn't have that much HP, plus has a bit more torque than that, and it sure wasn't the Jetta or Golf, so...
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    I had to get my wife's LS400 smogged this year. Passed well below the maximum numbers. It is now 24 years old. The diesel smog check in CA is a joke. Another case of harassing diesel owners and collecting more fees. Not happy with higher tax on diesels. Not sure when they will start checking my Touareg TDI.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    It's the Chevrolet Corvette Z06. Essentially like the others, it smogs as when NEW. Not bad despite the 60 year old + engine design. LOL It sports pushrod "technology," even as I have read, the 2014 iteration. I read in passing the new "Sting Ray" posts H EPA 29 mpg. BUT it has a Tremec 7 speed M/T.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    Unfortunately that will be next year. Yours is a 2013, so as a condition for registration, 2014.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    I don't think you have to have a smog check the first 6 years. This was the first year for the 2007 Sequoia. I sold it to the grand daughter so no smog was needed as a condition of sale. Then it is every other year. At least in this part of the UPSR of CA.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 14,758
    edited October 2013
    Yes, that used to be correct. In the earlier days it used to be EXEMPT! I had to smog the 09 TDI in 10. I agree with you, TOTAL RIP off !

    Well, I was posting 34.5 mpg, but could not resist much less than 75 mph on the upgrade (210 miles ZERO to 7382 ft down to 6225 ft) on the SOS DD trip. The views and weather were GORGEOUS !! It didn't fall off too much given a few stops and slows for mountain road work (escorted traffic, other than those, almost no back ups). The low fuel lamp and buzzer went off and filled 23.77 gals/ 26.4 gal tank (3.65 per gal) 786 miles or 33.2 mpg.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    edited October 2013
    I had forgotten you had a Vette in the mix. You sure do have an interesting and diversified collection in your family..altho the Bruisers (an affectionate term I use for the TLCs) are a bit redundant..especially since nary an oil burner between the pair :( :wink:
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    I wish I still had my 1964 TLC. I would of course gotten rid of that horrible engine Toyota put in it. Along with most of the running gear. I guess it was the body style that I liked. Only two surviving photos I have first the Tierra del Sol run 1965 and high in the Sierras.

    image

    image
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    Wow! Very cool pics, Gary..
    I'm not familiar with the Tierra del Sol run. Was this your very truck?

    See why I call 'em Bruisers? haha That one's a little close, if not over the edge of maybe of running the oil pump a little starved, unless you had special baffles in the pan?
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 28,895
    I killed the engine and winched out. The TDS run is one of the oldest 4X4 runs in the US. Still going every year. They make it tough going. I was taking pictures and my wife wrote stories for 4X4 and Dune buggy news back then. I still have some of the old newspapers. I should scan them into the computer.

    http://www.tds4x4.com/
Sign In or Register to comment.