It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
- Last Active
OEMS were DRAGGED kicking and screaming to 10% ethanol !!! ANY % ethanol posts app 25%+ DECREASE in fuel mileage!!!Car engines have been designed for ethanol for at least a decade now. I'd be more worried with older or "small" engines. If that's a concern though, get an EV. :D
@ the same time, the same regulatory agencies that DEMAND GREATER fuel efficiency, demand (de facto ) and GET ,.... LESS fuel efficiency !!!! ???????? :o :D So far, LESS fuel efficiency is winning.
Gotta LOVE EV !! This is especially true IF one likes COAL and NUCLEAR power !!! AW AW AW !!! ;)
Can't even make this stuff up !!
Right, I am sure you would normally take TWO or more RAMS ! ;) :DOregon and back.
On two tanks.
Towing half way.
(96 mpg considering there were four in the Ram).
Prius it is then?Now if only the money factor on E250 was better - it was so bad that the price of identical MSRP cars was over $100/month more - apparently that article pitting the MB vs Prius created some demand, and the cars aren't sitting around as much. With how I drive, I'd never save $100++ per month in fuel, even if old prices return. 2 weeks back into the gasser fold now, and I miss the torque, although the ride is better thanks to conventional tires.
I did a quick and dirty comparison between 14's Ford F150 and Ram 1500 TDI @ 16 mpg/ 23 mpg. Dodge Ram 1500 TDI posts (average) app 44% better mpg than Ford F150. !!! (16 vs 23 mpg) So it BEGS the question:
( over 13 years and 15,000 miles per year @ current RUG $3.05 D2 $3.69, corner store prices= 195,000 miles/ 16/23 mpg= 12,188 gals =$ 37,173 or 8,478 gals= $31, 284 )
WHICH would one RATHER pay???? We of course know what the LARGE percentage actually choses.
This is a round about way of saying, VW would have a HUGE hit on its hands (if the capital requirements doesn't suck the LIFE out of them: to cite only ONE issue) with a FULL size PU truck (crew cab, etc etc) DIESEL. that can post 30 to 35 mpg. Obviously that would be the VERY least of the "problems". The "hidden issues" almost makes it nonsensical to financially suicidal.
Slow news day on the left coast. ULSD prices have moved down glacially.
After an oil change in the MB GLK 250 with (dealer provided) M1 ESP Formula M 5w40 (MB 229.51 specification ), I read on the M1 web site http://www.mobiloil.com/usa-english/motoroil/car_care/which_oil/WhichOilManualResults.aspx?option=2
that the new recommendation is a 0w30 brew, M1 ESP X1 0w30 (latest specification of MB 229.52).
Older news is that M1 also says the ESP 5w30 can also be used where MB recommends 5w40. (MB 229.51) As soon as the ESP's 5w30/5w40's sells out the new M1 ESP x1 ZERO w30 will be the new go to M1 recommendation. I am guessing the lower viscosity and range should result in better MPG. (yup you guys are probably rolling your eyes :) ) At this time I do not know if the lower viscosity protects any better or worse (wear metals per 1,000 miles) than the MB recommended 5w40 M formula.