Well I never saw so many bad, wrong and uncited and unresearched ideas on the oil industry on one website. Interesting. But i get the point....
Of course I think that they don't believe what they are saying, nor do they research the depths of the oil industry--this is a political website. They know the White House can't do anything about fuel prices--by blaming the WH and insisting it do something about it, while of course knowing it can't do anything much about it, is a win-win for a political sucker punch. Clever.
Historically, the White House has never had much influence on the oil industry. When, for instance, the White House made a list of equipment they wanted Exxon to send to Prince Williams Sound to clean up the Exxon Valdez spill, Exxon simply said "no". And that was the end of that!
To this day, the oil spill technology employed by the oil industry as the same as it was 25 years ago.
Nope, I'm not buyin' misinformation on that order.
What you pay at the pump is not artificially high, it's actually artificially low---and it will go up. Why? Because the rest of the world will pay more for it than you will. Anything drilled will not, in any way, affect your fuel prices beneficially. Period. Ask any candid oil exec.
Sure the GOV makes money on fuel taxes, just like it does on any other tax---which is why we have such a huge deficit when we have a recession. People spend less on everything, and make less income.
My main concern about escalating diesel prices is that, unlike gasoline prices, it has far more impact on commodities that we consume daily.
That loaf of bread comes to your town by truck--diesel truck.
Actually I'm wrong--the WH could do something about oil prices---nationalize the oil industry! (it'll never happen).
What you pay at the pump is not artificially high, it's actually artificially low-
I would say the price at the pump covers the cost of oil and refining plus the taxes. Unlike countries that actually subsidize gas like Iran and Venezuela. The EU holds price up with Huge taxes and tariffs. Norway has some of the highest fuel prices in the EU and they are a net oil exporter. As long as oil is traded on the World market in US$ we will probably be ok. Once that changes our money will seek its true worth and we will be in deep trouble. Nationalizing would do no good as we only provide about 25% of our own oil. Unless you were planning on conquering Canada, Mexico and Saudi Arabia.
I've found that wearing a state-of-the-art digital-ready tinfoil-hat while driving increases my mpg while driving a diesel, but not while driving a gasser.
there are enough auto-related conspiracy theories that they might warrant their own forum!? like those stories about the buses in LA, electric cars in LA? EV1.EdBegley might be an entire subdomain devoted to EV1 conspiracy theories. I wonder if that dude is a diesel-h8r? a quick goog mentions that he has a home diesel generator.....
I ran a real simple earnings divided by sales for CHEVRON Corporation for 2011. After everything was said and done, they made app 5.7%.
The wholesale price of gas just flashed by on the SC-TV @ $2.96 per gal app. So based on CA tax on RUG (.69 cents) the governments make 23.3%. This does NOT include sales tax of 8.5%.
When you add them together one is paying a minimum of app 31.8% per gal (taxation) of RUG.
I know people were screaming when Exxon made 9%. That is not what I call great ROI. Not when companies like Apple and MSFT have 25% returns. Why don't they go after Apple like they do the oil companies? The price of an iPhone or iPad is ridiculous. :P :shades:
Just got back from a drive LA to Dallas. Passed dozens of trucks - only one had any black exhaust, and this included a number of climbs up extended grades. Never smelled any of them. Quite a change from 20+ years ago, when I'd hate to get behind one.
I think one thing that really gets over looked because the majority of the time you really can not tell if a passenger car is a diesel or no, and the fact the over all population is @ 5%, is that RUG/PUG fumes are given a pass simply because they are the OVERWHELMING majority. When one looks at a big rig, how many people normally assume its a diesel, which of course would be an almost slam dunk assumption ! ? I bet there is literally an extreme minority that says it is probably a gasser!
As far as I know ULSD is required for all on road vehicles. Many big rigs are being retro fitted for Urea treatment to cut down on the NOX. The Sulfur was the source of the black stinky smoke. Diesel exhaust is now safer than gas exhaust. Anyone doubts my word see who lasts longest in a closed garage with a gas rig vs a diesel running.
Another tank full for 31 mpg !? (515 miles, 16.6 gal of a 26.4 gal tank, ULSD has dropped a bit, albeit not much @ 4.30 per gal) The MK IV Jetta TDI is slipping, only got 49.9 mpg. :shades: The MkV is chugging alone in heavy commute traffic with 2 drivers @ 41.7 mpg. for my two lead foots.
This is really all I need. If it gets high 30s Mileage, what's not to like?
The 2013 GLK Class will be the sixth Mercedes model to offer a diesel option in the U.S., joining the likes of the E, S, M, R and GL Class models, which all feature a 3.0-liter turbodiesel engine. The GLK is likely to sport a 2.1-liter four-cylinder turbodiesel making 204 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, an engine that’s already been emissions-certified for the U.S.
Yes, things that bring down the fuel mileage, say over the H EPA 43 of the Passat (2.0 TDI), are the extra weight and much greater hp/torque (+56%). One thing that probably adds back mpg are the 7 speed CVT hybrid A/T. There are also not too many L/power consumption differences between 2.0 and 2.1 L. Of course, it will be interesting how they bill the TWIN turbo feature !! I would swag a bit less turbo lag.
So yes if one wants the extra room, etc., better mpg is better than less mpg ! The gasser GLK 350 puts up H EPA of 22, as a comparison. So IF the CDI version turns out to 35 mpg, that is 59% better mpg.
It probably also makes the Suv HATERS crazy, as some SUV's can post better mpg than some so called " economy cars" they recommend.
Another plus for the GLK is European Delivery. I have never been to Europe. So that would be an added plus having the GLK diesel for a month touring the different countries. The GL and ML are made here so NO EU delivery available. It will have the Urea injection to pass US emissions. That has become a non issue with the availability everywhere cheap.
Oh, and for juice the 2013 GLK will have auto stop/start in both gas and diesel. Hope they do a better job than GMC did.
Be funny if truckers quit using diesel and the passenger fleet owners start getting it for a buck cheaper than us gassers pay.
"Never before has the price gap between natural gas and diesel been so large, suddenly making natural-gas-powered trucks an alluring option for company fleets.
Some truckers soon will have the ability to hedge their bets. That is because the Environmental Protection Agency recently approved retrofit technology for big rigs that lets them burn LNG and diesel.Kathryn Clay, executive director of the Drive Natural Gas initiative of the American Gas Association, says "the new technology is really game changing because the trucker can run on either fuel, eliminating refueling anxiety."
CNG should be a good choice for fleet owners and short hauls. I don't think they will be practical for Long haul truckers. Too many places do Not have Natural Gas. Making CNG a tough find. Though if it will run on diesel or CNG it would not be a problem. Use diesel cross country and CNG in the urban locations.
This has got to be embarrassing for the politicos who have sung the mantra about ever increasing fuel prices due to various factors and probably the most important one being LIMITED supplies and for at least 4 to 5 decades. This totally abundant natural gas CLEARLY shows the emperor has no clothes policies. They will of course seek to spin it and probably start to increase the prices of natural gas.
Additionally diesel can be gotten from natural gas and with pretty close to ZERO ppm sulfur.
Being able to *switch* between fuel makes the transition easier to migrate over time from diesel -to- CNG.
However, I know that diesel has a MUCH higher power-density (more miles between fillups) I wonder how many miles a truck can go between CNG fillups?
I was reminded of this just today when we took my wiife's TDI for a road-trip. After filling the tank and after 200+ miles... THE FUEL-GAUGE WAS STILL ON 'FULL'!! I hope this TDI lasts for another 140K miles.
I know a guy who refurbed a couple of CNG fuel station gizmos and sold them to trucking companies. The end users returned to their terminal every night, so the actual miles between fill-ups wasn't a whole lot. Around 200 miles max range iirc. Plenty for that use where the driver was loading and unloading about as many hours as he was driving. Refueling took hours (his wasn't a hot fuel setup, but it's easier and safer to do it "cold").
Seems like a good option for short haulers, like garbage trucks or school buses.
Well indeed, it almost seems like 20/20 hind/ fore sight and we still chose to remain blind to the fact that we STILL require ALTERNATIVE fuels to get off a near 100% addiction to RUG/PUG. We also stubbornly INSIST on importing the oil from the middle east or defend Europe's ability to do so. While this should be more than obvious to almost everybody, the implementation phase is only 5% diesel after what 30/40 years? In terms of the stated goals and fairy tales, this is pure insanity, if one is looking for a real world. It is pure fairy tale, if one likes fairy tales.
Honda Civic CNG cars sell what 3,000 to 4,000 per year? This is almost unmeasurable on the yearly sales and PVF basis @ .0002758 and .0000154%. respectively???????? In might even be laughable to calculate a 5% PVF natural gas at that sales rate. :P
The almost hilarious part is that Prius hybrids are considered a step in the right direction even though the Prius hybrids, in the real world are still mated to 100% RUG engines !!!! Does one envision a real step in the correct direction( given the stated goals, aka not mine)? How about a Prius hybrid (20% hybrid advantage) mated to a natural gas engine?? :sick:
Now am I the only one who gets the feeling from the advertisments that if one runs a electric car like a VOLT that the advertisements imply that the electricity used to run a Volt is FREE ?
Everyone is saying electricity @ .06 to .08 cents. Here in CA that is more like .30 to .35 cents with penalties for exceeding baselines. . That is like saying RUG is 4.15 per gal but really selling it for 18.16 per gal. A Volt already cost 40,000 vs a 15k Corolla.
It is more like it will cost almost exponentially more !!! I will stop telling the truth now.
Based on CA electricity costs (.30 to .35 cents per KWH) a 30 mile charge is 10.5 cents per mile vs 10.5 cents (40 mpg @ 4.19 ULSD) If you ran it TOTALLY on gasoline @ 35 mpg (4.27 per gal RUG) it would be 12.2 cents per mile driven.
Makes one wonder how long it would take the electric car to B/E to a diesel or even a gasser.
The cars are 39,145 vs 22,775. Makes one wonder how many commute miles $16,370 can buy? If you make the" correct choice" 156,276 miles. :shades:
CNG makes sense for fleets that operate from a home base, that way they only need one filling station to run the whole fleet. In Brazil a lot of taxis are converted, because they're so cheap to run.
It's not practical (yet) for widespread, long-haul use until there is better availability.
There's no way Toyota would have sold 3 million Prius if every owner had range anxiety and drove around looking for a place to fill up.
Filled 17.8 gal of a 26.4 gal tank doing 563 miles for a tad more than 31.5 mpg. :shades: I was returning home from seeing a client and was doing 85 mph in the sss SLOW lane. Two highway patrol cruisers and a HP bike ZIPPED by on separate legs !!! With that kind of blow by and mpg, I don't know if I am the fuddy duddy and should either speed up or slow down ! :sick:
The reason I don't buy a diesel car is because diesel engines tend to have VWs wrapped around them. If Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Hyundai...pretty much anyone else made a diesel, I'd be really interested.
Toyota has been threatening to bring a turbo diesel TLC to the N/A M=markets for easily 20+ years. I would have been happy as a clam with 22-25 mpg all day long. Hindsight indicates WAY short sighted on my part, given the mpg posted above and kept under 90 mph. Honda promised a Ctdi, then ducked out. Nissan seems to be the only serious one, BUT no ... diesel here yet. While I hope it isn't true, from all the indicators, it would appear a Japanese diesel will be a tough sell, IF and WHEN it does show. I am getting the feeling they will have to go through the diesel growing pains in the American market and not be able to ride the (diesel) winds that VW and MB has created.
All the Japanese auto makers sell diesels around the World. They just don't have the engineering expertise of the Germans to pass our strict emissions. Maybe someday they will figure it out. Meanwhile the Germans are dominating the luxury market both here and around the World. MB will be bringing out another diesel soon to add to their USA sales. Worldwide Audi passed BMW last month to be the Number One luxury marquee. Looks like my next vehicle will be from a German maker. Probably MB.
With Toyota, I suspect they are just too invested in the hybrid marketing here. Honda? Not sure. But their engineering seems to have faltered in the past decade.
Subaru also put the US media in a Forester diesel. It even had a 6 speed manual (US models only get 5 speeds).
Doesn't meet CARB emissions. Yet.
Mazda may come first with a SkyActiv D. If they can get a real-world 35mpg average out of a gasser 2 liter Mazda3 hatch, just imagine what they can do with a similar diesel.
Both the Toyota hybrid and diesel markets have been world wide efforts. US regulations have favored the hybrid and (for a host of reasons) blocked out diesels. Except for the US markets being one of its BIGGEST hybrid markets, hybrids have been "tough sledding". Toyota does good diesel business in 3rd world countries (as do the European products). Toyota diesel products do not do as well in European markets.
News today said the Prius is the 3rd best selling name plate in the world, behind only the Corolla and Focus. And both of those have diesel and gas variants to outsell the hybrid.
Imagine if you could get a Prius diesel+electric. I bet it would be #1.
Evidently Toyota does not agree with you, particularly in the US markets. These are facts. There are no Toyota diesels or diesel/electric Priuses FOR the US markets. So no, I am not underselling. Indeed you are OVER HOPING ! :sick: Indeed you might have missed the post where I say I would have bought a Toyota Landcruiser turbo diesel, 26/27 years ago, if they were for sale, US markets. Are you a Chicago Cubs fan? 103 years in baseball with already no pennant? There is of course next year!!?? .... :sick:
Even VW has a 380 hp/ 428 # ft of torque V6 supercharged 3.0 L hybrid MONSTER H EPA 24 mpg. Edmunds.com has a whole write up on it !!
Pretty scary that two of the biggest blights on the road (Prius and Corolla) are the best sellers. Every time I get behind either at a light or an on-ramp, I try to breathe deeply and keep the upcoming rage at bay :shades:
Imagine if you could get a Prius diesel+electric. I bet it would be #1.
I don't think so. It would still be an ugly car. It sells on MPG and that is it. If it did not get considerably better mileage than the other leaders, it would not even be in the running. Think Pontiac Aztek. The Prius did not make the number one spot on the ugliest 100 cars ever. But it made the list none the less.
I am not sure what you mean, exactly, but Edmunds.com had some interesting preliminary things to say about the plug in 2013 Toyota Prius i.e., "range anxiety"?
If I did my math right (from the sketchy information provided) , one would have to recharge or plug in the Toyota Plug in 2.7 times (3 times more in the real world) more than the Chevrolet Volt.
That 31.62 mpg did include several trips into a well know very congested Bay Area city immortalized by Tony Bennett. Perhaps that was one reason the mpg could have been better? :lemon:
IF you mean I am not going 95 to 100 mph in that 500+ miles tank full, then yes, I am not. Getting speeding tickets is not part of the longer range plan either. I would also suspect that highway patrol's blowing by me (whatever speeds) is probably better than me blowing by them. :P If you like to do that, please let us know how that works out for you ! :shades: :lemon: I would suspect it is the principle of "mess with dah bull, get the horn" effect.
However more technically, the power train SEEMS optimized to run in 8 th speed A/T @ 2,000 to 2,100 rpm (81 mph) and posting 35 to 40 mpg.
This owners manual does not say it directly, but max torque in the Jetta's are at 1,750 rpm, with turbo spooling at a good load ing@ 2,000 to 2,100 rpm.
Although, I did do exactly the first sentence, but it was on a Texas interstate with higher speed limits and signs that said, words to the effect: " REALLY keep right except to pass, or we WILL give you a ticket for LLCing ! (God Bless Texas !)
Before passing a fully loaded tractor trailer, I scanned my six. But as I signalled to pulled into the #1 lane to pass, I caught sight of a VERY fast closing black dot. I decided to get back into the #2 lane to let the black dot over take and pass. But for whatever reason, the dot decided to let me pass at a safe following distance and I did, even as I could see it was a THP, or whatever they are called. As soon as I completed the pass, IT literally shot passed the tractor trailer rig and ...me. The mpg nexus as I recall was no more than 48/49 mpg for that leg, 03 Jetta TDI :P :shades: Now this would be just another day on the German autobahn of just another faster moving car passing two fuddy duddies. :P I do now wonder what the V6 would do under those similar circumstances.
Diesel +electric IS on the market, i.e. locomotives (google for GE).
The upshot is VW could have very easily put the hybrid on the TDI.
My take is the diesel electric car combination would provide literally an over lapping (i.e.., duplicated and for real world purposes not real usable for the cost) and almost ungodly amounts of torque. Prius folks would probably want the hybrid 's 20% advantaged increased to 50% (unreal right now? )
So for example, the VW Touareg V6 PUG burner, supercharged V6 hybrid (msrp $61,100) puts out 380 hp (100+ hp on tap via a supercharger vs turbo) for a combined 428 # ft. To its credit it does get 1 mpg better (H spa) than the much less powerful V6 RUG burner !?
The V6 TDI (no hybrid) puts out 406 # ft. I am sure that is dialed back a bit to give the V6 supercharged hybrid the "lead". My swag that product is for a VERY small demographic in an already small demographic. (projected 7.5k to 8k total production units) Further there is no word as to what percentage ARE supercharged/hybrids.
The weird thing about Toyota is they have already had some years where they lost some SERIOUS monies (billions) So just to B/E they have to have a SERIES of wildly profitable years !? They had to even admit publicly they had the wrong emphasis and had to refocus. (in effect punt) Even they, as the world wide auto #1 oem have to carefully go into markets; as you hope, i.e. diesel hybrids. I would say 5 more years will tell the story about the 15 miles plug in range, plug in Prius. I truly wish them all the best, but this latest foray does not look like it will go gangbusters.
VW during these lean Toyota times, aka second or even third placers MADE billions.
For me, diesels thrive on the highway, hybrids in the city, with all the stop and go (regen).
I'm sure your mileage would drop in half for my sort of commute. 13 miles long, 45 minutes to an hour. Think about how much time you sit still, idling.
Diesel with start/stop is probably more cost effective, but it would be fun to see 1000 lb-ft combined.
Well I think you really have to ask Toyota those questions. I really do not know why they have never paired a diesel with the hybrid or a natural gas vehicle with the hybrid. (I can swag but that would be just an op/ed) I do know that one really has to get used to the lack of torque for the Prius on the highway. It does move out at low speeds. I obviously would/ am not be in a position to really influence those decisions. If they did I would probably still look at them as I still have a great relationship with the local Toyota dealer and they would let it camp out at the house, for evaluation.
Also the two times I have been in a position to pull the trigger on commute vehicles, Prius for actually a lot of reasons didn't make the cut. Neither did the Corollas. Now, as I have posted in the past, I have a relative that absolutely LOVES the Toyota Prius IV. The vehicle, come from was a Mercedes station wagon. Not many miles were put on it. Funny part, ithe Prius is/will not (be) used for commuting, so on many levels: GO FIGURE !! ??? :confuse:
I am thinking that with 3 of the 3, the fuel mileage would pretty much stay the same or probably more consistently more toward the lower end. We have been doing and continue to do a 5 day 26 miles commute (one way) with 45 min being " exceptionally fast" to more like 1.5 hours more normally/when jammed. 40-47/ 48-52 mpg. Civic gasser does more like 38-42. Again this has been going on for more than 10 years, so it is not like a surprise or too much deviance (351,000 miles) . Also one needs to ask a question (or I should say we still ask) do you want a commute vehicle (like a Prius) that can handle the occasional highway trips or a highway vehicle that can handle commute duties. Now we like the Civic actually most of the family tolerates it. I like it for other reasons. But it is not the road car of choice, and THAT is unanimous. (unfortunately)
Still it might do you better time wise to leave either earlier or later, that is a lot of lost time for the miles.
Any how, point was if Prius is top 3 in the world then clearly it is not just a one-market phenomenon. Toyota should hybridize a diesel for Europe.
No, the Prius is a two market vehicle. Of the 2.5 million sold as of Feb 2012, over 1 million were in the USA, and another million in Japan. Both countries have extremely negative views toward the superiority of the diesel vehicles. The Prius does not sell in the EU well because they have a choice of high mileage vehicles. Given a choice in the US and Japan the Prius would probably not even exist.
I think also the European average 9,000 yearly miles posted a while back by one if not two of the hosts also tells an interesting story. The other is the European PVF is a tad bigger than ours (258.8 M 2009 NHTSA figures, vs app 270.4 M. ). So if you put those two together 1.5 M Prius/529.2=.00284 of Euro/US PVF.
So since China (18 M) is really a bigger yearly auto sales market than the USA 14 M, I would say that if Toyota wants to build Prius sales they would have to look to China's acceptance of the Prius.
just teasing, King. I wouldn't recommend zooming past peace-officers on traffic-enforcement detail! Also wouldn't recommend 95 to 100 mph in any SUV except the Cayenne or X5! I'd want to test the vehicle on a track first;. in 2004 I tested rollover-stability-control only up to about 55 or 60, on a racetrack paddock/road-course, and found it *impossible* to roll the XC90 SUV on pavement. Presumably VW's rollover/stability control today is at least as good as Volvo's was in 2004. But at 100 mph i wouldn't trust stability control. the moments at that speed in an emergency maneuver are possibly beyond any SUVs rollover-prevention-algorithm&brakes ability to stabilize by braking one side's wheels. I'd have to see it to believe it. Maybe edmunds or an automag has some videos/tests showing rollover control working on an SUV for a 100 mph moose-avoidance maneuver.
ps - another reason 100 mph is a bad idea is that EVERY vehicle gets horrid mpg at that speed. Touareg TDI would get awful mpg at an extended 100 mph. My guess would be : Under 20 mpg! EW!
Yes, and I hope you noted the tongue in cheek reply.
You make a good point about SUV's and higher speeds. As you probably know, the Touareg shares the platform with the Porsche Cayenne and competes in the space with it and the X5, MB ML 350. etc. etc. I make mention for those are the current diesels and there are a host of crossover SUV's that compete in that space, but are gassers. Before shopping/researching for the diesels in that segment, (settled on the VW T) I really did not pay attention to this "crossover" suv space. I have since gained the appreciation (thru Edmunds.com), that there are a host of great competitors in this segment. Narrowing it down to diesels of the segment, in some ways made it both easier and harder to decide. What is also popping out at me is there are going to be some FINE diesel competitors in the sub 4500# space. i.e., some of Gagrice's CDI postings. One of the greatest utilities in the "lower weight" space is better fuel mileage and to ability to use (slightly to significantly) smaller diesel engines. So for example, if the VW T V6 TDI dragging 4975#'s were only dragging 4,200 #'s, the vehicle has plenty of options. an easy one being up to 7 mpg BETTER. (100#s per 1 mpg delta)
As you caution, I would NEVER advocate driving beyonds ones comfort levels and or abilities, especially on a public access. It is well know that when one does anything "scared," decision making can suffer. Good decision making is tough enough being in ones comfort and abilities levels, even when both are very high and even outstanding.
Not to get TMI on non diesel stuff, but Porsche braking engineers had an integral part in the design and specifications for that platforms ( Cayenne/Touareg ) braking systems. The system is a slightly smaller version of the Pagid/Brembo components system that stops the Ferrari F 430.
Comments
Of course I think that they don't believe what they are saying, nor do they research the depths of the oil industry--this is a political website. They know the White House can't do anything about fuel prices--by blaming the WH and insisting it do something about it, while of course knowing it can't do anything much about it, is a win-win for a political sucker punch. Clever.
Historically, the White House has never had much influence on the oil industry. When, for instance, the White House made a list of equipment they wanted Exxon to send to Prince Williams Sound to clean up the Exxon Valdez spill, Exxon simply said "no". And that was the end of that!
To this day, the oil spill technology employed by the oil industry as the same as it was 25 years ago.
Nope, I'm not buyin' misinformation on that order.
What you pay at the pump is not artificially high, it's actually artificially low---and it will go up. Why? Because the rest of the world will pay more for it than you will. Anything drilled will not, in any way, affect your fuel prices beneficially. Period. Ask any candid oil exec.
Sure the GOV makes money on fuel taxes, just like it does on any other tax---which is why we have such a huge deficit when we have a recession. People spend less on everything, and make less income.
My main concern about escalating diesel prices is that, unlike gasoline prices, it has far more impact on commodities that we consume daily.
That loaf of bread comes to your town by truck--diesel truck.
Actually I'm wrong--the WH could do something about oil prices---nationalize the oil industry! (it'll never happen).
When clueless jugears is in play, the administration can control nothing.
Doncha see?
I would say the price at the pump covers the cost of oil and refining plus the taxes. Unlike countries that actually subsidize gas like Iran and Venezuela. The EU holds price up with Huge taxes and tariffs. Norway has some of the highest fuel prices in the EU and they are a net oil exporter. As long as oil is traded on the World market in US$ we will probably be ok. Once that changes our money will seek its true worth and we will be in deep trouble. Nationalizing would do no good as we only provide about 25% of our own oil. Unless you were planning on conquering Canada, Mexico and Saudi Arabia.
there are enough auto-related conspiracy theories that they might warrant their own forum!? like those stories about the buses in LA, electric cars in LA? EV1.EdBegley might be an entire subdomain devoted to EV1 conspiracy theories. I wonder if that dude is a diesel-h8r? a quick goog mentions that he has a home diesel generator.....
The wholesale price of gas just flashed by on the SC-TV @ $2.96 per gal app. So based on CA tax on RUG (.69 cents) the governments make 23.3%. This does NOT include sales tax of 8.5%.
When you add them together one is paying a minimum of app 31.8% per gal (taxation) of RUG.
This has been true for many years... a diesel exhaust may make you feel ill... but the CO (Carbon monoxide) from gasoline exhaust will KILL you!!
The 2013 GLK Class will be the sixth Mercedes model to offer a diesel option in the U.S., joining the likes of the E, S, M, R and GL Class models, which all feature a 3.0-liter turbodiesel engine. The GLK is likely to sport a 2.1-liter four-cylinder turbodiesel making 204 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque, an engine that’s already been emissions-certified for the U.S.
So yes if one wants the extra room, etc., better mpg is better than less mpg ! The gasser GLK 350 puts up H EPA of 22, as a comparison. So IF the CDI version turns out to 35 mpg, that is 59% better mpg.
It probably also makes the Suv HATERS crazy, as some SUV's can post better mpg than some so called " economy cars" they recommend.
Oh, and for juice the 2013 GLK will have auto stop/start in both gas and diesel. Hope they do a better job than GMC did.
"Never before has the price gap between natural gas and diesel been so large, suddenly making natural-gas-powered trucks an alluring option for company fleets.
Some truckers soon will have the ability to hedge their bets. That is because the Environmental Protection Agency recently approved retrofit technology for big rigs that lets them burn LNG and diesel.Kathryn Clay, executive director of the Drive Natural Gas initiative of the American Gas Association, says "the new technology is really game changing because the trucker can run on either fuel, eliminating refueling anxiety."
Will Truckers Ditch Diesel? (WSJ)
Additionally diesel can be gotten from natural gas and with pretty close to ZERO ppm sulfur.
However, I know that diesel has a MUCH higher power-density (more miles between fillups) I wonder how many miles a truck can go between CNG fillups?
I was reminded of this just today when we took my wiife's TDI for a road-trip. After filling the tank and after 200+ miles... THE FUEL-GAUGE WAS STILL ON 'FULL'!! I hope this TDI lasts for another 140K miles.
Seems like a good option for short haulers, like garbage trucks or school buses.
Honda Civic CNG cars sell what 3,000 to 4,000 per year? This is almost unmeasurable on the yearly sales and PVF basis @ .0002758 and .0000154%. respectively???????? In might even be laughable to calculate a 5% PVF natural gas at that sales rate. :P
The almost hilarious part is that Prius hybrids are considered a step in the right direction even though the Prius hybrids, in the real world are still mated to 100% RUG engines !!!! Does one envision a real step in the correct direction( given the stated goals, aka not mine)? How about a Prius hybrid (20% hybrid advantage) mated to a natural gas engine?? :sick:
Now am I the only one who gets the feeling from the advertisments that if one runs a electric car like a VOLT that the advertisements imply that the electricity used to run a Volt is FREE ?
Everyone is saying electricity @ .06 to .08 cents. Here in CA that is more like .30 to .35 cents with penalties for exceeding baselines. . That is like saying RUG is 4.15 per gal but really selling it for 18.16 per gal. A Volt already cost 40,000 vs a 15k Corolla.
It is more like it will cost almost exponentially more !!! I will stop telling the truth now.
35/40 mpg all gas ?
Based on CA electricity costs (.30 to .35 cents per KWH) a 30 mile charge is 10.5 cents per mile vs 10.5 cents (40 mpg @ 4.19 ULSD) If you ran it TOTALLY on gasoline @ 35 mpg (4.27 per gal RUG) it would be 12.2 cents per mile driven.
Makes one wonder how long it would take the electric car to B/E to a diesel or even a gasser.
The cars are 39,145 vs 22,775. Makes one wonder how many commute miles $16,370 can buy?
It's not practical (yet) for widespread, long-haul use until there is better availability.
There's no way Toyota would have sold 3 million Prius if every owner had range anxiety and drove around looking for a place to fill up.
Doesn't meet CARB emissions. Yet.
Mazda may come first with a SkyActiv D. If they can get a real-world 35mpg average out of a gasser 2 liter Mazda3 hatch, just imagine what they can do with a similar diesel.
News today said the Prius is the 3rd best selling name plate in the world, behind only the Corolla and Focus. And both of those have diesel and gas variants to outsell the hybrid.
Imagine if you could get a Prius diesel+electric. I bet it would be #1.
Even VW has a 380 hp/ 428 # ft of torque V6 supercharged 3.0 L hybrid MONSTER H EPA 24 mpg. Edmunds.com has a whole write up on it !!
I don't think so. It would still be an ugly car. It sells on MPG and that is it. If it did not get considerably better mileage than the other leaders, it would not even be in the running. Think Pontiac Aztek. The Prius did not make the number one spot on the ugliest 100 cars ever. But it made the list none the less.
Hmmm...when I start thinking everybody else is wrong...
MSRP 39,525?
and unless I over looked it, not a peep about KWH consumption per 15 miles? (want to arrive @ a cost per mile driven: fuel)
IF you mean I am not going 95 to 100 mph in that 500+ miles tank full, then yes, I am not.
However more technically, the power train SEEMS optimized to run in 8 th speed A/T @ 2,000 to 2,100 rpm (81 mph) and posting 35 to 40 mpg.
This owners manual does not say it directly, but max torque in the Jetta's are at 1,750 rpm, with turbo spooling at a good load ing@ 2,000 to 2,100 rpm.
Although, I did do exactly the first sentence, but it was on a Texas interstate with higher speed limits and signs that said, words to the effect: " REALLY keep right except to pass, or we WILL give you a ticket for LLCing ! (God Bless Texas !)
Before passing a fully loaded tractor trailer, I scanned my six. But as I signalled to pulled into the #1 lane to pass, I caught sight of a VERY fast closing black dot. I decided to get back into the #2 lane to let the black dot over take and pass. But for whatever reason, the dot decided to let me pass at a safe following distance and I did, even as I could see it was a THP, or whatever they are called. As soon as I completed the pass, IT literally shot passed the tractor trailer rig and ...me.
Funny.
Diesels improve on similar gas powertrains by 20-40%.
So a diesel+electric hybrid should be able to get 60-70mpg if a gas+electric manages 50 real world (on fuelly many do better).
Any how, point was if Prius is top 3 in the world then clearly it is not just a one-market phenomenon. Toyota should hybridize a diesel for Europe.
The upshot is VW could have very easily put the hybrid on the TDI.
My take is the diesel electric car combination would provide literally an over lapping (i.e.., duplicated and for real world purposes not real usable for the cost) and almost ungodly amounts of torque. Prius folks would probably want the hybrid 's 20% advantaged increased to 50% (unreal right now? )
So for example, the VW Touareg V6 PUG burner, supercharged V6 hybrid (msrp $61,100) puts out 380 hp (100+ hp on tap via a supercharger vs turbo) for a combined 428 # ft. To its credit it does get 1 mpg better (H spa) than the much less powerful V6 RUG burner !?
The V6 TDI (no hybrid) puts out 406 # ft. I am sure that is dialed back a bit to give the V6 supercharged hybrid the "lead". My swag that product is for a VERY small demographic in an already small demographic. (projected 7.5k to 8k total production units) Further there is no word as to what percentage ARE supercharged/hybrids.
The weird thing about Toyota is they have already had some years where they lost some SERIOUS monies (billions) So just to B/E they have to have a SERIES of wildly profitable years !? They had to even admit publicly they had the wrong emphasis and had to refocus. (in effect punt) Even they, as the world wide auto #1 oem have to carefully go into markets; as you hope, i.e. diesel hybrids. I would say 5 more years will tell the story about the 15 miles plug in range, plug in Prius. I truly wish them all the best, but this latest foray does not look like it will go gangbusters.
VW during these lean Toyota times, aka second or even third placers MADE billions.
Do they, though?
For me, diesels thrive on the highway, hybrids in the city, with all the stop and go (regen).
I'm sure your mileage would drop in half for my sort of commute. 13 miles long, 45 minutes to an hour. Think about how much time you sit still, idling.
Diesel with start/stop is probably more cost effective, but it would be fun to see 1000 lb-ft combined.
Also the two times I have been in a position to pull the trigger on commute vehicles, Prius for actually a lot of reasons didn't make the cut. Neither did the Corollas. Now, as I have posted in the past, I have a relative that absolutely LOVES the Toyota Prius IV. The vehicle, come from was a Mercedes station wagon. Not many miles were put on it. Funny part, ithe Prius is/will not (be) used for commuting, so on many levels: GO FIGURE !! ??? :confuse:
I am thinking that with 3 of the 3, the fuel mileage would pretty much stay the same or probably more consistently more toward the lower end. We have been doing and continue to do a 5 day 26 miles commute (one way) with 45 min being " exceptionally fast" to more like 1.5 hours more normally/when jammed. 40-47/ 48-52 mpg. Civic gasser does more like 38-42. Again this has been going on for more than 10 years, so it is not like a surprise or too much deviance (351,000 miles) . Also one needs to ask a question (or I should say we still ask) do you want a commute vehicle (like a Prius) that can handle the occasional highway trips or a highway vehicle that can handle commute duties. Now we like the Civic actually most of the family tolerates it. I like it for other reasons. But it is not the road car of choice, and THAT is unanimous. (unfortunately)
Still it might do you better time wise to leave either earlier or later, that is a lot of lost time for the miles.
No, the Prius is a two market vehicle. Of the 2.5 million sold as of Feb 2012, over 1 million were in the USA, and another million in Japan. Both countries have extremely negative views toward the superiority of the diesel vehicles. The Prius does not sell in the EU well because they have a choice of high mileage vehicles. Given a choice in the US and Japan the Prius would probably not even exist.
So since China (18 M) is really a bigger yearly auto sales market than the USA 14 M, I would say that if Toyota wants to build Prius sales they would have to look to China's acceptance of the Prius.
Not good news?
Also wouldn't recommend 95 to 100 mph in any SUV except the Cayenne or X5! I'd want to test the vehicle on a track first;. in 2004 I tested rollover-stability-control only up to about 55 or 60, on a racetrack paddock/road-course, and found it *impossible* to roll the XC90 SUV on pavement. Presumably VW's rollover/stability control today is at least as good as Volvo's was in 2004. But at 100 mph i wouldn't trust stability control. the moments at that speed in an emergency maneuver are possibly beyond any SUVs rollover-prevention-algorithm&brakes ability to stabilize by braking one side's wheels. I'd have to see it to believe it. Maybe edmunds or an automag has some videos/tests showing rollover control working on an SUV for a 100 mph moose-avoidance maneuver.
ps - another reason 100 mph is a bad idea is that EVERY vehicle gets horrid mpg at that speed. Touareg TDI would get awful mpg at an extended 100 mph. My guess would be : Under 20 mpg! EW!
You make a good point about SUV's and higher speeds. As you probably know, the Touareg shares the platform with the Porsche Cayenne and competes in the space with it and the X5, MB ML 350. etc. etc. I make mention for those are the current diesels and there are a host of crossover SUV's that compete in that space, but are gassers. Before shopping/researching for the diesels in that segment, (settled on the VW T) I really did not pay attention to this "crossover" suv space. I have since gained the appreciation (thru Edmunds.com), that there are a host of great competitors in this segment. Narrowing it down to diesels of the segment, in some ways made it both easier and harder to decide. What is also popping out at me is there are going to be some FINE diesel competitors in the sub 4500# space. i.e., some of Gagrice's CDI postings. One of the greatest utilities in the "lower weight" space is better fuel mileage and to ability to use (slightly to significantly) smaller diesel engines. So for example, if the VW T V6 TDI dragging 4975#'s were only dragging 4,200 #'s, the vehicle has plenty of options. an easy one being up to 7 mpg BETTER. (100#s per 1 mpg delta)
As you caution, I would NEVER advocate driving beyonds ones comfort levels and or abilities, especially on a public access. It is well know that when one does anything "scared," decision making can suffer. Good decision making is tough enough being in ones comfort and abilities levels, even when both are very high and even outstanding.
Not to get TMI on non diesel stuff, but Porsche braking engineers had an integral part in the design and specifications for that platforms ( Cayenne/Touareg ) braking systems. The system is a slightly smaller version of the Pagid/Brembo components system that stops the Ferrari F 430.