Prius has long since stopped having HOV access. It has the regained the same status now as my 2003 TDI during commutes. So I guess the system likes other cars( like mine) to idle more and waste more fuel? Or, more to the more likely, if the average Prius did not idle as much in traffic (using the commute lanes) and mine did, defacto, Jetta TDI mpg should be far better !!! ??? And that would even be better than what Prius drivers got USING commute lanes while mine didn't???
Yes I do know you are fearful of the results. I would not respond either if I was trying to "massage" the data.
The Japanese government subsidized initial hybrid development, no reason to think more governmental meddling hasn't taken place.
Funny thing is, by subsidizing their defense, we enable their ability to subsidize industry, which then helps them compete with our own industry at home. We are our own enemy.
Defacto if a Prius and Jetta TDI are in the SAME traffic going from the same point a to point B, ARE you in effect saying BOTH are hyper miing??? Perhaps your faulty conclusions come from faulty definitions?
Getting 85 mpg? No, I never have gotten that. Highest I ever got was a tank at 62 mpg. Watching paint drying was a blood sport in comparison.
BUT a team in a 2012 Passat TDI got 84 mpg on a single tank for something like 1600 + miles !!
What Prius drivers post for their mpg has absolutely NOTHING to do with my ego or what I actually get on a 03 Jetta TDI. Now because you are making wild accusations, it does need to be said that even in that very same commute, all three cars have different performance parameters: i.e.., 04 Civic, Jetta TDI, 03/04 Prius, etc. Now if I had the either 03/04 Prius, rest assured I would know and employ ITS performance parameters to get the best mpg. Now obviously, but maybe not to you, as you continue to make wild accusations: I do not do so for the Prius as I do not have either of them. Are they applicable to a gasser or a TID? Some might be generally. If anything Prius drivers would be more incline to practice "hypermiling". Indeed the techie aspect of the Prius encourages that, i.e. egg between the right foot and gas pedal. Now even I understand that is probably like scratching a black board with finger nails to your ears. But having run app a tank full through Priuses, I knew then and still feel now, I would not like it as much as the TDI's. Again that is an op/ed.
Pretty simple, it has not changed. 03 Jetta 42/49 EPA. This was posted on the new car sticker. Ranges were also: 35 and 49 in the city and between 41 and 57 on the highway.
But ... it was an all-highway road trip with no fuel stops. Most people work 48-50 weeks per year, vacation 2-4 weeks. So they simulate the latter, which you rarely get to do.
Unless you are retired and extremely lucky. :shades:
The conditions for record-setting drives favor diesels because it's all highway, naturally.
Even with the odds stacked in favor of diesels, they've done similar amazing feats with other cars:
08 Jetta TDI 3.99 L/100 Cruze Eco 3.65 L/100 KM Jetta TDI 3.46 l/100 km Sonata or Optima? Hybrid 3.36 L/100 Prius 3.148 L/100 KM Passat TDI 2.794 L/100 km Peugoet 308 HDi 2.23 l/100 km
Check out the little 308! Wonder if that meets CARB emissions?
Either way, most of us can try to match this mileage on road trips, meaning once or twice a year.
My concern is the other 11.5 months when I'm commuting in traffic.
Of course not. It's the driving. The roadster commutes in DC traffic. The van we use on weekends, mostly longer trips, lots of highway. I can break 30 at times. My Miata has never done that even once.
Guess how much MPG you get when you're not moving? Zero! If you don't have a hybrid or start/stop, at least.
Idle enough and your mileage will plunge, gas or diesel, no matter.
You said the EPA low range for city driving in your TDI was 35mpg, well I doubt I'd get that. I drive 13 miles and it takes 45 minutes on a good day. I bet half the time I'm idling and not moving. That would drag down any diesel's numbers.
Fuelly has literally thousands of Jetta owners tracking mileage there, so it's a good source. Actual range is very wide - high of 64mpg down to 28mpg for a low, with an average in the high 30s.
Unfortunately I would be on the 28mpg team on my city commute. :sick:
Passat is interesting - the range is lower, 26mpg low up to 55mpg high, but the average is better for the new model - in the 40s. Used to average mid 30s (2010 and earlier).
Is the Passat's 2l TDI more advanced than what they put in the Golf and Jetta? Or is it gearing? Odd that the bigger/heavier car does better.
The absolute worst I have ever gotten on the 03 Jetta TDI was doing 300 miles of stop and go (mostly stop) in downtown Las Vegas with up to 5 passengers and with the A/C blasting (104 degrees the norm) ...44 mpg. To boot we filled with President Hugo Chavez owned LSD (rot gut). :lemon:
How much torque would the Prius need to go a steady 60 mph? That speed is right in the Priuses sweet spot!!!!!!
Yes the tank was sealed and verified? Unless you are accusing them of tampering to fudge the numbers, so what?
It would be interesting to see what those TDI drivers would get with a Prius.
For a guy that commutes in and around Wash DC, it is a wonder why you haven't gotten a Prius for as much as you opine on it. 26 mpg in a Miata Roadster? What is wrong with the Priuses 51 C / 48 H + mpg ? Of course the interesting thing is what you would get in that commute with the van. Funny how you do not list it.
Your actual results and choices are a graphic demonstration of what I have said in past posts, burning more is the policy and better as long as one talks of burning... less. :lemon: :shades: Add to that and vilifying folks that actually do burn less and not merely talk of it.
But...the low is 38mpg for the Prius III. That's 10mpg better than the worst Jetta TDI.
See what happens when a car is in its element?
Also....I doubt that 32mpg was obtained in city driving. I bet that was high speed highway driving with an older 1.5l model. That engine would have to be screaming to keep up.
It's converse...in its element at lower city speeds, out of its element at high speeds on the highway. Ever seen one on the autobahn? They're probably not allowed. LOL
Wow; you folks are prolific! I just cannot keep up with the conversation here.
I'm pretty sure what Gary was saying is that offering a subsidy would boost demand for any vehicle. Demand for VW TDIs is already high enough that the manufacturing cannot keep pace, and a subsidy would only serve to boost demand higher. That would probably be true even if VW raised their MSRP on the car to put some of those "savings" into their own pocket.
Everyone likes a "deal." :shades:
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
I was the one that got you dialed into the "element" issue, with the do you want a road car that can do commuting or do you want a commute car that can do roads. Essentially, you are making my point.
But it truly seems a waste to commute with a Miata @26 mpg when by your cheerleading you should be getting 51 +. :lemon: Since you raised the issue it would be interesting to note what you would get in that commute with your van. But hey, disingenuousness is rampant.
I think in some ways VW made a real good call to in effect, to go with the mainstream 4 door sedan, aka midsized: Passat. Don't like diesel, get a gasser. Want to sample the diesel, get the TDI. It is sort of an Am/Euro/[non-permissible content removed] combination. Because of customer preferences, the Jetta probably would never have been the "optimum" to achieve the goal of 800,000 vehicles from that TN plant. Even in its decontented version it is really not Am/[non-permissible content removed] enough. Euro fans almost do not like it now. It is interesting that the Jetta TDI will be offered by rental agencies.
Miata works just fine, makes a long commute tolerable when you pop open the top and have something good on the radio. :shades:
I don't mind the MPG so much as I do the range. It has a small gas tank, so the low fuel goes on as early as 260 miles. It's annoying.
I would consider a 5 door with a panoramic moonroof. Golf TDI, Mazda3 SkyActiv, and Impreza 5 door would be on my short list, but can you get the panoramic roof?
Or a SkyActiv Miata - as long as they don't make the gas tank smaller.
Or a SkyActiv D Miata.
500C didn't impress me, so it's crossed off the list.
Prius C got nixed when I found out the gas tank is 9.5 gallons. That's 7-8 useable gallons, so range is not strong.
Regular Prius gets expensive and I'm not sure it has a panoramic roof either.
I realize I want a lot of contradicting things. Still looking.
do you want a road car that can do commuting or do you want a commute car that can do roads
Tough call. I want both.
what you would get in that commute with your van
I've driven it to work in foul weather, since the Miata has summer tires. It varies but I usually can't break 22mpg, and it's way too big for the point-and-shoot city driving I do.
Basically the van is not at all suitable for my commute.
I could compromise and try to get one vehicle to do both, but I doubt it would do either job as well.
by your cheerleading you should be getting 51 +
I want range. Not mileage by itself.
That's why I don't like the Prius C. A 9.5 gallon gas tank is stupid.
The Miata was the most fuel efficient roadster when I got it. The Solistice was much worse. My van was also the most fuel efficient van sold at the time. Bonus is the van has a HUGE gas tank. Love the 500 mile range.
I won't compromise my wants, but within a class of cars that meets my needs I will tend towards the efficient side.
Let's see if you have a 9.5 gal tank with 50 mpg. Say you live .5 gal to find the next fuel station. That is 450 miles range. Now you use a Miata that has by your own admission, 260 miles range. I am unclear of your definition of stupid.
Range became a priority after owning the Miata and being bugged by the low fuel light every 260 miles.
I actually keep a spare gas tank at home now, if I'm annoyed I just top off the tank to go a few extra days between fill ups.
A 9.5 gallon tank has ~8 gallons useable fuel. You don't want to run out, and remember fuel pumps are cooled by the fuel itself so you cold also burn a fuel pump if it's not bad enough to be stranded.
So even 52mpg real world, it has far less range than the regular Prius at 48mpg, since the Prius has a bigger tank.
Heck, I drive farther in my minivan.
Mazda, Subaru, and VW use nice sized tanks - 14.5 gallons for the 3, Impreza, and Golf. Passat's is huge, but the wagon is gone.
I'm waiting to see the new Elantra touring. Hyundai fumbles by putting a small tank in the sedan. Same with the Cruze Eco.
The Japanese government subsidized initial hybrid development, no reason to think more governmental meddling hasn't taken place.
Funny thing is, by subsidizing their defense, we enable their ability to subsidize industry, which then helps them compete with our own industry at home. We are our own enemy.
You are correct on all counts. And the 147k Prius sales in Japan the first quarter of this year were all subsidized. The Prius remains a 2 country car. It would not be in the top 20 without the Japanese subsidies.
I would bet if the US put money on an all American made domestic car it could reach the top in sales.
It's not a lot but they tax Japanese imported cars at 2.5%, trucks at 25% IIRC. Plus Japanese makes agreed to voluntary quotas to limit imports.
I think that's why they make most Lexus in Japan - because they cost more, and the quota limits the amount of cars, not the sales totals.
That's also why a Land Cruiser costs about a million bucks nowadays. A diesel Land Cruiser would be about a billion.
The chicken tax was really meant to keep cheap pickups out of the USA, though, and it has worked. And that's part of the reason why a loaded crew cab pickup costs $50-60 grand.
Let's face it - the automakers exploit these laws to their full benefit. The only one getting screwed is the consumer.
Amarok will never make it here with 25% on top of its cost. It would end up being priced like an F150.
I believe the chicken tax is going away as part of KORUS. At least phased out over 5 years. Which means the Ford Ranger T6 diesel may be heading here in the future.
Speaking of diesel. We drove by the Shell station this morning. RUG dropped to $4.17 and Diesel to $3.99. My wife says why haven't we bought a diesel SUV yet?????
Your prices are dropping?! Ours just keep going up. I think we're around $4.30 RUG (diesel still much more expensive), and in the Palmer/Anchorage area last weekend, prices were $4.50.
Looking out my window at a Chevron station next door, their RUG price is advertised at $4.70. Ouch; that Techron is worth a lot! :sick:
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
The worst part is you have a refinery in your backyard... Alaska is not the place to make a lot of money like it was in the 1970s. They are getting tough on those that are left working up in Prudhoe on our Teamster contract. I am glad I retired when I did. My son and daughter in law love Alaska. But they are about to sell out and move somewhere else.
Yep, we sure do. And, they just shut down one of the distilling towers "in an attempt to make the plant more cost-effective," which is probably the reason why they're justifying the price hikes. Not bad... lay off a third of the work force and sell your product for 5-10% more at the same time. That will definitely make it more cost-effective!
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
RUG around here runs from a low of $3.57 to $3.75 at my local station.
Diesel here is $3.79, $3.77 out of town. So the cheap gas places are still maintaining the .20 cent price differential between regular and diesel. Didn't pay attention to the premium prices; probably the same or a bit over diesel.
Interesting comment someone made a few pages back about more cars getting 50 mpg. If that becomes more of the norm, you have to wonder if we're going to continue to be awash in gas. Even diesel could head back toward $2 a gallon again, especially if no parts of the economy recover in the next few years other than the current strength in the auto industry.
And someone mentioned Hugo Chavez, who is dying fast according to Dan Rather. Who knows what effect that would have on Citgo.
Well here is the long and short: BOGUS BOGUS BOGUS ! Did I speak the truth and say .... BOGUS? If anyone has done the math on the recent discussion of 26 mpg vs 50 mpg, who really cares that I drive a diesel car that literally gets 92% BETTER fuel mileage than Ateixera's? Not only that he( almost hilariously) says it is a fuel sipper. Again who really cares that the savings is literally 48% !! ???
If no one got that Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy wants the price of RUG to go to Euro pricing aka $10 US per GAL US, aka 128 oz converted. On the other hand IF the demand DROPS you are saying the price could possibly go to $2 and below....... So if no one wants to connect the dots one really should not be surprised at what happens, eh? The system does not want folks to pay LESS per mile driven. It wants folks to pay MORE per mile driven, if anyone has lost sight of the original issue.
A relative was in Hugo Land a couple of years ago. RUG was selling for .29 cents !!!!!! ?????
I don't care what you drive. Not sure what you are saying is bogus.
Yeah, $2 a gallon gas may be a bogus pipe dream, but it is a supply and demand commodity. We're not talking cigarettes. If no one is buying it, the price will fall.
Bulk oil prices are falling in the EU, but I don't see a handy petrolbuddy site to check pump prices. Apparently fuel is down 7 p in the UK per this Daily Mail link.
. . .diesel could head back toward $2 a gallon again. . .
I've maintained for a long time that diesel demand is much less flexible than gasoline. Class 8 trucks, locomotives & heating oil demand are whatever they need to be, and people pay what they have to to get what's required. In all cases the cost is passed on to the consumer, but demand doesn't drop as a result. With gasoline, it does. I think it's called discretionary spending, to a point. You pay what you have to to get to work & back, but the weekend trips and vacations get a serious haircut.
That said, I don't see diesel fuel/fuel oil going down anytime soon, barring a total financial meltdown.
The game changer is the "ability" of those diesel users to retool to literally over abundant natural gas. This is part of the reason why the current administration is trying to get the environs to outlaw fracking.
I saw a comparison that puts equivalent numbers with diesel being 4 dollars and natural gas being .65 to .75 cents.
So for example that would turn my .08 cents per mile driven to .015 cents per mile driven. That would make diesel over 5 times more expensive.
This Globe and Mail story agrees with you. Besides demand (and demand that's now year round and not seasonal), another reason why diesel will be more expensive than gas is that it now costs more to refine it than gas or heating oil.
Yeah, that's at work too. When I drove a truck (several decades ago) sulphur content was measured in percentage points, not PPM. The change to low-sulphur diesel certainly contributes to the situation.
Diesel has lost much of its cost advantage, but still retains range and driveability (torque) plusses.
interesting and a nice point, ateixeira. but in the end your reasoning turns out not to be true due particularly to the second law of thermodynamics. The arithmetic is clear and indicates: the more efficient a system is to begin with, the less energy can be saved by further improving the system's efficiency. None of this is up for debate, actually, the arithmetic is basic, and the laws of thermodynamics are immutable. But it's legal to try to "disagree" with the laws of the universe, anyway! Innovate!
I also read in passing about the US BMW plant, Spartanburg SC that builds BMW's X3, X5, X6 model lines for WORLD WIDE consumption. (6 variants, but I am open to edifications and corrections: admittedly, I am short on the point for point details and other minutia) BMW plant Spartanburg SC.
So defacto this would mean that the various world wide fantastic selection of other diesel engines (more powerful, better fuel mileages, etc) that are not available in the US markets are actually MADE/assembled HERE in the USA !!!!
..."We get our six and eight cylinder gas and diesel engines for the X5 and X6 from Steyr, Austria. Our Motorsport engines for the X5 M and X6 M come from Munich."...
This is in stark contrast to the VW concept of the Chattanoga, TN plant, which makes the US only Passat model line. One back story is that BMW is more the niche player and VW world vies for first place giant auto oem of late.
Having said that, diesels could benefit from a simple start-stop system
Mercedes is listening to you:
Consumers will be able to choose between two versions: the higher-level GLK 350 which comes with a 3.5-liter V6, or the more efficiency minded GLK250 BlueTEC, which comes with a 2.1-liter diesel engine.
Regardless of which version strikes your fancy, the GLK lineup will offer improved fuel economy over the 2012 model thanks to engine start/stop technology.
Hopefully it can be disabled if it is not seamless. I hated the technology in my GMC Hybrid. With the inherent lag in many diesel engines, I don't expect it to be seamless.
If you really want a diesel hybrid VW has it for you:
The contrast between a fantasy diesel hybrid Prius and this real world and life VW TDI iteration is almost hilarious. Prius would have to step up beyond big time just on the underpinnings to handle the 516 # ft of torque !!!! In 20/20 hindsight, to even match VW (probable) production in the next two years, Toyota would have had to have started a min of 3 years ago.
On a more practical fantasy note: on the on/off idle, I would also agree. I would like the option to turn it on/off. My take and swag is the savings is not very much on a day to day commute. However it might make some B/E to cost saving sense on a longer term basis, say 100,000 miles. So for example the TDI consumption rate is .2 gal per 1 hour idle time (I read this reference in a very very obscure technical manual. Vag.com software, if anyone cares to look, even that was a calculation based on smaller time intervals). So the up cost of the system and fuel savings would make up at least some of that calculation/equation.
So to use the Miata 26 mpg example, in heavy commute traffic, one would want to calculate the mpg with NO traffic and see if the difference in mpg is worth the options cost. Another arcane issue is how much would it cost to fix if it broke down, then of course does it make economic sense to fix. On a vehicle that gets 55 mpg? It is low hanging fruit, in either case, and in effect makes the BE cost effectiveness more than double. In other worlds if it took 100,000 miles it will now take 200k +.
Strictly on mpg alone, (55 mpg vs 51 mpg) a Prius killer.
Also on first appearances, the VW TDI crossover couple looks to be competitive with the X6 BMW, albeit cheaper ?
My understanding is a diesel powered Jeep Wrangler is built in the USA for sale to the rest of the World. A Wrangler with a nice 2.5L diesel would be the perfect off road vehicle. Instead they continue to sell that gas hog V6 to get the needed torque for off road usage. :sick:
For those looking for a good looking Crossover, I don't think any of the others beat the VW Cross Coupe. And with the diesel hybrid getting a perceived 157 MPG, what's not to like. Personally I would opt for the GTD version.
On the other side of the spectrum, VW is bringing the 2013 Polo, the Fiesta, Fit, (Mazda) 2 fighter. I wonder when in the sequence and how much deviance from 70 mpg will the 1.6 TDI be?
In each's segment, 55 and 70 mpg sets a very high bar.
For the most part... you are correct that "multiple efficiency gains are not additive" There are many technical reasons for this and some of them have been described above. Perhaps you are not familiar with some of the engineering concepts which come into play here.
You seem to have overlooked some very basic facts: - For a given volume, Diesel fuel has more energy in it than gasoline. (especially gasoline with ethanol in it which has even LESS energy in it) - A diesel engine DOES NOT HAVE A THROTTLE-PLATE.. this intrinsically gives a diesel engine more volumetric efficiency than a gasoline engine. (A gasoline engine is constantly 'sucking' against the throttle-plate hence wasting energy)
BOTTOM LINE: A diesel engine is about 30% more efficient than a gasoline engine.... right from the get-go (even before adding in the efficiencies of a 'hybrid' system which can recover braking energy back into acceleration)
so YES - in this case combining Diesel with a 'hybrid' system can end up with an additive effect.
Also - in response to the the person who assumed we are discussing an EXISTING VW TDI engine ... NO we are not. The type of system we are discussing is a small (perhaps 3-cylinder) diesel engine combined with a 'hybrid' system.... remember, acceleration will be assisted by the batteries and NOT from the engine-torque. Essentially, the small Diesel engine will be used to keep the batteries charged and driving energy will be drawn from the batteries.
Additionally - those who are comparing to a Diesel-locomotive are missing an important point. The traction-motors on a Diesel-locomotive are driven DIRECTLY from the engine. There is no battery involved. The main reason they use this kind of system with a locomotive is the inherent ability of the traction-motors to reduce torque as soon as they start to loose traction. Hence the power of the engine can be smoothly applied without spinning the wheels at all.
It is kindof a cool way to apply the inherent ability of series-connected electric motors to never spin the locomotive wheels... but have no real-world application on a road-driven vehicle.
Conversely, road-driven vehicles use PARALLEL-connected electric-motors with tonewheel feedback from the ABS system.
If you wish to be in on this discussion - perhaps you should take several years of engineering classes in basic-electricity, thermodynamics, electronics...etc.
Comments
Yes I do know you are fearful of the results. I would not respond either if I was trying to "massage" the data.
Go hypermile-without-calling-it-that and keep thinking you'd do FAR better if you were actually hypermilng. I bet you'd get 85 mpg.
Your ego is bigger than the V10 TDI's torque curve.
Funny thing is, by subsidizing their defense, we enable their ability to subsidize industry, which then helps them compete with our own industry at home. We are our own enemy.
Getting 85 mpg? No, I never have gotten that. Highest I ever got was a tank at 62 mpg. Watching paint drying was a blood sport in comparison.
BUT a team in a 2012 Passat TDI got 84 mpg on a single tank for something like 1600 + miles !!
What Prius drivers post for their mpg has absolutely NOTHING to do with my ego or what I actually get on a 03 Jetta TDI. Now because you are making wild accusations, it does need to be said that even in that very same commute, all three cars have different performance parameters: i.e.., 04 Civic, Jetta TDI, 03/04 Prius, etc. Now if I had the either 03/04 Prius, rest assured I would know and employ ITS performance parameters to get the best mpg. Now obviously, but maybe not to you, as you continue to make wild accusations: I do not do so for the Prius as I do not have either of them. Are they applicable to a gasser or a TID? Some might be generally. If anything Prius drivers would be more incline to practice "hypermiling". Indeed the techie aspect of the Prius encourages that, i.e. egg between the right foot and gas pedal. Now even I understand that is probably like scratching a black board with finger nails to your ears. But having run app a tank full through Priuses, I knew then and still feel now, I would not like it as much as the TDI's. Again that is an op/ed.
84 mpg ! The Taylors
Then you say if you drove differently, you would improve by another large order of magnitude.
I bet you can make a 3-minute egg in 50 seconds, too.
You can focus on outliers all you want, I'll stick to real-world averages.
But ... it was an all-highway road trip with no fuel stops. Most people work 48-50 weeks per year, vacation 2-4 weeks. So they simulate the latter, which you rarely get to do.
Unless you are retired and extremely lucky. :shades:
The conditions for record-setting drives favor diesels because it's all highway, naturally.
Even with the odds stacked in favor of diesels, they've done similar amazing feats with other cars:
08 Jetta TDI 3.99 L/100
Cruze Eco 3.65 L/100 KM
Jetta TDI 3.46 l/100 km
Sonata or Optima? Hybrid 3.36 L/100
Prius 3.148 L/100 KM
Passat TDI 2.794 L/100 km
Peugoet 308 HDi 2.23 l/100 km
Check out the little 308! Wonder if that meets CARB emissions?
Either way, most of us can try to match this mileage on road trips, meaning once or twice a year.
My concern is the other 11.5 months when I'm commuting in traffic.
You can ignore it if you wish. Indeed for all the"gas" it seems to give you (no pun intended) you should.
Passat TDI is also a porkier car @ 318#'s more ! ?
* My big 3.5l V6 minivan average about 27mpg.
* My tiny 2l roadster gets about 26mpg.
Is the van more fuel efficient?
Of course not. It's the driving. The roadster commutes in DC traffic. The van we use on weekends, mostly longer trips, lots of highway. I can break 30 at times. My Miata has never done that even once.
Guess how much MPG you get when you're not moving? Zero! If you don't have a hybrid or start/stop, at least.
Idle enough and your mileage will plunge, gas or diesel, no matter.
You said the EPA low range for city driving in your TDI was 35mpg, well I doubt I'd get that. I drive 13 miles and it takes 45 minutes on a good day. I bet half the time I'm idling and not moving. That would drag down any diesel's numbers.
Fuelly has literally thousands of Jetta owners tracking mileage there, so it's a good source. Actual range is very wide - high of 64mpg down to 28mpg for a low, with an average in the high 30s.
Unfortunately I would be on the 28mpg team on my city commute. :sick:
Passat is interesting - the range is lower, 26mpg low up to 55mpg high, but the average is better for the new model - in the 40s. Used to average mid 30s (2010 and earlier).
Is the Passat's 2l TDI more advanced than what they put in the Golf and Jetta? Or is it gearing? Odd that the bigger/heavier car does better.
That trip was all highway, though. Not even a single fuel stop (it was one tank).
To be honest I doubt a Prius would match the Passat out on the open highway. Low end torque plus tall gearing = diesel in its element.
In the city the Passat would not come close, though. Imagine a fleet of taxis. I bet the hybrid would win by far more than 12.1%.
Here's a local outfit that uses 'em:
http://www.envirotaxicab.com/
I don't like that they use Escape hybrids, though. You can do a whole lot better with most regular sedans.
I tend to see mostly Camry hybrids lately.
How much torque would the Prius need to go a steady 60 mph? That speed is right in the Priuses sweet spot!!!!!!
Yes the tank was sealed and verified? Unless you are accusing them of tampering to fudge the numbers, so what?
There are outliers on the high end, but on the low end too...
For a guy that commutes in and around Wash DC, it is a wonder why you haven't gotten a Prius for as much as you opine on it. 26 mpg in a Miata Roadster? What is wrong with the Priuses 51 C / 48 H + mpg ? Of course the interesting thing is what you would get in that commute with the van. Funny how you do not list it.
Your actual results and choices are a graphic demonstration of what I have said in past posts, burning more is the policy and better as long as one talks of burning... less. :lemon: :shades:
But...the low is 38mpg for the Prius III. That's 10mpg better than the worst Jetta TDI.
See what happens when a car is in its element?
Also....I doubt that 32mpg was obtained in city driving. I bet that was high speed highway driving with an older 1.5l model. That engine would have to be screaming to keep up.
It's converse...in its element at lower city speeds, out of its element at high speeds on the highway. Ever seen one on the autobahn? They're probably not allowed. LOL
I'm pretty sure what Gary was saying is that offering a subsidy would boost demand for any vehicle. Demand for VW TDIs is already high enough that the manufacturing cannot keep pace, and a subsidy would only serve to boost demand higher. That would probably be true even if VW raised their MSRP on the car to put some of those "savings" into their own pocket.
Everyone likes a "deal." :shades:
But it truly seems a waste to commute with a Miata @26 mpg when by your cheerleading you should be getting 51 +. :lemon: Since you raised the issue it would be interesting to note what you would get in that commute with your van. But hey, disingenuousness is rampant.
I don't mind the MPG so much as I do the range. It has a small gas tank, so the low fuel goes on as early as 260 miles. It's annoying.
I would consider a 5 door with a panoramic moonroof. Golf TDI, Mazda3 SkyActiv, and Impreza 5 door would be on my short list, but can you get the panoramic roof?
Or a SkyActiv Miata - as long as they don't make the gas tank smaller.
Or a SkyActiv D Miata.
500C didn't impress me, so it's crossed off the list.
Prius C got nixed when I found out the gas tank is 9.5 gallons. That's 7-8 useable gallons, so range is not strong.
Regular Prius gets expensive and I'm not sure it has a panoramic roof either.
I realize I want a lot of contradicting things. Still looking.
Tough call. I want both.
what you would get in that commute with your van
I've driven it to work in foul weather, since the Miata has summer tires. It varies but I usually can't break 22mpg, and it's way too big for the point-and-shoot city driving I do.
Basically the van is not at all suitable for my commute.
I could compromise and try to get one vehicle to do both, but I doubt it would do either job as well.
by your cheerleading you should be getting 51 +
I want range. Not mileage by itself.
That's why I don't like the Prius C. A 9.5 gallon gas tank is stupid.
The Miata was the most fuel efficient roadster when I got it. The Solistice was much worse. My van was also the most fuel efficient van sold at the time. Bonus is the van has a HUGE gas tank. Love the 500 mile range.
I won't compromise my wants, but within a class of cars that meets my needs I will tend towards the efficient side.
Let's see if you have a 9.5 gal tank with 50 mpg. Say you live .5 gal to find the next fuel station. That is 450 miles range. Now you use a Miata that has by your own admission, 260 miles range. I am unclear of your definition of stupid.
I actually keep a spare gas tank at home now, if I'm annoyed I just top off the tank to go a few extra days between fill ups.
A 9.5 gallon tank has ~8 gallons useable fuel. You don't want to run out, and remember fuel pumps are cooled by the fuel itself so you cold also burn a fuel pump if it's not bad enough to be stranded.
So even 52mpg real world, it has far less range than the regular Prius at 48mpg, since the Prius has a bigger tank.
Heck, I drive farther in my minivan.
Mazda, Subaru, and VW use nice sized tanks - 14.5 gallons for the 3, Impreza, and Golf. Passat's is huge, but the wagon is gone.
I'm waiting to see the new Elantra touring. Hyundai fumbles by putting a small tank in the sedan. Same with the Cruze Eco.
Funny thing is, by subsidizing their defense, we enable their ability to subsidize industry, which then helps them compete with our own industry at home. We are our own enemy.
You are correct on all counts. And the 147k Prius sales in Japan the first quarter of this year were all subsidized. The Prius remains a 2 country car. It would not be in the top 20 without the Japanese subsidies.
I would bet if the US put money on an all American made domestic car it could reach the top in sales.
I think that's why they make most Lexus in Japan - because they cost more, and the quota limits the amount of cars, not the sales totals.
That's also why a Land Cruiser costs about a million bucks nowadays. A diesel Land Cruiser would be about a billion.
The chicken tax was really meant to keep cheap pickups out of the USA, though, and it has worked. And that's part of the reason why a loaded crew cab pickup costs $50-60 grand.
Let's face it - the automakers exploit these laws to their full benefit. The only one getting screwed is the consumer.
Amarok will never make it here with 25% on top of its cost. It would end up being priced like an F150.
Speaking of diesel. We drove by the Shell station this morning. RUG dropped to $4.17 and Diesel to $3.99. My wife says why haven't we bought a diesel SUV yet?????
On average gas costs a bit more, but here it costs a lot more, even more than premium costs. :sick:
Looking out my window at a Chevron station next door, their RUG price is advertised at $4.70. Ouch; that Techron is worth a lot! :sick:
Actually these are not my words or figures. I read it off the 03 Jetta TDI new car sticker and am merely the messenger here.
Like you, I doubt if I'd get that ! Indeed if I did, I would instantly think that something was massively wrong with the car. :sick: :lemon:
Diesel here is $3.79, $3.77 out of town. So the cheap gas places are still maintaining the .20 cent price differential between regular and diesel. Didn't pay attention to the premium prices; probably the same or a bit over diesel.
Interesting comment someone made a few pages back about more cars getting 50 mpg. If that becomes more of the norm, you have to wonder if we're going to continue to be awash in gas. Even diesel could head back toward $2 a gallon again, especially if no parts of the economy recover in the next few years other than the current strength in the auto industry.
And someone mentioned Hugo Chavez, who is dying fast according to Dan Rather. Who knows what effect that would have on Citgo.
If no one got that Steven Chu, Secretary of Energy wants the price of RUG to go to Euro pricing aka $10 US per GAL US, aka 128 oz converted. On the other hand IF the demand DROPS you are saying the price could possibly go to $2 and below....... So if no one wants to connect the dots one really should not be surprised at what happens, eh? The system does not want folks to pay LESS per mile driven. It wants folks to pay MORE per mile driven, if anyone has lost sight of the original issue.
A relative was in Hugo Land a couple of years ago. RUG was selling for .29 cents !!!!!! ?????
Yeah, $2 a gallon gas may be a bogus pipe dream, but it is a supply and demand commodity. We're not talking cigarettes. If no one is buying it, the price will fall.
Bulk oil prices are falling in the EU, but I don't see a handy petrolbuddy site to check pump prices. Apparently fuel is down 7 p in the UK per this Daily Mail link.
I've maintained for a long time that diesel demand is much less flexible than gasoline. Class 8 trucks, locomotives & heating oil demand are whatever they need to be, and people pay what they have to to get what's required. In all cases the cost is passed on to the consumer, but demand doesn't drop as a result. With gasoline, it does. I think it's called discretionary spending, to a point. You pay what you have to to get to work & back, but the weekend trips and vacations get a serious haircut.
That said, I don't see diesel fuel/fuel oil going down anytime soon, barring a total financial meltdown.
I saw a comparison that puts equivalent numbers with diesel being 4 dollars and natural gas being .65 to .75 cents.
So for example that would turn my .08 cents per mile driven to .015 cents per mile driven. That would make diesel over 5 times more expensive.
That's new.
Better get a clean gas-electric hybrid.
link title
In addition CA has some of the highest fuel taxes and sales taxes of the 58 states (just in case Obama gets re elected
Yeah, that's at work too. When I drove a truck (several decades ago) sulphur content was measured in percentage points, not PPM. The change to low-sulphur diesel certainly contributes to the situation.
Diesel has lost much of its cost advantage, but still retains range and driveability (torque) plusses.
CA ramped up the regulation machine and passed laws and regulations making MTBE cost BILLIONS of dollars.
The arithmetic is clear and indicates: the more efficient a system is to begin with, the less energy can be saved by further improving the system's efficiency.
None of this is up for debate, actually, the arithmetic is basic, and the laws of thermodynamics are immutable. But it's legal to try to "disagree" with the laws of the universe, anyway! Innovate!
So defacto this would mean that the various world wide fantastic selection of other diesel engines (more powerful, better fuel mileages, etc) that are not available in the US markets are actually MADE/assembled HERE in the USA !!!!
..."We get our six and eight cylinder gas and diesel engines for the X5 and X6 from Steyr, Austria. Our Motorsport engines for the X5 M and X6 M come from Munich."...
This is in stark contrast to the VW concept of the Chattanoga, TN plant, which makes the US only Passat model line. One back story is that BMW is more the niche player and VW world vies for first place giant auto oem of late.
Mercedes is listening to you:
Consumers will be able to choose between two versions: the higher-level GLK 350 which comes with a 3.5-liter V6, or the more efficiency minded GLK250 BlueTEC, which comes with a 2.1-liter diesel engine.
Regardless of which version strikes your fancy, the GLK lineup will offer improved fuel economy over the 2012 model thanks to engine start/stop technology.
Hopefully it can be disabled if it is not seamless. I hated the technology in my GMC Hybrid. With the inherent lag in many diesel engines, I don't expect it to be seamless.
If you really want a diesel hybrid VW has it for you:
http://www.insideline.com/volkswagen/cross-coupe/vw-cross-coupe-tdi-hybrid-heads- -to-2012-geneva-auto-show.html
55 mpg ???? Well, ... probably beyond superlatives.
On a more practical fantasy note: on the on/off idle, I would also agree. I would like the option to turn it on/off. My take and swag is the savings is not very much on a day to day commute. However it might make some B/E to cost saving sense on a longer term basis, say 100,000 miles. So for example the TDI consumption rate is .2 gal per 1 hour idle time (I read this reference in a very very obscure technical manual. Vag.com software, if anyone cares to look, even that was a calculation based on smaller time intervals). So the up cost of the system and fuel savings would make up at least some of that calculation/equation.
So to use the Miata 26 mpg example, in heavy commute traffic, one would want to calculate the mpg with NO traffic and see if the difference in mpg is worth the options cost. Another arcane issue is how much would it cost to fix if it broke down, then of course does it make economic sense to fix. On a vehicle that gets 55 mpg? It is low hanging fruit, in either case, and in effect makes the BE cost effectiveness more than double. In other worlds if it took 100,000 miles it will now take 200k +.
Strictly on mpg alone, (55 mpg vs 51 mpg) a Prius killer.
Also on first appearances, the VW TDI crossover couple looks to be competitive with the X6 BMW, albeit cheaper ?
On the other side of the spectrum, VW is bringing the 2013 Polo, the Fiesta, Fit, (Mazda) 2 fighter. I wonder when in the sequence and how much deviance from 70 mpg will the 1.6 TDI be?
In each's segment, 55 and 70 mpg sets a very high bar.
You seem to have overlooked some very basic facts:
- For a given volume, Diesel fuel has more energy in it than gasoline. (especially gasoline with ethanol in it which has even LESS energy in it)
- A diesel engine DOES NOT HAVE A THROTTLE-PLATE.. this intrinsically gives a diesel engine more volumetric efficiency than a gasoline engine. (A gasoline engine is constantly 'sucking' against the throttle-plate hence wasting energy)
BOTTOM LINE: A diesel engine is about 30% more efficient than a gasoline engine.... right from the get-go (even before adding in the efficiencies of a 'hybrid' system which can recover braking energy back into acceleration)
so YES - in this case combining Diesel with a 'hybrid' system can end up with an additive effect.
Also - in response to the the person who assumed we are discussing an EXISTING VW TDI engine ... NO we are not. The type of system we are discussing is a small (perhaps 3-cylinder) diesel engine combined with a 'hybrid' system.... remember, acceleration will be assisted by the batteries and NOT from the engine-torque. Essentially, the small Diesel engine will be used to keep the batteries charged and driving energy will be drawn from the batteries.
Additionally - those who are comparing to a Diesel-locomotive are missing an important point. The traction-motors on a Diesel-locomotive are driven DIRECTLY from the engine. There is no battery involved. The main reason they use this kind of system with a locomotive is the inherent ability of the traction-motors to reduce torque as soon as they start to loose traction. Hence the power of the engine can be smoothly applied without spinning the wheels at all.
It is kindof a cool way to apply the inherent ability of series-connected electric motors to never spin the locomotive wheels... but have no real-world application on a road-driven vehicle.
Conversely, road-driven vehicles use PARALLEL-connected electric-motors with tonewheel feedback from the ABS system.
If you wish to be in on this discussion - perhaps you should take several years of engineering classes in basic-electricity, thermodynamics, electronics...etc.