Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?

1127128130132133473

Comments

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    I am not sure why? I think we already have some history (understatement for me) as to how much better the TDI's are (mpg wise) than the gassers. Performance also, but it might be a secondary issue. Perhaps the real question/issue: can they beat the 43 mpg (and by how much) on their hybrid offering. I would suspect the 2012 Prius's 50 mpg would be the official but unofficial bar.

    IF I was starting fresh, the 6 speed Passat TDI would be front and center, even as it is way too big and too much car.

    EPA of 43 H, with unofficial but official 84 mpg, sets a VERY high bar. So the other question would be: can the VW hybrid offering beat 84 mpg.

    Being as how I am not right now the one that really appeals to me is that hopped up GTD, which is not yet avaiable on the US markets. Baring that BWM needs to bring back that 425 # ft twin turbo diesel 3 series.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    I am not sure why?

    The usual; fuel is higher, purchase price is often higher too, can be hard to find in the boonies, mechanics can be even harder to find, high particulates, and my wife can't tolerate the fumes.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    Got it. No real change for folks with your metrics?
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    I'm cheap so that'll probably mean a gasser when our beaters finally die. Hybrids really appeal to my wife. I'm curious about the stats that say most hybrid owners don't buy a second one though. Not a good omen.

    Remind me to look up Jetta TCO when they get all three of them out.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    I hear you. Short term goal for the Jetta TDI is 250,000 miles. The second TB/WB change is due in 22,000 miles, or @ 200,000 miles. I am even thinking about changing the lifetime transmission fluid. The second head lamp (passenger side) went out within the last 6 months, so I would not change them both when one goes out. Glad I have skinny hands.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,439
    I think the 50 to 75 times are more important but you rarely see that marketed.

    If we compared a gas to diesel in that segment, RPMs would also have to be taken into consideration. Those worthless little 4 cylinder gas engines have to scream to high RPMs and down shift to match the diesel performance. Then you are sucking gas like crazy with the DI gasser and it is likely Premium. Even big gas V8s do not come close to the torque of the V6 diesels until you get into the very expensive Turbo V8s. If you don't mind a $40k hit for a fire breathing V8 and the extra gas, the ML63 AMG is the one for you.

    The ML V6 gas has 273 ft-lbs of torque, compared to 455 ft-lbs in the Diesel model. For an insignificant $1700 premium. If you are looking for the most bang for your buck, it is hard to beat a diesel model when offered.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    introduce the Jetta hybrid

    I can guarantee failure for that one. For many reasons.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    it is likely Premium

    Didn't ruking1 just say only 9% of the gas fleet uses premium?

    Gassers fell behind mostly because fuel was so cheap it didn't really matter until recently.

    Nowadays, though, Volvo, Hyundai, Ford, Kia, Mazda, and GM all make DI gas turbos that run on regular fuel just fine.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Introduce the Jetta hybrid

    I can guarantee failure for that one. For many reasons.


    What if they wind up with a diesel hybrid?
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    On this thread anyway, it has been pretty well established that most folks are essentially brainwashed to chose the higher cost options when it comes to cost per mile driven (CPMD) fuel. Even if they are NOT brainwashed, most models and years do not have a valid diesel engine option comparison to chose among like models. So 95% of the folks will chose RUG/PUG (9% ) over diesel, despite

    RUG/PUG being 33% to 44 % more expensive than diesel.

    Sidebar puts: corner store prices @ RUG 4.09 /PUG 4.29 /ULSD 4.35 (it should be obvious that diesel sells for more than RUG/PUG Of course it would be 4.25 if the fuel tax was the same as RUG/PUG. Funny how ULSD is taxed more for being CLEANER 30 ppm, nominally delivered @ the pumps @ 5 to 10 ppm than RUG/PUG 30 to 90 ppm sulfur)

    VW 2009 TDI 39.6 mpg=.1098 cents CPMD / gasser 25.7=.159 cents CPMD/ T 29.4=.1459 cents CPMD

    The other issue of interest are real world mpg figures diesel are 54% to 35% better THAN rug/pug.

    VW pegs of late diesel yearly sales as app 20%. So one interpretation can be that of those considering VW's (aka RUG/PUG/ ULSD) 20% chose diesels, albeit given the three options. Another interesting note is that VW charges a slight to bigger premium for diesels.

    A guestion might be how would that effect the percentages if their were no premium above the engine option that uses PUG ?
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited September 2012
    If you don't mind a $40k hit for a fire breathing V8 and the extra gas, the ML63 AMG is the one for you.

    Not the one for me. For $8,000 less than the ML63, the BMW X5M has 40 more horsepower, handles twice as good and gets equally miserable gas mileage. Choice number two for me would be a Cayenne Turbo S, for a lot more money but with handling and driving dynamics that are on a different planet than the ML. AMG is very good at making muscle cars that go in a straight line.

    Or...we could all just be patient and wait for a 376 hp, 550+ ft.lb X5M Diesel that gets better fuel economy than the average V6 gas SUV: http://www.autoblog.com/2012/01/26/bmw-m-shows-off-new-diesel-powered-lineup-in-- - motion/

    In the meantime, I'm happy having an lowly X5d that runs circles around our old MDX and gets better fuel economy than my TL. That will probably be the case until about 2022.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited September 2012
    diesel hybrid?

    If they can keep the cost down to earth, I think that could be a hit.

    They're known for diesels, so there is a positive association there.

    Diesel+electric hybrid would beat any hybrid on the market for the MPG crown, and that would steal headlines.

    Gas+electric would fail. When you're asked to name a fuel efficient gas powered car, does a VW come to mind? Now name 20...still not one VW on that list.

    There's no association at all. It will not take the MPG crown, instead being a footnote on page 6 in the media.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    It is funny that you can't even bring yourself to say 37 (.33) mpg (ULSD) aka on a 550# ft of torque on a TRI turbo 3.0 L diesel ! ? ;) :sick: :shades:

    While I hope stuff like this hits our markets, holding the breath is not the best option. ;)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I don't disagree with what you wrote, but I think you're comparing the best diesels to some relatively mediocre gas engines (VW's 2.slow, 2.5l, etc), at least when it comes to gasoline fuel efficiency.

    In other words, the gas benchmark is set low.

    I think a shopper looking for an efficient car would consider the better gas engines, DI or DI-turbo, even. In those cases the advantages are far less than the 35-54% listed.

    Ex: Mazda3 SkyActiv vs. Golf TDI. Real world mileage is virtually tied, TDI only very slightly ahead.

    Depends on how you look at it, I suppose. I'd take a Gold TDI over a 2.slow or 2.5l, sure.

    But I'd shop SkyActiv or Focus SFE vs. a TDI, not a gasser Golf. There the claimed 35-54% advantage diminishes greatly.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    VW already has a gasser hybrid on the market. Not only does it sport low volume production in an already low volume MY (set @ 7.500 to 8,500 units), but there are 86 remaining units available in the US market.

    That would in no way shape or form encourage a diesel hybrid. Presumably they had made this decision and choice some years before.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Ah, no and no. It was stated very clearly the examples were a LIKE model issue, and stated several times. The 09 2.0 is a T (turbo), the 2.5 L is the "slo".

    Again you echo and reinforce my points.

    Put another way, why doesn't SKYACTIV or Ford Focus SFE have TDI's?

    (They probably do in other than US markets.)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I just don't think anyone looking for a gas hybrid even thinks about VW.

    I haven't seen a single ad for them, either.

    A diesel hybrid would write its own headlines. :shades:
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I don't disagree with what you wrote, but I think you're comparing the best diesels to some relatively mediocre gas engines

    Agreed. An interesting comparison is BMW's former 335d vs. their current 328i. EPA ratings of 23/36 vs. 22/34. In that case, the diesel advantage is - at least on paper - much less than it is in the case of the X5d vs. X5 3.5i. Add to that, the fact that the 328i is less expensive, quicker off the line and the weight advantage of the turbo 4 is more noticeable in a sport sedan.

    Sounds like I'm arguing against the 335d. Not really. Friend that has one actually gets 38-40+ mpg at 70-75 on the highway; 25+ in town. He doesn't need an engine on/off feature to get to those numbers and, once again, if he need to accelerate from 50-75, the 425 ft.lbs. of torque is ready and willing to accommodate. So, at least as far as he is concerned, in his 18 months of real world experience, he would not trade the 335d for the 328i. But it is a closer call than the VW comparison.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited September 2012
    stated very clearly the examples were a LIKE model issue

    And I don't disagree, in that context.

    But I also don't think that's how consumers shop.

    They want a fuel efficient 5 door hatch. They compare the TDI to the SkyActiv and Focus SFE.

    They would not even consider a 2.0T if fuel economy is the priority.

    Mazda does have a SkyActiv-D, they call it, just not here yet.

    Basically where we disagree is about what models get cross-shopped. My issue with your thinking is that VW would then only cannibalize itself, i.e. steal gasser sales for their TDIs.

    That's working.

    VW needs to bring new buyers to the brand, from the outside. To succeed at that, you have to also consider the better gassers as competition.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,218
    it is hard to beat a diesel model when offered.

    Yes, with strong emphasis on when offered! Basically, anything outside of the luxury market is extremely limited (as in VW only) when it comes to diesel offerings. When purchasing my Fiesta recently, there's no way I could justify purchasing a Jetta wagon at ~$10K additional cost just to obtain the extra space. Granted, I would like the extra space, but I can get along without it, and it wasn't $10,000 worth.
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    Obviously not many oems share that opinion, enough to commit the resources necessary.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    A diesel hybrid would write its own headlines.

    I don't think so. The hybrid advantage is pretty much limited to city driving and/or relatively short hops. A diesel hybrid on extended highway trips would get lower fuel efficiency than a straight diesel, correct? The electric motor would not be used at all and the added weight would be a drag to fuel efficiency.

    The revolutionary answer is, IMO, all electric as in the Tesla Model S. Unfortunately, current battery technology and economics result in a $20k premium to go from 150 mile range to a 300 mile range. For me, a 450 mile range in a $60k Model S would be the answer to our sedan needs. Enough juice to get us to our home in PA and competitive with a 5 series in price. I'm on the deposit list, but thinking that I probably don't want to spend $50k for 150 mile range or $85k for the 300 mile performance edition. Even though the latter would give my old 911S a decent run for the money.

    My guess is that if we all went to sleep for 100 years, we'd wake up with no fossil fuel cars to be found and a little nuclear cold fusion generator under our houses to supply nearly free electricity.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    ..."My issue with your thinking is that VW would then only cannibalize itself, i.e. steal gasser sales for their TDIs. "...

    I think that might be one consequence of YOUR thinking. It is not mine.

    VW has made no secret of its goal to profit and to be the number one car oem in the world. I think they realize they can not afford to be unprofitable to have the profit levels like Toyota/GM ( much lower) in their quest for the top slot. That of course presents internal challenges that really are opaque to us, the consumers.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    I would also agree. Despite all the bru ha ha, TMI, etc., etc. about hybrids, no oem of hybrids will come out and say (in plain English) it only offers @ most 20% advantage mpg wise over gassers. @ that you have to drive it in a behavioral changed way and attitude.

    Prius and Corolla have the same sized 4 cylinder engine (1.8 L) ! The Prius had to go through a few generations, redesigns and even 10 years to even come close. It even has the CVT vs Corolla's older than dirt designs. This is not even to mention the 7,900 MSRP premium.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited September 2012
    not many oems share that opinion, enough to commit the resources necessary

    And some already failed.

    X6 Active Blue Stupidity or something like that.

    Found a source:

    http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/19/bmw-x6-active-hybrid-cancelled-with-a-quickne- ss/
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Highway MPG would drop by 1 mpg, but city MPG would jump up by about 10 mpg.

    Combined weighs city driving more heavily, 55% IIRC, so combined would jump up 6 MPG or so.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    If anything I bet the diesel production cost is higher and they squeeze margins a bit to get them to market to meet CAFE standards.

    I doubt the diesels are more profitable.

    They can't thrive by only having the TDIs cannibalize their other models. They have to conquest shoppers looking at efficient competitors.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    I am not sure what you mean and what to make of your first sentence.

    I used profit in the over all sense and did not sequester diesel profits .

    Again this is your thinking. I am sure VW does not want to sell TDI's at the price of K balling VW gassers. So while I am sure some of that happens, NO oem's publishes K ball figures. So again, that is opaque to us, consumers. If anything VW wants to get both new/first car buyers, values current customers, encourages multiple vehicle ownership, and K ball other oems, but I think you know that.

    In my case if not for TDI's, I would more than likely NOT buy VW's. So in this case the consumer is a gimme. Additionally I probably will not buy another car or even oem that does not offer a diesel.

    Essentially VW needs to figure out how to improve how it is perceived in this US market. But at the same time it has gone from a less than 2.5% of US market share to 3.5% of market share a 40% improvement. I'd say they're whistling DIXIE.

    World wide, VW jockeys for positions 1,2,3. They are by far THE most profitable oem of almost any position; in percentage, volume, or any combination.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Well, if VW is aiming for profit margins, I don't think shifting more buyers to diesel purchases alone will accomplish that.

    Europe is in crisis so VW should buckle up for 2-3 years of stagnation at best, probably even drops in sales.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    In my case if not for TDI's, I would more than likely NOT buy VW's

    You just inadvertently supported my theory that people looking for an efficient car will not settle for one of VWs gassers. ;)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Well no. As I said in the post above, VW really needs to work on how it is perceived in the US markets. Due to cultural and I am sure a plethora of other reasons, they really did not understand the scope and depth of how they TRASHED themselves. Or, ... if they did, they didn't care. So using that rule of thumb, outstanding relations will lead 3 people to say positive things , and poor relations will lead 10 folks to trash talk,. SO... it is easily an uphill battle.

    TDI's 2.0 L and 3.0 L are literally bullet proof and proven for @ least a decade. Turbos are and have been long since proven and made by Garrett, the parent being Honeywell both US companies. Again, an arcane factoid, but turbos are better suited to diesels than gassers.

    So while I say I threw the dice in getting a 2003 VW, it really was more of a statisitical projection analysis and critical measurement. Upshot are the projections fulfilled in the real world. I would not get the second and third product, if I were not convinced of its durability, quality, reliability and value. It even has price performance thrown in for great measure. Believe me, I was a heartbeat away for app 5 years (and 100,000 miles ) from "junking" the 03 TDI: just BREATHE on me a reason. The additional thing is that for 2 of those years, I could literally sell the car for what I paid for it NEW !! As I have posted, it is rapidly coming up on 200,000 miles and I do not see 500,000 miles as unreasonable.

    Now, VW has taken a series of initiatives, but this starts to become arcane to consumers (folks shopping for any oem's car)

    So for the opposite reason, I would not buy a Mazda the (new) Skyactiv engines or what ever it is called: or to me, what the HELL does that mean? as it needs 5 to 10 years in the real US world for me to even consider it. Before that, they had less than efficient engines, albeit even if they were fun to drive.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Mazda started using DI a while ago, though. Not sure which model had it first, may have been the MazdaSpeed6 (launched in 2005), then the CX7, then the Speed3.

    So they have quite a bit of experience with DI.

    SkyActiv drops the turbo but if anything that makes them less complex.

    EcoBoost is more recent, I think. GM had DI in a lot of their SS models a while ago, also.

    My concern with durability relates to the EGR system. With DI only, the intake path doesn't get cleaned out by the detergents in fresh fuel.

    Toyota's port and direct injection addresses that but they have stupidly limited that engine to Lexus for now.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    you have to drive it in a behavioral changed way and attitude.

    It's nice having more HP and torque in my current minivan than my last one did, but I don't think I drive it (or the wagon) any different. I suppose I could get a bit extreme with a hybrid but I'm rarely a leadfoot anyway and don't have to replace my brakes all that often either.

    I've always been a first mile creeper in my neighborhoods, so I'd enjoy limping a hybrid along in electric-only mode until I got to the collector streets.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    That's how most normal people drive, but I don't think most Edmunds members are normal. :D
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    I dunno, seems like most people race from light to light.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Since this is a diesel thread, I am also pretty happy with VW "sub parts" (non diesel). @ 178,000 miles, there are more than half of materials left on the oem brake pads and rotors (03 Jetta TDI). The swag is for 250,000 miles (actually plus as I would not be surprised @ 300,000+ miles) on the oem brake pads and rotors. VW uses sub vendors such as Textar, Pagid, ATE.

    On a Civic, using the same drivers, same commute, the front pads and rotors lasted app 118,000 miles.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    ...I think you need to take out your digital hatchet and chop up post #6585 (and the poster). Looks like even Edmund's is susceptible to SPAM.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    The Chinese ones do slip in here now and then for a few hours. It just looks like us hosts never sleep, but sometimes we do. ;)

    Probably get more of them as their economy slows and people get more desperate for work. And we know that China's economy is slowing because....

    Dying diesel sales say China's engine slowing (Reuters)

    There's a correlation for you - more spam means cheaper diesel prices. :)
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited September 2012
    That's a masterful connection of dots. Unfortunately, I don't think there are any gas stations in DC's Chinatown area or I'd look to fill up on cheap diesel. ;)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Interesting factoid:

    As previously posted ULSD for diesel passenger vehicle fleet has a mandatory 30 ppm (nominally delivered @ 5 to 10 ppm). In US refineries LSD is produced (500 ppm to 140 ppm CA) and is EXPORTED. They get TAX credits for export (dont know where it is reflected on a P/L exactly, but in passing), I have read it is .50 cents per gal. On the consumer side .50 per gal charged to consumers (RUG/PUG and ULSD) This is in ADDITION to states fuel taxation. One can take a look at any fuel taxation chart to see how the states treat this.

    As bad as our balance of payments are (with China) , LSD is one avenue used to tip the scales. I am sure the export of coal via Warren Buffets choo choo train investments, ;) are another huge part of that effort. This China coal link was ramrodded through during the Clinton administration. I am sure H Clinton being the S of S is purely coincidental in making sure that policy continues. The repubs certainly did NOT attempt to change it.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    So do you want egg rolls wid that? :P
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    more than half of materials left on the oem brake pads and rotors

    What, do you coast to a stop at every light or something?

    Just teasing.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    What lights? ;)

    On a more serious side, the compare and contrast on consumables (VW vs Honda) is pretty stark. On the Civic @ 118,000 miles I opted for the oem (Aisin) brake pads. My ace Honda mechanic told me either oem rotors or Brembo's . So just for the fun of it I opted for Brembo's.

    Now I am NOT disappointed, as Honda from the git go "coded" me out on the faster wear consumables issue. Another example: Honda tires 74,300 miles, Jetta TDI tires 112,300 miles.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    do you want egg rolls

    No, gimme some biodiesel. Will smell like fried rice though not French fries. :)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Actually this more good natured bantering caused me to wax more philosophic. If all we do legislate and regulate for TDI's that are specified to run on UP to B100, they could delete the .50 cent charge to consumers (oh yes, I know there is no support for .50 cent per gal cheaper RUG/PUG/ULSD now is there?), export more LSD (balance the payments even more) and actually take huge bites out of existing AND potential process waste streams. They could also get creative and see whatever waste streams could be adapted.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    No stop lights would explain the lack of empathy for hybrids. ;)

    118k miles for brake pads seems fine to me, no?

    I'm not sure if I'd want to depend on 10 year old brake pads ... I guess they don't dry out like tires do, but how much do new ones cost? For my NA Miata I paid $17 for a pair of rear pads. LOL
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    The operational parameters has long been known to me (2002/2003 time frame when the 2003 Prius was in the running for the commute vehicle). Per 100,000 miles gal consumption would be 2,222 (03 Prius), 2105 (04 Prius), 2632 (04 Civic) GAL saved should be obvious. However it would have taken me 12,000 to 13,000 more to save those gals. ($2,155. @ 4.09 per gal rug)

    So yes if one finds oneself in the sweet spot for the Prius's electrical operation, One would be less than thrifty NOT to get it. A dumb example would be a pizza delivery driver based in Georgetown. (yeah like one could even live there)

    10 to 12 MY's later, you really have to wonder why it took so long for inner city taxi cab fleets ( NYC/DC area) to embrace hybrid vehicles. Keep in mind they can write off ALL costs and to boot even probably get tax credits. Speaks volumes.

    Other than those parameters, one is obliged to flog a 1.5 to 1.8 L engine. The 1.9/2.0 L TDI is WAY more fun !

    It would be interesting to compare how long Prius pads and rotors do last.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Regenerative braking should make them last longer than they otherwise would, if anything.

    That could be offset by the heavy batteries, though.

    There's a cab company in DC called EnviroCab and they tend to use Camry hybrids. Prius would make more sense IMHO.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited September 2012
    Honda tires 74,300 miles, Jetta TDI tires 112,300 miles.

    And to think that at the Porsche driving event that I attended last week, they replace the tires on the 911S's after the equivalent of about 100 miles on the track. At a cost of $2,000 per set. Better them than me.

    I could get 50,000 miles per set out of my old Maxima tires by rotating every 5,000-10,000 miles, but these were 15" H-rated 60 series tires and 90% of my driving back then was smooth highway. I don't think there is a car - or even SUV - that I've looked at recently that isn't down to 50 series tires or lower. Our X5d has 19" 255/50 that are estimated by BMW dealer to last 30-35k miles. We will likely replace them with non-run flats that should last a little longer.

    I'm not sure that brake pads that last 300k miles or tires that last 100k miles are going to give you stopping distances or handling that I consider acceptable. But they are "thrifty".
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    http://green.autoblog.com/2012/09/26/vw-golf-bluemotion-concept-is-a-diesel-look- er-worth-73-5-mpg/

    Very nice update, this is the best looking of the recent generations, IMHO.

    Wonder how the EPA will score it? 15% better than the old one, they say.

    It's lighter than older Golfs, has stop-start with battery regen

    Valuable updates.

    13.2 gallon tank is a step back, currently it's 14.5 gallons. BOO!

    Still beats the 11.9 of the Prius and measly 8.9 gallons in the Prius C.

    Now that's the 1.6l euro model, I wonder what we will get? And will the gas tank be upsized for the US?
This discussion has been closed.