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

1173174176178179473

Comments

  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    edited April 2013
    Yes the Prius does better in the city as he can get over 100 mpg.

    That is just incredible. I find it hard to believe even that many owners boast 70+ in the city. And my reason is simply this: I find it hard to believe that any energy regenerative device can spend more time putting energy back into the batteries suring slowdowns and stops, than those same batteries expel in order to get the car to move again after each of those slowdowns or stops.

    What I can believe is that on a previously charged (right to full) battery, could start its day and do the equivalent of 100 mpg, but only for part of that day. The first part, because there just isn't any free ride as Toyota (for example) would attempt to have you believe. To my mind, it is against physics for the regenerative process to work equally with the level of energy going out. Can it be done for a short while? Yup..but only until the batteries need to be rejuvenated back to full without using gas, and the only way an owner could do that is if they drove all day down a hill steep enough that the batteries got recharged from regeneration at a level that the owner only had to press the brakes, or coast, at just the right rate that the batteries get their juice and they are ready to go again.

    But of course the mpg you are REALLY getting is the average on the entire return trip which includes going UP that same hill all the way home..and of course we know that any battery reserves are quickly used up in that scene. Then you're on ga$.

    edit - in fact..the only way that the better of the hybrids do as well as they do in the city, speaks volumes as to how over-driven (for lack of the right terminology right now) the regenerative system is. i.e. Turning heat that would otherwise be used to brake, or momentum in the case of coasting, back into electricity. When I said about physics...I guess this regen process does speak to just how efficiently and well-sorted they have it. The lesson? There is amazing regen energy potential to slow a car down. But it doesn't negate my first point...how can it spend more time starting the car, than stopping it? The balancing act is further decided by the use of so many draws of electricity in between lights...A/C, heater, lights etc. The only thing the batteries can do in that case, is, little by little, lose the battle.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Indeed, but to have to state the blatantly obvious, either is the sound of one hand clapping, to wit Honda Accord, Prius C diesels?

    So for example, that is why the VW T/MDX gasser supercharged gasser/hybrid/diesel is very important. I mean even I will say BFD in getting 32 in a VWT diesel IF there were not a gasser (like model, point a/b, etc etc. 20 mpg to 18/19) for the comparison.

    I would like to see Wayne do a 85 mpg Prius C and whatever in a Prius C diesel. IF the Prius C diesel equivalent were available, I am sure he could do far better than his posted 85 mpg in a Prius C diesel.

    So for example if Wayne;s BEST was 84 mpg in a VW Passat diesel, are you REALLY saying he could probably do better than that in a Passat gasser: all things being equal? Now I would say NOT, he could probably do far better in a diesel over gasser, but then some would consider me biased. ;) One can easily see, I am not the one trying to cook the books.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    The battery is very aggressive at charging itself back up. It pretty much finishes a trip at about the same charge as it starts.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Took a little road trip around the area today, decent results:

    image
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Its all good !!

    I would say the indicators are good that I could probably do a 42/43 mpg on the VW T TDI, and not the wildly optimistic 39.9 mpg (on the downgrade );) given the speeds (and 88 miles) on your computer hud, aka 50 mph.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    edited April 2013
    I suspect the trip computer is optimistic, real mileage might be closer to 38-40 (MB forums claim optimistic numbers) - but still, for a car of that size and comfort, and with diesel 2 cents cheaper than premium here - wonderful.

    Pic is low quality, cellphone in a dark garage - it's just the center gauge rather than HUD (MB doesn't have HUD).
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaMember Posts: 16,217
    Heh, yeah, decent! Better FE than I get in my car, and twice the size! Sounds good to me....
    2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    ..."Btw, what does SOS DD mean?"...

    Same old stuff, different day (a vernacular reference to consistency- boring or boring consistency) We have a few posters on this site that have consistently posted total disbelief as if 32/42/50 were totally outlier to outright LIES.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Indeed ! It is a bit like asking the time off of two watches.

    However to me, I normally take pen and ink/ miles/gal calculations to heart. In the real world where (YOU) I do travel, I do not want to be stuck in 104 degrees off the side off the road in the desert because of an optimistic calculation, albeit computer or pen/ink calculations. ;) With my further luck, they would probably bring RUG/PUG instead of D2 :sick:

    However, I do fill a lot more when the low fuel light/s and buzzer/s goes off. :shades: :lemon: I even sometimes don't fuel when I start a 210 miles one way R/T's !!!!!Indeed, some times I don't fuel at all with a 420 miles R/T.

    On a TLC (gasser) that does get between 14-17 mpg (in that same R/T) it would be DUMB if I didn't fuel @ least twice if not 3 times.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    I'll admit I get a little annoyed when it is below 1/4 and usually always fill up by the time I hit 1/2 (maybe a gasser habit), but I did run it til the low fuel light came on this time.

    I've always relied on quick estimates or a trip computer. I can't imagine the computer being off by more than 5-10% anyway.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    While one can do things to make it wildly optimistic+/-, they are pretty close to spot on.
  • KCRamKCRam Mt. Arlington NJMember Posts: 3,516
    ...a quick message :)

    We are making plans to improve our Forums! Whether you're a long time member or new to the community, we need your input. Please take a few minutes to complete the Edmunds Forums Survey.

    https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/EdmundsForums

    kcram - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Host
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Hypermilers like Gerdes have all kinds of tricks. One I like is driving with one set of tires on the painted white line - it's usually smoother and offers less rolling resistance. I do that all the time on my bike. :shades:
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Indeed "hyper milers" really are a whole different "bred of cat" than "professional types" like the Taylor's . While I was following Gerdes when he used to post on Edmunds.com (years ago now) his central message was ANYONE can employ some to a myriad of techniques to get better mpg, aka cut RUG/PUG usage. So even if one is on his detractor side, he deserves some to MANY kudo's !!!!

    Indeed the structurally obvious thing is that if one uses D2, the structural (NON) use of RUG/PUG is 100% or ZERO USE !!! ???? ;)

    At that time, the overwhelming majority of folks were gasser users. (98% +) So really who the likely audience was and still IS/ARE apparent, despite app 150% growth in the diesel population (2% or less- diesels TO 5% to +more). So in that sense, it is no mystery why he still has not done a diesel challenge. Audience % and volume wise, WHO CARES !?

    So for example, I have cut my RUG/PUG usage a MINIMUM of 43% yet, same question, WHO CARES !! ??? That has been answered many times over, especially on this board.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    Is that a coffee cup below the high beam indicator? If so, does it come on every 2 hours? 2 hours is apparently the key hour when we start to lose concentration etc without a stop..no matter how well rested we may have been when we left.

    Great freakin' mileage. Just spectacular. So that 50 mph is your overall average over 88 miles right? The 1;46 sorta suggests that but I didn't get the calculator out. I'm thinking you set out to see just how good can this thing do if I set the cruise at 52 mph.

    And like you say..a pretty nice place to be while you're enjoying this fuel economy..errr....that is if they conquered the rattle??
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    Ya, I like that one too. Gotta hand it to him to discover that, but it makes sense.. but only if the lane isn't truck rutted too badly...otherwise he might spend a lot of time 'climbing the hill' (the centre of the lane) to stay on track. Another factor that would work against him in that condition is increasing ground clearance which would put further wind drag on the under carriage. Might more than offset his friction gains from line runnin'.
    But on a smooth level lane, it's gotta help..
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    edited April 2013
    The coffee cup is "attention assist", after a certain amount of time or errors (it checks for things like weaving in a lane etc) it will chime and give a message suggesting a break. The feature can be disabled, but I have all the nannies on (car also has blind spot monitoring and lane keeping assist, which can be goofy, but maybe helpful sometime, and I am still just basking in modern tech).

    That mileage is from a loop from east of Seattle up 405 to southern Snohomish county down I5 to south King county then up 167/405 back home. It was probably 90% highway cruising, speeds of all kinds from city crawls to the cruise set at 67. My head would explode if I set the cruise at 52 on a highway :shades:

    And as far as I can tell, the rattle is cured. This drive today was kind of a test, and I had a couple things to do anyway. Beautiful sunny day here, relatively relaxing drive even with traffic, no doubt helped by a comfortable mellow car.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Maybe that's why the dopes here in bike lanes straddle the lane.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    I hope so. I wonder why these cars are rated so low by EPA - I'm beating that by like 25%. Maybe I am a smoothe driver than their assumptions.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited April 2013
    Part of it is showing off that you can keep two wheels on the 4" wide paint strip block after block. When I do stop for stop signs, I try to avoid putting a foot down too. Another part of the "code" of cycling. :shades:

    "Diesel" exposure this week was boarding the plane on the tarmac. The jet fuel was pretty heavy on both ends of that leg of the flight. If gasser or diesel cars put out that much odor in a parking lot, people would be up in arms.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    ..."I wonder why these cars are rated so low by EPA - I'm beating that by like 25%. "...

    As you probably know and I have posted, but more importantly the regulators have "cooked the books" @ the behest of Toyota, ala result of the 2004 Prius experience/s on a older but still working AND reliable EPA test/s and standards: that in effect, favor hybrids.

    Now some would say this might be "conspiratorial. But in effect, the tests were probably "refried" (as in refried beans or twice cooked pork) due to the fact that hybrids ARE part and parcel of the US market and regulatory policies. Hybrids (hybrid policy) did NOT exist when the 40+ year old EPA test was first conceived and executed. In addition, (probably out of earshot, not for consumer consumption) it was said and Toyota probably knew it had to redesign and adjust its EPA ratings of 60 C / 50 H, when most were getting 43/45 mpg. Ergo, testing attempts to shown a positive (if obviously SLANTED) light on a portion of THE policy.

    Now through a convoluted set of logics and deductions, hybrids are favored while diesels are not directly lied about. I can cite any numbers of examples, but they are not sound bite able.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Do cyclists think people are impressed by that? Or does it seem worth the risk putting yourself closer to a 4'10" frazzled mommy hauling her devilspawn in a 6000lb behemoth? They always straddle the line here - makes me want to jerk my car over a little, just to scare them :shades:

    No real emissions controls on planes for sure.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    They must assume diesel drivers only make jackrabbit starts and have an inefficient set of gear ratios or something. If my numbers from yesterday are right, I beat EPA by a full 10mpg - without trying.

    Wouldn't surprise me at all if the books were cooked a bit in favor of the darling. They'd probably rate cars with some kind of surveillance/tracking tech built in even higher.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    EPA raw data for highway can be 40% higher than the dumbed down number than is published.

    For example the raw data for the MB E350 blutec is 45.6 mpg.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I am a tad confused by your post. EVERY new car sticker has both its EPA ratings : C/H and the RANGES of both C/H.

    I do not have access to the MB E 350 BlueTec data.

    So for example, the VW T TDI 2012 lists EPA FCE @ 19 C (range 15-23) 28 H (range 23-33)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    edited April 2013
    Now you have access.

    http://fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml

    The link above has the raw data files for the EPA numbers (columns M,N,O). These raw numbers are what the government uses for CAFE. The raw numbers are what used to be published on the window stickers until they dumbed them down in the 80's and even further a few years ago. My '80 Scirocco was rated at 41 mpg highway (raw and on window sticker). On a modern window sticker it would be rated under 30 mpg.

    Under similar conditions (listed on site) one can hit the raw data numbers. My '13 Accord 6MT is a raw 48 mpg on the highway and I have been able to duplicate that.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Well it does bring up the issue of a diesel 13 Honda Accord @ a min of 30% better !! (62.4 mpg) ;) 48 mpg leaves a lot on the table. :lemon: It should be obvious why they do not let it in the country if someone like you can get 48 on a US gasser version)

    Edumunds.com lists the above ( 13 Honda Accord M/T 6 speed-yours) EPA @ 24/34

    I think the mpg numbers do not detract from the central issue that (like model) diesels have a min of 30% mpg advantage (many others but I would just be repeating myself)
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Yep the Edmunds numbers are correct. All cars should beat EPA highway numbers pretty handily.

    I sure would have loved to get the 2.2 liter diesel Accord (specially in a wagon). They were going to bring it but cancelled when only the stick could meet emissions.

    Don't worry I will beat 48 quite handily when the car is broken in and the temps warm up - we have had 2 feet of snow in the last 2 weeks. Had less than 1k miles when I did that number. ;)
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Indeed, I have no doubt. But the central issue remains the central issue. (diesel advantages across the range and spectrum) ;)

    So for example, in the 2012 VW Touareg gasser vs TDI: 60% better fuel mileage with the DIESEL.

    Side benefit: 100% NON use of RUG/PUG . :surprise:

    Not to cap on you, but if you went from diesel BACK to RUG/PUG, you have in effect, gone back over to the DARK side Luke !!! Whose your Daddy? :) You have (in your own small way) tilted the scales BACK favor of INCREASED rug/pug consumption, even as it has precipitously dropped a lot already.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    >> Do cyclists think people are impressed by that?

    Nah, but some other cyclists are. Kind of like most people really don't care what someone else's mpg is, whether it's diesel or gas.
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    edited April 2013
    flightnurse, indeed, i didn't say my cruze got horrible mpg. to the contrary, 34 mpg out of a gasser with leadfoot driving is GRRRRREAT, nothing to complain about. (my basis for comparison is a V8 car which gets 21 mpg, and diesels which get 46 mpg.)
    also my cruze has the 1.8T no-turbo rather than the slightly decontented/lightweight/taller-geared turbo cruze ECO.
    thank you for your consideration.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaMember Posts: 31,450
    Part of it is showing off that you can keep two wheels on the 4" wide paint strip block after block.

    I have found they like to ride 4 abreast on our narrow two lane highways. Forcing drivers to cross the double yellow to get around them. The bike lane on most of that very heavily ridden road is less than a foot wide. It is part of the regular route run several times a year. I will be glad when they start taxing by the mile and include bike riders. ;-)
  • eliaselias Member Posts: 2,209
    VW is awesome with all their drivetrain choices.

    Lately I'm liking the upcoming TDI 6-speed VW iBeetle.
    (it looks like the VW Golf GTD isn't going to be happening in USA any year soon.)
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Actually these days with the cost of living and devolved economy, many people care more about mileage than in a long time.

    I bet if I drove my car on that line for a long period, I could get a ticket. Maybe it should go both ways. Probably wouldn't help my mileage either ;)
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Interesting stuff, thanks - I had forgotten about the lowering of mileage claims. Makes sense in a way - I think my previous car was rated at 23 highway, trip computer would get up to maybe 26.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Well, a few of our old friends up here are driving hybrids, but the folks we are staying with have a ML 500, Explorer, Suburban and a F-450 in the driveway. Sure looks like most folks are driving SUVs and pickemups.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 55,797
    Overmonied oldsters in flyover country?

    ML is available in a diesel - IMO one would be dumb not to choose it. Same for the F-series.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    (it looks like the VW Golf GTD isn't going to be happening in USA any year soon.)

    Yes that is a disappointment to me also. If I had another one to get it probably would be (now anyways) VW Golf GTD. Fintail and my sister almost have me getting interested in the MB 350 BlueTec. (Fintail's Bluetec- my sister could care less about bluetec)
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaMember Posts: 31,450
    Sure looks like most folks are driving SUVs and pickemups.

    Makes sense to me, I say Ban The Sedans :-)

    Just looking at the cost of our gas so far on this trip makes me want a diesel SUV even more. We have traveled 1589 miles so far. Gas cost so far $311. A new Jeep GC diesel rated at 30 MPG highway would have used far less fuel Even figuring at the high price so far of $3.89 per gallon I would have over $100 more still in my pocket. That is with diesel averaging 60 cents more per gallon across TX and AZ.

    The turbo-diesel is said to average 30 miles per gallon in highway driving. Its driving range exceeds 730 miles, the auto maker says. This compares with available Grand Cherokee engine including a 3.6-liter V-8 (17 mpg city/26 mpg highway) and the thirsty 5.7-liter V-8 (14/22).

    Which means I would now be on my 3rd tank instead of 6th. Easier to pick the good prices when you have more range. My highest price gas was $3.49 because I did not want to risk another 50 miles where we filled at $3.11 per gallon.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited April 2013
    Well, yeah, it's flyover country unless you are driving to Fairbanks. :-). At the ANC airport heading to Chicago on the redeye tonight back to the lower 48.

    One of my friends with the Prius (it's his wife's car) has a big pickup for towing and a tractor for plowing his longish driveway. I asked him what happened to his (used) diesel pickup that he got in late 99 before we moved. That's the one that ate starters and wouldn't start in the cold. He dumped it within a year.

    The tractor is a Kubota, not sure which model he has. Probably a B series, which is a diesel.

    Gas was $3.84, diesel $4.13 at most stations. Didn't see a premium sign.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    The oem stated tank capacity for the VWT is 26.4 gals. So when I get 32 mpg R/T, the range can be as high as 845 miles. If I wanted to make max miles per tank an issue, (I don't nor have a desire to) I would drive to get closer to 40+ mpg. In that case, range would extend (logically) to 1,056 miles. If I maintained Fintails speed of 50 mph, I would swag closer to 45 mpg. Again swagging, the mileage would be closer to 1,188.

    Your post really highlights an interesting portal into the real issue/s on the so called size discussion. While I do not have access to the so called "real" industry data, as say Edmunds.com would most likely have, I have gleaned through various sources that the so called "LARGE" vehicle segment is really more like 75%+ or majority of the passenger vehicle fleet. "SUV's/CUV", etc., are fully 12%. Needless to say there are some overlaps, so the percentages may or may not be exactly 100%.

    So as I understand you asking: why get 15 mpg to slightly better in the large car segments when some of the LARGEST of those can get 30 +mpg? To me a VERY logical question. Defacto, what the industry has done and folks overwhelmingly BUY is/are the EXACT opposite. To wit why do 30 mpg +(and move up) when you can do 15 mpg + or move UP from there. Of course the enviro cons vilify the size and lower mpg, but really have done a BANG job in helping to keep the cars that actually DO get great mpg OUT of the US markets: like a 30 mpg Jeep diesel !? Of course, all the while, they have been part and parcel of "the chicken little" story of catastrophically running out of RUG/PUG fuel, even as it was sure to leak out we are almost exponentially beyond the middle east in ALL the various energy resources, oil and gas. We have additionally beyond abundant coal resources.

    So for another example, I have done the SOS DD trip (210 miles one way /420 miles R/T any number of times in 1990's TLC's. R/T mpg's seem to be app 15/16 mpg (range 14 to 17). So given a (last trip) posting of 32 mpg on the similar weight vehicle (4974#'s vs 4,800#s. The VW T TDI gets 113% BETTER fuel mileage. There are some on this board of the attitude that is really not a big deal at all (range of 14 to 17 mpg vs range of 29 to 39 mpg, again similar weight) !!! Me? I laught out loud and wonder how that attitude can be expressed with a straight face !?

    SIDEBAR: But then, BO POTUS got elected and ... RE elected. example DOMESTIC terrorism has long been defeated !! Yup, Boston is NOT in the US ? Or is the BO administration ok with the "event" as only a majority of liberals were either killed or injured? (one China national, a BU grad student? and an 8 year old child could not vote anyway) GEEZ. Or perhaps is liberalism coming home to roost? :( ok getting off the political soap box.)

    The narrative on the enviro cons side would range from get rid of that sized vehicle to close the road so you cant get there with a petro product. They would of course be fine with a tight coffin getting 15 to 19 mpg. I say this as Toyota Camry's Honda Accord's actually qualifed for the "cash for clunkers" program during the height of the economic crash and as a consequence poorest yearly US passenger vehicle sales, or should I say DEPTH? Indeed the rules allowed one to get cash for a Toyota Camry to buy a US made pick up truck that in all probablility got WORSE mpg than the Camry !! ??
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    ..."One of my friends with the Prius (it's his wife's car) has a big pickup for towing and a tractor for plowing his longish driveway. "...

    Indeed that would cause me to ask why doesn't Prius build a model that one can hook up a plow and tow with?

    In upstate NY (39 years ago) we used to have PLENTY of no start problems with diesel/ gas/electric plug in/ propane towing vehicles. To say ONLY diesels have this issue is NOT within my experience set.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaMember Posts: 64,482
    Diesels can be tough to start from 20F on down. You do need to take various precautions to prevent this, but it's not all that hard to do those things.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Then in that sense, we agree.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    "If I maintained Fintails speed of 50 mph, I would swag closer to 45 mpg."

    for some reason I see no rich text options today

    Anyway, I'm not so sure. Consider that you both have the same displacement turbo diesel. I think they have similar bore and stroke configs also. Yet we know that apparently the MB version gets a bit more mpg than VW's due to the rating of the ML vs the T. Both weigh much the same and are of pretty similar configuration...AWD's, height, grd clearance, size, 8 sp vs 7, probably a bit lower final drive gearing in the T etc.. So all this suggests that the MB 3.0 has greater efficiency potential than the VW 3.0. And if that isn't convincing enough, consider that to compare your Touareg being what it is, to Fintails car being what IT is...only 2 WD, a CAR, lighter etc and to suggest that you can do as well or even better it...well that doesn't quite connect the dots..

    Don't get me wrong, I'm a pretty big T fan. For what it is, it gets incredible FE, but no matter how great it is, FT's E350 will always be able to do better driven like for like.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Indeed for me to maintain that speed, I would be fighting road hypnosis. So I am not predisposed to even attempt this, even for the benefit of this august board. In terms of the over all post, again the question might be asked WHO CARES !! ?? They really do not want cars like the MB and VW T to get really good fuel mileage, when the so called environmental options get same to less mpg.
    The more direct (but lesser yet more costly) comparison: Highlander(19.6)/Highlander Hybrid (24.9) CUV. vs VW T TDI 27.9 mpg.

    I am sure if we compare the Bluetec/TDI engine specifications side by side they are pretty close. The other issue would be the 7 speed vs 8 speed A/T comparison. Indeed I am running @ a disadvantage (advantage in chain control) with the "all wheel drive" AWD. The weight differences (+800-900#'s) works against the Touareg. In the ML350 it also has a hybrid CVT transmission. How that should would could affect mpg I really don't know and am curious.

    I do know that the 39.8 mpg is more than doable on the downgrade out of the mountains. But % wise that speed @ that mpg is only 13% of the total R/T. So the task would be do do 50 mph (AVG) for the 87% rest of the trip. ZZZZZZZZZ! ? GEEZZZZ Where is Gerdes when you want him? So yes I also would bet with the e350 bluetec on the mpg issue especially if Gerdes has mastered the intricacies of the TDI and transmissions.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    edited April 2013
    does anyone else have diminished formatting options today?

    I have no Bold, Italic, bar choices etc etc

    have they made changes at Edmunds or is the problem on my end?

    It says "Text formatting can be applied to preselected text."

    And there is a CLOSE ALL box, but no Open All box. Something is up..or down..
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited April 2013
    Right now there seems to be diminished capacity across a few sites I visit, including edmunds.com.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Member Posts: 2,345
    well that is even more odd. I thought the problem would be either mine or Edmunds. So you have no Italic quote ability here, for example?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Affirmative.
This discussion has been closed.