Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I forget the unintended consequences law that makes people use more stuff when it gets cheaper. Conservation at its finest.
VW diesel pickup
Peugeot 504 diesel
Mercedes 300 diesel
All driven many miles.
Also, I drive my brother's VW Jetta TDI now and then, so I know what the modern ones can do.
Anecdotal evidence isn't evidence. The plural of anecdote is...anecdotes...it's not evidence. Ask a scientist, not a lawyer. :P
I like to use www.truedelta.com for real world gas mileages when I can.
Do I believe the EPA numbers? Yes I do. I think they are real world, "bell curve" numbers that cut outliers from the equation.
I can't rely on what a neighbor gets for MPG. I want to know what 80% of all Americans driving a particular make are getting for MPG.
As far as being a "messenger", here's the news---
Forbes reports that diesels now occupy 3% of the market, and an optimistic report from the Diesel Technology Forum, a Washington D.C.-based nonprofit states that diesels will perhaps capture 10% of the market by the year 2020 if all goes well.
That's a good market jump, relatively speaking, due mainly to automakers offering Americans more options in the next few years.
But these projections are nowhere near the percentages for the European market.
My opinion is that many buyers are steered away from diesels because of
1. higher fuel prices in some areas
2. complicated exhaust system technologies
3. premium price you pay for a diesel engine
4. Not a wide range of choices
5. bad image created by American pickup trucks
As for addressing these issues:
I can't do anything about fuel prices. They are what they are
I have to tell people that urea will cost them about $200 in 20,000 miles on their Bluetec. It is what it is
I can encourage people that premium prices for a diesel engine might not be the case in the near future
Ditto for "range of choices"
I can dispel the prejudice against diesels caused by pickup trucks by telling them that modern diesel passenger cars are far more sophisticated and don't sound or smell like that.
Now in Shifty's world of metrics, there is a certain amount of truth or more specifically rubber ruler ness. It certainly did not stop my relative from buying a vehicle that averages 21 mpg. Nor is that really "BAD" just... LESS. Truthfully, he really didn't care that I got 32 mpg (in that R/T), nor I, that he got 21 mpg. We each fueled up and "paid the prices" !! ??
Now on those occasions that we buy each other's "TANKs," he gets the better deal (he would buy 7 gals less or save $28 !!!!! :shades: I should equalize compensate, obviously have him throw in a high end steak dinner in addition to tanks.
Further, i have no radical Islamic like thoughts of converting or Jihading the 95% of RUG/PUG passenger fleet owners to more like 55%+ DIESEL (as a short term goal) and establishing diesel LAW.
Actually a BO admin like "spin" is happening in that on fueleconomy.com, real world Acura MDX users are showing 13.5 mpg. Real world VW T TDI users post 27.9. The difference here is of course more like 14.4 mpg BETTER or 107% better.
So let us use THEIR mpg figures, (so mine aren't even in the mix). 24,000 miles/13.5 mpg to 27.9 mpg gives gallonage of 1,778 gals vs 860 gals. 918 gals MORE PUG consumed. @ 4.07 per gal that is (more like) $3,736 MORE (per year.) So over the course of a 5 year loan, assuming 24,000 miles per year, that is 18,681 MORE for fuel. Something about using less "gallonage" and costing less per mile driven seems to be very very complicated.
Basically, my only reason to defend diesels, is a selfish one spurred on by more than just economics but that does play a large role nonetheless. If more people out there spoke up and demanded: WE WANT DIESEL OPTIONS IN EVERYTHING! Then that means I would be able to get what I perceive to be the perfect vehicle for my purposes, which are fairly specific it would seem, compared to the Jones's.
There was a time that I wanted what I wanted only also had the extra PITA of trying to find it with a stick. Now I am even relaxed in that regard since age and genes are dictating stiffer knees etc, although I still would prefer to have a proper 6 or 7 segmented geared trans as opposed to a CVT.
That's it! In a nut shell!
But on these shores it seems to be a next to impossible request. And by the time what I want makes it here (or rather..is allowed here) they'll probably have my license under the microscope due to age or eyesight/health limitations..
The flip side to choice is whether your fumes may yet give me lung cancer in spite of additional fuel and exhaust controls in the developed world. (WHO pdf file)
The diesel appeal to me is that most 4 and 6cyl (non tuned) modern cars are really bland. There's no powertrain appeal. Unless one is buying a tuned performance model, I don't see the reason to want a normal gasoline engine. I think I enjoy my diesel MB more than I would the gasoline equivalent, and not just for mileage. But that might just be a car enthusiast thing, which isn't common among the average buyer.
That was me. And if you don't feel the EPA is playing games with the figures, why did they change them to more accurately represent the Prius? Why did they mess with the figures on gas and diesel vehicles when they were closer to correct than they are now? How do you know they are based on any kind of scientific criteria? IF they were screwed up in the past they can be just as screwed up now. EPA needs to bug out and let people do their own due diligence. As questions of owners to get the straight scoop. When I thought the GMC Acadia would be a decent vehicle I asked two owners. Both rarely break 16 MPG. They are supposed to get 19 combined according to the flawed EPA tests. From the owners on Fuelly.com the fellow I talked to was doing pretty well. Some are only getting 14 MPG. That is down in my Sequoia group.
Take a look at 780 2010 Jetta owners reporting on almost 17 million miles driven. Average 37.5 MPG. You can trust the Feds to be honest. That is why we are philosophically opposites.
I really would not care if there was a nickel per year savings on fuel. Sticking it to the Feds and the oil companies has a much higher value to me. :P
I just went by a station in Woodward OK that was selling diesel for $3.54 and RUG for $3.55. Best price for diesel this cross country trip. Most were selling diesel at $3.89. Highest price paid for gas so far was $3.65 in Kentucky.
Why do you HAVE to tell them that? You are creating a false image of what AdBlue actually costs. Do you tell people if the buy a Lexus the dealers will rip them off to the tune of $900 for a simple 30k mile routine maintenance. If you were not so negative about diesels, which you are without a doubt. You would tell them the dealer is likely to rip you off on a simple Adblue fill. You can buy enough for 20k miles for under $50 and pour it in yourself. Or you can buy a VW or BMW and get it as part of the maintenance package. As a spokesperson for a vehicle website, you put forth a very negative image of vehicles you decide you don't like. With very little basis in fact.
"One part of that emissions system is the special tank that injects urea-based "diesel exhaust fluid" into the exhaust stream to neutralize nitrous oxides emissions. It costs about $125 to replenish the fluid and must be done once every 10,000 miles."
Maybe Fintail can give us a quote on doing his d-i-y and at the dealer.
That is true. When I bought my new 2005 Passat TDI, diesel was at an all time high. The dealer went way below invoice. Enough that it more than paid for our plane ticket to Portland to pick it up and drive home. 13 Months later I sold it for $3000 more than I paid for it. When diesel prices are high, that is the time to buy a diesel. People are too stupid to know that diesel prices fluctuate summer and winter differently than gas prices.
Some EU countries tax diesel higher than gas like most states here do. They pay more than double what we do. Their diesels are not priced a lot higher than gassers either. A VW in the UK is a couple hundred bucks more from the TDI option. Same as they used to be here before all the added emissions stuff.
Now this is really a DIY operation !! It is about as difficult as pouring windshield washer fluid into its container. Now if Shifty wants to pay some guy $100 to 500 per hour to do that, well it surely is his money.
Amazon has it for $4.94 per gallon. I hear many truck stops are selling for around $3 per gallon. If you want to pay MB about $7 per gallon to pour in AdBlue, hey it is your money. Why don't you hire someone to fill your diesel tank as well in case you might get diesel on your hands? Too bad Shifty does not consider $200 chump change over 20,000 miles.
Same folks who put diesel in their gas tank and vice versa come to think of it.
See and here I am OVERPAYING !!!
..."The national U.S. Diesel Exhaust Fluid (DEF) pump price held steady for the third consecutive month in February 2013, at $2.79 per gallon, according to DEF Tracker. Prior to this period, the national average has only held steady month-to-month once, in April 2012."...
link title
So for the convenience of having DEF in 2.5 gal containers, I am paying 11.11 vs 6.97 bulk/dispensed !!!!
Having been in the army and in local politics, I can assure you that the government does lots of stupid things. They are usually not cleverly evil. They just do dumb stuff.
What someone "tells you" they get for MPG might be true, but it's not a testing procedure. There are no controls, so it's "anecdotal information".
For instance, the EPA tells you the average MPG for a 2010 Jetta TDI is 34 mpg.
True Delta tells you it's about 39!
But is EPA "wrong"? Probably not, because when you analyze the True Delta reports, most of the people are driving about 75% highway. The EPA highway mileage is 41 mpg.
The few Jetta TDI owners who report only 20% highway driving are getting....35 mpg. Bingo! Very close to EPA averaging.
So yeah, I don't take EPA as gospel, but 'close enough' for real world estimates.
I will get LESS than you in MPG, every time, because of where I live and how I drive.
And you cannot see the error in that thinking? The only vehicle the EPA was getting flack over was the Prius. So they change the testing across the board. If the socalled scientific tests were inaccurate before, why should I believe they are accurate now? And the EPA only tests a few vehicles. They leave it to the automakers to test. How convenient is that?
I can assure you that the government does lots of stupid things. They are usually not cleverly evil. They just do dumb stuff.
Stupid: YES, Evil: YES, Clever rarely. Latest example: IRS targetting Conservatives and the Tea Party. I could give you examples of the EPA being bought, but I am sure you are well aware of those cases. Go ahead and blindly trust your government to tell the truth. I trust my neighbors when it comes to mileage estimates.
I really think you should post that link where the EPA lays out the test specifications ( old and new) to which you refer, not just the readers digest summary by for example edmunds.com. I have and I assume other folks like Gagrice have been trying to find it and read it. IF it is out there, it is hidden quite well.
The only folks that really had issues with the old EPA test protocols were PO'd 04 Prius owners that got 43 to 45 mpg when IAW the EPA test protocols induced Toyota to rated it @ 60 C/50 H. !!! Toyota got caught with both hands and FEET in the cookie jar and with SPOTLIGHTS on CABLE TV. Sort of Reece DITHERSPOONS drunken "do you know who I am" you tube video.
Evidently it was behind the scenes "pa low ticking" between and betwixt a great brouhaha (aka huge amounts of lobby monies) that trashed a perfectly duplicable EPA test. Notice no hint of "EPA perfection here" Even at that Toyota had to Redesign the Prius any number of times to hit the "magical" 50 mpg.
I could do that going 90 mph in a 03 Jetta TDI and easily post 50 mpg. It still can after 180,000 miles. Get that down to 75 mph and with almost no effort (actually a lie as I would fight road hynosis which is a safety hazard) post 59 mpg. Either test believe it or not really doesn't change that. The OLD" EPA was 42/49. The new EPA is 29/40. So while the "real world" are even far better, @ 48% UP (new) from 20.4%(old) , there is an insistence the old test is a "LIE". The new metrics are being used to imply that being able to get FAR better than EPA in the real world is a LIE.
So if that is true, why did they change the EPA tests at the insistence of 2004 Prius owners who could come no where near the 60 C 50 H EPA ratings? The real issue was getting full value for the legislative lobby bux.
EPA Overhauls Fuel Economy Estimates for 2008
We could always adopt the Worldwide harmonized Light vehicles Test Procedures. (Wiki)
So, if science says one day: "No, we were wrong about the two-headed tree worm--it doesn't reproduce like we thought, it does it THIS way"...
then you examine the data and have no reason to presume that they are wrong this time, too. What kind of logic would presume you only get one chance to be right? If your plumber fails to unclog your drain, do you call a chiropractor next time? No, you call a better plumber, or you give him two tries.
I have never personally bought into the idea of a dark dystopian world of conspiracy, so I can't share your views. I firmly believe that the human race's stupidity *more* than explains what the government does 99% of the time. That leaves 1% for insane madmen to work with, and usually their plots blow up in the faces anyway.
The EPA just SCREWS UP. So does the IRS. The government is filled with screw-ups. :P.
Gee, your own Air Force accidentally drops hydrogen bombs. Do you need any more proof? :shades:
I would gladly bet my life savings that the EPA results currently published will match, within a 10% error margin, any other form of rigorous real-world testing that anyone can devise. No hypermiling, no anecdotes, no extremes of all highway, or all city.
In other words, it's about "as good as it gets". Not perfect, but pretty good.
and yes, you can believe it and rely on it, as much as anything creates by human beings can be relied upon.
As for science, yes it is truly the documentation of failure !! A good "scientist" designs systems to "fail faster". This way the scientist can hopefully get onto more promising hypothesis' or as they say in the vernacular "the yellow gold road."The best in biotech do this. The not so good ones fail or run out of VC capital.
So I ran a quick and dirty look back with the help of Edmunds.com. between the 03's Jetta TDI and Prius. Now I have more of a lifelong (180,000 miles) mpg of 50, but lets do with fuel economy.coms avg of 46.5 vs Prius of 45..4. Funny that the Jetta TDI is worth (across three edmunds.com values of) 694/509/200 MORE than the 03 Prius. But the interesting thing is at that time Toyota would not come off 25,000 and I got the Jetta TDI for 18,000 or 7,000 less.
As for the view of corruption in the EPA and in the sciences, I simply don't believe that is very widespread, if it exists at all.
I'm really not big on conspiracies, because I can usually find easier explanations.
But then again it might have absolutely nothing to do with it ! But yes seems like a good $7,000 decision 11 or so years ago to go with a VW Jetta TDI. @ todays fuel prices, 7,000 buys app 80,000 miles of commute miles. For us @ 14,000 miles a year for another 5.7 years.
The truth is the new EPA tests show TDI's getting better real world mpg. In my case real world 48% better vs 20% better. The issue is the suppression that springs up around the so called "new" test. I think what really PO'd those 04 Prius owners was buying into the hype, paying far more than warranted and being the laughing stock. These were none of diesel's doings.
I do beg to differ on the sturdiness. How many 03 Prius owners can step forward with original rotors and brake pads after 180,000 miles? Or tires over 100,000 miles? Now I do agree that German oems have issues with (wet cell) batteries lasting longer than 4 years. But how long do Prius batteries last (the normal ones)? I say that in another 100,000 to 200,000 miles lets revisit the 03 Prius. For the TDI that will be another timing belt and water pump change, tires too. May be by then it will finally need new brake pads and rotors.
In fact, i would never recommend my own car, a 2003 Mini Cooper, to anyone. :P
I've always been pretty harsh on high mileage cars, no matter what they are. To me, when a car reaches 225,000 or so, it has little value. I'd only consider such a car at a really bargain price, and "price guides" are out the window.
RE: Values---Edmunds shows a 2003 Jetta TDI to have a $100 advantage on dealer retail over a 2003 Prius. (100K miles, California zip code)
On Craiglist, a 2004 Jetta does seem to post a higher asking price, but there were fewer Jettas to compare to the Prius, so I dunno.
I see on craigslist that 2004 Priuses have asking prices between $6700 and $9500.
Again, Prius has a big advantage over any diesel car in the new car market---that "feel good marketing" that people seem to respond to.
A used Jetta TDI has a big advantage over a Prius in the used car market--scarcity.
It is an interesting metric, now that a $100,000 Tesla as been written up as the best over car CR has reviewed. It will be interesting to see what they think @ 100,000 miles.
From this morning:
This was maybe 90%+ with cruise set at 65-67 (which puts you in the top 20% of speed in western WA), and a little city driving mixed in.
Here's some maneuver-room though...if 52 isn't sitting in a good spot for top cog (7th) /rpm then we'll leave it up to you...heaven forbid you might have to drop it to 50 mph for an optimum result...who knows, maybe 54 mpg is possible.. :blink:
Taking donations now for 3 therapy sessions for fintail after his (extraordinarily) sedate cruise...
Amazing the blind faith some people have in an agency filled with Screwups as you just pointed out. I realize a strawman bet, when there is no real way to prove which is accurate. I do know the ones posted on Carpages in the UK are closer to real mileage than the EPA guesstimates.
In other words, it's about "as good as it gets". Not perfect, but pretty good.
and yes, you can believe it and rely on it, as much as anything creates by human beings can be relied upon.
Only with blind faith.
They are good enough to assist a person to make an informed buy.
It's like when we talk about the "value" of a car---some folks point at one car sold on one day but I'm looking at the fat spot in the bell curve.
The bigger the database, the more accurate one's results.
If a person violates the parameters of the EPA testing cycle, they will of course do better or worse. That's nothing wrong with the EPA.
Sure, set your cruise at 52 mph on the Bonneville salt flats and smack down the EPA numbers. Have a ball! :P
I think it goes into 7th just after 40.
I recall that there was a problem with one of the newer Ford products ---what was that flap about---anyone remember? Was that Ford's goof or the EPA's?
Hyundai had issues, too.
"And although automakers generally publicize only the higher rating number (for gasoline cars, always the highway cycle), the EPA's combined rating is usually pretty close to real-world fuel economy for most buyers--within that margin.
Carmakers can commission independent studies--VW did just that to show its VW Jetta TDI diesel outperforms its EPA ratings--but they can't quote those results in their ads.
And that brings us back to the question that Ford has highlighted: Are the EPA test cycles flawed?
The answer seems to be that for most cars, they're essentially on target."
Should EPA gas-mileage ratings tests change? (Christian Science Monitor)
But as my link points out, no one wants to do that.
If the tests were run by EPA test standards and they are inaccurate, it is an EPA problem. Sue the Feds for false advertising. If the EPA wants to play nanny, they should be responsible for the screwups.
What do you think the EPA should do?
Butt out of the mileage guesstimate business. Let the automakers post and accept the responsibility for over estimating.
Would be almost as hard as comparing mattresses.
Not sure where our disconnect is. From my link:
"Now, two cars--the 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid and the 2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid--have brought the failings of the EPA test system to the fore."
And because you are such a blatant biased skeptic (I almost didn't bother with you again) I could also use the VW T TDI as an example too, but don't have AS MANY real world examples (with decimal places) as proof. Hopefully ruking1's figures ranging from 31 to 44 (US) will suffice. Furthermore..his numbers on his 180000 mile Jetta TDI also support (along with my acupuncture therapist's 03 Golf with 310000km {192000 mi}) my friend's numbers.
What I don't get is why you even posted this. Because you easily could have gone to a few sites (Edmunds included) to see TDI numbers that freakin' annihilate EPA's. You KNEW the answer before you posted the question, Shiftright, and I guess contributes to why my reaction to your query has been taken with so much offense. It is like you are mocking but you manage it with a level of condescension also, and the culmination of your posts in the past couple days supports that, whether you see it or not.
If your past few posts have been an attempt to produce "forum activity" then I suggest taking a few lessons from Steve as he manages it with a lot more diplomacy and class.
A couple days ago I included you along with Steve in using the word 'hoot'. Little did I know that given the chance, not long after I posted that, I was sorry I included you with that complimentary word.
Sorry Shiftright, but I speak from a place of truth/my truth/opinion. If ya wanna nuke me, well so be it.. Nice knowing most of you..
They got the passat at 51 mpg at 65 mph - certainly won't hold that up to 90
For comparison the Altima and mazda6 both got 44 mpg on the EXACT same route.
Is the diesel better - yes by quie a bit. Enough to pay for the more expensive fuel ( both gasses use regular) plus urea? Maybe, depends on where you live. Not a total slam dunk anymore. Maybe a few years ago when the gasses were high 30's, but DI has raised the bar.
Actually the now bogus new EPA tests might have handed VW an excellent marketing opportunity, as demonstrated by the VW Passat TDI. with an EPA of 43 mpg. They hired the Taylor's and under stated methodology, proceeded to post 84+ mpg or 95.34% BETTER mpg. I read further and they changed from oem tires to so called "GREEN" tires and did even better than that.