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
Suffice to say that is one of the utilities of placing a factory order, albeit probably more expensive with a min of a 6 week boat ride AFTER factory order fulfillment.
(And don't tell me it's made in Alabama. :shades: )
Oh GOSH no ! I assumed anywhere BUT Alabama ! ML, GL, R, C, new MLC (Assembly Bremen, Germany
6th of October City, Egypt (EGA)[1]
Beijing, China (Beijing Benz)!
(NOTHING pejorative to AL or YOU in that response to your post), That great state is a busy bee for MB ! I am for more US jobs manufacturing and other wise to the tune of PLUS 300,000 @ a steady clip !
Why we went down the literally decades to generations long effort to get RID of domestic manufacturing is anathema to me. I am however glad to see the Fed/State/Local legislative to regulative bodies are beginning to see fit to make domestic manufacturing less onerous. Or perhaps the real world corollary is it had to go away for 40 + PLUS (68 years) years for "US" to appreciate it, despite it being anathema to folks like ... me. Even China consumers likes stuff manufactured in the US.
They START at 53975. ! and only standout option it has really is the power tailgate and diesel.
Drive in the comfort of a powerful and feature-full SUV, with the comfort of driving an efficient engine.
18Ó alloy wheels
8-way power front seats with lumbar support
Leatherette seating surfaces
Power tailgate
Next up is 59970.
And top cog is 63800. !!!
And VW thinks they are going to be the number #1 seller of new cars by 2016?
I wouldn't hold your breath on that VW...MB is gonna thump your butt... in some classes at least. I know it might not be fair to compare the GLK 4 cyl to the VW T 6, but in terms of power and capability, it just isn't that much less, except in price.
If VW was smart they would finally, once and for all, offer an affordable diesel AWD'r. Passat is the obvious choice. Since it would still have what I am basically looking for, since its FE potential would be better still than the GLK, about all a person would be giving up is the ability to throw a large flat screen TV or contractors table saw in the back. Yes, there would be times I would miss that ability..life is full of compromises.
But the more you compare the value, the more the GLK makes sense. There are unknowns still for me..many so far..I don't know how noisy it is on the road (not talking diesel noise...just wind and road noise..one of the reasons I want to get a new ride). I don't know how well it rides, but if I am interpreting Gary's? or was it somewhere else I read..they said it had a less jarring ride than the ML. That's fine with me at the expense of potential handling as the ML I have been in a few times lately is not that plush when it comes to ride. Plus it is quite hard to get in and out of without running boards which I would not want unless it unless they came standard. And I don't know what the seats are like. Probably good. Same with the sound system, hopefully very good or that too is a deal breaker for me. If the windshield defroster vents blow hot air low enough on the WS to keep the wipers from freezing in place at park, BONUS!!!! ANother pet peeve of mine with so many cars. I spent all of Wed sitting in cars and most had wipers parked a full 4 to 6" lower than where the defroster could possibly blow. And none had electric lines in the base of the WS. The GLK, being a MB might.
It can be simple irritants like this that make a person actually consider a set of otherwise, perfectly good wheels, as my CRV is still quite new mileage wise. It just bugs me. Practically everything about it except its quite cold but unknown life potential A/C. (they have a bad rep, and is big bucks to address...full replacement of ALL components..about 3500.)
I am not sure how you came to that conclusion. The base Touareg TDI Sport is MSRP $48,890 with just a trailer hitch. The base GLK Bluetec is $40,045. The $50k MSRP GLK on the lot is very loaded with lots of goodies. Which I would expect to get down below $45k. That said the TMV for the Touareg TDI is also well below invoice. The problem is none to even test drive. One in San Diego and they don't want to let me test drive it. Same thing I ran into with Mercedes of San Diego. They don't want people driving their hard to get vehicles. I would love to test drive the VW. I don't think there is anyway it would get the mileage of the GLK.
With this in mind, it's useful to consider a diesel vehicle's break-even period when comparing choices. The break-even period is the amount of time it takes for the vehicle's fuel savings to offset its price premium."
Top 10 Diesel Vehicles With the Shortest Break-Even Periods for 2013
With the GLK diesel I would only had to fill my 15 gallon tank 10 time on our recent 5400 mile trip. Instead of 23 times. My fuel cost would be about half.
What is the difference between the GLK250 and GLK350 designations anyway - just the engine?
Which reinforces the common wisdom that diesel cars do better than their EPA ratings in real-world use (while the same cannot be said of certain hybrids).
GLK250 Bluetec
EPA blows it on Jetta TDI
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is set to look into claims that two Ford hybrids don't meet their official fuel economy ratings in real world driving
EPA really blows it on Hybrids as well
Yes the engine. All of the GLK250 Bluetecs are 4Matic AWD. The gas V6 comes in 2WD or 4Matic. The AWD V6 is $500 more than the diesel. Now the TMV on the Gassers may be lower. I did not see much difference. I would expect MB to sell 50% GLK diesels or more.
The 350 is a 3.5L engine and the 250 is a 2.1L engine. Mercedes has several older 4 cylinder engines with 200, 220 etc. Mercedes is rightfully proud of this new 2.1L engine. They are putting it in much of their lineup in the EU. Including the ML, E, CLS and the new Sprinter due here this year.
Another outlier for the VW MIGHT be the Touareg is one of the higher priced VW's on the lot. The contrast with MB is the GLK might be one of the lower priced MB on its lot.
"I got 44 mpg on my GLK250 last tank."
"250? Nice ride but I sprung for the GLK350. Gonna upgrade to the 450 as soon as the dealer gets some in".
After lawsuits and 95 complaints to government officials, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has opened a preliminary investigation into the pride of Ford Motor, its F-150 pickup with EcoBoost engine.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2013/05/28/ford-f150-ecoboost-governemn- t-probe/2367197/
A good friend was faced with ordering a new truck. They only buy Fords at his company. He was replacing his F250 and the only option was the F150 or the Ford Van. His fellow workers with the new F150 told him not to buy the PU as it was a gutless POC. So he ordered the larger Van to get the V8 engine. He is now the envy of his fellow employees.
Ford has sold 700,000 engines with the EcoBoost label, about 400,000 of those being the 3.5-liter V-6 in F-150 pickups, where it can add $2,395 to the price.
Now, some owners of that 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine, also used in Lincolns and Ford cars and SUVs, have sued Ford because the engine doesn’t run right, they say.
They could have sold their customers a nice 3.0L V6 diesel and avoided all the lawsuits and had a happy customer base. Oh, I forgot Ford has not been able to build a decent diesel engine for the US market for over 20 years, if forever.
I hope the VM Motori diesel works out for Chrysler. They will kick butt on Ford with a small diesel PU truck.
I owned a 2000 F250 with the big diesel engine, used it to pull a 5th wheel travel trailer. I purchased it new, kept it for 9 years, and really liked the truck for what it was. Definitely not a daily driver though.
If I could get a half ton pickup with a small but high torque diesel engine, I would be all over that.
I think our problems started with the 2004 Model F250 diesels. Before that they seemed fine. It had to do with emissions systems. Our later model Ford diesels were in the shop more than on the road. Don't know after 2006 when I retired.
It isn't often that we describe a Mercedes-Benz vehicle as a "steal." Mercedes-Benz products frequently offer good value, especially when one factors resale into the equation, but a below-market, almost-too-good-to-be-true purchase? No, not really. But now we have driven the 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK250 BlueTEC, a vehicle we think legitimately deserves that kind of description. In the 2013 GLK250 you get all the benefits of the refreshed 2013 version of the GLK: heavily revamped interior, more dramatic exterior, convenient size and sharp handling, plus an uber-sophisticated twin-turbo diesel engine accompanied by 4MATIC all-wheel-drive, all for a lower list price than the gasoline-powered GLK350 4MATIC. Yes, the GLK250 offers 102 fewer horsepower than the GLK350, but due to its immense low-end torque that horsepower difference isn't as noticeable as you might imagine. And the upside is much better fuel economy and, we estimate, better resale value.
While many consumers have been willing to spend premium prices to obtain the longevity, range and fuel economy of a diesel engine, Mercedes-Benz is essentially throwing all those advantages in for free. The GLK350 4MATIC has a $39,090 MSRP, while the GLK250 BlueTEC 4MATIC is being offered at $38,590 MSRP. So excuse us if we call it a "steal."
Mid week I brought myself up to date with seat comfort in a number of random vehicles that are available in my town.
Here are my findings.
Altima, one up from base I think, seat was good, if not a little squishy but good. Keep in mind these ratings are just sitting there in the parking lot..the true test of course is in real world use after a few hours. Centre vents could not be turned off...one of the things I look for but not a deal breaker, unless they do not allow air to be directed far enough away from both front set passengers.
Subaru, Forester, the 2014 I think. Was fairly loaded. Seat left me wanting. Was basically a firm one, but too short seat base and ill-conceived lumbar positioning. Centre vents could be turned off.
Legacy, a lesser trimmed car, seat was marginally more comfortable.
XV Crosstrek...I really wanted to like it. Seat was better than the Forester, maybe better than the Legacy but if so, then marginally. Good grd clearance, so slight FE penalty over the car it is based off, the Impreza, of which they had none. Had the good vents. But lose the gawd-awful BMW Audi'ish red backlighting. I'm seeing that more lately are giving you NORMAL lighting for tach/speedo and what is right in front of you, but use red for HVAC etc. What is key if they are going to use the so-called air-sky-friendly lighting, then make the dang symbol large enough it doesn't look like just another dot. The more buttons and switches you have all the same small size lined up uniformly in vertical and horizontal rows, (talking about you guys for sure BMW and Audi) the worse it is. I've never understood why apparently pilots claim red lighting is easier to see at night than white or blue. Rubbish I say.. I hated that in my Matrix. The darker it got, the more irritating it was. Had to turn it down to near off.
And also lose those cast wheels with the blacked out centres, Crosstrek. The only rims it comes with. I think they contribute in a big way to comments of people older than 25 not taking that car seriously. In a lot of other ways, it makes a lot of sense. Not the CVT of course
Then checked out a pile of Fords. This was really interesting because I have them under boycott for life, and they have never been in the running with anything for years and years, simply outta principle. But they also still have a lot of carp. I almost sorta hate to still be on their case...(nah..not really...they screwed up and there is no love-loss there..I warned them..."you don't do the right thing here and this is forever..").
But this was an interesting tire kicker couple hours. I first sat in a C Max. Geez..don't know where to start, but let's just say it felt so wrong on so many levels. It was like you were sitting there, but piloting an entirely different vehicle from where the seat base was attached. Was strange and hard to describe. plus the seat sucked..as did the dash and ....everything....no diesel...people are already on their carpy FE case so zzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Next up was a Fiesta. I really wanted to like this car too. Really I did! But there is no frig way. First off the seat was horrific..so narrow it was trying to squeeze me into a 13 yr old skinny-a$$ed kid. I could elaborate on other things but..who cares..
Then the Focus. Was quite curious about it to be honest. Had high hopes for it feel like really something. It didn't. First was I noticed how the door dropped a 1/32" as soon as it came free of its catch. All 3 Focii? I tried did exactly the same thing...it was sort of like a unibody flex-relax without the door at home in its catch. The Fiesta, Escape, Fusion and F250 none others did this.
Yup they all still smell like Ford. The F250 was the weirdest ill-thought out and designed I saw that day. Worse than the Encore even. For one thing, there was no dead pedal for your left foot even though there was space galore down there! It was like...WHERE to put your foot?? I t was just left hanging uncomfortably tilted forward balanced on your heel but wagged all over the place evn though I wasn't even driving anywhere. Or unnatural feeling if you tried to plant it flat foot on the floor. Was weird. But not as weird as the centre elbow rest. In elbow rest position it was terrific. Truly, really a fantastic and roomy place to play elbows with the better-half on. Spacious, well padded. Perfect. Uhhh...no...So where's a place for CD's? Oh, there. but...it is this tiny little plastic box at the back. I don't think a CD would fit unless maybe one jammed in diagonally using up the entire space. But wait..there's more..I think oh...the real caverous cave is the BIG one under the front of the elbow rest. Nope. After fumbling for the 'catch' to lift the 'lid' I realize this whole contraction isn't more storage area at all..it is a SEAT BACK for the 'middle' passenger. Ugh...and when trying to lower the whole thing back into place again, there is no design to secure the seat belt recvr out of the way for the seatback to slide past it. But just ignoring it, there isn't room to squish the recvr, so you MUST DEAL WITH IT! :sick: But how? So you have to sorta hold the rcvr with your very finger tips and try to sneak the whole contraption back into place laying on the seat bottom face. And that is darn tight squeeze...you would not be able to do it if you wore a ring of any type without carving a slash mark across the side of the seat back. When it is in position for a 3rd fr passenger, they better not be more than about 10" wide, cuz that was the spacing between the seatbelt recvrs. :sick:
So....Ford...ya sure dropped the ball on the big F series eh? It seems your problems extend far beyond poorly powered and FE'd turbo gas jobs.
Arms too sore to type about the Fusion and old and new Escapes (the new one a lot like the C Max
Then went over to the Chevy lot. I want quiet so sat in a Buick Encore. It was really loaded. What an abortion. The seat was too narrow, you couldn't hardly buckle the seat belt without moving the right elbow rest out of the way and when it was in the way, it was uselessly placed...as was the left elbow rest molded into the side of the door. And I'm only 5'9" so it's not like I was sitting with the seat far back. What a pile of junk. Who cares that it had the good vents.
Then a Trax right beside it. Way less money, a
lotbit more comfortable, but lacking in so many areas. I think the centre vents were open only. And it uses the Cruze's 1.4 turbo which is a good thing, but again..the impressive FE potential with that engine, flies out the window when you put it in a car that pushes a lot more air, is higher off the grd and is AWD. Now if it were the diesel they put in the Cruze NOW...tIn some respects the higher costs are due to factors nothing to do with diesel.
More germane, if one is not a "BUY NEW EVERY TWO" advocate: in a lot of ways it is a " straw man" issue. Edmunds.com data, or any of the others data sources for that matter have documented well the average age of the US passenger vehicle fleet @ more along the lines of 8.5 to 9.5 years old. Indeed part of the 2013 "banner sales year" are in part due to replacement of so called "older vehicles". Further documentation shows the AVERAGE yearly miles are something like 12,000 to 15,000 per year. Outliers like under 12,000 or between 15,000 to 40,000 miles per year will benefit less or more as the case might be.
So if you permit me to use one set of numbers, i.e.., (9.5 years x 15,000 miles per year) =142,500 miles/ 21 mpg vs 30 mpg (my previous competitor example MDX vs VWT TDI ) the consumption would be 6,786 gals vs 4,750 gals=2035 gal x $ 3.88 per gal = $ 7,896 MORE. Of course adding higher resale (whatever that happens to be) would be another PLUS +.
(anyone can use whatever numbers; more or less appropriate to ones' situation)
While a C250 diesel would be a world class normal car.
Earlier today i had to delete 2 of 3 versions of same post, and now this time it said couldn't complete due to "log in delay" never saw that one before??
Anyway, to finish my impressions from the other day..
.................. Now if it were the diesel they put in the Cruze, then...they might have something..idiots..
Then to compare only, I sat in a 1/2 ton. Not interested unless it had a diesel though...something like what you get in the GLK and is ALL you need in a 1/2 ton p/u. Seat was better than the F250. It seemed to have a little better ergos (at least it had a place for my left foot) but didn't spend much time in it cuz the salesman asked me why I was sitting in it if I had wasn't going to buy a truck..I attempted to explain to him that much can be learned about the brand in general (and the idiotic things they do...altho didn't tell him that part) buy checking out various models within a brand. This was a young guy...he didn't even realize that brands maintain their individual interior new car smells for decades and decades...I have often wondered how they pull that off what with all the recycle eco-friendly rules etc in recent years.
Because I like small cars and considered buying an ankle biter and keep the CRV for mainly winter use, I was very curious to sit in a Spark. I actually liked the little bugger...the seat was better than any previous GM I sat in that day.
I'm wondering if my comment about the left elbow rest being too far forward to be useful, in the Buick Encore, might have been the new Fusion? What ever it was, it was in one of the cars that cost so much, it was a glaringly poor design.
So back to being at Ford...the Fusion just didn't impress much. They went to great pains to cover the otherwise 'exposed style' of hood hinges, so technically someone who can't think past the end of their nose will be less likely to crush something in the Fusion trunk, but on the other hand, a lot of nook-and-cranny space was now unavailable to be used due to the hinge cover designs..so in my opinion, still a fail.
The new Escape I thought might be really something. Boy was I wrong...from the outside the pics of it I've seen for..what?..about a year now? made it look really quite handsome. Same with Focus, IMO. BUT! In real life, those two are of a very rare breed of vehicles that actually look better in print than standing beside it...layf...as in laughing at you Ford..for producing such impressive levels of.......... failures. But before I continue to bash them too hard here, I actually managed to find a used last year's/gen model, Escape and Focus. Wonder of wonders, BOTH of them where more comfortable (at least just sitting there) than both the new generations. The switch gear in the Escape was superior and probably the Focus too, although the older Focus was a one up from base type trim car..a guess..
I do recall the seat comfort itself was good in the F250 I sat in, but as mentioned in other post it all falls apart after that. I would rate the Chev and Ford's p/u seats a tie. The Chev maybe just a hair softer, and may not stand up on a long drive as well...who knows..
I'm always amazed at how brands manage to maintain their trademark smell. It was not as obvious in the Subaru's, but then I am not as familiar with their smell although do have some experience with them, but my XT6 was used and had been smoked in, so...
But Chev, Ford, Nissan all smelled just like they always have for literally decades. if anything the Ford has gone a bit raunchier in terms of their smell always being close to but not quite a burnt smell. Now though it has crossed over a bit and is a little burnt. I know it would bug me even if they brought out my perfect diesel vehicle tomorrow. But due to my pertinacious boycott with them, will probably never have to rule one out on smell alone.
So......KIA. How the Rio's seat has improved since the very last generation. I simply could NOT believe how comfortable it was sitting there. The BEST, or possible tie for the seat in the Altima for comfort. Both slightly squishy the Rio's looking less so, and also maybe just a hair firmer. And that was in the base car plus I also sat in one up from base with same seat. That car is the one to have if you are on a tight budget. It was the LX Conv Pkg one (in Cda at least but I think KIA and Hyundai pkgs are the same here as in the USA). It had all you'd ever really want on a budget..cruise, air, media type perks, keyless. It also had closeable centre vents and always have for as long as I remember the Rio being available. It had really good, and Honda/Toyota-like feel to the switch gear you use often..all the HVAC, wipers, direction indicator hi-lo beam etc. To elaborate...it actually has better feel than the two big Japanese brands now, in that the lane change spring load, is firmer...as in...you can hit a bump during the lane change spring loaded position, and it will still resist you going all the way into the switched position having to them pull it back out. This is, admittedly a small thing, but is indicative of the efforts and pains they have gone to to cover the little details of building a modern day car in today's really really competitive mkt.
The Forte's seat was also better than the prev gen altho the prev gen also had an ok seat as I recall. Unfortunately the Forte does use a pile of red except right in front of you, but haven't had a chance to try in the dark so don't know for sure if it works or not. The brochures make it look pretty red..
The new Rondo was frekin' amazing! Its seat also a huge improvement over the prev generation car. The overall look of it is quite graceful and KIA-like in an Optima, Forte, Rio grill kinda way...and all the rest..Sorento etc...they have that defining grill and look that is not easy to do. BMW figured it out DECADES ago. Now KIA has too. Congrats to them. BUT! Enough with the compliments with them because there were TWO glaring omissions on that new car. The first is a real no-excuse-all-out-no-brainer lack of AWD option so it could compete with the Mazda, what's it called 5. So fail there big time...and of course.......NO DIESEL !!!!!! And talk about a car that could really really use it. It has a great shape. Huge inside, terrific seating position, high up, great visibility..altho not sure to the rear qtr. So have all that versatility, comfort, combined with AWD and the torque and economy of a diesel, you could tow with it, sleep in it at times, carry loads, carry people in more comfort than the majority of sedans in that size class...a real do it all. Instead....they get a fail from me on both counts..no AWD, and no diesel.. :sick:
BTW, FWIW, the salewoman even confessed that many many customers so far did say they would buy had it been an AWD'r, and, to her...(as in she was
Maybe there is hope for NA after all..
One can only hope. I think they should offer it with both RWD and 4Matic. There are still a lot of potential customers who really have no use/need whatsoever for AWD.
This is an area where VW has screwed up for years. In fact, I firmly believe one of the reasons the VW T is as popular as it is, considering it is still a very expensive vehicle, is that it is the ONLY AWD diesel you can buy from them on these shores.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I have no doubt about that. When we were looking around the MB lot, they had 3 GLK bluetecs with the plastic still on the fenders just off the truck. Two were pre-sold the third was the one I posted. My guess is the GLK will pass the ML in sales and be close to the E. The C with the diesel will only widen its lead as Mercedes top seller.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/mercedes-benz-adds-fifth-month-to-2013-r- ecord-sales-streak-with-may-totals-at-24713-units-209953021.html
I know there is/was a diesel IS in Europe, but I don't know about its emissions.
Talked to a salesman about the GLK today, as a friend of mine has an interest. He said they've had 3 - 2 were special order and taken, third was an unwanted special order that was bought within hours of being available. Going to be a hit, I think.
Salesman also told me no diesel E wagon at least in 14, and he didn't know when the diesel C is coming.
" To get more power
the turbos use air, which is free.
As opposed to gas, which is not".
The ad goes on to say jam air in the combustion chamber and and you'll get more power...but nothing about the fact that you need more fuel too. Deceptive. Why don't they just add "at cruising speed's you will get the FE of an efficient Direct Injected V6?" I just can't stand being lied to.
The teaser article
Replacement batteries? Almost a guarantee?
The one that will put the sound biters to sleep zzzzzzzzzz
Barron's zzzzzzzz
...."Industries and governments around the world have spent billions on battery research, but few expect to trim electric-car battery costs by more than 20%-30% by the planned 2016 launch of Tesla's car for the Everyman. Perhaps Musk will confound the industry again, but if Tesla's next-generation car can't go the distance at half the price, its stock will head much lower."...
We have already established that both RUG/PUG and ULSD prices are really manipulated and have been for literally multiple generations.
.75 cents per gal RUG (LESS than 50 cents for ULSD rounding UP is listed @ ZERO) in Saudi Arabia, next "real" price is .60 cents per gal diesel in Bahrain. for example... (you all know what you've paid lately?) Sorry sorry for folks in the UK and Germany?) :lemon:
link title
Ford wasted a TON of money on trying to squeeze more out of a gallon of gas than is possible. It has backfired on them. Check Fuelly for what ecoBoost buyers are getting. Same old 13-17 MPG of the old V8.
The GLK250 Bluetec is so new Farmers Insurance does not have them listed. If I buy one which is looking more likely every day I hope this is true about them.
The GLK 250 BlueTEC 4MATIC features a four-cylinder diesel engine generating 150 kW (204 hp) of power and 500 Newton metres of torque from a displacement of 2143 cc. Despite its formidable performance, this model is extremely frugal when it comes to fuel consumption: on average, the compression-ignition engine consumes 6.1 to 6.5 litres of diesel per 100 kilometres
That is 36 -38 MPG US.
New European emissions regulations (Euro 6) come into force in September 2014 and demand a dramatic reduction in the emission of nitrogen oxides (NOx). This change will bring the EU more in line with the U.S., allowing manufacturers to produce a global standard. In other words, the additional and often prohibitive cost of developing a U.S.-specific diesel will no longer apply."
Land Rover Diesel Hybrid Set for U.S.
Now don't get me wrong, it is WAY too logical on almost ALL levels, but even the most casual of observers have to admit that has never stopped the chaos that is in force now from happening, now has it?
http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2013/06/why-almost-a-third-of-new-car-shopp- ers-are-considering-diesel.html
The back story here: fully one half of that 5% are "light" trucks (really HEAVY or 3/4 ton trucks) (258.4 M vehicles *5%=12.92 M/50% are 6.46 M diesel light trucks and 6.46 M diesel passenger cars or 2.5% diesel CARS.
Using the (my) latest example, TDI CUV 30 mpg on a sub 5,000# vehicle vs gasser 21 mpg and less, and .....who really cares? Keep in mind the fuel mileage is 43% BETTER !!!! ???
More to the point, IF 31% (of the lookie loos) are considering diesels: what % actually buy diesels?
Been meaning to ask you what you do for service - dealer? (you've probably said before but I forget...).
I have this image in my head of my sister buying a Beetle TDI and then pulling into a 20' tall cavernous bay at Flying J or somewhere for an oil change. :shades:
I almost do not know how to address your graphic !
IF (probably not) she is a DIYer, one can do the oil change in literally less than 5 minutes. !!! I could show her how to literally do it in a metered street parking space on the streets of San Francisco. One runs the equivalent of a flexible straw down the dipstick, use a suction and storage device (I use a Mity Vac product) to pull the used oil out and again, THEN literally pour in the new oil from the top. On the other hand, I am sure a Flying J will set her right up !
Not sure there was much motivation. Gas was cheap and the manufacturers spend their engineering dollars on HP, not MPG. The standard was 15.8 for 4WD trucks back when CAFE kicked in back in '79. I assume that's where the MDX would have fallen (17.2 for the 2WD one).
I'm not sure my sister can even check the oil on her cars. :shades:
We stopped to fill the Sequoia at Costco on our way home from giving the GLK250 Bluetec another test drive. 15.69 MPG calculated. No improvement in gassers since 1979. Passed several stations on our journey. Diesel is running the same price as RUG, or a little less, at $3.79.
The test drive went good. Very nice handling and riding vehicle. With the passenger back my wife has plenty of leg room. She felt cramped on our previous drive. The seat was way forward to give the salesman some room. Back seat leg room nothing to write home about. He showed me an email from a satisfied customer. They got 37 MPG on her first full tank. She has a 65 mile each way commute. Told him Mercedes finally has a good vehicle for commuters. That is the kind of testimonials I like to see. He also told me they have sold 21 GLK diesels in the first full month of having them.
My wife is warming to having one as our daily driver. Not sure we will sell the Sequoia.
---times, they are a-changin---
Just saw this - hurry up, maybe we can get your name in print.
If you and your spouse disagreed about your recent family car purchase, please send your daytime contact to pr@edmunds.com.