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
No disagreement on WHAT to buy. It is on WHAT to get rid of. She just read that her 1990 LS400 is one of the 5 best cars ever built. So she wants to keep it. Even though we have put less than 1000 miles a year on it the last 9 years. So another vehicle is kind of foolish if we cannot keep it in the garage. She does like the GLK after the second time test driving it.
For Ruking,
One of the salesmen at the Mercedes dealership drives a black Touareg TDI. It has dealer plates so I thought it might be a trade-in. It looked good all shined up. I just don't like black or dark colored cars.
We are shooting for 25 to 30 years on the TLC's and reasonably see 300,000 each as an achievable goal. Both pass smog only (death) tests as essentially new cars. Now, they are both literally GUTLESS and the VW T TDI gets 107% better fuel mileage, but those are whole other discussions.
Black is positively absolutely one color I would never get, unless it served as an advertisement for a touchless car wash that I would own.
The wife for whatever reason liked the "FLINT" (a dark grey blue metallic).
In other news, we made the cover of The Edmunds Daily.
Cars have been marginally to unaffordable for actually a very long time: might I even submit decades. So more exotic combinations make even LESS sense !! (hybrids, plug ins, E85, etc.) So really the longer and more miles one can keep them (gassers and diesels), the better off one is, as one can control the mileage (cost per mile) Cars have NEVER been an investment... UNLESS there is (positive) cash flow from them.
So for example, I sold a 1987 TLC (OFF TOPIC as was a GASSER) with 250,000 miles (used in a business) for app 44% loss (MINUS - $ 7,000). So depreciation (cost in terms of the "WORK" it was bought to do) was app $ .028 cents per mile. MPG is really a comparative metric (i.e.,. 15 to 20 mpg vs 31 mpg diesel). Cost per mile driven can also be important to a lot to some folks, i.e. $.271, $ .204 cents vs $.128 cents diesel (4.07 PUG/3.97 ULSD current prices).
In terms of THE diesel topic, specifically TDI's: these are really the early days of anticipated 250,000+ PLUS miles. :surprise: So looking ahead it is a question of whether I want to consume 12500 gals or 8,333 gals.
& LOL !
I would need to build another garage. And with San Diego building laws, that is just about out of the question. Bad enough that my PU is parked outside all the time. I am not going to park a new Mercedes outside. And no way the wife will let me put her baby outside. Personally I would like to sell both the Lexus and the Sequoia and be Toyota Free. Then park the new smaller GLK and my Nissan Frontier in the garage.
1. car covers (PITA)
2. and/or a min of a horizontal surface paint job, years hence. :lemon:
3. Since horizontal surfaces "wear" faster app 5 to 1 I would use a poly sealant more often on the H surfaces.
4. a rotation (whose quarter is it due in the garage?), but musical chairs might get old after a while.
As the TLC's get longer in the tooth (19/17 years) , the good/bad news is essentially the same things tend to go wrong in each (same union?
I just got word that one needs a new set of tires @ 8 years old and 83,000 miles. (was hoping for 90,000 miles+ :P )
How about an outbuilding Gary? Turn the Sequoia into a true barn find.
It is not only having a good clean place to store it is the ever increasing insurance on vehicles that are not really being used much. Insurance rates have gone up 21% at least here in CA over the last two years. Paying a $1000 per year per vehicle is about 17 cents per mile. Add another 23 cents a mile for gas and it costs me $12 to drive to Costco. Add another $1000 per year for the car sitting in the garage and it paints a real picture of wasted resources. I would hate to see what people pay that have had a claim or ticket on their record.
I say we should be allowed to take out the dollars in blood if the buggers are driving around w/o insurance..
Even my house insurance has been going up 250 bucks PER YEAR!! for the last 3 in a row!! And I have never made a claim..And I may not have a fire hydrant in front of the house since I an rural, but I am within under 2 mi of a fire stn..
Ugh...insurance chat...I should have never posted...gotta go for a walk..
The LS sounds like a neat car...wish you were closer.. I'd be tempted to try to talk (the misses) into parting with it. Just sell out off the hill here and forego AWD.. Given where you live it probably has not a speck of rust on it, eh?
Rust? bite your tongue. You rarely see a CA car with rust unless they moved from somewhere else. Even cars along our coast don't rust like they do in many coastal places. No rust, dings or dents. Original paint and leather. Probably bring about $5k if I listed it on the traders. If it was not so low to the ground I would just want to keep it. You have to drive it real careful with our 3rd World roads in CA.
I recently upgraded to the 2013 GLK 250 BlueTec from a 2010 GLK 350 4matic (Loved everything about it except the premium gas requirement and fuel economy).
Now that the BlueTec Diesel engine is broken in its nice to see this kind of fuel economy and still have the torque when you need it .All 369lb-ft of it
I have always read about the advantages of Diesel but Now that I have the Blutec I get it.
Oh c'mon Mr. Practical - if you start thinking that way you'll talk yourself out of getting a new car.
I have to be talked into the idea before I can be talked out of it. I do like the idea of ridding myself of two old gas guzzlers in favor of one diesel sipper. I would like to take more trips. Just hard to dig deep for the gas. Even though that is usually about half or less than motels cost us.
Posts like this from the MB owners website are helping my cause:
European delivered GLK250 Bluetec.
Just refueled another time. Forgot to reset the trip on the first refueling so I ran just under 900 miles in combination of dirt "almost 4WD trails", street and heavy traffic, many country roads and just a bit of freeway, some mountain climbing (through the Alps twice) and up and down many hills elsewhere. Most of the time was with 5 full sized persons in the car and over half the time with luggage for all. Calculated mileage was 32.6 MPG. The gauge on the car showed 31.3 MPG.
Frankly I expected much less MPG than what I got considering the terrain and traffic, so I'm delighted! Not a single hitch with the car, and absolutely no complaints with the car. Have almost 2K miles on the clock.
In taking of the UPGRADE, (Zero to 7382 ft SOS DD) the borders were three: 1. not falling off the mountain roads 2 not being a danger to anyone else 3. and not breaking the glass ware and china 3 b. and of course not throwing heavy items such as chairs and such through windows and doors !
If he was like me getting 15 MPG, and now getting 32 MPG he is probably real happy, happy, happy..
I would personally feel I was not driving the GLK diesel correctly if I did not get close to 40 mpg on the highway. What is amazing driving it is going uphills. We went on the back roads around Escondido where there are some steepish hills. Not SF steep. And you kick it and it jumps going uphill. When I did the same with the Subaru Outback it just screamed up to a higher RPM and barely gained speed. The 7 Speed transmission is butter smooth as well. This is one of the smaller vehicles MB is using the 2.1L Bluetec. It is available in the S, ML, E and Sprinter van. It has more HP and torque than the 5 cylinder diesel I had in my Sprinter RV. You have to drive one to believe what they have done with 4 cylinders and 2.1L.
I am thinking the turbo diesel (twin in the MB GLK's case) is putting both the power and fun back into small CUV driving !? :shades:
I do have to say I am really liking the "composure", if one will of the 09/12, 2.0 L to 3.0 L turbo diesels. I really like how it fits the US highway system (of the 15 or so states I have run diesels ). For anyone with fuel availability concerns, the issue has been strictly straw man and for at least a literal decade that I have been involved with it anyway.
From what I am reading Subaru was having trouble getting their CVT to handle the torque of their diesel. Will this cure that problem?
The continuously-variable transmission (CVT) is a stronger version of that fitted to the petrol-fuelled Forester (which doesn’t get a diesel-auto combo until late 2014). This auto has been heavily modified and enhanced (including an oil cooler) so it offers a seven-speed stepped mode (like a conventional auto) with functions that assist downhill and engine braking.
The 110kW/350Nm 2-litre turbo-diesel - similar to the one fitted to the manual-transmission Outback and Forester - and claims an impressive 6.5 litres/100km. It can tow up to 1700kg. The extra weight of the diesel mill means the Aussie-tuned suspension and steering have been beefed up.
That is equal to 36 MPG US. The Outback 20D being sold in the UK with manual uses 5.4L/100km or 43 MPG US. I would not consider that a good trade-off for an auto transmission. For comparison the GLK250 Bluetec is rated 6.1L/100km or 38 MPG US combined in a heavier vehicle.
Not to link them in any way, other than the (Chevrolet) Cruze has a diesel option; it makes me curious how the Cruze TDI is optimized.
Now you have me wondering if I would have gotten a VW Touareg if it were built (beefed) UP rather than built DOWN !! ??
(I did get the chance to crawl around for several hours on the developmental rigs used in preparation for the DARPA challenge, on the Stanford University campus. So this WAS a factor, albeit not major or deal maker/breaker)
As you have posted a fair amount about, earlier VW Touaregs, were VERY stout and really were cloned Dakar (type) Racers, masquerading as production CUV's.
As you might agree, earlier VW Touaregs were truly meant for the truly RUGGED off road, out back (in the truest sense of the concept) and extreme weather runnings and had both V10 DIESELS and 550 # ft of torque capability which could be added TO !!! I am surprised they were not utilited as machine gun platforms like the TLC is
True, but because a diesel's compression concussion produces so much torque, usually they have a sturdier block from the get-go. That said, was the original block design beefy enough to accommodate beefier bearings etc? is the unknown.
I don't totally agree with this:
"Beefing up" is really the bare minimum.
If I can equate the two comparisons with house construction. Let's say you build a free standing floor made up of full length trusses, and the design allowed for a span that simply didn't require any load bearing posts from one end to the other. Let's say that design called for 24" O.C. (on centre). Now..fast forward 20 years, and you decide that you want to do something really out of the ordinary and redecorate using a rock floor. Plus one of the regular home occupants has determined that the best bed for them is another waterbed. Before you had 2, now you have three and the third one happens to be back to back with the new rock floor on that end of the building. Can you go ahead with your plans by beefing up the floor, or must you tear down the house and start over? In this example, you could literally dbl up on your trusses, and slip them in beside the originals. Or triple up if necessary. Etc. So now the weak link is, is the original foundation capable of the extra weight, and are the vertical walls that are supporting the extra trusses capable of supporting that weight? If we go back to the diesel engine block/displacement comparo..we are not adding an entire extra floor (as in story) so we know that the original foundation and vertical walls are up to the challenge because those are one aspect of construction that begins overbuilt. And we are not doubling the engines output. I'm not sure what the ft lbs is in EU with the single turbo use, but a guess is maybe around 275 ftlb? So to get an extra 34% out of it may simply require beefier rods/bearings, wrist pins etc. Is the original block up to securing those bearings for longevity is the unknown. It has a lot to do with just how conservatively built is that engine at its inception? Going back to the floor beef up job, just doubling up on trusses changes ALL the rules in terms of new sq footage payload weight allowances. The potential weak link? The vertical wall top caps supporting the extra trusses. Even that could be successfully beefed up if necessary although highly unlikely in reality, by transferring that load down through two diagonally placed 2x members to either side of the original trusses which were originally O.C. a top the original wall studs. (what transfers the weight to the foundation).
So again, to go back to the engine..what are the weakest links? Basically it's the block, head and cooling/fueling designs. Does the original design allow for enough wiggle room regarding powerstroke stresses and cooling ability etc to be able to handle the extra umpff by being beefed up or not? This is the unknown I referred to earlier about whether or not there may be complications down the road. Being the first year with the twin turbo and tat level of torque output, may or may not reveal certain weaknesses. It's what I call the guinea pig syndrome of risks of buying anything new in its first year of production. That said, MB has made an excellent diesel engine from as far back as I remember. I don't think they have a reputation for having to re-massage their original designs out of necessity. So this (I want to say) new engine, may be just fine for the long haul. One of my concerns given my own personal situation and anticipated level of use, is that while I do plan to put many more miles on the GLK if I were to get one, than my present car, I still would run out of wty in time probably before miles. Which here is only a 4/year/50000 mi engine wty. If they have a lot of confidence in their vehicles/ or in this case, engines, why not wty them for at least 60k miles like many others, and in more and more cases even 100000 miles now? Their extended wty you can purchase at anytime within the original wty period is fairly expensive..a guess is well over 3000$ and probably more if you tiered up.
Plus, is the V6 design very much like those V10's? Remember the cross-section pic you posted back in the winter of the front end of the V6. Following the path of the timing chain? To my eye, that looks like it would require fairly regular timing chain tension replacement maintenance every...maybe even less than 80000 miles. And that type of repair we know will be expensive. More than a timing belt re and re and we all know how much we look forward to those bills every 60 to 80000 miles.
I'd love to see a similar cross-section of the front of the VM Motori engine, to see their timing chain route. It and the VW T engine are so similar in so many aspects..from output to packaging..
So for example, we have a lot of miles (time also) in TLC's (805k) . Does that mean they are 100% durable, reliable, maintenance and break down free? I am sure you will agree the answer is NO ! But I do see 25 to 30 years old (94/96 MY) as a reasonable alternative. This is not to say you would not do that for say a Corolla?
While it is a tad early for the 03/09/12 diesels (CUV probably in particular), I suspect it will be reasonable for the Touareg. 200,000 miles is just around the corner for the 03 TDI and realistically all it will really need is the 2nd timing belt and water pump change.
VW Warranty on the drive trains for both the 09 and 12 are 100,000 miles. The 03 Jetta TDI had 4 years and 60,000 miles as I recall.
Of course, still.. here in 2013, the majority of the miles you've accumulated on both of them where back when fuel prices were not nearly as high as they have been this past decade.
There is another plus for the MB diesels, NO timing belt to change or worse break. I am hoping to sell the Sequoia before that comes due. According to my wife's records she has never had the timing belt on her Lexus changed. I have to check and see what that will cost her.
Actually for the LEX that is something that SHOULD be done ! As I recall I have had the AUX belts (1 to 2 belts per) on the TLC's done when they started to show signs of deterioration. They of course are NOT interference type designed. I had to change one set prematurely when one of the kids spilled motor oil on them in the process of topping !!! That will teach me !?
I did worry about it and went through our records. I did in fact have our Lexus indy shop change the timing belt and external belt at 88K miles back in 2004. That was almost 10 years ago. We had him replace some bushings in the front end and he recommended the timing belt be changed as it was 15 years old. Cost $72 for the belt, $348 labor. It is now at 105k and that means in about 15 years we may get close to needing it done again. Hopefully I sell the Sequoia before it needs the Timing belt replaced.
Because it has so few miles on the new belt, probably will be fine till you (she, haha) parts with it. The other key thing is if it was done (tensioned) correctly. I have had a personal experience with this when I sold a van to a friend and the indy shop screwed up and a) either didn't replace the belt but still charged me 432. or b) did it wrong as it failed only 30000 km later (18k miles). I covered the loss and paid to have it done again for my friend and will never darken the doors of that indy shop again. Ironic really cuz I did not authorize it in the first place..had it in for an estimate...left me a phone message on voice mail saying it was done and I could pick it up..our rules here state that if they don't have a signed work order, customer doesn't have to pay. I chose to not do that to them and wouldn't you know, I got screwed twice for my not sticking it to them.. :sick:
http://www.tlc-auto.com/
Some years ago I went to look for a good indie shop. (before yelp and sometimes you have to take yelp with a grain of salt) As it turns out one of the "top" TLC Indie (others also)shops is literally within walking distance !
We also have a pretty well known Toyota dealer that moved to our town and as it turns out is VERY good, even for a dealer. The service manager has even been over to the house, as amazing as that seems for this day and age. They have a shuttle service. They also arrange for me to keep a new car overnight if I get curious about a new Prius or whatever .
I tend to agree, but just out of curiosity, did you happen to go to the link last winter that ruking posted showing the frond end cross section of his engine. The route the chain was forced go, looked very confounded to me. Incredible reliance on chain tension guides and the oil (and oil system) that lubes them.
Infinity's first Q had quite neat engine except for one big glaring weakness. (might be more than one but I am only aware of the one) It had a terrible tensioner that failed early. I think that one was nylon surfaced, as are others too out there. It works if the angles aren't too severe on it. But just looking at that cross section pic link of ruking's engine, will really explain what I'm taking about.
The claims that belts are quieter don't really add up.
But, I can sorta imagine a belt having the ability to be quieter and contribute fewer parasitic losses. Mainly due to bearings in idler wheel tensioners having less friction resistance than a guide whereby it relies entirely on the surface compound and the oil that lubes it. I guess too, the metal to metal contact must make a slight difference in db potential no matter how exacting the engagement area is. Take metal bottomed frypan and set it gently on a steel work bench. Now take that same frypan and layer some kevlar etc on the bottom and set it down gently..I'm guessing that with db measuring device, it's going to read lower with the kevlar based pan.
You should hear the RACKET! that many bikes make from nothing more than the timing chain tensioner guides..Holy smokes, some of them make more noise than the exhaust note. Honda CX and many of their CBR models come to mind right off.. Now take Honda's ST. The first year and right up to 2002 (inclusive) generation, they used a belt. Then in 03 they did a complete and massive model redesign. The engine grew in displacement, placement in an aluminum frame (vs steel), became stressed in the frame (vs rubber mounted) used a timing chain, and grew a chain driven internal counter-balancer. It is that last little tidbit of info that camouflages the potential extra noise of a timing chain. The balancer uses straight cut gears that whine. And they are loud! Too loud for my liking. And they easily overcome any noise the timing chain may be making over the older belt model. The new generation is an entirely different beast. Incredibly capable in the handling department. The lowering and more forward positioning of the engine in the aluminum frame and stressing it in the frame as a structural member, all contribute to that handling. But that same solid mounting is what necessitated the internal balancer.
Sorry..I was going somewhere with this and now got totally sidetracked
So the key difference is that belt drives normally need a SCHEDULED maintenance cycle: as opposed to a CHAIN drive that is not scheduled but @ some TBD or unscheduled point, MAY or may not need a rehab to R/R !! As a general rule we are talking something on the order of 200,000 to 300,000 miles that it should @ the very leas be inspected by a qualified mechanic/shop. As a point of TMI belt drives really allow more precision in design, operation, and cheaper renewal, albeit on a schedule basis vs a TBD UN scheduled basis.
So for example early this morning, I heard the "PEPBOY'S" CEO say the 8.5 to 13 year old car owner is his organization's sweet spot customer. So given the US AVG yearly miles 12,000 to 15,000 miles, the range is between 102,000 miles and 195,000 miles. So by defacto and inference, a car is relatively care free: sub 8.5 years.
This was unsaid but almost any car is really designed to go a min of 100,000 miles with only minimal scheduled maintenance (oil/filter change, brake pads , rotors, tires and alignments if one is a consumption "MONSTER. "
A couple years ago, I tallied up the extra costs to just own an auto in a new Jetta or Golf (cuz I plan to finally get an auto due to leg and knee issues:( ) and it was really significant! Seems to me each service was 500-700 or some such ridiculous price. And it happened every ..I forget..still have the pamphlet here somewhere though..50 or 60k km less than 40k miles! As for the timing belt, well, it is pretty much a universal issue of not having enough room at TDC (top dead centre) for the valve to be left hanging from a broken belt, and the piston relentlessly following through with its usual stroke and wham
Sometimes engine rpm at the time of belt failure can cause the interference to happen or if lucky, not. But this will only happen with CC's that are not really squishing the intake air. So IOW's, if it's a diesel or very high performance type engine, not having a timing failure is crucial.
I believe that that is one of the reasons mfgrs have gone to chains...not just cuz we have voiced annoyance with the ongoing expensive maintenance of belts, but because if a belt happens to have a flaw and fails inside wty, well that costs them..
And chains (even with poorly designed guides and tensioners on certain engines) usually never fail under wty.
It was okay stranding my wife this past April when the belt broke in the Quest fifty miles from home. We got towed home pretty fast and the engine didn't get damaged by the belt breaking. And she's pretty tolerant of my foibles. :shades:
That sort of thing was widely told in the auto rags. $250 AdBlue fill ups. When I get a vehicle with Adblue tank that will be the first thing I do. Locate and keep it filled. If MB wants to rape me on synthetic oil change I will go elsewhere to have it done. There is a long established Mercedes Indie much closer than the dealer. He is right next to my wife's favorite thrift shop and my favorite gun dealer. I would probably use his shop anyway to save 30 extra miles of driving.
PS
Dieter is also an authorized MB warranty shop.
You and your wife are very adventurous. You stay in tents when there are perfectly good motels to stay in. :shades:
13 BMW 3 series
Did I ever tell you about camping at a river put-in down in N. Georgia one Friday night and the turkey-hunter camper next door came over and "helped" me start my campfire by pouring a half gallon of diesel on it?
I think he wanted to smoke us into his pickup camper to shoot craps on his ironing board. Seriously.