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

crkyolfrt

Thanks for finding that for me..I had made a copy of that quide in the past but kept overlooking it thinking the pic I was looking for was from a different source so kept ruling that one out..
Ya, I'm not too interested in the gas jobs as you know..although, gas engines that go the extra miles (by a lot) with very few $ to do it (i.e. IOWs, not including your two TLCs cuz of the humongous number of gallons of gas you have had to put in them to get the big miles ) do interest me.

So I called the closest VW dealer to me enroute to where I will be driving the MB 250, and they have no new VW Ts until the 2014s are out. They do have one used 2010 tho. Comfortline trim, has sunroof 44000 miles $35900.00
That is the previous generation though right? Any big changes in the engine and tranny? Were they using that Aisin 8 sp in 2010? Engine identical? Did the previous generation have as good a rep as the new ones? Something in my memory says they were troublesome...but that is always the problem when comparing prev generation to current. Current are all still so new that it takes time to get miles and use piled up enough to see if they are any more reliable/$ or not..

stever

"The guys from Edmunds.com were invited in Germany to an even sponsored by BMW to test this new model and share their opinion on it. They were enthralled.

It's a known fact that Americans are still reluctant towards diesels. However, slowly but surely, the advantages of these fuel efficient cars will soon start to make sense, even on the North American continent."

2014 BMW F10 5 Series Review by Edmunds (autoevolution.com)

ruking1

Indeed. I regularly get up to CN for a host of reasons. Over the years, I have developed flexible boundaries. So if I can adapt the Sir Winston Churchill quote:

...""Americans and British (Canadians, my sic) are one people separated only by a common language."...

Now I am NOT leaving out the province that speaks FRENCH.

ruking1

..."Take a look at this car: it has a 3-liter 258 HP engine under the bonnet that produces 560 Nm (413 lb-ft) of torque. That's more than enough to send the car up to 100 km/h (62 mph) in just 5.3 seconds and crush your lungs while doing it, keeping the fuel consumption to an incredible 44.4 mpg (5.3 l/100 km) on average."...

So is there ANYONE in the USA that remains unconvinced that LOW MPG has been and remains an American FAIRY tale !!

stever

We're getting there but 44 really is a bit sad so many years following the first gas shock back in the 70s. When the average hits 54.5, then maybe we'll see some real winners on the farther end of the bell curve.

crkyolfrt

We're getting there but 44 really is a bit sad so many years following the first gas shock back in the 70s.

Not when you consider the performance part of that same equation..

Of course that is not to suggest that you would get anywhere near 44 while extracting those 0-60 giggles, but the point remains that if they detuned so that it was still quite capable even if not very fast, it would easily exceed that 44..
Perhaps even almost meet that avg you mentioned..today.

ruking1

The 2004 Toyota Prius was advertised to get 60 C 50 H but folks who got 44 mpg were "lucky." The BMW in the article has app 4 x the torque of the Prius !! ??

So while I am (RELATIVELY) happy with the 32 mpg or so over all for a (US)Touareg TDI, I am firmly convinced with a so called "EUROPEAN" optioned Touareg TDI, I would not only get better mpg, but greater HP and Torque. I am also firmly convinced a 6/7/8 speed M/T would also add its own mpg, not to mention a lot less parasitic loss !

gagrice

We're getting there but 44 really is a bit sad

I think if we were not so obsessed with stop light racing we would see these companies offering the high mileage diesels. The BMW 525d will get you 55 MPG US on the highway. But it takes 7 seconds to get to 62 MPH. I think when the numbers start coming in on the GLK250 Bluetec, BMW and Audi will respond. I don't think Lexus has anything comparable and Honda kind of gave up when the EPA shot them down 5 years ago. What is interesting to me is BMW does not even sell the X3 with gas engine in the UK. Only two models of diesel. I think they are built in the USA and shipped back to the EU. The thinking must be that no one in the USA wants a CUV like the X3 that gets 47 MPG US on the highway.

gagrice

So while I am (RELATIVELY) happy with the 32 mpg or so over all for a (US)Touareg TDI, I am firmly convinced with a so called "EUROPEAN" optioned Touareg TDI

It sounds like you are getting just what the UK estimates the Touareg TDI will get, 39.2 MPG UK = 32.6 MPG US. They also have a V8 diesel that gets 31 MPG UK or 25.8 US MPG. And blasts you from 0-62 MPH in 5.8 seconds.

I think I would be just fine with 32 MPG in the US version. And only having to fuel up every 800 miles would be dandy. I could visit the kids in Indiana with only two fuel stops in Albuquerque and Springfield MO.

ruking1

What might be TMI AND hard to see is the ability to fuel literally @ will (which in theory allows one to chose the cheapest price per gal) as opposed to HAVING to fuel @ higher priced intervals.

In some current trips, the fact the cheapest prices being in resort areas (and less than one mile away from some destinations) as opposed to home or on the way home is just icing on the cake !

In a further TMI and "Wayne Gerdes" ish hyper miling twist, I can literally fill the 26.4 gal tank with only 6.56 gals or defacto (19.8 gals lighter- 8 #s per gal x=159 #s) LIGHTER for app 1 to 2 mpg BETTER fuel mileage. So if I get 31/33 mpg R/T, we are talking more like 32/35 mpg :surprise:

Way off topic but diesel related, saw 2.5 gal containers of BLUE DEF @ the local Walmart @ app 4.80 per gal.

crkyolfrt

Ruking, I get a kick outta some of your stats, but hope you don't mind if I call you on them sometimes?

This one, for example..

159 #s) LIGHTER for app 1 to 2 mpg BETTER fuel mileage

The very nature of how efficiently the diesel engine works, makes them so effective at exploiting the exceptional mpg they get when doing work. So I do find it hard to believe that a measly (in the context of the point I'm questioning here) 159 fewer pounds on board can equate to even 1 mpg saved in an almost 5000 lb vehicle, let alone a potential 2 mpg saved.

Hope you don't take offense to me questioning this but it is with sincerity that (to me) the numbers don't really align here in this example. If it is in fact, fact..then I guess we can only deduce that the 159 lb saved, exploits a sweet spot. Just seems hard to imagine though..

ruking1

No ! BUT....Actually this has been an observation and test in the real world side by side for a number of years (10 years) on both commute gassers and diesels, albeit less than 159 #'s. We lose app 1 to 2 mpg, when two people are in the car vs 1 person.

Naturally it makes all the sense in the world to go from 28,000 miles per year separate to 14,000 miles and suck up the 1 to 2 mpg loss by ride share.

Now, will I do the 6.56 gals "TEST"? No, not as a formal experiment. I in effect already can swag the result, by way of doing it already in the above paragraph. It is a gas (pun intended) NOT going to the fuel station as much. (how can not doing a negative be fun? )

KCRam

The 2014 Ram 1500 preliminary press kit released today lists the VM Motori 3.0L V6 EcoDiesel at 240 hp @ 3600 and 420 lb-ft at 2000, hooked exclusively to the ZF 8HP70, with either 3.21 or 3.55 axles. The engine is priced at $2850 above the 5.7L Hemi (for comparison, the 6.7L Cummins is a $7795 option above the 5.7L for the 2500 and 3500 trucks). EPA numbers will come later, but are predicted at 23/29 for the 1500 4x2.

KCRam - Pickups/Wagons/Vans+Minivans Host

crkyolfrt

It is a gas (pun intended) NOT going to the fuel station as much. (how can not doing a negative be fun?

I sure do concur there...if I manage to swing this new diesel, it is one of the things I am looking forward to...I hate going to fill up so the least times the better.

So what are your thoughts on that 2010? Anything off hand that springs to mind as a head's up? I don't like that it has a sunroof. Probably wouldn't buy it for that reason alone..but I am curious still.

crkyolfrt

EPA numbers will come later, but are predicted at 23/29 for the 1500 4x2.

Certainly sounds predictably conservative..

gagrice

So what are your thoughts on that 2010?

Many writers have lamented the dumbing down of the post 2010 Touareg. The 2010 had air suspension and many other enhancements including a more luxurious interior. I doubt it would give the same or as good mileage as the 2011 and newer. And don't forget the World record time set in a 2011 Touareg TDI from the tip of So America to the Arctic ocean. That was NO small feat. I don't think you will see any other automaker taking the chance to best that feat. 16,000 miles in 11 days is more than I would attempt. The current Touareg TDI is the vehicle to beat. VW dominates from DARPA to Dakar to the Arctic, whatever they enter.

http://www.tdi-panamericana.com/about.php

gagrice

(19.8 gals lighter- 8 #s per gal x=159 #s) LIGHTER for app 1 to 2 mpg BETTER fuel mileage.

That may be if you are Wayne Gerdes and cruise at 55 on the yellow line to lessen friction. I have no doubt he could squeeze 45+ MPG out of the Touareg TDI. If you want to try it with a lighter load toss out the Mother in Law and tell her how much better the mileage was with her at home.

ruking1

I do not have any direct experiences with that MY. Edmunds.com documents an occasional issue with glow plugs. Other than that, most consumers rate it well. It does have the 6 speed A/T.

ruking1

Yes, I think that 45+ mpg would be a point of pride for Gerdes.

I remember being pretty excited when I noted 39 mpg for app 90 miles on the South Lake Tahoe, CA downgrade leg !

I think part of every endeavor, there are certain aspects that fall under the categories of "games. " So while maximum mpg can be one aspect/category of the "games," I like being able to drive slightly to semi aggressively and still post the range of mpg numbers that I do. The mpg range is like a gauge of optimization, given the perception of the conditions I am facing. I do know I was more careful during the break in phase and posted a few tank fulls of 36 mpg. My sense is 36 mpg is duplicable.

stever

Not when you consider the performance part of that same equation..

Well, I suppose, although I well remember my old man frequently pointing out that we were going a mile a minute back in the early 60s heading to our fishing cabin. Probably did take more than 12 seconds to get there, and my 170 horse minivan would handily beat his '53 Buick Special off the line but big whoop. Great for those red light to red light speeders I suppose but the speed limit was 55 and 60 then, and it's just 70 to 75 most places now, and not even that high on the fun roads.

I bet 20 mpg was pretty common back then too, even if that was just among the Rambler and AMC crowd.

gagrice

I like being able to drive slightly to semi aggressively and still post the range of mpg numbers that I do.

And that is why I consider the VW Touareg TDI a good choice. I never drive like grandpa even though I R 1. :shades:

Research shows the ML350 Bluetec does not yield as good as the Touareg. could be gearing or any number of factors. Fuelly lists a lot more Touareg TDIs to compare. And the average is about 26 MPG, which I consider a worthwhile improvement over 15 MPG on my Sequoia.

ruking1

..."And the average is about 26 MPG, which I consider a worthwhile improvement over 15 MPG on my Sequoia."...

@ 73% + better, quite the improvement !!

The same is true over the TLC's 14 to 17 mpg range.

I am now extremely curious as to the mpg range the MB GLK 250 (blue tec) will be able to post.

If you are still interested, I was told today, the one I test drove is still for sale, albeit the more "loaded" one ( white with black interior) PO1 Premium with sunroof , 319 lighting pkg, 320 multi media pkg, 321AMG pkg, 550 trailer hitch, 810 HK sound sys with dolby 5.1, 873 heated front seats, 889 keyless, 993 lane tracking pkg.

gagrice

I have no doubt the GLK will be well over 35 MPG combined. And 40+ highway should be the norm.

That GLK should have an MSRP about $55k and sell for $50k. I never buy black interior, too hot in CA. I have replied to all the dealers that were shooting me GLKs they have, and told them I was not interested in any vehicle with Run Flat Tires. They were all gracious and told me any time I was looking for a new Mercedes let them know. The last thing that turned me off is the 15.6 gallon tank. That is 2 gallons less range than the gas version and 11 gallons less than the Touareg. The low fuel light came on once this last trip in the Sequoia. It took 21.5 gallons and we had gone 346 miles. That was on an I20 TX leg where going 75 MPH will get you run off the highway. In the Touareg I could have gotten to Arkansas where gas was 30 cents a gallon less than in TX. Diesel and a big tank gives the consumer much better choices. We paid $3.11 in El Paso and $3.11 in Arkansas. We had to stop 2 fill up two more times in TX and the price was $3.45. States like TX know they have you if you are driving a gas guzzler.

ruking1

Then I am looking forward to what MB GLK250 owners will probably post in mpg and other parameters. Even in the very short test mileage, the salesman and myself posted 35 mpg on the computer. What that would post on a 15 gal + tank would only be a guess.

Pretty close, they would start to talk turkey for app $1.5k less. So thanks for your early heads up.

For me, I was very excited about the new Blue Tech engine. Having driven the 8 speed A/T, I found myself wondering how it would be on this 7 speed equipped A/T. While all the equipment pkgs were VERY nice and all had LOADS of functionality, I really had minimal want or real need for most to all of it. The sun roof even when bottled up let in a lot of ambient light. So the key issue would be if that was liked, you were ok with it, or liked less ambient light. They are GREAT for letting out the hot air after it has been sitting in the hot CA sun for ANY length of time.

Yes, Texas is real interesting when it comes to the speed dichotomy On something like I 20, fully loaded tractor trailers are loathed to go 75 mph. They do follow and do enforce the "KEEP RIGHT" except to pass signs/warnings. (God bless Texas)

When you get off the interstate, I found myself getting gunned (almost all speed enforcement cars have radar) at almost every crest of a new rolling hill, by a series of county and small town municipalities LEO's.

crkyolfrt

I notice this is the 2nd time you refer to your US cars as having a small tank in the BT than the gas. Not so here in Cda. They are both 66 litre. So, if they are correct, then almost 2 (of your) gallons larger than the 15.6 you indicate or apprx 80+ miles more range. That was the point I was making last week when you factor in that 80+ miles and also add the (significantly) better mpg than the VW T, all of sudden the overall range of both is only about 100 miles apart, with the VW T having that extra 100.

I wonder if there is a CA emissions difference causing the tank to be smaller for some reason? Either that or one of the countries is mistaken in their specs. I wonder what the EU spec shows for the BT? I'll bet you it is 66 litre, the same as here, and someone has screwed up the math converting to an American (3.785 l) gallon when drawing up the specs. According to our car, yours should have a 17.44 gal tank if there is no different between the engine choices. 640+ mile range on a trip like you described, leaving 1.5 gal in the tank. (700 if sniffing fumes)

Interesting about the pre 2011 VW T having air suspension etc..lots to go wrong with that.. And I know I would never be as happy with a 6 speed in that same application as that 8 sp Aisin. The Aisin would literally help you achieve better FE and do so more easily.

Another curious thing that has been mentioned a few times (on the GLK250) is that our car comes standard with heated seats. And it is an almost 800. option in the US. I wonder what all else there might be different that would help close the $ gap..although admittedly, would still leave quite the spread in the end cuz, yes, we are gouged heavily on vehicles (and all related parts like tires) And electronics. And medications. And clothes. And groceries..And..

ruking1

..."Another curious thing that has been mentioned a few times (on the GLK250) is that our car comes standard with heated seats. And it is an almost 800. option in the US. I wonder what all else there might be different that would help close the $ gap..although admittedly, would still leave quite the spread in the end cuz, yes,"...

Right. So the 873 Heated Front Seats are a $750 MSRP option. I guess the expectation is ANY MB should come "fully" loaded. This of course is not the case, as one CAN order (this MB GLK 250 Blue Tec) with only the so called "STANDARD ACCESSORIES."(38,590 MSRP in three colors N/C with 6 interior colors N/C) Prices for options (already configured and in inventory) will accordingly will be all over the range.

gagrice

I notice this is the 2nd time you refer to your US cars as having a small tank in the BT than the gas.

I got it off the MB website both for US or EU delivery. They show the Gas model with the 17.4 gal tank.

Fuel requirement Diesel fuel #2 or B5 biodiesel
Fuel tank (capacity-reserve) 15.6 gal

http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/legacy/vehicles/model?class=GLK&model=GLK250BT#des- ign

Looking at Mercedes Canada there are several differences including the larger tank. You may not even have AdBlue injection to pass your emissions. I would imagine that tank took up space and forced a smaller fuel tank for US consumption.

elias

is it obvious to everyone that the 15.6 gal is not the tank size, it's the tank size minus the size of the 'reserve', which could maybe 1.8 or 2 gallons?
i looked around the link provided to look for the 17.4 number for the gas version to see if it also said capacity-reserve, but didnt find it. could it be that they don't bother with the 'reserve' for the gasoline version tank specification/dashboard-indication? i don't think it's usual in USA to list the fuel tank size as "capacity-reserve". just tell us the size. btw, does anyone remember some old cars (my friends dad drove a Rover car in 1975, i think that was one) where you had to slide a lever to go from main tank to reserve tank?

btw, one reason i've seen for smaller fuel tanks is for a couple tenths% better mpg. for example chevy cruze eco has smaller fuel tank compared to base model.

yankabilly

The OLD reserve tank my dad would call the Sunday tank, when shops were closed on Sunday's. Up until last five yrs when you filled up you're tank when the fuel nozzle would auto stop they would say you're tank was full, this was so there was an air bubble in the tank, this had to do with the fuel injection system then they went to a vent hole in the fuel cap.
Cars now don't need that many don't even have gas caps, so the reserve is how much more fuel you can get in the fuel tank neck. It drives my wife nuts I will spend extra few minutes filling up the neck, takes lest time when there is some one on the others side filling up also since there is only one one pump for both of us. I even can get the full 6 gallons on my HD mc tank VERY CAREFULLY

stever

Seems like old VW Bugs had an emergency gallon you could get to.

Don't know about diesels, but if you routinely top off a gasser, you're risking killing the vapor recovery cannister system stuff.

scwmcan

You really shouldn't fill the tank to the brim if it is a gas car ( bad things for the evaporative control systems) with a diesel you can do it if you want to take the time to wait for the foam to settle.

stever

Ah, I see. Diesel is like beer. :shades:

gagrice

for example chevy cruze eco has smaller fuel tank compared to base model.

I see that. The Cruze base and diesel models have a 15.6 gallon tank and the Cruze Eco only a 12.6 gallon tank. According to Edmunds TMV you can buy the larger base Passat diesel for about $1300 less than the base Cruze diesel. That should make the Cruze a real tough sell against the proven Passat diesel. And the Passat has an 18.5 gallon tank. If you can match Wayne Gerdes 48 state mileage record it would be 1400 miles on a tank of diesel. That is what I call a decent range between fuel stops.

gagrice

Ah, I see. Diesel is like beer.

Exactly, when I had the Passat TDI, I could get an additional gallon into the tank and filler tube after it first clicked off.

Looking back at the spreadsheet on the Passat TDI, I was able to get 18.79 gallons into what was listed as a 16.4 gallon tank according to Edmunds. Either ARCO ripped me off or the tank and filler could hold a lot more than the rated size. I drove into the station so I did not run out.

While in the Edmunds used car section I compared current trade-in on the diesel vs the gas from that 2005 model. At the time the TDI was a $200 premium over the gas model. Today the trade-in has the TDI at $7494 and the gasser at $5569. I would say buying a diesel pays off from beginning to end.

ruking1

Being a former (more than one) TDI owner, I know you are being a bit to far too conservative in your comments.

I ran the used car- drill downs (2003 Jetta's TDI sans the specific details) on Edmunds.com and on a GL 1.8 T gasser. GL TDI posted $6,570. GL 1.8 T posted $4,749. This is a difference of 1,821 better for the TDI or 38.3 % better !!!

I also know that if I put the 03 TDI Jetta on the market today, I would get an even BETTER premium over $6,570 with or without the details. I also know that if I had the 1.8 T gasser, I'd be lucky to get the $4,749 ! On a TDI "premium" of app $236, the numbers pencil $1821 better TDI resale value. So on the premium alone, I would make 772%/10 years or 77% per year better on the TMV.

The boring mpg aspects of a TDI choice (vs gasser B/E) mask an even more dramatic result !!!! 27.5 vs 46.7 mpg (posted on fuel economy.gov: some would vilify my 50 mpg as "cooking the books" ) using 200,000 miles = gals consumed of 7,273 vs 4,283 or 2,990 gals MORE for the 1.8 T. With PUG @ $4.13 (current prices), I would have spent $12,349 more to perform the same amount of miles ( work).

crkyolfrt

Cdn site lists fuel capacity like this:

"Fuel tank capacity/with reserve (L) 66/-"

I would take that to mean capacity as 66, reserve as zero.

Interesting theory on the Adblue tank possibly using up tank capacity space, altho somewhere I thought I read it was up front under the hood. I can't believe how much crap info there is as you dig into the Cdn site, yet says precious little about the use of Adblue. Somewhere I thought I saw an ad talking about about what Adblue does but it might not have been MB. Get a load of this...they actually talk about it, yet DON'T :sick:

BlueTEC minimises emissions from our cutting-edge diesel engines while at the same time lowering fuel consumption.
The BlueTec technology developed by Mercedes-Benz is based on cutting-edge diesel engines with common rail direct injection and features all the strengths and advantages of this drive principle. BlueTEC is a modular concept for the effective reduction of fuel consumption and emissions in diesel vehicles. It comprises various coordinated technical measures combining technologies inside the engine aimed at reducing untreated emissions with the effective aftertreatment of exhaust gases. All the relevant constituents of emissions are minimised. The employed technology includes an oxidation catalytic converter and a particle filter. The most important objective, however, is to drastically reduce nitrous oxide emissions Ð the only component of exhaust gases today whose level is higher for diesel engines than the corresponding value for petrol engines.

Also saw this, but doesn't make sense to me at all..I would not use the damn start/stop tech probably ever...ya I really want my cam lobes getting drained of oil at each stop light then enduring the wear upon startup each time to save some micro grams of fuel...I don't think so...

And this is makes no sense..

Vehicles equipped with the ECO start/stop function feature a starter motor that is also capable of acting as a generator to power the vehicleÕs electrical system while the engine is stopped.

So what is with their comment about the starter becoming a generator?? All the systems still use only 12 volts..so the generator only has one place to get power when the engine is off, which is from the battery! So the starter being able to be a generator which still is only going to power "electrical accessories" with 12 volt, which they can get from the battery anyway..so the starter having the ability to be a generator makes no sense whatsoever.

I have seen a pattern of reflection and memory every time I visit the MB site. I leave frustrated and still as confused as when I first went there. Even their damn PDF Brochure file has not been updated to include the 250. Like...how frig long does it take to add this to their website? Yet they spent time and resources creating small videos here and there...about 27 seconds long, with the bloody captions in print, covering up where you want to see in the video! They should be ashamed. We're talking MB of Canada for cripe's sake.. :sick:

crkyolfrt

I can sorta see maybe I failed at the point I was trying to make..but your comment about "70 to 75" speed limits is exactly what I was getting at...we don't need the additional performance requirements to make the car super quick 0-60 cuz in order to do that, by default, the same car can't be as efficient at 75 mph as it could be if it also wasn't designed to really rip..They think that in order to sell diesels, they have to make them basically as quick as the gas job siblings under the same conditions..yet in the real world, I would much rather see them list 0-60 times with the car's full payload, with the diesel vs gas...then see which 0-60 is going to be quicker...the diesel of course would just annihilate the gas job in every sprint, every hill, every mountain run...even hook a loaded to capacity trailer to it..and the diesel is going to stomp all over the gas..

Anyway...ignorance (your avg North American's knowledge of what a diesel is really all about) is bliss..and the mfgrs do what they think they have to do in order to get more oil burner buyers on board..which is give the engine the ability (and the tranny the lower gearing etc) to produce these impressive sprint times, at the expense of cruise-down-the-hwy-real-world fuel economy. It's incredible that they do as well as they do when you consider the full spectrum of conditions they can operate under. I consider Fintail's E350, Ruking's VW T, (and the GLK too) all sleepers..they go down the road driven sanely delivering great economy, yet all three have the ability to really get up and gooooooo if you get extra intimate with the loud pedal..

stever

I stepped on someone's toes a few years ago when a poster was lauding an "innovative" race car driver. One trick (among many) he did involved using a "regulation" sized tank but running the filler hose from one end of the chassis to the other, letting him get another gallon of gas loaded. Saving a pit stop let him win some races.

That innovation sounded like cheating to me and I said so. You'd have thought I said Washington never cut down a cherry tree.

ruking1

Steering away from a founding father, fah der of the country to current politcal parsing of words and truth discussion (where the lie is the truth and the truth is the lie and all manner of scenarios.....

Under the heading of TMI, the TDI's fuel filter and "preload system" holds a (unknown to me but) known (to the TMIers of TMI), quantity of fuel. So for example, a diesel fuel filter holds app a soft ball and a hard ball volume of ULSD. While it is probably not wise to totally evacuate the tank's capacity and work on this quantity of fuel, the fact of the matter is anyone can/I can (on a 26.4 gal tank) actually USE the full capacity. Do I ? Would I? No x2 with #2 being a qualified no. = emergency.

crkyolfrt

Here is a bit of interesting trivia I learned about 4 years ago..but was only after some extensive digging. It was regarding a bike, but found out it is apparently true of all cars too. Technically if a manufacturer lists a fuel tank capacity as...let's say 56 litres (or a hair under 15 US gal) the actually capacity is 56 litres MINUS the volume of the internal fuel pump assembly, filter(s) and pick up tubing/fuel gauge sensing parts. This can be upwards of 1.5 litre or more depending on the vehicle.

Anyway, as you often say...probably classed under TMI..but I found it interesting and is always in the back of my mind when reading about a vehicles tank size. It is a bigger deal on a bike of course because the tank is smaller than on a car, yet the FI systems and assorted fuel pump etc etc are much the same size.

FWIW, I don't run any of my tanks too low very often due to my belief that the quantity of fuel in the tank, cools the fuel pump..thereby extending fuel pump life. Furthermore reducing the chance of cavitation draw going over bumps or around corners, which also is a longevity factor.

ruking1

..."Ruking's VW T, (and the GLK too) all sleepers..they go down the road driven sanely delivering great economy, yet all three have the ability to really get up and gooooooo if you get extra intimate with the loud pedal.."...

Took the 09 Jetta TDI to a place in Shiftright's turf (he can comment about the MacArthur MAZE) yesterday during 100 degree heat (A/C blasting of course) and traffic, traffic, traffic out the wazoo !!! After the BBQ, went to another location with street traffic (again out the wazoo) Longer story short, the computer posted 42.8 mpg for that R/T traffic out the wazoo legs/outing.

stever

Nice, now we can blame big fuel pumps for gas tanks not holding as much as they claim.

I've always heard the "keep 'em lubricated" claim but I think it'd be tough to get the tank so low consistently to cause pump burnout problems. I often wait until I'm close to empty or the low fuel light is on to find a station and have yet to lose a fuel pump.

The good news:

Ram offers diesel V6 in 1500 pickup early next year (Detroit Free Press)

And yep, it's a extra cost option. "Ram will charge $2,850 more for the 1500 diesel than for a similarly equipped Hemi V8 model of the truck"Ram will charge $2,850 more for the 1500 diesel than for a similarly equipped Hemi V8 model of the truck."

Even so - "Diesel vehicles beat out gasoline-powered cars in low ownership costs, saving drivers between $2,000 and $6,000 on average over the course of a few years."

Want to save cash? Go diesel over gas, study says 9la tIMES)

ruking1

As a poster who has laid out (the grade school math) number on "diesels when the haters vilifications have risen to levels of BS.... " This study is news to me ! ? Can't be true !

But then on the other hand using MSG #9928 as an EXAMPLE, gasser fans have issues spending more $236 (for a diesel premium) when they can spend $14,170 MORE/extra to save $236 !! ?? :shades: :lemon: And it is done app 95%+ of the time, if looking at the 95%+ being gassers in the passenger vehicle fleet! :lemon: :shades:

gagrice

Found a great dealer with a White Touareg TDI Lux. It has what VW is now calling saddle brown. It is almost black. Very dark brown. My wife would rather have the cornsilk. Which brings us back to the Sports with NAV and leatherette. Going to try and locate one. I want to make sure the seats are as comfy as the LUX Leather seats with power lumbar and 12 way adjustment. The salesman was very laid back. Had me drive half way up the Coast on a very long loop. Longest test drive I have ever been on. I like driving the Touareg TDI for sure. The other advantage to the Sport with NAV is no sun roof which for us is a total waste. Here is the color on the VW website for saddle brown leather:



Here is the color of the leather actually in the Touareg.

crkyolfrt

I want to make sure the seats are as comfy as the LUX Leather seats with power lumbar and 12 way adjustment.

That's for sure. I will look forward to hearing more about this..

Don't forget dark interiors soak up a lot of heat. I have been in a Jetta with the cornsilk colour. I like lighter colours due to them being cooler. I take a bit of extra effort to keep them clean..(like a big beach towel to use to come from a contracting day). It's not that hard if a person puts just a bit of effort and thought into it..For me, well worth the cooler interior. Hell..I wouldn't even ever own a black car due to the extra heat the interior gets from it..and of course one of many reasons I too do NOT want a sunroof...at all. I had a black X Trail once and the sunroof leaked, only in the winter. Picture an evening of snowfall...then a bright sunny but COLD Jan day the next day..The snow on the south side melts on the roof even though it is -20. But as the sun starts to make its way west, the water from the melting, starts to freeze in the drain tubes going down the A pillars. This leaves the only other thing that can happen if the design does not allow for such a scenario (next to impossible even on high-enders)(I guess you're supposed to live in sunny Cali or parj in garage and never go out if it snows) which is water that backs up. In the X Trail, this meant that a LOT of frig water completely soaked the passenger seat and floor while the car was parked (leak undiscovered) for 10 days of sunny but cold wx. I used the seat heater to help thaw and dry it out but here...in the coldest part of the wx, with windows up, and only 30 to 40 min drive into town, imagine how long it takes to dry the moisture so that it doesn't cause the defroster to work overtime till you can dry the thing out the next summer.
So many other reasons too I really don't like sunroofs:
- they cost more to buy
- own
- maintain
- insure
make the interior hotter, and louder and brighter and not as peaceful as there is no sound insulation where it is
- body rigidity suffers
- would you rather be in a roll-over and have an uninterrupted steel roof and roof reinforcing rails to protect you from the top of a guard rail post, or rock or stump in the ditch that happens to be right where the sunroof was, or have a huge glass opening so your melon can be cheek to cheek with that post or boulder? (not 'you' Gary cuz I know I'm just preachin' to the choir here..)

Now for perks, they are few..I have had reason to bring a tool home that was able to poke up through the sunroof just by pure chance. So that was handy.

If you are parked at home where someone won't vandalize you by chucking their lit cigarette butt in the slightly open sunroof cuz you are letting it vent heat, then I suppose that is a perk..But even at home there are birds..and they crap in my front yard all the time. Ironically, I feed them by hand here, but it isn't THOSE ones who crap on my car...it is the OTHER birds that are attracted to a property that they have figured is bird friendly cuz there is seed and always bird activity around. To reduce random seeds and the extra birds is one of the reasons I feed by hand and carry seed in my pockets when I'm working outside.

I have had to quit parking with my wipers lifted off the hot glass (the hot glass will prematurely harden the rubber..my wipers last way longer since I started doing this) cuz there is ..what I think is a feegee or some such crapper, that craps more than the dang things could possibly eat you would think, from landing on the wipers and then crapping on the hood. What a frig mess..I know...clean the damn garage out so the car can go in there...I'm my own worse enemy.. :sick: But the bikes are in there and tools etc and bikes are a lot harder to clean

Can I get derailed or what?? But seriously...there is sense in my madness, lol

stever

Happy Canada Day.

At least the ravens aren't eating your wiper blades. Now go clean out your garage.

ruking1

Between the two brown colors and the cornsilk, (if this was my first buy) I think I would have a hard time in the selection. Now keep in mind the logic of the lighter colors absorbing less UV and heat energy and vice versa is also true. So to me there is really no argument there.

Since these issues are a matter of degrees, it is what you like, tolerate/won't tolerate, etc.

Further I do have a white with cornsilk sedan. Defacto, I have that perspective first. However there are a lot of other things going on that really make me ok with the Flint metallic grey and black upholstery. Indeed when I got it, because of the dark color and combination, I thought I would have to suck it up and get used to the disadvantages. The real world is it is no where near as bad as I had anticipated. Another is I actually like the dark interior for longer trips, as it is to the eye more soothing/comfortable. The principle here is if the eyes are fatigued it affects your over all "well being". So I am thinking the two fold unseen variables are that the glass on the darker exterior and dark interior stops massive UV and of course oem tinted. Further the dark brown is actually VERY close to black even as the perception of color is indeed that brown is NOT black and not as dark.

crkyolfrt

Thanks for the HCD wishes, Steve..didn't do much...laundry.. while getting an Econo Hydro (electricity) rate cuz of it being a legal holiday..

Your ravens eat rubber bits there, eh? That sucks..but then I have porcupines that I have to discourage, or they'd be after the many tires on vehicles and snowmobile track etc around here..always something..eh..

Ya know the best way to clean out my garage? Build another and then transfer over selectively...that'd free up some room..I bought my DIESEL bus so I could free room in the garage...maybe I should quit storing my lumber and asst bits and other tools in the bus and then also free up room in the carport by piling my firewood in the bush under tin (which I still do with next season's worth) but I tend to go in circles when I try to get so organized and then cuz I can never finish, have to put things back unsorted, and then after a few times that happens, I can't find something when I need it.

I do need to get on top of stuff here though..pretty sure it contributes to my present singledom..haha
Although, ya know.. I think I might be being a tad too hard on myself here as things really started to go downhill when I hurt my neck and back...now I need to reserve that load/pain effort for paying jobs on the lake so not too much extra other than processing firewood and grass cutting gets done at home.. AND I have to do two out of the four roofs here before winter...like I say...method in the madness even if not always welcomed..

crkyolfrt

Yes, a dark colour can make for a peaceful environment if you are doing mostly long trips. Unfortunately the majority of mine aren't anywhere near the length of those mtn trips you do so regularly.

I have had so many grey interiors that I am actually tired of them. I could still live with a silver exterior if I had to..as long as the vehicle wore it ok..and most do of course..And I am no fan of carmel or dark browns..
I absolutely love that...whatever it is called..light tan coloured interior of the GLK250 Gary posted last week. It was just beautiful..to my eye..Of course in front of me live, might be a whole other story..same with the saddle brown VW has now...maybe in person I would like it. Tried to source a VW to drive this week enroute to the MB dealership..had none. And the dealer in the same city as the MB has been closed since I tried..holiday today too up here of course..

scwmcan

Wow, I would want the colour in the first picture, the colour of e actual seats just doesn't do it for me either.