Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I know my truck is not geared for high gas mileage. It is geared to tow. A 3.48 axle ratio is not meant for high mpgs. I once had a car with a 2.61 ratio that had the same Torque as my truck.
..."Wouldn't you rather have a PU truck with a 3.0L Diesel and 8 speed that can get you an honest 30 MPG instead of 18.5 MPG? Won't be long now. And rated for REAL green B20 diesel. ?...
Really, I am ok with you not answering the questioned quote (which was posted by Gagrice). However, it is pretty transparent why you are not.
I still am waiting for the confirmation that it is a 5000 lb ext cab full size auto trans 4WD 6.5 ft bed truck that will be giving this quoted 30 mpgs. Not a Tacoma sized reg cab manual trans substitute that only tows 7500#. Lets compare apples only.
PUG $3.79
ULSD $3.79
.20 cents between RUG & PUG
par between PUG & ULSD
.20 cents between RUG & ULSD.
I am not sure why you think we do not believe you when you state the SPREAD in your area !? In a prior post, I just ran the numbers using YOUR area's spread as YOU stated it. TDI per mile driven was still cheaper (like model VW T) Were you disappoint that even with your greater SPREAD that TDI's were still cheaper? (again like model) I also ran my spread.
I have no idea of what you are trying to compare. (6.5 L truck getting 30 mpg? Or a TDI Tacoma that is not available in US markets. This might be wishful thinking) The next thing you will probably say is why does it not get 30 mpg when taking a family and towing two horses, tack and a load of feed? Oh and what a lightweight it can't move 15,000+ #'s
The quote CLEARLY said a 3.0 L 14 Dodge 1500 series PU. Most folks into P/U trucks know what that means and hopefully the ramifications. I say I hope it goes GANGBUSTERS for them ! So I have no idea why you say apples to apples, a 6.5 L TDI vs a non US market TDI Tacoma vs upcoming US market 3.0 L TDI. 14 Dodge 1500? Let's move on. I am way over you answering the hypothetical question.
If you're in the market for a new vehicle (or new used!), that's when it makes sense to evaluate all your options. My old '69 pickup only nets me 11-12 MPG, but it would still NEVER make sense for me to replace it with any new(er) truck because no new truck has the style that truck brings......
Hahaha; just kidding there! It wouldn't make sense because I could never recoup the cost of the purchase versus just keeping what I already have.
Neither does anyone else.
He's just desperately trying to defend the indefensible.
Denial and captiousness at its finest.
And clearly doesn't understand the difference of torque that is made at 1600 rpm vs 3600 rpm, and further, the copious amounts in reserve which makes the drilling questions of a specific truck configuration so petty.
The very fact that his friend's big thirsty Power Stroke gets practically the same FE loaded vs empty is all part of the concept he either can't..or won't grasp.
Why keep going on about the greatest cost spread between fuels in his part of the country, when that doesn't represent the majority for the rest of the nation? If the numbers don't work for him, then don't buy a diesel. It's as simple as that. And at 6000 miles/year and given the depreciation hit, he probably is a good candidate to keep what he has.
But why keep going on about it...it's like he is trying to make black Ð white, come hell or high water.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/07/26/2014-ram-1500-9200-pound-tow-rating/
Ram also finalized the maximum towing number for the exclusive Ram 1500 EcoDiesel. In a 2WD, two-door, long bed configuration, the new EcoDiesel will tow up to 9,200 lbs. The new diesel engine approaches much larger displacement V-8 towing capability with a small but powerful 3.0-liter V-6 and best-in-class fuel efficiency of better than 25 MPG on the highway.
I have friends that get 25 MPG with their 2500 Ram diesel PU trucks on the highway. So 30 MPG should be a snap. I guess I should repeat the fact that you cannot go by EPA estimates for diesel vehicles. They just don't come close to reality. Heck I beat the EPA with my new Touareg TDI by 20% on the very first tank.
http://cars.chicagotribune.com/fuel-efficient/news/chi-diesels-for-2014-20130814-
I am guessing that Wayne Gerdes, et al., also got the 411 on how to drive the turbo diesel for the record setting 77+ mpg, 8,000+ miles road trip. Perhaps noteworthy was Gerdes also set a gasser/hybrid record and it was far less than 77 mpg (64 mpg as I recall?) Other references list a 6 speed M/T. When the Taylor's set their Passat TDI record @ 84+mpg for a tank full, there was no mention of what transmission: albeit a strong swag was also the 6 speed M/T. While their can be a host of things that can be done to optimize mpg, the Taylor's listed one NON technical one. Drive (presumably in 6 gear) @ 5 mph UNDER the speed limit, (65 limit) @ 60 mph. This of course has a technical conversion @ "x,xxx" rpm.
Yes they do. The (2012) recommendation is 33 F/38 R psi. The oem manual lists a "highway economy" (or some such title) of PLUS + 3 psi. (36 F /41 R ) Operating temperatures seems to add 4 to 6 psi.
Sometimes the screen lists a # or two difference, side to side, front to rear, diagonally in sun/out, etc. . After a while they do seem to pop back. I use a dial tire gauge, so I do have a frame of reference. Not to worry, as tires are meant/engineered to be run with variance.
The additional measurement errors are when it is filled so called "cold" So for example if you top off @ 55 degrees (morning/night) and you take the vehicle out @ 75 degrees the temp should now be PLUS + 2 #'s.
I've been running the car fairly hard (lots of hills and mountain passes) with the AC on 98% of the time, mileage in the upper 30s I think.
The fact of the matter is cost of getting all three products to market is really similar. It is all the if, ands, buts that in large measure determine the actual market prices.
PUG (here to your south) sells normally @ a premium to RUG. We RARELY see PUG cheaper than RUG. Further ULSD is normally taxed higher for most states (CA is higher for example) and normally for that reason alone, sells more than RUG, and most times more than PUG
I am glad to hear your mileage is very very good , even as you run it hard ! What are the minimum and maximum elevations you are running @ ?
Some old friends from the OR area visiting in NorCA were surprised to see fuel prices similar to OR's. (they are normally RUG consumers and OR prices are usually lower)
Snap shot only here :
RUG $3.57
PUG $3.77
ULSD $3.83
We are really in between ww market scares !!
The 09 VW Jetta TDI (EPA H of 40) is posting (a very consistent) 42 mpg. I suspect if I had the latest 13 VW Passat TDI (EPA H of 43) it'd be posting more like 45 to 47 mpg (close to the way less powerful 03 Jetta TDI @ 50 mpg).
Funny just as I posted the above paragraph, I ran across a WSJ article saying Ford was forced to cut their C-Max HYBRID mpg from 47 mpg to 43 mpg, a 8.5% DEGRADE/haircut.
I again would swag that if I drove a Ford C-Max the way I drove the diesels, the downward haircut of 43 mpg would probably be a pipe dream to an outright LIE.
Anyway, my nephew in Alabama who works for a steel company that sells to the automakers has a brother-in-law and father-in-law both in manufacturing.
The brother builds engines for Toyota.
The father builds engines for GM.
They both are hook and bullet types and do a lot of 4 wheeling and have 8 or 10 horses.
Naturally they both drive Ford diesels.
I've been from literally at the beach to maybe ~4000 ft. I haven't checked mileage regularly, but at random times the trip computer says between 35-40mpg. All of that in the relative comfort and better style/design the car affords over most gasoline hybrids or plug ins - not to mention the range. I've driven over 350 miles since I last filled up, and I think I am at half a tank now - and that includes a real mountain pass and lots of steep winding hills, hills where I'd pass slowpokes and punch it, city crawling in Portland, etc.
RUG: $3.999
PUG: $4.399
ULSD: $4.299
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
How does your state treat diesel drivers? Looks like CT really rapes those that drive diesel vehicles. OK taxes Diesel just half of what CT does. Finally a state that is a bigger rip-off than CA. Remind me never to fuel up back East.
http://www.api.org/oil-and-natural-gas-overview/industry-economics/~/media/Files- - /Statistics/state-motor-fuel-taxes-report.pdf
A guy I worked with retired from the tracking station just outside FBKS. He moved to Easy St in Melbourne FL. No desire to go back. So there is life after AK.
(I enjoyed seeing friends last April, but there's other places left I want to live in, so no plans to return north).
Hm, just passed a Chevy Aveo pulling a 5x7 U-Haul trailer. Even I'd want a diesel before trying that!
Upright pianos are so abundant (and unwanted) that people are having to pay to have them hauled away. Kind of like horses.
BMW is hitting the airways:
"An advertising campaign, which gets under way this week, will seek to dispel the negative perceptions among “those who still hang on to them.”
The lack of interest in diesel in this country during the last 30 years also means that younger drivers may not be considering it when they shop."
Clearing the Air on Diesel’s Dismal Reputation (NY Times)
First off, it was price much too high (even for BMW true believers). It was also priced too high for a BMW 3 series. Next it was a most impressive touring car that somehow got lost in the translation. One could almost say it was an outlier that never overcame the fact that it was a stellar 3 series example (diesel) that was overshadowed by stellar (albeit less so) BMW 3 series... gassers.
I think also they might have over/under estimated the logic (transfer) of the logical European sensibility about diesels in the across the pond translation. European markets come from a perspective of a minimum of 50% diesel and with multiple gasser/diesel engine options in a model line (3 series in this case). But then you have to ask how many young people can really afford to buy BMW's.?
US markets have the perspective of 95%+ gassers with less gasser engine options and only one diesel choice. The diesel choice was probably not the workhorse most BMW buyers were looking for. They probably also remembered the 70's and 80's (bad) diesel experiences: even as the 70's 80's gassers experiences were WORSE than diesels.
I remember being impressed with the 335 D getting 36 mpg for its capabilities. However if in today's day and age their latest diesel will deliver 45 mpg that might be another deal maker variable.
The 335d was BMW's way of testing the market for a diesel 3 series. The oil burner had to perform and that it did. Now fast forward to today, we have 328d with a 2L diesel, and now have a 535d with the same diesel as the 335d.
I'm in the market for a used 335d and find them priced at the same as a 335i, which is a bargain for what the car can do. This is a classic way of letting someone eat the depreciation and allow others to have a sweet ride for less money. It is hard to find one with the sport package
So for example, in the mean time MB literally shot ahead of BMW (X3) with the GLK 250's 2.1 L Bluetec, twin turbo, 369 # ft of torque motor. My sense of it is it will dwarf the BMW X3 (competitor) when (IF REALLY for the X3) it comes to diesels. Also in the mean time on a marketing basis, the X5 (and by implication the 35 D) took a few marketing hits for being "long in the tooth" so to speak from more than one auto rag.
Regular is $3.33.9, diesel is $3.69.9.
And red dyed diesel is $3.34.9.
I was reading WSJ article about (BIG CORN) ethanol for fuel. (makes me wonder why we do not get this stuff in auto rags)
Essentially, the EPA (ethanol) program was app 99.9% over estimated (by EPA government forecasters) . But the regulations were SET. (given the (gross) overestimation)
Longer story short, that because ethanol fuels are being SEVERELY under used, penalties (passed to the consumer) are being levied IAW those past 99.9% over estimations. The EPA refusing to adjust for the actual so called "REAL WORLD"lower consumption.
Longer story even shorter: because of lower use (one of the enviro cons "GOALS"" prices at the pumps are (you guessed it) far HIGHER than "freer" market prices would dictate. When you combine that with the fact that higher (unknown outside the industry) levels and percentages of RUG/PUG are being exported (like known D2 @ 20% plus+): prices should be far LOWER.
The EPA's response when asked to not impose fines (passable to consumers) was tough beans or some such. (would have liked to be a fly on the wall, eh?) Or was that referenced same "BAD VIDEO" used in the Benghazi affair.
This is purely a swag, but the so called VW luxury segment (13 VW Touareg) will be lucky to sell 11,000 units (10,553 12 VW Touareg). VW has not yet released the percentage composition of (13 Touareg) TDI's.
(TMI for those that care, I was waiting for a special tool which arrived Friday, so I procrastinated till today.
With the Mity Vac "evacuator, oil draining can be down "topside". Run the "straw" down the oil dipstick and prime the pump (20 or so strokes), out comes the oil. The hardest thing about this oil change was not waiting for the engine enough to cool down (had to be careful of hot spots), clean up and the recycling of the product containers.
TMI over TMI:
@ over 61,000 miles, so far so good. TSB's have been done @ the local dealer. Unscheduled maintenance has been two rear (L/R) brake lamps burning out (replaced free by the dealer) and one driver's side low beam headlamp burning out. Longer term mpg is a tad shy of 42 mpg (41.85), but in rounding, @ 42 mpg.
Actually both averages: 50 mpg, 03 Jetta TDI/42 mpg,09 Jetta TDI are close to the EPA H's @ 49 mpg/40 mpg. As it is working out for the Touareg TDI, EPA H of 28 is app 31 mpg (31.5 mpg)
I saw a price list for 2014, E250 Bluetec undercuts the E350 gas by $500 MSRP - and probably more in real world negotiating.
If I feel secure about cash flow and the 4cyl diesel works well in the E, I might do another. Or if the 6 becomes some kind of new classic, maybe I will keep the current car.
I too love a wagon. They make so much sense. As for drawbacks, vs a sedan, there are really only three that I can think of.
They usually require more effort to maintain a similar interior db level. They are noisier by design. SUVs fall into same category of course.
It is a little harder to make what you may have in the back (a laptop or camera etc) harder to not be seen by prying eyes when you are parked. SUV's have this same weakness. I find roll type covers to always be a pain and they spend more time at home in the garage than in the car where they should be to cover that base. And that said, if you have a wagon or an SUV, just having the roll cover rolled out, tells a potential thief that there might be something there that you are trying to not let be visible.
And sound systems usually sound better in a sedan.
As for perks, and aside from all the other obvious ones, they have a wiper on the rear window which you never see on a sedan, and even on sedans there is a lot of stuff builds on the rear window in the winter (or dust if you do dirt roads). Even parallel parking a wagon is a little easy than a sedan. From the driver's seat we haven't been able to see the rear lip of a trunk lid since the 70's..
I once had an I6 gas in an old S-class that seemed smooth as an electric motor, and even the I6 in my fintail feels good, for an engine design from the 50s.
It will be interesting to see how BMW markets the new oil burners, I have to wonder, MB will go after "most" power, and BMW will go after higher MPG.
Then really high praise (defacto) for the much longer available JSW TDI (Jetta Station Wagon). VW must be doing a few things right as MB and BMW (other also) are not going to be giving competition to VW in the station wagon (TDI) segment anytime soon . I think you posted that app 85 % of VW JSW's are TDI's. They both sell at a premium, less available and the resale value is more stellar than the already stellar TDI's.
OTOH, if they were doing just one more thing right, (in NA offer the JSW as an AWD) I'd have owned one so many years ago I would be on my 2nd or 3rd one now. And my friend who waited and waited and WAITED for the same thing, finally gave up and bought the FWD. His old Jetta was on its last legs. He is still somewhat bitter towards VW every time he is in situations that he knew would come up and why he would have sprung for the syncro if the DAMN thing had of just been available to us here. Makes me so irritated I could just spit, because it would also be much more inline with my budget, than a GLK is. And would tow adequately enough that it would fill that void I have had for years and years and years.
Also the realtor I know, bought the VW T because his JSW was only FWD and he too NEEDED 4x4 capability.
You can be sure that MB and BMW won't fool around when they do offer one...it'll be available in a wagon...just wait and see.
I can honestly say, that a C Class MB wagon with that incredible 2.1 twin turbo would tick all the boxes for me and make more sense too than the GLK would.
Using Fintail's E Bluetec as a comparison, along with what it (the 2.1) does in the GLK, being what it is, in wagon C Class form it amazingly it would get MORE mpg than the 03 and 09 FWD only Jettas. Even tho it will be bigger, heavier and have the added parasitic losses of AWD.