Not too long ago, Obama Potus did an announcement that he wanted the US to be a customer of Brazil's oil (energy) products !!! Might be a reason why he wants to put the kibosh on domestic oil production, even as we out middle east the middle east in EVERY energy category.
My pickup costs 20 cents a mile getting 17 on RUG and would only cost 13.1 cents a mile if it had a 3 liter diesel that could get me 30 mpg on a commute. That 30 mpg would be for a full size ext cab 4WD? If so, that would be $34 a month fuel savings based on the 6000 miles a year that I might drive the diesel truck. That would be a 34% drop in fuel cost. Only problem is the low miles on my truck make it take a beating if getting rid of it and I would have to add $30k to my trade in value to go chasing the $34 a month I'd save in the new diesel. That's figuring I'd get $11k trade-in and a new ecodiesel 4WD ext cab full size would be $41k. Just a guess. I recently saved more than $34 a month by negotiating with my cable tv provider, without a $30k outlay. My brother's 2012 5.3 liter 2WD ext cab Chev saves $19 a month over my 4WD. His truck has a 6 spd and shut off at red lights feature. ~16 cents a mile to drive it.
No, all I was saying that the truck has twice as big an engine and gets almost exactly half the gas mileage as my car. both gassers.
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.
That was very clear, as if you thought we misunderstood what you had posted. Let me ask another way. So what? Do you honestly think or want to imply that it could get the same mpg as the TDI just because of better truck gearing?
..."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.
A coworker drives a 7.4 L Ford diesel truck daily. I just asked him today what he sees as the typical spread between prices and he says 50-70 cents, although he immediately mentioned the 80 cent difference there was on Tuesday.
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.
.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.
Well, the website claims that the engine is available across the 1/2-ton line of Ram pickups, so you should very well be able to get it in any configuration (single, ext, or crew + 4x2 or 4x4 + various bed length) you want. Full details remain lacking, but remember that no new vehicle purchase is going to make sense if the only reason you're considering it is to save money on fuel.
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.
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
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.
Right. So the baseline here is EPA H 21/20 mpg for most of the (gasser) engines. (25 mpg for the 6 speed A/T tradesman) So a 3.0 L V6 TDI, IF it gets EPA H of 29/30 will be a smaller engine putting out a tad to par # ft of torque vs a beefy V8 and getting app 45% to 50% better fuel mileage ! For any business considering a Dodge configuration that has to be a strong option.
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.
If there are 13 TDI choices (diesel passenger cars), the last number of models on the market (Steve the host provided the FYI of) 586 models or 2.22% TDI models.
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.
Speaking of mileage tricks. Does your Touareg have different tire pressure front and rear? Mine shows 33 lbs front 39 lbs rear. That also shows up along with the actual tire pressure on the info LCD for the driver. After a few miles mine are up to 36 lbs fr/ 41 lbs rear. They did find a tire out of balance when I took it back in.
Glad you found and they corrected the balancing error.
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.
In the past 4 days I've been all over eastern and western OR and WA. I've seen diesel equal to RUG, equal to PUG, never more than PUG, never less than RUG. Maybe it's a middle American heckhole thing to have diesel more expensive than either?
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 !! Funny how the more "energy independent" US markets are almost not reacting to the geopolitical events in Syria, Egypt, other ME hot sports and the ww terrorist threat resulting in embassy shut downs or even "BAD VIDEOS " made in Los Angeles !! Needless to say, there are US markets GLUTs of RUG/PUG & ULSD. It is heartening to see SA, et al., be concerned. Funny how we are not hearing IRAN or other "saber rattlers" trying to give oil tankers transporting "middle eastern" oil a "flat tire" in the Straits of Hormuz.
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.
I don't recall seeing diesel higher than PUG since I got the car. Taxes are indeed a big impact. And I am surprised the speculators/financial criminals who should be sent to a gallows haven't manipulated prices up yet because areas that have been fighting for generations are fighting again.
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.
Typically summer is when prices are the closest. Gasoline goes down in the winter as demand goes down and diesel goes up as demand goes up for heating oil.
I would kind of look for that to change. Many places now have Natural Gas that used to heat with oil. As people upgrade to NG furnaces that demand will go down in the winter. I think the proof is the fact that we rarely have those big differences between RUG and D2. Mainly the added tax by the Feds of 6 cents per gallon over gasoline. Almost 20% of a gallon of diesel in CA is tax.
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.
Sickest part is you live right close to the refinery. And not that far from the oil source. It has to be a plot. Wages are not that much higher than CA if as high. My son is doing better in Indiana than he did in Wasilla. They say Alaska gets into your blood. I worked there 37 years and can honestly say I have NO desire to return.
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.
That has to have an impact on diesel sales. When I heated with oil in MN, my little house went through about 3 gallons a day during the winter. That was a killer on our budget.
I'll be pulling a 5x8 Uhaul with my Forester this evening. I'm running down to Eagle River to pick up a piano. I expect ~20 mpg on this haul. Diesel Forester, please, Subaru!!!!
2018 Subaru Crosstrek, 2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2013 Subaru Forester, 2013 Ford F250 Lariat D, 1976 Ford F250, 1969 Chevrolet C20, 1969 Ford Econoline 100
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."
It is an interesting article. I think the real issue really might be the good/bad news when BMW brought the (stellar) BMW 335 D to market with one diesel engine option.
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.
"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
Yes, actually I am glad you brought that out. It just wasn't germane to the response to the NYT's article. My take of your response is it's an awfully expensive way to get market information. This is not to mention the lost time and opportunity values. BMW's do almost drop like rocks. However even you will probably agree you are probably hoping there are less buyers than sellers. To me, it is a screaming opportunity, heighten by the fact not many folks know about it, or are willing to over come the so called diesel "disadvantage". Best of luck in getting a great example.
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.
If I can use the 12 VW Passat (ubiquitous Camry/Accord competitor) 27.8 vs TDI 41.4, we are talking per mile driven .12 cents/.0894 cents. 34.2% MORE
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. It would be easy to swag the greater prices are being used defacto as a (broad base consumer) gasoline tax.
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.
It looks to me like Mercedes has been the only company to effectively market their diesel SUVs. I don't think it has anything to do with the quality or performance of the competitors. It could be Mercedes much longer history of diesel vehicles. In the case of the BMW 35D it is aimed at the performance crowd more than the comfort bunch. I did not test drive the Q7 TDI as it was much bigger than I was interested in buying. I think VW has hit the sweet spot between comfort, high tech, performance and price. Just not a lot of people interested in a VW luxury vehicle. Think about the Phaeton's fate. Hopefully more automakers offer diesels in CUV and SUVs that are less pricey.
I would agree. It really gives people a VW Touareg (TDI in our cases) both a niche market and diesel ( AND @ much lower prices) opportunity. This is of course against a back drop of Porsche Cayenne, Audi Q7.
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.
Sometime used diesels can bring a super premium. MB dumped the R350 Bluetec for 2013, now the used ones bring a premium. The MB salesman I was working with said they paid way over dealer price for a clean used R350 BLuetec taken in trade. They already had a buyer when they did it. You may have to put your name on a list at the local BMW dealer.
(TMI for those that care, I was waiting for a special tool which arrived Friday, so I procrastinated till today. LISLE low clearance 1 1/4 in socket to R/R oil filter canister top. Just went to another VW 507.00 specification oil Total INEO 5w30.
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. Additionally I had to get in the groove of the new tool, as there is barely (seemingly) enough room for the new tool.
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 read today that there is definitely no plan to put the Bluetec in a MB wagon for next year, in the goofy NA market. Too bad - something like that might have been a car I'd buy and keep for a long time. Not many cars are more practical or have as good long term resale value.
There is a stigma attached to station wagons in the US for some reason. I personally like them. I like the SUV even more for the easier getting in and out of. I know you are a sedan kind of person. Next time the E is in for service take a GLK250 for a spin. You may be won over.
I find more of a stigma on fancy SUVs. To me, a MB wagon is one of the classiest vehicles on the road. Not to mention, the resale on say a pristine 30 year old MB diesel wagon is insane. I'd probably choose an E250 over the GLK, and maybe a C250 over either. C250 4matic wagon would be the best, as the E is kind of big.
I saw a price list for 2014, E250 Bluetec undercuts the E350 gas by $500 MSRP - and probably more in real world negotiating.
The well kept illogical members of the fairer set who do the shopping in that category want an ML or GL. It's that easy.
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..
Your new E is an inline engine? Gosh I had no idea...I just assumed it was the same engine as the ML. I love inline engines. They are the best configuration for smoothness and longevity, bar none.
Oops, typo. I agree it is a good configuration. Something I worry about is NVH of the 6 vs the 4 - the engine in my car is so smooth, especially at speed, that one probably couldn't tell it is a diesel. The only clue is at idle, especially when cold, or under certain grades of acceleration. The 4 might have a hard act to follow - but I know the engines can be isolated well.
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.
There are many examples of the 335d out there, but finding my color combo and options will take the time. Carmax has a nice selection of them , I missed out on one at a Atlanta Dealer, it was 2011, 23K miles, while, tan, sport package, premium package, nav, price was $30K and it was a certified pre-owned too, a screaming deal...
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.
I have heard the 4 in the GLK is not as smooth as the V6, but some things are a trade off. I think that if it is 'smooth enough', and db levels are kept in check, then its still plentiful performance numbers, combined with lower price of admission and better FE, gives it much ammo to compete favourably with many shoppers. Me for example, and I'll confirm that if I can ever get a chance to do the demos I have been trying to get to all summer.
This doesn't seem to be the case for the 335d, people do not equate BMW and Deisels, BMW is going to have a up hill battle with the current 328d. I'm finding nice clean used 335d's at very reasonable prices, but not in the color combo and options I want, but I know I'll find one.
..."There is a stigma attached to station wagons in the US for some reason. I personally like them."...
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.
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
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.
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.