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

ruking1

Well yes, do you want fries with that discussions? (past posts) It is AMAZING what can be used in the production of diesel if the legislation, resulting regulations, specifications, financial roadblocks removed , incentivized and allowed it. (specifically B100)

Off subject but probably related: In Silicon Valley, I pass by a (Chevron) station where B20 is cheaper than ULSD, albeit not by much ($4.12 vs 4.39 Sep 8, 2012)

stever

Yeah, but Mr. Motlow's emissions - boy, talk about triggers. Drive down the street and everyone will be looking for the nearest Cheers.

Oh, the RUG/diesel spread here at home is only 15 cents right now.

ruking1

Ah your last tank had cinnamon notes and smelled fruity, just like your last UOA (used oil analysis)

As you know CA is normally blessed with inflated prices

CS: RUG $3.67, PUG $3.87, ULSD $3.99

houdini1

Prixus. I like it. Laughed out loud !

ruking1

by Joseph B. White, pg B1, B2, Marketplace, Tuesday, Sep 10. 2013, WSJ.

Very interesting WSJ article. Noteworthy, or shall I say lack of note is NO mention of diesels' component which would gives app 30% better fuel economy.

..."BMW's X3 SUV with a 2.0 l 4 cylinder engine is rated @ 24 mpg in comb C/H driving,"...

Interesting they left out a 1000 # heavier machine with a 1 l BIGGER engine (3.0) getting 25.9 (app) like the 2013 VW Touaeg TDI !!

gagrice

I was going to fill up the Touareg yesterday when we were running around. It went past 500 miles on this tank and computer shows 25.9 MPG. Did not get past the Chevron. Though I may use Shell again with that kind of mileage. Still more than 1/4 tank left. Going on 1100 miles total on second tank. I love not worrying about filling every 250-300 miles. I plan to post on Fuelly when I get the calculated mileage.

ruking1

Yes ! There is a hidden one that almost works invisibly in your favor when you let the tank run out to the low fuel buzzer to lit low fuel lamp. The issues is it takes too much effort/testing to really objectify the results. So whatever criticism one would levy, there would be a half truth to it.

TMI: The rule of thumb is per 100#'s( +/-) is app 1 mpg hit/advantage. The 26.4 gal tank weighs app 211 #'s, full tank.

So the longer you do not fill, the more (undetermined to actual unknown) mpg for the remaining gals you will theoretically get.

Let's use half a tank to illustrate. Our 1/2 tank is 13.2 gals (8*'s per gal )= 105.6 #'s. SO for the remaining (1/2 tank 13.2 gals) you should get 1 mpg better or 13.2 miles better.

Fueling early actually worked against me the last time in the SOS DD end destination. Long story short, the grocery store station where I fueled gave me a $1 per gal discount which I found out AFTER the card swipe. I took on 12.5 gals or so. (12.5 dollar savings) BUT if I had waited, I think I could have taken on 26 gals for a 26 dollar savings. Now that savings could have bought 6.5 gals of diesel or almost 1 leg (202 miles) of the SOS DD. LOL

stever

I do that in my gasser. I was thinking I let my low fuel light come on more often than it really does, but this last trip I tried to pay a bit of attention to that and it only came on once or twice. But carrying less weight around has to help mpg a little bit.

ruking1

Yes ! It does work even better for gassers. Now again at the risk of courting criticism, I really do not know the percentages.

Now it must be a pretty huge cumulative deal, as OEMS ACTIVELY try to lose weight. Needless to say most of the US market cars are GASSERS.

So for example, a past post indicates the (gasser) Acura MDX going so far as to change PLATFORMS (from mini van to RDX ) with an engine tweak to lose something like 232 #'s (two MAJOR changes) !!!! This was good for a 28 H mpg EPA. I would swag a less than for the real world, driving it the way I drive the diesel.

stever

The other thing that's happening is that gas tanks are getting smaller, presumably to shed a little more weight for EPA testing (I don't know if tanks have to be filled for that test though). But every ounce helps.

You know, back in the day I backpacked some and weight was a big deal - the zealots would go so far as to cut off half their toothbrush handles. Then I discovered river canoeing and you get to see more with not a lot of work, and you can carry chairs and other fun stuff while saving your back.

Great mpg is one thing, but there's no need to get too carried away - these 10 or 12 gallon gas tanks are the pits.

ohenryx

these 10 or 12 gallon gas tanks are the pits.

I have to agree with you on that one. I once owned a 2005 Mazda Tribute with a V6. I averaged about 19.5 mpg overall with the SUV, which I did not complain about. But the 12 gallon tank, combined with 19.5 mpg, gave me a very, very short range.

stever

fwiw, looks like we did 6,750 miles on our road trip, and burned 280.6 gallons of gas. Right around $1,000. Got 23.96 mpg (already forgot how to do gallons per mile, lol).

Double that mpg for a diesel and the $500 we'd saved would have handled one car payment. :-)

Michaell

Got 23.96 mpg (already forgot how to do gallons per mile, lol).

Yeah, but can you carry as much as you did in the Quest in something that gets 48MPG?

Maybe a Jetta Sport Wagen. Maybe.

gagrice

I think the new VW Alltrack will be the vehicle for you. Basically a Sportswagen with AWD and better ground clearance.

Jetta Alltrack will follow that same blueprint as the Audi A4-based allroad.

stever

The bikes are fun to have for tooling around the campgrounds but they really didn't get used all that often. Quit hauling a canoe around on most of these trips. Sure is easier to pack a van than a hatch though.

More ground clearance would be a plus. Didn't really get off the pavement much this trip; need to correct that next time. :-)

Michaell

I think the new VW Alltrack will be the vehicle for you. Basically a Sportswagen with AWD and better ground clearance.

I hate to pick nits, but the license on the picture says "Passat Alltrack". So, a size up from the Jetta.

Don't think the Passat Wagon is offered here.

But, I like. More stylish than the Outback, IMO.

gagrice

That is a bit confusing. According to all I read that is the EU Passat Alltrack. It will be called the Jetta Sportswagen Alltrack in the USA. As the Passat we get is not the same as the EU version.

Left Lane Says:

The production Alltrack will be based on an all-new version of the Jetta SportWagen, which is scheduled to arrive in U.S. showrooms by the end of next year. The new SportWagen will share its architecture with VW's latest Golf model.

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/volkswagen-alltrack-to-target-subaru-xv-crosstre- - k-in-us.html

Michaell

My guess is that since the Jetta nameplate is already associated with wagons, VW is rebranding the Passat Alltrack to capitalize on that.

Let's just hope the "regular" wagon stays in the lineup, and not discontinued like the Legacy wagon was.

scwmcan

No the pictured model is not going to be available in North America, they will however have an all track version on the new Jetta ( Golf) wagon available here when it is finally upgraded and on sale here.

ruking1

It will be interesting to see if VW in the process of offering a "Subie type" alternative, offers a (market) trump option: TDI ( and the new more powerful) 2.0 TDI with 280 # ft (not sure of new figure) UP from 236# ft. (the edmunds.com) reference only lists the +10 hp increase, which as we know in comparison to gassers is not the key metric. So a 19% increase in torque for a gasser is MASSIVE, not to mention a 45/46 mpg EPA H that can easily reach 50 mpg +

http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/new-diesel-engine-set-for-2015-volkswagen-golf-b- - - - eetle-passat-and-jetta.html

Michaell

Plus the upgraded engine slated for the Golf GTD .. 180HP and 280# torque.

That would work well in the Jetta Alltrack.

[Deleted User]

I am scared to death about the current sales bubble, and about the larger economic worries expressed by prominent businessmen (like Trump), who sold
a lot of his stock.

I believe we are at the tail end of the "golden age" of capitalism. Our government is running with NO fiscal responsibility.

I guess America doesn't have a credit report to maintain. 17 trillion in debt. In car terms, I wouldn't approve a Toyota Yaris for our government.

stever

I'm not so worried about that stuff - just take a little road trip and you'll be reminded (and amazed all over again) about how wealthy this country is, no matter how the current political environment appears to you.

But I think that people have figured out that cars cost a lot to own and maintain, and parking and driving is getting to be a bigger and bigger hassle. Easier to take public transit to your job if you can and play on your tablet or smartphone getting there.

Once we all upgrade our aging fleets, demand will likely fall back a few million cars.

Cars all run pretty good these days, there's not much differentiation in looks, the "prestige" brands are a dime a dozen and we all know you're leasing your ride for $299 a month anyway. So why bother trading cars until your current one gets real stale? These days, that may take a decade or more.

ruking1

In terms of the cars and point A to point B transportation, the numbers hold true. Using the decade (10 years) with an average of 12,000 to 15,000 miles per year= app 120,000 to 150,000 miles. Outside of scheduled and some unscheduled maintenance, the first major tune is normally @ 120,000 miles. So with MINIMAL care, there is no real reason why ANY car can't hit 2 cycles or 240,000 to 300,000 miles.

So in the case of a VW Touareg gasser vs TDI, consumption is 14,286 gals vs 9677 gals 4,609 gals more (48% more). At today's prices, the cost of fuel is app $18,436 more.

houdini1

These cars can't just keep getting better and better. My guess is that the cycle will turn and we will start seeing cheaper built models like in the old days when cars were done after 5 years or 100,000 miles. Otherwise the car companies are going to put themselves out of business. Just a thought.

ohenryx

cars cost a lot to own and maintain

Yes and no. If you're talking about a Porsche, hell yes, ungodly expensive. But if you're talking Honda or Toyota, not so much, no.

parking and driving is getting to be a bigger and bigger hassle

Once again, yes and no. I understand that most people who live in New York City do not own a car, for exactly the reasons that you have stated. It's my understanding that has been true for many years in NYC, and is being more true in other major urban areas. But if you live in, oh, say West Texas, then definitely not true.

Cars all run pretty good these days, there's not much differentiation in looks, the "prestige" brands are a dime a dozen and we all know you're leasing your ride for $299 a month anyway. So why bother trading cars until your current one gets real stale? These days, that may take a decade or more.

You're actually arguing against yourself here, both sides of the coin. If people are leasing, then they pretty much have to do something different every 3 years, don't they?

And as for "differentation in looks", I will admit there are a lot of models that look alike, but you can still get very individualistic if you wish. Have you seen a Murano convertible? Or how about buying a Jeep Wrangler instead of a car?

ruking1

Well I wish I could still get the (2013) VW Jetta TDI for the price I got the 2003 for.

ruking1

..."If people are leasing, then they pretty much have to do something different every 3 years, don't they? "...

Actually that is one way (of many) to cut the costs of car buying. Let someone else take the depreciation hit. So if one buys a car coming off lease (3 years/36k miles), one easily has 114,000 miles left.

stever

Good thread, even if we are getting away from diesels a bit.

I think boredom will set in after one cycle, Ruking. Leasing fixes that, but leasing at an all time high. It really doesn't make sense (to me at least) for the typical driver, so I'm guessing that the leasing boom will end after a bunch of first timers face over-mileage charges, excess wear and tear costs and turn in fees.

VW cheapened their Passat and Jetta Houdini, and sales boomed for a while. Word may be getting out, because they've canceled shifts in Chattanooga.

Funny that I had a Wrangler at one time, and I'm one of the few people around here (especially being a guy), that "appreciates" the Murano CrossCabriolet.

I got no answer for West Texas Ohenryx and I'm not going to tell those folks to move, since I like big empty spaces like that. But I'd head for El Paso or Abilene for living.

Got a cousin in Midland but with all the stripper wells around there, it smells too much like diesel everywhere for me to live there. :-)

ruking1

"Boredom" has a VERY VERY high cost !

The (US markets) Passat and Jetta "decontenting" was announced years before. Indeed the 2009 Jetta TDI was one of last of the more European "like" model years.

The good / bad news was that was part to parcel of sales success for both the Jetta (slight increase) and the "Americanized" Passat, ZERO to app 139k units ! I think the only issues are really of "ASSUMPTIONS." Even though total units of US market Passat sales are UP, they have not doubled yet AGAIN, to 280k units. But yes, to keep the upward climb, constant improvement is probably an essential ingredient. VW has not made it a secret that it wants to grow market share AND volume.

So with so called "constant" improvement BEING an essential ingredient, while Houdini makes a very VALID point, itt is really a fear of the "big three , 2.5 peat" and not the realities and benefits of constant improvement.

By that I mean when Ford was on the rope a dopes and GM Chrysler were both doing bankruptcies and bail outs. They gave less than constant improvement/s and enough customers LEFT or didn't BUY. The government should have let 2 to three fall, if the decrease in manufacturing capacity (cars) was really the government's longer term goal. If this happened during the current administration it would have been easy to blame it on a bad video made in LOST Angeles ! We all know what they did. We also know what taxpayers were stuck with doing. Even unions know they have to keep costs in line and quality up and make that even better. They now have stock stakes and board room representations (if for no other reasons) . So they can no long blame their gluttonous greed and "seemingly business stupidity perspectives" solely on "management," they NOW are ONE ! ? If union officials don't like the hideous salaries paid to so called "management", any union type can step up and do the job for a token say $1.00 to $100,000 per year. Seems to me, not many takers. BUT I could be WRONG.

gagrice

Got a cousin in Midland but with all the stripper wells around there, it smells too much like diesel everywhere for me to live there.

It does stink along I20 for sure. I could live in the Hill Country of TX. Just too expensive for my blood. All the fat cats from Austin and San Antonio have hunting ranches out there.

I believe we are at the tail end of the "golden age" of capitalism. Our government is running with NO fiscal responsibility.

Totally agree with that point.

Funny that I had a Wrangler at one time, and I'm one of the few people around here (especially being a guy), that "appreciates" the Murano CrossCabriolet.

Too ugly to own. But would rent one in Hawaii for fun. Any reviews on its off roadability?

US market Passat sales are UP, they have not doubled yet AGAIN, to 280k units.

My bet is the Alltrack will be built in Chattanooga and go on sale late next year. They are being sold in Australia currently. Volkswagen has its eyes set on competing against the Subaru Outback with an all-wheel-drive, Golf-based Jetta SportWagen due in the U.S. in late 2014.

But I think that people have figured out that cars cost a lot to own and maintain, and parking and driving is getting to be a bigger and bigger hassle.

Vehicles do cost a lot. Buy one with maintenance included. And if you have a NAV or Google maps put the filter to avoid CITIES, INTERSTATES & Toll Roads. No hassle with traffic or parking in the small towns across America. And they appreciate your dollars in the small Diners, Drive-ins and Dives. Not to mention lower priced Motels and stress free driving. :shades:

houdini1

I assume that Jetta SportWagon will have a diesel option?

gagrice

The VW Alltrack makes no sense without diesel to me.

ruking1

I would swag that would be a very safe assumption going forward, given that app 84% of JSW's have been diesels. This percentage is easily their best percentage diesel model.

houdini1

With a diesel, all wheel drive, and good ground clearance that Jetta SportWagon could really hit the "sweet spot". The type of vehicle you could hang onto for a long time. Assuming it is a good sound vehicle overall.

ruking1

Absolutely ! This you probably know, but many to all VW's really go through pretty heavy testing and statistical analysis in European markets and EU real world. The one caveat (which can be a killer) is the metamorphosis it has to go through to become a US market model. It has been evident for a very long time that the US market does not get anywhere near the variants of each model that the EU markets do.

If I can cite one that is literally LONG in the tooth but probably as fresh today as when I bought one one (new) in 1978 or 35 years ago is the GOLF platform (aka then, Rabbit) As funny as this sounds even I want to at least test drive a GTD !?

stever

Well, as usual I forgot to check premium, but I assume it's the usual 20 cents higher than regular. Which would make it the same price as diesel here. Could be a bit higher than diesel though (and yeah, I could hop back on my bike and find out for sure in ~5 minutes, but the guesstimate is close enough). :shades:

RUG - $3.79
Diesel - $3.99

gagrice

The Local Shell today is $3.99 RUG
$4.19 PUG and $4.15 diesel.

according to Gas Buddy.
Costco is back up to $3.75
Cheapest diesel is $3.97

ruking1

Corner store (CA resort town)

RUG = $3.75
PUG = $3.95
D2 = $3.99

It probably needs to be said more folks buy PUG than D2 (ratio of 2 to one, 8/9% PUG to less than 5% diesel)

stever

Close enough to call it parity, compared to some of the RUG/D2 fifty cent swings we occasionally see.

zigster38

For BMW to lower the price of their imported 320d (called the 328d) about 4k. Then I could see the value over a 328.

Or for VW to bring in a TDI engine that does a little better than 9.3 in the 0-60. Slooowwwww. I'd settle for a 170hp tdi that did 8.0ish. Fast enough to have fun, still good mileage.

ruking1

Sounds like the gasser versions of both are more applicable for you. I get the feeling you'd want the diesels to be more like the gassers, which they are not. Too much room for disappointment I'd swag.

ruking1

On the flip side, my prescription for GASSERS would be (for like models) have the SAME to even BETTER mpg as .... diesels. Why pay more for diesel fuel when RUG is normally cheaper? With better mpg than diesel and cheaper RUG fuel, per mile driven will always be cheaper.

I would also like the same if not greater torque. I would also like it all in @ low rpm. I'd like way less noise hoopla. Since most (95%) passenger car gasser drivers are used to gassers and the majority of this majority don't even know what more or less torque means, at the worst some will notice: "wow, love these gassers". I'd also like more hp, you can see this race in the iconic upcoming 14 Chevrolet Corvette Sting ray @ 455 hp with 460# ft of torque (6.2 liter @ 29 mpg H EPA) and 40 to 46 mpg would be wonderful. Did I also say way cheaper would be better also? Since I am @ it why not little to no hp, torque and mpg loss at higher altitudes (5,000 to 12,000 ft), and RUG ? All that in a 3.0 liter engine would really move the needle for me, getting me back to gassers. If a 6.2 l engine can get 29 mpg why shouldnt a 3.0 l gasser be able to get say 58 mpg?

stever

I enjoyed the bump up in HP and torque when I went from my 4 cylinder Voyager to the Quest's V6. But it's a big rig and moves fine for my needs with "just" 170 hp. And I can still chirp the front tires if I try. 200 lb-ft. of torque is fine.

Since most people aren't motor-heads or car guys, unless someone tows, they probably aren't going to care much about torque. Even 0 to 60 numbers don't mean much to the "average" car buyer.

Diesel fans really should emphasize range and mpg (or gpm) imo.

ruking1

..." 200 lb-ft. of torque is fine"...

LIke I have said under different topics, why use 200 # ft of torque when 460 # ft will do ?

...."should emphasize range and mpg (or gpm) imo."...

Even on this thread, the majority of gasser owners/users do not care.

stever

Why bother? I don't see any advantage for my driving - I'm not rock crawling in the minivan (much, lol), I'm not racing Vettes at the red lights and I'm not pulling a 28' travel trailer. So why should I care?

Sad to say, you're right about the indifference to gas mileage.

Okay, so, the best way to attract diesel fans has to boil down to this:

MORE CHROME!

ruking1

Even the ones that are so called "driving the crusade or jihad" for better fuel mileage don't care. Have you ever asked the question why the (government) vehicles of choice in the Wash DC area are the Chevrolet SUBURBAN sized?

stever

G-Men tend to be big guys and they carpool a lot. :-B

ruking1

Hire midgets and stuff em in a 50 mpg "Pious"

stever

Too small - that would be against the rules. (HuffPo)

Talk about idiocy, but that's DC I guess.