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 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Reporting it is also laughable, but you would have known that, if you had reported one, to a few. They (the alleged) basically get (if it is an EXTREMELY slow news day) a "warning" letter with no power of (exceptional) enforcement (don't ask me how I know) .
Good point. I suppose there aren't really laws against "excessive display of emissions" especially as the jerks don't smoke much unless driven in a specific manner.
What would it take do me to buy a Diesel car? How about I start with a test drive?
A few weeks ago I struck up a conversation with a gentleman in a Passat TDI while refueling our Pilot. He turned out to be a sales dude @ the local VW dealership.
Fast forward to this afternoon. I call him up, leave a message, & he calls me back within 10 minutes. "I'll have a car outside ready for you to drive when I get here." So far, so good.
I show up, and immediately recognize the guy from the gas station. "Hey Bradd. Thanks for coming. I've got a car outside ready to go. Let me grab a plate and let's go for a ride."
The Passat is very well finished. Passes the "bang on the dashboard test" with flying colors. It is definitely a big car inside. Especially since I came from the Prelude. I settle into the leather with suede insert seats nicely.
He took me on a pretty extensive test drive on roads that I am very familiar with. It was a good mix of city & highway driving as well as curvy back roads. I was genuinely impressed with the Passat. It is very smooth and soaks up bumps and potholes very nicely. There is a Mercedes-esq rid quality to it.
The Diesel engine is smooth and quiet. You have to really try and listen for the clatter at idle. I felt the DSG drove very much like a conventional automatic.
I told the salesman my timeline (Labor Day Weekend), color, trim, & that I'd send my wife down to test drive the car.
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
I am thinking good deals can be made and had for the 14 MY TDI's.
This is more VW specific, albeit PLUS +50 hp/44 # ft.
http://blog.caranddriver.com/detailed-vw’s-new-2-0-liter-ea288-four-cylinder-tdi-diesel/
I am also getting the feeling the 14 MB GLK 250 B/T is also going to be another "work horse," I did the dreaded commute @ (27 miles one way, 54 miles R/T) , AND with multiple trips to SFO AND in/out of down town (SF, CA) traffic. The tank (13.1 gal/15.6 ) posted 36 mpg (473 miles, EPA's of 24 C/33 H). Considering the mpg hit from AWD, aka "4 motion" (55% rear wheels/45% front wheels), and the 2.1 L twin turbo with 7 speed A/T, it is an interesting combination.
Still IF it were not for both chain control points (they will let pass 4WD/AWD SUV/CUV's) AND the utility of a utility vehicle, I would probably lean more toward sedans and or "Euro Wagon" concepts.
If it were just me, a hot hatch sub 3k #'s stuffed with a 2.1 L twin turbo (369# ft +) or a 3.0 TDI (428# ft +) with 6/7 speed M/T's (both non existent on the US markets) would be the tickets. Yee Haw !!
The 09 Jetta TDI is posting app 40/41 mpg, approaching 79,000 miles. Tires look to be a weak link. I do not anticipate the OEM set will last over 100,000 miles. So sad.
Other than normal (not related to diesels) consumable items, I do not anticipate much (scheduled/unscheduled maintenance) before the 120,000 miles major tune. At that time, the TB/Water Pump and tune up routine is due ($300. in parts). I will probably do the DSG fluid/filter also. I might even break down and get an alignment. The truth is that 120k TB/WP interval is probably stretch able to 150,000 miles.
Unknown shot to the diesel inventory: Diesel Cruzes?
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gm-tells-dealers-stop-selling-221936899.html
I was under the impression that getting a diesel was "all" about personal fuel mileage and not about the environment? http://www.carsdirect.com/car-buying/how-clean-are-diesel-cars-5-facts-based-on-pollution I wasn't that interested in a diesel but I knew at least my mechanic could work on one without having to take it to the dealer. In Pick ups and big SUVs your can pull more and then the fuel savings seems to be more pronounced. But in a car I simply am not convinced they are as clean or can be made as clean as a gas or Hybrid car. But I did look into it when I was thinking Bio Diesel at least till I thought about particulates. Other than that if the cost to me was close to the cost of a gas powered Pzero vehicle and I believed it was cleaner I might consider one.
For me the pleasure of driving a diesel is number one and the fuel economy icing on the cake. The comfort & Safety of a heavy SUV also adds to the experience. I cannot get close to 30 MPG with any gas or hybrid SUV driving cross country at 75+ MPH. The ones that come close have too many restrictions for off road and towing. As for pollution, people pollute not diesel cars. We are far past the point of diminishing returns on emissions controls. Nothing we do is pollution free. PZERO is a joke that we pay dearly for.
PS
The only one close is the Highlander hybrid that averages about 22-23 MPG according to the few that post their mileage. Will not tow half the load of a T-Reg. I would bet it cannot be put on cruise at 75 MPH and maintain 1900 RPMs up and down hill for hours crossing TX.
@gagrice
"For me the pleasure of driving a diesel is number one and the fuel economy icing on the cake."
I couldn't have said it better myself.
@boaz47
Driving a diesel is also an effortless way to achieve that better fuel economy. Just drive like you normally drive. My daily driver is a 2011 BMW 328xi. Once when it was in for service, I got a 2011 335d as a loaner car. It had 265 horsepower & 426 lb ft of torque. It literally accelerated like a freight train, passing was a breeze, and triple digit speeds came up very fast. It handled amazing as a BMW 3 series should. I also got over 30 mpg without even trying. That's a full 10 mpg increase of what I normally do.
Another time, I got a 328xd (current body style) as a loaner car. While it wasn't nearly as fast as the 335d, it still drove as well as the current crop of 3ers drive. It was BRAND NEW, not broken in at all and I got 38 mpg.
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
The other way to FRAME the question: what do you think would be the numbers I would be posting with GASSERs????? : 1. 09 Jetta, 2. 12 Touareg, 3. 12 Touareg hybrid, 4. 14 MB GLK 350 ?
While I'm sure Carsdirect is both well meaning and a good publication, etc., the mathematics does not match the narratives and on many levels.
Here is only one example.
Snap shot only:
D2 $4.13 PUG $4.12, RUG $3.95. Now it is pretty obvious that RUG is .18 cents CHEAPER than ULSD ! ? PUG is .01 cent cheaper ! AKA ULSD currently cost MORE per gal.
Fuelly.com avg for the (like models) MB GLK 250 is 30.3 mpg, for the GLK 350 is 22.35 mpg. I have been posting what I have been posting (aka better mpg: in the latest commute TANK 36 mpg (13.65 mpg better ) The gasser requires PUG.
So cost PER MILE DRIVEN are .1363 cents ( D2 $4.13 per gal/30.3 mpg) vs .18434 cents (PUG $4.12 per gal/22.35 mpg) or D2 is .04804 cents cheaper per mile driven . In this case, per mile driven: PUG costs 35+ % more !
Evidently, they are ok with you consuming more (app 8 mpg) and paying more !! ?? So I guess, IF most folks insist, so am I.
GASSER advantage would LOGICALLY dictate both 1. CHEAPER per mile driven AND 2. BETTER mpg than diesel. So you might ask them how they came to the conclusion that using almost 8 mpg MORE is both LESS consumptive and less pollutive ??????
It is FURTHER exacerbated by the FACT that D2 has 15 ppm sulfur and nominally delivered @ the pump @ 5 to 10 ppm. RUG/PUG is 30 ppm sulfur and can be nominally delivered up to 90 ppm sulfur (off line fees paid over 30 ppm sulfur) So structurally, RUG/PUG are 2 TIMES to 18 TIMES DIRTIER than ULSD !!!! ????
You do of course know that 100% biodiesel normally has ZERO ppm sulfur !! ???
Yes I know TMI is eye glazing. Yes I only promised one example.
Of course, the other question might be: how is .18434 cents cheaper than .1363 cents. ????
Passing power is important to me. I don't mind following someone on the highway if they stay at a constant speed. When they don't I want to pass and pass quickly. When I would pass in my Sequoia with the big V8 and 5 speed auto it would always downshift and the engine would race, but not real fast acceleration from 70 MPH. With the T-Reg TDI it is a burst of power from 70 to 90 MPH and passing up or down hill is very quick. It is very exhilarating and confidence building when you don't have a lot of room to pass on 2 lane highways. Have I mentioned how much I love driving my Touareg TDI?
I have posted my first 14,502 miles on Fuelly and they show a running 27.9 MPG with an overall 26.9 MPG average. I proved to myself I can get 32+ MPG if I keep it under 70 MPH. I found I can go 685 miles on a tank and still have 2 gallons in reserve. The low fuel icon shows up with more than a 100 miles in reserve. From the fuel website it seems the people with diesels are as enthusiastic about posting their mileage as the early Prius owners. Pride of owning a fuel saving diesel without giving up any performance.
Diesel power seems more advantageous to the purchaser of larger vehicles rather than smaller ones.
Looking at the 7217 Jetta posters on Fuelly. Less than 200 are gas or hybrids. The top vehicle on the list.
In the case of the GLK 250 B/T (diesel) vs GLK350 (gasser) the obvious is also hidden in plain sight and site. This can make the narrative almost NARCOTIC and defacto, FALSE. It is almost like the mind control buzzer words are spoken/written/said and folks then regurgitate the kool aid effects.
So for example, the GLK 350's engine is a V6 3.5 L gasser vs the GLK 250's twin turbo 2.1 L, I 4 cylinder. IF gassers are OF advantage, why does the gasser engine need to be 67% BIGGER AND 2 cylinders more to yield LESS # ft (273# ft) and less mpg than the more powerful (369# ft) and smaller diesel??????
Again, another redundancy gasser advantage would dictate (logically) the gasser be 2.1 L and/or smaller and 2 less cylinders and be just as powerful, if not more so.
I also should say that I am not singling out MB. for the L differences. It is one of many that can illustrate what I am saying generally.
In fact MB can be singled out for the killer application, the 2.1 L T TDI !! This is also 2x killer application with the 7 speed A/T.
You bring up a good point. If a gas engine cannot supply equal power and fuel economy to the diesel offered, should it be allowed in the market place? What does the GLK V6 gasser really offer the customer vs the GLK250 BT? or any other comparable vehicles? Borders on deceptive sales practice IMO.
Environmentally, the higher MPG and smaller engines are a sound idea; they produce less pollution per mile driven and require less fuel to be produced. As for particulates and such, California has the toughest standards in the world, and they now allow diesel passenger vehicles. For many years they did not allow them to be sold here as new cars due to those same concerns. If there were still issues with pollution they would simply not allow the vehicles to be sold here.
Guess we're likely to see more diesel SUVs and trucks and more little gassers for city use.
The upshot - " As long as cars are fuel-efficient and fun to drive, buyers likely won't care what's under the hood."
Automakers Increase Three-Cylinder Engine Offerings in Fuel-Economy Quest
They'll care if they want torque though--which can only be had through displacement. Hmmm....I guess you could get that with a 1 cylinder 1300cc
Using the (not available in US markets) VW Polo TDI as an example, that has been on European markets for a very long time : right now that might be a bit of a stretch.
While 26/35 mpg is very good, the Polo can post 75 mpg. So you have probably seen me post this before, why get 75 mpg when 26/35 mpg will do just fine !! ??? Another context is the " LARGER small US car market" is only 25%. I could find no real breakdowns in the even smaller, smaller car markets. So the assumption is smaller small cars are an even smaller subset. Further, we know that M/T is not preferred by the VAST majority of car owners (80% plus) .
I was amazed a few years ago in Victoria BC to see so many Smart Car diesels around that town. Talked to one owner that claimed as much as 90 MPG. Stopped at the rather large dealer there. He claimed 72 MPG US for the little diesel. They dropped the diesel and not sure if they are even made any more. In Britain they sell so many diesel models from Seat, Skoda, VW & others that far surpass our 55 MPG mandate. I think the American (Rockefeller) obsession with burning gasoline is too deep seated to overcome. Face it if 50% of American cars were diesel what would we do with the glut of gasoline coming out of the refineries?
Many have mistaken my response as not liking diesel. Not so. I have had Diesels trucks for towing and some were turbo diesels. What I was saying is it seems as if in real world numbers they are not a cleaner alternative to gas or LPG or even a hybrid. And if as cars direct stated it takes more Oil to make diesel then the advantage in fuel mileage is only for "me" not for oil supply. Assuming their science and research isn't a lie. I am just saying if I were more concerned with being green I might be less concerned with diesel.
The question was what would it take for "me" to buy a diesel car? The answer was they would have to cost less and I would need to "know" they were cleaner.
My caution comes from years dealing with government transportation. What I am not saying is that I know diesel cars are bad only that I was in the middle of transitioning from Diesel school buses in one of California's larger school districts. ( I am now retired so it is no longer in my face.) http://www.thefreelibrary.com/BAN+ON+DIESEL+BUSES+PUSHED+LOCAL+REGULATORS+TO+ASK+STATE+TO+TAKE...-a0136233210
So getting back to my answer, if fuel mileage was my only concern a diesel car would be as high on the last as any other. However if I am not sure that I will be cleaner or if I am not comfortable that I will be the diesel would lose some points. Like Hybrids I believe diesels are over priced for what you get. And in the case of diesel R and D can't be blamed because they have been around for as long as gas. If I needed extra torque then diesel might gain some points.
No, I don't recall that, but we're beginning to get the impression that you do!
Actually not many folks on this board have mistaken your responses. Since some of the "best diesels" come from European OEMS, one might get the impression that Europe does not have already strict emissions laws, standards and enforcements. Nothing could be further from the truth.
So if you are ok with paying more real world numbers, then again clearly I am ok with you paying more !! ??? EVEN if I was not, who really cares? They are YOUR dollars. The same is true with MORE consumption and resulting consequences. Really it is about EXPANDING (PVF) choices. The policies that got us into the (pseudo) crisis are pretty obvious, ultra narrow fuel choices (RUG mostly with app 9% PUG) that have led to 100% to 95% GASSERS in the PVF. @ this stage of more than 95% of the PVF being RUG/PUG and 2.5 % (IF that) being diesels; to say diesels are an outlier minority population(after 30 to 50 years) is to only state the OBVIOUS.
My caution comes from years dealing with government transportation. What I am not saying is that I know diesel cars are bad only that I was in the middle of transitioning from Diesel school buses in one of California's larger school districts. ( I am now retired so it is no longer in my face.)
We still have diesel buses in our San Diego school districts. Even many of the metro buses outside of the city are diesel. If RUG/PUG is so much cleaner than diesel, why are they forced by CA law to have special delivery systems that keeps the fumes from escaping while filling gas cars? Maybe because gas fumes both raw and burning are far more dangerous than diesel. Nothing is perfect. For my money diesel comes the closest for personal transportation. When they get an E-SUV that will travel 700 miles and recharged in 15 minutes, I will take another look. I expect by the time that happens electricity will be only for the rich and those on welfare subsidies. For the record the Nissan Leaf will take you 84 miles on a 24 KWH charge. My neighbor says more like 70 miles. Cost to charge at 37 cents per KWH = $8.88. More expensive than driving a Passat TDI with our $4 diesel.
The N Leaf and the VW 03 Jetta TDI might be "competitive for commute". So per mile driven, respectively .12686 vs .0826 cents. E in this case would cost .04426 cents more.
So to do a trip of 210 miles (normally takes 2.75 hours and ZERO fuel stops, indeed the R/T requires NO fuel stops) would take app 3 fuel stops (6 total R/T) . I do not know the E fueling times. IF it takes a day to recharge, it would turn 2.75 hrs into three days, R/T more like 6 days.
@gagrice, do they still have those nozzles in California? I haven't seen one on a gas pump for a couple of years now.
Ah, I guess y'all do (2014 Volkswagen Passat TSI: Flimsy Fuel Filler-Neck Surround)
It looks like VW is trying to protect drivers from those dangerous gasoline fumes. All gas pumps in CA have nozzles that look like that to keep the gas fumes in the tank not in the air. Of course some escapes when you pull out the nozzle and replace the cap. With a gas vehicle it is BUYER BEWARE. You are exposing yourself to dangerous chemicals every time you fuel the vehicle. Which is twice as often as a diesel.
The EPA wants to get rid of those vapor protection nozzles. I do not see CARB giving into the EPA. They have not allowed the FEDS to tell them what to do in the past.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/10/politics/epa-gas-pump-handles/
Since the time I posted, no one has corrected my post nor elocuted their real world Leaf recharging experiences, I found this link. http://www.pluginamerica.org/faq/how-long-does-it-take-charge-plug-car
So, assuming it is an accurate general description, a N Leaf is almost TOTALLY impractical for a trip over 70 miles and probably more importantly if one does not have a dedicated source of recharging, albeit 120 V or 240 V. AND for 8 to 20 hours. Indeed there are a lot of folks who drive cars in CITIES that do NOT have a garage, nexus: complete and IMMEDIATE access to a dedicated recharging station: that being ANOTHER impracticality for operations it was specifically DESIGNED to operate. !! ????
To wit, in the time variances needed to recharge a N Leaf (8 hour to 20 hours@ 60 mph) The diesel could be 520 miles to 1300 miles further along.
To wit, pt two: it turns a 15 min or less refueling procedure every 700-725 miles into a 8 hour to 20 hour procedure @ least 10 to 11 times !!!!!!
To wit, pt 3: COLD (weather) operation decreases charge strength that will decrease range (25 to 33%). Ergo a 70 miles range can now be 53 miles 47 miles.
To wit, pt 3b: this turns one charging cycle (assuming 70 miles, 8 to 20 hours) into 2 charging cycles and 2.64 hours to 6.6 hours more.
Other than helping fleet CAFE, I think the point of a Leaf is a "free" commute and errand buggy around town.
The Leaf is for those who run around local most of the time, a station car, etc. Driving over 50mph decreases the range GREATLY. I can use it to get to work and back in fair weather only. No extra side trips, no going out to lunch, no A/C or heat, and very gentle acceleration most of the time. God forbid I should run into a traffic jam cause then I'd be screwed.
Wife was going to take it to work today but apparently I did not successfully plug it in last night after getting back from the gym (car beeped but I suppose it came loose because I don't recall it "clicking" into place). So although I only used 2 of the 12 bars, that's enough to thwart her commute.
The train station on the other side of my office parking lot does have a charge station on the roof. However, after calculating the parking fee into the operating cost for the day, it would be the same cost as driving my gas car, so I would not bother with the extra effort and headache to park there.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Would you care to define ( "Driving over 50mph decreases the range) GREATLY. " ?
I also did not allow for traffic jams in the city (yes, we all know traffic jams are non existent in a city !! ??
Nexus here are decreased ranges on top of decreased ranges !! ?? The economic consequences would be even higher cost per mile driven.
People on this (diesel) thread complain how hard it is just to remember to use the correct pump
It's a deal breaker to put in Ad Blue !!! ??? (like filling a windshield washer fluid tank)
Just your description is total TMI in comparison !! ????
Not sure about FREE commute. Here it is about equal to 35 MPG. Unless you have a generous company that will charge for free during your work cycle. Our local Leaf owner's wife commutes 35 miles to the Navy base. There is a plug-in that requires a CC for charging.
@ruking1, we looked at a car last month or so that had two windshield washer reservoirs, and the salesperson pointed to one of them saying "that's where the antifreeze goes". Never underestimate the human factor.
@gagrice, that's the trick, let the employer fill your tank or suck off your solar panels. The diesel alternative is to grow your own algae in that fishing pond your next house is gonna have (or fight for the leftover French fry grease, but I understand that stuff gets sold now).
yep, it's the modern equivalent of the 3-wheel adult trike.
Indeed, that is why I said what I did. When I first got the Touareg, it sort of perplexed me why the Ad Blue port was sequestered in-between the space saving spare in the trunk, say rather than behind the locking fuel door flap. While I personally still want it there, it makes perfect sense why it isn't. It will be interesting to see what "mis fueling to mis ad blue experiences the Dodge diesel posts (ad blue fueling is behind the locking fuel door flap) .
Another indeed on the BIODIESEL. The major thing wrong with 100% biodiesel is it makes all together WAY TOO much sense !!!
Diesel continues its plummet in NJ. At my local Hess of choice...
87 - $3.539
89 - $3.759
93 - $3.899
D2 - $3.659
Nicely splitting the difference between regular and mid-range. At the BP-formerly-NoName...
87 - $3.509
89 - $3.709
93 - $3.909
D2 - $3.659
Similar splits, same price as Hess for ULSD number 2...
Left Coast Resort town:
ULSD - $3.98
RUG - $3.89
MUG - $3.99
PUG - $4.09
73.6 mpg with a 21.13 gal tank (option)on an E300 MB diesel hybrid. They still were unable to best either the Gerdes, et al (app 8550 miles trip) nor the Taylor's (one certified TANK) mpg postings on TDI's ONLY.
http://news.yahoo.com/africa-england-one-tank-fuel-144010287.html
To able", should read Unable.
Fixed. :-)
In the news, "Jeep brand head Mike Manley says sales of diesel-powered Jeep Grand Cherokees in the United States would have to nearly double before the brand would consider offering a domestic diesel-powered version of the smaller Jeep Cherokee."
The current "take" rate looks to be 8% currently for the Grand Cherokee diesel option.
No diesel Cherokee without Grand Cherokee sales boost, Jeep brand chief says (Automotive News)
If that is the same kluged up 2.8L 4 cylinder diesel they offered here in the Liberty. Best to leave it in the EU. If the reports are true that the GC ecodiesel has issues with mostly city driving, Jeep needs to fix it. The fact that GM/FIAT designed the engine makes it suspect. Too bad, I hope Chrysler does not set back diesels in the USA, like GM did in the 1970s. Ram is the HD truck diesel to beat with the Cummins. Not sure why they don't stick with a company that knows how to build diesel engines.
As for the comparison between the 2014 GC gas vs diesel. The V6 gasser is lucky to get 20 MPG with people reporting as low as 13 MPG. At least the GC diesel is hitting pretty well in the 25 MPG range. I would take 20% increase in mileage, with a gob more torque when you need it. ULSD in the worst part of the year is not 20% more expensive than RUG.
PS
Have you tried building a Jeep GC diesel on Edmunds to get the TMV? It keeps dumping me.
I just spec'd out an JGC Overland, and except for missing some invoice numbers on one build page, I got Invoice, MSRP and TMV on the True Market Value page. That test was with Chrome and IE11, fwiw.
TMV for the 3.6L V6 FFV 4x4 8-speed Automatic with the 3.0L V6 Turbo Diesel Engine and Advanced Tech Group option is $50,567 ($50,716 invoice/$53,685 MSRP.
If you keep getting dumped, please click on the Contact Us link and report it (or PM me).
I did let them know. Then tried again and got a little further before it stopped. Thankfully I have the finest diesel SUV on the market in my garage.
In regard to the Dodge/Chrysler/Ram "diesel/s" offering (or probably closer to the truth: " lack there of " ), given some of the articles I have read: cobbling the logic of the reading between the lines, this latest article seems to adding more complicated spin/spinning to the Dodge/Chrysler "not ready for prime time realities" into an opaque screen, blaming the lack on the so called "lack" of diesel customers. The chicken/egg dilemma seems to be at least one of their own making; aka hard to sell MORE chickens without ... more.... chickens and limited abilities to produce EGGS. (diesels)
In addition, RAM has some serious 3.0 L diesel logistic/production issues. This is probably in the context of: they can move almost any unit (RAM 1500 P/U) they can get a ( 3.0 L ) diesel into. The much higher premium also serves to truncate demand.
The $4,500 "diesel premium" for the Cherokee is another indicator or obstacle. The other side of that is why not benefit + plus $4,500 more on the same platform that literally costs them the same ( to oem) as the gasser's versions while they attempt to remedy these situations. They can also evaluate whether they want to remain with the 2.8 L TDI.
My take: I hope they use that time and profit to work on over all reliability and durability, et al, issues. But then, they have loads of other fish/es to fry.
Again, that is in the context that other BIG (smaller also: aka Nissan) car companies can also decide to enter the 1/2 ton PU platform market to which RAM is currently the only player.
Scouring the local screamers as I do every weekend. Jeep dealer is advertising a diesel 2014 GC Limited with a sticker price of $49,495 selling for $44,495. $5K off before you even walk in the door is a nice start;)
2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2025 Camry SE AWD
I also looked at the $1500 premium of the GLK 250 ($38,980) over the GLK 350
($37,480). Of course, the actual configurations will affect the actual MSRP 's.
I would be real surprised if the Italian VM diesel costs anymore to build than the V6 gasser built here with UAW workers. I think it is a case of charging more and hoping the market will bear the premium. As NYCCarguy points out the dealers will cut that premium if they want to move vehicles. With 8 diesel SUVs to choose from there is finally a choice for those of US that love the smell of diesel in the morning.
Indeed, I would agree ! One assumption would be lower diesel price premiums with more choices.
If anything, my anecdotal experiences seem to point to diesels ENHANCING durability, reliability and various economies (over gassers) .
To me, up to 23% of the PVF being diesel makes a whole lot of sense, given that diesel fuel is a normal component of the refinery process for RUG/PUG. The killer application would be the ability to turn a much greater to 100% of a barrel of oil to RUG/PUG or to D2. Right now this is in the realm of alchemy, and for a host of reasons, it would be economically nonsensical.
(Actually vice versa, as both the PVF is 95% plus gassers and mot folks think DIESEL is the byproduct OF a barrel of oil rather than RUG/PUG, and not the other way around.)
Conversely, this exists with bio diesel !!!!! ???? PRACTICALLY it actually solves LOADS of concerns !!!! ???? (ongoing waste product streams being only one.)
It is also VERY hard for folks to wrap their heads around the fact that barrels of oil consumption would go down (actually plummet ) with much higher level %'s of the passenger fleet being diesel.
Upshot: more and better diesel choices are better.
I was reading about the 1000 # Gorilla in the electrical infrastructure (SIDE) ROOM requiring @ least a $ 3 TRILLION dollar UPGRADE (US/SYSTEM wide) , not to mention further $$$$'s upgrades to expand capacity and capability.
So for example, what would the ENVIROCONS think about another HOOVER DAM project????
Of course, the disingenuousness of it is why they have not been successful in getting it decommissioned and deconstructed. Then of course they would law suit its proposed replacement for years and to DEATH !!
Related only to Fintail's "smoking diesel's post", perhaps it is an attempt like the anti 1% movement aka "redneck" 99%.2
Rollin’ Coal” Is Pollution Porn for Dudes With Pickup Trucks
http://www.vocativ.com/culture/society/dicks-pick-trucks-meme-rollin-coal/
Rollin' Coal is part of the divide in this country. People are tired of being pushed around and will exhibit their disdain in many different fashions. Look for it to get worse before it gets better. I like clean air and water, but finding a place in this country where you are not bullied by rich Eco Nuts that are never satisfied is getting hard to find. Look how long it took before VW was able to build a diesel that could get by the [non-permissible content removed] at CARB. It was not about emissions. It is about control. One reason I bought a VW, I appreciate their willingness to "Git er done".