i understand the reluctance to discuss politics, especially since this is an automobile web site and specifically a "what would get you to buy a diesel" thread. HOWEVER, politics in the context OF diesels , etc., are VERY integral issues, as to the US markets LACK there of and added EXPENSES OF (economics) diesels !! ??
On the other hand, since diesel fuel is being EXPORTED (one of the many reasons for higher prices) buying diesel fuel (for diesel cars) in US markets is an act of patriotism !! ?? aka, POSITIVE + balance of payments and all !!!! Does one want the prices of RUG/PUG to go UP AND POSITIVE+ balance of payments to go up even more? Export RUG/PUG !!!!
Slow news diesel day is actually tongue in check !!
Insofar as US markets, diesels are in the beginning stages of a renaissance !!! ???? I am happy with current diesel mpg in comparison to gas, gas/hybrids, plug in's cost per mile driven equivalent fuel ! BUT I mean a 60 mpg (vs 33 H EPA) 406 # ft of torque 2.0 L to 3.0 L diesels are very definite gasser game changers !!! They do not want, for a plethora of reasons to happen.
Here's an easy one, if my GLK 250 got 60 mpg with 400+ # ft of torque @ 3.57 per gal ULSD (current inflated price of ULSD, over 33 H EPA ) the cost per mile driven fuel would be .0595 !! That is a figurative and literal HUGE price drop !!! What gasser/gasser hybrid, plug in can do that without revolutionary technical engineering? (read massive higher costs)
On the other hand, today's diesels are utterly and completely seamless (to me).
...that is unless we are talking about using hydrogen batteries to hydrogen fusion !!! ??? All the oems would need to do is build a 50 year life span platform !! But then they would find something wrong with the "smog" producing properties of H20 !!! Perhaps it will alter the mojo on some milky way galaxy area !
I did a quick and dirty comparison between 14's Ford F150 and Ram 1500 TDI @ 16 mpg/ 23 mpg. Dodge Ram 1500 TDI posts (average) app 44% better mpg than Ford F150. !!! (16 vs 23 mpg) So it BEGS the question:
( over 13 years and 15,000 miles per year @ current RUG $3.05 D2 $3.69, corner store prices= 195,000 miles/ 16/23 mpg= 12,188 gals =$ 37,173 or 8,478 gals= $31, 284 )
WHICH would one RATHER pay???? We of course know what the LARGE percentage actually choses.
This is a round about way of saying, VW would have a HUGE hit on its hands (if the capital requirements doesn't suck the LIFE out of them: to cite only ONE issue) with a FULL size PU truck (crew cab, etc etc) DIESEL. that can post 30 to 35 mpg. Obviously that would be the VERY least of the "problems". The "hidden issues" almost makes it nonsensical to financially suicidal.
Here is a "be careful what one WISHES for " article (higher "energy" oil prices). The DECLINE of Detroit might be a "USEFUL, albeit GRAPHIC" model. (aka 140 sq MILES of prosperous American production has LOST - 44 sq miles of that production. ) Vast areas of the "heartland" have been, are, continue to be ... gutted. So if we like that, continue on with the policies that got it there !! The policies seem to work....VERY well !!
The flip side is that cheap gas is a bad sign for the economy, per this other wag at the Washington Post. Meaning cheap isn't good if no one is buying stuff, including diesel cars.
The NHTSA posts (where the "rubber meets the road" so to speak) data. The issue is the DATA is about as BORING as watching paint dry.
Be that as it may, may I call attention to the "other national statistics" (4 data points).
1. VMT (in B's) vehicle miles traveled = 2,969 2. RP (in thous) resident population = 313,914 3. RV (in thous) registered vehicles = 265,647 4. LD (in thous) licensed drivers= 211,815
If there is no interest, I will leave it @ that. The only thing one needs to get a handle around the numbers is the AVERAGE PVF mpg. ( seems to be 24 mpg. ) AVG miles per year is app 14,017 miles (#1/#4=)
It's an interesting dichotomy. If gas and diesel are dirt cheap, who's going to care about mpg?
So what is wrong with $1.85 ULSD? ($ 3.69 todays corner store)
@ 31/38/41/50 mpg, the cost per mile driven fuel are @ .0597/.0487/.045/.037 cents per mile driven. (Prices in 2003, when I got first involved buying diesel fuel for 2003 VW Jetta TDI, aka, the FED sez there is no to LITTLE inflation) That's me for one.
Well, obviously YOU for two ! In a prior post, you stated you wanted LESS RUG/PUG use. So for example, would the PVF use more or LESS going from a 24 mpg PVF AVG to 48 mpg ! ? ADDITIONALLY IF half of the RUG/PUG users were now, in the future /converted to diesels, would that increase or DECREASE RUG/PUG USE? The conversion has a turbo kicker, in that conversion would boost fuel mileage anywhere from 30% to 65 % : a decrease to the decrease. aka, even LESS usage.
Now keep in mind the GROWTH in mileage in the PVF has been cut app 4% (stable to no growth) and it (the cut in 4% year over year growth) brings out the chicken little in the fuel logistics supply chain and in the narratives !!!!! The middle east is the (snap) end of the bull whip, so to speak and is literally and figuratively FREAKING OUT.
Another is a HUGE minority of Americans (12.5 % to 37.5 %) that can ill afford what is NOW being charged, per gal of RUG/PUG.
So assuming 12,000 miles to 15,000 miles AVG (14,017 down from 14700 miles in 2003 for example) per year @ 24 mpg AVG PVF = 500 gals to 625 gals @ $2.92 (RUG, corner store) = up to $1,825 per year/$152 per mo.
Cheap fuel is going to put more cars on the road, with less tax revenue to pay for fixing the potholes.
I've seen a few stories lately about charging hybrids and EVs an annual "road usage" fee to offset their low fuel use. Of course to my way of thinking, those cars should get a smog credit.
That usage idea will flow back around to paying by mile in lieu of paying fuel taxes as revenue continues to shrink.
Meanwhile the shale stuff will flow across the Midwest to the ports on the Gulf of Mexico and off to Asia. None will stay in the US, so that increase in supply won't help Michigan gas prices or the price of diesel that Iowa farmers rely on.
Cheap fuel is going to put more cars on the road, with less tax revenue to pay for fixing the potholes.
I've seen a few stories lately about charging hybrids and EVs an annual "road usage" fee to offset their low fuel use. Of course to my way of thinking, those cars should get a smog credit.
That usage idea will flow back around to paying by mile in lieu of paying fuel taxes as revenue continues to shrink.
Meanwhile the shale stuff will flow across the Midwest to the ports on the Gulf of Mexico and off to Asia. None will stay in the US, so that increase in supply won't help Michigan gas prices or the price of diesel that Iowa farmers rely on.
Now, that might be YOUR opinion, and I respect that ! BUT, that is PRECISELY the OPPOSITE of what the NHTSA data says !!!!!!!! Also, you TOTALLY discount the ENORMOUS multiplier effect/s of transportation, aka, cars, boats, planes, trains and etc. etc. !!
We ALREADY pay HUGE taxations for road repairs and a LARGE yearly surplus should be left over. The truth it is stolen, to "misappropriated " for other than roads and transportation purposes. Those funds actually applied to roads, etc. are poorly managed @ best !!
Again, let me call attention to Detroit MI. The population goes away, (less cars) fuel prices HIGHEST and what happens ?????? Realities do not match the narratives (non PC, fairy tales).
Doesn't matter - I'm still irritated with NHTSA for letting so many people get killed over the ignition switch fiasco (not to mention exploding Jeep gas tanks that get "fixed" with trailer hitch installs). So whatever the NHTSA says, I'm going to find a way to be contrarian, LOL.
Did I mention on my 20k mile service, they forgot to top off the adBlue? About half way to Palm Springs the adBlue alarm comes on. Fortunately it gives you about 1500 miles to get it filled. I am calling to add to my list of service complaints. No more Mr Nice guy giving all 10s on the surveys.
Doesn't matter - I'm still irritated with NHTSA for letting so many people get killed over the ignition switch fiasco (not to mention exploding Jeep gas tanks that get "fixed" with trailer hitch installs). So whatever the NHTSA says, I'm going to find a way to be contrarian, LOL.
Ah come on, don't be such a denier. You know the gov wouldn't lie !!
Doesn't matter - I'm still irritated with NHTSA for letting so many people get killed over the ignition switch fiasco (not to mention exploding Jeep gas tanks that get "fixed" with trailer hitch installs). So whatever the NHTSA says, I'm going to find a way to be contrarian, LOL.
I can't say I blame you there !! On the subject of the 2009 Jetta TDI that had the HPFP issue , (high pressure fuel pump) my take of reporting it to the NHTSA, will be in about a decade, they will have "breaking" news that their procedures have indicated there may be an issue with the HPFP's in some MY's.
When you have a bloated bureaucracy protecting the Corporations, you get exactly what you voted for. The automakers hide behind the NHTSA. The Feds don't think it is worthy of a recall, so why should they bother. Keep cranking out the faulty ignition switches and injectors etc etc.
I did a quick and dirty comparison between 14's Ford F150 and Ram 1500 TDI @ 16 mpg/ 23 mpg. Dodge Ram 1500 TDI posts (average) app 44% better mpg than Ford F150. !!! (16 vs 23 mpg) So it BEGS the question:
( over 13 years and 15,000 miles per year @ current RUG $3.05 D2 $3.69, corner store prices= 195,000 miles/ 16/23 mpg= 12,188 gals =$ 37,173 or 8,478 gals= $31, 284 )
WHICH would one RATHER pay???? We of course know what the LARGE percentage actually choses.
I don’t think most people plan on keeping a vehicle, car or truck, for 13 years and 195,000 miles. Certainly some do, but they are in a minority.
But let’s just go with your numbers, and take a second, longer look at what they really mean. You project a a savings of $5,889 over 13 years ( $37,173 cost of regular unleaded gas versus $31,284 for diesel). 13 years is 156 months, $5,889 divided by 156 is $37.75 per month saved. Simply immaterial to me.
I owned a 2000 Ford F250 diesel for about 9 years. The thing was too big for daily use, but great for its intended purpose (pulling a fifth wheel travel trailer, and occasionally a horse trailer). Jump forward to the present day, I own a F150 with a gasoline engine as I have no need to pull big trailers. If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost, I would buy it, based on 4 criteria.
1) Longevity of the diesel engine 2) Increased resale value 3) Greatly increased torque 4) Cost savings due to greater fuel mileage
Yes, I know Dodge (Ram) is offering the diesel as an option in the half ton. But that option was not available at the time that I purchased my 2013 F150. And from what I have seen / read, you have to purchase a very upscale Dodge pickup to get the diesel option. See above where I stated “If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost”.
I did a quick and dirty comparison between 14's Ford F150 and Ram 1500 TDI @ 16 mpg/ 23 mpg. Dodge Ram 1500 TDI posts (average) app 44% better mpg than Ford F150. !!! (16 vs 23 mpg) So it BEGS the question:
( over 13 years and 15,000 miles per year @ current RUG $3.05 D2 $3.69, corner store prices= 195,000 miles/ 16/23 mpg= 12,188 gals =$ 37,173 or 8,478 gals= $31, 284 )
WHICH would one RATHER pay???? We of course know what the LARGE percentage actually choses.
I don’t think most people plan on keeping a vehicle, car or truck, for 13 years and 195,000 miles. Certainly some do, but they are in a minority.
But let’s just go with your numbers, and take a second, longer look at what they really mean. You project a a savings of $5,889 over 13 years ( $37,173 cost of regular unleaded gas versus $31,284 for diesel). 13 years is 156 months, $5,889 divided by 156 is $37.75 per month saved. Simply immaterial to me.
I owned a 2000 Ford F250 diesel for about 9 years. The thing was too big for daily use, but great for its intended purpose (pulling a fifth wheel travel trailer, and occasionally a horse trailer). Jump forward to the present day, I own a F150 with a gasoline engine as I have no need to pull big trailers. If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost, I would buy it, based on 4 criteria.
1) Longevity of the diesel engine 2) Increased resale value 3) Greatly increased torque 4) Cost savings due to greater fuel mileage
Yes, I know Dodge (Ram) is offering the diesel as an option in the half ton. But that option was not available at the time that I purchased my 2013 F150. And from what I have seen / read, you have to purchase a very upscale Dodge pickup to get the diesel option. See above where I stated “If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost”.
What folks PLAN and what folks actually DO are and can be different.
I have posted before the average age of the vehicle fleet. It has been and continues to go UP (13.5 years). You also can google to confirm percentages.
IF I remember correctly it was 60 to 70%.of the PVF. Again 60-70 % IS one definition of MOST/majority. 51% is another definition of "MOST/majority". Another benchmark is IF 14 MY sales are 16.5 M by most talking heads a BANNER year (265.647 M) that is 6.2%. However (going back two year as the figures are in arrears) , that does not alter the PVF population MUCH from the previous years (13/12 MY's) before @ 15.5/14.5 M in yrly sales. So the salvage rate % factor is not too far behind. Again you can bounce that off the NHTSA figures. Keep in mind both the population and licensed drivers numbers and %'s have grown also. So growth is even slower (adjusted for those two factors) .
Again with most of the PVF (95%) being gassers, MOST folks do not mind paying MORE per mile driven fuel (like model) . In effect you are anecdotally confirming what I have said consistently all along !!
..."Simply immaterial to me."... (you- my sic)
As you might also agree, MOST towing has been, is, and going forward will be done with gassers.
I would guess that the great majority (90% plus) of heavy duty towing (above 10,000 lbs) is done with diesels.
That is an extremely small "niche" market (less than 2.5%) that I do not follow. I of course follow the EXTREMELY small diesel CAR market (less than 2.5%) .
But IF 50% of the less than 5% diesels are the "bigger diesels or "potential" tow vehicles, that is probably south of app 6.64 M. The next question is how many of those / % actually tow.
Jim Lenz (talking head) Toyota, on CNBC saying (secondary issue):
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle. (aka, hard to get off RUG when it uses RUG?)
He was introducing the new hydrogen battery product that has a 300 mile CHARGE RANGE capacity. @ $35.00 of fuel, PRELIMINARILY .11 cents per mile driven: fuel. He was opaque on cost per xxx of hydrogen fuel. To compare with D2 @ $3.64, 50 mpg = .0738 cents per mile driven fuel, for 49.1% more for hydrogen. GEEZ, Can one afford to switch?
SIDEBAR: Mark my words, the enviro conservatives will find something catastrophic wrong with its emissions, H20 water vapor. Perhaps it is a new reason for Armageddon? Fresh clean potable water is almost non existent in nature?
Jim Lenz (talking head) Toyota, on CNBC saying (secondary issue):
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle.
He was introducing the new hydrogen battery product that has a 300 mile CHARGE RANGE capacity. @ $35.00 of fuel, PRELIMINARILY .11 cents per mile driven: fuel. He was opaque on cost per xxx of hydrogen fuel. To compare with D2 @ $3.64, 50 mpg = .0738 cents per mile driven fuel, for 49.1% more for hydrogen. GEEZ, Can one afford to switch?
Our Passat TDI is running right at 9 cents per mile.
Jim Lenz (talking head) Toyota, on CNBC saying (secondary issue):
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle.
He was introducing the new hydrogen battery product that has a 300 mile CHARGE RANGE capacity. @ $35.00 of fuel, PRELIMINARILY .11 cents per mile driven: fuel. He was opaque on cost per xxx of hydrogen fuel. To compare with D2 @ $3.64, 50 mpg = .0738 cents per mile driven fuel, for 49.1% more for hydrogen. GEEZ, Can one afford to switch?
Our Passat TDI is running right at 9 cents per mile.
Additionally, in another article I have read, IF you are getting 40 mpg, you are already @ the TARGETED 2025 AVG !! The BIG IF here: can they really even come close to hitting that nail on the head.
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle. (aka, hard to get off RUG when it uses RUG?)
The gas (and diesel) infrastructure has been around so many decades, it's a real uphill battle for any other fuel to gain traction.
Toyota and Honda are really pushing hydrogen right now (auto show season?) but yeah, who knows what unintended consequences will crop up (like battery production getting hammered due to a materials shortage - better go land on a few more comets).
BMW took a swing at hydrogen powered vehicles, at significant expense, and appears to have hung it up.
Just another data point.
Indeed, IF after 30-50 years in the US markets, we NOW have less than 2.5% diesel CARS OR 6.641 M, a question might be: how long will it take for hydrogen battery cars to reach EITHER, percentage or number?
Meanwhile here is an interesting solution.
Miracle' tech turns water into fuel German cleantech company Sunfire GmbH has unveiled a machine that converts water and carbon dioxide into synthetic petroleum-based fuels. by Michelle Starr @riding_red November 18, 2014 4:34 PM PST
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN COAL reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Another example, recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years) has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations linked ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good, bad, indifferent) (America are Goliaths in coal, natural gas and oil, ALSO)
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years)has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good bad indifferent) (America are Goliaths in both the natural gas and oil ALSO)
Additionally, in another article I have read, IF you are getting 40 mpg, you are already @ the TARGETED 2025 AVG !! The BIG IF here: can they really even come close to hitting that nail on the head.
Our TDI is getting about 40.5 on average, but that is highway. In town it only gets around 32. Can't really say, because this is a road car. But I'd say the average MPG is around 36 - short of the 2025 requirement.
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years)has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good bad indifferent) (America are Goliaths in both the natural gas and oil ALSO)
I am sorry. Are you confused with what the consequences of what YOU said, or my response to what you said?
Additionally, in another article I have read, IF you are getting 40 mpg, you are already @ the TARGETED 2025 AVG !! The BIG IF here: can they really even come close to hitting that nail on the head.
Our TDI is getting about 40.5 on average, but that is highway. In town it only gets around 32. Can't really say, because this is a road car. But I'd say the average MPG is around 36 - short of the 2025 requirement.
It is important to note. In the 2009 Jetta TDI case, 41 mpg is what it gets and it makes little difference of town/country or however one wants to define it. The car gets frequently onto the STREETS of San Francisco and does the daily commute. Additionally it is in the #3 WORST commute in the NATION !! Now I have driven in all the top 5 areas, and I can see why they are ON the top 5.
Now one can segregate what one gets IN SF streets, but that would then SKEW both averages.
On the other hand, HOW is this crash in RUG/PUG prices doing for everybody? So given a .50 cent per gal drop for a YEAR, here would be the XMAS yield: $288/$ 183 SAVINGS . Merry XMAS !! One can of course / by 12 to get the months of savings for as long as the crash in prices have lasted
( 15,000 miles AVG yearly miles / 26 mpg=577 gal /41 mpg= 366 gal / (like model)= 577 gals/366 gal x $.50 cent per gal savings gals savings= )
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle. (aka, hard to get off RUG when it uses RUG?)
Toyota and Honda are really pushing hydrogen right now (auto show season?) but yeah, who knows what unintended consequences will crop up (like battery production getting hammered due to a materials shortage - better go land on a few more comets).
Germany’s Sole Electric Car Battery Plant To Be Closed…Yet “Another Setback” For Germany’s CO2 Reduction Target
By P Gosselin on 16. November 2014
Spiegel reports here that Germany’s sole plant for producing electric car batteries, owned by Daimler, is shutting down thus casting doubt Germany will reach its ambitious target of putting 1 million electric cars on the road by 2020.
According to Wikipedia, as of September 2014 a total of 21,256 plug-in electric vehicles were registered in Germany. Most of the plug-in stock in Germany has been registered by corporate customers.
Spiegel reports:
The only German plant that produces battery cells for electric cars will be closed. The company Li-Tec in the German state of Saxony will produce batteries only for one more year. Daimler Manager Harald Kroger told Spiegel that the current production numbers make it far too expensive to produce the batteries.”
Daimler was banking on higher production numbers, which are necessary for producing economically. But the quantities never materialized. Kroger told Spiegel that the company realized that “an automaker does not have to produce the batteries itself.”
I don't understand what "it" and "NOT" are referring to. I also didn't catch the connection between leaving reserves in the ground and how that kills coal. ???
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years)has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good bad indifferent) (America are Goliaths in both the natural gas and oil ALSO)
I am sorry. Are you confused with what the consequences of what YOU said, or my response to what you said?
I don't understand what "it" and "NOT" are referring to. I also didn't catch the connection between leaving reserves in the ground and how that kills coal. ???
I think Steve's right. Most of that shale oil could be going to Asia. Oil companies have no national loyalties. They are beyond the rules of national sovereignty. If Asia will pay more for fuel than we will, it'll go there. My feeling is that all our natural resources are the birthright of the population and we should have a say in where it goes.
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years)has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good bad indifferent) (America are Goliaths in both the natural gas and oil ALSO)
I am sorry. Are you confused with what the consequences of what YOU said, or my response to what you said?
Essentially "WE" (representatively) do have a "SAY," in so called Fed/State/Local/private energy sources . The anomalies are interesting drivers and points of discussions. The degree of say AND whether we agree, disagree, like, dislike, think it good, bad, indifferent, want a change or not, etc, etc, etc, are wholly different "OTHER" discussions.
So for example, US markets (by way of economics, emissions policies, regulation, etc.) expresses its distain in the figurative and literal plethora of ways for PVF diesels. Again to state the obvious, 95% of the passenger vehicle fleet are gassers and less than 2.5 % are passenger CAR diesels. So KUDO's to MB for making a like model diesel cheaper than a like model gasser. (albeit, MINUS - $ 500. ) Parenthetically they probably still sell more (like model ) gassers. VW, BMW, and other oems should take the hint (to sell more diesels) , as it does not seem to hurt MB in selling GASSERS.
Essentially Toyota took up "the powers that be" standard and instead of improving the fuel mileage of gassers went to a VERY expensive (gasser/hybrid) technology. To me this put the Prius @ app 2x price of Corolla. They were summarily skewered in the 2004 "Pious" debacle overstated mpg 60 C 50 H and were "bailed out" with the EPA reconstructing the mpg tests !!! They did not make much money over the majority of the LIFE of the Prius product. However arguably it was a "loss leader" for the whole line of less efficient (mpg wise) GASSERS, (an easy example being Tundra full sized truck) . I am sure a lot of folks during the 2008/2009 MY (period of decimation of new car sales) FORGOT that older Toyota Camry's were labeled gas guzzlers and could be turned in for tax credit. One could then turn around and buy even a BETTER (American) gas guzzler (even less mpg??/) !!!! ????? Truly ironic here?
Another example is despite a segment of dislike to vilification for the so called "SUV" segment, the "big minority" of the SUV's segment sales is "GREATER" (albeit slightly) than the sedan's segment. In fact, despite distain to vilification of the "LARGE" car markets 75% (majority) have been, are, remain and will BE .... LARGE cars. I would posit part of the dislike to vilification for diesel is it enables large cars tweaking the unit large car logic. (waving the red flag in front of the anti large car bulls)
Here is FORD's ( another oems') look @ the SUV segment. 20% WW to 33.3% + in US markets.
Ongoing saga with NAV program. After sitting in the lounge for 3 hours the service rep said it would be another 4-5 hours loading the (New) NavTeq map program. I asked for a ride home and the response was to give us a new Jetta loaner. It was stripped so not likely I would keep it. We are 30 miles from the dealer which is out of their shuttle range. Found out they had filled the AdBlue, and why there are white splotches in the spare tire area. The mechanic did not know they had to reset the 10k mile counter. No actual gauge for DEF. After thankfully handing them the keys to the Jetta loaner and getting in our nice freshly washed Touareg, I was excited to see if any of the missing highways would now show up on the NAV. You would think that a 2013 Navigation system would have Freeways that were opened to the public the end of 2010 would be there. Well it still is not there. So we just drive out across open territory like we are off roading. Good thing the Touareg has AWD. When the service manager called this morning I gave her the bad news. The new disc they got from NavTeq is the same software as last year. They did replace a cracked foglight lens that mysteriously showed up broken after out last visit. Which I consider a 10 pointer. I love the vehicle, and despise OEM NavTeq mapping. It still does not realize that Stockton CA is a city. Until someone comes up with live mapping similar to Google Maps, I will not be paying for an OEM NAV in any new vehicle. I understand Audi offers a live Google online mapping system. I assume it is similar to what is offered on most smartphones. For you Garmin fans. It looks like you are going to get shafted by NavTeq.
The NavTeq mapping in the Toyota Sequoia was even worse. You had to keep reloading the DVD when you went to another region. The automakers need to put pressure on Microsoft/Nokia/NavTeq to get their act together. People will stop wasting $2000 on a poor option.
"The 22 mpg combined fuel economy for the most efficient 2015 F-150 falls just 1 mpg short of the combined rating for the Ram 1500 fitted with a 3.0-liter six-cylinder diesel engine, rated at a combined 23 mpg (20 city/28 highway). Ford insists, however, that the comparison isn't apples-to-apples, as the diesel engine is a more expensive upgrade than the $495 Ford charges for the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6. More importantly, at current fuel prices, the diesel-engine Ram costs $449 more to drive over 15,000 miles."
Other than the NAV, it sounds like you have a good dealer. Lots of techs forget to reset the service interval doohickies.
A foglight lens showed up broken after service. It was not broken when I cleaned the millions of CA bugs off the SUV after our trip to Oregon. Did they do it? I don't know. They did replace it free. I just wrote a glowing report to the general manager. I think the white stuff is dried DEF they splashed while filling. I will clean it all off the spare. I am most upset with the whole NAV business. I hated the NAV in my Sequoia. Mostly because of NavTeq. And I don't trust this NAV. Even though the interface is way ahead of the Toyota NAV. The 8 inch screen is clear and bright. You can choose 2D, 3D or flat map. And the integrated SiriusXM sound system is decades ahead of the Toyota unit. I can load 1000s of tunes with complete control of the database. If there was some easy way to integrate 4G cellular with Google maps, it would be near perfect. Audi has it I want it. Microsoft IS the problem with NavTeq.
Comments
Usual suspects, heating oil season and construction demand.
On the other hand, since diesel fuel is being EXPORTED (one of the many reasons for higher prices) buying diesel fuel (for diesel cars) in US markets is an act of patriotism !! ?? aka, POSITIVE + balance of payments and all !!!! Does one want the prices of RUG/PUG to go UP AND POSITIVE+ balance of payments to go up even more? Export RUG/PUG !!!!
Slow news diesel day is actually tongue in check !!
Insofar as US markets, diesels are in the beginning stages of a renaissance !!! ???? I am happy with current diesel mpg in comparison to gas, gas/hybrids, plug in's cost per mile driven equivalent fuel ! BUT I mean a 60 mpg (vs 33 H EPA) 406 # ft of torque 2.0 L to 3.0 L diesels are very definite gasser game changers !!! They do not want, for a plethora of reasons to happen.
Here's an easy one, if my GLK 250 got 60 mpg with 400+ # ft of torque @ 3.57 per gal ULSD (current inflated price of ULSD, over 33 H EPA ) the cost per mile driven fuel would be .0595 !! That is a figurative and literal HUGE price drop !!! What gasser/gasser hybrid, plug in can do that without revolutionary technical engineering? (read massive higher costs)
On the other hand, today's diesels are utterly and completely seamless (to me).
...that is unless we are talking about using hydrogen batteries to hydrogen fusion !!! ??? All the oems would need to do is build a 50 year life span platform !! But then they would find something wrong with the "smog" producing properties of H20 !!! Perhaps it will alter the mojo on some milky way galaxy area !
( over 13 years and 15,000 miles per year @ current RUG $3.05 D2 $3.69, corner store prices= 195,000 miles/ 16/23 mpg= 12,188 gals =$ 37,173 or 8,478 gals= $31, 284 )
WHICH would one RATHER pay???? We of course know what the LARGE percentage actually choses.
This is a round about way of saying, VW would have a HUGE hit on its hands (if the capital requirements doesn't suck the LIFE out of them: to cite only ONE issue) with a FULL size PU truck (crew cab, etc etc) DIESEL. that can post 30 to 35 mpg. Obviously that would be the VERY least of the "problems". The "hidden issues" almost makes it nonsensical to financially suicidal.
Here is a "be careful what one WISHES for " article (higher "energy" oil prices). The DECLINE of Detroit might be a "USEFUL, albeit GRAPHIC" model. (aka 140 sq MILES of prosperous American production has LOST - 44 sq miles of that production. ) Vast areas of the "heartland" have been, are, continue to be ... gutted. So if we like that, continue on with the policies that got it there !! The policies seem to work....VERY well !!
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-would-the-keystone-pipeline-affect-oil-and-gas-prices/
Whether the prices go up or down, advantage diesel. !!
In South Korea,
... ""The driving force of imported cars has been diesel engines, younger customers in their 30s and luxury brands," "...
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/fortress-korea-car-market-cracks-under-german-luxury-215347149--finance.html
In other news, Energy Department Forecasts Cheap Diesel in 2015. (logisticsviewpoints.com)
Looks like a fifty cent a gallon drop is coming!
Oh, that's bad, lol.
Be that as it may, may I call attention to the "other national statistics" (4 data points).
1. VMT (in B's) vehicle miles traveled = 2,969
2. RP (in thous) resident population = 313,914
3. RV (in thous) registered vehicles = 265,647
4. LD (in thous) licensed drivers= 211,815
If there is no interest, I will leave it @ that. The only thing one needs to get a handle around the numbers is the AVERAGE PVF mpg. ( seems to be 24 mpg. ) AVG miles per year is app 14,017 miles (#1/#4=)
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
As they say in Hollywood and stage, break a leg !
So what is wrong with $1.85 ULSD? ($ 3.69 todays corner store)
@ 31/38/41/50 mpg, the cost per mile driven fuel are @ .0597/.0487/.045/.037 cents per mile driven. (Prices in 2003, when I got first involved buying diesel fuel for 2003 VW Jetta TDI, aka, the FED sez there is no to LITTLE inflation) That's me for one.
Well, obviously YOU for two ! In a prior post, you stated you wanted LESS RUG/PUG use. So for example, would the PVF use more or LESS going from a 24 mpg PVF AVG to 48 mpg ! ? ADDITIONALLY IF half of the RUG/PUG users were now, in the future /converted to diesels, would that increase or DECREASE RUG/PUG USE? The conversion has a turbo kicker, in that conversion would boost fuel mileage anywhere from 30% to 65 % : a decrease to the decrease. aka, even LESS usage.
Now keep in mind the GROWTH in mileage in the PVF has been cut app 4% (stable to no growth) and it (the cut in 4% year over year growth) brings out the chicken little in the fuel logistics supply chain and in the narratives !!!!! The middle east is the (snap) end of the bull whip, so to speak and is literally and figuratively FREAKING OUT.
Another is a HUGE minority of Americans (12.5 % to 37.5 %) that can ill afford what is NOW being charged, per gal of RUG/PUG.
So assuming 12,000 miles to 15,000 miles AVG (14,017 down from 14700 miles in 2003 for example) per year @ 24 mpg AVG PVF = 500 gals to 625 gals @ $2.92 (RUG, corner store) = up to $1,825 per year/$152 per mo.
I've seen a few stories lately about charging hybrids and EVs an annual "road usage" fee to offset their low fuel use. Of course to my way of thinking, those cars should get a smog credit.
That usage idea will flow back around to paying by mile in lieu of paying fuel taxes as revenue continues to shrink.
Meanwhile the shale stuff will flow across the Midwest to the ports on the Gulf of Mexico and off to Asia. None will stay in the US, so that increase in supply won't help Michigan gas prices or the price of diesel that Iowa farmers rely on.
We ALREADY pay HUGE taxations for road repairs and a LARGE yearly surplus should be left over. The truth it is stolen, to "misappropriated " for other than roads and transportation purposes. Those funds actually applied to roads, etc. are poorly managed @ best !!
Again, let me call attention to Detroit MI. The population goes away, (less cars) fuel prices HIGHEST and what happens ?????? Realities do not match the narratives (non PC, fairy tales).
Doesn't matter - I'm still irritated with NHTSA for letting so many people get killed over the ignition switch fiasco (not to mention exploding Jeep gas tanks that get "fixed" with trailer hitch installs). So whatever the NHTSA says, I'm going to find a way to be contrarian, LOL.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
What I was trying to say was:
It's like the IRS - if they'd fund the durn thing, we'd all save money (or lives).
At least you aren't choking me intentionally.
I don’t think most people plan on keeping a vehicle, car or truck, for 13 years and 195,000 miles. Certainly some do, but they are in a minority.
But let’s just go with your numbers, and take a second, longer look at what they really mean. You project a a savings of $5,889 over 13 years ( $37,173 cost of regular unleaded gas versus $31,284 for diesel). 13 years is 156 months, $5,889 divided by 156 is $37.75 per month saved. Simply immaterial to me.
I owned a 2000 Ford F250 diesel for about 9 years. The thing was too big for daily use, but great for its intended purpose (pulling a fifth wheel travel trailer, and occasionally a horse trailer). Jump forward to the present day, I own a F150 with a gasoline engine as I have no need to pull big trailers. If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost, I would buy it, based on 4 criteria.
1) Longevity of the diesel engine
2) Increased resale value
3) Greatly increased torque
4) Cost savings due to greater fuel mileage
Yes, I know Dodge (Ram) is offering the diesel as an option in the half ton. But that option was not available at the time that I purchased my 2013 F150. And from what I have seen / read, you have to purchase a very upscale Dodge pickup to get the diesel option. See above where I stated “If they offered a diesel option at a reasonable cost”.
I have posted before the average age of the vehicle fleet. It has been and continues to go UP (13.5 years). You also can google to confirm percentages.
IF I remember correctly it was 60 to 70%.of the PVF. Again 60-70 % IS one definition of MOST/majority. 51% is another definition of "MOST/majority". Another benchmark is IF 14 MY sales are 16.5 M by most talking heads a BANNER year (265.647 M) that is 6.2%. However (going back two year as the figures are in arrears) , that does not alter the PVF population MUCH from the previous years (13/12 MY's) before @ 15.5/14.5 M in yrly sales. So the salvage rate % factor is not too far behind. Again you can bounce that off the NHTSA figures. Keep in mind both the population and licensed drivers numbers and %'s have grown also. So growth is even slower (adjusted for those two factors) .
Again with most of the PVF (95%) being gassers, MOST folks do not mind paying MORE per mile driven fuel (like model) . In effect you are anecdotally confirming what I have said consistently all along !!
..."Simply immaterial to me."... (you- my sic)
As you might also agree, MOST towing has been, is, and going forward will be done with gassers.
https://www.polk.com/company/news/suvs_and_crossovers_overtake_sedans_to_become_most_popular_vehicle
IHS has the average vehicle fleet @ 11.4 years but no %'s (they use figures closer to the 2006 NHTSA PVF #'s)
https://www.polk.com/company/news/average_age_of_vehicles_on_the_road_remains_steady_at_11.4_years
But IF 50% of the less than 5% diesels are the "bigger diesels or "potential" tow vehicles, that is probably south of app 6.64 M. The next question is how many of those / % actually tow.
"PRIUS" gasser/hybrid is nearing end of its' lifecycle. (aka, hard to get off RUG when it uses RUG?)
He was introducing the new hydrogen battery product that has a 300 mile CHARGE RANGE capacity. @ $35.00 of fuel, PRELIMINARILY .11 cents per mile driven: fuel. He was opaque on cost per xxx of hydrogen fuel. To compare with D2 @ $3.64, 50 mpg = .0738 cents per mile driven fuel, for 49.1% more for hydrogen. GEEZ, Can one afford to switch?
SIDEBAR: Mark my words, the enviro conservatives will find something catastrophic wrong with its emissions, H20 water vapor.
Is this a problem every oem would like to have?
Volkswagen China Growth Slows To 10 Percent Due To Capacity Limits
Reuters
BY SAMUEL SHEN AND MATTHEW MILLER, REUTERS
NOV. 18, 2014, 11:49 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/r-volkswagen-china-growth-slows-to-10-percent-due-to-capacity-limits-2014-11
This (2008 close to 6/7 years old) 2.1 L MB GLK 250 diesel power train piece might be TMI.
http://www.mercedesclass.net/safety-2/diesel/the-new-four-cylinder-diesel-engine-generation/2/
Toyota and Honda are really pushing hydrogen right now (auto show season?) but yeah, who knows what unintended consequences will crop up (like battery production getting hammered due to a materials shortage - better go land on a few more comets).
Just another data point.
Meanwhile here is an interesting solution.
Miracle' tech turns water into fuel
German cleantech company Sunfire GmbH has unveiled a machine that converts water and carbon dioxide into synthetic petroleum-based fuels.
by Michelle Starr
@riding_red November 18, 2014 4:34 PM PST
http://www.cnet.com/news/miracle-tech-turns-water-into-fuel/#ftag=YHF65cbda0
Tis the season HHO HHO.
Turbo compounding, a 5 to 7% incremental solution?
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/18/turbo-compounding-next-big-thing-powertrains/
Why do you think it is NOT happening? For example, America has made the decision (recently) to leave the overwhelming majority (500 to 700 years) of KNOWN COAL reserves in the ground. They are euphemistically KILLING COAL !!! Another example, recent oil policy decisions (last 75 years) has helped to create the FUBAR conditions in the middle east.
The two innovations linked ALSO allow other natural resources the same flexibility (good, bad, indifferent) (America are Goliaths in coal, natural gas and oil, ALSO)
Fracking uses tons of it.
Audi and Sunfire need to hurry up with that synthetic diesel:
Court puts more heat on diesels (BBC)
(and better to kill coal before it kills us, lol).
https://screen.yahoo.com/touchvision/top-5-worst-commutes-232118001.html
Now one can segregate what one gets IN SF streets, but that would then SKEW both averages.
On the other hand, HOW is this crash in RUG/PUG prices doing for everybody? So given a .50 cent per gal drop for a YEAR, here would be the XMAS yield: $288/$ 183 SAVINGS . Merry XMAS !!
( 15,000 miles AVG yearly miles / 26 mpg=577 gal /41 mpg= 366 gal / (like model)= 577 gals/366 gal x $.50 cent per gal savings gals savings= )
Germany’s Sole Electric Car Battery Plant To Be Closed…Yet “Another Setback” For Germany’s CO2 Reduction Target
By P Gosselin on 16. November 2014
Spiegel reports here that Germany’s sole plant for producing electric car batteries, owned by Daimler, is shutting down thus casting doubt Germany will reach its ambitious target of putting 1 million electric cars on the road by 2020.
According to Wikipedia, as of September 2014 a total of 21,256 plug-in electric vehicles were registered in Germany. Most of the plug-in stock in Germany has been registered by corporate customers.
Spiegel reports:
The only German plant that produces battery cells for electric cars will be closed. The company Li-Tec in the German state of Saxony will produce batteries only for one more year. Daimler Manager Harald Kroger told Spiegel that the current production numbers make it far too expensive to produce the batteries.”
Daimler was banking on higher production numbers, which are necessary for producing economically. But the quantities never materialized. Kroger told Spiegel that the company realized that “an automaker does not have to produce the batteries itself.”
http://notrickszone.com/2014/11/16/germanys-sole-electric-car-battery-plant-to-be-closed-yet-another-setback-for-germanys-co2-reduction-target/
Essentially "WE" (representatively) do have a "SAY," in so called Fed/State/Local/private energy sources . The anomalies are interesting drivers and points of discussions. The degree of say AND whether we agree, disagree, like, dislike, think it good, bad, indifferent, want a change or not, etc, etc, etc, are wholly different "OTHER" discussions.
So for example, US markets (by way of economics, emissions policies, regulation, etc.) expresses its distain in the figurative and literal plethora of ways for PVF diesels. Again to state the obvious, 95% of the passenger vehicle fleet are gassers and less than 2.5 % are passenger CAR diesels. So KUDO's to MB for making a like model diesel cheaper than a like model gasser. (albeit, MINUS - $ 500. ) Parenthetically they probably still sell more (like model ) gassers.
Essentially Toyota took up "the powers that be" standard and instead of improving the fuel mileage of gassers went to a VERY expensive (gasser/hybrid) technology. To me this put the Prius @ app 2x price of Corolla. They were summarily skewered in the 2004 "Pious" debacle overstated mpg 60 C 50 H and were "bailed out" with the EPA reconstructing the mpg tests !!! They did not make much money over the majority of the LIFE of the Prius product. However arguably it was a "loss leader" for the whole line of less efficient (mpg wise) GASSERS, (an easy example being Tundra full sized truck) . I am sure a lot of folks during the 2008/2009 MY (period of decimation of new car sales) FORGOT that older Toyota Camry's were labeled gas guzzlers and could be turned in for tax credit. One could then turn around and buy even a BETTER (American) gas guzzler (even less mpg??/) !!!! ????? Truly ironic here?
Another example is despite a segment of dislike to vilification for the so called "SUV" segment, the "big minority" of the SUV's segment sales is "GREATER" (albeit slightly) than the sedan's segment. In fact, despite distain to vilification of the "LARGE" car markets 75% (majority) have been, are, remain and will BE .... LARGE cars. I would posit part of the dislike to vilification for diesel is it enables large cars tweaking the unit large car logic. (waving the red flag in front of the anti large car bulls)
Here is FORD's ( another oems') look @ the SUV segment. 20% WW to 33.3% + in US markets.
http://www.thestreet.com/story/12961522/1/ford-european-president-explains-why-global-suv-sales-are-strong.html
Again to me, the nexus here: TDI's in SUV's are an absolute no brainer and for many reasons.
Here is an easy one. For RAM ( oem offering a like model) diesel, 2 gassers options.
The NavTeq mapping in the Toyota Sequoia was even worse. You had to keep reloading the DVD when you went to another region. The automakers need to put pressure on Microsoft/Nokia/NavTeq to get their act together. People will stop wasting $2000 on a poor option.
Associated Press By MARY CLARE JALONICK
...""This is an example of government at its worst," Gerard said."...
http://news.yahoo.com/epa-delays-decision-ethanol-gas-161703053.html
Golf platform ALLTRACK
This might make an interesting US market TDI ! ?
http://www.autoblog.com/2014/11/21/vw-golf-alltrack-us-sales-confirmed/
What were the white blotches?
Other than the NAV, it sounds like you have a good dealer. Lots of techs forget to reset the service interval doohickies.
Volkswagen to Invest $107.3 Billion Over Next 5 Years (Detroit News)
In diesel news:
"The 22 mpg combined fuel economy for the most efficient 2015 F-150 falls just 1 mpg short of the combined rating for the Ram 1500 fitted with a 3.0-liter six-cylinder diesel engine, rated at a combined 23 mpg (20 city/28 highway). Ford insists, however, that the comparison isn't apples-to-apples, as the diesel engine is a more expensive upgrade than the $495 Ford charges for the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6. More importantly, at current fuel prices, the diesel-engine Ram costs $449 more to drive over 15,000 miles."
2015 Ford F-150 Earns Up to 22 MPG Combined; Pickup Bound for Dealers Now
A foglight lens showed up broken after service. It was not broken when I cleaned the millions of CA bugs off the SUV after our trip to Oregon. Did they do it? I don't know. They did replace it free. I just wrote a glowing report to the general manager. I think the white stuff is dried DEF they splashed while filling. I will clean it all off the spare. I am most upset with the whole NAV business. I hated the NAV in my Sequoia. Mostly because of NavTeq. And I don't trust this NAV. Even though the interface is way ahead of the Toyota NAV. The 8 inch screen is clear and bright. You can choose 2D, 3D or flat map. And the integrated SiriusXM sound system is decades ahead of the Toyota unit. I can load 1000s of tunes with complete control of the database. If there was some easy way to integrate 4G cellular with Google maps, it would be near perfect. Audi has it I want it.
Microsoft IS the problem with NavTeq.
http://blumenthals.com/blog/2013/09/03/microsoft-buys-nokia-and-gets-navteq-for-free-or-less/