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

nyccarguy

Not too much data to go by on fuelly either. Diesel GL 350s (both of them) seem to average about 20 mpg while the lone GL 450 seems to be hovering around the 15 mpg mark.

ruking1

nyccarguy said:

Not too much data to go by on fuelly either. Diesel GL 350s (both of them) seem to average about 20 mpg while the lone GL 450 seems to be hovering around the 15 mpg mark.

Some folks want to do more than their fair share in "stimulating" the economy.

TMI observation:

The MB's three year 45,000 mile lease pretty much is designed for the AVERAGE mileage per year, US driver.

(Range of 12,000 to 15,000 miles, among other targets, goals and executions.)

ruking1

ruking1 said:

IF one is shopping for a gasser, given the (above) posted article, I hope it is easy to see that 15 Honda's presents consumers buying opportunities ? !

TMI : ?

I debated whether to post this following article or not, for they didn't specifically mention DIESEL HPFP's ! (by nexus, Bosch fuel pumps WOULD affect the majority of those 15 gassers (Nissan, BMW, VW, Audi)

So for example, I am unclear IF and HOW it would affect/effect the HPFP's in VW's Jetta TDI's 2009, VW Touareg TDI 2012. The HPFP issue might even drift over, i.e., to the 2014 MB's (my case GLK 250 BT).

So, I do NOT wish to infer ANYTHING beyond what the article specifically mentions. BUT it does imply what happened to my 2009 VW JETTA TDI HPFP is probably NOT diesel ONLY related, albeit, extremely LOW incidence rate (less than 1/3 of 1%- 800/241,000+).

Bosch Fuel Pump Recall Expands To Include 2015 Volkswagen Golf, GTI, Audi A3
By Richard Read

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1098023_bosch-fuel-pump-recall-expands-to-include-2015-volkswagen-golf-gti-audi-a3

I may have to stand up and BE CORRECTED !

UPSHOT

So NOW on the 2009 VW Jetta TDI with (now) 92,000+ miles, so far there have been no diesel issues.

Based upon the above articles' RECALL of GASSER HPFP's on approximately a 100,000 population vs warranty repair and case basis repair on 800 units of 241,000 DIESEL HPFP units, it would APPEAR the issue/s is/are FAR more prevalent on GASSERS, based upon recall protocols.

When you add it to past GASSER HPFP recall campaigns, fixing of 800/241,000+ DIESEL units are the figurative and literal "drop/s in the bucket". So far, an advantaged added back to diesels ! Of course, the HPFP issue would be more "neutral", IF a recall were to be done on the diesels 241,000+ also.

stever

Diesel cars could be banished as Britain ordered to cut air pollution ( telegraph.co.uk)

Is Audi’s Carbon-Neutral Diesel a Game-Changer? (energytrendsinsider.com)

Jaguar XE to get a diesel in North America (autonet.ca). Our version of the story confirms that "North America" includes the US.

elias

I'd consider a diesel vehicle *today* if it had stickshift or if it was a impeccably maintained 2006/2007 Benz E series diesel. Thankfully I'm able to resist VWs lately.

A BMW diesel 3 or 5 stickshift would probably be irresistible to me, as would any Audi stickshift diesel model.

ruking1

I hear you! Yeah, I would find a Porsche 911 TT diesel with a 7/8 speed MT irresistible ! Another on that list would be a Corvette Z06 Cummins V8 TDI TT with 7/8 speed Tremec MT with auto rev matching. Oh and 40 to 45 mpg would be good too. Don't forget under $50k.

ruking1

Not really a diesel topic, BUT since VW makes a majority of DIESEL passenger cars....

Volkswagen is a mess in the US, but things may be about to get better
Business Insider By Benjamin Zhang
April 29, 2015 5:25 PM

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/volkswagen-mess-us-things-may-212429585.html

stever

All well and good, and with my Chattanooga connections, I'm rooting for them.

But, to make it in the US, I sure hope those interchangeable platforms will support pickup and SUV bodies.

ruking1

stever said:

All well and good, and with my Chattanooga connections, I'm rooting for them.

But, to make it in the US, I sure hope those interchangeable platforms will support pickup and SUV bodies.

In the context of 2 to 5% US market share AND compact to midsized cars, I'd say yes. In the context of competing in the large to light truck markets, absolutely not ! So for example, the VW Touareg is a "MIDESIZED" CUV.

stever

Here's this month's "target":

Michaell

stever said:

Here's this month's "target":

I know the Outback we bought in February was on the lot for 1 day .. it arrived on Friday, we made a deal for it on Saturday.

gagrice

VW seems to be continuing their down hill slide. The Passat is just not selling like it needs to for VW to keep that factory in TN open. I really believe they are not getting enough diesels onto the lots. The Golf and Tiguan seems to keep them afloat.

High-mileage, TDI® Clean Diesel models accounted for 21.4 percent of sales in April

http://media.vw.com/release/976/

xwesx

Wow; thirteen days?! That's completely insane!

nyccarguy

I know @ruking1 has his eye on this: http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/meet-577-mpg-land-rover

gagrice

nyccarguy said:

I know @ruking1 has his eye on this: http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/meet-577-mpg-land-rover

A LR Discovery that gets 57 MPG UK (48 MPG US) would be worth looking at. Not real enthused with the styling, especially the Evoque. A couple of them around here. Looks like the 9 speed transmission could be problematic.

A recent report from Automotive News said Fiat-Chrysler would be updating software for the transverse-mounted 9HP gearbox on 2014–2015 Jeep Cherokees and four-cylinder 2015 Chrysler 200s starting this month. This marks the third time the automaker has released a software patch (the last occurred in May) since the Cherokee’s debut in late 2013, which was delayed to fix problems with the transmission. The Cherokee and 2014 Range Rover Evoque were the first two cars in production with the nine-speed, followed by the 2015 Chrysler 200 and six-cylinder versions of the 2015 Acura TLX.


http://blog.caranddriver.com/holy-shift-zf-9-speed-automatic-problems-mount-chrysler-releases-third-software-update-for-jeep-cherokee/

gagrice

Something many of US have known for a long time. The SUV/CUV is the most practical vehicle for anyone over 50. Who is driving the market right now? Boomers are retiring buying the most practical vehicle for retirement travel. Even the gassers like the CRV, RAV4 & Escape are getting respectable mileage. Though it could be a lot better if Honda, Toyota and Ford would get their heads out of you know where.

gagrice

What I find funny, our friends have a GMC Terrain, rated at the same mileage as our Touareg. Difference is he averages just under 20 MPG around town. Rides on the BIG E at about 350 miles. He is always making excuses for us to take the Touareg when we go places. Of course having ridden in the Terrain, the comfort quiet factor is night and day. he is a hard core GM fan and kicks himself for not spending a few shekels more to get a little more luxury in the Caddy SRX. I tell him he will still be looking for a cheap gas station when he gets to 350 miles on the tank. His response is great, "I wish GM would offer a diesel SUV".

ruking1

We have relatives with a Camry that were bragging on 25 mpg. I didn't have the heart @ first to say what any of the diesels got. Funny when they finally found out, they were then always asking for us to drive. Weirder was another that got 40 mpg or with a Prius!!! I was also surprised @ the serious monies Toyota gets for those.

gagrice

ruking1 said:

We have relatives with a Camry that were bragging on 25 mpg. I didn't have the heart @ first to say what any of the diesels got. Funny when they finally found out, they were then always asking for us to drive. Weirder was another that got 40 mpg or with a Prius!!!

Riding anywhere more than 10 miles in a Prius is painful. I think my Nissan PU is more comfortable and quiet. When our friends moved to Idaho, they borrowed their daughter's full size PU and towed a U-Hual. A few weeks later the daughter and son in law drove the Prius to Boise and picked up their truck. The trip home was much more comfortable than the long drive up. Prius is a commuter vehicle.

stever

gagrice said:

The SUV/CUV is the most practical vehicle for anyone over 50.

Minivans still (generally) have an easier slide in height than most, not to mention power doors for stashing the groceries (or grandkids) in the back seat.

(@ruking1, let's try to let the other sites deal with the politics - it's bad enough that we have some forum ads using POTUS to sell mortgages. Thanks.)

ruking1

What cars are driven in US markets/ PVF are VERY VERY VERY political !! ?? GM/Chrysler went BR and FORD really was not far behind. Would be simple to let em go BR to ZERO production of ICE's, ban imports and sell those cars no longer !!! So the question was IF we had forced that, which engines would we have put in place of what was killed or banned? The defacto answers are history.

But I have to agree, crow is not a ver tasty dish!

I also think the 2009 VW Jetta TDI DID benefit from an IRS tax $1,500 tax CREDIT because some of its' emissions components were vendored by an emissions manufacturing company based in NY State. NY State incidently @ the time was represented by then SENATOR Hillary Clinton.

stever

Ugh, two years more of this.

(What am I saying, the political season never stops any more).

This link is noteworthy because it blames the greens:

We’ve all been taken for a ride over diesel (telegraph.co.uk)

ruking1

The article is almost totally misleading, given certain truths and half truths. Blocking ALL diesels in London will do and change absolutely NOTHING !!!

Well, your post goes DIRECTLY to my point. POLITICS ! POLITICS ! POLITICS !!!! ????

In "OUR" country, when the powers that be MANDATED FROM regular/mg/premium LEADED gasoline (70's) TO regular/mg/premium Unleaded gasoline, it was supposed to END pollution,, cure cancer, solve war , insure the peace, fix the roads, insure domestic tranquility, zzzzzzzzzzzzz etc.,etc, yada, yada, yada, !!!!!! ???????

So, ....do you see any of it around, 45 years later ????? Ditto London 45 years from now !!!

Also @ that time, they did NOT mandate ULSD (PVF) . Guess which fuels STILL causes the majority of the pollution (by PVF) ! ?? Guess which fuel STILL gets blamed even as it is NOW ULSD @ WAY less than 5% of the passenger vehicle fleet and HUGELY cleaner AND cleaner than the so called " NON" pollutive gasoline !!! ???

ruking1

stever said:

gagrice said:

The SUV/CUV is the most practical vehicle for anyone over 50.

Minivans still (generally) have an easier slide in height than most, not to mention power doors for stashing the groceries (or grandkids) in the back seat.

(@ruking1, let's try to let the other sites deal with the politics - it's bad enough that we have some forum ads using POTUS to sell mortgages. Thanks.)

I have read in passing the 9 passenger minivans (Odyssey, Sienna) are HUGELY popular in the China market. I do not follow the minivan market here, but it seems to be an overpriced to premium priced niche market? Why the oems do not see the logic of diesel power trains is probably not in my pay grade.

gagrice

stever said:

Ugh, two years more of this.

(What am I saying, the political season never stops any more).

This link is noteworthy because it blames the greens:

We’ve all been taken for a ride over diesel (telegraph.co.uk)

Well to say that gas emissions are safer than diesel is a bit disingenuous. CO carbon monoxide is the silent killer. And gas cars put out way more CO than diesels. I had four friends in Prudhoe that died from a gas vehicle left running under neath their camp bedrooms. London, should get the picture. TOO MANY PEOPLE.

An interesting side note on the Greenies in the EU. They seem to have allied themselves with Putin and the Russians. The Russians are BIG opponents of gas fracking.

henryn

stever said:

gagrice said:

The SUV/CUV is the most practical vehicle for anyone over 50.

Minivans still (generally) have an easier slide in height than most, not to mention power doors for stashing the groceries (or grandkids) in the back seat.

I agree about the minivans. But I think many people over 50 still have that negative image (soccer mom) associated with a minivan. Let's face it, image matters. Substance is secondary (at least for most people - not anyone here, of course!)

gagrice

henryn said:

stever said:

gagrice said:

The SUV/CUV is the most practical vehicle for anyone over 50.

Minivans still (generally) have an easier slide in height than most, not to mention power doors for stashing the groceries (or grandkids) in the back seat.

I agree about the minivans. But I think many people over 50 still have that negative image (soccer mom) associated with a minivan. Let's face it, image matters. Substance is secondary (at least for most people - not anyone here, of course!)

I could get interested in a Mini-van that has some luxury and a diesel engine. For some reason VW has several van models and has not brought any of them recently. Why they bothered with the re-badged Chrysler MV is anyone's guess. The new T6 van with a couple diesel options would get me looking. I can always use more room for stuff when traveling. The T6 comes with power sliding doors & AWD. Seems made for US market.

ruking1

I do not think "image" has much to do with it. I think it has more to do with how it fits ones applications/lifestyles.

It is a no brainer to say it fits the so called Soccer Mom/Dad's lifestyle. I mean, you have to ask when those very same folks (current and paying customers) are SANS the family, why do they NOT keep the minivans, ..... or buy new ones.

For me, for its intended use (9 passengers, cargo and towing) it approach being seriously overloaded. It is almost SCARY in snow and ice. Sans chains, a minivan will not pass chain control check points. Any of the SUV's CUV's (any i have had) will.

gagrice

Power comes from a completely new generation of 2.0-liter TDI diesel engines codenamed 'EA288 Nutz' launched for the EU6 markets that are available with 84PS (83hp), 102PS (101hp), 150PS (148hp) and 204PS (201hp), and a 2.0-liter turbocharged petrol offered in two states of tune with 150PS (148hp) or 204PS (201hp).

http://www.carscoops.com/2015/04/this-is-vws-all-new-t6-transporter-van.html

Mr_Shiftright

VW simply does not fully understand the US market and has more than enough time to learn it.

ruking1

Mr_Shiftright said:

VW simply does not fully understand the US market and has more than enough time to learn it.

Yes ! An example is 75% of the US market PVF are large cars to "light trucks" . Any viable offerings there? 25% are so called smaller cars The market sees fit to snap up 2.3% of that minority (25%) segment. This of course makes for opportunities, i.e., VW Touareg TDI, a NON branded good selling Porsche Cayenne.

ruking1

So, IF 2015 projections of 17.1 M hold true, and VW MATCHS its 2014 market share of 2.2% of the market sales (366,970/16.5 M), THEN that is 376,200 units or 8.8% % of the smaller car markets. Again, this would be well below its 850,000 unit target or 4.97 % of market share. In the small car market, the unit target is almost 20% of small cars (19.9%)

Right now @ 2015 PROJECTED sales of 327,744 units is (12%) short of actual 2014 sales of 366,970. AGAIN, IF it hits projected market share, it would THEN be 1.92%

A good time to make ones BEST deals, IF one is in the market for small to midsize car, albeit diesels.(21/22% of the fleet offering (72,103 units)

Monies @ ZERO % are not hard to take also. This is in addition to various incentives, that do come and go.

In the midsize CUV segment, VW Touareg projected % is .00359 %, i.e..,BARELY to non measurable. I have read that 40% are TDI's (projected 6, 147). So ...2,459 TDI units are less than BARELY measurable @ .00144%.

ruking1

Here is an article (defacto) on why the so called "diesel premium" has been, is, remains a straw man issue !

U.S. Auto Buyers Spend to Trade Up
Buyers’ demand for more luxury in new vehicles shows up in rising prices paid

By JOHN D. STOLL and JEFF BENNETT
Updated May 1, 2015 2:36 p.m. ET

http://www.wsj.com/articles/chrysler-sales-rise-5-8-in-april-1430484083

gagrice

The most-efficient version of Ford’s Explorer SUV, now built on a modified car platform, achieves 28 mpg on the highway, compared with the 21 mpg achieved by the truck-based Explorer of 2005.

Someone pulled the wool over the EPA eyes on that one. Not many buyers for the 2.0L explorer. And those that posted on Fuelly are so far under the EPA lies, they have to be very unhappy. Hoping for the advertised 23 MPG combined and getting 18 MPG is serious over estimating. Especially with 96% of their driving highway. 10 MPG under the 28 MPG they should be getting. Once again proves you cannot change the laws of physics and squeeze more energy out of a gallon of gas than is in there.

ruking1

gagrice said:

The most-efficient version of Ford’s Explorer SUV, now built on a modified car platform, achieves 28 mpg on the highway, compared with the 21 mpg achieved by the truck-based Explorer of 2005.

Someone pulled the wool over the EPA eyes on that one. Not many buyers for the 2.0L explorer. And those that posted on Fuelly are so far under the EPA lies, they have to be very unhappy. Hoping for the advertised 23 MPG combined and getting 18 MPG is serious over estimating. Especially with 96% of their driving highway. 10 MPG under the 28 MPG they should be getting. Once again proves you cannot change the laws of physics and squeeze more energy out of a gallon of gas than is in there.

I have got to shake my head on that one !!

Even the Touareg GASSER gets 19.5 mpg (tad lower) with a 3.6 L engine !!!! 80% BIGGER !!! The Explorer is 300 #'s LESS ! Are you thinking FORD might put the Explorer line on an aluminum (further) diet ?

Since EPA on a Touareg TDI is @ 28 mpg also, using my anecdotal (32-35) mpg is @ least 78% BETTER !!! ?????

gagrice

The sad part is seeing the EPA estimate and then realizing you have been Screwed Big Time. That is how the changes came about with the Prius testing. I would rather the manufacturer makes the estimates and then the buyers can go after them when they learn the estimates are not true. To me the Ford Eco Boost engine is a joke. It is a high performance engine. Not a high mileage engine.

Looking at the Ford Transit Diesels, there are some good numbers going up. It's a start.

ruking1

I think that SOTP losses of 36% on gassers (28 mpg eps to 18 mpg RW) are not perceived as great as gains of 14.3% (28 mpg EPA to 32 RW mpg) ? The actual delta is really more like 50% PLUS !!!

nyccarguy

My 2015 Legacy (gasser) is rated at 26 city/36 highway (30 combined). According to my fuelly dash board, I'm averaging 26.5 mpg (with a best tank of 28.9). My cost per mile is still low at $.102 since September 2014.

Not living up to EPA estimates, but still a whole helluva lot better than the 15.8 mpg I average in my wife's Pilot. Last tankful was 12.8 mpg.

gagrice

nyccarguy said:

My 2015 Legacy (gasser) is rated at 26 city/36 highway (30 combined). According to my fuelly dash board, I'm averaging 26.5 mpg (with a best tank of 28.9). My cost per mile is still low at $.102 since September 2014.

Not living up to EPA estimates, but still a whole helluva lot better than the 15.8 mpg I average in my wife's Pilot. Last tankful was 12.8 mpg.

You make a great point. How are these automakers getting the EPA to fudge so much on mileage? I hear you when you say 26 MPG is far better than 15 MPG. That has been my savings from the Sequoia to the Touareg. I wonder if it is possible to get 36 MPG with the Legacy on our highways maintaining the 65-70 MPH flow of traffic. If they are testing at 55 MPH on level land, that is hardly fair to the buyer.

qbrozen

I get mixed results. On exactly the same commute, I get 40 mpg in my Honda Fit vs the EPA's combined estimate of 32 (25% better) but only 20.5 in the CTS vs the EPA's 18 (about 14% better). Not a huge discrepancy, but it does make me wonder.

nyccarguy

The automakers definitely "play" with the automatic transmissions (or in my case CVT) to achieve the EPA mileage. For instance, when I set the cruise control and toggle the trip computer to show "instant MPG" I notice the display saying 99 MPG when I'm going down hill and back to 40 mpg when the ground levels out and eventually settles in the 34 - 36 mpg range. I also notice that if I set the cruise at say 65, then slow down, and reset the cruise to 65 the CVT doesn't "downshift" to get back up to speed.

stever

Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings

Detailed Test Information is available from the EPA. The other wrinkle is that the tests are run with "pure" gasoline. No ethanol blends, yet. (link)

No idea what they use for diesel fuel in those tests.

gagrice

stever said:

Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings

Detailed Test Information is available from the EPA. The other wrinkle is that the tests are run with "pure" gasoline. No ethanol blends, yet. (link)

No idea what they use for diesel fuel in those tests.

Here is the bottom line, saving face at all costs:

In government and policy circles, it's well known that the EPA's fuel economy figures are too optimistic, but changing the system to more closely reflect real-world averages would mean lowering the bar on all the measurements of the current state of fuel efficiency on the American highway, and no one is eager to admit that we really haven't come as far in fuel-efficiency gains as it seems.

The 54.5-mpg average for fuel efficiency among new vehicles that the Obama administration is proposing for 2025 will really be somewhere down around 36-38 mpg in real-world terms.


As for diesel fuel, my only consistent finding is Mobil gives me less mileage than any other brand. I am guessing it has the lowest cetane rating. No proof other than 3 full tanks of Mobil were about 3 MPG lower than any other brand. Shell, ARCO and 76 seem comparable.

stever

It was pretty common knowledge at the time that the 54.5 proposal would be 38ish in the real world.

But when people are buying Camrys (~40 mpg) instead of Prii (~46), as someone posted today, it's easy to argue that CAFE is working.

ruking1

Since you take the exact same route, you could measure the percentage difference between the two. So what do you attribute the difference to right now?

ruking1

stever said:

It was pretty common knowledge at the time that the 54.5 proposal would be 38ish in the real world.

But when people are buying Camrys (~40 mpg) instead of Prii (~46), as someone posted today, it's easy to argue that CAFE is working.

Not! Camry/competitors have been ubiquitous for decades going on @least a biblical generation. Current MPG PvF is app 24.

stever

35 highway per Toyota. The link I skimmed may have been referring to the Camry hybrid.

ruking1

stever said:

35 highway per Toyota. The link I skimmed may have been referring to the Camry hybrid.

Perhaps I should have repeated the long established "to sell the far more important truck & suv gasser"markets. So NO quibble about your mpg posting!

stever

True that - Average Fuel Economy Dips to 25.2 MPG in April as Truck, SUV Sales Climb.

I should have brought a Prius last month before gas prices popped. Well, popped relative to the $1.59 RUG briefly noticed in Las Cruces over the winter. The going rate now is almost buck more than that.

ruking1

stever said:

True that - Average Fuel Economy Dips to 25.2 MPG in April as Truck, SUV Sales Climb.

I should have brought a Prius last month before gas prices popped. Well, popped relative to the $1.59 RUG briefly noticed in Las Cruces over the winter. The going rate now is almost buck more than that.

That was what I was saying about TDI's Fuel prices are ALWAYS fluid. Tha diesel RATIO advantage is app 30% better AND is also fluid.