I see no reason to verify the health problems from NOx, it's been heavily studied. No need for "correlated longitudinal (health) studies before and after: Gas, gas hybrid, diesel, EV, etc." Regulations are about the pollutants, if NOx has been shown to be a health problem, there's no excuse for VW's cheating.
Here's the EPA's take on NOx: "Current scientific evidence links short-term NO2 exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, with adverse respiratory effects including airway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma.
Also, studies show a connection between breathing elevated short-term NO2 concentrations, and increased visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory issues, especially asthma.
NO2 concentrations in vehicles and near roadways are appreciably higher than those measured at monitors in the current network. In fact, in-vehicle concentrations can be 2-3 times higher than measured at nearby area-wide monitors. Near-roadway (within about 50 meters) concentrations of NO2 have been measured to be approximately 30 to 100% higher than concentrations away from roadways.
Individuals who spend time on or near major roadways can experience short-term NO2 exposures considerably higher than measured by the current network. Approximately 16% of U.S housing units are located within 300 ft of a major highway, railroad, or airport (approximately 48 million people). This population likely includes a higher proportion of non-white and economically-disadvantaged people.
NO2 exposure concentrations near roadways are of particular concern for susceptible individuals, including people with asthma asthmatics, children, and the elderly
The sum of nitric oxide (NO) and NO2 is commonly called nitrogen oxides or NOx. Other oxides of nitrogen including nitrous acid and nitric acid are part of the nitrogen oxide family. While EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) covers this entire family, NO2 is the component of greatest interest and the indicator for the larger group of nitrogen oxides.
NOx react with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds to form small particles. These small particles penetrate deeply into sensitive parts of the lungs and can cause or worsen respiratory disease, such as emphysema and bronchitis, and can aggravate existing heart disease, leading to increased hospital admissions and premature death.
Ozone is formed when NOx and volatile organic compounds react in the presence of heat and sunlight. Children, the elderly, people with lung diseases such as asthma, and people who work or exercise outside are at risk for adverse effects from ozone. These include reduction in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms as well as respiratory-related emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and possibly premature deaths.
Emissions that lead to the formation of NO2 generally also lead to the formation of other NOx. Emissions control measures leading to reductions in NO2 can generally be expected to reduce population exposures to all gaseous NOx. This may have the important co-benefit of reducing the formation of ozone and fine particles both of which pose significant public health threats. "
Once upon a time, (no, this is not the beginning of a fairy tale) I served on a county board & committee with the Mayor of Palo Alto CA. Over that time, not directly related to the board that we served, we had several off- mike and off-line discussions about wood fireplace burning. @ that time, I mentioned that there would probably come a day when we (Bay Area) would seek to regulate wood-burning fireplaces. She looked at me like I had two heads. Aka part of the value of a Palo Alto home are the wood burning fireplaces. In a lot of cases MULTIPLE fireplaces.
FF to your posted link, seeking to stem wood burning in fireplaces has been true for quite awhile. So yes burning of wood-burning fireplaces (9,200) is approximately 708 times more pollution producing than the TDI population(13). We also hide the gasser (death) rates! As IF there are ZERO deaths. Yet, we chicken little the VW TDI's.! ?
More news is due out tomorrow. "At least 30 managers were involved in Volkswagen Group's emissions test cheating, German magazine Spiegel reported on Wednesday, citing internal and external investigations." (europe.autonews.com)
"The world's best-selling auto maker said that by 2050, gas-electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, fuel-cell cars and electric vehicles will account for most of its global vehicle sales, without giving a detailed breakdown.
That means gasoline- and diesel-engine powered cars, currently accounting for roughly 85 per cent of Toyota global vehicle sales, would be near zero, Senior Managing Officer Kiyotaka Ise said.
"It wouldn't be easy for gasoline and diesel cars to survive," Mr Ise told a media briefing in Tokyo. "With such massive decline in engine-powered cars, it's like the world is turning upside down and Toyota has to change its ways.
Last year, around 14 per cent of Toyota's global sales were hybrid vehicles, including plug-ins."
Toyota lost some major money (minus- billions) while VW was making major money (+ billions) , albeit, for three years in a row.
Indeed, when Toyota was able to come up for air, Toyota had to put even more money in to restructure Toyota globally. Articles confirm what I have said.
VW has done restructuring I.e., MQB. It was/is not enough. VW has to shake off the grip of the lower saxony politicians ( controls 20%) and stop VW labor unions gravy trains. ( they also control a% of stock) More importantly labor needs to get much more productivity. Hans and Franz are used to getting seven weeks vacation with a bonus as pin money. I.e., CUT/CUT.
You are right, a LOT has to change. Total swag on my part, but VW has to cut a minimum of 10% headcount just to tread water. Treading water as you probably can guess is the kiss of death. Without an increase in productivity, and much lower costs, it can be literally over: game, set, match!
Well given my "ISIS branded" gasser 94/96 TLC's, ( don't have the machine gun mounts yet) we seriously are looking at 30 years of operation (2024/2026) . I seriously think that (my)?diesels will be around for @ least another 30 years.
"The world's best-selling auto maker said that by 2050, gas-electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, fuel-cell cars and electric vehicles will account for most of its global vehicle sales, without giving a detailed breakdown.
Well I don't imagine I will still be driving at 107 years of age. Though there are those people that are. My Touareg TDI will only be at half life of 37 years of age. Young as cars go.
Most classic car owners are accustomed to the unusual looks other motorists cast toward their relics on the road. But when Margaret Dunning is behind the wheel of her 1930 Packard 740 Roadster, she draws more attention than her vehicle.
Dunning, age 102, may be one of a small handful of classic-car drivers who can lay claim to the fact they're older than their vehicles.
Turns out that higher mpg is not the same as creating less CO2 when comparing RUG to diesel. As an example, my Altima generates 284 grams per mile of CO2 while a diesel Passat is sending 298 grams per mile out the tailpipe. This is the case even with the VW getting a combined mpg of 34 while the Altima is 31 mpg. The Altima also uses less oil per year with an Annual Petroleum Consumption of only 10.6 barrels a year as opposed to the diesel Passat at 11.2 barrels. The answer to why the Altima creates less CO2 can be found at http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=307&t=11 “About 19.64 pounds of carbon dioxide (CO2) are produced from burning a gallon of gasoline that does not contain ethanol. About 22.38 pounds of CO2 are produced by burning a gallon of diesel fuel.”
For me it is even more obvious, the best vehicles in the family sedan category are powered by RUG engines.
Nice try but no cigar. Average MPG for the Altima on Fuelly is 30 MPG, with the average for the Passat TDI is 40 MPG. The Passat is in the top ten best mileage cars on the highway. That means using your numbers from the EIA the Altima puts out 285 K/Mile and the Passat TDI puts out 254 K/Mile. You are the one causing GW. If you insist on 31 MPG many Passat owners are getting high 40s.
It looks like most people are Not getting what they paid for in Mileage with the Altima. From the EPA site it is even worse with the average Altima MPG being 28.8. Heck my 5000 lb Touareg gets that good and I drive it 80 MPH on short freeway trips. Hard to keep that 400+ lbs of torque below 75 MPH on the highway.
Most VW TDI owners are very happy with their cars and 3 of the top ten mileage vehicles are VW TDIs. Pretty amazing considering how few their are on the roads.
You are missing some important details. First, as of today: There are 2671 Volkswagen Passats with reported gas mileage parked at Fuelly. There are 960 Nissan Altimas with reported gas mileage parked at Fuelly.
Here is the percentage of 2014 owners of each vehicle that register on Fuelly. 96649 419 0.43% 335644 61 0.02%
Only 0.02% of 2014 Altima Owners go to Fuelly. About 20 times more 2014 Passat owners register at Fuelly. So the question is, why do more Passat owners go to Fuelly?
People go to Fuelly to brag and see where they stand compared to other owners. Notice that a majority of the engines listed for the Passat are diesel. The same thing happens with Prius owners as over 4,000 are registered on Fuelly. Passats TDIs are a bit of a one trick pony as the biggest draw is fuel economy – not so much with the Altima.
The Passat TDI is often bought for its highway MPG. This does not mean that the Altima does not get excellent highway mpg. Without actual statistics comparing the % highway/city, speeds and other conditions like wind one cannot do a good comparison. I did notice that more than a few Altima owners were able to get 40+ mpg on the highway. One person reported a high of 45.6 mpg with 90% highway driving.
I have personally seen 42.8 mpg traveling at 70 mph. I have no doubt that the car would hit 44 mpg at 65 mph as Consumer Reports found out.
The 2016 Altima is rated at an additional one mpg which suggests even better real world mpg.
When we crunch the numbers we see that the $332 savings over 100,000 miles hardly justifies the several thousand dollar delta between the Passat TDI and an Altima.
And finally, it will be interesting to see if the TDI mpg numbers hold up once the cars are updated.
I had a recent model Altima for over a week as a rental and can vouch that either the EPA's highway mileage is outright fraud (under the table payments to get the high 38 posted; aka bribery), or simply the Altima has horrid fuel economy. No way no how under real-world conditions was I getting 38. Maybe at 55 MPH. The CVT made the car take a few eons to reach 60 MPH unless you floored it. I'm not a fan of the car, but if it got 38 MPG in real-life, that would be a selling point. Not sure what else there is to like about the car? I guess I'm spoiled.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
Haven't lived in LA but have lived in two "bad air" valley towns (ANC and Boise). Both were a far cry from 13 zillion and both used IM testing to help the air quality. Diesel's just dirtier, esp. with particulates and NOx.
Too eco-friendly? Is that like too rich and too thin?
VW news seems to have paused a bit. Guess everyone is waiting to see what the fix will be and we may know that by the end of next week. Or at least by the end of October.
And another test appears to shed some light on why Mazda hasn't gone diesel in the US yet.
"Last night, the researchers said the huge discrepancy between real-world diesel emissions and the legal limits set by the European Commission was ‘extremely concerning’ – and suggested that Volkswagen was not alone in finding ways to pass laboratory tests."
Too Eco-Friendly? Yes, it happens. Too safe, yes, it happens.
We are making things so eco-friendly and/or so safe that no one can afford to buy them anymore. We do it with houses (engineering overkill for every 1 in 1,000 year storm/wind/earthquake), and cars.
It all comes down to the law of diminishing returns, we are spending way too much money/capital chasing way too little of a benefit.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
True, I often only get 20 MPG from the S4, in mixed driving. If everyone stays out of my way and keeps out of the left lane so I don't have to use the brake pedal I've seen 30 MPG is possible even at super legal speeds in CA such as 80 MPH which is legal nowhere in CA.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I'm all for reasonable spending in response to actual risks. John Stossel had a great show on this several years ago, "Are We Scaring Ourselves to Death?" I think it was called. You can find it on Youtube, I think.
But the VW fraud isn't the same thing. They cheated, and they got caught. They didn't want to pay to license BlueTec from MB, they saved a few hundred per car, they sold more as a result. They should be held accountable.
The range on the 2009 Jetta TDI is between 38 and 42 mpg in a punishing 58 miles R/T commute. If I take that on the road and cruise it between 80/85 mph, ( I do not use cruise control) it's kind of a no-brainer to get from 41 to 44 mpg. A/C blasting, of course.
I think I'll trade cars with the wife for a week sometime soon and as I have a very long commute, I should be able to report fairly accurate mileage on a '15 Sportwagen Golf TDI pre-EPA tampering. I'll drive with the same lead foot, and yes, the TDI needs a heavy foot. The DSG in the TDI is a 3-toed sloth in D mode. I wonder if the EPA will ever require testing in S mode.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
People getting high mileage with gassers are driving on level roads at 55 MPH. The proof is on Fuelly for all to see. The same person driving an Altima and Passat TDI will get at least 25% better mileage with the diesel. More than likely if they live where they have to drive 75 MPH to survive on the freeways, it will be closer to 40% better mileage with the diesel. That is the reality of gas vs diesel. If you are comparing like SUVs diesel vs gas, it is over 40% better mileage and overall better for the environment.
M "At least 30 managers were involved in Volkswagen Group's emissions test cheating, German magazine Spiegel reported on Wednesday, citing internal and external investigations."
I hope that's not a surprise to anyone. When VW/Audi said the cheating was the fault of two software folks, I had to laugh at how naive that statement was.
I think I'll trade cars with the wife for a week sometime soon and as I have a very long commute, I should be able to report fairly accurate mileage on a '15 Sportwagen Golf TDI pre-EPA tampering. I'll drive with the same lead foot, and yes, the TDI needs a heavy foot. The DSG in the TDI is a 3-toed sloth in D mode. I wonder if the EPA will ever require testing in S mode.
I suspect you would get better mpg than we would get under any circumstance. As you know, there are a lot of constant improvement reasons why.
What would the pundits forecast with the crystal ball ? Will the USA get to continue to have clean TDIs with great mileage or a neutered down version which would not be worth paying for extra premium over a similar gasser ? And will Europe continue to allow the existing TDIs having just a sleight of hand software tweak and passed emissions tests with a wink wink and a nod nod ?
For Europe, they were already moving towards our more stringent diesel emission standards to I think this scandal will only drive public awareness and accelerate the EU's move to cleaner emissions. VW will likely have to ensure the current TDI cars meet the standards for when they were sold, which means it might not take as much since those have been a lot more lax than the US standards.
For the US, there really aren't any other direct competitors to the small VW cars. GM was apparently able to get the current Cruze Turbo Diesel to pass the stringent emission standards but it was a significant hurdle and they used the US diesel Cruze program to prepare for the upcoming, more stringent European diesel standards. It also required significant hardware (lean NOx trap and selective catalyst reduction/SCR (DEF)) which is one reason the Cruze took a slight hit in city economy compared to the Golf/Jetta but was able to run leaning on the highway and had slightly better economy (somewhat common for diesel cars using SCR/DEF).
GM has said they're committed to bringing the next gen Cruze diesel to the American market since that car's new 1.6L engine was designed with global emission targets from the start. I imagine that VW should be able to eventually certify and sell the model year '16+ cars with little more than a software calibration change since they already have SCR (DEF) injection. It's probably going to harm VW's new and conquest sales but they still have a lot of customers that like how their TDI powered vehicles drive.
Same thing with a lot of the higher end luxury cars. While some trendy buyers might have bought into the "clean" aspect, I'd suspect a larger majority place a higher priority on the power delivery, range and economy and will still buy in similarly small percentages of overall sales.
If anything might help spur diesel sales is the truck and CUV/SUV market. With vehicles like the Ram getting a diesel for the half-ton 1500, the GM Colorado/Canyon twins now available with a diesel, work vans available with diesel and I suspect other small utility vehicles in the pipeline, a lot of new buyers are getting exposed to diesels. It's absolutely possible to build a clean running diesel, just more complex and expensive, but if consumers experience it and have favorable impressions it should only help passenger car sales (but I still don't see those numbers jumping dramatically).
It's hard to compare since the EU emphasizes CO2 emissions more than the US but even with Euro 6, I think the US has stricter overall standards. Euro 6 just brings the standards up to what we've had since 2008. (Green Car Congress)
I'm all for reasonable spending in response to actual risks. John Stossel had a great show on this several years ago, "Are We Scaring Ourselves to Death?" I think it was called. You can find it on Youtube, I think.
But the VW fraud isn't the same thing. They cheated, and they got caught. They didn't want to pay to license BlueTec from MB, they saved a few hundred per car, they sold more as a result. They should be held accountable.
At the approaching fall of the Third Reich, in 1944, the death camps in Auschwitz/Dachau/Buchenwald ., were asked to expedite the gassing , in spite of shortage of Zyklon B poison gas. The camp commanders improvised by running the Panzer tanks and diverting its exhaust into the gas chambers.
I'd suspect a larger majority place a higher priority on the power delivery, range and economy and will still buy in similarly small percentages of overall sales.
That would be me for sure. I don't want to drive a car with a cloud of black smoke spewing out the back. Diesel vehicles have not done that since D2 formula was mandated to have less than 15 PPM sulfur. The major health risk was the sulfur. Same as the major health risk with gasoline was the lead for 75 years before the EPA got the lead out. The worst part about this witch hunt over NOx is the fact that it is worse with BioDiesel. I was looking forward to running biodiesel when VW gave the go ahead. They may be leery with all the latest brouhaha.
I took this board off my favourites list a couple of months ago, but after the VW debacle, hooked it up again. I'm interested in watching certain people's heads explode after about mid-September. I've not been disappointed.
That said, I've wanted a European-style diesel vehicle with a manual transmission since 2001, when I first drove one in Germany. Looks like I've got an even longer wait than I've endured so far.
I've only worked my way through the first 300-400 posts since the feces hit the rotating object, but am looking forward to more entertainment as the rest unfold.
Waters are just great here! Over many & like miles, I've had far more problems with gassers vs diesel vehicles.
So if they decide to put a combination of Ad Blue and/or SCR emissions systems or both in the 2009 Jetta TDI, the Fed will make VW slap a warranty on it, up to 10 years/100,000 miles. So if they do this later than sooner, the emissions system could possibly be warranteed up to 250,000 miles & Up to 10 more years. Will your gasser have that?
I'm all for reasonable spending in response to actual risks. John Stossel had a great show on this several years ago, "Are We Scaring Ourselves to Death?" I think it was called. You can find it on Youtube, I think.
But the VW fraud isn't the same thing. They cheated, and they got caught. They didn't want to pay to license BlueTec from MB, they saved a few hundred per car, they sold more as a result. They should be held accountable.
At the approaching fall of the Third Reich, in 1944, the death camps in Auschwitz/Dachau/Buchenwald ., were asked to expedite the gassing , in spite of shortage of Zyklon B poison gas. The camp commanders improvised by running the Panzer tanks and diverting its exhaust into the gas chambers.
Actually, they tried exhaust fumes first, but it wasn't efficient. But anyway, German Panzers used gasoline, not diesel engines. And they used trucks, not panzers - the tanks were needed at the front.
I'd suspect a larger majority place a higher priority on the power delivery, range and economy and will still buy in similarly small percentages of overall sales.
That would be me for sure. I don't want to drive a car with a cloud of black smoke spewing out the back. Diesel vehicles have not done that since D2 formula was mandated to have less than 15 PPM sulfur. The major health risk was the sulfur. Same as the major health risk with gasoline was the lead for 75 years before the EPA got the lead out. The worst part about this witch hunt over NOx is the fact that it is worse with BioDiesel. I was looking forward to running biodiesel when VW gave the go ahead. They may be leery with all the latest brouhaha.
That would be me also. I don't think I even/ever mentioned "clean" diesel cars ? A poll on another diesel site indicates that was a priority for a minority, app 24% EPA has said all along that diesel emissions have to be just as clean as GASSER emissions. By that definition, it does not confer an advantage to D2.
N0x in ONLY diesel is a witch hunt. Car diesel N0x as shown in AQMD is not even measurable, let alone on the radar. What is a major N0x emitter & clearly ON the radar are GASSER cars, SUV's, to light trucks. @ 95% to 98% gassers.
When I started with the 2003 Jetta TDI , LSD was very common ( @ 140 ppm CA/500 ppm, 49 states.) With current standard @15 ppm delivered nominally from 4ppm (B5) to 5 ppm to 10ppm, B5 to ULSD. D2 is far cleaner than RUG/PUG standard 30 ppm, which by law can be up to 90 ppm (with off line fee payment)
Nobody's listening. I want a smaller diesel PU Truck. Not a monster like the Titan. Where is Ford with their T6 to compete with GM's midsize PU? ISIS has what I want by the hundreds. All I want is one HiLux diesel. Better yet an Amarok, if VW doesn't get the boot out of here.
I really can't think of a time in my life when I either wanted or needed a full-size pick up truck. It's a little hard to understand why a smaller pick up truck and specifically a smaller diesel pick up truck has never really caught on.
The Prius PU still does not come up to the standard needed in a small PU. Need to tow my 3500lb trailer. Want at least 500 miles between fill-ups. Otherwise I may as well stick with my gas guzzling Nissan Frontier. The real problem, it needs a set of tires. Do I drive it down to Costco to get the tires, and fill the tank? Or just keep driving on baldies and pay 30 cents more per gallon for RUG? Life has too many decisions. Of course it is not likely I would pay $60k for a diesel PU truck in this lifetime. If my wife would just let me sell the Lexus, I would look for some moron with a fairly new VW Golf TDI that wants to get rid of it. Perfect car for running errands.
For sure, the Frontier is in hand. It also can take some time to find both the right Golf TDI and the right circumstances for the other party's reasoning for selling. I'm sure the new smaller pick up truck diesels, when it hits the market will command a premium for a while. Within the past year, we went through getting 4/5 sets of tires and 4 each 5,000 miles rotationss. so I might have a clue how you may be feeling. Hopefully, the good news on this side will be 80.000 to 90,000 to one @ 120,000 miles before tire sets are due.
For sure, the Frontier is in hand. It also can take some time to find both the right Golf TDI and the right circumstances for the other party's reasoning for selling. I'm sure the new smaller pick up truck diesels, when it hits the market will command a premium for a while. Within the past year, we went through getting 4/5 sets of tires and 4 each 5,000 miles rotationss. so I might have a clue how you may be feeling. Hopefully, the good news on this side will be 80.000 to 90,000 to one @ 120,000 miles before tire sets are due.
The 2008 Frontier has 60k miles and OEM tires that don't have much tread. No big deal for my 3-6 mile local trips. Should I buy non brand name tires at $86 a piece or get some high mileage $145 tires. I hate buying anything but good quality tires. I also hated dumping $800 on tires for a vehicle we put about 3500 miles a year on. I will probably just run them around here till I see the cords. Haven't done that for 50 years so not easy for me.
For sure, the Frontier is in hand. It also can take some time to find both the right Golf TDI and the right circumstances for the other party's reasoning for selling. I'm sure the new smaller pick up truck diesels, when it hits the market will command a premium for a while. Within the past year, we went through getting 4/5 sets of tires and 4 each 5,000 miles rotationss. so I might have a clue how you may be feeling. Hopefully, the good news on this side will be 80.000 to 90,000 to one @ 120,000 miles before tire sets are due.
The 2008 Frontier has 60k miles and OEM tires that don't have much tread. No big deal for my 3-6 mile local trips. Should I buy non brand name tires at $86 a piece or get some high mileage $145 tires. I hate buying anything but good quality tires. I also hated dumping $800 on tires for a vehicle we put about 3500 miles a year on. I will probably just run them around here till I see the cords. Haven't done that for 50 years so not easy for me.
I know you don't get a lot of rain in SD, but wouldn't you worry about hydroplaning if you plan to drive the Frontier with no tread on the tires?
Actually it sounds like a plan! 2/32 tread remaining is the legal definition of bald. However, if you're at 4/32nds, the recommendation would be to shop for tires.
You have at least two other vehicles that you can use, so it's not like you're exposing yourself to excessive risk, in the case you were close to 2/32 in tread remaining.
This might be TMI, off topic, applies to diesel/gas or gas hybrid, etc. Tire wear/ longevity is weird !
My bias is to get vehicles that are easiest on tires: given ones conditions and how one drives in them.
The other bias is for tires that allow for longer wear with good to great performance; as opposed to to shorten wear with absolutely great performance.
Longer story short : H rated tires seem to be in the sweet spot for many applications.
Exactly...who the hell needs 550# of torque in a pickup truck? Maybe 1 in 1,000 pickup truck owners...maybe. I really don't think those grocery bags are that heavy.
Nobody's listening. I want a smaller diesel PU Truck. Not a monster like the Titan. Where is Ford with their T6 to compete with GM's midsize PU? ISIS has what I want by the hundreds. All I want is one HiLux diesel. Better yet an Amarok, if VW doesn't get the boot out of here.
Not only true, but absolutely true! However, advantage, advantage DIESEL!
But that's only part of the weirdness of that full sized PU truck segment. ANY gasser engine option offered in the class gets very poor fuel mileage. They also have a lot less torque ! The torque is/has been less useable.
To state the obvious, why not get a whole lot more and USEABLE (emphasis on useable) torque, with even better MPG and a better transmission ?
Lets face it, no one buys TDI for its clean emissions. Everyone wanted the high MPG and the high torque. No compensation unless the MPG falls below THE OFFICIAL STICKER value or the torque is significantly reduced. I want to buy a TDI , if as stated the resale value has dropped by 50% ., which I cannot find anywhere
??? Somethings/folks might be confused, I have always face those issues! ! Indeed, I have posted about higher fuel mileage and higher torque (like model)
No, it is false that "EVERYONE" wants higher mph/torque! However, (like model) I would submit TDI BUYERS most likely may.
Why should the lawyers and taxing agency's get the penalty monies, when the OWNERS are being defrauded? Priorities are FUBAR!
I think that's the key nobody wants to admit. Nobody really cares about the emissions - they want the running costs and better driving experience than a hybrid. Of course, people love to feign outrage, and this drama show gives them a chance. Let's engage in self-righteous bluster while using gross polluter commercial vehicles and gasoline powered lawn equipment that probably cancels out 1000 TDis an hour.
Lets face it, no one buys TDI for its clean emissions. Everyone wanted the high MPG and the high torque. No compensation unless the MPG falls below THE OFFICIAL STICKER value or the torque is significantly reduced. I want to buy a TDI , if as stated the resale value has dropped by 50% ., which I cannot find anywhere
Given EPA/CARB standards and in the concept of neg decs, (negative declarations) that is absolutely to very true.
As a point of comparison, In the U S, everybody (212.1 M drivers) still drives, despite a fantastic NHTSA FARS 2013 record of only 30, 000 people dying in traffic fatalities, etc. (i.e., est 2,988 B miles) So for example, the stat 30,000 crash fatalities is a negative declaration.
Another way to ask: how many folk (316.1 M ) boycott the fruits or consequences of driving? (Well, the dead obviously, not counted in the pop)
Lets face it, no one buys TDI for its clean emissions. Everyone wanted the high MPG and the high torque. No compensation unless the MPG falls below THE OFFICIAL STICKER value or the torque is significantly reduced. I want to buy a TDI , if as stated the resale value has dropped by 50% ., which I cannot find anywhere
If mileage is reduced, I want to be compensated properly, and the EPA sticker means absolutely zero to me. I go by real world dollars and cents here. If torque is reduced, perhaps 25% of MSRP is in order if under 50,000 miles on the odometer, if over 50K miles then perhaps 12.5%. Also, if I have to visit the gas station more often due to the "fix," then each owner should be compensated at a rate of $100/hour for wasted time. I figure each fill-up is at least 10 minutes, and based on the age/mileage of the car you can calculate it out for 200,000 mile expected lifetime. Figure fuel at $4/gallon cause you never know.
'18 Porsche Macan Turbo, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I really can't think of a time in my life when I either wanted or needed a full-size pick up truck. It's a little hard to understand why a smaller pick up truck and specifically a smaller diesel pick up truck has never really caught on.
When nothing else is available and you have to have a pick up, Mfgs. will gladly sell you one of the big ones that are twice as much as you need. Why? They make more MONEY selling the big ones.
Sounds like it was a factor to a lot of folks - a sampling:
"The company lied to me and to millions of other buyers who wanted solid performance without ruining the environment." (MarketWatch)
"Robin Cole, a medical physicist from Surrey, says low emissions were a key factor behind his decision to buy a diesel VW Golf BlueMotion." (BBC)
"Ottawa energy-efficiency consultant Andrew Cole feels "absolute disappointment" over the Volkswagen emission-rigging scandal after buying a "very expensive" model to make a good environmental statement this spring." (CBC)
“I remember that commercial where they put a coffee filter over the tailpipe to show how clean the exhaust was,” said Pete Ramundo, 45, of Newtown, Conn., who purchased a Jetta TDI in 2010. “We were looking for a high-mileage solution, and this seemed like a godsend." (Boston Globe)
"Corona's family is very environmentally conscious. That's why the Golf attracted him and why he hasn't told his idealistic 7-year-old daughter the bad news. "She probably won't like it," he said." (Daily Herald, Chicago)
Sounds like it was a factor to a lot of folks - a sampling:
"The company lied to me and to millions of other buyers who wanted solid performance without ruining the environment." (MarketWatch)
"Robin Cole, a medical physicist from Surrey, says low emissions were a key factor behind his decision to buy a diesel VW Golf BlueMotion." (BBC)
"Ottawa energy-efficiency consultant Andrew Cole feels "absolute disappointment" over the Volkswagen emission-rigging scandal after buying a "very expensive" model to make a good environmental statement this spring." (CBC)
“I remember that commercial where they put a coffee filter over the tailpipe to show how clean the exhaust was,” said Pete Ramundo, 45, of Newtown, Conn., who purchased a Jetta TDI in 2010. “We were looking for a high-mileage solution, and this seemed like a godsend." (Boston Globe)
"Corona's family is very environmentally conscious. That's why the Golf attracted him and why he hasn't told his idealistic 7-year-old daughter the bad news. "She probably won't like it," he said." (Daily Herald, Chicago)
It is all holier then thou attitude after the "event" to gain compensation from the VW. No one was even aware that TDI were "cleaner " then gassers. Hypocracy by hindsight
Comments
Here's the EPA's take on NOx:
"Current scientific evidence links short-term NO2 exposures, ranging from 30 minutes to 24 hours, with adverse respiratory effects including airway inflammation in healthy people and increased respiratory symptoms in people with asthma.
Also, studies show a connection between breathing elevated short-term NO2 concentrations, and increased visits to emergency departments and hospital admissions for respiratory issues, especially asthma.
NO2 concentrations in vehicles and near roadways are appreciably higher than those measured at monitors in the current network. In fact, in-vehicle concentrations can be 2-3 times higher than measured at nearby area-wide monitors. Near-roadway (within about 50 meters) concentrations of NO2 have been measured to be approximately 30 to 100% higher than concentrations away from roadways.
Individuals who spend time on or near major roadways can experience short-term NO2 exposures considerably higher than measured by the current network. Approximately 16% of U.S housing units are located within 300 ft of a major highway, railroad, or airport (approximately 48 million people). This population likely includes a higher proportion of non-white and economically-disadvantaged people.
NO2 exposure concentrations near roadways are of particular concern for susceptible individuals, including people with asthma asthmatics, children, and the elderly
The sum of nitric oxide (NO) and NO2 is commonly called nitrogen oxides or NOx. Other oxides of nitrogen including nitrous acid and nitric acid are part of the nitrogen oxide family. While EPA’s National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) covers this entire family, NO2 is the component of greatest interest and the indicator for the larger group of nitrogen oxides.
NOx react with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds to form small particles. These small particles penetrate deeply into sensitive parts of the lungs and can cause or worsen respiratory disease, such as emphysema and bronchitis, and can aggravate existing heart disease, leading to increased hospital admissions and premature death.
Ozone is formed when NOx and volatile organic compounds react in the presence of heat and sunlight. Children, the elderly, people with lung diseases such as asthma, and people who work or exercise outside are at risk for adverse effects from ozone. These include reduction in lung function and increased respiratory symptoms as well as respiratory-related emergency department visits, hospital admissions, and possibly premature deaths.
Emissions that lead to the formation of NO2 generally also lead to the formation of other NOx. Emissions control measures leading to reductions in NO2 can generally be expected to reduce population exposures to all gaseous NOx. This may have the important co-benefit of reducing the formation of ozone and fine particles both of which pose significant public health threats. "
FF to your posted link, seeking to stem wood burning in fireplaces has been true for quite awhile. So yes burning of wood-burning fireplaces (9,200) is approximately 708 times more pollution producing than the TDI population(13). We also hide the gasser (death) rates! As IF there are ZERO deaths. Yet, we chicken little the VW TDI's.! ?
"The world's best-selling auto maker said that by 2050, gas-electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, fuel-cell cars and electric vehicles will account for most of its global vehicle sales, without giving a detailed breakdown.
That means gasoline- and diesel-engine powered cars, currently accounting for roughly 85 per cent of Toyota global vehicle sales, would be near zero, Senior Managing Officer Kiyotaka Ise said.
"It wouldn't be easy for gasoline and diesel cars to survive," Mr Ise told a media briefing in Tokyo. "With such massive decline in engine-powered cars, it's like the world is turning upside down and Toyota has to change its ways.
Last year, around 14 per cent of Toyota's global sales were hybrid vehicles, including plug-ins."
Toyota maps decline of petrol cars (theaustralian.com.au)
Don't see a cite for "world's best-selling auto maker" lol.
Toyota lost some major money (minus- billions) while VW was making major money (+ billions) , albeit, for three years in a row.
Indeed, when Toyota was able to come up for air, Toyota had to put even more money in to restructure Toyota globally. Articles confirm what I have said.
VW has done restructuring I.e., MQB. It was/is not enough. VW has to shake off the grip of the lower saxony politicians ( controls 20%) and stop VW labor unions gravy trains. ( they also control a% of stock) More importantly labor needs to get much more productivity. Hans and Franz are used to getting seven weeks vacation with a bonus as pin money. I.e., CUT/CUT.
You are right, a LOT has to change. Total swag on my part, but VW has to cut a minimum of 10% headcount just to tread water. Treading water as you probably can guess is the kiss of death. Without an increase in productivity, and much lower costs, it can be literally over: game, set, match!
Well given my "ISIS branded" gasser 94/96 TLC's, ( don't have the machine gun mounts yet) we seriously are looking at 30 years of operation (2024/2026) . I seriously think that (my)?diesels will be around for @ least another 30 years.
"The world's best-selling auto maker said that by 2050, gas-electric hybrids, plug-in hybrids, fuel-cell cars and electric vehicles will account for most of its global vehicle sales, without giving a detailed breakdown.
Well I don't imagine I will still be driving at 107 years of age. Though there are those people that are. My Touareg TDI will only be at half life of 37 years of age. Young as cars go.
Most classic car owners are accustomed to the unusual looks other motorists cast toward their relics on the road. But when Margaret Dunning is behind the wheel of her 1930 Packard 740 Roadster, she draws more attention than her vehicle.
Dunning, age 102, may be one of a small handful of classic-car drivers who can lay claim to the fact they're older than their vehicles.
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/09/18/102-year-old-woman-still-drives-her-82-year-old-car/
We are making things so eco-friendly and/or so safe that no one can afford to buy them anymore. We do it with houses (engineering overkill for every 1 in 1,000 year storm/wind/earthquake), and cars.
It all comes down to the law of diminishing returns, we are spending way too much money/capital chasing way too little of a benefit.
But the VW fraud isn't the same thing. They cheated, and they got caught. They didn't want to pay to license BlueTec from MB, they saved a few hundred per car, they sold more as a result. They should be held accountable.
The range on the 2009 Jetta TDI is between 38 and 42 mpg in a punishing 58 miles R/T commute. If I take that on the road and cruise it between 80/85 mph, ( I do not use cruise control) it's kind of a no-brainer to get from 41 to 44 mpg. A/C blasting, of course.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
For the US, there really aren't any other direct competitors to the small VW cars. GM was apparently able to get the current Cruze Turbo Diesel to pass the stringent emission standards but it was a significant hurdle and they used the US diesel Cruze program to prepare for the upcoming, more stringent European diesel standards. It also required significant hardware (lean NOx trap and selective catalyst reduction/SCR (DEF)) which is one reason the Cruze took a slight hit in city economy compared to the Golf/Jetta but was able to run leaning on the highway and had slightly better economy (somewhat common for diesel cars using SCR/DEF).
GM has said they're committed to bringing the next gen Cruze diesel to the American market since that car's new 1.6L engine was designed with global emission targets from the start. I imagine that VW should be able to eventually certify and sell the model year '16+ cars with little more than a software calibration change since they already have SCR (DEF) injection. It's probably going to harm VW's new and conquest sales but they still have a lot of customers that like how their TDI powered vehicles drive.
Same thing with a lot of the higher end luxury cars. While some trendy buyers might have bought into the "clean" aspect, I'd suspect a larger majority place a higher priority on the power delivery, range and economy and will still buy in similarly small percentages of overall sales.
If anything might help spur diesel sales is the truck and CUV/SUV market. With vehicles like the Ram getting a diesel for the half-ton 1500, the GM Colorado/Canyon twins now available with a diesel, work vans available with diesel and I suspect other small utility vehicles in the pipeline, a lot of new buyers are getting exposed to diesels. It's absolutely possible to build a clean running diesel, just more complex and expensive, but if consumers experience it and have favorable impressions it should only help passenger car sales (but I still don't see those numbers jumping dramatically).
That would be me for sure. I don't want to drive a car with a cloud of black smoke spewing out the back. Diesel vehicles have not done that since D2 formula was mandated to have less than 15 PPM sulfur. The major health risk was the sulfur. Same as the major health risk with gasoline was the lead for 75 years before the EPA got the lead out. The worst part about this witch hunt over NOx is the fact that it is worse with BioDiesel. I was looking forward to running biodiesel when VW gave the go ahead. They may be leery with all the latest brouhaha.
That said, I've wanted a European-style diesel vehicle with a manual transmission since 2001, when I first drove one in Germany. Looks like I've got an even longer wait than I've endured so far.
I've only worked my way through the first 300-400 posts since the feces hit the rotating object, but am looking forward to more entertainment as the rest unfold.
Zealot(s), party on!
So if they decide to put a combination of Ad Blue and/or SCR emissions systems or both in the 2009 Jetta TDI, the Fed will make VW slap a warranty on it, up to 10 years/100,000 miles. So if they do this later than sooner, the emissions system could possibly be warranteed up to 250,000 miles & Up to 10 more years. Will your gasser have that?
N0x in ONLY diesel is a witch hunt. Car diesel N0x as shown in AQMD is not even measurable, let alone on the radar. What is a major N0x emitter & clearly ON the radar are GASSER cars, SUV's, to light trucks. @ 95% to 98% gassers.
When I started with the 2003 Jetta TDI , LSD was very common ( @ 140 ppm CA/500 ppm, 49 states.) With current standard @15 ppm delivered nominally from 4ppm (B5) to 5 ppm to 10ppm, B5 to ULSD. D2 is far cleaner than RUG/PUG standard 30 ppm, which by law can be up to 90 ppm (with off line fee payment)
http://www.off-road.com/diesel/review/nissan-titan-xd-wait-almost-over-54317.html
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and let us know! Post a pic of your new purchase or lease!
MODERATOR
2015 Subaru Outback 3.6R / 2024 Kia Sportage Hybrid SX Prestige
You have at least two other vehicles that you can use, so it's not like you're exposing yourself to excessive risk, in the case you were close to 2/32 in tread remaining.
This might be TMI, off topic, applies to diesel/gas or gas hybrid, etc. Tire wear/ longevity is weird !
My bias is to get vehicles that are easiest on tires: given ones conditions and how one drives in them.
The other bias is for tires that allow for longer wear with good to great performance; as opposed to to shorten wear with absolutely great performance.
Longer story short : H rated tires seem to be in the sweet spot for many applications.
But that's only part of the weirdness of that full sized PU truck segment. ANY gasser engine option offered in the class gets very poor fuel mileage. They also have a lot less torque ! The torque is/has been less useable.
To state the obvious, why not get a whole lot more and USEABLE (emphasis on useable) torque, with even better MPG and a better transmission ?
https://www.yahoo.com/autos/s/vw-customers-want-compensation-survey-121000480.html
No compensation unless the MPG falls below THE OFFICIAL STICKER value or the torque is significantly reduced.
I want to buy a TDI , if as stated the resale value has dropped by 50% ., which I cannot find anywhere
No, it is false that "EVERYONE" wants higher mph/torque! However, (like model) I would submit TDI BUYERS most likely may.
Why should the lawyers and taxing agency's get the penalty monies, when the OWNERS are being defrauded? Priorities are FUBAR!
I haven't found that 50% off on an E250 either
As a point of comparison, In the U S, everybody (212.1 M drivers) still drives, despite a fantastic NHTSA FARS 2013 record of only 30, 000 people dying in traffic fatalities, etc. (i.e., est 2,988 B miles) So for example, the stat 30,000 crash fatalities is a negative declaration.
Another way to ask: how many folk (316.1 M ) boycott the fruits or consequences of driving? (Well, the dead obviously, not counted in the pop)
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Sounds like it was a factor to a lot of folks - a sampling:
"The company lied to me and to millions of other buyers who wanted solid performance without ruining the environment." (MarketWatch)
"Robin Cole, a medical physicist from Surrey, says low emissions were a key factor behind his decision to buy a diesel VW Golf BlueMotion." (BBC)
"Ottawa energy-efficiency consultant Andrew Cole feels "absolute disappointment" over the Volkswagen emission-rigging scandal after buying a "very expensive" model to make a good environmental statement this spring." (CBC)
“I remember that commercial where they put a coffee filter over the tailpipe to show how clean the exhaust was,” said Pete Ramundo, 45, of Newtown, Conn., who purchased a Jetta TDI in 2010. “We were looking for a high-mileage solution, and this seemed like a godsend." (Boston Globe)
"Corona's family is very environmentally conscious. That's why the Golf attracted him and why he hasn't told his idealistic 7-year-old daughter the bad news. "She probably won't like it," he said." (Daily Herald, Chicago)
No one was even aware that TDI were "cleaner " then gassers.
Hypocracy by hindsight