Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
The hybrid remains the country's most popular car, with 27,249 sold in September, according the Japan Automobile Dealers Association.
As far as German carmakers offering incentives on diesel cars:
Not necessary. Due to diesel fuel tax breaks, diesel cars are already entrenched in the European market.
If the German guvmint had provided incentives "back in the day" when they were pushing the idea of diesel cars onto the public, it would have certainly sped adoption.
The Prius is still a fairly new concept.
We won't be talking about "green cars" needing incentives in 25 years, after they are entrenched as diesels are in Europe.
None of this is news to the regular visitors of this forum, but it's good info for people trying to get caught up:
The Future of Diesel in the US: Analysis
In Europe it is 51% diesel with 49% RUG to PUG. Again it should be obvious what is going on with these real life comparisons.
A few post ago, I posted the current state/fed taxation tables for each state for Diesel and RUG to PUG. Diesel in almost all 50 cases and Wash DC are taxed more . (surprise surprise)
JD Powers predicts diesels being 12% by 2018. (from less than one half of 1 percent 2011) Now since the latest tally is 2008 @ 257.4 M it truly might be more than) 30.888 M
In times past the SUV growth to 12% of the population in 30 years time (from 1 to 2%) was seen as Mathusian !! (aka the barbarians at Rome's gates)
Um, No. That's in reality a little bit of an over-sold idea. One very popular with diesel conspiracy theorists, but not true from an objective viewpoint.
There are definitely a few available in the US right now:
2011 diesel cars in the USA: here’s the lineup
All the "regulators" ask is that diesel exhaust get scrubbed to modern-era cleanliness. As clean as a few years ago is not clean enough, and shouldn't be. "Dirty Diesel exhaust" and it's evils are well-known and to be avoided.
No one (including you) wants dirty diesel exhaust. The guvmint is only trying to protect the air, which we ALL want done.
And on the same token, NO ONE is opposed to diesel cars which have clean exhaust.
However the JD Powers projections (12% or 30.88 M + DIESELS by 2018) are probably a slap in the face to those who would want diesels out of the US market or continue to want them to be the extreme minority "choice".
Just thinking about that situation. Could it be that Germany favors business? Most trucks and work vehicles are diesel. When you over tax business you lose jobs and become less competitive in the global market place. I think the UK is just the opposite. They tax diesel higher than Unleaded. I would imagine the popularity of diesel vehicles in the EU as a whole is based on all the reasons we like them. The cost of fuel being double makes the diesel just that much more appealing to those so oppressed. It may not be long before we join their ranks, without a variety of high mileage diesels to cushion the blow.
Interesting that the Europeans are ok with "dirtier" diesel emissions.
Not So Dirty - Diesel fuel may help jump-start green-car success.
In recent years, however, thanks to stringent emissions requirements in both the United States and Europe, automakers have found a way to reduce almost all of these noxious gases and retrofit older vehicles to meet current standards. Today’s best clean-diesel automobiles such as the Audi A3 TDI and the Volkswagen Jetta TDI are quiet, low--emitting cars with lots of pep. Their combined miles-per-gallon average is only slightly less than hybrids like Toyota’s Prius and far better than their gasoline-engine counterparts. In fact, Green Car Journal, a magazine devoted to energy-efficient automobiles, rated the Jetta TDI and A3 TDI as its Green Car of the Year in 2009 and 2010, respectively. “Clean diesel is gathering momentum,” says Ron Cogan, the magazine’s publisher.
I have said for a while that diesel/hybrid is a good combination.
The problem: COST.
But: if I could lease a diesel/hybrid with a $40,000 price tag for $350/month, I would jam on that in a heartbeep.
They aren't. They have increased diesel exhaust regulations there too.
And they have had to declare "no drive days" in some towns to reduce the polluted air.
And in some Euro cities there are constant battles with cleaning "soot" off of everything.
Sounds like Germany now has a toll system for trucks over 12 tons and they track their movements for billing purposes automatically. Guess that means they don't have to tax the fuel as much? Toll Collect.
Lars, the PopSci link says "The 50-state light-duty vehicle limit for emissions of nitrogen oxides is 0.07 grams per mile. In Western Europe, the limit is 0.29."
Again the effect of the invisible regulations at work. Bio diesel has normally close to ZERO "DIRT". But for purposes of discussion, it has 1 ppm sulfur. ZERO puts any fuel into mathmatical la la land. Yet NO on the road engine is certified to run up to 100% biodiesel, aka B-100. So with an artificial dirt value of 1 ppm sulfur; that puts RUG to PUG 30 times to 90 times DIRTIER !!!! For some reason (to larsb and ) environ cons that is perfectly ok !!!???
The overwhelming advantages to US, locally and centrally produced bio diesel might be way off topic; so I will stop now.
Indeed VWA (seems to one of the few "in town") was dragged kicking and screaming to certify B5. I think they knew up to B15 would be a slam dunk.
I would say the guvmint has failed miserably then. If not for restrictive regulations and tariffs we would have 100s of 1000s of small diesel PU trucks instead of the 100s of 1000s of behemoth PU trucks with huge unneeded diesel engines. The government has made it clear they prefer US to buy an F250 diesel to a Ranger diesel using less than half the fuel with subsequently much cleaner emissions. Even in CARB controlled states. Look at the number of huge PU trucks running around with diesel engines. Most of those contractors would be tickled to buy a smaller diesel PU and get at least a 50% increase in mileage. Thank you EPA and Federal protectionist. :confuse:
Problem with your theory? How many small gas trucks do you see on the roads?
Not many.
Americans just don't BUY small trucks in bulk. They buy diesel pickup trucks to pull heavy things, and the little diesel trucks cannot do it well.
It's not "if you build them they will buy" because that has already been tried.
It's "make sure there is a market BEFORE you build them."
Total diesel passenger diesel fleet is @ 2%. If we acknowledge 2008 2.57.4 M PVF, then that is 5.148 M diesel vehicles. As I have said, there are app (MINUS -) 1.272 M diesel passenger CARS. So that would leave 3.876 M ("light" but really heavy,250/350) trucks.
On the other hand the PU's SUV's (really) small trucks, etc, as an aggregate are really more like 45%. This converts to more like 115.83 M. (vs 3.876 M diesel light, but HEAVY trucks) I shall leave so one can ponder the math.
The key to the new V60 is a multimodal switch on the dashboard. In “Pure” mode, it’s a commuter car with a 70-horsepower electric motor driving the rear wheels. The 12-kilowatt-hour lithium-ion battery pack offers a 30-mile range and can recharge fully in under three hours at a 16-amp outlet. Switch the selector to “Hybrid” and banish range anxiety with an astounding 125-mpg equivalent rating and a 745-mile range — enough to get from Luleå to Malmö on one tank of diesel.
Not many.
Of course you don't. Truth is most Tacoma, Frontier, Ranger sized PU trucks do not get any better mileage than the F150 size. So why sacrifice size for no gain real in mileage? The Ranger and Toyota PU trucks sold worldwide mostly with 4 cylinder diesel engines get over 30 MPG average. None are offered in the USA since the last oil crisis in the 1970s and early 80s.
You can buy a new F150 PU truck rated 18 MPG combined and 22 MPG hwy. The smaller Tacoma is only rated 21 MPG highway. Most of the World is laughing or maybe crying at our waste of the precious commodity, all to bow at the PZEV temple.
So, PZEV is BAD?
And, you want MORE regulation of mileage? Because the only way to get those MPG figures up is to FORCE automakers to do it.
If that means they bite the bullet and build a few small diesel trucks, then great. It's a good way to get their fleet average up.
Don't you think they would DO THAT if ANY of their marketing studies said they would sell?
Fuel Economy, reliability, and TORQUE... what more could you ask for? Oh yeah, there is the matter of $$$$ at the pump. But, we (americans) can make our own diesel right here and put more people to work and keep our money here at home. WIN, WIN situation if you ask me.
Remember Honda could not get their very clean diesel to pass the CARB requirements. So far VW is the only one with the smarts to pull off a non urea diesel engine that complies with the regulations.
They are sensical in the context of 98% of the vehicle fleet being gasser. (not wanting to be the odd duck syndrome)
YES, it is a HUGE waste of natural resources.
The emissions would be fine capped at Tier 2 Bin 5. Instead of raising them to where it is just a waste of fuel and money. Past that level the return on investment is impossible to detect in our air quality. Just busy work for the EPA and CARB to justify their existence. The 09-10 VW TDI was awarded the GREEN vehicles for those years. I would suggest that means they are clean enough.
The stuff on sale currently (diesel and gas) is plenty clean enough. The vast majority of dirty air is from commercial (not always automotive) sources, and older cars/trucks.
If you could snap your fingers and replace everything more than 10 years old with cars meeting the 2009 level standards, there would effectively be no smog/pollution issue at all from the passenger fleet.
if the EPA really was concerned about air quality, I have to imagine there are many other pollution sources to go after where you can make a much bigger impact.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Yes actually what you are saying is more than true. So for example the Ports (say Long Beach, LA LA Oakland, SF,) let in ships that use bunker oil that are INXS of 20,000 ppm sulfur and up to 50,000 ppm sulfur AND with NO/NONE/NADA smog emissions mitigation !!!! Through a quirk of the language of DA LAW, the "STRICT smog regulation is strict NO regulation ?????
Now keep in mind that my 03/09 TDI's are considered GROSS polluters when they use lawful ULSD @15 ppm sulfur, nominally delivered @ the pump @ 5-7 ppm sulfur. So not to state the extremely obvious, but let me ask the question. What is 20,000 to 50,000 ppm sulfur/ by 5 to 7 ppm, ok use 15 ppm AND FULLY mitigated?
OMG 1,333 TIMES to 3,333 times GREATER as a minimum !!!!! YUP you got it, I have the gross polluters !! :sick: Let's cruxify with rusty nails.
sidebar:
As you can see, the numbers indicate FAR greater @ 4,000 to 10,000 times GREATER. We are in polite company, what's a couple of factorials between martini's.
"clean ENOUGH"
and
"cleanEST"
I'll take the latter.
That would probably be a $100,000,000 clean room at Intel. Quite possibly the air in your home is be more hazardous than the exhaust from a diesel car today. Like most people I believe we have reached the point of diminishing returns. And further auto emission regulations are purely busy work for the EPA to justify their $16 billion budget. Time to hack them down to one cubicle next to the DOE and DE.
so sure you can always get cleaner, but as a consumer, will you pay 2x the price for your next car (and fuel at the pump) to support an infintismal imporvement that you won't even notice?
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I don't think if you took a survey and asked the General Joe Q. Public this question:
"Do you think the EPA should freeze vehicle emission testing and stop requiring future cars to be have ever-cleaner exhaust?"
I don't think you could get 30% saying yes to that statement.
Look: We all know the EPA is driven by a bunch of bureaucrats like any other guvmint agency, and that they OF COURSE want to keep their agency relevant.
In that way they are the same as, Oh, about 100% of other guvmint agencies.
I shudder to think of what kind of world we'd have if we just let businesses and carmakers "police themselves" when it came to industrial pollution.
OMG.
just get a smaller engine in a lighter car, and automatically your polution output drops significantly. And that is without the other obvious step of just driving less!
The last gas price bump help push that process along. The one that is just starting now should help keep the momentum going!
that, and lots of tasty new smaller cars. Still don't get the MPG they could, but a step in the right direction.
sometimes normal market forces actually overcome government bumbling.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Now, expand this to have an explanation of how clean it already is, and put the caveat that to get fractionally cleaner will cost them significant real $$s out of their pocket, and see what the answer is.
Hey, in abstract, I am sure everyone if you ask think "free" government healthcare is a wonderful idea. As long as you don't ask them if they are willing to have their taxes jacked up to pay for it!
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
I don't think you could get 30% saying yes to that statement.
It would be far higher than 30% if you were honest and told them the current cost of such emissions would add $1000s to the cost of a new car. We know for a fact that the cost to go from ULEV to AT-PZEV is at least $2000. Same to get a VW TDI up to T2 Bin5.
I shudder to think of what kind of world we'd have if we just let businesses and carmakers "police themselves" when it came to industrial pollution.
You are talking about an entirely different subject. I am referring to wasted money on minute improvements. I think the EPA proved its worth in the past with cleaner rivers and air. I think they have outlived their usefulness along with buggy whips.
Hasn't stopped them from buying cars.
And not many people anyway would say "I'm willing to pay less for a HIGHER polluting vehicle."
That would be idiotic.
if you put 2 otherwise identical cars side by side, and one is the current standards (as in I could probably breath off the tailpipe with no ill effects), and one was 10% "cleaner" (an unnoticable real world change), but the cleaner one also cost 10% more, I am going dirty.
Of course, I already drive a 4 cyl stick mid size car, so I am polluting less than people driving around in gas swilling bigger cars/suvs with AT and V6 engines.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Yes, but it makes a BIG difference in total pollution numbers when you multiply it by the number of cars on the road.
Look at Page 3 of this document:
Emission Standards
See the numbers for NOx:
PZEV: .02 grams per mile
ULEV: .07 grams per mile
So if you take 1,000,000 cars, that's an extra 50,000 grams PER MILE from all those cars.
It the average number of miles driven is 15,000 per year, that's an extra 750,000,000 grams per year polluted.
The numbers for Formaldehyde and NMOG are even more significant.
So it's not just one car for which we are worried about decreasing the pollution....It's a HUGE, GARGANTUAN fleet.
BIG PICTURE, GARY.
In fact, Post #1882 should be BRONZED it's so eye-opening. :shades:
Plus the diesel is more expensive than gas in the US and the diesel cars are more polluting.
I don't see myself buying a diesel, even for its better mpg and more torque.
Bad testing protocol?
Faulty calibration?
Everyone knows a vehicle in the state you described can't possibly REALLY emit ZEROS.
So in 10 years when this 03 diesel is 18 years old and pushing (at current clip) 350,000 miles. The results will probably be the same, .... PASSED . Wasn't it you that note "mountain out of mole hill?"
I'm not calling anyone a "liar."
But no emissions test that is CORRECT is going to measure a vehicle at 0 emissions.
I have not said anything about passing or failing emission tests....