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

stever

The second pic looks like one of my minivan roads.:D

cooterbfd

Yes, it is a diesel. Understand this, at 750 miles, a very small sample. And yes, the EPA numbers for a Cruse eco are within 10% of the diesel.

ruking1

On the mpg issue alone, the initial mpg usually takes a longer mileage to get better, than a gasser. However from the git go mpg is usually better. That is in addition to folks understanding and implementing driving the diesel and now increasingly, the transmission in accordance with its parameters. So how are you liking it?

stever

I'm still amazed that my lifetime mpg keeps going up and the van has ~193k on it. I figured it'd level off at 90k and start sliding.

August's Car and Driver has a comparison on the Jetta TDI and Cruze diesel. The manufacturers probably wish they would have left off the "rolling coal" photo with the article though.

ruking1

So the real question, in your case would be how many more mpg would a diesel like model van start off with? Fuelly and fuel economy.gov lists them for the 03 TDI and gassers 1.8 T and 2.0. They also list a 6 cylinder. The cents per mile driven savings (at todays prices) is almost staggering using diesel. Mine is a puppy compared to yours (186,000 miles) .

Since we have nothing to compare the Cruze with, I would say VW did pretty well with all the decontenting starting in 2010. If I were looking to get another Jetta TDI I might reconsider after reading that article. Right now I have an ad blue and two with no ad blue.

stever

Lifetime mpg on the gasser is 21.66. I presume a diesel moving a box would do ~30 - what's that, 50% better? I don't track gas prices but I've burned 8912 gallons and that's a staggering number (to me anyway) at $3 a gallon ($26,763 - about $4k more than we paid for the van). Just another reason to downsize to a hatch or wagon and aim for 40 mpg.

I saw the print edition of C&D at the docs earlier today but my wife got finished with her eye exam and I never actually read the comparison. The photo stuck with me though.

gagrice

They seemed to wring out both vehicles quite well. If I was going for a Sedan I would probably get the Passat for all the extra room in back. And the real world mileage is better with the Passat than the Jetta. Not sure why. I am glad Chevy has jumped into the fray. Anyone looking should give it a go.

ruking1

I think with the "marks" on both, it is almost a toss up. I think the article is good at fleshing out the issues. Of course add to that, personal preferences. But then on the other hand I just got 2 local dealers advertisements about ZERO down and ZERO percentage and a list of other incentives.

I used to be a skeptic about Ad Blue. Now if it was a choice between having it or not, I would still be in the NOT camp. However given current regulations, it is pretty apparent the use of Ad Blue gives @ least an mpg advantage.

I am not put off in the least about (Chevrolet's) rear drum brakes. Given some of the issues on VW's about REAR disc brakes, not only is Chevrolet being proactive about addressing the (American) issue, but rear drum brakes are both cheaper and last longer. (given the issue).

While off topic, the rear drum brakes on the Honda Civic are swagged to go a minimum of 250,000 miles. So what would be a full consumption issue on the Civic is cut literally @ least in half.

stever

Who's doing the 0/0 - Chevy or VW?

I'm in the amen corner with you on rear drums.

ruking1

..."Who's doing the 0/0 - Chevy or VW?"...

VW is doing the 0/0, and the incentives.

There is actually a back story to Chevrolet/GM dealers in this area. I didn't get the Z06 in the immediate local area. Three local area's dealers were either forced out or went Chapter 11, when GM went through its Chapter 11. So while I am sure there is a now (going on) #4, I haven't kept up with it and have been using an Indy. One side benefit is the owner when I go likes to get me out in his latest power and handling upgrade projects (normally other clients cars) . Some of these machines are just plain scary.

ruking1

In line with the mpg taking a lot longer to get better with diesels than like model gassers, I posted 34 mpg (computer) . There was relatively little traffic and it posted 37 mpg for 101 or so miles (down out of the mountains) where it got lost @ 34 mpg for the rest of the trip. So 33.6 mpg for the round trip (420 miles)

The interesting anomaly was being able to "resume speeds" after new tires break in. There were also road work delays in the mountains. My swag would have been a LOSS of mpg even for a downgrade leg.

ikedc

these dsg tranys can be fun especially on down hills,shift into neutral. engine will of course coast at 800rpm . when you slow or put brakes on the engine will slow the car and maintain rpms. I have saved a lot of trany shifts in my 05.5 tgi jetta dsg----272000mi no trany service. I also use my dsg to lug up hill contrary to some that like to keep the r's up.

ruking1

..."I also use my dsg to lug up hill contrary to some that like to keep the r's up."...

I think this is harder to understand for those that have not driven a diesel and actually a lot of diesel drivers have issues implementing this. Normally this works better for a stick shift. One UP shifts to use the torque band better. One would normally downshift for a gasser stick shift. On the DSG (unless you use the manual sequential gear SHIFT gate) is really programmed to shift at the so called "correct" points.

Another advantage is to keep the engine in GEAR. When you do put it in neutral there is a cumulative fuel draw (.2 gal per hour) vs a "NO FUEL DRAW".

Now i personally do not shift the DSG as much as the VW TDI's A/T, as the fluid interval change is "LIFETIME" vs 40,000 miles DSG oil and filter change. However it is encouraging that there are some DSG's with 272,000 miles !!! So in that sense, I can see that it really does not wear as fast as I have been led to believe. I also will change the DSG filter and fluid @ the 65k to 70k miles range.

ohenryx

I believe the recommended fluid change interval on the DSG is and always has been 40k miles. The 6 speed torque converter automatic is a different story. My 2008 Passat, with the 09G automatic, is supposed to be a "sealed unit", never requiring service. Newer model VWs with the same transmission are supposed to have the fluid changed (but not the filter) every 40k miles. The dealer recently serviced my transmission as part of a recall (for a solenoid I believe).

ruking1

It would seem the OEM recommended DSG interval for (older) Passat is the same @ 40,000 miles. How are you liking the 09G A/T?

ohenryx

100.5k and still shifting smoothly. The car looks like new and drives like new. Still on the original set of brakes.

ruking1

Yours' might be an(normal) example of what I have been saying all along. A (any actually) passenger vehicle should be able to go to 100,000/120,000 miles, aka "first major tune up" with "normal scheduled" maintenance. Any unscheduled maintenance (warranty/otherwise work) is usually the subject of reliability and durability surveys !

For 120,000 miles (first major tune up) Fuel Economy .gov lists 09 Jetta TDI @ 39.4, mpg (ULSD@ $3.99), 2.0 T @28.4 mpg (PUG@ $3.75), 2.5 L mpg @26.0 mpg (RUG@ 3.51), this would put consumption and cost (current corner store prices @):
1. 3,046 gals ULSD = $12,152.
2. 4,225 gals PUG = $15,845.
3. 4,615 gals RUG = $16,200.

respectively.

ruking1

(Follow up post due to Edmunds.com server lock out due to updating)

So some reasonable expectations might be: (with reasonable care and to the hosts issue of (lack of) BOREDOM)

1. 2nd & 3rd cycles (of 100k to 120k miles) with normal scheduled maintenance

2. SOME unscheduled maintenance.

ruking1

I read this in passing in a Yahoo.com article, so I did not save a link.

In fact, app 40% of the US passenger vehicle fleet is 10 + years old. Basically it was one fact offered in its premise, that there was a pretty heavy (structural) European market slow down. This casts a LONG shadow on US markets. The US market current MY surge (projected sales of 16M + vehicles) is/was due to low interest rates and a portion of that was to replace a portion of the 10+ years segment. So if the 2011 PVF is @ 257.5 M, 40% or = 103 M vehicles are 10 years +old.

In contrast, European market cars acquisition and operating costs are more, despite availability of much more fuel efficient cars (US markets). The PVF is app 270 M vehicles and the average drivers yearly mileage is app 9,000 miles vs US market averags of 12,000 to 15,000 miles or 34% to 67% more miles per year.

stever

We've got a long thread going about aging fleet and surging sales over in Go Green By Driving It 'Til The Wheels Fall Off, but the EU angle didn't come up. That's probably helping keep prices down in the US and helping to push our sales, since we have easy credit again.

ruking1

If off topic, I will change tack. It just seemed germane to why one would want to get a diesel, which can have longer term consequences: such as: diesels being WAY more adaptable to our roads, higher like model mpg which could result in less gals consumed (as if anybody believes this fairy tale of less consumption anymore) lower cost per mile driven, fuel and others, higher resale values, etc.

The market trend for EXPORTED US refinery products (Congress has prohibited exporting DOMESTIC crude oil but RUG/PUG, D2, etc is ok) also have never been HIGHER !! The funny part in another article, sez we are exporting to China, Russia, Africa, Brazil, Venezuela, and get a load of this, DAH MIDDLE EAST !!!

They see us as "ROILING" the markets (taking their TURF?) Life's good !!

stever

Oh, I think it's on topic in here too - those excess EU cars and tech? Lots of it is diesel and we're an "underutilized" market. And with our longer commutes and wider open spaces, we should be the diesel adopters while it would make more sense if the EU had been the gas/hybrid crowd.

ruking1

I would TOTALLY agree with the point. As it turns out/defacto we consume (fuel) both at a greater RATE and volume, even as we are a smaller vehicle population. (257.5 M US vs 270 M + European ). We act like we have to invent the (higher mpg) wheel (and at much greater, almost unconscionable COSTs) , when models using the wheel (higher mpg) are on the European markets and have been for YEARS, if not decades ! The run of the mill 03 Jetta TDI 50 mpg @ 90 mph being just one (OLD) example. Indeed, the European model has both more power and extra gear (6 speed vs 5 speed) and will post 52 mpg !!! Why would one want a 04 Prius that indeed gets 44 mpg, but has to be driven like hyper miler Gerdes on a record setting mission, when one can drive XX mph and still get 50 mpg with almost no effort? Indeed with simiilar effort, 62 mpg + !!!!

Michaell

And with our longer commutes and wider open spaces, we should be the diesel adopters while it would make more sense if the EU had been the gas/hybrid crowd.

Exactly right, Steve! After WW2 Europe was in shambles. Small cars were the order of the day, and that mentality never really changed over the years. The price of gas and diesel were kept high due to taxes, I suspect to drive the masses to public transportation.

The smaller distances in Europe also meant that travel by train is more common.

And, the most popular class of car in Europe is the C-segment hatch (Focus, Golf, etc). In the US, it's the D-segment sedan (Accord, Camry, et al).

ruking1

If we use the 12 Passat TDI as an example ("D"segment I presume?), the "CRAZINESS" is even more apparent. The 12 Paassat TDI is rated 43 mpg H EPA.

The Taylor's posted 84 + mpg going 5 mph under the speed limit !! (95.3% better) Gerdes posted even better than his own record in a gasser/hybrid. @ 77 mpg for a 8,500 miles trip. (I am sure he wanted to complete the trip faster than a covered wagon)

The new Audi A6 TDI, ( not light @ app 4100+ #'s) is rated @ 38 mpg H EPA with a 3.0 L TDI posting 428 # ft !

Solely from the car poiint of view, these are truly the good ole days, the BEST of times !

So how are the big three doing with sales on gasser pick up trucks !! ??

ezshift5

......at circa 7,000 miles, the JSW TDI is averaging 45 per Fuelly.com. The much respected Accord 6M coupe averages circa 25-27. About 65% HWY. Again regret lateness here.

It's all good

best, ez

ruking1

Like you said, it is all good ! If you are driving it lightly to moderately aggressively, @ app 7,000 miles on the clock, the most likely scenario is your mpg will average BETTER on the JSW.

fintail

Drove for over 300 miles yesterday, including a couple mountain passes and some ~80mph cruising. Car claims 39.8mpg.

ruking1

Essentially the same MPG @ 31 to 34 (as highway trip travel) . The areas are Highway's 101, 1, Monterey (downtown), Monterey, CA, Carmel (downtown), Carmel, Carmel by the Sea, Carmel Highlands, Pacific Grove. The weather and scenery (was) is spectacular !

stever

Sounds lovely. I got my watch at Carmel by the Sea in the late 70's.

Timex, found it on the beach. Still works (how's that for mileage?).