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
From the auto show reports in 2008 the Honda/Acura TSX diesel was touted as getting 60 MPG by the manufacturer. It is possible when subjected to the hybrid skewed EPA tests, it was far less. That could have been another reason Honda dumped the project. Looking at the version sold in the UK it is more like 42 MPG US and 51 MPG on the HWY. Still very respectable numbers. Those tests were done in the UK where they are considering dropping the speed to 80 MPH to save fuel.
I guess we could get even more involved if we were to consider that no matter what efforts we do here in North America, to consider the possible affects of contributing to dirty air, they pale in comparison with other major manufacturing centers in other parts of the world. There are no magic barriers in our atmosphere that keeps theirs separate from ours.
There must be a reasonable balance, and while much of it is out of the little guy's control, I believe that balance is where we falter.
Sam
I stand corrected. It seems like a strange move to me.
If you can believe the UK mileage tests it would be a dandy car. With a combined city/hwy 65.7 MPG UK, the would be 54.7 MPG US. Nothing out there comes close including the Nissan Leaf for CA owners.
Volkswagen Polo was awarded the 2010 European Car of the Year, title.
So for example if one googles, VW Polo can have 4 TDI engines, 1.2 L 3 each 1.6 L and have a range of 56 mpg to 69.18 mpg (US GAL @ 128 oz )
wiki Polo
Now what engine it ultimately ends up with in the US markets is any consumers guess. My guess is the 56-69 mpg versions have appeal.
But,... if it gets the currently certified 2.0 L TDI @ 140 hp and 236# ft of torque @ 2688 #'s that is 600+ #'s lighter than the Jetta. It will be a potent (performance) yet economical (mpg wise) but not as good as 56 to 69 mpg offering.
The best option would have been a CNG Civic. With fuel averaging 30-50% the cost of gasoline right now, plus the ability to add a fueling device to in your own garage, it's a no-brainer. And it gets carpool access(that carpool sticker will be offered on CNG vehicles long after they stop offering them for hybrids). No batteries, either, to worry about, and it actually pollutes less than the Prius. There's also a tax credit, but as it is a true alternative fuel vehicle, there's no limit to the number per year.
Note - here's a check on fuel prices:
$3.55 is the lowest in Los Angeles today
1.5 Therms of natural gas (equivalent to a gallon of gas) is $1.08 (stupidly high - most of the U.S. is closer to $0.80) X 1.5. ($1.62)
30mpg(actual observed average)
That nets you 65.75mpg!
Even if you went with Wyoming as a price (2.95 - lowest average in the nation) and city mpg (24), *and* 1.10 a therm (no place is higher than California), you'd still get 42.9 mpg in an absolute worst possible theoretical scenario.
Natural gas is also strictly price controlled as it is used for heating, so price swings and inflation is much less of a factor than with fuel prices. Taxes are also much less as well than on diesel or gasoline. So as prices creep upwards of $4 a gallon in the U.S, natural gas prices will only nudge up a few cents per therm on average.
You simply can't beat that with anything right now. For your driving patterns, your next vehicle (since you already bought a Prius) should be one of these. And for most people who want a "green" car that's reliable, affordable, and gets high mpg, this is the only reasonable alternative as well right now, since the auto makers have essentially dropped the ball on offering diesels that fit all of those criteria.
The infrastructure for refueling CNG on the road is pretty thin, and that really hampers interest for anyone who uses their car other than for a commuter vehicle.
The trucking companies buying them are using them for short haul runs so the rigs can be back in the garage every evening.
And even though it burns clean, lots of people are beginning to worry about the issues associated with fracking it.
1. 04 Civic (mine 38 mpg/3.55 per gal (your example=)
.0934 cents per mile driven
2. CNG Civic equivalent 30 mpg/1.08 = .036 cents per mile driven
2b CNG Civic equivalent 30 mpg/.80 cents= .0267 cents per mile driven.
So per mile driven RUG is 159.4 % MORE than CNG.
In the case of 2b. RUG is 249.8% MORE than CNG.
Any swags why CNG is going NOWHERE?
1 - Every CNG civic comes with a NAV system that has every known CNG fueling station entered into it. Municipalities must offer CNG to consumers at their filling lots/fleet yards. Often there is a 50-75 cent surcharge, so it's not a huge benefit, but you can make longer trips with a little planning and 20 seconds with the NAV system. There's even a "find fuel" on the main menu to make it stupidly easy.
2 - people are brain-washed into not taking control of their own destiny. That is, we go *out* to buy fuel instead of filling at home. With a 200 mile range in a worst case scenario(250 highway), the truth is that 98% of all people and trips in the U.S. are under than amount per day and are in or near a major highway or city.
If all of that fails, then they are driving 200-250+ miles a day on back roads or in rural areas where they can't get fuel. Then they need a typical car.
3 - People are in a bad habit of filling when the car is empty. With a CNG Civic, if you are on a trip, you need to check the NAV system and then plan a bit - as well as fill at about halfway whenever you can.
I have a cousin who's husband owns a GX. And he has no issues with using it as a daily driver and commuting car. He drives roughly 120-150 miles a day for work and errands and so far he's never been stranded or run out of fuel.
Now to the reality of CNG. Just looking at the map. Closest CNG station to me is 30 miles West of home. That is the SDG&E station. Current price $2.17. If I wanted to go visit my sister in Casa Grande, AZ it would not be even close to a possibility. It is 365 miles between the San Diego station and the closest one in AZ. Puts it back into a niche market for people with a commute that fits the vehicle.
I am stuck with a big gas bill or just stay at home.
http://www.altfuelprices.com/
1 - Gassers get to go 2 years between emissions tests. Diesels are checked every year.
2 - Gassers can go to any Envirotest location and pay a fixed $25 fee. Diesels have to hunt down an authorized inspection station, whose locations are not easy to track down. Those stations charge between $60 and $75.
3 - While any Envirotest station can check any gas vehicle, the same is not true of the diesel stations; The one I went to can't check anything except RWD or traditional 4WD vehicles. Their single axle dyno is not equipped to aim the wheels on FWD cars. So, if you own a VW, you're looking at 45 minutes round trip to the next closest facility.
Worse yet, if you have AWD (as opposed to 4WD), as in a BMW X5, Mercedes 4-matic or VW Toureg, there is one, count them one, station in the entire Denver metro area, and it's in Centennial which is close to as far south as you can get and still be said to be in Denver. That would translate to an almost 3 hour round trip for me.
I just have to keep reminding myself that my trailer-towing mileage went from barely 10 MPG (with the gasser) to 17, plus I can go up grades without ever dropping out of overdrive.
Speaking of the Leaf, the local news last night had a piece on the first Leaf owner in California, who apparently is local and has had his for some months now. According to him, he is laughing all the way to the bank, so he is pleased as punch. The news people used his story as a springboard to the conclusion that electric vehicles "truly will be a big part of our future".
For me, they are going to have to double that range first.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I get ~$1196 in fuel cost for gasoline and ~540 for the CNG. That's ~656 a year in fuel savings. Over ten years, that's a lot of money saved. And it gets better as gasoline prices rise and you drive more miles. If you put 15K a year, it's closer to $1000 in savings every year.
The reason it never caught on was because they introduced it when gasoline was $2 a gallon. At that price, it was close enough to a wash vs the Prius. Now, at nearly $4 a gallon, it easily is the best option.
The GX has been around 11 years and never sold many. It is probably a good commuter for a place like Los Angeles with a good variety of fueling stations. The Interstates headed out of So CA are mostly void of stations. I would not count on City stations to be open on the Weekends if you decide to try getting to Las Vegas. Good idea, just lack of interest for many reasons.
My choice would be the Golf TDI with DSG. Better handling, more power, quieter ride by far. Safer, better interior materials, better rust warranty, and a 700 mile range looking for diesel, which is sold in every podunk town across America. Both about the same price.
I am not sure who told you the Civic GX comes equipped with NAV. Better tell Honda. They don't even offer it as an option. This is a stripped down steel wheel with plastic hubcaps car for $25k. That is a lot to pay to get a free ride in the HOV lane.
http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-gx/price.aspx
HOWEVER, the car costs that much more than a regular gas-powered subcompact, which would also be more fun to drive (Mazda2, Honda Fit, Fiat 500 perhaps?), cheaper to insure, easier (and cheaper?) to service, and without any restrictions on where I could fuel up.
And the GX is down about 25 hp on the regular gas versions, right?
So for now I will hold my intrigue in check until such time as the price of gas goes up by another 50% (I'm not ruling that out, even in the next year or two) or the price of natural gas comes further down (I think that's extremely unlikely). I would like to see more than just the one CNG option made available - couldn't they put one in a smaller car or improve the technology to increase fuel efficiency?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I think it would be tough. The tank takes up most of the Civic trunk as it is. In a smaller car where would you put it? You can convert just about any car to CNG. The tank is the issue. Works best in a PU truck. Safer there also. When I looked into it the cost was about $5000. Not sure now. A simpler conversion is to Propane with a switch from gas to propane. Then you can fill lots of places. Just as clean or close enough.
http://www.cngnow.com/EN-US/Vehicles/Pages/ConverttoCNG.aspx
One thing that should be mandated is different sized nozzles for diesel pumps (mostly to benefit you diesel fans). Too many pumps will let you put gas in your diesel rig or vice versa.
The end result is that you spend about 4K more for the GX than the standard Civic. You get a car that's larger and safer than the typical sub-compact for a sacrifice of half of the trunk space. Otherwise it drives and feels like a normal Civic in every way. It's down some on HP, but it's not really bad. The HP is about the same as a typical sub-compact, so you'll run about the same as a Fit or Mazda 2 speed-wise.
If you drive 18K a year, you'll save a LOT of money, and you can't buy a used GX for under $16-$18K no matter what the age due to how rare it is. Also, this last year they made it in the new body style which means it will hold its value incredibly well - almost like the Mini did for the first few years.
The problem is that it IS a normal Civic but that CNG physically requires 1.5x the volume to get the same energy out of. The GX is designed with much higher compression and tighter specs as there is a LOT of issues that it avoids compared to gasoline. CNG is incredibly easy to modulate amounts and ratios compared to gasoline. It essentially drives almost like an in-cylinder injection engine.(one step more advanced than direct injection) Efficiencies are upwards of 40% as a result.
*quote*
Natural gas has a high octane rating and is non-toxic, non-corrosive, and non-carcinogenic. It is lighter than air and burns almost completely.
***
It's not nearly as good as propane, but it's a lot cheaper. And the thing is that we can make natural gas manually from many sources if we have to. In a pinch, prices could rise to $3 a therm, but we'd no longer need foreign oil. In fact, long after the oil is all gone, CNG will still be easy to produce in mass quantities.
100 years from now, GNC and electric will be the only real options anyways.
And CNG vehicles are usually twice as reliable as they age due to virtually no wear, since CNG isn't generally harmful to oil in the same manner as gasoline is if tiny amounts mix. It's not uncommon to see GXs with oil that's only lightly discolored when you change it(you still need to due to thermal breakdown). The GX is a better engine and if you did the same with a gas engine, it would get close to 50mpg. But the 0.66x multiplier on energy rears its head, which is why it gets closer to 30mpg.
But at less than half the cost of gasoline per gallon equivalent, "30mpg" is just fine.
$7200 in fuel savings plus half the depreciation of a normal Civic.... It certainly is a better option than a Prius, IMO. And filling at home makes you incredibly lazy as there are no lines, waiting, or grimy money to deal with. Nothing spilling on your shoes, either. The device is about 4K including installation, but there is a 4K rebate on the car itself and 1K on the device, so it's about a wash to fill up at home.
Edmunds does a great job of reporting on cars but another source of available USA vehicles documented for a side-by-side comparison can be found at:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
This site includes the interior volume, needed for vehicle classification, and owner reported mileage.
Honda Insight owners are getting slightly higher mileage than the Prius yet with Jetta TDI class, interior space . . . unless one want's to stretch out on a sleeping bag. For example, fishing below the local river dams slows down about midnight or 1:00 AM and then pickups at the earliest, dim light.
Still, I agree with the use of natural gas as fuel when the car is parked in the driveway. We want a plug-in-Prius as in a 'docking station' that supplies natural gas and the hybrid provides electricity and heat for the house. In the morning, the car is warmed up, our electric bill is reduced and the house and shower water temperatures are perfect.
Bob Wilson
The EPA and Harvard School of Public Health as well as other experts in public health estimate that particulates in the air are responsible for at least 60,000 premature deaths in the U.S. each year [1]. Researchers believe majority of the health risk from diesel exhaust is caused by PM, which can carry many harmful organics and metals. The PM averages 0.1 to 0.25 microns (1 x 10 -6 meters), with 75 percent of particles less than 1 micron. This is a size range easily inhaled, resulting in possible lung cancer or non-cancerous lung damage. The particulate matter also, like other forms of air pollution, has the greatest impact on children, asthmatics, and the elderly.
Non-cancer toxicity from chronic exposure to diesel exhaust causes such respiratory ailments as airway restrictions, reduced pulmonary function, and immunological and allergenic reactions. This is much like the effect of smoking cigarettes, however, the inhalation of diesel exhaust is involuntary. Acute exposure can cause tissue irritation and permanent respiratory damage. Exposure and sickness from diesel exhaust is usually hard to pinpoint, since affected people can exhibit cold-like symptoms of headache, runny eyes and nose, nausea, and asthma-like responses. Exposure usually occurs directly through breathing exhaust, though particles can deposit on skin as well. Once inside the body, the pollutants are absorbed through tissue to the bloodstream and eventually are excreted as other toxins in the body are.
In addition to the health effects discussed above, most of the pollutants from diesel exhaust are regulated by federal air standards called NAAQS (National Ambient Air Quality Standards). The standards were set up by the 1970 Clean Air Act to protect public health and welfare. Today, NAAQS put limits on the concentration in the air of CO, NO2, SO2, PM, Hydrocarbons excluding methane, Ozone, and lead. When areas, such as Houston-Galveston for example, exceed these concentrations of air pollutants, they are said to be non-attainment areas and the state must create a plan (SIP -state implementation plan) to reduce pollutant concentrations below the NAAQS.
Air emissions of diesel exhaust are more than just another air pollution issue. Diesel exhaust can deposit onto water, soil, and vegetation, contaminating anything it comes into contact with. It contributes to global warming because it contains the greenhouse gases methane and carbon dioxide and fine carbonaceous PM. Diesel exhaust also contributes to acid deposition because it contains nitric and sulfuric acids and other substances which can be transformed to acidic PM in the atmosphere. The NOx portion of diesel emissions also contributes to ozone (O3) formation and eutrophication of coastal waters (spurring algae to bloom to such an extenExposure to diesel exhaust cause serious health problems in humans, including cancer, cardiac illnesses, respiratory problems and other serious health issues.
Diesel exhaust contains over 100 individual hazardous chemical components, that when combined can result in as many as 10,000 chemical compounds.t that the algae blocks sunlight from aquatic life beneath the surface). The contribution of NOx to the formation of ozone is significant in the Houston-Galveston area because it is a non-attainment area for ozone air pollution standards. Ozone in the troposphere (caused by pollution), as opposed to stratospheric ozone (the good ozone) has been known to exacerbate asthmatics and increase hospital admissions on high ozone concentration days.
"Not dangerous like gasoline" me [non-permissible content removed].
.
“If you’re on an interstate going through the middle of Chicago – good God – every other car is a diesel powered semi-trailer truck,” said Michael Mark, executive director of the American Lung Association of Greater Chicago. “That exposure, over a long period of time, is detrimental to those individuals.”
Studies of those constantly exposed to diesel exhaust found their risk of lung cancer increased by up to 50 percent, said Michael Thun, chief epidemiologist for the American Cancer Society, on the organization’s Web site.
According to The American Cancer Society, lung cancer is the main one to have been linked to diesel exhaust. But it is also suspected that other cancers such as those of the larynx, pancreas, bladder and kidney may be associated with diesel exhaust.
In addition, as a major source of outdoor air pollution, diesel exhaust is believed to play a role in other health problems such as eye irritation, headaches, lung damage, asthma and other lung diseases, heart disease and possibly immune system problems.
“Just because you’re young and healthy doesn’t mean you were designed to breathe polluted air,” Mark said. “If your body was designed to inhale smoke then it would have been built differently.”
Exhaust from diesel engines is made up of both gases and soot. The gas portion is mainly comprised of carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur oxides and hydrocarbons, according to the American Cancer Society’s Web site.
Mark said diesel exhaust contains roughly 100 times more of the soot materials than ordinary gas, which makes diesel more of a concern than other emissions.
I could post hundreds of these. So let's not try to live the fantasy about how "safe" diesel is, UmKay?
http://www.a1autoelectric.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=104&I- temid=271
It looks more like it is based on the DX for 2011. It has 15" steel wheels not alloy as the EX has. The EX also has 4 wheel disc brakes which the GX does not have. Someone gave you a bum steer. And no NAV even offered as an option. So finding CNG would be a challenge.
As far as installing a PHILL or whatever they are called now. It will be pricey at best. There is only one dealer in CA and availability is scarce. I am a fan of NG for powering vehicles. They suffer worse than diesels for available vehicles. Like many point out here. If CNG was so great the automakers would offer US more choices. Rumor has it Ram PU trucks may have the option soon.
http://www.impco.ws/phill-dealers.asp
They are a huge pain to use. If you are off even a bit they pop out of the downspout. CA just mandated a newer more expensive one. That is part of the higher cost of gas in CA. The ones at my local Shell have to be held in the whole time I am pumping gas. A real pain not to mention they were at $3.83 yesterday for RUG. Shell Diesel has held at $3.99 for well over a month. It does not have the radical up and down of RUG.
While the average consumer may think gas station owners must be raking it in as they see the price of gas continue to rise, in fact they are the most highly regulated small business in California per square foot. On average the typical gas station owner has over 19 permits they have to maintain every year. These permits cost an average of $19,000.00 annually. Not to mention the cost of what is required to retrofit, upgrade, maintain and install parts as required by these regulations.
This latest regulation, to replace locking nozzles with non-locking nozzles, has impacted more than a consumer's ability to get back in their car to get out from the cold and rain when pumping gas. Now consumers are less inclined to go into the convenience gas station store while gas is being pumped to purchase drinks, snacks or (gasp) cigarettes. Our local gas station friend told us he has seen a dramatic decrease in sales with his newly upgraded convenience store since this new non-locking nozzle regulation went into effect.
By the way, why were the locking nozzles removed? Because of a low percentage of people getting sprayed by the nozzles. However, since the new nozzles have been installed at a cost of $350 each, some of those have been cited with spilling. What's a small business owner to do?
http://technorati.com/business/small-business/article/the-trickle-effect-gasolin- e-nozzle-hold/
Costco still have the nozzles that can be used unattended. Shell does not. Not sure if it has to do with there being an attendant on duty or what.
It's like saying "Coke" in place of "pop" or "soda" when the brand might be Pepsi or Dr. Pepper.
You didn't miss his point.
Well look at that. What a bunch of bums Honda are. The older model (2005) was like that but they seem to have kept the price the "same" while dropping it two entire trim levels. No NAV is *incredibly* stupid of them. That's essentially a $10K surcharge now for the GX, which makes it actually lose against the Insight. :sick: 8K price difference is just too great to make up in fuel savings for most people. And it's a shame, since the Insight is literally as flimsy and ticky-tacky inside as it gets in order to save every last ounce of weight. Hard plastics and thin fabric is everywhere and the knuckle-tap test is like a drum head. I'm not a fan of CVT transmissions, either.
So we're at square 1 again. Honda once again treats us like stupid "bubbas" and offers us crap while the rest of the world gets their normal offerings. I swear that the people who run the company have some sort of repressed hatred for the U.S. or something, as it's just irrational that we get treated like this year after year.
But the real point I wanted to make was neither Toyota nor Honda dealer/s would deal when shopping for the 03 and 04 Prius and 04 Honda hybrid. Toyota would not come off over MSRP and Honda hybrid would not come off 20 k. So for a 37%+ discount off the Honda Hybrid, the (gasser) Civic was almost a no brainer.
There is opposition to CNG by companies like FedEx. They prefer diesel or hybrid for various reason. Then we do have the option of GTL as is going on in the World's largest gas reserve. Making ultra clean diesel from NG is an option I could really like.
That means you would be "pro-GASOLINE-ONLY" and I don't see that as a productive position.
I don't think anyone is "anti-CLEAN-diesel" at all. I think the only diesel opponents are those who oppose the high sulfur kind.
There are lots of high sulfur proponents in diesel. It starts with the legislatures, laws and regulation on through the food chain.
They are not the passenger car diesel oems, and the products they bring to market. ( i.e., VW, MB, BMW, etc.)
OK, I'll give you THAT one.
However: name me one person in a position of power (and is not a oil/automaker lobbyist) who has said they are against cleaning up diesel fuel exhaust by removing high sulfur content....???
My 03 TDI (now 10 model years old) was designed from the start to run ULSD to ZERO ppm sulfur !!!! It was the laws and regulations and ENFORCEMENT that forced LSD (up to 500 ppm) for a MAJORITY of those years. Once again you express a bias not supported by the facts.
Now that's a little but uncalled for, in addition to being obviously incorrect.
If ANYONE in these forums has shown the ability to become educated about a subject, it's me.
I was a 100% diesel HATER when I came to these forums, and I became educated about clean diesel vehicles and torque advantages and MPG advantages and all kinds of info I did not know.
Now I am a proponent for clean diesel, and I want more of it, and I want more choices from my automakers.
My dream car (I have said this a lot ) is a diesel/electric hybrid 5-passenger car that gets 70+ MPG.
I know it's possible to make and someday I hope someone does make one.
But to ignore the FACTS about how damaging diesel exhaust can be is not a good thing to do. So I don't do it.
RUG to PUG is 2 times to 18 times dirtier than ULSD !!! I know reality sux and the best thing to do is ignore ignore ignore, deny deny deny!!??
But I will ALWAYS be a hater of the ills of unscrubbed diesel exhaust.
Try getting a Nor Easterner to shut down his furnace 24/7 burning of 5000 ppm sulfur diesel (again, TOTALLY unmitigated).
Is that an educated statement or just your feelings on the subject. I happen to own a Kubota Tractor with a basic diesel engine. No emissions devices whatsoever. When I use the higher sulfur diesel with red dye for offroad use it smells. Shortly after buying the tractor ULSD came on the market. I started using it and the smell and soot was gone. So I for one think much of the restrictions on small diesel engines to be unnecessary with ULSD.
We have been through this before. We can't regulate the world's ships. At least, the political will to do so is not there.
Are there REALLY a lot of people burning 5000 ppm sulfur diesel in their home furnaces? Really? At the current prices?