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 facts overwhelmingly point to the governments regulations being some to all of the impediments.
The research from the Civil Society Institute, a not-for-profit think tank that focuses on energy and ecological issues, shows a growing “fuel-efficient car gap.”
CSI found that the number of vehicle models sold in the United States that achieve combined gas mileage of at least 40 miles per gallon actually has dropped from five in 2005 to just two in 2007 — the Honda Civic hybrid and the Toyota Prius hybrid.
Overseas, primarily in Europe, there are 113 vehicles for sale that get a combined 40 mpg, up from 86 in 2005. Combined gas mileage is the average of a vehicle’s city and highway mpg numbers.
Adding insult to injury is the fact that nearly two-thirds of the 113 highly fuel-efficient models that are unavailable to American consumers are either made by U.S.-based automobile manufacturers or by foreign manufacturers with substantial U.S. sales operations, such as Nissan and Toyota.
“These cars sold in Europe meet or exceed U.S. safety standards, so there is no reason why they shouldn’t be made available to U.S. consumers,” said CSI President Pam Solo.
“We have to face the unpleasant facts here: America is needlessly losing the race to develop the best fuel-efficient technology and then deliver it to the American consumer,” Solo said. “U.S. consumers say they are willing to buy these cars, so the big U.S. automakers are actually going backwards at a time when it’s possible to make cars that are more fuel efficient.”
A national poll conducted for CSI shows that millions of Americans would welcome the introduction of the fuel-efficient cars now being sold overseas. Nearly nine out of 10 respondents to the survey thought U.S. consumers should have access to these vehicles.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17344368/
Now I really don't care if they (decide they) don't want to make them here in the states. They key issue is if they really do not want to make em, they really do NOT want the competition from 40 mpg + vehicles from "ABROAD" either.
Still t is pretty amazing a liberal media outlet (such as MSNBC) let them even say (what they said in the article) that. Seems also the big 3 love those tributaries of DE NIAL.
I agree that the carmakers might get irritated at the regs. But the bottom line is this: If they thought they could make money on the cars and sell enough of them to help the bottom line, THEY WOULD JUMP THROUGH ANY REGULATORY HOOPS to bring the cars here.
VW and Mercedes and Audi believe strongly enough in diesel that they want to and DO have diesels in their USA lineup.
Why don't the others? That's an unanswered question, possible UNANSWERABLE.
Then why do you think it is here?
The average US car price is around $28K.
If you took half of the small diesels offered in the UK, realities say that almost ALL of them could be offered in the USA for less than $28K.
It's the unwillingness of the carmakers to offer them here that is the main barrier.
Perhaps you can refresh our memories. Why would the UAW oppose diesel cars?
But to address your $28,000, ESPECIALLY in todays' economic climate, 28,000 for a majority of American's might as well be a Mount Everest fiqure.
This is (real life) interesting in that I have read in passing the average age for Honda Civic ownership is 39 to 44 years old !! ?? It might be particularly indicative as the MSRP (listed on Edmunds.com ranges from 15,600 to 22.2k for the sporty luxury version.
VW and Mercedes and Audi believe strongly enough in diesel that they want to and DO have diesels in their USA lineup.
I'm going to disagree that the Deutche 3 are really jumping through any and all hoops.
Now that they have mechanics that can fix them and a growing fan base, they still each only have 1 or 2 or 3 models tops. And even then, they offer them with limited options.
335d but no Xdrive, A3 but no quattro. Then comes the question if the 5-series wouldn't have fared better, or the A4. Both of which I think the answer is a solid yes.
So by... 2013? Audi will have one more diesel in the US? (waiting for the next-gen A6 to get a fresh start on the whole lineup).
They offer a diesel or two, but unfortunately the one or two offered aren't the exact trim and options I would get in a gasser, therefore I won't go for those options in a diesel either.
Not terribly impressed by them, all-in-all. I agree that they should at least allow us to order a diesel from the factory with any options in whatever model they currently have (335d for example). How is having a 335d xdrive going to ruin everyone's day if their mechanics already know how to work on a) 335d b)335i xdrive? Does 2+2 = 7 to these carmakers? What gives?
..."Another reason why many European models are not marketed in the United States is that labor unions object.
The traditional Big Three automakers — General Motors, Ford and Chrysler — are in the middle of massive restructuring programs to reshape their businesses that depend in part on gaining concessions from the United Auto Workers and other unions.
“For years they have not been able to bring vehicles here that are going to displace their workers — this is a competitive challenge for the Big Three,” McManus said. “The unions have influence over the Big Three, and they can’t afford not to have the unions with them as they go through their restructuring. It’s hard to get the unions to agree to import vehicles when you are laying workers off. Overseas car companies like Toyota don’t have the same restrictions — they’ve been able to bring vehicles here from Japan to respond to consumers’ growing taste for more fuel-efficient cars.”...
(UNQUOTE)
So I would have thought you would have read the article by now. Apologies for the "late answer".
Labor issues while an important component is really filler. It is sort of like watching Cable/TV Wrestling.
The essential issue for discussion is and probably remains (yes they can be moving targets)
(QUOTE)
..."In Europe, cars on average get 40 mpg, compared with 20.4 mpg for U.S. cars."...
(UNQUOTE)
I did not repost the link as it is ALREADY posted. I can if you think it a good idea.
Another is you have to remember that VW is partially (privte) state and UNION (aka probably not directly by UAW) owned. I would not be surprised if the country provides "linebacker" duties for them also.
So I hope that addresses the curiosity?
I still don't see a conspiracy here. Cummins makes diesel engines here. They're union afaik (Diesel Workers' Union).
GM makes plenty of diesels for their Opel line don't they? I don't know why workers would object to bringing the tooling over to make engines here. GM has made over a million Duramax V8 diesels for trucks in Ohio per Wiki.
Just doesn't seem much of a stretch for the manufacturers to make diesels here, if there's demand for them.
And the UAW didn't keep the Transit Connect out of the country. That's the one made in Turkey and they send the gas models over here to be
retrofittedstripped to avoid the Chicken Tax.So yes, in that sense a lot of diesel engines are made by UNION LABOR.
I think what they are worried about is selling a car, say the Cruze, with an engine currently made in a UAW factory, but now being made in one of their European factories.
Even if 10% of the Cruze's were diesel, that's 10% more manpower shift in the engines plants from UAW to some other country.
One doesn't really even need a sharp pencil when faced with a choice between a $15,000 or less Toyota Corolla or a Honda Civic less than $13,000 or even a Kia, Hyndai? COMPARED to a $ 23,000 to 25,000 Prius?
The latest contestant might be the VOLT
@ $40,000+ vs a now $15,600 MSPR or so Toyota Corolla, etc?
Like I said, the average age of Civic owners (@39 to 44 years old) is TELLING.
I am encouraged whenever I read that at least there are people out there that realize some of these unfortunate truths. Now, if only we could do something about it.
Going down for the 3rd time, breathing through straw here.
Sam
I'm the wrong guy to ask I guess. The Prius II we test drove would have worked for us. It's way smaller than the minivan but since it's a hatch, it wouldn't be much worse than our wagon. I wanted to swoon over the "minivan" Prius but it doesn't look much bigger than the sedan. But on either one, the seats fold down so we could put a snowboard in there or paddles for canoe on top.
The Volt I saw at the Detroit show was nice and all, and I sure managed ok with a Tercel 4 door for almost two decades, but we're still hauling enough junk around that we want something bigger. At least the rear seats in the Volt fold down for long stuff, so that's a plus.
The problem with minivans is that they've gotten about as pricey as a Volt! They don't get "up to 95 mpg" either.
I wish the new Prius had been more of a xD style.
Ok, bring a diesel Transit Connect over and I promise to go test drive one. :shades:
I cna't imagine WHY anyone would want to buy a diesel!
For some of us we like the fact that it doesn't even need a source of ignition in order to fire. When you think about it, that is pretty cool don't you think?
And surely you wouldn't deny they have great torque and achieve that peak at very low revs, which brings us to another cool trait, shared by supercharged engines. The ability to short shift.
What I do understand though, would be if a person who loves to wring out their S2000 daily, would probably not have as much fun with a diesel.
IMHO, a diesel internal combustion engine is one of the coolest inventions since the wheel itself.
Hope I helped your imagination?
Sam
Apples to Oranges
So an 03 Jetta TDI (48-52 mpg) @ today's (same corner store) $4.15 ULSD we are talking a range .0864583 cents to .0798076 per mile driven. Still 11.1%- 14.9% cheaper. In addition the Civic uses a min of 26.3% more fuel.
I cannot imagine anyone wanting a gas vehicle after they have driven a comparable vehicle with a diesel engine. Even if the price of fuel was a lot more. Today in San Diego diesel and premium are the same price. If I bought a new SUV it would have a diesel engine capable of 30 MPG on the highway. My current SUV is straining to get 17 on the highway with the crap ethanol gas sold in CA. Costco is selling RUG for $3.79 today. My local Shell is selling diesel for $3.99. A trip to Phoenix with my Sequoia will cost about $156 in RUG. A trip in any of the half dozen diesel SUVs will cost about $93 in diesel. Not to mention the fact I can go nearly twice the distance between fuel stops with the diesel.
Why would anyone in their right mind buy a gas powered car?
I had hopes that Honda would get their act together and offer a diesel Pilot. Oh well, still plenty of great choices in diesel SUVs.
Yes, they get better mileage but you pay so much more upfront that the math probably won't work out.
As far as not having a source of ignition? Well, I suppose that's cool but nothing I care about.
The availability, the smell..no thanks!
But it's the PRICE that irks me most of all. It should be far less than regular
Honda did look into producing diesels but decided there wouldn't be enough of a market. At least for the time being anyway.
If the others had that will, we'd have a lot more good diesel choices.
Even if the ones that brought them here had the will to complete their lineups (A4, A6, A8, Q5, A3 quattro) (123d, 335d xDrive, 535d, 735d, X3d) (C350d)
When those that bring them here have a full lineup of diesel vehicles, you will see other manufacturers join in.
Until then, I don't understand why they are basing their idea of no demand when diesels have a very high take-rate in the US when offered in that model, and the diesel version never sits on a dealer lot for long.
You can't base lack of demand on pure sales numbers, when they aren't offering many cars, and I'm sure that is how they are looking at it. They have to base on time-to-sale and time on the lot. Which is very low for diesel models of those cars in the US.
Sigh... they'll never listen though.
My current SUV is straining to get 17 on the highway with the crap ethanol gas sold in CA.
With ethanol in widespread uses, I can't understand why anyone would want a 'gas' vehicle. You can't get straight petrol in many places anymore. Ethanol in our gas doesn't give us any discounts when you factor in the horrible economy you get with it. Good luck getting real-world EPA numbers on E-15!
And when you factor in how many vehicles are having issues with the alcoholic gas, it becomes a real cost issue for consumers.
Nothing about ethanol is good for the average consumer. Diesel has proven cost benefits.
You have pointed out one of my major incentives to get out from under gas powered vehicles. I even considered electric until the rates went out of sight. Diesel in the USA is not as good as in the EU. But it is improving, while at the same time RUG is getting worse. By design would be my guess. If the average car gets 10% lower mileage on the current E10. You can guess that E15 will drop mileage by 15%. That equates to more gas tax dollars. It is basically a tax increase under the guise of ALTERNATIVE FUEL. What a joke.
For most cars with both gas and diesel offerings the diesel will get on average 40% better mileage. SUVs fare even better with close to 50% increase in mileage. That means diesel would have to be twice the price of gas to make the diesel SUV a bad deal. I don't see that happening. And I agree with those that say diesel is over priced. I think that is part of the political game being played with diesel cars. Politicians may not be the sharpest pencils in the box, they do know if the US goes diesel as they have in the EU that they will have to raise fuel taxes to make up for the loss in revenue. That is not politically advantageous. And what do we do with all the worthless Gasoline? Don't ever forget that Rockefeller built his empire on convincing the public to burn his gasoline that was disposed of prior to making it run in the automobile engine. Henry Ford developed his cars to run on alcohol. It was a real battle of the titans.
Make mine diesel, most bang for the buck.
We could take the ethanol content back out and improve our crop growing potential so that we can eat. And the exportation of those crops helps offset the tax not collected by the volume of diesel users.
We go in circles in this thread and I believe it stems out of frustration.
At least the easy majority of us here are on the same page. You, me and mclarge, lars, ruking and others have all said much the same only a week or so ago.
I was talking with a snowmobile dealer the other day and the mechanic overheard our conversation and came out. He said the ethanol is rotting seals and destroying reeds even, in under a year.
I try to look for the positive if I can. Slim pickings on this topic. But here is my best for a Monday morning. Anyone who must burn 91 or might be 93 depending on your location at least doesn't have the ethanol content. Reg and mid grade do but not the premium. I suppose one could wonder if the big players (all the big boys whose cars run exclusively on premium) said don't put that crap in the gas our cars must burn or we won't let you political and oil types have our luxury metal. (so they don't have to do the warranty when it does its dirt)
Sam
Looking back on it I should have gotten a 1978 Rabbit diesel instead of the gasser. The only problem I had with the Rabbit (under warranty) the A/C blew out in the summer IN the EVERGLADES, FL. Other than that, app 95,000 trouble free miles, albeit @ 25-30 mpg if memory serves correctly.
In 1978 I wanted a VW Dasher Diesel wagon in the worst way. The wait was well over a year. I needed a small vehicle for my 75 mile commute each way to work. I bought a new Honda Accord Hatch. It was fun to drive but worthless in snow or on ice. Engine blew up before it reached 60K miles. Probably the second worst new car I ever owned. The 1973 Subaru being the worst.
If that dealer was not honest they could have done any number of things in order to make work and money, that could have ranged anywhere from swapping your good injectors with another set that had 400000 miles on them to messing with the timing of the pump. Those Rabbits were no ball of fire being naturally aspirated but they got the job done. In (only) 84 they turbo'd the Rabbit. Two years later they turbo'd the Jetta.
We have to believe that whatever happened to your Rabbit is the exception out there, but stuff does happen unfortunately. What was the name of the dealer or can we say?
Sam
GROUP 1
4 cylinder diesels that can "fly under the radar" due to their inherently small output of pollutants. This group is basically German and is approximately 2.0 L displacement. Small Audi and VW diesel engines. These do not require the Urea injection system to reduce pollutants.
GROUP 2
Large Cargo Vans and Super/Heavy Pickups that have large diesel engines 5L or bigger in most cases. There are many choices in this area because of the way the EPA classifies these vehicles. These are "Work Vehicles" and consequently have more relaxed emissions requirements. Almost all US made diesels fall in this group ( if not all)..........
GROUP 3
Luxury SUV's and Sedans that use 6 cylinder engines that are 2.5L or larger in most cases. They are high performance diesels that inherently pollute due to their greater size/output. These engines are too large to pass the EPA passenger vehicle requirements , so they all rely on the UREA injection system to reduce the pollutants low enough to pass the EPA requirements.
This is a great idea until you consider how EXPENSIVE it is to go to the (Mercedes, BMW, or Audi ) dealer and get that UREA canister refilled.........it is in the HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of dollars................if you don't fill it up in time, your diesel engine will not start.......it is designed that way.............this is a significant regulatory hurdle and one that only the luxury auto makers see fit to overcome...................A pity...................
Bottom line: thanks to the EPA , there is little chance you will see a diesel Tahoe, Suburban, Expedition, or 4Runner in our near future. These popular vehicles cry for a diesel, but it ain't happening thanks to our clueless energy policy in the USA.
7 gallons of the Urea will cost around $110. Plus labor charges to refill it.
But the reality is that ANY luxury SUV is costly to service at the dealers.
If you can drop $50-$75K, then you can afford the service calls.
406 ft #'s of torque
Reality check , the Sequel.......
Here in Houston, the urea refill at a Mercedes Dealership is $800, done every 10K..............
I rest my case................
I said "Luxury SUVs are expensive to maintain. If you can drop the cash for a vehicle like that, you CAN afford the maintenance."
You are going on a tangent here.
Yes, a Mercedes owner can afford to be gouged.
I would just like the opportunity to buy a Diesel Tahoe, that's all I am saying here.........................
I tow a trailer with an antique car from time to time, but my only diesel choice that is affordable is a diesel pickup, which my wife objects to........she wants an SUV............
A diesel SUV that ISN"T $60K is what I am looking for, but , as I said earlier , thanks to the EPA , it's not going to happen..................
Finally, the UREA system is a stopgap measure at best.........
lalrsb, you would have to agree that even a Mercedes owner would resent going in to the dealer to fork over $800 bucks every 10,000 miles...........they will just get the gas model, because, using your same reasoning, they can afford the gas..................
Bottom line, there is more fuel burned every day thanks to our seriously misguided energy policy in the USA.......................
Suggestion to you larsb..............drink decaf.
That sounds excessive to me. I will check my local MB, VW and BMW dealers. With every new diesel truck being required to have urea injection the price will come down. I just read where one truck stop was selling it for $2.75 per gallon. That would be about $41 to fill the Mercedes diesel 15 gallon reservoir. Depending on driving style it is supposed to last up to 15,000 miles. Not even a penny a mile. Diesel additive will cost more than urea. Urea is a very common fertilizer as well. Just a pain that it could shut down the engine. Would be nice to figure out an over ride.