By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
There's a snowmachine dealer/service station in the boonies here (nothing around it for ~30 miles) that I drove by last week. Their sign said ethanol free gas. The only problem was that it was around $3.85 or so for regular; higher than RUG here and even higher than some diesel stations. The ethanol free stations in my town are running about 20 cents a gallon more than corn-RUG.
"Due to rising gasoline prices, as well as federal mandates, about 40% of corn—America's biggest crop—is being brewed into ethanol. By the time the fall harvest begins, the Agriculture Department expects the U.S. to have enough corn left to satisfy the country's appetite for 18 days." (WSJ).
Those are Depression era supply levels.
Steely, the automakers are under the gun to reach 35 mpg CAFE standards (it's 27.3 mpg this year). I still don't think there's some big conspiracy to keep diesel out. If anything, the feds are encouraging more of it with the CAFE regs.
Chevy could make a diesel Tahoe. They just CHOOSE not to do so.
If they are willing to sell a EREV for $40K, they can afford to sell a diesel Tahoe for whatever they need to sell it for to recoup their costs.
All this blame on the regs is a common cop-out, and I'm a little bit tired of hearing it.
True, we need more diesel vehicles. That would be good for reducing fossil fuel usage. I'm all for more CLEAN DIESEL cars.
But at the cost of dirty air, like Europe is dealing with?
London's air pollution worst in Europe so city faces stiff fine
NO. THANK. YOU.
"This week, rumors spread on the Internet that General Motors was planning to assemble diesel-powered Chevrolet Cruze models at its Lordstown plant. GM denied the claims.
Because diesel fuel is more expensive than gasoline right now, GM spokesman Tom Read said the company isn’t sure there is demand for a diesel-powered Cruze in the U.S., even though cars with diesel engines are about 25 percent more fuel-efficient than cars with gasoline engines." (Vindy.com)
I have never agreed with this convoluted so-called logic.
Saying that, is no different than not caring whether your portfolio is earning 2% or 10% annually and we all know that everyone, (and especially the affluent) cares about interest rates. They also will choose regular or mid grade gas at the pumps when their car clearly calls for premium.
You could buy a $2 million home and have plain, conventional roof shingles protect that home from the rains, just as well as the premium shingles. You should have that choice.
Humble earners and savers like nice things too you know. Consider that they worked hard for something extra $pecial, and spent their hard earned savings on the purchase. And then budgeted for a normal or reasonable service investment schedule.
Sam
An oil change at Jiffy Lube it is not........the price of urea is just one component.
It is a fact that the engine will shut down if it is not refilled. I think it allows you "so many" starts after the interval has passed, but after that..............
In 1995, I bought a used 1992 Infiniti Q45, then could not afford to maintain it. Had to trade it in and eat $5K on the deal.
I couldn't afford it to begin with (wife talked me into buying it) then I indeed proved that I could not afford it by being unable to afford the service.
Tangent OVER.
Well said, well said. I will only add this: The affluent did not become affluent by spending freely their whole life.............
I know many affluent people who routinely shop at Costco and Sam's Club.................and they fill up there , as well.
My 03 TDI (actually much earlier than that) EASILY gets 50 mpg. For the ones who insist on driving it like a nervous nellie Honda VTEC= 45 mpg. Shoot the only way I could get 44 mpg was to drive 300 miles in stop and go traffic in downtown Las Vegas in 104 degrees ambient temp with the A/C BLASTING. This was 9/10 MY's in the PAST !!!!!!!
I think what the FEDS are starting to realize that even in Europe they can NOT get the gasser motor to do what is mindless for a diesel motor (better mpg)
All you need do is to compare like for like on the 03 VW. TDI, 1.8 T, 2.0 fuel economy.gov
Why aren't the automakers switching to diesel left and right?
You think maybe they're afraid people won't buy them?
I am not sure why we insist on trying to save the biggie three automakers from themselves? (I actually do, but that sentence sounds better) They don't want to oem TDI's for American markets? So be it. I mean they did bankruptcy when they didn't oem cars that the American market actually wanted to buy? What about up ours didn't we learn??? LET EM FALL !!!?? I mean it isn't like they do not already oem turbo diesels??? They do not advertise this much, but I am sure if you look on whatever assembly lines diesel equipped whatevers are being made and shipped to where ever , but obviously not to the US markets.
I am surprised that some don't think there is any govt intervention at all. All the pieces fit if you allow for just that one thing. It has been 24 years since we had diesels in any number on these shores. The diesel's time has come now. In fact it is long overdue.
Sam
Well Steve that is the thing, if I drove the 03 TDI like the 03/04 Prius to get 50 mpg, that figure (in the TDI) would be more like 60+ mpg !!!!!!!!!!!! I mean all I need do (right now on the TDI) is go 75 mph with bursts to 80/85 TO LA LA LAND (to wake up from road hypnosis) and it will post 59 mpg !!!! I actually have a few fav diesel stops in Santa Monica on Wilshire Blvd.
Keep in mind this is with an engine pushing 157,000 miles. AND this capability has been on our shores for at least a DECADE AGO !!!
Sam, I am also surprised. It is obvious that CARB keeps setting the bar higher when a mainstream US maker gets close. Like Honda that made a huge deal of bringing their very fine diesel engine to our shores. Only to get shot in the foot by CARB. As we all know California decides what gets sold in the USA. EPA people are just puppets to the CARB bullies.
The domestics just play their silly games and build lots of diesel trucks all over 7500 lbs to fit the RULES. I'm with steelydan on wanting a Tahoe with a V6 Duramax that can hit 30+ MPG out on the road. And still have the torque needed to pull a heavy trailer. The silly GM hybrids are neutered pieces of crap.
..."An optional 6.6-liter turbodiesel V8 is surely the engine choice for those who plan on towing or hauling on a regular basis. This new engine produces 397 hp and 765 lb-ft of torque and is mated to a beefier six-speed automatic transmission with manual shift control."...
No nambi bambi U REA(h) bottles for this bad boy. More like yippee YAHOO !!
Judas Priest !! AW AW AW.
And made even more inefficient in colder climates but still having work to do and heavy things to tow.
A V, or better still, inline 6 Duramax of even relatively humble displacement of 3 or 3.2 litres would have close to 450 lb ft of torque. A lot of work can be done with that, and with appropriate gearing, great fuel economy when you're running lighter.
And I agree with every point you made above that too. I am not very politically minded in so much as knowing the strategy to oppose regulations that belie common sense, but what is so discouraging is that while there are those among us know we are getting screwed, we are at a loss to stop the railroading and manipulation over us. In many respects we are too busy working overtime to pay our taxes and bills that we don't have the extra where-with-all to address things even if there are many more of us out there who would like to initiate change.
Sam
That is a result of the HP race among the 3 domestic auto makers. Just like the emissions standards, those rigs have far surpassed the point of diminishing returns. It is all one upsmanship with those behemoths. I have no interest in that kind of power. I want economy with enough power to get the job done. I found the 400+ ft lbs of torque in the BMW X5 diesel more than I really needed. I would probably get tickets for speeding as kicking it to 85 was as effortless as getting to 65 MPH with th V8 gasser in my Sequoia.
1. A Peugeot Station Wagon that was a rugged as a box of rocks.
It rattled and stunk but it was actually a great little car that NOBODY would work on. The shops HATED it. Most confortable seats of any car I've owned.
2. A 1981 Olds Cutlass Supreme that I bought for next to nothing in like new condition. Used it as an airport car for a year without incident until I sold it out of fear.
2. An Isuzu Pickup with a stout, dependable little diesel.
It's not that I hate diesels. I just cant justify paying the extra money for one ONLY to get HOSED on the prices they charge for diesel.
Just don't see the attraction at least not for now.
You make another excellent point. It is not just the EPA or CARB that are totally out of control. It is every level of our City, County, state and Federal governments. My wife just paid the second quarter property tax bill. 10% went to redevelopment agencies in San Diego county. She wondered what they do with that money. San Diego County has 59 redevelopment agencies. Most likely all just scamming us of our tax dollars.
We are surrounded by bureaucratic idiocy and ripoff agencies. All trying to justify dipping into our collective pockets. Meanwhile they deny US the opportunity to save a few bucks on fuel by blocking fuel efficient vehicles that every country in the world has except ours.
I know wrong forum. You might like to join us at a more appropriate thread.
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f1d3f68/10036#MSG10036
Your hosed comment leads me to think you are getting hung up on the unfair irony rather than letting the real world numbers (unfair at the pumps and all) rule. I'm sure you have seen the many posts showing the end math? And those posts were not fudged or sensationalized. This is one of these rare cases where it sounds like it is too good to be true, but is true. The math doesn't lie.
I'm not trying to change your mind however. You sound quite adamant. But I would wager that if diesel prices were lowered to pre ULSD levels, it would be a lot easier sell because while people don't have the imagination to see the bigger picture even at todays prices, they would be winners by default. Govt would want to quickly impose a tax base from other avenues to fill that gap, but overall everyone would be happier, polluting less and as an extra bonus we wouldn't have to recycle all those hybrid batteries. Or incur the environmental impact when they are initially manufactured either.
Sam
I respect your position on diesels but I really don't seem them growing much in popularity since most people feel as I do. I could, however, be wrong.
But then, I'm not a big fan of hybrids either for the obvious reasons.
A 1981 Olds Cutlass Supreme (2011-1981=) 30 years old. What ppm sulfur was D2 in that time?
Shoot Honda's were spewing LEAD aka LEADED gasoline?
Sam :sick:
Actually by 1981 leaded gasoline was about done for. In 1975, most cars went unleaded and that's when catalytic convertors came out EXCEPT for the old Honda CVCC's that ran so clean they didn't need a cat.
Indeed FF to ULSD 2006 mandatory start point of the switch. ULSD is @ 15 ppm sulfur and nominally delivered @ the pumps from 5 to 7 ppm sulfur. RUG to PUG on the other hand is 30 ppm and can be nominally delivered from 30 ppm to 90 ppm sulfur (uppers can be off line FEE mitigated.
So by law and by practicallity RUG to PUG is 2 to 18 times DIRTIER.
It is all fun. We get along though we disagree a lot. Very civil bunch.
I'm not sure what I'm missing here...?
By 1981 most pump gas was UNLEADED. I think there may have been just a few stations that still pumped the good old high octane leaded gas but not many. So, a 1981 Honda would have used unleaded gas.
I do know the diesel car I had would turn the air BLACK with soot and my non diesels wouldn't.
Again unleaded RUG to PUG was INXS of 500 ppm sulfur !!
I do actually wish I had the 1985/1987 MB 300 TD. Not only would one be running ULSD but it has been and REMAINS smog EXEMPT.
Old myths die hard. When I brought my 2009 TDI to the smog station the owner/technician kept on saying all diesels smog, all diesels smog. I didn't say a word. He literally ran the smoke test 5 times looking for ....smoke, when only ONCE is the requirement. So when he was about ready to run it the sixth time I asked him if there was an issue that I was not SEEING. I think he "GOT IT" and stopped @ the 5th smoke test.
Sidebar: I don't know if I should say this or not, but the real funny part was the vehicle was in a 3 sided and roofed enclosed space.
Like you, I've always liked the 300 TD's but I wonder if you have ANY IDEA just how troublesome these cars can be or how expensive they are to fix?
If you can find one without vacuum problems with A/C that works you'll be doing great. Still, I like them.
..."The 2.2CTDi Honda Civic is supposed to be around 22% more economical than the 1.8 V-TEC engine models, delivering around 39mpg around town and 55.4mpg in the combined cycle fuel economy tests. That said, the fuel economy is poor "...
Honda Civic 2.2 L cTDI
But then even in 2004, I wanted a 1.7 L cTDI Civic
Steve agrees with the US market oems who say the the 2012 35 mpg targets are HARD. (tell me if I have misrepresented you and or the US market oems) :sick:
This works the opposite way also.
If I drove the Prius like the TDI there is almost no way I will get the 50 mpg on the Prius that I get on the TDI.
So in that sense it is a double whammy, a win/win for the TDI and a win /lose for the Prius.
But that is not even near the real news. The Jetta TDI's (hybrid) competition is the Toyota Camry Hybrid. .gov indicates the TDI's get @ least 9.8% better fuel mileage. It is thousands of $'s cheaper and dare I say better built?
Why we took pity on Honda, buying a 1982 Accord is one of the mysteries. The 82 MY was as you said: ..."crude, primitive, tinny and noisy"... but did hold up well, used RUG and gave app 95,000 trouble free miles. As I remember 34 mpg. (stick shift if anybody cares)
Yes the MB 300 TD drive train (TD engine and automatic transmission) were pretty bullet proof. I would submit any old car but NON diesel stuff can be problematic. For some reason there are a few reliable independent shops that LOVE to care for these around here (50 miles radius). Here is one gushing review getting 28 mpg?
1984 MB 300 TD
Hopefully after 27 years and over 540,000 miles, I hope the 03 VW Jetta TDI will be chugging along and 50 mpg (44 to 62 mpg range) in 2030 will seem like a fuel guzzler !!!
It is really a shame to a tragedy they do not let in the 70 mpg turbo diesels here in 2011.
I can't speak for the automakers but going from the current CAFE regs to 35mpg is what - a 50% increase?
Don't know why it's not doable, but the pencils will have to be extra sharp. :shades:
Sam
What would cinch the deal for me would be a STOUT 6 speed manual transmission in the Touareg. If the American market used it, a Tremec TR 6060, up to 606 #ft of torque handling.
I think a lot of folks in the gasser vs diesel discussion really realize that a lot to some of the extra COSTS do go to more durable items. Some examples are engines, engine parts, intercoolers, beefier drive line: manual and automatic transmissions, suspensions, aka; springs, shocks, struts,
Now you know why Mercedes purchased smart back from Penske - the little city cars will help them meet fleet CAFE regs.
Must be easier to make and sell a subcompact gasser than raising the fleet mpg with diesels that people in the US may not want to buy.
For passenger vehicles, it's hard to say that diesel engines are more durable than gas ones (see my Liberty CRD comment a while back).