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.
Options

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

16566687071473

Comments

  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    10+ years, wow.

    Tell you what, when the economy does pick up, in earnest that is, there are a lot of people ready to trade up. We should see a boom, eventually.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited August 2011
    While I would like to agree with you, it really has been 3/4 MY's since the 2008 DIP (9.6 M to 10.5 M MY sales) . Indeed, it is more like 4/5 MY's !!!!! I am not taking any bets that the back half of 2001 will se a return to 16 M yearly car sales.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    It's hard to say, with fuel prices bound to go up, road rage and traffic expanding at a fast clip, and actual wages (adjusted for inflation) remaining static for the last three decades. Could be the auto industry will never get much bigger than it is....or....there will be an even more rapid shift to "other" types of cars.

    Everyone is jumping on the "sustainability" bandwagon--so people will be looking for innovative ways to get around.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    That has happened in Japan big Time. Not sure it will work in CA. Maybe on the East coast. I know people with out a car. They manage sort of. Bum rides etc. Reminds me of my years on the Farm. I was addicted to farm auctions. I went to all of them with antiques and antique farm equipment. There were always Amish there with HUGE rolls of cash to bid. They would come with non Amish friends. They would pile out of a van. I thought that is kind of hypocritical. Kind of like the guy that has quit buying cigarettes, just bums them.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    Correction 2001, should be (back half of) 2011.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    ..."Everyone is jumping on the "sustainability" bandwagon--so people will be looking for innovative ways to get around. "...

    Almost any new "innovative" ways to get around will almost of necessities and realities ... cost more monies and at every parameter you can name. So to me, diesel engines will continue to lead the way. Just in case there are those that think electrical is a NEW and innovative way to go, just remember that electric cars were on the market 100+ years ago. Indeed my local utility of the natural gas pipe line explosion fame, just tacked on a .30 cent+ kilowatt charge category just in case I was thinking of adding a 40,000 dollar Volt or Leaf to my stable. It is so expensive per mile driven that even the oems do not post what it will cost mpg equivalency.

    One thing I do like about VW's (not to pitch VW's) are the body's have 12 year body work warranty's.

    Indeed, I have cars with 3 year body work warranties (Toyota) that are going on the 17/19 year old time frames. So the galvanized body panels are a gimme. I fully intend for them to do a minimum of 20 years. 20 to 30 years of use when 5 years is expected of say a Prius, meets one of my definitions of "sustainabiliy."
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Sustainability innovations will express themselves in terms of a highly *diversified* spectrum of vehicles I think. Besides, it's more than practicality or realism as viewed today---people just won't be able to avoid change. The reality will be different, so realism becomes a relative term.

    Seeing how cars have been forced to change since the 1970s, this could all be a good thing. :)

    You know that when you have NASCAR officials using the term "sustainability", (which they are) -- that the earth has definitely tilted! :P
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    When do you think Diesel will start dominating NASCAR as it has Endurance races like LeMans and European Sports car racing?

    http://www.motivemag.com/pub/news/Diesel_Dominates_Sportscar_Racing_Round_2_Peug- eot.shtml

    Although Ferrari and Porsche, along with other big name sports car builders like Aston Martin, Lotus and the Chevrolet Corvette, are still chasing victory, they are relegated to class contenders while the outright prize is now the domain of the people who can build the best diesel powerplants.

    http://www.fullyloaded.com.au/technical-news/articleid/74195.aspx

    When diesel reigns supreme what will Exxon do with all their excess gasoline? The same dilemma Rockefeller was in at the turn of the century. Maybe sell it cheap to the 3rd world. By then that will be US.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    Indeed. "Restart", if one will of the passenger car diesels would not have been possible, if the regulatory agencies were forced to avoid change. Now I realize the regulatory agencies have a bias against diesels. For many years they have enforced the bias against diesels very well ! So, as you say change (however small, as passenger car diesels are concerned) is a good thing.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    When diesel reigns supreme...

    Won't happen for several reasons:

    * The Feds will tax the bejeezus out of it
    * Increase demand will mean even higher diesel prices
    * Lower demand for gas will mean cheaper gas prices
    * Turbos and DI are helping gas engines protect market share
    * Tougher to meet emissions standards with diesels
    * Diesels cost more, and Americans in general are cheap
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited September 2011
    Oh I don't think there was a "bias" against diesels. Until very recently, diesel passenger cars had a long way to go with regards to emissions and air quality. A city completely filled with 70s and 80s era diesel cars and trucks would be a pretty miserable place.

    "bias" suggests some kind of keen, evil and focused intelligence working efficiently to implement a direct goal----this is giving way too much credit to any government agency. Surely you remember junior high school? It's like that.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Don't forget CARB allowed a phony PHD build the case against diesels. I do think the Junior High level of competence describes our State legislature to a "T".
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I think the biggest obstacle is the Oil Companies. The UK has a glut of Gasoline they sell to US. If we had any percentage of diesels that glut would exist here. I do agree that the 70s and 80s diesel offerings were less than clean burning. Though it was the diesel itself that was the major problem. With ULSD my diesel tractor burns darn clean. It has No emissions on the exhaust. No turbo just a nice 21 HP chugging diesel engine with torque out the kazoo.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    All regulations have a built-in momentum, which explains their intransigence much better than conspiracies IMO. Once dirty diesels were stigmatized in the 70s and 80s, it takes a long time to sanctify them again.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Oh I don't think there was a "bias" against diesels

    Don't the feds tax diesel at a higher rate? Anyone know diesel vs. gas taxes?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Fed excise tax:---24.4 cents/gallon vs. 18.4 cents/gallon. Not so different really.

    Combined taxes on diesel (local, state, and fed) varies considerably among states, from about 39 cents to 70 cents per gallon.

    If we attempted to predict proliferation of diesel cars based strictly on the lowest taxes (probably not very accurate), then we'd have boatloads of diesel cars in Georgia, So. Carolina and Oklahoma, and none in Hawaii, CA, NY, PENNA, Illinois, Indiana and Washington state.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited September 2011
    Last I checked CA has the highest tax on diesel at 76.9 cents per gallon. The Federal tax is half a cent higher than gas at 18.9 cents per gallon.

    http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/July2011_gasoline_diesel_summary.- - pdf

    I don't think the oil companies are creating a conspiracy. It is simply a business decision. No matter what they do in the cracking they get a certain amount of gasoline. For you young fellers, gas was a byproduct of making kerosene. It was dumped back before gasoline engines were developed. Now you want the real conspiracy. Henry Ford wanted his cars to run on ethanol (alcohol) His enemy Rockefeller wanted to get rid of that nasty gasoline he had been dumping. So Rockefeller gave the Ladies Temperance movement a few million to promote their campaign against alcohol and you know the rest of the story. The oil companies want a balance of gas to diesel. They have a mess in Europe with too many diesel vehicles. I am sure they are not above putting a bug in the ear of our politicians. Spreading stories about how awful diesel is etc. It will all change when they get biodiesel from algae profitable. In the mean time I am waiting for my perfect diesel vehicle to come along.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    ..."Fed excise tax:---24.4 cents/gallon vs. 18.4 cents/gallon. Not so different really. "...

    I take it you are saying this tongue in cheek, correct?. If you (if you were king or Harry Reid) switched that right around tomorrow, where the gasser folks paid the higher taxation price, you'd have to beat back a scalded pit bull pack protest !!! Just for the record your example is 33% more TAXATION !!!
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    33% is the penalty for getting that much better mileage. No way the Feds want US using less gas. It is all rhetoric to LOOK like they are green. Big bunch a Fat Liars.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    They have to sell diesel some where, gas some where else. May as well send the gas to the place where it enjoys a 33% tax advantage.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Well the claim was that perhaps the higher taxes were a "bias". Seems to me that a "bias" would have been far greater than that. I mean, a "bias" isn't supposed to be subtle. Anyway, that was my point--it's not outrageously out of line.

    So if I filled up a diesel MINI rather than a gasoline MINI I'd be paying .66 cents a week more in taxes. Gee, call out the Minutemen, man the barricades---I'm oppressed!
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    Well then... I would take it you (as king) are saying you fear the guillotine !? :P
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    I am not sure you would agree concur or even disagree, but we really need to get into the EXPORT bit ness for RUG to PUG. One target should be China. At the very least it will be a pebble sized weight on the ledger of the massive imbalance of payments we have with that country.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited September 2011
    Sales of Mercedes-Benz diesel models were up 14.7% for the month (851 versus 742) and up 100 % for the year (7,717 versus 3,859).

    Audi is having their best year ever in the USA. I would say diesel has been the difference.

    Audi reports best-ever August U.S. sales, marking the eighth straight record-setting month of 2011
    • August 2011 marked fourth-best month ever with sales of 10,201, an 11.1% gain
    • Demand for the all-new 2012 Audi A6 increased 36.4%; Q7 sales climbed 28.6%
    • Audi A3 TDI and Audi Q7 TDI accounted for 69% and 45.5% of sales mix, respectively

    Audi SUV models constituted a healthy 30% of overall Audi sales in August. Sales of the popular Audi Q7 full-size luxury sport-utility vehicle increased 28.6% YOY to 720 vehicles sold, when compared to August 2010.


    The only Lexus with gains is the hybrid CT. It is at the bottom of the price scale. I would say the Japanese better get working on diesels if they want to stay on top of the game.

    I figure about $23 million in sales for Audi on the Q7 TDI alone last month. A decently equipped Q7 will be about $70k. And they are not giving incentives to move them. Still people with money to spend.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    I am probably in the minority, but if I get another car, it will be a diesel (what ever segment) I would either think twice or not get it at all if there is not a diesel option. I just filled my TDI (WAY past its prime, ala Shiftright discussion) with the A/C blasting most of the time for a 49 mpg. For sure a TB/WP change is due @ app 200,000 miles (100,000 miles oem recommended intervals)

    It is really hard to come to any other conclusion that the US follows a burning more is less policy. . A like model VW gasser (2.0 and 1.8 T) gets 30.6 to 27.5. to the snap shot 49 mpg. This is 60 to 78% more respectively.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    The tax difference is mainly due to the trucks being all diesel and do the most damage to the roads, and the tax is supposed to be for the roads.

    I'm all for biodiesel from Algae, 100%. Unlike ethanol, you get good btu's and power out of biodiesel, pretty much online with regular diesel, downside of biodiesel, it gels at higher temps. The real question is, can current diesel vehicles run on pure biodiesel? I know My Kubota can, and my 99 F350 can, but can the latest gen diesels with the particular filters and other doohickeys survive on bio?
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    Depending on your point of view that is the right/wrong question. Again the regulators put their biases in full view. Indeed it is LAW. There are currently no (passenger) cars/light trucks with specifications to run B6 to B100. Can they be modified? Absolutely! Are they legal? No not currently. Are bio diesel fuels being used legally and illegally? Absolutely. Agricultural and construction equipment, etc can legally run up to 100% bio diesel.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited September 2011
    "It is GOOD to be King" -- LOL!

    I call fuel taxes "hidden taxes" because ultimately, we, the consumer, pay them. E.G., price of diesel goes up, the bread truck fuel bill goes up, price of bread goes up.

    I'm not sure I felt discriminated against when I had a diesel car---perhaps a little bit, as I wondered why I was paying MORE than Hummers pay for high test gasoline....but once the economy of operation on my car sunk in, I felt compensated in that regard.

    I object more to the wild speculations in the energy market...these people have nothing on the Somali pirates when it comes to their view of a moral world.

    The big downside of these sudden jumps in fuel prices is that it immediately starts sucking huge amounts of money out of the economy---resulting in less spending, resulting in recession, etc.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    I think on para #2 we do in fact agree. The fuel taxes tables have been posted any number of times.

    I think the BO Potus administration finally has "got it" that despite the efforts to bring the price of fuel to or higher than European levels, aka $10.00 per gal gasolline : it needs to DECREASE even from its current 3.99 per gal levels (I paid this for ULSD @ a Chevron station) They of course do not think any of the open and hidden TAXATION needs to decrease.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited September 2011
    Kind of ironic how all these politicians talk about taxing the rich and then stick it to the middle and lower classes. I think the high cost of fuel has finally caught up with everything we buy. I notice many price increases. The coffee I always buy at Costco was the same price range the last 10 years. Last month it jumped from $12 for 3 lbs to $16.50. CH sugar over the last year went from $4 for 10lbs to $6.12 this week. I am sure that reflects the use of ethanol in Brazil. Avocados from 5 for a dollar to $1.99 each. I see Carter type inflation coming on strong.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    I really do not think one can over emphasize the fact the price of a gal of fuel affects/effects EVERYTHING !!

    So when no less an authority figure as the US Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Chu floats the European fuel scheme ($10.00 per gal fuel trial ballons) this should be down right SCARY. I am guessing the demeanor of a world renoun PHD physicist does not have the intimidation factor of say a DARTH VADER on WALLET CRUSH.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Audi A3 TDI and Audi Q7 TDI accounted for 69% and 45.5% of sales mix, respectively

    Good news, but those are both very low volume cars.

    Let me do some math, I'm curious...

    764 A3, so 527 are TDI
    720 Q7, so 328 are TDI

    CT sold 2087 units with severely restricted supply. That could easily have been 3000+.

    Even if every one was a bare-bones stripper, that's $63 million in sales.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    We should expect that fuel prices won't go DOWN ever again, because it seems that all the "easy oil" has been, or will soon be, pumped.

    But the European model won't work because US citizens don't think the higher taxes on fuel will come back to them (and why should they?) In Europe, they pretty much expect that they do benefit from taxation, and I think in fact that they do in most cases.

    Essentially my view is that the US military umbrella allowed for a European paradise in which Americans are not allowed to live.

    The irony does not escape me when I travel in Europe with my weak dollars.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    I do not know when the MASSIVE US conus energy finds will find its way into the national consciousness, but IF the powers that be let the US citizens benefit from it, fuel prices could literally drop in HALF (almost over night).; aka 4 dollar USLD to 2.00 per gal ULSD.

    On the Europe issue, indeed that has been true for many decades. I am sure you have talked to a few expats. They should cut us a break but alas they actually charge us more for the privilege of propping them (now) ALL UP. Germany is now getting a gllimpse of the realities if they had won WW2.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited September 2011
    Well the US capitalist system has never regarded natural resources of the country as the property of US citizens, so don't hold your breath on that one. We'd have to nationalize the oil industry in order to practice that economic philosophy.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    Or anything else for that matter. Title in perpetuity for most things rests with the "STATE". The rest is fee simple. Pay the fee, get the regulated rights.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    and then the fee goes to the people....oh, wait a minute....

    SO---who do you think will introduce the first diesel sports car? (was there ever one?)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    Must be Audi...though not sure it would be exclusively diesel, maybe the next TT?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Yeah, I think Audi is a darn good guess, although a diesel Z4 from BMW isn't out of the question. The Japanese wouldn't dare, the Americans wouldn't know how, Mercedes wouldn't dream of it, Volvo never made a full production open two seater, the British auto industry is dead (unless you include open wheel racing chassis), the French have done stranger things than that but they aren't keen on open cars, the Italians have all the know-how, so they're a player, and the Koreans---well you never know with those guys but seems not to be in their resume.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    Indeed both guesses are logical and spot on. Audi/VW has both the proven products, resources , ...et al to really pull it off. The VW 4.9 L V-10 diesel was actually tested and marketed in the US (553 # ft?) . The 3.0 L V6 TDI (406 # ft)) with a twin turbo/supercharger would be dynamite and adde 450 to 550# ft?) . The 2.0 L I4 TDI (current work horse) is a proven entity (236# ft). I think Z-4 BMW would benefit the most, as fuel mileage is anemic for a mainliner two seater/coupe/convertible. We already know the BMW 335D gets 36 mpg and it has super car power in its own right @ 425# ft of torque. Seems to me the real issues would be the transmission. Any to all would have to past the BEEF test.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    Well the transmissions from the Audi hot rods must be pretty sturdy. So we could have a quattro turbo diesel two-seater!! The problem might end up not being the transmission, but rather keeping that power on the ground without buttering the roadway with tire rubber.
  • ruking1ruking1 Member Posts: 19,826
    edited September 2011
    I think there is probably more a tendency to modify SPORTS cars. What happens in most cases are the oem's provide just enough power (torque) handling headroom. Depending on how one drives it, sometimes this provided headroom is just barely enough. Additionally, maximum torque is available at relatively (to most gassers) LOW rpm. With mods, it is very easy to exceed.

    So for example, (NOT a sports car) my 03 Jetta TDI is and remains BONE stock. (shooting for ultra high reliability, durability, mpg, mileage, 400,000 miles clutch life, etc.)

    So if I want make mods in the future, i.e., bigger injectors, chip and tune to intergrate, will easily overtake the 5 speed manuals' power handing capabilities. I really need to go from 155# ft (185# ft peak handling) to more like 285 to 300# ft just for a safety margin. This can mean a minimum of V-6 clutch (VW V-6 SACHS) and one or two gear swaps to even a 6 speed upgrade. The BEEFIER transmission upgrade with be the FIRST step.

    What a lot of folks are pleasantly discovering on diesels, if one does not "get into it" and drive normally, fuel mileage actually can improve. I am led to believe on my example, 1-3 mpg BETTER.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    edited September 2011
    The Japanese wouldn't dare

    They're having enough trouble pitching sporty hybrids, e.g. look at CR-Z sales.

    Let's see how the Infiniti M hybrid does, though, it's perhaps the best attempt at a hybrid/sports sedan.

    I'd like to see Subaru try a diesel/sports, and for the reasons you mention above - AWD helps put all that torque down on the pavement.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "The Japanese wouldn't dare..."

    How about the new generation Mazda Miata with the new SkyActiv-D diesel engine mated to a 6-Speed manual?
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    DON'T TEASE ME LIKE THAT!

    Man, that's just cruel! ;)

    HECK YEAH, though, great idea!

    Weight is a minor concern, but the ND is supposed to be lighter to begin with, so it should still be fun.
  • acdiiacdii Member Posts: 753
    My F350 with the 7.3 Powerstroke is a good example of this. Just changing the tuning gained 85 HP and 2 MPG improvement. Drawback, the trans cant handle it, and will need to be upgraded with improved clutches, hardened casing and shafts, and a stronger torque converter, then and only then can bigger injectors or other tuning be done to it. Heck, already blew out the trac-lok rear end on the truck just by tuning it.

    It went from 16 MPG to 18 MPG with the tune, and now is at 19 MPG with a gear swap after blowing the rear end out. Not bad for an 8000# 6 wheel brick.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    edited September 2011
    Wasn't meant to be a tease; I spend a lot of time on Mazda boards (now that I'm a Mazda driver), and the word on the street is that the next generation MX-5 will be endowed with the new SkyActiv-D engine and a significantly improved SkyActiv-MT 6-Speed manual. After having driven any number of Miatas and RX models my question is, "An improved 6-Speed? How does one improve upon perfection?"
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    edited September 2011
    That could be a very risky move for Mazda. The Miata has a tradition of not being messed with. The buying public is fickle. They can turn on you in a flash. You all remember perhaps Porsche being slapped for going water-cooled and front-engined, (but everyone kissed and made up eventually..it did get nasty though, and they kept the original config as well, throughout the flap).

    Or the Mustang II.

    Of course Alfa got away with making the Spider a FWD car, so maybe a Miata could be a diesel. I dunno, there could be a revolt. Consider the Miata demographic for instance. Does it encourage diesel-love? I don't think so.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Member Posts: 72,587
    I'd be happy if they put in a Sky-Activ gasser, to be honest.

    The gas tank is tiny, and will remain tiny, since weight is so important in that small car.

    So the only way to improve range is to add DI, since they're not going to gear it tall.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,481
    But the Miata was never designed to be a long-range vehicle. It's a toy that one uses now and then. I think you'd find few people that have Miatas as primary vehicles, wouldn't you agree? It's a second car, or maybe a Solo or Spec vehicle, things like that.
This discussion has been closed.