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
A better choice might be something like fuelly. Based on 49 Touareg TDIs, owners seem to be averaging somewhere around 23-24 MPG. 49 responses isn't conclusive, but it is far better than you picking one single anonymous person.
That kind of MPG is outstanding for a large SUV. Why tarnish that accomplishment by throwing out wild, easily refutable numbers?
But just posting anecdotal evidence of one or two anonymous people is almost worthless.
I agree completely.
I have an advanced degree in statistical analysis, and I am always entertained when people attempt to use numbers to justify their beliefs, instead of letting the numbers speak for themselves.
Off hand, one of the few times I can see only 2 samples being significant is your birth data and the date you die, and even then, its only significant to you.
As an old stat instructer repeatedly told me back in college... "one or two points on a graph don't signify a trend".
But then based on that, it isn't like you are going to buy 10,000 Acura MDX's or 5,000 TDI's. Like your BD, etc. you are only probably going to buy one and concerned about that ONE, AND what you buy is going to only be significant to YOU.
That single person who reported 32mpg is an outlier - it might even make sense to discard the highest and lowest reported numbers.
I still say it's foolish to assume you will average 30mpg in any 5000+ lb SUV. I'd be happy with 25.
This indicates the Golf typically does better than the EPA estimates and the Prius does worse.
Jokes aside, the advantages of diesels are clear without cherry picking data points.
On that EPA site, one outlier reported 32mpg...maybe that's the guy who lives at the top of Pikes Peak.
Of course, the item YOU purchase is the most significant one to YOU, but its not when you are attempting to project the future outcome of an as-yet unmade purchase.
If I am comparing 2 similar products, and one has a sample of 5 owners with a FE of 20 mpg, and the other has 500 owners reporting a FE of 25, I'm going to have a much higher comfort level that the second item will approach that same FE IF I purchase it.
The more samples one has, the better the chance of approximating reality.
While 1 or 2 samples of dropping a 8 lb bowling ball on your foot many be sufficient to convince you it will hurt, using the same bowling ball at your local bowling lanes for 1 or 2 frames may not be enough samples to let you know that particular weight ball is the best option for you.... when it comes to bowling. You may bowl much more successfully with a lighter or heavier ball.
It is just disingenuous to say that you get 50 mpg and compare that to an average person in a Prius getting 45 mpg. If you had a Prius, it would stand to reason that your abilities would allow you a 25% increase in mpg over the average person. So, in a Prius you should likely see about 56 mpg.
A sample of two would make my statistics teacher laugh pretty hard.
In any case, a half sec or even a full sec .... when comparing mid-sized SUVs, mind you... is nothing. I'd say they are quite comparable no matter who is ahead.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I am far from a so called hyper miler. Nor have I ever said that it was indicative OF an average experience !!! Indeed it was I that said that even I realize getting 38-42 mpg on a GASSER (2004 Honda Civic) is high on the bell shaped curve. It is not a leap to say that of diesels also. However one KEY issue is, I am in tune with each's characteristics, i.e., power curves and drive them accordingly.
You all can believe what you want. But the Touareg TDI sold in the UK is rated at 40.4 MPG combined. Now if my conversion is correct. That would be 33.64 MPG US. That is the detuned version of the TDI sold here. So they are out there. Just not sold here in the land of fruits, nuts and flakes.
http://www.carpages.co.uk/guide/volkswagen/volkswagen-touareg-se-3.0-v6-tdi-204p- s.asp
If you want the fast version of the Touareg you can get a V8 TDI that does 0-62 MPH in 5.8 seconds. And get you almost 32 MPG on the highway. Face it we get sold the dregs. You can have your foo foo MDX, I would not waste room in my garage with one.
http://www.carpages.co.uk/guide/volkswagen/volkswagen-touareg-altitude-4.2-v8-td- i.asp
Now the range I have able to get has been interesting 44 mpg to 62 mpg.
http://www.sciencemadesimple.net/fuel_economy.php
To see just how little relation European fuel economy ratings have to the figures on U.S. window stickers, let's look at the Volkswagen Golf TDI, a diesel compact sold in Europe and America.
VW's British Web site lists its fuel economy at 46.3 m.p.g. in the city, 68.9 on the highway and 58.9 in combined driving. The same car, with the same engine and transmission, rated 30 m.p.g. city/42 highway and 34 combined in U.S. EPA tests.
Part of it is their gallon is 20% bigger. The rest is completely different testing methods.
Give the MDX taller gearing to allow the TDI to keep up, and the MDX would get better mileage.
Plus I'm paying more for diesel to begin with.
Base price $42,930 compared to $46,875, also.
Get a diesel because you want diesel characteristics, not because one anonymous guy claims he got 32mpg.
Maybe ours are also emissions choked? That could explain some of the difference.
You have determined the desired outcome and now want to justify your results.
Here's the correct answer....
If you don't have enough samples to make an accurate prediction, then you don't make the prediction.
That's exactly what professional statistical gathering organizations, including CR, do.
Basing my mpg estimate on how the FE will be for every driver in a car by driving 100 miles is meaningless, just as my basing the FE of a fleet of "cloned" cars upon the FE of a single vehicle with a single driver is meaningless...
Don't take my word for it.... Ask any high-school math teacher that teaches statistics.
Voting polls don't predict results for a presidential election after interviewing 10 voters at a single location...">
Don't forget the 2009 Jetta Sportswagen TDI holds the mileage record for cross country travel. And the Touareg TDI holds the record for fastest time from the tip of South America to the most Northern spot in the USA. If the MDX was worth a hoot Honda could enter in the Dakar and show VW what for. hahahaha
Right now it looks like Mercedes will offer the first decent sized SUV with a 4 cylinder diesel that will get well over 30 MPG on the highway.
I wouldn't. I can't stand that they run out of steam so early. I like an engine that revs a little. Plus, VW and Audi have to increase their reliability a lot before I'll consider anything they make.
Ah, that is the key here. I hate engines that have to get over 3000 RPM to produce any power. I loved driving the X5 with diesel. It just grunted and jumped from under 1000 RPM. I like cruising at low RPM and not have to listen to a screaming engine to maintain 75 MPH up hill. Different strokes for different folks. Give me the 700 mile range between fillups as well.
For me, a normally aspirated V6 gas engine is probably the best compromise of everything.
Then again, diesel fuel costs more, the vehicle is more expensive, and historically diesels have required more maintenance.... Probably because they lasted for so many more miles. Diesels are most efficient when they reach their normal operating temp, which doesn't happen in brief 5-10 mile trips.
Diesels make a lot of sense for one who travels 100K plus highway miles/ year. Running at a constant, lower rpm is the "sweet spot" for a diesel. And again, historically speaking, one can get a lot more miles out of a diesel engine as compared to a gas fired engine.
I've considered diesels in tha past, but my driving profile isn't suitable to the historic strengths of a diesel.
That is precisely the opposite reason why I prefer and use diesels because my driving profiles are. Not that gassers can't do it. Our driving is in the historical strengths of the diesels we have.
To be fair short trips are not good for gassers either.
"
I don't think holds true for the passenger fleet. Don't recall seeing any links to that effect at least.
My stat on that is Irv Gordon, and his 1966 Volvo 1800S that's pushing 2.6 million miles. 1966 is getting sort of historic.
Americans making cars last longer (telegram.com)
Master Vehicle mechanic and Heavy truck mechanic. I have 2 diesel rabbits that both get 55 mpg and NO I WILL NOT sell them.
03 Jetta TDI is standard in Europe with a 6 speed manual (one more gear and gears matched accordingly) 1.9 T diesel engine and .205 fuel injectors (larger)
In addition to the dumbing down to American standards, (yes it costs more money to give you a lousier product), the American version is standard with a 5 speed transmission and .184 fuel injectors (smaller, this and more mandated by the EPA) )
So as one can see it is hard to compare if you can not see it or drive it side by side. So not only does the European version get BETTER mpg 52 vs 50, it has a more powerful motor (10 hp more and 27# ft of torque more) and additional gear. So which one do you think I would rather have? Now I have not lived at all with the European version as it is not allowed in this country. Or not that I am dissatisfied with 50 mpg and the American Jetta TDI version.
I can tell you that for "like miles" my 04 Civic took more maintenance and cost more than the TDI, given the same purposes (commute) ( $975.00 vs $600.00)
so you know, you read enough longterm tests on TDIs and you "get the picture".
My response for the 2011 Jetta TDI's 35.3 mpg and for a 2009 Jetta TDI is that if I got 35.3 mpg, I would think something direly wrong with the car. The significance of the 2009 vs 2010, 2011, 2012 is the gearing on those is geared more for mpg than the 2009 (optimized if one will). But if OTHERS got that, it is WELL within ranges expressed.