Edmunds Members - Cars and Conversations (Archived)

driver100

carnaught said:

Bon voyage Driver. Keep in touch, and post pics. if you can.

Thanks carnaught...I'll do what I can. I will only have my Samsung tablet with me which is almost useless for doing anything...what a pain. I guess it is ok for traveling, but few people over 40 can master a Galaxy Tablet.
I may use it as an E-reader if I run out of books!

henryn

suydam said:

It's true, only time tells what kind of mileage you get. I've had cars that got significantly less mpg than claimed (I'm looking at you, '04 Mazda6 wagon) and some that got much better. But all things being equal, I'm generally looking to improve mpg with a new purchase. Not just to save $$ personally, but also to do my part for the environment. That's why fudging MPG numbers infuriates me. Consumers should have good info to make their choices. In the last few years I've found that the EPA numbers are pretty accurate and even underestimate the mpg.

That has been my experience as well. I don’t think cheating on the mileage numbers is prevalent or widespread at all. Certainly some few, but not many.

I really do believe cheating on emissions tests is going a whole nother ball game. I fully expect the Feds to hit VW very hard for this. In reality, they kinda/sorta have to. If they allow this to go unpunished or relatively unpunished, the cheating will spread. And the clean air standards do work, they have made things better.

In 1971, when I first moved to Houston, I actually experienced acid rain. When the wind blew out of the southeast (ship channel, oil refineries), and it was a soft rain, it would actually burn the skin (mildly) if you were outdoors in the rain. Turns out, the EPA did not have the ability to monitor air pollution when it rained. So the refineries would save up their worst pollutants, and release them all at once when it rained.

oldfarmer50 said:

Who would voluntary submit to having your car detuned? Especially if that made gas milage suffer.

tyguy said:

Registration. States can block the owners' annual registration renewal unless they have proof the update has been completed. The owner could always pay for an aftermarket tune after the fact to get around it, but then fines could be imposed if caught. Plus companies caught making or selling the non-compliant tune could be shut down. That'd be unlikely due to how difficult it is to police.

Interesting thought. A few years back, I had a Super Duty Ford with the big block diesel engine. There were aftermarket tuners that would nearly double the horsepower. Basically, any turbocharged engine is highly susceptible to aftermarket tuners. I have been looking at new trucks, and it would appear there are several companies selling “tunes” for the EcoBoost engines.

robr2

All this talk of fuel economy makes me think my car buying. I've been shopping used vehicles to replace my Passat. The Passat has averaged 24.6 mpg over the past 10 years using the required premium fuel at an average of $3.16 per gallon. Since I now travel about 1500 miles per month on business, fuel economy is paramount. But since I now travel about 1500 miles per month on business, I want to love my car.

I've looked at:

2014 Mazda 6 - gets a combined 32 on regular, 40 highway ($22K)
2014 Fusion - gets a combined 26 on regular. 33 highway ($17K)
2013 S60 - gets a combined 24 on regular, 30 highway. ($24K)

and the current

2005 Passat - gets a combined 23 on premium, 28 highway.

The Mazda is a no brainer in terms of fuel economy. But the 19" wheels make me cringe at the thought of replacement. The Fusion would allow me to buy a whole lot of gas vis a vis the Mazda and Volvo but it's a pretty bland car. The S60 has a wonderful cockpit and is CPO (basically bumper to bumper to 100K miles) but the fuel economy is not much better than the Passat.

Of course, I'm leaning towards the S60 even though it has the lowest mpg.

isellhondas

If you do the math getting 2 MPG better mileage isn't going to save anyone a lot of money.

suydam

But if all vehicles improved by 2 mpg it would save a lot of pollution costs.

stever

I'm probably getting 19 or 20 combined on the current minivan. Going to ~27 combined would be a nice jump.

If I was already getting 25ish, then it's almost a why bother kind of thing.

driver100

robr2 said:

All this talk of fuel economy makes me think my car buying.
I've looked at:

2014 Mazda 6 - gets a combined 32 on regular, 40 highway ($22K)
2014 Fusion - gets a combined 26 on regular. 33 highway ($17K)
2013 S60 - gets a combined 24 on regular, 30 highway. ($24K)

and the current

2005 Passat - gets a combined 23 on premium, 28 highway.

.

Of course, I'm leaning towards the S60 even though it has the lowest mpg.

So, using highway driving the Mazda uses 37.5 gallons to go 1500 miles @$2.50 a gal = $93.75
The S60 uses 50 gal to go 1500 miles @ $2.50 gal = $125.
The Passat will use 54 gallons of premium fuel which I est $2.80 = $151.20.

I guess over a year it could add up. But, looking at it weekly, the difference between highest and lowest is about $14. Is that $14 a week going to make a big difference in your life?

The difference between the newer cars, the Mazda and S60 is about $32, or less than $8 a week! Less than a coffee a day, less than a bottle of wine a week, etc.

Buy the car you like best!

[Deleted User]

stever said:

I'm probably getting 19 or 20 combined on the current minivan. Going to ~27 combined would be a nice jump.

If I was already getting 25ish, then it's almost a why bother kind of thing.

We're experiencing something similar by jumping from 18 combined average mpg in the minivan to about 29 average combined mpg in the 2015 Outback. It is indeed nice.

laurasdada

Friday morning, Costco PUG $2.49.
Friday evening, Costco PUG $2.54.
Saturday morning, Costco PUG $2.49.
Costco RUG holding steady at $1.98.
What's with the seemingly hourly fluctuation with PUG??? And, of course, I purchased at the "height" of the price swings. Perhaps they're gouging folks heading out for a weekend road trip?

Also, In n' Out is a nice burger. And, given the price of everything in So Cal, not a bad deal at all. Having written that, 5 Guys wins for me. And my father in Santa Monica. Went there for lunch after touring UCLA. 5 Guys is becoming like Dunkin' Donuts around here, one every few miles down the road. And, now they're doing shakes! Mmmmm.

oldfarmer50

henryn said:

suydam said:

It's true, only time tells what kind of mileage you get. I've had cars that got significantly less mpg than claimed (I'm looking at you, '04 Mazda6 wagon) and some that got much better. But all things being equal, I'm generally looking to improve mpg with a new purchase. Not just to save $$ personally, but also to do my part for the environment. That's why fudging MPG numbers infuriates me. Consumers should have good info to make their choices. In the last few years I've found that the EPA numbers are pretty accurate and even underestimate the mpg.

That has been my experience as well. I don’t think cheating on the mileage numbers is prevalent or widespread at all. Certainly some few, but not many.

I really do believe cheating on emissions tests is going a whole nother ball game. I fully expect the Feds to hit VW very hard for this. In reality, they kinda/sorta have to. If they allow this to go unpunished or relatively unpunished, the cheating will spread. And the clean air standards do work, they have made things better.

In 1971, when I first moved to Houston, I actually experienced acid rain. When the wind blew out of the southeast (ship channel, oil refineries), and it was a soft rain, it would actually burn the skin (mildly) if you were outdoors in the rain. Turns out, the EPA did not have the ability to monitor air pollution when it rained. So the refineries would save up their worst pollutants, and release them all at once when it rained.

oldfarmer50 said:

Who would voluntary submit to having your car detuned? Especially if that made gas milage suffer.

tyguy said:

Registration. States can block the owners' annual registration renewal unless they have proof the update has been completed. The owner could always pay for an aftermarket tune after the fact to get around it, but then fines could be imposed if caught. Plus companies caught making or selling the non-compliant tune could be shut down. That'd be unlikely due to how difficult it is to police.

Interesting thought. A few years back, I had a Super Duty Ford with the big block diesel engine. There were aftermarket tuners that would nearly double the horsepower. Basically, any turbocharged engine is highly susceptible to aftermarket tuners. I have been looking at new trucks, and it would appear there are several companies selling “tunes” for the EcoBoost engines.

Are cars exempt from pollution laws after a certain period? I mean I can't see a model T complying with any modern regulations. More to the point, I watch car restoration and modification shows and they slap carburetors on modified engines which have to exceed the modern pollution standards. I know my Lincoln can pass inspection with the check engine light on so is it only 1996 or newer that the government cares about?

explorerx4

@oldfarmer, In CT car are tested every other year through being 25 years old. My Mustang is 24 years, so it passed it's final test.

robr2

Here in MA, if passenger vehicles and light duty diesel trucks have an OBD port (MY 2001), then they have to pass the emissions levels for their year of manufacturer.

stickguy

whew. back from a week away (well, 9 days now) and finally caught up from 200 posts and a name change.

had comments along the way. forgot most of them.

Oh, GG: does the IF still have that goiter on the floor in front of the gas pedal (for the AWD?) I liked the car in a lot of ways, but that was a total deal breaker for me. Though a RWD was fine, just did not exist in NJ! I had to contort my leg around the dumb thing. Horribly uncomfortable. I honestly couldn't see how anyone could buy one.

5 guys has great burgers. and fries. Just horribly unhealthy!

good luck on all the moves. I want to relo soon, but given my wife and her "collecting" tendencies (meaning we got a lotta stuff), getting moved may be too much to conceive of.

Ab, thought of you last week. one of the stations at our hotel in Bermuda was the fox station out of Miami, so I watched the news most nights. Saw you were getting pounded daily by bands of heavy rain. And that there were a lot of bad drivers down there. Scary place!

too many stories on these diesel cars. Don't think I would ever buy one.

graphicguy

STICK....tested an IS a couple of times. Didn't notice anything on the floor in front of the gas pedal. Actually found the interior quite comfortable, as was the C300 and TLX.

stickguy

really? Not sure on the recent redesign, but I know on the first generation AWD that was a goiter the size of a softball (well, seemed that big to my) sticking out of the center tunnel, making you twist your leg around it to reach the gas. My son noticed it too and found it awful.

henryn

Here in Texas, emissions testing is only required in 17 counties.

"Motorist’s safety is a top priority in Texas; as a result, vehicles registered in Texas are required to pass an annual inspection to ensure compliance with safety standards. While safety inspections are required throughout the state, emissions testing is required of vehicles inspected in 17 Texas counties to comply with federally mandated clean air requirements. Vehicle inspections are performed at Official Vehicle Inspection Stations licensed by DPS. "

Those 17 counties are basically Houston and Dallas and the surrounding suburbs.

snakeweasel

henryn said:

Here in Texas, emissions testing is only required in 17 counties.

"Motorist’s safety is a top priority in Texas; as a result, vehicles registered in Texas are required to pass an annual inspection to ensure compliance with safety standards. While safety inspections are required throughout the state, emissions testing is required of vehicles inspected in 17 Texas counties to comply with federally mandated clean air requirements. Vehicle inspections are performed at Official Vehicle Inspection Stations licensed by DPS. "

Those 17 counties are basically Houston and Dallas and the surrounding suburbs.

In Illinois we have 10 counties where emission tests are required and they are the Chicago metro and St. Louis metro areas (of course the areas of those metro areas in Illinois).

oldfarmer50

snakeweasel said:

henryn said:

Here in Texas, emissions testing is only required in 17 counties.

"Motorist’s safety is a top priority in Texas; as a result, vehicles registered in Texas are required to pass an annual inspection to ensure compliance with safety standards. While safety inspections are required throughout the state, emissions testing is required of vehicles inspected in 17 Texas counties to comply with federally mandated clean air requirements. Vehicle inspections are performed at Official Vehicle Inspection Stations licensed by DPS. "

Those 17 counties are basically Houston and Dallas and the surrounding suburbs.

In Illinois we have 10 counties where emission tests are required and they are the Chicago metro and St. Louis metro areas (of course the areas of those metro areas in Illinois).

In NY emissions testing is required at each annual inspection only 1996 and newer have the computers to interface with the state. That's why I'm wondering if you can do whatever you want with something older.

dino001

We have no emission testing in Florida. Yeah, you really love that when you get stuck behind some clunker spewing burnt oil.

qbrozen

robr2 said:

I've looked at:

2014 Mazda 6 - gets a combined 32 on regular, 40 highway ($22K)
2014 Fusion - gets a combined 26 on regular. 33 highway ($17K)
2013 S60 - gets a combined 24 on regular, 30 highway. ($24K)

Of course, I'm leaning towards the S60 even though it has the lowest mpg.

Don't pay $24k for the volvo. There are plenty, even on volvo's website, for far less than that.

robr2

qbrozen said:

robr2 said:

I've looked at:

2014 Mazda 6 - gets a combined 32 on regular, 40 highway ($22K)
2014 Fusion - gets a combined 26 on regular. 33 highway ($17K)
2013 S60 - gets a combined 24 on regular, 30 highway. ($24K)

Of course, I'm leaning towards the S60 even though it has the lowest mpg.

Don't pay $24k for the volvo. There are plenty, even on volvo's website, for far less than that.

Here in New England, CPO S60 T5 FWD Premiers are in the $23-24 range. The one I saw at $22K had been sold about 30 minutes before I arrived. They had another with fewer miles (9K vs 15K) but they wanted $24K. I'll keep shopping.

mako1a

I got back from my West Virginia camping/boating trip about 10 days ago. It didn't go as expected, but when you're with a friend from grade school it's still fun.

The pontoon boat rental ($400/day) didn't happen as they were going to drain the lake early due to a lack of rain and low O2 levels in the river. That meant not only opening the outflow valves, but the sluice gates as well so all the boats had to be pulled leaving us boatless. Who knew WVirginians were such ecologists.

The boat was supposed to be my treat and the camper and food was my buddys treat. We had great chili, potato salad, Halyupkis, Big Lous Lasagna and Chipped Ham sandwiches (I can't get them here in Va). I did go in the water a bit, but didn't get far without the boat. Mustang got all dusty on the gravel roads, but rain washed it all away.

dino001

That Volkswagen scandal looks serious. I only wonder if they also cheated in Europe. There were some indications of numbers not adding up (ever increasing pollution standards vs. measured pollution in cities). Seems like "special software" game may have been played there, too, not just VAG. This thing can be bigger than any of us could imagine. I hope it will also debunk the "superclean diesel" myths that some like to perpetuate. Will see, it's going to be interesting. VAG 20% down today, may not be enough.

andres3

snakeweasel said:

abacomike said:

@andres3:

Can we call a truce please on speed!  I am tired of the bickering.  Enough is enough!!!

I'll agree to that, I had a few more posts to reply to andres3 but I'll let it slid, I don't think he is interested in the facts anyway.

Anyway I have been out doing some preliminary looking today.

Just for the record, It is I who has proven to use facts in my arguments, and you who has proven to choose to believe in fantasy and insurance backed and based rhetoric. But I agree to a truce based on that observation.

andres3

tyguy said:

stever said:

imidazol97 said:

I see a whole lot of problems and irony with all the VW/Audis out there polluting more than they should have been doing. And the fix is to lower the fuel economy from what I'm reading.

How many other companies fudged on the fuel mileage vs emissions for tests.

I don't want to steal @houdini1's thunder but "Apparently, when the EPA tested these vehicles, the emissions systems were working as advertised, and those results were used to calculate the mpg. If this is the case, the EPA estimates should not change."

The other mpg fudging companies are Kia/Hyundai and Ford.

Good info.  I think this case involves more than fudging, though. In the mpg fudging, there was a different interpretation of testing methodology.  In the case of VW/Audi, they wrote a set of code to detect when the car was being emission tested, and intentionally changed the emission performance to provide false data during the test.  The actual results in real world testing are up to 40 times worse than the falsified test.  That's much more egregious in my opinion.

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

andres3

nyccarguy said:

@andres3 - since you just bought a VW Golf Wagon TDI, this affects you.  What do you want out of this if the recall significantly reduces your TDI's gas mileage?  What if it doesn't pass emissions next year?

I wouldn't do anything that would drop my gas mileage; I'd refuse any service that would increase my fuel consumption. When it's time to have it smogged in 6 years, if the test has changed to find the "fault's" in the program, CA has a 7 year, 100,000 mile emissions warranty. I'd expect VW to make the car pass without lowering its performance; or increase its performance to offset the additional emissions restrictions free of charge. I guess the **** will hit the fan at the end of the emissions warranty, or the first smog check; whichever comes first.

robr2

andres3 said:

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

I think that MPG is the issue. I've read that in order for the VW 4 cylinder diesel to pass NOX testing it does so at a reduced fuel economy. Without the better fuel economy then VW diesels do not offer as MPG advantage over hybrids or even some regular gas vehicles.

IMHO, the fix for this will probably be the addition of an AdBlue system.

andres3

ab348 said:

explorerx4 said:

@ab348,
I'm not implying anything. Cadillac got busted for the same thing, installing software to fool the emissions testing.

I assume you are referring to the 1991-era ECUs. Long time ago.

You could use that same argument for VW. After all, this software trick dates back to models many years ago. Therefore, the "offense" was committed long ago; it just took awhile for the EPA to catch on

andres3

robr2 said:

andres3 said:

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

I think that MPG is the issue. I've read that in order for the VW 4 cylinder diesel to pass NOX testing it does so at a reduced fuel economy. Without the better fuel economy then VW diesels do not offer as MPG advantage over hybrids or even some regular gas vehicles.

IMHO, the fix for this will probably be the addition of an AdBlue system.

If MPG are reduced, I think you will have a low take-rate on the "software update." People will simply choose to ignore this "EPA issue."

stever

A reporter is looking to talk with a VW diesel owner affected by the recall. Please email PR@edmunds.com today, 9/21/15, if you would like to share your perspective.

andres3

suydam said:

1 mile, no, but 2 or 3, it would figure in.

Or 1 extra MPG, plus an extra 40 or so horses would do it. Better acceleration/performance AND better mileage; now that's a win win, even if it's 1 MPG and .2 seconds to 60 MPH.

I saw on another board/forum a Mercedes guy trying to argue that the new S4 which is going to be MORE powerful and significantly lighter (around 260 lbs. I've read) would not be significantly faster than non-AMG models he liked. Based on manufacturer provided data (if you believe they are equally honest companies), the new S4 will get a couple extra MPG while getting to 60 MPH .2 seconds faster. The more neutral guy argued based on some historical experience with Audi underrating HP, and many past models outdoing the specified 0-60 times (like the current S4); there was no reason to believe the new Audi wouldn't be both faster, lighter (better handling) and more fuel efficient. For some reason the Mercedes guy didn't want to admit his preference was solely based on badge and subjective looks, so he argued in vain that the performance was "similar or the same."

andres3

tyguy said:

oldfarmer50 said:

Who would voluntary submit to having your car detuned? Especially if that made gas milage suffer.

Registration. States can block the owners' annual registration renewal unless they have proof the update has been completed. The owner could always pay for an aftermarket tune after the fact to get around it, but then fines could be imposed if caught. Plus companies caught making or selling the non-compliant tune could be shut down. That'd be unlikely due to how difficult it is to police.

Registration at least in CA is only tied to smog in year 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and so on (and when you sell after year 6). Not that the gov't hasn't ever tried to make a non-grandfathered retroactive regulation and rule before, but it would be hard for them to change the rules of the game after the game has already started.

It's the reason classic muscle cars still exist in CA. How long will that last? If your car is old enough, you don't need to smog it anymore.

oldfarmer50

robr2 said:

andres3 said:

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

I think that MPG is the issue. I've read that in order for the VW 4 cylinder diesel to pass NOX testing it does so at a reduced fuel economy. Without the better fuel economy then VW diesels do not offer as MPG advantage over hybrids or even some regular gas vehicles.

IMHO, the fix for this will probably be the addition of an AdBlue system.

My new school bus has some weird pollution injection system they call DEF which puts some liquid into the exhaust system. It has it's own fuel tank and a seperate gauge on the dash. Don't have any idea how it works but all the mechanics say pollution controls and diesels don't belong together.

robr2

andres3 said:

robr2 said:

andres3 said:

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

I think that MPG is the issue. I've read that in order for the VW 4 cylinder diesel to pass NOX testing it does so at a reduced fuel economy. Without the better fuel economy then VW diesels do not offer as MPG advantage over hybrids or even some regular gas vehicles.

IMHO, the fix for this will probably be the addition of an AdBlue system.

If MPG are reduced, I think you will have a low take-rate on the "software update." People will simply choose to ignore this "EPA issue."

I wouldn't be surprised to find that the states with emissions testing will simply fail cars based on VIN's provided by VW that have not had the recall done. Further, the states could block registration of non repaired vehicles again based on the VIN list.

Interesting new twist - VW had been approached by the EPA a year ago and had stalled them saying there was an issue with the EPA's testing procedure. Now the EU is letting the EPA take the lead on investigating VW with regards to fudging testing for European markets.

qbrozen

jpp5862 said:

Our new home came with a tankless water heater, by far one of the best energy saving features ever.

Can I ask how big your home is and how many people live there?

I want to make the switch in our new house, but my installation company of choice tells me it isn't all it is cracked up to be. He says they have installed them and had people call to switch back because it can't keep up with demand. He also said something about, even with higher volume units, the natural gas coming into the home can't flow fast enough to get full effect from the unit.

dino001

oldfarmer50 said:

robr2 said:

andres3 said:

Wait, if the vehicle gets the same fuel economy/gas mileage as before, then no harm has been done to the customers. It is simply the EPA looking foolish for doing arbitrary inaccurate tests. The purpose of a test is to pass it; VW/Audi appears to have done that.

Playing devil's advocate here. However, a manufacturer claiming inflated miles per gallon is directly stealing from a customer's wallet.

I think that MPG is the issue. I've read that in order for the VW 4 cylinder diesel to pass NOX testing it does so at a reduced fuel economy. Without the better fuel economy then VW diesels do not offer as MPG advantage over hybrids or even some regular gas vehicles.

IMHO, the fix for this will probably be the addition of an AdBlue system.

My new school bus has some weird pollution injection system they call DEF which puts some liquid into the exhaust system. It has it's own fuel tank and a seperate gauge on the dash. Don't have any idea how it works but all the mechanics say pollution controls and diesels don't belong together.

That's probably urea injection system, similar thing to those in Benz and Passat engines. DEF stands for Diesel Exhaust Fluid, also known as AdBlue (TM). Hense Blue Tec, I guess.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_exhaust_fluid

stever

Friend of mine was talking tankless this morning with me on IM. I had to get a new water heater back in January and the bill would have been at least double for a tankless. Our house is 1,700 sq. ft., propane, and the connection is near the outside wall adjacent to the garage and close to where the existing water heater is, so very doable from a physical plant standpoint. But the numbers didn't work well. And reviews are all over the map.

Spent thirty minutes searching for that quote and haven't been able to find it. Found my whole house "file" in my recycle bin on the desktop so I guess it's a good thing I went searching.

Jalopnik has a good article on Dieselgate.

wlbrown9

qbrozen said:

jpp5862 said:

Our new home came with a tankless water heater, by far one of the best energy saving features ever.

Can I ask how big your home is and how many people live there?

I want to make the switch in our new house, but my installation company of choice tells me it isn't all it is cracked up to be. He says they have installed them and had people call to switch back because it can't keep up with demand. He also said something about, even with higher volume units, the natural gas coming into the home can't flow fast enough to get full effect from the unit.

I just replaced a 25 year old 50 Gallon natural gas water heater, Memphis area. $1250 total by a local plumber. Could probably have gotten a quote from Lowe's or HD like my other one 10 years ago, but this plumber covered everything including any unexpected issued popping up during installation (like the vent pipe he needed to adjust and had to make two trips up on the roof because the collar had been heavily tarred and attached with three screws).

I understand tankless requires quite a bit larger gas pipe which would increase the installation. Also, gas prices are cheap at this time. I have 2 - 50 gallon with standing pilot lights. Looks as if those 2 average at most $25/month, at least during the summer when no gas usage by the furnaces. I don't see how I could save enough on NG to ever break even. BTW, 2 adults in the house most of the time. Your mileage may vary if you have larger families.

stever

That's about what the new water heater cost me here, installed. The Lowe's quote I got was worse. These puppies have gotten pricey.

ab348

Back in '06 I needed to replace my water heater as I was converting to gas from heating oil and installing a gas furnace. I figured either a regular gas tank-type water heater or a tankless gas unit would be the way to go. Back then at least, nobody locally wanted to touch a tankless. They said they were highly stressed units, for want of a better term - that when you called for hot water, they needed a big flame and that there were doubts about how long the unit would last under that kind of stress. In my case nobody recommended a regular gas model either. They said that with just me in the house, the most cost-effective thing was a well-insulated electric tank since my demands for hot water were low. So that's what I got. I expect I will need to replace it fairly soon since it is now 9 years old. But it has worked well.

imidazol97

stever said:

Jalopnik has a good article on Dieselgate.

Great article: it's not written with the PC usually reserved for some car companies in cases like this.

"Yes. Dealers have been told by VW not to sell whatever remaining 2015 TDI cars are on lots. The EPA will also not grant VW a “certificate of conformity” for the 2016 cars, so they cannot be sold either."

"What does this mean for diesel in the U.S.?

"It’s really, really bad.

"Since the days of soot-blasting Mercedes-Benzes and horrendous Oldsmobiles, diesel has struggled with widespread adoption on passenger cars in America. While a relatively small number of buyers swear by diesels, they’ve never really hit mainstream success in this country thanks to everything from fewer filling stations to higher fuel prices and environmental concerns. The VW Clean Diesels were supposed to change the latter."

But here the PC comes back a llittle:
"I thought these were good cars, what happened?

"They’re just not as clean as they were billed, and now they represent a bunch of huge, costly headaches for VW."

Wrong. They are polluting and fixing will likely reduce that wonderful mileage and power. (My opinion.)

"What pollutants are we talking about?

"Specifically, nitrogen oxides, or NOx. They contribute to smog, particulate matter and a wide range of health problems for certain people, which is why they’re so heavily regulated in emissions. Via the EPA:

" NOx pollution contributes to nitrogen dioxide, ground-level ozone, and fine particulate matter. Exposure to these pollutants has been linked with a range of serious health effects, including increased asthma attacks and other respiratory illnesses that can be serious enough to send people to the hospital. Exposure to ozone and particulate matter have also been associated with premature death due to respiratory-related or cardiovascular-related effects. Children, the elderly, and people with pre-existing respiratory disease are particularly at risk for health effects of these pollutants."

Will this be handled by other sites with the same vim, vigor, and vinegar with which the GM switch recall has been treated? LOL.

And if a company will use trick software for the small diesel, will they have used it for their gas engine testing?

As someone I worked with used to say, "A dog doesn't change its spots."

stever

You can't spell noxious without NOx.

btw, our off-grid friends have tankless and theirs works well. Small house, one indoor bath. They don't have plumbing in the second "bath" out back. :-)

robr2

I'm going to look at tankless as my current WH is about 8 years old. I installed this one and the one before that.

From what I understand, one MAY need a larger gas pipe but only a plumber determine if you do. The biggest issue is usually the need to raise the incoming water temp from 40-70 degrees to 100-120 degrees. If you live in the north, incoming water can be very low during the winter and that will affect the size of the unit needed.

Some systems now use a small holding tank (10-20 gallons) before the tankless in order to keep a small reservoir of "hot" water ready for use. But since the water doesn't have to be kept at 120 degrees, it is much more efficient.

In my case, going tankless will allow me to abandon my chimney as the water heater is the only device still using it.

driver100

RE; VW

Makes me wonder if certain car companies have been caught doing stuff, Kia, Hyundai, Honda, Toyota, Jeep, GM and now VW, how many have done stuff and not been caught?

Also, what kind of thinking would risk an $18 Billion penalty, and the loss of confidence from the buying public?

I always say in business, honesty is the best policy, once you lose your credibility it is hard to get it back. But, people will go back and memories for this type of thing are short.

I just wonder if it is part of the executives...do what you have to in order to make it through another quarter so we won't get tossed out...and meanwhile, build up our buy out package!

(leave for airport at 5 p,m,)

dino001

I think it had to do a lot with the execs thinking in terms of their one-two year prospect rather than company 10-20 year prospect. It's also because so far any wrongdoing seems to get settled using company money, not execs' money and/or freedom. The government always vows to change it, but they also last only for a few years and those regulators often get jobs with the industries they regulate. Prosecutors sometimes go after it, but only to the extent it makes their name and gets them elected to higher offices - then it all goes back to the same old.

ab348

I suspect they (VW) will try to find a fall guy/gal, a single person whom they can pin this on. It would likely be a senior-level engineer or engineering exec, not the corporate execs who will all do their best Sgt Shultz impression. And in fairness, in a massive company like VW there are lots of things that get decided that nobody else beyond a certain circle may ever know about.

imidazol97

Maybe we'll see the "randy" grandmas ads from VW/Audi where they're reminding people that VW/Audi cheated in their cars and that people need to get their cars detuned with software updates to avoid polluting our atmosphere and killing women and children. LOL

ab348

Question for the mods/Edmunds staff:

When I click on an outside link (say, on Twitter) to an Edmunds article, for the last few weeks I often get an ugly overlay on the bottom of the resulting page that is titled "Edmunds UDM Seed Segment" in what almost looks like Comic Sans font. It gives a bunch of checkboxes as if for a search. Why? How to make it permanently vanish?

tommister2

ab348 said:

Question for the mods/Edmunds staff:

When I click on an outside link (say, on Twitter) to an Edmunds article, for the last few weeks I often get an ugly overlay on the bottom of the resulting page that is titled "Edmunds UDM Seed Segment" in what almost looks like Comic Sans font. It gives a bunch of checkboxes as if for a search. Why? How to make it permanently vanish?

Same here. Glad you brought it up.

stever

That issue was reported in recent weeks. Not sure why it hasn't been fixed. It seems to be growing...