Even in Europe that supposedly loves diesel, gasoline powered motors make up for nearly 70% of the sales. Why do you think that is true?
I don't think it is true, here are the facts. Diesel IS clearly the superior fuel for the ICE
In Europe, annual diesel sales have reached about 5.8 million and are expected to rise to almost 7 million by 2005, according to the investment bank Schroder Salomon Smith Barney.
That is 40% of all new cars, set to rise to 45%.
And that is a modest estimate. Some experts predict that diesels will outsell petrol cars in Europe by 2005.
That's a purely ECONOMIC phenomenon !! It's just because a diesel that gets 35 MPG and with diesel costing 20 cents less per gallon will save you about $150 a year in fuel costs over a comparable petrol model.
And diesel cars are already prevalent, so there is no "anti diesel culture" like we have in the USA.
And their air is already putrid anyway in most of the largest cities, so the diesel exhaust has a nice home !! It's not because Euros are "so much smarter" and have recognized the "clear superiority" of diesel as a fuel .....
i drive a 1998 jetta tdi. I know everyone here obviously thinks diesels are "dirty". The truth is the U.S. diesel is very poor quality. Diesel fuel needs a high cetane rating. Cetane is basically the opposite of octane (the higher the number the easier it burns). With low cetane levels our diesel doesnt burn completely and makes for bad emission. Once the new low sulphur diesel comes ot in 2007, u will c much cleaner diesels
Welcome to the forum. It is good to have another voice of reason in this ongoing debate. Especially those with first hand knowledge of diesel cars. Many here would like to reduce our independence on foriegn oil. Yet they would do anything necessary to hang on to the old "gas" technology. Including the overly complex gas hybrids. They just can't let go of the big HP produced by the gas engine. They love that 0-60 rush. For me the 50-70 acceleration is more practical. That is where the modern diesels shine.
Whatever sales diesels are mustering in Europe is primarily due to cheaper cost of fuel. As of now, even in that market, gasoline rules (if people can afford it, they seem to like gasoline, otherwise why would you see a higher percentage of buyers going for it?).
otherwise why would you see a higher percentage of buyers going for it?
Could it be that the cars are not available in the biggest market for high mileage cars? MB and VW are having no problem selling their diesel cars in the 45 states they are allowed into. Maybe this lawsuit between CARB and the EPA will open that door back up. Right now you will pay new price for a used VW TDI in CA. They are very easy to sell here when they get the required 7500 miles on them. A loophole in the CA law. Hard to imagine eh?
Whatever sales diesels are mustering in Europe is primarily due to cheaper cost of fuel
You could not be more incorrect. The price of diesel in the UK is higher than gas. They are selling diesels in the UK at a very good rate. Why do you think your beloved Honda went to all the trouble of building a diesel engine from the ground up. They were not able to sell any cars in the EU. They had to put other diesel engines into the Civic to get any sales. I am happy, I think the i-CDTI is a great piece of engineering. I am not sure why it took Honda so long to see the light on which fuel was superior. I am just glad they did and would be on an Odyssey with i-CDTI in a heartbeat, if they ever get that auto transmission working correctly.
I knew that was coming. Does it matter? In some of your arguments against hybrids, it doesn't.
But if diesels are hot and everybody wants them, you would think automakers will slow down production of gasoline powered vehicles to favor diesel powered.
I was on a trip to India last year, and the only fascination diesel had in the market was that it cost half of what the "petrol" did per "litre". This comes from the mouth of the driver who was driving the vehicle.
"Europe also taxed gasoline (it now costs the equivalent of $5.40 per gallon, of which 70 percent is tax in some countries, versus $2 in the United States) and gave tax breaks to diesel, which now sells 15 to 20 percent cheaper."
"In Europe, where tax breaks make diesel fuel much cheaper than gasoline, more than 40 percent of all new vehicles are diesel-powered -- more than double the amount of just five years ago."
"If you think that the Brits buying almost one-in-three new cars as diesels is high, then consider countries like Italy, France and Austria where diesels account for more than 60 percent of all sales. In those countries, diesel fuel is a lot cheaper, because of lower rates of tax, than in the U.K. where we pay about the same for diesel as for unleaded petrol or gasoline."
"Levin does not see the fuel tax structure changing to echo the situation in Europe, where diesel is significantly cheaper than gasoline and has created a market in which at least 50 percent of new cars are diesel powered. "The public would have to believe in diesels for the tax situation to change," says Levin, "and I think it's very unlikely we will see a big differential in fuel costs, like there is in Europe."
I am sure places like India are not using the latest in diesel engine technology. I am also sure they are not worried about the quality of the diesel they burn. That is a bad thing. If the price of dirty diesel is half of what gas is, what does that tell you? One of two things. Either we are taxing diesel at a higher rate than gas, which we are. And highly refined diesel is more expensive to make than the cheap diesel. My biggest reason for promoting diesel is the flexibility to use alternative products without any mods to the vehicle. For people that SAY they are worried about our finite supply of oil in the world, I would think they would above all others be pushing for diesel/biodiesel cars in the USA. The gas hybrid is a bandaid at the very best. It is only saving a pittance of oil. In the case of some recent & proposed hybrid releases, it is questionable if it is saving any oil.
I think what you are trying to say with all those informative links is that diesel is cheaper than gas, not withstanding higher taxation. I agree it is cheaper. It is also more efficient burning than gas. It is also easy to replace with renewable sources of energy. It is only in the USA that we have not pursued diesel as the main source of fueling our automotive fleet. Of course the trucking and heavy equipment and railroads and shipping industry have known all along it was a better source of energy than gas. Remember gas was a by-product of oil refining that was discarded for many years.
Who cares about latest and greatest in technology? Bottom line is WHY people prefer one fuel over the other. Do you think about emissions from your Suburban while you're at it? Or only once in a year when you have to get it emission tested? Most people prefer one over the other for economic reasons.
In the "other markets", who is to say they are using the greatest "gasoline/petrol" technology?
Bottom line is WHY people prefer one fuel over the other.
People prefer what ever they are offered. In the rest of the world where they can buy gas, gas/hybrids or diesel, they prefer diesel. Have you driven a modern diesel car or truck? If not you should give one a try. I think you would find it enlightening. I drive an F350 diesel at work. There is so much more power than our old gas trucks, with better mileage.
I never think of emissions from my Suburban. I paid good money for a vehicle that would pass inspection. I do think about mileage. I wish I could have bought one with a diesel. I would be getting closer to 18/24 mpg instead of the 14/18 I currently get. I would sell it and buy something else if anything fit my needs as well. I would rather have a little Ranger PU with a 4 cylinder diesel. Seen any for sale?
There we go! I assumed you would at least once in a year.
No, I couldn't care less about diesel, hybrid or gasoline powered vehicle. I don't have a set priority. The vehicle has to appeal to me though! And living in the present, I wouldn't mind owning a hybrid Accord. BUT, I hope TSX hybrid comes out, and that will be an intriguing proposition for me when replacing my 1998 Accord which has over 112K miles now.
TSX w/diesel option doesn't sound like an intriguing option to me, however.
zodiac, your post couldn't be father from the truth. There are many OEM diesels offered in India, including common rail diesels. Huyndai, Ford, Maruti (Suzuki), Merecedes, Mitsubishi, Toyota etc all offer OEM diesels throughout their range.
The conversions you are talking about are from 10-15 years back, when people used to buy gas engine cars and convert them to diesel by putting in a new or rebuild deisel. This was also done mostly by the transport segment, not private buyers. This practice is long discontinued and may be followed in some remote region, definitely not the majority of the country.
India follows Euro III pollution norms for automobiles.
Also, the reason diesel is cheap is because gas (pertol in India) is taxed heavily as opposed to Diesel which is considered primarily an agriclutural fuel and thus subsidized.
I don't know where you get the 70% more mileage figure, because if you compare the autos that offer options of both Gas and petrol, the fuel efficiency is around 25% highes for the diesel.
If you need more infomration about autos in India, do not hesistate to ask.
Are you suggesting I should have purchased a Suburban instead and contributed to the green world better?
You were worried about how much my Suburban pollutes, I was saying no more than your Accord. It is directly relative to the miles driven. A person that commutes 100 a day is polluting twice as much as the person driving 50 miles per day. If the cars are equal.
"People prefer what ever they are offered. In the rest of the world where they can buy gas, gas/hybrids or diesel, they prefer diesel"
This isn't true. as pointed out, the one fuel that costs less than the other will be favored.
Diesel here in the U.S. is currently more expensive than gasoline but I remember last Summer it was about equal. People still preferred gasoline to Diesel.
I don't belive people would prefer diesel autos, as witness here in the U.S.
"Have you driven a modern diesel car or truck? If not you should give one a try"
I haven't driven a diesel truck other than rentals but early last year I drove a new TDI and didn't like it. I bought the HCH.
I guess last year would still be considered modern.
You were worried about how much my Suburban pollutes
Are you sure about that? Here is a related piece of our conversation:
gagrice: I am sure places like India are not using the latest in diesel engine technology. I am also sure they are not worried about the quality of the diesel they burn. That is a bad thing. If the price of dirty diesel is half of what gas is, what does that tell you?
robertsmx: Do you think about emissions from your Suburban while you're at it? Or only once in a year when you have to get it emission tested? Most people prefer one over the other for economic reasons.
gagrice: I never think of emissions from my Suburban.
robertsmx: There we go! I assumed you would at least once in a year... I hope TSX hybrid comes out, and that will be an intriguing proposition for me when replacing my 1998 Accord which has over 112K miles now.
gagrice: I would say that you have polluted as much with your Accord over the last 7 years as my Suburban with only 48k miles on it.
robertsmx: Are you suggesting I should have purchased a Suburban instead and contributed to the green world better?
I don't believe people would prefer diesel autos, as witness here in the U.S.
They sell all they bring over, just like the Prius. My local VW dealer had a TDI wait list before they shut them down the beginning of last year. He has a call list right now for any used ones that he gets, I am on it. I don't believe for a minute they would not sell if given the choice. Remember VW outsells Toyota & Honda combined in the EU. One poster from Spain paid $35k US for a Passat TDI and thought it was a bargain. It sounds like they can sell them for more in the EU with less freight. Send the gas VW cars to Americans they don't know any better.
I drove a new TDI and didn't like it. I bought the HCH.
Was the TDI smelly, noisy or you just don't trust the VW quality or dealers?
Do you think about emissions from your Suburban while you're at it?
Why should I? I did not suggest you buy anything. You brought up my Suburban and it's emissions. I don't really see how that has much to do with diesel vs hybrids. What is your point? You have lost me on this one. The Suburban polluted whatever a good running Suburban pollutes in the 3400 miles I drove it last year. That amounts to about a third more than a 1998 Accord pollutes. So actually you polluted more if you drove your Accord more than 4600 miles last year. Does that make you feel less green?
"They sell all they bring over, just like the Prius"
(Prius, VW, HCH)
I think we can agree that it's wonderful we sell every fuel efficient car that we have. But it still doesn't mean that the vast majority would flock to them. At least not yet. Perhaps that will happen after the next major fuel price hike.
I can't speak for anyone's Suburban but my other vehicle is an 02 Grand Caravan. It's a very large pig for my family's comfort. But gosh-darn if I can't get better than about 19MPG no matter what I do. Normal driving gets only about 17.
The last thing I'm worried about is emissions. It does what it does. My main concern is the $$$$$ we spend feeding its thirsty funnel.
As soon as the loan is paid I'll toss it like a hot potato.
Better yet to rent a back hoe, excavate a hole, bury it for a bomb shelter.
I was thinking about possibly looking into Prius if they still make them in 2007.
"Was the TDI smelly, noisy or you just don't trust the VW quality or dealers?"
The car I drove didn't smell or smoke. I was really just curious about it. It drove fine and I don't recall any real complaints.
One factor was that I kept an eye out for stations with diesel that I pass on my commute, and out of 13 zero sold it.
I would have had the hassle of exiting/entering the freeway only for fuel. We decided against it for the reasons I (always) mention in my earlier posts.
Without having read all that many posts I find the whole topic rather senseless. Hybrid v. Diesel, they're not exactly mutually exclusive. Let me make an analogy. Say a person wants to lose weight and he is deciding between a low fat or low carb diet. That would be a legitimate discussion. This discussion is comparable to that person trying to decide whether to lose weight through dieting or exercise. Like I said, senseless.
No one disputes that higher mpg can be achieved through diesel. The reason that diesel isn't more prevalent in this country has zero to do with hybrid technology, zero!!!
quote tpe-"The reason that diesel isn't more prevalent in this country has zero to do with hybrid technology, zero!!!"-end quote
That is true.
But the point of this forum is to provide data to help people choose the better option for themselves by providing the Pros and Cons of each technology when compared to the other...
No one disputes that higher mpg can be achieved through diesel.
To the contrary. Many feel the gas/hybrid is a better solution to the problem of diminishing oil supply than diesel is. I disagree and feel the use of diesel would solve more problems than the hybrid without the added complexity. As you can see it is a popular thread. I don't quite understand what you find senseless, I try to lose weight any way I can....
I guess you didn't get my analogy of this discussion being comparable to diet v excercise when it comes to losing weight. My point is, why not both? The topic somehow implies an either or condition. Right now there is no diesel-hybrid option but a lot of the posts are based on what path we should take in the future. Maybe there is something that I'm not grasping, do the regenerative benefits of hybrid technology not lend themselves to diesel? If they do wouldn't that be the ultimate solution in terms of efficiency? Just like diet or exercise by themselves will never be as effective as doing both. Maybe I'll think of a better analogy.
do the regenerative benefits of hybrid technology not lend themselves to diesel?
I am sure they would. However that still adds more complexity, initial expense and long term reliability issues that diesel alone does not have. As you can tell I would rather have a simple diesel Only solution. Many on this forum are in favor of the more complex (more parts to replace) hybrid systems, gas or diesel.
Once "clean diesel" is completely entrenched in the USA distribution system, and costs for Hybrid systems in general come DOWN, then someone (Toyota or Honda I would hope) could probably sell a $25K Diesel Hybrid 4-dr family sedan that gets more than 60 MPG EPA, city/hwy combined.
That might be 5-8 years away, but if that happens, it will certainly have an impact and will probably hasten the demise of "lower efficiency gas hybrids" in the USA.
But it will ABSOLUTELY REQUIRE that diesel is indeed as "clean" as the diesel proponents seem to think it will be, and all those states banning diesel vehicles will have to get off that policy.
And that the company selling it is not VW (low reliability) or Mercedes (too expensive) will be another key factor in the success of such a vehicle.
The fact is that you can achieve greater efficiency with a diesel engine and you can also achieve greater efficiency by incorporating hybrid technology. The two methods can definitely complement one another so any suggestion of pursuing one at the expense of the other doesn't make sense. Diesel faces environmental hurdles that aren't relevant when discussing hybrids and these obstacles shouldn't manifest themselves as obstacles for the other approaches. Everything that I have read indicates that the first diesel-hybrids will appear in heavy trucks and buses. This is probably due to the fact that they already burn diesel, no environmental barriers, and because this is where the greatest cost savings will be realized.
Being that the current direction of hybrids seems to be more performance biased if someone opted for a purely diesel solution as opposed to diesel-hybrids they would not only be sacrificing optimal efficiency but performance.
I have no doubt that the diesel/hybrid is a good way to optimize the automotive drive train. It is still more expensive to build and will be more expensive to maintain. More parts, more money. When you weigh that against the minimal savings in fuel, to me it does not justify the extra cost.
Right now the rage is diesel/hybrid buses. Cities all over the world are buying GM diesel/hybrid buses at about $750k each. Some early adopting cities are already complaining that the savings in fuel is not outweighing the initial investment. I don't know if the decreased emissions was factored into their equation. And that is important also.
Thirdly, the Life cycle analysis of the Toyota Prius maintains that the hybrid has to go past the half way point in it's 150k mile lifetime to see the added overall benefit in the area of pollution. Batteries and electric motors add pollution to the manufacturing process on a hybrid. All these minus's to me are good reasons to opt for the time proven single engine drivetrain. And diesel is still the efficiency leader in vehicle propulsion.
if someone opted for a purely diesel solution as opposed to diesel-hybrids they would not only be sacrificing optimal efficiency but performance.
Lack of performance or mileage is not a complaint you hear from the owners of VW & Mercedes diesel cars built in the last 6 years. You do hear those complaints from the owners of all the hybrids.
I did some further research. The "green score" posted at www.fueleconomy.gov is actually variable. It is dependent upon which emissions standard is applied, so I dug through the EPA website and found these results:
BIN 9 - non-CA region
=====================
Civic Hybrid = 6
Jetta/Beetle/Golf TDI = 6
BIN 10 - non-CA region
======================
Civic Hybrid = 4
Jetta/Beetle/Golf TDI = 4
The Civic Hybrid & TDIs are equally clean *if you apply the same standard*.
.
I don't understand why fueleconomy.gov mixes different test standards? It's hard to make comparisons when one car is BIN 9 and the other car is BIN 10. Nevertheless, when running the high-sulfur gasoline/diesel, both the VW TDIs and Civic Hybrid end up with equal ratings.
When run with no-sulfur gasoline, the Civic Hybrid scores a 9..... and the TDIs??? We'll just have to wait until 2006 when no-sulfur diesel arrives.
Regardless of those "points scored" assignments, in terms of Eco-Friendly emissions, the Civc Hybrids are "cleaner to the environment" because they emit a smaller total amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
That's why the top five "greenest cars" are the USA Hybrids.
Maybe that top five will be modified for the 2007 model year cars - time will tell. But for NOW, TODAY, the "greenest" cars on the USA roads are the Hybrids.
Once "clean diesel fuel" is firmly entrenched into the USA distribution system, and five states now banning diesel cars stop banning them, we can start saying they are "as clean" as Hybrids.
Right now, that is not true.
P.S. Are any Hybrids "banned" anywhere in the world?
I agree that there is a greater increase to the cost of the vehicle by incorporating hybrid technology. When it will pay for itself, if ever, through gas savings depends on the price of gas and whether or not future hybrid technology becomes cheaper. I guess I should have clarified my personal point of view a little better. The appeal of hybrid technology to me is greater performance. The hybrid Accord is just the first example of what I see as a general trend to incorporate this technology for performance enhancement as much as fuel efficiency. People that care about performance have always paid a premium for it and the question of when will it pay for itself at the pump was irrelevant. The fact that hybrids improved efficiency might eventually pay for itself results in the performance premium being eliminated or at least being reduced.
BTW, You said you hear complaints of lack of power from "all" the owners of hybrids. Are the new Accord owners really complaining, I guess all means all but that surprises me.
BTW, You said you hear complaints of lack of power from "all" the owners of hybrids. Are the new Accord owners really complaining, I guess all means all but that surprises me.
I grouped mileage and performance together. There are much complaints about the mileage on the HAH. No performance problems that I have read about. The other four hybrids all lack performance as stated by some owners. I understand that life is a trade-off and I don't believe you can have both at the same time high performance and great fuel mileage in a gas/hybrid. Maybe in a diesel :-)
"C&D mag tested a Honda Civic hybrid in one mountain range, and exhausted the battery pack after a mile's upward driving."
.
That is called "stupidity". It's obvious what they did: Drove the car without shifting to lower gears, until they emptied the battery. S-t-u-p-i-d
In contrast, I drove my Insight over the Colorado Rockies on U.S. 40 (steeeeeeep grades), in 3rd gear, and my battery was still near-full at the top! When you drive a hybrid, you have to use that thing in your head called a "brain". If you're climbing a mountain, and you're emptying the battery, shift to a lower gear.
A ULEV car like the Civic or Insight Hybrid is actually *dirtier* than a "normal" car like the Nissan Sentra SULEV/PZEV..... but the dirtier car is allowed?!?!?
It's bass-backwards.
Of course, this also means that a *diesel*-electric car would be allowed, regardless of how much black soot it emits. Yep. Stupid Law.
___Although a bit OT, the sad part of this town’s idea of reducing pollution is that the 05 Accord PZEV (non-hybrid) is cleaner then any hybrid other then the HCH PZEV made to date I wonder if Honda sells PZEV based Accords in Europe given they already have LS fuel? Even the Acura MDX is cleaner then some hybrid’s yet this town would have banned them as well?
05 Accord PZEV (non-hybrid): SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 2 on HS fuel.
Prius I: SULEV on LS fuel/ULEV on regular HS fuel
Prius II: SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 3 on HS fuel.
HCH (PZEV): SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 2 on HS fuel.
HCH non-PZEV: ULEV on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 9 on HS fuel.
AH: ULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 5 on HS fuel.
Insight 5-speed: LEV on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 9 on HS fuel.
Insight CVT: LEV on LS fuel w/out SULEV rated emissions HW/SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 5 on HS fuel.
___In regards to diesel is king in Europe, they (the Europeans) have a choice of gas, gasoline hybrids, and/or diesels. The consumer is making the choice to reduce CO2 emissions albeit with a lousy EURO IV spec emissions and EURO V in another 4 + years. Still lousy by comparison to CARB’s ULEV-II/SULEV-II or the Fed’s Tier II/Bin5 or better specs.
If you think getting people to buy Hybrids to help clean the environment is hard (and it is hard), try getting people to buy a car based on the "emissions rating"
Salesman:
"Here we have a beautiful black PZEV Accord. Cleanest Accord in the world."
Potential buyer:
"But I need it in green."
Salesman:
"We have a Green one, but that's only a ULEV, not nearly as clean as the black PZEV."
Potential buyer:
"OK I'll take the green one."
That exhange is facetious, of course, but it goes to point out that virtually no one, while car shopping, cares didly about the PZEV/SULEV/ULEV ratings.
___If you were to ask the same question(s) to 99.5% of my fellow Illini, they would ask what is a PZEV? Even after you told them and said it is only a $135.00 up charge, they would say, “I will take the LEV because it’s cheaper”! Place the same 99.5% of all Illini purchasers in front of the $3,000 - $4,000 more expensive Hybrid and guess what happens? At least in California, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and Vermont, the automobile dealers have taken this choice away from the purchaser in terms of PZEV’s anyway.
Comments
I don't think it is true, here are the facts. Diesel IS clearly the superior fuel for the ICE
In Europe, annual diesel sales have reached about 5.8 million and are expected to rise to almost 7 million by 2005, according to the investment bank Schroder Salomon Smith Barney.
That is 40% of all new cars, set to rise to 45%.
And that is a modest estimate. Some experts predict that diesels will outsell petrol cars in Europe by 2005.
And diesel cars are already prevalent, so there is no "anti diesel culture" like we have in the USA.
And their air is already putrid anyway in most of the largest cities, so the diesel exhaust has a nice home !! It's not because Euros are "so much smarter" and have recognized the "clear superiority" of diesel as a fuel .....
Welcome to the forum. It is good to have another voice of reason in this ongoing debate. Especially those with first hand knowledge of diesel cars. Many here would like to reduce our independence on foriegn oil. Yet they would do anything necessary to hang on to the old "gas" technology. Including the overly complex gas hybrids. They just can't let go of the big HP produced by the gas engine. They love that 0-60 rush. For me the 50-70 acceleration is more practical. That is where the modern diesels shine.
Could it be that the cars are not available in the biggest market for high mileage cars? MB and VW are having no problem selling their diesel cars in the 45 states they are allowed into. Maybe this lawsuit between CARB and the EPA will open that door back up. Right now you will pay new price for a used VW TDI in CA. They are very easy to sell here when they get the required 7500 miles on them. A loophole in the CA law. Hard to imagine eh?
You could not be more incorrect. The price of diesel in the UK is higher than gas. They are selling diesels in the UK at a very good rate. Why do you think your beloved Honda went to all the trouble of building a diesel engine from the ground up. They were not able to sell any cars in the EU. They had to put other diesel engines into the Civic to get any sales. I am happy, I think the i-CDTI is a great piece of engineering. I am not sure why it took Honda so long to see the light on which fuel was superior. I am just glad they did and would be on an Odyssey with i-CDTI in a heartbeat, if they ever get that auto transmission working correctly.
But if diesels are hot and everybody wants them, you would think automakers will slow down production of gasoline powered vehicles to favor diesel powered.
I was on a trip to India last year, and the only fascination diesel had in the market was that it cost half of what the "petrol" did per "litre". This comes from the mouth of the driver who was driving the vehicle.
From:
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2005-01-11-auto-show_x.htm
"Europe also taxed gasoline (it now costs the equivalent of $5.40 per gallon, of which 70 percent is tax in some countries, versus $2 in the United States) and gave tax breaks to diesel, which now sells 15 to 20 percent cheaper."
From :
http://damagevaluation.com/v-web/b2evo/blogs/index.php/2004/11/21- /p210
"In Europe, where tax breaks make diesel fuel much cheaper than gasoline, more than 40 percent of all new vehicles are diesel-powered -- more than double the amount of just five years ago."
From:
http://www.dieselforum.org/dtfinthenews/washpost_022204.html
"If you think that the Brits buying almost one-in-three new cars as diesels is high, then consider countries like Italy, France and Austria where diesels account for more than 60 percent of all sales. In those countries, diesel fuel is a lot cheaper, because of lower rates of tax, than in the U.K. where we pay about the same for diesel as for unleaded petrol or gasoline."
From:
http://www.ai-online.com/issues/article_detail.asp?id=499
"Levin does not see the fuel tax structure changing to echo the situation in Europe, where diesel is significantly cheaper than gasoline and has created a market in which at least 50 percent of new cars are diesel powered. "The public would have to believe in diesels for the tax situation to change," says Levin, "and I think it's very unlikely we will see a big differential in fuel costs, like there is in Europe."
From:
http://216.239.63.104/search?q=cache:PG5-zJxcHlcJ:www.detnews.com/2003/insiders/0305/27/insiders-174468.htm+%22europe%22+%2Bdiesels+%2Bcheaper+%2Bcars&hl=en&lr=&strip=1
So, yes, in the UK the costs are similar, but the UK is only a small part of Europe in general.
In the "other markets", who is to say they are using the greatest "gasoline/petrol" technology?
People prefer what ever they are offered. In the rest of the world where they can buy gas, gas/hybrids or diesel, they prefer diesel. Have you driven a modern diesel car or truck? If not you should give one a try. I think you would find it enlightening. I drive an F350 diesel at work. There is so much more power than our old gas trucks, with better mileage.
I never think of emissions from my Suburban. I paid good money for a vehicle that would pass inspection. I do think about mileage. I wish I could have bought one with a diesel. I would be getting closer to 18/24 mpg instead of the 14/18 I currently get. I would sell it and buy something else if anything fit my needs as well. I would rather have a little Ranger PU with a 4 cylinder diesel. Seen any for sale?
There we go! I assumed you would at least once in a year.
No, I couldn't care less about diesel, hybrid or gasoline powered vehicle. I don't have a set priority. The vehicle has to appeal to me though! And living in the present, I wouldn't mind owning a hybrid Accord. BUT, I hope TSX hybrid comes out, and that will be an intriguing proposition for me when replacing my 1998 Accord which has over 112K miles now.
TSX w/diesel option doesn't sound like an intriguing option to me, however.
I would say that you have polluted as much with your Accord over the last 7 years as my Suburban with only 48k miles on it.
You have to buy conversion kits to get the diesel engine in the first place. No OEM automobiles come with the diesel engine.
But once you convert, there is no going back. Diesel costs 1/2 as much per liter and provides about 70% more mileage.
The conversions you are talking about are from 10-15 years back, when people used to buy gas engine cars and convert them to diesel by putting in a new or rebuild deisel. This was also done mostly by the transport segment, not private buyers. This practice is long discontinued and may be followed in some remote region, definitely not the majority of the country.
India follows Euro III pollution norms for automobiles.
Also, the reason diesel is cheap is because gas (pertol in India) is taxed heavily as opposed to Diesel which is considered primarily an agriclutural fuel and thus subsidized.
I don't know where you get the 70% more mileage figure, because if you compare the autos that offer options of both Gas and petrol, the fuel efficiency is around 25% highes for the diesel.
If you need more infomration about autos in India, do not hesistate to ask.
You were worried about how much my Suburban pollutes, I was saying no more than your Accord. It is directly relative to the miles driven. A person that commutes 100 a day is polluting twice as much as the person driving 50 miles per day. If the cars are equal.
This isn't true. as pointed out, the one fuel that costs less than the other will be favored.
Diesel here in the U.S. is currently more expensive than gasoline but I remember last Summer it was about equal. People still preferred gasoline to Diesel.
I don't belive people would prefer diesel autos, as witness here in the U.S.
"Have you driven a modern diesel car or truck? If not you should give one a try"
I haven't driven a diesel truck other than rentals but early last year I drove a new TDI and didn't like it. I bought the HCH.
I guess last year would still be considered modern.
Are you sure about that? Here is a related piece of our conversation:
gagrice: I am sure places like India are not using the latest in diesel engine technology. I am also sure they are not worried about the quality of the diesel they burn. That is a bad thing. If the price of dirty diesel is half of what gas is, what does that tell you?
robertsmx: Do you think about emissions from your Suburban while you're at it? Or only once in a year when you have to get it emission tested? Most people prefer one over the other for economic reasons.
gagrice: I never think of emissions from my Suburban.
robertsmx: There we go! I assumed you would at least once in a year... I hope TSX hybrid comes out, and that will be an intriguing proposition for me when replacing my 1998 Accord which has over 112K miles now.
gagrice: I would say that you have polluted as much with your Accord over the last 7 years as my Suburban with only 48k miles on it.
robertsmx: Are you suggesting I should have purchased a Suburban instead and contributed to the green world better?
They sell all they bring over, just like the Prius. My local VW dealer had a TDI wait list before they shut them down the beginning of last year. He has a call list right now for any used ones that he gets, I am on it. I don't believe for a minute they would not sell if given the choice. Remember VW outsells Toyota & Honda combined in the EU. One poster from Spain paid $35k US for a Passat TDI and thought it was a bargain. It sounds like they can sell them for more in the EU with less freight. Send the gas VW cars to Americans they don't know any better.
I drove a new TDI and didn't like it. I bought the HCH.
Was the TDI smelly, noisy or you just don't trust the VW quality or dealers?
Why should I? I did not suggest you buy anything. You brought up my Suburban and it's emissions. I don't really see how that has much to do with diesel vs hybrids. What is your point? You have lost me on this one. The Suburban polluted whatever a good running Suburban pollutes in the 3400 miles I drove it last year. That amounts to about a third more than a 1998 Accord pollutes. So actually you polluted more if you drove your Accord more than 4600 miles last year. Does that make you feel less green?
(Prius, VW, HCH)
I think we can agree that it's wonderful we sell every fuel efficient car that we have. But it still doesn't mean that the vast majority would flock to them. At least not yet. Perhaps that will happen after the next major fuel price hike.
I can't speak for anyone's Suburban but my other vehicle is an 02 Grand Caravan. It's a very large pig for my family's comfort. But gosh-darn if I can't get better than about 19MPG no matter what I do. Normal driving gets only about 17.
The last thing I'm worried about is emissions. It does what it does. My main concern is the $$$$$ we spend feeding its thirsty funnel.
As soon as the loan is paid I'll toss it like a hot potato.
Better yet to rent a back hoe, excavate a hole, bury it for a bomb shelter.
I was thinking about possibly looking into Prius if they still make them in 2007.
"Was the TDI smelly, noisy or you just don't trust the VW quality or dealers?"
The car I drove didn't smell or smoke. I was really just curious about it. It drove fine and I don't recall any real complaints.
One factor was that I kept an eye out for stations with diesel that I pass on my commute, and out of 13 zero sold it.
I would have had the hassle of exiting/entering the freeway only for fuel. We decided against it for the reasons I (always) mention in my earlier posts.
It was a nice car. Just not for me.
No one disputes that higher mpg can be achieved through diesel. The reason that diesel isn't more prevalent in this country has zero to do with hybrid technology, zero!!!
That is true.
But the point of this forum is to provide data to help people choose the better option for themselves by providing the Pros and Cons of each technology when compared to the other...
To the contrary. Many feel the gas/hybrid is a better solution to the problem of diminishing oil supply than diesel is. I disagree and feel the use of diesel would solve more problems than the hybrid without the added complexity. As you can see it is a popular thread. I don't quite understand what you find senseless, I try to lose weight any way I can....
http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/126689- 1.html
I am sure they would. However that still adds more complexity, initial expense and long term reliability issues that diesel alone does not have. As you can tell I would rather have a simple diesel Only solution. Many on this forum are in favor of the more complex (more parts to replace) hybrid systems, gas or diesel.
That might be 5-8 years away, but if that happens, it will certainly have an impact and will probably hasten the demise of "lower efficiency gas hybrids" in the USA.
But it will ABSOLUTELY REQUIRE that diesel is indeed as "clean" as the diesel proponents seem to think it will be, and all those states banning diesel vehicles will have to get off that policy.
And that the company selling it is not VW (low reliability) or Mercedes (too expensive) will be another key factor in the success of such a vehicle.
Being that the current direction of hybrids seems to be more performance biased if someone opted for a purely diesel solution as opposed to diesel-hybrids they would not only be sacrificing optimal efficiency but performance.
Right now the rage is diesel/hybrid buses. Cities all over the world are buying GM diesel/hybrid buses at about $750k each. Some early adopting cities are already complaining that the savings in fuel is not outweighing the initial investment. I don't know if the decreased emissions was factored into their equation. And that is important also.
Thirdly, the Life cycle analysis of the Toyota Prius maintains that the hybrid has to go past the half way point in it's 150k mile lifetime to see the added overall benefit in the area of pollution. Batteries and electric motors add pollution to the manufacturing process on a hybrid. All these minus's to me are good reasons to opt for the time proven single engine drivetrain. And diesel is still the efficiency leader in vehicle propulsion.
Lack of performance or mileage is not a complaint you hear from the owners of VW & Mercedes diesel cars built in the last 6 years. You do hear those complaints from the owners of all the hybrids.
BIN 9 - non-CA region
=====================
Civic Hybrid = 6
Jetta/Beetle/Golf TDI = 6
BIN 10 - non-CA region
======================
Civic Hybrid = 4
Jetta/Beetle/Golf TDI = 4
The Civic Hybrid & TDIs are equally clean *if you apply the same standard*.
.
I don't understand why fueleconomy.gov mixes different test standards? It's hard to make comparisons when one car is BIN 9 and the other car is BIN 10. Nevertheless, when running the high-sulfur gasoline/diesel, both the VW TDIs and Civic Hybrid end up with equal ratings.
When run with no-sulfur gasoline, the Civic Hybrid scores a 9..... and the TDIs??? We'll just have to wait until 2006 when no-sulfur diesel arrives.
troy
That's why the top five "greenest cars" are the USA Hybrids.
Maybe that top five will be modified for the 2007 model year cars - time will tell. But for NOW, TODAY, the "greenest" cars on the USA roads are the Hybrids.
Once "clean diesel fuel" is firmly entrenched into the USA distribution system, and five states now banning diesel cars stop banning them, we can start saying they are "as clean" as Hybrids.
Right now, that is not true.
P.S. Are any Hybrids "banned" anywhere in the world?
http://www.terradaily.com/2005/050124163542.bszf34w6.html
The article mentions other cities using "stop the driving" tools and alternate days, etc. to curb SMOG problems.
Maybe they should just promote cleaner cars.
BTW, You said you hear complaints of lack of power from "all" the owners of hybrids. Are the new Accord owners really complaining, I guess all means all but that surprises me.
I grouped mileage and performance together. There are much complaints about the mileage on the HAH. No performance problems that I have read about. The other four hybrids all lack performance as stated by some owners. I understand that life is a trade-off and I don't believe you can have both at the same time high performance and great fuel mileage in a gas/hybrid. Maybe in a diesel :-)
.
That is called "stupidity". It's obvious what they did: Drove the car without shifting to lower gears, until they emptied the battery. S-t-u-p-i-d
In contrast, I drove my Insight over the Colorado Rockies on U.S. 40 (steeeeeeep grades), in 3rd gear, and my battery was still near-full at the top! When you drive a hybrid, you have to use that thing in your head called a "brain". If you're climbing a mountain, and you're emptying the battery, shift to a lower gear.
To Car & Driver - DUH.
troy
.
Actually, they banned BOTH gasoline & diesel cars. That means even a SULEV/PZEV car like the Nissan Sentra CA would be banned. Stupid.
(Note = the "liquid gas" in the article refers to liquid natural gas aka LNG.)
troy
But my point was that they did NOT ban Hybrids...
Do they have any hybrid cars in Italy?
A ULEV car like the Civic or Insight Hybrid is actually *dirtier* than a "normal" car like the Nissan Sentra SULEV/PZEV..... but the dirtier car is allowed?!?!?
It's bass-backwards.
Of course, this also means that a *diesel*-electric car would be allowed, regardless of how much black soot it emits. Yep. Stupid Law.
troy
Apparently the "diesel is king" theme is not helping the pollution problem.
___Although a bit OT, the sad part of this town’s idea of reducing pollution is that the 05 Accord PZEV (non-hybrid) is cleaner then any hybrid other then the HCH PZEV made to date I wonder if Honda sells PZEV based Accords in Europe given they already have LS fuel? Even the Acura MDX is cleaner then some hybrid’s yet this town would have banned them as well?
05 Accord PZEV (non-hybrid): SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 2 on HS fuel.
Prius I: SULEV on LS fuel/ULEV on regular HS fuel
Prius II: SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 3 on HS fuel.
HCH (PZEV): SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 2 on HS fuel.
HCH non-PZEV: ULEV on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 9 on HS fuel.
AH: ULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 5 on HS fuel.
Insight 5-speed: LEV on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 9 on HS fuel.
Insight CVT: LEV on LS fuel w/out SULEV rated emissions HW/SULEV-II on LS fuel/Tier II Bin 5 on HS fuel.
___In regards to diesel is king in Europe, they (the Europeans) have a choice of gas, gasoline hybrids, and/or diesels. The consumer is making the choice to reduce CO2 emissions albeit with a lousy EURO IV spec emissions and EURO V in another 4 + years. Still lousy by comparison to CARB’s ULEV-II/SULEV-II or the Fed’s Tier II/Bin5 or better specs.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes
Salesman:
"Here we have a beautiful black PZEV Accord. Cleanest Accord in the world."
Potential buyer:
"But I need it in green."
Salesman:
"We have a Green one, but that's only a ULEV, not nearly as clean as the black PZEV."
Potential buyer:
"OK I'll take the green one."
That exhange is facetious, of course, but it goes to point out that virtually no one, while car shopping, cares didly about the PZEV/SULEV/ULEV ratings.
___Exactly!
___If you were to ask the same question(s) to 99.5% of my fellow Illini, they would ask what is a PZEV? Even after you told them and said it is only a $135.00 up charge, they would say, “I will take the LEV because it’s cheaper”! Place the same 99.5% of all Illini purchasers in front of the $3,000 - $4,000 more expensive Hybrid and guess what happens? At least in California, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, and Vermont, the automobile dealers have taken this choice away from the purchaser in terms of PZEV’s anyway.
___Good Luck
___Wayne R. Gerdes