I think the diesel will first show up in light trucks, quite possibly Ridgeline (V6 diesel) and CR-V (I-4 diesel). Odyssey will be in its last year of design cycle in 2009, so it may not get it until the redesign. Pilot is getting redesigned next year (given the spy shots, possibly Spring), so that is a strong candidate also.
Accord might get it a little later. And if it does, I think Honda should offer it in LX and EX trims, instead of starting with EX-L. But it is also likely they will pick only one trim to start with until production/sales find a balance.
I've read about specific models by year, just that these vehicles will be offered with diesel. All models won't get it right away. The question remains, will Accord be one of the first? It might depend on how sales of the new Accord stack up. If it sells well, and Pilot/CR-V suffer, Honda might put diesel on Pilot/CR-V before they do on Accord. And vice versa.
The current 2.2 iCTDi is too small for the Pilot - it would only work in the CR-V and Accord. They really need it in the Accord as a hybrid substitute.
Thats why I mentioned V6, something Honda has announced. I'm expecting it to be a 3.5/V6 unit, with 220-240 HP and ~400 lb-ft. That can provide for a big boost to Pilot, Odyssey and Ridgeline sales, as long as Honda manages to have the production capacity.
Cut what? Honda trucks are not designed for heavy duty towing. Hope the vehicles don't weigh 5000. Think 3.2 would be the max size probable. Just my .02.
IF the Honda 3.0L is nearly as powerful as the old Mercedes 2.7L 5 cylinder it should be plenty. That 2.7L pushed my 8k lb. motor home with ease. The Mercedes V6 diesel is really only a 3.0 and it is used in the GL320 CDI that is probably heavier than the Pilot or Odyssey.
My guess is based on current 2.2-liter I-4. Honda has not pushed the engine as much as competitors have, in terms of peak power and torque (sure, it rated 140 HP/251 lb-ft, but others are getting those numbers from 2.0). I don't doubt Honda couldn't do the same, and that they could get 200+ HP/400 lb-ft from a 3.0. But would they go for higher pressure turbo, or make it less stressed/high response engine.
Even if the diesel can get 300+ lb-ft, it still needs reasonable horsepower to go with it, or else it could be tough sell.
Its not just lb-ft, its also horsepower, and how Honda achieves that goal. It would make for a less stressed engine, if Honda achieves higher HP (220-240) from a 3.5 as opposed to pushing a 3.0. Not official, but a quick google brought up the following excerpt...
"The new engine is said to be a 3.5L diesel unit that’s 30% more fuel efficient that an equivalent petrol models. Diesel engines also emit close to 20% less carbon-dioxide but do release harmful nitrogen oxides and particulates." (link)
I wonder if they will be made in USA? a nice bonus... I hope they will be available in fairly maxxed trim level, with manual-trans. Honda makes sweet manual trannies & shifters. It's about time VW got some competition in the diesel-car-geek segment!
I'm a happy 2007 TCH owner, I paid 25600 in early 07'...knowing Honda the Diesel...which I would want badly becuase it would be the cool new thing will probably sticker for about 32,000-35,000..remember the race-inspired Accord hybrid.....for a 7,000 diff, no thanks. ..but who am I, I could be wrong.
While a Diesel Accord seems like a lower consumption means of travel, I am now much less intrigued.
I just returned from a trip from New York to Roanoke. I travelled about 480 miles each way through New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia.
The price per gallon of Diesel fuel was consistantly twenty to fifty cents per gallon more than regular grade gasoline.
I think you can expect to get at least 30% better mileage with an Accord diesel than a 4 cylinder. At todays prices diesel would have to be at least 90 cents higher to make it less practical. Then you have the driving dynamics that are soooo much better with a diesel engine. In reality diesel costs less to make than regular unleaded. I think the oil companies are playing games to keep the would be diesel car buyers nervous.
You wrote "I think the oil companies are playing games to keep the would be diesel car buyers nervous".
Could be, but there are incredible numbers of over-the-road tractor trailers out there buying Diesel fuel at those inflated prices. That's got to mean much higher prices for EVERYTHING that we buy that is carried by truck.
In CA there is additional road tax on diesel. It is supposed to offset the additional wear on the highways caused by big trucks. Diesel has always gone up in the winter because of additional demand for heating oil. I think over a period of a year it stays pretty close to unleaded in price. I do think the oil companies are concerned about a massive switch to diesel. In the EU they have a surplus of unleaded gas because of the percentage of diesel cars. We buy much of that surplus gasoline.
I believe most new diesels are not eligible for sale in MA due to emissions, yet diesels are available in almost every gas station (except for mom & pop joint with 2 pumps) and their prices are either at or lower than 87. Very strange.
:confuse: I was thinking that if Honda does bring their diesel engine to the USA that the gas companies will just inflate their diesel fuel prices. The Supply/Demand dynamic can be blamed for the inflated prices what with so many new diesel engines on the road...
Yeah, here in California regular unleaded is $3.06 a gallon and diesel is $3.32. That's less than 10% higher. Considering diesel has 15% more energy per gallon and also a diesel engine is about 15% more economical than a gas engine, you will still be money ahead in the $/mile travelled department. and that is not taking into consideration the positive environmental effects relative to a gasoline engine.
Why is it taking so long to get the diesels popular in the USA? Now that all of the regulatory logjams have been cleared with the new honda diesel engine passing the Tier 2 tests, will the new diesel engines be a big hit with lots of demand? Will diesel car prices and diesel fuel prices soar with increasing demand?
It will be fun to watch as the new diesels start to get popular.
Like the Prius and Civic hyrids? I guess it makes sense to make an "only car" like Prius when you want to charge a whole lot more. High prices will NOT squash anything if there is NO (pent up) demand!!?? The effect would be totally the opposite! If the price is too high and it doesnt sell....!!??? You'd be FORCED to sell lower unless you do not really want to sell your product and/or inventory.
Diesels have normally followed the platform logic. If you look at the Jetta, in 2003 there was a 246 dollar premium. Over all I got it for 300 over invoice. The 2003 Prius at that time made absolutely NO economic sense (even at invoice). It was selling for OVER MSRP!! It made even less sense with the massive redo in 2004 (again at invoice). Again over even a HIGHER MSRP! Fast forward, it NOW even makes LESS sense. The only time it make sense is as a marketing statement. (with its attending over price)
Just like a 8,0000 dollar Civic hyrid premium did over my Civic, which I needed for an everday commute. Perhaps that is where Honda made the mistake with hybrid in that they did not make it an "only car" like Prius. So really one could not buy it for the "STATEMENT" it made. To me TOTALLY ridiculous!!! However I liked the Civic (Hybrid) one of several models concept! The problem was that I was not a buyer at a 8,000 premium. I was a buyer at $ -8,000 for one of the Civics' model line!!
Honda will probably ask for a 1,000 diesel premium over a gasser Accord. My swag is they will have NO issues selling their WHOLE (diesel Accord) inventory.
We will have to see what the actual price is and what the price of diesel is compared to regular unleaded at the time of launch. Maybe it will be "only" $1000 more and maybe it will be much more than that. Maybe diesel fuel will cost much more than gas. It is already in some areas.
Are the Priuses today still being bought at a purchase price premium? People were not long ago still paying a lot for them as the demand was so high the dealers could charge anything for them, and they were in short supply. (high demand & low supply market)
I am thinking the Honda diesels could go into the same high demand/short supply scenario where it would be hard for anyone to get them for even $2500 over the price of the gasoline engine. This honda diesel is pretty exciting for me, so I expect it will be exciting for those with more purchasing power willing to spend more than me.
If you think how bad it is that the dealers are holding out for MSRP on the new Accords, think how bad it could be with the new diesel engine models.
I hope i'm wrong!
We need a decent low pollution/high milage vehicle here in California, and I do not consider the Prius it. I just hope something can arrive within the next two years that is actually something exciting FROM A MILAGE/ENVIRONMENTAL POINT OF VIEW, and at the same time HIGHLY AVAILABLE AT A GOOD PRICE.
That also goes without saying. Another will be the "structual" advantage of diesel over gasser. So in the Honda Accord's case 30 mpg gasser vs 52 mpg diesel. Keep in mind both Honda & Toyota are both considered GREEN. They also have hard fought and as it applies to the markets "won" reputations for economy. The math will flow easily from that.
However lets used msg# 283 quote(in response to another message); "...Yeah, here in California regular unleaded is $3.06 a gallon and diesel is $3.32."...
as an example. gas $3.06/30 mpg vs diesel $3.32/52 mpg
Gasser per mile driven: .102 cents
diesel per mile driven: .0638461 cents
this will be on the economic test, .0381539 cents cheaper per mile driven= which one?.
No rocket science here, only grammar school math. :shades:
You wrote: "I believe the only question re the new diesels is the ability of the automakers to keep up with a huge demand."
I'm not sure that I can agree that that is the only question. It is clear that there is some pent-up demand for Diesel engines on these Edmunds enthusiast forums. But that probably doesn't translate to more than a miniscule percentage of overall sales. The vast majority of North Americans (except perhaps those who've been driving Diesel trucks for years) equate Diesels with EXHAUST STINK, EXHAUST SMOKE, CLATTERING ENGINE NOISE and POOR ACCELERATION.
All of that aside, I'd be interested in checking out an Accord Diesel if the price were right.
It looks like our "enthusiast" best chance to get a good deal on the new diesel accord will be to hope to get a good invoice-like deal before our fellow americans figure out the new diesels are great. It is possible that americans will still be ignorant, and there will not be much demand at the very beginning of the Honda Diesel in the USA. Perhaps not until some time has passed will people really warm up to the idea of diesels, and in the meantime demand may be cold and prices will have to stay low.
Will the new diesels start out with slow sales due to ignorance?
Many consumers are smart and will see the advantages of a diesel Honda or Toyota in lower operating costs and upon future resale. Good luck selling your gasser for a good price in 6 years,if gas/diesel is $6 a gallon.
Gas/Diesel has been $6 per gallon in Europe for many years. It has taken more than half a century for Diesel cars to match the sales volume of gassers. There will be strong demand for new and resale gassers here for many more years. Diesels will be very slow to catch on here for the vast majority of the non-enthusiast population.
Your take is really indicative of the fact that (we)the powers that be are NOT serious about reducing the so called "demand" for oil, AKA RUG. The flurry of new "clean" diesel regulations indicate seriousness about keeping the passenger disel fleet down and low for the longest period of time! AKA continued majority and high use of RUG! (current diesel passenger vehicle fleet is less than 3%) Further it is also indicative that what they ARE serious about is raising the price/cost per gal OF that demand!!
I have posted this in other diesel threads. The growth of passenger diesel will follow the growth rate of SUV's to 12% of the passenger vehicle fleet over a generation (30 years) from less than 1% or an average of (a little over) 1/3rd of 1 percent per year.
The metaphor/sound bite in the case of the Honda Accord is: why get 52 mpg when 29 mpg will do!!! (it will just cost more)
I am very interested in an Accord diesel, but the current gasser is certainly capable of much higher than 29 mpg when driven under the same conditions that would yield 52 mpg in the diesel (mostly highway I imagine).
I would have no argument with your assertion. The sample was taken from a current Accord owners' posting of 28/30 mpg. The 52 mpg was taken from internet posted news for the Honda Accord iCTDI.
Please keep in mind that I have gotten as high as 62 mpg in the TDI! The range has been a low of 44 to 62 mpg! I have a Civic that gets 38-42 in a plain jane commute. I would have to employ EXTREME driving techniques to even attempt 45 mpg in the Civic. The TDI gets 48-52 in that same commute.
Just recently on a trip (interstate highway 5) Washington, Oregon, they (revenue takers) were doing a series of rolling speed traps (5/6 trooper cars) and I dialed in 70/75 mph, to avoid even the appearance. When I filled for that leg (can't resist a drive by, sub par diesel price ) I got 59 mpg!!!
That was then and this is now! Low sulphur diesel,common rail technology,availability in mainstream vehicles (Honda,Toyota,Nissan,SUVs ,and Pickups) across the board changes that! The diesels will take away at least 10% of gasser sales initially and increase and additional 5% per yearly thereafter.
The metric that I base what I say is the passenger vehicle fleet being (registered ) 253.4 M vehicles. Less than 3% being diesels (235.4M *3 % = ) 7.062 M diesel vehicles. It is acknowleged that yearly new car sales @ between 16-17 M vehicles. So in order to increase the vehicle fleet the real question will be how many DIESEL vehicles (vol and percentage) are sold per year. Part of the driver is the yearly salvage rate of app 7% (which is coincidently 16.5M vehicles)
The sample was taken from a current Accord owners' posting of 28/30 mpg. The 52 mpg was taken from internet posted news for the Honda Accord iCTDI.
One appears to be real world fuel economy. The other (52 mpg) is based on British fuel economy rating and measured in imperial gallons (an addition 20% advantage added right there).
Appearances can be deceiving. You should be careful not to be easily deceived! More importantly, not to validate an already drawn conclusion on faulty assumptions due to a intentional/unintentional misread of data.
..."one of which was shown recently with with a new emission control system at a diesel conference in California. That car is apparently capable of 52mpg which, if replicated by the production version, will put it well ahead of anything else in its class."...
It will be more than just a pleasant surprise if Accord Diesel could deliver 52 mpg on EPA's highway cycle. But I'm not holding my breath for it. Sam Mitani seems to have extrapolated that number by using UK extra urban cycle which are known to be higher than EPA ratings. Just to provide a perspective (extra urban mileage, in imperial gallon with equivalent numbers in standard gallon in parenthesis): Accord Diesel: 62.8 mpg (52.3 mpg) Civic Hybrid: 65.7 mpg (54.8 mpg) Civic 1.8: 52.3 mpg (43.6 mpg)
Based on that, and looking at EPA ratings in the USA, a more logical guess would be Accord Diesel getting highway in low 40s. Impressive, but no 50s.
I would agree! As curious as I am about the Accord iCTDI, I would essentially go through the same process I did when buying the VW Jetta TDI. (caveats) IF and WHEN, I would be in the market. I also know better what to look for. While I have violated this in the past, I am always a bit skeptical about the first model year (not the first model/s from a global point of view). The prudent thing to do of course is for a generation to get longer in the subsequent model year's production.
As for the mpg variance, I think all one has to do is look at the thread Civic Real world MPG. There is a variance between high teens to low 40's. The point of departure of course is the EPA mpg figures, which my point of reference is 29/38 mpg. Commute we get 38-42. So from my perspective while he might be considered "off", he is not FAR off. (3.7%) So if the "diesel" figures tighten the range up from 25-40%, is it not still a NNN gain!?
if the "diesel" figures tighten the range up from 25-40%, is it not still a NNN gain!?
"If" they do, then yes. But we saw similar variance in a test report from C&D between hybrids (Civic and Prius), non-hybrid (Echo) and a diesel (Jetta) in a comparison test.
Cars will return mileage based on how much power (energy) is used. There is a variance between gasoline and diesel in terms of energy content, and that is 11%. So, there isn't a magic involved that no matter how hard one pushes the diesel, there is going to be less variance than gasoline.
Not looking for magic, nor complicated explanations, just results that hits the bottom line! The 11% energy advantage does not explain the real world results of say the TDI vs gasser in the Jetta. The Jetta will easily get 50 mpg while either gasser struggles to get 29/30. This is a difference of 40%. On the gasser Accord 29/30 vs 52 example that is 42.3%. So again a secondary data point. But I would opine the logic is more direct given higher volume and % diesel models. Would I rather get 29/30 or 50/52 mpg in the same model!?
So really the 11% advantage does not explain the market resistance. Perhaps market inertia might be a catch basin. We are all aware of course that not all buying decisions are made with an emphasis on fuel mileage.
Comments
Accord might get it a little later. And if it does, I think Honda should offer it in LX and EX trims, instead of starting with EX-L. But it is also likely they will pick only one trim to start with until production/sales find a balance.
Even if the diesel can get 300+ lb-ft, it still needs reasonable horsepower to go with it, or else it could be tough sell.
"The new engine is said to be a 3.5L diesel unit that’s 30% more fuel efficient that an equivalent petrol models. Diesel engines also emit close to 20% less carbon-dioxide but do release harmful nitrogen oxides and particulates." (link)
I hope they will be available in fairly maxxed trim level, with manual-trans. Honda makes sweet manual trannies & shifters. It's about time VW got some competition in the diesel-car-geek segment!
I just returned from a trip from New York to Roanoke. I travelled about 480 miles each way through New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia.
The price per gallon of Diesel fuel was consistantly twenty to fifty cents per gallon more than regular grade gasoline.
Could be, but there are incredible numbers of over-the-road tractor trailers out there buying Diesel fuel at those inflated prices. That's got to mean much higher prices for EVERYTHING that we buy that is carried by truck.
Yeah, here in California regular unleaded is $3.06 a gallon and diesel is $3.32. That's less than 10% higher. Considering diesel has 15% more energy per gallon and also a diesel engine is about 15% more economical than a gas engine, you will still be money ahead in the $/mile travelled department. and that is not taking into consideration the positive environmental effects relative to a gasoline engine.
Why is it taking so long to get the diesels popular in the USA? Now that all of the regulatory logjams have been cleared with the new honda diesel engine passing the Tier 2 tests, will the new diesel engines be a big hit with lots of demand? Will diesel car prices and diesel fuel prices soar with increasing demand?
It will be fun to watch as the new diesels start to get popular.
-Nano
Diesels have normally followed the platform logic. If you look at the Jetta, in 2003 there was a 246 dollar premium. Over all I got it for 300 over invoice. The 2003 Prius at that time made absolutely NO economic sense (even at invoice). It was selling for OVER MSRP!! It made even less sense with the massive redo in 2004 (again at invoice). Again over even a HIGHER MSRP! Fast forward, it NOW even makes LESS sense. The only time it make sense is as a marketing statement. (with its attending over price)
Just like a 8,0000 dollar Civic hyrid premium did over my Civic, which I needed for an everday commute. Perhaps that is where Honda made the mistake with hybrid in that they did not make it an "only car" like Prius. So really one could not buy it for the "STATEMENT" it made. To me TOTALLY ridiculous!!! However I liked the Civic (Hybrid) one of several models concept! The problem was that I was not a buyer at a 8,000 premium. I was a buyer at $ -8,000 for one of the Civics' model line!!
Honda will probably ask for a 1,000 diesel premium over a gasser Accord. My swag is they will have NO issues selling their WHOLE (diesel Accord) inventory.
Maybe it will be "only" $1000 more and maybe it will be much more than that. Maybe diesel fuel will cost much more than gas. It is already in some areas.
I am thinking the Honda diesels could go into the same high demand/short supply scenario where it would be hard for anyone to get them for even $2500 over the price of the gasoline engine. This honda diesel is pretty exciting for me, so I expect it will be exciting for those with more purchasing power willing to spend more than me.
If you think how bad it is that the dealers are holding out for MSRP on the new Accords, think how bad it could be with the new diesel engine models.
I hope i'm wrong!
We need a decent low pollution/high milage vehicle here in California, and I do not consider the Prius it. I just hope something can arrive within the next two years that is actually something exciting FROM A MILAGE/ENVIRONMENTAL POINT OF VIEW, and at the same time HIGHLY AVAILABLE AT A GOOD PRICE.
-Nano
However lets used msg# 283 quote(in response to another message); "...Yeah, here in California regular unleaded is $3.06 a gallon and diesel is $3.32."...
as an example. gas $3.06/30 mpg vs diesel $3.32/52 mpg
Gasser per mile driven: .102 cents
diesel per mile driven: .0638461 cents
this will be on the economic test, .0381539 cents cheaper per mile driven= which one?.
No rocket science here, only grammar school math. :shades:
You wrote: "I believe the only question re the new diesels is the ability of the automakers to keep up with a huge demand."
I'm not sure that I can agree that that is the only question. It is clear that there is some pent-up demand for Diesel engines on these Edmunds enthusiast forums. But that probably doesn't translate to more than a miniscule percentage of overall sales. The vast majority of North Americans (except perhaps those who've been driving Diesel trucks for years) equate Diesels with EXHAUST STINK, EXHAUST SMOKE, CLATTERING ENGINE NOISE and POOR ACCELERATION.
All of that aside, I'd be interested in checking out an Accord Diesel if the price were right.
Will the new diesels start out with slow sales due to ignorance?
Well, I can dream can't I?
-Nano
I have posted this in other diesel threads. The growth of passenger diesel will follow the growth rate of SUV's to 12% of the passenger vehicle fleet over a generation (30 years) from less than 1% or an average of (a little over) 1/3rd of 1 percent per year.
The metaphor/sound bite in the case of the Honda Accord is: why get 52 mpg when 29 mpg will do!!! (it will just cost more)
Please keep in mind that I have gotten as high as 62 mpg in the TDI! The range has been a low of 44 to 62 mpg! I have a Civic that gets 38-42 in a plain jane commute. I would have to employ EXTREME driving techniques to even attempt 45 mpg in the Civic. The TDI gets 48-52 in that same commute.
Just recently on a trip (interstate highway 5) Washington, Oregon, they (revenue takers) were doing a series of rolling speed traps (5/6 trooper cars) and I dialed in 70/75 mph, to avoid even the appearance. When I filled for that leg (can't resist a drive by, sub par diesel price
The metric that I base what I say is the passenger vehicle fleet being (registered ) 253.4 M vehicles. Less than 3% being diesels (235.4M *3 % = ) 7.062 M diesel vehicles. It is acknowleged that yearly new car sales @ between 16-17 M vehicles. So in order to increase the vehicle fleet the real question will be how many DIESEL vehicles (vol and percentage) are sold per year. Part of the driver is the yearly salvage rate of app 7% (which is coincidently 16.5M vehicles)
One appears to be real world fuel economy. The other (52 mpg) is based on British fuel economy rating and measured in imperial gallons (an addition 20% advantage added right there).
Appearances can be deceiving. You should be careful not to be easily deceived! More importantly, not to validate an already drawn conclusion on faulty assumptions due to a intentional/unintentional misread of data.
..."one of which was shown recently with with a new emission control system at a diesel conference in California. That car is apparently capable of 52mpg which, if replicated by the production version, will put it well ahead of anything else in its class."...
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/06/07/2009-honda-accord-diesel-to-hit-52-mpg/
one secondary data point: (you can google for more, just as I can)
..."A European Accord that was fitted with the 2.2L diesel was capable of achieving 62.8mpg.
That means that the US version of the car should achieve around 52 mpg"...
http://www.thetorquereport.com/2007/06/2009_honda_accord_diesel_will.html
2009 Honda Accord Diesel Will Achieve Over 60mpg
Accord Diesel: 62.8 mpg (52.3 mpg)
Civic Hybrid: 65.7 mpg (54.8 mpg)
Civic 1.8: 52.3 mpg (43.6 mpg)
Based on that, and looking at EPA ratings in the USA, a more logical guess would be Accord Diesel getting highway in low 40s. Impressive, but no 50s.
As for the mpg variance, I think all one has to do is look at the thread Civic Real world MPG. There is a variance between high teens to low 40's. The point of departure of course is the EPA mpg figures, which my point of reference is 29/38 mpg. Commute we get 38-42. So from my perspective while he might be considered "off", he is not FAR off. (3.7%) So if the "diesel" figures tighten the range up from 25-40%, is it not still a NNN gain!?
"If" they do, then yes. But we saw similar variance in a test report from C&D between hybrids (Civic and Prius), non-hybrid (Echo) and a diesel (Jetta) in a comparison test.
Cars will return mileage based on how much power (energy) is used. There is a variance between gasoline and diesel in terms of energy content, and that is 11%. So, there isn't a magic involved that no matter how hard one pushes the diesel, there is going to be less variance than gasoline.
So really the 11% advantage does not explain the market resistance. Perhaps market inertia might be a catch basin. We are all aware of course that not all buying decisions are made with an emphasis on fuel mileage.