By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
The price of diesel in my area is as high or higher than gasoline and it is much harder to find.
Maybe you have to question folks in your area. Here in NJ, I'm not sure I even know of many stations WITHOUT diesel.
Yes, they get better mileage but I would think the additional pricing of the cars would eat that up?
Depends to what end. Just like a hybrid, it would eat up initial savings, but long-term is a different story. However, unlike a hybrid, long-term reliability and durability are not typically in question. historically, well-built diesels outlast gasser engines by a wide margin.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Semis have about 10% of the power to weight ratio of a car that is why they need so many gears. An Accord will be fine with 5 or 6 speeds (had a rabbit diesel with only 4 speeds)
Now if the Accord diesel had about 15 or 20 hp it would have power to weight closer to a semi, and then it might need a whole bunch of gears to eek the most out of the engine. Fortunately that is nowhere neer being the case.
This is simply not an issue with passenger cars.
You will have to drive extreme mileage to come out ahead based on fuel savings within 5 years.
People who drive the typical 12,000 miles per year may never see a savings.
I think the people who buy these next year will buy just because they want the "new thing" and do not have cost as a concern.
In my case, the hybrid (over gasser) premium was 7,400 for a commute vehicle, selection was no brainer (for me). Really how it played out was too bad, in that I understand a Civic hybrid will no longer be offered. But then of course,...
http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/article/103775/Most-Power-Packed-Cars;_ylt=- AmDiHkUOF4Jdd8UykIPufG27YWsA
(this is of course not germane to the (Honda) DIESEL thread)
The problem isn't with mentioning advantages, the problem is overblowing them while masking the shortcomings.
That is your take, not mine! I have described some even as you ignore that! You are just trying to use what I really have said (which I did not say your quote) as a false foil to get on the soap box. That hurts your credibility!
Just stand on the soap box!!!
..."The problem isn't with mentioning advantages, the problem is overblowing them while masking the shortcomings."...
I am glad then you are emphasing the gasser short comings (indirectly), by attempting to deny the obvious (not so obvious to you, obviously) diesel advantages. Clearly you feel threaten by them. No problem here, just don't buy one when they come out.
You guys are not very clear on exactly what you are arguing about are you?
Both of your previous posts over the last few days have been very cryptic on exactly what you were trying to say. I didn't really understand either of your points.
Obviously there is more to car performance than just peak HP and torque numbers. the shape of the power and torque curves are important and are directly related to final gearing for performance feel. Yes, the gearing is just as important as the gross power output and the shape of the power curves, and indeed the gearing is dependent on these power curves.
Other than that i just don't see what all the fuss is about between you two.
I like the idea of listing the diesel advantages and disadvantages to initiate discussion. Here is my first take:
DIESEL GOOD:
engine fuel efficiency
diesel fuel energy density
low end torque
environmental pollution
multiple fuel sources
can pump fuel faster while refueling
DIESEL BAD:
new unproven engine for honda (in europe for 4 years?)
new unproven 2008 Honda Accord model
initial car price differential
fuel is more expensive
lower horsepower
narrow torque curve
What do you think?
While I would not necessarily categorize things the way you have...BAD:"fuel is more expensive" (agreed) ...
What is not to understand 3.00 for RUG and 3.29 for #2 ULSD? What is not to understand about diesel being: per mile driven: cheaper for like (gasser) models?? 30 mpg vs 50 mpg.?... What is BETTER? : #2 diesel CHEAPER than RUG: this I fear is what RUG consumers fear!? ... #2 diesel is sold artificially higher than RUG!! So it would be a no brainer to do.
But hey, a good jump off point for renewed discussions. Since I have lived with a passenger diesel for 100,000 miles, and the gasser side for over 1 M miles, I am actually talking about BOTH sides from both points of view (mine obviously) and not just from having lived with gassers.
Diesel is cheaper to refine as it is a step cruder than gasoline. BUT, now they have the added cost of removing the sulphur from the diesel produced from the refining process. AND, I believe they are adding synthetic lubricators diesel to replace the removed sulphur's lubricity properites. This is added expense that is not necessary for gasoline.
So the question is, how much does ULSD diesel really cost to produce relative to gasoline when you take the necessary additives into account? How much $$$ in additives goes into gasoline?
-Nano
This will give you an idea of taxes http://www.taxadmin.org/FTA/rate/motor_fl.html
Not only is diesel cheaper to refine, a percentage of it IS a direct (consequence) product of getting RUG. Indeed you can NOT have RUG without diesel (and a host of other products). Further if a refinery were able to refine 100% of a barrel of oil ((or close to)) to RUG or what ever; it would be a HUGE revolutionary break through!!
Currently most US refineries can only deal with light sweet crude (more expensive and less plentiful). Also diesel can be 40% cheaper for the crude oil for it can be refined even more cheaply from "other than light sweet crude"!!! So what do you think that 40% discount REALLY does to 92 dollar light sweet crude?? If this is cryptic, I can't help you. So it can be cheaper than "cheaper" if you get my drift. Indeed the over all effect of a % of diesel use (like Europes @ 50%) make diesel use INTENSELY more profitable, while paradoxically decreasing consumption!! In the case of the Jetta example 40% !! . Do you ever wonder why Europe is doing much better than the US right now? Here is a very simple example. SUV's get app 15 mpg (if you are perfectionistic or picky pick whatever number you wish). Actually talk to any expert and they will tell you the AVERAGE MPG IS app 20 mpg and has been for 30 plus years (3 per gal/20 mpg=.15 cents per average mile driven). RUG @ 3 per gal= .20 cents per mile driven. Diesel Jetta 50 mpg #2 diesel in Europe is 6 per gal= .12 cents per gal. The cryptic questions: What do you think the average mpg in Europe is!! WHICH is cheaper! WHICH is more expensive. How many folks do you think choose to drive FORD F150's in Europe?
This is Honda. they get it right the first time!
http://www.chevron.com/products/prodserv/fuels/diesel/documents/Diesel_Fuel_Tech- _Review.pdf
I must say Ruking that a lot of your posts ARE cryptic to me, including the last one. I fully understand how petroleum is refined into its constituent fractions. I also understand you can't help me.
Thanks again for your efforts in spite of it all!
-Nano
Link
The article doesn't say what the difference in the two Honda diesel engines is. How could there be that much power difference in the same engine block design? Must be the DTEC head/camshaft design?
I am thinking we will see only one Accord Diesel next year in the USA as the USA is a new market. I am wondering just how far Honda is going to stick their neck out bringing the new diesels into the USA. Limited supply at first to feel out the market? It seems like they are already sticking their necks way out to me bringing something new to the USA!
The really exciting thing to me is that VW is bringing in their new diesel to compete head-to-head! These two diesels are very similar in all respects. And the VW is slated for release in early or late spring 2008, so they will have a short jump on Honda. this is good for us consumers, and especially for people interested in the new Honda diesels. Honda is more likely to be aggressive with supply and pricing if VW is out of the blocks sooner.
I can't wait for a test drive. Especially with an auto tranny. I can't wait to see how the Honda diesel does with an auto.
-Nano
This statement is false in that it's based only on the respective engines. It doesn't take into account the wrapping that the engine comes in. Most owners need the wrappings.
The major diesel seller here for the recent past is VW and their reliability and durability is in the very pits.
Trucks? OK
There are no others.
Your reference to the hybrids is doubly false in that they are among the most reliable vehicles on the road since their respective debuts. Prius, HCH, FEH, HH and TCH.
It might be time to update your perspective a little, aye?
VW has all 60000 of its units available I believe.
The really exciting thing to me is that VW is bringing in their new diesel to compete head-to-head! These two diesels are very similar in all respects. And the VW is slated for release in early or late spring 2008, so they will have a short jump on Honda. this is good for us consumers, and especially for people interested in the new Honda diesels. Honda is more likely to be aggressive with supply and pricing if VW is out of the blocks sooner.
OTOH I think HOnda has the inside track here to make the diesels really take off. VW has been here and for the most part have mucked around in other issues like electronics reliability and electrical systems. Honda may be poised to take all these recently dissatisfied buyers into the fold immediadely...foreever. These buyers already took the first diesel step so there is little or no 'education' to do with them. It the rest of the market that needs educating. IMO Honda is best positioned to do it, oh and they need to do it and make the Accord work. They cannot let Toyota have the high ground all to itself with the TCH.
My TDI is only at 100,000 miles. Give me a min of 400,000 more, or at least until the next 100,000 miles which will make it @ 200,000 miles.
As for the wrappings, the Honda Civic's are wearing twice as fast as the Jetta's. I do not benefit from saying this at all. If anything, the Civic IS and will cost me more!
As for the Honda diesel, for my .02 cents, it will truly have to be a step above (VW's), as the quality is no where near VW's. True, Honda has the reputation of doing reliability better (with lower quality) than VW reputation of doing reliability (with higher quality). So going forward, if VW does reliability better, then it is just a marketing slug out. Let me also make clear nothing is "WRONG" with the Civic. I am very satisfied with it so far. Nothing is "WRONG" with the Jetta. I am very satisfied with it so far, also.
Honda (and Toyota) also is facing significant challenges in the European market. So it really gives them motivation to carve out market share whereever they can.
Honda today confirmed that the 2009 Honda Accord would be available with an optional 2.2 liter i-CTDi 4-cylinder Tier 2 Bin 5 diesel engine.
The diesel engine is reported to produce in excess of 150 HP, while torque -- always a diesel strength -- is pegged at 260 lb-ft. The diesel will be emissions legal in all 50 states and is set to deliver real word fuel economy in excess of 40 MPG.
If the fuel economy estimates pass the Environmental Protection Agency's testing, that would make the diesel Accord more fuel efficient than the previous generation Accord Hybrid and Toyota's current Camry Hybrid.
The 2.2 liter diesel is expected to be closely followed by a new 3.5 liter V6 diesel destined for Honda's large vehicles. The engine is 30 percent more fuel efficient than the current 3.5 liter V6 gasoline engine used in the Odyssey, Pilot and Ridgeline according to the Nikkei newspaper.
In addition to the diesel news, Honda also announced that the CR-Z hybrid concept will make it to production. The small two-seater uses the same powertrain as the Civic Hybrid (4-cylinder gasoline engine, Integrated Motor Assist and CVT) and is likely to better its 40 MPG/45 MPG city/highway EPA ratings.
The CR-Z will be accompanied by a $22,000 five-seat Global Small Hybrid (GSH) which will do battle with Toyota's Prius in 2009.
-in the news today
It will probably do very poorly compared to a manual. Diesels shift at much lower RPM's. When people compare most of Europe's diesel cars (countries most Americans have never been to) to cars made specifically for the US. You also need to see that automatic transmissions are clearly in the minority in most of Europe. Shift a diesel at low RPM's and you are fine but it will probably seem awkward to someone who has never owned a diesel before.
Honda knows they have to sell automatics in the US since most Americans will not drive a manual transmission car.
So this also keeps most diesels out of the US market.
I can't fathom buying an automatic diesel, but my guess is Honda will sell more of them. If they only offer a slushbox on their new diesel accord I will not buy it. VW offers manuals but has such awful reliability that they really need something to work for them. Making cheaper quality cars in Mexico didn't help reliability and now they want to go even cheaper. Hard to trust a company like that. Honda has consistently ticked me off with not bringing the Type R Civic and Accords to the US. This is why I haven't bought a Honda in a long time.
With 3.0/V6 for the light trucks, one can expect 210-215 HP/~400 lb-ft.
With turbo that is an integral part of the diesel engine, different output from same displacement isn't impossible. The 180 HP version is likely a result of higher compression and higher pressure turbo. The first iteration of Honda's diesel was actually relatively docile in both regards.
One might notice a bit more turbo lag in the 180 HP version though than the 155 HP. Perhaps slightly worse NVH too. One of the design criteria for the original diesel (N22) was to operate at lower compression than most other diesels in the market. This, apparently, made the engine smoother. 16:1 compression in that N22 is considered low by diesel standards. So, the new i-DTEC may continue with lower compression for base engine, and be more aggressive for a higher output.
Trucks are likely to get (at least) a 3.0, and that will likely be showcased in one of American autoshows.
As in any turbo charged engine, increasing compression and/or turbo size/pressure can help create different outputs from same displacement. I don't recall how big the turbo is in the first Honda diesel (referred to as "N22", where "N" would be engine series, and 22 represents the 2.2-liter displacement) but it was a relatively low compression design for a diesel (16:1). Several diesels push beyond 20:1 with, apparently, NVH becoming an issue with higher compression.
So, for the 155 HP/260 lb-ft 2.2/i-DTEC, Honda may have implemented incremental improvements, with relatively low pressure turbo and lower compression, to maintain smoothness. That output may also allow them to use a shared automatic transmission (from gasoline/V6 engines). This is very likely the diesel engine we will see in American Accord, and any other vehicle that will get I-4 diesel (likes of Element/CR-V remain candidates).
The 180 HP/320 lb-ft 2.2/i-DTEC may be reserved for "sport" models in Europe, and perhaps in heavier models if Honda does offer, say, Pilot or RDX. This will likely remain a manual transmission only engine. Higher output may be from higher pressure/larger turbo and perhaps higher compression.
What surprises me is that Honda didn't consider building a smaller diesel for Civic. Perhaps, they didn't want to create a smaller block and there is no point to having smaller displacement from same block so they might just use the 2.2 in Civic as well, like they do now.
Since the Honda diesels are not on the market yet and the resultant aftermarket vendors have not yet come up with Honda diesel add ons, a Jetta TDI can serve (hopefully) as an example. Stock injectors (2003) 5 speed were .184's which gave 90 hp and 155# ft of torque. Just a one step up (.205) injector swap (which incidently was stock on European models) ($300 aftermarket)will put 25 hp and 40#ft of torque on line. There are a couple of steps going up with the resultant hp/#ft of torque ratio inprovements. The aftermarket for Jetta upgrade turbos are almost dizzying. Of course, the oem will adjust (or should) the transmissions mated, so as to match the components for durability. It would not make sense to mate a 155# matched clutch only to be fried early by someone who routinely would jump on his now 200#ft of torque motor. Combined this with chip upgrades (hp/torqe additions and power curve adjustments): LQQK OUT!! :shades: Indeed if one will go to this effort and expense, one can easily do a (i.e., .658,) 5th gear upgrade. The practical translation: if you run between 2800-3000 rpms, you can now run 2400 RPM's. A much more costly (2-3k) but do able modification is the 6 speed manual swap.
I think when Honda introduced the 3.5 liter diesel engines they talked about hybrid engines not being right for the larger cars and trucks, accord and above. Maybe a result of the Accord hybrid experience.
By inference, I think Honda is saying that hybrid is the way to go for the smaller cars like the Civic. In other words, I think they are saying the Civic will be hybrid, and the Accord and larger models will be diesel.
The new CR-Z hybrid sport concept is an example.
Only one year to wait to test drive what they've got.
-Nano
HOnda's diesel interest is directly related to their lack of offerings in hybrids for the midsize segments. The HCH is perfectly capable and inexpensive as a small ultra-economical vehicle; the new Honda hybrid even more so. There's no reason to bring a diesel in to compete with its own hybrid offering.
However in the midsize sector the HAH was a flop and Honda has no alternatives to the TCH, HH/400h and possibly the Sienna hybrid in the future. They must make diesel work in order to keep Toyota from grabbing all the good press.
And based on couple of reviews, the diesel engine has been a rather tight fit in the engine bay of smaller cars, resulting in some compromises in mounting techniques. Apparently, and as a result, the same diesel that feels quite refined in Accord, has been said to be a bit less than that in Civic. So, I was actually expecting a smaller diesel for Civic.
Hybrid might be perfect for anything Civic and smaller. I'm looking forward to hear more about that promised economy hybrid from Honda in the very near future.
I also think those that are thinking of going with a diesel must ALSO make it work. In a previous post, I short listed 11 benefits. So for example, someone posted they will only do 8,333 miles per year. This is an example of diesel probably NOT being cost effective. While anyone can google for a B/E equation, normally given a diesel premium, the yearly miles that make sense are app 18,000 to 20,000 to an ideal of 21,000-35,000-PLUS per year. So for example, if you will only keep a car 100,000 miles (using Jetta TDI 50 mpg vs Jetta 30 mpg) that is 3333 gals-2000 gals=1333 gals @$3. or 3999- premium=.... What is unknown is any greater resale value over a gasser Honda- even as if Edmunds.com indicates up to 4,600 dollars Jetta TDI over a gasser Jetta. In which case, it STILL makes sense to get a diesel!!
Hmmm... so how is it false? maybe I only was talking about the engines. And... well, yes, I was.
The major diesel seller here for the recent past is VW and their reliability and durability is in the very pits.
That's why I said "historically" and "typically" in my statement. VW makes up a very very small percentage of diesel vehicles sold on these shores throughout automotive history.
Your reference to the hybrids is doubly false in that they are among the most reliable vehicles on the road since their respective debuts.
HUH?? First off, find me a reliable reference for this. Second, find me a 10-year-old 300k-mile Prius and I will certainly call it reliable.
It might be time to update your perspective a little, aye?
Actually, what I think you may need to do is EXPAND your perspective beyond just the past 5 years.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Maybe it will be like the Accord Hybrid where it was only one model that was an EX-L sedan equivalent.
I could see them doing that the first year because the production will probably be very low at first while they ramp up production of the new engine and gauge demand. Early adapters will be willing to pay almost anything for the high end model just to be first, so the diesel could be the most expensive 2009 Accord model.
The first buyers won't be buying the diesel seriously expecting to recoup the extra expense with the fuel savings.
Then maybe in 2010 or later they will roll it out widespread to where it will be available on at a least as many different models as you can get a V6 engine and it will just be another engine choice on various trim levels.
While this is probably off topic, I would certainly include the Honda Civic Hybrid!!!! There is certainly a privation of information about either at 200,000 and 300,000 miles.
On www.tdiclub.com, there are truly many write ups on TDI's with 200,000, 300,000 miles. Folks normally are asked or include the litany of maintenance items, scheduled and probably of greater interest, unscheduled maintenance.
I envision. absolutely no issues for the TDI I drive, hitting 200,000 miles from 100,000 miles. So one on topic expectation is a min of 100,000 miles with the ability, or feeling the vehicle will hit 200,000 miles and of course, beyond. My first major unscheduled/scheduled maintenance item will be new tires @ 110,000 to 120,000 miles. I probably should get the first alignment at that time also.
..."Actually, what I think you may need to do is EXPAND your perspective beyond just the past 5 years. "...
That said - I think the US versionn will only have one output. They don't want to confuse things.