While unacknowledged by the (gasser) hybrid folks, diesel products can be the portals to alternative fuels, biodiesel to name one product. Of course we are seeing feeling, paying for the so called alternative fuel ethanol in almost everything we pay money for. Most folks can visualize the pain @ 1% ethanol. Imagine now that being @ 10% which is the dilution rate that is frequently touted. It is also noteworthy that almost NONE are converting diesel trucking and mass transportation to gasser ethanol, despite being .38 cents more (spread) Indeed why no E85 to E100 Prius? May a reason be 25% less fuel mileage? So if a Prius gets 50 mpg, 25% less =37.5 mpg. My gasser Civic gets between 38-42 mpg. The Prius at the time was double the cost. Lets see $13,436/4.51 per gal =2979 gals or (*38=)113,208 miles of commuting. It is numbers like these that make it overwhelmingly obvious why the food chain REALLY is pro gasser. ( anti diesel).
"I'm glad you liked the post. Just trying to put some perspective in the discussion about diesel."
The non sequiter responses from a couple of folks are the most entertaining.
My friend with the two year old Prius is consistently getting 45mpg city. My friend with the used TDI is still recovering from thousands in fuel system repairs and maintenance. She still likes the car, uses bio-diesel mix, and believes she is helping the environment. She gets 45mpg highway - and far less in the city. She walks/runs to most places.
Interesting confirmation that mpg is pretty much neck and neck. Prius/TDI. Sorry to hear that she is having fuel system repairs and maintenance issues. Short trips are hard on almost any vehicle!! Diesels are better adapted to the open road. If I had a downtown LA, SF, Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Wash. D.C., NYC, Boston, etc, etc, requirement and the company would pay for it (IRS business rate of 50.5 cents per mile,) Prius would be very high on the list!
An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence. A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.
Actually what was non sequitur was the original "don't blame me"conclusion of the quote of the quote. in msg# 6170. Was it terrible the numbers upset the illusion?
So while the pew # was similar, the church was entirely different. :lemon:
I still am not sure why the Prius/TDI adversarial relationship continues.
Latest flash on CNBC, the USA has HUGE reserves of other than light sweet crude. The problem is the MOST US refineries are geared to refining light sweet crude. Seems like an upcoming trend will be refined (from light sweet crude ) RUG to PUG will come from INDIA!!!!
Not a good time or situation to be a 98% plus RUG to PUG consumer when there is a HUGE abundance of refine able diesel fuel!!! (from other than light sweet crude- and up to 40% cheaper per barrel)
My friend with the used TDI is still recovering from thousands in fuel system repairs and maintenance.
One of the biggest mistakes with a VW TDI is babying it. They like to be wrung out now and then to blow the soot out. If the car is from another state it could be buildup of very dirty diesel. If it was run on dirty diesel then she started using biodiesel mix she flushed some of the crap into the injectors. Biodiesel is an excellent solvent. Keeping a clean fuel filter is essential. With so few VW TDI vehicles in CA it is hard to find a dealer with a mechanic that is competent to repair and advise the owner.
Fuel Filters When first using biodiesel it is recommended to replace the fuel filter on your engine. Because of the solvent properties in Biodiesel, it may cause the release of accumulated deposits inside the fuel tank and fuel lines from years of diesel-fuel use. These deposits can flow down the fuel line and may plug the fuel filter. Luckily, most of the time the filter's don't plug all at once, but slowly, causing slight hesitations in engine acceleration, missing (cylinder's not all firing), or other sluggish behavior.
Indeed what Gagrice said is true. I actually hesitated to answer for it would probably seem like I was figuratively "poking a stick" at the anti diesel folks with the true structural answer. The true structural answer was the VW diesels (actually most ALL oem brands) have been designed to run on "ULSD" (aka 15 ppm and or less) for a very long time.
We can thank the USA regulatory agencies. The major mistake was not requiring diesel ( D2 specifically) sold in this country for as a min of the last generation (30-40 years) to be ULSD.(to have coincided with the switch from leaded to unleaded RUG to PUG and subsequent lowering to 30 ppm sulfur)
So if one bought a diesel before the October 2006 time (delayed cut over to ULSD) frame (with an ultimate 20 year full implementation time) , the most widely form of diesel available was LSD or 500 ppm (or CA 140ppm) This means/meant that one was in effect destined to run a less than optimium fuel, with the inherent problems and issues. This of course played right into the "dirty diesel" scenario/mantra, even as the combination was no dirtier than a Ford Taurus/Honda Accord/Toyota Camry. The real hidden secret which is SLOWLY getting out is that bio diesel not only is cleaner than electric cars and renewable vs non renewable Prius fuel, but consumes C02 in part of the cycle but can be adapted to use waste from ongoing and to be developed processes vs NON for the hybrid Prius. Indeed the extra batteries have been stated by Toyota as being more consumptive in the total life cycle than even SUV's. Another secret hidden in plain sight that is getting out is RUG to PUG is a min of 2 x dirtier than D2 @ 30 ppm (vs 15 ppm) So how would it sit with all you RUG to PUG users to now get it as clean as ULSD to bio diesel? Would stricter regulations and 10-15 cents per gal more for RUG to PUG be in the cards? Goverments have not been inattentive, as the % of revenues has decline with the higher RUG to PUG per gal prices and they will likely be looking to increase both the % and vol of taxation. The decrease (however slight) in mileage has SEVERELY impacted government/s revenues also.
98% of gasser users could give a DARN about this, but another internal truth is ULSD to bio diesel burns FAR cleaner than RUG to PUG. I can run a normal 25,000 mile OCI. So does a 3-5,000 mile OCI use more/less oil than a 25,000 mile OCI??
Another fine choice would be a V6 diesel Cayman. The gas versions never crossed my radar. Bring em on. I am ready to start test driving the myriad of SUV diesel choices over the next 2 years.
... Speaking of ultra high pressure injection, Green Diesel Corp (Google News) showed up in the heart of Bosch country, @ the tenth annual engine expo show in Stuttgart Germany. Their revolutionary injector has over *five* times the pressure of the latest common rail systems. Should the reg bodies be looking at the superior carbon footprint of this system, and offering incentives to bring this to market ???
This one will be moving to the head of my list: With the diesels winning the big races Porsche may start using diesels in their sports cars :shades:
We have been expecting a diesel engine option for the Porsche Cayenne for a while, and it appears that March of 2009 may be the date. While Porsche purists the world over may be upset over an oil-burner underhood (or under trunk) of any Porsche model, we don't see the big deal. After all, it's not like the Cayenne, despite what Porsche would have you believe, has all that much 911 DNA in it anyway. A modern diesel engine could help Porsche meet new fuel economy regulations for a lower cost than a hybrid, and the diesel V6 engine sourced from Audi should prove plenty capable of hauling the SUV's mass-tonnage around. Though Audi's current TDI six displaces 3.0 liters and is good for 240 HP and 406 lb.-ft. of torque, rumors indicate that Porsche will be using a 3.2 liter version of this engine that makes at least 300 horses. We think that should do rather nicely.
Porsche purists will recoil in horror, but desperate times require desperate measures: The German sports carmaker is developing its first-ever diesel. With the gas-electric Cayenne Hybrid delayed until at least 2010 and fuel prices spiraling ever higher, the company needs an interim measure. The obvious answer, for the European market, at least, is a diesel.
It's not so un-Porsche as you might think. The plan calls for using the 50-state-legal 3.0-liter turbocharged direct-injection V-6 from the forthcoming Audi Q7 3.0 TDI. In U.S. trim, the engine produces 221 horsepower and a very stout 406 pound-feet of torque — notably more torque than the either the direct-injection gasoline V-6 from the base-model Cayenne or the direct-injection gasoline V-8 from the Cayenne S and GTS.
In testing the diesel-powered Q7, we were pleasantly surprised to discover that the engine pulled very much like a gas-fed V-8, with the quick-witted six-speed Tiptronic transmission compensating for narrower rev range of the diesel V-6. It launches the Q7, all 5,100 pounds of it, from zero to 60 in about 8.4 seconds while returning a respectable 25 mpg.
Considering the 3.0 TDI accounts for more than 80 percent of Audi's Q7 sales in Germany, there's little doubt Porsche will find homes for the 15,000 diesel Cayennes it plans to build each year, starting with the European market in March. Meanwhile, the Q7 3.0 TDI arrives in North America later this year.
It looks to me like it will be a close call if they offer them in the USA. If Audi & VW are successful with diesels, I imagine Porsche will jump on the bandwagon.
Diesel dropped in price over the last week. While gas held steady. Just 34 cents difference now in CA.
And, of course, with Porsche. VW. AUDI, SKODA, SEAT all now being, effectively the same company Porsche don't have to start from scratch - just raid the parts bin and play.
With the success of Audi diesels, I think it is just a matter of time before Porsche will decide to come to market with a sports car, twin turbo diesel. The neat thing is if they decide to do this, they will probably test it in Europe first.
I think if GM really wants to knock the cover off the baseball (almost literally) in crushing another home run; they will give or support the assignment to Chevrolet Corvette to come up with a twin turbo diesel (Corvette) sports car!! This would be a high speed LONG distance tourer PAR Excellence!!
I would cite what Corvette did with a poorly selling "hard top" entry level Corvette, which has morfed into one of GM's quintessential (-my take but I might be WRONG) success stories...the Z06 Corvette.
Both of course would face EXTREME resistance from the ( each brands') faithful. My take is the good news if they do not like it, don't buy it. Next, it is not likely for any of those faithful to drive their current selections off a cliff. Lastly it would definitely increase each brand's reach.
If Porsche follows through with the V6 Cayenne TDI it will be a winner. I am still not sure why VW decided to test the waters with that huge V10 TDI. Unless they wanted to get the weight over the point of being restricted in the CARB states. The Touareg V10 TDI was able to compete with the only other diesel SUV at the time in CA, the Excursion. Both in my opinion were overkill and not what the market really wants. Sadly that is the way our laws are written. Big or nothing.
Now that the V6 TDI is approved for 50 state sale I wonder if it will also show up in the Touareg and Tiguan. Or maybe the very good looking VW mini vans. We can hope we get something soon.
A TDI Rouan huh? Now wouldn't that be interesting.
Hmmm, let's see here, a Canadian built Chrysler Town & Country minivan with a VW logo and VW interior, and sporting an engine that was designed and built by Audi, an engine that also happens to be used in the Porsche Cayenne. I'm thinking that I'd be more than happy to buy one if/when we decide to replace one of our two minivans (both six figures showing on the odometer) with yet another minivan. :shades:
Yes I learned that after posting the picture. Strange bedfelllows. Though I think that is common practice in the EU. Probably an alliance forged prior to MB selling off Chrysler. The article I read seemed to think a diesel version was off a ways in the future, sadly.
Probably an alliance forged prior to MB selling off Chrysler.
This "alliance" goes back a lot furthher than you may think. The Dodge Omnis back in the 1980s had a VW engine. (minus the fuel-injection that VW used in their vehicles of that vintage.)
Speaking of CARB Cool Aid this is what the OEM's are drinking and in huge amounts. I just read in Auto news that Dodge has tweaked the valve timing, air induction and other things and they are going to have a Ram Pick up that is a whopping 4 % better fuel economy! WHAT are the nuts??? A 3L or 3.5L Diesel with BluTech technology would give them 40% better fuel economy. You say they could not sell it in Calf and some north east states, SO WHAT. Screw them give the rest of the country what they need and quit worrying about Calf.
... I think the tailpipe would pass anywhere with the urea after-tratment, and a particulate trap, but the infrastructure for the urea is not ready. I am still on the fence about the after-treatment, as the ability of the reg bureaucrats to see the big picture, especially in cost and long term maintenance, is a known failure. They are only recently paying attention to GHG and the current USA regs gives NO distinction betwixt 80 horsepower and 370 HP. You see the NoX is visible and the carbon is not and they have hinged their whole careers on the visible.
Another example of that is the gm/mile measurements are prominiently displayed for most to ALL European new cars (in Europe) . In the US you have to dig deep almost like looking for a needle in a haystack to find those figures. Indeed there is no statistical correlation between our segments. They really might not do full disclosure for it will show the inconvenient truths that more consumption is not as good as less consumption, even as all the laws rules and regulations favor MORE consumption.
You say they could not sell it in Calf and some north east states, SO WHAT. Screw them give the rest of the country what they need and quit worrying about Calf.
Thank you. I have been saying that all along. If the big three are so affraid they can't make a profit witout CA, NY, MA, etc. then they need to change there business model or just let those states deal with the gas ver.
... All-right, we all want clean air and the reg bodies are trying to balance NoX regs with total carbon output; I just disagree with the fact that they don't seem to realize what the vehicle manufacturers have to do to the cars and trucks and how the add-ons will be five years down the road, but I think the UN-availiabilty of vehicles that can and will get near or well into the fifty MPG range is a total disgrace and it's my opinion that the reg bodies are responsible for this.
I would agree with you, with one minor caveat, I think they do REALIZE- which is the reason why they make them do it!!! They also realize that for literally ANY population they care to let passenger diesels expand to (say 12% as 5/10/15 year targets) they can not make the statistical correlation that whatever emissions D2 does put out will be MORE than a like populations of diesels. They have not been able to make the case for the 12% SUV population, and they have not been able to make the opposite correlation for the hybrid population.
The Cummins light duty diesel will be ready for the 2010 model year in the Ram 1500, and it will be 50-state legal. Automotive News stated this week it will be the 4.2L V6 version instead of the 5.6L V8... still more than adequate with preliminary ratings of 270 hp and 420 lb-ft of torque (more than the revised Hemi at 407).
Tested a couple of years ago in a Dodge Durango, the V6 turbodiesel averaged 20 mpg city and 25 highway.
I agree, this is still not good enough. How about a 3L to 3.5L V6 That should provide all the HP anyone using a ½ ton pick-up should need and may give you 30 to 35 MPG hwy.
... Well the reg bodies don't appear to REALIZE that EGR causes: increased soot, increased engine wear, increased GHG, increased initial cost, increased maintenance cost, increased fuel consumption, decreased oil change interval, increased vehicle weight, and they also don't seem to realize the great advances in fuel injection, turbocharging, engine weight, particulate traps, and even their own ULSD fuel, but keep adding regs that are long passed the point of diminishing returns, and don't even make the general public consider (with incentives) (like trading a little NOx for a bunch of carbon) the very low carbon footprint, smaller, four cylinder, Diesel, sedans, that are not availiable because of the regs.
How about a 3L to 3.5L V6 That should provide all the HP anyone using a ½ ton pick-up should need and may give you 30 to 35 MPG hwy.
The 5 cylinder diesel in my Mercedes Sprinter was a great engine. It pulled that 8500 lb RV around up and down hills with ease. It was also rated to tow 5k lbs. If they put that engine in a regular van or 1/2 ton PU it should get 35 MPG out on the highway. It is the mentality in the auto industry that we either have to have a vehicle that is fast or we are going to tow a 10,000 lb trailer. Most people just need to haul a few cement blocks, bags of concrete and sheets of plywood.
The new Sprinter has the V6 Mercedes diesel and the mileage dropped from 25 MPG to under 20 MPG. We sure are making progress in this country. It will be interesting when the CAFE mandates run up against the EPA/CARB wall of worthless regulations.
Yes, indeed, CO2 emissions statement is mandatory for all new cars in EU and has been for some time now. Numbers are in g/km............after all, Europe is Metric, (apart from UK & Ireland - sort of).
Want some CO2 examples ?
o Audi A4 3.2 V6 Quattro = 250
o Audi A4 3.0 TDi Quattro = 204
o Audi RS4 V8 Quattro = 324
o BMW 335i = 231
o BMW 335d = 200
o Lambo Murcielago = 400
o Mini 1.6 D Cooper = 118
o Mini Cooper S = 164
o VW Jetta 2.0 TDi 140 = 148
o VW Jetta 2.0 TFSI 200 = 189 new TFSI's are getting pretty clean.
o VW Polo 1.4 TDi Bluemotion = 99 (non-Bluemotion = 119)
o Volvo S80 D5 AWD = 182
o Volvo S80 4.4 V8 = 294
o Audi Q7 4.2 V8 FSi = 326
o Audi Q7 4.2 V8 TDi = 294
o Cadillac CTS 2.8 V6 = 278
o Chrysler 300C 3.0 V6 CRD = 215
o Chrysler 300C 5.7 V8 Hemi = 287
o Chrysler PT Cruiser 2.2 CRD = 185
o Chrysler PT Cruiser 2.4 = 231
Just a small cross-section that will allow folks to postulate all sorts of "Aha, but......." comments. Have fun with 'em and if you'd like some specifics I'll try to oblige.
Well if your post is any example, it is easy to see that EPA/CARB (states) CONSISTENTLY has said and will continue to say :
1. that higher emissions are better than LOWER emissions!!!! (250 is better ( aka LESS than) 204, etc)
2. They also say that burning a min of 2x to higher dirtier fuel (RUG to Pug @ 30 ppm) is better than burning cleaner fuel (ULSD @15 ppm to ZERO)
2b. They make the dirtier fuel (RUG to PUG @ 30 ppm) CHEAPER per gal to boot !!!
3. They also say why burn less less (50 mpg) when MORE will do (30 mpg) !!!
( we have been saying this stuff ALL ALONG !!!!! Now we know at least one reason why K-12 US schools impart such wonderful mathematics awareness in the USA general populations.)
besides the fact that the Jetta is getting not great gas mileage; and the fact that diesel is 30% more expesnive than gasoline (which wipes out what little benefit you are getting from the 29/40 gas mileage)...
the real issue is that the Jetta is being built in the Pueblo, Mexico factory which means it will be plauged with the same quality problems as the rest of the VWs that come from Mexico
there is NO cost ebenfit to buying this hunk of junk :lemon:
from what I understand , the quality of vehicles built in mexico often exceeds that resulting from european manufacturing and that has been the case for some particular model years for VW. half of my 4 Un-Clean TDIs (03, 05, 06, 06) were built in mexico and they are awesome with regard to quality. New Beetle had a couple of tough months as dealer searched for a water leak, but that was the only annoying reliability issue. So all those VWs have been reliable, but I have not driven one past 100K yet.
What in the Jetta Sportwagon TDI class would you recommend that is rated 40 MPG out on the highway? I don't see any vehicle even close. Room for 5 adults and 30+ cubic feet of luggage. My GM vehicles built in Mexico were better than the ones from Detroit.
Today in CA diesel is only 7% higher than regular unleaded. Not sure where you are at. You can check here and see the difference. That makes the VW TDI are real bargain. The TDI gets 25% better hwy mileage than the premium burning gas Sportwagon. With premium about the same as diesel, it is advantage diesel big time. If you have not owned a VW TDI in the last few years you should do yourself a favor and try one. The competition will seem so blah after you do.. I have and want another one.
Diesel is $4.97, RUG is $4.53 at our store on the island. I didn't look in town. $4.53 for RUG plus 35% = $6.11. Diesel would have to be $6.11 a gallon to make the same value as RUG at $4.53
Gary, why did you send all this heat up here? It's 1:45 PM and 82 degrees outside, I'm dying. My guess it will be close to 90 by 5:00
I wondered where our 90 degrees went to. The weather guys said it should be that warm here today and it barely made it to 80. Hope you enjoy it. At least you can take a dip in the Sound, eh? Our local Shell is still at $4.65 for RUG and $4.99 for diesel. I would be tickled pink if my Sequoia got 25 MPG on diesel. I have only driven it once in 2 weeks. It sits all shiny in the garage. I drive my old beater Ranger PU. It gets 16 MPG. Big whoopee.... I should not think about it as I get soooo upset with our ignorant regulators and government.
You'll never see 30s out of a full-size pickup. The vehicle configuration won't allow it. You're talking about a 5000+ pound vehicle with an open bed that is intended for (and thanks to fuel prices will primarily be used for) load hauling and towing. The "consumers" will no longer be buying full-size pickup trucks the way they did just a year ago, let alone the last decade. Instead, it'll be back to the 70s and 80s "when trucks wuz trucks" and the people who bought them did so knowing the shortcomings because they actually wanted/needed one.
The "consumers" will no longer be buying full-size pickup trucks the way they did just a year ago,
I will give you that to a point. I will give you a 50% drop is the average suburb guy buying a full size pick-up. He goes from a F-150 to a Ranger. Let’s put a 2.5L or a 3.0L diesel in a Ranger. I know you can get 35 + MPG out of that. Still plenty of power and good MPG. And it won’t be rocket science either, they are all over the world except ..yep, you guessed right, the USA.
VW Jetta gets 29/40. 08 Honda Civic gets 26/34. So by your definition, one of the best (gasser) economy cars is 10.3% to 15% worse than the diesel (obviously not like model, look to VW for a like model gasser) Keep in mind the torque on the diesel is almost 49% better (mine are 155# ft vs 110# ft or 29% better)
So at 4.91 D2 and 4.53 RUG /29/40, 26/40 =
D2 range per mile driven of 16.9 cents-12.3 cents
RUG range per mile driven of 17.4 cents-13.3 cents or 2.88% to 7.5% MORE.
I am ok with others paying more!
No issues with the Mexican built Jetta after 108,000 miles. Of course both are in a longer mileage race to a min of 450,000 miles and hopefully to 1,000,000 miles.
Uisng 16 mpg (RUG) and 25 mpg (D2) as samples, A diesel Toyota Tundra @25 mpg would literally be a 36% increase!! So if the goal is to DECREASE fuel consumption, this would be a HUGE step in the right direction, unless of course the real goal is to get P/U trucks, etc, etc, OFF the roads. My take is there will always be a core of folks who will have those needs/wants and will pay the freight accordingly. Indeed the SUV population is 12% and probably shrinking- clearly a minority position getting... SMALLER!! If I had need/want for one to more of those segments, 36% better mpg would be an absolute NO brainer. Those that do not want to buy diesel can and do buy gasser. All they have to do is offer good (diesel) products folks want to buy. Diesels longevity, better drive ability etc would be added advantages. Diesel p/u, suv's, minivans, etc trucks would literally revolutionize these segments. Perhaps that is one strong reason why the logistics system is resisting the change to D2.
Diesel 30% more than gasoline. Where do you buy fuel?
I buy my diesel at several different places and the price disparity between RUG and D#2 is less than 15%.
In looking at the EPA website showing fuel economy for various vehicles, I compared my 2005 Jeep Liberty CRD to the 2005 Jeep Liberty with the 3.7 L V-6. Overall 23.8 for the CRD versus 14.8 for the gasser or about a 57% improvement in FE for the diesel. On long trips I regularly get 31 MPG with my CRD and back and forth to work in metro D.C. rush hour I average 23.1 MPG. My rush hour commuting FE is better than the highway FE for the V-6 gasser.
You're assuming you will be able to buy a Ranger. Ford has (as of right now) not announced a replacement for the current Ranger, which is scheduled to end production and have its plant close in less than 2 years.
That leaves you with the "overgrown compact" trucks like Colorado/Canyon, Dakota, Frontier, Tacoma, and Ridgeline - and some of these trucks are on th bubble too, as they have grown to the point where they get mileage as bad or worse than the full-size half tons.
The 300 and Grand Cher have the Benz 3.0L V6 diesel, the others run the 2.0L 4-cylinder. A couple from England, with a diesel Patriot and diesel Compass, drove from England through the Chunnel and 5 other countries to set an SUV record of over 66 miles per gallon, going from London to Berlin "on the fly" - both Jeeps making the trip on a single tank.
Even with the diesel price premium, Chrysler would sell every US-spec diesel Patriot/Compass (and Caliber, same platform) they could screw together using that story in their marketing. A documented 66+ mpg compared to the EPA rating of 23/28 for the gasoline version? Who wouldn't go for that?
A documented 66+ mpg compared to the EPA rating of 23/28 for the gasoline version? Who wouldn't go for that?
Most of the American public has a problem. They see the cost of diesel fuel being higher than that of gasoline and they stop there never bothering to investigate further. Most never bother to do the math showing them that the cost per mile for diesel is significantly less than that for a gasser. I have had numerous discussions with people and they cannot see past the price difference even when you show that diesel is still cheaper to run.
If said diesel powered Compass or Caliber were to come to the United States, my wife would be in one tomorrow. I will continue with my Jeep Liberty CRD. Considering sixty-six miles per gallon, who would need a Prius?
I drove diesel vehicles in Europe seven years ago that aren't here yet, but got 40+ mpg. For whatever reason, California & a few other uber-green states have made the U.S. the diesel car industry what it is today.
Comments
Jeep Grand Cherokee 2WD 18 city 23 hwy $3637 diesel
Jeep Grand Cherokee 2WD 15 city 20 hwy $4450 Regular
It should have read:
Jeep Grand Cherokee 2WD 18 city 23 hwy $3637 diesel
Jeep Grand Cherokee 2WD 13 city 19 hwy $4450 Regular V8 5.7L
Oh wait.... :confuse:
It's not.
The non sequiter responses from a couple of folks are the most entertaining.
My friend with the two year old Prius is consistently getting 45mpg city. My friend with the used TDI is still recovering from thousands in fuel system repairs and maintenance. She still likes the car, uses bio-diesel mix, and believes she is helping the environment. She gets 45mpg highway - and far less in the city. She walks/runs to most places.
An inference or conclusion that does not follow from the premises or evidence.
A statement that does not follow logically from what preceded it.
Actually what was non sequitur was the original "don't blame me"conclusion of the quote of the quote. in msg# 6170. Was it terrible the numbers upset the illusion?
So while the pew # was similar, the church was entirely different. :lemon:
I still am not sure why the Prius/TDI adversarial relationship continues.
Latest flash on CNBC, the USA has HUGE reserves of other than light sweet crude. The problem is the MOST US refineries are geared to refining light sweet crude. Seems like an upcoming trend will be refined (from light sweet crude ) RUG to PUG will come from INDIA!!!!
Not a good time or situation to be a 98% plus RUG to PUG consumer when there is a HUGE abundance of refine able diesel fuel!!! (from other than light sweet crude- and up to 40% cheaper per barrel)
One of the biggest mistakes with a VW TDI is babying it. They like to be wrung out now and then to blow the soot out. If the car is from another state it could be buildup of very dirty diesel. If it was run on dirty diesel then she started using biodiesel mix she flushed some of the crap into the injectors. Biodiesel is an excellent solvent. Keeping a clean fuel filter is essential. With so few VW TDI vehicles in CA it is hard to find a dealer with a mechanic that is competent to repair and advise the owner.
Fuel Filters
When first using biodiesel it is recommended to replace the fuel filter on your engine. Because of the solvent properties in Biodiesel, it may cause the release of accumulated deposits inside the fuel tank and fuel lines from years of diesel-fuel use. These deposits can flow down the fuel line and may plug the fuel filter. Luckily, most of the time the filter's don't plug all at once, but slowly, causing slight hesitations in engine acceleration, missing (cylinder's not all firing), or other sluggish behavior.
We can thank the USA regulatory agencies. The major mistake was not requiring diesel ( D2 specifically) sold in this country for as a min of the last generation (30-40 years) to be ULSD.(to have coincided with the switch from leaded to unleaded RUG to PUG and subsequent lowering to 30 ppm sulfur)
So if one bought a diesel before the October 2006 time (delayed cut over to ULSD) frame (with an ultimate 20 year full implementation time) , the most widely form of diesel available was LSD or 500 ppm (or CA 140ppm) This means/meant that one was in effect destined to run a less than optimium fuel, with the inherent problems and issues. This of course played right into the "dirty diesel" scenario/mantra, even as the combination was no dirtier than a Ford Taurus/Honda Accord/Toyota Camry. The real hidden secret which is SLOWLY getting out is that bio diesel not only is cleaner than electric cars and renewable vs non renewable Prius fuel, but consumes C02 in part of the cycle but can be adapted to use waste from ongoing and to be developed processes vs NON for the hybrid Prius. Indeed the extra batteries have been stated by Toyota as being more consumptive in the total life cycle than even SUV's. Another secret hidden in plain sight that is getting out is RUG to PUG is a min of 2 x dirtier than D2 @ 30 ppm (vs 15 ppm) So how would it sit with all you RUG to PUG users to now get it as clean as ULSD to bio diesel? Would stricter regulations and 10-15 cents per gal more for RUG to PUG be in the cards? Goverments have not been inattentive, as the % of revenues has decline with the higher RUG to PUG per gal prices and they will likely be looking to increase both the % and vol of taxation. The decrease (however slight) in mileage has SEVERELY impacted government/s revenues also.
98% of gasser users could give a DARN about this, but another internal truth is ULSD to bio diesel burns FAR cleaner than RUG to PUG. I can run a normal 25,000 mile OCI. So does a 3-5,000 mile OCI use more/less oil than a 25,000 mile OCI??
Article doesn't specifically mention the US market, but does state that the engine choice is to help avoid CAFE fines that start in 2016:
http://www.leftlanenews.com/porsche-confirms-diesel-cayenne-updated-boxster-to-d- ebut-in-january.html
Of course I did mean Cayenne. Those two names always cause me confusion.
We have been expecting a diesel engine option for the Porsche Cayenne for a while, and it appears that March of 2009 may be the date. While Porsche purists the world over may be upset over an oil-burner underhood (or under trunk) of any Porsche model, we don't see the big deal. After all, it's not like the Cayenne, despite what Porsche would have you believe, has all that much 911 DNA in it anyway. A modern diesel engine could help Porsche meet new fuel economy regulations for a lower cost than a hybrid, and the diesel V6 engine sourced from Audi should prove plenty capable of hauling the SUV's mass-tonnage around. Though Audi's current TDI six displaces 3.0 liters and is good for 240 HP and 406 lb.-ft. of torque, rumors indicate that Porsche will be using a 3.2 liter version of this engine that makes at least 300 horses. We think that should do rather nicely.
http://www.autoblog.com/2008/06/17/porsche-cayenne-i-diesel-i-arrives-in-early-0- 9/
Porsche purists will recoil in horror, but desperate times require desperate measures: The German sports carmaker is developing its first-ever diesel. With the gas-electric Cayenne Hybrid delayed until at least 2010 and fuel prices spiraling ever higher, the company needs an interim measure. The obvious answer, for the European market, at least, is a diesel.
It's not so un-Porsche as you might think. The plan calls for using the 50-state-legal 3.0-liter turbocharged direct-injection V-6 from the forthcoming Audi Q7 3.0 TDI. In U.S. trim, the engine produces 221 horsepower and a very stout 406 pound-feet of torque — notably more torque than the either the direct-injection gasoline V-6 from the base-model Cayenne or the direct-injection gasoline V-8 from the Cayenne S and GTS.
In testing the diesel-powered Q7, we were pleasantly surprised to discover that the engine pulled very much like a gas-fed V-8, with the quick-witted six-speed Tiptronic transmission compensating for narrower rev range of the diesel V-6. It launches the Q7, all 5,100 pounds of it, from zero to 60 in about 8.4 seconds while returning a respectable 25 mpg.
Considering the 3.0 TDI accounts for more than 80 percent of Audi's Q7 sales in Germany, there's little doubt Porsche will find homes for the 15,000 diesel Cayennes it plans to build each year, starting with the European market in March. Meanwhile, the Q7 3.0 TDI arrives in North America later this year.
It looks to me like it will be a close call if they offer them in the USA. If Audi & VW are successful with diesels, I imagine Porsche will jump on the bandwagon.
Diesel dropped in price over the last week. While gas held steady. Just 34 cents difference now in CA.
Good move.
I think if GM really wants to knock the cover off the baseball (almost literally) in crushing another home run; they will give or support the assignment to Chevrolet Corvette to come up with a twin turbo diesel (Corvette) sports car!! This would be a high speed LONG distance tourer PAR Excellence!!
I would cite what Corvette did with a poorly selling "hard top" entry level Corvette, which has morfed into one of GM's quintessential (-my take but I might be WRONG) success stories...the Z06 Corvette.
Both of course would face EXTREME resistance from the ( each brands') faithful. My take is the good news if they do not like it, don't buy it. Next, it is not likely for any of those faithful to drive their current selections off a cliff. Lastly it would definitely increase each brand's reach.
Now that the V6 TDI is approved for 50 state sale I wonder if it will also show up in the Touareg and Tiguan. Or maybe the very good looking VW mini vans. We can hope we get something soon.
Hmmm, let's see here, a Canadian built Chrysler Town & Country minivan with a VW logo and VW interior, and sporting an engine that was designed and built by Audi, an engine that also happens to be used in the Porsche Cayenne. I'm thinking that I'd be more than happy to buy one if/when we decide to replace one of our two minivans (both six figures showing on the odometer) with yet another minivan. :shades:
Best Regards,
Shipo
This "alliance" goes back a lot furthher than you may think. The Dodge Omnis back in the 1980s had a VW engine. (minus the fuel-injection that VW used in their vehicles of that vintage.)
I just read in Auto news that Dodge has tweaked the valve timing, air induction and other things and they are going to have a Ram Pick up that is a whopping 4 % better fuel economy!
WHAT are the nuts??? A 3L or 3.5L Diesel with BluTech technology would give them 40% better fuel economy.
You say they could not sell it in Calf and some north east states, SO WHAT. Screw them give the rest of the country what they need and quit worrying about Calf.
Thank you. I have been saying that all along. If the big three are so affraid they can't make a profit witout CA, NY, MA, etc. then they need to change there business model or just let those states deal with the gas ver.
Oh, wait, they are not making a profit now.
Give it time, I'm sure they are working on a plan :sick:
Tested a couple of years ago in a Dodge Durango, the V6 turbodiesel averaged 20 mpg city and 25 highway.
kcram - Pickups Host
We need average MPG in the 30's.
The 5 cylinder diesel in my Mercedes Sprinter was a great engine. It pulled that 8500 lb RV around up and down hills with ease. It was also rated to tow 5k lbs. If they put that engine in a regular van or 1/2 ton PU it should get 35 MPG out on the highway. It is the mentality in the auto industry that we either have to have a vehicle that is fast or we are going to tow a 10,000 lb trailer. Most people just need to haul a few cement blocks, bags of concrete and sheets of plywood.
The new Sprinter has the V6 Mercedes diesel and the mileage dropped from 25 MPG to under 20 MPG. We sure are making progress in this country. It will be interesting when the CAFE mandates run up against the EPA/CARB wall of worthless regulations.
Want some CO2 examples ?
o Audi A4 3.2 V6 Quattro = 250
o Audi A4 3.0 TDi Quattro = 204
o Audi RS4 V8 Quattro = 324
o BMW 335i = 231
o BMW 335d = 200
o Lambo Murcielago = 400
o Mini 1.6 D Cooper = 118
o Mini Cooper S = 164
o VW Jetta 2.0 TDi 140 = 148
o VW Jetta 2.0 TFSI 200 = 189 new TFSI's are getting pretty clean.
o VW Polo 1.4 TDi Bluemotion = 99 (non-Bluemotion = 119)
o Volvo S80 D5 AWD = 182
o Volvo S80 4.4 V8 = 294
o Audi Q7 4.2 V8 FSi = 326
o Audi Q7 4.2 V8 TDi = 294
o Cadillac CTS 2.8 V6 = 278
o Chrysler 300C 3.0 V6 CRD = 215
o Chrysler 300C 5.7 V8 Hemi = 287
o Chrysler PT Cruiser 2.2 CRD = 185
o Chrysler PT Cruiser 2.4 = 231
Just a small cross-section that will allow folks to postulate all sorts of "Aha, but......." comments. Have fun with 'em and if you'd like some specifics I'll try to oblige.
1. that higher emissions are better than LOWER emissions!!!! (250 is better ( aka LESS than) 204, etc)
2. They also say that burning a min of 2x to higher dirtier fuel (RUG to Pug @ 30 ppm) is better than burning cleaner fuel (ULSD @15 ppm to ZERO)
2b. They make the dirtier fuel (RUG to PUG @ 30 ppm) CHEAPER per gal to boot !!!
3. They also say why burn less less (50 mpg) when MORE will do (30 mpg) !!!
( we have been saying this stuff ALL ALONG !!!!! Now we know at least one reason why K-12 US schools impart such wonderful mathematics awareness in the USA general populations.)
the real issue is that the Jetta is being built in the Pueblo, Mexico factory which means it will be plauged with the same quality problems as the rest of the VWs that come from Mexico
there is NO cost ebenfit to buying this hunk of junk :lemon:
half of my 4 Un-Clean TDIs (03, 05, 06, 06) were built in mexico and they are awesome with regard to quality. New Beetle had a couple of tough months as dealer searched for a water leak, but that was the only annoying reliability issue.
So all those VWs have been reliable, but I have not driven one past 100K yet.
Today in CA diesel is only 7% higher than regular unleaded. Not sure where you are at. You can check here and see the difference. That makes the VW TDI are real bargain. The TDI gets 25% better hwy mileage than the premium burning gas Sportwagon. With premium about the same as diesel, it is advantage diesel big time.
If you have not owned a VW TDI in the last few years you should do yourself a favor and try one. The competition will seem so blah after you do.. I have and want another one.
$4.53 for RUG plus 35% = $6.11. Diesel would have to be $6.11 a gallon to make the same value as RUG at $4.53
Gary, why did you send all this heat up here? It's 1:45 PM and 82 degrees outside, I'm dying. My guess it will be close to 90 by 5:00
kcram - Pickups Host
I will give you that to a point. I will give you a 50% drop is the average suburb guy buying a full size pick-up. He goes from a F-150 to a Ranger. Let’s put a 2.5L or a 3.0L diesel in a Ranger. I know you can get 35 + MPG out of that. Still plenty of power and good MPG. And it won’t be rocket science either, they are all over the world except ..yep, you guessed right, the USA.
So at 4.91 D2 and 4.53 RUG /29/40, 26/40 =
D2 range per mile driven of 16.9 cents-12.3 cents
RUG range per mile driven of 17.4 cents-13.3 cents or 2.88% to 7.5% MORE.
I am ok with others paying more!
No issues with the Mexican built Jetta after 108,000 miles. Of course both are in a longer mileage race to a min of 450,000 miles and hopefully to 1,000,000 miles.
I buy my diesel at several different places and the price disparity between RUG and D#2 is less than 15%.
In looking at the EPA website showing fuel economy for various vehicles, I compared my 2005 Jeep Liberty CRD to the 2005 Jeep Liberty with the 3.7 L V-6. Overall 23.8 for the CRD versus 14.8 for the gasser or about a 57% improvement in FE for the diesel. On long trips I regularly get 31 MPG with my CRD and back and forth to work in metro D.C. rush hour I average 23.1 MPG. My rush hour commuting FE is better than the highway FE for the V-6 gasser.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do?action=browseList2&make=Jeep&model=Libert- y/Cherokee%204WD
That leaves you with the "overgrown compact" trucks like Colorado/Canyon, Dakota, Frontier, Tacoma, and Ridgeline - and some of these trucks are on th bubble too, as they have grown to the point where they get mileage as bad or worse than the full-size half tons.
kcram - Pickups Host
With the sudden shift to smaller vehicles, “maybe” Ford may/might rethink closing the Ranger plant as it might be just the right size.
And then there is my philosophy on life. If it’s too big to fit in a Ranger, then it’s more work than I want to be a part of.
- Chrysler 300C
- Chrysler Voyager (aka Dodge Caravan)
- Dodge Avenger
- Dodge Caliber
- Dodge Journey
- Jeep Grand Cherokee
- Jeep Cherokee (aka Liberty)
- Jeep Compass
- Jeep Patriot
The 300 and Grand Cher have the Benz 3.0L V6 diesel, the others run the 2.0L 4-cylinder. A couple from England, with a diesel Patriot and diesel Compass, drove from England through the Chunnel and 5 other countries to set an SUV record of over 66 miles per gallon, going from London to Berlin "on the fly" - both Jeeps making the trip on a single tank.
Even with the diesel price premium, Chrysler would sell every US-spec diesel Patriot/Compass (and Caliber, same platform) they could screw together using that story in their marketing. A documented 66+ mpg compared to the EPA rating of 23/28 for the gasoline version? Who wouldn't go for that?
kcram - Pickups Host
Most of the American public has a problem. They see the cost of diesel fuel being higher than that of gasoline and they stop there never bothering to investigate further. Most never bother to do the math showing them that the cost per mile for diesel is significantly less than that for a gasser. I have had numerous discussions with people and they cannot see past the price difference even when you show that diesel is still cheaper to run.
If said diesel powered Compass or Caliber were to come to the United States, my wife would be in one tomorrow. I will continue with my Jeep Liberty CRD. Considering sixty-six miles per gallon, who would need a Prius?
Yes. Yes, they do.
And here we are.
I drove diesel vehicles in Europe seven years ago that aren't here yet, but got 40+ mpg. For whatever reason, California & a few other uber-green states have made the U.S. the diesel car industry what it is today.
Enjoy.