Did you say you test drove one? I would give your name and number to several Internet sales people with what you are looking for. There may be a lot of people not ready when the cars come in. I'm hoping that VW does well so they offer more options and more vehicles. I think I could live with the Touareg V6 TDI. Though I am getting excited about the X5 diesel.
I think the mini-van with TDI would be great also.
We got a quick look at the sport wagon, but I have not test driven the wagon or the TDI sedan. Maybe when I get off this boat after the 19th we can do some test drives. The wife even wants to put down a deposit, but I’m not too sure about doing that just yet. I’ll listen to what they have to say and the condition before I’ll agree to anything. I wonder what the allotment numbers are. How many per state or total US allocation. The salesman I talked with the other day said 1200 for this year. I think just the SF Bay area could pre-sell 1200+ in the month of July, so I just blew that figure off.
I think VW is counting on the TDI to put them back in the running. Right now it is a hard sell for VW with their gassers mileage compared to the others. Maybe 1200 for the WA dealers. I don't know. I have learned not to take much stock in what a salesman tells you.
I think time will show the EPA estimates to be low for the diesels. Too bad they are not on the high side to give bigger tax credits as they were for the hybrids. If the new estimates were used for the hybrid tax credit the Prius would not have gotten as much as it did. Hopefully the IRS is generous with the VW TDI tax credits.
The new Jetta is heavier and uses more filtering technology than the old ones - thus driving down the MPG. You won't see vast numbers of people reporting similar numbers to the previous models.
Some people will get the high end of numbers, some at the low end - just like gassers and hybrids.
The cars are not issued credits based solely on MPG. The credits are based on the following formulas:
Credits are available only for a limited number of vehicles per automaker. While the credits last through 2010, some automakers will exhaust their shares well before then. The provision is structured so vehicles can earn credits both for achieving greater fuel economy and for saving fuel. Fuel economy improvement is measured against a weight-dependent, model year 2002 baseline, with tiered credits starting at 25% over the baseline fuel economy. With each 25% improvement over the baseline fuel economy up to a maximum of 250%, the tax credit increases by $400.
A "conservation credit", designed to boost the amount of credit available for vehicles in the heavier weight classes, is available as well. A vehicle qualifies for the credit if it is expected to save at least 1,200 gallons over its lifetime relative to a vehicle achieving the baseline fuel economy for that weight class. For each additional 600 gallons of gasoline savings up to a maximum of 3,000 gallons, the vehicle earns $250 in tax credits.
Combining the two components, the maximum available credit is $3,400. However, once a manufacturer sells 60,000 qualifying vehicles, the tax credit is phased out over a period of fifteen months for vehicles that manufacturer produces.
Both diesels and hybrids must meet certain emissions certification levels to qualify: smaller vehicles must have a Federal emissions rating of Tier 2 bin 5 or better, and larger ones must achieve Tier 2 bin 8, a less stringent requirement. While most hybrid vehicles already meet the emissions requirement, no diesels are currently rated cleaner than bin 9. Diesels may begin achieving requisite levels in model year 2008 with the introduction of models utilizing advanced aftertreatment systems, however.
That is why the Escape 2WD hybrid earned nearly as much ($3K) of a tax credit as the Prius at $3,400.
Interesting to see when the IRS gets the 2009 clean diesels incorporated and what the tax credits will be. Since the baseline models are the 2002 model, the Jetta might suffer a little bit in the credits since it is a newer, heavier, more filtered version of the car.
A dealer told me that the US was only going to get 1200 TDI’s this year and I just looked at him and said nothing.
As starved for TDI’s as California is I would think the Bay area alone could sell 1200 in July.
Does anyone know if there is an allotment/quota per dealer and or state? It seems that VW want to build its market share in the US and I would think the best way to do that is to supply the buying public with what they want. Holding back on a quota system or to maximize dealer profit seems counterproductive to me.
Everybody is talking about the Jetta or the MB or the BMW diesels. The real deal will be the Tata Nano with the world’s first 800 cc, turbo charged, CRDi diesel engine. :P
The odds are about 1 to 1000 it will EVER be sold in the USA. The world is flush with super high mileage vehicles. They are all banned from the USA. The Nano is kind of cool and would be fun to run errands to the store etc. Especially if it sells for under $4000. I am sure we will get the neutered version like with the Smart.
Indeed this is what has occurred with the Prius (2004 to 2007/8 that I am familar), where I have seen 5,000 OVER MSRP. Par for the course if you ask me.
So if one wants one, it makes sense to sharpen the pencils and work the dealers and other contacts.
Looking back on my TDI paperwork, the dealer posted 2,000 above MSRP. As I recall, invoice+ plus did the trick.
... I've been thinking along these lines recently. The new Green Diesel Corp. injector will enable us to have the performance of a two liter engine with only 1500 CC's and thusly considerable better MPG, less NOx and particulate, upstream of the exhaust system.
It is good to see Avalon02wh come around to what has been advocated on this thread for a long while; to which he seems to have been a vocal opponent.
My take:
IF USA oem's can/ do/ will NOT want to build USA market diesels, let the foreign ones in. :surprise: :confuse:
Indeed, USA oem's build diesels for foreign markets, i.e. some of those diesels are even built in US plants!!??
I do like and would advocate the higher mileage diesels, especially.
Again we do not need new standards such as the 35 mpg 2012 standards, we just need cars on the market that meet and more importantly exceed them.
Further ANYONE can do the math here (or maybe they really can't :lemon: )
Going from 27 mpg standards to 35 mpg is only ( a tad less) 23%. Advertisements on CNBC with T Boone Pickens say we import over 70% of our oil demand and the % of import is GROWING (3/4% OVER last years figures).
So EVEN if we can wave the magic wand (we can not) and the 35 mpg happens NOW/IMMEDIATELY (aka 2012) (fairy tale) we would STILL import the majority of the oil (63%). By ANY definition that is NOT energy independence. I would define energy independence as a MINIMUM of 101-104 % DOMESTIC.
Any percentage less than that, meets the objective measure of DEPENDENCE.
So at 14 m yearly new car sales (meeting the 2012 standard starting @ 2012), it will take a MINIMUM of 18 YEARS . So as a minimum the taxation portion can be reasonably expected to rise 3/4% per year or to 12-16%. So much for lower price/cost/taxed fuel.
So if history is ANY gauge, the 50 mpg VW Jetta is an interesting example in a 27 mpg standard with defacto standards of 22 mpg. Which one gets up to banning under the laws??? Of course, the higher advocated mpg one!!!! D2 it probably should be mentioned again is/can a portal to one form of alternative fuel: biodiesel. Prius as good as they are (45 mpg) ' are NOT. During this period the passenger diesel population shrank app 33% from less than 3% to 2%. :lemon: :P :surprise:
Additionally and evidently, the current fuel crisis, with RUG @ over 4 dollars and in some markets approaching $ 5. per gal is NOT in crisis enough. :lemon: EVEN as we pay more per mile driven than the Europeans where the fuel is over $9.00 per US gal (128 oz) (see my other posts if one does not think the math was demonstrated)
But as Gagrice indicates probably not anytime soon for these here markets AKA...Christ's second coming might be more imminent
So Tennessee won the bidding war. That will be a real boon to Chattanooga. If they build all the models with TDI in the USA that would be great. I think all of the current diesel models will be coming from Mexico. I would have bet on Alabama. Maybe they did not want Mercedes close by trying to steal their secrets about small diesel engines. :shades:
Indeed, my understanding is the TDI engines are built and assembled in Germany. After testing completed motors are crated and sent to Mexico for the assembly process.
I don't think any car company is close to VW in the EU. They are also the biggest in Brazil and Mexico. They were number one in China. Not sure if GM passed them. They backed off the US market after their run in the late 1970s early 1980s. I wish them well for at least trying their best to offer diesel to the people of the USA. It has been an uphill battle for them.
For the purposes of our discussion thread, this is where I find an interesting incongruency.
In the US, it might be easy to see why the Japanese manufacturers have gained a good to great market share.
I understand that despite our perceptions of the European cars being built worse than even US oems, the Japanese manufacturers are seemingly struggling in the European markets. So with Japanese better quality, presumably cheaper acquisition costs and cheaper scheduled and unscheduled maintenance costs, higher reliability, etc., they would seem to have a built in advantage.
I am assuming that well over 50% of those cars are diesel. GM owns Opel? If so it is good to see GM and Ford doing well somewhere. They could do well in the USA if they brought those little diesels.
I have had a Fiat (long ago) and Fords (paneled trucks ie 150 250 models) and have helped neighbors even worked on Fords, I have ridden in late model Ford Focus (gasser not diesel) not impressed at all say over low quality Honda/higher quality VW's.
Left Lane News is reporting that Honda plans to have a V6 diesel for the U.S. in 2010. First introducing it in the Odyssey,then other vehicles that spec the 3.5 gasser,including the Accord!!
"It is good to see Avalon02wh come around to what has been advocated on this thread for a long while; to which he seems to have been a vocal opponent."
Come around, not really. I'm still more of an interested observer when it comes to diesel issues. I do not mind playing the devils advocate now and then to prevent the forum from becoming a diesel love festival. Someone needs to provide a balanced perspective. :shades:
On a more serious note, AAA posted another record for diesel at $4.845. Given all the talk of truckers going out of business and the economy being in a slump the price increase is a bit surprising. What happens to the price of diesel when economic activity increases?
And I agree that the Nano will not make our shores. Their production capacity is only about 250,000 a year. With a potential market of 50 to 100 million in India it will take decades for them to satisfy their own market.
I agree with the article you posted. Many environmentalists are against the palm oil because they are cutting rain forest to plant the palms for biodiesel. I don't think that is the answer. Until they get very high production on a per acre basis both ethanol and biodiesel are causing more problems than they are solving. That includes biomass for ethanol.
That magazine is a good source of information on the biodiesel business. I did not know that a company I invested in 4 years ago is building one of the first Algae production facilities. I think that is the only feedstock that currently shows real promise for sustainable production of biodiesel. If 100,000 gallons per acre can be produced as demonstrated it will be a viable source for the future.
"Algae is the ultimate in renewable energy," Glen Kertz, president and CEO of Valcent Products, told CNN while conducting a tour of his algae greenhouse on the outskirts of El Paso.
Kertz, a plant physiologist and entrepreneur, holds about 20 patents. And he is psyched about the potential algae holds, both as an energy source and as a way to deal with global warming.
"We are a giant solar collecting system. We get the bulk of our energy from the sunshine," said Kertz.
Algae are among the fastest growing plants in the world, and about 50 percent of their weight is oil. That lipid oil can be used to make biodiesel for cars, trucks, and airplanes.
Kertz said he can produce about 100,000 gallons of algae oil a year per acre, compared to about 30 gallons per acre from corn; 50 gallons from soybeans.
Here is a classic example of the waste in our government. They spent 18 years messing with algae for biodiesel. They gave up because oil was $20 per barrel and biodiesel will never be able to compete against fossil fuel.
Using algae as an alternative fuel is not a new idea. The U.S. Department of Energy studied it for about 18 years, from 1978 to 1996. But according to Al Darzins of the DOE's National Renewable Energy Lab, in 1996 the feds decided that algae oil could never compete economically with fossil fuels.
The price of a barrel of oil in 1996? About 20 bucks!
As usual the Feds are long on spending, short on results. So they switched to biomass research. The Feds are never going to do anything the upset the OIL LOBBY. They have not done so in 130 years and will not start now.
Rather than give up midstream, they should have finished the research up to viable production processes and then it would have "been in the CAN" so to speak. As scientific and quasi scientific experimentation goes, researchers could have used this study as one of its foundations and/or spring board into the next level.
100,000 gals per acre is one of the highest potential to date. It can literally be seen as PLANTING an eco friendly oil well !!!! This itself is HUGE.
I think also one has to put it into perspective that 1 barrel of oil yields Gasoline 19.3 gals and Distillate Fuel Oil (Inc. Home Heating and Diesel Fuel) 9.83 gals
Rather than give up midstream, they should have finished the research up to viable production processes and then it would have "been in the CAN" so to speak. As scientific and quasi scientific experimentation goes, researchers could have used this study as one of its foundations and/or spring board into the next level.
100,000 gals per acre is one of the highest potential (I have read) to date. If the growth of algae does not meet the definition of natures way of using SOLAR, what else does? It can literally be seen as PLANTING an eco friendly oil well !!!! Each separately is big, together they are literally HUGE.
I think also one has to put it into perspective that 1 barrel of oil yields Gasoline 19.3 gals and Distillate Fuel Oil (Inc. Home Heating and Diesel Fuel) 9.83 gals, with HUGE refinery costs in comparison with little to NONE for bio diesel. In the generation (30-40 years) of NO new refineries, I have read of at least 165 bio diesel plants coming on line and producing...bio diesel. So the current disapproval/approval ratio is at LEAST 165 to one (if not ZERO, which is not calculable)
AKA it does not take the same refining that oil DOES. "Waste" (the other products are truly NOT waste, but are the real products that make oil cost effective) is practically NIL in comparison? HUGE advantages does not even represent the almost exponential positives.
100,000 gals per acre is one of the highest potential to date
At $4.00 a gal that is $400,000. crop value per acre. Looks like I will be heading back to the farm!! I'll become a land baron....I'll be rich...I'll buy a fleet of diesels...women will love me...I can't waste any time though, I just turned 65.
To follow up on my post and stay on track D2 wise, 100,000 gals ( / 9.83 gals per barrel of oil) of D2 would be equivalent to 10,173 barrels of oil, AND refined, that would NOT have to be imported.
I sent an email to all three BMW dealers around here. Told them I would be interested in the X5 35D when it arrives. Two responded with we got great deals on the X5 gassers. My response back was I want the 425 ft lbs of torque and 30 MPG on the highway. I will just keep my Sequoia if I want to drive a gas hog.
... It's all perfectly clear to me now. Carrying a grandchild, on my hip, with one arm, crossing a shallow creek, hoping from stone to stone; sees a rock with green moss, looks completely dry, it was; however bottom of shoes were wet, slipperier than a bowl of okra, no injuries, child was on the high side, as I sprawled on my left side in the water and rocks.
The price of fuel has been a slam dunk to go up...
NOW taxation is getting on the band wagon: 54.3% for RUG to 41% for D2
..."Now, lawmakers quietly are talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel."...
Electrical cars are literally dead in the water, until they find a way to collect 28.4 cents per gal equivalent and convince folks, the extra costs on top of the extra costs are good for them.
Most folks have really forgotten a major component of why taxation in the first place.. i.e., damage to the environment vs the so called common good. If we are doing the common good with exponentially less damage to the environment, the taxes should go DOWN, NOT go UP!!!!!
After quickly reading through the attached article, congress has got it backwards as usual.
If they raise the tax of diesel fuel more than that of gasolene, then transportation costs for all goods and services will rise. That means the trucking companies and the independent truckers get screwed further, the consumer pays more for goods, and a very economical means of moving a car (diesel) gets slammed. Looks like the consumer gets the red hot poker in the butt as usual by congress.
Ford will allegedly be putting a supercharged 4.4L diesel V8 engine in the F-150 for 2009. Expect it to have around 330 horsepower and 520 lb-ft of torque! GM & Dodge are also planning on putting diesel engines in 1/2 ton trucks, but Ford is expected to be the first to actually produce such a truck. The 4.4-liter engine is a larger version of the 3.6-liter turbocharged V-8 used in European market Land Rover Range Rovers.
Why not use the 3.6 L diesel engine in the F150? I would be more than happy with 250 HP and 400+ foot lbs of torque. I would give a Range Rover a shot at my wallet if they offered a diesel in the USA. I will not buy a new vehicle that requires unleaded gasoline again. With the ethanol laced gas it is nearly impossible to get EPA estimates. That seems to be all we get in CA now. Of course that makes the tax extractors in Sacramento very happy. I would expect with the 4.4 L diesel in the F150 at least 25 MPG would be possible on the highway. Better than the current F150 getting 15 MPG if you are lucky. Only 10 MPG if you are using E85.
... My guess is that Ford thinks that the buyers usually expect a six liter Diesel. The 150 is only a slightly lighter than the 250, 350 etc. So a strong 4.4 ought to be o/k. The question might be: why not the 3.6 in the Ranger ??? Btw, it's turbo(supercharged).
I don't think Ford et al actually understand how the market has changed / is changing. They have a perfectly good 3.6 Diesel but feel only a 4.4 Diesel will do. Audi buyers here in Europe generally don't feel the need for "big" diesels and their 3.0 TDi is more than adequate even in the Q7. Are Ford going out of their way to make a Diesel offering that isn't attractive or can they really not understand that the days of bhp figures being the be-all-and-end-all are over ?
GM and Ford marketing folk in Europe do seem to understand about small(ish) Diesels yet their "Home Office" counterparts seem mired in the past. Maybe it's time to import some European marketing talent into USA. It must be an improvement over the current herd of dynosaurs they currently seem to have.
I was more than happy with the Mercedes 2.7 L 5 cylinder diesel in my 8500 lb motor home. A 3.0 L 6 cylinder should handle all but the biggest trailer towing jobs. And it is not safe hauling a 10,000 lb trailer with a 1/2 ton vehicle in the first place. I don't care if it does have the power.
I think the biggest obstacle to diesel fuel here in the USA is the government regulation. They seem to wait until a new cleaner diesel engine comes out on the World market and change the regulations just enough to keep it out of our market. The oil companies wield a lot of control over our Government. Things have not changed in 100 years. There is always a surplus of gas to dump. It is very obvious in the winter months when people are using more heating oil. The price rises. This year it has not gone down like normal.
In the USA the government has convinced the populace that gas is a good fuel. I guess it is better to use it in a substandard engine than just dump it in the landfills. John D. Rockefeller lives on...
I really have to wonder who does the research for new products at Ford, Chevy and Chrysler. What criteria do they use?
Is it based on marketing whims, or wish lists?
Is it based on the real needs of people? If it is, they had better change things.
Do they ever look out the window to see what is going on in the REAL world?
The domestic car makers need to scrap their marketing and product development departments and build anew. Any fool would know, taking fuel prices and economy into consideration, that you market a ½ ton pick-up with the 3.6L diesel standard and the 4.4L diesel as an option. :surprise:
My guess is that they will put such a premium on the diesel that it will not be affordable to the ½ ton market. :sick:
Well! as RR used to say I don't think so. It seems like all three are bound and determined to sink them selves in the US market but do the right thing across the pond. In 1979-82 I sold and had installed Isuzu QD 100's to many bakeries and laundry companies for a couple of reasons, the price of gas had more then doubled, none of the OEM's offered a walk in type chassis with diesel power. Needed power, although a bread truck only weighs about 8000# loaded a laundry walk in can leave the factory and come home in the 12000 to 14000# area and guess what a Isuzu QD 100 a 4cyl 235cid engine made 90 HP and 265lbs ft. How ever did they get the job done? Quite nicely I might say. I had a Ford F250 SC at 155 wb and a 25 ft boat that weighted 14000# I towed from Minneapolis to Bayfield WI at least three times a year, did I need second gear going up the hill in Duluth? Damm right but having made the trip with Ford 400's and 460's I can tell you that the trip required just a tad over 1/2 as much diesel as gas. .If anyone needs to do the right thing and soon it's Ford.
Dodge appears to "get it" according to the most recent stories in Automotive News. Instead of the 5.6L V8, Dodge will reportedly go with the 4.2L V6 diesel from Cummins in the Ram 1500. Developmental output of that engine is 270 hp and 420 lb-ft. In a Durango test vehicle a few years ago (2005 report), the 4.2L diesel bested the 4.7L V8's fuel economy by nearly 50%: * Durango 4.7L V8 gasser - 14 mpg city/18 highway/15 combined * Durango 4.2L V6 diesel - 20/25/22 With proper trans and axle gearing, the torque (higher than the revised-for-2009 Hemi's 404 lb-ft) would probably match the gas V8s for acceleration, while blowing them away at the pump.
Hopefully Ford doesn't think customers are expecting a diesel to outrun a sports sedan. The 5.9L I-6 Cummins under the hood of my 2005 Ram 3500 (Quad Cab 4x4 dually, the heaviest configuration) is rated at 325/610, but it's also moving a truck that weighs close to 8000 pounds with just me in it. That level of power allows me to safely merge and pass without obstructing traffic, but I'm not going to outrun the Mustang GT next to me at the traffic light. And I can still get over 20 mpg (unloaded, of course) if I keep it under 60 mph on the interstate.
Comments
I think the mini-van with TDI would be great also.
The wife even wants to put down a deposit, but I’m not too sure about doing that just yet. I’ll listen to what they have to say and the condition before I’ll agree to anything.
I wonder what the allotment numbers are. How many per state or total US allocation. The salesman I talked with the other day said 1200 for this year. I think just the SF Bay area could pre-sell 1200+ in the month of July, so I just blew that figure off.
Some people will get the high end of numbers, some at the low end - just like gassers and hybrids.
The cars are not issued credits based solely on MPG. The credits are based on the following formulas:
Credits are available only for a limited number of vehicles per automaker. While the credits last through 2010, some automakers will exhaust their shares well before then. The provision is structured so vehicles can earn credits both for achieving greater fuel economy and for saving fuel. Fuel economy improvement is measured against a weight-dependent, model year 2002 baseline, with tiered credits starting at 25% over the baseline fuel economy. With each 25% improvement over the baseline fuel economy up to a maximum of 250%, the tax credit increases by $400.
A "conservation credit", designed to boost the amount of credit available for vehicles in the heavier weight classes, is available as well. A vehicle qualifies for the credit if it is expected to save at least 1,200 gallons over its lifetime relative to a vehicle achieving the baseline fuel economy for that weight class. For each additional 600 gallons of gasoline savings up to a maximum of 3,000 gallons, the vehicle earns $250 in tax credits.
Combining the two components, the maximum available credit is $3,400. However, once a manufacturer sells 60,000 qualifying vehicles, the tax credit is phased out over a period of fifteen months for vehicles that manufacturer produces.
Both diesels and hybrids must meet certain emissions certification levels to qualify: smaller vehicles must have a Federal emissions rating of Tier 2 bin 5 or better, and larger ones must achieve Tier 2 bin 8, a less stringent requirement. While most hybrid vehicles already meet the emissions requirement, no diesels are currently rated cleaner than bin 9. Diesels may begin achieving requisite levels in model year 2008 with the introduction of models utilizing advanced aftertreatment systems, however.
That is why the Escape 2WD hybrid earned nearly as much ($3K) of a tax credit as the Prius at $3,400.
Interesting to see when the IRS gets the 2009 clean diesels incorporated and what the tax credits will be. Since the baseline models are the 2002 model, the Jetta might suffer a little bit in the credits since it is a newer, heavier, more filtered version of the car.
VW **WARNED** Dealers NOT o do EXACTLY that - somehow I KNEW they still would !!!
As starved for TDI’s as California is I would think the Bay area alone could sell 1200 in July.
Does anyone know if there is an allotment/quota per dealer and or state?
It seems that VW want to build its market share in the US and I would think the best way to do that is to supply the buying public with what they want. Holding back on a quota system or to maximize dealer profit seems counterproductive to me.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/07/report-tata-nan.html#more
So if one wants one, it makes sense to sharpen the pencils and work the dealers and other contacts.
Looking back on my TDI paperwork, the dealer posted 2,000 above MSRP. As I recall, invoice+ plus did the trick.
My take:
IF USA oem's can/ do/ will NOT want to build USA market diesels, let the foreign ones in. :surprise: :confuse:
Indeed, USA oem's build diesels for foreign markets, i.e. some of those diesels are even built in US plants!!??
I do like and would advocate the higher mileage diesels, especially.
Again we do not need new standards such as the 35 mpg 2012 standards, we just need cars on the market that meet and more importantly exceed them.
Further ANYONE can do the math here (or maybe they really can't :lemon: )
Going from 27 mpg standards to 35 mpg is only ( a tad less) 23%. Advertisements on CNBC with T Boone Pickens say we import over 70% of our oil demand and the % of import is GROWING (3/4% OVER last years figures).
So EVEN if we can wave the magic wand (we can not) and the 35 mpg happens NOW/IMMEDIATELY (aka 2012) (fairy tale) we would STILL import the majority of the oil (63%). By ANY definition that is NOT energy independence. I would define energy independence as a MINIMUM of 101-104 % DOMESTIC.
Any percentage less than that, meets the objective measure of DEPENDENCE.
So at 14 m yearly new car sales (meeting the 2012 standard starting @ 2012), it will take a MINIMUM of 18 YEARS . So as a minimum the taxation portion can be reasonably expected to rise 3/4% per year or to 12-16%. So much for lower price/cost/taxed fuel.
So if history is ANY gauge, the 50 mpg VW Jetta is an interesting example in a 27 mpg standard with defacto standards of 22 mpg. Which one gets up to banning under the laws??? Of course, the higher advocated mpg one!!!! D2 it probably should be mentioned again is/can a portal to one form of alternative fuel: biodiesel. Prius as good as they are (45 mpg) ' are NOT. During this period the passenger diesel population shrank app 33% from less than 3% to 2%. :lemon: :P :surprise:
Additionally and evidently, the current fuel crisis, with RUG @ over 4 dollars and in some markets approaching $ 5. per gal is NOT in crisis enough. :lemon: EVEN as we pay more per mile driven than the Europeans where the fuel is over $9.00 per US gal (128 oz) (see my other posts if one does not think the math was demonstrated)
But as Gagrice indicates probably not anytime soon for these here markets AKA...Christ's second coming might be more imminent
VW announces plan for 1.0-billion-dollar US auto plant
link title
Germane to the US market, they report 2% market share.
In the US, it might be easy to see why the Japanese manufacturers have gained a good to great market share.
I understand that despite our perceptions of the European cars being built worse than even US oems, the Japanese manufacturers are seemingly struggling in the European markets. So with Japanese better quality, presumably cheaper acquisition costs and cheaper scheduled and unscheduled maintenance costs, higher reliability, etc., they would seem to have a built in advantage.
VW Golf
Peugeot 207
Ford Focus
Opel/Vauxhall Corsa
Renault Clio
Opel/Vauxhall Astra
Ford Fiesta
Fiat Punto
VW Polo
BMW 3 series
Indeed, no Japanese or Korean cars in the top 10..............so far. The Beemer is, physically, the biggest car on the list.
Come around, not really.
On a more serious note, AAA posted another record for diesel at $4.845. Given all the talk of truckers going out of business and the economy being in a slump the price increase is a bit surprising. What happens to the price of diesel when economic activity increases?
And I agree that the Nano will not make our shores. Their production capacity is only about 250,000 a year. With a potential market of 50 to 100 million in India it will take decades for them to satisfy their own market.
The Changing Face of Biodiesel Production
http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/article.jsp?article_id=2562
That magazine is a good source of information on the biodiesel business. I did not know that a company I invested in 4 years ago is building one of the first Algae production facilities. I think that is the only feedstock that currently shows real promise for sustainable production of biodiesel. If 100,000 gallons per acre can be produced as demonstrated it will be a viable source for the future.
"Algae is the ultimate in renewable energy," Glen Kertz, president and CEO of Valcent Products, told CNN while conducting a tour of his algae greenhouse on the outskirts of El Paso.
Kertz, a plant physiologist and entrepreneur, holds about 20 patents. And he is psyched about the potential algae holds, both as an energy source and as a way to deal with global warming.
"We are a giant solar collecting system. We get the bulk of our energy from the sunshine," said Kertz.
Algae are among the fastest growing plants in the world, and about 50 percent of their weight is oil. That lipid oil can be used to make biodiesel for cars, trucks, and airplanes.
Kertz said he can produce about 100,000 gallons of algae oil a year per acre, compared to about 30 gallons per acre from corn; 50 gallons from soybeans.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/04/01/algae.oil/index.html
See this page:
Palm Oil No Bueno
Using algae as an alternative fuel is not a new idea. The U.S. Department of Energy studied it for about 18 years, from 1978 to 1996. But according to Al Darzins of the DOE's National Renewable Energy Lab, in 1996 the feds decided that algae oil could never compete economically with fossil fuels.
The price of a barrel of oil in 1996? About 20 bucks!
As usual the Feds are long on spending, short on results. So they switched to biomass research. The Feds are never going to do anything the upset the OIL LOBBY. They have not done so in 130 years and will not start now.
100,000 gals per acre is one of the highest potential to date. It can literally be seen as PLANTING an eco friendly oil well !!!! This itself is HUGE.
I think also one has to put it into perspective that 1 barrel of oil yields Gasoline 19.3 gals and Distillate Fuel Oil (Inc. Home Heating and Diesel Fuel) 9.83 gals
link title
100,000 gals per acre is one of the highest potential (I have read) to date. If the growth of algae does not meet the definition of natures way of using SOLAR, what else does? It can literally be seen as PLANTING an eco friendly oil well !!!! Each separately is big, together they are literally HUGE.
I think also one has to put it into perspective that 1 barrel of oil yields Gasoline 19.3 gals and Distillate Fuel Oil (Inc. Home Heating and Diesel Fuel) 9.83 gals, with HUGE refinery costs in comparison with little to NONE for bio diesel. In the generation (30-40 years) of NO new refineries, I have read of at least 165 bio diesel plants coming on line and producing...bio diesel. So the current disapproval/approval ratio is at LEAST 165 to one (if not ZERO, which is not calculable)
link title
AKA it does not take the same refining that oil DOES. "Waste" (the other products are truly NOT waste, but are the real products that make oil cost effective) is practically NIL in comparison? HUGE advantages does not even represent the almost exponential positives.
At $4.00 a gal that is $400,000. crop value per acre. Looks like I will be heading back to the farm!! I'll become a land baron....I'll be rich...I'll buy a fleet of diesels...women will love me...I can't waste any time though, I just turned 65.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Same here. We can be the next KFC startup Algae R US. Maybe that land in the desert I bought was a good deal after all :shades:
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I sent an email to all three BMW dealers around here. Told them I would be interested in the X5 35D when it arrives. Two responded with we got great deals on the X5 gassers. My response back was I want the 425 ft lbs of torque and 30 MPG on the highway. I will just keep my Sequoia if I want to drive a gas hog.
And the grandchild said “that was fun, let’s do it again”.
NOW taxation is getting on the band wagon: 54.3% for RUG to 41% for D2
..."Now, lawmakers quietly are talking about raising fuel taxes by a dime from the current 18.4 cents a gallon on gasoline and 24.3 cents on diesel fuel."...
link title
Electrical cars are literally dead in the water, until they find a way to collect 28.4 cents per gal equivalent and convince folks, the extra costs on top of the extra costs are good for them.
Most folks have really forgotten a major component of why taxation in the first place.. i.e., damage to the environment vs the so called common good. If we are doing the common good with exponentially less damage to the environment, the taxes should go DOWN, NOT go UP!!!!!
If they raise the tax of diesel fuel more than that of gasolene, then transportation costs for all goods and services will rise. That means the trucking companies and the independent truckers get screwed further, the consumer pays more for goods, and a very economical means of moving a car (diesel) gets slammed. Looks like the consumer gets the red hot poker in the butt as usual by congress.
Why not use the 3.6 L diesel engine in the F150? I would be more than happy with 250 HP and 400+ foot lbs of torque. I would give a Range Rover a shot at my wallet if they offered a diesel in the USA. I will not buy a new vehicle that requires unleaded gasoline again. With the ethanol laced gas it is nearly impossible to get EPA estimates. That seems to be all we get in CA now. Of course that makes the tax extractors in Sacramento very happy. I would expect with the 4.4 L diesel in the F150 at least 25 MPG would be possible on the highway. Better than the current F150 getting 15 MPG if you are lucky. Only 10 MPG if you are using E85.
GM and Ford marketing folk in Europe do seem to understand about small(ish) Diesels yet their "Home Office" counterparts seem mired in the past. Maybe it's time to import some European marketing talent into USA. It must be an improvement over the current herd of dynosaurs they currently seem to have.
I think the biggest obstacle to diesel fuel here in the USA is the government regulation. They seem to wait until a new cleaner diesel engine comes out on the World market and change the regulations just enough to keep it out of our market. The oil companies wield a lot of control over our Government. Things have not changed in 100 years. There is always a surplus of gas to dump. It is very obvious in the winter months when people are using more heating oil. The price rises. This year it has not gone down like normal.
In the USA the government has convinced the populace that gas is a good fuel. I guess it is better to use it in a substandard engine than just dump it in the landfills. John D. Rockefeller lives on...
Is it based on marketing whims, or wish lists?
Is it based on the real needs of people? If it is, they had better change things.
Do they ever look out the window to see what is going on in the REAL world?
The domestic car makers need to scrap their marketing and product development departments and build anew. Any fool would know, taking fuel prices and economy into consideration, that you market a ½ ton pick-up with the 3.6L diesel standard and the 4.4L diesel as an option. :surprise:
My guess is that they will put such a premium on the diesel that it will not be affordable to the ½ ton market. :sick:
In 1979-82 I sold and had installed Isuzu QD 100's to many bakeries and laundry companies for a couple of reasons, the price of gas had more then doubled, none of the OEM's offered a walk in type chassis with diesel power.
Needed power, although a bread truck only weighs about 8000# loaded a laundry walk in can leave the factory and come home in the 12000 to 14000# area and guess what a Isuzu QD 100 a 4cyl 235cid engine made 90 HP and 265lbs ft. How ever did they get the job done? Quite nicely I might say. I had a Ford F250 SC at 155 wb and a 25 ft boat that weighted 14000# I towed from Minneapolis to Bayfield WI at least three times a year, did I need second gear going up the hill in Duluth? Damm right but having made the trip with Ford 400's and 460's I can tell you that the trip required just a tad over 1/2 as much diesel as gas.
.If anyone needs to do the right thing and soon it's Ford.
* Durango 4.7L V8 gasser - 14 mpg city/18 highway/15 combined
* Durango 4.2L V6 diesel - 20/25/22
With proper trans and axle gearing, the torque (higher than the revised-for-2009 Hemi's 404 lb-ft) would probably match the gas V8s for acceleration, while blowing them away at the pump.
Hopefully Ford doesn't think customers are expecting a diesel to outrun a sports sedan. The 5.9L I-6 Cummins under the hood of my 2005 Ram 3500 (Quad Cab 4x4 dually, the heaviest configuration) is rated at 325/610, but it's also moving a truck that weighs close to 8000 pounds with just me in it. That level of power allows me to safely merge and pass without obstructing traffic, but I'm not going to outrun the Mustang GT next to me at the traffic light. And I can still get over 20 mpg (unloaded, of course) if I keep it under 60 mph on the interstate.
kcram - Pickups Host