The sooner you come to the realization that the individual auto is NOT going away, the easier it will be to cope with the fact that mass transit is NOT practical for most of the World. Several posters have verified that mass transit in the EU is only in the major cities and corridors. High fuel prices spawned the huge demand for diesel cars in the EU.
I fully expect about the time that fossil fuel becomes in short supply. Long after we are gone. That good alternatives will be available making the individual vehicles even better than they are today. It will facilitate people moving to less densely populated areas, which will cut down on all the negatives that big cities are plagued with.
Indeed "Hurricane Season" more than amply demonstrates some of the key weaknesses of "densification" aka stacked city living. I have read in passing that app 1 million folks have evaculated the New Orleans area in anticipation of Hurricane Gustov. This would be analogous to the city of San Francisco being totally empty. Needless to say these are NOT good things.
I notice tons and tons of cars are supposedly coming in 2010 or 2011... but is ANYTHING other than overpriced bling-mobiles and yuppie cruisers like the Mercedes tanks going to be available in 2009?
God I want a nice little 50mpg+ diesel hatch that's not a VW. Why the hell can't we get one in the U.S.?
It has been/is probably for lots and lots of reasons. In 2003 I was hesitant to get back into a VW ! However 5/6 years and 109,000 miles later, it has been the "perfect storm" type situation/s, since I made the leap. It truly is VW's market to lose, as not many oems are not ready, willing and/or able to "step up to the plate". I filled up yesterday (just another fill up, CA ULSD, nothing out of the ordinary) 567 miles with 11.5 gals for a 49.3 mpg.
True, but the cost of getting an EPA certificate for a specific drive train configuration/car is significant -- niche market cars (& that's what a small diesel would be) cost just as much to get certified as a car they can sell 50K+ of annually.
When I checked the BMW website for the UK a couple of years ago, there were something like 25 different versions of the 3 series available, including 6 diesels (3 each for the sport wagon & sedan). In the U.S., what's available? Three - five?
European turbo-direct-injection diesels have been available for ten years or more, and last I checked, the EU supported most green initiatives. Those may have been good enough for the rest of the world, but not here. Even when 15 ppm sulfur diesel came on the market in the U.S. 2-3 years ago, the laws in a few states were just enough more stringent to keep the high-volume European diesels out of North America.
Cdnpinhead's point is that it only takes the smallest incremental difference in regulation to make the latest and greatest technology unavailable to us. All of the European research and resources goes into meeting the latest/next European regulation challenge. No one is going to be very interested in doubling the funding to invent new technology for the tiny market which the US represents. Euro regulations are very strict, especially the new Euro VI. The US is just 'very strict + 1'. My personal opinion is that we've gone past diminishing returns, into the realm of unjustifiable. Emissions per mile have been reduced 50-100 times or more depending on which one you look at, since the start of regulation. The number of miles driven in the US has less than doubled (< 2.0x) in the same timeframe. Adopting Euro regulations wouldn't change those facts significantly, but would allow a flood of diesel powered vehicles that get 40% better mileage than what's available now, using aftertreatment technology that has volume bundle cost advantages and proven durability. Instead, as I wait for the diesels that may never come, I continue to drive my 1992 Olds Achieva that gets decent (for a gasser) 30mpg, but has MUCH WORSE emissions than a current Euro V diesel that I could be driving...
I think you guys are hitting the nail on the head. To wit this "strictness" has resulted in NO statistical studies let alone statistical correlation/s. However regulatory agencies remain ANTI diesel, as they would have you believe mitigated diesels (aka my one lone 03 TDI ) using their late to the market regulated ULSD causes all the problems!! :lemon: Absolute drivel !!! The truth is the TDI pollutes no more than the ubiquitious Toyota CAMRY !!!
ruking1 says, "The truth is the TDI pollutes no more than the ubiquitious Toyota CAMRY !!!"
Are you talking about a 2003 TDI versus a 2003 Camry, or current model year cars?
Because if you are talking 2003, you are not correct. The 2003 TDI does not have the advanced emission control systems that the newer diesel cars have. Much more particulate matter is released into the atmosphere in that model year car than the current diesels or the 2003 or current Camry.
Particulate matter is the main evil in diesel exhaust. Cars which do not filter PM effectively, EVEN if they are using ULSD, are contributing to bad air.
The EPA sets a "moving target" of more restrictive emission levels because it is the only way to get automakers to improve emissions. The EPA sets emission requirements to match what the technology allows.
Apparently, the gist is that while the Jetta TDI is 50-state legal and has much cleaner emissions than diesels past, it's not as clean as today's ULEV and SULEV-rated vehicles. Looks like they rated it a LEV.
Are you talking about a 2003 TDI versus a 2003 Camry, or current model year cars?
I would say ruking is correct. The 2003 VW TDI engines were tested for emissions with 500 PPM Diesel that was in use at the time. I have not seen any test results using ULSD. I would think it would be a whole lot better than the Camry on all but NoX. If CA even had a test for diesel cars we could find out. They don't because it is not worth it for so few vehicles. It was easier to not allow them to be sold in CA. Fortunately for the discriminating few VW was tenacious and went through the hoops CARB was hoping would stop them.
Well, of course you would Amigo !! Birds of a Feather and whatnot !!!
Here's a hot one for you Gary. If the 2003 TDIs were so clean, why did models after that not achieve the 50-state emissions guidelines? (I know your answer will be, and it's not correct.......)
Let's try keep things within the realm of reason and common sense, eh, and not erode/degrade our thought processes with random biases?
P.S. I love clean diesel vehicles as much as anyone around here, but you all know I don't think people should be using their biases to make irresponsible claims. Just like I might need to be occasionally brought back down to Earf on my favorite type of vehicle, so do some others at times require that action. Nothing wrong with showing your bias; just keep it within reason.
They met the EPA standards, which should be enough as they are the governing body. I suppose you think that each state should dictate what can and cannot be sold in their state. Emissions need a standard so the automakers are not wasting money trying to please some fringe wacko group in Hollywood or Miami with an agenda.
You know that the 2003 has most of the same emissions as the 2006 VW TDI. Sold right up until the 2009 came out.
As usual you blame the automaker instead of the Government. Only the government has the power to mandate the fuel content tha we are sold. It was ULSD that made most of the difference in diesel emissions. Just as getting the lead out was the biggest problem with gasoline. A diesel tractor like mine does not blow any black smoke with ULSD. With the cheaper red dye diesel it blows lots of black smoke. Most heavy equipment is still using off road diesel.
It is the fault of the automaker. Here is the conversation:
CARB/EPA: Your vehicle is not clean enough for 50-state emissions. Use the available technology to make it clean enough and you can sell it.
AutoMaker, (Whining): But that will COST TOO MUCH !!
CARB/EPA: What, $500? $700? - Pass it on to the customer.
AutoMaker, (Whining Again): But they won't buy it !! Margins are slim already.
CARB/EPA: Not my problem. If you want to sell the car and make the associated profit, CLEAN IT UP and then you can sell it. You know as well as I do that the technology is available.
It is without any doubt the fault of the Automaker, because we ALL KNOW that the technology IS available.
If the bean counters and marketeers at VW told their bosses, "The demand for the diesel cars is strong enough - we could sell 100,000 of them or 200,000 of them" - in that case, the mistake was made by VW for not cleaning up and selling the cars.
If VW decided the market was not there, then they would not want to spend the money on cleaning the cars up. That was just smart marketing.
If the market WAS there, and we know the technology is there, then CARB/EPA would have no way to stop VW from raking in all that profit if they wanted to do so.
In the case of the 03 TDI (actually back a ways) being able to use/not use ULSD, your take is patently incorrect. The A4, (AKA 03 TDI) has LONG since been designed to run on the European equivalent of ULSD. ULSD was NOT commonly available till the back ward looking October 2006. As a result a majority % of miles were run on USD.
Here's a hot one for you Gary. If the 2003 TDIs were so clean, why did models after that not achieve the 50-state emissions guidelines? (I know your answer will be, and it's not correct.......)
The answer is simple... the diesel emissions regulations were changed in 2004... January 1 to be exact. And again on Jan 1 2007. And will be again Jan 1 2010. And were every few years back to 1994.
If gasoline-powered vehicles underwent similar substantial re-regulation every couple of years, they'd be a lot more expensive.
Changing standards almost always have a way of costing more than it has to.
This would be addressed to the Larsb attitude folks. So what do you think would happen to the cost of gassers if they were specified to run on 15 ppm sulfur instead of the now 2x diritier (than ULSD) unleaded regular of 30 ppm?
It is the fault of the automaker. Here is the conversation:
As is usually the case we just disagree. You are pro government and I am pro business. Changing the rules every few years to keep the diesels out is just not right. I guess it fits your idea of fair. It does not fit mine.
I like those that get 40+ mp(US)g, and have driven several over the past 8 years -- all in Europe. Audi & BMW make cars that handle really well and, with a (relatively) small diesel engine, put econoboxes to shame.
You'll have to take my word for it, unless you've been over the big (well, medium anyway, compared to the Pacific) water. No North American who's only been exposed to the awful GM diesels of the '70s has any sort of clue as to what's being discussed here.
Often wrong, but never uncertain. Is that me or the other guys?
Amen Brother! Hopefully, the Honda/Acura IDTEC 2.2 will be here soon. Read a test run here in the states - can't remember the link - & it averaged 53 mpg, even with some NYC traffic in the test loop.
I average 55,000 miles a year & 50 mpg would be worth $200. a month or more to me compared to the 28 mpg I average with my 06 Avalon..
I'm not pro guvmint at all. Unlike some, I just trust my taxes are being spent wisely. I know guvmint is not even close to being perfect. But if the EPA and CARB were not out there protecting clean air and water, this would be a MUCH worse place to live.
Fairness is not even a part of this discussion.
My stance is clear and unmovable: if the market was there, the carmakers WOULD meet the regs without complaint, and diesels would thrive.
The market IS NOT THERE for the cars or nothing short of natural disasters would prevent the carmakers from having all the clean diesels American wanted to buy.
My stance is clear and unmovable: if the market was there, the carmakers WOULD meet the regs without complaint, and diesels would thrive.
Your stand has nothing to do with reality. It is just the position you have taken in your mind, and facts are of no importance.
Fact: 50% of the cars sold in the EU are CLEAN diesel. Fact: Every time the automakers bring the latest and cleanest, CARB changes the rules. Fact: If you cannot sell a vehicle in CA the practicality is lost. VW and MB are the only ones that continue to try and keep up with the moving target put up by the EPA and CARB. I am sure it is not profitable. When Obama gets in and starts charging a 100% tariff on cars and parts not made in the USA it will do the same thing to hybrids that CARB has done for diesels. It is forcing out products with legislation and regulation. My stance is most of the money spent by EPA and CARB is wasted on diminishing returns. With the benefits going to those that are working for the agencies. You can only squeeze so much juice out of a lemon before you are wasting your time. EPA and CARB have been wasting our tax dollars for the last couple decades with little to show for the Billions wasted.
Last Fact: Americans want cars that go 0-60 MPH very quickly and MPG is not the main concern. Until we become more interested in Mileage than racing from one stop light to the next, we will get what people want.
Gary incorrectly says, "Your stand has nothing to do with reality. It is just the position you have taken in your mind, and facts are of no importance. "
No it's not. Yours is the view which is tainted by bias, not mine.
Show me a study or a poll or anything else that shows that Americans are clamoring to buy a clean diesel passenger car......
Show me the organizations which are petitioning CARB or the EPA with lists of thousands of people who are protesting the fact that diesel cars are strictly regulated.
The FACTUAL evidence of heavy diesel car demand in the USA DOES. NOT. EXIST.
Show me a study or a poll or anything else that shows that Americans are clamoring to buy a clean diesel passenger car...
The waiting lists at the VW dealers speak for themselves. There was NO demand for the Prius for the first couple years. The Insight never did catch on. The Hybrid Civic is marginally popular. The Prius ONLY gained popularity when a couple of high profile celebs drove them to the Oscars.
Doing that with the Jetta TDI would not work. It does not look DIFFERENT enough to attract attention. It will take a few years of available cars. That is like saying no one likes Ice Cream where it is not sold.
You are welcome to your opinions concerning EPA & CARB, many here do not share them.
Low demand = low sales = why bother? - that has been their attitude.
Why did Toyota bother to bring the Prius to the US. Why did Honda bring the Insight? The Prius was on the market for 3 years before they saw any real demand. The Insight NEVER sold well.
You forget that VW has been selling diesel cars continuously from the 1970s, 80s all through the 90s up until now. They passed all EPA regulations up till 2007. So are you saying that the EPA was not doing its job? Either EPA or CARB is wasting tax dollars. You could still buy a diesel VW in 2004 at CA dealers. They were limited as to how many they could bring into the CARB states. My local dealer had a waiting list for every VW TDI they were allocated. I finally went to Oregon and bought the Passat TDI it was because I was tired of the government shenanigans in CA. It was easier as an Alaskan resident to just license it to my primary residence.
VW made several changes in emissions over those years to comply with the EU regs and EPA regs. CARB regs were always just out of reach. The technology was just not good enough for the CARB dweebs. Probably bought off by Toyota. How will we ever know that is the way our government works. Prize goes to the lobbyist with the biggest purse.
Larsb, you are really hurting what little credibility you have here. To stubbornly deny that the constantly changing diesel regulations do not affect auto mfg. willingness to bring clean diesels to the U.S. is either ignorant, silly, or dishonest. You pick.
When is the last time I posted something NEGATIVE but UNTRUE about diesels? A LONG LONG time ago maybe, but it was due to lack of education.
There are "negative but TRUE" facts about all types of cars. Pointing some of them out does not make me anti-anything.
It should not harm a diesel lover or hurt their feelings AT ALL when I point out that the market is just not there and that's why the carmakers are not bringing them in droves to the USA.
Anyone who believes the market IS there, provide some proof.
My view is neither ignorant, nor silly, not dishonest.
It's absolutely true that the changing diesel regs HAVE had an effect on bringing diesels here. Just not the way you guys think it has. It has not once PREVENTED a carmaker from selling a car here that they WANT to sell.
VW has never sat in a marketing meeting and said with a long sigh, "If CARB and the EPA would just LEAVE US ALONE we could go sell 300K cars in the USA every year !!!"
If they HAVE done that, they are COMPLETE FOOLS.
But my point is and has been, THE REGULATIONS DO NOT MATTER when carmakers decide to or not to bring a car here.
They bring a car here WHEN and IF they believe it will SELL large enough volumes to bring them a substantial profit.
Is that so hard to agree with? What in that statement is not clear to everyone reading it?
My views on diesel come from EDUCATION. They ARE NOT based AT ALL on any sort of anti-diesel BIAS. They are based on the FACTS.
The FACT remains, however much diesel lovers want to dispute it, that the market for diesel passenger cars in the USA is SMALL. It's just small. That's not even debatable in any sort of credible way, and it amuses and irritates me when people try to dispute it. It's so well-known that I can't believe anyone would challenge it.
Even the diesel websites acknowledge that fact !!!
I Googled ("diesel demand" passenger cars) and there is nothing there that indicates strong USA demand for the vehicles. The demand IS increasing slowly, but it is far far far from the high levels which would indicate that 300K of them a year would sell in the USA.
The EPA and CARB are in place to keep our air clean. Thousands of studies in the past 70 years or so have pinpointed the health dangers of diesel exhaust. This is not something I invented. Too many times, people want to dismiss it, but I'm not going to let that happen. The danger is REAL and is a health issue.
Anything the people who guard our clean air decide to ban is done with YOUR HEALTH and mine in mind. They don't arbitrarily pick on diesel vehicles. The regulations are there to protect the clean air, what little of it we have left.
I love a clean diesel as much as the next guy. But if CARB and the EPA want to restrict them until PM exhaust is ZERO then I'm all for that, and you should be too.
Whatever the reason, it has truly been a real shame in that the turbo diesel is uniquely adaptable to our highway systems.
To wit even the 37 year Toyota Corporate veteran ( Jim Press, a Toyota lifer and one of the people most responsible for that brand's U.S. success) said ..." The Prius is more reflective of the typical Tokyo driving pattern, which is stop-and-go traffic."...
You are so wrong on so many fronts I will just address demand.
Volkswagen dealers say the high price of diesel fuel isn't stopping a rush of buyers eager to snatch up the first batch of Jetta TDI cars.
The TDI models--with new diesels that meet emissions standards in all 50 states--don't go on sale until late August. But many dealers say they already have enough orders to eat up their 2008 allocation of the new Jetta sedan and Sportwagen TDI.
With diesel approaching $5 a gallon in some states, what's the appeal? Dealers say it's the improved fuel economy and high reliability of the diesel engine--plus the kind of performance you can't get from a hybrid or fuel-efficient small car.
"People are becoming aware of what constitutes a true economy vehicle," says Richard Fisher, owner of Auto Barn VW, which has three Chicago area VW stores. "They don't just want economy but a car that drives well and handles well and has good performance."
Volkswagen of America plans to sell 15,000 TDI Jettas this year. Next year, the TDI could account for up to 30 percent of Jetta sales, says VWoA spokesman Steve Keyes. That would take volume above 30,000 units.
The company is also studying whether to bring in other diesel vehicles, including a Tiguan SUV. Dealers say they've been clamoring for the diesel Tiguan for months, especially because sales of the new compact SUV haven't been as hot as they had hoped.
Well for sure, I was not addressing (answering ) your question. But if you want my response or are addressing me, the answer/s is/are truly not coordinated. VW chose the 2009 model year. They have started delivery. BMW seems to be on track for a 2009- 330 D. Honda started off with a TDI Civic, then switched to Accord, then changed the engine; now it is slated to be an Acura. After that, there are 2010 MY targets, all the way from a Toyota Tundra, Ford 150, Honda Pilot, If you have a particular interest, happy (googling) hunting !! Times and prices are truly all over the map.
I just did an MSRP comparison (Edmunds.com) on the Honda Civic across the cheapest model (DX-16,205.) to most expensive (EX-L-21,555.) and the hybrid (24,750.). The differences can range from 5,350. to 3,195 to 8,545 (gassers). Seems like a diesel premium (for a Honda if/when they decide to offer diesel models, if one is so inclined to get one) is a can do easy, sans the fru fru stuff ANY manufacturer puts on to boost its sales price. :shades:
I put together a graph showing the historical emissions limits for two regulated emissions that have been a challenge for diesels: particulates (PM) and NOx. emissions graph I included US. European, and Japanese regulations. The rest of the world, if you are curious, like Russia, China, India, and South America, are following Euro'x-1' (China), Euro'x-3' (India), or Euro'x-2' (the others). What I mean by that is If Europe is at EuroV, then China is at EuroIV, etc. This allows those countries to use the latest production-ready diesel technology (being driven by Europe) without issue. Even Japan is commonizing with Europe, since Japan2009 and EuroVI are the same. Very smart. Referring to the graph, The large blue box represents the first real regulation, starting in the early seventies and through the mid eighties. Before that, 'the sky was the limit'. Where we (collectively, the post-industrial world) are now, are the tiny boxes in the lower left. It is obvious that it is not just the US that cares about emissions. Japan and Europe have also made giant reductions in the allowed limits. It's just that our box is a little taller and narrower and Europe/Japan's are a little shorter and wider. Is one better than the other? Compared to the big blue box we came from (and keep in mind the total vehicle miles driven in the US has less than doubled in that timeframe), the differences are trivial. Yet, the difference in allowed NOx level is enough to keep modern EuroV diesels and the even cleaner EuroVI versions from coming here. Yes, the technology exists to meet Tier2Bin5, just like the technology exists to go to Mars. But manufacturers aren't going to allocate huge resources to make those technologies mass-production feasible or tool up to produce them until they have to. With Europe being the big diesel consumer, that means the technology will be made ready according to the Euro'x' schedule. If our 'box' was a little shorter and wider (just commonize with Europe!), we'd be driving cars that get 40-60mpg, therefore emitting much less of that latest gas of concern, CO2. Interesting to note that a 2006 diesel (Tier2Bin8), which could get by without any aftertreatment, has more stringent regulations than a 2003 California ULEV car (which needs a catalytic converter). There are still quite a few 2003s or older on the road, no? The newest car in my own possession is a 2001... And 2006 diesels are now considered 'dirty'. Right.
Given the example of 'EPA not very bright', here's an example of 'EPA smart'. This is the future, in my mind. Much more efficient than electric 'hybrid', and much cheaper, too. Note diesel figures prominently, because efficiency is the goal. diesel hydraulic diesel hydraulic 2
And really, it is CARB that is not too bright, since tier2bin5 is a requirement to sell diesels there (carmakers could sell diesels to the non-CARB states at tier2bin6+, but won't). Can't they tell Europe is on the same path of ever more stringent emissions? Walk the same path for the same high-efficiency low CO2 vehicles to be available in the US. I can see how, because of California's unique geography (big valley), they may have once needed more stringent emissions standards. I don't see that now, as the whole world's regulation limits approach zero.
Hi, I have been told there is no market for diesel cars in the USA.
If they marketed them for the milage they get ...well no one with a brain would want another car.
Why? In Europe the Mercedes Class A 170 diesel usually get 50+miles to the gallon and it is not infrequent to get close to 60 and there are other cars that frequently get 60 miles to gallon a italian car gets 60 mpg and yes it is a diesel.
The test market (USA) did not even have a chance to spead the word,about diesel cars. What test market? We had a 25mpg+ diesel 4x4 from jeep ...it was only sold for 2yrs. 25+mpg for a real 4x4 is rare(not non existant)
Why would diesels be unatractive to the USA market. The market isnt geared to diesels. They (car manufactures) would have to accentuate to diesels positive points(milage)
The problem is the market is geared toward milage ONLY. If asked what would you rather have a 25mpg car or 60mpg diesel with better performance.
I ask you which would you pick. Your current car or your car with twice the milage ..using diesel?
I have been told there is no market for diesel cars in the USA.
There a lot of anti diesel car people that would like you to believe that. Here is my opinion. The oil companies in the USA do not want more diesel cars. They have seen what has happened with the HUGE demand in the EU and fear it would happen here. They have through lobbying efforts in the Federal and CA state legislatures have kept the bar just above the technology on emissions. This is not something new. For at least 100 years the oil companies have had to deal with an over supply of gasoline vs diesel/heating oil/jet fuel. We have mostly gas cars to use what was once a waste product and just dumped. Currently the EU has a surplus of gasoline that is sold directly to the USA. There is a glut of gasoline and a shortage of distillates. That is the reason for the higher price for diesel.
The Feds go along with the whole deal because if you use less fuel in a diesel car you pay less road tax per mile. Keeping diesel cars from the consumer is a winner for the oil companies and the government.
If you look back to past posts, it is easy to get folks to see this by their own hand. (a calculator that can M/S/A/D, %'s are handy also :shades: )
Past EIA.gov links indicates the data are published. here is a local adaptation and reference. link title
So in a barrel of oil (42 gals) 19.3 gals or 46% is refined to gasoline, diesel varies from 9.83 gal or 23.4% to slightly higher. So a diesel passenger vehicle fleet at 23.4% would SEVERELY cut gasoline IMPORTATION. Currently the diesel passenger vehicle fleet is up @ 2%.
Gary has this in his head and he's not letting go. That does not make it fact.
The fact is that as soon as the diesel cars the carmakers want to bring here get clean enough, there will be plenty of them to go around for the 3% of the car-buying market who wants them.
Gary, you are only seeing one side of the coin and refusing to admit there is a second side of that same coin.
I have NEVER denied that there is diesel demand. Have you EVER seen me post something saying "there is NO diesel demand in the USA?"
No, you haven't because I have never said that.
What you are proving with the VW stories is that there is a market for VW diesel cars and SUVs at the VW dealerships.
That does not translate into "every other car buyer in America is pining and whining for a diesel car."
Go to Google News and search "diesel car demand" or "demand for diesel cars" inside the quotes and see what you get.
ZERO hits.
There are no current news stories about diesel car demand. What does that tell you? That it's not news. There is not enough interest even to generate ONE story with either of those phrases in it.
Like I said - there will be a demand for diesel VWs because VW is the "USA Diesel Dealer" and everyone has known that. Everyone associates VW with having diesel cars. All the 3% of USA buyers who might want a diesel car will be lining up to get the VW diesels.
That DOES NOT MEAN that there is a massive, country-wide demand for diesel cars.
U.S. Demand: Less than 5 percent of all cars in the United States are diesel fueled, compared to about 55 percent in Europe, and diesel car manufacturers have difficulty selling their cars in the U.S. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the price of diesel in the U.S. has been higher than the price of regular gasoline since the third quarter of 2004. This has dampened the demand for diesel in the U.S., which does not have the tax incentives or subsidies that other countries have to promote diesel usage.
There is also no doubt that diesel car demand is growing in the USA. But RIGHT NOW, it's not overwhelmingly high. It's there, but it's not huge. It's JUST NOT.
I don't think there's a conspiracy. It's simply that the EPA and CARB have a clean air mandate enforced by laws and regulations. I THINK ws still have a Dept. of Energy, but they've got no horsepower (excuse the pun) to increase the energy efficiency of cars. The two mandates clash. The one with regulatory power, wins. More's the pity, now that fuel prices higher.
Of course, it makes you wonder where we'd be now if the automakers spent the last twenty years worrying less about the HP wars and more about the MPG wars.
Comments
Several posters have verified that mass transit in the EU is only in the major cities and corridors. High fuel prices spawned the huge demand for diesel cars in the EU.
I fully expect about the time that fossil fuel becomes in short supply. Long after we are gone. That good alternatives will be available making the individual vehicles even better than they are today. It will facilitate people moving to less densely populated areas, which will cut down on all the negatives that big cities are plagued with.
God I want a nice little 50mpg+ diesel hatch that's not a VW. Why the hell can't we get one in the U.S.?
You can thank the EPA, the state of California & the green weenies (I realize there's overlap involved), not necessarily in that order.
We can't buy something they won't sell us.
The technology is there to make the cars clean enough to meet the regs.
True, but the cost of getting an EPA certificate for a specific drive train configuration/car is significant -- niche market cars (& that's what a small diesel would be) cost just as much to get certified as a car they can sell 50K+ of annually.
When I checked the BMW website for the UK a couple of years ago, there were something like 25 different versions of the 3 series available, including 6 diesels (3 each for the sport wagon & sedan). In the U.S., what's available? Three - five?
European turbo-direct-injection diesels have been available for ten years or more, and last I checked, the EU supported most green initiatives. Those may have been good enough for the rest of the world, but not here. Even when 15 ppm sulfur diesel came on the market in the U.S. 2-3 years ago, the laws in a few states were just enough more stringent to keep the high-volume European diesels out of North America.
Personally, I think protecting public health and having clean air is more important than having an extra 15 diesel models available to choose from.
Some passage in the Motor Vehicle History Bible somewhere says:
"To the USA the diesels shall come, and they shall be clean, and the people shall rejoice."
Are you talking about a 2003 TDI versus a 2003 Camry, or current model year cars?
Because if you are talking 2003, you are not correct. The 2003 TDI does not have the advanced emission control systems that the newer diesel cars have. Much more particulate matter is released into the atmosphere in that model year car than the current diesels or the 2003 or current Camry.
Particulate matter is the main evil in diesel exhaust. Cars which do not filter PM effectively, EVEN if they are using ULSD, are contributing to bad air.
The EPA sets a "moving target" of more restrictive emission levels because it is the only way to get automakers to improve emissions. The EPA sets emission requirements to match what the technology allows.
Well apparently not. That is how they handle it in Europe but not here. Here we have the current technology plus 1 catch22 rule in effect.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I can't make heads or tails of it, other than to see that the vehicle is officially certified.
Have fun:
CARB 2009 Jetta TDI certification page and assorted and gobbledygook
Apparently, the gist is that while the Jetta TDI is 50-state legal and has much cleaner emissions than diesels past, it's not as clean as today's ULEV and SULEV-rated vehicles. Looks like they rated it a LEV.
I would say ruking is correct. The 2003 VW TDI engines were tested for emissions with 500 PPM Diesel that was in use at the time. I have not seen any test results using ULSD. I would think it would be a whole lot better than the Camry on all but NoX. If CA even had a test for diesel cars we could find out. They don't because it is not worth it for so few vehicles. It was easier to not allow them to be sold in CA. Fortunately for the discriminating few VW was tenacious and went through the hoops CARB was hoping would stop them.
Well, of course you would Amigo !! Birds of a Feather and whatnot !!!
Here's a hot one for you Gary. If the 2003 TDIs were so clean, why did models after that not achieve the 50-state emissions guidelines? (I know your answer will be, and it's not correct.......)
Let's try keep things within the realm of reason and common sense, eh, and not erode/degrade our thought processes with random biases?
P.S. I love clean diesel vehicles as much as anyone around here, but you all know I don't think people should be using their biases to make irresponsible claims. Just like I might need to be occasionally brought back down to Earf on my favorite type of vehicle, so do some others at times require that action. Nothing wrong with showing your bias; just keep it within reason.
You know that the 2003 has most of the same emissions as the 2006 VW TDI. Sold right up until the 2009 came out.
As usual you blame the automaker instead of the Government. Only the government has the power to mandate the fuel content tha we are sold. It was ULSD that made most of the difference in diesel emissions. Just as getting the lead out was the biggest problem with gasoline. A diesel tractor like mine does not blow any black smoke with ULSD. With the cheaper red dye diesel it blows lots of black smoke. Most heavy equipment is still using off road diesel.
CARB/EPA: Your vehicle is not clean enough for 50-state emissions. Use the available technology to make it clean enough and you can sell it.
AutoMaker, (Whining): But that will COST TOO MUCH !!
CARB/EPA: What, $500? $700? - Pass it on to the customer.
AutoMaker, (Whining Again): But they won't buy it !! Margins are slim already.
CARB/EPA: Not my problem. If you want to sell the car and make the associated profit, CLEAN IT UP and then you can sell it. You know as well as I do that the technology is available.
It is without any doubt the fault of the Automaker, because we ALL KNOW that the technology IS available.
If the bean counters and marketeers at VW told their bosses, "The demand for the diesel cars is strong enough - we could sell 100,000 of them or 200,000 of them" - in that case, the mistake was made by VW for not cleaning up and selling the cars.
If VW decided the market was not there, then they would not want to spend the money on cleaning the cars up. That was just smart marketing.
If the market WAS there, and we know the technology is there, then CARB/EPA would have no way to stop VW from raking in all that profit if they wanted to do so.
In the case of the 03 TDI (actually back a ways) being able to use/not use ULSD, your take is patently incorrect. The A4, (AKA 03 TDI) has LONG since been designed to run on the European equivalent of ULSD. ULSD was NOT commonly available till the back ward looking October 2006. As a result a majority % of miles were run on USD.
The answer is simple... the diesel emissions regulations were changed in 2004... January 1 to be exact. And again on Jan 1 2007. And will be again Jan 1 2010. And were every few years back to 1994.
If gasoline-powered vehicles underwent similar substantial re-regulation every couple of years, they'd be a lot more expensive.
kcram - Pickups Host
You probably think me remiss in not mentioning Honda Accord, Ford Taurus, etc etc, again the "ubiquitous" gassers.
Changing standards almost always have a way of costing more than it has to.
This would be addressed to the Larsb attitude folks. So what do you think would happen to the cost of gassers if they were specified to run on 15 ppm sulfur instead of the now 2x diritier (than ULSD) unleaded regular of 30 ppm?
As is usually the case we just disagree. You are pro government and I am pro business. Changing the rules every few years to keep the diesels out is just not right. I guess it fits your idea of fair. It does not fit mine.
I like those that get 40+ mp(US)g, and have driven several over the past 8 years -- all in Europe. Audi & BMW make cars that handle really well and, with a (relatively) small diesel engine, put econoboxes to shame.
You'll have to take my word for it, unless you've been over the big (well, medium anyway, compared to the Pacific) water. No North American who's only been exposed to the awful GM diesels of the '70s has any sort of clue as to what's being discussed here.
Often wrong, but never uncertain. Is that me or the other guys?
I average 55,000 miles a year & 50 mpg would be worth $200. a month or more to me compared to the 28 mpg I average with my 06 Avalon..
Ask the carmakers why they have such a hard time doing it.
Fairness is not even a part of this discussion.
My stance is clear and unmovable: if the market was there, the carmakers WOULD meet the regs without complaint, and diesels would thrive.
The market IS NOT THERE for the cars or nothing short of natural disasters would prevent the carmakers from having all the clean diesels American wanted to buy.
Your stand has nothing to do with reality. It is just the position you have taken in your mind, and facts are of no importance.
Fact: 50% of the cars sold in the EU are CLEAN diesel.
Fact: Every time the automakers bring the latest and cleanest, CARB changes the rules.
Fact: If you cannot sell a vehicle in CA the practicality is lost. VW and MB are the only ones that continue to try and keep up with the moving target put up by the EPA and CARB. I am sure it is not profitable. When Obama gets in and starts charging a 100% tariff on cars and parts not made in the USA it will do the same thing to hybrids that CARB has done for diesels. It is forcing out products with legislation and regulation. My stance is most of the money spent by EPA and CARB is wasted on diminishing returns. With the benefits going to those that are working for the agencies. You can only squeeze so much juice out of a lemon before you are wasting your time. EPA and CARB have been wasting our tax dollars for the last couple decades with little to show for the Billions wasted.
Last Fact: Americans want cars that go 0-60 MPH very quickly and MPG is not the main concern. Until we become more interested in Mileage than racing from one stop light to the next, we will get what people want.
No it's not. Yours is the view which is tainted by bias, not mine.
Show me a study or a poll or anything else that shows that Americans are clamoring to buy a clean diesel passenger car......
Show me the organizations which are petitioning CARB or the EPA with lists of thousands of people who are protesting the fact that diesel cars are strictly regulated.
The FACTUAL evidence of heavy diesel car demand in the USA DOES. NOT. EXIST.
The waiting lists at the VW dealers speak for themselves. There was NO demand for the Prius for the first couple years. The Insight never did catch on. The Hybrid Civic is marginally popular. The Prius ONLY gained popularity when a couple of high profile celebs drove them to the Oscars.
Doing that with the Jetta TDI would not work. It does not look DIFFERENT enough to attract attention. It will take a few years of available cars. That is like saying no one likes Ice Cream where it is not sold.
You are welcome to your opinions concerning EPA & CARB, many here do not share them.
I'm not saying (and have NEVER said) that there is ZERO demand for diesel passenger vehicles - you know I have not.
Their IS INDEED demand. Just not at the level that has spurred carmakers (up to now) to really targeting the US market with diesel cars.
My point is that because the demand is not overwhelming, the automakers have dragged their feet on bringing clean diesel cars to our shores.
That's the ONLY reason.
Low demand = low sales = why bother? - that has been their attitude.
Why did Toyota bother to bring the Prius to the US. Why did Honda bring the Insight? The Prius was on the market for 3 years before they saw any real demand. The Insight NEVER sold well.
You forget that VW has been selling diesel cars continuously from the 1970s, 80s all through the 90s up until now. They passed all EPA regulations up till 2007. So are you saying that the EPA was not doing its job? Either EPA or CARB is wasting tax dollars. You could still buy a diesel VW in 2004 at CA dealers. They were limited as to how many they could bring into the CARB states. My local dealer had a waiting list for every VW TDI they were allocated. I finally went to Oregon and bought the Passat TDI it was because I was tired of the government shenanigans in CA. It was easier as an Alaskan resident to just license it to my primary residence.
VW made several changes in emissions over those years to comply with the EU regs and EPA regs. CARB regs were always just out of reach. The technology was just not good enough for the CARB dweebs. Probably bought off by Toyota. How will we ever know that is the way our government works. Prize goes to the lobbyist with the biggest purse.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I AM NOT ANTI-DIESEL !!!!!!
When is the last time I posted something NEGATIVE but UNTRUE about diesels? A LONG LONG time ago maybe, but it was due to lack of education.
There are "negative but TRUE" facts about all types of cars. Pointing some of them out does not make me anti-anything.
It should not harm a diesel lover or hurt their feelings AT ALL when I point out that the market is just not there and that's why the carmakers are not bringing them in droves to the USA.
Anyone who believes the market IS there, provide some proof.
It's absolutely true that the changing diesel regs HAVE had an effect on bringing diesels here. Just not the way you guys think it has. It has not once PREVENTED a carmaker from selling a car here that they WANT to sell.
VW has never sat in a marketing meeting and said with a long sigh, "If CARB and the EPA would just LEAVE US ALONE we could go sell 300K cars in the USA every year !!!"
If they HAVE done that, they are COMPLETE FOOLS.
But my point is and has been, THE REGULATIONS DO NOT MATTER when carmakers decide to or not to bring a car here.
They bring a car here WHEN and IF they believe it will SELL large enough volumes to bring them a substantial profit.
Is that so hard to agree with? What in that statement is not clear to everyone reading it?
The FACT remains, however much diesel lovers want to dispute it, that the market for diesel passenger cars in the USA is SMALL. It's just small. That's not even debatable in any sort of credible way, and it amuses and irritates me when people try to dispute it. It's so well-known that I can't believe anyone would challenge it.
Even the diesel websites acknowledge that fact !!!
I Googled ("diesel demand" passenger cars) and there is nothing there that indicates strong USA demand for the vehicles. The demand IS increasing slowly, but it is far far far from the high levels which would indicate that 300K of them a year would sell in the USA.
The EPA and CARB are in place to keep our air clean. Thousands of studies in the past 70 years or so have pinpointed the health dangers of diesel exhaust. This is not something I invented. Too many times, people want to dismiss it, but I'm not going to let that happen. The danger is REAL and is a health issue.
Anything the people who guard our clean air decide to ban is done with YOUR HEALTH and mine in mind. They don't arbitrarily pick on diesel vehicles. The regulations are there to protect the clean air, what little of it we have left.
I love a clean diesel as much as the next guy. But if CARB and the EPA want to restrict them until PM exhaust is ZERO then I'm all for that, and you should be too.
To wit even the 37 year Toyota Corporate veteran ( Jim Press, a Toyota lifer and one of the people most responsible for that brand's U.S. success) said ..." The Prius is more reflective of the typical Tokyo driving pattern, which is stop-and-go traffic."...
link title
Volkswagen dealers say the high price of diesel fuel isn't stopping a rush of buyers eager to snatch up the first batch of Jetta TDI cars.
The TDI models--with new diesels that meet emissions standards in all 50 states--don't go on sale until late August. But many dealers say they already have enough orders to eat up their 2008 allocation of the new Jetta sedan and Sportwagen TDI.
With diesel approaching $5 a gallon in some states, what's the appeal? Dealers say it's the improved fuel economy and high reliability of the diesel engine--plus the kind of performance you can't get from a hybrid or fuel-efficient small car.
"People are becoming aware of what constitutes a true economy vehicle," says Richard Fisher, owner of Auto Barn VW, which has three Chicago area VW stores. "They don't just want economy but a car that drives well and handles well and has good performance."
Volkswagen of America plans to sell 15,000 TDI Jettas this year. Next year, the TDI could account for up to 30 percent of Jetta sales, says VWoA spokesman Steve Keyes. That would take volume above 30,000 units.
The company is also studying whether to bring in other diesel vehicles, including a Tiguan SUV. Dealers say they've been clamoring for the diesel Tiguan for months, especially because sales of the new compact SUV haven't been as hot as they had hoped.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-9990524-48.html
I Googled diesel car demand and got hundreds of hits.
It was WHEN. Dates and times and prices.
emissions graph
I included US. European, and Japanese regulations. The rest of the world, if you are curious, like Russia, China, India, and South America, are following Euro'x-1' (China), Euro'x-3' (India), or Euro'x-2' (the others). What I mean by that is If Europe is at EuroV, then China is at EuroIV, etc. This allows those countries to use the latest production-ready diesel technology (being driven by Europe) without issue. Even Japan is commonizing with Europe, since Japan2009 and EuroVI are the same. Very smart. Referring to the graph, The large blue box represents the first real regulation, starting in the early seventies and through the mid eighties. Before that, 'the sky was the limit'. Where we (collectively, the post-industrial world) are now, are the tiny boxes in the lower left. It is obvious that it is not just the US that cares about emissions. Japan and Europe have also made giant reductions in the allowed limits. It's just that our box is a little taller and narrower and Europe/Japan's are a little shorter and wider. Is one better than the other? Compared to the big blue box we came from (and keep in mind the total vehicle miles driven in the US has less than doubled in that timeframe), the differences are trivial. Yet, the difference in allowed NOx level is enough to keep modern EuroV diesels and the even cleaner EuroVI versions from coming here. Yes, the technology exists to meet Tier2Bin5, just like the technology exists to go to Mars. But manufacturers aren't going to allocate huge resources to make those technologies mass-production feasible or tool up to produce them until they have to. With Europe being the big diesel consumer, that means the technology will be made ready according to the Euro'x' schedule. If our 'box' was a little shorter and wider (just commonize with Europe!), we'd be driving cars that get 40-60mpg, therefore emitting much less of that latest gas of concern, CO2. Interesting to note that a 2006 diesel (Tier2Bin8), which could get by without any aftertreatment, has more stringent regulations than a 2003 California ULEV car (which needs a catalytic converter). There are still quite a few 2003s or older on the road, no? The newest car in my own possession is a 2001... And 2006 diesels are now considered 'dirty'. Right.
Given the example of 'EPA not very bright', here's an example of 'EPA smart'. This is the future, in my mind. Much more efficient than electric 'hybrid', and much cheaper, too. Note diesel figures prominently, because efficiency is the goal.
diesel hydraulic
diesel hydraulic 2
I have been told there is no market for diesel cars in the USA.
If they marketed them for the milage they get ...well no one with a brain would want another car.
Why?
In Europe the Mercedes Class A 170 diesel usually get 50+miles to the gallon and it is not infrequent to get close to 60 and there are other cars that frequently get 60 miles to gallon a italian car gets 60 mpg and yes it is a diesel.
The test market (USA) did not even have a chance to spead the word,about diesel cars. What test market? We had a 25mpg+ diesel 4x4 from jeep ...it was only sold for 2yrs. 25+mpg for a real 4x4 is rare(not non existant)
Why would diesels be unatractive to the USA market. The market isnt geared to diesels. They (car manufactures) would have to accentuate to diesels positive points(milage)
The problem is the market is geared toward milage ONLY. If asked what would you rather have a 25mpg car or 60mpg diesel with better performance.
I ask you which would you pick. Your current car or your car with twice the milage ..using diesel?
There a lot of anti diesel car people that would like you to believe that. Here is my opinion. The oil companies in the USA do not want more diesel cars. They have seen what has happened with the HUGE demand in the EU and fear it would happen here. They have through lobbying efforts in the Federal and CA state legislatures have kept the bar just above the technology on emissions. This is not something new. For at least 100 years the oil companies have had to deal with an over supply of gasoline vs diesel/heating oil/jet fuel. We have mostly gas cars to use what was once a waste product and just dumped. Currently the EU has a surplus of gasoline that is sold directly to the USA. There is a glut of gasoline and a shortage of distillates. That is the reason for the higher price for diesel.
The Feds go along with the whole deal because if you use less fuel in a diesel car you pay less road tax per mile. Keeping diesel cars from the consumer is a winner for the oil companies and the government.
Past EIA.gov links indicates the data are published. here is a local adaptation and reference. link title
So in a barrel of oil (42 gals) 19.3 gals or 46% is refined to gasoline, diesel varies from 9.83 gal or 23.4% to slightly higher. So a diesel passenger vehicle fleet at 23.4% would SEVERELY cut gasoline IMPORTATION. Currently the diesel passenger vehicle fleet is up @ 2%.
There is no "anti-diesel conspiracy" in the USA.
Even the diesel forums don't think that.
Gary has this in his head and he's not letting go. That does not make it fact.
The fact is that as soon as the diesel cars the carmakers want to bring here get clean enough, there will be plenty of them to go around for the 3% of the car-buying market who wants them.
I have NEVER denied that there is diesel demand. Have you EVER seen me post something saying "there is NO diesel demand in the USA?"
No, you haven't because I have never said that.
What you are proving with the VW stories is that there is a market for VW diesel cars and SUVs at the VW dealerships.
That does not translate into "every other car buyer in America is pining and whining for a diesel car."
Go to Google News and search "diesel car demand" or "demand for diesel cars" inside the quotes and see what you get.
ZERO hits.
There are no current news stories about diesel car demand. What does that tell you? That it's not news. There is not enough interest even to generate ONE story with either of those phrases in it.
Like I said - there will be a demand for diesel VWs because VW is the "USA Diesel Dealer" and everyone has known that. Everyone associates VW with having diesel cars. All the 3% of USA buyers who might want a diesel car will be lining up to get the VW diesels.
That DOES NOT MEAN that there is a massive, country-wide demand for diesel cars.
How about a JD Power survey published last month?
Demand not huge
U.S. Demand:
Less than 5 percent of all cars in the United States are diesel fueled, compared to about 55 percent in Europe, and diesel car manufacturers have difficulty selling their cars in the U.S. According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the price of diesel in the U.S. has been higher than the price of regular gasoline since the third quarter of 2004. This has dampened the demand for diesel in the U.S., which does not have the tax incentives or subsidies that other countries have to promote diesel usage.
There is also no doubt that diesel car demand is growing in the USA. But RIGHT NOW, it's not overwhelmingly high. It's there, but it's not huge. It's JUST NOT.
Of course, it makes you wonder where we'd be now if the automakers spent the last twenty years worrying less about the HP wars and more about the MPG wars.