So with the above good range plug in and (secondary) turbo diesel AND a 35.5 mpg turbo diesel SUV can easily put one 10 years north of the 2016 35.5 mpg standards . Given how long the current 27 mpg standards have lasted, easily 30 years from 2009 !!!
The diesel goal was stated @ 25% of production. The actual seems to be @ 30%. I have read in other press releases the 2010 goals are at 40% of production.
..."Volkswagen is also considering bringing its minicar, the Polo, to the U.S. The company claims that the BlueMotion diesel version will deliver more than 60 mpg, highway and city combined—while also managing 99 g/km of CO2, an important European measurement. The gasoline version turns in 43 mpg on the same test cycle. Analysts predict that the Polo could land stateside in 2010."...
Suddenly it is starting to make sense to the US market that more (up wards of 23% for my .02 cents) diesels (volume and percentage) makes a LOT of sense.
The VW Polo is a fine little device. We don't see too many around my neck of the woods but we do see lots & lots of the Skoda Fabia which is based on the same mechanicals but with a slightly larger body, in 4 or so different styles, (not trim levels - styles). (They are Hatch, Estate, Roomster and Yeti which is available as a 4x4 with the 2.0TDi 170bhp engine), at a lower retail price, better dealers and, arguably, better build quality than its VW parent. Then there is the SEAT variant of the Polo. At least as good and cheaper.
To date, no Skoda Fabia, SEAT products (gasser or diesel) has/have hit the US market.
Perhaps you could comment on the European FIAT products, being as how it seems a slam dunk for FIAT to buy Chrysler. Since before the announcements, I have speculated that in the shorter term, Fiat would make ready for the US market "off the shelf" Fiat products (2-5 years). It seemed a perfect opportunity to introduce FIAT diesels. How they plan to do a 0 to 60 launch for the existing Chrysler line is a complete mystery (1 to 5 years). link title Longer term, there will be some re engineering and rebadging of Chrysler products to FIAT and vice versa. I am sure there will be some new Fiat/Chrysler concept to market offerings. Ultimately they will put the FIAT imprimatur, with possible Chrysler cues. What the linked article mysteriously did not address is how long it actually took the current FIAT CEO to turn around FIAT....
Perhaps it is just my lack of perception, knowledge, etc. but I am hard pressed to see what MB did to Chrysler during MB's ownership.
There is ONE example however: the Dodge SPRINTER turbo diesel. It has the MB turbo diesel engine mated to MB's almost bullet proof automatic transmission. I have heard folks getting 25 mpg !!!!! Some OCI's have crazy good UOA numbers with 50,000 miles !!!!!! But outside of highly specialized markets and/or the occasional "enthusiast," an almost NON event.
However, it would seem that Chrysler had a hugely corrosive effect on MB. MB seems STILL in recovery phase from that past ordeal.
It is noteworthy that MB has remained COMPLETELY silent about the FIAT purchase of Chrysler. It is a further curiosity in that no one from the news media has even seem to even ask MB for their take......
A further speculation; a few of their diesel products could find their way here, as well as the new Cummins turbo diesel "small block" for the Dodge RAM 1500 series, which presumably could be adapted to the mid to large car products.
The next model year is supposed to get around 75 mpg hway and 50 around town. The main change is automatic start/stop at idle. This should be the first one we get. Keep your fingers crossed.
If Land Rover brings their Defender line to the USA they would move to the top of my list. As far as I can tell the 2010 newly designed Defender's only come with a 2.4 L diesel engine. I like the looks. They are about $20k less than a comparable Toyota Land Cruiser. That is only offered with diesel engines in the UK. Now that a progressive company owns Land Rover maybe will see some good choices. I look for Tata to end up with the whole Chrysler dealer network.
Yes, you're right - 2.4 diesel only now. Gone are the days of a proper "Landy" with a V8 gasser. These are still proper "Landy's" but for a purpose - climbing mountains, pulling main battle tanks out of the mud; that sort of thing.
Still very cool for what is basically a 60 year old body design. Still very much respected in their homeland and lots of old ones still roaming about. Used to be that they could be fixed by anyone with a screwdriver, hammer and a set of spanners. Fender bender ? Unbolt the offending panel, attack it with a soft mallet, (or even a lump of 4" x 2"), and bolt it back on. Sorted. I imagine the body construction hasn't changed and is still the same aluminium it always was, (long before everyone else "invented" alum for car bodies).
I'd be totally ok with a 30 year old vehicle with a proper "new diesel". Nothing wrong with 30-35 mpg !!!!
We just put a 15 year old TLC (gasser) through a major maintenance ! 170,000 miles. For sure it "should have" this and that... BUT... all systems A OK. The last MANDATORY but alledgedly randomly drawn "SMOG ONLY" tested essentially @ NEW. They tore into the valve cover to check the valve adjustment, still @ factory specifications (a valve adjust would net them a couple hundred dollars more) Perhaps at the 30 year mark we will be looking at 340,000 miles. .
So despite what most all claim, vehicles can be built to last 30 years....
He recorded "15.7 mpg (6.37 gallons per 100 miles) in easy-going suburban driving." The vehicle is rated 17/25 mpg. It sounds like the Q7 will struggle to make its EPA ratings.
..."Diesels can get 25% to 40% better mileage than similar-size gas engines."...
The Toyota Prius had issues meeting its EPA ratings. At the time I was considering the 04 Prius, the EPA was 50 highway 60 city. Again at the time Edmunds.com Prius mpg threads were indicating 45 MAX (more like 43 in the city. minus - 28% from the stated city EPA ) from a lot of very dissapointed folks. In all fairness I did not and still do not count myself amoung that population.
It was all the more interesting, since Toyota did the submissions. Needless to say it (those self submissions) became not only politically embarrasing, but the EPA took the unusual action to re"cook" the tests so the Toyota Prius could get closer to the "cooked" ratings they didn't and should not have cooked. Incidently they still have issues meeting their OWN published numbers.....
Makes you wonder with the above quote how much better a diesel powered (anything) Prius hybrid will do.
..."And those that do suffer multiple thousands of dollars in repair work along that way. "....
I think also the above "sweeping" generalization might hide the fact that most is generated on the newly place unneeded and unreliable (usually electronic...) stuff.
Let's hope the Q7 owners do better than that. They have some very tough competition in the class. The only owner posting on the GL320 CDI so far is getting a combined 26.7 MPG. I talked to a lady at the Shell station the other day with the GL320 CDI and she is in love with the vehicle. Says it is so much better than the Denali she traded in. I asked what kind of mileage and she did not know. It just went twice as long on a tank of fuel than the Denali. And it handles like a car rather than a truck.
The Q7 is just not attractive at all to me so I am not sure I would even test drive one. I would rather have the 2010 Audi Allroad Quattro with the 2.0L TDI used in the Jetta. So far no talk of them coming to our 3rd world nation. Soon to be the land of $4000 Tata Nano and Fiat's
I thought this was a diesel forum? Why did you bring up the Prius? And just for the record, if you check Toyota Prius MPG-Real World Numbers you will see that 45 mpg is certainly not the MAX.
Over the years I have noticed that there is often a lot of cherry picking when it comes to how great mpg is with diesels. If you don't like the EPA ratings you call them "cooked". Of course if a journalist or forum member should happen to get "great MPG" in an uncontrolled test, well that must be right....
the anomaly with the prices in your links is that the national average was updated june 6 2009 and the state by state was updates march 10 2009, so I guess your email to them should be asking why the state by state price is so out of date. Scott
Why did I bring up a Prius in a diesel forum? For the simple reason the Prius was one of those in contention for my .02 cents. A diesel Prius would probably have been a slam dunk. Indeed I would have been happy with 50/60 mpg in my commute. However the diesel was chosen because the other reason was longer distance touring mileage. The like model at the time got 25 mpg, the diesel 49 mpg. I think you "fail" to see, simply because you don''t WANT to see.
..."Diesels can get 25% to 40% better mileage than similar-size gas engines."...
The above is quoted from THE article YOU posted........
If you feel diesel mpg is "cherry picked", then Prius serves as a "cherry picked" gasser hybrid comparison. Another is I also follow gasser Civic threads. I also understand (from a posted survey) that only 3-6% of folks get better mpg than the (38-42 mpg) Civic we have. So with Prius being @ (the time) a roughly 12,000 premium getting a real world of 45 mpg, how long do you think it would take to break even on real world mpg? Again I have no doubt I could get 45 mpg on the Prius (maybe even better)...which again would probably be on the same order ("cherry picked") as the diesel, gasser, gasser hybrid Again if the diesel Civic were available, a diesel Civic would have been another slam dunk.
Again please read my post for understanding. The "cooked" is in reference to those Prius drivers who were upset THEY did not get anywhere near to the 50/60 mpg. I say again.... I do NOT count myself among that population. If you STILL don't see the obvious reason, please let me know.
Now even this $12,000 premium could have been social engineered out of the equation and/or neutralized. Simply put: IRS tax credit of 12-15k to offset the premium over Toyota Corolla (Prius' nears performance competitor)
I hate when they do that!!!!!!! :mad: Now why would they would keep the old link active???????? The email was already sent. Maybe Geoff will get it fixed.
While GM, Ford, Chrysler can NOT close US plants fast enough...
A few interesting tidbits.....
..."VW was No. 3 in the world in sales for the first quarter, selling 1.4 million units. Toyota Motor Corp. topped the list at 1.7 million vehicles, followed by General Motors. VW has more than 40 plants worldwide, but does not assemble cars in the United States."...
..."The Chattanooga plant will make the new sedan on which VW is hinging much of its goals. Mr. Jacoby said the automaker can become a major player in the U.S. only if it competes in the major vehicle segments such as midsize cars"...
..."Company officials already are thinking about a future expansion in Chattanooga and boosting production from 150,000 vehicles annually to 300,000. Officials for Audi, VW’s upscale brand, also are looking at possible American production."...
..."Late last year, the company filed documents with the city-county Air Pollution Control Bureau indicating that after production starts it could expand to include more paint and press lines. The expanded facility would have the potential to produce 595,000 vehicles a year, the documents show."...
..."“We see a higher demand (for diesel). It will take time in the U.S,” he said. But he predicted it could eventually hold a significant stake in the market."...
Evidently in the foreseeable future "cross over" suv's will be continue as a strong part of the line-up for VW and naturally GM.Ford,Chrysler, and etc, etc. So to me a (min) 35.5 mpg (2016 standards) TDI crossover will be a killer application and easily to 5/10/15/20 years into the future.
Scuttlebutt has it short term the midsized (Passat) platform will be built in Chattanoga, TN. Additionally of total production, 40% diesel is the overall stated goal for VWOA for 2010.
The 2009 target was 25% and I have read in passing they are currently @ 30%. So if 150,000 will be the overall (ww) production for the US market, 30% will be app 45,000 diesel cars.
You went a bit off the mark, my post was originally about the Diesel Audi Q7 TDI.
Gagrice made the comment: "Let's hope the Q7 owners do better than that. They have some very tough competition in the class. " That comment was more relevant since it acknowledged the low mpg and went on to talk about GL320 CDI a close competitor to the Q7. In other words, the Q7 will need to keep pace with the other diesels in its class.
I am still wondering why the Q7 did get the low MPG. Is this a one-off deal or will it be typical of other Q7s? Part of what I am seeing with diesels is that some manufacturers seem to do a better job of execution. This situation is all the more surprising given that VW does a good job and Audi maybe didn't in this case. Audi is part of the VW group.
The V6 TDI in the Q7 is the same basic engine offered in the Touareg TDI. All 3 of the 6 cylinder diesel SUVs are in about the same power range. It is possible the guy driving the Q7 was not interested in saving fossil fuel. We know from tests that even the Hybrids like the Prius can be forced to get very low, under 30 MPG mileage if there is a concerted effort to hotrod them. I got a feeling a person cruising at 70 MPH across country in the Q7 should be able to get near 30 MPG. At least 27 MPG. For a vehicle that weighs in over 5500 lbs that is not bad mileage. My biggest complaint about all three companies diesel SUVs is the Urea injection. Whatever it takes to please the crooks running California.
Just a note. The BMW is by a quite a bit the most responsive and has the highest torque rating. I would assume that is the inline 6 which is a better configuration than the V6. Not sure why MB abandoned their proven inline 6 for the V6 engine.
Since diesels are fairly uncommon, most testers being used to gassers, do not drive turbo diesels correctly. Indeed a lot of testers make it a point to compare a diesel with a gasser (gasser being the "standard"). They also usually mention these obligatory things:
1. doesn't stink like diesels of old (oh please) 2. they took the marbles in the can noise out 3.you can actually get diesel fuel 4. ZERO to sixty is slower in a diesel. 5. do you want fries with that?
( Gee this almost sounds like a David Letterman routine)
You almost NEVER read about driving a diesel within its parameters.
So for example, another reason why I did not get the Prius (as I was well introduced and schooled into the correct driving procedures to get "close to EPA"), I just didn't want to drive the Prius the way it had to be driven (day in day out) to achieve the desired results. So my issues were not with Toyota and/or Prius.
Contrast that with the TDI with 118,000 miles. It still amazes me I can drive 90 mph and still get 49/50 mpg !! When I drive 75 mph with bursts to 80/85 it returns 56/59 mpg. Other than knowing and staying within the operating parameters of the turbo diesel, as you probably would agree, I do not use hypermiling techniques. The other interesting thing is if you drive a diesel like a Prius should be driven, it almost always results in much higher mpg for the diesel.
Here in the U.K. the Q7 3.0 TDi is quoted at 27.2mpg Imperial on the EU Combined Cycle, the VW Touareg 3.0 TDi is rated at 25.9 on the same basis so neither is exactly "frugal", (nor are they "guzzlers"). But, as has been pointed out, they are big, heavy vehicles and there is always a price to be paid for hauling metal. To get a feel for the "Highway" mpg you could always Google Audi UK and look at the numbers.
Of the Q7's locally, all are TDi's; not a single gasser to be seen...........so no surprise there, then.
Of the Q7's locally, all are TDi's; not a single gasser to be seen...........so no surprise there, then.
What is stupid, is the fact that all large SUVs in the USA are not diesel. The UK saw the potential to save fossil fuel and did not get in the way. Here the EPA, CARB, Congress and the lobbyist that own them have made a concerted effort to keep diesel SUVs out of our market. All you have to do is go test drive a new BMW X5 Diesel to be sold. I have not driven the Touareg or Q7 TDI yet.
It would take the wind out of the sails of the crowd that bemoans our waste of fossil fuel. If a Mercedes diesel full size SUV gets 30 MPG out on the road it is about the same as a CamCord V6. Why would anyone want to drive a CamCord if they can get the same mileage in a solid SUV?
The 2010 Golf Turbo Diesel, would be my choice for a slightly smaller and sportier car, than the Jetta TDI, if I had to get "the next" car. If the rating systems are the same, the GTD gets combined "44 mpg" ( vs 34 mpg for the Jetta TDI) , AND has more hp & torque !!
Since we get (so far) 39-45 mpg on the Jetta TDI, using similar ratios; I suspect we would have no issues getting 50.5 -58.21 mpg in the GTD, Golf Turbo Diesel. @ less than 20k (MSRP), why get a Prius, that is app $7,270 more?
D2@ $ 2.75 per gal (current corner store price) will buy 2,643.64 gals *44 mpg = 116,320 miles of commuting.
I like the looks of the new Golf GTD. I took my Sequoia in for an oil change to my local mechanic. There was a late 90s Jetta TDI parked there. I asked if he works on the TDI. He does and that is his wife's Jetta. They bought it used in 1999 with 12k miles. It now has 206k miles and he claims the most reliable car he has ever owned. He loves driving it and never gets less than 40 MPG.
...I just didn't want to drive the Prius the way it had to be driven (day in day out) to achieve the desired results. So my issues were not with Toyota and/or Prius.
Past tense says it all.
The 2010 model changes the rules. Setting the cruise on the highway and seeing 55 MPG as the result is the situation now. Slow down, the MPG can hit 60.
I would totally agree with you, especially with a 2003 Jetta TDI. No cruise @75 mph with bursts to 80-85, sees 59 mph. A little more "frisky," 56 mpg. To keep with the flow of traffic on CA freeways, 50 mpg is a no brainer.
When the Highway Patrol consistently passes you @ 80-85, you might be going a tad...slow. But not to worry. You can at your option, go 40-45 mph. You also can literally ( flip on your 4 way flashers) and (legally) go even slower (aka, rolling 2 lane (min) obstruction). They will literally pass you with a greater speed.
To see 60 mpg is not hard. For me however, I risk road hypnosis. When you add to the bevy of fully loaded tractor trailers trying to make you their nose pieces... no appealing options.
I am currently working on my 2nd 100,000 miles interval. I did have th change the tires at 112,300 miles. This is purely a swag, but I sense the "weak" clutch will far exceed the 400,000 miles best guess average estimate.
Fuel mileage above the current standards 27 mpg and 22 mpg defacto, have clearly been completely and utterly meaningless. If it were meaningful, (among hosts of other things) Prius' would be selling in far greater volume and percentage of total vehicle fleet than it has for the last 8 years that I know of. They would have literally not severely limit to outright outlawed diesels getting 50 mpg .
I am glad you agree again,.... in the future....
..."I suspect we would have no issues getting 50.5 -58.21 mpg in the GTD, Golf Turbo Diesel. less than 20k (MSRP), why get a Prius, that is app $7,270 more?
D2 $ 2.75 per gal (current corner store price) will buy 2,643.64 gals *44 mpg = 116,320 miles of commuting."...
This is a virtual apples to oranges comparison also: pocket rocket vs banana slug. So how much to B/E from $7,270 @ 51 mpg vs 59 mpg?
Keep in mind the VW POLO might be coming in 2010/2011 @ 60 mpg and even less than 20k... Again.... So... how much to B/E from even more than $7,270 @ 60 mpg vs 59 mpg?
As an op/ed since you post continually on the diesel thread, you don't see 50 state legal diesels as the .... enemy. BUT... I could be wrong!!??
Not if the anti diesel crowd has its way. 60 mpg makes the current standards of 27 with 22 defacto seriously not even in the ball game. It is even far ahead of the 2016 standards of 35.5 mpg. So let's hope they don't have their way.
Anyone know how the 335d has been selling? If anyone has talked to a dealer, even some word-of mouth from your local dealer would be interesting.
Just curious since I haven't seen any on the road in my area.
If it is selling, awesome.
I'm still contemplating the 335d for my next vehicle, but I'd be nervous buying something that only a few hundred examples exist in the US as a one-off model year.
At MSRP and in some cases, PLUS, it does not seem to be SRO.
But If you like the BMW 335 I and the BMW brand, I would not hesitate on the D version. The twin Turbo diesel with 405 # ft of torque is just a fantastic diesel example. It makes road cruising just effortless.
As I think I've mentioned before, Europe get alternate-Polo's from Skoda and SEAT, (pronounced SAYAT - it's Spanish).
The Skoda line-up on the Polo floorpan/mechanicals comprises : Fabia Hatch, Fabia Estate, Roomster and Yeti, (about to be launched). All with a choice of , (usually), 3 x gasser and 3 x diesel engines). Roomster is a Honda Fit competitor for interior space/practicality but with diesel options.
Next up come the Octavia Hatch and Octavia Estate, based on the Golf - but bigger.............same TDi's, though.
Last in line is the Superb, based on a larger-than Passat floorplan with rear leg room you will simply not believe, (more like Audi A8 than Passat), but at Passat pricing.............and an ultra-frugal 1.4TSI gasser if you want; plus the usual range of TDI's. Oh, and a definitely not-frugal 3.6 V6 gasser.
From SEAT, the Ibiza range is Polo-based, Altea range is Golf-based, Exxeo is Audi A4-based and Alhambra shares a platform with the VW Sharan and previous Ford Galaxy. All the usual TDI's available.
May be worth looking at the sites just to see what other parts of the VAG empire turn out. Both marques are cheaper than VW, SEAT are much more funky designs and Skoda have a reputation, (confirmed by JD Power), for quality, reliability and dealer service that is streets ahead of VW and Audi. Go figure, as they say.
"So I guess California got it right after all. The world did not end when they made diesel engines comply with emissions standards. "
Well it does beg the (current ) question: why does CA STILL mandate 2 to 6 times dirtier air ???? (than it has to be)
They are a minimum of 31 years behind the times. They could have "HAD" those dropped those figures
"New diesel trucks and buses cut soot and smog more than 90%"
easily 31 years ago, @ the same time CA first mandated the switch to UN leaded gas for the passenger vehicle fleet. So what would be your calculation of 31 years of 97% less emissions????
The actual figure, standard wise is 97% ( LSD 500 ppm / ULSD 15 ppm) Indeed if they made bio diesel a viable economic alternative/option (for the big rigs; trucks and buses) , they could have it down even lower @ 99%(>5 ppm to ZERO ppm which essentially would mean the air is 30 x dirtier than it would have to be (using 1 ppm/30 ppm) We can actually use (point).5 ppm and the figure would now be 60 x dirtier.
On the other "hand in glove" topic of diesel cars (since I would assume most of us do not drive diesel big rigs/buses) , as a comparison, RUG to PUG is STILL @ 30 ppm or a MINIMUM of 2x DIRTIER than ULSD (15 ppm) diesel. So with CA having 98% RUG to PUG (almost mandated) the air is @ least 2 x to a more normal 6 x dirtier (If bio diesel were used, and in a greater population of diesel cars...) air than it has to be, if more passenger car diesels both volume and percentage were allowed.
CA still allows bunker oil (3000 to 5000 ppm ) to be burned at all shipping levels, and with NO emissions devices :lemon: CA still allow jet fuel to be up to 3000 ppm. Aviation fuel users require no emission devices, and leaded fuel is still the norm.
Jose, You're right; the Cupra and FR variants are both up there with the best. Body design leaves the rest of the VAG outfits struggling some way behind.
Correction to me previous post - the Skoda Yeti is actually Golf-based and comes in FWD or AWD flavours.
Shane neither SEAT nor Skoda will make it across the water. :P
Comments
Now that the new model is available, it's obvious why sales were lower.
Demand is strong now... in part due to the impressive efficiency.
55.8 MPG is my average from my first 1,001 miles of driving a 2010 model.
.
Which model did you get and were you able to get a price below MSRP? Also, what do you think of the 2010?
Diesels here, please.
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
link title
Suddenly it is starting to make sense to the US market that more (up wards of 23% for my .02 cents) diesels (volume and percentage) makes a LOT of sense.
Perhaps you could comment on the European FIAT products, being as how it seems a slam dunk for FIAT to buy Chrysler. Since before the announcements, I have speculated that in the shorter term, Fiat would make ready for the US market "off the shelf" Fiat products (2-5 years). It seemed a perfect opportunity to introduce FIAT diesels. How they plan to do a 0 to 60 launch for the existing Chrysler line is a complete mystery (1 to 5 years). link title Longer term, there will be some re engineering and rebadging of Chrysler products to FIAT and vice versa. I am sure there will be some new Fiat/Chrysler concept to market offerings. Ultimately they will put the FIAT imprimatur, with possible Chrysler cues. What the linked article mysteriously did not address is how long it actually took the current FIAT CEO to turn around FIAT....
Perhaps it is just my lack of perception, knowledge, etc. but I am hard pressed to see what MB did to Chrysler during MB's ownership.
There is ONE example however: the Dodge SPRINTER turbo diesel. It has the MB turbo diesel engine mated to MB's almost bullet proof automatic transmission. I have heard folks getting 25 mpg !!!!! Some OCI's have crazy good UOA numbers with 50,000 miles !!!!!! But outside of highly specialized markets and/or the occasional "enthusiast," an almost NON event.
However, it would seem that Chrysler had a hugely corrosive effect on MB. MB seems STILL in recovery phase from that past ordeal.
It is noteworthy that MB has remained COMPLETELY silent about the FIAT purchase of Chrysler. It is a further curiosity in that no one from the news media has even seem to even ask MB for their take......
A further speculation; a few of their diesel products could find their way here, as well as the new Cummins turbo diesel "small block" for the Dodge RAM 1500 series, which presumably could be adapted to the mid to large car products.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
No GTD, just TDI for 2010.
Still very cool for what is basically a 60 year old body design. Still very much respected in their homeland and lots of old ones still roaming about. Used to be that they could be fixed by anyone with a screwdriver, hammer and a set of spanners. Fender bender ? Unbolt the offending panel, attack it with a soft mallet, (or even a lump of 4" x 2"), and bolt it back on. Sorted. I imagine the body construction hasn't changed and is still the same aluminium it always was, (long before everyone else "invented" alum for car bodies).
Some good, some bad
We just put a 15 year old TLC (gasser) through a major maintenance ! 170,000 miles. For sure it "should have" this and that... BUT... all systems A OK. The last MANDATORY but alledgedly randomly drawn "SMOG ONLY" tested essentially @ NEW. They tore into the valve cover to check the valve adjustment, still @ factory specifications (a valve adjust would net them a couple hundred dollars more) Perhaps at the 30 year mark we will be looking at 340,000 miles. .
So despite what most all claim, vehicles can be built to last 30 years....
And of course you aren't saying that you never have to replace rotors, brake pads, tires, etc?
By Ken Thomas
link title
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/reviews/healey/2009-06-11-test-drive-audi-q7- -tdi_N.htm
He recorded "15.7 mpg (6.37 gallons per 100 miles) in easy-going suburban driving." The vehicle is rated 17/25 mpg. It sounds like the Q7 will struggle to make its EPA ratings.
The Toyota Prius had issues meeting its EPA ratings. At the time I was considering the 04 Prius, the EPA was 50 highway 60 city. Again at the time Edmunds.com Prius mpg threads were indicating 45 MAX (more like 43 in the city. minus - 28% from the stated city EPA ) from a lot of very dissapointed folks. In all fairness I did not and still do not count myself amoung that population.
It was all the more interesting, since Toyota did the submissions. Needless to say it (those self submissions) became not only politically embarrasing, but the EPA took the unusual action to re"cook" the tests so the Toyota Prius could get closer to the "cooked" ratings they didn't and should not have cooked. Incidently they still have issues meeting their OWN published numbers.....
Makes you wonder with the above quote how much better a diesel powered (anything) Prius hybrid will do.
I think also the above "sweeping" generalization might hide the fact that most is generated on the newly place unneeded and unreliable (usually electronic...) stuff.
The Q7 is just not attractive at all to me so I am not sure I would even test drive one. I would rather have the 2010 Audi Allroad Quattro with the 2.0L TDI used in the Jetta. So far no talk of them coming to our 3rd world nation. Soon to be the land of $4000 Tata Nano and Fiat's
Over the years I have noticed that there is often a lot of cherry picking when it comes to how great mpg is with diesels. If you don't like the EPA ratings you call them "cooked". Of course if a journalist or forum member should happen to get "great MPG" in an uncontrolled test, well that must be right....
Scott
..."Diesels can get 25% to 40% better mileage than similar-size gas engines."...
The above is quoted from THE article YOU posted........
If you feel diesel mpg is "cherry picked", then Prius serves as a "cherry picked" gasser hybrid comparison. Another is I also follow gasser Civic threads. I also understand (from a posted survey) that only 3-6% of folks get better mpg than the (38-42 mpg) Civic we have. So with Prius being @ (the time) a roughly 12,000 premium getting a real world of 45 mpg, how long do you think it would take to break even on real world mpg? Again I have no doubt I could get 45 mpg on the Prius (maybe even better)...which again would probably be on the same order ("cherry picked") as the diesel, gasser, gasser hybrid Again if the diesel Civic were available, a diesel Civic would have been another slam dunk.
Again please read my post for understanding. The "cooked" is in reference to those Prius drivers who were upset THEY did not get anywhere near to the 50/60 mpg. I say again.... I do NOT count myself among that population. If you STILL don't see the obvious reason, please let me know.
Now even this $12,000 premium could have been social engineered out of the equation and/or neutralized. Simply put: IRS tax credit of 12-15k to offset the premium over Toyota Corolla (Prius' nears performance competitor)
My bookmark to
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.asp
is no longer valid! They changed it to
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.html
I hate when they do that!!!!!!! :mad: Now why would they would keep the old link active???????? The email was already sent. Maybe Geoff will get it fixed.
A few interesting tidbits.....
..."VW was No. 3 in the world in sales for the first quarter, selling 1.4 million units. Toyota Motor Corp. topped the list at 1.7 million vehicles, followed by General Motors. VW has more than 40 plants worldwide, but does not assemble cars in the United States."...
..."The Chattanooga plant will make the new sedan on which VW is hinging much of its goals. Mr. Jacoby said the automaker can become a major player in the U.S. only if it competes in the major vehicle segments such as midsize cars"...
..."Company officials already are thinking about a future expansion in Chattanooga and boosting production from 150,000 vehicles annually to 300,000. Officials for Audi, VW’s upscale brand, also are looking at possible American production."...
..."Late last year, the company filed documents with the city-county Air Pollution Control Bureau indicating that after production starts it could expand to include more paint and press lines. The expanded facility would have the potential to produce 595,000 vehicles a year, the documents show."...
..."“We see a higher demand (for diesel). It will take time in the U.S,” he said. But he predicted it could eventually hold a significant stake in the market."...
link title
(my op/ed)
Evidently in the foreseeable future "cross over" suv's will be continue as a strong part of the line-up for VW and naturally GM.Ford,Chrysler, and etc, etc. So to me a (min) 35.5 mpg (2016 standards) TDI crossover will be a killer application and easily to 5/10/15/20 years into the future.
Scuttlebutt has it short term the midsized (Passat) platform will be built in Chattanoga, TN. Additionally of total production, 40% diesel is the overall stated goal for VWOA for 2010.
The 2009 target was 25% and I have read in passing they are currently @ 30%. So if 150,000 will be the overall (ww) production for the US market, 30% will be app 45,000 diesel cars.
Gagrice made the comment:
"Let's hope the Q7 owners do better than that. They have some very tough competition in the class. "
That comment was more relevant since it acknowledged the low mpg and went on to talk about GL320 CDI a close competitor to the Q7. In other words, the Q7 will need to keep pace with the other diesels in its class.
I am still wondering why the Q7 did get the low MPG. Is this a one-off deal or will it be typical of other Q7s? Part of what I am seeing with diesels is that some manufacturers seem to do a better job of execution. This situation is all the more surprising given that VW does a good job and Audi maybe didn't in this case. Audi is part of the VW group.
Just a note. The BMW is by a quite a bit the most responsive and has the highest torque rating. I would assume that is the inline 6 which is a better configuration than the V6. Not sure why MB abandoned their proven inline 6 for the V6 engine.
Since diesels are fairly uncommon, most testers being used to gassers, do not drive turbo diesels correctly. Indeed a lot of testers make it a point to compare a diesel with a gasser (gasser being the "standard"). They also usually mention these obligatory things:
1. doesn't stink like diesels of old (oh please)
2. they took the marbles in the can noise out
3.you can actually get diesel fuel
4. ZERO to sixty is slower in a diesel.
5. do you want fries with that?
( Gee this almost sounds like a David Letterman routine)
You almost NEVER read about driving a diesel within its parameters.
So for example, another reason why I did not get the Prius (as I was well introduced and schooled into the correct driving procedures to get "close to EPA"), I just didn't want to drive the Prius the way it had to be driven (day in day out) to achieve the desired results. So my issues were not with Toyota and/or Prius.
Contrast that with the TDI with 118,000 miles. It still amazes me I can drive 90 mph and still get 49/50 mpg !! When I drive 75 mph with bursts to 80/85 it returns 56/59 mpg. Other than knowing and staying within the operating parameters of the turbo diesel, as you probably would agree, I do not use hypermiling techniques. The other interesting thing is if you drive a diesel like a Prius should be driven, it almost always results in much higher mpg for the diesel.
Of the Q7's locally, all are TDi's; not a single gasser to be seen...........so no surprise there, then.
What is stupid, is the fact that all large SUVs in the USA are not diesel. The UK saw the potential to save fossil fuel and did not get in the way. Here the EPA, CARB, Congress and the lobbyist that own them have made a concerted effort to keep diesel SUVs out of our market. All you have to do is go test drive a new BMW X5 Diesel to be sold. I have not driven the Touareg or Q7 TDI yet.
It would take the wind out of the sails of the crowd that bemoans our waste of fossil fuel. If a Mercedes diesel full size SUV gets 30 MPG out on the road it is about the same as a CamCord V6. Why would anyone want to drive a CamCord if they can get the same mileage in a solid SUV?
link title
The 2010 Golf Turbo Diesel, would be my choice for a slightly smaller and sportier car, than the Jetta TDI, if I had to get "the next" car. If the rating systems are the same, the GTD gets combined "44 mpg" ( vs 34 mpg for the Jetta TDI) , AND has more hp & torque !!
Since we get (so far) 39-45 mpg on the Jetta TDI, using similar ratios; I suspect we would have no issues getting 50.5 -58.21 mpg in the GTD, Golf Turbo Diesel. @ less than 20k (MSRP), why get a Prius, that is app $7,270 more?
D2@ $ 2.75 per gal (current corner store price) will buy 2,643.64 gals *44 mpg = 116,320 miles of commuting.
Past tense says it all.
The 2010 model changes the rules. Setting the cruise on the highway and seeing 55 MPG as the result is the situation now. Slow down, the MPG can hit 60.
I would totally agree with you, especially with a 2003 Jetta TDI. No cruise @75 mph with bursts to 80-85, sees 59 mph. A little more "frisky," 56 mpg. To keep with the flow of traffic on CA freeways, 50 mpg is a no brainer.
When the Highway Patrol consistently passes you @ 80-85, you might be going a tad...slow. But not to worry. You can at your option, go 40-45 mph. You also can literally ( flip on your 4 way flashers) and (legally) go even slower (aka, rolling 2 lane (min) obstruction). They will literally pass you with a greater speed.
To see 60 mpg is not hard. For me however, I risk road hypnosis. When you add to the bevy of fully loaded tractor trailers trying to make you their nose pieces... no appealing options.
I am currently working on my 2nd 100,000 miles interval. I did have th change the tires at 112,300 miles. This is purely a swag, but I sense the "weak" clutch will far exceed the 400,000 miles best guess average estimate.
Fuel mileage above the current standards 27 mpg and 22 mpg defacto, have clearly been completely and utterly meaningless. If it were meaningful, (among hosts of other things) Prius' would be selling in far greater volume and percentage of total vehicle fleet than it has for the last 8 years that I know of. They would have literally not severely limit to outright outlawed diesels getting 50 mpg .
I am glad you agree again,.... in the future....
..."I suspect we would have no issues getting 50.5 -58.21 mpg in the GTD, Golf Turbo Diesel. less than 20k (MSRP), why get a Prius, that is app $7,270 more?
D2 $ 2.75 per gal (current corner store price) will buy 2,643.64 gals *44 mpg = 116,320 miles of commuting."...
This is a virtual apples to oranges comparison also: pocket rocket vs banana slug. So how much to B/E from $7,270 @ 51 mpg vs 59 mpg?
Keep in mind the VW POLO might be coming in 2010/2011 @ 60 mpg and even less than 20k... Again.... So... how much to B/E from even more than $7,270 @ 60 mpg vs 59 mpg?
As an op/ed since you post continually on the diesel thread, you don't see 50 state legal diesels as the .... enemy. BUT... I could be wrong!!??
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Just curious since I haven't seen any on the road in my area.
If it is selling, awesome.
I'm still contemplating the 335d for my next vehicle, but I'd be nervous buying something that only a few hundred examples exist in the US as a one-off model year.
But If you like the BMW 335 I and the BMW brand, I would not hesitate on the D version. The twin Turbo diesel with 405 # ft of torque is just a fantastic diesel example. It makes road cruising just effortless.
The Skoda line-up on the Polo floorpan/mechanicals comprises : Fabia Hatch, Fabia Estate, Roomster and Yeti, (about to be launched). All with a choice of , (usually), 3 x gasser and 3 x diesel engines). Roomster is a Honda Fit competitor for interior space/practicality but with diesel options.
Next up come the Octavia Hatch and Octavia Estate, based on the Golf - but bigger.............same TDi's, though.
Last in line is the Superb, based on a larger-than Passat floorplan with rear leg room you will simply not believe, (more like Audi A8 than Passat), but at Passat pricing.............and an ultra-frugal 1.4TSI gasser if you want; plus the usual range of TDI's. Oh, and a definitely not-frugal 3.6 V6 gasser.
Skoda UK
From SEAT, the Ibiza range is Polo-based, Altea range is Golf-based, Exxeo is Audi A4-based and Alhambra shares a platform with the VW Sharan and previous Ford Galaxy. All the usual TDI's available.
SEAT UK
May be worth looking at the sites just to see what other parts of the VAG empire turn out. Both marques are cheaper than VW, SEAT are much more funky designs and Skoda have a reputation, (confirmed by JD Power), for quality, reliability and dealer service that is streets ahead of VW and Audi. Go figure, as they say.
Seat León Cupra
Seat León FR
Regards,
Jose
We never get the good stuff here in the third world !
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
you guys really know how to rub it in !! ARRGGGHH!!
:P
Regards,
Jose
So I guess California got it right after all.
Well it does beg the (current ) question: why does CA STILL mandate 2 to 6 times dirtier air ???? (than it has to be)
They are a minimum of 31 years behind the times. They could have "HAD" those dropped those figures
"New diesel trucks and buses cut soot and smog more than 90%"
easily 31 years ago, @ the same time CA first mandated the switch to UN leaded gas for the passenger vehicle fleet. So what would be your calculation of 31 years of 97% less emissions????
The actual figure, standard wise is 97% ( LSD 500 ppm / ULSD 15 ppm) Indeed if they made bio diesel a viable economic alternative/option (for the big rigs; trucks and buses) , they could have it down even lower @ 99%(>5 ppm to ZERO ppm which essentially would mean the air is 30 x dirtier than it would have to be (using 1 ppm/30 ppm) We can actually use (point).5 ppm and the figure would now be 60 x dirtier.
On the other "hand in glove" topic of diesel cars (since I would assume most of us do not drive diesel big rigs/buses) , as a comparison, RUG to PUG is STILL @ 30 ppm or a MINIMUM of 2x DIRTIER than ULSD (15 ppm) diesel. So with CA having 98% RUG to PUG (almost mandated) the air is @ least 2 x to a more normal 6 x dirtier (If bio diesel were used, and in a greater population of diesel cars...) air than it has to be, if more passenger car diesels both volume and percentage were allowed.
CA still allows bunker oil (3000 to 5000 ppm ) to be burned at all shipping levels, and with NO emissions devices :lemon: CA still allow jet fuel to be up to 3000 ppm. Aviation fuel users require no emission devices, and leaded fuel is still the norm.
Correction to me previous post - the Skoda Yeti is actually Golf-based and comes in FWD or AWD flavours.
Shane neither SEAT nor Skoda will make it across the water. :P