If you do a little research on the shipping vs emissions control stuff you will find that major ports require ships to switch to cleaner burning fuel at X miles out from the coast. It's already done! Bunker fuel being burned is nasty stuff same with what comes out of the stacks. If a state like CA is working hard and pushing its residents to get clean - it would make no sense for that effort to go out the window the second a ship cruises in to port.
CA is a special case - though I've seen Reno NV and a few other cities not in CA that could really use some fresh air. I make several trips to Socal a year and the second you hit the bottom of the Vine you know your in LA simply by the low Air quality. By the time I reach San Diego I'm blowing black dirt out of my nose every time I use a hanky. Now for those who live in say Idaho that get all grumpy about CA screwing up the auto choices and making them more expensive? Chew on this CA is the largest Auto market in the US - money talks and drives the market many of the product improvements made on the cars you buy in Idaho are the result of market pressures in CA and other large Auto markets - not from people in Idaho demanding a better product.
I'm replacing my 12mpg 7 passenger SUV in a year and it will get replaced with a clean diesel which will cut my fuel usage by 50% and probably cut my emissions by near 50%. Will I buy a GM gas SUV that gets 20mpg with a tail wind? HELL no!
... There is a guy in Colorado that converts gas Suburbans to Duramax Diesel Suburbans. If you have to ask how much, keep in mind he prefers you to bring a donor Duramax pickup. The price is absurd but he is busy.
This is most certainly true, or at least many of the people in other states hope it's the case.
California will be able to show what happens when a state does many other things that are just as senseless as CARB over a period of time. The next five years should tell the tale.
CA has a history of failed mandates that cost the state tax payers a lot of money. The EV debacle in the late 1990s, when the state mandated 10% EVs had to be sold by the automakers. Billions were spent and we have yet to benefit from it. Now they are on this CO2 kick to reduce carbon with mandates that have already raised electric rates above the rest of the USA. Productive people are leaving the state taking their tax dollars with them. The state is on the verge of bankruptcy. The US cannot print enough money to pull the state out of the mess that the governor and legislature have caused.
I can give a whole list of areas the state has pushed their citizens beyond common sense & reason. CARB regulating diesel cars into oblivion is just one of dozens. Having been a resident in a FREE state, Alaska, for 37 years, I don't know why the people here don't rise up and vote out the whole lot of their legislators. Family and great weather is the only thing keeping me here.
Not only has CARB harmed the diesel market, they have also harmed human health.
Remember when CARB was a proponent of MTBE?
quote CARB - In fact, according to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), cleaner burning gasoline with MTBE has: • Reduced smog-forming emissions by more than 1300 tons per day. • Eliminated toxic emissions equivalent to removing 3.5 million cars from Californian roads. • Reduced human cancer risk related to gasoline exposure by an estimated 40%. -end quote
Thank you for contaminated drinking water CARB. MTBE is a carcinogen.
CARB is dangerous. Wonder if the CARB models for MTBE were performed by a mail order PHD?
CARB has not done any favors for Californians. The EPA has set reasonable standards, only to be taken to court by CARB. It is counter productive having multiple agencies doing the same thing. Of course they are going to come up with different standards to justify their jobs. CA is broke. They need to disband CARB and save the billions wasted by them. Lobby Congress and the EPA to get what they want.
Wanna hear something REAL SCARY? Moonbeam is acting Governor while Ahnold is in DC begging for money. Kind of Ironic.
I heard on the radio here in Los Angeles that there is a well funded group that is going to try to qualify two initiatives for the November 2010 ballot that will eliminate or greatly limit the power of CARB. The first will suspend AB-32 (green house gas regulations) any time the unemployment rate in California is over 5%. The second would cut the number of Board members and would prohibit CARB from passing any regulations that are stronger than EPA’s without EPA’s approval.
I will put up signs in my yard to promote any referendum against CARB. They have proven they are against any kind of growth in CA. With no viable alternatives offered.
Most governmental agencies are run by persons who have no inkling of what they are getting into or in most cases have an agenda bought and paid for by some special interest group or groups.
Who has really damaged diesel in this country?
1. GM for sure with their clunkers of the late 70's to mid-80's. 2. The U.S. government and congress. The lack of foresight by the government and congress has left us with a shortage of diesel fuel, plus they are allowing the oil companies to trade diesel to Europe for the gasoline the Europeans do not use. Why do you think anything moved by diesel power costs so much more to ship? 3. The oil companies. They have been slow and reluctant to build diesel refineries in this country. They also help keep diesel supplies tight to keep the cost of diesel high thus discouraging potential diesel buyers. 4. The unwillingness of major U.S. automakers to bring diesel to this country. In the U.S., businesses love to re-invent the wheel even though the technology is out there. 5. Lack of education or advertising about clean diesel. So diesels cost a bit more than gassers and the fuel costs a bit more too, but when you get anywhere from 20% to 40% more miles on that same gallon, why not push that fact. Also, consider the ramifications of using biofuels. Diesels actually run better and cleaner without taking a fuel economy hit like E85 burners. When Toyota started selling the Prius in the U.S., you can be sure that little or no profit was made on them.
Most government agencies are run by someone looking to make a name for themself, and must influence any form of change (especially change that doesn't necessarily solve anything whatsoever) so that they get credited with new funding, promotions, raises, staff, benefits, etc.
You are absolutely correc;t it has nothing to do with intelligence. It has to do with who has the loudest mouth and the toughest attitude. None of this typically ends up benefitting the public.
bigmclargehuge is right on point. Most government EPA related agencies are run by liberal activists who make a living trying to solve problems that do not exist. Environmental activists should not be allowed to run an agency responsible for environmental regulations. Obamas appointments to run the Dept of Commerce and the EPA are tree hugging liberals who will use all of the power they have to forward their own agenda. The time has come to vote the tree hugging liberals out of office.
Good luck with that in CA. I doubt they'll be 'voted out' any time soon. But there needs to be some precedent that certain boards can't just act unilaterally.
There's a reason the Fed has checks and balances. CARB undermines this.
Also, I don't think the 'liberal problem' in the US is so much an environmental one as a "I'm Big Brother, give me money!" problem.
The greed of government I think exceeds any actual love of the environment. But I digress.
When the Conservatives are in power, they put at the head of these agencies people not qualified for the job and those same people run the agency in question very poorly. They use this poor showing to justify the ineptitude of government when in reality if either side put a competent person in charge, then things would be different.
Things get bad when you have extremist fringe elements of either major party calling the shots.
quote- The real story with the Jetta TDI begins in the exhaust stream, which requires no urea-injection, using only oxidation catalysts and regenerating particulate filters to meet emissions standards. It can be sold in all 50 states.
Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency rated the TDI at 29/40 mpg (8.1-5.8 L/100 km) city/highway, but VW’s third-party testers found a 38/44 mpg (6.2-5.3 L/100 km) figure to be more accurate.
The EPA must have retested the vehicle because it now rates at 30/42 mpg (7.8-5.6 L/100 km) with an excellent 6-speed dual-clutch DSG transmission that perfectly complements the TDI’s prodigious output, channeling it to the front wheels with amazing speed and efficiency.
Believe the folks in Wolfsburg when they say the Jetta TDI is the most powerful car in the U.S. capable of getting 40 mpg. A number of Ward’s editors exceeded that mark. -end
Now I have two Wards 10 Best Engines award winners in my garage!
It’s tragic to think the U.S. market, having just gotten a taste of contemporary, European-style, torque-rich clean diesel engines, could see them disappearing in the future, the victim of extremist emissions regulations proposed in California.
quote- The best way to win the argument is to send these environmental autocrats for a daylong drive along the Pacific Coast Highway in the BMW 335d. They will return with smiles on their faces and a firm grasp of the enthusiast culture that embraces diesel as the perfect balance between performance and fuel efficiency.
For achieving this balance so well, BMW wins its second consecutive 10 Best Engines award for its outstanding 3.0L DOHC inline-6 turbodiesel. -end
I think the 2.0L TDI is the best engine in the World today. I would love to have it as sold in the EU in a Tiguan or Amarok. My first choice would be the Audi A4 Allroad Quattro TDI with that engine. The Sportswagen TDI with about 8 inches of clearance would be hard to resist.
... It can't be all that far away that the catalyst technology in the VW Diesel four would be enough to have a larger engine pass NOx regs without the SCR additive. Still waiting for Cat, Argonne, GE, Navistar, Tennenco, etc. to solve the growing quagmire of SCR. It appears that anything bigger than two liters is a problem.
The beauty of the 2.0L diesel engines, especially the ones built by VW/Audi, is they can replace most of the cars gas engines on the road, with no loss in driveability. Any car up to about 3500 lbs will be more than usable. If the EPA and CARB were serious about wasting fuel they would encourage replacing all the gas guzzling V6 engines in new cars with the much more practical 4 cylinder diesels. The very fine Honda diesel is selling well in the EU. Yet missed getting passed the ignorant goon squad at the EPA & Carb by a whisker. I find that reprehensible. Those agencies do not look at the big picture.
That is 6 year old news. What has Honda done recently with gas or diesel engines that is worth comment? Their latest hybrid is a total flop. I think Honda missed a golden opportunity to stick it to Ford and Toyota by not pursuing their fine midsized diesel offering into the US market. Then we would be able to judge the two systems side by side. I think Honda could have easily sold 10% of their total as diesel offerings. Both the Insight and Civic hybrid combined was 3% of the Honda total last year.
... Which one is impossible ? CARB admitting they have been somewhat mistaken by not considering fuel economy, or an incentive program that allows a slight increase in NOx if there is a substantial reduction in greenhouse gas I.E. better fuel economy.
Getting a government agency to admit they are wrong is tough. Though the new slightly changed EPA estimates on the VW TDI cars is encouraging. Hopefully the people in charge at CARB, do not keep pushing the emissions to justify their existence. I think that is much of it. Once standards are established and the testing is in place, what need is there for EPA and CARB to exist?
It SURE would be nice to have it here, because I think it would blow the Jetta TDi out of the water as far as overall polish and performance and quality of build.
Maybe not in MPG, but who knows until we had one here to test, eh?
VW has much better interior quality than Honda. Build quality, VW TDI and Honda i-CTDi I did not perceive a difference.
I've driven euro Accord (sold as Acura TSX in USA) with diesel a few years ago and I was quite impressed with it.
It would be a welcome addition to the North American diesel availability.
There are too many differences between emissions regulations in U.S. compared to the rest of the world, regulations need to be harmonized to allow an efficient transfer of technology.
Well, this is from February 2009 and it is now February 2010. GM's 4.5L and Cummins 5.0L have completed engineering and testing and are waiting for an application. Ford's 4.4L is complete, though not fully tested in the F series.
Not even a solid rumor of any of the three sold anytime soon.
There is unverified info. that Nissan will be first to market with a 1/2 ton diesel in it's Titan. Plan was for Nissan to offer a Cummins engine when Dodge began building the Titan for Nissan. Now that Fiat is in charge the agreement is off and Nissan is going it alone on the new Titan. Fiat is said to be considering Fiat diesel engines in the Ram and Nissan may partner with Cummins for engines for it's commercial vehicles to be built in Canton.
Heck, there was even ridiculous talk of Navistar supplying diesel engines to Toyota. Toyota and Nissan are both fully capable of designing and manufacturing their own diesel engines.
Same old speculation we've been hearing for years. I'll believe it when I see it.
It is. 4.5L was to be manufactured in Tonawanda, NY. Portions of the tooling were delivered before the plan was changed as part of the bankruptcy.
Tonawanda was selected to build this engine. Below is an article that preceded the selection.
from 5/22/2007 quote David Robinson of the Buffalo News GM plans a 4.5-liter diesel that would be available in some pickups and SUVs after 2009. Making the diesel engine would be a first for the plant on River Road, which makes gasoline engines for GM cars and trucks.
The diesel would broaden the scope of the $300 million expansion that the automaker announced in January for its 1,860-job factory. That project will build eight-cylinder gasoline engines for future luxury cars.
Production of the gasoline engine is scheduled to begin in 2008. The new diesel would start production in October 2009, if the Powertrain Division plant is selected. Brown said she doesn’t know how many other GM plants are bidding for the new work.
The Erie County Industrial Development Agency approved Monday an additional $350,000 in sales tax savings linked to the possible expansion, said Alfred Culliton, the agency’s chief financial officer.
George Schneider, GM’s regional tax manager, told IDA officials that the additional sales tax break would put the Tonawanda plant in a better position to win the additional investment from GM.
“We’re in an extremely competitive environment,” he said.
IDA officials said the total investment associated with the new production line would be around $77 million. Brown, of GM, put the investment at $88 million.
At an expected production of 200 engines per shift, the diesel would be a relatively small product for Tonawanda but one with implications for the site’s future.
With gasoline prices topping $ 3 a gallon and approaching $4 in parts of the country, diesel engines are gaining more attention as a way to boost fuel economy.
“It’s really important to get out in front on some of these alternative fuels,” Schneider said.
GM and other automakers are planning diesel engines for light trucks in advance of tighter federal fuel economy standards expected in 2011.
“Obviously, diesel is a good alternative — you get a 25 to 30 percent increase in efficiency,” said Paul Lacy, a research manager with analyst Global Insight in Troy, Mich.
Once linked with sooty, high-sulfur exhaust, diesel fuel for cars and trucks must meet higher environmental standards under rules that began to take effect last year.
Whether diesel trucks will appeal to buyers depends on fuel prices and on the extra cost of the vehicle, Lacy said. The U.S. average price for diesel is $2.80 a gallon, 41 cents less than gas, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. In the Buffalo Niagara region Monday, a gallon of diesel averaged $3.01, compared with $3.11 for a gallon of regular gas, according to the AAA of Western and Central New York.
GM has discussed plans for a diesel that would be available in some full-size pickup trucks and SUVs. The planned engine would fit into the spot reserved for a gasoline engine but with 25 percent better fuel efficiency -end
I think that was a big mistake to start with. Why would anyone need a 4.5L diesel in a half ton PU. They could build an efficient 3.0L inline 6 that would pull all you should with a half ton vehicle. The 3.0L diesels in the BMW and VW SUVs will tow over 7500 lbs and have over 400 ft lbs of torque. I don't think the domestics get the picture. We don't need more HP. We need optimum size and maximum mileage. Give me a half ton that gets 30+ MPG and I am a happy camper.
... G, I think it was a more cost effective way, as the 4.5 is a smaller or V-6 version of the new Duramax V-8, six something liter. It would use most of the same tooling rather than an in-line. At this point the Big Three ought to eat crow and buy Diesel fours from VW, and put them in Rangers, Dakotas, and the small GM pickup. Well eat crow or beg CARB and EPA to wake up and reward fuel economy.
No kidding I've been asking that question for years. By the way I think the new 09 and 2010 landcruiser is sold with a 4.5L turbo diesel engine outside the US. Which case I'd bet that its based on or is the GM engine only Toyota got with it and actually put it in a vehicle and is selling it vs just blowing smoke up our [non-permissible content removed] talking about it like GM.
As for HP Americans are about as stupid as you can get when it comes to car shopping - all you need to do is watch the Auto commercials and look at the glossy Magazine adds to see that. HP numbers are posted everywhere. But anyone that has some knowledge of cars and engines knows that HP means very little if it only shows up at engine speeds that are rarely if at all ever reached in normal vehicle use.
How often does your wife rev the car up to 3800-4500 RPM when she drops off the kids at school? Better yet how often do you hit those numbers pulling your ATV across town? HP numbers mean nothing when the power only happens at RPM's most people never reach or even think about spinning up too.
"Western European Passenger Car Purchases Shifted to Higher Share for Small Cars, Lower Share for Diesels in 2009"
52.7% to 45.3%...that is a huge drop. The article did not seem to address why diesels took a hit.One commenter suggested more efficient gasoline engines are the reason. I am not aware of any tax changes. Europe did see some higher diesel prices in 2008/2009 that might have scared off some people. It might also suggest that people prefer gasoline engines over diesel.
"One of the negatives of driving a diesel in the winter came early in the test, when the weather was cold: diesels take a long, long time to get up to operating temperature and provide enough heat to warm the cabin. Also, an idling diesel simply won’t get warm in sub-zero temperatures, so starting and driving away gently is the best way to get heat as soon as possible. If you get stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic in your TDI, well, you`re gonna be chilly until you can get up to speed again."
For me this would be a deal breaker. We had -20 & -30 temps in Jan, - normal around here. Our gasoline engines do not have the warm-up problem. A lot of people have remote starters. They start their engines 20 minutes before they leave work. A diesel would not work if it doesn't warm-up at idle.
I would agree about the HP issue. This report talks about the HP problem we have in the U.S. Automobiles on Steroids: Product Attribute Trade-Offs and Technological Progress in the Automobile Sector
I am surprised you are not familiar with the devices used on diesel PU trucks that kick up the idle to the optimum RPM. We had them on all our trucks in the Arctic. When you let you vehicle sit idling for more than a minute the idle control kicks the engine up to 1300-1600 RPM. That being the best for the engine. We started our trucks at 5:30 AM and shut them down about 5:30 PM every day all winter long. They were always nice and warm. Slow idling a diesel is not good for the engine. It does not get up to the best operating temperature for proper lubrication.
When the temps dropped to zero we plugged our vehicles in whenever they were stopped for more than a few minutes. They were always equipped with a circulating heater for the coolant and a trickle charger and blanket for the battery.
I would think in the Dakotas you would welcome diesel over gas engines that do not like long hours of idling. One of my fellow workers lives in Brookings SD and loves his diesel F250 running on B20. If you are willing to use about 40% fossil fuel to have an engine that warms up quicker in sub zero temperatures, then gas may be your best bet. You will probably get a lot more advice from owners of VW TDIs that live in cold climates. The positives of diesel far outweigh the negatives for me. I just wish we had a decent choice of small diesel engined vehicles.
I own a 2005 Jeep Liberty CRD and I live in the metro DC area. We occasionally have single digit temps during the winter. My diesel will start instant in this weather after a two second pre-heat (without being plugged in) and I have heat in about one mile of driving. I let the engine idle for about two minutes before I move the vehicle. My Jeep also has a silicone friction heater for cabin heat and helps to warm the engine more quickly.
I have a factory installed block heater which I use during the work week and I have instant start and heat within 1/2 mile.
If you chose to buy a diesel, make sure you can get a block heater. That will mitigate the need to let the engine run in sub-zero weather.
If you get stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic in your TDI, well, you`re gonna be chilly until you can get up to speed again
I noticed Car and Driver said the same thing in their recent long term test of the TDI Jetta. People may have used plug-ins etc. for their trucks, but will this even occur to the average consumer cross-shopping this versus an Accord? VW needs to proactively educate the consumer here, I think...or equip it like the Canadian models.
Simple and effective cure - a good grille cover. I'm sure the people testing that TDI in Canada have seen plenty of semis up there with vinyl full-grille covers - their sole purpose is to block the intake of the cold air - you only leave the portion of the grille open where air is directed over the intercooler. Engine heats up faster, fluids move more freely.
I can understand a PU warming the cabin quickly. The engine in your PU would probably be 3 times larger than a Jetta TDI. In any case it sounds like something VW needs to work on.
Years ago I used cardboard. It worked rather well. At the end of the season you put it in the recycling bin. The newer engines have electric fans so I do not bother anymore. In the old days the fan would keep turning regardless of temperature. We all remember the not so good old days - right?
That is what puzzles me, the car was a Canadian Model as is the web site. Usual ND cars need to be equipped more like Canadian cars as opposed to cars from Texas or Florida.
There is even talk of ND becoming part of Canada, but that is another story....
Have to admit that my previous Skoda Fabia with the VW 130bhp TDi engine was slow to warm up in winter. Less fuel used = less heat generated + heavy cast iron block = slow warm-up. Can't beat the physics, I guess.
My Volvo D5 has an alloy block and is considerably better in this respect.
Ref your previous post about fall-off in diesel sales in Europe; think it's a combination of higher diesel fuel cost, people covering lower annual mileages, diesel option costing more to buy imitially and an increasing number of very good small gasser engines. If I were buying a small - medium car for my 10-12k per year it would be a real debate of gas vs diesel. Gas might just edge it on cost but I like the greater torque of diesels. Decisions, decisions. I think we can, probably, thank the diesel builders for prodding the gasser builders into better engines - but I think they would have got there anyway, probably.
Comments
Yes, in some cases we are.
But CARB is not one of those cases. California is different than most other states.
Bunker fuel being burned is nasty stuff same with what comes out of the stacks. If a state like CA is working hard and pushing its residents to get clean - it would make no sense for that effort to go out the window the second a ship cruises in to port.
CA is a special case - though I've seen Reno NV and a few other cities not in CA that could really use some fresh air. I make several trips to Socal a year and the second you hit the bottom of the Vine you know your in LA simply by the low Air quality. By the time I reach San Diego I'm blowing black dirt out of my nose every time I use a hanky. Now for those who live in say Idaho that get all grumpy about CA screwing up the auto choices and making them more expensive? Chew on this CA is the largest Auto market in the US - money talks and drives the market many of the product improvements made on the cars you buy in Idaho are the result of market pressures in CA and other large Auto markets - not from people in Idaho demanding a better product.
I'm replacing my 12mpg 7 passenger SUV in a year and it will get replaced with a clean diesel which will cut my fuel usage by 50% and probably cut my emissions by near 50%. Will I buy a GM gas SUV that gets 20mpg with a tail wind? HELL no!
This is most certainly true, or at least many of the people in other states hope it's the case.
California will be able to show what happens when a state does many other things that are just as senseless as CARB over a period of time. The next five years should tell the tale.
I can give a whole list of areas the state has pushed their citizens beyond common sense & reason.
CARB regulating diesel cars into oblivion is just one of dozens. Having been a resident in a FREE state, Alaska, for 37 years, I don't know why the people here don't rise up and vote out the whole lot of their legislators. Family and great weather is the only thing keeping me here.
Remember when CARB was a proponent of MTBE?
quote CARB -
In fact, according to the California Air Resources Board (CARB), cleaner burning gasoline with MTBE has:
• Reduced smog-forming emissions by more than 1300 tons per day.
• Eliminated toxic emissions equivalent to removing 3.5 million cars from Californian roads.
• Reduced human cancer risk related to gasoline exposure by an estimated 40%.
-end quote
Thank you for contaminated drinking water CARB. MTBE is a carcinogen.
CARB is dangerous. Wonder if the CARB models for MTBE were performed by a mail order PHD?
Wanna hear something REAL SCARY? Moonbeam is acting Governor while Ahnold is in DC begging for money. Kind of Ironic.
Who has really damaged diesel in this country?
1. GM for sure with their clunkers of the late 70's to mid-80's.
2. The U.S. government and congress. The lack of foresight by the government and congress has left us with a shortage of diesel fuel, plus they are allowing the oil companies to trade diesel to Europe for the gasoline the Europeans do not use. Why do you think anything moved by diesel power costs so much more to ship?
3. The oil companies. They have been slow and reluctant to build diesel refineries in this country. They also help keep diesel supplies tight to keep the cost of diesel high thus discouraging potential diesel buyers.
4. The unwillingness of major U.S. automakers to bring diesel to this country. In the U.S., businesses love to re-invent the wheel even though the technology is out there.
5. Lack of education or advertising about clean diesel. So diesels cost a bit more than gassers and the fuel costs a bit more too, but when you get anywhere from 20% to 40% more miles on that same gallon, why not push that fact. Also, consider the ramifications of using biofuels. Diesels actually run better and cleaner without taking a fuel economy hit like E85 burners. When Toyota started selling the Prius in the U.S., you can be sure that little or no profit was made on them.
There's a reason the Fed has checks and balances. CARB undermines this.
Also, I don't think the 'liberal problem' in the US is so much an environmental one as a "I'm Big Brother, give me money!" problem.
The greed of government I think exceeds any actual love of the environment. But I digress.
Things get bad when you have extremist fringe elements of either major party calling the shots.
^^^ this. :shades:
Wards 10 Best Engines 2010 VW 2.0L TDI
quote-
The real story with the Jetta TDI begins in the exhaust stream, which requires no urea-injection, using only oxidation catalysts and regenerating particulate filters to meet emissions standards. It can be sold in all 50 states.
Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency rated the TDI at 29/40 mpg (8.1-5.8 L/100 km) city/highway, but VW’s third-party testers found a 38/44 mpg (6.2-5.3 L/100 km) figure to be more accurate.
The EPA must have retested the vehicle because it now rates at 30/42 mpg (7.8-5.6 L/100 km) with an excellent 6-speed dual-clutch DSG transmission that perfectly complements the TDI’s prodigious output, channeling it to the front wheels with amazing speed and efficiency.
Believe the folks in Wolfsburg when they say the Jetta TDI is the most powerful car in the U.S. capable of getting 40 mpg. A number of Ward’s editors exceeded that mark.
-end
Now I have two Wards 10 Best Engines award winners in my garage!
I like the TDI too!
It’s tragic to think the U.S. market, having just gotten a taste of contemporary, European-style, torque-rich clean diesel engines, could see them disappearing in the future, the victim of extremist emissions regulations proposed in California.
quote-
The best way to win the argument is to send these environmental autocrats for a daylong drive along the Pacific Coast Highway in the BMW 335d. They will return with smiles on their faces and a firm grasp of the enthusiast culture that embraces diesel as the perfect balance between performance and fuel efficiency.
For achieving this balance so well, BMW wins its second consecutive 10 Best Engines award for its outstanding 3.0L DOHC inline-6 turbodiesel.
-end
Honda Diesel Sets New World Records
I would look long and hard at a Pilot Diesel.
The fuel consumption figures remain comparable with returns of 48.7mpg for the Honda Accord Type-S over the combined cycle against 50.4mpg
It SURE would be nice to have it here, because I think it would blow the Jetta TDi out of the water as far as overall polish and performance and quality of build.
Maybe not in MPG, but who knows until we had one here to test, eh?
Build quality, VW TDI and Honda i-CTDi I did not perceive a difference.
I've driven euro Accord (sold as Acura TSX in USA) with diesel a few years ago and I was quite impressed with it.
It would be a welcome addition to the North American diesel availability.
There are too many differences between emissions regulations in U.S. compared to the rest of the world, regulations need to be harmonized to allow an efficient transfer of technology.
Well, this is from February 2009 and it is now February 2010. GM's 4.5L and Cummins 5.0L have completed engineering and testing and are waiting for an application. Ford's 4.4L is complete, though not fully tested in the F series.
Not even a solid rumor of any of the three sold anytime soon.
There is unverified info. that Nissan will be first to market with a 1/2 ton diesel in it's Titan. Plan was for Nissan to offer a Cummins engine when Dodge began building the Titan for Nissan. Now that Fiat is in charge the agreement is off and Nissan is going it alone on the new Titan. Fiat is said to be considering Fiat diesel engines in the Ram and Nissan may partner with Cummins for engines for it's commercial vehicles to be built in Canton.
Heck, there was even ridiculous talk of Navistar supplying diesel engines to Toyota. Toyota and Nissan are both fully capable of designing and manufacturing their own diesel engines.
Same old speculation we've been hearing for years. I'll believe it when I see it.
Navistar is also linked to Mahindra's U.S. efforts.
Tonawanda was selected to build this engine. Below is an article that preceded the selection.
from 5/22/2007
quote David Robinson of the Buffalo News
GM plans a 4.5-liter diesel that would be available in some pickups and SUVs after 2009. Making the diesel engine would be a first for the plant on River Road, which makes gasoline engines for GM cars and trucks.
The diesel would broaden the scope of the $300 million expansion that the automaker announced in January for its 1,860-job factory. That project will build eight-cylinder gasoline engines for future luxury cars.
Production of the gasoline engine is scheduled to begin in 2008. The new diesel would start production in October 2009, if the Powertrain Division plant is selected. Brown said she doesn’t know how many other GM plants are bidding for the new work.
The Erie County Industrial Development Agency approved Monday an additional $350,000 in sales tax savings linked to the possible expansion, said Alfred Culliton, the agency’s chief financial officer.
George Schneider, GM’s regional tax manager, told IDA officials that the additional sales tax break would put the Tonawanda plant in a better position to win the additional investment from GM.
“We’re in an extremely competitive environment,” he said.
IDA officials said the total investment associated with the new production line would be around $77 million. Brown, of GM, put the investment at $88 million.
At an expected production of 200 engines per shift, the diesel would be a relatively small product for Tonawanda but one with implications for the site’s future.
With gasoline prices topping $ 3 a gallon and approaching $4 in parts of the country, diesel engines are gaining more attention as a way to boost fuel economy.
“It’s really important to get out in front on some of these alternative fuels,” Schneider said.
GM and other automakers are planning diesel engines for light trucks in advance of tighter federal fuel economy standards expected in 2011.
“Obviously, diesel is a good alternative — you get a 25 to 30 percent increase in efficiency,” said Paul Lacy, a research manager with analyst Global Insight in Troy, Mich.
Once linked with sooty, high-sulfur exhaust, diesel fuel for cars and trucks must meet higher environmental standards under rules that began to take effect last year.
Whether diesel trucks will appeal to buyers depends on fuel prices and on the extra cost of the vehicle, Lacy said. The U.S. average price for diesel is $2.80 a gallon, 41 cents less than gas, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. In the Buffalo Niagara region Monday, a gallon of diesel averaged $3.01, compared with $3.11 for a gallon of regular gas, according to the AAA of Western and Central New York.
GM has discussed plans for a diesel that would be available in some full-size pickup trucks and SUVs. The planned engine would fit into the spot reserved for a gasoline engine but with 25 percent better fuel efficiency
-end
As for HP Americans are about as stupid as you can get when it comes to car shopping - all you need to do is watch the Auto commercials and look at the glossy Magazine adds to see that. HP numbers are posted everywhere. But anyone that has some knowledge of cars and engines knows that HP means very little if it only shows up at engine speeds that are rarely if at all ever reached in normal vehicle use.
How often does your wife rev the car up to 3800-4500 RPM when she drops off the kids at school? Better yet how often do you hit those numbers pulling your ATV across town? HP numbers mean nothing when the power only happens at RPM's most people never reach or even think about spinning up too.
Don't forget to watch for the Audi A3 TDI commercial during the Super Bowl if you will be watching the Super Bowl.
Green Police Audi Super Bowl Ad Spotlights 2010 Green Car of the Year Winner A3 TDI
52.7% to 45.3%...that is a huge drop. The article did not seem to address why diesels took a hit.One commenter suggested more efficient gasoline engines are the reason. I am not aware of any tax changes. Europe did see some higher diesel prices in 2008/2009 that might have scared off some people. It might also suggest that people prefer gasoline engines over diesel.
"One of the negatives of driving a diesel in the winter came early in the test, when the weather was cold: diesels take a long, long time to get up to operating temperature and provide enough heat to warm the cabin. Also, an idling diesel simply won’t get warm in sub-zero temperatures, so starting and driving away gently is the best way to get heat as soon as possible. If you get stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic in your TDI, well, you`re gonna be chilly until you can get up to speed again."
For me this would be a deal breaker. We had -20 & -30 temps in Jan, - normal around here. Our gasoline engines do not have the warm-up problem. A lot of people have remote starters. They start their engines 20 minutes before they leave work. A diesel would not work if it doesn't warm-up at idle.
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/images/bis/climate/BISLCDJAN
Automobiles on Steroids: Product Attribute Trade-Offs and Technological Progress in the Automobile Sector
http://pubs.its.ucdavis.edu/download_pdf.php?id=1305
When the temps dropped to zero we plugged our vehicles in whenever they were stopped for more than a few minutes. They were always equipped with a circulating heater for the coolant and a trickle charger and blanket for the battery.
I would think in the Dakotas you would welcome diesel over gas engines that do not like long hours of idling. One of my fellow workers lives in Brookings SD and loves his diesel F250 running on B20. If you are willing to use about 40% fossil fuel to have an engine that warms up quicker in sub zero temperatures, then gas may be your best bet. You will probably get a lot more advice from owners of VW TDIs that live in cold climates. The positives of diesel far outweigh the negatives for me. I just wish we had a decent choice of small diesel engined vehicles.
I have a factory installed block heater which I use during the work week and I have instant start and heat within 1/2 mile.
If you chose to buy a diesel, make sure you can get a block heater. That will mitigate the need to let the engine run in sub-zero weather.
I noticed Car and Driver said the same thing in their recent long term test of the TDI Jetta. People may have used plug-ins etc. for their trucks, but will this even occur to the average consumer cross-shopping this versus an Accord? VW needs to proactively educate the consumer here, I think...or equip it like the Canadian models.
25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0 / 03 Montero Ltd
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
That is what puzzles me, the car was a Canadian Model as is the web site. Usual ND cars need to be equipped more like Canadian cars as opposed to cars from Texas or Florida.
There is even talk of ND becoming part of Canada, but that is another story....
Fighting Irish part of Canada? Never!
My Volvo D5 has an alloy block and is considerably better in this respect.
Ref your previous post about fall-off in diesel sales in Europe; think it's a combination of higher diesel fuel cost, people covering lower annual mileages, diesel option costing more to buy imitially and an increasing number of very good small gasser engines. If I were buying a small - medium car for my 10-12k per year it would be a real debate of gas vs diesel. Gas might just edge it on cost but I like the greater torque of diesels. Decisions, decisions. I think we can, probably, thank the diesel builders for prodding the gasser builders into better engines - but I think they would have got there anyway, probably.
Just my two pen'orth.