Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
In January, new diesel engine rules will force automakers to cut emissions by as much as 95 percent.
As a result, new diesel-powered vehicles will run smoother and quieter than previous models. Those advances, coupled with high gasoline prices, have automakers scrambling to get models on the road.
By 2010, U.S. customers will have diesel options for everything from small compact cars to large sport utility vehicles.
"You just can't walk away from a 30 percent improvement in fuel economy," said Jim Kelly, engine business president for diesel engine maker Cummins Inc., based in Columbus, Ind.
-end
This is gonna be interesting
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Ben Knight, vice president for research and development of American Honda, said that the major components of the i-CTDi engine’s emissions-control strategy were improved combustion within the engine and effective aftertreatment — an industry buzzword for the devices that chemically convert exhaust pollutants to harmless gases.
The engine uses common-rail fuel injection at very high pressure, about 30,000 pounds per square inch. Such pressures deliver the fuel more quickly, giving it more time to evaporate. It also breaks the fuel into smaller droplets, increasing its total surface area.
High injection velocity — close to the speed of sound — ensures that the droplets penetrate deeply into the highly compressed air in the cylinder, mixing the fuel and air more uniformly, which helps to lower the output of nitrogen oxides. Cooled exhaust gas is recirculated to the cylinders, lowering combustion temperatures, which reduces the formation of nitrogen oxides.
Exhaust gas from the cylinders is piped first to an oxidation catalyst in which carbon monoxide and any unburned hydrocarbons are combined with oxygen to complete their combustion into carbon dioxide and water. Next, the exhaust gases pass through a particulate filter, which removes the carbon particles that in older models made diesel exhaust smoky. The last step, new and crucial to passing the toughest regulations, is cutting nitrogen oxides.
Instead of adding liquid from an onboard reservoir to produce the ammonia needed to clean up the nitrogen oxides, as the Mercedes Bluetec system does, the Honda makes its own ammonia as it goes, combining hydrogen with nitrogen inside a two-layer catalyst.
This is not your simple everyday diesel engine. None of the new diesels which have a lot of emissions equipment on them in order to be clean enough for a 50-state approval are simple engines. My point is that saying a hybrid is more complex than a diesel, with today's diesel engines, is no correct. All new, high technology engines are complicated.
As far as making a diesel hybrid car and the notion that it is silly - Dodge did it in 1997 and got 72 MPG out of it and said they could sell it for $28,500. If a company like that can do that, then any major car company can do it.
Apparently some of the Euro carmakers are working on diesel/hybrid cars. We will see them someday, probably in the next 5 -6 years.
I know what your point is. You think that you can convince someone else that hybrids are not overly complex. That is NOT true. Do you think the gas engine part of the Prius is any less complex than the diesel engine described above. All the electronic fuel metering required, electronic ignition (which is not needed in a diesel engine). The Prius catalytic convertor that costs $2100 to replace and not covered under the hybrid warranty. Add to that all the electronics required to keep that precious battery between 20% & 80% charged at all times.
You have not convinced me that gas hybrid is better or even equal to diesel. In fact your research has confirmed what I have believed all along. Diesel is the simplist way to oil independence. When the next gas shortage comes around you will notice that the lines at the diesel pumps are short. While you are sitting for hours waiting to fill up with gas. It happened last year in LA, MS and Florida.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Once you reach a certain level of complexity, regardless of what the complex issues ARE, then you are out of the reach of the "shadetree mechanic" which is my point.
It's like math problems: once you reach a certain level of complexity, be it algebra or calculus or trig, you need someone who is really trained and skilled at math to solve the problems.
There will always be cars which are more complex than other cars. Like when the hydrogen cars hit the market. These current and future high-technology cars will ALWAYS require specially trained and skilled technicians to repair them.
We cannot go back to 1959 engines, regardless of how badly some of you might want to do so. :shades:
PS. I will never in my LIFE sit in a gas line. I have been going 30-40 days between fillups with my TCH. If my car is out of gas and I cannot easily fill up, I will take the bus.
I read about this diesel-electric car that Chrysler flirted with some years ago. If it is so wonderful, why is it not on the road now? Why did Chrysler not put it out there?
Comparing a diesel to a hybrid.
There is no battery pack and need to modify the vehicle to fit one.
There are not two motors needed for propulsion, one electric and one ice.
There is no need for a complex transmission. No CVT or planetary type transmission is needed, conventional manual or automatic is just fine.
No need for expensive lithium or nickel batteries.
What do you find so complex about the Honda diesel? It uses a different catalytic converter and a different injection system. Honda's conventional gasoline motors already have catalytic converters and injection system.
Sure the injection system is different than a gasoline engines, it is more expensive and complex, however, it is already proven and there are no supply issues as there are with hybrid components.
Your hatrid of diesel is evident.
Should be modified to say the REAL TRUTH:
" Larsb hates DIRTY DIESEL but is anxious for the day a CLEAN DIESEL/HYBRID 5-passenger car is available in the USA so he can buy it. "
IMHO it was just a BIG MISTAKE in judgment by the people in charge. They were either lying about being able to sell it for $28,500 or they just did not believe it would sell. ( Or maybe they could not get the diesel engine exhaust clean enough for the EPA, which is not surprising since almost 10 years later diesel car makers still have that particular problem. )
Either way, it was a mistake because Toyota had the Prius three years later in the USA.
The whole car world might have changed if that AMERICAN MADE diesel hybrid had hit the road.
Well, like the Prius, it will be the only engine of it's kind in the USA. It will take special training by Honda Techs to know the specific details of that engine. Just like the Prius.
And read post #887 above for more details.
All I'm saying is that modern, high technology engines are ALL complicated and they ALL require special training by the mechanics who repair them. That's not a hybrid or a diesel thing - it's just reality of 2006.
VW is offers high presure injection system diesels.
Chevrolet offers high presure injection system diesels.
Mercedes offers high presure injection system diesels.
Dodge offers high presure injection system diesels.
GMC offers high presure injection system diesels.
Ford offers high presure injection system diesels.
Diesel is not new. Rudolf Diesel demonstrated diesel in 1898.
There is a long history of diesel engines in the United States and a very large number of mechanics with experience to fix them. It is not difficult to transition from a regular gasoline engine mechanic to a diesel mechanic.
Only engine of it's kind. What a lousy reason to raise an objection upon.
It is not as if hybrids are un-repairable. The mechanics that repair hybrids at Toyota and Honda dealerships are not from MIT. I do not think that difficulty of repair is a valid problem for hybrids or diesels.
I know winter2 said that hybrid diesel is not going to work. I am wondering why ? If the hybrid electric engine can assist the diesel, and we can make the diesel 25% smaller and use less fuel, and harness the braking force to generate electricity, then maybe it will be a big plus.
I have no problem with hybrids, but I bought a diesel because I think they last longer and use less resources thru out the entire lifecycle of the car. That is all . I may be wrong, but it is the choice I made. I hope that the powers to be come up with some reliable batteries, reliable hybrid engine, to go along with the ultra reliable diesel engine....
Just me 02 cents.... :-)
That's not an OBJECTION to anything my friend.
It's part of my point which remains "all modern cars, ESCPECIALLY high-technology cars like the new clean diesels and hybrids, require special training to repair."
Not an MIT degree. Not an electrical engineering degree. Just training which is keyed to that particular set of vehicle components.
This all stemmed from a comment Gary made that "hybrids are too complex because shadetree mechanics cannot work on them" and my contention is that shadetree mechanics are going to need special training like any other mechanic to work on these modern cars.
The Honda Accord diesel engine is not 1990 diesel technology. If you got your training in 1990 as a diesel mechanic, you are not going to be able to work on that engine without Honda training.
Which is not BAD in any way - it's just a fact.
A properly cared for diesel will use fewer resources than any gasser including gasser hybrids. A well maintained gasser engine will probably give you 150K miles before requiring rebuild or some other major surgery. A well maintained diesel will give you 300K or more miles before requiring a rebuild or major surgery. Most contemporary EU diesels are sleeved engines, something you do not find in any gasser. Diesels are also true multi-fuel engines.
The likely scenario is that the diesel engine would be downsized, so that the combined electric/diesel torque at takeoff would be pretty much the same. The diesel would be able to handle cruising speeds by itself.
The combo is definitely possible and definitely more efficient. One issue that might differ with a gasoline engine is shutdown/startup in city traffic. Diesels are less suited to cycle starts because of the higher cylinder temps they run.
The future of diesel/electric hybrids is bright.
John
I don't think that was just the diesel engine alone making them numbers, or they would not have bothered hybridizing it.
And in mention of torque - the electric engine in the current hybrids is not there SOLELY to provide low-end torque. It's there to increase the MPG of the vehicle and reduce the fuel burned.
Diesel hybrid passenger cars WILL eventually hit the road in the USA. Sorry about that all you "diesel purists" but that's the situation.... :shades:
I am not sure why you insist on advancing this kind of attitude. But I think you are forgetting "this situation" is far less than mandatory. The efficacy of gasser, gasser hybrid, diesel hybrid, diesel, etc., IS whether or not sufficient markets supports each one!!! Given that fact, there are not many oems (not to mentioned the fact there are not very many oems) who will risk the BILLIONS of capital investment necessary, if there was not a very clear path of relative success. So another way of looking at it, do you think Toyota would even consider taking a risk in gasser hybrids without the FANTASTICALLY profitable TOYOTA TRUCK AND SUV markets? Government tax credits, etc., etc.?
It takes 20% more oil to create diesel fuel than gasoline. Diesels also produce alot of soot which causes asthma. Places in Europe where diesels are abundant the buildings are covered in soot.
The future lies in putting an electric motor in each wheel powered by batteries and maybe a gas generator for long trips. Charging stations could be placed at spaces in a parking garage, your work lot, or even parking meters. Having a motor in each wheel can give you instant electronic traction control along with a low perfectly balanced center of gravity and a much less complicated piece of machinery. Think about it, no transmission, no cooling system, no fuel system, no variable valves, no turbos, etc. to have to maintain and design the car around. Someday we will look back and laugh at how complicated cars are today.
....the VW PU sitting in my garage with 300k on its' 1.6 liter diesel appreciates your words.......
...1982 was a long time ago; I've seen nothing out there to replace this simple little truck..... Can most of us pronounce "55 MPG"..........?
all the best, ez..
Don't be making up stories now. I said it would be difficult to find an independent shop working on hybrids. I am not sure that Toyota would sell hybrid parts to a non Toyota shop.
The bottom line is there are 38% more parts to break in a Prius than a competitive size non hybrid car. Face it, according to Toyota they are built to last 150k miles and be recycled. They are built as throw away cars. I find that detestable.
Using regenerative braking, much of the power from this can be gotten for free. The upshot is that most of the components of a hybrid drivetrain are not present, but fuel economy is improved.
Combined with the "steamer" concept ( a small steam engine using the heat form the exhaust ) this would allow for diesel hybridization without too much extra complexity, yet possibly boost economy by 20%.
Not diesel news per se, but a bit of speculation.
I am not sure where you got the diesel fuel takes more oil. I thought that in the process of refining unleaded gas, the cast off thicker substances are used to make diesel, almost as an afterthought ? .... The last part is used to make asphalt, bunker fuel oil, etc.......
plus I am now mainly using biodiesel...which does use some dino fuel to make....but overall, the vast bulk of the biodiesel is renewable resource....plus it cleans the engine and fuel lines, and burns cleaner than diesel of yore..... I think you might want to check out biodiesel....for the diesel engine...wow..!!
but I agree that in general, diesel exhaust smells a bit....
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
LOL. What happened? You get tired of being browbeat in your gasser hybrid vs diesel crusade so now you're picking up a different flag to carry? Maybe I miscounted, but as far as I see, there was just ONE guy here saying diesels shouldn't be hybridized. So please step away from the soapbox.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I have owned/leased/possessed a total of 15 cars between myself and my various significant others, in 27 years of driving.
Only ONE of those cars passed 150K miles.
So does that mean I "threw away" the other 14 cars, that they were "disposable" cars?
Only one of that 14 was a hybrid. So that means 13 other cars were "disposable" if the hybrid was "disposable."
I think it's just silly to say if a car is kept for less than 150K miles it was "disposed of" like trash.
In every case except the one car I kept for 323,000 miles, the other cars (after I traded them in) were purchased by another used car buyer.
So they were not "disposed of" but just given to another driver to continue driving.
Only ONE of those cars passed 150K miles.
So does that mean I "threw away" the other 14 cars, that they were "disposable" cars?
Only one of that 14 was a hybrid. So that means 13 other cars were "disposable" if the hybrid was "disposable."
I think it's just silly to say if a car is kept for less than 150K miles it was "disposed of" like trash.
In every case except the one car I kept for 323,000 miles, the other cars (after I traded them in) were purchased by another used car buyer.
So they were not "disposed of" but just given to another driver to continue driving."
To answer the poll directly, 2 cars past 150,000 miles. Another is currently at 135,000 miles and probably would not count. The other 4 cars I fully intend to go past the 150,000 miles of which you target.
Indeed there is a much higher % of cars gotten rid of before 150,000 miles simply because it was not built nor did it last THAT LONG.
Since it is everyone's or should I say technically each's nickel, for me this has to come under opinion. At some point oem's have to respond to what the market is doing rather than what it says.
My major point has been and still is; cars should be made to last much longer than what the majority of cars are indeed kept in the real world. Indeed as well noted by LOTS of different sources, it is hard to keep a car 10 years and 150,000 miles, if indeed due to a whole host of reasons it does not physically last that long. So if they in fact do start to build them so they are capable of lasting longer, it should increase the % that are kept longer. Pretty logical and easy to understand, but even I admit it is hardly sound bite able.
As an example, I had one suv 14 years and 250,000 miles, and it really had a min of 15 years left. The logistics would have easy allowed another 15 years (30 years total) of parts and products to rebuild or replace drive train components. Indeed this was recognized by a market in which one person was just fine with paying a price which represented a loss of app 3% per year for each year of ownership.
All below bought new from dealers;
1975 Chevy 1/2 ton 4x4 stick with a 350. 225,000+ miles. Regular normal maintance. Water pump went out, parked it in 1998, gave it away 2002.
1980 Monte Carlo, 6 cyl. 178,000 miles. Regular normal maintance. Traded it for new 1993 Ford Explorer.
1993 Explorer 182,000 miles. Hope to trade for new diesel auto in next 18 to 24 months.
1994 Ford Ranger (bought used 2 years old in 1996) has 109,000 miles and I plan to keep it well beyond 150,000 miles.
That's a red herring, larsb. There's a difference between a car to be thrown away at 150K miles and a car designed to go longer. We may only keep the car for the lease period, perhaps, but if it's still going strong at 150K miles, someone will still be driving it.
My cousin is a car mechanic, and he often sees cars over 200K miles, occasionally over 400K. The parts van at his dealer has nearly 500K miles.
I have 118K on my car, bang it off the redline all the time, and he says that the engine "sounds new". If i don't get tired if the car, and restrain my redlining ways, i'm sure it will hit 250K.
Manufacturing and disposing of a car is one of its biggest environmental impacts and energy uses, so longevity is worth thinking about.
The reality is that most people do not keep every car they buy for 150K miles or more.
And another reality is that MANY MANY cars that arrive in junkyards arrive there with less than 150K miles on the odometer.
I disagree that a car which "ONLY" makes it to 150K should be considered a "throw away/disposable" car.
Especially when a vast majority of that car can and will be recycled.
If so, then we should call any car which hits a junkyard under 150K miles a "disposable car."
VW Rabbit pickup
Nissan diesel pickup (yep, they sold one in the US)
Toyota diesel pickup
Isuzu diesel pickup
I can't remember if there was a small GMC, but possible using the Isuzu.
I also can't remember if Mitsubishi had one here. Also a possibility.
John
I have never owned a vehicle with 150k miles on it. I do have a 1990 Mazda 626 with 90k miles that is good for 2 more years as it passed the smog check. We have a 1990 LS400 Lexus with 86k miles that is like new. You seem to have a fixation on miles being the only factor in vehicle longevity. It is years for me not miles that count. Unless I buy a vehicle for a specific reason and then sell it, I want a vehicle that is good for many years. I wish this latest GMC hybrid PU gave me a warm longterm feeling. It does not so it goes on sale while people are foolishly thinking hybrids are the way to go. I may or may not buy a diesel vehicle when they become plentiful. Right now the only one that like is the GL320 CDI, due out soon. I think I could like that for several years.
Do you think that recycling is energy saving? The only advantage to recycling is not filling up the landfill. It costs more to recycle than to use new material in most cases. It is not an environmental savings from a pollution or saving fossil fuel standpoint.
we should call any car which hits a junkyard under 150K miles a "disposable car."
Any car that cannot go 10 years AND 150k without needing major repairs would be considered throw away to me.
..."Any car that cannot go 10 years AND 150k without needing major repairs would be considered throw away to me."...
Yes, and in this context.
According to some other sources,the average USA driver does 12,000 to 15,000 miles per year.
According to folks in the USA auto salvage industry, the average age of the passenger vehicle fleet is between 7.5-8.5 years.
So with a 10-15 year (increased vehicle life) it would be between 120,000 to 225,000 miles. So I think that in the spirit of how sometimes the cost to do marginal upgrades to pollution devices is conceptualized, they should break out the costs (per unit) for higher durability.
The reality is that most people do not keep every car they buy for 150K miles or more. "
Well, once again, i don't see why that's important. Do you think that if i sell a car before 150K miles it will be sent to the junkyard immediately?
There are cars with ten miles on them in the junkyard that got totalled on the way home from the dealership. I think the issue is how long you can expect a car to last on average with normal use and maintenance. All other things being equal, a car that typically will go 200K miles will have less impact on he world than two cars designed to go 100K miles.
Again, it doesn't matter how long the average person keeps and sells it! Trade-ins are not sent right to the crusher. And in fact, a car in the junkyard is typically supplying parts to keep other cars on the road... It's the scrapping that's expensive.
You know, i've seen that factoid before, and from what i can tell, it's not true in most cases. Loath as i am to criticize penn & teller, i think they were the ones spreading BS in that case.
Look at the case of steel. To recycle steel & metal in general you melt it down. You have to melt down the ore to make metal in the first place, but since ore is typically very impure, there's a lot more mass to heat, and the cost of mining is also very high.
http://www.recycle-steel.org/cars.html
Of course, we agree that it's generally best to keep cars on the road...
So to put numbers to it the passenger vehicle fleet: 235.4M. So I am sure the "throw away" advocates can do the math. However I would assume they are afraid to do the math.
I also read the yearly new car sales is app 17 M.
My position is the longer you can keep a car without it draining your finances the better for all of us. A car sitting in a used car lot has a negative impact on the environment. The bulk of the pollution surrounding a vehicle comes in the manufacturing. If it is not being used or is replaced by a newer car that is a negative. Now two cars have already polluted more than half of their life's cycle amount of HC, PM and Sox. One just sits on a car lot and we buy a new one. The cycle seems to be getting shorter. When I was a kid only the rich uncle could afford a new car every 3 years.
Biodiesel fuel, made from soy beans, produces far fewer harmful chemicals in its exhaust, and it is made from a renewable source of energy grown on American farms.
Environmentalist Lynn Thorpe, whose 1999 VW Beetle uses B100 (100 percent soy bean fuel), is so enthusiastic that she wrote The Times and invited us, "Come smell my diesel car exhaust." It is, she says, rather sweet smelling. Her car bears a sticker on the back window reading, "This car runs on soy beans."
Proponents of biodiesel are particularly insistent that school buses be fueled with it, because small children are often forced to breathe bus exhaust when lined up for buses at the end of the school day.
http://www.mvtimes.com/news/2006/10/19/soy_bean_car.php
That little three-cylinder diesel is still being made today and produces 150 lb-ft of torque at 1800 RPM and is EURO IV emissions compliant. It also gets mid-fifties fuel economy (U.S. MPG) without batteries or electric motors. Some of the SMART cars coming to North America will be diesel powered and get seventy miles per gallon or more as urban or city commuters.
By the way, are you the same John who use to post in the hybrids versus diesels forum that was recently closed?
As to reliability ratings, what a joke. This year Toyota ranked only three cars as reliable versus nine a year or two ago. Now that is what I call progress. With more than one million cars recalled for various issues, I would say Toyota is progressing backwards while it tries to overtake GM.
If the 2005 hyrid is rated EPA at 60 city and 50 highway I would probably be disappointed if I was expecting that but got 41 mpg.