The article and/or my bias or lack there of is NOT as an anti Prius/hybrid piece. Indeed the article points to the base of unleaded regular, not being the so called "stable" base as we would tend to believe.
So yes, I am glad you agree with me. Folks have known all along that (on average) Prius (among others) do not get anywhere near the EPA's. The other example you left out was the Corolla still will get 28.9 which again is less than the EPA's.
So for example,I know I can get between 44-62 mpg on a 2003 TDI EPA rated 42/49. On a 54 mile daily commute, the range is between 48-52. On a recent stop and go funeral procession (on the streets of San Francisco, no less) I got 46 mpg. This was with A/C blasting and 4 people. Indeed I thought it would be closer to 38/42.
I've seen seveal articles with summaries of the what the new changes might be but nothing with actual values from the EPA.
Nevertheless nothing changes in any of the current vehicle no matter what the stickers might say. A driver getting 28 or 32 or 38 mpg in a gasser Corolla will continue to get those. Everything remain the same. If you are one of the 1-2 Million drivers of Corollas and Civic over the last 4 years, your vehicles didn't suddenly become less efficient causing you to have to buy more fuel in the next weeks. If you are one of those Civic owners - and I know you are - when you might go looking for a new Civic you will expect to get what you get now, say 36 mpg. If the window sticker says you 'should' get 30 mpg you will just feel better about yourself and your driving habits. Proof positive that you consistently do better than the EPA says that you should. Isn't this a great world?
What I haven't seen any thing written about though is what the new diesel values might be. They are equally affected by the phyical forces around us like cold weather and wind and drag forces. These are immutable. Might it be possible that since there are next to no new diesels available for sale this year that makes them less than a footnote ( j/k :P I couldn't resist ) ......
Again, glad another and specifically you agree with me. I (among others) have consistently made the case for the so called "real world mpg's". The new downward mobile figures indicate what most folks have known all along: still have a LONG way to go and glad no mpg increase was mandated.
By 20/20 hindsight in light of the article, I am also glad I got the Civic vs the Corolla. I'd be happy to be a "test" mule to see if I can't get better than 28.9 mpg on the Toyota Corolla vs the 38-42 I get on the Civic, specifically on that 54 mile R/T daily commute. Shoot I'd even volunteer to be the test mule for the Prius under the same conditions.
So while a 54 mile daily commute really doesnt qualify under the fun trips Yahoo for 48-52 mpg in the diesel and 38-42 in the Civic.
rukling1, once again I think you may have confused "EPA numbers" with "reality."
Of the 412 Civic Hybrid II drivers at a well-known mileage database on the web, only about 60 of them are getting 42 MPG or less.
Regardless of what MPG the EPA says the hybrids or the diesels will get, the cars will not actually achieve lower MPG when the new estimates are released.
People getting 50 in a diesel are still going to get 50, and people getting 50 in an HCH are still going to get 50.
Ah no my thread friend! EPA mpg is really a procedural methodology that is sometimes is actually spot tested BY the EPA. Typically the oem runs the procedure IAW the procedures. Results are of course posted for a host of purposes. The utility OF this procedure is in theory you have a VERIFIABLE base line.
Again, thanks again for agreeing with me AGAIN, in looking for so called real world mpg.
Your point being what? Regardless of the "spot testing" of the MPG, there has never been an instance where a carmaker was accused of or found out to be "cheating."
It's ALWAYS BEEN a "verifiable baseline." The problem has been that the test method has not advanced with modern driving habits, and now it will be.
In reading the article, I think YOU may have incorrectly applied the correction factor, as the expression is indeed in MPG. i.e., the figure is 72.4 mpg. The thing that hints at this is the article (above)reference to metric ..."emitting 102g/km – 2g/km less than Toyota's electric-hybrid."... and it CLEARLY says MPG (as opposed to KM/liter.
The old EPA procedure for determining mpg is ARCANE enough. So without a compare contrast as to what are the new procedures, what makes you say it is good all the way around!?? The fact of the matter is if you look at the boiler plate around those BIG BOLD EPA #'s of say 42 city /49 highway, the RANGE is already there!!!!!!?????
..."The BlueMotion goes from 0-62mph in 12.8sec and on to a top speed of 109mph. Its 45-litre tank gives the car a theoretical range of more than 710 miles. Prices are expected to start at just over £10,000."...
Triangulation indicates app 45 liters converts to 9.9 IMPERIAL gal/710=app 72 mpg or something like 12 gals US (128 oz, 710 miles) so indeed the USA mpg is app 60 mpg. The author was probably writing for a Euro audience rather than the USA "across the pond"
What you are stating, 4 x or more is PRECISELY what I understand. You are looking for an enemy (in me) that is truly NOT there? YOU are missing the original point that what YOU (us) have been told or alluded (YOU will get the EPA MPG) is/was a lie and as you would agree NOTHING has really changed???????? That was and has been the real utility for the so called "REAL WORLD" MPG figures!!?? Why this is cool for diesel is: while the JETTA TDI is EPA'd @ 42/49 mpg it (mine) gets 48-52 mpg in a GRUELING daily commute.
So that I can use what you are saying in an operative way, I get 48-52 mpg in a 54 mile R/T commute with LSD and ULSD, since the so called "truth in mpg" I will STILL get 48-52 mpg. !!??? Are we clear or are you still confused!?
YOU are missing the original point that what YOU (us) have been told or alluded (YOU will get the EPA MPG) is/was a lie and as you would agree NOTHING has really changed????????
This is a false statement. The current EPA numbers are not a lie, they just don't reflect how today's driver uses the vehicle.
In fact I can get the current EPA numbers any time I wish as long as I drive in the same manner as the EPA tests have been done. I've done it in a Highlander, Escort, Prius, Camry, MR2. Many many people report exceeding the current EPA numbers with their current vehicles.
It's nothing magical it's just physics. replicate the tests as they were originally done and you will get the same results...with any vehicle on the road.
..."replicate the tests as they were originally done and you will get the same results...with any vehicle on the road. "...
..."Ah no my thread friend! EPA mpg is really a procedural methodology that is sometimes is actually spot tested BY the EPA. Typically the oem runs the procedure IAW the procedures. Results are of course posted for a host of purposes. The utility OF this procedure is in theory you have a VERIFIABLE base line"...
...:So that I can use what you are saying in an operative way, I get 48-52 mpg in a 54 mile R/T commute with LSD and ULSD, since the so called "truth in mpg" I will STILL get 48-52 mpg. !!???"...
..."Why this is cool for diesel is: while the JETTA TDI is EPA'd @ 42/49 mpg it (mine) gets 48-52 mpg in a GRUELING daily commute."...
YOU are missing the original point that what YOU (us) have been told or alluded (YOU will get the EPA MPG) is/was a lie and as you would agree NOTHING has really changed????????
This is a false statement. The current EPA numbers are not a lie, they just don't reflect how today's driver uses the vehicle.
I agree with ruking. The EPA’s figures do not represent the way MOST people drive and their fore do not reflect real world figures. You can call it anything you want, a distortion, a misrepresentation, misleading, a lie, but the bottom line is they are not correct, they distort the truth. Ironically, it seems the diesel figures seem to error on the side of pessimism while the gas figures error on the side of optimism.
EPA gas mileage estimates for many vehicles are way too high...and those values are seldom reflected in real world driving....at least most of the time.
However, with diesel engined cars, specifically the jetta tdi, many people are routinely reporting gas mileage near the EPA estimates....
Example: .
ACura TL, EPA 19/27 mpg....but real world, I was only getting only 19 mpg VErdict: EPA estimates way way way too high...
OTOH, my jetta routinely gets 45 mpg....and many times gets 50 mpg. verdict: EPA is on spot. or conservative...!
"I agree with ruking. The EPA’s figures do not represent the way MOST people drive and their fore do not reflect real world figures. You can call it anything you want, a distortion, a misrepresentation, misleading, a lie, but the bottom line is they are not correct, they distort the truth. Ironically, it seems the diesel figures seem to error on the side of pessimism while the gas figures error on the side of optimism. "
I agree with both ruking and jkinzel. I have both diesels and gassers....actually 3 gassers. They all err on the side of irrational exuburent optimism in projecting a gasser mpg... (EX : Prius ) , whilc EPA mpg for jetta TDI is very close or conservative, in real world driving.
Both the jetta and Prius were used in real world driving by myself....and Pruis mpg never reached 60 mpg, but the jetta reached there max mpg and sometimes over it ....
Not to be political, and while I would hesitate to say the so called anti diesel forces have their heads in the sand on this issue, but these so called real/unreal, good/ not so good to BAD EPA numbers have (many) consequences. One issue, there is increasing call for RAISING the so called fleet mpg from 27 to 40?
This of course raises the so called OBJECTIVE point especially in light of the fact that most EPA figures have been discounted a min of 20-40%. RUBBER RULER measurements come to mind.
quote- The global trend of producing more hybrid cars _ that use gasoline and electricity simultaneously _ will be continued here as 12 of the 60 new models will be classified as eco-friendly.
Ten of the 12 models are diesel-powered cars and the remaining two are hybrid cars, the Korean Automobile Importers and Distributors Association (KAIDA) said yesterday.
Seven automakers _ Peugeot, Mercedes-Benz, DaimlerChrysler, Jaguar, Land Rover, Cadillac and Ford _ are preparing to launch diesel vehicles and Toyota will unveil two hybrid versions of its Lexus _ the LS600h and GS450h. -end
Perhaps to its detriment, the most newsworthy thing about diesels is they are NOT newsworthy!!
In the bru ha ha of such issues as: forwardly legislating 40 mpg fuel standards, a 2006 MB E320 cTDI @ 80 mph gets 39 mpg in the current 27 mpg landscape!!!???
So again for my .02 cents is we do NOT need this HUGELY EXPENSIVE legislation and compliance overhead costs, we just need cars that actually GET higher mileage.
If, right now for the 2008 model year, GM released 5 different well-equipped, EPA-approved, 50-state approved, 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, all which got 35-45 MPG on the road, do you think they would sell?
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW.
They have those cars in Europe.
The reason those cars are not here is twofold:
1. the difficulty which diesel cars have meeting US emission regulations. 2. the reputation of "dirty diesel" in America.
I would welcome those cars with open arms and many would too if they were truly clean. But diesel has a tough row to hoe in the USA because of just NOW getting decently clean because of the new ULSD fuel and better technology for the catalytic converters.
"...If, right now for the 2008 model year, GM released 5 different well-equipped, EPA-approved, 50-state approved, 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, all which got 35-45 MPG on the road, do you think they would sell?
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW."...
DCB, GM, Ford, (ETC) are almost all experiencing overly LARGE unsold inventory of GASSERS. So even dirty gassers of ALL SEGMENTS and gas guzzlers are not selling well. So for example, if the snapshot is 16.5 M new cars yearly, then in a "more perfect" world ;(indeed it is not) if the non overage yearly new car production is now at say 15.5M, AND whatever % happens to be so called economy diesel models, I would SWAG % wise, the diesel would sell much much better than gassers. Indeed that was the case in 2003 (subsequent years also for the 4% of VW diesel production. (across all lines Jetta, Golf, New Beetle)So to put a % to it nearly 100% of the 4% of diesel production.
As you know gassers are upwards of 97% of the USA passenger vehicle fleet. So my take is: if the above oems were actually making cars that folks would like to and indeed actually BUY, it would immediately make it extremely tough sledding for the name plates you have mentioned; Toyota, Honda, VW.
ruking1 says, "DCB, GM, Ford, (ETC) are almost all experiencing overly LARGE unsold inventory of GASSERS. So even dirty gassers and gas guzzlers do not sell."
YES, True, but here's the difference:
The reason diesels are not selling is because of the bad reputation that diesels have in the USA. The unsold gassers are not suffering from the same reputation problem - no one in the USA cares that an Impala might score only 3 on the EPA Air Pollution Score.
"...The reason diesels are not selling is because of the bad reputation that diesels have in the USA...."
Well, I think mathematically you are almost totally incorrect. Pretty easy here given your GM hypothetical situation. Suppose I was in the market for a diesel Dodge Ram. GM (Chevy)Tahoe, Ford Explorer that in fact got 25-32 mpg? Cummins or ISUZU works for me! WOO HOO! How many of those are in the inventory? To be fair, YOU and I both know there are ZERO inventory!!??
Another? Jeep Liberty (DCB) did an 11,000 item production of their diesel model. COMPLETELY SOLD OUT.
Another? Dodge Sprinter. HUGELY popular especially in the MB CTDI.
I wasn't really talking about trucks and SUVs. I was talking about 5-passenger cars.
People who need the diesel work trucks buy them for the torque. They could give a diddly squat about emissions.
My original point was that even if there was a glut of good, well-equipped, clean, 50-state approved 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, sold by GM/Honda/'Yota/VW, would they sell?
I was shopping for a Prius for over a year...but decided on a VW jetta tdi diesel .....
1- for a 2002 VW jetta gasser, the selling value is $10,000 + or minus.
2- for a 2002 VW jetta diesel, the selling prices are around $15,000...+or minus....
So diesels are hot....go to your VW lot, and you will see gassers discounted, or at least in California. THe high dealer prices go to the diesels.... A used 2005 Jetta TDI was selling for more than the original new asking price.
But the deals are still better than the Prius... so I was lucky to get a 2002 Tdi for only $13,500, with all modifications done.
I sure would hope that the other companies come out with diesels, since that would increase the availability of biodiesel...
I just picked up 4 gallons of peanut oil....to be used in a mix with biodiesel and Diesel #2 ....that saves resources...not to mention the longevity of the vehicle...less waste in this buy em and throw em away society....plus the 45 mpg plus REAL world fuel mileage.
..." wasn't really talking about trucks and SUVs. I was talking about 5-passenger cars.
People who need the diesel work trucks buy them for the torque. They could give a diddly squat about emissions.
My original point was that even if there was a glut of good, well-equipped, clean, 50-state approved 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, sold by GM/Honda/'Yota/VW, would they sell?
Anyone else besides ruking want to speculate? "..
Same church; different pew is all. Operatively the concept is given upwards of 97% of the vehicle fleet being gasser at what % of unsold inventory would diesels begin to have unsold inventory %'s like now?
You might want to re read for understanding #1367. Or you might have just missed the point. Or you are just ignoring the obviouos!?
I used and VW's Jetta, Golf, New Beetle)that actually HAVE diesel models. In #1365, I used the MB E320 CTDI, exaample.
It will take a long education period with which, like any new technology, will go through stages of 'early adopters' 'early majority' 'late majority' full acceptance.
I'm interested for a number of reasons, personal and business. I've been hitting people cold with this question 'I'll trade you a diesel Odyssey for your current Odyssey' 'Would you go to a diesel Corolla if the price was the same or $1000 higher?' Mostly I get weird looks.
People are vaguely aware or not aware at all that a different fuel is now available.
If I were in the market for the Corolla (in that segment) you'd have one buyer!
But I think if you know someone at VW with any type of diesel inventory they could clue you in.
But for a longer term indicator you might also want to look at some of the factors in say Europe; that not too long ago was mostly gasser and how the diesel models are now 50% of the passenger vehicle fleet and GROWING. The long term trend is certainly bullish.
My original point was that even if there was a glut of good, well-equipped, clean, 50-state approved 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, sold by GM/Honda/'Yota/VW, would they sell?
Anyone else besides ruking want to speculate?
Sure! I'll speculate.
First, a glut, by definition, means, "to flood (the market) with a particular item or service so that the supply greatly exceeds the demand."
So, by using that term, you have already made it so that the answer automatically has to be "no." Obviously, if supply exceeds demand, you can't sell them all.
HOWEVER, let me move forward and forget that adjective for a minute. IF the vehicles were available AND met all EPA requirements AND were advertised properly, yes, I believe they would sell in a heartbeat. Without the advertising part of the equation, most common shoppers won't know they exist or won't know the advantages that the new diesels offer.
I also would like to address a previous post of yours:
If, right now for the 2008 model year, GM released 5 different well-equipped, EPA-approved, 50-state approved, 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, all which got 35-45 MPG on the road, do you think they would sell?
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW.
They have those cars in Europe.
The reason those cars are not here is twofold:
1. the difficulty which diesel cars have meeting US emission regulations. 2. the reputation of "dirty diesel" in America.
I don't see the sense here. You asked, "if they meet EPA and are 50-state legal?" And you go on to say they could do it because they have them in Europe .... but then you say they aren't here because they don't meet EPA ... HUH??? So which is it? Do you think they can or can't meet EPA? If they can't, then your supposition that they could sell them now is obviously incorrect. If they can, then your reason for them not being here is incorrect.
'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
My reasons (however disparate you might have envisioned them in your response) are BOTH correct.
1. The diesels are not here in part because automakers have been finding trouble in getting them clean enough for 50-state approval due to technology issues.
2. The are ALSO not here because of the "dirty" reputation diesel cars have in the USA. Because even if they WERE 50-state and EPA-approved, the "anti-diesel" perception is a serious problem that automakers are scared of.
Diesel in Europe has not such:
1. regulatory problems, or 2. reputation problems
so they get the diesel cars and we do not.
My question is: IF they were clean enough, and there were several choices from multiple manufacturers, would they sell here, even with the reputation problem?
ok. So when you said "they could do it. they have those cars in europe," that was a typo of some sort. That's all I wanted to know ... where the miscommunication was.
'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
Obviously, the standards are different in Europe than here. Like fuel mileage, it takes alot of engineering to make a small difference in emissions. At least, that's my understanding. They can't just bring the cars over unchanged.
'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
As a comparison, my take is that Euro oems have had little to no trouble over the years getting Euro gas guzzler's into the USA market. Our laws, regulators and markets, etc, etc, are really ok with (unleaded regular) GAS GUZZLERS and more specifically using unleaded regular/premium. In fact it is mostly the law.
This is disingenuous beyond description in light of all the bru ha ha (you know the litany, global warming, conservation, pollution, piece of peace, chunk of war, yada yada yada and other micro and macro world situations. The truth is it does not bother me much on a personal day to day level. This is very easy to see in the EPA discussion that we have been having. So for example, not to pick on VW but the 2003 VW 1.8T gasser GETS 24/31 mpg vs 2003 VW 1.9 TDI's 42/49 mpg.
So lets ask the question would one rather get 58% better mileage or is 37% less mpg better!!?? You already know that the majority markets have voted!!!???
The real concern? Lets not make the diesel cost effective enough that there will be a too large percentage switch to diesel. DISINGENUOUS, DISINGENUOUS, DISINGENUOUS!!!!
Received the December Benz newsletter in my email today. They have put the specs for the GL320 on their site. I'm a bit saddened to see the mileage figures at 20/25. While better than comparable vehicles, to be sure, I still think this is excessive consumption, but lots of buyers will be attracted to it, regardless.
I also kind of had hopes based on what I've seen previously printed in mags and whatnot that the mileage would hit the high 20s. Oh well, it just means I have to keep thinking about the R320 instead.
'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
On a utility basis, I am swagging a Dodge/MB Sprinter with the MB diesel would be the hot ticket. The platform, once chosen has an almost dazzling array of choices. For sure one might not have the same cachet and or status.
well, as it is, and maybe there isn't a model i'm not familiar with (i really haven't even looked since its intro), the uncomfortably tall (ie, unbalanced) sprinter wouldn't be a practical daily driver, IMHO. Make it more like a van rather than a delivery truck or bus and I might reconsider.
edit: i just checked dodge's website. it really is intended to be more of a commercial or rental vehicle. what is the mileage on it, anyway? i can't seem to find that on their site. obviously, it would vary by configuration, but i'd only look at the smallest model as a passenger setup.
'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
For sure, it takes ALL kinds to make a market. The diesel nexus is not only does it have the capability to run alternative fuels, but the fuel mileage can be 20-60 % better than like gassers. So for example VW 1.8T gasser vs TDI is 31 mpg vs 49 mpg. Truly I have a gasser Civic that gets 38-42 mpg. if that were a diesel, it would be icing on a cake to get 20-60% better fuel mileage 45.6 to 67.2 mpg!!
quote- Americans will ignite a love-affair with diesel-powered cars in 2007 that will eventually reach European dimensions, while hybrids will remain a niche option, revealed as more of a feel-good publicity stunt than a serious method of powering cars efficiently, economically and at one with the environment.
That is the bet European automobile manufacturers are making as they talk the talk of gas-electric hybrid engines to show they care for the environment, but walk the walk down the diesel trail. -end
Yes, my alternate take is on the flagship (Japanese) Lexus that now offers a gasser and a gasser hybrid version. It would truly be a hoot for a third, diesel engine model. If it were $1,000 extra or at par, like say the MB E320 any bets as to what would sell the best!??
That "opinion piece" is a nice buncha quotes from people who have an anti-hybrid agenda.
I spotted hybrid-related mistakes in the story. They incorrectly repeated and falsely reported that "hybrid sales are slipping" when if you compare the year-to-year sales totals that is not true at all.
Another key point they failed to recognize is that the new TCH has only about a $1,500 hybrid premium, and that Toyota has pledged to cut the Prius hybrid components size and complexity by 50% while reducing the premium to $1,000, about equal to the diesel premium.
( And a 90+ MPG Prius in 2009. Let's see someone put a 90+ MPG diesel passenger car in the USA by 2009. :shades: )
But I think this line summed up the future in the best way:
The new-generation diesels using the new low-sulfur diesel fuel will become a significant niche in the U.S., but whether it becomes more than that is difficult to say, and frankly, unlikely. I'd be surprised if it became a mass market product."
Neither hybrids nor diesels will in the immediate future (5-7 years) have much more than 8% each of the USA market.
I'm all for the clean diesel passenger cars, but they will NEVER take off in significant numbers in the USA unless GM or Ford or Toyota or Honda has a good vehicle choice or two.
VW and MB and Audi cannot carry the load themselves.
..."That "opinion piece" is a nice buncha quotes from people who have an anti-hybrid agenda."...
It might be helpful to note that "Diesel In the NEWS" is about diesels. Sure from time to time diesels are compared with gassers and hybrids. To boot, is is NOT anti unleaded regular.
To address the so called "slipping" of hybrid sales, that is hard to judge. However total populations of hybrids are less than one half of one percent of the passenger vehicle fleet of 253.4 M vehicles. As a comparison diesels are between 2.3-2.9%. So the diesel ratios are something like 4.6 to 5.8 x greater than hybrids.
My question is: IF they were clean enough, and there were several choices from multiple manufacturers, would they sell here, even with the reputation problem?
Honda, Toyota and Mazda diesels would sell with minimal marketing/advertising. GM would have a tough time selling diesels because they suffer from a triple whammy - a poor reputation for quality, a poor reputation for innovation and the lingering reputation of their 1980's passenger car diesel disaster. Ford and Damlier would have a hard time marketing/selling small diesels for reasons similar to GM.
Personally - I am waiting and hoping that Honda or Toyota or Mazda have a 2008 US diesel. I'll buy the first vehicle that Honda brings to the US market with its 2.2l diesel.
Yes, I really can't remember the last time I even saw a VW TDI advertisment in terms of radio, tv, cable, print media, etc etc.
Prius!? Name me a advertisement that hasnt been in all the media's!!??
Also probably one of the greatest things the American car diesels have going for them is the engine is made by Cummins and Iszuzu.(or so I am lead to believe that is who makes Ford's diesels.)
A previous statement that diesel has no chance because of EPA standards is obviously the reason that diesel sedans have not taken off- there are so few to choose from!
You would have to be an incredibly conservative buyer not to take the opportunity to buy a car that gets better mileage and lasts twice as long.
Not sure why this should even be debate. The real question is why are US auto makers so short sighted that they are not working harder to bring a 'clean' diesel F150/ Expedition, Silverado/ Tahoe to market? They are all watching sales in a high profit segment go down the drain without attempting to change the paradigm of the poor mileage that is the ONLY consistent reason people are moving away from the truck based market.
Comments
So yes, I am glad you agree with me. Folks have known all along that (on average) Prius (among others) do not get anywhere near the EPA's. The other example you left out was the Corolla still will get 28.9 which again is less than the EPA's.
So for example,I know I can get between 44-62 mpg on a 2003 TDI EPA rated 42/49. On a 54 mile daily commute, the range is between 48-52. On a recent stop and go funeral procession (on the streets of San Francisco, no less) I got 46 mpg. This was with A/C blasting and 4 people. Indeed I thought it would be closer to 38/42.
Nevertheless nothing changes in any of the current vehicle no matter what the stickers might say. A driver getting 28 or 32 or 38 mpg in a gasser Corolla will continue to get those. Everything remain the same. If you are one of the 1-2 Million drivers of Corollas and Civic over the last 4 years, your vehicles didn't suddenly become less efficient causing you to have to buy more fuel in the next weeks. If you are one of those Civic owners - and I know you are - when you might go looking for a new Civic you will expect to get what you get now, say 36 mpg. If the window sticker says you 'should' get 30 mpg you will just feel better about yourself and your driving habits. Proof positive that you consistently do better than the EPA says that you should. Isn't this a great world?
What I haven't seen any thing written about though is what the new diesel values might be. They are equally affected by the phyical forces around us like cold weather and wind and drag forces. These are immutable. Might it be possible that since there are next to no new diesels available for sale this year that makes them less than a footnote ( j/k :P I couldn't resist ) ......
New values for future diesel vehicles?
By 20/20 hindsight in light of the article, I am also glad I got the Civic vs the Corolla. I'd be happy to be a "test" mule to see if I can't get better than 28.9 mpg on the Toyota Corolla vs the 38-42 I get on the Civic, specifically on that 54 mile R/T daily commute.
So while a 54 mile daily commute really doesnt qualify under the fun trips Yahoo for 48-52 mpg in the diesel and 38-42 in the Civic.
Of the 412 Civic Hybrid II drivers at a well-known mileage database on the web, only about 60 of them are getting 42 MPG or less.
Regardless of what MPG the EPA says the hybrids or the diesels will get, the cars will not actually achieve lower MPG when the new estimates are released.
People getting 50 in a diesel are still going to get 50, and people getting 50 in an HCH are still going to get 50.
A new Volkswagen Polo which boasts fewer CO2 emissions than a Toyota Prius will go on sale in the UK next year.
VW claims the Polo BuleMotion is the most economical five-seater in Europe, emitting 102g/km – 2g/km less than Toyota's electric-hybrid.
The Polo uses a three-cylinder 1.4 direct-injection turbodiesel engine and has a combined fuel consumption of 72.4mpg.
That's about 60 MPG in US numbers. Interesting development...
New VW Polo next year in Europe
Again, thanks again for agreeing with me AGAIN, in looking for so called real world mpg.
It's ALWAYS BEEN a "verifiable baseline." The problem has been that the test method has not advanced with modern driving habits, and now it will be.
It's good all around. :shades:
See a converter here:
MPG conversions
If VW could make and sell a diesel passenger car for the USA that got 72 MPG in the USA they would do that in a heartbeat...
http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/WebX/.efeb44e/79
Triangulation indicates app 45 liters converts to 9.9 IMPERIAL gal/710=app 72 mpg or something like 12 gals US (128 oz, 710 miles) so indeed the USA mpg is app 60 mpg. The author was probably writing for a Euro audience rather than the USA "across the pond"
Realworld drivers in HCH that are getting 50 mpg will still get thesame results.
Realworld ICE Civic owners getting 26 mpg will still get the same results.
Realworld ICE Camry owners getting 30 mpg will still get the same results.
Realworld ICE Accord owners getting 33 mpg will still get the same results.
It's nice tosee you pat yourself on the back but what are you puffed up about? Nothing has changed.
So that I can use what you are saying in an operative way, I get 48-52 mpg in a 54 mile R/T commute with LSD and ULSD, since the so called "truth in mpg" I will STILL get 48-52 mpg. !!??? Are we clear or are you still confused!?
This is a false statement. The current EPA numbers are not a lie, they just don't reflect how today's driver uses the vehicle.
In fact I can get the current EPA numbers any time I wish as long as I drive in the same manner as the EPA tests have been done. I've done it in a Highlander, Escort, Prius, Camry, MR2. Many many people report exceeding the current EPA numbers with their current vehicles.
It's nothing magical it's just physics. replicate the tests as they were originally done and you will get the same results...with any vehicle on the road.
..."Ah no my thread friend! EPA mpg is really a procedural methodology that is sometimes is actually spot tested BY the EPA. Typically the oem runs the procedure IAW the procedures. Results are of course posted for a host of purposes. The utility OF this procedure is in theory you have a VERIFIABLE base line"...
...:So that I can use what you are saying in an operative way, I get 48-52 mpg in a 54 mile R/T commute with LSD and ULSD, since the so called "truth in mpg" I will STILL get 48-52 mpg. !!???"...
..."Why this is cool for diesel is: while the JETTA TDI is EPA'd @ 42/49 mpg it (mine) gets 48-52 mpg in a GRUELING daily commute."...
This is a false statement. The current EPA numbers are not a lie, they just don't reflect how today's driver uses the vehicle.
I agree with ruking. The EPA’s figures do not represent the way MOST people drive and their fore do not reflect real world figures. You can call it anything you want, a distortion, a misrepresentation, misleading, a lie, but the bottom line is they are not correct, they distort the truth.
Ironically, it seems the diesel figures seem to error on the side of pessimism while the gas figures error on the side of optimism.
kcram - Pickups Host
I think I know what Ruking is getting at:
EPA gas mileage estimates for many vehicles are way too high...and those values are seldom reflected in real world driving....at least most of the time.
However, with diesel engined cars, specifically the jetta tdi, many people are routinely reporting gas mileage near the EPA estimates....
Example: .
ACura TL, EPA 19/27 mpg....but real world, I was only getting only 19 mpg
VErdict: EPA estimates way way way too high...
OTOH, my jetta routinely gets 45 mpg....and many times gets 50 mpg.
verdict: EPA is on spot. or conservative...!
Ironically, it seems the diesel figures seem to error on the side of pessimism while the gas figures error on the side of optimism. "
I agree with both ruking and jkinzel. I have both diesels and gassers....actually 3 gassers. They all err on the side of irrational exuburent optimism in projecting a gasser mpg... (EX : Prius ) , whilc EPA mpg for jetta TDI is very close or conservative, in real world driving.
Both the jetta and Prius were used in real world driving by myself....and Pruis mpg never reached 60 mpg, but the jetta reached there max mpg and sometimes over it ....
This of course raises the so called OBJECTIVE point especially in light of the fact that most EPA figures have been discounted a min of 20-40%. RUBBER RULER measurements come to mind.
10 of 12 New Eco Friendly Models Diesel
quote-
The global trend of producing more hybrid cars _ that use gasoline and electricity simultaneously _ will be continued here as 12 of the 60 new models will be classified as eco-friendly.
Ten of the 12 models are diesel-powered cars and the remaining two are hybrid cars, the Korean Automobile Importers and Distributors Association (KAIDA) said yesterday.
Seven automakers _ Peugeot, Mercedes-Benz, DaimlerChrysler, Jaguar, Land Rover, Cadillac and Ford _ are preparing to launch diesel vehicles and Toyota will unveil two hybrid versions of its Lexus _ the LS600h and GS450h.
-end
In the bru ha ha of such issues as: forwardly legislating 40 mpg fuel standards, a 2006 MB E320 cTDI @ 80 mph gets 39 mpg in the current 27 mpg landscape!!!???
So again for my .02 cents is we do NOT need this HUGELY EXPENSIVE legislation and compliance overhead costs, we just need cars that actually GET higher mileage.
If, right now for the 2008 model year, GM released 5 different well-equipped, EPA-approved, 50-state approved, 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, all which got 35-45 MPG on the road, do you think they would sell?
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW.
They have those cars in Europe.
The reason those cars are not here is twofold:
1. the difficulty which diesel cars have meeting US emission regulations.
2. the reputation of "dirty diesel" in America.
I would welcome those cars with open arms and many would too if they were truly clean. But diesel has a tough row to hoe in the USA because of just NOW getting decently clean because of the new ULSD fuel and better technology for the catalytic converters.
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW."...
DCB, GM, Ford, (ETC) are almost all experiencing overly LARGE unsold inventory of GASSERS. So even dirty gassers of ALL SEGMENTS and gas guzzlers are not selling well. So for example, if the snapshot is 16.5 M new cars yearly, then in a "more perfect" world ;(indeed it is not) if the non overage yearly new car production is now at say 15.5M, AND whatever % happens to be so called economy diesel models, I would SWAG % wise, the diesel would sell much much better than gassers. Indeed that was the case in 2003 (subsequent years also for the 4% of VW diesel production. (across all lines Jetta, Golf, New Beetle)So to put a % to it nearly 100% of the 4% of diesel production.
As you know gassers are upwards of 97% of the USA passenger vehicle fleet. So my take is: if the above oems were actually making cars that folks would like to and indeed actually BUY, it would immediately make it extremely tough sledding for the name plates you have mentioned; Toyota, Honda, VW.
YES, True, but here's the difference:
The reason diesels are not selling is because of the bad reputation that diesels have in the USA. The unsold gassers are not suffering from the same reputation problem - no one in the USA cares that an Impala might score only 3 on the EPA Air Pollution Score.
Well, I think mathematically you are almost totally incorrect. Pretty easy here given your GM hypothetical situation. Suppose I was in the market for a diesel Dodge Ram. GM (Chevy)Tahoe, Ford Explorer that in fact got 25-32 mpg? Cummins or ISUZU works for me! WOO HOO! How many of those are in the inventory? To be fair, YOU and I both know there are ZERO inventory!!??
Another? Jeep Liberty (DCB) did an 11,000 item production of their diesel model. COMPLETELY SOLD OUT.
Another? Dodge Sprinter. HUGELY popular especially in the MB CTDI.
People who need the diesel work trucks buy them for the torque. They could give a diddly squat about emissions.
My original point was that even if there was a glut of good, well-equipped, clean, 50-state approved 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, sold by GM/Honda/'Yota/VW, would they sell?
Anyone else besides ruking want to speculate?
1- for a 2002 VW jetta gasser, the selling value is $10,000 + or minus.
2- for a 2002 VW jetta diesel, the selling prices are around $15,000...+or minus....
So diesels are hot....go to your VW lot, and you will see gassers discounted, or at least in California. THe high dealer prices go to the diesels....
A used 2005 Jetta TDI was selling for more than the original new asking price.
But the deals are still better than the Prius... so I was lucky to get a 2002 Tdi for only $13,500, with all modifications done.
I sure would hope that the other companies come out with diesels, since that would increase the availability of biodiesel...
I just picked up 4 gallons of peanut oil....to be used in a mix with biodiesel and Diesel #2 ....that saves resources...not to mention the longevity of the vehicle...less waste in this buy em and throw em away society....plus the 45 mpg plus REAL world fuel mileage.
YEAH !!!!!
I can see the car makers not wanting to make many diesels...since then people would not be buying a new car every 4 to 6 years....
The darn things just last too long, and gets tooo good a gas mileage....
Starve them oil financed terrorists, I say !!!
oops....off the politics for now..
Sedans with diesel engines are in short supply. THat is why there is a mark up in most markets.
People who need the diesel work trucks buy them for the torque. They could give a diddly squat about emissions.
My original point was that even if there was a glut of good, well-equipped, clean, 50-state approved 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, sold by GM/Honda/'Yota/VW, would they sell?
Anyone else besides ruking want to speculate? "..
Same church; different pew is all. Operatively the concept is given upwards of 97% of the vehicle fleet being gasser at what % of unsold inventory would diesels begin to have unsold inventory %'s like now?
You might want to re read for understanding #1367. Or you might have just missed the point. Or you are just ignoring the obviouos!?
I used and VW's Jetta, Golf, New Beetle)that actually HAVE diesel models. In #1365, I used the MB E320 CTDI, exaample.
It will take a long education period with which, like any new technology, will go through stages of 'early adopters' 'early majority' 'late majority' full acceptance.
I'm interested for a number of reasons, personal and business. I've been hitting people cold with this question 'I'll trade you a diesel Odyssey for your current Odyssey' 'Would you go to a diesel Corolla if the price was the same or $1000 higher?' Mostly I get weird looks.
People are vaguely aware or not aware at all that a different fuel is now available.
But I think if you know someone at VW with any type of diesel inventory they could clue you in.
But for a longer term indicator you might also want to look at some of the factors in say Europe; that not too long ago was mostly gasser and how the diesel models are now 50% of the passenger vehicle fleet and GROWING. The long term trend is certainly bullish.
Anyone else besides ruking want to speculate?
Sure! I'll speculate.
First, a glut, by definition, means, "to flood (the market) with a particular item or service so that the supply greatly exceeds the demand."
So, by using that term, you have already made it so that the answer automatically has to be "no." Obviously, if supply exceeds demand, you can't sell them all.
HOWEVER, let me move forward and forget that adjective for a minute. IF the vehicles were available AND met all EPA requirements AND were advertised properly, yes, I believe they would sell in a heartbeat. Without the advertising part of the equation, most common shoppers won't know they exist or won't know the advantages that the new diesels offer.
I also would like to address a previous post of yours:
If, right now for the 2008 model year, GM released 5 different well-equipped, EPA-approved, 50-state approved, 5-passenger diesel cars in the USA, all which got 35-45 MPG on the road, do you think they would sell?
Because GM certainly thinks that answer is NO or they could do it. So could Toyota and Honda and VW.
They have those cars in Europe.
The reason those cars are not here is twofold:
1. the difficulty which diesel cars have meeting US emission regulations.
2. the reputation of "dirty diesel" in America.
I don't see the sense here. You asked, "if they meet EPA and are 50-state legal?" And you go on to say they could do it because they have them in Europe .... but then you say they aren't here because they don't meet EPA ... HUH??? So which is it? Do you think they can or can't meet EPA? If they can't, then your supposition that they could sell them now is obviously incorrect. If they can, then your reason for them not being here is incorrect.
'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
1. The diesels are not here in part because automakers have been finding trouble in getting them clean enough for 50-state approval due to technology issues.
2. The are ALSO not here because of the "dirty" reputation diesel cars have in the USA. Because even if they WERE 50-state and EPA-approved, the "anti-diesel" perception is a serious problem that automakers are scared of.
Diesel in Europe has not such:
1. regulatory problems, or
2. reputation problems
so they get the diesel cars and we do not.
My question is: IF they were clean enough, and there were several choices from multiple manufacturers, would they sell here, even with the reputation problem?
'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
'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
This is disingenuous beyond description in light of all the bru ha ha (you know the litany, global warming, conservation, pollution, piece of peace, chunk of war, yada yada yada and other micro and macro world situations. The truth is it does not bother me much on a personal day to day level. This is very easy to see in the EPA discussion that we have been having. So for example, not to pick on VW but the 2003 VW 1.8T gasser GETS 24/31 mpg vs 2003 VW 1.9 TDI's 42/49 mpg.
So lets ask the question would one rather get 58% better mileage or is 37% less mpg better!!?? You already know that the majority markets have voted!!!???
The real concern? Lets not make the diesel cost effective enough that there will be a too large percentage switch to diesel. DISINGENUOUS, DISINGENUOUS, DISINGENUOUS!!!!
I also kind of had hopes based on what I've seen previously printed in mags and whatnot that the mileage would hit the high 20s. Oh well, it just means I have to keep thinking about the R320 instead.
'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
edit: i just checked dodge's website. it really is intended to be more of a commercial or rental vehicle. what is the mileage on it, anyway? i can't seem to find that on their site. obviously, it would vary by configuration, but i'd only look at the smallest model as a passenger setup.
'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
quote-
Americans will ignite a love-affair with diesel-powered cars in 2007 that will eventually reach European dimensions, while hybrids will remain a niche option, revealed as more of a feel-good publicity stunt than a serious method of powering cars efficiently, economically and at one with the environment.
That is the bet European automobile manufacturers are making as they talk the talk of gas-electric hybrid engines to show they care for the environment, but walk the walk down the diesel trail.
-end
I spotted hybrid-related mistakes in the story. They incorrectly repeated and falsely reported that "hybrid sales are slipping" when if you compare the year-to-year sales totals that is not true at all.
Another key point they failed to recognize is that the new TCH has only about a $1,500 hybrid premium, and that Toyota has pledged to cut the Prius hybrid components size and complexity by 50% while reducing the premium to $1,000, about equal to the diesel premium.
( And a 90+ MPG Prius in 2009. Let's see someone put a 90+ MPG diesel passenger car in the USA by 2009. :shades: )
But I think this line summed up the future in the best way:
The new-generation diesels using the new low-sulfur diesel fuel will become a significant niche in the U.S., but whether it becomes more than that is difficult to say, and frankly, unlikely. I'd be surprised if it became a mass market product."
Neither hybrids nor diesels will in the immediate future (5-7 years) have much more than 8% each of the USA market.
I'm all for the clean diesel passenger cars, but they will NEVER take off in significant numbers in the USA unless GM or Ford or Toyota or Honda has a good vehicle choice or two.
VW and MB and Audi cannot carry the load themselves.
It might be helpful to note that "Diesel In the NEWS" is about diesels. Sure from time to time diesels are compared with gassers and hybrids. To boot, is is NOT anti unleaded regular.
To address the so called "slipping" of hybrid sales, that is hard to judge. However total populations of hybrids are less than one half of one percent of the passenger vehicle fleet of 253.4 M vehicles. As a comparison diesels are between 2.3-2.9%. So the diesel ratios are something like 4.6 to 5.8 x greater than hybrids.
Honda, Toyota and Mazda diesels would sell with minimal marketing/advertising. GM would have a tough time selling diesels because they suffer from a triple whammy - a poor reputation for quality, a poor reputation for innovation and the lingering reputation of their 1980's passenger car diesel disaster. Ford and Damlier would have a hard time marketing/selling small diesels for reasons similar to GM.
Personally - I am waiting and hoping that Honda or Toyota or Mazda have a 2008 US diesel. I'll buy the first vehicle that Honda brings to the US market with its 2.2l diesel.
Prius!? Name me a advertisement that hasnt been in all the media's!!??
Also probably one of the greatest things the American car diesels have going for them is the engine is made by Cummins and Iszuzu.(or so I am lead to believe that is who makes Ford's diesels.)
A previous statement that diesel has no chance because of EPA standards is obviously the reason that diesel sedans have not taken off- there are so few to choose from!
You would have to be an incredibly conservative buyer not to take the opportunity to buy a car that gets better mileage and lasts twice as long.
Not sure why this should even be debate. The real question is why are US auto makers so short sighted that they are not working harder to bring a 'clean' diesel F150/ Expedition, Silverado/ Tahoe to market? They are all watching sales in a high profit segment go down the drain without attempting to change the paradigm of the poor mileage that is the ONLY consistent reason people are moving away from the truck based market.