Diesels in the News

larsb

Gary says, "Not a Toyota in the bunch. Just won't take the abuse I guess."

That's meant as a joke I presume, with tongue in cheek?

The FJ Cruiser will be entered in the Baja 1000 this November. We'll see how much "abuse" it can take.

'Yota FJ goes BAJA on they buttz

P.S. A Toyota Tundra won the Baja 1000:

Go Tundra

bristol2

Just imagine if all those Chevys and F-150's had diesel engines....

moparbad

Honda V6 Diesel

blufz1Bad info. The diesel accord and ridgeline will be here for the 09 model year. :surprise: :confuse: :sick:

quote-
Honda Motor Co., Japan's second- largest carmaker, plans to sell large vehicles using a low- emission V-6 diesel engine in North America starting in 2010, Nikkei English News reported.-end

quote blufz1 -Bad info. The diesel accord and ridgeline will be here for the 09 model year.

Wrong again. :surprise: The Odyssey will be the first. Not until 2010. Maybe the Ridgeline after the van.

quote blufz1 -The Ridgeline gets a V6 diesel. Care to guess the displacement?

3.5L :P

Was someone bluffing earlier?

blufz1

Badmopar...... We'll see.....Hope your Plymouth Valiant is running well.

gagrice

That was significant with the VW diesels. They were only a one minute behind 10th place. Which is a big V8 gas engine on a special chassis. None of the top finishers in those races are on stock truck frames. They are beefed up to the max.

So the Touaregs were competing against unlimited off road sprinters, with a vehicle set up for a 5000 mile Dakar race. I think that VW/Audi are the only auto makers competing successfully with diesel engines against gassers. I would like to see the Honda diesel competing. I just don't think they build a vehicle capable of rough off road abuse.

bristol2

I would like to see the Honda diesel competing. I just don't think they build a vehicle capable of rough off road abuse.

Agree 100%. I think they may be able to put one of their engines in with a chance but they are nowhere near that kind of abuse-readiness.

ruking1

In a way that is why I take a wait and see attitude with the diesel in a Honda. There are a series of apples to oranges comparisons for one. So for example a more fair example would be a diesel Honda Civic vs a diesel Jetta. For any long distance trip the Jetta is the first choice hands down vs the gasser Honda Civic.

gagrice

I don't think Honda will put a small diesel in the Civic. It would take sales away from the Civic Hybrid. Accord, CR-V and Pilot diesels make more sense.

ruking1

No they will not. They have already announced for the record the cTDI will be on the "Accord" platform for the US market. So now the most likely apples to apples comparison will be the Passat TDI.

However I did read the Euro reviews for the diesel "Civic." While a good solid car by our standards, it is not as well thought of as say other European oems. One review bemoan the fact that the average buyer for a Civic was 55 years old. I think in auto parlance; this is not a good thing.

ruking1

Seashore mallow seen as biodiesel source

By RANDALL CHASE, Associated Press Writer

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_sc/seashore_mallow

tagman

Great article... thanks for the link.

As with so many good ideas, I expect little or nothing to become of it. :sick:

TagMan

ruking1

I think if you goggle for bio diesel from algae, you will see a range of 5,000 to 15,000 gals of bio diesel per acre (not including being a food source and ethanol source). In addition you do not have to use so called prime agriculture land.

Corn per acre has app 18 gal per acre. Even opium poppies have a higher potential at 124 gals per acre.

tagman

I agree with you. You don't have to sell me on it... I already understand the benefits are dramatic in comparison. Unfortunately, politics and big money seem to be heading in the wrong direction right now with regards to corn.

TagMan

gagrice

It is simple, the money is made on corn and ethanol by everyone involved including the oil companies. They have to be loving this latest boondoggle. In fact I know Texaco is involved in ethanol production.

ruking1

In a very perverse way: "what's not to like"? Good if not better subsidies, higher prices, tax credits, tax deductions, 25% GREATER fuel consumption, the green badge, etc, etc. It is regularly announced the GROWTH of the INCREASE demand is only affected. This means there is increased demand every year despite ethanol being up to 10% of a gallon of unleaded regular NOW!? While this is going on, we can look forward to ever increasing commodity prices, i.e., meat chicken and corn prices. It will literally be years before they discover the truth and take legislative action to reverse this fiasco (depending from whose point of view ,I will admit) This of course will serve as the lever needed to push the prices of unleaded regular still higher; if the CA MTBE process is any gauge.

But then more on topic, I am enjoying the 27-40% cheaper cost per mile driven between diesel and gasser.

elias

ruking, enjoy, enjoy, but be aware that your 27%->40% number is way off, at least how you stated it. yes your fuel cost is 30% or 40% less, but the fuel cost is small compared to total cost of operating a vehicle, which is rarely less than 50 cents per mile.
if your fuel is 7 cents/mile instead of 11 cents permile, total cost goes from about 50 cents to 47 cents. so you are saving about 6% by driving a diesel.

ruking1

No, in my mind this is JUST for the fuel, and I have stated it in context. If anyone believes that one is paying ONLY 7 cents total for diesel vs (to use your example) 47-50 cents is just taking it out of context. The IRS doesn't give .45 or so cents per mile as a taxpayer give back for gassers only and .07 cents for diesels. So in context, this would be another good reason why keeping a diesel model much longer is better. So if anyone is confused by this, when a gasser is paying a buck for fuel (per mile driven) a diesel is paying less. (.25-.40 cents less)

But having said that, the diesel Jetta model has app 4600 dollar premium over a Jetta gasser, if I were to sell it. Given the high costs of running a vehicle (as per IRS and your examples), and IF it holds over the longer term that is a gimme! In addition the consumable parts on the VW are lasting app 2x longer than the Honda Civic (gasser).

tagman

So... I am curious... after all the posts so far, is it this board's consensus that VW makes the best diesel engine... or does Mercedes or someone else?

And, of course... WHY?

TagMan

ruking1

Wow, that can be a simple yet complex question. I would say that MB makes a qualitatively as well as quantitatively better diesel engine; than VW. Off topic, if one needs a heavier duty rig, Cummins almost owns the category.

However for the typically American metric: "bang for the buck" for my .02 it is hard to argue with this comparo for the application. MB does 40 mpg but at a cost of 50-52k; while VW does 50 mpg at a cost of 18k, for a plain jane commute.

qbrozen

I dunno. I've always liked the Volvos, personally. ;b

tagman

Well... truth be told, I'm looking for a small diesel SUV as soon as possible, and the upcoming Mercedes GLK really looks awesome, but the VW Tiguan sounds good, too.

If there are major differences in the quality of those diesel engines, then I want to know about them... before I spend the green.

TagMan

ruking1

I can see you like my longer held opinion that in the USA market it would be good to have oem's offer diesel options.

That being said and correct me if I am wrong, but Volvo does not currently have a diesel option in the US market?

qbrozen

did you click the link in my last post?

qbrozen

how small? You could go get an ML320cdi right now. 26 mpg isn't bad for an SUV.

blufz1

Honda!

houdini1

So if anyone is confused by this, when a gasser is paying a buck for fuel (per mile driven) a diesel is paying less. (.25-.40 cents less)

Ruking, I am also a diesel fan but your average motorist is not paying a dollar a mile for fuel. If you average 20 mpg and gas costs $3.00 then your fuel cost is about 15 cents per mile driven. If driving a diesel that gets 30 mpg and cost $3.00 per mile then your fuel cost is about 10 cents per mile driven. So you are actually saving 5 cents per mile with the diesel.

ruking1

Yes, but what passenger cars or light trucks are those Volvo truck engines available in. I know they are available in (larger) DELIVERY type trucks!!??.....

qbrozen

my response was tongue-in-cheek. (hence the winky face)

the original poster only asked who made the best diesel engine.

ruking1

Well no it was done that way so one could see the per dollar PAID ratio. But as you know all you have to do is the following diesel 3.13 per gal/50= .0626 cents ULR 3.25/31=.1048387 cents difference=.0422387 cents/.1048387 = 40% per mile driven. Sure less than .05 cents, whoop di doo!? The only question is if you will or are going to do 500,000 to 1,000,000 miles that is 21,000 dollars-42,000 dollars. Now I have only done 100,000 and at .042 that is a savings of 4,223. or 1350 gals *50mpg = 67,473 miles.

tagman

how small? You could go get an ML320cdi right now. 26 mpg isn't bad for an SUV.

Smaller than the ML... like the upcoming GLK and Tiguan... even a diesel CR-V would be a consideration.

TagMan

bristol2

Wow, nice question...

First you have to categorize:
Heavy Duty- consensus seems to be Cummins although Chevy's Duramax's reputation is strong. International seems to be having some problems although how much of that is the engine and how much is Ford's application?- I don't know the answer.
Note- Cummins also seems to furthest forward with a light duty truck diesel.

Non-50 state legal- I think you could go back and forth on this for as long as you want. The diesel without all the extras to make it 50-state legal is pretty mature technology so between MB and VW you probably are not going to find a reliability or performance gap. Certainly MB is more experienced making 6 cylinder diesels but VW leads the way with 4- cyl.

50-State legal- here's the unknown. At first glance you would have to say Honda since it looks like they will be first to market. With no competition it's easy to be the best.
Anything requiring the urea additive is, in my opinion, very dubious in terms of both making it to EPA standard and being easy to maintain...if your MB has to go to the doctor's every 3000m for a top-up, that's a pain in the [non-permissible content removed].
BMW has won awards for its diesel performance and we have Jose's observations to support that.
If you ask the Europeans, it seems that Peugeot is currently the small diesel leader in diesel's most demanding market (go figure).

For your application I think your choice is simply do I want VW levels of service or do I want MB levels of service.....probably not hard to answer that question.

ruking1

I know one of the few certified (in this area) MB diesel (dealer) mechanics. Diesel has been his specialty for 16 years. His take is there is not a lot of product to service. The feeling I get from him it is more like the stereotypical Maytag Repairman. His dealer time is of course filled with gassers.

tomcat63

Just for information:
Until model-year 2005 diesel engines for Volvo passenger cars were supplied by Renault (4-cylinders) and Audi (5-cylinders). Now they started to create their own stuff based on Audi´s 5-cylinder block.

roland3

... I have to give MB / DC great compliments on making the bold move around the bureacratic bungle ( EGR ), because they bet: the World, the Earth, and the Company, with more: heat, compression, timing, boost, and better efficiency (and less GHG ) , albeit with a very sophisticated exhaust system.
... On another note, time will have to tell if the common rail with the piezo-ceramic injectors and all that fuel pressure will go down the road say 300,000 miles without too much trouble.

tomcat63

It´s really a difficult question with an answer hard to find. In the end it depends on what you need, want and expect.
From a mechanics point of view I tend to trust more in European makes, simply because they have a lot more experience with diesels, also in the heavy duty category.
Cummins? Okay, they are popular powerplants for boats and ships over here. Chevy Duramax? Give me a break! I recently had a ´98 Suburban Diesel in my shop with a blown up engine (2 burned pistons). The repair was a giant pain in the anus and when I finally got it running again, it made that awful sick noises I thought it was going to blow up again every minute. Later the owner seriously stated it never ran that "smooth" before...! I really like Chevy´s V8 gas-guzzlers, they are simple built, easy to service and almost indestructible. But they should keep their hands off diesels unless somebody shows them how to do it properly.
Worst thing I remember is good old M113 with that stubborn Detroit two-stroke diesel. I did my army service in a salvage & repair unit, spending most of the time on changing roots-blowers and cold-start coils, while our Leopard tanks only came in for a boring oil change.

moparbad

The truth on diesels

Your "truth" is wrong Bob!

gagrice

Well Bob's bunch did bungle diesel pretty badly. Left a bad taste in a lot of mouths. I don't think he has watched how well the Prius has sold at the same or higher premium.

ruking1

Yes also the Corvette line which is arguably one of the more successful GM lines has faced extinction on more than one occasion. Bottom line is a car does not get built unless there is an order for it and they are % wise one of the most profitable. My take is if they can bypass the GM attitude both toward itself and diesel; a twin turbo diesel option in a Vette (for three V-8 options: small block, big block, small block twin turbo diesel) would put it head and shoulders above their already head and shoulders above position.

gmginsfo

LOL! Maybe if you stick a white flag into a flower pot on your balcony you'll get a response - but you'll have to meet in a parking structure to get it!

BTW, Subaru's last owner magazine mentioned an H-6 Euro Diesel it's considering bringing here in a year or two.

houdini1

Uh, I think that is what I just said.

The average driver would save about $600. a year. Not much but I would take it. Or to look at it a different way they would save about 200 gallons of fuel a year!

ruking1

Well no, I said it, you denied it, but seems you now agree.

To further intergrate your example of saving 200 gals; again it might not seem like a lot, but multiply it by 235.4 M vehicles and I think the math might have some appeal.

My take is in this "process", the cost per mile driven will actually go UP rather than down. We see that happening with ethanol. Costs the same due to greater subsidies than oil, and gets 25% or so less mpg. The ultimate example might be fuel at 7 dollars US in Europe. So in that sense one of the advantages to switching will actually go away, but might remain in a relative way.

houdini1

Well no, what you said was this. "when a gasser is paying a buck for fuel (per mile driven) . And I said it is no where near this. More like 15 cents for fuel per mile driven. Then you proved my point. So now it seems you agree with me.:shades:

ruking1

If you look at the post 3347 example, your swag of 15 cents does not pencil out. 15 cents per mile pencils out in the case of the Corvette that gets 25 mpg @ 3.37 per gal premium (actual 13.4 cents). Indeed it was penciled out in the example (gasser vs diesel option, Jetta). So I really am not sure what issue you disagree or agree with.

houdini1

I am sorry that you are confused but I do accept your apology.

deminin

One of the major complaints with diesel cars has been the smoke and stink. However, with the new LSDF containing less than 5PPM sulphur, that objection should be greatly reduced. I've been using this new fuel in my Kubota tractor for several months, and the smoke and odor is almost non-existant. I even started using this new diesel fuel in my Kerosene forced air heater in my workshop, and the odor is far less than kerosene. I have heard that Honda is getting ready to release a diesel Accord that will be rated for about 60MPG on the highway. That would seem to be an ideal fuel efficient vehicle. Diesel engines are very simple, and when given proper maintenance, will last for years with no trouble. This certainly sounds like a better choice than some of these very complex hybrids.

ruking1

Well it is actually you that should apologize for being misleading and confused. I compared like models diesel/gasser and you were comparing a hypothetical 20 mph with no like for like (diesel) comparison. So yeah 3.00/20 mpg =.15. But so what? So unless you like the sound of one hand clapping, you really need to do the other side of your comparison. But since you are more into oneupsmanship, I would swag an apology (or like for like comparison) is not forth coming.

gagrice

I have run the ultra low sulfur diesel in my Kubota also. I used it in a VW TDI for a year and a Mercedes Sprinter for a year. Never any smell from any of them. I think we are ready for all these new diesel vehicles to get here. The sooner the better.

ruking1

Most late model diesels have in fact been designed to run on ULSD. As Gagrice has indicated it ran/runs well. It was almost a designer fuel before the more widespread implementation was mandated. Also it was longer in coming to the marketplace than madated/promised and continues to be so (not widely available) in a good many states.. I also was glad for its arrival and widespread availability (CA). The change over has been seamless, for this one user. Indeed it was swagged to be more expensive, but now that unleaded regular costs more than ULSD, it almost seems moot.

moparbad

Cadillac and Saturn Dieselsa>

moparbad

Cadillac and Saturn Diesels