By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
... Would it, not be, big picture better, if the new VW had the incentive trying to reach SEVENTY MPG with less GHG (than current or soon to be regs) if the above mentioned agencies would offer a slightly lower NOx standard ???
This is a non issue "issue" in the TDI community.
TagMan
Accord Diesel engine too loud?
So you can imagine my surprise when the test car turned out to be clumsy to drive, with horrible ride quality and a tremendous amount of racket from the engine.
Why would GM buy 50% of VM Motori when GM believes diesels are too costly and gasoline engines will become as efficient? :confuse:
Diesels vs. hybrids
Diesel-powered vehicles are about 30 percent more fuel-efficient than equivalent gas-powered cars. Hybrids also offer greater fuel economy but consumers have complained that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ratings overstate the mileage for some hybrids.
The competition between hybrids and diesels pits two national industries against each other: Germany's automakers are the leading manufacturer of diesel-powered vehicles, while the Japanese have pioneered hybrids.
Combined, diesel and hybrid sales account for less than 5 percent of U.S. auto sales. So far this year, about 150,000 hybrids and around 250,000 diesel-powered cars and light trucks have been sold in the United States.
In recent years, DaimlerChrysler AG tried to market diesels in the United States as an alternative to hybrids. But in 2004, it teamed up with General Motors Corp. to develop hybrids. "We've always had the belief you can't put all your eggs in one basket," Vines said. "This is a very complex marketplace."
Engines are costly to build
Consumers considering alternative powertrains were willing to pay more, but not always enough to cover the costs incurred by auto manufacturers. Diesel engines cost more to build than conventional gas-powered engines, and the costs are rising because of stricter U.S. emission standards. Hybrids, with dual powertrains and expensive batteries, also are costly to build.
Shoppers considering hybrids were willing to pay $2,396 more, on average, for a hybrid, while potential diesel car buyers would be willing to pay an additional $1,491, according to the study.
Hard to figure out of the reviewer thinks that the test car was the problem or the engine. Right before the statement you copied he says:
The 138bhp 2.2-litre i-CTDi unit in the Accord is a very long way from being the most powerful in its class, but it performs very well at lower revs (responding to instructions from as low as 1000rpm) and, thanks to an impressive programme of noise reduction, it also runs pretty quietly - at least in previous diesel Accords we've driven.
Not sure what to make of it.
..."My take is the diesel Honda might be harder to get used to for Honda lovers (repeat customers). They are used to the (VTEC) gasser engines and its "wind it up" performance characteristics. Indeed that difference (to me) is an annoyance: nervous engine winding, nervous ride vs (VW TDI) smoother torque application (TDI redline is less than gasser) and smoother ride compliance. So for example this would not mean that I would not seriously consider it, but at time time for any longer distance trip, the VW Jetta (TDI) is the first choice over the Honda Civic."...
The formulas that have worked well for Honda (gasser) needs to be scaled/re-scaled from tweaking to total re-engineering. Indeed they might be having issues matching the proper transmission to the diesel engine.
From memory, going back to AlTorque's posting on the "Euro product" Skoda (VW TDI 1.9 T engine product), that product has more hp/torque corresponding bigger injectors and an extra gear (6 speed manual) vs US markets' smaller injectors and one less gear (5 speed manual) and indeed the Euro VW TDI product delivered 1/2 mpg better than the US market version. This is of course oxymoronic here, in that the stated reason for the US modifications (downgrade) was to limit power, hence getting better mpg; but in fact the better power/transmission match actually DELIVERS BETTER MPG!!!!
Honda also of course has long embraced the low profile rim and tire combination and more performance leaning tire products. Honda of course has somewhat tune the suspension to that combination (given that embrace). To me, that embrace has produces a very very very nervous ride. To cut to the chase the Jeopardy answer is what is 195/65/15 H rated?
It is of course deeper and more technical than that, but I just wanted to use an example for discussion purposes.
I totally agree.
...but incur roughly a $0.03/mile hidden expense due to the higher lifecycle maintenance costs. If the battery pack only lasts 150K miles and costs $5K to replace, then $5K/150K = 3 cents per mile maintenance cost that doesn't exist on cars that don't have large battery packs.
The competition between hybrids [Japan] and diesels [Germany] pits two national industries against each other...
Which is why we have only the worst technology choice available for the USA's industries to try to use as a niche, namely Ethanol. Thank-you GM and ADM.
Diesel engines cost more to build than conventional gas-powered engines...
...not because they are inherently more expensive (hard to do, considering that they have fewer parts) but simply due to lower production volumes to amortize fixed costs across.
Hybrids, with dual powertrains and expensive batteries, also are costly to build.
And their Japanese manufacturers are strategically willing to take the risk on their amortization of their higher fixed costs.
The unfortunate reality is that it comes down to issues with Boardroom Leadership and the use of Policital Influence to manipulate the economics of your competitors to put them at a disadvantage...hardly the American spirt of innovation and capitalism, but purely self-serving with zero regard for the best interests of the consumer or Country.
-hh
You hit the nail on the head.
I do think the US auto manufacturers will get there, they will just have to lose market share, pay out license fees to get in the game rather than make them and fall further behind the innovation curve before they get in the game.
Rather than pay for the development cost of clean diesel they will end up having to license it from another (Japanese or European) manufacturer.
The heavier diesel applications may be an exception, apparently Cummins and International are both working on 50-state compliant applications of their diesels.
If they have their eye on the future you can count on it.
TagMan
Different car makers refer to their common rail engines by different names:
* BMW D-engines
* DaimlerChrysler's CDI (and on Jeep vehicles simply as CRD)
* Fiat Group's (Fiat, Alfa Romeo and Lancia) JTD (also branded as MultiJet, JTDm, Ecotec CDTi, TiD, TTiD , DDiS)
* Honda's i-CTDi
* Hyundai-Kia's CRDi
* Ford Motor Company's TDCi Duratorq and PowerStroke
* Renault's dCi
* General Motors'/Opel's Vauxhall's CDTi (manufactured by Fiat and GM Daewoo) and DTi (Isuzu)
* GM Daewoo's/Chevrolet's VCDi (licensed from VM Motori; also branded as Ecotec CDTi)
* Mitsubishi's DI-D
* PSA Peugeot Citroën's HDI or HDi (Volvo S40/V50 uses engines from PSA 1,6D & 2,0D.)
* SsangYong's XDi (most of these engines are manufactured by DaimlerChrysler)
* Volkswagen Group's TDi
* Toyota's D-4D
* Nissan's NEO-Di
* Mazda's CiTD
* Tata's DICOR
* Mahindra's CRDe
* Maruti Udyog's DDiS (Manufactured under license from Fiat)
It's not that diesels can't meet those standards. Diesel engines ordinarily produce much more smog-forming pollution than gasoline engines, though. Meeting these standards will mean lots of complex and expensive emissions control technologies. That technology will add cost, said Lutz, as much as $2,800 per vehicle. Diesel vehicles already cost more than gasoline-powered vehicles because the engines themselves, built tough to withstand the high compression diesel relies on, are more expensive to begin with. Lutz put the current cost premium of a diesel engine at about $2,000.
That kind of added cost would take away much of the incentive for consumers to buy diesel vehicles. It would take a long time to make that money back through fuel savings.
"Are buyers of smaller cars actually going to pay a $4,000 to $5,000 premium to get a diesel engine, when the tougher the emissions [standards] you have to meet, the more the fuel efficiency savings [as compared to a gasoline engine] shrinks?" Lutz says in the video.
As more emissions control technology is added, the fuel efficiency savings of diesel engines could be cut to as little as 12 to 15 percent over gasoline engines, Lutz estimated. And that's compared to current gasoline engines, not taking into account technologies being investigated that could make gasoline engines about as efficient as diesel engines.
The entire video blog seemed so far from reality and a very poorly done bit of propaganda.
It is, after all, a free world.
It will also speed up the decision making process when the time comes to buy a new clean-diesel passenger car because I will be able to rule out GM's offering immediately due to price!
I only hope he doesn't apply his 'we can't really figure it out and it's very difficult' logic to the light-duty truck engine his team is developing. I would love one of the new GM Sierra's with a diesel.
Given we no longer have emmission checks out our way, and that nothing physcially will be different looking since you do not need to remove it, just stop it from opening after start up... Meh. I will take my chances.
If you worry about emissions run 5% BioD. But that itself may sadly have issues with some of the newer polution controls.. So, someone else can experiment with it for a few years first before I do, or until GTL biofuels become available. ;-)
link title
TagMan
link title
TagMan
Besides the 2.9 liter turbodiesel engine mention here GM will also be introducing a 4.5 liter turbodiesel in 2010 in light-duty pickups and its HUMMER lineup.
Yes... and even worse than that is the RDX... real-life mpg in the mid teens!
TagMan
quote-
But while the case for ignoring the U.S. diesel-car market appeared to make perfect business sense, it sounded an awful lot like the rationale that initially led GM to take a pass on hybrid-electric vehicles.
Because profitability looked dicey at best and demand was highly uncertain, GM watched as Toyota took control of the sector with its Prius hybrid, helping convince the public it is the world’s most advanced and environmentally friendly auto maker.
Lutz later confessed GM had been badly outmaneuvered.
“We failed to appreciate that Toyota basically treated (hybrids) as an advertising expense,” he says. “That’s what we should have done.”
Now the same thing may happen in the diesel market, where rising gasoline prices could fuel demand, and those slow to act not only could miss the curve but risk being viewed as technological and environmental laggards.
In his blog, Lutz notes the business case for passenger-car diesels here hasn’t changed any since Freese so thoroughly laid it out. But the auto maker now plans to at least tiptoe into the field and presumably better position itself in case demand blossoms more fully.
“At best, people have concluded the diesel engine is going to be tremendously expensive,” he says. “(But) we’re going to introduce passenger-car diesels in the U.S. We’re going to have a V-6 diesel engine for (cross/utility vehicles), passenger cars, light-duty trucks, etc.
“I’m just cautioning you, do not assume the diesel is the (fuel-economy) panacea.”
Unlike with hybrids, this time GM is being careful not to assume anything either.
-end
INGOLSTADT, Germany - July 20, 2007: From mid-2008 Audi will be putting the cleanest diesel technology in the world into series production. The new TDI engines with their ultra-low emission system combine the spontaneous performance and superior pulling power of today’s TDI power units with outstanding fuel consumption figures and incomparably low emissions. Indeed, they will already undercut the most stringent emissions limits that are to be applied in the future in Europe as soon as production starts. Just as the entire Audi range complied with the Euro 4 standard and the forthcoming Euro 5 emissions limits years in advance, the Ingolstadt brand is once again set to assume its role as the pioneer of groundbreaking technology.
For Audi, the trendsetting TDI engine is a core element of its integrated technology strategy. “We intend to consolidate the status of the TDI as a highly efficient form of propulsion on a sustained basis. And in future we will be launching ‘e’ model variants designed for optimised fuel consumption in the high-volume model series – either in TDI guise or as petrol models with state-of-the-art TFSI technology,” says Rupert Stadler, Chairman of the AUDI AG Board of Management.
Exactly my problem with it. It's exterior appearance is horrible, IMO.
I am still leaning toward an ML320 CDI with 7500 miles.
No need to pay the premium for a used one. Buy it new in Hawaii, register it to your address there, and then send it stateside. It doesn't cost that much to do so. Keep the Hawaii plates on until 7500 miles, and then re-register it in California. Done deal!
TagMan
Probably fly to Oregon an buy one new.
And the so called "greenies" want us all to live in places like this:
"NYC blast could cost businesses millions"
By PAT MILTON, Associated Press Writer
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070720/ap_on_re_us/manhattan_explosion
I usually avoid Wiki, however, in this case it is useful.
... So the big three, West Germany and Japan gave us: lower compression, less timing and Exhaust Gas Recirculation to contaminate the combustion process and lower reaction (burn) temps. The result was actually impressive. In the Los Angeles basin and many other places the air is much clearer; however there was very little thought about GHG.
... EGR, takes some exhaust gas (15 percent or less) and introduces it the intake tract. It frequently has to be intercooled. This is not to reburn it to extract more energy but to contaminate the combustion process and make a cooler reaction.
... Now if all this sounds offensive to a engine or petrocombustion person (it is), it gets worse. This all happened to gasoline engines. There was no or almost no thought of Diesel. Gasoline does not produce soot, but today most Diesels are worn out early because the rings, cylinders and pistons are running in excess soot and it is an abrasive. This is so offensive Mercedes is spending tens of millions Euros to get around it so they can build engines correctly: heat, pressure, ring seal, timing, compression, and boost.
... There are a couple of BTW's of Biblical proportions. The NOx regs cost billions and billions of petrochemicals and the USA cars ran so lousy with EGR, retarded timing and low compression in the early Seventies that it made Japan a giant in the industry. The Japanese cars had the same stuff in or on their engines but it usually worked and their smaller cars got much better MPG in the first fuel crisis since WW II. Back then CARB and EPA did not measure quantity only tailpipe percentages. Today we are much more aware of GHG and there is a total carbon number that is much more relevant and is a measure of total tailpipe output in relation of how much it moves a vehicle down the road.