From information sent to VW dealers by email it appears that VW Jetta TDI Sedan and Wagon will be delayed and will be available sometime Sept. 2008 to first quarter 2009.
There is a problem with the emissions system believed to be with the particulate filter/catalyst that requires a delay to correct.
source VWoA- November 7, 2007 To: All Volkswagen Dealers Subject: Clean Diesel TDI Launch Dear Dealer, I am writing to inform you that the North American introduction of the new Clean Diesel 2.0 li TDI for the Jetta Sedan and Wagon has been delayed from April 2008, to late summer 2008. We will remain the first volume brand offering Clean Diesel in the USA.
This situation is due to a technical issue that was found during the later stages of durability testing.
As disappointing as this is for all concerned, our first priority is to ensure that the integrity and quality of the new technology is not compromised, so as to maintain a trouble free launch.
A new SOP date has been confirmed for July by engineering, and we will initiate our ordering activities i.e. launch cars, dealer orders, etc. in spring. For image and competitive reasons, we are now working hard to bring early promotional cars into the Country in order to give you the chance to pre-sell the production arriving in October, during the Summer months. We will continue to promote Diesel through the Dieselution Tour, Jetta TDI Cup Series, and feature the technology as a part of our Brand Campaign in the first half of the year.
For reasons of our mutual profitability, we are investigating a number of actions to make up a portion of the TDI shortfall, such as but not limited to, obtaining additional production of high demand product, ramping up the launch production, and speeding up shipment times of the new TDI, bringing in special edition cars etc.
The launch of all other new models planned for 2008 are on time; Jetta SportWagen, Tiguan, Passat Coupe, M-Van and Touareg 2 with V6 Clean Diesel TDI. With all of these new models coming into the market, and even with the delay of the new TDI, we are targeting to grow next year, and this delay will be discounted from the BPB objectives as we have always promised.
We must now take advantage of the launches that are before us, and not let this set-back to our growth strategy cause us to lose focus on the turnaround that we have begun. We appreciate your understanding of the situation and will keep you apprised of any further developments as soon as they are available.
At least they are doing it right and making sure all the "T's" are crossed and the "i's" are dotted.
As to ruking's analysis a vehicle still costs money to maintain as well as feed. People at my job think I am nuts to drive diesel because of the per gallon cost of diesel fuel. When I show these persons the math, then they shut up.
A co-worker of mine recently purchased a used 2004 Prius. He is going to join a group that is trying to convince lawmakers to allow hybrids to travel with one person in the HOV lanes.
Cars and light trucks powered by advanced diesel technology or hybrid technology can provide larger societal benefits than traditional gasoline-powered automobiles, according to a Rand Corporation working paper recently presented.
The paper ranks the four technologies using benefit-cost analysis. Using most reasonable assumptions, the results placed advanced diesel technology first, followed by hybrid technology, the gasoline engine and E85 technology.
Yes! Now adds on right instead of left. Now selecting "Favorites" covers messages instead of adds! Maybe that's the reason for the change? Not an improvement! GR
Are pages displaying goofy with wasted gray space on the right and compressed pane on the left?
Yep they sure are. I don't care for this new format. Everything is small and you have to scroll miles to get to the bottom. My guess is that it's a work in progress. They have some bugs to iron out.
The point has interesting implications. For example, it is common knowledge for a Ford LTD (V-8) that sees cab /police duty is enormously consumptive and presumably pollutive in so called "urban duty".On a good evening 15 mpg would be good. Keep in mind municipalities do NOT pay fuel taxes, i.e., they buy fuel close to wholesale!? Conversely time has proven it inexpensive to repair and durable.
Indeed the real question is why unionized police forces have not been supportive of adopting hybrids (like Prius, etc) for duty use, Surely, even if a hybrid got 30 mpg or even better that would be better!? To use a police truism: " how many cars can outrun a radio"!? Hybrids for NYC cab use have only RECENTLY passed all the approval hoops! Majority implementation is literally 5-10 years away.
On a macro level, it is almost a truism that something OFF, pollutes less than something that is ON !!?? The key, as I read the quote and of course envision the wider implications are the concepts still have along ways (R&D etc, etc, on down) to go to make it a (venacular) no brainer, far and away over whelming EDGE for uban consumers. NOT so with diesel.
Are pages displaying goofy with wasted gray space on the right and compressed pane on the left?
Yes.
Must be the same design team that royally messed up edmunds.com. Now if you try to search for a new car, it takes forever, and then you can never go back to the same page and have to go through the process all over again. Example, you find the car you wanted to look at on page 5, you try to "Open in a new tab" - Noooo, it won't let you. It will open the duplicate of the search page. Okay, fine, so you left click on the car, you check it out, then you decide to back-back-back to page 5 where you just were, Nooooo, the search has to start all over again. Brilliant. Not only it takes much longer, makes it hard to find what you want, but it puts a lot of completely unnecessary and redundant load on their own servers.
My advice is, people, stop hiring teenagers who learned web design on myspace.com.
My advice is, people, stop hiring teenagers who learned web design on myspace.com.
Yeah, it's more messed up than ever... and the five vertically-stacked icons at the bottom of every post are real space-savers (NOT!), as compared to horizontal. :sick:
... I don't know my company does more than two billion a year and every so-called improvement seems to have new problems. So it will have to be iterated. One change I would like to see is the number of hits on each post. I am sure Edmunds has the info. Got to have that Google (?) model, say Bowtie and Chevys appear on the right.
..."If you use the 1700-2100 (rpms-my sic) rule you would do well in terms of fuel economy."...
Here is the visual, discussion (post# 3 & 8) and comparison and contrast. While results will inevitably vary , every oem and model 's has its own particular parameters. It just so happens (in the arcane world of ) VW diesels...there are graphs documenting VW TDI performance parameters.
If I used the 1700 to 2100 rpms (at half load) consistently, I know by experiences, my EPA of 42/49 mpg , range of 44-62 mpg would be consistently higher (more like 59 -65 mpg!!
Graphically speaking, it is a tad like driving the topographical map of the holy grail mountain of fuel efficiency, with your right foot!! (using your tachometer of course)
... Recent press releases by Cummins and Ricardo have me worried that MTBE may have gotten into my drinking water. These have to be spin doctor PR guys because most engineers would be afraid of having their degrees revoked if they published any such malarky. Here is the deal. If you can't reason with: CARB, EPA and EURO, join them and try and fool all the people all of the time. .. ... So what are they saying? Both concerns say that by suffocating combustion with their versions of EGR (and other better systems) they can pass the latest regs. Cummins and maybe Ricardo have went so far as to say their engines or engineering actually are more efficient with their EGR, and Cummins says that some of their big engines will pass without urea after treatment. They both mention depriving the combustion process of oxygen. Of course the object (however contrary to physics and petro-chemistry) is to reduce combustion temperatures, thusly reducing NOX. .. ... I suspect that if they know (and I think the engineers KNOW ) that the real advances made with ultra-high pressure common rail injection are COVERING all the spin with better effeciency and both these engineering concerns have given in to their PR departments are SELLING their intellectual programs, and also accepting the bureaucratic stranglehold as inevitable.
Possibly because they just announced pickup trucks with hybrid systems? Perhaps they want to go hybrid throughout their product lines? I find it bizarre for trucks instead of diesel, but perhaps their marketing departments told them that "hybrid is hot".
I mean I don't; but I do!? Might be code for "we want to charge you GOBS more, or we really do not want to do it, or lets position ourselves for NO disappointment
But if that is the harbinger of things to come, perhaps the real heavy lifting, or lead dogs will be smaller independent shops that take on the challenge.
How much can adapters to mate a diesel engine (already built by the same oem GM!!?? ) cost to adapt to an already manufactured GM product!!? The R/R portion is what one would do to replace a transmission/engine at some future interval anyway!!??
The other side of it is VW has been doing this ( with their platform designs) literally for years. Jetta, New Beetle, Golf , Rabbit, Passat etc. etc., all have had diesel models.
Indeed, we don't even have to deviate from GM, as GM produces diesel models overseas! Being as how the HQ of the company is in the USA, it is a real stretch to say HQ didn't know about diesels.
... Not perusing all this but I think the new engine from Tonawanda will be availiable in one or both Hummers. I don't know the release date for the new Duramax. The Big Three keeps saying: the regs, the regs, and to some extent this is true; however having commited most of the product line to gasoline for years seems to have driven them into an anti-Diesel stance.
Kia Cee'd will be offered with diesel in North America as early as 2009. Source is Chicago Tribune 11/19/07. 1.6L turbo-diesel. Hatchback with several aerodynamic modifications to improve fuel economy, such as lowered ride height, smoothed underbody, a low-drag grill and low-rolling-resistance tires. Europe will get the diesel first, then US.
Yes, but it's still a Kia. That will probably mean comfortable, decently equipped, but subpar in reliability, fit and finish. I know, Consumer Reports and other publications may say otherwise, but as a Kia owner, I have my own anecdotal evidence that matters to me more than any article.
For many paying less has become not a luxury, but a necessity due to the higher-inching costs of a gallon of gas. New York, California, Michigan, Canada, it does not matter, where in North America, you are, there are tools to help you pay and spend less on fuel for your car.Fuel efficiency and recently escalating gasoline prices have forced many to place themselves on a strict budget and/or even getting a gas card, putting the commute expenses that seems to keep on rising and not come down, on credit!
Unless you pay off your gas card every month you are getting deeper into debt. If you are spending more than you can afford (using a credit card) then buying a smaller car or relocating closer to the job might be a better solution.
We are all facing higher energy prices and paying with credit cards is not the solution.
More than ever, the cost per mile driven metric is the real deal. Right now, the per mile driven costs (average) can range from .70 cents to .09 cents. (I posted .09 cents on a prior post)
Even the IRS will allow (if eligible: this is not accounting / tax advice)
..."Beginning Jan. 1, 2007, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (including vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be:
48.5 cents per mile for business miles driven"...(bold, my sic)
To control the cost per mile driven, the issues are to keep ALL those things that are NOT really necessary, down or off. The problems of course can be epitomized by a fully LOADED model.
With #2 diesel fuel at $3.58 per gal, ( at a local high inventory turnover station) I got 50 mpg (49.85 mpg actually, this converts to .0718154 cents per gal).
Loading up on credit card debt is a tad like jumping from the fying pan into the fire.
As the price of fuel continues to climb, and as we begin to understand that it will not go down, the economic pressure to expand mass transit, particularly on commuter routes will increase, Asian cities are completing state of the art systems while the US still thinks it's 1950.
You can preach all the mass transit ignorance you would like to. The bottom line, it is a Huge waste of money in all but a few densely populated places. And tell me how you get to work when they go on strike? Maybe the transit authority will send you a paycheck because you put your faith in a flawed system of transport.
PARIS (Reuters) - Saboteurs staged a co-ordinated attack on France's high-speed rail network early Wednesday, causing nationwide delays to services already hit by an eight-day transport strike, the SNCF state railways said.
A senior SNCF executive blamed militant strikers for the damage and said police were hunting those responsible.
"We are now seeking harmonisation of standards worldwide", Goudriaan added. "The new, highly ambitious emission levels proposed by the industry should enable the EU and the US to align future pollution control standards, paving the way for harmonised standards around the globe."
Good idea, too bad CARB insists on being different than any place else. The major reason we are not driving fuel efficient diesels in CA. CARB is in the back pocket of OPEC. Keep them driving gas guzzling vehicles.
Folks, could we please stop feeding the trolls? Replying to this tired collectivist propaganda only provides food for more regurgitation. The only purpose of this drivel is to deprive individual of choice. It has nothing to do with diesel.
... I always used to be concerned when Diesel would spike over reg 87 octane and I understand it has to cost more for the new ultra low sulphur, but does anyone know roughly in cents per gallon how much more it talkes to get the sulphur out ???
It depends on the crude oil they are refining. Light Sweet from Saudi or TX is pretty easy. If they got that high sulfur crude from Iran it would be very difficult. Not sure about the Canadian tar sands oil or Mexican crude oil. The best is yet to come, GTL will be available in the not too distant future from Qatar. That is virtually sulfur free diesel. Less than 15 PPM. It will be interesting to see how it is priced. It will be like premium diesel.
PS Shell is the latest to jump on the GTL bandwagon. Shell is spending $5 billion. Exxon has already spent $7 billion on the project. I would say we should see this diesel flowing in a couple years. Just in time for the flood of diesel cars into the USA.
Yes, As folks are more exposed to the concept of diesel, they will see diesel as a STRUCTURAL improvement over gassers for MPG. As a greater percentage and volume of folks start to use it, they will also see diesel to be more adaptive to our transportation system.
Cost is really unrelated to selling price - as long as the selling price is marginally greater than the cost of production and distribution, the product will be offered for sale. The only upward bound of any price is the customers "willingness" to pay. In the unlikely event that diesel becomes a high demand item, the cost of diesel will surpass gasoline to the extent that the "substitute" becomes equally, or less economical. The price follows the basic economic axioms of a "free market" economy: marginal rate of return, and substitution costs.
Your logic gives really good reasons NOT to increase mass transportation!! The cost of mass transportation is REALLY unrelated to the selling price!! The selling price is exponentially LESS than the cost of production and maintenance! The real fear is that if the price comes any where CLOSE to the real cost of production and maintenance LESS folks would use it. The price of diesel (3.65) routinely EXCEEDS the prices of RUG (3.35), & PUG (3.55) (Corner store prices RUG 3.35 PUG3.55 #2 diesel 3.65)
Using the 2003 Jetta line
TDI , 50 mpg/ 3.65= .073 cents
2.0 , 29 mpg/3.35= .1155 cents
1.8 T 29 mpg/3.55= .1224 cents
Of course by your logic .073 cents is WAY more expensive than .1155 cents to .1224 cents (cost of fuel per mile driven)
... The 2009 VW common rail Diesel, availiable mid-08, will keep the "TDI" badge on the rear deck and nomenclature. The PR's are somewhat redundant in that VW is touting it as their cleanest Diesel ever, (oh, it's not a '76 Rabbit engine). It would be a huge step, in the right direction, for the Earth, if the reg bodies, would accept VW's catalyst NOx reduction system, as good enough, instead of the EGR and urea systems forced upon most engines any larger than two liters; in consideration, of the: extra carbon emissions, lousy running a few years down the road, extra maintenance, and expense, caused by the extreme regs. The VW also has a particulate trap, that I am in favor of.
Comments
There is a problem with the emissions system believed to be with the particulate filter/catalyst that requires a delay to correct.
November 7, 2007
To: All Volkswagen Dealers
Subject: Clean Diesel TDI Launch
Dear Dealer,
I am writing to inform you that the North American introduction of the new Clean Diesel 2.0 li TDI for the Jetta Sedan and Wagon has been delayed from April 2008, to late summer 2008. We will remain the first volume brand offering Clean Diesel in the USA.
This situation is due to a technical issue that was found during the later stages of durability testing.
As disappointing as this is for all concerned, our first priority is to ensure that the integrity and quality of the new technology is not compromised, so as to maintain a trouble free launch.
A new SOP date has been confirmed for July by engineering, and we will initiate our ordering activities i.e. launch cars, dealer orders, etc. in spring. For image and competitive reasons, we are now working hard to bring early promotional cars into the Country in order to give you the chance to pre-sell the production arriving in October, during the Summer months. We will continue to promote Diesel through the Dieselution Tour, Jetta TDI Cup Series, and feature the technology as a part of our Brand Campaign
in the first half of the year.
For reasons of our mutual profitability, we are investigating a number of actions to make up a portion of the TDI shortfall, such as but not limited to, obtaining additional production of high demand product, ramping up the launch production, and speeding up shipment times of the new TDI, bringing in special edition cars etc.
The launch of all other new models planned for 2008 are on time; Jetta SportWagen, Tiguan, Passat Coupe, M-Van and Touareg 2 with V6 Clean Diesel TDI. With all of these new models coming into the market, and even with the delay of the new TDI, we are targeting to grow next year, and this delay will be discounted from the BPB objectives as we have always promised.
We must now take advantage of the launches that are before us, and not let this set-back to our growth strategy cause us to lose focus on the turnaround that we have begun. We appreciate your understanding of the situation and will keep you apprised of any further developments as soon as they are available.
Yours sincerely,
Adrian Hallmark
-end
As to ruking's analysis a vehicle still costs money to maintain as well as feed. People at my job think I am nuts to drive diesel because of the per gallon cost of diesel fuel. When I show these persons the math, then they shut up.
A co-worker of mine recently purchased a used 2004 Prius. He is going to join a group that is trying to convince lawmakers to allow hybrids to travel with one person in the HOV lanes.
Cars and light trucks powered by advanced diesel technology or hybrid technology can provide larger societal benefits than traditional gasoline-powered automobiles, according to a Rand Corporation working paper recently presented.
The paper ranks the four technologies using benefit-cost analysis. Using most reasonable assumptions, the results placed advanced diesel technology first, followed by hybrid technology, the gasoline engine and E85 technology.
The trucks are arriving in three pieces. Probably to obtain a better tax or tariff treatment by having final assembly in the USA.
If Ford, Chevrolet and Dodge and were not offering 1/2 ton diesels soon then Mahindra would be a contender for my next truck.
Notice of new layout
kcram - Pickups Host
Yep they sure are. I don't care for this new format. Everything is small and you have to scroll miles to get to the bottom. My guess is that it's a work in progress. They have some bugs to iron out.
Where are THEY buying their fuel ???????
Also: the Big Brotherism of "societal benefits" is right up there with "clean air technology" "All hail Big Brother!! War is Peace!!"
Indeed the real question is why unionized police forces have not been supportive of adopting hybrids (like Prius, etc) for duty use, Surely, even if a hybrid got 30 mpg or even better that would be better!? To use a police truism: " how many cars can outrun a radio"!? Hybrids for NYC cab use have only RECENTLY passed all the approval hoops! Majority implementation is literally 5-10 years away.
On a macro level, it is almost a truism that something OFF, pollutes less than something that is ON !!?? The key, as I read the quote and of course envision the wider implications are the concepts still have along ways (R&D etc, etc, on down) to go to make it a (venacular) no brainer, far and away over whelming EDGE for uban consumers. NOT so with diesel.
An organization I used to work for had a saying:
"PEACE IS OUR PROFESSION"
(the small print used to be more like: and WAR is our hobby)
Can't take the fun out of everything!?
Yes.
Must be the same design team that royally messed up edmunds.com. Now if you try to search for a new car, it takes forever, and then you can never go back to the same page and have to go through the process all over again. Example, you find the car you wanted to look at on page 5, you try to "Open in a new tab" - Noooo, it won't let you. It will open the duplicate of the search page. Okay, fine, so you left click on the car, you check it out, then you decide to back-back-back to page 5 where you just were, Nooooo, the search has to start all over again. Brilliant. Not only it takes much longer, makes it hard to find what you want, but it puts a lot of completely unnecessary and redundant load on their own servers.
My advice is, people, stop hiring teenagers who learned web design on myspace.com.
Yeah, it's more messed up than ever... and the five vertically-stacked icons at the bottom of every post are real space-savers (NOT!), as compared to horizontal. :sick:
TagMan
kcram - Pickups Host
..."If you use the 1700-2100 (rpms-my sic) rule you would do well in terms of fuel economy."...
Here is the visual, discussion (post# 3 & 8) and comparison and contrast. While results will inevitably vary , every oem and model 's has its own particular parameters. It just so happens (in the arcane world of ) VW diesels...there are graphs documenting VW TDI performance parameters.
link title
If I used the 1700 to 2100 rpms (at half load) consistently, I know by experiences, my EPA of 42/49 mpg , range of 44-62 mpg would be consistently higher (more like 59 -65 mpg!!
Graphically speaking, it is a tad like driving the topographical map of the holy grail mountain of fuel efficiency, with your right foot!!
Happy dieseling!!"
..
... So what are they saying? Both concerns say that by suffocating combustion with their versions of EGR (and other better systems) they can pass the latest regs. Cummins and maybe Ricardo have went so far as to say their engines or engineering actually are more efficient with their EGR, and Cummins says that some of their big engines will pass without urea after treatment. They both mention depriving the combustion process of oxygen. Of course the object (however contrary to physics and petro-chemistry) is to reduce combustion temperatures, thusly reducing NOX.
..
... I suspect that if they know (and I think the engineers KNOW ) that the real advances made with ultra-high pressure common rail injection are COVERING all the spin with better effeciency and both these engineering concerns have given in to their PR departments are SELLING their intellectual programs, and also accepting the bureaucratic stranglehold as inevitable.
SAE Energy
Why does GM choose not to offer diesel in H2?
Possibly because they just announced pickup trucks with hybrid systems? Perhaps they want to go hybrid throughout their product lines? I find it bizarre for trucks instead of diesel, but perhaps their marketing departments told them that "hybrid is hot".
I mean I don't; but I do!? Might be code for "we want to charge you GOBS more, or we really do not want to do it, or lets position ourselves for NO disappointment
But if that is the harbinger of things to come, perhaps the real heavy lifting, or lead dogs will be smaller independent shops that take on the challenge.
How much can adapters to mate a diesel engine (already built by the same oem GM!!?? ) cost to adapt to an already manufactured GM product!!? The R/R portion is what one would do to replace a transmission/engine at some future interval anyway!!??
The other side of it is VW has been doing this ( with their platform designs) literally for years. Jetta, New Beetle, Golf , Rabbit, Passat etc. etc., all have had diesel models.
Indeed, we don't even have to deviate from GM, as GM produces diesel models overseas! Being as how the HQ of the company is in the USA, it is a real stretch to say HQ didn't know about diesels.
1.6L turbo-diesel. Hatchback with several aerodynamic modifications to improve fuel economy, such as lowered ride height, smoothed underbody, a low-drag grill and low-rolling-resistance tires. Europe will get the diesel first, then US.
To paraphrase those ancient Pirelli tire commercials...
Because Bob Lutz wants it that way.
If you are spending more than you can afford (using a credit card) then buying a smaller car or relocating closer to the job might be a better solution.
We are all facing higher energy prices and paying with credit cards is not the solution.
Even the IRS will allow (if eligible: this is not accounting / tax advice)
..."Beginning Jan. 1, 2007, the standard mileage rates for the use of a car (including vans, pickups or panel trucks) will be:
48.5 cents per mile for business miles driven"...(bold, my sic)
http://www.irs.gov/newsroom/article/0,,id=163828,00.html
To control the cost per mile driven, the issues are to keep ALL those things that are NOT really necessary, down or off. The problems of course can be epitomized by a fully LOADED model.
With #2 diesel fuel at $3.58 per gal, ( at a local high inventory turnover station) I got 50 mpg (49.85 mpg actually, this converts to .0718154 cents per gal).
Loading up on credit card debt is a tad like jumping from the fying pan into the fire.
http://www.autowired.co.uk/news/article.aspx?storyid=18972
PARIS (Reuters) - Saboteurs staged a co-ordinated attack on France's high-speed rail network early Wednesday, causing nationwide delays to services already hit by an eight-day transport strike, the SNCF state railways said.
A senior SNCF executive blamed militant strikers for the damage and said police were hunting those responsible.
Good idea, too bad CARB insists on being different than any place else. The major reason we are not driving fuel efficient diesels in CA. CARB is in the back pocket of OPEC. Keep them driving gas guzzling vehicles.
Horse Hockey, say I!!!!!
PS
Shell is the latest to jump on the GTL bandwagon. Shell is spending $5 billion. Exxon has already spent $7 billion on the project. I would say we should see this diesel flowing in a couple years. Just in time for the flood of diesel cars into the USA.
http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=qatar
Tick tock.
(Corner store prices RUG 3.35 PUG3.55 #2 diesel 3.65)
Using the 2003 Jetta line
TDI , 50 mpg/ 3.65= .073 cents
2.0 , 29 mpg/3.35= .1155 cents
1.8 T 29 mpg/3.55= .1224 cents
Of course by your logic .073 cents is WAY more expensive than .1155 cents to .1224 cents (cost of fuel per mile driven)
Tock tic or was that tic tock: tocken ticken?