... Alt, you can make a close comparison with the Liberty. My wife's gas. 3.6, model, now broke in (14,000 miles), just made 22.9 MPG on a similar trip as you mentioned. There are many posts on the Diesel Liberty in Edmunds. BTW, these Liberties are about as aerodynamic as a barn door.
The problem is Tier 2 bin 5. It is very, very difficult and expensive to make a diesel engine meet it. Since the diesel is already at least $1000 more expensive than the comparable gas engine, adding another $2000 in emissions gear doesn't help. $3000 will buy a lot of gasoline.
"The problem is Tier 2 bin 5. It is very, very difficult and expensive to make a diesel engine meet it. Since the diesel is already at least $1000 more expensive than the comparable gas engine, adding another $2000 in emissions gear doesn't help. $3000 will buy a lot of gasoline.
Blame EPA and CARB"
When it comes to operative terms, what it really means (on a micro level):
Let's use the 03 Jetta, i.e.,: TDI 1.9T,@ 50 mpg, gasser 2.0/1.8T @ 29 mpg /100,000 miles (= 3448- 2000 gals=1448).
This is GREATER ( GASSER) consumption (of 42 % over a like model diesel), if indeed anybody is fooled!!?? . So really, by virtue of banning to limiting diesel: 42 % GREATER GASSER consumption is and will be the RULE and NOT the exception, for at least the next 24 years. (12+12) (if anyone was fooled here)
Sure it probably does cost more to comply with tighter standards. Really if we were to use the Toyota Prius as an example, all the fed/state/local governments need do is to give TAX CREDITS. This is absolutely NOTHING NEW, as they continually have done and will continue to do, for behaviors they want to see to fruition. So do you think a 7,500 tax credit (and/or UP) would motivate folks to buy diesels?
(or at worst give the SAME TAX CREDITS as granted Toyota Prius')
..."Assuming a 35-mpg target average, consumers could expect to save nearly $22 billion a year in gasoline costs, assuming a price at the pump of $2.55, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. But the introduction of advanced technologies by auto makers to meet that target won't come without costs. Price premiums for advanced-technology autos could exceed $5,000 on average, car makers say"...
So if we use the current passenger vehicle fleet of 235.4 M vehicles, what is that * $5,000 per average car? Did I do my math correctly? $ 1,177,000,000,000 EXTRA!?
Trillions to save billions!!! Gee, folks could go broke saving all this money?
... All right, I figured it out, thanks to Edmunds. The entire problem is so complicated, it allows for *some*, oil and auto money corruption, and bureaucratic demagoguery. So what is the solution (forget over-population for now). Well, I'll use an example from motorcycle racing. .. ... The team of Jeremy Burgess and Valintino Rossi have just about owned the World for the last ten years and they have had huge resources behind them (Honda, Fiat and Yamaha). They actually left Honda and took lowly Yamaha and made the Giant look bad. Is their secret just a hands-on engineer ??? Although with much less formal education than the scores of engineers supplied by the mega-corps, Burgess has been given final say over all and tells them what to focus on. Jeremy seems to think the various departments become so involved in their areas of expertise that the big picture is lost. The only way I can see something like this happening is either a environmental disaster or maybe the Diesel industry shutting down the country(s) until the UN appoints a czar. Oh, we are in a disaster; would the UN appoint the right guy or gal ???
Side comment, though, I never understood the whole Hybrid vs. Diesel thing, people seem to take sides and like one and hate the other. I'd like to see as many options as possible to boost fuel economy.
..."That "tin can" outsells many brands, and may catch VW soon if VW can't get their TDIs to pass emissions:"...
Given that 2009 TDI's have been certified, I am not sure why there is a press on a moot point?
Indeed the argument for some reason has centered around the two minority positions 2% hybrid (of what I currently read) and less than 3% diesels due to much discussed bans, when the real culprit issues are the other 95% of the (narrow emissions % of ) passenger vehicle fleet population!!!
..."Indeed the argument for some reason has centered around the two minority positions 2% hybrid (of what I currently read) and less than 3% diesels due to much discussed bans, when the real culprit issues are the other 95% of the (narrow emissions % of ) passenger vehicle fleet population!!! "...
Let me call into question(my own quote) the above "2% hybrid (of what I currently read) " of the passenger vehicle fleet being hybrid. Attempts to goggle OTHER sources than the one I read being 2% of the passenger vehicle fleet being hybrid (4.7M vehicles) gave essentially unverifiable numbers (did not triangulate). Indeed the only figure that seemed close was the Toyota figure of app 1% being hybrid of total YEARLY passenger vehicle sales (app 16.5 M). This would be app 160,000 per 2007 model year, which even if you assume that for each year,( from 2003-2007) is at most 800,000 vehicles, which is .0034% (less than 1/2 of 1 percent).
So really the correction should be app 3% being diesel AND hybrid and the new figure is 97% gasser vehicle fleet. There are of course some minor exceptions.
If someone else has more verifiable figures, I will of course stand corrected , past my own correction.
Probably needless to say, the corrections do not change the original points.
I never understood the whole Hybrid vs. Diesel thing, people seem to take sides and like one and hate the other. I'd like to see as many options as possible to boost fuel economy.
Here on edmunds there was a Hybrid vs Diesel forum that was closed by the powers that be.
That forum as a gladiatorial arena, and very brutal at times. The proponents of hybrids were very single minded and felt, in general that gasoline hybrids were the only solution and that pointing out any flaw with a hybrid bordered on heresy. A lot of dis-information concerning diesel was put out by hybrid proponents, including john1701a. Remember him ruking?
Hybrids are not the only solution and neither are diesels. Both have their weaknesses and strengths.
Indeed ! I think these folks were at times borderline paranoid and some when it came to diesel, were almost reactionary. Now I do realize that just because one feels folks are out to get them, doesn't necessarily mean they are necessarily NOT. . However when you pointed out that use of a gasser hybrid still meant by definition they still used RUG (addicted to RUG, per THEIR definitions) they were in absolute total denial. When you pointed out that diesel was a natural consequence of RUG/PUG production, another point of total denial. There are other points of total denial, so that might have been one reason why the topic was closed. I really thought it was too bad as like you say the answers are in the ALTERNATIVES.
So I think the latest demo legislation of the year 2020 35 mpg standard gives definitive time frames (24 years ) of further RUG/PUG addictions and consistent almost guranteed greater fuel consumption. It will be interesting how this almost total disingenuousness will work out.
As a snap shot there are currently app 540 models sold in US markets. The overwhelming majority of those models do NOT meet the forward looking 35 mpg standard. Starting NOW, why would anyone buy a NON 35 mpg vehicle!!?? Nothing but abuse from here on out!!
So a new flag ship might be a twin turbo diesel Corvette that has 300-450 hp and over 650 # ft of torque and still get 40-45 mpg race day with 70 mpg @ 65 mph!!! All I can say is WOO HOO!! and bring that puppy on! Given me a 7,500 tax credit to boot! Life is good!
I was going to keep my 50 mpg TDI for 24 years anyway. (600,000 miles at current pace)
I am not so certain a Honda Civic will be able to last that long, but we will see.
Now Ford is revamping its focus and support 2 diesel versions with power shift auto box which is a rebadging of the DSG. [...] Ford also announce a 4,3L/100 Diesel model of the Focus in combined consumption. that is 54 mpg overall.
Alas, we are extremely unlikely to see any of those in the US. I admit to liking Ford vehicles in general (having owned some in the past with great success), and would love to buy one, but I don't think Ford gives a *&%# anymore about what its US customers want, and is apparently convinced that we will buy it whatever Ford decides to throw our way.
I may end up driving a Honda or a VW in the future.
Well, to state the obvious, this legislation highlights gives AD/IN advertently those FEW oem's and models offered that do currently get 35 mpg or better.
As consumers, we are not privy to why Ford can offer say in Europe, the diesel Focus, but can not do so in the US market. Congress and Ford (any other oem for that matter) are not talking, so I would be speculating on speculation. BUT would it be would be a no brainer to say they (any oem for that matter) understand the emissions compliance process in both markets.!!??? The only real question, since both the union interests and Fords real profits lie in products like the F150 is what ultimately will the EPA mpg be?
... Well, I have speculated plenty about this, and it appears that Ford, GM, Mopar and the imports are fearful of the 50 state legal issues. So much so that since there is no market they appear anti-Diesel and the PR departments have to laud what they have in the showrooms, and proposed new tech ideas. Some of this might be that the manus don't want to overload their already jammed service departments with interim engine combos when (they say) they will have legal packages in '08 or '09.
Well if they survive the 12 years (till 2020) they certainly have 2.4 product lifecycles of 5 years to figure it out. Of course, the big three already have been selling 50 state legal light truck diesels for literally decades.
it appears that Ford, GM, Mopar and the imports are fearful of the 50 state legal issues.
That is the problem in a nutshell. CARB has spread its ugly tentacles to about 8 states now. One of the leaders of that worthless organization is an avowed diesel hater.
If anyone thinks there is no market for diesels in the CARB states they are mistaken. I just checked the San DIego Craigslist for VW TDIs. There is about 8 on the market here. Four 2006 Jetta TDIs with enough miles to get past the DMV. They are listed from $26k to $27K. These are brand new listings. The ones last week are gone. I have to assume they are getting sold. Try getting that kind of premium for ANY other daily commuter vehicle.
Honda related, I was surprised to read that the Honda Element was on one of the worst selling models list. Might turn that totally around with one of those hot new diesel engines!?
Diesel-spewing trucks chocking out Chinese Vehicles Are Mules Of The Economy, by Keith Bradsher NYT's
pg 15A, World News, Staturday, December 8, 2007 SJMN
..."China allows up to 2,000 ppm."...
(15 ppm here in the states up to 500 ppm, diesel passenger vehicle fleet has also been mitigated for a very long time, vs NO mitigation for the up to 2000 ppm, my sic)
RUG/PUG
..."The average sulfur in American gasoline is limited to 30 ppm: China allows up to 800 ppm."... (would you guess the 800 ppm is also mitigated/un mitigated!!??
For all the lead they are currently putting in paints, perhaps that is that is LEADED RUG/PUG? :sick:
mercurynews.com
Like I have said in prior posts, the assumptions that led us down our current anti consumption and emissions path have long ceased being drivers on the world scene. Indeed the Kyoto Accord sanctions not only a higher volume of emissions but 134 x's diesel and 27 x's DIRTIER. RUG/PUG
Seems like we should EXPORT those folks in EPA/CARB, etc. to attack the results of the Kyoto signers/signings. Perhaps it will help to reverse the trade deficit.
Popular Mechanics January issue has article about diesel cars that is worth reading. Audi A4, BMW 3, Cadillac CTS, Ford F150, Saturn Aura, Honda Accord and Jetta TDI are listed as diesels arriving in the US starting in 2008 and continuing thru 2010.
In light of how the hybrids started out with one oem and one model, the multiple oems and models (..."Audi A4, BMW 3, Cadillac CTS, Ford F150, Saturn Aura, Honda Accord "..) might be an interesting precurser of how widespread forward looking demand is projected to be. Indeed I would swag all oems and models will not have a problem selling their inventories. Even VW when it was so called "lone wolf " in offering diesels, it had several models Passat, Jetta, New Beetle, Golf.
In light of Moparbad's posting, I am amazed that GM and Chysler gave Ford a pass to come first to market with the diesel model of eachs flagship and probably most profitable segment.
Thanks for mentioning the PM site. There are so many good resources on the net that I had forgotten about PM. It is a very good site.
I found an article there on driving the 09 Jetta diesel. The guy loved it and said it would probably average 45 mpg and was fun to drive, etc.
But then he went on to say that when they were available in a few months that he would not buy one. Why? He said they just did not make economic sense at around $25,000.
He said that you could opt for a Corolla, for $10,000. less that averaged 38 mpg and that it would take the Jetta 66 years to make up this difference assuming gas/diesel at $3.00 per gal.
I haven't checked his math but he is probably right. I assume he is using 12,000 miles per year. Also note that he is assuming that diesel and regular will cost the same.
This is one of those cold hard light of day comparisons that none of us probably like.
To me, your point really gets back to several I have made about diesels. The point about the Toyota Corolla (Honda Civic, in my case, another) is particularly germane in light of the 2020 standard- 35 mpg. Civic at the time was 3k cheaper. This not only was a no brainer (for me, .02 cents) but the Civic is indeed a better product.
However starting with MY 2006, Jetta competes really in the Camry, Accord. (not to exclude Ford GM or Chysler products) arena. As such, it truly brings 45 mpg to that market segment, where it has never existed. So indeed 25,000 is the norm for that segment. As a product the Jetta is more BMW like than any of them. Right now IF folks want to buy in THAT segment, Jetta is a great choice. The bad news is Jetta has (since) left the old segment.
When I was at the Los Angeles Auto Show last month I stopped by the VW booth and talked to a couple of VW reps. What I found interesting was that starting next summer VW plans to bring in a mix of 45% to 50% diesel Jetta’s. Further, the rep indicated that VW has told its dealers that they don’t want to see the diesels selling for more than MSRP. He also indicated that VW was first with diesel and they want to stay that way. They expect serious competition, first from Honda and Hyundai, and then followed by others so they want to get as many Jetta TDI’s in the hands of consumers before they have other choices.
I would be happy cruising across Montana in a luxury SUV getting 30 MPG. Mercedes offers 3 such vehicles in part of the USA. Because of the giant demand for them in the highly oppressive CARB states they are way over priced when used. That being the case I settled for a lesser gas guzzling SUV, until such time as the diesel SUVs are available at a competitive price.
I also follow another thread on Edmunds.com Honda Civic Real World MPG. There are a fair % and number of folks that report high 20's to high teens MPG!? . This of course goes without saying that Honda Civic is considered by many to be one of the premier eco, economy and high mpg vehicles.
So an SUV getting 30 to 35 mpg, should would could be a top seller, and would be severely anathema to the so called ANTI's excoriation mantras.
..."In that same article the author mentions a diesel Polo, sold only in Europe of course, that gets 70 mpg."...
As I have said, we do NOT need 35 mpg (disingenuous) LEGISLATION, (thanks for driving home the point) we just need cars that actually GET 35 mpg!!! (as per your quote) 70 MPG!!!!!
This so called FORWARD looking legislation is actually a min of 12-13 year protectionist legislation of the 22 mpg defacto standards (look back or backwards (showing direction, not an editorial comment) .
Indeed if one reads the legislation it actually LIMITS the % and volume of cars that actually get 35 mpg and ABOVE!!!!
"... I don't think all that cost per mile stuff is everything. I think cruising out in Montanna somewhere North of fifty MPG would feel rather right. "...
Nor do I. It is really the icing on the cake so to speak, when you actually are getting GREATER than 35 mpg (12/13 years earlier) and pegged at 90 mph getting 50/52 mpg!! Now I haven't been through Montana in quite a while, but got 50 mpg across I 10 E/W across Texas!!
Being a foreigner in TX ( :shades: CA plates) I was probably going too slow as I swapped positions with a few fully loaded tractor trailers for literally hours on end and was even passed by the State Troopers/Highway Patrols. They also will issue tickets for LL camping. Signs and enforcement everywhere: use left lane to PASS!!! On these issues: GOD bless TEXAS !!!!
I believe the 1.4 L ( 80 hp 143 #ft of torque) engine is SMALLER than the Prius gasser engine! The HP is certainly less!!! Prius should match the Polo's hp, for hp quieting!! STOP THE HP WARS!! It certainly does much better mpg wise and emissions wise as Prius keeps it a big secret as to what the real numbers are (advertised 60 mpg but real folks might get 45 mpg!) other than they like to wrap themselvs in the green cocoon moniker.
On the power issue, certainly the 143# ft beats my Civic's 110 # ft of torque!!
The 61 mpg sure beats my 38-42 mpg. Sure beats Prius' 45 mpg!!! For me to spend 12-13 k more for a Prius ( to get 3-7 mpg better) makes NO economic sense, other than making a false green statement (as compared to a VW Polo, or even Civic/Corolla)
12/13 k (cost of the Prius over Civic/Corolla) will buy a lot of gas, even at today's prices (3.25) 4000 gals or 152,000 miles-168,000 miles of commuting.
Adjusted for the difference in mpg Civic 38- Prius 45 mpg) = 410 gals over 100,000 miles or -18,450 miles. Lets see is 168,000 miles saved more or less than 18,450 miles!!! ???
I know VW would like us to think so...but I beg to differ.
Both the Camry and Accord are now EPA full sizers. They're as big (if not bigger) than the Passat. I just can't see a Jetta in that size class.
VW did put a big 4 banger as the base engine, to stretch so perhaps people would compare with 4 cylinder Camcords, but I would not be surprised if the Corolla and Civic have more interior space.
To me, the Jetta is still compact, the Accord is huge. I can't imagine cross-shopping them. Maybe on price and engine displacement, but not in sheer size or space.
Truth is, it is in the measurements! Are they exact? No . Just do a side by side comparo in Edmunds.com to see. I did this for the Jetta and the Honda Accord showed as a comparo (among others) The article that drew this conclusion from, showed it was indeed in the same class. (I read it in passing, so didn't book mark it.)
As I have stated before, I for one wished the Jetta was still in the so called "smaller" size.
But I do have to admit the upwards of 250 ft #'s vs my 155# appeals to me (similar mpg to boot!!) While obviously more powerful in the diesel realm, in the gasser realm and increase of 100 ft#'s would be considered MONSTER! And probably lose mpg in the upgrade!!
The good news is that it might create a demand for a so called compact", future diesels that gets UPWARDS of 42/49 mpg, such as a VW Polo @ 62 mpg! I say bring it on!
My 44-62 mpg Jetta is a fuel guzzler in comparison.
Given I already know how to wring out an extra 20% fuel mileage on a diesel epa of 42/49 mpg, 62 mpg * 20% puts that at 74.4 mpg!!! This is 3.38 x BETTER than the defacto (but to be mandated) 22 mpg.
Dare I ask, what does that do to the almost ratified defacto 22 mpg avg for at least the next 12/13 years, which would be mandated by the 2020 35 mpg fuel standards??? Why do we really want 65% less consumption any how??
OK, per Consumer's Guide (not the same as Consumer Reports, by the way), the Jetta is still a Compact, on a relatively short 101.5" wheelbase, 179.3" length.
Is that right? The photo shows the new model, but I wonder if those are the measurements for the old one.
Corolla's wheelbase is a little longer, Civic's wheelbase is a LOT longer, nearly 5 inches.
Jetta is an inch longer than the Corolla and about an inch and a half longer than the Civic.
I don't really want to ask,... but is 12 and or 14 cub feet greater than 16 cub feet?
max luggage capacity
Jetta 16 cub feet
Accord 14 cub feet
Civic 12 cub feet
Given what I am reading, I would surmise Jetta is using space FAR better than any of the alternatives in the comparo. Indeed I would swag handing, etc would be far better in the Jetta (due to that more efficient use) .
Nothing against more space, length, width in a "bigger sedan", but if a diesel suv can get 30-35 mpg, the SUV for my .02 cents would be a far better alternative than a bigger sedan- Camry, Accord for (literally) the same mpg range. But my original point of 45 mpg (and above) Jetta would raise the bar in that segment (which didn't exist before) for my .02 cents and IF I wanted or needed a vehicle in that segment, advantage 45 mpg (and above) !!
But really it is no big deal. All Toyota has to do is to come up with a 45 mpg Camry. :shades:
Jetta is about 90 cubic ft inside same as Corolla and Civic. The Accord and Camry are 103 and 102. The Passat is 96.
Jetta is a nice car - especially with the diesel. I was seriously considering a TDI wagon a while back, but there is a huge difference in room between it and the Accord.
I am all over the first diesel stick shift wagon that comes down the pike. Love my Accord (40+ mpg on the highway with a 4-cyl stick - if driven carefully) but I really miss having a wagon. Suprisingly one thing I am starting to miss the most is the rear wiper. How can people with sedans put up with never being able to clear the rear window? I will never understand why anybody would choose a sedan over a wagon or hatch.
My father for some reason wanted and bought two station wagons. One was a stormer road car, Toyota Cressida (detuned I-6 Supra engine, sans turbo- so you know the guts were STOUT). I actually drove it some (maybe 15,000 miles), but never understood the station wagon fascination. I have a"station wagons" in SUV's, but it is not commonly referred to or thought of as of a station wagon in the 4wd configuration. In cars make mine 2 door coupes or 4 door sedans.
I will never understand why anybody would choose a sedan over a wagon or hatch.
I am with you. If I have to have a 4 door car I want a wagon. I have never liked a 4 door sedan. My wife likes them. I tolerate her LS400. I would much rather have a station wagon. So much more room and practicality. For Ruking the Jetta Wagon TDI from your series gets better mileage than the sedan. Probably less drag at high speed. The 2005 and earlier Jetta and Passat Wagons are classic looking in my eyes. I cannot think of a 4 door sedan on the market today I would even consider buying, except the E320 CDI. Then only used for an extreme bargain price to resell.
I'm with you on this, as well. The problem is that there are so very few on the market in North America. I'm in the early stages of buying something new and would like to replace my Passat wagon (B5.5 version) with another wagon. I want something of comparable size, price and economy.
The Passat wagon got too big and too expensive and I won't go down that reliability path again for awhile. The Mazda 6 wagon was discounted last year, and had no 4 cylinder engine available. Subarus don't get the fuel economy with the AWD (which I really don't want or need). Audi - well, too pricey. What else is there??
I'm sort of trying to convince myself that a FWD CR-V is really a wagon, but the styling, especially the rear quarter window treatment, kinda gags me.
The Mazda 6 5 door is somewhat appealling, but the current body is shortlived and I don't think I want to wait for the next generation (won't buy a first year of anything!).
And none of these currently (right now) have a diesel option....
..."For Ruking the Jetta Wagon TDI from your series gets better mileage than the sedan. Probably less drag at high speed"...
While I do not know this from personal experiences, but have no reason to doubt what folks have written, indeed I understand the wagon gets 1 mpg better than the Jetta sedan. This is despite the SAME aerodynamics and numerical drag ratings.
They are certainly much more rare, and not to bore the I do not care about VW types but the wagon is/was made in Germany vs parts shipped from Germany and assembled in Mexico. So while this may be only perceptual, there is a perception of better quality.
For me, I prefer the sedan look as other folks might prefer the wagon look. Judging by some comments, it would seem a tad harder to get the wagon look right. Or perhaps that there is a much narrower market for wagons that it does not get the same attention. I also like a closed trunk.
Comments
Blame EPA and CARB.
Blame EPA and CARB"
When it comes to operative terms, what it really means (on a micro level):
Let's use the 03 Jetta, i.e.,: TDI 1.9T,@ 50 mpg, gasser 2.0/1.8T @ 29 mpg /100,000 miles (= 3448- 2000 gals=1448).
This is GREATER ( GASSER) consumption (of 42 % over a like model diesel), if indeed anybody is fooled!!?? . So really, by virtue of banning to limiting diesel: 42 % GREATER GASSER consumption is and will be the RULE and NOT the exception, for at least the next 24 years. (12+12) (if anyone was fooled here)
Sure it probably does cost more to comply with tighter standards. Really if we were to use the Toyota Prius as an example, all the fed/state/local governments need do is to give TAX CREDITS. This is absolutely NOTHING NEW, as they continually have done and will continue to do, for behaviors they want to see to fruition. So do you think a 7,500 tax credit (and/or UP) would motivate folks to buy diesels?
(or at worst give the SAME TAX CREDITS as granted Toyota Prius')
How New MPG Standards Could Crimp Your Ride
by Mike Spector
Tuesday December 4, 2007
Online WSJ
..."Assuming a 35-mpg target average, consumers could expect to save nearly $22 billion a year in gasoline costs, assuming a price at the pump of $2.55, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists. But the introduction of advanced technologies by auto makers to meet that target won't come without costs. Price premiums for advanced-technology autos could exceed $5,000 on average, car makers say"...
So if we use the current passenger vehicle fleet of 235.4 M vehicles, what is that * $5,000 per average car? Did I do my math correctly? $ 1,177,000,000,000 EXTRA!?
Trillions to save billions!!! Gee, folks could go broke saving all this money?
..
... The team of Jeremy Burgess and Valintino Rossi have just about owned the World for the last ten years and they have had huge resources behind them (Honda, Fiat and Yamaha). They actually left Honda and took lowly Yamaha and made the Giant look bad. Is their secret just a hands-on engineer ??? Although with much less formal education than the scores of engineers supplied by the mega-corps, Burgess has been given final say over all and tells them what to focus on. Jeremy seems to think the various departments become so involved in their areas of expertise that the big picture is lost. The only way I can see something like this happening is either a environmental disaster or maybe the Diesel industry shutting down the country(s) until the UN appoints a czar. Oh, we are in a disaster; would the UN appoint the right guy or gal ???
http://blogs.edmunds.com/karl/675
Side comment, though, I never understood the whole Hybrid vs. Diesel thing, people seem to take sides and like one and hate the other. I'd like to see as many options as possible to boost fuel economy.
Given that 2009 TDI's have been certified, I am not sure why there is a press on a moot point?
Indeed the argument for some reason has centered around the two minority positions 2% hybrid (of what I currently read) and less than 3% diesels due to much discussed bans, when the real culprit issues are the other 95% of the (narrow emissions % of ) passenger vehicle fleet population!!!
Let me call into question(my own quote) the above "2% hybrid (of what I currently read) " of the passenger vehicle fleet being hybrid. Attempts to goggle OTHER sources than the one I read being 2% of the passenger vehicle fleet being hybrid (4.7M vehicles) gave essentially unverifiable numbers (did not triangulate). Indeed the only figure that seemed close was the Toyota figure of app 1% being hybrid of total YEARLY passenger vehicle sales (app 16.5 M). This would be app 160,000 per 2007 model year, which even if you assume that for each year,( from 2003-2007) is at most 800,000 vehicles, which is .0034% (less than 1/2 of 1 percent).
So really the correction should be app 3% being diesel AND hybrid and the new figure is 97% gasser vehicle fleet. There are of course some minor exceptions.
If someone else has more verifiable figures, I will of course stand corrected , past my own correction.
Probably needless to say, the corrections do not change the original points.
Here on edmunds there was a Hybrid vs Diesel forum that was closed by the powers that be.
That forum as a gladiatorial arena, and very brutal at times. The proponents of hybrids were very single minded and felt, in general that gasoline hybrids were the only solution and that pointing out any flaw with a hybrid bordered on heresy. A lot of dis-information concerning diesel was put out by hybrid proponents, including john1701a. Remember him ruking?
Hybrids are not the only solution and neither are diesels. Both have their weaknesses and strengths.
Here is a link to john1701a's poopooganda: http://john1701a.com/
On another technical issue, some (I am part of the group) complained about the excellent DSG double clutch box being only available in VW models
Now Ford is revamping its focus and support 2 diesel versions with power shift auto box which is a rebadging of the DSG. These are good news
http://www.autobild.de/artikel/Themen-Testberichte-Der-Focus-kriegt-Gesicht_4581- 55.html
Ford also announce a 4,3L/100 Diesel model of the Focus in combined consumption. that is 54 mpg overall.
So I think the latest demo legislation of the year 2020 35 mpg standard gives definitive time frames (24 years ) of further RUG/PUG addictions and consistent almost guranteed greater fuel consumption. It will be interesting how this almost total disingenuousness will work out.
As a snap shot there are currently app 540 models sold in US markets. The overwhelming majority of those models do NOT meet the forward looking 35 mpg standard. Starting NOW, why would anyone buy a NON 35 mpg vehicle!!?? Nothing but abuse from here on out!!
So a new flag ship might be a twin turbo diesel Corvette that has 300-450 hp and over 650 # ft of torque and still get 40-45 mpg race day with 70 mpg @ 65 mph!!! All I can say is WOO HOO!! and bring that puppy on! Given me a 7,500 tax credit to boot! Life is good!
I was going to keep my 50 mpg TDI for 24 years anyway. (600,000 miles at current pace)
I am not so certain a Honda Civic will be able to last that long, but we will see.
Alas, we are extremely unlikely to see any of those in the US. I admit to liking Ford vehicles in general (having owned some in the past with great success), and would love to buy one, but I don't think Ford gives a *&%# anymore about what its US customers want, and is apparently convinced that we will buy it whatever Ford decides to throw our way.
I may end up driving a Honda or a VW in the future.
As consumers, we are not privy to why Ford can offer say in Europe, the diesel Focus, but can not do so in the US market. Congress and Ford (any other oem for that matter) are not talking, so I would be speculating on speculation. BUT would it be would be a no brainer to say they (any oem for that matter) understand the emissions compliance process in both markets.!!??? The only real question, since both the union interests and Fords real profits lie in products like the F150 is what ultimately will the EPA mpg be?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071206/ap_on_go_co/congress_energy
The above is SORT of related to diesels!?
That is the problem in a nutshell. CARB has spread its ugly tentacles to about 8 states now. One of the leaders of that worthless organization is an avowed diesel hater.
If anyone thinks there is no market for diesels in the CARB states they are mistaken. I just checked the San DIego Craigslist for VW TDIs. There is about 8 on the market here. Four 2006 Jetta TDIs with enough miles to get past the DMV. They are listed from $26k to $27K. These are brand new listings. The ones last week are gone. I have to assume they are getting sold. Try getting that kind of premium for ANY other daily commuter vehicle.
A diesel engine might perk up sales, sure.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071208/ap_on_sc/bali_seaweed_solution
Great balance of performance/economy.
So 1 us gal (128 oz)= 3.785411783 liters
= .832673818 imperial gals.
pg 15A, World News, Staturday, December 8, 2007 SJMN
..."China allows up to 2,000 ppm."...
(15 ppm here in the states up to 500 ppm, diesel passenger vehicle fleet has also been mitigated for a very long time, vs NO mitigation for the up to 2000 ppm, my sic)
RUG/PUG
..."The average sulfur in American gasoline is limited to 30 ppm: China allows up to 800 ppm."... (would you guess the 800 ppm is also mitigated/un mitigated!!??
For all the lead they are currently putting in paints, perhaps that is that is LEADED RUG/PUG? :sick:
mercurynews.com
Like I have said in prior posts, the assumptions that led us down our current anti consumption and emissions path have long ceased being drivers on the world scene. Indeed the Kyoto Accord sanctions not only a higher volume of emissions but 134 x's diesel and 27 x's DIRTIER. RUG/PUG
Seems like we should EXPORT those folks in EPA/CARB, etc. to attack the results of the Kyoto signers/signings. Perhaps it will help to reverse the trade deficit.
Audi A4, BMW 3, Cadillac CTS, Ford F150, Saturn Aura, Honda Accord and Jetta TDI are listed as diesels arriving in the US starting in 2008 and continuing thru 2010.
In light of Moparbad's posting, I am amazed that GM and Chysler gave Ford a pass to come first to market with the diesel model of eachs flagship and probably most profitable segment.
I found an article there on driving the 09 Jetta diesel. The guy loved it and said it would probably average 45 mpg and was fun to drive, etc.
But then he went on to say that when they were available in a few months that he would not buy one. Why? He said they just did not make economic sense at around $25,000.
He said that you could opt for a Corolla, for $10,000. less that averaged 38 mpg and that it would take the Jetta 66 years to make up this difference assuming gas/diesel at $3.00 per gal.
I haven't checked his math but he is probably right. I assume he is using 12,000 miles per year. Also note that he is assuming that diesel and regular will cost the same.
This is one of those cold hard light of day comparisons that none of us probably like.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
However starting with MY 2006, Jetta competes really in the Camry, Accord. (not to exclude Ford GM or Chysler products) arena. As such, it truly brings 45 mpg to that market segment, where it has never existed. So indeed 25,000 is the norm for that segment. As a product the Jetta is more BMW like than any of them. Right now IF folks want to buy in THAT segment, Jetta is a great choice. The bad news is Jetta has (since) left the old segment.
In that same article the author mentions a diesel Polo, sold only in Europe of course, that gets 70 mpg.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
So an SUV getting 30 to 35 mpg, should would could be a top seller, and would be severely anathema to the so called ANTI's excoriation mantras.
As I have said, we do NOT need 35 mpg (disingenuous) LEGISLATION, (thanks for driving home the point) we just need cars that actually GET 35 mpg!!! (as per your quote) 70 MPG!!!!!
This so called FORWARD looking legislation is actually a min of 12-13 year protectionist legislation of the 22 mpg defacto standards (look back or backwards (showing direction, not an editorial comment) .
Indeed if one reads the legislation it actually LIMITS the % and volume of cars that actually get 35 mpg and ABOVE!!!!
Nor do I. It is really the icing on the cake so to speak, when you actually are getting GREATER than 35 mpg (12/13 years earlier) and pegged at 90 mph getting 50/52 mpg!! Now I haven't been through Montana in quite a while, but got 50 mpg across I 10 E/W across Texas!!
Being a foreigner in TX ( :shades: CA plates) I was probably going too slow as I swapped positions with a few fully loaded tractor trailers for literally hours on end and was even passed by the State Troopers/Highway Patrols. They also will issue tickets for LL camping. Signs and enforcement everywhere: use left lane to PASS!!! On these issues: GOD bless TEXAS !!!!
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/07/18/vw-polo-bluemotion-is-now-down-to-99g-km- -co2/
Makes me so irritated we cannot get it in the US.
On the power issue, certainly the 143# ft beats my Civic's 110 # ft of torque!!
The 61 mpg sure beats my 38-42 mpg. Sure beats Prius' 45 mpg!!! For me to spend 12-13 k more for a Prius ( to get 3-7 mpg better) makes NO economic sense, other than making a false green statement (as compared to a VW Polo, or even Civic/Corolla)
12/13 k (cost of the Prius over Civic/Corolla) will buy a lot of gas, even at today's prices (3.25) 4000 gals or 152,000 miles-168,000 miles of commuting.
Adjusted for the difference in mpg Civic 38- Prius 45 mpg) = 410 gals over 100,000 miles or -18,450 miles. Lets see is 168,000 miles saved more or less than 18,450 miles!!! ???
Both the Camry and Accord are now EPA full sizers. They're as big (if not bigger) than the Passat. I just can't see a Jetta in that size class.
VW did put a big 4 banger as the base engine, to stretch so perhaps people would compare with 4 cylinder Camcords, but I would not be surprised if the Corolla and Civic have more interior space.
To me, the Jetta is still compact, the Accord is huge. I can't imagine cross-shopping them. Maybe on price and engine displacement, but not in sheer size or space.
As I have stated before, I for one wished the Jetta was still in the so called "smaller" size.
But I do have to admit the upwards of 250 ft #'s vs my 155# appeals to me (similar mpg to boot!!) While obviously more powerful in the diesel realm, in the gasser realm and increase of 100 ft#'s would be considered MONSTER! And probably lose mpg in the upgrade!!
The good news is that it might create a demand for a so called compact", future diesels that gets UPWARDS of 42/49 mpg, such as a VW Polo @ 62 mpg! I say bring it on!
My 44-62 mpg Jetta is a fuel guzzler in comparison.
Given I already know how to wring out an extra 20% fuel mileage on a diesel epa of 42/49 mpg, 62 mpg * 20% puts that at 74.4 mpg!!! This is 3.38 x BETTER than the defacto (but to be mandated) 22 mpg.
Dare I ask, what does that do to the almost ratified defacto 22 mpg avg for at least the next 12/13 years, which would be mandated by the 2020 35 mpg fuel standards??? Why do we really want 65% less consumption any how??
I'd like to see some number on that.
Is that right? The photo shows the new model, but I wonder if those are the measurements for the old one.
Corolla's wheelbase is a little longer, Civic's wheelbase is a LOT longer, nearly 5 inches.
Jetta is an inch longer than the Corolla and about an inch and a half longer than the Civic.
I'd put those in the same class for sure.
Camry and Accord are about a foot longer.
There's no way, VW is stretching it for sure.
max luggage capacity
Jetta 16 cub feet
Accord 14 cub feet
Civic 12 cub feet
Given what I am reading, I would surmise Jetta is using space FAR better than any of the alternatives in the comparo. Indeed I would swag handing, etc would be far better in the Jetta (due to that more efficient use) .
Nothing against more space, length, width in a "bigger sedan", but if a diesel suv can get 30-35 mpg, the SUV for my .02 cents would be a far better alternative than a bigger sedan- Camry, Accord for (literally) the same mpg range. But my original point of 45 mpg (and above) Jetta would raise the bar in that segment (which didn't exist before) for my .02 cents and IF I wanted or needed a vehicle in that segment, advantage 45 mpg (and above) !!
But really it is no big deal. All Toyota has to do is to come up with a 45 mpg Camry. :shades:
Welcome to the 90's CNN.
Jetta is a nice car - especially with the diesel. I was seriously considering a TDI wagon a while back, but there is a huge difference in room between it and the Accord.
I am all over the first diesel stick shift wagon that comes down the pike. Love my Accord (40+ mpg on the highway with a 4-cyl stick - if driven carefully) but I really miss having a wagon. Suprisingly one thing I am starting to miss the most is the rear wiper. How can people with sedans put up with never being able to clear the rear window? I will never understand why anybody would choose a sedan over a wagon or hatch.
I am with you. If I have to have a 4 door car I want a wagon. I have never liked a 4 door sedan. My wife likes them. I tolerate her LS400. I would much rather have a station wagon. So much more room and practicality. For Ruking the Jetta Wagon TDI from your series gets better mileage than the sedan. Probably less drag at high speed. The 2005 and earlier Jetta and Passat Wagons are classic looking in my eyes. I cannot think of a 4 door sedan on the market today I would even consider buying, except the E320 CDI. Then only used for an extreme bargain price to resell.
The Passat wagon got too big and too expensive and I won't go down that reliability path again for awhile. The Mazda 6 wagon was discounted last year, and had no 4 cylinder engine available. Subarus don't get the fuel economy with the AWD (which I really don't want or need). Audi - well, too pricey. What else is there??
I'm sort of trying to convince myself that a FWD CR-V is really a wagon, but the styling, especially the rear quarter window treatment, kinda gags me.
The Mazda 6 5 door is somewhat appealling, but the current body is shortlived and I don't think I want to wait for the next generation (won't buy a first year of anything!).
And none of these currently (right now) have a diesel option....
While I do not know this from personal experiences, but have no reason to doubt what folks have written, indeed I understand the wagon gets 1 mpg better than the Jetta sedan. This is despite the SAME aerodynamics and numerical drag ratings.
They are certainly much more rare, and not to bore the I do not care about VW types but the wagon is/was made in Germany vs parts shipped from Germany and assembled in Mexico. So while this may be only perceptual, there is a perception of better quality.
For me, I prefer the sedan look as other folks might prefer the wagon look. Judging by some comments, it would seem a tad harder to get the wagon look right. Or perhaps that there is a much narrower market for wagons that it does not get the same attention. I also like a closed trunk.