Chrysler's packaging of the diesel is in some respects necessary. The five speed automatic is the only automatic trans available domestically that can handle the torque produced by the diesel. The four speed automatic that sits behind the the V-6 is to gutless. The ABS is also a good thing considering that brakes on Chrysler products have generally been a weak point for them.
Diesel does stand up on it's own merits, it is just that the American public is too stupid appreciate the merits of diesel.
The turbo lag in the MB diesel was also present in my Jeep Liberty CRD but to a lesser degree.
There are two things that one can do to reduce that turbo lag.
1. Use a good synthetic oil. Sounds crazy but it works. 2. Install a K&N or equivalent air filter. That helps even more. I have one in my Jeep and the difference is quite noticeable but the lag is not totally gone, there is just less of it.
Well lets see based on the apples to oranges comparisons, I suppose I could compare my Z06 Corvette against the VW Jetta TDI and MB E320 diesels. :shades:
We can't help but compare apples to orange, we're talking about turbo-diesel vs. gas!
I understand all turbos lag somewhat, but it was more pronounced in that particular Benz.
My choice was E320 vs. E class diesel, so that's what I compared on that day. The 3.2l was not a turbo and naturally felt more linear, though the diesel was ultimately both quicker and more efficient. You trade-off throttle reponse and up-front costs (though not in Europe!).
..."You trade-off throttle response and up-front costs (though not in Europe!). "...
True statements, glad you agree. Also to me, the higher up front costs are so called the risk/low volume premiums (among other market realities) .
If the regulatory agencies were REALLY motivated to achieve the stated goals (YESTERDAY as opposed to 24 years hence) to cut consumption (up to 62%); all they need do is to give tax CREDIT/S. There is precedence for it as they did it for Japanese companies; such as Toyota!! Indeed on the flip side, R/E folks, in the not too distant YESTERDAY bought $100,000 (gasser) Hummers with IRS sec 179 tax write offs = $100,000 dollars!? We all see what is happening in the real estate market of late!? :lemon: :sick: I would swag "proper" DIESEL tax credits would literally start a stampede: which is the real problem. Nevertheless a lot of folks point to premiums and won't switch because of that. It is totally understandable, and probably planned on.
I had a $246 dollar premium (at invoice, as I remember) to over come and while it was a nit and absolute no brainer, it was factored in.
Merry Christmas John, One is fine for me. I want simple efficiency. ULSD needs to handle the pollution. I will try to get as many miles out of the gallon as my share of the equation. If there was a real issue with diesel emissions CARB would be testing the 100s of 1000s big PU trucks using diesel. NO emissions tests in CA for all the diesel PU trucks. That says a lot to me. Same truck with a gas engine is tested every other year. Do they test diesels in MN for emissions?
..."Why bother knowing that virtually all of them would fail?
The high-sulfur of the past made testing pointless, so exceptions were granted."...
Indeed the hybrids (and upwards of 97% of the passenger vehicle fleet at use R UG through PUG) use higher sulfur (30 ppm) RUG than less than 3% of the diesel passenger vehicle fleet using ULSD (15 ppm) . In fact RUG through PUG is 2x higher.
Indeed VW's have been designed for a long time to use 15 ppm or less ULSD fuel which was confined to being a "boutique type" with the higher pricing to match , fuel since before 2003.
Sulfur damages the cleansing equipment, making emissions dirtier over time. That's why the significant reduction of sulfur in diesel recently is such a big deal.
But unfortunately, the system is only as clean as the automaker chooses to deliver it. That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5
The technology has existed for a while and is "off the shelf" It just needed a wider market and regulatory attitudes and environments to support the costs (of R& D and other costs) to bring it to market.
But really not a big deal, if I drive the 2003 TDI like a Prius driver, 62 mpg is achieveable. On one recent trip, I didnt even drive like a Prius driver and got 59 mpg. Frankly even I was surprised as I swagged 55 mpg.
..."Sulfur damages the cleansing equipment, making emissions dirtier over time. That's why the significant reduction of sulfur in diesel recently is such a big deal.
But unfortunately, the system is only as clean as the automaker chooses to deliver it. That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5 "...
Right! You can thank the regulations which effectively have keep out ULSD for SO LONG!!! Yes, the numbers do show RUG through PUG (30 ppm) consumers burn 2x dirtier fuel than ULSD (15 ppm). Indeed B5 to bio diesels can have as low as 0 ppm .(ZERO)
Also you would think Prius makers would get the hint also!!! Since Prius drivers have showed a willingness to overpay, they should be able to buy (aka pay more ) boutique less than 30 ppm RUG. :lemon: My guess on the cost is easily a buck more per gal.
But really, what is the big deal, as you can thank the democrats for passing the 2020 35 mpg standards which operatively enforces the defacto 22 mpg fuel standard for a min of 13 MORE years to 26 more years!!?? What is also baked in are massive increases to the per mile driven cost.
Keeping a current diesel seems the prudent thing to do; going forward at least 13 years. I'd also be interested in a real world accounting of 5/10/15/20 years and of mileage accounting of hybrid batteries and engine also. You might be anti diesel, but I am pro alternatives.
There must have been some connection or access problems to this web site so I apologize for the multiple posts. This is the complete post.
What is misleading failing to acknowledge diesel is way less consumptive of most PZEV rated vehicles. Another is Upwards of 98% of the passenger vehicle fleet does not deliver a PZEV rating. A real omission is that you will not be able to verify the PZEV rating for at least 10 years from when a so called PZEV vehicle was put into service. Given the rate at which PZEV vehicles are hitting the current fleet, Independent verification of the "effects" will not be measurable let alone found statisically significant for another 20 years. The PZEV designation vehicles indeed are more fuel consumptive than diesels, so SIMPLY the longer less consumptive vehicles are kept out of the passenger vehicle fleet mix, the longer we will consume more. In addition diesel can be alternative fuels. RUG to PUG used by hybrids/PZEV are not nor can not be currently alternative.
That same sulfur found on gasoline also has a negative impact on emissions equipment found in gassers so that the super clean emissions car is not so super clean after many, many miles.
That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5 If you know of something better to handle diesel emissions, put it out here in the forum for the rest of us to look at.
On the other hand, you use the phrase barely enough and that pretty much sums up how much of the auto industry really works here and abroad when it comes to emissions. The one exception that comes to mind is Cummins whose diesel engines already meet or exceed 2010 emissions requirements now.
I find it strange that hybrids are allowed to travel in HOV lanes with a single passenger. The Prius like hybrids get better FE in city driving than on the highway, so it is rather backwards thinking in my book.
Well...for a given technology, yes, but the point is you can spend extra on emissions controls to reduce 'smog' emissions, but you can't do anything about CO2 except reduce fuel consumption.
Oh yes, car diesels are the choice for the long distance commuter. Everyone had good points on here. Their MPG and lower maintenance costs would offset the higher fuel prices charged to diesel customers. Clean diesels are possible and economical. We know that the EPA and CARB have been slow to certify more mainstream diesels and auto manufacturers have been less than enthusiastic on selling the idea to the public. Even though most auto manufacturers have car diesels throughout the world. Heck, my 2007 Hyundai Elantra "U.S. spec" even has a non functional glow plug light on the dash because they use the same dash almost worldwide.
I even wrote to Honda Europe 2 years ago asking for a push of their diesels to the U.S. market. Apparently, they were already considering it as a diesel is coming in the Pilot and RidgeLine in 2010. Although i would love to see their Accord diesel here in the U.S. Just dont expect the high MPG like Europe due to our tight diesel emission regulations. I do agree however that diesels do need to be cleaner and now they can be at a reasonable cost. But auto manufacturers must advertise them when they are available. They cannot pull the crap VW did by not advertising them and having only one or two in stock even though they sold every one of them at list price the second they came in. I know they were not 50 state emission legal but that does not mean you dont make them available to the other states in large quantities. They always wanted to push the low mileage, moderate reliability gas engines, mainly their turbo four bangers.
The time has come for the new diesels to rise to the occasion. And thank God the car diesels of the 70's are a fading memory as a the new generation of car buyers were not exposed to that so the discrimination towards car diesels from some people of that generation will not poison the minds of the new ones to try them out when they are available.
You can have some impact on CO2 emissions by changing the type of fuel you use. Users of biodiesel have lower CO2 emissions than users of straight petro-diesel.
Even as LESS C02 production is advocated by the "anti diesel" forces, the gasser vehicles they "sanction" produce more C02 that a (same model) diesel!!! This is easy to check on the EIA.gov web site.
..."But auto manufacturers must advertise them when they are available. They cannot pull the crap VW did by not advertising them and having only one or two in stock even though they sold every one of them at list price the second they came in. I know they were not 50 state emission legal but that does not mean you dont make them available to the other states in large quantities"....
I would disagree with your conclusions.
The VW 2003 (all stripes) for example was app 250,000 US sales and app 4% were diesels (10,000) ALL were 50 state legal./50 states= 200 average per state. As a point of discussion, my take: it was an absolute no brainer that they would have been able to sell double to triple that. (12%). The regulators did not allowed a higher %. Indeed in that year VW lost BILLIONS over all in the US market.
You are right on that one. CARB only allowed a small percentage of diesel cars up till 2004. Then they were banned unless they were real big. That is how the 7000 lb Touareg V10 diesel was allowed. Of course you can buy a near new diesel car when it gets 7500 miles on it here in the CARB states. All seems to stupid to me.
I dunno, a PZEV Subaru Outback is more efficient than the new Tahoe hybrid. I'm not sure, does the Tahoe qualify for any credits? It shouldn't.
When you're talking about a Prius or a HCH, that argument makes sense. But an RX400H? GS hybrid? Tahoe hybrid? Not so much, yet some of those get credits.
By giving a luxury car like the RX400H tax credits the feds are showing a clear bias for one technology.
The anti-diesel forces advocate more than just reduced CO2 output. They also advocate cleaner emissions which I have no problem with. What does bother me though is that they feel there is only one answer, when such is not the case.
In Europe, the Prius model is the same as what sells here in the U.S. However, there is the VW Lupo diesel that beats that same Prius in CO2 and several other emissions, is not a hybrid, and goes further on a liter of fuel than does the Prius.
If fuel prices continue to rise, then there will be a clamoring for cars similar or like the VW Lupo. Even Hyundai has a version of the Rio or Accent powered by a 1.5L diesel that is very clean and yet gets more than sixty MPG (American) on the road. In a recent edition of a diesel magazine I buy from time to time, Jaguar has a 2.7 L V-6 turbodiesel that gets 49 MPG on the road in Europe. Ford is seriously thinking about bringing that family of engines here.
..."The anti-diesel forces advocate more than just reduced CO2 output. They also advocate cleaner emissions which I have no problem with. What does bother me though is that they feel there is only one answer, when such is not the case. "...
To you and I that understanding is/has been a given. You will probably remember that I took/have taken and continue to hold the position that parity in emissions (diesel/gasser) was a technological no brainer, but was an "HUGE " economic consideration. My take: Launch 20-40% better(diesel) fuel mileage and make the technological changes going forward, JUST AS THEY DID FOR GASSERS OVER THE PAST 30 to 40 years. Gasser mpg improvements are/have been largely low hanging fruit so to speak. Anti diesel forces act like the current gasser emission standards existed 40 years ago!! Sorry not even close! ?
Then of course there followed the hordes of " what came first the chicken or egg" theme posts. Given the fact the passenger vehicle fleet is greater than 50% diesel fleet in Europe, a diesel easily and more cheaply I would surmise beats even the US markets heralded Prius hybrid.
Better mpg has been the "holy grail" in the European markets. All too soon that might be true in the US markets.
Industry's Woes Endanger EU Goal for Using Fossil-Fuel Alternatives
By John W. Miller Borken, Germany
Some excepts from Politics & Economics section of
TWSJ, (PAGE-my sic) A4, Thursday, December 27,2007
"The European Union's dream of using vegetable-based diesel fuel in cars to cut oil imports and the pollution that causes global warming is turning sour....
...As with ethanol in the U.S.though, Europe now has a glut of biodiesel....
...The industry is in trouble under pressure from soaring costs, dissappearing tax breaks, less costly imports and waning public support....
...The trend is at odds with conventional wisdom that rising oil prices make green energy more attractive.... ...
...It also means EU risks missing the goal it set in 2003 of replacing 10% of transportation fuel with nonfossil fuels by 2020....
...The 27 nation bloc, which claims to lead the world in cutting the carbon-dioxide emissions believed to cause global warming, uses nonfossil fuels for less than 2% of transportation fuel consumed....
...EU producers recently asked the EU to impose punitive tariffs on biodiesel imports from the US, citing the subsidies as unfair competition. US producers despute the claim..."
I know what this means to me, so folks might want to read the whole article to draw their own conclusions.
Page 30 of the February 2008 Car and Driver magazine has a story about their test, here in the USA, of a European (UK) Honda Civic i-CTDi, 2.2-liter, 138 HP, turbocharged, intercooled, dual OHC, Diesel coupe with 251 lb. ft. of torque and a 6-speed MTX.
With all of the predictions in this forum, about spectacular mileage once the anticipated 2009 Accord Diesel arrives, it is interesting to see that Car and Driver's observed fuel economy of this particlar Civic was only 33 mpg. That's exactly the same result that they got in their testing of a US spec gasser Civic LX. They achieved 40 mpg when they tested the Civic Hybid.
They stated that their best tank of Diesel returned 36 mpg, and it ran 7.6 seconds in their 0-60 test.
That seems fairly underwhelming, although I would want to see the official numbers for both city and highway usage. I hope Honda can do better than this, or put a smaller engine in their cars.
What surprised me is the 0-60 test. 7.6 sec seems low for a diesel. I hope Honda does not confuse the message of the diesel offering, and that they aim for fuel efficiency, not for acceleration. They already made that mistake once with Accord hybrid, and it flopped spectacularly.
It is unfortunate that the MPG tests may not be with a fully broken-in engine. It is a proven fact that a turbocharged diesel engine really needs some miles on it before the rings start to provide an optimum seal. The design of the rings REQUIRES some turbocharger pressure to seal approprately. The heavy-duty nature of a diesel engine tends to make break-in take significatly longer than a gasoline engine which ususally have light ring-loading.
I am not surprised that an engine with less than 30K miles on it (or poorly broken in) would retrun less-than-optimal MPG numbers. It is all-too-easy for an engine that sees only magazine-writers as the driver to NEVER get a proper break-in.
The break-in on my engine was deliberate and defined... I left nothing to chance. My VW TDI did not start to return consistant 56MPG until after at least 50K miles. (With 3 passengers and AC blasting, 95F outside)
I have no doubt that my 2003 TDI would easilly travel over 850 miles on the highway between fillups. I log EVERY drop of fuel pumped into my TDI and can prove these numbers.
Again, the nature of a magazine tester is to do some quick dragstrip tests and perhaps measure MPG over a short distance. If a diesel engine was added to one of their long-term tests... they would get a more realistic average of MPG numbers.
The Diesel really shines when you; 1)Break in the engine! 2)Fill it up and drive cross-country on the highway
... One of the strongest parameters for MPG is correct cruising RPM. Many, that don't know better, rev too high because the car feels better and or is quicker to respond. The feeling may be right; however the driver should consult the owner's manual for correct RPM. BTW, it is close to impossible to rev a modern Diesel too low on the cruise control as the module will kick it out of cruise if RPM drops too low. This is somewhat compromised by an auto-matic trans.
The Brits did a lot better than C&D managed with their test vehicle. Must have been the lead foot writers and our cheap fuel. Even with the conversion it gives the Civic a respectable 46.13 US MPG Combined. In a vehicle with a pretty decent 0-60 MPH.
The 2.2CTDi Honda Civic is around 22% more economical than the 1.8 V-TEC engine models, delivering around 43mpg around town and 55.4mpg in the combined cycle fuel economy tests.
Let us take this a bit further. John1701a also remarked that the auto manufacturers did what they had to do to just barely meet emissions standards.
Thus imagine how much cleaner the Prius would be if Toyota had done the following:
1. Put in a larger battery so that the Prius could go further than a few miles before the engine needs to start to keep the battery pack charged. 2. If the Prius could run at 55 or 60 MPH for about 50 miles on battery power before needing to start the engine. 3. If the Prius had come from the factory as a plug-in hybrid or with the option to be a plug-in hybrid.
Now after having done a little research either on of the first two options would add more than $10K to the price of the car, while the last option maybe a few hundred dollars.
So as we can see, Toyota did the bare minimum to make the Prius as clean as possible.
1. C&D drive test vehicles like they are all sports cars, thus the poor showing in FE. If you want more realistic FE numbers, look elsewhere.
2. The engine was probably, as some have surmised, not broken in. A diesel takes close to 20 - 25K miles to properly break in.
When I first started driving my 2005 Jeep Liberty CRD (which I purchased new), the best highway mileage I got was in the 23- 24 MPG range. FE continued to improve and by 22- 24 K miles and beyond, 30 - 31 MPG (calculated) is not uncommon at highway speeds. This is the FE I get for a 4300+ pound vehicle with the aerodynamics of a cinder block, and powered by a 2776 cc four cylinder turbodiesel making 295 lb-ft of torque.
I have to agree with others who have pointed out that C&D, or any enthusiast magazine, for that matter, is NOT a good place to look for real-world mileage numbers. To put that in Civic perspective, 1 of the major mags (not sure which, as I received C&D, R&T, MT, and more) has a long-term Civic Si that they have gotten an average of 22 mpg in. I don't believe I could even get that low in my V6 Accord unless I just let it sit in the driveway idling for a few hours.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
I have a 2000 f-250 7.3 manual transmission. it has 400,000 miles, it was very well taken care of is still a very good truck. sometimes while at a constant speed it starts bucking like a bull out the gate, its like it looses power and gets spurts of energy within seconds (back and fourth). i change my fuel filter and its good for about 20 miles then starts again. but usually at low speeds from 5-35mph.if anyone knows anything about this please help me.
I believe the reason that hybrids can drive in the HOV lanes, at least in GA, is because ANYTHING that is something other than a standard gasoline/diesel car or truck qualifies...
In Georgia, that includes motorcycles, hybrids, flex-fuel vehicles (even if you run gasoline thru it, it becomes "environmentally friendly" with flex fuel), natural gas vehicles, anything to brainwash the public...
What I can't understand is that the HOV lanes are the far left lanes, so when those drivers have to exit the freeway, they have to cross 4-5 lanes of rush hour traffic to exit, which is a job in and of itself...
They just don't get how stupid they are, and , now, finally, numerous climatologists and scientists are standing up and admitting that there is NO consensus at all about human caused global warming, and that carbon footprints are simply a way to tax us simply for $$$, with no anticipated change to the environment...
Finally, many are disputing AlGore's crap as deliberate deception and misinformation...this stuff is being taught to our schoolkids but the liberal, left wing NEA/Democrats as politically correct, when it is crap...
Be careful if you vote for Democrats...they will take your guns, raise your taxes, define middle class as the rich, and make every ethnic group a victim except the taxpayer, and give your money to those who refuse to work...for all of W's faults, that ain't one of them...
I do not own a Ford truck but have enough experience with diesel to offer up an idea.
You might have air in the fuel injection system. Was it purged properly after the fuel filter change? Also, when you fill your truck, do you shut off the engine or do you let it run? I have heard of instances where air gets pulled into the fuel system when filling a near empty tank with the engine running.
Some diesel fuel injection systems are not self purging. Also, check all of the hose connections of the fuel system to make sure they are snug. Check the condition of the hoses/lines too.
Comments
Diesel does stand up on it's own merits, it is just that the American public is too stupid appreciate the merits of diesel.
There are two things that one can do to reduce that turbo lag.
1. Use a good synthetic oil. Sounds crazy but it works.
2. Install a K&N or equivalent air filter. That helps even more. I have one in my Jeep and the difference is quite noticeable but the lag is not totally gone, there is just less of it.
http://autos.yahoo.com/articles/frankfurt_auto_show_2007/221/2008-BMW-1-Series/;- _ylc=X3oDMTFiYmVxYmxrBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEc2VjA2ZwLXB1bHNlBHNsawNwcmV2aWV3LTFzZXJpZXM- -
The 2.5l EJ257 turbo Subaru uses is much better off boost, there is some lag but it's not quite on off. Just medium, then fast.
That Benz felt slow, "off" even, then fast.
The BlueTec engines have replaced those anyway, so I'd be curious to try them out to see if they're any better.
Also, I'm sure the aftermarket offers chips for turbo-diesel applications to address those concerns.
I understand all turbos lag somewhat, but it was more pronounced in that particular Benz.
My choice was E320 vs. E class diesel, so that's what I compared on that day. The 3.2l was not a turbo and naturally felt more linear, though the diesel was ultimately both quicker and more efficient. You trade-off throttle reponse and up-front costs (though not in Europe!).
True statements, glad you agree. Also to me, the higher up front costs are so called the risk/low volume premiums (among other market realities) .
If the regulatory agencies were REALLY motivated to achieve the stated goals (YESTERDAY as opposed to 24 years hence) to cut consumption (up to 62%); all they need do is to give tax CREDIT/S. There is precedence for it as they did it for Japanese companies; such as Toyota!! Indeed on the flip side, R/E folks, in the not too distant YESTERDAY bought $100,000 (gasser) Hummers with IRS sec 179 tax write offs = $100,000 dollars!? We all see what is happening in the real estate market of late!? :lemon: :sick: I would swag "proper" DIESEL tax credits would literally start a stampede: which is the real problem. Nevertheless a lot of folks point to premiums and won't switch because of that. It is totally understandable, and probably planned on.
I had a $246 dollar premium (at invoice, as I remember) to over come and while it was a nit and absolute no brainer, it was factored in.
Up until a short while ago, you could even ride in the HOV lanes by yourself in a hybrid. The HOV lane was full of one-passenger Priuses. :sick:
I'm pretty sure you get a tax credit in the state of MD, so that's 2 if you include the federal one.
Why no such help for diesels? PZEVs? Efficient sub-compacts?
I do think it's absurd to give RX400H owners a tax credit when a Toyota Yaris gets *far* better mileage.
Because they are not *BOTH* clean & efficient.
Just one isn't enough.
Improvements to *BOTH* are needed.
JOHN
One is fine for me. I want simple efficiency. ULSD needs to handle the pollution. I will try to get as many miles out of the gallon as my share of the equation. If there was a real issue with diesel emissions CARB would be testing the 100s of 1000s big PU trucks using diesel. NO emissions tests in CA for all the diesel PU trucks. That says a lot to me. Same truck with a gas engine is tested every other year. Do they test diesels in MN for emissions?
Why bother knowing that virtually all of them would fail?
The high-sulfur of the past made testing pointless, so exceptions were granted.
JOHN
The high-sulfur of the past made testing pointless, so exceptions were granted."...
Indeed the hybrids (and upwards of 97% of the passenger vehicle fleet at use R
UG through PUG) use higher sulfur (30 ppm) RUG than less than 3% of the diesel passenger vehicle fleet using ULSD (15 ppm) . In fact RUG through PUG is 2x higher.
Indeed VW's have been designed for a long time to use 15 ppm or less ULSD fuel which was confined to being a "boutique type" with the higher pricing to match , fuel since before 2003.
But then again, you knew all that!!
But unfortunately, the system is only as clean as the automaker chooses to deliver it. That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5
JOHN
"...April 25, 2007 3:09 PM PDT
A diesel Honda that gets 62.8 miles a gallon?
Posted by Michael Kanellos "...
..."At that mileage level, the car is about as "clean" as a new Toyota Prius."...
http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9712548-7.html
The technology has existed for a while and is "off the shelf" It just needed a wider market and regulatory attitudes and environments to support the costs (of R& D and other costs) to bring it to market.
But really not a big deal, if I drive the 2003 TDI like a Prius driver, 62 mpg is achieveable. On one recent trip, I didnt even drive like a Prius driver and got 59 mpg. Frankly even I was surprised as I swagged 55 mpg.
Boy, was I wrong!!!
But unfortunately, the system is only as clean as the automaker chooses to deliver it. That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5 "...
Right! You can thank the regulations which effectively have keep out ULSD for SO LONG!!! Yes, the numbers do show RUG through PUG (30 ppm) consumers burn 2x dirtier fuel than ULSD (15 ppm). Indeed B5 to bio diesels can have as low as 0 ppm .(ZERO)
Also you would think Prius makers would get the hint also!!! Since Prius drivers have showed a willingness to overpay, they should be able to buy (aka pay more ) boutique less than 30 ppm RUG. :lemon: My guess on the cost is easily a buck more per gal.
But really, what is the big deal, as you can thank the democrats for passing the 2020 35 mpg standards which operatively enforces the defacto 22 mpg fuel standard for a min of 13 MORE years to 26 more years!!?? What is also baked in are massive increases to the per mile driven cost.
Keeping a current diesel seems the prudent thing to do; going forward at least 13 years. I'd also be interested in a real world accounting of 5/10/15/20 years and of mileage accounting of hybrid batteries and engine also. You might be anti diesel, but I am pro alternatives.
That's called misleading by omission, not including all the details necessary to know.
Carbon emissions relate directly to mileage. Smog emissions don't.
That's why there is a rating system. To be as clean, it would also have to deliver a rating of PZEV.
JOHN
What is misleading failing to acknowledge diesel is way less consumptive of most PZEV rated vehicles. Another is Upwards of 98% of the passenger vehicle fleet does not deliver a PZEV rating. A real omission is that you will not be able to verify the PZEV rating for at least 10 years from when a so called PZEV vehicle was put into service. Given the rate at which PZEV vehicles are hitting the current fleet, Independent verification of the "effects" will not be measurable let alone found statisically significant for another 20 years. The PZEV designation vehicles indeed are more fuel consumptive than diesels, so SIMPLY the longer less consumptive vehicles are kept out of the passenger vehicle fleet mix, the longer we will consume more. In addition diesel can be alternative fuels. RUG to PUG used by hybrids/PZEV are not nor can not be currently alternative.
kcram - Pickups Host
Because they are not *BOTH* clean & efficient.
I must respectfully disagree with your statement. PZEV's still pollute when they run on their gasoline engines. Neither engine is perfect.
That choice for diesel is the bottom of the scale, just barely enough to allow for sales: Bin-5 If you know of something better to handle diesel emissions, put it out here in the forum for the rest of us to look at.
On the other hand, you use the phrase barely enough and that pretty much sums up how much of the auto industry really works here and abroad when it comes to emissions. The one exception that comes to mind is Cummins whose diesel engines already meet or exceed 2010 emissions requirements now.
I must again respectfully disagree here. Both are closely related.
I even wrote to Honda Europe 2 years ago asking for a push of their diesels to the U.S. market. Apparently, they were already considering it as a diesel is coming in the Pilot and RidgeLine in 2010. Although i would love to see their Accord diesel here in the U.S. Just dont expect the high MPG like Europe due to our tight diesel emission regulations. I do agree however that diesels do need to be cleaner and now they can be at a reasonable cost. But auto manufacturers must advertise them when they are available. They cannot pull the crap VW did by not advertising them and having only one or two in stock even though they sold every one of them at list price the second they came in. I know they were not 50 state emission legal but that does not mean you dont make them available to the other states in large quantities. They always wanted to push the low mileage, moderate reliability gas engines, mainly their turbo four bangers.
The time has come for the new diesels to rise to the occasion. And thank God the car diesels of the 70's are a fading memory as a the new generation of car buyers were not exposed to that so the discrimination towards car diesels from some people of that generation will not poison the minds of the new ones to try them out when they are available.
I would disagree with your conclusions.
The VW 2003 (all stripes) for example was app 250,000 US sales and app 4% were diesels (10,000) ALL were 50 state legal./50 states= 200 average per state. As a point of discussion, my take: it was an absolute no brainer that they would have been able to sell double to triple that. (12%). The regulators did not allowed a higher %. Indeed in that year VW lost BILLIONS over all in the US market.
I dunno, a PZEV Subaru Outback is more efficient than the new Tahoe hybrid. I'm not sure, does the Tahoe qualify for any credits? It shouldn't.
When you're talking about a Prius or a HCH, that argument makes sense. But an RX400H? GS hybrid? Tahoe hybrid? Not so much, yet some of those get credits.
By giving a luxury car like the RX400H tax credits the feds are showing a clear bias for one technology.
In Europe, the Prius model is the same as what sells here in the U.S. However, there is the VW Lupo diesel that beats that same Prius in CO2 and several other emissions, is not a hybrid, and goes further on a liter of fuel than does the Prius.
If fuel prices continue to rise, then there will be a clamoring for cars similar or like the VW Lupo. Even Hyundai has a version of the Rio or Accent powered by a 1.5L diesel that is very clean and yet gets more than sixty MPG (American) on the road. In a recent edition of a diesel magazine I buy from time to time, Jaguar has a 2.7 L V-6 turbodiesel that gets 49 MPG on the road in Europe. Ford is seriously thinking about bringing that family of engines here.
To you and I that understanding is/has been a given. You will probably remember that I took/have taken and continue to hold the position that parity in emissions (diesel/gasser) was a technological no brainer, but was an "HUGE " economic consideration. My take: Launch 20-40% better(diesel) fuel mileage and make the technological changes going forward, JUST AS THEY DID FOR GASSERS OVER THE PAST 30 to 40 years. Gasser mpg improvements are/have been largely low hanging fruit so to speak. Anti diesel forces act like the current gasser emission standards existed 40 years ago!! Sorry not even close! ?
Then of course there followed the hordes of " what came first the chicken or egg" theme posts. Given the fact the passenger vehicle fleet is greater than 50% diesel fleet in Europe, a diesel easily and more cheaply I would surmise beats even the US markets heralded Prius hybrid.
Better mpg has been the "holy grail" in the European markets. All too soon that might be true in the US markets.
By John W. Miller Borken, Germany
Some excepts from Politics & Economics section of
TWSJ, (PAGE-my sic) A4, Thursday, December 27,2007
"The European Union's dream of using vegetable-based diesel fuel in cars to cut oil imports and the pollution that causes global warming is turning sour....
...As with ethanol in the U.S.though, Europe now has a glut of biodiesel....
...The industry is in trouble under pressure from soaring costs, dissappearing tax breaks, less costly imports and waning public support....
...The trend is at odds with conventional wisdom that rising oil prices make green energy more attractive.... ...
...It also means EU risks missing the goal it set in 2003 of replacing 10% of transportation fuel with nonfossil fuels by 2020....
...The 27 nation bloc, which claims to lead the world in cutting the carbon-dioxide emissions believed to cause global warming, uses nonfossil fuels for less than 2% of transportation fuel consumed....
...EU producers recently asked the EU to impose punitive tariffs on biodiesel imports from the US, citing the subsidies as unfair competition. US producers despute the claim..."
I know what this means to me, so folks might want to read the whole article to draw their own conclusions.
With all of the predictions in this forum, about spectacular mileage once the anticipated 2009 Accord Diesel arrives, it is interesting to see that Car and Driver's observed fuel economy of this particlar Civic was only 33 mpg. That's exactly the same result that they got in their testing of a US spec gasser Civic LX. They achieved 40 mpg when they tested the Civic Hybid.
They stated that their best tank of Diesel returned 36 mpg, and it ran 7.6 seconds in their 0-60 test.
What surprised me is the 0-60 test. 7.6 sec seems low for a diesel. I hope Honda does not confuse the message of the diesel offering, and that they aim for fuel efficiency, not for acceleration. They already made that mistake once with Accord hybrid, and it flopped spectacularly.
I am not surprised that an engine with less than 30K miles on it (or poorly broken in) would retrun less-than-optimal MPG numbers. It is all-too-easy for an engine that sees only magazine-writers as the driver to NEVER get a proper break-in.
The break-in on my engine was deliberate and defined... I left nothing to chance. My VW TDI did not start to return consistant 56MPG until after at least 50K miles. (With 3 passengers and AC blasting, 95F outside)
I have no doubt that my 2003 TDI would easilly travel over 850 miles on the highway between fillups. I log EVERY drop of fuel pumped into my TDI and can prove these numbers.
Again, the nature of a magazine tester is to do some quick dragstrip tests and perhaps measure MPG over a short distance. If a diesel engine was added to one of their long-term tests... they would get a more realistic average of MPG numbers.
The Diesel really shines when you;
1)Break in the engine!
2)Fill it up and drive cross-country on the highway
The 2.2CTDi Honda Civic is around 22% more economical than the 1.8 V-TEC engine models, delivering around 43mpg around town and 55.4mpg in the combined cycle fuel economy tests.
http://www.stevelarkins.freeuk.com/honda_civic_review.htm
Thus imagine how much cleaner the Prius would be if Toyota had done the following:
1. Put in a larger battery so that the Prius could go further than a few miles before the engine needs to start to keep the battery pack charged.
2. If the Prius could run at 55 or 60 MPH for about 50 miles on battery power before needing to start the engine.
3. If the Prius had come from the factory as a plug-in hybrid or with the option to be a plug-in hybrid.
Now after having done a little research either on of the first two options would add more than $10K to the price of the car, while the last option maybe a few hundred dollars.
So as we can see, Toyota did the bare minimum to make the Prius as clean as possible.
1. C&D drive test vehicles like they are all sports cars, thus the poor showing in FE. If you want more realistic FE numbers, look elsewhere.
2. The engine was probably, as some have surmised, not broken in. A diesel takes close to 20 - 25K miles to properly break in.
When I first started driving my 2005 Jeep Liberty CRD (which I purchased new), the best highway mileage I got was in the 23- 24 MPG range. FE continued to improve and by 22- 24 K miles and beyond, 30 - 31 MPG (calculated) is not uncommon at highway speeds. This is the FE I get for a 4300+ pound vehicle with the aerodynamics of a cinder block, and powered by a 2776 cc four cylinder turbodiesel making 295 lb-ft of torque.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
In Georgia, that includes motorcycles, hybrids, flex-fuel vehicles (even if you run gasoline thru it, it becomes "environmentally friendly" with flex fuel), natural gas vehicles, anything to brainwash the public...
What I can't understand is that the HOV lanes are the far left lanes, so when those drivers have to exit the freeway, they have to cross 4-5 lanes of rush hour traffic to exit, which is a job in and of itself...
They just don't get how stupid they are, and , now, finally, numerous climatologists and scientists are standing up and admitting that there is NO consensus at all about human caused global warming, and that carbon footprints are simply a way to tax us simply for $$$, with no anticipated change to the environment...
Finally, many are disputing AlGore's crap as deliberate deception and misinformation...this stuff is being taught to our schoolkids but the liberal, left wing NEA/Democrats as politically correct, when it is crap...
Be careful if you vote for Democrats...they will take your guns, raise your taxes, define middle class as the rich, and make every ethnic group a victim except the taxpayer, and give your money to those who refuse to work...for all of W's faults, that ain't one of them...
End of rant...
You might have air in the fuel injection system. Was it purged properly after the fuel filter change? Also, when you fill your truck, do you shut off the engine or do you let it run? I have heard of instances where air gets pulled into the fuel system when filling a near empty tank with the engine running.
Some diesel fuel injection systems are not self purging. Also, check all of the hose connections of the fuel system to make sure they are snug. Check the condition of the hoses/lines too.