By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
'Well, I may offend some folks here, but I've been on record for a long time that I actually do not think a whole lot of most Bose products, and yes, I do think they are way overhyped. There are many better choices, IMO. Sorry to those that like Bose.
TagMan
I'm not so sure. I don't think Lexus or Mercedes will be losing much sleep, but I think Hyundai has moved up in the world and is considered on par with or at least close to Honda and Toyota in terms of brand level. Kia though still has a ways to go. What's worse, a reputation for making (formerly) cheap and cheerful cars, or a reputation as a rental fleet queen with Fisher Price interior quality and uncompetitive engines? Chrysler's V6s, which represent the majority of 300s sold, can't hold a candle to the ones Hyundai will be using in the Genesis.
While I am no fan of Bose Lifestyle stuff, or their headphones, I will admit that they have occasionally put together some pretty decent car stereos. The problem is that Bose has so many partnerships with so many different automakers that you can't really say that Bose car audio is good or bad. Their mainstream car efforts are also most likely handicapped because they must design to a price point. I think Bose's best work has been at Infiniti. The systems in the G and M are very good.
I like the B8 interior quite a bit. It's better than the BMW 3 series, and much better than the C-class. I thought the B7 actually was a bit of a step-back in quality, and it didn't really go anywhere in terms of a styling update. It was almost exactly the same as the B6 interior.
May be the high number of street cars one can see in Italy makes the difference.
1-series...
I must drive to French Alps and back (1,500 miles) at the beginning of February. I have booked a 1-Series (in order to rent it as I do not know the future of my crashed car). I am putting pressure to have a Coupé instead of a Hatched. It will be a diesel one in any case—I hope—since the fuel in France is even more expansive than in Spain. I will post my comments.
Regards,
Jose
TagMan
Per liter,
(1) premium gas (98 NO, unleaded) 1.234 € ≈ 1.8188 US$
(2) regular gas (95 NO, unleaded) 1.121 € ≈ 1.6521
(3) premium diesel (low sulfur) 1.130 € ≈ 1.6655 US$
(4) biodiesel 1.099 € ≈ 1.6196 US$
(5) regular diesel (low sulfur) 1.089 ≈ 1.6049 US$
Per gallon,
(1) US$ 6.89
(2) US$ 6.25
(3) US$ 6.30
(4) US$ 6.13
(5) US$ 6.08
I used to fuel my 530d just with #5, as recommended by my dealer.
Regards,
Jose
You may as well wish to have a look into
gasoline
http://goeurope.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=goeurope&cdn=travel- - - &tm=9&f=00&su=p531.31.150.ip_p531.29.420.ip_p284.8.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=0&zu=ht- - - tp%3A//www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/prices.html%23Motor
road diesel
http://goeurope.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=goeurope&cdn=travel- - - &tm=9&f=00&su=p531.31.150.ip_p531.29.420.ip_p284.8.150.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=0&zu=ht- - - tp%3A//www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/prices.html%23Diesel
in Europe. Prices are given in US$ per gallon.
Watch your wallet if you come here to a driving holiday :sick:
Regards,
Jose
Thanks for the conversion! I'd never have figured it out.
TagMan
Surprising is an understatement. I think it's shocking.
What took you sooo long?
Better late than never.
The regular Bose systems like those found on Mazda I would say it's about in the same level as the JBL system.
I find driving through such a European route enjoyable no matter what car I am in. I always found fuel prices ridiculous in Europe and whenever I rent cars in Europe I usually rent sub-compacts and avoid minivans or big cars like a plague.
In the short term there would be a lot of hardship if those prices existed in North America. But in the long term we would be much more conservationist and less fuel dependent and paradoxically much better off than we are today.
http://goeurope.about.com/od/transportation/a/gas_prices.htm
What is the difference between the two grades of diesel?
Premium diesel is sort of an invention to collect more money from up-nose users—given that regular diesel is usually the cheapest fuel choice. Sort of "How can I buy 'that' oil to fuel my high-end Jag, Audi, BMW, MB, etc? Premium diesel is offered by saying it easies the injection process and has more energy, thereby giving more mileage.
Nonsense. I have tried both and found no difference. Regular diesel is all you need in your more sophisticated, luxury bi-turbo engines. BMW recommends regular diesel as a rule of thumb.
Biodiesel is still of not much use. Though more and more gas stations offer it now, it is still not standardized through Europe. Thus, you cannot be confident on its quality from station to station. Bad Biodiesel can ruin your engine. Regarding mileage, it is of no advantage either, or is just disadvantageous. May be in the future it will be the choice, but currently BMW, for instance, strongly advises not to use it in their engines.
I now see the potential for future fuel prices in the USA
Yeah
Regards,
Jose
If a person is on a strict diet and does not want to eat all those chocolates that are hidden in his cupboards and coat pockets then this kind of surplus could be of good use.
LONDON, UK, November 26, 2007 (ENS) - Biodiesel made from waste chocolate is fueling the journey of two British men who left the town of Poole, on England's southern coast Friday headed for Timbuktu, Mali in West Africa. They are using the trip to raise public awareness about biofuels and their potential to ease the impact of climate change.
link title
True. Just like heavily subsidized ethanol from corn may cause significantly higher food prices and at the same time higher starvation in poor countries ,"palm oil " has its own problems too.
Massive amounts of land converted from other essential crops in order to grow cocoa beans for fuel would not help the situation too.
But that doesn't mean Joe's gas is the same as what you'll find coming out of the pump at Chevron, BP, Amoco or other brands.
At the fuel depot, where gasoline from the refiner is dispensed, a lot of brands mix in their own formula of additives that they say goes beyond what the federal government requires.
Some manufacturers say that today's high-tech engines require higher-standard gasoline than the EPA benchmark. Audi, BMW, General Motors, Honda, Toyota and Volkswagen have worked with major gasoline companies to set a standard for what is known as Top Tier Detergent Gasoline.
Gas companies that meet these standards include QuikTrip, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, MFA Oil Company, Kwik Trip/Kwik Star, The Somerset Refinery Inc., Aloha Petroleum, Tri-Par Oil Co., Texaco, Petro-Canada and Sunoco-Canada.
I guess I'll be sticking to my Chevron/Shell routine...
Source: Will bargain gas harm your car?
Yes, I agree with you both that fuel expensive prices have pushed all car brands but a few to develop very good diesel engines—not willing to wait for future alternatives—in order to be offered in the European markets. This may also be the reason for the emergent appraisal of the middle-size cars even in America, the land of big cars (ask a European of my age about American Cars of the last Century :surprise: ).
Also, although I appreciate the performance of the most powerful gas engines as much as anyone, do you remember my time-ago posts saying "Do we want to reach the moon with our daily-use cars?
On the other hand, I may see Biodiesel made of wastes as an alternative for the future. I believe Biodiesel made of crops or any kind of vegetables is just as bad as adding gas to the fire.
Regards,
Jose
Right, they do. Price of oil barrel and refined fuel are quite similar everywhere. It has been estimated that taxes account for 70% of the fuel price at the pumps in Europe. Inter-national variations depend on national taxing policies. Thus, diesel is, or it has been, cheaper than gas in most European countries because their governments are or have been interested in promoting diesel as universal fuel because of better mileage.
Regards,
Jose
Yes, governments wring their hands and bemoan the high cost of gas/diesel while sticking it to everyone.
In general diesel costs more than gas in the U.S. Makes no sense unless gov is in bed with oil companies.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Dewey, great news! Start tracking how many gallons of gas you buy and then send $2.00 to me for each gallon you buy. This will surely start me on a downward spiral while uplifting you and making you much better off!
As a bonus I am willing to include heating oil as well!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Er.. ML and Lexicon are owned by Harman (as well as JBL and Infinity), but the stuff H/K makes themselves isn't even close to the top names you mentioned. The only car company I can think of that uses H/K branded systems is BMW, and I've never been particularly impressed by a BMW stereo.
I think besides BMW, MB also uses the Harman's LOGIC7 Digital Surround Sound System on its CL-class.
Well, as I understand it, ULSD is expensive to make, and many European countries subsidize it in order to make it cheaper than gasoline and thus push people in to more diesel cars. The US doesn't subsidize diesel at all.
Regards,
Jose
My point exactly!!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
The Europeans are also dependant but at a lower level of dependance than ours.
Even after the tax is taken into consideration the oil companies are still making 10's of Billions each year in profits. I read somewhere that the actual cost of extracting a barrel of oil from the ground in the middle east is around $.40. Oil from the North sea is around $13. Quite a profit margin.
I am all for free markets and if you invest wisely you can profit from the outrageous price of gasoline but IMO the price of oil and gasoline is very much manipulated and is much higher than it needs to be.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Sure oil companies are big and therefore make a lot of dollars but they are also at their highest ever % of sales profitability. That means that they are making more profit off every dollar bill they receive.
I would certainly count 2 appearances in Congress in the last year as a pretty clear signal that it is not just the conspiracy theorists who think there is a little more to the oil business than increased costs of business.
The question is to what extent has that profitability changed through the last year of surging gas prices?
If Exxon Mobil has seen their profitability go up at the same time as surging energy prices have slowed the general economy, I would think that we are certainly owed an explanation. Particularly since oil exploration/ extraction/ refining/ shipping is not a business that allows for much competition.
TagMan
To get back (slightly) on an earlier discussion, I checked with my brother, a refinery managment engineer for a major, and he had this to say regarding the earlier diesel/gasoline discussion:
The current U.S. refining industry has only limited capability to generate more diesel versus gasoline in the short term. In fact, I personally believe the diesel market in the U.S. will not take off like it did in Europe for three reasons:
1) Europe's rapid dieselization was heavily subsidized by preferential tax policies vs. gasoline. This type of aggressive social engineering is not as likely to occur in the U.S.
2) Diesel engines are significantly more expensive to produce than comparible gasoline engines and do not have a broad history of usage in passenger vehicles in the U.S. like in Europe.
3) Most importantly, the Europe's dieselization was essentially "costless" in terms of refining capital expenditures, as European refiners simply cranked up their excess refining capacity to make more diesel and gasoline, selling the excess gasoline to the U.S. In fact, the U.S. imports roughly 1 Million Barrels of gasoline and gasoline components from Europe every day!
In other words, Europe's dieselization was done on the back of the U.S.'s continued consumption of (relatively cheap) gasoline. If the U.S. were to "dieselize" in any significant manner, it would require 10's of Billions of Dollars in refining capital expenditures for process units such as Hydrocrackers to shift the product mix from 2/3 gasoline ~ 1/3 diesel to half & half gasoline and diesel.
SO DO I... you have no idea. I would take it with the turbo four if I had to.
Well, maybe not. But I do love the thing. I just can't swallow spending that amount of money on a car any time soon. My wife and I spend, spend, spend, and now it's time to save, save, save. Of course, that won't restrict me too much... I just want a car that's under $100K. Not right now, either. I've decided to keep the S4 until early next year ('09), when it will be four years old. It's not as if I really need a winter car; the only reason I bought the A3 is because I knew it would be the perfect car for my younger son, who is fast approaching 16.
Of note: my brother bought a 2008 C2S coupe last week, in dark blue. Yes, I'm jealous. I already wrote that somewhere; not sure if it was this blog or another one. But now I'm thinking I can't get a Porsche any more, because he's my younger brother, and older brothers don't follow younger brothers. Maybe a used 997 Turbo will do the trick? LOL, no, that kind of speed is unnecessary.
The V12 mighty feel heavy as you suggest, or on the other hand perhaps its mid-ship location might become a positive handling attribute in spite of its hefty nature... I suggest waiting to see what the V12-equipped beast can do and what it drives like before you declare it as a mistake.
Agreed. Because of the R8's favorable layout, it could go either way.
Somehow I doubt they would announce that they are putting the V12 diesel in the R8 engine bay if it didn't deliver awesome performance characteristics. It could very well be a real screaming monster!!
Also true.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
So it will effect the ride and comfort very much? so the best ride comfort handling combined is the standard 18in? or the 19?
the ability to handle foul weather, tread life, wheel rim life, front suspension component life, wheel bearing life, etc
and lots of $$$$$$$ for replacing?
The general rule goes that if you "+1" the standard wheel size of a car (go one inch larger), you can improve the handling with minimal compromises. Too much more than that and you open the door for a lot of problems.
However diesel use is largely commercial & the demand will continue at about the same rate regardless of price -- the trucks, trains & ships that burn diesel (which is a huge percentage of total diesel use -- I'd venture to say 90-95% or more) keep right on running in the face of increasing price, with a corresponding price increase in everything that is hauled or floated.
I still pine for the days of 40 cent a gallon diesel purchased in La Grange (TX) in 1978. Two years later it was over a dollar, and diesel prices went up much quicker than gas did.
It is this dissimilarity in price curves and the similarity that fuel price has from a brand to another what induces me to think that fuel market is not really a free market, apart from the consequences produced by the government taxing policies.
Regards,
Jose
Could be due, at least in part, to the low-sulphur situation also, which kicked in over here about a year and a half ago. However, in the years prior to low-sulphur, diesel started out much less expensive than gasoline & gradually caught up & (in some markets) went well beyond.
Oh well, time will tell.
I'm looking forward to hearing your impressions of the rented 1 series.
That is a wildly overblown misconception. Naturally aspirated engines are great, for sure. I have two. They're smoother than turbos and have torque all over the place. I believe that turbocharged engines are superior, though. They offer better fuel economy than n/a engines which have more displacement and the same power. They may have lag, but it's been reduced drastically in the last five years alone. They are not "bad" for the engine; or, they are no worse than natural aspiration. I think they will be useful for fuel efficiency improvements in the future.
Consider this: the Audi TT 3.2 quattro has 250hp, and it's naturally aspirated. It will get 25MPG on the highway... on a GOOD day. In the city it will struggle to get anything better than 17-19. However, the new Audi TT-S, released at the 2008 Detroit show, has the 2.0T engine with 272hp. It doesn't sound like a huge improvement until you consider that it will get 25MPG combined, it gets from 0-100km/h in 5.2 sec, which is 0.7 sec quicker than the 3.2 (and that's Audi's claim! Audi underestimates!), it weighs much less and it will presumably have much better handling.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
Instead of the Allroad being based on an A6 the new one will likely to be based on a A4. As I had said yesterday a far larger A4 makes the A6 somewhat redundant and I think Audi is smart to bring out a Allroad version of a A4. In fact an A4 Allroad would make a Q5 quite redundant in my opinion. I cant imagine wanting a Q5 over a A4 Allroad.
I will seriously consider getting a TDI 3.0 Allroad A4 with hopefully a DSG transmission. My wife is starting to complain about using her clutch in her BMW Touring while in Toronto traffic
Twin turbos are definitely the enginse of the future. More powerful, lighter and more fuel efficient. BMW will extend their twin turbos to other models while other marques will expand twin turbo offerings.
I am incredibly satisfied with the twin turbo in my BMW335i.
But there is one thing the car people won't be charged up about: batteries. For all the hoopla, nobody yet has figured out how to make a small enough battery that will hold a big enough charge for these new cars -- and not be a risk to burst into flames.
The limits of electric-car technology are achingly clear in one of the most-heralded cars on the drawing board: GM's Chevy Volt. GM executives mention the prototype, which the Detroit auto maker aims to put into production in three years, nearly every time they discuss their vision for "gas free" cars. But GM still hasn't solved the battery problem.
Toyota had planned to use lithium-ion batteries in a new version of the Prius that would get 60 to 80 miles per gallon, according to Toyota engineers. But the safety problems prompted Toyota to push back the planned launch of the lithium-ion technology from later this year to late 2010 or early 2011
A handful of companies are racing to come up with a battery suitable for this next generation of electric cars. The competition pits big Asian battery makers against a gaggle of small start-ups, most of them based in the U.S. Each is trying to come up with a viable power source for long-range electric cars and for gasoline-electric hybrids such as the Volt, which rely far more on electricity than do hybrids currently on the market.
But the most promising technology, lithium-ion batteries like the ones used in laptop computers and cellphones, has been plagued by problems. Earlier this week, for example, the battery in a laptop made by a South Korean firm burst into flames. U.S. transportation authorities recently said air travelers will no longer be allowed to pack loose lithium-ion batteries in checked luggage.
Car makers can't very well sell vehicles that might "ignite and burn up grandma and two kids sitting on half a ton of batteries in the car," says Tim Spitler, a battery-material researcher at Altair Nanotechnologies, which is working to develop a car battery.
Wall Street Journal
The battery research being conducted by a few brilliant companies will ultimately provide a nano-battery that will accomplish the necessary prerequisites for automotive applications. It is only a matter of time. The reward to the company that nails it first will be astronomical.
My bet has been with A123, and I still think they will be the ones to get it right. We'll see.
TagMan