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
Dewey, this may not be the case afterall... the latest information I read was that sulphur is corrosive and the old fuel will destroy the emissions equipment and ruin the newer engines, but the newer cleaner, less-corrosive diesel fuel won't necessarily hurt the older engines.
I think there is a lot of rumor out there, and some of it has to do with the trucking industry and those big commercial diesel rigs. I wouldn't jump to any conclusions yet on this. I think the true verdict is not in yet.
What has Mercedes said on this?
TM
What has MB have to say? I haven't been to a MB dealer in ages since I get my car serviced by an independent (one scheduled service at a MB dealer would cost more than its resale value).
Anyways it is worth giving MB a call to find out.
I believe the potential problem with the new diesel was that the rubberized connectors (and synthetic rubberized) would be eaten away with the fuel....There is also some talk about marine diesel engines, and a few people I know have been warned against the bio diesel.....Like you say , alot of talk....Tony
Um... I wasn't aware that an '83 diesel was necessarily known for being "green". Improved mileage aside, I have to assume that the emissions coming out of the back of that thing are shall we say "not good".
Ford Europe is on a roll, made all the more extraordinary by the problems of its parent. Last year the company's North American automotive business lost $3.5 billion, and sales of its “domestic brands” fell by 12.7%, allowing Toyota to claim second place in the market for the first time. By contrast, Ford Europe made a record number of vehicles, increased sales by 5.4% and claimed a larger share of a market in which it has to compete head-on with Germany's premium brands.
Ford almost lost the art of making good passenger cars in its home market because of its shortsighted concentration on pick-ups and sport-utility vehicles, but in Europe it has steadily built a reputation for product excellence. With the addition of the new Fiesta, its range of cars can fairly claim to be the best, or a match for the best, in every segment of the market in which they compete.
It is an achievement that has its origins in the early 1990s, when the company's European management realised that building cars that were reliable and good value for money was no longer enough. Under the leadership of Richard Parry-Jones, a legendary development engineer who retired last year, Ford set out to improve the dynamics—the combination of ride, handling, steering and so on—of every car it made. This started with the first Mondeo, launched in 1993, and reached its apotheosis five years later with the Focus. Its pricey independent rear-suspension set-up meant it far outclassed its rivals.
It is now taken for granted that Ford Europe's products will have fine dynamics. But in the past couple of years the cars have begun to look the part, with higher-quality interiors and more radical exterior styling than the staid look for which Ford had been known. The man responsible is Martin Smith, the head of design, who was hired in 2004 with a brief from Lewis Booth, the chairman of Ford Europe, to create “drop-dead gorgeous cars”.
Previous attempts to build “world cars” that could be sold everywhere have foundered, in part, on the belief that their styling had to be bland and inoffensive in order to be acceptable to different cultures. Until the new Fiesta, Ford did not know whether Mr Smith's “kinetic” design language would be understood and liked outside Europe. It need not have worried. Thanks to the globalisation of fashion and design, the iPod generation (“design progressives”, Mr Smith calls them) clicked with the Fiesta wherever it was shown.
The Economist
TM
And I agree with you about how they should've compared the normal Cayenne S to the X5 instead of the GTS. Why would they do that? :confuse:
Anyway, 0-60 times may differ from source to source. I've seen a 6.1 sec 0-60 time for the X5 4.8i.
Wait for the X5 sport model to come out (4.0TT?)... it will show the GTS who's boss! :shades:
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
Yes, my next purchase should be a lot of fun... hopefully.
I think you are right about the problem with regards to the new diesel fuel. As I understand it, the sulphur provided a little bit of lubricity to the old fuel, and with it removed, the added friction can potentially have a negative effect on some of the older rubber-type seals that are not able to withstand the added friction. Most will be fine, but some won't tolerate the change easily.
There are reports that biodiesel has more lubricity than petroleum based diesel, and there are also some conflicting reports that additives have now been put in the ULSD to increase the lubricity. Some reports claim that there are additives, while others say there are not. Chevron itself denies the use of additives, and warns of the potential for some seals to be damaged on a small percentage of older vehicles.
Beyond that, it also appears that there may be some additive products emerging that diesel vehicle owners will be able to add to the fuel when filling up the tank.
It's still too early to know for sure. But, as time goes, we will have to know more because the public will be faced with many more decisions regarding diesel vehicles and diesel fuel. Personally, I think it's all going to work out very well for the diesels, but that's just my opinion. After all, Europe is a case example of the success of diesel vehicles. If they can do it, so can we.
Take care,
TM
:surprise: You do know that the Prius is supposed to get better mileage in stop-and-go traffic, right?
Anyway, thanks for your insight. I've never driven it, though my wife was interested before. Of course, my son and I talked her out of it and now she drives a car that burns four times the gas.
That said, anyone willing to burn a little more fuel, however, should forget about the Prius and get a car that would be a LOT more fun to drive.
Agreed. BMW 335d / Audi A4 3.0TDI for me, thanks.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
That's funny because I am trying to talk my mom INTO getting a Prius...
:P
What a beautiful exhaust note. There's nothing like an inline six--not even a V8 can match a loud Porsche or BMW six in terms of aural pleasure, IMO.
I could pay $52K for an ideal 335xi sedan that has 380hp (thanks to Vishnu), or I could get a more aggressive kit, which would be even hotter.
Why not? I'm even starting to really love the looks of the E90. And I could whip my brother's Carrera S. :P
Ah, I still have a while until I actually drive it, but it's fun to think about.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
"City Driving" and "Stop-and Go" may not mean exactly the same thing... I don't know exactly how the EPA creates a city scenario. I am ocnvinced, however, that what the EPA refers to as "City" driving is not the same as being stuck in traffic on a Southern California freeway!!!
My son and I watched the fuel consumption indicator numerous times. In the lighter traffic, it registered better, and sometimes incredible readings, as high as 99.9 mpg, meaning that the car was not using any gas at times... but in heavily-congested traffic, it was registering numbers all over the place, and burning up the gas in the process. We could see it on the readout.
Agreed. BMW 335d / Audi A4 3.0TDI for me, thanks.
In the end, you and I agree that the fuel economy of a Prius is nice, but just isn't worth the horrible sacrifice of enjoying the driving experience... for those that appreciate the driving experience. For those that don't care about the driving experience, the Prius makes total sense in almost every other way.
TM
Also, if that's the case I'll get to drive it next time I go back home and I always like to have the opportunity of driving different kind of cars, whether it's a gas guzzling V8 or the funky Prius.
You won't fool me for a second... We both know darned well that you would LOVE to have a Carrera S. That darned brother of yours beat you to it, and that's a whole different problem.
I can tell you plain as day, that the latest 997 is the best 911 ever built. There is nothing like it. Sure, some cars are a little faster, but brother, the Carrera S delivers a driving sensation that is fantastic. It's just that good.
So trust me here... and quit competing with your brother, and get yourself that Carrera S... I guarantee you would NEVER regret it. If you don't believe me, maybe you'll believe your brother. :shades:
TM
I sure hope so.
I drove some1s land cruiser today 2007 it was like new i felt it was very big after driving what can i say japanese is the king or reliability but i am beginning to think bmw does have reliability issues and electronic software problems complicated systems but is the bmw a true drivers car i am beginning to think its the best drivers car.
link title
TM
I'd say if you're planning on boosting the 335, you should get the RWD version. The "sport" package for the xi is basically fake, its just wheels and seats. It doesn't get any actual upgrades like the RWD version.
Interesting. I'm surprised that the Nismo Z is able to really go toe-to-toe with the M3 even though it doesn't have near as much power.
I guess it will be hard appreciating the driving experience of this car below. BMW is toying with the idea of having a microcar in India and the disaster below is a rendering of such a car.
link title
Totally not true, of course... the article states that of all the BMW vehicles sold in India last year, 80% were locally made 3- and 5-series models...
No leather interiors in India, of course... as the cowhide is still walking around town.
But, there's always this upcoming 1/2-Series convertible: the 1/2 28i... And, of course, I can't wait for the M 1/2.
:P
TM
That yellow micro BMW is just a rebadged Tata Nano.
link title
link title
Is BMW going green? A new report on the German automaker appears to be pointing in that direction, indicating that the United States may be receiving an all-electric Bimmer by 2012. It's unclear exactly what sort of size (or price) this new BMW will be, so we can't say for certain whether it'll be a sporty number like the Tesla Roadsterk, a generic-looking sedan, or hopped-up crossover.
BMW also has not said whether this all-electric vehicle will even be manufactured on their own. They are considering the possibility of having the work outsourced to a major US automaker. This isn't the first time that BMW has partnered with a domestic automaker.
Norbert Reithofer, BMW CEO,k says that they will likely "make a battery-powered ecologically compatible car for the U.S. market" with a target launch date of 2012. Nissan also has an all-electric in development for the same time period.
link title
Yes, the M3 is great, but... That's a huge difference! I really think the 135i is a rare bargain and the glorious M3 just makes it even more obvious!
TM
This is an example of when they finally tell you all that was wrong with the current model. I am not singling Audi out here, these reviewers do this with virtually all cars.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Oh, how true.
I remember at one time my wife was driving an E-430 sport. The next model year the E-Class was re-styled with more curves, and one reviewer said that by comparison to the new E-Class, the prior E-Class (my wife's) looked like the crate that the new one came in. (Ouch!... LOL.) Just the year before, they were saying how attractive the prior one was. :surprise:
Oh, well... progress is good.
TM
Only one problem with it: "The reward is a 0-100 km/h acceleration time of less than 6.5 seconds. That is close to par with BMW's 330i (6.1 seconds)."
The BMW 330i doesn't exist anymore, and 0-60 in 6.5 seconds isn't even in the same ballpark as the 335i. What is the point of Audi's V6? The TT-S shows that the 2.0T can be easily boosted to the same 265hp, and it also produces a lot more torque than the 3.2. The 2.7T also had 265hp and 280ft.lbs of torque from 1800rpm back in 2004.
LoL! That always makes you feel good!!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I agree with what you are saying, but when a new car is a significant improvement over the old one, as the A4 is, you would expect the reviewer to point that out. It's the same with any type of product improvement. The HDTVs that were being raved about 3 years ago can't hope to compete with the latest 2008 models.
Reviewers also still seem capable of pointing out when a car is not necessarily an improvement over its predecessor, as with the Subaru WRX.
True, and that apparently also applies to the latest digital cameras, from all those posts recently. It should be fun trying to buy one in the near future. :confuse:
TM
That is only a problem if speed is your main concern.
Audi has never really been about raw speed and power. They are more about good looks, comfort, and refinement. That appeals to a lot of people, me included.
The speed and HP war has gotten way out of hand, IMO. Just how much power do you need anyway? The HP escalation is a loser's game. No matter how big they make an engine, someone will make a bigger one with more hp. It has gotten to the point of being ridiculous.
As Al Gore said, "They are playing on our fears". The fear that someone else will have a faster car! I wonder what Freud would say about that!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
LX. I felt the interior was a lot similar to the new cruiser but surely there are more gadgets more smoothness should be a lot better handling more comfy etc etc but i think they should have done better than that, Its still very much a cruiser but in a better luxurious way i guess.
The strange thing i felt was same head room as the x5 well at least thats how i felt.
RX.
I i think its a nice car after all simple comfy and not as huge as the LX which is quite BIG. I guess thats why ladies love this car
Absolutely! And that backs my reasoning as to why the 2.0T in standard form(200hp) is sooo good. It runs with many of the competitors V-6's. While the IS350, G35/37, and 335i are stormers for sure, it holds it's own.
But to Audi's defense, this 3.2L V-6 is only a stop-gap for the initial rollout of the A4 and A5. Just as Lexus went from the GS300 to the GS350 w/ the same body style, and as MB is about ready to do with the E and C-Class, Audi is about to do the same. There is reportedly a 305hp version of the 3.2FSI that will be installed into the new models.
But just as Houdini said, Audi hasn't really been known for outright speed, at least in the pedestrian models. But of course, there is always Lemans when all else fails..... :P
I hope that's true because I'll be interested in a 300hp+ A4 that can do 0-60 in less than 5.5 seconds.
TM
Absolutely. P&S cameras have been rather stagnant for a couple of years, they keep either shoving in more megapixels without increasing the sensor size or making the optical zoom range even bigger (Olympus has a 20X zoom now), while picture quality stays the same or gets worse. On the SLR side though the cameras are improving by leaps and bounds. The $800 Canon Rebel XSi or Eos 450D depending on where you are in the world can beat up the multi-thousand dollar pro SLRs from just a few years ago.
Any idea what happened to the rumored 3.0T? I'm also curious as to what Audi's engine plans are for the A6, which apparently is due for a refresh soon.
If you don't mind, I'll ask you at that time what you recommend.
TM
The only problem is the fact that he's my younger brother. Older brothers don't copy their younger brothers, ever.
I'll keep you posted.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
Also, what difference does it make? I'll still get the same results with these kits either way, unless you know something that I don't...
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
It would make sense to compare the 135i to the 335i... but M3? No way. The M3 is a clear step above in every sense of the word. It's larger. It's more practical. It's faster. It's more luxurious. IMO, it's better-looking. To some, it has better handling.
The fact that a 1 Series can cross the $50,000 barrier is mind-boggling and actually makes the 3 Series look good. It goes both ways. My Audi A6--which was very well-equipped--didn't cost that much.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
You have to remember that 0-100 and 0-60 are actually a bit different. Not only is the 6.5 sec time Audi's underestimate, but you can expect a 5.7-6.0 time for 0-60 in real life, and a 6.0-6.2 for 0-100.
No, still not up to par with the other six-cylinder sedans, but 5.7 has a nice ring to it.
What is the point of Audi's V6? The TT-S shows that the 2.0T can be easily boosted to the same 265hp, and it also produces a lot more torque than the 3.2. The 2.7T also had 265hp and 280ft.lbs of torque from 1800rpm back in 2004.
I have brought this up several times... I completely agree.
I'm thinking, what would be fabulous is if the V6 was dumped, leaving the 2.0T (~220hp), the 3.0TDI, the S4 and the RS4. That would be perfection.
'08 BMW X5 4.8i • '06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet
The only problem is the fact that he's my younger brother. Older brothers don't copy their younger brothers, ever.
I have a younger brother who has owned BMWs for years. Could that be the reason I've never owned a BMW! :confuse: ... LOL. This 135iCab will be my very first Bimmer.
Bottom line... get what you want! If you must, think of this this way... you're not copying your brother.... your copying ME!! Now you're in the clear.
TM
Not at all. Send me an email when you're ready to buy.
Ah, I didn't realize it was going to be a winter car. I just thought you were considering boosting a 335i instead of an M3.
I really agree with you that there's a bit of an apples to oranges situation if they are directly compared, but the M3 itself really makes the 135i look like a steal. Remember, the M3 is still a 3-Series, not a 5-Series, so while it's reasonable to a point to compare the 135i to the 335i, it's only natural to take it a step further and see how it stacks up against the M3. Also, the 135i has a lot of 3-Series in its DNA as well. I find it interesting that the M3 and the 135i are both derived from the 3-Series to an extent.
Those three vehicles make an interesting trio and the 1er really shines next to the M3 when you consider that it is about $40K less expensive and yet performs so well. If the 0-60 were seconds apart, it would be ridiculous to contrast them, but when they are only a half of a second apart, and the greater fun-factor has been reported to be with the 1er, then I'm OK with sticking the three of them together and seeing how they stack up.
So... I'd have to say I see and understand your point, but I kind of disagree also, as I see no harm in contrasting all three of those cars.
I found circlew's chart, for example, which showed the C&D test results for all three cars to be very interesting and illuminating.
TM