I guess that VAG and Merc are small-volume players in the USA because they choose to headline with the perception of up-market cars, at premium prices and corresponding profits. BMW ditto ? I have no figures to justify this statement, just a SWAG. However all the "majors" listed do have good small diesels on the mass market here in Europe. As for Ford not doing diesels, (even not, apparently, believing in them ?), that just looks like "We'd like to but we're all out of cash". They do have some good diesels in their European portfolio. Volvo fits some cracking oil-burners and the new(ish) Volvo C30, (think Audi A3 with a sexier rear end), gets the D5 - 5cyl/2.4ltr at around 178bhp. In addition to the majors, even the Koreans; Hyundai, Proton, Kia all have diesel offerings.
They're all out there and will surely get to you but you need national ULSD etc availability and a less blinkered approach by the regulators. Sorry, I'm singing my old song again. Put it down to old age and high taxation.
My thanks to houdini1 for the compliments. Made my day.
Completely off-topic : the UK Government has recently announced proposals to bring in road-charging. Every vehicle will have a GPS device fitted and cars will pay GBP1.43, (that's around USD2.7), PER MILE for every mile driven, plus automatic tracking and automatic speeding fines, (feasible but not proposed - yet). Numbers may be a little out but you get the idea. UK motoring public is not happy. The sound you can hear is probaly blood boiling. Apologies for interrupting a fine forum with this but I thought it might help you appreciate what you have.
Completely off-topic : the UK Government has recently announced proposals to bring in road-charging. Every vehicle will have a GPS device fitted and cars will pay GBP1.43, (that's around USD2.7), PER MILE for every mile driven, plus automatic tracking and automatic speeding fines, (feasible but not proposed - yet). Numbers may be a little out but you get the idea. UK motoring public is not happy. The sound you can hear is probaly blood boiling. Apologies for interrupting a fine forum with this but I thought it might help you appreciate what you have.
That's a HUGE amount of taxes for driving. Is that GBPound or GBPence? What does the typical UK motorist drive in a year? 10,000 mi? 15,000 mi? At 1.43 GB Pounds per mi @ 10000 that's half the price of a vehicle just for one years driving. That's nuts. Or one way to kill an entire manufacturing industry.
I'd hope that last proposal would launch a massive round of assasinations and hangings/beheadings, should it come to fruition. Even diesels can't overcome that kind of handicap, even if that is pence and not pounds (could it really be pounds?).
I am amazed the British public has put up with speed cameras for so long....the revenuers must have a nice propaganda campaign.
houdini, isn't it sort of wacky and nonmagical to compare lowest gasoline price with highest diesel price? personally i compare "super" which is 2.49 locally with diesel which is also 2.49. 87 octane is 2.29. that's a pretty small delta either way, 0% or 9%... i expect the delta will increase if/when winter actually happens here - and next summer maybe we'll see diesel costing less than 87 octane. it has happened before during summers...
I was listening to NPR a few weeks ago and they had stories on both Paris and London. Both cities are trying to tax the car out of existence. In paris especially the entire city's transportation network is being redesigned to make owning a car in Paris impossible. The mayor of Paris has even said publicly that his ultimate goal is to eliminate the car from the city limits.
Don't point fingers elsewhere - Oregon is proposing exactly the same thing to replace its per-gallon gas tax. Bad idea - Hummer pays the same as a diesel Jetta. Where's the logic?
Yes, GBP is GB Pounds, hence I added circa US Dollars2.7. It's not enacted yet but is being flagged as being done for "Environmemtal" reasons. No, the Legislators do not have a great marketing tool - they just refuse to listen to the population and claim everything is for "Environmental" reasons. Dare to question the Enviro mis-information and you may as well enlist for a well-known organisation headed by "America's Most Wanted"; the Green guys put you in the same box.
Speed Cameras ? We don't have any of those. We have "Safety Cameras". Same end results but they will become redundant if the Road Pricing proposal becomes reality, because the GPS Black Box will automatically log your location and speed, compare that to the limit of the road you're on and ......guess what ? Yeah, issue an automatic speeding fine. Of course, this is being denied at present. Even now, each speeding offence carries a minimum of GBP60 fine and 3 Penalty Points. Collect 12 points in any rolling 4 year period and goodbye driving licence for about a year. Drive at 30mph+ over any posted limit = goodbye licence for just one offence, (unless you are Royalty, or a foreign Diplomat, in which case it's O.K.).
Want to drive into central London ? That will be GB Pounds8 per day, thank you very much, regardless of it being a Nissan Micra or a Hummer. Hybrids, Electrics and Motorcycles are exempt. London's Mayor, (Ken Livingstone - he HATES cars), is talking of raising the London Congestion Charge to GB Pounds25 per day for "gas guzzlers", i.e. any car with a CO2 rating in excess of 224g/km, (figure from memory but in that area). The Passat 3.2 turns out 247 CO2, the 2.0 TDi just 143. Audi A4 4.2 gasser is 324 and the 3.0TDi is 206. The US Embassy in London, (along with others), has decided that the Congestion Charge, Parking Fines and Speeding Fines are nothing to do with them 'cos they have Diplomatic Immunity. They have unpaid fines etc running into hundreds of thousands of GB Pounds. Yeah, that's the good old "Special Relationship" in action.
All UK cars pay an annual Road Tax based on - guess what - CO2 emmissions. Some local authorities are seriously considering raising residents' parking charges depending upon their car's - yep CO2 emmissions. Unless you have your own off-street parking, (fairly rare in London).
Get a Company Car, because you need one ? Well, you will pay Income Tax on the perceived benefit of that car. Level of tax is based on a number of Tax % Bands decided by - oh no - CO2 emmissions. Let's suppose you get something really naughty, that VW Passat 3.2 gasser, (it's in the top band). You will have 35% of the car value - that's Manufacturers List Price when new - added to your annual tax liability for the first 4 years of it's life and then the % drops.
Fuel Prices ? Let's try US Dollars 7 per gallon, (Imperial Gallon = 4.546 ltrs), for gas with diesel a little dearer.
Starting to see a pattern emerging here vis-a-vis the growth of the diesel car population ? Why do we stand for all this ? Apathy, pure and simple. Think it can't hapen to you ? Think your Legislators' aren't aware of all this ? Read George Orwell's classic book "Nineteen Eighty Four" and think again.............about so many things, such as friends and enemies for instance.
Sorry to go off topic, but I did come back on near the end. Have to stop now as I'm even depressing me. Time for a nice cup of tea and a lay down in a dark room.
In near future we fly to USA for a 4 week vacation, (Las Vegas/Arizona/Texas), and I've rented the biggest SUV I could find, just because I can and your gas is so cheap.
An often quoted number for fuel savings with a diesel is 30%. Honda recently announced that their new 2.4L gas engine will be 13% more efficient. That would suggest that the new Honda engine will only be 17% less efficient than a comparable diesel.
As I write this, the average price of regular in California is $2.629. Diesel is running at $2.993 or about 14% more. 17%-14% =3% Not much of an advantage. In my state, and may others, the advantage would be zero or less. For ND diesel is about 20% more than regular. If the prices hold until the Honda engine is introduced I would save 3% by buying the Honda gas engine over a comparable diesel.
The above calculations assume that there is no premiums for the engines. I suspect the new diesels may be a bit more expensive because of the new emission controls (initial cost and maintenance). The new 2007 BIG truck diesel engines are carrying $10K to 12K price premiums according to the reports I have read. Diesel demand & prices may increase as the new trucks make their way into the fleet. Reports indicate they are less fuel efficient than the older trucks.
Right now EIA is reporting that diesel costs 23 cents more a gallon to refine. This would suggest that diesel will continue to be more expensive than gasoline.
Diesel fuel costs need to come down if the prediction, by J. D. Power, of 15% diesels by 2015 is to come true.
Another wild card in this is E85. Right now it is not competitive price wise with gasoline or diesel. In the next few years the flood of ethanol plants might bring the price down enough for it to be competitive. For it to be competitive the price of oil probably needs to get back up over $70 a barrel and the ethanol subsidies will need to be extended.
I suspect the availability of ULSD is dependent on how quick the local refinery upgraded. EPA gave the companies so much time to get the job done. Some folks had planned for the change. Some probable procrastinated. All the information is available on the EPA web site. Good luck finding it, and if we don't hear from you again....well....we know where you got lost
One more comment, I read somewhere (recent Oil $ Gas Journal??) that they are still getting the gulf refineries back on line. And if memory serves me right, Maryland does get gulf gasoline/diesel. I think you are at the end of one pipeline.
I also follow the Honda real world mpg numbers thread. On that thread, to be polite, they see me as a statistical anomaly with 38-42 on a daily commute and epa of 29/38. A bigger portion of those folks get 29 mpg and BELOW. This to me means even as Honda is acknowledged to be the economy class, economic,as well as mpg leader, the real world speaks of a much more interesting variation and deviance. One guy even said he got 26 mpg. I sort of scratech my head a bit for I get 25/26 in a Z06 Corvette. :
As a comparison the TDI gets 48-52 same commute. The other anomaly is this vehicle weighs about 450#'s more. So a more valid comparison and question to ask would be would the Honda get better or worse mpg under the same conditions but with 3 EXTRA people in the car (24/7) or loaded with 450#'s extra? I know for a fact the mpg for the Honda would be 1-3 mpg less and the wear of consumable parts would be more than the double it already is vs the Jetta for the weight factor ALONE.
If you want to do a real world comparison with all the INIQUITIES in place, per mile driven the TDI is still cheaper to run the TDI vs Civic in that daily commute. .0578 TDI vs .0633. Can't do a like for like fair comparison with the Honda Civic line for there is no diesel. But if you do it with the Jetta line the difference is even more dramatic at epa of 42/49 vs 24/31. Just on EPA alone 31/49 the price per mile driven is .059/.0797 or 26%. The mpg difference is 37%. Again advantage advantage diesel. I think you can fully understand why they want to charge more for diesel both in taxation and price.
(corner store prices of 2.89/2.47)
When you factor in the fact that a much greater % of gassers use unleaded PREMIUM, than diesel, whose price is at par with #2 diesel, the cost per mile driven difference and % is even more DRAMATIC than the 26% even with the real world iniquities. One boundary or measure is how many vehicles do you know of that require unleaded Premium get 38-42 mpg LET ALONE 48-52 mpg? I have found NOT many.
The "real hidden in plain sight" issue is the more we conserve, the higher they want the per mile cost to be!!! So in that sense there is an extreme down side to fuller diesel implementation.
I am in Montgomery County MD. Nothing is cheap here. Best price I have seen for diesel is 2.399 in Germantown at the Free State near Milestone. However it is S500 fuel and I prefer not to use it.
Not sure why you are talking about the Civic. The 2.4L goes in the Accord/CRV/Element. I was referring to the Accord, which according to some of the people posting in the Accord forum, is getting about 38 on the highway. A 13% increase in MPG would let them get 40+ MPG on the highway (H).
The Jetta 2.5L gas engine you refer to appears to be a poor engine from a performance standpoint.
Jetta 2.5 150 hp 0-60 9.4 seconds - premium fuel 33 mpg H Jetta TDI 100 hp 0-60 12.2 seconds 46 mpg H Accord 2.4 166 hp 0-60 9.0 seconds - regular fuel 38 mpg H (2006 Consumer Reports Best & Worst New Cars)
The 2.5L gas motor in the Jetta requires premium fuel yet gets 16 hp less than the smaller Honda engine. The Jetta uses a performance fuel and has a 6spd trans but it is slower to 60 mph and gets 5 mpg less on the highway vs. the Accord 2.4L with a 5spd trans. Honda makes a mean engine, don't count them out.
I would agree that premium and diesel cost wise are similar. However, premium is a "performance" fuel. If you want to look at low costs you would compare regular vs. diesel.
A few posts back (582) I talked about Ford's new engine. The rumor is it will be a 3.5-liter gasoline twin-turbocharged direct-injection V-6 running on E85. At 415 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque the engine will give diesels a run for their money in the torque department. Ford is claiming it is 15% more fuel efficient than comparable gas V8s. It sounds like Ford finally started taking advantage of the high octane in ethanol.
For reference, MB is claiming 208 hp and 388 lb-ft of torque for the E320 BLUETEC diesel V6.
The next few years will be exciting as each manufacturer trots out their latest miracle engine.
I can understand your reference to the 2.4L engine. However it is truly not the Honda universe. So if the majority of folks in the "economy" model are having trouble getting what I had mentioned, the 2.4L in the model up is probably not going to fare much better (ratio wise) .
The main point as it relates to diesel is the exact form has not been delineated by Honda as of yet. We know from over seas' models, diesel is in the Civic and the "Accord" type platform. Most of us think it might be in the "Accord" platform with the (internally developed) Honda cTDI motor which promises to be a splendid performer. Indeed it is capable of 40 mpg.
I was not referring to the 2003 Jetta motors. So for sure it remains to be seen how Honda will position its diesel option or just do a diesel option in the Civic and Accord (and other ones), and the MPG's relate to each other.
The second you get on it you might need to make an E85 stop! You may wish to peruse the GM E85 offerings. That is where I get the 25% LESS mpg SWAG. So indeed if they did perform a miracle and erased the 25% hit, I would say good for them. Next frontier would be the gap between gasser and diesel, another 20-35% for a total of 45-60%!!??
Too bad they can NOT put a hole in that massive domestic sales, market share loss and dollar hemorrhaging.
I would agree, in the pantheon of superlatives. I have a gasser 385 hp motor with a 385 # ft of torque. It still amazes me after 72,000 miles that I can get 26 mpg at XXX digit speeds with the A/C on.
Now if we could mate that to a twin turbo diesel motor and get 70 mpg at 65 mph, That would be too cool for words.
I own a 2006 Accord SE 4 cyl and regularly get over 35 MPG on the highway.
My last long trip was a 400+ mile drive through the hills of TN (over Jellico mountain)... 90% highway driving, averaged 70-80 MPH, A/C on approximately 50% of the time...I got 36.5 MPG on that trip.
Keeping the speed around 70-75 on flat interstates, with minimal A/C use, will easily net 38+ MPG.
The European Honda Accord with the 2.2 i-CTDi diesel shows 140bhp & 250lb ft. With it's 6-spd manual it's rated at 39.2 mpg urban, 62.8 mpg highway and 51.4 mpg combined urban & highway. These are EU test cycles and Imperial gallons, of course. The 0-62 sprint is 9.3secs. Pretty much par for the course for diesels around 2 ltr in that size of car. Same engine also lives in the new Civic, new CR-V and, (I think), the FR-V. Still no sign of Auto/DSG/Tiptronic etc on Honda diesels though. My local dealer tells me that "There is no market demand for them". i.e., We don't have them, so they're obviously not needed. Shame.
Whygas.com is almost laughable. Most of the reasons they tout are just dead wrong and puts misleading information out there.
The only item that is true is that the engines cost less initially but they do not address long term costs. The calculator only seems to address first year costs. Keep that truck five, six, or more years and see what happens to your savings of the first year. They will go down the toilet in no time.
Fuel availability is a lie. I had a diesel car in the early eighties and never had trouble finding fuel then and now have another diesel and have no trouble finding fuel now.
As for noise, once my Jeep Liberty is warmed up you can barely hear it. Even underway it hardly makes any noise from the outside.
Ease of service. Easier than any contemporary gasser. Oil change every 12.5K, fuel filter every 25K, air filter every 25K. No sparkplugs. and associated electrical system. And as to FE, 8 - 9 MPG for the gasser. Get a Flex Fuel version and use E85 and watch FE take a 22+% hit.
Cab heat. Almost hilarious! I can boil myself out of my Jeep Liberty in single digit cold in under 3 miles.
Cost of diesel engine in my Liberty (MY 2005) was $846!
hey, o, there goes tokyo, gogogodzilla, why do you think 400ftlbs is just adequate for a 415hp engine? i think probably you are talking about pickup trucks not cars. for a car, 395 ftlbs & 400 hp is a lot more than adequate - imho it is well into the "insanely fast" department.
While I will not speak for Gogogodzilla, it would seem the context is in comparison to a 400 hp diesel. Using a very conservative power to torque ratio of a A-4 TDI of 90 hp/155 # ft a 400 hp diesel would have 689 #ft !!!!
I noticed GM added 6 to 9 thousand $ to the cost of the diesel monster truck they were using for comparison to obtain their advantage. Just another reason not to buy GM. Somehow,I don't think it will work out quite way with the new Honda diesels in our passenger cars.
I think therein lies the real reason for pooh poohing diesels in domestic CARS. I mean really!!! GM GASSER truck PROFITS are HUGE and adding 6k-9k is literally PROFIT on profit !! Some of the GM/Ford/DCB CARS you can barely give away! So offer a diesel model .....whatever and it is 6-9k MORE??? I could swag the markets' response... OH PLEEZEEEE.........
Herein lies the problem. That engine will produce that horsepower and torque with the proviso it is using E85. Put straight gasoline in the tank (premium) and you will lose lots of power and torque. Also since it has such small displacement, that generally means that torque is produced at significantly higher RPM. So off the line it may not be that great.
Even in cars, tons of low end torque and a wide torque band to boot is the ticket. Why do you think the Chrysler Hemis of some years ago were almost impossible to beat? They had that combination.
Even Daimler-Chrysler adds about 5 to 6K in cost for a diesel engine in their RAM 2500 and RAM 3500 pickup trucks. I think GM is over blowing the cost of emissions equipment and is just plain greedy.
Remember too that the Duramax diesel is not built domestically but comes from Isuzu (which GM partially owns). So they have to probably pay some kind of licensing cost to Isuzu that adds some cost to the price of the engine.
Yes, actually you can see this in the difference between c5 to c6 generation Z06 Corvettes. I think most would agree 385 to 400 hp and 385 to 400 # ft of torque is as Elias implies, in rarified company. Be that as it may Cheverolet in the C6 , for the quest for higher hp (505) and torque 470, indeed went from 350 cu in to 427 cu in. Interestingly enough it only gained 70# ft of torque in the process.
Yes GM sold it's ownership in Isuzu to Toyota late last year. However the DuraMax which GM/Isuzu developed together is still GM's. Toyota has no part of that. But what Toyota does have is access to the brainpower that Izusu has developed. It's unlikely IMO that GM in selling it's share would allow Isuzu to partner with Toyota to develop a competing diesel system for HD pickups but Toyosuzu might partner to develop a small diesel, an improvement for the HiLux?, or for a smaller yet auto.
If toyota can come out with a small to mid size Turbo diesel for the Tacoma/Hilux that is US emissions certified that might just be the death blow for what is left of the compact to midsized Domestic Truck market.
Ranger is dead. Ford has let it sit how long since a redesign?
Colorado/Canyon uhh not sure what GM was thinking with that redesign.
Dakota was never really compact and is so large now it is almost midsized. Not a particular great truck either way.
Yes I agree that this one very likely scenario. I've heard but I don't think it's confirmed that the St Paul Ranger plant is scheduled for closure in this next round.
However...Ford, as per Edmunds, has already introduced the new world-Ranger ( diesel ) which is made in Thailand where both Toyota and Nissan also have huge presences in diesel trucks. My own opinion is that Ford is going to let the unionized Ranger plant pass away and then when the political situation allows ( FTA with Thailand ) and the diesel fuel situation stabilizes then it will import the diesel Ranger.
That would be nice as ford will have the only light duty full size diesel truck when the next gen F-150 comes out at the end of the decade. If Ford had the only compact/midsize diesel truck as well then they would have a small corner of the market for a while.
Oh one correction I meant to say the Dakota was so large now it was nearly full size.
..."i'd rather pay GM an extra $10k up front than pay terror-funding-countries an extra $1k/year or whatever. "...
I would agree almost wholeheartedly. However the real truth is there is ABSOLUTELY NO shortage of unleaded regular and premium. NEVER has been, NEVER WILL BE!!! The other blasphemy committed (not my take) is the systems are absolutely LOATHED to make transportation costs such as diesel ACTUALLY CHEAPER!!! Environmental laws make the second coming almost a locked event (date certain) will happen before domestic drilling is expanded and NEW refineries are built!! Indeed environmental laws would rather send us to war, rahter than BE energy self sufficient (100% domestically supported). And guess what... we have!! So this is not a matter of MY conjecture.
All one has to do is to use the UK as an example UK Skoda gets a very respectable 50-55 mpg. #2 diesel is 6.70 (vs 6.40 for ULR) So the cost per mile driven is .12 cents to .134 cents PER MILE DRIVEN. The USA VW Jetta gets 50 mpg and I just paid 2.60 or .052 cents per mile driven. I just filled up my Honda Civic @ 2.42/38= .0637 cents per mile driven. It is really no secret why they wish to ban diesels here or make them WAY more costly to operate.
So gather the CO2 at the sources, compress it and feed it to farmable ALGAE. PRODUCTS among others are: OXYGEN, bio diesel, ethanol, burnable dried pellet fuel, FOOD products, and ah..... fertilizer.
Info. released by VW Jan 23, 2007 CLEAN DIESEL VOLKSWAGEN JETTA MAKES NORTH AMERICAN DEBUT AT WASHINGTON, D.C. AUTO SHOW
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Volkswagen of America, Inc. today unveiled its cleanest diesel ever for the U.S., the Jetta TDI. Additionally, the company announced that this new clean diesel will be available to the U.S. market in the spring of 2008. This Jetta TDI will meet emissions standards applicable in all 50 states, including the most stringent "TIER 2/BIN 5" or "LEV II/LEV" requirement limiting nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions to 0.05 g/mile.
This clean diesel Jetta meets the lowest emissions standards without the use of urea injection. Instead, a nitrogen oxide storage catalyst reduces NOx emissions by up to 90 percent. The engine management system in the Jetta changes operating modes periodically to treat the NOx that has been stored in the catalytic converter. A particulate filter in the exhaust system further reduces emissions.
The Jetta TDI is one of the first products of the BLUETEC offensive initiated jointly by Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen. The goal of this partnership is to establish the concept of BLUETEC as a uniform label for clean and highly fuel efficient diesel-powered cars and SUVs with 50-state compliant engines. BLUETEC denotes diesel power plants that comply with the strictest emissions regulations of the US market. The technologies individually developed by each manufacturer serve to reduce NOx in particular – an exhaust element more prevalent in a diesel engine.
Volkswagen unveiled its clean diesel concept Tiguan compact SUV at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November. The Tiguan will be available in the U.S. mid 2008.
Volkswagen has a 30-year history of providing the U.S. market with efficient and durable diesel vehicles. Diesels traditionally account for almost 20 percent of Volkswagen's sales in the United States.
The following was from the Honda Accord I4 vs V6 forum. So it appears some people are getting high 30s.
Message #55 ... carefully monitored (i.e. exact routes, 2runs) mpg checks seem to indicate 36-37 mpg in the 70 mph range. its true what they say about the i4 ...
Message #46 ... I'm about to load up my Accord EX I-4 to go to the beach, maybe this time I can crack the 40 MPG barrier? Probably not, since I'll have major A/C use, but I look for another 38 MPG trip! Woo ...
Message #20 ... I got 36 on a 5 hour trip to NC...
“Some Omaha Public Schools' buses and Laidlaw buses were delayed because they would not start in the cold weather on Tuesday. Blended diesel is being blamed for the trouble.”
If you read the article they actually blame the ULSD. “the likely culprit for the bus problems was an ultra-low sulfur fuel” A trucker said to “and put in lots of additives”. I talked with a diesel owner recently who said that it costs him about 5 cents per gallon of diesel for additives.
My question for the Dieselologists is how many of you use additives? Is it required just in cold climates or do people feel the need to use it all the time? The bigger question is how many people are going to want to hassle with additives?
I am also thinking that people reading this article will shy away from diesels – fuel problems, hard starting.
I recently observed some of the problems a diesel owner had starting his truck in sub zero weather. His truck was plugged in (heater) for several hours. The truck started (has two batteries) but took several minutes to “calm down” before the driver pulled away. I started my gasoline car (not plugged in and sitting the same amount of time) and 20 seconds later was off and running.
The diesels also seem to need time to cool off after running in hot weather. Ford suggests letting their diesel engines idle for 3 minutes before shutting them off. Sounds like a hassle to me.
Comments
They're all out there and will surely get to you but you need national ULSD etc availability and a less blinkered approach by the regulators. Sorry, I'm singing my old song again. Put it down to old age and high taxation.
My thanks to houdini1 for the compliments. Made my day.
Completely off-topic : the UK Government has recently announced proposals to bring in road-charging. Every vehicle will have a GPS device fitted and cars will pay GBP1.43, (that's around USD2.7), PER MILE for every mile driven, plus automatic tracking and automatic speeding fines, (feasible but not proposed - yet). Numbers may be a little out but you get the idea. UK motoring public is not happy. The sound you can hear is probaly blood boiling. Apologies for interrupting a fine forum with this but I thought it might help you appreciate what you have.
That's a HUGE amount of taxes for driving. Is that GBPound or GBPence? What does the typical UK motorist drive in a year? 10,000 mi? 15,000 mi? At 1.43 GB Pounds per mi @ 10000 that's half the price of a vehicle just for one years driving. That's nuts. Or one way to kill an entire manufacturing industry.
I am amazed the British public has put up with speed cameras for so long....the revenuers must have a nice propaganda campaign.
personally i compare "super" which is 2.49 locally with diesel which is also 2.49. 87 octane is 2.29. that's a pretty small delta either way, 0% or 9%...
i expect the delta will increase if/when winter actually happens here - and next summer maybe we'll see diesel costing less than 87 octane. it has happened before during summers...
I was listening to NPR a few weeks ago and they had stories on both Paris and London. Both cities are trying to tax the car out of existence. In paris especially the entire city's transportation network is being redesigned to make owning a car in Paris impossible. The mayor of Paris has even said publicly that his ultimate goal is to eliminate the car from the city limits.
Speed Cameras ? We don't have any of those. We have "Safety Cameras". Same end results but they will become redundant if the Road Pricing proposal becomes reality, because the GPS Black Box will automatically log your location and speed, compare that to the limit of the road you're on and ......guess what ? Yeah, issue an automatic speeding fine. Of course, this is being denied at present. Even now, each speeding offence carries a minimum of GBP60 fine and 3 Penalty Points. Collect 12 points in any rolling 4 year period and goodbye driving licence for about a year. Drive at 30mph+ over any posted limit = goodbye licence for just one offence, (unless you are Royalty, or a foreign Diplomat, in which case it's O.K.).
Want to drive into central London ? That will be GB Pounds8 per day, thank you very much, regardless of it being a Nissan Micra or a Hummer. Hybrids, Electrics and Motorcycles are exempt. London's Mayor, (Ken Livingstone - he HATES cars), is talking of raising the London Congestion Charge to GB Pounds25 per day for "gas guzzlers", i.e. any car with a CO2 rating in excess of 224g/km, (figure from memory but in that area). The Passat 3.2 turns out 247 CO2, the 2.0 TDi just 143. Audi A4 4.2 gasser is 324 and the 3.0TDi is 206. The US Embassy in London, (along with others), has decided that the Congestion Charge, Parking Fines and Speeding Fines are nothing to do with them 'cos they have Diplomatic Immunity. They have unpaid fines etc running into hundreds of thousands of GB Pounds. Yeah, that's the good old "Special Relationship" in action.
All UK cars pay an annual Road Tax based on - guess what - CO2 emmissions. Some local authorities are seriously considering raising residents' parking charges depending upon their car's - yep CO2 emmissions. Unless you have your own off-street parking, (fairly rare in London).
Get a Company Car, because you need one ? Well, you will pay Income Tax on the perceived benefit of that car. Level of tax is based on a number of Tax % Bands decided by - oh no - CO2 emmissions. Let's suppose you get something really naughty, that VW Passat 3.2 gasser, (it's in the top band). You will have 35% of the car value - that's Manufacturers List Price when new - added to your annual tax liability for the first 4 years of it's life and then the % drops.
Fuel Prices ? Let's try US Dollars 7 per gallon, (Imperial Gallon = 4.546 ltrs), for gas with diesel a little dearer.
Starting to see a pattern emerging here vis-a-vis the growth of the diesel car population ? Why do we stand for all this ? Apathy, pure and simple. Think it can't hapen to you ? Think your Legislators' aren't aware of all this ? Read George Orwell's classic book "Nineteen Eighty Four" and think again.............about so many things, such as friends and enemies for instance.
Sorry to go off topic, but I did come back on near the end. Have to stop now as I'm even depressing me. Time for a nice cup of tea and a lay down in a dark room.
In near future we fly to USA for a 4 week vacation, (Las Vegas/Arizona/Texas), and I've rented the biggest SUV I could find, just because I can and your gas is so cheap.
http://hondanews.com/CatID2001?mid=2006092536320&mime=asc
As I write this, the average price of regular in California is $2.629. Diesel is running at $2.993 or about 14% more. 17%-14% =3% Not much of an advantage. In my state, and may others, the advantage would be zero or less. For ND diesel is about 20% more than regular. If the prices hold until the Honda engine is introduced I would save 3% by buying the Honda gas engine over a comparable diesel.
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.asp
The above calculations assume that there is no premiums for the engines. I suspect the new diesels may be a bit more expensive because of the new emission controls (initial cost and maintenance). The new 2007 BIG truck diesel engines are carrying $10K to 12K price premiums according to the reports I have read. Diesel demand & prices may increase as the new trucks make their way into the fleet. Reports indicate they are less fuel efficient than the older trucks.
Right now EIA is reporting that diesel costs 23 cents more a gallon to refine. This would suggest that diesel will continue to be more expensive than gasoline.
11/06....Gasoline%...Gasoline$..Diesel%....Diesel$
Taxes......20%..........$0.45.....21%.......$0.54
Dist...........8%..........$0.18......7%.......$0.18
Refining...15%..........$0.33.....22%.......$0.56
Crude Oil..57%..........$1.27.....50%.......$1.28
Total........................$2.23..................$2.55
http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gasdiesel.asp
Diesel fuel costs need to come down if the prediction, by J. D. Power, of 15% diesels by 2015 is to come true.
Another wild card in this is E85. Right now it is not competitive price wise with gasoline or diesel. In the next few years the flood of ethanol plants might bring the price down enough for it to be competitive. For it to be competitive the price of oil probably needs to get back up over $70 a barrel and the ethanol subsidies will need to be extended.
One more comment, I read somewhere (recent Oil $ Gas Journal??) that they are still getting the gulf refineries back on line. And if memory serves me right, Maryland does get gulf gasoline/diesel. I think you are at the end of one pipeline.
As a comparison the TDI gets 48-52 same commute. The other anomaly is this vehicle weighs about 450#'s more. So a more valid comparison and question to ask would be would the Honda get better or worse mpg under the same conditions but with 3 EXTRA people in the car (24/7) or loaded with 450#'s extra? I know for a fact the mpg for the Honda would be 1-3 mpg less and the wear of consumable parts would be more than the double it already is vs the Jetta for the weight factor ALONE.
If you want to do a real world comparison with all the INIQUITIES in place, per mile driven the TDI is still cheaper to run the TDI vs Civic in that daily commute. .0578 TDI vs .0633. Can't do a like for like fair comparison with the Honda Civic line for there is no diesel. But if you do it with the Jetta line the difference is even more dramatic at epa of 42/49 vs 24/31. Just on EPA alone 31/49 the price per mile driven is .059/.0797 or 26%. The mpg difference is 37%. Again advantage advantage diesel. I think you can fully understand why they want to charge more for diesel both in taxation and price.
(corner store prices of 2.89/2.47)
When you factor in the fact that a much greater % of gassers use unleaded PREMIUM, than diesel, whose price is at par with #2 diesel, the cost per mile driven difference and % is even more DRAMATIC than the 26% even with the real world iniquities. One boundary or measure is how many vehicles do you know of that require unleaded Premium get 38-42 mpg LET ALONE 48-52 mpg? I have found NOT many.
The "real hidden in plain sight" issue is the more we conserve, the higher they want the per mile cost to be!!! So in that sense there is an extreme down side to fuller diesel implementation.
The Jetta 2.5L gas engine you refer to appears to be a poor engine from a performance standpoint.
Jetta 2.5 150 hp 0-60 9.4 seconds - premium fuel 33 mpg H
Jetta TDI 100 hp 0-60 12.2 seconds 46 mpg H
Accord 2.4 166 hp 0-60 9.0 seconds - regular fuel 38 mpg H
(2006 Consumer Reports Best & Worst New Cars)
The 2.5L gas motor in the Jetta requires premium fuel yet gets 16 hp less than the smaller Honda engine. The Jetta uses a performance fuel and has a 6spd trans but it is slower to 60 mph and gets 5 mpg less on the highway vs. the Accord 2.4L with a 5spd trans. Honda makes a mean engine, don't count them out.
I would agree that premium and diesel cost wise are similar. However, premium is a "performance" fuel. If you want to look at low costs you would compare regular vs. diesel.
For reference, MB is claiming 208 hp and 388 lb-ft of torque for the E320 BLUETEC diesel V6.
The next few years will be exciting as each manufacturer trots out their latest miracle engine.
The main point as it relates to diesel is the exact form has not been delineated by Honda as of yet. We know from over seas' models, diesel is in the Civic and the "Accord" type platform. Most of us think it might be in the "Accord" platform with the (internally developed) Honda cTDI motor which promises to be a splendid performer. Indeed it is capable of 40 mpg.
I was not referring to the 2003 Jetta motors. So for sure it remains to be seen how Honda will position its diesel option or just do a diesel option in the Civic and Accord (and other ones), and the MPG's relate to each other.
Too bad they can NOT put a hole in that massive domestic sales, market share loss and dollar hemorrhaging.
Only their 2.0L turbocharged 4-cylinder engine requires premium.
And it gets 50 more horsepower, roughly 30-35 more foot pounds of torque... and slightly better fuel economy to boot.
The hallmark of diesels has always been the better fuel economy and torque numbers far greater than the horsepower.
Gasoline engines, however, usually have horsepower and torque balance out. (unless it's a Honda :P )
Now if we could mate that to a twin turbo diesel motor and get 70 mpg at 65 mph, That would be too cool for words.
My last long trip was a 400+ mile drive through the hills of TN (over Jellico mountain)... 90% highway driving, averaged 70-80 MPH, A/C on approximately 50% of the time...I got 36.5 MPG on that trip.
Keeping the speed around 70-75 on flat interstates, with minimal A/C use, will easily net 38+ MPG.
Good times are coming your way.
Diesels give their torque way down RPM wise and give better FE than any gasser.
http://www.whygas.com/
I just saved $10,292.75 by buying a GM gas engine VS a diesel.
15,000 miles, c4500 Gas in my area is $2.05 regular and $2.62 diesel
Using 26,000 miles a year increased the savings to $11k. :surprise:
The only item that is true is that the engines cost less initially but they do not address long term costs. The calculator only seems to address first year costs. Keep that truck five, six, or more years and see what happens to your savings of the first year. They will go down the toilet in no time.
Fuel availability is a lie. I had a diesel car in the early eighties and never had trouble finding fuel then and now have another diesel and have no trouble finding fuel now.
As for noise, once my Jeep Liberty is warmed up you can barely hear it. Even underway it hardly makes any noise from the outside.
Ease of service. Easier than any contemporary gasser. Oil change every 12.5K, fuel filter every 25K, air filter every 25K. No sparkplugs. and associated electrical system. And as to FE, 8 - 9 MPG for the gasser. Get a Flex Fuel version and use E85 and watch FE take a 22+% hit.
Cab heat. Almost hilarious! I can boil myself out of my Jeep Liberty in single digit cold in under 3 miles.
Cost of diesel engine in my Liberty (MY 2005) was $846!
i think probably you are talking about pickup trucks not cars.
for a car, 395 ftlbs & 400 hp is a lot more than adequate - imho it is well into the "insanely fast" department.
Even in cars, tons of low end torque and a wide torque band to boot is the ticket. Why do you think the Chrysler Hemis of some years ago were almost impossible to beat? They had that combination.
Remember too that the Duramax diesel is not built domestically but comes from Isuzu (which GM partially owns). So they have to probably pay some kind of licensing cost to Isuzu that adds some cost to the price of the engine.
Ranger is dead. Ford has let it sit how long since a redesign?
Colorado/Canyon uhh not sure what GM was thinking with that redesign.
Dakota was never really compact and is so large now it is almost midsized. Not a particular great truck either way.
However...Ford, as per Edmunds, has already introduced the new world-Ranger ( diesel ) which is made in Thailand where both Toyota and Nissan also have huge presences in diesel trucks. My own opinion is that Ford is going to let the unionized Ranger plant pass away and then when the political situation allows ( FTA with Thailand ) and the diesel fuel situation stabilizes then it will import the diesel Ranger.
Oh one correction I meant to say the Dakota was so large now it was nearly full size.
In comparison to a similar diesel engine, 385 ft. lbs. of torque would be pathetic.
I would agree almost wholeheartedly. However the real truth is there is ABSOLUTELY NO shortage of unleaded regular and premium. NEVER has been, NEVER WILL BE!!! The other blasphemy committed (not my take) is the systems are absolutely LOATHED to make transportation costs such as diesel ACTUALLY CHEAPER!!! Environmental laws make the second coming almost a locked event (date certain) will happen before domestic drilling is expanded and NEW refineries are built!! Indeed environmental laws would rather send us to war, rahter than BE energy self sufficient (100% domestically supported). And guess what... we have!! So this is not a matter of MY conjecture.
All one has to do is to use the UK as an example UK Skoda gets a very respectable 50-55 mpg. #2 diesel is 6.70 (vs 6.40 for ULR) So the cost per mile driven is .12 cents to .134 cents PER MILE DRIVEN. The USA VW Jetta gets 50 mpg and I just paid 2.60 or .052 cents per mile driven. I just filled up my Honda Civic @ 2.42/38= .0637 cents per mile driven. It is really no secret why they wish to ban diesels here or make them WAY more costly to operate.
10,000 gals of BIOFUEL from (1) ONE acre of farmable algae.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algaculture#Biodiesel_production
So gather the CO2 at the sources, compress it and feed it to farmable ALGAE. PRODUCTS among others are: OXYGEN, bio diesel, ethanol, burnable dried pellet fuel, FOOD products, and ah..... fertilizer.
CLEAN DIESEL VOLKSWAGEN JETTA MAKES NORTH AMERICAN DEBUT AT WASHINGTON, D.C. AUTO SHOW
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Volkswagen of America, Inc. today unveiled its cleanest diesel ever for the U.S., the Jetta TDI. Additionally, the company announced that this new clean diesel will be available to the U.S. market in the spring of 2008. This Jetta TDI will meet emissions standards applicable in all 50 states, including the most stringent "TIER 2/BIN 5" or "LEV II/LEV" requirement limiting nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions to 0.05 g/mile.
This clean diesel Jetta meets the lowest emissions standards without the use of urea injection. Instead, a nitrogen oxide storage catalyst reduces NOx emissions by up to 90 percent. The engine management system in the Jetta changes operating modes periodically to treat the NOx that has been stored in the catalytic converter. A particulate filter in the exhaust system further reduces emissions.
The Jetta TDI is one of the first products of the BLUETEC offensive initiated jointly by Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen. The goal of this partnership is to establish the concept of BLUETEC as a uniform label for clean and highly fuel efficient diesel-powered cars and SUVs with 50-state compliant engines. BLUETEC denotes diesel power plants that comply with the strictest emissions regulations of the US market. The technologies individually developed by each manufacturer serve to reduce NOx in particular – an exhaust element more prevalent in a diesel engine.
Volkswagen unveiled its clean diesel concept Tiguan compact SUV at the Los Angeles Auto Show in November. The Tiguan will be available in the U.S. mid 2008.
Volkswagen has a 30-year history of providing the U.S. market with efficient and durable diesel vehicles. Diesels traditionally account for almost 20 percent of Volkswagen's sales in the United States.
Message #55 ... carefully monitored (i.e. exact routes, 2runs) mpg checks seem to indicate 36-37 mpg in the 70 mph range. its true what they say about the i4 ...
Message #46 ... I'm about to load up my Accord EX I-4 to go to the beach, maybe this time I can crack the 40 MPG barrier? Probably not, since I'll have major A/C use, but I look for another 38 MPG trip! Woo ...
Message #20 ... I got 36 on a 5 hour trip to NC...
http://www.ketv.com/education/10771230/detail.html
If you read the article they actually blame the ULSD. “the likely culprit for the bus problems was an ultra-low sulfur fuel” A trucker said to “and put in lots of additives”. I talked with a diesel owner recently who said that it costs him about 5 cents per gallon of diesel for additives.
My question for the Dieselologists is how many of you use additives? Is it required just in cold climates or do people feel the need to use it all the time? The bigger question is how many people are going to want to hassle with additives?
I am also thinking that people reading this article will shy away from diesels – fuel problems, hard starting.
I recently observed some of the problems a diesel owner had starting his truck in sub zero weather. His truck was plugged in (heater) for several hours. The truck started (has two batteries) but took several minutes to “calm down” before the driver pulled away. I started my gasoline car (not plugged in and sitting the same amount of time) and 20 seconds later was off and running.
The diesels also seem to need time to cool off after running in hot weather. Ford suggests letting their diesel engines idle for 3 minutes before shutting them off. Sounds like a hassle to me.