Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Case in point: My local Subaru dealer did an inspection on my Forester a few weeks ago as part of a warranty item being addressed, and part of the notations indicated that my manual transmission's fluid needed to be changed. I let the gal at the counter know that I had no faith in that inspection at all given I had just changed the tranny fluid two weeks earlier.... :confuse:
On a more serious note, A/T and M/T transmission fluid change can be a little bit of a red herring and a lack of oem lack of back bone or advertent or inadvertent cost padding.
I have 3 current cars that specify LIFETIME transmission fluid. The oem specifies the Civic A/T @ 120,000 miles first change and 90,000 miles subsequent. Yet there are no documented studies that a A/T or M/T fluid change actually stopped a transmission break down.
So, the tech didn't actually check the fluid - he just assumed it was still factory (even the stuff I changed out wasn't factory) due to the car's mileage (45K) and said, de facto, "it needs to be changed." If I'm basing a car purchase on that kind of thoroughness, how much chance do I have? :surprise:
More on nexus with my Civic A/T oil change @ 120,000 miles I could literally tell no difference from the oil that had 120,000 miles and NEW (couple of miles to get it warm and check ITS' dipstick. Now, I know the ace tech changed it, as I WATCHED him.
When I changed the transmission fluid (AT fluid in a MT unit... strange!) in my '98 Escort at about 125,000 miles, it was the same way - I couldn't visibly tell a difference between the two by color. There was a (very) little particulate in the old fluid. The owner's manual says the fluid is good for the life of the car.
Being as how this is a diesel thread, 2 VW TDI's also specify lifetime fluid 03 TDI Jetta with 5 speed M/T and 12 TDI Touareg with an Aisin 8 speed A/T.
There you go. Trust but verify is a auditor/accountant's mantra, so I know it well, and it goes as well for used vehicles as it does for manufacturer specifications! One always has to remember that they don't want your car to last "forever," but rather just long enough to get you back for another buy in a handful of years.
Filled the 03 Jetta TDI today, 556 miles posted 51.48 mpg. The odometer is close to 178,000 miles.
Is that related to your Touareg TDI?
A bit on the portly side.
I wonder what that combination could do in a Panamera.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
But then on the other hand, the Porsche Cayenne TDI " alone" can MSRP from 57k to OVER 100k !!
Panameras have to be fast so that you never look back (at the back, I mean).
As is well known, VW easily bought Porsche. In any case, all good for the "controlling interest". It was a heads: he and his family wins. Tails: he and his family wins !! Do nothing: same as the other two. What is not to like? Big? Small? Small BIG? It kind of all comes together.
Perhaps more of the reality is the Cayenne line is the bulk of sales and profit and what keeps "Porsche" viable as a smaller entity. This is not to mention the fact it is a smaller off shoot of the now huger VW. The controlling interest still has a lot of control !
Alaska was their test site. That's definitely the way to go! It looks like their foray took them down on the Kenai Peninsula. Beautiful country down there. The roads are fun too, if you can find enough space to enjoy them a little bit.
I would think that diesel would probably get mid to high 30mpg in it. And acceleration in the low 6s. That would be quite impressive, IMHO.
Of course, the current Panamera start about $20k more than the diesel Cayenne. Yikes!
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
It gets back to what I was saying about "frankensteining"
..."He went on to admit that because a diesel wasn't planned at the start of the Panamera program, there isn't space to package Audi's new 313-hp twin turbo version of the same engine."...
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1108_2012_porsche_panamera_diesel_dri- - - - - ve/#ixzz26yPLAFqK
Some of the torque figures are breathtaking. 240 hp and 406 # ft are pretty intoxicating. Using the same ratios a 313 hp TDI would post 529 # ft.
I am also not sure why they only list 27 mpg (diesel Panamera) while the USA Porsche Cayenne, Q7,Touareg, list 28 EPA and weighs app 800#s more.
Yeah, I don't get the mileage figure. The article about the Cayenne said 29 highway. So how does a more aerodynamic and much lighter vehicle get worse mileage? Gearing difference? Very odd.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
I am sure gearing/transmissions had/have something to do with it. However gearing is normally different for a higher end touring sedan than for a higher end SUV/CUV. In any case, this speaks well for the (Cayenne's) Aisin 8 speed transmission. I am led to believe the Panamera's 7 speed transmissions are made by ZF.
This might be rather arcane to gush over a Japanese transmission in higher end German CUV. :shades:
The Cayenne and the Panamera diesels both use the 8-speed auto, though.
There must be something about that particular diesel engine's design that makes it awkwardly sized since Porsche is able to put a turbo V8 in the Panamera.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
That's true, but how they do it can have different results. For example, I think the Audi A7 is a great looking car, but the Q7 TDI's front grill looks like a Mack truck to me. The old Cayenne looked awkward, the new Cayenne seems much more proportionally attractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I guess.
Regarding a previous post on the Cayenne Diesel, I had a chance to test drive one last night. Short drive, but I can say unequivocally that it is quicker, tighter and much more sporty of a drive than the Touareg and Q7. Porsche may have borrowed the base engine from VW, but they must have cooked it in their special oven to give it an extra dose of adrenaline. It also helps that the Cayenne is several hundred pounds lighter, but the engine itself just felt noticeably more responsive than the VW and Audi.
This is just a swag, but the 15 hp more is probably at higher rpm. (my op ed "LESS" usable, but probably quicker spooling)
So clearly, the combination of those two variables are SOTP's noticeable. Mine has neither. (15 more hp and Minus 179 #'s)
The weight is significant in that the rule of thumb is 1 to 2 mpg per 100#'s. That fact alone (-179#s) could account for the EPA better of 1 mpg. (20/28 vs 19/28)
However for $600 ... chipping for 280 hp and 427 # ft is available. :shades: It is starting to seem like a better and better deal. (quicker spooling AND (for me) more grunt)
That's not really fair.
I bet the Sequoia handles at least as well as an Expedition or Suburban, and those are more direct competitors. For fuel economy comparisons, too.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
All this stuff has been low hanging fruit from hp/torque, mpg, weight perspective and for a long time. OEM's like to tell us how hard it is to shed these #'s.
Also, while weight is a factor, I don't think your rule of thumb of 1-2 mpg per 100#'s is accurate. If that was the case, the Q7 would be rated 6-12 mpg lower than the Touareg. Weight is a bigger factor in stop and go traffic in the city, but for highway cruising, rolling resistance, aerodynamics, and engine/gearing efficiency are relatively more important. Our X5d, no lightweight at nearly 5,200 lbs, still managed to get 29.4 mpg on the 510 mile trip home from the factory.
I'm going to a Porsche special driving event this Sunday at Summit Point Raceway. Mostly to try out the new Boxster and 911. But if they have a Cayenne diesel there, I'll give it another drive around the track.
How'd you get invited? Club?
Did an Audi event there once and had a blast in a Q7 TDI going around the carousel.
Make sure to put the transmission in Sport else the stability control freaks out and cuts the throttle. Go figure, a transmission setting affects the nanny that slows you down!
Oh heck yeah, I'm going.
Heard an R8 running around the track but you have to pay and only got to be a passenger, no thanks.
The time on track with the various 911s was very restrictive. You weren't supposed to use the paddle shifters and you had to play follow-the-leader, so you could only go as fast as the guy in front of you, and the front of the pack was a Porsche employee.
The autocross portion was better. All done with Boxsters and Caymans. Each car had an instructor and you took turns in each car going around 1 lap. My first instructor was quite firm about me being gentle. The others let me hang it out more.
The final bit was that you could take a demo car out for a road test. That's where I drove and fell in love with the Panamera.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '08 Maser QP; '11 Mini Cooper S
European motorists, alarmed no less by rocketing pump prices, continue to head en-masse into the diesel market for salvation. That’s simply because all the available information tells them that on the real-world fuel-economy front diesels still run rings around latest petrol-electric hybrids, What’s more, not only are they more fuel economical that today’s petrol-electric hybrids, they also offer a more satisfying drive. Above all else, they remain markedly cheaper to buy,” Schmidt said."
More Americans go for hybrids, but cost-conscious Europeans embrace diesels (Detroit News)
Europeans buy diesels because their brain cells have suffered so much damage from inhaling the exhaust fumes for so many years. :P (Reuters)
No firggin kidding? It took 10 brain-less volunteers to figure that one out? Put them in a room filled with exhaust from a gasoline engine for an hour and they'd all be dead of carbon monoxide poisoning. Duh.
Glad I didn't see Zuyd University on my 17 year old's preferred college list.
I probably posted that link back in '08 when the study first came out.
You'd love the Scheid Diesel Extravaganza in Terre Haute.
There is hypermiling "racing" btw.