Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

What Would It Take for YOU to buy a diesel car?

1125126128130131473

Comments

  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,153
    That's true. I'd still ding the PO for lack of maintenance records, as the shop isn't going to catch everything that might crop up (especially if it hasn't started "cropping" already).

    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:
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    I guess you didn't keep good maintenance records ? :P As she obviously didn't see or ignored your documented transmission fluid change?

    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.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,153
    That's it.... a red herring. MT fluid that needs changing looks a LOT different than fresh fluid. If my two-week old fluid, with probably 800 miles on it, looked like it needed changing, I have bigger problems than needing a fluid change. As it was, the fluid on the dipstick looked brand new.

    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:
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    To tell you the truth, with what I have known for any number of years, I could not tell you without UOA's what the status of any oil is. Indeed you can literally change diesel engine oil and run it for circulation (no miles) and it (the new oil) will look almost to completely BLACK.

    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.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,153
    That's very true for engine oil. Not so much for A/T and gear oil, but still is to a lesser extent. For those oils, shear forces are intense and as they age (due to shear) they will change appearance. If your oil at 120K looked so similar to new that you couldn't tell the difference, that's a good sign for the health of your Civic's transmission. It doesn't mean the change was a waste (the fluids don't age linearly), but it also means that it wasn't harming the unit.

    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.
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    Without UOA's I think that changing oils A/T, M/T, etc., on change of ownership is first and foremost a BASELINE type action. It is done in lieu of TRUST but VERIFY (verify being faith in what the PO told you or on your own UOA's. At that, it is almost an OLD SCHOOL hold over. Evidently for your 98 Focus, Ford has seen the light with a LIFETIME transmission fluid.

    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.
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,153
    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. ;)
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    Short term goal for the first one is 200,000 miles. I am 22,000 miles away. It will be due its 100,000 miles cycle or TB/WP change.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    Me too. Probably will take me at least 18 months longer than you to get there though. You're the Vin Diesel of drivers around here (Vin got his nickname "Diesel" from his friends who said he ran off diesel fuel, referring to his non-stop energy, per Wiki).
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    If I had used a like model 03 Jetta 1.8 T @ 27.5 mpg, (per 100,000 miles) I would have used 3,636 gal vs 03 Jetta TDI @ 46.5 mpg @ 2,151 gal (per www.fueleconomy.gov.) or 69% more fuel (x 2 for 200k) . ;) @ todays prices of 4.19 per gal PUG that would also be $6,222 more. @ the time the TDI premium was $236. Edmunds.com lists the 03 used TDI @ 1,819 more or 46% more than the 03 1.8 T.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    The bad /good news? :sick: :shades:

    Filled the 03 Jetta TDI today, 556 miles posted 51.48 mpg. The odometer is close to 178,000 miles.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    In 178k miles the 1.8T would have gone through about 4 sets of ignition coils, too. ;)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    LOL ! What are those? ;)
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    mmmm... me likey.
    A bit on the portly side.
    I wonder what that combination could do in a Panamera.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    That would be " frankensteining" both vehicles. :sick: ;) The Panamera offerings already ARE that way: from the " mild to wild" optioning ! ?

    But then on the other hand, the Porsche Cayenne TDI " alone" can MSRP from 57k to OVER 100k !!
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The new one looks much better than the original Cayenne, but I still haven't warmed to the idea of Porsche allocating resources to non-sports cars. ;)

    Panameras have to be fast so that you never look back (at the back, I mean).
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Indeed that is a common theme. But I guess that is what happens when a company like Porsche (smaller) tries to take over a company like VW.

    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 !
  • xwesxxwesx Fairbanks, AlaskaPosts: 13,153
    Nice! SUVs with decent fuel economy are a good combination (sport-oriented or not!).

    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.
    2014 Audi Q7 TDI, 2008 and 2013 Subaru Forester(s), 1969 Chevrolet C20 Pickup, 1969 Ford Econoline 100, 1976 Ford F250 Pickup
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I like the looks of the Touareg twin better. I would bet they are made in the same factory.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    edited September 2012
    Wow, that's interesting. We just bought an X5d but I think the Cayenne diesel is the best looking mid size SUV on the road, inside and out. Of course, I owned a 911 so the front end and interior dash and center console look really nice to me. It's just enough smaller than the X5 that the size was an issue. Not to mention a $10,000 higher price tag. The Touareg is a very nice car in all respects, but the style is more Passat than 911. To each their own, as they say and all of these are great vehicles that can get 30+/- mpg on the highway.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    I like the looks of the Panamera.

    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!

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Panamera TDI

    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.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I would expect the Cayenne to be very good handling like the X5. I know the X5D I test drove was much better handling than my Tuna boat Sequoia.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    I think it pretty standard for any oem to bring unifying styling cues in its model line. So given your post (style cues wise) , I am projecting you like the Cayenne, X5 D and Touareg. (in the order of those diesels mentioned.)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    Suspension options can easily add MSRP's of $5,970. These are on top of an already stellar system. Different sizing on the wheels, tires and even brakes (MSRP $8,150) combinations present another almost another level of staggering array of options. Aftermarket items are anyones literal guess.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    I'm not sure what you mean about frankensteining. Just because they add a different engine option?

    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.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Correct. Reading the article should clear up the confusion. If not, my humble readers digest interpretations are: the Panamera was not conceived with room for the specifications of a BIGGER (higher hp/torque twin turbo) diesel motor, lsuch as the 4.3 ? L 313 hp and 529 # ft ? MONSTER: let alone a diesel motor Additionally they were probably just by the skin of the specifications teeth, "shoe horn" in the 3.0 L TDI. (parts bin if one will)

    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. :blush: :shades:
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    I believe you are correct on the transmissions.

    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.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    ZF did come out (me too or AFTER the Aisin 8 speed A/T) with an 8 speed A/T product. Again I am overwhelmed by what I do not know about the design specifications of that "8 HP Kit" in terms of product inclusion on the Panamera.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I think it pretty standard for any oem to bring unifying styling cues in its model line.

    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.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    According to Edmunds.com the 2013 Cayenne diesel is app MINUS- 179#'s lighter than the 2012 VW Touareg. I have not seen the 2013 VW T specifications. It does sport 240 hp vs 225 hp, but 406 # ft is the same. The 2013 VW T is also due the 240 hp version, so I think they are probably more similar.

    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)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    much better handling than my Tuna boat Sequoia

    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.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    15 hp in a roughly 2.5-ton vehicle ain't gonna amount to any measurable difference anyway.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    In any case, 15 hp is 6.7% greater ( than 225 hp for 240 hp). So why are we emphasizing one hand clapping, and leaving out the other measurable : 1 mpg better mostly likely due to Minus - 179#'s. 5.3% ;)

    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.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    I was surprised to see that the Cayenne Diesel only weighs 179 lbs less than the Touareg TDI. That's nearly 400 lbs more than the Cayenne V6 6-speed manual I test drove in July. But my SOTP comparison was probably more based upon the Q7 that I test drove more extensively than the Touareg. The Q7 is 5,567 lbs - a whopping 770 pounds heavier than the Cayenne diesel.

    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.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited September 2012
    Given those Q7 metrics, I can understand why you had the perception/s that you did. 772 #'s are 5 people weighing 155#'s each. Any car will behave differently with 5 to 6 passengers. (one still has to have a driver @ 155#'s in this example) meaning the other 4 correctly weigh more like 193#'s)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited September 2012
    I'm going to a Porsche special driving event this Sunday at Summit Point Raceway

    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!
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Porsche sales manager invited me. Guess they think buying an X5d at their sister dealership didn't deplete our checking account enough, so he wants to show off the new Boxster and 911. Unfortunately the fun car I'd be most interested in - the new Cayman - won't be out for another few months. But hey, I'll burn up some rubber at someone else's expense. :)
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Cool. I inquired about an A4 and got an invite to a track day a couple of years ago.

    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.
  • qbrozenqbrozen Posts: 26,227
    edited September 2012
    If its the same setup as the one I went to, its not all that great. I mean, fun enough as long as you don't have to drive far. It was about a 4-hour roundtrip for me and I wouldn't necessarily do it again.

    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.

    '10 Equinox LS; '08 Charger R/T Daytona; '67 Coronet R/T; '14 Town&Country Limited; '18 BMW X2. 49-car history and counting!

  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    "Cash strapped Europeans are finding that hybrids are too expensive, don’t drive as well as diesels, as well as failing to meet diesel economy achievements.

    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)
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    Simple answer. Europeans are much better educated than Americans. What do we rank now 38th in the World? It is reflected in our choice of vehicles. Of which we have a very poor selection. Which shows the level of intelligence in our government. The EPA would rather we own a hybrid that pollutes some 3rd World country during manufacture.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    Education stats are all over the map; good luck picking what to rank, much less where we rank.

    Europeans buy diesels because their brain cells have suffered so much damage from inhaling the exhaust fumes for so many years. :P (Reuters)
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    Too Funny, I knew what your response would be. There is a lot of evidence that the creation of batteries and electric motors is too polluting to be done in the USA. I say if it cannot be manufactured here, it should not be allowed here.
  • habitat1habitat1 Posts: 4,282
    Borm (from Zuyd University) and his team put 10 volunteers in a room filled with exhaust from a diesel engine for one hour and monitored their brain waves with an electroencephalograph (EEG).....After about 30 minutes, brain wave patterns displayed a stress response, suggesting changes in information processing in the brain cortex.

    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.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I would say 10 minutes in a closed garage with a gas vehicle running would cause permanent brain damage. Which explains Americas love affair with gas engines. I love the smell of diesel in the morning. :shades:
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    Too Funny, I knew what your response would be

    I probably posted that link back in '08 when the study first came out. :D

    You'd love the Scheid Diesel Extravaganza in Terre Haute.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I risked my neck too many times before the age of 30. Racing does not interest me in the least. Not to watch or participate. Waste of money and fuel. That is why I don't really need a V6 diesel engine in an SUV. The 4 cylinder would be plenty for my needs. Squeezing 40 MPG out of a ML250 Bluetec would be more fun than racing from stoplight to stoplight. They are rated at 50.4 MPG highway in the UK.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited September 2012
    We had a similar discussion last week or so ago. Except it involved whether a Prius could be fun and engaging, and squeezing 50 mpg out of a car came up in that thread too as one example.

    There is hypermiling "racing" btw.
This discussion has been closed.