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
http://www.wcoty.com/web/eligible_vehicles.asp?year=2012&cat=4
In fact, the so called "exact same" (European) model was "detuned" and at GREAT extra cost to get MINUS - 2 mpg LESS for the US markets !! I had read in passing one of the stated reasons: US regulators were scared of the much higher HP ratings of the European models (100 hp vs 90 hp) :sick: :lemon: As anyone knows, US cars with INXS of 400 hp cause absolutely NO issues. :shades:
Indeed the very next year (2004), it was against the law to sell it (NEW2004 MY ) in the BIGGEST market in the US (CA).
It does make one wonder IF and when the new 72 mpg Golf TDI will hit the US markets IF it ever will.
Also the 2012 Passat TDI's (6 speed manual) ability to post 84 mpg for a 43 EPA H rated vehicle has pretty much garnered a YAWN by the overall press. 84 mpg by VW Passat TDI
On the other hand the folks that manage the propoganda for the electric cars imply that the plug ins are FREE of electrical costs !!!!! PREPOSTEROUS !!! In wacked out CA electrical costs (home) beyond base line easily climb and are normally @ .29 cents + per KWH. To add insult to injury, they dont list how many KWH's it takes to go X miles or a per mile driven: fuel equivalent costs.
In the Passat TDI's case @ (corner store prices) $4.35 per gal /84 mpg = .0518 cents per mile driven fuel. On the electrical cars side, I think it would take a Senator Darryl Issa senate probe and a couple of years to get what that is for say a Volt.
Outside of contractual arrangements, I would wonder why Toyota and GM, etc., had not snagged them to do mpg runs with say the more recognizable "sanctioned" models: i.e., Prius and Volt.
I probably should do a 5 under speed limit (60 mph) tank full in the VW Touareg. (The Taylor's stated partial protocol) At that projected rate of consumption, ( 40 mpg @ 26.4 gal tank-official) that would post 1,040 miles with .4 gal left over. For me, it is more about safety issues: 1. getting rear ended 2. road rage 3. falling asleep. 4 and that grating question: ARE WE THERE YET??? :sick: 5. my personal one: BORING.
Early on, I was able to post a 36 mpg (bit higher actually) tank during (component longevity) break in, sub 65 mph. The caveat here was the engine and drive train was subject to MANY 75% to 80% of redline= 5,000 rpm) jaunts, acceleration and deceleration. I call it more "herky jerky" The 8 speed transmission was shifted down/up in some cases to keep speeds low. 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and when appropriate 7th 8th.
Just like gassers do.
Marketing explains the poor sales as good as any theory.
It sort of gets back to the whole suv hysteria and harkens back to a long since popular but closed thread about SUV's. The enviro cons saw this as the end of the western world as we know it (to keep the ills under 25 points or less) , even as if they are joined at the "political" hip to the industries and unions that produce these things. Despite 30+ years of "unmitigated" SUV growth and "utter destructions" at any to all of those feared levels, they are 12% of the vehicle fleet and NHTSA posts some of the best safety numbers since they have been recording the statistics. Indeed the air is cleaner. "Coincidently", (not actually a coincidence)the numbers are far better than even when SUV's were 1 to 2% of the passenger vehicle populations.
When 5% of the cars and SUVs are diesel, I would say the country is making progress. Until that point it looks like a government married to the oil companies. They have too much RUG to unload. Just like 100+ years ago, gasoline is a worthless refinery byproduct we are stuck using.
Now I agree with Gagrice that a drift toward 5% diesel passenger cars is progress, albeit snails pace. But when I got my first TDI in 03, the diesel passenger population, the best I could figure was @ 2/3% which was recovering at that time from a loss FROM 5%. Of the 2/3% fully 75% were so called diesel "light trucks". Now @ 5% I have read in passing "light trucks" are 50% of the population.
In 2008, "The International Fuel Quality Center (IFQC) has ranked the top 100
countries based on sulfur limits in gasoline; Germany was found to be at the
top of the ranking with the lowest sulfur limits. Following in second and
third were Japan and Sweden, respectively. If California was a country, it
would have ranked along with these top achievers."
Reuters
Now the availability of 10 ppm RUG/PUG in Germany is not going to do US markets vehicles much good now is it?
It does beg the question will the use of 30 to 90 ppm RUG to PUG (US) in German cars specified for 10 ppm, do they suffer the same clogging and failure problems as diesels that ran LSD (500 ppm- 140 ppm CA) when they were specified for ULSD @ 5 to 10 ppm- nominally delivered at the pumps ? Again the 2003 TDI was specified for ULSD 11 MY ago and even earlier.
Again the regulators have not let oems do an engine that is capable of running bio diesel. 100% bio diesel literally has ZERO ppm sulfur. Yes that is right NADA! However for mathematically logical discussion, bio diesel (suspension of disbelief) is @ 1 ppm sulfur.
DC (high priced urban station): Regular $4.15, Mid $4.37, Premium $4.55, Diesel $4.17
Maryland (lower priced suburban station): Regular: $3.79, Mid $3.99, Premium $4.19, Diesel $4.15
Unfortunately, I passed on a chance to fill up in West Virginia at $3.95/gallon, figuring the Maryland price would have been closer to their regular price. I think I need to invent an Apple app that updates diesel prices and shoots them directly to the BMW nav system. But given that I haven't figured out how to use Facebook, don't hold your breath. If someone else wants to do the tech, I'll bankroll the app and we can split the profits.
But the relationship between diesel prices and regular/premium gas prices varies considerably at the stations in our region. Some price diesel at or near premium, some barely above regular. I would have assumed they (all Shell or BP stations) would be paying about the same wholesale prices for diesel.
BTW, when we were at the Porsche driving event, one of the reps had a Cayenne Diesel he drove up from Atlanta. With a 26.4 gallon tank and MPG ratings of 20/29, that's an EPA highway range of 765 miles. He said the trip computer on the drive from Atlanta actually showed 32.6 mpg. Pretty impressive.
cheapest RUG $3.79, 18th and S, 0.6 miles away.
cheapest diesel $3.99, W. Virginia Ave, 2.1 miles away.
So 20 cents cheaper and 1/3rd the distance, with city traffic that's farther than it seems.
Americans buy more hybrids for several reasons:
* sprawl and crawl - more people drive in cities
* diesel often costs more, offsetting about half your savings
* CARB blocks all but the cleanest options entirely
* EPA tests do not favor diesels, real world mileage is often better
* no selection, VW or nothing basically under $30k
* VW is considered a reliability risk (even with TDI being reliable)
* dirty/unreliable reputation still lingers, not deserved, but it does
Give a policy maker a TDI to drive daily for a week and guess what? That impression won't even change much. Why? Because to get to Congress you drive in gridlock, basically.
He or she will wonder why there isn't idle start/stop, then get mad when they can't find a diesel station and when they finally do it costs 20 cents more per gallon. Not made in the USA, whaaaaa? ...
They won't see the benefit that the ideal target buyer (Gary for instance) will. Out in the country, needs the extra torque, open roads, less traffic, range desired.
Don't go "clean diesel" on me. Sulfur is just one component to watch for, and particulates are still worse for diesel rigs last I checked.
Habitat1, I bet there's an app for that already. Maybe Gasbuddy.com?
Every time there is a change to the price of fuel, it is like clockwork some article in the propaganda mill tries its hand at explanation. Most to all articles are pure BS. I think they just give the issue to a cub rookie journalist to let em cut their teeth and to check to make sure they are ultra liberal. I just see it as fictional entertainment. Let's see 95% of motor cars are now electric plug in, fuel prices go up. Apple comes out with a new product, fuel prices go up. Apples sues and beats Samsung, fuel prices go up. Global warming causes MASSIVE increase in weed growth, fuel prices go up. People are having less babies, fuel prices go up. Prices are in a broad based decline, fuel prices go up. We have long ago discovered we are way past being the middle east of natural gas and have easily 250 years more of reserves, the price of fuel goes up. I am not sure what we do not understand that fuel prices are on automatic esculators to go .... UP !?
I think if a little "reality" was injected into the issue it would read something like:
Presidential candidate X,Y Z will implement a plan to get fuel prices from 4+ per gal to 1.85 per gal, in less than two years ( back to 2003 LSD prices)
LOL I am sure this candidate would not win ! If he/she did, he/she would not be long for the earth :sick: :lemon:
As for your presidential candidate proposal, just what "plan" do you think it will take to get fuel prices down to $1.85 per gallon, that doesn't involve socialism or communism. Oops, sorry, forgot you were from California. Just kidding, don't take that seriously.
The enviro cons are and have been hard at work trying to close down the (Benecia, CA) refinery complex that help to win WW2 (Chevron is the most recognizable name) So in their wildest dreams come true, what do you think would happen to the price of fuel, if they are/were successful ? I am sure you see the consequences and corrective actions in this little example (but real life also). They just had a little break down and fire and prices almost over night went up .50 cents per gal.
More on nexus: $1.85 (when Obama took office( /$4.35 (current) per gal/ 50 mpg = per mile driven fuel is .037 cents/.087cents (per mile driven fuel). that means under OBAMA's care and feeding was prices rose 235% or 59% PER YEAR in a little under 4 years.
Now who the hell was saying he is incompetent? He is doing a damn fine job raising the cost of a basic commodity !! :sick: :lemon:
I'm sure we could commandeer this forum in an interesting political debate about the energy policy and the future of America as we know it. From what I can tell, I suspect we'd agree more than not.
That said, I'm not sure how much blame Obama deserves for gas prices being where they are. Some, for sure, but I'm not a fan of opening up the strategic reserve due to market conditions or even drilling everywhere that a rig can be transported. I'd like to see the nuclear industry get back on track - with small package plant reactor technology - and essentially wipe out the use of oil and coal for power plants. I'll stick with blaming Obama for hamstringing the country with $11 trillion in debt and heading towards $20 trillion if he gets re-elected. And being on the forefront of turning America into the land of entitlement from the land of opportunity. And....OK, you get the point.
My infatuation with the Boxster S this Sunday notwithstanding, I also wish we could advance battery technology at a faster clip so that I could seriously consider the Tesla Model S that I've plopped down a $5,000 deposit on to get the #7000 +/- spot on the delivery list. At $55k the car is a steal. Unfortunately, having to pay $28k more to go from a 40kwh to 85kwh battery and get the performance edition means that I will likely be keeping my TL and sticking a Boxster S (or Cayman S) in my garage. No final decision just yet, but $84k+ to get the exact same car with a 250-300 mile range instead of a 125-150 miles range is just not reconciling with my checkbook.
I'll get off politics and back to diesels now. Thanks to whoever suggested the MyGas Buddy. It takes a little research to find good diesel prices and I'm glad that there is already a tool out there to help.
Amen! If the Voyager spacecraft can operate for 35 years on their nuclear power plants, I'm sure we can package something with today's technology that will perform at least as well and as safely/reliably. For some reason, when people think about nuclear, it's all about big size with big (potential) consequences. How about small in scale but larger in scope? Heck, something like that would solve the energy crisis (yes, it is a crisis now) in rural Alaska and other remote areas of the world.
No back on topic, I really like my diesel car, but I do wish the promises from other car makers to bring their diesels to north America would come true sooner, rather than later.
Also for the particulate issue, apparently the new has cars with direct ingestion have more particulate matter than diesels do now, and they may be required to has similar particulate traps in the near future, we shall wait and see.
"First, a new emissions standard is set forth, and the OEMs say, “We can’t meet those requirements with what we currently have.” That’s when the engineers step in, take control of the product from the bean counters, develop a new technology, solve the problems, meet the standards, and the new product gives enthusiasts a new tool to extract more power from our engines."
Diesel Power
The best thing that could happen for diesel adoption in the US is for the price to consistently fall below the price of regular unleaded. People can't do the miles per tank math but they pay attention to the pump prices.
Meanwhile Toyota is doubling down on hybrids, not to mention a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle. (NY Daily News)
VW ran into this issue when it was forced to run (mandatory) LSD (500 ppm sulfur to 140 ppm sulfur, CA) in a car designed for ULSD (30 ppm standard, nominally delivered at the pump from 5 to 10 ppm sulfur). This is a 10-15 year old design specification, that I know of (2003 VW Jetta TDI MY). There was a very easy remedy/corrective action, which the writer indicates he ignored..
You made some interesting observations:
..."People can't do the miles per tank math but they pay attention to the pump prices. "...
Yep and they are just fine paying 40k for a car (Volt is what I am thinking) for a car they should be paying less than 18 for, for the privilege of plugging in a car to an outlet for 10 hours or so. per mile driven equivalent is .11 electrical (for 30/35 miles range and 11.6 RUG after that range vs .107 RUG. vs .087 ULSD.
It also made no sense for us in 2003/2004 (14,000 miles yearly commute) to pay 25,000 for a hybrid, when its competitor cost 12.6k.
But yes diesel fuel does normally cost more per gal than RUG. PUG is about PAR (9% of vehicle fleet have a requirement for PUG)
I would hope that at least the folks over on the "BMW X5 Lease Questions" could figure it out, given all the time they spend analyzing residuals, down payemnts and money factors to try to figure out the best deal. Here are the facts, based upon my driving assumptions (3 years, 36,000 miles, to equate to typical lease deal; I drive more);
X5 3.5i gas: Estimate 18 mpg average (2005 MDX ave. 16 mpg) = 2,000 gallons premium unleaded @ $4.15; $8,300 fuel cost.
X5 Diesel: Estimate 24 mpg average (currently 24.5 in 800 miles) = 1,500 gallons diesel @ $4.00; $6,000 fuel cost.
Savings $2,300 = $63.90 / month. On 15k miles/year, it's $80/month
For all of the brain damage some people go through to negotiate a lease deal that saves them an extra $20 per month over on that board, this seems to me to be an easy analysis. With the $4,500 eco-credit currently ofered by BMW on the diesel, it is roughly $1,500 cheaper than the gas model, similarly equipped. But even if it was $1,500 more expensive, the payback would be about 2 years. We intend to keep the vehicle for 8+ and 120,000+ miles. That's over $7,500 in fuel savings added to the $1,500 up front. Not insignificant.
Some folks over there have said they don't like the "sound" of the diesel or think it's unresponsive compared to the gas. Either they have better ears than me or haven't driven the car. The gas (barely) wins the 0-40 drag race, but the diesel solidly wins the 50-75 passing maneuver. On the highway, I can barely tell the engine is running. I guess I can be thankful that BMW has to offer a $4,500 eco credit to overcome the bozo's that can't do the math or have preconceived notions having never driven the current X5d, Cayenne Diesel or comparable vehicle.
Cars are new and shiny sitting on the showroom floor and they look nice sitting in your garage or in front of your house.
You can spill an ounce of gas or diesel on the asphalt in the moonlight and enjoy looking at the swirly rainbow colors (Gomer Pyle :shades: ), but otherwise it's just a necessary evil. No one is going to slow down in front of your driveway to admit that new 5 gallon can of gas. Fuel offers no joy of purchase and you have to keep buying it over and over, and the price keeps going up. Plus it adds weight to your car and messes up the driving dynamics.
When electric cars get range and cheaper power, one of the other triggers that will sway folks away from ICE will be the ability to avoid going to a gas station. Even better when they can charge them by induction and won't have to do anything special to top up the batteries.
I hope you are not holding your breath. That niche will be smaller than diesel for at least 20 more years. Without heavy government subsidies they would be non existent right now. Toyota is getting out of the EV mess. Just not wise money being spent.
Drawing a dramatic line in the sand for a global auto industry that has continued to invest heavily in all-electric vehicles, a top Toyota executive today simply said what a lot of people are thinking: EVs don’t make business or financial sense at this point.
And then Toyota Vice Chairman Takeshi Uchiyamada, also head of Toyota R&D, announced in Japan that the company was backing up its dramatic conclusion with equally decisive action: Toyota killed plans for a volume launch of its second all-electric car, the eQ, a version of the iQ minicar, and said that it hopes for only 2,600 sales worldwide of its other EV, a RAV4 version, over the next three years.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/dalebuss/2012/09/24/toyota-calls-emperor-on-no-cloth- es-essentially-kills-evs/
That is and has been true for almost any fuel purchase, including electrical. Indeed one would have to buy electricity DAILY, given a 30-35 miles (electrical) range on a good day. It is far less in reality. Charging times for the Volt are 10 hours. So right away that is a 365 additional purchase cycle. The math indicates you will add 3650 hours to your routine per year. Gas purchases would be estimated @ 19 for a total of 384.
On the adding of pertro fuel systems weight to the car, there can be no denial. OEMS have made that opaque to consumers. Again why are we listening to the sound of one hand clapping, when a simple fuel system weight comparison will illustrate that electrical fuel systems weight far more !? Indeed they do not get any lighter with consumption ! Again, are you saying electrical fuel systems have NO weight? Are they signicantly less?
If I just use my Honda Civic as a sample: 40. If you hated stopping at a gas station 40 times a year (3.33 times a month) what about going to an electrical station 384 times or 960% more motivates one? One also has to to go to still purchase gas, albeit on a longer cycle.
Indeed on another post, I mentioned how the price of fuel has gone up app 59% per year, for just under 4 years. So really, are you wanting to go on record as saying electricity is free and will NEVER go up in price? Or that it will actually go down in price, just because the goal is to switch 100%(in someones dreams) electrical? Or electrical gives ZERO pollution? OR?
..."When electric cars get range and cheaper power, one of the other triggers that will sway folks away from ICE will be the ability to avoid going to a gas station. Even better when they can charge them by induction and won't have to do anything special to top up the batteries."...
When electric cars get range and cheaper power, one of the other triggers that will sway folks away from ICE will be the ability to avoid going to a gas station. Even better when they can charge them by induction and won't have to do anything special to top up the batteries."...
Are you doing a futuristic add for 1950's and 1960's DisneyLand?
I hate to break your bubble, but when that happens and a significant percentage of the passenger vehicle fleet are electrical, the price of electrical power will go even higher. Indeed the most logical place to co mingle electrical "fuel" vendors will be ... gasoline stations.
Indeed the price per mile driven that I used WAS from a highly "punished" price per KWH (in CA case .295+ cents per KWH). Again anything over base line is severely punished (246% more) . I would not be surprised if in the future almost any one will be categorized a gross user for going over base line (.12+ cent), with penalties over the penalties, which are already STIFF.
To be fair we should compare turbo/intercooled DI diesel to turbo/intercooled DI gas, same displacement.
It is also hard to compare and really not representative, as many oems and models do not have equivalent diesel models. VW (to their credit) does have a few. MB might be another.
Things are always a trade off. To say they have to have the SAME ( zero to sixty times in this case) is dreaming to unrealistic. They don't and never have. They are different in some other ways, also. Now if those variables (zero to 60 times) are important, then the trade off is a min of 27.5 mpg vs 46.5 mpg. Now if one is a "darter," one should not have gotten the TDI. One can dart in a TDI, albeit, not as well. If one is a commuter, over 100,000 miles, one can use 2,151 gals vs 3,636 gals or 1,485 gals LESS. @ 4.19 PUG darting and better zero to 60 times cost $6,222.00 more.
Actually 200,000 miles is fast approaching for me, so really it is more like 2,970 gals SAVED or MINUS- $12,444.00, CHEAPER.
Sidebar: actually that is not true, it is more like app 3,272 gals SAVED (@4.19 PUG= $13,710. as my longer term average is more like 50 mpg, 46.5 mpg on wwwfueleconomy.com)
I bet the diesel won't match the 1.8T but it's probably closer than it would be in 0-60 times.
Just a SWAG.
Diesel Car quotes times of 7.7 secs for 30-50 in 4th and 11.5 secs for 50-70 in top gear for a 90hp TDI Golf. The only gasser times quoted are 6.4 and 9.2 respectively for a 1.8T Golf.
source:
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=2400
So 30-50 the difference was pretty small.
At higher speeds you have to plan ahead more with the TDI.
Of course the TDI would win if the 1.8T blew an ignition coil.
Of course that's impossible, it's diesel vs. gas, after all.
I have been more than pleased with the brake pads and rotors. @ 178,000 miles, the pads have more than half of the material left. I also have been impressed with tire life (112,300 from 28/32 rated tires ) :sick:, and also alignment cycles.(100,000 miles per cycle and barely a need) I did one @ 100k just to get back to new car base line.
I think the 50 to 75 times are more important but you rarely see that marketed.
I don't pull out in front of 60 mph traffic from a standing start too often, but around here you often need to pass on a two lane when the driver in front is poking along at 5 mph under the limit. A little oomph makes the pass quicker and safer.
I think you also illustrate a past point how almost utterly inconsequential the zero to 60 times really are. I say this in the context of having a vehicle that CAN do a 4 second zero to sixty. Ah, needless to say it is not a hopped up diesel.
YOu are absolutely correct. Passing times (50 to 75 mph in this example) are almost never mentioned, by either gassers or diesels . I think some of the car mags in the interest of having some more to blather about, sometimes do mention it. But then in over 50 years, I have yet to read a car mag article about the mechanics of how to pass "safely" on 2 lane roadways.
Funny how you can find stuff on the internet
So, for diesels or gassers, the real important number is the 70 to zero time.
Diesel drops nearly a nickel, still 30 cents over last year (Land Line)
won't burn anymore. Nobody knows what happened , but it just won't burn.
The only time I can actually hear the diesel is at start up and idling. My gasoline vehicle is louder when cruising on the highway and has soot around the exhaust tip. The only detectable smell is an occasional ammonia like smell
when the car is cleaning any accumulated soot from the cats.
The diesel vehicles are a 2011 BMW 335d and a 2009 VW Jetta TDI. The gas vehicle is a 1996 4-Runner which happens to be the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned.
Not to beat a dead horse, but over 100,000 miles (early on the third go arounds) that would be 4,000 gals instead of 6,666 gals per 100k miles. We are shooting for 25 to 30 years of service, whatever the miles happen to be. With hindsight being 20/20, I probably wold not have bought VW diesels, if I was already getting 25 mpg on a TLC.
5 other follow on articles.
"Once we introduce the Jetta hybrid, the Jetta will be the first volume model with a choice of gas, diesel, and hybrid in the US. We are interested to see what happens there. This is why I love reading what people say in online forums about their cars."
Mr. Spira must love you and hate me. Will be interesting to see the Jetta "take" numbers in a few years.
It's always fun seeing the VW pics in the Chattanooga area. That fireworks store is in Jasper TN; really on I-24 near where I'd always cut off to go to Alabama back in the day.