Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
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
I'm thinking the reason the oil companies sell diesel at a higher cost is that they can, we dont have a system of checks to make a private company charge what they should so they charge all they can with no worries !
I'm thinking that car makers will fight making longer lasting diesel vehicles as long as they can, why make a vehicle that can last 200,000 miles when you can make one that will go 100,000 and sell two of them ?
I'm thinking there is Zillions of dollars being tossed around on so called man made global warming, and not even a dollar spent to tell the people that this earth is a living ever changing world ! Ya cant charge people more money to tell them lifes a bytch but ya can charge them more money by telling them its all their fault !
Just comparing some '06 Jetta's against each other, I don't see any advantage.
TDI 4dr Sedan w/Manual
Average Cost per Mile* $0.50
link
2.0T 4dr Sedan w/Manual
Average Cost per Mile* $0.50
link
2.5 4dr Sedan w/Manual
Average Cost per Mile* $0.45
link
* This is a 5-year estimate (based on 15,000 miles per year). The automatic styles seem to be a penny or so cheaper to own and operate.
No it is the Dirty Environmentalist in the government on the payroll of the oil companies. :shades:
Gas is the byproduct in the refining process they want to get rid of. Diesel will be in short supply until they add more refining capacity. With a glut of gas there is no real urgency to sell more diesel.
****
No, the issue was smoothness and a nice ride. If the engine has to rev to get its power, then that means it needs many gears(problem prone and expensive to fix mega-speed automatic) or has to rev to where most Americans think it's noisy.
A modern turbo-diesel is quiet, refined, shifts less, and generally is better in traffic and normal daily driving. They have done great things with the technology in Europe and it's nothing like what Americans remember. Though, to be honest, I love the sound of an old 4 cylinder 1970s Mercedes diesel... Like a small tractor and just as anti-yuppie at the same time...
On the VW (03 5 speed manual anyway) as most folks probably do not know, the system is a so called "drive by wire" system. One spin off: a coasting or no fuel draw situation, does NOT have the engine compression of older diesels. It does result in better overall mpg due to no fuel draw conditions (on longer grade descents). I would imagine the same is true for automatics (to a lesser degree)
Thanks for your response. Here's some follow up questions:
Doesn't diesel fuel come first in the refining process. Doesn't it take another step in the refining process to obtain our gasoline? If so, why is diesel more expensive?
If 80% of Europe's passenger cars are diesels doesn't that indicate that diesel is pretty efficient? Those folks pay huge taxes on their fuel so they are hyper sensitive to price.
Is there still an environmental downside to diesel that I'm missing?
Bob
And even though diesel cars have not taken off here, we still have plenty of pickups, trucks and buses using it. Not only that, but diesel cars have taken off and taken over in Europe and Asia. Thus there are other buyers clammering for the insufficient diesel fuel that is made in this country (relatively speaking). On top of that, the fuel tax structure in this country (unlike other countries where diesel has a clear tax advantage over gasoline) is biased toward gasoline.
While on a trip to the mountains. We ran into a couple from British Columbia. They were driving a Mercedes B200. The guy told me it is the best car he has ever owned. It was a nice rig. Not available in the USA of course. With the diesel engine in the UK it is rated 62.8 MPG highway, that being 52.3 MPG US. You have to ask yourself if our EPA and CARB are really concerned about fossil fuel usage. If so why do they not allow so many great small cars that get super mileage.
For you Mini-Cooper diesel fans. The UK version gets 80 MPG highway. That would be a lousy 67 MPG on our diesel in the US.
It is hard to be less dependent on "foreign" oil, when we knowingly and willingly continue to ....and, and, and.... IMPORT MORE FOREIGN oil
I just got off a second test drive of the new 2009 BMW 335 D TWIN turbo diesel with 425 # ft of (monster) torque . While it DOES get 36 mpg, which is more than most folks get with the (gasser) Honda Civic economy leader, it is still a fuel guzzler compared to the pantheon of available European diesel models (as per Gagrice's above post). Still, I'd love to run this twin turbo beast in the Rocky Mountains @ 4000 to 7000 ft altitude and above WOW !! It is a stormer at sea level. As most folks will attest 425 # ft of torque exceeds MANY so called super car metrics!!! ??? Pretty heady stuff for a 3 series BMW !!! The MB 320/350 diesel has a "MERE" 369 # ft of torque as I remember.
So it is easy to conclude that 10-20 miles per gal is not only desireable, it is written into the current laws. Certainly the UAW wrote life time contracts around it. It is important enough to receive Congressional bail out monies.
No, seriously. Turbo diesels are great for daily driving. Honestly 95% of the time, other than a freeway on ramp for a few seconds before the light at the end or the slow guy in the lane you have to merge into ruins your fun, people are doing 10-40mph quick speed changes. You don't have the room to wind the car up, nor do you have the speed limits that allow it. Torque is a huge thing in such a situation as long as the vehicle isn't geared like a tractor.
That BMW, btw - yes, it pulls like its rear end is on fire. Immediate power with a sense of extreme urgency at pretty much any speed. Gong 25mph and want to go 45? Done. Already wound up and ready to push you in your seat like a typical 911 used to do. Not quite as quickly, mind you, but 25-45mph in 2-3 seconds is quite fast enough for most people's needs. No whining, no down shifting like crazy. It just happens. Like a big V8 in the 70s.
Remember them? 120-140HP but wicked torque curves. They weren't very quick, but man they felt like you were really driving a car and not some tin can.
That is what I am talking about. I love driving the back highways in San Diego and Southern CA. Up and down and with hairpins and lots of turns. Aside from an old 1978 Porsche 911 my Passat TDI was the most fun to drive those roads. Problem is when I get to the desert and want to go down a sandy wash, it is too low to the ground. In search of the perfect vehicle. I am afraid if I go test drive the new X5 35d I will be compelled to plunk down more cash than I really should. I have talked to half a dozen people that own the X5. They all say it is the best handling SUV on the market. Not many cars handle better. The only complaint is the V6 is somewhat under powered. The diesel X5 takes care of that with 200 more ft lbs of torque than the V6 and quicker to 60 MPH than the V8. I will keep you all posted when I take one for a spin.
Current prices in my locality are :
Regular Unleaded Petrol : £0.849 per litre (RUG)
Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel : £0.959 per litre (ULSD)
If my math is correct that equates to, (at current £/$ exrate) :
RUG : $4.93 per US Gall
ULSD : $5,57 per US Gall
That's close on a 13% differential. Some parts of EU have ULSD marginally cheaper than RUG but most are dearer, (AFAIK), it's a tax thing. Yes, it hurts but it's not difficult to see why diesels are so popular - just on fuel cost per mile :
Examples, all figure are "Combined" mpg for Imp Galls :
Subaru Legacy : 2.0R = 32.8 vs 2.0TD = 48.7
Volvo C30 : 2.0 = 38.2 vs 2.0D = 49.6 but 1.6D = 57.6
Toyota Yaris : 1.3 VVT = 47.1 vs 1.4D = 62.8
BMW : 335i = 31.0 vs 335D (Auto) = 42.2
I've tried to match like-for-like as closely as possible. In all examples, the gassers are listed first, (but you'll have figured that out).
Here is an interesting issue being discussed in the US. Since the price is so "low" there is FED Congressional as well as State Congressional discussion on raising the fuel tax up to 1.00 per gal :lemon: So given 50 mpg vs 22 mpg (defacto fleet mpg) that is .02 cents vs .04545 cents per gal. ) the taxation will be 227% higher on the defacto fleet mpg average!?
The sad part is, I really like driving the Sequoia. Went up into the mountains for a few days. Handles well. Just cannot get much better than 16 MPG with this crappy CA gas. The electronics in the Toyota suck. It is a good thing I knew the way to my destination. That NAV is near worthless. CD player skips on smooth highways. Not what you should get in a $50k vehicle.
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/cto/987200403.html
http://norfolk.craigslist.org/cto/986486825.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/nsd/cto/987172182.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/nsd/cto/986593236.html
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/csd/cto/982543005.html
Must be 30 old MB diesels in San Diego for sale
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
A W126 turbodiesel (300SD) would be a good car, and if you find a 1984-85 model there's a decent chance it will even have an airbag. The W123s aren't bad either, very slow if not turbo...but I have an attraction to the W126.
http://sandiego.craigslist.org/nsd/cto/986269181.html
Most of the 300sd models are 82-83'
Of course, if our Commisar Brown takes the hint and raises fuel taxes even more then I may be on here asking for the odd food parcel. That's "odd" as in occasional, not weird, by the way.
But they really prefer neither.
Exxon chief backs carbon tax (Guardian)
That 300SD was sold from 81-85. There was a W116 300SD that is pretty rare, only sold here in 79 and 80 I believe. The post 85 diesel S-class tended to be a little more problematic. And of course now we have a diesel hybrid S on the horizon.
Onto the thread topic...it would take a big raise for me to buy a new diesel car. I "built my own" 335d and it was in the mid 50s! That's too much.
*Note - these are expected highway figures*
300D - Maybe 25mpg, tops. 15-20 city. No, honest.
240D - About 30mpg. Costly to repair. Kind of a letdown when you consider cars like a modern Civic. People claim they get 40mpg... They don't.
220D - About 30-35mpg highway with a light foot. OK in town. About 25mpg average.
190Dc - 35mpg, easy. Smart people get the 1960s "Fintail" 190D instead of the older "Ponton" 190D.. 31mpg average. +2-3 mpg without air conditioning. (pattern based upon engine size should be clear - heh) 0-60 in 30 seconds. 75 mph top speed. 60-65mph practical top speed.
Note - the same era 200D does 0-60 in 25 seconds and has 80mph top speed. 28mpg. It's a lot better for not much less fuel economy. These are highly prized commuting gems, actually, as they keep up with traffic and drive like a more modern car. Same car, just larger engine designed for the U.S. market/highways. Bit taller gearing and bit more torque. Practical top speed is exactly 65mph as well.
180Dc (these are 1950s era - close to 45mpg highway) 40-48HP, though, and close to 40 second 0-60 times. But they DO get 6.3l/100km combined(average). That's 37mpg. I've seen these do nearly 45-50 mpg with careful driving. But they really ARE dangerously slow and not good for modern highways. 70 mph top speed(gearing maximum!). Practical is 55mph on level ground.
Just get a 190D or 200D instead.
You can pick these up for next to nothing, and there's precious little to actually break as well, since there's not a single piece of electronics anywhere. It really IS a tractor engine stuffed into a car. :P
http://blogs.trucktrend.com/6276377/suvs/mt-takes-old-tech-to-bluetec-mercedes-b- - - - enz-diesel-across-america-tour/index.html
A neat article. He got 40mpg combined out of it.
Good article, that was fun.
Note - the same era 200D does 0-60 in 25 seconds and has 80mph top speed. 28mpg.
Funny thig is, if they built a few diesels with this type of acceleration today, they would probably make 100 mpg easy. Too bad they won't do it.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/190d/index.htm
30-35mpg. Acceptable as an alternative to a typical compact car. Anything with a larger engine, though, is going to be not very thrifty.
Oh, and they have made a 30-40 second 0-60 time TDI already. The VW 1 liter car.
Okay, it gets 210MPG, not 100... heh.
http://www.vw.com/touaregtdi/en/us/
Equipped with VW's signature TDI clean diesel engine, the midengine roadster concept has an average fuel consumption of 42 mpg, or 50 mpg on the highway. In theory, the roadster can go 710 miles between fill-ups while meeting emissions standards in all 50 states.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20090111/ANA02/901119989/1115
(registration link)
If this ever makes it to the States, it would be the first fun-to-drive diesel car sold here, even as we await the first fun-to-drive hybrid car, which looks like it will be the Honda CRZ, debuting next year. Of course, the CRZ hybrid will make better mileage than the Civic hybrid sedan it shares parts with, and that model can be had for $22K and ALREADY makes an average fuel consumption of 42 mpg. The CRZ is promised to start under $20K, and will probably match the VW TDI roadster for average and highway fuel economy. I think odds are that the Honda will find more buyers than the VW, as people are getting more used to hybrids all the time while diesels cannot fully shake off their bad rep from the 80s.
As hybrids expand, the question remains: will there be enough potential diesel car buyers to make it worth it for automakers to invest in making more available?
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Good question about having enough potential buyers to justify selling it in North America. Hybrid sales have crashed along with the price of gasoline. But the diesel tech shouldn't be as expensive to implement as the hybrid stuff I'm guessing, so maybe VW could price it right.
VW (one of the standard bearers) has and will continue to benefit; and in fact is constructing a TN plant to put out @ least 1 US made diesel model. This is not to say they did not have to suffer along the way (multi million to billion $ losses), due to the over whelming bias AGAINST D2 passenger cars. (less than 1/5 of 1% of the passenger vehicle fleet ( of 254.1 M) is D2 )
So I am sure VW finds itself in a catch 22 situation. They want diesel models to take off, but want NO real competition!? VW will probably TRY to make as much hay as they can while the D2 issues are in the so called "perfect storm" scenario.
Almost all the oem's that have signalled an interest in bringing D2 passenger cars have let their schedules slip.
2009 VW TDI's are really the only game in town. BMW is less than 5 per dealership to must order. I called one BMW dealership to inquire and they flat said ZERO inventory, but please come down (see the gassers in stock) to order a D2 BMW 335 D twin turbo. A day later, they had located one from another dealership and had it delivered and I was able to demo; first customer test miles.
It will be interesting what the actual real world mpg will be. I think anything over 25 mpg ( real world 25-32 mpg) will make the V6 Touareg a hit !
link title
Now that we are on a roll, D2 cheaper than RUG to PUG.
Anything less than that and you can rest assured the "system" is NOT serious about the actual passenger car percentage switch to so called "alternative fuel".