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?

1282283285287288788

Comments

  • flightnurseflightnurse Valley of HellPosts: 2,178
    So can I assume you have a VW Touareg? Are dealers making good deal on them?
  • scwmcanscwmcan Niagara, CanadaPosts: 399
    edited March 2013
    For Gary mostly, but others may be interested, I heard an ad on the radio today for the GLK diesel, so apparently it is available up here ( or will be very shortly). I didn't hear any details, and I haven't looked at the web site yet, it started at around $43,500 up here which is $1,400 less than the v6 version. It has a combined rating of 7.2l/100km or 32.7mpg, so fuel economy is good. The price in the states is likely a bit lower, and I would assume it should be available down there as well.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited March 2013
    It does happen to be one. I am thinking one of the first considerations is whether a CUV makes sense for you, THEN a diesel. I actually could have just as easily gone with any number of diesel models. In fact, I went with other than CUV diesels first. So really my sense of it has been VW has been fairly motivated and this has been true since I ventured into it with the 2003 Jetta TDI.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I will be interested in the GLK250 BlueTec. I think it is capable of 40 MPG on the highway. 6 months ago the MB dealer told me it should be here soon. Soon has come and gone. Not sure when it will make it. The Jeep GC diesel and the ML350 Bluetec are at the top of my list. With the VW Touareg TDI not far behind. I have not taken the X5 diesel off my list. Though I need to see the newest model. The 2009 I drove had a horrible NAV unit.
  • scwmcanscwmcan Niagara, CanadaPosts: 399
    Don't know why it isn't down there, it is available in Canada so that should be a good sign ( I believe we did something stupid like start using the California emissions standards up here), so hopefully they will keep their commitment to offer in the states. The website here only gives the combined number, but it should be very close to 40mpg on the highway with the combined being 32.7, however I belive our ratings are still higher than the states ( though maybe more accurate for diesels?). I would think Mercedes woud sell quite a few of them if they were able to advertise a crossover with close to 40 mpg highway ratings though, and if it turns out to be cheaper than the v6 version in the states. If they don't release it soon they may lose the advantage of being the first out with a diesel crossover with that kind of milage, doesn't make sense to me if it is ready to not be offering it now.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    edited March 2013
    When I talked to the MB dealer he was under the assumption they would get the GLK350 Bluetec. Which makes very little sense. It would not get any better mileage than the ML and is smaller. The EPA site does not have any rating for them yet. Edmunds says coming soon for the GLK250 Bluetec.

    The UK site has the ML250 Bluetec combined rating at 44.8 MPG that would be 37.3 MPG US. And 42 MPG US on the highway. I would love to get my hands on the steering wheel of that beauty.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    Nice mpg, but I would much prefer to see the CRV if I was looking for an SUV, and it is rated at over 50 mpg combined with the 2.2 liter diesel and MT.

    It will take a mainstream model like that with a diesel and killer mpg to really gain momentum for diesel. Diesel Camry or Accord would really get diesel out there. We will see what the Mazda 6 does, but it is still kind of a bit player.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited March 2013
    it has taken so long to just even get the regulators seeing it as logical.

    Good observations you all !

    GLK 250, CRV, etc. The diesel's Passat and Jetta, JSW TDI (lots of etc's but older models) , really have put Toyota, Honda, GM, Ford, Chrysler, et al. on notice regarding the TDI. If I had to guess, to really build the "perfect" motor, we are talking between 2.1 to 2.75 L for the balance between great mpg/torque, and up to twin turbos.

    The over all truth: it has been logical and for a long time to have diesel options wherever there is a gasser, gasser hybrid option E85, natural gas, plug in hybrid, etc. One example is out of 270 M European passenger vehicles, fully 50% + PLUS are diesels. The US market is @ 258.4 M vehicles with less than 5% diesels.

    Underlying all of this are the fact that Northern America is sooooooo overwhelmingly blessed with energy as to be beyond profound. Just the central CA portion is literally and figuratively BEYOND the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    The CRV diesel or not, would not be on my list. They are noisy little CUVs, very basic appliance vehicle. Not something I would want to spend time driving cross country in.

    All the German diesel models are selling very well. As high as 80% in the VW Sportswagen. The Domestics and Japanese have dropped the ball. Chrysler is going to try and catch up with the Jeep GC and small Ram diesels. Not sure what the holdup is on the Cruze diesel. Honda blew it 5 years ago when they could not make their diesel clean enough for CARB. The CRV diesel sold in the EU is not that great for mileage. Not in a league with VW or MB.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    As you can see the small CRV diesel does not match up to the mileage of the ML250 Bluetec. The ML is 1700 lbs heavier, can tow 6000lbs more and is a foot longer. The only thing the Honda has going for it is being cheaper.

    Honda CR-V Fuel Consumption :: 2.2 i-DTEC EX Auto

    Urban Fuel
    34.4 mpg

    Extra Urban
    47.1 mpg

    Combined
    41.5 mpg

    Mercedes Benz M-Class Fuel Consumption :: ML 250 BlueTEC SE

    Urban Fuel
    38.7 mpg

    Extra Urban
    50.4 mpg

    Combined
    44.8 mpg
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    edited March 2013
    I think the ML250 would struggle in the USA---it's expensive and really not enough to lure a person out of a BMW X5 or Cayenne I don't think. No jackrabbit, either.

    Maybe Mercedes is having second thoughts about this vehicle for the US market?

    I think if you're willing to compromise on power and handling to achieve outstanding fuel economy for a decent-sized SUV that will maintain value, then there you go....
  • dudleyrdudleyr Posts: 3,469
    CRV is not just a little cheaper but a lot cheaper and most people don't tow with them anyway. Being 1,700 lbs lighter is a big advantage in many ways.
  • flightnurseflightnurse Valley of HellPosts: 2,178
    the US is getting the GLK250 Blutech, according to the MB dealer I was at, it is to arrive in US dealers at a 2014. E Class is getting the same engine E250 which I thought was interesting, the ML will keep the 350 bluetech. The C class is to get the small diesel too.

    If the GLK250 can do high 30s in combined driving, it will be a winner, with low 40s on the highway...

    BMW hasn't officially released MPG # for it's 2.1 diesel yet, but reports are 2 series wagon should get high 30's easily on the highway..

    It will be interesting to see what other Asian car manufacture will release a diesel in the US..
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    If the GLK250 can come in at entry-level pricing, it should do well; if it gets too expensive for its class/size, that'll be trouble.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited March 2013
    While I think MB wanted to be a BIGGER global player, they might have been a bit early to market with the B/S of Chrysler.

    I think MB MIGHT be able to get way with greater than entry level pricing. I think if they do it that way, they will bank on the aspirational aspects of the brand. In other words, basic (upscaling) customer training. :confuse:

    Yes, I think VW understood the concept, AND more importantly demonstrated IT with the execution of the de-contented Jetta, after it was pounded into them for literally decades (by the US markets) , in contrast to Audi/Porsche/MB/BMW/et al. Secondarily, they took a lot of heat/gas from so called "loyal VW cultists". They were vindicated by not only better subsequent (de-contended) Jetta sales @ lower/affordable price points, but with an additional almost total hit with the launching of the American PASSAT: assembled in the USA !!!
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    Maybe Mercedes is having second thoughts about this vehicle for the US market?

    I am not sure they have ever considered it for the US market. For me driving mostly highways, 369 ft lbs of torque is plenty. More than their V6 standard engine. Better for long uphill runs than the gasser.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    If the GLK250 can come in at entry-level pricing, it should do well; if it gets too expensive for its class/size, that'll be trouble.

    It should be a quite a bit less than the RX hybrid and beat the socks off mileage wise. It will likely out handle the Lexus as well. For those that want a city SUV for racing from the stoplights the RX is probably the best choice. Everything else the MB diesels should satisfy.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    edited March 2013
    ..."For me driving mostly highways, 369 ft lbs of torque is plenty. More than their V6 standard engine. Better for long uphill runs than the gasser."...

    I am actually getting a lot of confirmation (on the road) that a lot of folks (one might encounter on the road) really are either surprised @ or do not understand the issue of turbo diesel torque.

    On higher altitude mountain legs, longer UPGRADEs (2,000 to 5,000 ft): two Corvettes (C5/6 @ different times) saw fit to pass me. I hate to say this, but I really only woke up to them being Corvettes after they passed me in the #2/2 lanes.

    Unbeknownst to them:

    1. I had 5 folks in the vehicle
    2. app 1000 #'s of GEAR
    3. rpm were in sleeps ville
    4. getting 29 mpg.

    Both seemed a bit confused , as I (did not change speeds but) kept up with them (4/5 car lengths behind) approaching 7,386 ft. Down grade was another hoot, but you were talking upgrade.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    It's a tough segment because gas engine crossovers get pretty good MPG compared to the heavier gassers.

    The concept of "small + luxury" is an interesting marketing challenge. To offset the visual problem of size, which clashes with the problem of price (in other words, you expect some small things to be costly, but not so much cars), then you have to dangle some other perk.

    in the case of the MINI, a not-so-cheap small car, the perk was "cute and fun to drive".

    So what's MB's perk going to be to convince someone to pay a substantial sum of money for a crossover of modest size? (probably more than $40,000 out the door).

    It's heavy at 4,250 lbs, so it'll feel "solid". Performance is very frisky 0-60, nonetheless, due to the massive torque.

    Perhaps the "me first" aspect, since the Q3 and X3 won't have a diesel just yet?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,086
    For a few years, my local dealer has been telling me the C diesel is just around the corner. The smaller engine is the real sweet spot - almost as much power as the 6, but more efficient.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,086
    "So what's MB's perk going to be to convince someone to pay a substantial sum of money for a crossover of modest size?"

    It's the same price as the gas (which in my area anyway, still sell like hotcakes) but gets significantly better mileage.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    So what's MB's perk going to be to convince someone to pay a substantial sum of money for a crossover of modest size? (probably more than $40,000 out the door).

    The crossover is just about the perfect vehicle for the 60+ boomer crowd. If they retire with a decent income, they may want to go for the luxury without spending a fortune at the gas pump every 300 miles.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Sonoma, CaliforniaPosts: 64,490
    I don't think the difference in a crossover getting 30 mpg is going to constitute a "fortune" in gas over the GLK250. It's going to be more like $300-$400 a year, especially if the gasser runs regular.

    It's got to be more about luxury than economy to buy this vehicle.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 19,825
    I do think you have something there in that it is a question of "like models over time".

    So for example (I dont know what the GLK250 gasser/diesels gets) VWT 30/20 mpg = 3,333/5,000 gals =1,667 gals over 100,000 miles. Right now, 1,667 more gal @4 per gal = $6,668/10 years/10k miles per year= $667 per year more. Over 10 years time the diesel's resale is/has been @ a premium to the gasser.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,462
    edited March 2013
    So what's MB's perk going to be to convince someone to pay a substantial sum of money for a crossover of modest size? (probably more than $40,000 out the door).

    Not a diesel issue, but MB has to sell on their brand I think. The problem is that BMW and Audi are hurting their luxury sales and even "regular" VWs have grabbed some of their potential "performance" market. I bet Dieter will be gone this year.
  • scwmcanscwmcan Niagara, CanadaPosts: 399
    If the pricing follows the Canadian model, the GLK250 diesel will start out $1500 less that the 350 gas model, which from what I saw on the Mercedes USA site means it could start at around $35,000 down there. As I said the combined milage rating in Canada is 7.2 L/100k or about 33 MPG, note this is combined not highway! This means it is getting 40+ on the highway unless the highway and city MPG are closer than normal, there are no gas model CUV's with AWD getting this kind of milage in Nort America ( the best FWD models are getting 33 mpg highway so there is a significant difference in milage). I think waiting to release it as a 2014 model in the states could be a mistake if Mazda , BMW, Audi or VW beat the to being the first out the gates. I think it could be a very nice CUV for a lot of people, but so could one of the others, it should be interesting to see what develops in the next year or so. I have to take the smart into the dealer for a recall, will have to check out the GLK if I have a chance just to see what it is like ( also the new B Class in interesting as well)
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    ( also the new B Class in interesting as well)

    Don't you get the B class with diesel already? I ran into a couple with a MB B CDI. They said they were from Canada. Though the plates looked European. They were loving the little thing. Looked like a smaller version of the GLK.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,086
    edited March 2013
    No diesel B in Canada, although they have much more tolerant private import rules, so who knows what might get in. It also doesn't really look like a GLK to me, it is a tiny van or a tall hatch:

    image

    I've seen plenty of these in Seattle, with BC plates.
  • gagricegagrice Pahrump, NevadaPosts: 31,432
    I never really compared them closely. I just remember seeing the one and wondering what it was. It was a CDI and the owner said it got great mileage. He may have shipped it home to Canada. They may have easier import rules than we have. That was about 3 years ago. They sell 3 different size diesel engines in the B according to the UK carpages.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 48,086
    If you spend some time in major Canadian cities, you will see freakshow cars that have been privately imported. No lame 25 year rule.

    I think there are 5 different E-class diesel engines in Germany.
This discussion has been closed.