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
We're in this burg visiting an old friend for a couple of days so I'll try to get a pic of pump prices soon.
Word on the street is that the fuel mix-up is typical for this particular station.
This is a "painted" sign and I didn't pull up to the pump to double check:
That beats the Volt on the highway by a long shot after 40 miles when the battery is depleted.
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130418/AUTO0103/304180390/1121/auto01/New-C- - hevy-Cruze-diesel-gets-46-mpg-on-highway
Meanwhile, her in England our local price for ULSD is now down to an almost bargain basement equivalent of $8.29 per US Gall. Mostly TAX + VAT, (i.e. tax on tax), of course.
:sick:
Try $3.54/g here in Phoenix. D2 has fallen in price the last couple of months, this is less then premium unleaded and slightly higher than regular unleaded.
Time for a GC, AZ road trip! Got to get "charged up) @ Sedona !!Well, don't forget: have to do a dual detour to LOST Wages.
On the SOS DD topic, 09 TDI still boring @ 42 mpg in 5 day sloughing commute traffic. 03 TDI still posting 50 mpg (48-52 mpg, of late 51 to 52 mpg). Had a very unfortunate thing happen to the 09 TDI. The drivers side head lamp gave up the ghost. (We had to R/R to avoid a FIT) I am firmly convinced the DRL mandatory (no good deed goes unpunished) has a lot to do with the 4 year (55,000 miles) operating life.
Probably more correctly each of those VW models has its' DIESEL variant. Given the fact the 09 is 4 MY's diesel has a 39% advantage (in arrears).
While the 2013 Cruze posts 32.1 mpg (eco@ 33.1) gasser, the diesel version (mpg (real world) is not even listed (fueleconomy.gov).
This is just a quick trip to use up the last of our air miles. Maybe we'll be able to do a drive up in another year or three and we can meet at the Pump House or somewhere.
Pretty amazing to have any jets, much less several, serving a town of maybe six thousand people.
I'm sorry you're missing the Interior, but we'll hold out for a next time. At least you weren't sick!
on pure highway driving it gets 36 at real highway speeds.
1.8L motor, manual transmission.
(for comparison, my 3 VW TDIs always got 45 to 48 mpg, tank after tank, except for the passat tdi which got 37 mpg, all with leadfoot-driving).
It all starts with a 2.0L turbocharged clean diesel engine designed in Italy, built in Germany and installed in the Cruze at our factory in Lordstown, Ohio.
on pure highway driving it gets 36 at real highway speeds.
1.8L motor, manual transmission.
(for comparison, my 3 VW TDIs always got 45 to 48 mpg, tank after tank, except for the passat tdi which got 37 mpg, all with leadfoot-driving)."...
I am glad you posted this !! The real world really has a way of being well... real.
We (4 adults and app 600#'s) decided to take the SOS DD trip (210 miles one way, after 8 pm). The projected "good" news: I was looking forward to just another SOS/DD. (posted in a few past posts, aka SMOOTH and no traffic sailing). This trip takes normally 3 to 3.25 hours (point a to point b). The real world? I surely KNEW we took the WRONG way this time as I stared at easily 1 to 1.5 miles of back up 4/5 lanes in EACH direction. Turns out the same trip took, between 4.25 to 4.5 hours. Seems there were massive choke points due to night road work, huge flows of night traffic and a accident site saw fit to post an accident, injuries and one fatality. (RIP I heard two helo's and numerous ambulances and other emergency vehicles). What added to the "mess" was Friday night tractor trailer work night (elephant races). Shifties SAC race ways didn't disappoint @ a 85/90 mph pace. Long story short, computer on a 3.0 L TDI posted 29.7 mpg on the (same) UPGRADE portion.
This time on the mountain UPGRADE, I did happen to catch a 4 ship of seemingly faster moving traffic. I inadvertently (defacto) took the lead, as no one took time to pass me at numerous turn out areas and 2 lane per way passing lanes. @ higher altitude, I did make it a point to SLOW down to let (all three) 3 pass (one at a time it turns out) and take the 4th and last position just for the point of view. I was halfway expecting at least one to probably ALL to leave me in their long since cold RUG/PUG vapor trails. That projection never happened. I have gotten to know the twists and turns during the day, so normally do little to no braking. Again longer story short, I got to see massive and frequent braking and had to adjust downward a faster pace. Since I "lit" and "led" the way, they all could follow FASTER. I thought maybe I was the geezer in the lead. It was funny to see the reality from the 4th and last position, not even close. Will see what the downgrade posts.
on pure highway driving it gets 36 at real highway speeds.
1.8L motor, manual transmission.
Cruze 1.8 MT - EPA is 25/36. Sounds like you are hitting the ratings. 33 mixed with a leadfoot sounds pretty good.
23 Civic Type-R / 22 MDX Type-S / 21 Tesla Y LR / 03 Montero Ltd
FWIW, I believe the numbers mentioned before for the Cruze, is usually the turbo 1.4, which is known to use less fuel than the 1.8. And of course, especially when comparing max potential with other vehicles, it's not only the 1.4, it's also the Eco, which has the lower rolling resistant tires and the grill shutter, among other lesser influential mpg increasing touches. (slightly less weight).
That said, I suspect that if the 1.4 was rugged all the time, it has not only the ability to draw a lot of tickets, but I'm pretty sure like any gas/turbo (unlike a diesel turbo...or certainly not anywhere near the same league of) if you are heavy footed all the time, they have the ability to burn a lot of fuel. So in your case, I'll bet your 1.8 would get considerably higher mpg driven your usual style. The fact that it gets such impressive mileage rugged all the time..considering the Cruze weight too, the engine ssounds like it has a very pro-active self-regulating output, even when pressed. Probably why many say that engine with the auto feels lethargic. (not me, but then I credited its urge (or lack of...and it wasn't that bad at all) considering all the factors. Yes, the turbo would be my pick I think, but maybe not if I start hearing of longevity issues and we don't know that yet. Same with all those Ford Ecoboost engines..
Is the 1.8 a good engine? In terms of...let's say...being the absolute polar opposite of GM's 2.4 which they use in even as new as 2010 Equinox's? What a disaster THOSE poor excuses for an ICE are.
What year is your Passat? A stick?
The new ones must be geared perfectly, cuz they actually claim higher mpg in top cog (stick) than in a Golf, which is a far narrower, lighter car. From what I hear, they're getting it too. The majority new Passat owners I've seen have the stick. And surprisingly (to me anyway) about a full half of them are women. I think one was a Real Estate Agent. I'll bet the only thing she longs for in that car in this area is an AWD option. But this is VW we're talking about, and getting an AWD turbo diesel in a car on this side of the ocean, is akin to pulling teeth..
I agree. If he had a 1.4 rugged all the time, I don't think it would post anything nearly as impressive has his 33 lifetime avg so far. Just amazing.
The Cruze is one car that doesn't penalize you too much with auto vs stick. The auto gets almost as much as the stick on the hwy. This suggests to me that the regular stick (not the Eco which has noted higher final drive gearing still) has a similar final drive as the auto. Something which has been rare in the past.
edit - does anyone know what makes a low rolling resistant tire what it is? I assumed it was a more flexible sidewall and used usual PSI figures. But I have read a comment in past that suggested the LRR tires use 50 psi and up. Is that true? And it probably still must have a more flexible sidewall. If not, what a challenge to tune the suspension so that it's not choppy on stutter surfaces or expansion joints.
Car and Driver test on the US 1.4 Eco: 0-60 in 8.4 sec.
23 Civic Type-R / 22 MDX Type-S / 21 Tesla Y LR / 03 Montero Ltd
The engine has VERY useable torque, from about 1600 revs and up. I think peak is around 148 lbft at 1850 or something. Pretty useable and does not at all feel like a slouch.
Even in the diesel, the earlier VW turbos..say 86 to early 90's Jetta TD, had issues with the turbo pulling oil once north of only 125000 miles. Not all owners idle down for a minute to cool and lube the turbo just prior to shut down. Living on a hill and driving aggressively up that hill and pulling into your drive and shutting down right away would be perfect recipe for premature issues related to turbos both in gas or diesel, but especially in gas. I looked at the Cruze, and while I might have missed it, I didn't see a gravity feed reservoir to supply cooling/lubing oil to the bearings after the engine's pump system was shut down. Maybe it is done with an electric motor somewhere? If so...complexity that could be avoided with gravity feed.
So what I am getting at, is turbos becoming more common-place in the general public's hands may have a bigger challenge to do the higher miles that people have been accustomed to getting with their NA engines of the past. FE is great, sure, but only as long as someone isn't paying for it in other ways down the road. That would be my caution if choosing any new gas turbo vehicle.
-Rocky
The downgrade posted 32 mpg (actually 32.35 mpg- round down)
my driving mix is about 60% highway, 30% 'suburban', 10% downtown/city.
I floor my low-power cars like Cruze constantly in order to get to the traffic speed... This style of driving is actually quite efficient.
It is a falsehood that "jackrabbit starts" always lower mpg. When used properly, the jackrabbit-start to get up to traffic speed, then shift to maximum gear, is the way to maximize mpg for typical traffic.
If I might be permitted to interject an "off topic" response to elias' response on the gasser side. I find that (sentiment/response) VERY true within the operating parameters of a 04 Honda Civic gasser (any vehicle really). I regularly get 38-42 mpg (diesel counterpart being 48-52 mpg) . ( one can google for the old/new EPA figures and ones favorite mpg reporting web sites) This is over 120,000 miles PLUS, so it is really not a fluke or outlier (for ours anyway), AND using up to 4 drivers. I realize from following Civic boards that those results are considered outlier to outright lies by many Civic drivers. :sick: (SOS DD) In addition, I bought that model without a tach. :P But then after a while it is a tad like riding a bike. You just instinctively know the drill/s. So more to the DIESEL point, the drills are different for the diesel ("marbles in a can," low and SLOW) vs whiny Honda Civic engine, albeit point A to point B being EXACTLY the same.
This is what you wrote, and since I have driven a cruze, but not with a 6 spd manual, it wasn't slug nor was it fast like a Porsche GT3, but your comment that you FLOOR IT ALL THE TIME, says a lot. So yes, I was talking to you. The cruze I drive, had no problem keeping up with traffic, no one was honking at me to move faster, so again, not too sure why people have to drive so fast. Now, maybe, JUST maybe if you didn't FLOOR IT ALL THE TIME, you might get better MPG...
I think this says a lot about you and where you drive. In So CA if you are piddling along in the left lane at 75 MPH you can get a ticket. Slower traffic must move to the right by law. It also has a lot to do with your terrain. Around here we have a lot of long up hill stretches. Driving a gutless 4 banger gas car can be frustrating as well as noisy. You may like to hear those little pistons going up and down at speeds that will get them up the long grades. I do not and will not subject myself to such a vehicle. Where any 4 or 5 cylinder diesel I have driven on those same highways had no problem keeping up with traffic in high gear and low RPMs.
else it would be a case of nonstop unintended acceleration.
avoiding "flooring it" it in those highway situations will not affect my mpg much.
driving 45 or 55 on the highway would improve my mpg, but that's not going to happen when traffic is moving at 75 or 80+. the slowest i'll go in that situation is about 65 in the right lane...
any slower than 65 on the interstate highway seems absurd, but 50 or 60 can be very nice on a state highway.
i think this all started as a comparison of cruze diesel mpg with the cruze gasser mpg (and price too maybe). if the cruze diesel were available wiith manual transmission or a wagon formfactor, i'd probably trade my 2011 M6 for one.
happy motoring!
Again not to be a cheerleader for VW, but it would seem they endeavor to offer more choice per model than other oems in each's model line, diesel now being ONLY ONE of those choices. A bread and butter example would be the Jetta.
It offers several transmission choices (for those bemoaning the lost of M/T or still like slush box ):
1. DSG 6 speed A/M
2. A/T
3. M/T 6 speed.
4. M/T 5 speed
Engine choices (include several gassers )
1. 4 cylinder
2. 5 cylinder
3. turbo diesel
4. turbo gasser/hybrid
For me, engine choices literally approaches TMI and some of the lines really start to blur. So for another example, Jetta offers a turbo gasser/hybrid that sports 45 mpg. To some, that would be competitve to say a CVT Prius.
I do not drive like a granny, but for people to come on a public forum and say, "my XXXX get horrible gas mileage, BTW, I floor it where ever I go" doesn't lead to a creditable posting. Since most people do not "floor it" all the time. That data point isn't worth much. I'm sure a lot of people on this forum at times do not baby their cars, will still get 85% of the best mileage. This says a lot about a diesel. Granted diesels are not for everybody, my partner hated them, but now, he see's the advantages of having them, this is why we are waiting for the new BMW diesels to arrive so we can take a look.
But then on the other hand, both on downgrade/upgrade/s, I have had Prius' @ my six UNWILLING to pass despite using turn outs AND( extreme) right lanes.
I've looked and can't find where elias said that. He did suggest that the Cruze does not get EPA, but he was forthright in indicating his driving style.
Since most people do not "floor it" all the time. That data point isn't worth much.
On the contrary, his findings given his driving style, is quite useful. It tells readers that this is about as poor mpg as you're going to get with a stick 1.8 Cruze. When you factor in the elaboration later, I found that info more useful and detailed than many many other posts in fuel mileage threads where the grey areas of how they drive is open to vast interpretation.
In the past I've read a poster claim they have gentle non-aggressive or perceive their driving style should be conducive to getting way better FE than they are complaining about, but then when you read further, and/or continue to see other posts where they elaborated further, you can only shake your head in disbelief, cuz they are living in a world of fantasy. In many cases it is amazing that they are getting as good a mpg as they do, given their real world habits.
Indeed that is one thing that still amazes about the TDI's (3 total now), albeit a 3.0 L (BIG) one. So for example, if I were not "happy" with the TDI's R/T of 32/42/50 mpgs, I would need to decide on changes to the driving style, given where I did my point a to b driving destinations.
On the other hand, I know that 20 mpg (even @ real world) would be almost DREAMING (more like 18/19 mpg) if I were in a gasser/s Touareg and/or A MDX, BMW X5, etc. :shades: :lemon: In terms of percentage, the gasser/s consumes 60% more fuel. If I drive the gasser like I do the diesel/s, consumption would likely be more like 78% MORE.
So true. A few pages back you wrote what your family member..bros? I forget, but what he gets with the MDX on the same trip you always do. Actually I was amazed he got as good as he did...to the point I even wonder if he wasn't embellishing a little so his gasser would not be paled even worse by the VW TD.
Btw, what does SOS DD mean?
He did an 85 mpg highway jaunt in a Prius C. His was a round trip, and while certainly shorter than the Taylors drive he could not take advantage of prevailing winds.
Yes the Prius does better in the city as he can get over 100 mpg.
As another point of reference he averaged 59 mpg in an automatic Accord that is rated 31 mpg highway.
http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?p=338555