backtop


Print 42 comment(s) - last by StanO360.. on Jul 5 at 10:13 PM

Study claims diesel vehicles are cheaper to own

A new survey has been published looking at the cost of ownership for gasoline vehicles compared to diesel vehicles. The University of Michigan conducted the study for Robert Bosch, LLC.

The study determined that diesel vehicles save owners between $2,000 to $6,000 in total ownership costs during a 3- to 5-year period compared to similar gasoline vehicles. The data was compiled by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.

"Overall, the results of our analyses show that diesel vehicles provide owners with a TCO (total cost of ownership) that is less than that of the gas versions of the same vehicles," according to the study. "The estimates of savings for three and five years of ownership vary from a low of $67 in three years to a high of $15,619 in five years.”


2014 Volkswagen Golf Variant (aka Jetta Sportwagen for the U.S. market)

The study claims that Volkswagen Jetta owners saved $3,128 while Volkswagen Golf owners saved an estimated $5,013 compared to owners of similar gasoline-powered vehicles. The study also finds that all of the diesel vehicles had better miles per gallon figures then gasoline versions with diesel is offering between 8% and 44% higher fuel economy.

The study also shows that nine of the 10 diesel vehicles held their value better the comparable gasoline vehicles.
 
One has to keep in mind, however, that Bosch has quite a big financial stake in these results as it produces high-pressure fuel pumps for diesel manufactures like Volkswagen which have a tendency for failing in late model vehicles.

Source: Autoblog



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Lord 666 on 7/1/2013 9:28:56 AM , Rating: 2
Those cost savings are for 75,000 miles driven over five years. When I sold the 06 TDI Jetta with 150,000 miles on it after seven years, the cost savings were in line with their formulas.

On the way to work, averaged 45mpg in mostly highway driving in the new Passat with 1000 miles on it and 2 weeks of driving. Don't have that warm and fuzzy feeling for it yet.




RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Dribble on 7/1/2013 9:42:35 AM , Rating: 2
It's not just the fuel savings. Diesel is better for engines - it's non corrosive and runs at lower rpm. The engines last much longer which effects used sales.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Mint on 7/1/2013 10:04:26 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, but most engines nowadays have very few major issues in the fuel subsystem or engine block during the first 5 years. These seem like pretty outlandish claims to me.

I wonder if there's some self-selection going on, with diesel drivers doing more steady state highway miles, since that's their primary strength.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Dribble on 7/1/2013 10:33:56 AM , Rating: 2
...and after those 5 years you sell the car. Which is worth more - the diesel with the engine that has a lot of life in it yet, or the petrol that's going to die much sooner? The diesel that's more economical, or the expensive to run petrol (someone who can only afford to buy a 5 year old car is going to care more about costs then the person who could afford to buy it new)?


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By dnd728 on 7/1/2013 11:09:44 AM , Rating: 3
The thing is, in Europe lately diesels started losing market share.
Here are some reasons:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1082978_are-di...
quote:
Most smaller European diesels don't currently need urea injection, but new "Euro 6" emissions standards will arrive in September 2014. They're roughly equivalent to U.S. standards that have seen urea injection fitted to every passenger diesel sold in the States except the Volkswagen Golf and Jetta and 2014 Mazda6 diesel.

quote:
At some point, the extra expense of a diesel car simply won't be worth the extra money

quote:
Longer-term maintenance is causing worries too, with those necessary particulate filters often failing for city-bound drivers.

quote:
economical low engine speeds mean exhaust gases don't get hot enough to burn off the particulate matter--leading to clogged filters and expensive replacements.

quote:
Small gas engines improving

quote:
Today, they're starting to disappear, replaced by tiny-capacity, turbocharged gasoline engines like Fiat's TwinAir and the 1.0-liter Ford Ecoboost. Volkswagen has said it will build no future diesel of less than 1.6 liters for its volume cars.

quote:
there's much less difference in gallons of fuel consumed.


By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2013 11:24:48 AM , Rating: 2
I can attest to the particulate filter thing. I used to bread down all the time because of those things. I believe in the concept but they have to make them reliable.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By DerMack on 7/2/2013 6:36:06 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure how well known it actually is but the cars are meant to burn up the particles on the filters once the onboard sensors detect high enough pressure drop across the filter. During the burn cycle the engine will run wierdly for some time and most people just panick at this point thinking somethings gone wrong and stop the engine and this really will ruin the filter.. so let it run...


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:21:12 AM , Rating: 2
So the thing about the diesel particular filters is that a lot of people don't understand how they work. When the computer detects that the DPF is getting "full", the engine sprays diesel fuel into the engine exhaust directly before the exhaust enters the DPF. When it contacts the exhaust gasses, it ignites, reaching temps in excess of 1500 degrees Fahrenheit. This causes the particulates trapped in the filter to be burned off. However, since this system relies on the exhaust gasses to ignite the fuel it can only activate once the engine reaches are certain operating temperature. If the engine rarely (or never) gets up to peak temperature then the DPF recharge can't happen and the DPF will eventually fail. This is more common in a city driving scenario where the car is used for a lot of short drives, or a lot of low-speed stop-and-go situations.

BTW, some cars use a blue urea injection system in place of the DPF/recharge system (VW has AddBlue, Mercedes has BlueTec, etc), but those tend to be larger and more expensive cars (Passat or E-Class), and as such aren't used so much as "city cars" in Europe.


By superstition on 7/3/2013 11:48:31 AM , Rating: 2
It's not in place of, but in addition to. Urea mainly deals with nitrous oxide emissions. It does improve fuel economy in a DPF system by requiring less fuel to be used. This is why the Passat TDI gets better mileage than the Jetta, Golf, and Golf Wagon.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Mint on 7/1/2013 2:48:13 PM , Rating: 4
This is exactly the type of thing that makes me skeptical of the study in the article. I mean really, up to $15k over 5 years? It's not like diesels are maintenance free and get 100 MPG while gasoline engines are built like an XBox 360.


By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:22:32 AM , Rating: 2
By my estimates I can hit $7500 in 6 years with a Jetta TDI. I expect that with larger more expensive cars (Mercedes BlueTec, perhaps) you would see even better numbers.


By Lord 666 on 7/1/2013 12:09:43 PM , Rating: 2
@Mint - You have a valid point as it is assumed most diesel owners anticipate higher resale value, so they take better overall care of the car the entire time.

Additionally, I always go to the same Hess station and at the same pump... unless during a long trip. The consistency helps. The biggest thing is not running the tank dry, but refilling by 1/4 remaining.


By Reclaimer77 on 7/1/2013 5:08:40 PM , Rating: 3
This study is highly suspect. I haven't dug into their methodology yet, but at a glance you just know it's horribly flawed when it claims, as you pointed out, petrol cars have fuel subsystem issues or block problems in the first 5 years. Huh? Maybe cars made in the 1970's!

Diesels cost more upfront, like a LOT more.
Diesel fuel costs more, like a LOT more.
Diesel maintenance costs are more, like a LOT more.

Yet, somehow, they are magically finding thousands and thousands of dollars in savings? Yeah right lol.

Compounding this is the fact that in America there are very few option for diesel passenger vehicles. You'll probably end up with a VW, which any VW owner can tell you, there's NO savings there with the constant breakdowns and mechanics visits.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By Richlet on 7/2/2013 12:32:57 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Diesel fuel costs more, like a LOT more


It does? Zoiks. Here it costs on avg 15 cents *less* per gallon than regular gasoline. >.<


By BRB29 on 7/2/2013 10:05:13 AM , Rating: 2
This is a study based in the US. Diesel normally cost 10-20% more in the US.


By StanO360 on 7/5/2013 10:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
Remember in the US the vast majority of freight, Truck and Rail is moved with Diesel. There is a limited amount of diesel or gas that can be taken from a barrel of oil, it's not either or.


RE: impressive study even being sponsored by bosch
By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:15:16 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure why you think that there are so many issues with VWs, but they are generally reviewed quite highly. Especially the diesel models.

Anyway, according to my math I'm paying about 9% more per gallon for diesel fuel, but getting almost 50% better fuel economy. Between that and the less frequent oil changes (10k for TDI vs 3k for gas) I'm saving around $1200/year. I paid about $1800 more for my TDI than I would have for the gasoline model, and when I resell it at the end of 5-6 years (if that's what I do) then I will be able to get close to another $2000 for it than I could for a gasoline model, as the diesels tend to have a significantly higher resale value. So over the course of 6 years I'm looking at close to $7500 in savings (even after accounting for the higher purchase price).


By superstition on 7/3/2013 12:03:52 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm not sure why you think that there are so many issues with VWs, but they are generally reviewed quite highly. Especially the diesel models.

Check out the B5 Passat TDI.

Here's a nice list of issues:

Timing chain that was too weak. Warps or snaps. Bad for engine! VW offers gear retrofit... won't pay for it. Out of owner's pocket! Apparently Europeans were treated to a free replacement. The part is known as a "balance shaft module".

But, don't worry. It only costs thousands of dollars to get the timing chain replaced with gears. Or you can treat yourself to a ruined engine. I love how dealers sell these cars at top dollar without mentioning this small caveat.

Oh, and then there are the wonderful Pumpe Düse cam lobes that wear out because of poor engineering.

And, if that's not enough, the car was assembled as VW's Mexican plant, which was a pinnacle of quality during these years... just as the New Beetle owners.


By StanO360 on 7/5/2013 10:13:54 PM , Rating: 2
The Passat is a rarity, most seem to be $4-$5k more and don't get twice the mileage. But I think that this is because the Passat gas is not that efficient. When a Mazda6 is getting 38mpg on the highway now.


Really?
By BRB29 on 7/1/13, Rating: 0
RE: Really?
By Geminiman on 7/1/2013 9:27:15 AM , Rating: 2
Well the question that's not directly answered is if TCO includes fuel or not. It's implied that their metric does not include the cost of fuel and the savings are ON TOP of the savings in fuel over the same period.

So the number is actually much higher.

Given that diesel will cost you $2500 or so more (give or take) you gotta get it back. If you're getting it back on fuel AND TCO then you have a serious win.


RE: Really?
By Dorkyman on 7/1/2013 9:58:15 AM , Rating: 2
From a different web site: "The study developed three and five year cost estimates of depreciation by modeling used vehicle auction data and fuel costs by modeling government data. The study also combined these estimates with three and five year estimates for repairs, fees and taxes, insurance, and maintenance from an outside data source."

So this is, as stated, a TCO analysis.

As an aside, I think most people assume diesels cost less to own, but they trade that off with convenience, noise, smell, and power. In the past, diesel had issues in those areas.


RE: Really?
By BRB29 on 7/1/2013 11:01:47 AM , Rating: 1
I know it's Total Cost of Ownership savings. This has been known since at least the 90s. Diesel engines are more durable and reliable. Dependability is the biggest factor in determining the value of used cars. Diesels also have less parts to break and and maintain.

Like I said, do we need a survey to know this? It has been done many times already. It would be more useful if they did a survey on satisfaction of owning a diesel vehicle. The dreaded shakes and noise of yesteryear is mostly gone. The smoke is nowhere near it used to be. The only bad thing it seem to have now is the urea tank and some gas stations not offering diesel.


RE: Really?
By Spuke on 7/1/2013 3:28:14 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Diesels also have less parts to break and and maintain.
Here we go again. Which parts are these? Just so you know, I own a diesel truck and it's definitely NOT cheaper to own than its gas equivalent and there are MORE parts not less.


RE: Really?
By Lord 666 on 7/1/2013 4:52:19 PM , Rating: 2
Come on, you are just teasing him. He's talking about spark plugs, ignition coils, and spark plug wires. Those are countered in a diesel by glow plugs, DPF, and urea solution.

Any dually meant to pull horse trailers or boats is going to be less frugal than a petrol model. A Jetta 2.5 or 2.0 is going to be less frugal than the TDI model. Same for the Passat and apparently for the E250.

Honestly, this debate is going to be moot in 5-10 years. Diesel is just a stop-gap measure until hybrid/diesels come down in price. Saw my second Tesla S today; all black and looked great.
The milestones to be mindful of are 2017, 2025, and 2030. That last one is big because that was the deadline for commercial diesels to meet emissions.


RE: Really?
By BRB29 on 7/2/2013 10:46:53 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Come on, you are just teasing him. He's talking about spark plugs, ignition coils, and spark plug wires. Those are countered in a diesel by glow plugs, DPF, and urea solution. Any dually meant to pull horse trailers or boats is going to be less frugal than a petrol model. A Jetta 2.5 or 2.0 is going to be less frugal than the TDI model. Same for the Passat and apparently for the E250.


What?
Glow plugs = ~120k+ miles, most people run it way past that. It's common for a diesel car to have original glow plugs its entire life.
DPF = ~120k+ miles, only newer diesel cars have catalytic converters so you can't even say it's an extra part all the time. At the same time, many gas cars have more than one cat converter.
urea solution =~10k miles and barely cost anything.

Maintenance intervals for diesels are just longer and there are less wear/tear on the drivetrain due to its efficiency.

I guess I just can't argue with someone who thinks a jetta 2.5 is going to be less frugal the TDI model. Logic just went out the window there.


RE: Really?
By Lord 666 on 7/2/2013 12:30:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I guess I just can't argue with someone who thinks a jetta 2.5 is going to be less frugal the TDI model. Logic just went out the window there.


Whoa, major reading comprehension fail. Less frugal means it consumes more gas.


RE: Really?
By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:27:32 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think most people assume diesels cost less to own, but they trade that off with convenience, noise, smell, and power.


That may have been true historically, but it hasn't been the case for a long time. My 2013 Jetta TDI isn't appreciably louder than any other car. I've never seen diesel smoke coming out the rear or it (or other modern TDIs). There is no exhaust smell that I've noted, though when the DPF recharge happens there can be a slight smell if your windows are down and you come to a stoplight. Power isn't and issue with the turbo. Horsepower is comparable to most other economy cars, and torque (i.e., "get up and go) is WAAAAAAY better.


RE: Really?
By Reclaimer77 on 7/1/2013 5:00:39 PM , Rating: 2
BRB you seem to take issue with almost any article written here. You're always making some smart ass comment about how everyone already knew whatever, or how it's just more "Jason Mick sensationalism", whatever.

I'm sure I speak for many people when I say, nobody is keeping you here. I suggest you find a website that's more in line with what you're looking for.


RE: Really?
By superstition on 7/3/2013 11:55:21 AM , Rating: 2
I frequently disagree with BRB's posts, but telling a critic to leave because they are critiquing something is hardly the hallmark of healthy debate.

Similarly, being able to hide comments that aren't clearly spam impedes good debate.


Total Cost of Ownership?
By Apone on 7/1/2013 3:31:44 PM , Rating: 2
I honestly am considering making the jump to diesel flavor but am curious, how much would it cost to replace applicable parts like a timing belt, water pump, serpentine belts, etc.? I think these parts should also be factored into this TCO study.

I've also heard that traditionally, German automaker maintenance has been relatively more expensive than Japanese vehicle maintenance which is why I'm happy to pay only $350 for a timing belt/water pump replacement for my Civic and Accord.




RE: Total Cost of Ownership?
By Spuke on 7/1/2013 3:53:52 PM , Rating: 2
Timing belt with water pump can cost $1000. Some places less, some more. Sometimes the serpentine belt tensioner (it rattles sometimes) needs to be replace along with the belt itself. You can do the serpentine belt yourself though and save some cash. I think the belt is $30 but the tensioner is like $80 or something like that.


RE: Total Cost of Ownership?
By Bad-Karma on 7/2/2013 12:29:58 AM , Rating: 2
And in the case of my F350 & 550, it used to be over $170 for a full synthetic oil change and filter.

I switched both over to oil bypass-filters systems. Now each one holds over 6.5 gallons of oil. My 550 is now over 102K miles with the same oil, minus what oil is lost during the filter changes every 25K.

But yeah, people don't tend to realize that maintenance on a diesel tends to be more often and the parts can be quite a bit pricier. The other big issue is that a rated diesel mechanic can be double the hourly rate of your normal gas engine one.


RE: Total Cost of Ownership?
By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:33:41 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
But yeah, people don't tend to realize that maintenance on a diesel tends to be more often and the parts can be quite a bit pricier. The other big issue is that a rated diesel mechanic can be double the hourly rate of your normal gas engine one.


It sounds like you're coming from the world of larger trucks, not economical diesel cars. As far as maintenance goes, the schedule on my 2013 Jetta TDI is oil change once every 10k miles. They do change the fuel filter with the oil change. But VW also includes all scheduled maintenance on the TDI for the first 36k miles for free. At any rate, when you consider that gasoline engines will want roughly 3 times as many oil changes (now who needs maintenance more often?), you can still pay a little more for the TDI oil changes and come out well ahead.

Labor costs at the VW dealer are the same regardless of which engine you have.


RE: Total Cost of Ownership?
By JediJeb on 7/2/2013 2:31:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
when you consider that gasoline engines will want roughly 3 times as many oil changes


That is only if you buy into the oil company sales recommendation of changing oil every 3000 miles. Using synthetic I have been going 10k miles on every oil change in my gasoline vehicles with no problems for almost 20 years. Most vehicle manufacturers even state oil change intervals for gasoline vehicles at 5000 to 7000 miles now days.


RE: Total Cost of Ownership?
By Jeffk464 on 7/1/2013 4:15:23 PM , Rating: 2
Last study I heard, the Japanese still beat everyone in reliability.


Sorry but I have to call foul
By Dr of crap on 7/1/2013 12:45:52 PM , Rating: 2
MOST cars for the first 5 years WILL NOT cost thousands in repairs. In fact most will only need regular maintenance. Yes there will be the occasional one that has a bad part that will cost the owner big dollars, but that is the exception.

This study is way messed up.




RE: Sorry but I have to call foul
By djc208 on 7/1/2013 1:14:29 PM , Rating: 2
I think that's what makes the study valid. If you push the dates out it gets more interesting but harder to determine since once parts start failing it's hard to keep comparing information. Bare minimum over what should be the most reliable period of a vehicle's life, is a diesel still worth it? This says yes.

As you aluded to, most diesel owners also buy them for the longevity they have been known for, and that's a different animal. Diesel repairs can get very expensive very quick, it would be interesting to see how that advantage holds up over longer periods of time, but there are so many variables it would be impossible to really compare the two to the point no one could cry foul.


RE: Sorry but I have to call foul
By kmm1191 on 7/2/2013 10:42:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
MOST cars for the first 5 years WILL NOT cost thousands in repairs. In fact most will only need regular maintenance.


That's why the cost savings reported in the study are so low. Compre the Jetta TDI to the Jetta gas model. Oil changes on the TDI are every 10k miles vs 3k miles on the gas. Diesel fuel costs are somewhat higher than gasoline (about 9% higher where I live), but I get close to 50% better fuel economy. I drive about 19k miles/year, and just in fuel and oil change costs I'm saving close to $1200/year.

I average about 42mpg combined. The Jetta gasoline model is 28mpg combined. Fuel costs where I am today are around $3.50/gal for gas and $3.80/gal for diesel. It fluctuates, but diesel is roughly 9-10% more expensive than gasoline where I live. Over the course of 100k miles that's going to be about $3500 in fuel savings alone. Over the course of 100k miles the TDI will need 10 oil changes, and the gasoline model will need 33. That's a big chunk of change there as well, even if a diesel oil change is marginally more expensive.


By superstition on 7/3/2013 11:52:30 AM , Rating: 2
However...

The DSG servicing isn't inexpensive and VW only offers a manual TDI in a very basic Passat trim line. VW's reliability track record hasn't been so good. Fuel system failures have been a problem, according to accounts on tdiforum. They say metal shards go through the fuel system, causing an expensive replacement.


Ethanol
By btc909 on 7/1/2013 1:10:18 PM , Rating: 2
Once E15 is rammed down the consumers throats it'll make Diesel even more enticing.




"So if you want to save the planet, feel free to drive your Hummer. Just avoid the drive thru line at McDonalds." -- Michael Asher











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki