backtop


Print 120 comment(s) - last by Andrwken.. on Aug 12 at 2:14 PM

GM expects rapid diesel adoption through 2020

Despite laggard sales of the Chevrolet Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel, General Motors still has plans to introduce diesel engines into more of its passenger vehicle lineup. When the diesel version of the Chevy Cruze was first introduced over a year ago, Chevy sales chief Don Johnson said that the vehicle would achieve 10 percent of the product mix.
 
Just over a year later, only 5,974 of the diesel-powered Cruzes have been sold, representing just two percent of all Cruze sedans sold in the United States. For comparison, over 46,000 Volkswagen Jetta TDIs (which admittedly has a lot more marketing, history, and mindshare with consumers) were sold during the same period.
 
Two percent is a long way from ten percent, but Chevy’s Rick Kwiecien says that “Cruze diesel sales have been solid and consistent month-to-month, and the Cruze diesel is meeting our sales expectations.”


Chevy Cruze Clean Turbo Diesel
 
And it now looks as though GM will double down on diesel engines in the next few years. GM’s VP of global powertrains, Steve Kiefer, says that cars and light trucks could account for up to 10 percent of the overall U.S. auto market by the year 2020. Diesel Technology Forum, a non-profit organization that backs clean diesel engine vehicles in the U.S., recently reported that diesel sales in the U.S. market are already up 25 percent through the first six months of 2015 (year-over-year) and represent 4.2 percent of the overall vehicle market.
 
GM wants a piece of that action and next year will introduce a 2.8-liter four-cylinder diesel engine for its brand new mid-size Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon pickups.


2015 Chevy Colorado
 
Chrysler is the only other domestic manufacturer to offer a diesel engine in its light-duty vehicles including (Jeep Grand Cherokee, Ram 1500). German automakers BMW, Audi, Mercedes, and Volkswagen also offer a plethora of vehicles with diesel engine options in the U.S.
 
Chevrolet’s current generation full-size pickups and recently introduced full-size SUVs would make great platforms for a diesel engine, although it remains to be seen what passenger cars — other than the Cruze — would make a great fit for diesel power.
 
“The Chevrolet Cruze diesel will be the first of many diesel-powered passenger cars General Motors will offer in the United States,” Kiefer added.

Sources: Automotive News, Wards Auto, Diesel Technology Forum



Comments     Threshold


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

why?
By Murloc on 8/7/2014 3:07:59 PM , Rating: 2
why would you buy a diesel passenger vehicle?
Is it cheaper than petrol in the US?




RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By BioHazardous on 8/7/2014 4:10:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
No diesel is a terrible option for passenger vehicles here in the US.


What makes diesel a terrible option in the US?

Is it that the engines last longer, and the resale value can be nearly double that of a gasoline equivalent model?

Is it the roughly 25% better fuel economy than its gasoline equivalent?


RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 4:23:49 PM , Rating: 3
Biggest problems for the Cruze Diesel is that it's only available at the highest trim package available and only in an automatic.

This increases the cost. And people with a manual would be able to manage better fuel economy.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 8:11:44 PM , Rating: 2
I had a manual in my Eco.


RE: why?
By doctorx on 8/7/2014 4:52:59 PM , Rating: 2
i had a choice of manual or dsg when i got my 2013 jetta tdi... in any trim i wanted... but i didnt get a manual because the wife overruled me... even though she never drives it.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/14, Rating: 0
RE: why?
By Alexvrb on 8/7/2014 11:50:15 PM , Rating: 3
Actually many modern conventional automatics are much, much better than you're giving them credit for. They shift fast, are reliable, provide great acceleration and mileage, and handle gobs of torque. In some cases they actually turn out better numbers than their manual brethren.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/14, Rating: 0
RE: why?
By Alexvrb on 8/9/2014 12:28:32 AM , Rating: 4
You should totally call Mercedes up and tell them they're a bunch of dumb-dumbs what with their 7 and 9 speed automatics that can handle ~800 ft-lbs of torque. With less service required than many competing DCTs.

There are even vehicles with automatics and manuals available, with the same number of gears, and the AUTOMATIC gets better fuel economy - despite the truly staggering number of crippling disadvantages. "They're only efficient because they have more gears". Two examples off the top of my head: FWD: V6 Accord 6MT vs 6AT. RWD: V6 Camaro 6MT vs 6AT. MTs tend to make more sense in very small/light vehicles, where the weight advantage can really pay off.

Maybe you can convince them to retest with the vehicles programmed to never lockup the torque converter, then the results would be as predicted.


RE: why?
By Andrwken on 8/12/2014 2:14:54 PM , Rating: 2
I get the inefficiencies you speak of but they have become so marginal that corvettes consistently beat the 7 speed manuals with 6 speed automatics. They just shift faster and do a far better job than you can.


RE: why?
By domboy on 8/7/2014 8:36:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Biggest problems for the Cruze Diesel is that it's only available at the highest trim package available and only in an automatic.


Agreed, if I was in the market the lack of a manual would be a deal breaker (not in the market as my diesel Golf manual is still running great).

I'm really hoping that mid-sized truck will have a manual transmission available... in a couple years or so that would be EXACTLY the vehicle I'm hoping for...


RE: why?
By Andrwken on 8/12/2014 2:10:16 PM , Rating: 2
Manual transmissions have gotten to the point where they are marginally to no better in mileage and no better in performance. The dealer tends to see better on the slush box due to letting the computer pick the gear and not the driver. I have a cruze with a manual (non eco) and the mileage has been no different than what people with the automatics are getting. That's also with my wife running exclusively highway and she tends to keep her foot out of it. How many people even spec a manual anymore? I did because it knocked 2k off the sticker and it still had the options she wanted from the LTZ package.

Interesting that they don't offer it in some basic packages as the person that knows they are going to kill the car driving 100 miles a day would probably not want to shell out for all the extras. Probably picking up some of the extra cost in the upper tier packages.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By doctorx on 8/7/2014 4:46:35 PM , Rating: 3
you dont know jack

fuel is only 10cents more a gal. My 2013 jetta tdi gets 39 mpg in town and 48-52 mpg on the interstate at 80mph. One tank lasts me a whole month and get 530 miles to the tank.

I get approx 25% more milage than the corolla that replaced it. I went for the same miles per month from filling up 3x at 13.5 gals to 1 x 14.7 gals. you do the math.

Power when from 120 hp/123ft-lbs to 180hp/235ft-lbs for better mpg.

I opted for the top trim level but they offer it in the lowest too. i havent paid for an oil change yet... 10k interval, and when i need to ... it will be around $30. Where did you get $100? maint can be expensive , but most of that is because it is german.


RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 8:13:34 PM , Rating: 3
Diesel prices all over the country and around states. Even different areas of a city. It might be the same price as regular. It might be the same price as premium. It might be more than both. It completely depends on the market.


RE: why?
By Solandri on 8/8/2014 1:51:18 PM , Rating: 3
Diesel fuel taxes are about $0.55/gal for the U.S., gasoline fuel taxes about $0.49/gal. The taxes account for the vast majority of the regional variation in pricing.
http://www.api.org/oil-and-natural-gas-overview/in...

If you factor in diesel's ~15% higher energy content (it's a denser fuel than gasoline, and unfortunately we measure liquid fuels by volume and not mass), you eliminate most of diesel's higher mileage - the higher miles per volume mostly does not translate into a higher miles per mass. On a per mass basis, diesel ends up being marginally cheaper than gasoline throughout the country. Other slight differences are due to the engine technology. Diesel is more efficient at consistent heavy loads. Gasoline does better with large variations in load.

However, diesel and gasoline are somewhat interchangeable. When you refine a barrel of oil, you get a certain amount of diesel and gasoline out of it naturally. The ratio depends on the type of oil. Heavier crudes like Alaskan and Venezuelan yield more diesel, lighter crudes like Texan and Middle Eastern yield more gasoline. On top of that, you can further process the oil to produce a larger fraction of gasoline than diesel. (The reverse can be done too, but is more expensive as breaking apart oil to form smaller molecules like gasoline is easier than gluing them together to form larger molecules like diesel.)

So prices for both gasoline and diesel are minimal when demand for diesel and gasoline exactly match the natural fraction you get from refining the oil. The U.S. maintains this ratio by using diesel for trucks, gasoline for cars. (Europe, which uses rail a lot more than trucks, has excess diesel so diesel cars are a better fit for them economically.) As demand for gasoline goes up, the price of gas will go up a bit. But as demand for diesel goes up, the price of diesel will go up a lot.


RE: why?
By Dorkyman on 8/8/2014 3:19:39 PM , Rating: 2
Don't forget that the Diesel cycle is inherently more efficient than gasoline, due primarily to the much higher compression ratio.

Also, diesel engines are much more efficient at partial/no load, such as while waiting for a stoplight, because they're not working against a closed throttle plate. Gas engines are basically just giant vacuum pumps at idle, and that requires a lot of energy.


RE: why?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/7/2014 9:33:09 PM , Rating: 2
180hp? What do you have some funky tune that only increases HP and not torque?

The '13 TDI is rated for 140hp and 236 lb-ft of torque.


RE: why?
By hpglow on 8/10/2014 9:57:19 PM , Rating: 2
Reclaimer loves to hate on anything logical man, no reason to try and argue with his stupidity. If you knew where he was coming from you would be one step closer to being retarded.

I drive a '00 TDI with 210k miles on it and it still starts every day with an oil change every 10k miles. It has balls of torque and even with a worn cam/lifters/and turbo it pulls 36 MPG of city driving. When it was fresh it got about 45 to 55 depending on how I drove it. Every 100K I had to put a new timing belt on it, annoying and more expensive than it should be but a small price for the durability of that engine. My VW replaced a 96' Pontiac that threw a rod after 135K in miles and had an oil change every 3000 miles. People that bash diesel passenger cars have no idea what the hell they are talking about. I've owned two and one of them had almost 400K on it when the electrical caught fire and I decided to scrap it.


RE: why?
By BioHazardous on 8/7/2014 4:59:38 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
by Reclaimer77 on August 7, 2014 at 4:28 PM

1. Expensive fuel (hella taxed)
2. Expensive maintenance ($100+ oil changes)
3. Expensive vehicles (yeah the resale might be higher, way to completely ignore the equally higher initial cost!)

4. Limited choice (if you like a car, chances are there is NO diesel option anyway)

I'm not saying there aren't advantages, but the fact that you ONLY list them while ignoring the cons makes you a homer.

ps. I'm not even going to get into your numbers, which appear pulled from your ass entirely.

So what I'm hearing you say is you have an irrational fear of things you've never bothered to research. It's okay, there's support groups for people like you. We can get you help, and curb your Internet rage toward things you don't understand.

Jetta Gasoline: 24/34
Jetta Diesel: 30/42
Approximately 25% greater fuel economy
(http://www.vw.com/models/jetta/)

Average US price per gallon, week of 8/4/2014
Gasoline: $3.45
Diesel: $3.85
Diesel is only 11.6% higher than Gasoline based on the above most recent numbers for the US
(http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w...

$100+ oil changes? I never once paid anywhere near that with my Jetta, not even at the dealership. Apparently you are the one who likes to just make up numbers to support your delusions.

Based on the base model prices, the diesel variant of the Jetta is $4400 more. For comparison purposes on kbb.com I chose a 2012 Jetta 2.0L Gasoline base model and a 2012 Jetta 2.0L Diesel base model with 150k miles.
Diesel: $8,169
Gasoline: $5,422

Price difference of $2747. Subtracted from the price difference for when purchased new, $1,653. Fuel savings of $1,470, so within $200 for the price difference between owning the gasoline and diesel variants of the Jetta.

I didn't ignore anything, I just didn't make a blanket generic statement saying they don't sell, and anybody who sees value in them is an idiot.


RE: why?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/7/2014 6:01:16 PM , Rating: 2
JSW TDI DSG owner here. I came from a car that was rated at 22/33/25 (city/hwy/combined) and averaged exactly 25 mpg combined.

My JSW is rated at 29/39/33 and I'm averaging 36.2 mpg combined so far after a year and 14,000 miles on the odo. My combined average has been steadily increasing as my per-tank mileage has been 38 to 39 in mixed driving for the past few tanks.

As for $100 oil changes, my stealership charges $75 for full synthetic. But I have carefree maintenance from VW for the first three years/30,000 miles so I still have a ways to go before I pay anything out of pocket for maintenance.

The BIG knock against my car is the fluid changes on the DSG transmission. I've read on TDIClub that prices range from $500 to $800 depending on the dealership -- and that's every 40,000 miles.

When I come up on that magic mark, I'm taking mine to Apex Tuning, which is an independent shop local to me. They quoted me $271 when I was researching prior to purchasing my vehicle which ain't bad IMHO. OTOH, the same indy charges $89 for a full synthetic oil change, so go figure.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/7/2014 6:11:48 PM , Rating: 2
How's reliability so far Brandon? Not sure where Rec lives but here in CA, oil changes for that car are $100 or more. Nothing is cheap out here.


RE: why?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/7/2014 7:05:45 PM , Rating: 2
Nothing mechanical so far. Being that it's a VW, I was expecting at least three unscheduled dealership visits by now :)


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 9:51:17 PM , Rating: 2
ick the wet clutches in those dsgs need 40k oil changes? damn - tranny oil is espensive @ $500 a pop!

Kinda makes me glad Ford chose dry clutches for the Focus DCT. They are known to be a little funky but the only time you change tranny oil is at the same service interval as a manual trans (never).

I hear you on the reliability ratings of veedubs though. It's ... not good. Too bad they don't have the reliability of the old bugs.


RE: why?
By Samus on 8/8/2014 1:59:04 PM , Rating: 1
Still not as bad as CVT's. The Versa CVT needs changes every 60k, but bigger cars like the Murano are every 50k and need 3 more quarts of fluid. Nissan charges at least $500 to do it. And if you don't do it, they acts more finicky than an old AMD K6 on a VIA Chipset.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 2:19:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And if you don't do it, they acts more finicky than an old AMD K6 on a VIA Chipset.


Ouch! That's finicky (I remember those battles well)!

Well one more reason (beyond the fact that I simply don't like them) to avoid CVTs.


RE: why?
By Lord 666 on 8/7/2014 11:07:24 PM , Rating: 2
Rec lives in NC.

Have had my '13 TDI Passat SEL since June '13 with 8 miles on it and now has 32,000 miles. Have only needed oil changes but there is some pulsing on the front brakes due to nj style driving. The Passat is the best car I have ever owned and that's right after having a '06 TDI Jetta with 140,000 flawless miles. My VW charges $85 for TDI oil changes down from $105 back in '07. The PD motor spec is ever 5000 miles so things are getting better. Plus it was a pita to get the car off the road for an oil change that frequently.

GM's strategy should include diesel minivans and third row SUV's. Need something to differentiate them. Holding out for the new VW TDI crossover or diesel XC90. If those bomb by winter '15, will just get a GL 350 CDI.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 1:24:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
If those bomb by winter '15, will just get a GL 350 CDI.
Drove a ML with the same motor. Liked it more than I thought I would. Bro-in-law wasn't as impressed. He thought the 455 lb-ft would be more noticeable. I sure noticed it LOL!


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/2014 8:24:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have had my '13 TDI Passat SEL since June '13 with 8 miles on it and now has 32,000 miles.


Wow a whole 32k trouble-free miles. What an achievement. Well you've certainly proved me, JD Power, and Consumer Reports wrong.

/sarcasm


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 11:53:00 AM , Rating: 2
LOL


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 1:07:27 PM , Rating: 2
Give him time. He's only had it a year.


RE: why?
By Lord 666 on 8/8/2014 4:19:22 PM , Rating: 2
Taking into account the car right before it had 140,000 trouble free miles and now the Passat doesn't have issues after 32,000 ... yes, that's 172,000 trouble-free diesel miles over 8 years. Would be more hesitant to purchase a new 335D over reliability and service concerns.

My mother has a '11 JSW with 72,000 trouble-free miles and Brandon has a JSW without issues as well. Other people on this site have TDIs without issues. Anyone on this site have TDI issues? How about the 105,899 diesels VW sold in 2013... surely there isn't a flooded market of used VW TDIs one year later or dead on the side of the road; http://media.vw.com/release/707/

Granted, the durability of any car is based on the care it receives. Follow VW's service schedule, use quality diesel fuel, take it to a VW shop with high diesel service volume, and always fill up before it goes past the 1/4 tank mark and everything will be all right.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 4:41:20 PM , Rating: 2
That's good you aren't experiencing issues but your "facts" are just anecdotal. Poor VW reliability is well documented and not anecdotal.


RE: why?
By Lord 666 on 8/8/2014 4:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
Totally agreed with you.

However, the reliability metrics are not broken down (or at least publically) by fuel type. It would also be interesting to see it delineated by socio-economic factors too.

Talk about anecdotal, the Passat was a stretch for me because it was the first car I have ever purchased with an odd number year as in '13. Also think there is some truth to fully loaded models being more reliable but that could be related to socio-economic factors as well.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 6:39:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, the reliability metrics are not broken down (or at least publically) by fuel type.
It would be nice to see this info. I've always wondered if the diesel VW's had better reliability. My anecdotal evidence was only with gas versions.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/9/2014 12:04:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
However, the reliability metrics are not broken down (or at least publically) by fuel type.


VW cars seemed to be plagued by electrical failures more than anything. So I assume it doesn't matter if you have a diesel or gasoline model.

Also just massive component failure. The engines themselves are reliable, it's just everything ATTACHED to the engines including the trans that fails WAY before their time.

Yeah having warranty coverage is great. However by all accounts, the average VW owner seems to be constantly having to take their vehicles to the dealership for warranty work. Who want's to put up with that?


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 5:01:21 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
4. Limited choice (if you like a car, chances are there is NO diesel option anyway)


An interesting point when your earlier post stated that it was a terrible idea to have diesels in the U.S.

That is kinda like saying "Diesels are a bad idea in the U.S> because there just ain't enough of them".

Some of the other cons -

Expensive vehicles :
(a) Diesel engines are necessarily heavier to handle the super high compression ratios and stresses. While recently you are starting to see aluminum diesels, even those aluminum parts are heavier/thicker than the gas engine equivs.

(b) Diesels are not produced in enough quantity to kick in the benefits of mass production. If diesels were the corporate engine put in most cars a vendor makes, the cost of those would come way down. Once car makers kick over to producing mostly diesels, you will find that it is gas-powered cars that are the costlier option.

When you look at a gas powered Jetta and a Diesel powered one, the difference is only a couple thousand dollars. Most of that goes to the better motor than the standard gas engine. You can bet that if the diesel became VW's bread & butter engine, you would see that price difference flip in favor of the diesels.

Expensive fuel:
Yes indeed diesel costs more because you get less out of a barrel than you do gasoline. However you also burn a lot less of it to go a mile. It evens out. But plain old gas is just as heavily taxed as diesel.

Expensive maintenance:
Not sure where you pulled that $100 oil changes from. Diesels don't use more or particularly different oil than a gas engine of the same size. Maintenance is basically the same. In fact Jiffy Lube here does not have a separate price for oil changes on a diesel car.

If diesels are so bad, why is just about every semi truck in the U.S. a diesel? Why is 95% of dump trucks diesels? Why not gas? Gas is cheaper right? And it is not so tough to build a high torque gas engine - as well you got gears to deal with any torque shortage. When you figure the cost of a semi's tractor; about $150k - $200k a high torque gas engine would be a drop in the bucket.

The reason is that it is more economical to use diesel. Truckers have known that for years. To get the same amount of torque out of an engine, you use a hella lot less diesel and when you are hauling cross country, you want to make as few of those >$200 fuel stops as you can.


RE: why?
By domboy on 8/7/2014 8:41:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2. Expensive maintenance ($100+ oil changes)


Where in the world did you get that number?!? Granted my TDI is a bit older (03), but I can get a gallon of the synthetic it takes at Walmart for $20. So that plus the filter (forget exactly, but probably not more than $10) and I do it myself, once every 10,000 miles. Nowhere near $100.


RE: why?
By Alexvrb on 8/8/2014 12:09:10 AM , Rating: 2
The newer ones require oil meeting such-and-such VW spec (such as 507.00). So you're likely stuck with higher-end oil meeting those specs which can drive up costs a bit. But either way if it's only every ~5000 miles the extra $20-30 isn't a huge dealbreaker.


RE: why?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/8/2014 12:31:49 AM , Rating: 2
TDIs are every 10,000 miles for oil changes


RE: why?
By Alexvrb on 8/9/2014 12:32:55 AM , Rating: 2
Even better... if you're using the right oil. My point was that the latest spec'd oil is more expensive than it was for his older model - but in the end it still doesn't make that big of a difference.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By domboy on 8/8/2014 8:56:25 AM , Rating: 2
Are you having a bad day or something?

Diss Walmart all you want. I've shopped around and Walmart usually sells the oil I need cheaper than the autopart stores. I get the oil filter from the dealership though.

I don't think I know anyone that takes their car to the dealership for oil changes. Those that don't do it themselves take it to a regular repair shop. Not saying there aren't people that do. Besides, dealerships of any type are usually more expensive than a regular repair shops, that's nothing new.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By twhittet on 8/8/2014 12:44:21 PM , Rating: 5
Maybe if you spent more time in real life actually accomplishing ANYthing, rather than all your time on here spewing immature garbage at anyone and everyone, your day wouldn't be so horrible.

I know the whole internet sure would have a better day.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 1:13:47 PM , Rating: 1
Hmm, and when did you take your diesel VW to a dealer and have to pay $100 for an oil change? I don't know about where you live but where I am (and our oil prices are higher than the US) the MOST you are gonna pay is $70 for full Quaker State synthetic at a dealer.

$100 for an oil change. Yeah, right.

I'll take your horrible day and raise you 2 back to back family deaths so fuck off with your "boo hoo! My dog bit me so I'm having a really bad day. QQ".


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 2:21:18 PM , Rating: 4
... or visiting DT and trying to read past the crap you write.


RE: why?
By Dorkyman on 8/8/2014 3:26:48 PM , Rating: 2
My gosh, friend, you really must be having a bad day. This anger and irrationality is not like you.


RE: why?
By atechfan on 8/10/2014 4:05:51 PM , Rating: 2
Haven't been here long?


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 3:48:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
$100 for an oil change. Yeah, right.
I called a couple of dealerships out here in CA, one was $100, the other was $120.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: 0
RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: 0
RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 4:43:04 PM , Rating: 2
It has gone downhill of late. I didn't know Michael left. That sucks.


RE: why?
By domboy on 8/9/2014 10:44:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The top-to-bottom ignorance by most of the posters being displayed here is truly staggering.

Thing is, you seem to be completely ignoring the replies from people that actually own these cars and tell a different story than yours.


RE: why?
By Arkive on 8/11/2014 1:41:17 PM , Rating: 1

I believe in an earlier post you mentioned having a Subaru. Well, I owned one as well for 5 years, and am just now coming up on the 5-year mark with my TDI diesel. The fact that you think servicings are more expensive on a diesel than a gas engine (*especially* a Subaru) is really hysterical. I've paid for both, at the dealership, exactly as prescribed by the service manuals, and I spent over twice as much servicing my Subaru as I have the VW (no repairs for either vehicles, both were/are solid and reliable performers). The complexity of the gas engine compared to the diesel is significant. Just the plat plugs alone in the Subaru's are enough to give you a coronary.


RE: why?
By BernardP on 8/7/2014 10:31:16 PM , Rating: 2
Diesel's economy is way overrated when considering all costs. As for it's "green" creds, Europe is finding it's not green at all:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/11007326/...


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/2014 2:30:57 PM , Rating: 2
European governing bodies are idiots.

They've decided that C02 is such a threat, it's better to push fuels that dump several times more actual pollutants into the air over gasoline.

Not that I'm in favor of these types of regulations, but if I had to choose between reducing CO2 emissions or toxic chemicals, duh, I think I'll go with the former.

Even the cleanest diesel engine pollutes far more than the gasoline powered equivalent.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/2014 2:32:16 PM , Rating: 2
Edit: latter, not former. Latter.


RE: why?
By phreaqe on 8/8/2014 10:28:58 AM , Rating: 2
I have not seen a diesel with double the resale value unless you are talking about ancient cars only worth a a few thousand at most, nor have i seen 25% better economy. What i have seen in marginally better economy and MUCH higher fuel costs. Around here diesel costs 50-60 cents more per gallon. So for a small increase in economy i have actually increased my fuel costs while also having to pay a premium for the diesel vehicle in the first place.

I used to be very excited about diesel engines, but over time have lost that due to the factors mention above. When i got my last 2 cars i did the math and it just did not work in my favor. Add to the fact that i would have a very limited selection of vehicles to chose from and it just did not make any sense.


RE: why?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/8/2014 11:08:27 AM , Rating: 3
It really depends on your needs. I wanted a fuel efficient wagon-type vehicle that wasn't a friggin' high-riding ridiculous crossover. The only affordable compact wagon on the market in the U.S. is the Jetta Sportwagen. The 170hp 2.5-liter gasser is so horrible that it got the same fuel economy as my previous car which had a 274hp turbocharged four-banger.

That's what lead to the JSW TDI. Nicely equipped, great fuel economy, reasonably priced, tons of cargo space, better ride/handling than a crossover, and plenty of passenger space for the kid and dog.

My fuel costs are $420 lower after one year (and roughly the same miles/year) compared to my previous car. And that's even factoring in that I'm paying roughly 30c a gallon more for diesel than I was for regular unleaded.


RE: why?
By Jeffk464 on 8/11/2014 1:14:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
What makes diesel a terrible option in the US


Nothing in my opinion. The 4cyl turbo diesel in the pickup makes it an attractive option over Tacoma's.


RE: why?
By mars2k on 8/11/2014 3:19:04 PM , Rating: 2
Or that diesels sip fuel while idling in traffic. I have owned several diesels and each has had its charms. I like the exhaust smell...no really.


RE: why?
By GotThumbs on 8/7/2014 4:14:10 PM , Rating: 2
That's YOUR opinion, but lacks any real facts. Typical.

In fact, Volkswagen TDI's do very well in the U.S.. They have higher MPG and better torque over gas pumpers.

Biggest problem is dealers over charging for the diesel option and existing US bias/ignorance regarding diesel.

It's your choice to buy what you want, but don't assume you speak for the rest of us.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/2014 4:32:21 PM , Rating: 2
Mazda's Skyactive engine technology has completely ended the myth that diesel engines are inherently more efficient. Besides the efficiency gain is completely wiped out by the markup on diesel fuel.

Volkswagen TDI's do well in the States, yes. However it's the ONLY one that does. Wonder why you left that out? If diesel was so great, the consumers would want it, and everyone would offer it. Ooops, you fail!

VW's are also the WORST brand on the road currently. And yes, that IS a fact. Go read Consumer Reports or whatever.


RE: why?
By doctorx on 8/7/2014 4:47:48 PM , Rating: 2
heard of skyactive diesel? they have great mileage and apparently good perfomance too.


RE: why?
By sprockkets on 8/7/2014 5:11:06 PM , Rating: 2
(adding to the other reply)

Dude, you need to do more research and look at Mazda's skyactive diesel. The 1.5l for the upcoming Mazda2 puts out as much torque as the new 2.5l. And while torque isn't everything, C&D would love to have the 2.2l diesel in the states since it runs like a V6 in the new Mazda6.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/2014 7:29:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
C&D would love to have the 2.2l diesel in the states since it runs like a V6 in the new Mazda6.


Yes so NOBODY will buy it. Just like nobody ever buys any diesel vehicles here.

I just pulled up the top 50 sales list for all vehicles in July. I could not find a SINGLE diesel vehicle in the whole damn thing.

You people are clueless. I love when some fringe element of society tries to convince everyone that they know better.

If diesel vehicles were so amazing, I happen to believe more than a few models would be available, and they would be selling a LOT more.


RE: why?
By BioHazardous on 8/7/2014 8:09:23 PM , Rating: 2
Ever check out the European car market?


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By BioHazardous on 8/7/2014 10:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If diesel vehicles were so amazing, I happen to believe more than a few models would be available, and they would be selling a LOT more.

We're making an argument about America's car market.


A general statement about the performance/functionality of a vehicle has nothing to do with geography.

quote:
The only reason diesel is used there, is because "petrol" is taxed out the ass.


So like your earlier statement about diesel having "hella tax" here in the US? When the taxes are reversed, all of the sudden you have the reverse for amount of engine options? So perhaps your irrational hate of all things different from what you own, stems solely from your options available based on your current geography.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 1:36:03 AM , Rating: 2
Rec's talking (and everyone else for that matter) about diesels in the US market. They sell in very low volumes here. VW probably sells the most and their numbers aren't that great. I have no idea why though BUT Americans are more price sensitive to fuel costs and since diesel is generally higher, that might be turning people off. Oddly, diesel trucks don't suffer the same fate.

I speculated that the Cruze diesel would be the real indicator of whether or not diesel was taking off here as it's a top 20 selling car. But given the poor sales, it seems Americans still don't like diesel in their cars. I expect to see a Cruze hybrid soon.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 1:33:35 PM , Rating: 2
That might be because there really isn't much of a selection of domestic cars sporting diesel engines. Ford doesn't have one neither does Chrysler. The american-jap cars don't either.

Personally I can't stand GM cars - I have owned far too many bad ones in my life so of course GM is not going to sell me a car - diesel, gas or otherwise. And I like them marginally more than I like Chrysler. That doesn't mean that I would not very seriously consider trading my 2013 Ford for a diesel Ford, Honda or Toyota equivalent. I am sure once these others have diesel-flavored offerings in North America, you will see some changes happening

Most of the Cruze sales however are for fleet, rental and company cars. Those will not be buying top-trim cars but the lower end econo gassers.

I think GM's failure is including the diesel option only in the top trim car. Not a lot of people buying a Cruze will be wanting to pay for, the second-from-top trim version.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 3:58:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think GM's failure is including the diesel option only in the top trim car. Not a lot of people buying a Cruze will be wanting to pay for, the second-from-top trim version.
I was thinking this too but even if they did offer it on lesser models, it wouldn't make up for dismal 6000 units sold. I just don't think Americans are interested on a large scale. We're definitely interested hybrids though. Ford sold 4300 PLUG-IN C-MAX Hybrids last year! That's not that far off from Cruze diesel sales.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By Murloc on 8/8/2014 6:38:47 AM , Rating: 2
I live in Europe.
In Italy, most people drive diesels, even if they're smaller cars. Why? Because it costs less, because it's taxed less for some reason.
In Switzerland, the price gap is reversed. The result? Most cars use gasoline. There also are diesels for some reason though, but they're a minority.


RE: why?
By GotThumbs on 8/8/2014 2:37:09 PM , Rating: 2
Not everyone is a follower like you.

Of course diesels are not in the top 50 sales lists.

How about looking at the jump in sales of diesels in the past couple of years?

Data can be bent to support multiple views depending on how YOU CHOOSE to use it.

take a look at this link:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/dieselnews.shtml


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 4:34:57 PM , Rating: 2
Rec owns a Subaru. How is he a follower? Besides, how does buying a good, reliable car make you a follower? I wouldn't own a Camry or an Accord but I won't deny their reliability and appeal. Most people don't want to be bothered with cars, they want to get in a drive. Camry's and Accord's are good for that. If you do go outside even the top 20, IMO, you're taking a chance. The chance is worth the better drive IMO, (I drive a Pontiac Solstice daily...132,000 miles on mine).


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/2014 8:29:25 PM , Rating: 2
I own two actually :)

Which makes me twice as knowledgeable and car-savvy than any idiot who actually bought a VW.


RE: why?
By Apone on 8/7/2014 5:19:34 PM , Rating: 2
@ Reclaimer77

quote:
Mazda's Skyactive engine technology has completely ended the myth that diesel engines are inherently more efficient. Besides the efficiency gain is completely wiped out by the markup on diesel fuel.


Actually, diesel engines are inherently more efficient. More horsepower & gobs of torque (in addition to better MPG), no spark plugs to replace, oil changes every 10k miles (instead of every 5k), first tune up @ 250k miles....well you get the point.

quote:
Volkswagen TDI's do well in the States, yes. However it's the ONLY one that does. Wonder why you left that out? If diesel was so great, the consumers would want it, and everyone would offer it. Ooops, you fail!


Of course VW (and its TDI) does well in the United States; it's because it has been an established automotive brand and American consumers have been familiar with VW TDI engines. And everyone is starting to offer it; look at current models by BMW, Mazda, Audi, Chevrolet, VW and Jeep (yes they're working on a Cherokee diesel flavor edition).

The reason why mass adoption is slow in the U.S. is because many people (like yourself) still have an outdated perception that diesel engines are either only for commercial trucks and diesel cars continue to emit gross amounts of black smoke and pollution which may have been true in the 70's but clean diesel technology has advanced considerably.


RE: why?
By NovoRei on 8/7/2014 6:04:02 PM , Rating: 2
You know what's funny?

All those pickups (F150, etc) with gasoline engines instead of diesel.

Everyone else in the WORLD knows that any serious pickup (or large SUV) MUST have diesel engine (performance, reliability, TOC, comfort, etc). Gasoline engines are a NO-GO.

At least in US, besides economical reasons as upfront price and diesel price, I believe it never gained momentum because most of the commercial pickups are used in urban environment. Even more so for private owned vehicles. Also, diesel powertrains used to be sluggish which is something terrible in a urban environment. Some still are though (and some will still be, which is a shoot in the foot)...


RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 8:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
You do not get more horsepower in a diesel vs a gas engine for the same size. Torque yes. Horsepower no.


RE: why?
By silverblue on 8/8/2014 5:44:43 AM , Rating: 2
There's this perpetual myth that German cars are rock-solid reliable. It seems to go hand-in-hand with the myth that French cars aren't. Times are a-changing.


RE: why?
By GotThumbs on 8/8/2014 2:31:21 PM , Rating: 2
LOL.

I've owned 3 VW's and have NEVER had a problem with them. Maybe I'm lucky or maybe I just choose to educate myself on my vehicles. Just because consumer reports does reviews on products, doe not mean I put 100% trust in them for my buying decisions. Only a fool would be so naive to do that IMO.

One of my current vehicles is a Dodge Ram 3500 Cummins powered diesel and I average between 21 and 26 MPG on 400+ mile trips. 143000 miles and still going. Oh and my other car is a mazda and thats doing just as well. If you maintain your vehicles, you won't have any issues. I've never paid someone else to change the oil in any of my vehicles. This way I know for a fact it's been done right. You think the mechanics care more about your car than you? to them, it's a job. So many ignorant fools these days haven't' a clue, so they rely on the dealers to do the thinking for them. Most of those people are walking zombies who choose not to use their brains.

Buy what you want but don't get so pissed with people who actually own or have owned the products your bashing, and know for a fact that your full opinion is BS.

Bottom line,

Your opinion on this story/topic means nothing to me.

Best wishes on your choices.


RE: why?
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 4:38:29 PM , Rating: 2
Piss poor VW reliability is NOT an opinion, it's fact. Just because you choose not to accept it doesn't make that go away. If you really had 3 trouble free VW's then you are in the VAST minority. Since were on the anecdote train, I don't ANYONE with a VW that hasn't had reliability issues.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/14, Rating: -1
RE: why?
By ICBM on 8/7/2014 4:56:24 PM , Rating: 1
I tried to test drive a diesel Jetta, I guess it was back in 09, they didn't have a single one. The dealer told me there was a 40 person waiting list. So collecting dust in the dealership is a negative.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 5:06:56 PM , Rating: 2
I did actually test drive one. It was shockingly good. The only reason I didn't buy one is that the features I wanted in the car weren't available in the Jetta.

I wish to hell Ford offered a diesel Focus - I would have been all over that!


RE: why?
By Lonyo on 8/7/2014 5:12:50 PM , Rating: 2
*in the US.

You can get diesel models of pretty much every Ford in Europe.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 5:17:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yes that is true.

Ford and all the other car makers have to certify their diesels under the U.S. & Canada's EPA before they can roll them out here.

They are coming, but it is going to take some time to get thru all the EPA's Bureaucratic red tape.


RE: why?
By Samus on 8/7/2014 6:29:07 PM , Rating: 3
I agree with Reclaimer.

Every time I do the math, the break-even point on diesel is around 200,000 miles.

*Diesel is not much cheaper than petrol
*Diesel vehicles cost thousands more than their petrol equal
*Diesel is higher maintenance (urea tanks, injectors, turbo, etc)
*Diesel has poor cold weather performance
*Diesel drivability is an adjustment, sometimes good, sometimes bad
*Diesel fuel economy is artificially restricted with emissions regulations, giving them only slightly better MPG than petrol
*Diesel fuel in the United States is poorly formulated for small diesel engines, requiring additives and treatments, again increasing costs and decreasing reliability.

Diesel makes much more sense in heavy duty applications where demanding torque is needed, or where petrol engines guzzle fuel (5000lb+ vehicles)

It is also a myth that diesel vehicles have better resale value. Although that may have historically been the case, modern diesel engines require MORE upkeep, which is predicted to reduce current diesel vehicle resale value down the road. This is ironically why new diesel vehicles are selling better than used ones (because current used diesel vehicles are expensive)

If you are a proponent of diesel passenger vehicles, do the math, and you may be surprised by the economic facts.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/7/14, Rating: 0
RE: why?
By Apone on 8/7/2014 8:49:41 PM , Rating: 2
@ Reclaimer77

Oh puh-lease, you and Samus need to pull your collective heads out of your asses. At least many of the proponents who have commented are diesel engine car owners who can honestly comment and back up the merits of diesels and why they are a solid option relative to gasoline & EV's/hybrids.

And using verbs as nouns in your shit-talking further reduces your less-than-zero credibility.


RE: why?
By Lord 666 on 8/7/2014 11:19:29 PM , Rating: 3
Samus tried to tell me my Jetta TDI wasn't made in Mexico until I posted a pic of the door jam plaque clearly saying it was.


RE: why?
By Reclaimer77 on 8/8/2014 6:35:22 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
many of the proponents who have commented are diesel engine car owners


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias


RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 8:18:27 PM , Rating: 2
Cold weather performance is not an issue in a large portion of the country.

And a diesel uses less maintenance because oil changes aren't as often. You don't necessarily ever have to rebuild the turbo either. That's also no different than a small turbo motor. As far as urea tanks, you can thank the government for that.

You're right about their mileage dropping as result of government regulations. But that applies to gas engines too. Gas engines today would be about 10% more efficient on the highway if it weren't for the government essentially banning the lean cruise feature due to emissions regulations.

As far as diesel vs gas prices, again, totally varies by market.


RE: why?
By Apone on 8/7/2014 8:39:03 PM , Rating: 2
@ Samus

* No one said Diesel is arbitrarily better than gasoline engines (I'm saying it's an alternative to gasoline & EV/hybrids)

* Of course diesels cost more; they're still in the process of being widely adopted in the U.S. (Economies of Scale)

* Diesel wins in maintenance as it can go longer before needing a tune-up and oil changes; injectors and turbos can also be found in gasoline engines so their endurance would require more scrutiny

* Diesels use a glow plug to vaporize fuel so they don't have poor cold weather performance

* Drivability? So you can't be bothered to adapt? Just like switching from a gasoline to a hybrid car?

* By "slightly better fuel economy", do you mean 1-2 MPG? Because any diesel engine car owner would beg to differ

* Bullcrap, diesel fuel prices average about $0.25-$0.30 more than premium gasoline (someone is a penny pincher)

Sources:

http://www.anl.gov/articles/five-myths-about-diese...
http://www.dieselforum.org/files/dmfile/20130311_C...


RE: why?
By mad_magician on 8/8/2014 11:27:44 AM , Rating: 3
I am just going to tag on to this one....

I own a 2013 Passat TDI DSG SEL Premium. I paid only about $1500 more than the Gas Version and I believe about $1k Less than the V6 version that was next to it on the lot. VW uses the higher trim level to mask a good bit of the cost of the engine, but that is OK, I wanted the features.

I just rolled 20k this week and am about to have my 2nd service appt.

TO the points presented

- My city mileage is a rather unimpressive 27ish MPG my Highway mileage is 43-48 depending on how much coffee I have had and if I am carrying the wife and daughter. Is it a better car than a gas or hybrid? Depends on your use case. Because 90% of my driving is highway, it works out very well, and the short trips don't tank my mileage enough to make me cry. If you are a mainly stop-and-go city driver, I have a west coast colleague that averages about 70 in is plug-in Prius. Use the right tool for the job.

- Like I said above, I got a fully loaded car for less than the V6 more than the Gas version. Consumer's choice.

- Although the Dealership has my maintenance covered for several years, sans tires, having to only service every 10K is a huge advantage.

- I was a bit bummed during the extended cold snaps here in the Northeast this year as the "winterized" diesel seems to be a bit less potent. I don't know that I topped 39MPG during the winter. So I can see a bit of a disadvantage here.

- the DSG is anything but squishy and VERY driveable. The key adjustment is learning not to let your tires loose from a stop, but that only took a few trips to get used to. If you need a burst at road speed, push the stick into Direct Shift mode and take off. It is very quick to respond and you can go from 75-90 for passing operations very quickly.

- In my experience with a 5-cylinder 2007 Jetta, my highway mileage was always a bit lower than the sticker, with my TDI, I am always pushing higher. Based on the other non-turbo Passat numbers, I am actually pushing 20-25% better mileage and even though Diesel is ungodly here in PA, I am still seeing a net cost savings on Fuel. In Canada, where part of my family lives, Diesel is actually about 15% cheaper so I really win when I cross the border. 25% better mileage, 10% increased materials cost? come on, folks, that is easy math.

- "Diesel fuel in the United States is poorly formulated for small diesel engines, requiring additives and treatments, again increasing costs and decreasing reliability."

Yeah, need a citation....

- "It is also a myth that diesel vehicles have better resale value. Although that may have historically been the case, modern diesel engines require MORE upkeep, which is predicted to reduce current diesel vehicle resale value down the road. This is ironically why new diesel vehicles are selling better than used ones (because current used diesel vehicles are expensive)"

Well, when I was getting a major repair done in late April (more on that in a second) I was offered a buyback from the dealership that would have put me in a new, identically trimmed 2014 at the same payment. I declined for personal reasons (I really want to put miles on this car and see how things hold up long term). The moral of the story, is they cannot get enough TDIs on the used market to meet demand!

And finally, In the spirit of full disclosure, I had my turbocharger fail. Thankfully it was a known issue and I simply beat the recall to the punch. I am sure it would have been a hella painful repair out of warranty. In any case, VW treated me like gold! I was out of a car for 15 minutes (waiting for the morons at teh rental car place to find me a car that didn't reek like a bar on Monday morning.) As I was out of town visiting family, VW offered me a full reunification package, a warranty extension, prepayed my rental car and offered to fly me home! While in the shop, they performed a full alignment, software updates and tire rotation for free as well as fixed a sticky gas cap. I have never been treated better by a car company.


RE: why?
By GotThumbs on 8/7/2014 4:17:42 PM , Rating: 2
Better MPG and better power/torque.

The days of old Mercedes diesels pumping out clouds of smoke and lagging in pickup.

People think diesels are slow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pni0BtSXNXo


RE: why?
By Lonyo on 8/7/2014 5:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
Only very recently though, to be fair.

In the 90s, diesels were pretty bad. They got better efficiency than petrols, but not significantly so.
Early 2000's, and diesels began to get much better mpg than a petrol engine, but weren't that powerful.

Very modern diesels (<7 years pretty much) are both poerful AND much more efficient than a petrol engine.
Petrol engines can't touch the power and efficiency of a very modern diesel, but it has to be a very modern one.

2002 BMW 2.0 diesel: 150hp, 8.9s 0-60, 36/61 UK MPG
2011 BMW 2.0d: 163hp, 8s 0-60, 56/78 UK MPG

Faster AND more efficient. The cars are roughly the same weight as well.


RE: why?
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 10:00:37 PM , Rating: 2
For those that don't think diesels can be stinkin fast, here is a video of a Dodge ram Diesel pickup smoking (literally) a Supercharged Dodge Viper....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_AOp64SBL8k

To be fair the Diesel is pushing >1100HP and about 1900ft-lbs of torque, and MAN does


RE: why?
By TMike7 on 8/9/2014 8:28:28 AM , Rating: 2
Here in some countries in Europe Diesel has always been way cheaper than gas and in many cases still is, though not any more in the same degree. If you add that for the same model car, you can travel more miles with one gallon of diesel than with one gallon of gas, the chek sum goes in favor of the diesel.
As a result the sales of diesel models increased.
Some manufacturers went so far as to sell the diesel models for the same price or even less than the gas models. Some models of cars are almost exclusively sold in the diesel model.
The result is that the majority of cars here are diesel models.
Unfortunately that brought also its consequences.
In the exhaust of diesel vehicles there are very fine particles due to not complete combustion of the diesel. These particles are so small that they cause serious health problems.
It gets so bad that on a regular basis we get FOG alarms. And FOG alarms comes with restriction. The first restriction is that the maximum speed is limited to 50 miles per hour on the highway.
The second restriction is that only the cars that have an even number on their numberplate are allowed in the city on even days, the other cars on the odd days and so on.
So, please DO NOT MAKE the majority of cars to be diesel models!
The more, like several among you have already posted, in the current situation you don't gain anything by going diesel, unless you drive an awfull lot of miles, especially since the efficiency of modern gas models has increased significantly, so much that the difference in consumption is now neglectable.
I know, by now urea filters are obligatory in new cars.
Although they seam to diminish the problem they don't take it away.
Once the urea is full of particles, the urea gets burned and all the particles land in the atmosphere.
A better solution is the sky-active engines from Mazda. They have lowered the compression to obtain a more complete burning of the diesel. But it is still far from perfect.
Only now we start to realize that diesels are not perfect.
The result it that the price of diesel models have gone up compared to the gas models.
The price gap between diesel and gas is now very small, and in some countries diesel (per gallon) is already more expensive than gas.
Let's hope this will bring the number of diesel cars down.

Greetings,

Mike


RE: why?
By TMike7 on 8/9/2014 8:29:39 AM , Rating: 2
Here in some countries in Europe Diesel has always been way cheaper than gas and in many cases still is, though not any more in the same degree. If you add that for the same model car, you can travel more miles with one gallon of diesel than with one gallon of gas, the chek sum goes in favor of the diesel.
As a result the sales of diesel models increased.
Some manufacturers went so far as to sell the diesel models for the same price or even less than the gas models. Some models of cars are almost exclusively sold in the diesel model.
The result is that the majority of cars here are diesel models.
Unfortunately that brought also its consequences.
In the exhaust of diesel vehicles there are very fine particles due to not complete combustion of the diesel. These particles are so small that they cause serious health problems.
It gets so bad that on a regular basis we get FOG alarms. And FOG alarms comes with restriction. The first restriction is that the maximum speed is limited to 50 miles per hour on the highway.
The second restriction is that only the cars that have an even number on their numberplate are allowed in the city on even days, the other cars on the odd days and so on.
So, please DO NOT MAKE the majority of cars to be diesel models!
The more, like several among you have already posted, in the current situation you don't gain anything by going diesel, unless you drive an awfull lot of miles, especially since the efficiency of modern gas models has increased significantly, so much that the difference in consumption is now neglectable.
I know, by now urea filters are obligatory in new cars.
Although they seam to diminish the problem they don't take it away.
Once the urea is full of particles, the urea gets burned and all the particles land in the atmosphere.
A better solution is the sky-active engines from Mazda. They have lowered the compression to obtain a more complete burning of the diesel. But it is still far from perfect.
Only now we start to realize that diesels are not perfect.
The result it that the price of diesel models have gone up compared to the gas models.
The price gap between diesel and gas is now very small, and in some countries diesel (per gallon) is already more expensive than gas.
Let's hope this will bring the number of diesel cars down.

Greetings,

Mike


RE: why?
By FITCamaro on 8/8/2014 8:21:03 AM , Rating: 2
Then in more recent years, diesel efficiency has gone down due to government regulation. Mileage has suffered as a result.


Price
By Flunk on 8/7/2014 2:52:00 PM , Rating: 2
I think the Cruz Diesel's sales problems might have a lot to do with the $8,000 price premium over the base car more than anything else. Considering the base Cruz starts at about $17,500 that's a big jump.




RE: Price
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/7/2014 2:57:46 PM , Rating: 3
Yeah, and look at the Jetta TDI, they allow you to get the TDI in just about any trim level you want and give you the option of a manual or DSG.

It also helps that the Jetta TDI Value Edition starts at $21,000 compared to $26,000 for the Cruze diesel.


RE: Price
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 4:27:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yup. Why pay $5,000 more when you can get the Cruze Eco for less than $20,000 and get similar fuel economy to the diesel. And diesel and premium run roughly the same price. Sure you can run regular in a Cruze 1.4T but it affects the mileage quite a bit. At least in the summer.


RE: Price
By doctorx on 8/7/2014 4:50:15 PM , Rating: 2
you might want to double check your facts on that....

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/33663.shtm...

apparently gets worse mileage than my old corolla. 26city/39 highway... i get 36 city and around 50 highway in 2013 jetta... and the more miles i get on it, the better it gets.


RE: Price
By FITCamaro on 8/7/2014 8:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
That's for the automatic. The Eco manual gets 42. Only 4 mpg less than the diesel. But many people, myself included, easily beat the EPA numbers.


RE: Price
By Azuroth on 8/8/2014 12:22:07 PM , Rating: 2
Of course, diesel drivers crush the EPA numbers as well. If I set my cruise control at 65, I average around 60mpg. At 70mph, I average 56mpg. My diesel also only has 8k miles on it, so the engine isn't fully broken in yet.


RE: Price
By Spuke on 8/8/2014 4:46:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Of course, diesel drivers crush the EPA numbers as well.
Only people here on DT claim they get 50 and 60 mpg from their diesels. When I ask people on the street or people I know, they're either right around EPA or less.


RE: Price
By Azuroth on 8/11/2014 9:40:03 AM , Rating: 2
Do you know a lot of cruze diesel drivers? I could post a pic of my mpg graph if you'd like.


RE: Price
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 5:27:08 PM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that Diesel will perform a hella lot better than the 1.4L Turbo. As well the diesel comes with a few bells/whistles than the eco does. So that $5000 premium is not just for the engine.

With the diesel you are getting excellent mileage AND you are getting 151 hp & 264 lb.-ft torque (that torque is in V6 territory!). I daresay that is far better than that enemic little 1.4L engine will give you even with a turbocharger (138 horsepower and 148 lb.-ft torque).

The diesel is rated at 4.2 L/100 km (67 mpg) highway.
The eco is rated at 4.6 L/100 km (61 mpg) highway

So the diesel is stronger, faster and uses less fuel. The downside is that it costs that $5k more. I would call that a pretty good trade off.


RE: Price
By Mint on 8/7/2014 8:23:20 PM , Rating: 2
Nope. The Eco performs better in 0-60, quarter mile, and braking. It's a lot cheaper, too.

Cruze Eco:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/1205_20...

Cruze Diesel:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/13...


RE: Price
By Banana Bandit on 8/7/2014 10:20:12 PM , Rating: 2
Looked at those.

Eco was std trans and are know to be pretty stripped down cars.

Diesel was slushbox auto and heavier (probably because of that trans and the fact it is better equipped than the eco)

Performance times show only a couple tenths difference. I would bet that if you had the same auto trans in both the results would be very different.

Braking differences are so close that human inconsistency would account for the difference but I would chalk up the added weight of the diesel car as the wild card here.


Cruze Diesel is a terrible buy.
By grooves21 on 8/8/2014 3:32:34 AM , Rating: 2
The Cruze Diesel only comes available on the highest trim packages and only offers a minimal gas mileage improvement over the standard engines in the lineup.

Cruze Diesel = 33mpg combined
Cruze Eco = 31mpg combined
Cruze LS 1.8 = 27mpg combined

The non-diesel models both run on 87 octane gas which is currently about $0.20 cheaper/gallon than diesel, in my area.

Based on the Price premium, it would take you 13.5 years to make the money back you paid up front for the diesel through gas savings. If you choose to compare to the ECO model, it would take you FIFTY (50 ... FIVE-ZERO) years to make up for the price through gas savings.

When you add in the loss of convenience due to fewer stations carrying diesel, extra maintenance, and potential resale value, it makes absolutely zero sense to even consider the diesel in a vehicle like the Cruze.

Now, in a pickup like the Canyon/Colorado it might be a great option, as long as they don't price the option outrageously. Not only would the diesel give you better gas mileage, you would get more torque/towing/hauling capacity. People might actually consider those benefits to be worth the increased costs, where in a commuter like the Cruze people only care about the bottom line.




By Banana Bandit on 8/8/2014 7:05:57 AM , Rating: 2
Keep in mind that you are not paying that price difference *just* for a diesel engine. The Cruze diesel is the top trim for that car and is loaded.

Put the same level of options in the eco and you would see the price get very close to that diesel AND you would see a few mpg less economy because. Let's face it, you have to keep the eco light and stripped down for the piss poor torque of that itty-bitty 1.4L engine to pull it.

The V6-level torque on the diesel however could pull not only the added weight of the added options, but also a trailer of stuff without breaking a sweat.

Like I said in an earlier post - I wish Ford had a turbo diesel option for the Focus when I bought my Titanium. I would have been all over it.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il














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