Diesel News: POST HERE
- Thread starter Scott Brady
- Start date
Viggen
Just here...
Its factory everywhere but the United States. The problem with all of these "diesel news" postings with high mpg numbers are that they are, as indicated, imperial mpg which is different and they are not federalized for the US. That is a lot of money and it is not worth it for just one car, like a Cruze for example. The gas powered Cruze will do 42 mpg highway and about 30 city and will do it with a cheaper sticker price and cost of ownership than a diesel version of the same car. When you add the diesel motor premium and the increased cost of fuel (diesel being over ten cents more than regular), the increase in mileage isnt that good and isnt worth the increase in the sticker. I dont see Chevrolet going through the trouble of federalizing a diesel motor for their economy car that will drive the sticker price WAY over its competitors? So, add federalization costs (that will be added to the price of every car), diesel motor premium and increased cost of fuel to the cost and youve got a car that is much, much higher than its competitors. I know VAG and Merc are doing it but they have a diesel motor that can go in more than one model so federalization is worth it to them.
Keep dreaming guys. If you want a diesel, youre going to have to build it (and its going to have to be something pre 95 to get around the EPA regs). Jeep gave it a shot and couldnt move enough units to make it worth it. Merc and VAG do it and are successful (relatively) because their average customer is willing to spend that money. Also, look at VAG, their offering a hybrid now. Its more expensive and loses 4 mpg to the TDI but the performance is much better. So much so that the car rags are recommending the hybrid over the diesel version, even though they acknowledge that the TDI gets better mileage.
Im a diesel owner and love it. My 6000+ lbs piece never gets below 17 around town. VW has about 2000 Amaroks sitting at the port in Baltimore brought in by VWoA. No destination on the manifest. For those that dont know, the Amarok is only available in diesel trim.
Keep dreaming guys. If you want a diesel, youre going to have to build it (and its going to have to be something pre 95 to get around the EPA regs). Jeep gave it a shot and couldnt move enough units to make it worth it. Merc and VAG do it and are successful (relatively) because their average customer is willing to spend that money. Also, look at VAG, their offering a hybrid now. Its more expensive and loses 4 mpg to the TDI but the performance is much better. So much so that the car rags are recommending the hybrid over the diesel version, even though they acknowledge that the TDI gets better mileage.
Im a diesel owner and love it. My 6000+ lbs piece never gets below 17 around town. VW has about 2000 Amaroks sitting at the port in Baltimore brought in by VWoA. No destination on the manifest. For those that dont know, the Amarok is only available in diesel trim.
If anyone finds a post in this thread that contains miles per Imperial gallon, let me know. I'll convert to miles per US gallon.
VW is well positioned to import the Amarok diesel, since the same basic engine is already certified by EPA for use in VW's passenger cars. The Amarok diesel engine is available in single turbo and twin turbo configurations. The single turbo model (250 ft lbs) is most like the engine in the Jetta. But there are other problems.
First, USA charges a 25% import tax on pickups assembled outside North America. This could be worked around by importing a partially disassembled truck, and finishing the assembly in USA. That's how Ford imports the Transit Connect from Turkey, for example.
Second, the VW plant in Argentina has a maximum output of 90,000 vehicles, and those trucks are already spoken for in other countries that VW serves. VW is setting up a new plant in Germany to build the Amarok for sale in European countries, but that probably won't free up enough volume for North America.
My guess is that VW will have to build the Amarok in USA if they decide to sell it here.
VW is well positioned to import the Amarok diesel, since the same basic engine is already certified by EPA for use in VW's passenger cars. The Amarok diesel engine is available in single turbo and twin turbo configurations. The single turbo model (250 ft lbs) is most like the engine in the Jetta. But there are other problems.
First, USA charges a 25% import tax on pickups assembled outside North America. This could be worked around by importing a partially disassembled truck, and finishing the assembly in USA. That's how Ford imports the Transit Connect from Turkey, for example.
Second, the VW plant in Argentina has a maximum output of 90,000 vehicles, and those trucks are already spoken for in other countries that VW serves. VW is setting up a new plant in Germany to build the Amarok for sale in European countries, but that probably won't free up enough volume for North America.
My guess is that VW will have to build the Amarok in USA if they decide to sell it here.
Viggen
Just here...
They have a plant in Tennessee now but I think its Jetta/ Passat only right now. The other problem is that it will probably cost $40k and at that price, it is in full size territory. I want one. I know the had of product development at VWoA and Im thinking about dropping him a line and asking what the chances are. Hes pretty upfront. I asked him a year or so ago what the chances of getting a TDI Tiguan and was disappointed by the response.
Pedro
Capitan rally fluffer
Its factory everywhere but the United States. The problem with all of these "diesel news" postings with high mpg numbers are that they are, as indicated, imperial mpg which is different and they are not federalized for the US. That is a lot of money and it is not worth it for just one car, like a Cruze for example. The gas powered Cruze will do 42 mpg highway and about 30 city and will do it with a cheaper sticker price and cost of ownership than a diesel version of the same car. When you add the diesel motor premium and the increased cost of fuel (diesel being over ten cents more than regular), the increase in mileage isnt that good and isnt worth the increase in the sticker. I dont see Chevrolet going through the trouble of federalizing a diesel motor for their economy car that will drive the sticker price WAY over its competitors? So, add federalization costs (that will be added to the price of every car), diesel motor premium and increased cost of fuel to the cost and youve got a car that is much, much higher than its competitors. I know VAG and Merc are doing it but they have a diesel motor that can go in more than one model so federalization is worth it to them.
Keep dreaming guys. If you want a diesel, youre going to have to build it (and its going to have to be something pre 95 to get around the EPA regs). Jeep gave it a shot and couldnt move enough units to make it worth it. Merc and VAG do it and are successful (relatively) because their average customer is willing to spend that money. Also, look at VAG, their offering a hybrid now. Its more expensive and loses 4 mpg to the TDI but the performance is much better. So much so that the car rags are recommending the hybrid over the diesel version, even though they acknowledge that the TDI gets better mileage.
Im a diesel owner and love it. My 6000+ lbs piece never gets below 17 around town. VW has about 2000 Amaroks sitting at the port in Baltimore brought in by VWoA. No destination on the manifest. For those that dont know, the Amarok is only available in diesel trim.
Most of the MPG reports on this page are properly converted from lt/100km (as I even uncorrectly called out earlier in this thread).
and the Cruz is a poor example. when you put in the same features as the diesel jetta (I know, different car) but you have a $2000 difference. but you end up with better equipment in the jetta. The cruz eco doesn't even come with a spare. you get tire slime, that's it.
The problem with the way Jeep brought over the diesel is that they put it in two models only. one was the lower volume model of the lineup (liberty) and the other was the grand. BUT they only put the diesel in the highest trim line. so when you add the diesel option you were crossing into loaded mercedes/lexus land on the price. if you didn't need to add $15k in options before you add the diesel, it would have sold better for sure.
The Chevy Cruze Eco does offer high mpg from a non-hybrid gasoline powered drivetrain. Now GM has announced that they intend to produce a diesel-powered Cruze that gets better mpg. The diesel Cruze should appear in 18 months or so as a 2013 model. http://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/22/diesel-chevrolet-cruze-coming-to-u-s-in-2013/
Given that diesel fuel costs about 10% more than regular unleaded, the diesel Cruze will need to get better than 47 mpg to match the gas Cruze in dollars spent at the pump. My guess is Gm is aiming higher, for more than 50 mpg so the diesel Cruze can compete with the Toyota Prius.
Given that diesel fuel costs about 10% more than regular unleaded, the diesel Cruze will need to get better than 47 mpg to match the gas Cruze in dollars spent at the pump. My guess is Gm is aiming higher, for more than 50 mpg so the diesel Cruze can compete with the Toyota Prius.
Pedro
Capitan rally fluffer
I will say for the record that the auto on the Jetta isn't a standard automatic. It is a DSG transmission. So basically an autoshifting twin clutch manual. The Jetta diesel loaded similarly to the Cruz is $2000 over the price of the Cruz. and the Cruz eco is quite a bit more than the regular cruz. So there may not be that much of a price jump for the diesel.
Here's more evidence that Dodge will soon be switching to urea injction to control NOx emissions in its RAM pickups with Cummins diesel engines.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/0...id-coming-soon-to-ram-heavy-duty-pickups.html
Dodge added urea injection to its 4500 and 5500 chassis cab models last year, but sold the 2011 HD pickups with exhaust gas recirculation only. GM and Ford moved to urea injection in 2010, resulting in improvements to drivability and fuel economy.
On a related subject, Navistar is suing the EPA to improve enforcement of the urea injection rules. It seems that filling the urea tank with plain old H2O is enough to fool the onboard sensors in most trucks. This allows owners to avoid paying for the urea solution, but also increases air pollution. Navistar wants a more sophisticated system to ensure that the urea solution is used.
Why would Navistar sue the EPA? It's because Navistar's diesels don't require urea solution, which Navistar promotes as a competitive advantage. If owners of other manufacturers' diesels don't need to use urea, Navistar's advantage disappears.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/0...id-coming-soon-to-ram-heavy-duty-pickups.html
Dodge added urea injection to its 4500 and 5500 chassis cab models last year, but sold the 2011 HD pickups with exhaust gas recirculation only. GM and Ford moved to urea injection in 2010, resulting in improvements to drivability and fuel economy.
On a related subject, Navistar is suing the EPA to improve enforcement of the urea injection rules. It seems that filling the urea tank with plain old H2O is enough to fool the onboard sensors in most trucks. This allows owners to avoid paying for the urea solution, but also increases air pollution. Navistar wants a more sophisticated system to ensure that the urea solution is used.
Why would Navistar sue the EPA? It's because Navistar's diesels don't require urea solution, which Navistar promotes as a competitive advantage. If owners of other manufacturers' diesels don't need to use urea, Navistar's advantage disappears.
Bill Beers
Explorer
Navistar also conveniently leaves out the detail that their .5g NOx "Advanced EGR" engines don't meet the .2g NOx standard without using emissions credits.
John Mies, VP of corporate communitcations at Mack/Volvo:
"The fact is that a Mack or Volvo truck running at 0.2 grams (per brake hp/hr NOx) is and will continue to be much better for the environment than a Navistar truck running at 0.5 grams – and no amount of changes to the inducement strategies will change that,” he said. “Let’s make sure that what we do is truly in the interest of the environment and the public. And let’s not penalize those who have worked with you in good faith, and reward those who are trying to manipulate the system for their own competitive advantage.”
John Mies, VP of corporate communitcations at Mack/Volvo:
"The fact is that a Mack or Volvo truck running at 0.2 grams (per brake hp/hr NOx) is and will continue to be much better for the environment than a Navistar truck running at 0.5 grams – and no amount of changes to the inducement strategies will change that,” he said. “Let’s make sure that what we do is truly in the interest of the environment and the public. And let’s not penalize those who have worked with you in good faith, and reward those who are trying to manipulate the system for their own competitive advantage.”
Here's a road test of the Australian version of the Chevy Cruze with diesel engine.
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/cruze/2011/2011-chevrolet-cruze-cdx-first-drive.html
The engine is a new 2.0L turbo model, rated at 265 lb-ft of torque, and produced in GM's engine manufacturing facility in Korea. According to the Australian version of the EPA, the Cruze diesel should return 6.7 liters/100 km, or about 35 miles per USA gallon.
That's not the 45+ mpg I was hoping for, but the Cruze diesel that reaches USA in 2013 will probably include all sorts of tweaks to improve its fuel economy. I doubt that GM will have enough time to produce an entirely new engine by 2013.
http://www.insideline.com/chevrolet/cruze/2011/2011-chevrolet-cruze-cdx-first-drive.html
The engine is a new 2.0L turbo model, rated at 265 lb-ft of torque, and produced in GM's engine manufacturing facility in Korea. According to the Australian version of the EPA, the Cruze diesel should return 6.7 liters/100 km, or about 35 miles per USA gallon.
That's not the 45+ mpg I was hoping for, but the Cruze diesel that reaches USA in 2013 will probably include all sorts of tweaks to improve its fuel economy. I doubt that GM will have enough time to produce an entirely new engine by 2013.
Viggen
Just here...
The DSG is terrible for smooth driving. The Jetta is also a larger car than the Cruz so why buy a diesel Cruz when a proven VW diesel is the same price? GM is pissing in the wind with this one. They need to offer serious mpg in order for the cost to be justified.
Pedro
Capitan rally fluffer
If they combine the Highway/City MPG's in nearly the same way as the EPA, then it gets BETTER mileage than the Jetta TDI. Fueleconomy.gov lists the 2012 Jetta as 30city/42highway with 34 combined. Since the 35.1 combined was the Cruz' number.. I am decently impressed.
Bill Beers
Explorer
How many gallons of gasoline could you put into the 33 mpg (EPA combined,) Cruze Eco for the extra $$ forked out for a diesel?
Would be nice to have that range though!
Pedro
Capitan rally fluffer
Depends on the price difference.
It would probably work in my advantage if the price is similar to the "eco". 30k mi/yr, it would be a good choice. nearly all of my mileage is highway cruising. I have noticed that the diesel's tend to get really good mileage @75 where the gassers seem to start to stumble. that alone would be worth the price of admission for me.
but I don't buy new anymore. the warranties just don't last long enough to be worth the price.
It would probably work in my advantage if the price is similar to the "eco". 30k mi/yr, it would be a good choice. nearly all of my mileage is highway cruising. I have noticed that the diesel's tend to get really good mileage @75 where the gassers seem to start to stumble. that alone would be worth the price of admission for me.
but I don't buy new anymore. the warranties just don't last long enough to be worth the price.
Similar threads
