At $4 A Gallon, Will We See A Ford Diesel Car

[Ford Jellymoulds]

In the end, Ford won't do a diesel car in the US until they have perfected a urea free clean diesel for the market, then, they'll take a look at the market and decide if its worth while. Ford the global company has several small, very fuel efficient diesels in its stable. They just see no need to bring them to the US yet. There's no compelling reason to do so. Gasoline here is still averaging 10-20% less in price than diesel fuel on a national basis (with variations among the regions). Clean diesel cars are unlikely to return more than a 20-25% mpg gain over a similarly speced gasoline engine (turbo, dgi, sized right, dual VCT, etc) under ideal conditions, and perhaps less on regular conditions. Judging by the price differential at the pump, that means that the effective benifit to the average consumer will be near a 5 to 8% reduction in fuel costs over the first five years of the vehicles life. Said diesel vehicle will likely cost a couple thousand dollars more than the gasoline equivalent, thus making the net effect a wash or a loss financially over those five years.

 

So, it may be vogue to get diesels by then, but, the majority of consumers will likely consider diesels to be even less desirable than hybrids, which will have been on the market about a decade at that point (Honda Insight), be on their second or third generations by then and will likely, for the same price, get better gas mileage than the diesels. And, though you must replace the battery pack once every 7-10 years in a Hybrid, the average consumer will have discarded the vehicle long before that time. And, heaven forbid that your diesel engine takes a dump, because it's going to be very expensive to have fixed as well, likely more so than the hybrid batteries. I also expect that, as hybrid battery production picks up, their replacement price will come down.

 

Good post you may be right some good points, the European Union are not happy with the Diesels Nox emissions they are putting some legislation through that if it becomes law will make EU emissions much tougher than those proposed by California for the future. Experts are already saying sales of diesels could drop off from 65% European market share in 2012 to 40% in 2015 when the law will come in force. So it should not be a problem selling them in California its the huge rise in the cost of the technology that will cause the slump.

[mlhm5]

In the end, Ford won't do a diesel car in the US until they have perfected a urea free clean diesel for the market, then, they'll take a look at the market and decide if its worth while. Ford the global company has several small, very fuel efficient diesels in its stable. They just see no need to bring them to the US yet. There's no compelling reason to do so. Gasoline here is still averaging 10-20% less in price than diesel fuel on a national basis (with variations among the regions). Clean diesel cars are unlikely to return more than a 20-25% mpg gain over a similarly speced gasoline engine (turbo, dgi, sized right, dual VCT, etc) under ideal conditions, and perhaps less on regular conditions. Judging by the price differential at the pump, that means that the effective benifit to the average consumer will be near a 5 to 8% reduction in fuel costs over the first five years of the vehicles life. Said diesel vehicle will likely cost a couple thousand dollars more than the gasoline equivalent, thus making the net effect a wash or a loss financially over those five years.

 

So, it may be vogue to get diesels by then, but, the majority of consumers will likely consider diesels to be even less desirable than hybrids, which will have been on the market about a decade at that point (Honda Insight), be on their second or third generations by then and will likely, for the same price, get better gas mileage than the diesels. And, though you must replace the battery pack once every 7-10 years in a Hybrid, the average consumer will have discarded the vehicle long before that time. And, heaven forbid that your diesel engine takes a dump, because it's going to be very expensive to have fixed as well, likely more so than the hybrid batteries. I also expect that, as hybrid battery production picks up, their replacement price will come down.

 

There are so many "old wives tales" in your post, I really don't know where to start.

 

1. Have you read about the Honda diesel engine?

 

The 2009 diesel engined Honda Accord will achieve 52MPG highway and 43MPG combined. Hardly the mere 20-25% mileage improvement as you claim under ideal conditions.

Data Sheet

 

Basically mid 40s+ mileage if you are a commuter. Anyone looking for a sedan would have to put this at the top of their list, when you consider that gas and diesel will be at the $4 mark or more by summer 2008, just prior to the introduction of the Accord.

 

If you are in the market for a smaller car, the 2.2CTDi diesel-powered Honda Civic, currently sold in the UK, delivers 43 miles per gallon in town and 55.4 mpg in combined city-highway driving.

Business Week Article

 

2. Edmunds found that diesel’s slightly higher purchase price compared to a conventional gasoline vehicle is quickly offset by fuel-economy savings. Diesel drivers have recouped the initial premium anywhere from six months to four years following the vehicle’s purchase. At a 43MPG combined, the Honda Accord's payback will be at the short end of the scale for a commuter.

 

3. Edmunds also said that hybrid vehicles “this so-called break-even period is longer — in some cases as much as eight years longer.” So much for your contention that diesels are less desirous than hybrids.

 

4. If the day comes where you can routinely get better gas mileages with a hybrid auto of the same size and power of a diesel, the decision will be made on reliability and service costs over the life of the car, which will be in favor of the diesel.

 

5. I don't know where you got your info about replacing battery packs, but they will last a minimum of 100k miles.

[ShockFX]

This was lost in another post, but it bears repeating.

 

Ford Global has a stable of efficient, clean diesel engines. They have decided it's not worth bringing them here yet. Does Toyota have a stable of proven diesel engines?

[mlhm5]

This was lost in another post, but it bears repeating.

 

Ford Global has a stable of efficient, clean diesel engines. They have decided it's not worth bringing them here yet. Does Toyota have a stable of proven diesel engines?

 

 

I ain't defending Toyota, but yes they do. Link

[ShockFX]

I ain't defending Toyota, but yes they do. Link

 

Ford can do the exact same if they want. It's a wash.

[theoldwizard]

Clean diesel cars are unlikely to return more than a 20-25% mpg gain over a similarly speced gasoline engine (turbo, dgi, sized right, dual VCT, etc) under ideal conditions, and perhaps less on regular conditions. Judging by the price differential at the pump, that means that the effective benefit to the average consumer will be near a 5 to 8% reduction in fuel costs over the first five years of the vehicles life. Said diesel vehicle will likely cost a couple thousand dollars more than the gasoline equivalent, thus making the net effect a wash or a loss financially over those five years.

My experts (all engineers and Technical Experts at FoMoCo) disagree with you.

 

You have to add turbo, DGI and TI-VCT to get close to turbo, non-VCT, diesel efficiency. With those additions, the cost difference is less than $1000 (we are talking 4 cylinder). And you only get close.

 

One thing no one mentions is "pumping losses". Gasoline is "sucking" through a throttle. Diesel is unthrottled, which means it will alway be more efficient.

 

Ford management (and marketeers) are still worried about the 1980 Olds debacle. That is why they have crowned TwinForce the way of the future. Right now, they are finding out that TwinForce is expensive and difficult to package all of the plumbing, especially on a V6 FWD/AWD. Of yeah, the software for DGI, twin waste gates, TI-VCT is not exactly easy either. I'm betting you'll never see twin turbos on any non-Lincoln (car) product.

 

My experts tell me that they can meet future standards without urea.

 

Off topic here, but does anyone else think it is odd that Ford is killing off RWD while GM is adding ?

Edited November 13, 2007 by theoldwizard

[Extreme4x4]

mlhm5, your rant sound all good until someone actually looks into each one of your points. In other words, it is convincing to the non informed.

 

Diesel fuel is currently MUCH more expensive than gasoline. My husband drives big truck. Here in AZ, diesel is running $3.50-3.65 a gallon, where regular gas is $2.82-2.97 a gallon.

 

Diesel engines may last significantly longer (the gap is getting shorter all the time), but the maintenance is more expensive. However, what do I know, we just owned an auto repair and towing business for 9 years.

 

Using the price of a diesel option in Europe has no bearing on the cost here. The new emmisions standards for diesels has raised the already high premium by about $1500 per vehicle. Thus, add $2000 plus the $1500 on a smallish................. less expensive car, and you get a real pricy little car that uses real expensive fuel.

 

I have looked at all the variables. See, we plan on buying a 2005-2007 Superduty with the 6.8L gas engine. Why?? The diesel is alot more expensive, the fuel is more expensive, the maintenance is more expensive, we will not be driving alot of miles ( to amortize the cost over), and we will probably never sell the truck ( we keep our vehicles, as my husband is currently driving our '69 F250 Crewcab 4x4). In other words, for us, it would just not be good money.

 

However, whatever................ you are right, Ford sucks. :rolleyes:

[suv_guy_19]

My experts (all engineers and Technical Experts at FoMoCo) disagree with you.

 

You have to add turbo, DGI and TI-VCT to get close to turbo, non-VCT, diesel efficiency. With those additions, the cost difference is less than $1000 (we are talking 4 cylinder). And you only get close.

 

One thing no one mentions is "pumping losses". Gasoline is "sucking" through a throttle. Diesel is unthrottled, which means it will alway be more efficient.

 

Ford management (and marketeers) are still worried about the 1980 Olds debacle. That is why they have crowned TwinForce the way of the future. Right now, they are finding out that TwinForce is expensive and difficult to package all of the plumbing, especially on a V6 FWD/AWD. Of yeah, the software for DGI, twin waste gates, TI-VCT is not exactly easy either. I'm betting you'll never see twin turbos on any non-Lincoln (car) product.

 

My experts tell me that you can meet future standards without urea.

 

Off topic here, but does anyone else think it is odd that Ford is killing off RWD while GM is adding ?

 

 

Blue II says RWD is coming back, so I don't see what your getting at.

[P71_CrownVic]

Isn't diesel just a by-product of refining gasoline? I thought I heard that somewhere.

 

Heres my thoughts on diesel cars.

 

1. It is the future. Period.

 

2. In 1981 VW's Rabbit diesel was capable of 50MPG. An here we are now 26 years later and VW is coming out with a 2.0 diesel in the Jetta that gets...50MPG. Why? Why in 26 or so years have we not been able to get a car that gets 70MPG? A car that is Focus or Jetta sized and not a hybrid.

[Michael Reynolds]

2. In 1981 VW's Rabbit diesel was capable of 50MPG. An here we are now 26 years later and VW is coming out with a 2.0 diesel in the Jetta that gets...50MPG. Why? Why in 26 or so years have we not been able to get a car that gets 70MPG? A car that is Focus or Jetta sized and not a hybrid.

 

You could ask that question about a lot of cars, both diesel and gas powered. Look @ the horsepower and torque ratings of the 80s VW Diesel and compare those to the latest numbers from VW.

[P71_CrownVic]

You could ask that question about a lot of cars, both diesel and gas powered. Look @ the horsepower and torque ratings of the 80s VW Diesel and compare those to the latest numbers from VW.

That does not matter. When I am looking for a economy car, HP and TQ are the last things I am concerned with.

[suv_guy_19]

That does not matter. When I am looking for a economy car, HP and TQ are the last things I am concerned with.

But see, thats not where the market is going. Things in the compact class are becoming more premium and upscale. In a way, I suppose, things are becoming more European.

[bolita]

This was lost in another post, but it bears repeating.

 

Ford Global has a stable of efficient, clean diesel engines. They have decided it's not worth bringing them here yet. Does Toyota have a stable of proven diesel engines?

 

IIRC its a deal with Emissions and fuel quality (sulphur content)...

[Michael Reynolds]

That does not matter. When I am looking for a economy car, HP and TQ are the last things I am concerned with.

 

Uh huh, sure it doesn't. When you can't safely merge in with traffic because your car isn't up to the task, let me know how that works out for ya.

 

Hey, I wasn't talking about going out and drag racing the thing but you can not directly compare the 80s with what we are looking at today. Need I sit here and go, on and on about what cars come equipped with today that were no where to be seen in the early 80s. Hell a Tempo pretty much got better fuel economy than alot of the hybrids zippin around here.

[ShockFX]

I heard Vespas get 80mpg. Maybe we should all ride them.

[bolita]

[quote

[bolita]

Isn't diesel just a by-product of refining gasoline? I thought I heard that somewhere.

 

Heres my thoughts on diesel cars.

 

1. It is the future. Period.

 

2. In 1981 VW's Rabbit diesel was capable of 50MPG. An here we are now 26 years later and VW is coming out with a 2.0 diesel in the Jetta that gets...50MPG. Why? Why in 26 or so years have we not been able to get a car that gets 70MPG? A car that is Focus or Jetta sized and not a hybrid.

 

I agree with your pint 1 above.

 

Only that I believe that it will be BioDiesel

 

Gas cars can/could migrate towards ethanol (and I am 100% ethanol). Brazil is a good example of a flex fuel market. Ford has the technology. I just think it is a matter of time.

[Michael Reynolds]

Ugh ethanol......

 

Not so sure I'm on the ethanol bandwagon. Feed for livestock (the stuff that we eat) has a ton of corn in it doesn't?

[Hemiman]

the maintenance is more expensive,

 

 

Not sure I agree here. Diesels much are less maintenance intensive. They require no ignition service at all. When my shop at work, went to diesels, work load for failure to start and drivability was cut in half. Same was true when I was a mechanic in the Army, 50% of our work was on gassers, even though they made up less than 10% of the fleet.

 

I do agree with you that if you don't drive the vehicle enough for the diesel to pay off it's premium, you should just go with a gasser.

[bolita]

Not sure I agree here. Diesels much are less maintenance intensive. They require no ignition service at all. When my shop at work, went to diesels, work load for failure to start and drivability was cut in half. Same was true when I was a mechanic in the Army, 50% of our work was on gassers, even though they made up less than 10% of the fleet.

 

I do agree with you that if you don't drive the vehicle enough for the diesel to pay off it's premium, you should just go with a gasser.

 

I disagree with you, especially with the new common rails. Just look at what an injector or the pump costs...

[Hemiman]

I disagree with you, especially with the new common rails. Just look at what an injector or the pump costs...

 

 

Injector pumps have always been very expensive. It's the most precise part on a diesel and very sensitive to contamination. However, they typically last 300K+, (exception, some Cummins 5.9 units and early GM 6.2)).

 

We've found the pumps used in common rail systems to be even more reliable then the old pumps. Zero pump problems so far, but our common rail trucks are just hitting 120Kmi, so we'll see, (our fleet is about 500 vehicles nation wide, about 100 are newer common rail diesels).

 

Now, how will the DGI pump be any different than the common rail diesel pump? After all, it's common rail diesel technolgy that paved the way for DGI.

 

The way I see it, the DGI engine is really just a low compression diesel that needs a spark to get things to light.

 

 

PS: I know, I know... A a diesel is a compression ignition engine.

[P71_CrownVic]

But see, thats not where the market is going. Things in the compact class are becoming more premium and upscale. In a way, I suppose, things are becoming more European.

Almost every model sold in Europe has a diesel option.

[NickF1011]

So I'm a bit confused. Is this the same diesel debate thread we had last month (and the month before that) or is this a new one for November?

 

All we need now is some mention of the C1 Focus and the Panthers and we'll have the hat trick!

[NickF1011]

2. In 1981 VW's Rabbit diesel was capable of 50MPG. An here we are now 26 years later and VW is coming out with a 2.0 diesel in the Jetta that gets...50MPG. Why? Why in 26 or so years have we not been able to get a car that gets 70MPG? A car that is Focus or Jetta sized and not a hybrid.

 

Comparing a 1981 Rabbit to a 2007 Jetta isn't exactly apples to apples. Just how many airbags were in the '81 Rabbit? Did it have anti-lock brakes? Stability control? Active head restraints? What did the 1981 Rabbit get in NHTSA crash tests? I'm guessing NOT very well. Let's not even mention that the Jetta today probably has about 3 times the interior volume of an '81 Rabbit. I would say it's quite an accomplishment that a car that's 20 times as safe, performs 20 times better, and is 20 times more comfortable can even MATCH the fuel economy of a car build over 25 years ago.

[old_fairmont_wagon]

My figures for diesel fuel economy savings were taken from looking at the few diesel vehicles that are on the market today as opposed to their most efficient gasoline version available. When you start putting forth figures from engines that will be available in vehicles in two to three years time at the earliest, you discount the fact that hybrid technology is progressing as well. As Lithium Ion batteries begin to displace NiMH batteries, the efficiency of hybrid vehicles will increase. Couple a Hybrid with a smaller, DGI, low pressure turbo gasoline engine than they currently have (one specifically developed for the application, instead of just taking one off the shelf and trying to tweak it for that duty) and it is entirely possible that a hybrid will be able to match or beat a diesel in the mpg race. Couple that with plug in hybrid technology, and you could have a whole different world for Diesels to compete in.

 

I'm not saying that one tech is far and away better than the other. Who knows, someone may come up with the perfect combination of tiny diesel engine and hybrid technology and manage 70 mpg in the city and on the highway for a usable family vehicle.

 

What I am saying is that, what we're going on about is still years in the future. Hybrid tech will be another generation down the line then. Our most appropriate example will be coming soon. GM is expected to release a 4.5L diesel option for their large SUVs and pickups soon. It will be interesting to compare a new Two-Mode hybrid Tahoe to a 4.5L Diesel Tahoe. Which will cost more? Which will get the most mpg? Which will cost more to maintain over a typical 5 year period with 70K miles driven during it? How about at 10 years with 140K miles? That to me will be a very revealing challenge as a vehicle that heavy is a challenge to make efficient. Both systems will be within a year or so of each others in production and for-sale dates, so the tech generations may not be that far apart. What happens when the two-mode hybrid gets Lithium Ion batteries? What happens when it gets a plug in option? All parts of the equation.

 

I will say right now, Ford should be doing some research on bringing over a clean diesel, but, it shouldn't be betting the farm on it. In this race, it will be ok to be a few years behind as the market won't be quickly saturated with them. Diesel is not expected to become cheaper than gas anytime soon. Neither is likely to be cheap again. I just think that, if they can successfully pull off twinforce, and get the gains they are saying, as well as continue the development of their hybrid systems, they will be ok.