Do You Understand Field's Logic? I Don't

[Extreme4x4]

Chuck, European emissions and new US emissions are NIGHT and DAY different.

 

Completely different

 

Totally different

 

As different as different can be

 

US emissions are MUCH more stringent, and cuts diesel efficiency by a large amount.

 

All you have to do is look at the difference in the trucks. You can equate the old diesel emissions standards to the European standards. The 2009/2010 changes have cut fuel economy in trucks................ not 18-wheeler trucks................ by a LARGE amount.

 

Europe manipulates there diesel emissions to make subsidize the diesel market.............. much as they do the same with diesel fuel taxes, which are alot lower than gasoline fuel taxes.

 

It is NOT that way in the US. Diesel fuel taxes in the US are higher than gasoline taxes. The new (I think it is 2009 or 2010) diesel emissions standards are much more restrictive.

 

These are the things that make a European diesel get much lower mileage in the US. You can spin this any way you want.............. yet the fact remains the same. Diesel equals higher cost to purchase, higher fuel costs, per gallon, higher maintenance costs, and higher mpg. The higher mpg does NOT make for a compelling reason to buy, based on the other issues.

 

Will people buy diesel cars. Yes, some will. Will everyone flock to diesel engined cars as their savior............. NO. You have provided your own proof. Even Honda does not think that the diesel makes a compelling arguement here, thus, they are only going to offer it, at some point, in their higher dollar line. Their line that can absorb the extra cost more, and that the customers will not balk as much at the higher price.

 

Get it through your head.

 

RJ does not work for Ford. However, his reasoning skills are some of the best out there. Nobody here is saying that noone will buy a diesel car, they are just saying that it is going to be slow going............... and much as you bash Ford for not jumping in hook, line, and sinker............ neither is anyone else................ and it is because THERE IS A GOOD REASON FOR IT. Frankly, right now, they don't have the money for fishing expeditions. Let someone else be the guinea pig.

 

Finally, VW can bring diesel here, because they actually have a diesel car history here. There is a VW diesel cult following. Now, you may think I am full of it, but I owned an auto repair and towing business for 9 years, and saw it first hand............... and worked on the cars.

 

Good grief............. talk about a broken record. Augh !!!

[RichardJensen]

There is no possible way that the difference between EU Block IV emissions testing and US EPA 2008 scale emissions testing could possibly lead to such a large discrepency in numbers.

Okay,

 

1: The highway test is significantly different, both in terms of acceleration rate and average speed

2: The emissions regulations are, at present 5x more permissive of NOx in the EU than they are in the US. If you think there's no significant difference in mileage from that, compare the numerous technological improvements to the Jetta TDI which yields no significant gain in city mileage and only about 10% on the highway over the outgoing model.

 

I never compared Fusion and TSX, you did

 

No. You asserted that a 50mpg+ Accord was imminent. I pointed out that it is far beyond unlikely that the smaller TSX will yield 50mpg highway.

 

Did I ever say they'd last forever?

 

No, but--without any supporting evidence you assert a lower TCO.

 

To sum up your conflation of fact and speculation:

 

1: Honda is launching a diesel TSX in 2009 (fact) - This means that Honda is launching a diesel Accord in the very near future (speculation), and this vehicle will 'destroy' the US auto makers (speculation).

 

2: The TSX gets over 50mpg in Europe (fact) - The Honda Accord will get over 50mpg in the US (speculation)

 

3: Diesels in the past have had lower TCO (debatable fact) - Diesels in the future will have lower TCO than hybrids (speculation)

 

If you would be so good as to acknowledge the difference between provable facts and unsupported speculation......

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And you know why I ignored your 1.6L Focus illustration? Because the 2.0L Jetta requires 10 seconds to get to 60mph. At that rate, a 1.6L Focus won't even be going 60mph by the time it passes the quarter.

Edited September 11, 2008 by RichardJensen

[chucky2]

Chuck, European emissions and new US emissions are NIGHT and DAY different.

 

Completely different

 

Totally different

 

As different as different can be

 

US emissions are MUCH more stringent, and cuts diesel efficiency by a large amount.

 

<snip>

 

We just covered this in RichardJensen 4:59 PM post today. Check out the EU Jetta highway mpg: 46. Check out the US Jetta highway mpg: 41 (or 44 when 3rd party tested).

 

That is the total cut. Period. That total cut is a 13% difference between the EU diesel Jetta and the US diesel Jetta.

 

Even giving 20% difference (that's 35% over the 13% difference), and then another 10 mpg on top that, a Ford UK 1.6L diesel would get 59+ US mpg highway - that's with the tougher US emissions standards. This example is so skewed against diesel, it just makes the case for it stronger.

 

When you take the incoming Hybrid Fusion, which has had zero mpg info from Ford (or anyone else credible that I tried to find) posted on it, and theorize that it might get 40mpg highway (based on what the '09 Escape gets (since it shares the same basic engine and system)...and then you compare that to something getting - at the very worst - 19 mpg more that it....well....it just gets embarrassing.

 

Again, we can just stop debating. When the '10 Hybrid Fusion comes out, we'll see this massive mpg rise across the board (not just in town now, some of drive, you know, not in the city), for pennies...and, of course, since we're talking these sky high diesel maintenance costs, we'll of course see a guarantee from Ford for the first out of warranty battery replacement free...since that's so cheap I'm sure Ford will be able to do that no problem.

 

I give up.....you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.....

 

Chuck

[Edstock]

and, of course, since we're talking these sky high diesel maintenance costs, we'll of course see a guarantee from Ford for the first out of warranty battery replacement free...since that's so cheap I'm sure Ford will be able to do that no problem.

 

I give up.....you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.....

 

Chuck

Judging from Ford's Escape taxi fleet, and Prius usage, that doesn't seem like a great consideration, especially as electronic components like batteries tend to get cheaper. Diesel re-builds? Not so much.

 

The new US diesels require rich-burning catalytic converters to control NOx, plus sensors and control system; we'll of course see a guarantee from Volkswagen for the first out of warranty cat replacement free . . . since that's so cheap I'm sure VW will be able to do that no problem.

 

I give up.....you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.....

Edited September 11, 2008 by Edstock

[syrtran]

I saw you totally ignored the whole breakdown of mpg figures I did for the diesel 1.6L UK Ford Focus...here, I'll give you the relevant numbers again: 74.2 mpg (EU emissions testing, Imperial gallons) * 20% (which takes into account when looking at the diesel Jetta numbers you so nicely provided, all relevant emissions testing, Imperial to US gallon conversion, etc.....plus, gives 35% more leeway against my argument and for yours). The result: 59.36 US mpg highway. Even giving another 10 US mpg highway, that's 49+ mph highway. That number is so incredibly skewed toward your argument as to basically invalidate any excuse you could possibly come up with, and it still makes the incoming Ford Fusion Hybrid your slobbering over look weak - no $5000 USD replacement batteries down the road needed, either.

Your math is off, even though you end up nearly right.

 

Focus Diesel - 74.2 UK mpg

74.2 x .83 = 61.6 US mpg (UK to US gallon conversion, miles are the same)

This is without the EU to US difference in emission controls. Using the difference RJ gave for the Jetta:

41 / 47 = .87

61.6 x .87 = 53.6 mpg

 

 

Your, and Lutz's video, argument will be that clean diesel in the US isn't doable. Well, these crazy companies called VW, Mercedes, and Honda beg to differ. The Big 3 (and your) excuse: It's too hard!!! Waaaaa!!!

Neither Lutz nor RJ said that diesel isn't doable in the US. We obviously have them here, now. What both of them said, quite clearly, is that diesels won't sell as well when compared to other high-mpg options. Hybrids have the 'green' cachet, and diesels still have a bad reputation (thank you to GM, and thank you to all the big rigs/dump trucks/garbage trucks/school buses that don't keep their injectors clean)

 

In fact, the Jetta TDi sold about 2400 cars for the 1/2 of August they were on sale, while the Prius sold over 13,000 for the whole month. Here's the math: Assume the sales were slow due to the whole 'new model' thing and double them. That's 2400 x 2 x 2 = 9600. Does that come close to 13000? Sales would have to triple, and that kind of quick start hasn't happened in decades (see: 1965 Mustang).

 

And, as to the whole 'cost of replacing the battery' thing, Toyota is still claiming they haven't replaced a Prius battery yet. That's 11 years of Priuses (Prii?) with original batteries.

 

Then, again, since this thread is about the Fiesta diesel, no one arguing for this thing has shown us the future announcements for the Fit diesel, the Yaris diesel, the Versa diesel or the Excel or Rio diesel. Not even the Suzuki SX/4.

 

We just covered this in RichardJensen 4:59 PM post today. Check out the EU Jetta highway mpg: 46. Check out the US Jetta highway mpg: 41 (or 44 when 3rd party tested).

Um. no. that's Volkswagen's testing. Go back and read the articles.

[chucky2]

Okay,

 

1: The highway test is significantly different, both in terms of acceleration rate and average speed

2: The emissions regulations are, at present 5x more permissive of NOx in the EU than they are in the US. If you think there's no significant difference in mileage from that, compare the numerous technological improvements to the Jetta TDI which yields no significant gain in city mileage and only about 10% on the highway over the outgoing model.

 

And yet, Mercedes, VW, and soon Acura (Honda) will have solved these emissions problems and have/are bringing high mpg clean diesel options to the US. And yet, the '09 Jetta TDI gets 41 (or 44 for 3rd party) mpg on the highway...that you can consider first year. Given the design, testing, and manufacturing lead times, when the Big 3 finally come up with something that can touch 41 mpg on the cost side, where do you think VW's TDI will be then? Answer: Not at 41mpg...it'll be higher, always higher.

 

What's sad is that this is just VW's diesel option. Think if Ford had done what Lutz says is incapable of happening (you know, the incapable thing 3 other leading manufacturers have done/are about to do)...and applied that to their 1.6, 1.8, and 2.0 UK diesels.

 

 

No. You asserted that a 50mpg+ Accord was imminent.

 

Yes, then I corrected that to be the Acura TSX (which is an Accord over in UK). I didn't say "imminent" either, I said '09. '09 being.....'09.

 

I pointed out that it is far beyond unlikely that the smaller TSX will yield 50mpg highway.

 

Interesting...since NYT already drove a pre-prod one and saw 53+ mpg in the real world. We'll see though...hopefully sooner than later, but, either way, we'll see...

 

No, but--without any supporting evidence you assert a lower TCO.

 

I don't assert a lower TCO, there will be a lower TCO. A high mpg diesel solution will net a tax credit, and use far less petroleum than a gas version, especially when you look at performance, and ratchet up miles driven. You only have to look at the link I provided to get maintenance cost (I'll save you time though: diesel is .1-.15 more than comparable gas options), and look at this link and compare city, highway, combined, 0-62mph, and 31-62mph numbers. Ouch on those gas city numbers...they're looking worse than the highway comparison....and, what's that??? Diesel options performing better while getting better mpg's??? Say it ain't so....

 

To sum up your conflation of fact and speculation:

 

Are you even reading what I post, or, are you like a bot that keeps going on an unfounded smear compaign against diesel? Oh god, now I have to straighten you out on the below....F....

 

1: Honda is launching a diesel TSX in 2009 (fact) - This means that Honda is launching a diesel Accord in the very near future (speculation), and this vehicle will 'destroy' the US auto makers (speculation).

 

Now, based on your previous posts, I know you have an imagination...but please, just try and stay rational here:

 

When the diesel '09 TSX hits the US market, and it catches on - due to what will be just straight out superior gas mileage - Honda will have learned all it needed to know (incidentally, the diesel '09 Jetta TDI has a wait list...which I'm sure Honda has sorta heard of by now). It does not take a PhD in Rocket Science to theorize that since my clean diesel option in the US just did great, and the US manufacturers are coming out with Hybrid cars (Fusion) and Ecoboost (even though it'll debut in the 3.5L, making it useless for vehicles that need it most), to stay on top, I need an edge. That edge I already have, and it's already proven. All I have to do (as I'm sure they're already doing, as Ford is doing with Ecoboost), is put that same exact powertrain in my bread and butter offerings, and watch the $$$$ roll in. Given that Honda has already stated the difference between their solution and VW's is that it can be scaled to other engine designs easily, you know that's where they're already thinking about going. Now, you may read this as "speculation", I read it as Big Problems for the Big 3. Given multi-$Billion losses quarter over quarter, the Big 3 don't need anything that sounds like problems. When there's an Accord getting 50+ mpg and the best a Fusion can do is 35 mpg, that's called: A Big Problem. (insert that in place of 'destroy' if it bothers you that much)

 

2: The TSX gets over 50mpg in Europe (fact) - The Honda Accord will get over 50mpg in the US (speculation)

 

No, it doesn't. Your number is wrong. The UK Accord gets 61.4 mpg highway (EU emissions, Imperial gallons). Your numbers were also wrong for the Jetta TDI. The EU gets 62.8 highway vs 41 highway (official EPA, but 44 for 3rd party) for the US. (you'll notice that rather than partisanly not mentioning that to make my 13% value stick, I'm pointing it out here). So the EU to US difference (taking into account everything for the Jetta TDI), is a whopping 35% loss (thanks tree huggers!!!)...or, a 30% loss if you want to use the more realistic (but, not EPA, number). This places the Accord diesel at an estimated US 40 mpg highway - quite a bit lower than 50+ figured earlier - or 43 mpg highway if using 30% conversion. Taking 35% into a Ford diesel 1.8L from the UK, would be 48+ highway mpg, or 52 highway mpg if the 30% is used. Keep in mind most TDI owners report exceeding the EPA numbers by quite a bit, which starts chopping down that % reduction.

 

In answer to your quote above on the US diesel '09 TSX, you may be right (wow, it happens to everyone once in a while). Then again, we have no idea what Honda's numbers are on that, so we have no way of knowing if they'll be better or worse. Time will tell... On thing is for certain: Even at 35% numbers, it's 33% better than the gas option available today...if someone told me I could get a 33% rise in fuel economy, I'd be more than a little happy.

 

3: Diesels in the past have had lower TCO (debatable fact) - Diesels in the future will have lower TCO than hybrids (speculation)

 

Well, we can see our past diesel cost. We know how much it costs to replace the battery packs ($5k or thereabouts). One not need to "speculate" much on the TCO numbers for diesel vs. hybrids to see that diesel is going to come out ahead until the next shift in technologies.

 

If you would be so good as to acknowledge the difference between provable facts and unsupported speculation......

 

Here's the thing: I give facts, you ignore them and go onto something else because 'You can't handle the truth'. The truth being the Big 3 is going to be late to the party when clean diesel takes off, and we're paying - literally - the cost of that...in more ways than one.

 

And you know why I ignored your 1.6L Focus illustration?

 

Because the 2.0L Jetta requires 10 seconds to get to 60mph. At that rate, a 1.6L Focus won't even be going 60mph by the time it passes the quarter.

 

Because by doing so, you don't have to acknowledge, that even at 35% loss, a 1.6L diesel would sell so well here Ford couldn't make enough of them? That it could have been here today, if it weren't for Big 3 excuses? That the Big 3 have basically nothing that will be able to touch clean diesel in the US? That the best we'll have is expensive battery tech, which needs replacing, which has its own environmental problems? I don't know, why did you ignore it?

 

If you want to compare diesel 1.6L Focus to gas Focus, I've already given you the link. The diesel 1.6L doesn't do badly at all (it certainly is better than the 1.6L gasser), and the 1.8L diesel is slightly slower 0-62, but faster 31-62 than the 1.8L gasser...all while delivering superior mpg. If you want to compare Jetta numbers, it's anywhere from 1-2 seconds 0-62 off...they don't list 31-62 numbers, but given the torque characteristics of diesel, there's little doubt that the diesel is better once moving...all while delivering superior mileage.

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

Judging from Ford's Escape taxi fleet, and Prius usage, that doesn't seem like a great consideration, especially as electronic components like batteries tend to get cheaper. Diesel re-builds? Not so much.

 

It does to me. We're talking FoMoCo here, not Toyota. FoMoCo is the company that has no problem giving out cr@p today that costs them reputation and sales down the road, so they can rake in the profits in the short term. Until Ford delivers 20 years worth of hybrid type cars, and the battery system outlasts the car - like gas and diesel options do today - I'll remain skeptical.

 

The new US diesels require rich-burning catalytic converters to control NOx, plus sensors and control system; we'll of course see a guarantee from Volkswagen for the first out of warranty cat replacement free . . . since that's so cheap I'm sure VW will be able to do that no problem.

 

I'm sure it's not cheap...then again, after saving it won't be $5k in batteries, and it won't be the production of new batteries (and all that entails on the environment), and the disposal of the used batteries (and all that entails on the environment). There's tangental costs here too...

 

I give up.....you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.....

 

Drinking battery acid....yeah, that's bad....

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

Your math is off, even though you end up nearly right.

 

Focus Diesel - 74.2 UK mpg

74.2 x .83 = 61.6 US mpg (UK to US gallon conversion, miles are the same)

This is without the EU to US difference in emission controls. Using the difference RJ gave for the Jetta:

41 / 47 = .87

61.6 x .87 = 53.6 mpg

 

No, the 13% took into account the Imperial to US gallon conversion...it was all encompassing. In the end though, he got the EU Jetta mpg wrong (not in my favor), so the whole 13% got blown out to 35% (or 30% if you want to use more reliable but not official EPA numbers). Even so, taking the EU 74.2, and multiplying by .65, gets an estimated 48+ mpg highway...or using the more realistic (but again, not EPA derived) 30%, we get 52 mpg highway. The reality (given current Jetta TDI owners mileage reports), it'd be even higher...but since we're sticking with EPA/EU numbers...them's the breaks.

 

Neither Lutz nor RJ said that diesel isn't doable in the US. We obviously have them here, now. What both of them said, quite clearly, is that diesels won't sell as well when compared to other high-mpg options.

 

No, their basic gist was a bunch of excuses on why clean diesel for light vehicles wasn't doable for the US...which 3 other major manufacturers have already/are about to disprove. We didn't get to the moon on excuses and what can't be done, and the Big 3 aren't going to dig them out of the whole they dug themselves over the past 25 years by doing that either.

 

As for not selling as well, in the time of high car stocks, declining sales across the board...US Jetta TDI purchasers are coughing up $2k and getting on a wait list - I think the sales argument can be put to rest.

 

Hybrids have the 'green' cachet, and diesels still have a bad reputation (thank you to GM, and thank you to all the big rigs/dump trucks/garbage trucks/school buses that don't keep their injectors clean)

 

In fact, the Jetta TDi sold about 2400 cars for the 1/2 of August they were on sale, while the Prius sold over 13,000 for the whole month. Here's the math: Assume the sales were slow due to the whole 'new model' thing and double them. That's 2400 x 2 x 2 = 9600. Does that come close to 13000? Sales would have to triple, and that kind of quick start hasn't happened in decades (see: 1965 Mustang).

 

I realize this, don't dispute it. The Prius has been a huge success...just as clean diesel will be when it takes off. Give clean diesel another year, 2 years max. By then it'll be cleaner, have higher mpg, and have way more sales penetration. When you get neighbors talking to neighbors about their new ride that happens to be clean diesel, and they let it pop they're seeing 50-55+ mpg on the highway, and 35+ around town....it's going to generate sales volume just like the Prius has built up. All without the batteries.

 

And, as to the whole 'cost of replacing the battery' thing, Toyota is still claiming they haven't replaced a Prius battery yet. That's 11 years of Priuses (Prii?) with original batteries.

 

That may be true (and we'd have to get into degraded battery pack vs. complete/near failure of the battery pack), however that's Toyota, a company that actually cares in its actions in regards to long term quality. Ford...given their actions (not words) over the past 25 years....they cannot be trusted. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

 

Then, again, since this thread is about the Fiesta diesel, no one arguing for this thing has shown us the future announcements for the Fit diesel, the Yaris diesel, the Versa diesel or the Excel or Rio diesel. Not even the Suzuki SX/4.

 

Give it time....

 

Um. no. that's Volkswagen's testing. Go back and read the articles.

 

I did read the articles. It's 41 EPA highway, 44 for VW's numbers they contracted a 3rd party to conduct testing on. It takes nothing to find present TDI owners getting far in excess of 41 highway...so in reality even the 44 number is low. See here for the press release on EPA and 3rd party cert's.

 

Chuck

[Extreme4x4]

That may be true (and we'd have to get into degraded battery pack vs. complete/near failure of the battery pack), however that's Toyota, a company that actually cares in its actions in regards to long term quality. Ford...given their actions (not words) over the past 25 years....they cannot be trusted. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

 

You just lost any semblence of credibility with that one statement.

 

Toyota does not care about you anymore than Ford does. They have proven this time and again. Toyota does not go to the "Bentley" battery store, while Ford goes to the "Tata" battery store. Toyota batteries are not made of rainbows and butterflies, while Ford uses that "kill the whole world, nonrecyclable" acid batteries. They are sourced from the same suppliers.

 

The 2010 Hybrid Fusion is rumored, by reliable sources, to be capable of over 40mpg in the city. There will also be happy money from the government for buying one. How is this vehicle any less credible than your fictional diesel Accord??? This vehicle starts production in December............... 3 months away. Your fictional diesel Accord will be here when???

 

Before you rant about my questions, remember that you have touted the validity of the Prius in saving fuel. A Toyota hybrid is legit............ but a Ford one is not (remember, if you say "because it is a Ford," you are to be slapped about the head and shoulders)??? Thus, you have created your own double standard.

 

Finally, the only mileage figures that matter, are those from the EPA. I don't care if your sisters second cousin on your fathers side, swore on a bible that an independent lab, with certification from God himself, swore that it got __________ mpg. The EPA numbers would still be all that matter.

 

BTW, all of your calculations, and all of your speculations, still have not proven that these diesel cars will have a lower TCO than a gas or hybrid car. As you have stated that Ford will have to be flawless for 25 years to prove to you that they have quality............... I guess we can use that same standard of measure for the TCO of the diesel Jetta............... 25 years. Then, we can reapproach the subject. My husband drives diesel truck, and understands all of the costs involved in maintaining them.............. and we worked on many diesel vehicles in our shop............. but hell, what do we know???

[RichardJensen]

Your numbers were also wrong for the Jetta TDI. The EU gets 62.8 highway

 

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=19021

 

Multiply 58.9 by .8 and get back to me, hmmmmkay?

[chucky2]

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=19021

 

Multiply 58.9 by .8 and get back to me, hmmmmkay?

 

Multiply this page by itself, then get back to me. Gezus...you said 47, it's F'ing not: UK Jetta: Engines and Performance (Fuel)

 

And, because I know you'll be confused by this, there are two versions of the 2.0 TDI...the one the US gets is the lesser tuned of the two, which gets (drumroll).........................62.8 mpg highway. Hmmmmmmkay???

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

You just lost any semblence of credibility with that one statement.

 

I did not lose any credibility, as anyone going to any long term (not 90 day ownership BS) reliability tracking publications will be able to see quite clearly exactly where FoMoCo stands in respect to Toyota. It's not American hate, Jap love, or any other such BS...it's called cold hard reality. When Ford puts up some years reliability ratings that are on Toyota's - across the board, not for one car - then I'll change my position. Until then, it's completely warranted.

 

Toyota does not care about you anymore than Ford does. They have proven this time and again. Toyota does not go to the "Bentley" battery store, while Ford goes to the "Tata" battery store. Toyota batteries are not made of rainbows and butterflies, while Ford uses that "kill the whole world, nonrecyclable" acid batteries. They are sourced from the same suppliers.

 

Yes, I realize that no Corp. cares about people, thanks for that. The fact still stands that Toyota has far more credibility in delivering on a consistent and large scale, long lasting (that doesn't mean it's still lurching down the road but still running), reliable, designs to consumers than does Ford. That's not to say Ford's cannot be reliable - my family has owned many reliable Ford's. I wish the truth were not true, but, it is. To pretend otherwise is just deluding oneself.

 

The 2010 Hybrid Fusion is rumored, by reliable sources, to be capable of over 40mpg in the city. There will also be happy money from the government for buying one.

 

Sweet. I have to take a 300 mile drive in a few months: What does it get on the highway again?

 

How is this vehicle any less credible than your fictional diesel Accord??? This vehicle starts production in December............... 3 months away. Your fictional diesel Accord will be here when???

 

First, it's the TSX here in the US, it's the Accord in the UK. Less credible? What do you even mean by that? I have 0 doubt the 2010 Escape Hybrid will be here at some point, none whatsoever...and I never said otherwise - so, why the strawman there? The TSX will be here sometime in '09...which is about as specific as when the 2010 Escape will finally make it to Stealerships.

 

Before you rant about my questions, remember that you have touted the validity of the Prius in saving fuel. A Toyota hybrid is legit............

 

Yes, however at the prices they're selling at, you'd have to put on a whole hell of a lot of miles to justify the current pricing...

 

but a Ford one is not (remember, if you say "because it is a Ford," you are to be slapped about the head and shoulders)??? Thus, you have created your own double standard.

 

No, I didn't say the Ford wasn't credible. I said I can't trust it long term, based on Ford's long term reliability reputation. I'm comfortable trusting the engine in it out to 10 years/200k, but, the batteries? The charging system? Ford's design that their Management team had the beancounters butcher up so they could save $200....sorry, if Ford had the rep for long term reliability Honda or Toyota have, then I'd say Yes no problem - but, they don't, pure and simple. No double standard here: There's the Honda/Toyota level of long term reliability, to which I hold the Big 3 to that standard. When the Big 3 reach that standard, then there won't be two standards anymore....until then.....

 

Finally, the only mileage figures that matter, are those from the EPA. I don't care if your sisters second cousin on your fathers side, swore on a bible that an independent lab, with certification from God himself, swore that it got __________ mpg. The EPA numbers would still be all that matter.

 

Yes, I agree....which is why I've always given the EPA numbers. It is worth noting that current TDI owners are getting far better EPA mileage though than their rides are rated for. We can't count it in the actual numbers comparison, but, as a prospective buyer, I'm concerned about real world results, not just EPA numbers. And, to be fair, the hybrid folks are getting some very impressive numbers also. Gas only? No.

 

BTW, all of your calculations, and all of your speculations, still have not proven that these diesel cars will have a lower TCO than a gas or hybrid car.

 

And I haven't seen any calculations, just speculations, that diesel will be worse. I like to remain optimistic, not doom and gloom (or defeatist, as Lutz is). If you'd like to dispute the numbers in the link I'd provided earlier though on maintenance costs, go right ahead...the gas and diesel numbers are right there for you to look at. I'll save you time though: Gas was like 2.78 or .88 or something like that...comprobable diesel was .1-.15 higher...for whatever that means. Certainly was not this huge massive diesel add on expense you all keep alluding to. So, as you said earlier: We have hard numbers from the UK link I provided earlier, and we have you all (the sisters second cousin on your fathers side) keep saying light vehicle diesel costs so much more to maintain...and the two aren't jiving up. We should believe you now, is that it?

 

As you have stated that Ford will have to be flawless for 25 years to prove to you that they have quality............... I guess we can use that same standard of measure for the TCO of the diesel Jetta............... 25 years.

 

The Big 3 have a large long term quality and reliability reputation to fix, and it's taken them 25 years of subpar product to get to the point they're at now....that point being it's a given to the average person that Big 3 is subpar, Jap is better. For me, I'll most likely end up buying a Ford regardless. But for someone who's not as loyal as me reading this thread, you can be sure they'll be wanting to see years worth of Jap level quality and reliability numbers from Detroit before they'll even start thinking about considering their products again. This is not me doing this to Detroit, it's not the average US auto buyer doing this to Detroit, this is Detroit doing this to Detroit.

 

As for a Jetta, I'd never buy a VW, period. What you could do though is look at VW warranty claims on their gas engines vs. their diesel engines. That might give you a

 

Then, we can reapproach the subject. My husband drives diesel truck, and understands all of the costs involved in maintaining them.............. and we worked on many diesel vehicles in our shop............. but hell, what do we know???

 

Well, since you've never worked on Honda diesels (which aren't here yet, but are coming...from a company that decade over decade has been tops in reliability), I'd guess you'd not know much about them, would you?

 

Do you work in UK/EU on the light diesels there that have been in passenger cars for years now? If not, telling me how working diesel trucks, 18 wheelers, and F-250/350/450 diesels are doesn't do me much good really. Comparing a light duty car diesel in a car, used for car use, to a truck that's going to have the sh1t run out of it, and often made by the Big 3, really doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot, does it?

 

Chuck

[RichardJensen]

because I know you'll be confused by this

Check this out:

 

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=19021

 

What's that number next to the 2.0L? Hmmm. It's 140. You'll have to excuse me for considering data provided by the UK government as definitive.

 

However, if the VW data is correct, there's an even bigger drop off from the EU to the US than I'd earlier estimated, and you're looking at 41mpg hwy estimated for the TSX, not the higher number I'd provided earlier. Or 'over 50mpg' as you were earlier asserting.

 

I like to remain optimistic, not doom and gloom

 

Only selectively so, as you are quite pessimistic about hybrid TCO. And quite blithe about the difference between TCO in a country where diesel's a lot cheaper than gas and a country where it ain't.

Edited September 11, 2008 by RichardJensen

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Check this out:

 

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=19021

 

What's that number next to the 2.0L? Hmmm. It's 140. You'll have to excuse me for considering data provided by the UK government as definitive.

 

However, if the VW data is correct, there's an even bigger drop off from the EU to the US than I'd earlier estimated, and you're looking at 41mpg hwy estimated for the TSX, not the higher number I'd provided earlier. Or 'over 50mpg' as you were earlier asserting.

 

 

 

Only selectively so, as you are quite pessimistic about hybrid TCO. And quite blithe about the difference between TCO in a country where diesel's a lot cheaper than gas and a country where it ain't.

 

If you have a look at the UK Government website Richard you will find we have 118 cars that get Prius MPG, most get much better MPG than the GAS GUZZLING Toyota Prius most are DIESELS.

 

Gas Guzzler Prius piss poor 67.5 MAX could do better.

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=10982

 

Seats, Skoda, Mini, VW and soon the Fiesta Econetic diesels all have cars the return over 88 MPG, BMW, Fiat and others tec and other will all be releasing 90-100 MPG diesels in the near future and hybrid diesels will take MPG numbers higher in the future.

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=20471

 

List of 71-80 MPG cars (List is out of date there are few more that should be both in this class and the 61-70 MPG class)

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/fu...archResults.asp

 

List of 61-70 MPG (Prius is in this group of 115 mostly diesel cars)

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/fu...archResults.asp

 

So would you give me one good reason l should buy a pricy $41,500 Toyota Prius please Richard when most a lot of these diesels cost half to 3/4 the price to buy new the longevity of a Prius is piss poor most of the diesel engines should make 250,000+ plus no with problems, Prius engines are throw away don't last long Jap junk, they wont cost you the earth when you only have to replace a battery when it dies causing untold damage to the environment, they gas guzzle the earths oil at alarming rates they are the Environments worst nighmare, if your No1 goal is buying a fuel sipper its got to be a DIESEL in Europe, the environmentally unfriendly damaging nightmare, overpriced, gasoline guzzling JUNK Prius would never make to anybodys shortlist in Europe.

Edited September 11, 2008 by Ford Jellymoulds

[Extreme4x4]

The conversation is about diesel cars in the US marketplace............. not in Europe.

 

Once again, the US environment, for diesels, is VERY different than the European one............ so the TCO for diesel cars in the US will be VERY different also.

 

Remember this................ US diesel not equal to European diesel.

[StevenCaylor]

://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/fu...archResults.asp[/url]

 

So would you give me one good reason l should buy a pricy $41,500 Toyota Prius please Richard when most a lot of these diesels cost half to 3/4 the price to buy new the longevity of a Prius is piss poor most of the diesel engines should make 250,000+ plus no with problems, Prius engines are throw away don't last long Jap junk, they wont cost you the earth when you only have to replace a battery when it dies causing untold damage to the environment, they gas guzzle the earths oil at alarming rates they are the Environments worst nighmare, if your No1 goal is buying a fuel sipper its got to be a DIESEL in Europe, the environmentally unfriendly damaging nightmare, overpriced, gasoline guzzling JUNK Prius would never make to anybodys shortlist in Europe.

 

Amazing how different things are between the US and Europe.

 

29 & 40 Jetta diesel at $4.50

 

48 & 45 Prius gas at $3.75

 

Jetta $24190

 

Prius Touring $24,930

[Deanh]

Chucks beleif is obvious that he beleives Diesel is the holy grail...I for one do not beleive that fact...I think there are viable and perhaps superior alternatives right around the corner..FACT is the big three have weighed the diesel alternatives benefits, viabilty, costs and liabilities....and guess what they are unnaimous in their decision.....along with 99% of the ENTIRE bunch of manufacturers on this side of the pond.....so, either two manufacturers are brilliant or perhaps mistaken......I for one would back the majority...there is a reason they/ we have NOT pursued it here in the States.....and it is NOT going to hurt us in the slightest, in fact it will probably lead to the developement of a powertrain that will make the diesels redundant........win win I say :shades:

Edited September 11, 2008 by Deanh

[Edstock]

Diesel is the holy grail...

I fart dieselfarts in your general direction! Putain! Tabernac!

[Deanh]

I fart dieselfarts in your general direction! Putain! Tabernac!

I'm not sold.....and i have heard a lot from TDI, Benz, Peugeot diesel drivers....when something goes wrong its BIG BUCKS!

[Edstock]

I was being sarcastic. I saw chucky2 up in that tower, with dieselfarts.

 

Because of emissions, unless diesel gets a break-through in technology, IMHO, it is not going to be a large part of the market.

 

One reason is that all the research on biofuels is going to pay off over the next decade. Petroleum oil could go to $200 a barrel, but the biofuels companies will be able to make fuel for less than $3 a gallon and make money. The point is, EU fuel prices are necessary to sell diesel, and IMHO, that's not going to happen.

[Ford Jellymoulds]

Chucks beleif is obvious that he beleives Diesel is the holy grail...I for one do not beleive that fact...I think there are viable and perhaps superior alternatives right around the corner..FACT is the big three have weighed the diesel alternatives benefits, viabilty, costs and liabilities....and guess what they are unnaimous in their decision.....along with 99% of the ENTIRE bunch of manufacturers on this side of the pond.....so, either two manufacturers are brilliant or perhaps mistaken......I for one would back the majority...there is a reason they/ we have NOT pursued it here in the States.....and it is NOT going to hurt us in the slightest, in fact it will probably lead to the developement of a powertrain that will make the diesels redundant........win win I say :shades:

 

Chucks appeared just as mlhm5 the VW lover disappeared

[Deanh]

Chucks appeared just as mlhm5 the VW lover disappeared

my thoughts exactly....VERY suspicious.....

[Ford Jellymoulds]

I'm not sold.....and i have heard a lot from TDI, Benz, Peugeot diesel drivers....when something goes wrong its BIG BUCKS!

 

They are bomb proof, the wifes little Pug is coming up 200,000 and is still running as sweet as a nut still runs like new and has no signs of any black smoke yet, the yearly MOT emmissions test show it was still only chucking out 1/5 of the limit before it has to be failed and a major engine stripdown is need, l have not spent much on the engine other than fuel, oil filter, 1 set of glow plugs and 2 cambelts & engine oil, l would say they are very cheap to own and easy to live with and simple to service no timing and all the other shit you get with gasoline cars.

[chucky2]

Check this out:

 

http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/ve...ls.asp?id=19021

 

What's that number next to the 2.0L? Hmmm. It's 140. You'll have to excuse me for considering data provided by the UK government as definitive.

 

You know what I consider definitive? The manufacturers own data on their own site. I'd consider real world user feedback definitive also, however for the purposes of this debate, it's not something concrete that can be used. A gov site vs. the people who actually make the car? I'll take the manufacturer thanks.

 

However, if the VW data is correct, there's an even bigger drop off from the EU to the US than I'd earlier estimated, and you're looking at 41mpg hwy estimated for the TSX, not the higher number I'd provided earlier. Or 'over 50mpg' as you were earlier asserting.

 

Now I know you're not reading my posts...because I already went over that after I found your UK Jetta TDI 47 number was wrong. Even at an estimated US 41 mpg highway, that's 33 percent better fuel mileage than the gas offering. And that'd be 41 mpg first release....wait until they've had some time to tweak it, and work EPA car diesel testing out (because from what VW is saying, it sounds like the EPA testing for car diesel maybe isn't quite so accurate, hence their independent 3rd party testing that got 44 mpg highway).

 

Only selectively so, as you are quite pessimistic about hybrid TCO. And quite blithe about the difference between TCO in a country where diesel's a lot cheaper than gas and a country where it ain't.

 

I'm not selective in the least. Diesel is marginally more expensive that gas to buy, and cheaper to fuel, with equal maintenance costs. Over the long run, for someone who drives anything more than light miles per year, diesel is superior. Lower the high diesel tax rate here in the US, and/or build more diesel refining capacity, and diesel will become even cheaper to operate. All while markedly reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Granted, hybrid will to...except there's the whole battery production thing, battery disposal thing, and battery replacement cost thing. None of those are positives - none. Diesel has none of those limitations...it's only limitation is emissions, which (Lutz and defeatist Co. excluded) other top manufacturers have somehow found a way to work within. I keep saying time will tell, and it will....we'll just have to wait and see....

 

Chuck

Edited September 11, 2008 by chucky2

[Deanh]

They are bomb proof, the wifes little Pug is coming up 200,000 and is still running as sweet as a nut still runs like new and has no signs of any black smoke yet, the yearly MOT emmissions test show it was still only chucking out 1/5 of the limit before it has to be failed and a major engine stripdown is need, l have not spent much on the engine other than fuel, oil filter, 1 set of glow plugs and 2 cambelts & engine oil, l would say they are very cheap to own and easy to live with and simple to service no timing and all the other shit you get with gasoline cars.

friend in Ireland just had to replace a high pressure pump for the second time in his Pug.....the repairs were more than the car is worth...........2 cambelts cannot have been cheap Jelly.....but 200k ( miles or KM's ) if miles is not bad at all....