Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"strong surge and torque" has nothing to do with diesel, just turbo chargers. Ask Rabbit and 300D drivers !!!!
I think all diesels today are turbocharged and diesels deliver a huge torque at low rpm....but I get your point especially the older diesels without turbos.
I drive a Charger hellcat with 650 pounds of torque and 707Hp so I hate driving virtually anything else now.
From what I've heard from diesel (car and SUV) owners that I've talked to personally, the sticker MPG on diesel autos is VERY conservative. If it weren't for word getting around about this, I don't think they'd be nearly as popular if they "only" performed as advertised.
the "sticker MPG" is determined by driving the car in a Federal mandated test driving cycle which some engineers have determined is representative of how the cars will be driven.
Some folk will obtain higher MPG because their actual driving cycle falls more closely into the optimum use of the vehicle as designed by the manufacturer.
Some folk will obtain lower MPG because their driving cycle doesn't optimize the vehicle in line with the manufacturer's parameters.
Of course, many folk like to brag on their vehicles and perhaps the "owners that I've talked to personally" may have inflated their numbers for your consumption.
As well, many folk can talk about the fuel economy they got on a tankful or two, but that may not be the composite fuel economy they got over a year's time. I've seen some diesel cars turn in 50 mpg on the open road with good fuel and ideal driving conditions, but the day-in day-out composite fuel economy was closer to 40 mpg (or less!)
The big issue today is that diesel fuel is priced on a energy parity with the gasoline formulations. So if the diesel fuel at the pump has 20% more energy BTU's per gallon than a gallon of gasoline, it has to be priced less than the gasoline equivalent to show a per mile benefit in fuel cost … assuming that the diesel vehicle does, in fact, deliver 20% higher fuel mileage per gallon. Years ago when diesel #2 was priced less per gallon than gasoline, the fuel economy savings per mile were dramatic. (like when gasoline was 25 cents per gallon and diesel was 18 cents per gallon, and I could compare my 18 mpg Ford Custom w/289 V8 to driving my MB 220D at 30 mpg).
But right now, regular gasoline in my area is running $2.68/gallon, and diesel #2 is running $3.20. My Subie's turn in 30 mpg on the road, my 300Dturbo turns in 26 mpg. Guess which one is the lower cost/mile vehicle to drive? and quite candidly, the Subie's are as comfortable and capable to drive as the 'benz … only they don't have the 3-pointed star on the hood. In fact, for inclement driving conditions which present 5 months of the year in my area, the Subie is by far and away the more desirable car to be driving.
yeah, my son had a 2014 BMW 328d wagon and there was no hiding the fact that it was a diesel. Great torque and fuel mileage, but it came at a price. My Volt was cheaper and gets better "fuel mileage." And also has great torque, and is not noisy or smelly.
Diesels are getting hit hard in Europe by new regulations and are even getting banned in many urban areas due to particulate emissions.
Wrong one to buy......the 335d was FAST and efficient! They will get 40 mpg at 80 mph!
Acceleration is ridiculous with a tune, neck snapping fun!
Two main reasons that diesel cars never really caught on in the U.S.:
1. NOx regulations are more restrictive here than in Europe. More difficult and expensive to get good performance out of an engine that will pass U.S. standards. So difficult that Volkswagen had to cheat Though to be fair, heavy truck engine manufacturers were caught doing much the same thing back in the 90's.
2. U.S. auto makers produced some absolute junk when they tried to introduce light duty diesels in the 80's. Between the poor performance and even worse reliability, most Americans lost interest and never got it back.
Now personally I was a diesel mechanic for quite a long time, and I'd like to have a diesel vehicle. But they're just not practical. Cost more to buy, cost more to maintain... and fuel savings in most cases aren't that significant when you factor in the higher price of diesel.
Granted if you're towing a trailer all day long every day... a diesel pickup is the way to go. And *some* of the diesel volkswagens can get great fuel economy and last a long time (though both of those are less true as time goes own and emissions standards tighten more). But except for those specialty cases, a gas engine is cheaper, more reliable, and has better performance. I haven't seen any reason to bother with small diesels.
Jag and Range Rover recently introduced diesels, MB has had them for years, BMW has been going 10 yrs+
so they must see that their is a market
Emissions equipment has really taken a toll on diesel engines- more so than gas engines.
When they introduced EGR, that added a couple dozen more parts that can break. More codes to be set. And dumped a ton of heat and crud right back into the engine. Increased complexity, reduced performance, reduced reliability and durability... and for zero gain in performance.
DPF and catalyst systems were similar: more complexity, more stuff to break. Increased maintenance. Zero performance gain.
Now, common rail fuel injection was actually a good thing in terms of performance. The common rail engines- generally speaking- are quieter, more powerful, and more efficient than their counterparts with older fuel system designs. BUT at the cost of yet more complexity. And decreased reliability/durability.
And now we have the DEF systems. These are actually a.good thing in terms of performance. And not *entirely* bad in terms of engine durability. DEF systems allow diesel engines to meet NOx emissions standards with significantly less use of Exhaust Gas Recirculation. Better efficiency, better performance, less heat and crud being dumped back into the engine. BUT there is always a cost. DEF systems are a rube-goldberg device of pumps, heaters, injectors, and catalysts. HUGE increase in complesity and maintenence costs... not to mention the fact that you now have to buy DEF.
So these days when you open the hood on any diesel auto or equipment... it looks like you've opened a hatch on the goddamn space shuttle. None of these systems are particularly complicated in and of themselves. But if you haven't followed the progression of all the changes made to diesel engines over the past 30 years... good luck doing *any* work on them. The days of diesel engines being the simple, efficient, low maintenance alternative are long gone... unless you're willing to buy one that's 20+ years old.
Now don't get me wrong- I *like* diesel engines and I'm very good at working on them. I'm just saying that complexity and possible failure modes are increasing at an exponential rate. While performance is *at best* stagnant. These trends don't bode well for diesel engines in general.
Wrong one to buy......the 335d was FAST and efficient! They will get 40 mpg at 80 mph!
Acceleration is ridiculous with a tune, neck snapping fun!
And it came at a higher price (the one they got was already close to $50k). Also, the 3 series wagon ended up being too small for them when the family grew. But that's a separate discussion.
I've driven the 335d, loads of torque and fun, but it sounded like a diesel and it still smelled like one when running (and you still had to deal with the diesel pumps and the smell that could be left on your hands).
And it came at a higher price (the one they got was already close to $50k). Also, the 3 series wagon ended up being too small for them when the family grew. But that's a separate discussion.
I've driven the 335d, loads of torque and fun, but it sounded like a diesel and it still smelled like one when running (and you still had to deal with the diesel pumps and the smell that could be left on your hands).
Today’s automakers have to cater to the woman drivers also because they are a big factor in how automakers design vehicles and how many women will want to pump smelly diesel. So that’s another factor why there not many diesel vehicles sold in the United States.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,780 posts, read 58,251,797 times
Reputation: 46278
Quote:
Originally Posted by easy62
Today’s automakers have to cater to the woman drivers also because they are a big factor ...how many women will want to pump smelly diesel. ..
They can move to NJ or Oregon and NOT be allowed to PUMP their own fuel!
True... diesel is not for everyone, and needed by few (since USA has very low fuel costs and very high 'throw-away' mentality / goods sector (including cars). )
Very EZ to find a replacement "Gas" (ick) car.
Not so EZ to find a 50mpg car that will last you 500k miles (Most will be SICK of that car long before it wears out.)
Diesels are not happy, or appropriate for a 20 min daily commute.
Maint for diesels is slightly different and 'bothersome' for conventional drivers. (no maint preferred).
Diesels like CLEAN dry fuel, and if you don't feed them that they can become VERY expensive!
USA consumers like 'convenience' and CHEAP. Cheap diesel fuel may not be CLEAN or dry! Filling up a tank after a long trip BEFORE you park the car overnight... is NOT conventional practice (but healthy for a diesel.... warm fuel tanks (Diesel recirculates fuel to tank) condensate on cool nights.)
Last edited by StealthRabbit; 08-03-2018 at 10:15 AM..
Seems like for the added cost of a diesel truck one could simply replace the drivetrain in a gasser at 200k. Odds are most won’t keep a vehicle much longer than 200k.
You'd be surprised. Especially in the pickup market, a huge portion of the customer base is "fleet" (and I use the term generously) sales. Despite all the comments about "They Don't look like they need a truck" a lot of them work in the trades and whatnot and they will run them for well over 200K.
In any case, it truly is better mousetrap for towing.
the "sticker MPG" is determined by driving the car in a Federal mandated test driving cycle which some engineers have determined is representative of how the cars will be driven.
Some folk will obtain higher MPG because their actual driving cycle falls more closely into the optimum use of the vehicle as designed by the manufacturer.
Some folk will obtain lower MPG because their driving cycle doesn't optimize the vehicle in line with the manufacturer's parameters.
Of course, many folk like to brag on their vehicles and perhaps the "owners that I've talked to personally" may have inflated their numbers for your consumption.
As well, many folk can talk about the fuel economy they got on a tankful or two, but that may not be the composite fuel economy they got over a year's time. I've seen some diesel cars turn in 50 mpg on the open road with good fuel and ideal driving conditions, but the day-in day-out composite fuel economy was closer to 40 mpg (or less!)
The big issue today is that diesel fuel is priced on a energy parity with the gasoline formulations. So if the diesel fuel at the pump has 20% more energy BTU's per gallon than a gallon of gasoline, it has to be priced less than the gasoline equivalent to show a per mile benefit in fuel cost … assuming that the diesel vehicle does, in fact, deliver 20% higher fuel mileage per gallon. Years ago when diesel #2 was priced less per gallon than gasoline, the fuel economy savings per mile were dramatic. (like when gasoline was 25 cents per gallon and diesel was 18 cents per gallon, and I could compare my 18 mpg Ford Custom w/289 V8 to driving my MB 220D at 30 mpg).
But right now, regular gasoline in my area is running $2.68/gallon, and diesel #2 is running $3.20. My Subie's turn in 30 mpg on the road, my 300Dturbo turns in 26 mpg. Guess which one is the lower cost/mile vehicle to drive? and quite candidly, the Subie's are as comfortable and capable to drive as the 'benz … only they don't have the 3-pointed star on the hood. In fact, for inclement driving conditions which present 5 months of the year in my area, the Subie is by far and away the more desirable car to be driving.
We are very rural where I live, so you're either on long 2-lane roads or interstate, so I believe even the aggregate MPG for all types of trips would be very different than the typical urban driver. I don't think they're lying to deceive, as there's no benefit for them to do so, but I do understand what you're saying about reporting it for that particular trip.
There are some drivers that essentially floor the pedal each time they accelerate, but I have found that the old MPG ratings (prior to the change for 2008 models going forward) is much more accurate than the sandbagged ratings now. You really have to make a concerted effort to be a bad driver, or idle in traffic for an hour a day to get the kind of mileage that is on the newer stickers, IMHO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Though to be fair, heavy truck engine manufacturers were caught doing much the same thing back in the 90's.
