You'd figure that Mercedes would promote their new California-compliant BlueTec diesel-powered vehicles based on their fuel efficiency. Times two, considering that opting for the oil-burning engine requires a $1k premium. And the fact that diesel is roughly 25 percent more expensive than gas. We knew there was an "issue" when WardsAuto's strapline revealed that "The ability of the diesel cross/utility vehicles to achieve a cruising range of up to 600 miles is a significant selling point, the auto maker says." To which we say uh-oh. Still, you'd think that Ward's would crunch the numbers. Nope. "Cleaning the exhaust doesn’t bite into fuel economy because the diesel generates 20%-33% better mileage than a comparable gasoline engine. The 6-cyl. Bluetec provides 4-cyl. fuel economy and V-8 power and torque, the auto maker claims." In the interests of veracity and transparency, Frank did the math for you below. Oh, and the BlueTec's NOx-scrubbing urea supply lasts just 10k miles. If the tank gets too low, you get 20 starts to refill. After that, the car won’t start. Where do I sign?
[First mpg = EPA combined mileage; second mpg = BT mpg rounded to the nearest whole number]
G-class – GL450 4matic (4.6L V8), 15mpg > 18 – 20mpg; GL550 4matic (5.5L V8), 14mpg > 17 – 19mpg M-Class – ML350 4matic (3.5L V6), 17mpg > 20 – 23mpg; ML550 4matic (5.5L V8), 15mpg > 18 – 20mpg R-Class – R350 4matic (3.5L V6), 16mpg > 19 – 21mpg
I’m disappointed Merc ditched diesels in their cars to focus only on the trucks. My issue is because the recent, rapid change in fuel prices means that anyone sensitive to them probably won’t simply switch to diesel for an extra 2-4mpg in their SUV…they’ll be ditching the SUV altogether for a car or crossover. So it just seems like an academic exercise (like the Grand Cherokee diesel, as well). Never mind that in the US, this means that well-heeled M-B owners might have to work a little harder to find their local diesel pumps, then get their $300 shoes all smelly. That can be a pretty quick turnoff.
The real diesel efficiency comes in smaller cars, where the actual mpg improvement over gas can be counted on two hands, not one. My $0.02.
The 42-state legal E320 BT sedan (EPA 23/32, 0-60 in 6.6 seconds, MSRP $53K) currently has a deal: 1.9% APR for 72 months. At that price, leather & sunroof are still optional, as a colleague who owns the older non-BT version once complained.
http://www.mbusa.com/models/main.do?modelCode=E320BTEC
There is no cost savings, and people in this country still equate diesel engines with buses spewing smoke. Hardly the “green” image that people want to openly display these days (weather fair or not.)
Does anyone know what the cost of the urea refill will be? And I also wonder if only dealers are allowed to re-fill it, or can a Shadetree mechanic do it. As much as I love diesel engines, I don’t think any vehicle that requires urea refills will do very well. VW was smart to engineer their new TDI engine to not require it, and hopefully we see the Honda engine that doesn’t require it as well.
Finally, all of this 25% more for diesel crap is annoying. Yes, diesel costs more per gallon, but diesels are still more efficient engines. It all boils down to cost per mile for fuel. Right now, I average about 10 to 11 cents per mile in my 2003 Jetta TDI @4.87/gallon. If I had a 2.0 litre gas Jetta, my cost would be about 14 cents per mile @4.10. If I had a 1.8T gas Jetta that requires premium, my cost would be about 15 cents per mile @4.32. If I drove a VR6 Jetta, my cost per mile would be about 20 cents @4.32/gallon.
People need to learn how to do basic math. I’m still glad I bought my Jetta way back in 2003 when fuel was dirt cheap and no one wanted diesels. It’s pretty much the same thing as 2003, just slightly different. Back then no one wanted them because diesel and gas were both cheap. Now that diesel costs a little more than gas, people say diesel costs too much for there to be any benefit, even though it’s obvious that there are still efficiency benefits. Maybe not so with these Mercedes Bluetec vehicles, but it’s fun to drive 700 miles or more before your car needs fuel.
Ditto what brettc says. The “costs 25% more” stuff doesn’t wash. Right now in my area the pumps are at parity between Premium unleaded and Diesel. Then of course there is that fact that with a Diesel you have the ability to use something other than what you can buy from a pump. I know I’m an edge case but I haven’t paid for Diesel at a pumps since it was less than $4/gal… but I’m still driving. =)
ash78 is also on-point. Automakers have to realize by now (how many years since Katrina??? hello??) that they have to just give up on the SUV. It is dead. Gone. Soon to be forgotten like ocean-going barge-sized sedans in 1975. Benz should go back to their Diesel roots and sell oelmotor equipped S- and E-class cars. I have a friend who drives an old 300E 2.5 TurboDiesel that gets 35 MPG. It is a complete old-school Merc: Built like a Panzerkampfwagen V, reliable as the sunrise, and quite luxurious too. People are going to be buying CARS, not trucks, so why waste effort on these stupid SUVs?
–chuck
http://chuck.goolsbee.org
Diesel can *potentially* be made out of all kinds of stuff – algae, suet, poop, landfill gunk. If we can think 5 years down the road, MB may look pretty smart on this. As for urea fillups, so what? It’s just one more fluid.
So no E or C class BlueTech’s coming out in the US? Damn.
MB is obviously subsidizing the cost of their diesels, with that $1k price. Their cost is about $2.5k over the gas engine. They need to bring up their EPA numbers with it.
Might not be a bad choice in the big GL and M class.
I’m in the “costs 25% more doesn’t wash” camp. If I need a 2.5L gas engine to move the same vehicle as a 1.8L diesel engine AND I get better fuel economy with a same size diesel vs gas engine then aren’t I ahead twice over compared to the guy buying the gas engine?
Why is this so hard to accept? Are people really that lazy to do the math or are they that isolated from the rest of the world?
And yes, M-B did miss the boat on this one, same as GM. Had they put a small diesel option in the C-class it would have done a lot more to start dispelling the long-held anti-diesel myths.
THE “problem” with euro-diesels is trying to get them to run properly on this country’s lameass 40 (maybe)cetane fuel. If I cant get biodiesel(47), Im assured of a check-engine light when I have to put the ole petro-crap in. Where are the stickers on the pumps? Where are TPTB trying to improve this situation? Why are we exporting diesel?
Can you imagine the uproar if 93 octane cars suddenly had to make do with 87?
Diesel cars apparently did not sell in high volume, and I believe that a few years ago the idea was if you can’t sell enough diesel SUV’s to make it worthwhile, why bother with sedans.
I like diesels though. I would like to buy one in my next vehicle, but I don’t want to have to get more power than I need. I also don’t want an engine I can’t rely on, so MB and VW are likely out.
The merc diesels of the eighties were built tough and relatively simple. (The Tiger tank was only one of those two, but I get the reference in spite of how many got abandoned or destroyed in place due to mechanical failure). If they offered something close to their military spec G wagon over here, I would risk it. But if they made a diesel C class, I would not.
The next big test will be Honda’s accord diesel. If it doesn’t sell well, don’t plan on seeing a lot of offerings from others.
RF – You might want to correct your statement on urea since it is a NOx-scrubbing fluid and not intended to reduce particulates.
cdotson :
RF – You might want to correct your statement on urea since it is a NOx-scrubbing fluid and not intended to reduce particulates.
And so I have. Doh!
What happens when you fill that urea tank with water?
What happens when you fill that urea tank with water?
that water can be made from drinking lots of Budweister. It has Urea probably mixed from concoction of Salamanders’ eyes , rain forest Pygmy Dung too.