Why don’t more mass-market brands offer diesel engine options? After all, the evidence suggests that the passenger cars that offer diesel options enjoy a healthy take rate for oil-burner engines. So would a brand like Ford ever consider bringing diesels to its US offerings? According to the Blue Oval’s Product Boss Derrick Kuzak, the answer is absolutely not. And, according to Automotive News [sub] he’s got an interesting reason for nixing a US-market diesel option.
With rising petroleum prices, one European journalist asked if Ford planned to alter its powertrain strategy and sell cars with diesel engines in the United States. The journalist mentioned that some European automakers offer diesels in the United States.
Kuzak said Ford “could easily bring diesels to the U. S. market.”
Then he quickly added: U.S. “customers, I think, are pragmatic.”
Too pragmatic for improved efficiency? Huh?
Kuzak continues:
With diesel engines more expensive than gasoline powerplants, and diesel fuel more costly than gasoline in the United States, the payback time for a U.S. driver, he said, would be 10 years.
“It doesn’t make sense. We are not going to force it on customers,” he said, adding that an EcoBoost engine comes close to matching the efficiency of a diesel.
Unlike the luxury brands, Kuzak said Ford’s fuel economy strategy “is driven by affordability.”
And yet Ford offers its fair share of hybrids… and how long does it take to pay off that premium? After all, National Research Council studies show the cost of upgrading from a gas four-cylinder to an advanced diesel or power-split hybrid are almost identical… and I know which I’d rather drive. So are Kuzak and Ford scared of the marketing challenge of bringing back advanced diesels, or do they really believe that their hybrid strategy good enough to not need some diesel diversification?
The price premium between diesel and regular gas cars, may be similar to that between hybrid and regular gas cars, but diesel fuel’s premium over regular gas is huge and likely to get larger. You can’t just increasse the percentage of diesel that’s refined from a barrell of oil by flipping a switch, it’s part of the basic refinery design.
The other reason: EPA numbers, critical for meeting CAFE:
The compact Jetta Diesel: 34 (combined)
The mid-size Fusion hybrid: 39 (combined)
That pretty much sums up the answer to the question there, given the huge costs of converting to diesel production. It’s not like hybrids are flying out the door all that fast either.
The Jetta’s EPA numbers from just a few years ago were: 49/43
California’s bad math (off by 340%) when creating the 2007 emissions standards for Diesel engines in automobiles is to blame for the outrageous hoops the engine designers had to jump through to create “Clean Diesel.” This is what has strangled the efficiency of the US Market Diesel engines compared to those elsewhere… and ironically has eliminated the cleanest Diesel option, namely BioDiesel. You can’t run any post-2007 CARB-Compliant US Diesel car on BioDiesel mixtures above 5%.
Meanwhile those of us who own pre-2007 CARB standards Diesel, or any Diesel outside the USA can happily see ultra-high hybrid-beating MPG from 100%, clean, carbon-neutral, renewable fuel.
Go figure.
And yet Ford offers its fair share of hybrids… and how long does it take to pay off that premium?
Probably about the same, and with hybrids at least there’s no emissions issues to address, whereas diesel, even in Europe, is going to have to pay the piper some day. I know it pains diesel aficionados to hear this, but a modern turbodiesel requires about as much expense and complexity as a hybrid, and certainly is under more mechanical stress. That fuel injection system, turbo and emissions control technology isn’t free, and your modern TDI sure as hell ain’t your grand-dad’s Mercedes 300D.
This is also why you’ll never see diesel hybrids in passenger cars: the expense and complexity of a diesel plus the expense and cost of a hybrid all for very incremental gains over either technology alone doesn’t make sense.
Interesting. I’ve wondered for a long time why there are no Diesel-hybrid (or “Diesel-electric,” as a rail buff would call them) cars, now that Diesel starting is no more difficult than gas.
Add in the fact that hybrids fare far better on city driving than diesels, too.
Peugeot 3008 has just launched in Europe with a diesel hybrid. It is also common on commercial vehicles – buses, trucks etc
why there are no Diesel-hybrid cars?
1. Expense. Both diesel and hybrid add costs. Doubling up makes the payback time stretch out towards never.
2. Weight. Both add weight. Doubling up adds a lot of weight, and hurts the fuel efficency you are trying to promote.
3. Warm up time. Diesels need to be warm to run well. Hybrids stretch out the warm up time by killing the engine instead of letting it idle.
Quentin: Add in the fact that hybrids fare far better on city driving than diesels, too.
…as long as you don’t require any torque to get the car moving in the city.
…as long as you don’t require any torque to get the car moving in the city.
Huh? The Prius electric motor alone generates 258 ft/lb at 0 RPM.
@vbofw
“…as long as you don’t require any torque to get the car moving in the city.”
except that hybrids use instant torque electric motors at low speeds, so have more than enough torque to get moving.
IMNSHO at this point those who have viable hybrids (Toyota, Ford, Honda) will stick with them, anyone else will try to do what they can to improve fleet mpg. if GM brings (and is able to sell) a diesel Cruze, others will follow, but it’s not worth taking the marketing risk when you can point to an hybrid as the green choice in your showroom.
Ford is not going to sell good cars to Americans they worked out long ago that you will buy any shit they tell you to. They are not stupid enuff to sell hybrid crap to anyone else they wont tolerate it. The tech in a modern diesel is long paid for it was developed by Peugeot thats why BMW Ford etc jumped at joint engine programmes with them and now make the best diesel cars out there. Think about it Jaguar do a supercharged petrol V8 the next best performer in their range is a Peugeot/Ford V6 diesel. You really need to find something out about modern diesels before making stupid uninformed comments as a bove.
I strongly agree with psarhjinian. I would like to add that we could easily make standard gas or gas turbo equipped cars 10-20% more efficient immediately by making them LESS powerful. In the US market, most of the advances in IC engine technology in the last 20 years have been put toward more power and faster acceleration. For my 50 mile round trip commute I would happily drive a tiny, shitty, slow car that could cruise at 80 (eventually) and give me 40mpg. If it were a little fun to drive that would be a bonus and I would pay extra for it. Remember guys, it’s more fun to drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. Of course 90% of American consumers disagree with me but they might come around when gas hits $5…
It’s simple marketing. Bagless vacuums.
So when the old Hoover started not sucking a couple of weeks ago, the wife and I decided we should look for a better model. A kid is on the way, we have a sheddy dog, and Austin is covered in a fine layer of pollen almost year ’round. When you think “better vacuum”, your brain responds instantly with the word Dyson. It’s hi-tech, it’s shiny, it has marketing out the ying yang. So then you start doing some research, and find out the modern, hi-tech bagless vacuum really isn’t the best around. What you want is a quality bagged vacuum.
Here’s where the issue arises for most consumers. When you think of bagged vacuums, you think of that dusty, rattly contraption your mom used while you camped out on the couch eating fruit rolls ups and watching He-Man. It was a miserable contraption. The truth is, you haven’t really bothered to research the benefits of the “old technology”, instead just relying on marketing to convince you the modern version is superior.
To most people’s brains, it’s the equivalent of being told a Motorola Star-Tac is better than an iPhone.
See the analogy? BMW is doing a good job of working to convince people the new diesel is in no way comparable to the rattly, filthy, stinking oil burner that America learned to hate three generations ago.
And for the record, Miele makes some frakking AMAZING bagged vacuums, with technology to send Mr. Dyson back to engineering school. Pricey, but built like a… Mercedes diesel.
+1 on the vacuums. Dyson can bite me – putting a big ball in something and wrapping it in yellow plastic doesn’t mean it’s any good at being a vacuum.
My parents have a Miele cannister vacuum which I borrow. It’s amazing. The thing can suck spiders off the wall at three paces.
Maybe Mazda should look into buying some of them.
Reman Dyson from woot.com for $99. Best of both worlds.
Love my Miele— it’s the Ultimate Cleaning Machine.
As someone who has had asthmatic attacks triggered by so called ‘superior’ bagless vacuum cleaners, I agree. A properly engineered bagged vacuum cleaner is the way to go.
I imagine it’s (also) due in no small part to the image that offering a hybrid carries. Diesel and CNG just doesn’t have the marketing cred that a hybrid does. Most consumers aren’t aware of any of the environmental drawbacks of a hybrid or plug-in, they just see the price difference on the sticker… just as they still think of diesel as dirty.
Let’s face it, hybrids are easier to market and involve no information campaign to explain the benefits of it to customers. Because of their image in the market as clean, hybrids can also be a status purchase. “I’m interested in a car like the Fusion. Do you offer it in a hybrid?” A simple word conveys fuel efficiency and green credentials. Diesels don’t have fancy growing-tree indicators in the instrument cluster.
It’s hard to get that same green perception for diesel when diesel owners often have to fill up next to enormous rigs spewing black smoke.
What a moron.
Ford is so arrogant lately.
Hey Ford…how about spending a bit more money on making diesel a viable alternative to gasoline rather than producing mediocre appliances that have very confusing climate controls and are uglier than sin?
Ford told me (via Twitter) that it would cost them about $400 million to convert one of their engine plants to building diesels, and that there just isn’t a market for small diesel powered cars OR trucks in America to justify that kind of cost.
I still think they are making a mistake by not bringing the diesel global Ranger to America, because truck owners know how awesome diesels can be. But do most passenger car drivers? I’d wager not.
I disagree with the statement that modern diesels are as complicated as hybrids though. One reason I’m not a hybrid fan is because your placing a motor on top of an engine, which seems needlessly complicated. Then again, I’m not an engineer. I just think I’d rather work on a straight diesel engine than a hybrid.
Assuming oil prices are on a secular trend to be much higher than $100/bbl, I do not see how they will be able to stay in the pick up business without a small diesel truck.
Instead of just assuming that hybrids are complex, research how a hybrid transmission works. The motors essentially take the place of sets of planetary gears and clutchpacks in a normal automatic transmission. Controlling the electric motor speed controls the ring gear and thus gives you an absurdly reliable CVT (no cones!). The rest of the vehicle, sans the battery, which does require add’l precaution when working on, is pretty much a normal vehicle.
http://www.toyota-global.com/innovation/environmental_technology/technology_file/hybrid.html#h304
The complex part of a hybrid is the method of control. I’ve been elbows deep into 5 and 6 speed automatics. The first time I tore into a hybrid transmission, I couldn’t believe how much simpler it was than a traditional AT.
That’s interesting.
I would think diesel engines are less complex than hybrid drivetrains but yeah, I’m no engineer. I figure if VW/Audi (and BMW to some extent) made it work then it shouldn’t be that difficult, what with America slowly turning to diesel as an alternative. Then again, I imagine the cost to develop and market their EcoBoost technology wouldn’t leave much in the way of funds to bring diesels across the Atlantic.
Plus it would sorta be like shooting yourself in the ankle…
I would think diesel engines are less complex than hybrid drivetrains
To make it emission complaint and to get 200bhp out of 2.0L like BMW takes a huge amount of complex engineering.
when comparing a diesel with a DI turbo the diesel requires a heavier block for higher compression forces and extensive aftertreatment (urea tank, more complicated/expensive catalysts). the cost of those components either have to be eaten in the already razor-thin margins on a small car, or passed along to the customer.
given that current fuel economy standards can be met without resorting to loss-making high-mpg diesels, it’s hard to convince someone buying a Fiesta/Fit/Aveo or Focus/Cruze/Civic/Elantra that they need to step up $2k in sticker (nearly into the next size vehicle up the range) in order to get 10mpg better mileage. if you can already get a headline grabbing (rated at least) 40mpg, getting another 10mpg isn’t likely part of the purchase equation.
if you want buy an hybrid, you get one and enjoy the self-esteem boost which you seek from it’s purchase, economic payoff be damned. buying a diesel is a contrarian choice and suits some, but not most. until diesel picks up green street cred, it’s not seen as a green choice, so won’t get the pull from the marketplace.
where diesel makes sense is in something like an X5/ML/Q7 or 5/7/A6/A8/E/S where the extra which is charged (less than the cost of the content) is far less on a % basis. the equation is somewhat less clear in an 3/C/A4 sized vehicle where BMW has thus far been the only one to make a move there and at a price premium vs the NA 330. same thing with awd – I read a while back that something like 75% of Merc S-classes were 4-matic, likely because when one is paying $75k for a car, checking a $2500 box which gives you a (perceived) safety advantage is easy.
But it complex engineering is paid for by the European market so cost isn’t that high. Hybrids also require expensive things
@charly :
But it complex engineering is paid for by the European market so cost isn’t that high. Hybrids also require expensive things
not so. european diesel emissions regs are not as strict as US, so there is invention required to sell them in the US market. Honda gave up on selling a diesel TSX here when they were unable to make it work without expensive aftertreatment. the invention required is now complete, but there is still a lot of added cost to the systems, which makes them less practical for sale here.
Hybrid drivetrains aren’t really that complex at all. The electric motors themselves are far simpler than any ICE engine. The servo motors they run in hybrids only have a few parts and are maintenance free.
Coupling the two together is also not hard, being as the technology to do so has existed for nearly a century now.
Electric motors are simple, much simpler than ICE engines yes.
But when you talk about hybrids versus diesels, you are talking about:
A second method of propulsion (electric motor)
A often large battery that adds both weight and cost.
Regenerative braking.
Computer controls for hybrid system.
And that is really just a very basic breakdown, and I am probably missing a few components. Yes, high tech diesels have plenty of complex technology on them too to deal with the compression and emissions and whatnot. But I just fail to see how a hybrid system, with all of those additional bits and pieces that even complex diesels don’t have, is simpler than your “normal” automobile.
Add to that that many Euro diesels are able to achieve similar, and sometimes better gas mileage than hybrids, as well as more torque and “fun” factor, and at least for me, diesels come out ahead. Then again, maybe not.
Electric motors are simple, much simpler than ICE engines yes.
But when you talk about hybrids versus diesels, you are talking about:
A second method of propulsion (electric motor)
A often large battery that adds both weight and cost.
Regenerative braking.
Computer controls for hybrid system.
And that is really just a very basic breakdown, and I am probably missing a few components. Yes, high tech diesels have plenty of complex technology on them too to deal with the compression and emissions and whatnot. But I just fail to see how a hybrid system, with all of those additional bits and pieces that even complex diesels don’t have, is simpler than your “normal” automobile.
Because a hybrid doesn’t have a complex emissions system. It doesn’t have a turbo. it doesn’t have an ultra-high-pressure fuel rail. It doesn’t have injectors that have to deal with pressures that could cut brass. That big, heavy block and turbocharger plumbing also adds mass, and does so right on the nose of the car. Oh, an it also has a complex set of computers to cope with all this stuff.
On the flip side, HSD and IMA hybrids are over ten years old now (Euro-V compliant diesel emissions controls are very, very new) the technology is well understood and the actively managed nature (at least, under HSD) that allow the mechanicals to operate under less stress. Priuses often go two to three times the distance on the same sets of brakes, there’s no starter or ignition to wear out and the engine is a very light-load cycle that lives an unstressed existence.
Add to that that many Euro diesels are able to achieve similar, and sometimes better gas mileage than hybrids,
This never happens. People claim it does, but in cars of the same size the hybrids always test out at better mileage, city and highway. Even in Europe. About the only advantage diesel gets is constant high-load operation (towing, racing), which hardly anyone does day-in, day-out.
When you see someone saying “the Peugeot 208/VW Polo/Whatever Diesel beats the Prius”, they inexplicably fail to mention that the 208 or Polo are smaller than the Yaris inside, while the Prius exceeds the interior space of the Passat and 407. The same story is true of the “the 520d beat the Prius’ mileage”. Yes, it does. On the racetrack. In just about every other situation, the Prius does better.
as well as more torque
Have you seen the torque figures on most hybrids?
and “fun” factor, and at least for me, diesels come out ahead. Then again, maybe not.
A Jetta or Golf TDI is composed and rides well, but on fifteen-inch steelies it’s not really “fun”. Honda did, for a while, make an Accord hybrid that was a lot of fun to drive. Ford’s Fusion matches the VW’s ride sophistication and enjoyment easily. I’ll admit that, when I did drive one, a 335d was a fun car, but the “fun” factor of a Golf or Jetta is a lot nearer a Prius or Insight than it is a 335d.
The truth of the matter is that diesels do certain things well. Hyrbids do much of the same things well, and, in North America, “work” better for more people. Heck, a simple, naturally-aspirated gas engine works for even more people.
The other truth is that many diesel fans can’t accept the reality of the situation. It’s always CARB, or Hollywood imagemongers, or memory of the Olds 350 (does anyone really remember those outside of a automotive forums?) and suchlike conspiracies, but if diesels were really so good, so easy and so simple, cheap & reliable, and since Toyota, Honda and Ford all have good diesels in Europe, you’d think it would be a no-brainer to sell them here. But it they don’t, and that’s because diesels aren’t a panacaea.
How about the fact that the California Air Resources Board can’t do math?
There is one reason why we don’t have diesels here in greater numbers, (puts on tinfoil hat) and that is because the automakers and oil companies don’t want them here. I drove in a Ford diesel in England back in the late 90s, and it was so quiet and refined that I didn’t even realize that it was a diesel. The last day I was there we switched to an identical car (was a ford wagon) with a gas engine and you couldn’t tell the difference. There’s no way you can’t tell me that those European diesels wouldn’t sell over here if they were promoted, and yes, I know about VW’s TDIs, I have one (currently waiting for new IP seals, thanks ULSD!!!).
…adding that an EcoBoost engine comes close to matching the efficiency of a diesel.
Great. So when is Ford planning on selling an Ecoboost-powered car that is tuned for mileage instead of performance?
Perhaps around the time gas hits $5/gal?
@ajla :
4Q of this year, in the Explorer and Edge with the 2.0L motor. tho I have not kept track of the launch schedule exactly, so I may be a Q off.
@faygo:
I should have been more specific. When I wrote “car” I meant not a truck/SUV/CUV. It’s nice for Edge/Explorer intenders that they can get a 22MPG Ecoboost engine, but those type of vehicles don’t really interest me.
I’m thinking more of something like offering the 1.6L EB in the Fusion and Escape or making a 1.25L EB for the Focus and Fiesta.
Right now the Ecoboost stuff seems to be focusing on performance cars and trucks.
I suspect that future vehicles will have expanded EB engines in place of larger ones, matching performance and improving economy. and at the same time, allowing one to select the next size up as a performance variant. as the 2.0 motor in Edge/Explorer/S-max is being used in the Focus ST.
it’s harder to justify going with a really small boosted motor in a Fiesta as you push up the cost and kill margins, just as you would with a diesel. if you want a very economical (cheap) car, you don’t get to expect performance as well. at least not with the current market logic in play.
don’t knock the economy cred of the EB in the F150 either – the marketing campaign may be all tire smoke and “it’s just as tough as a V8” bluster, but it’s positioned as a win-win vs the V8 and priced accordingly. the market will tell the tale of whether that’s the right approach.
Just as the Hindenberg did great harm to hydrogen technology, so GM’s 1980s diesels did great harm to interest in diesels in the US.
Americans want the comfortable/quiet/powerful ride, and the memory of wheezng, clattering, smelly 55-HP Rabbits and exploding GM 350 diesels doesn’t jive with what Americans ‘want’. Turning the public’s perception back in favor of diesels will take real effort and time. Ford can make money without embarking on this quixotic adventure.
Bingo! It’s the public’s [i]perception[/i] of what a diesel car is that is holding them back. Everyone (except VW and MB) say that they wouldn’t sell enough of them to make it worth their while…but they didn’t try except back in the pre-turbo era of the early 80’s. When I bought my TDI back in 2001, the majority of people I ran into didn’t even know that VW offered a diesel option (usually when they tried to stop me from putting diesel fuel into the tank).
As Adam Sandler said, “diesel gas sucks my ass!”
It couldn’t have been a Rabbit though, as it was “too wide for drive-through”. It must have been an Oldsmobile Diesel.
In other words..
U.S. customers will buy what we tell them to buy.
We think U.S. customers are afraid of diesels so we won’t tell them to buy them.
Go pound sand.
nowadays gas engine can be very efficient, the margin is getting narrower & narrower all the time.
the gas direct inj, turbos.
hybrid turns on & off so may times, if thats doing it to a diesel the starter will get fried pretty soon.
plus dsl needs a lot more cranking power too.
better off to market straight dsls.
Hybrids don’t use conventional starter motors. One of the hybrid motors starts the engine. That’s why start stop is so seamless. If it used a standard starter, it would have to crank each time.
I dunno… I could sure see myself pragmating myself into a new Focus Titanium with even a 100hp diesel and a stick.
Ford, Y U no compete with VW?
Each of us can find an anecdote to support their own paradigm. In my area, I continue to see ads promoting “clear out pricing” on “brand-new” 2010 hybrids, while a 2010 diesel cannot be found. With a similar price premium between hybrid and diesel technology, these inventory hangovers must be telling us something.
Can anyone tell me why in new cars that an identical sized diesel engine always costs more than the equivalent gas version? Are they really that much more expensive to build? Or is it because they are produced in smaller quantities that economies of scale doesn’t kick in so much?
Are they really that much more expensive to build?
Yes, even if all you had to deal with was the higher compression ratio it would involve substantial extra cost.
In the past everyone just put up with their horrible particulate emissions, hence all the soot on European buildings. Emissions control is difficult on diesels (i.e. expensive). Diesel engines also need to be heavier because of high compression ratios (which in themselves require a longer stroke, which means stronger/heavier moving parts).
But above all, diesel engines really need to be turbocharged to be any good. In passenger car applications they pretty much all come with turbos attached.
I think if you build it, they will come. Everyone seems to like diesel pickups. And the TDI’s seem to sell pretty well.
Plus, even the clean diesels smell like farts…when you’re unlucky enough to be stuck behind one with your HVAC running and they are nice enough to do a jackrabbit start.
And diesels are still louder than gas engines.
For all their improvements, diesels are still diesels.
I actually think clean diesels smell worse. I like the smell of the old diesels, but the new ones have a metallic smell. You can’t even run one in the shop for an extended period of time.
Are turbodiesel overboost “farts” still exempt from emissions regulations in Europe?
I like the “pound sand” reference made earlier because that’s pretty much what the guy is saying. As shown by the sales of TDIs by VW, they do sell every car they can import. Sure Diesel fuel is more expensive, but if you drive enough it does become cheaper to own a diesel than a comparable gas vehicle.
Assuming 30 MPG combined at $3.50 per gallon of gas and 42 combined @ $4.10 per gallon for diesel, the gas vehicle works out to 12 cents/mile while the diesel works out to 10 cents/mile. Adjust accordingly depending on real world fuel economy for both vehicles. Diesels aren’t for everyone, but it sure would be nice if any of the “domestics” would even attempt to offer a diesel powered passenger car or small SUV. I think they’d be surprised at the sales results.
Your math may be correct, but a $0.02/mile difference wouldn’t sell me. The smell alone isn’t worth that kind of savings.
In addition to all the well reasoned economical and engineering arguments above, perhaps another reason why Ford doesn’t market diesel in passenger cars in America is because they don’t want to compete with their own hybrid technology.
After all, it took lots of time, energy, resources and money to build it. I forget the precise profit metric Toyota used to determine the moment the accounting column turned black on Prius, but it took several years and many thousands of vehicles to achieve.
By adding a high-tech, high-mileage and premium priced diesel option for their cars in the US, Ford may feel they’re pushing that profit bogey on their hybrids farther into the future than they want.
It’s really simple. Clean diesel is still dirtier than modern gasoline engines, and a hell of a lot dirtier than most hybrids. It’s the wrong path at the wrong time – for all the wrong reasons.
Bravo! As an ex marine diesel engineer, and a trucker, I love diesels, but not in passenger vehicles.
Rubbish. Gasoline vehicles pollute more parked in your garage than clean diesels do driving down the highway because of Gasoline’s much, much, higher vapor emissions. Diesel is a much less volatile fuel and the evaporative emissions of a diesel vehicle are far lower than a comparable gasoline engine. That’s not counting the higher vapor emissions encountered in the refining, transport and storage of all that volatile fuel and the higher energy consumption of gasoline refining.
That’s why diesel cars’ fuel tanks tend not to blow up when ruptured in an accident.
Sigh. Impossible to measure those supposed emissions, which is why, of course, you diesel guys keep bringing them up.
What’s unquestionably true is that “clean diesel” cars are now the dirtiest general-purpose passenger vehicles legally allowed to be sold in the USA.
How many of you have actually looked under the hood of a modern clean diesel? Ever read a white paper on how the VW current gen 2.0 TDI works? Here’s the short version; it’s insane. crazy insane; Rube Goldberg confused and beating him self in the head with a dead-blow mallet insane. There’s two EGR systems, half a dozen scrubber/cat/exhaust filters, a diesel particulate filter (a $2000 wear item!!), and a GIANT alternator to power a 1000w cabin heater for the first 15 minutes of driving until the cabin warms up. I really don’t see how diesel can offer any initial cost advantages over a hybrid when hamstrung like that
this.
I’m pretty smart and I spent a good 15 minutes staring at a Scorpion diesel on an engine stand in the garage and still couldn’t figure out what half of it was for. talk about a nightmare to repair. makes the magic of a powersplit CVT transmission and planetary gearset seem almost simple by comparison.
Lol’ed!
So what you’re saying is I can’t expect small diesel engine with lots of low end grunt and low rpm efficiency in a Jeep Wrangler any time soon. In theory, just what you need for low speed trail and dune use, but in practice, never going to happen. What a downer, Sundowner.
Among other things, I sell really, really big trucks. A particulate filter is about $100, not $2000. And they last about a half a million miles.
According to VW’s website, their filter is good for 150K kilometers. And they say their’s is made with precious metals, I don’t see Volkswagen selling anything with precious metals for a hundred bucks.
Also, those of you repeating the FUD that hybrids don’t pay off need to cut it out. That’s a lie; the Prius pays off quickly compared to a Camry and even fairly quickly compared to a Corolla, even by the conservative standards of Edmunds; while the Jetta TDI takes quite a bit longer.
From a very recent post on this very blog:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/03/the-price-of-green-savings-at-all-cost/#more-386447
“Some of the worst choices, says Edmund, are the BMW X5 xDrive35d (takes 25.2 years before savings kick in), the Volkswagen Jetta TDI (13.8 years) and the Nissan Altima Hybrid (10.3 years.)”
The Prius was 0.7 years.
FUD. Cut it out. Just stop.
Hybrids are the darlings of Hollywood and have stand out “look at me I care!” looks (the Focus is a welcome exception). For these reasons they are currently exempt from payback analysis. Diesels are not the in thing (certain low volume German exceptions notwithstanding) and are subject to payback analysis. Unless you drive a lot and intend to keep your car at least 10 years, payback analysis in the US favors petrol.
Shopped around some local dealers last summer for a Golf TDI; no inventory. The salesmen I talked to said ‘Oh yes, we’ve moved 3-4 of these already this year.’ I know the Jetta Sportswagen moved much quicker, but something didn’t sit right with that slow rate of turnover. I didn’t want to fork over $25k only to be SOL 7 years down the road.
A four-banger breaks down, you can take it to any shade tree, a turbo-diesel breaks down, well, I’m not sure what the correct answer is, so I took a pass.
Depends on the turbodiesel. Toyota’s HZ and KZs with turbos are relatively simple and easy enough for an untrained idiot such as myself to rebuild and swap. It’s the I in TDI plus all the other stuff that’s hanging off the engine for emissions compliance that confuses me to the point where I don’t know which end of the engine I’m looking at.
I see the usual crap being trotted out here. As far as diesel being hugely more expensive, horsepucky – stop comparing little 4cyl N/A motors to a modern turbocharged direct injection diesel. The true comparison is to a modern, turbocharged, all-alloy gasoline engine. For example, I find it VERY hard to believe there is an significant cost difference between the VW 2.0L TDI motor and the VW 2.0T gasoline motor. Certainly any economy of scale is in the diesel’s favor these days, at least for the Europeans. Ditto for the BMW 3.0L turbodiesel vs. the 3.0L turbo gas motor. In either case, in the real world the diesel handily DOUBLES the gasoline engines mpg, while offering just as good real-world performance. If you can live with merely decent performance, rather than rocket ship performance the BMW 2.0L TD is astounding, another 50% better fuel economy or so, still with 135mph performance in a 5-series. But of course that would never do for Americans. We must have the theoretical capability of a sub 6 sec 0-60 time and a 155mph top speed while we crawl in traffic and run along on our 65mph highways.
I do think hybrids have their place – they are absolutely the best technology for an urban stop and go commute. So LA, NY, SF, Atlanta, Chicago, perfect! But for burning up highway miles at speed the diesel is far superior.
I can’t speak to VW’s cost structure; however, I was working for a BMW dealer when the 335d was introduced. The complexity of the emissions control systems, required to meet Bin5 tier 2 emissions regulations in the US, made the 3.0 liter turbo diesel the single most expensive power-train (from the standpoint of manufacturing cost) imported by BMW NA at that time. The purchase price reflects the difference. The mileage of the diesel is 36 hwy, which is quite good, but nowhere near double the petrol motor’s 28 mpg. As a result you must drive well in excess of 100,000 miles to make the car pay out.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=bmw+diesel+emissions+controls&cp=29&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=bmw+diesel+emissions+controls&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.&fp=89e96c95c947f3f0
I don’t recall “two EGR systems, half a dozen scrubber/cat/exhaust filters, a diesel particulate filter (a $2000 wear item!!), and a GIANT alternator to power a 1000w cabin heater for the first 15 minutes of driving until the cabin warms up” on my VW 2.0T.* There certainly is extra cost that goes into making a block, head, rods, pistons, and gaskets that can handle the add’l compression in the engine. The 2.0T makes 60 more hp than the TDI, as well, while returning 32mpg regularly.
*See Sundowner’s post a few spots up.
For example, I find it VERY hard to believe there is an significant cost difference between the VW 2.0L TDI motor and the VW 2.0T gasoline motor
It is. The injection system costs more, the block costs a lot more, and the emissions control system costs a hell of a lot more.
If you can live with merely decent performance, rather than rocket ship performance the BMW 2.0L TD is astounding, another 50% better fuel economy or so, still with 135mph performance in a 5-series. But of course that would never do for Americans. We must have the theoretical capability of a sub 6 sec 0-60 time and a 155mph top speed while we crawl in traffic and run along on our 65mph highways.
Yeah, well, that’s the way the market works. Diesel people try to pretend this doesn’t happen, but the truth is that North America doesn’t want diesels. Hell, even in the Eurozone, countries that don’t offer a big tax break to diesels** see gas engines attaining prevalence.
This is the flip-side of what diesel fans accuse California of doing, by the way.
The truth of the matter is that people just don’t want them, while they do want hybrids (the Prius, which was barely tax-subsidized for the first part of it’s run and isn’t so any longer, outsells all diesel cars combined by several times) that offer the same benefits, don’t stink, and don’t require special fuel—even though they’re hardly sub-six-second Family Dragsters.
** coincidentally, the countries that do this just happen to be the same countries where manufacturers of diesel passenger cars are headquartered.
On cost, you also have the crank being forged instead of cast and I think the cam, too. Same for the pistons, I think that they’re forged and not cast as well. The crank bearings have to be heavier – even the rings have a different design. The valves also have to withstand more heat. Turbo engines also usually have an oil spray that cools the underside of the piston on each downstroke, I know that the 2.0 VW TDI does and that the whole oiling system is more advanced. I have a Golf and they also have hydraulic motor mounts to dampen vibration, which I don’t believe the gas cars have. That’s right of the top of my head.
I have driven an automobile with a sub 6 second 0 to 60 time,and a limited top speed of 155 mph. for over 11 years. It still makes my days better. Try it.
Me too! I have driven an automobile with a sub 6 second 0 to 60 time,and a limited top speed of 155 mph. except it gives 36mpg & moster 465 ft/lb torque. It always makes my days better. Guess what? It’s a twin turbo low emmission diesel.
Someone help me out. If a prius gets 48 mpg on the Hwy, and its just operating as a 4cyl IE carrying around extra battery and motor, then why cant toyota offer a similar sized car (basically a non-hybrid prius) that gets better than 48 mpg on the Highway? Or a diesel non-hybrid prius that gets 66 mpg highway?
It must not be that simple…
The Prius engine is an Atkinson cycle. It is very efficient when steadily cruising in its optimal rpm band, but runs like crap outside that band. The hybrid part of the drivetrain compensates for the ICE’s weak performance in those instances.
Toyota could offer a diesel engine in the Prius body if they wanted to, but I don’t think the aero styling is sufficient to get it into the 60s on the EPA test.
A Prius with just that little tiny ICE would take 30 seconds to accelerate up to highway speed – it’d be worse than the old Metro. In that sense, the electric engine does, in fact, help on the highway.
The Prius isn’t just towing the motor and batteries: that’s a myth. Take the Camry and Fusion, for example: the hybrid variants also get better highway mileage than the base four-cyl models, and you can plainly see the electric motor assisting the gas engine at highway speed.
The the Camry and Fusion hybrids are both quicker despite the Atkinson cycle engine is really all you need to know.
Thanks! Makes sense now.
I’ve driven all sorts of diesels in Europe and the UK and can attest to their appeal. I’m not sure what the impediments to diesel uptake are in the US, but I suspect is has something to do with our automotive ‘instant gratification’ when it comes to the accelerator pedal and every automotive journalists fetish around onramp speeds and 0-60 acceleration – rather than real roadgoing flexibility, torque and thrift. Adding to all of this our relatively cheap gasoline. We pay far less per gallon for gasoline here, so we tend to care less about economy. If gas were $5 to $7 per gallon, diesels would start to look more appealing to US consumers. With any luck, we’ll get to find out if I’m right.
As a bit of anecdotal evidence of diesel appeal, here in the Pacific Northwest, diesel Jettas, New Beetles, and Passats see very little depreciation and trade at much higher multiples than their gas equivalents.
Big take rate for diesels in Europe [various government subsidies/incentives] = surplus of gasoline there which they sell here in the US. Lots of diesel cars here and what happens to that refinery imbalance? Meanwhile, modern gasoline engines’ efficiency pretty much make the diesel payback unreachable here, unless the higher price than regular 87 goes away.
Sundowner where do you get your information. I drive a VW TDI and i sure as hell do not have all the parts you mentioned. I use my TDI for long trips, I can drive at 80 MPH and get approx 40-45 MPG. If i use the car in the city i get approx 38-39. If i want to drive it like a hybrid i could get better MPG but i love the pick up on this car. You do pay more for diesel but you make it up in greater MPG. Plus TDI’s hold their resale value very well.
Look what’s gonna happen to diesels vs petrol engines under the next gen euro 6 regulations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards
Tier Date CO THC NMHC NOx HC+NOx PM P***
Diesel
Euro 1†
July 1992
2.72 (3.16)
–
–
–
0.97 (1.13)
0.14 (0.18)
–
Euro 2
January 1996
1.0
–
–
–
0.7
0.08
–
Euro 3
January 2000
0.64
–
–
0.50
0.56
0.05
–
Euro 4
January 2005
0.50
–
–
0.25
0.30
0.025
–
Euro 5
September 2009
0.500
–
–
0.180
0.230
0.005
–
Euro 6 (future)
September 2014
0.500
–
–
0.080
0.170
0.0025
–
Petrol (Gasoline)
Euro 1†
July 1992
2.72 (3.16)
–
–
–
0.97 (1.13)
–
–
Euro 2
January 1996
2.2
–
–
–
0.5
–
–
Euro 3
January 2000
2.3
0.20
–
0.15
–
–
–
Euro 4
January 2005
1.0
0.10
–
0.08
–
–
–
Euro 5
September 2009
1.000
0.100
0.068
0.060
–
0.005**
–
Euro 6 (future)
September 2014
1.000
0.100
0.068
0.060
–
0.005**
–
I guess that will make the European diesel v hybrid equation a little more complicated.
he said, adding that an EcoBoost engine comes close to matching the efficiency of a diesel.
Bull. A V6 that gets the same, OR WORSE, mileage than a V8 is not efficient.
Having an engine that’s more to purchase/maintain/repair and runs within an inch of it’s life isn’t really efficient with the $$$ either.
I love diesel, I love torque beast & I will still take 335d over others.
The weak link with a turbo diesel is the turbo. If it lasts the life of the chassis then great. If you ever have to replace it then you have wiped out any savings over a normally-aspirated gasoline engine.
You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “Do I feel lucky?” Well do ya, punk?
It’s not just the turbo: recall the the only companies that makes diesels in North America are Mercedes and VW. You stand a pretty good chance of paying more than the hybrid/diesel premium in non-powertrain repairs.
Diesels are low-speed, low revving engines. They put very little stress on their turbos. They normally last as long s the chassis and are seldom, if ever a weakness in Diesel engines.
@psarhjinian
Check your fact: BMW makes diesel & a rather high performance diesel.
@ Chuck
For industrial equipment I agree wholeheartedly; however, for (relatively) high revving automotive applications I don’t. Turbo failure is an important (and costly) failure mode that needs to be considered for a complete cost of ownership analysis when comparing to normally-aspirated gasoline engines.
Having to use a high-quality oil for diesel applications to protect the turbo futher decreases any cost savings by using a turbo diesel engine.
Yes, the 335d and X-Series diesels. They hardly sell and BMW puts a pile of cash on the nose to do it.
45% take rates on 335d versus 335i during FY2010.
335i = lack tiger blood
335d = winning
After BMW started plunking something like $4-10K worth of incentives and credits on the 335d, yes, it did start to move in volume. Before the credit it was barely moving at all.
The dealer I spoke to about the car more or less agreed: it’s a nice car, but it wasn’t selling much versus the 335i. Now that you can get it for the on-the-road price of a 328i I suspect things have changed.
@Morea, I’ve owned and driven many turbo-Diesel cars over a million miles over the past 30 years – I’ve never had an issue, even a minor one, with the turbocharging system on any of them. Every Diesel I’ve ever used achieves max torque at around 2000 RPM, and even while passing I don’t think I’ve revved any of them over 4000 RPM. Ever. In contrast, the gasoline cars I have owned and driven (other than a couple of big V8s) don’t even come alive until they hit 4000 RPM. Turbochargers in gasoline applications can be an expensive Achilles Heel, but that is just not true in the Diesel world.
@ Chuck
After googling “TDI turbo failure” we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
@Morea
I have owned a dozen or more turbocharged cars, both gas and diesel. Most of them with north of 100K on them, and I tend to put a bunch of miles on. I have never, not once, ever had any sort of issue with a turbocharger. Yes, they CAN fail. But any part of a car can fail. Note that I have never been dumb enough to buy a half-baked American turbo or diesel however. Saab, Mercedes Benz, VW, Volvo, and Peugeot seem to know what they are doing. Also, I actually maintain my cars, as opposed to the average brain-dead American car leaser.
Have you ever actually OWNED a turbocharged car, or a diesel car? You seem to be doing a lot of doom and gloom talking without any experience.
Nope I have never owned a turbocharged or diesel car. If that makes my opinions invalid then read no further.
I am not anti-turbo per se, my one and only point is that total cost of ownership must be considered for any meaningful comparisons to be made. (At least meaningful to cost conscious car buyers.) Yes diesel vehicles get better gas mileage but if they are turbocharged then you have an additional complex, expensive subsystem that may (or may not) be the cause of a big dollar repair at some point. There is (financial) risk involved. Hence the Dirty Harry reference: do I feel lucky that the turbo will last for the time period I plan to own the car?
Small displacement gasoline engines may also be turbocharged and the same consideration applies. The normally aspirated V6 version of a car may get worse mileage than the turbocharged I4 of the same car, but one turbo replacement before you have sold the car and much of the cost advantage is wiped out (either in repair bills or lost resale value).
In most cost-of-ownership or reliability/maintainability analyses the mantra ‘keep it simple stupid’ trumps most other considerations.
Note that I am not considering the ‘fun to drive’ factor, or using less fuel ‘to reduce greenhouse gases’, or anything else. I am only considering total cost of ownership per mile for equivalent sized cars. These external factors are hard to price and are really personal preference traits of a vehicle. That’s fine I myself don’t drive the highest fuel efficiency or the (statistically) highest reliability car that I could own.
I believe a full analysis would show that diesels, hybrids, electrics, etc have a higher total cost of ownership than the equivalent ‘keep it simple stupid’ gasoline engined car. However, I have never seen a full study of this. So again, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
You seem to be doing a lot of doom and gloom talking without any experience.
What you consider doom and gloom I consider sensible questioning of the underlying assumptions in a purchase.
But any part of a car can fail.
Precisely! And the more parts the greater chance of failure, i.e. system inoperability.
@Morea
Turbochargers are not complex. Mechanically, they’re incredibly simple. It doesn’t get much simpler.
TDIs, OTOH, are complex and VW’s not known for their quality.
Veedub/audi TDI is POS. BMW 335d has twin turbo & it is simply the most reliable E90 series available in US market. It never suffers HPFP problems that plague 335i. I gladly take my chances on 335d over its petrol counterparts.
Change your oil at the required intervals with the correct oil will go along way to lengthening the life of a turbo. They’ve got to float on a cushion of oil, not varnish.
I bought a 2010 VW Golf TDI last May,before the federal tax credit expired – so that’s $1300 back in my pocket. Besides that, if you go strictly by EPA numbers, the “real world” mileage results are much higher than stated. I average consistently in the low 40’s, approx. 525 miles from a 15 gallon tank, and never dip below 35mpg in city driving. On the contrary, both Hybrid and Gasoline MPG numbers are usually a bit lower, sometimes disappointingly so, that what is reflected in the EPA numbers. I may be paying 30 cents more per gallon for diesel, but dollar-for-dollar, I’m still WAY ahead of most other gasoline cars. Otherwise, it’s not just about the fuel economy, but the driving dynamics of the whole car – 236 ft./lbs of torque with a 6-speed manual, superb ride and handling, a high level of refinement, and the versatility of a hatchback. Try and find all those characteristics in one vehicle – they are few and far between. For me, I can’t ask for much more value in a vehicle. A slight sticker price premium? Yes, but a great value nonetheless. Let’s compare apples to apples here.
You’ve got to ask yourself one question: “Do I feel lucky?” Well do ya, punk?
The problem with turbos is that they last longer than the warranty but not longer than the rest of the car. Timing when to sell the car is critical for the overall cost of ownership equation.
I think that all of the criticisms of the complexity and engineering expertise/ expense needed to make a modern clean diesel explains exactly why there will never be a FORD diesel sold in the US.