Why I don't have/want a diesel:
Average Local Prices Today
87 $3.30
94 $3.55
Diesel $3.79
Those prices are typical in this area. Since I have 2 vehicles that run on 87 and get 25mpg for the truck and 30mpg for the car that extra 50 cents is a real downer.
Some quick math. Lets drive 20,000 miles/yr.
Let's say a gas car gets 30 mpg avg. and fuel for the year averages $3.25. You'd need 667 gallons and it would cost $2168.
Let's say the oil burner gets 40 mpg avg. and fuel costs average $3.75/gallon. You'd need 500 gallons and it would cost $1875.
In this case, you'd save almost $300/yr in fuel...not very much.
Knurled wrote:bastomatic wrote: One argument I can't dispute is MOAR TORQUES.I can. Here's my argument: I can not think of any example of turbodiesel that makes more torque than an equivalent sized gas engine running an equivalent amount of boost would make. "But," says the oilburner fan, "gas engines can't handle that much boost!" Counterargument: Build a gas engine as thoroughly overkill beefy with respect to internals and cooling system, and I betcha it would.
woulda, coulda, shoulda. So, you go and spend thousand and thousands on new crank, rods, pistons, maybe a new block, etc. for the gasser to get close the the diesel output. Depending on the car, I'll just put a tuner on it and start cranking up the numbers nearly as high as I want. It's apples to oranges here.
I bought my Dodge with the Cummins because I wanted/needed to tow regularly. You will NOT find a gas engine that would pull the loads I did and even get half the economy and be sold at 365,000 miles for the same I paid for it at 220,000 and the engine still had not been opened. With those parameters in mind, there's no comparison. And those parameters are what I bought the truck for.
Now take my DD, I get 50+ MPG consistently, have a car that's still fun to drive and if/when I sell it I will break even at worst. Again, find me a gas car that fits those parameters. There aren't any. Heck, find me a car that seats 5 (three really should be kids) and get's 50+ MPG in real world driving.
I'm not saying that diesel is king, or that gas is stupid. Just saying, people buy diesels for certain things that just can't be had with a gas engine.
And yeah, diesel is 20-sumthin percent more. But when you have the possibility of not even buying fuel, well....
When oil no longer exists, you can contact me for locally grown diesel fuel. 
FSP_ZX2 wrote: Some quick math. Lets drive 20,000 miles/yr. Let's say a gas car gets 30 mpg avg. and fuel for the year averages $3.25. You'd need 667 gallons and it would cost $2168. Let's say the oil burner gets 40 mpg avg. and fuel costs average $3.75/gallon. You'd need 500 gallons and it would cost $1875. In this case, you'd save almost $300/yr in fuel...not very much.
Let's take it further, with advertised numbers.
Jetta SE w/ Connectivity 5-spd Manual $20,420 26/36mpg
Jetta TDi (Connectivity incl) 6-spd $23,195 30/42mpg
With a difference of $2,775, you'd have to keep that TDi for close to ten years, to recoup that "fuel savings"
You guys are missing resale. Let me know how much more that TDI is worth in 5 years than the gasser given the same mileage. The TDI will hold its value WAY better.
I bought my older TDI, drove 60k miles with average mileage of 50mpg, then sold it for nearly what I paid for it. That would be exceedingly unlikely with the equivalent gas powered model.
In reply to Nathan JansenvanDoorn:
Fair enough. Quick check on NADA:
9yo Jetta GLS w/ 180k $5,250 clean retail
9yo Jetta GLS TDi w/ 180k $8,250 clean retail
So, diesel is a wash, financially. 
Doh!
Buy-in and resale is a wash, but the fuel savings of diesel over those nine years can buy a lot of beer. 
RealMiniDriver wrote: Doh! Buy-in and resale is a wash, but the fuel savings of diesel over those nine years can buy a lot of beer.
Yeah, but then you're stuck driving a diesel car.
yamaha wrote: In reply to alfadriver: Cummins may very well still not run it.......both Chevy and Ford are. What is more pointless is that the diesel engine emissions carried over to agricultural machinery as well......
As long as the emissions requirements are met, it doesn't matter how it's done. I do realize that our products run urea, but I don't see that as a big deal. Ran into a guy who runs tractor trailers- his fleet also runs DEF. That being said, I'll wager very strongly that Cummins will use SCR and urea injection technology. It works.
Not sure what you mean about ag machinery. Is it bad that the tools that we use to grow food have good emissions? Or bad that they have an exemption? I do understand that all diesels, including marine, are getting emissions controls on them. Considering what unregulated diesels produce, I'm not sure why that's a bad thing.
yamaha wrote: When oil no longer exists, you can contact me for locally grown diesel fuel.
you do realize that alcohol does grow as well, don't you? Even better, butenol is a more even replacement for gas, and it grows, too.
FSP_ZX2 wrote: Some quick math. Lets drive 20,000 miles/yr. Let's say a gas car gets 30 mpg avg. and fuel for the year averages $3.25. You'd need 667 gallons and it would cost $2168. Let's say the oil burner gets 40 mpg avg. and fuel costs average $3.75/gallon. You'd need 500 gallons and it would cost $1875. In this case, you'd save almost $300/yr in fuel...not very much.
but in 10 yrs.. (I usually keep cars at least that long) then the savings would be $3000 … makes it a bit more of a choice …now you'd have to factor in the increased costs associated with maint. of the Diesel
Toyman01 wrote: It gets driven about 3000-4000 miles a year so fuel economy was a moot point. I would never recoup the extra buy in for a diesel. Having a $10k-$15k diesel truck sitting in the yard is stupid when a $3K gas truck will do the same thing. $7000-$12000 will buy a lot of gas.
Exactly my reasoning too. Also gas engines tend to better on short trips and left to sit. If you do these with diesels they tend to be angry with you.
Diesel prices used to be cheaper than gas, now they are not but I have noticed that diesel is cheaper in summer and more expensive in winter.
fidelity101 wrote: Diesel prices used to be cheaper than gas, now they are not but I have noticed that diesel is cheaper in summer and more expensive in winter.
They still are, by almost half, until you get caught with an aux tank full of off-road diesel plumbed into your fuel line.
bastomatic wrote: In the Detroit area, the higher cost of diesel would seem to offset the fuel savings entirely, let alone the much higher purchase price over a gasoline engined vehicle, so you aren't really saving money.
I was curious. Detroit lists $3.103 for regular gas, and $3.971 for diesel. So lets take a Jetta 2.0 liter with a manual (28mpg combined) and a diesel with a manual (34 mpg combined) and drive them 2000 miles in a year. The gas version eats up 71.42 gallons and costs $221.64 The diesel eats up 58.82 gallons at a cost of $233.58. It looks like you can get them for the same price new, so you actually loose some money on the diesel in fuel costs.
That rating however comes from fueleconomy.org. People I have spoken with routinely get 50mpg+ with their tdi, so that would drop your annual cost to like $160. Assuming equal purchase price, you'd save a bit. However, that might be offset by urea costs and more mileage spent trying to find diesel.
And buying used, the Tdi always commands a premium when gas gets over $4. So yeah, it actually doesn't add up for most folks.
do all the newer (VW) diesels use urea ? I thought that the smaller cars, Golf, Jetta .. etc didn't require the use of urea
It's not just about money. Having owned gas and diesel tow rigs, I can't see going back to a gasser.
First truck was a Suburban with a 350. It got 14 mpg on its best day and 8mpg towing a single car trailer with an averaged-sized car. It wailed and revved and shifted like crazy towing that ~5,000 pound trailer. But, when not towing, it was a nice driving vehicle.
Next real tow vehicle was a 1992 Dodge Cummins. Relaible, simple, 21 mpg not towing and 17mpg towing. Loved it. Loved that I could just motor for hours and hours and hours non-stop. The engine just worked. It was as close to a joy to tow with as anything I can imagine. I once drove cross country and shut the engine off one time. You can fuel them while running, no real safety issue.
Sold that to get something a bit newer and more refined, and now have a 2000 F350 with the 7.3. Much like the Dodge, the engine just seems relaxed and happy cruising on the highway with a huge freaking trailer behind it. I've towed nearly 10,000 pounds, and it'll go into overdrive and just plug along at 2000 RPM and 70 mph. I yanked that trailer up a 6 mile long, 6% grade and was still doing 40mph at the top. It used more fuel (best I've seen is 15 mpg) but it's quieter than the Dodge and more comfortable.
Really, you can argue money all you want (yes, $100 oil changes sting) but really it comes down to preference. Would I buy another diesel car? Maybe not so much. But when this Ford gets long in the tooth I already have my next truck purchase planned- the last of the pre-DEF Duramaxes. (No brand loyalty here. grin)
wbjones wrote: do all the newer (VW) diesels use urea ? I thought that the smaller cars, Golf, Jetta .. etc didn't require the use of urea
I believe you are correct. Up thru 2013 the Golf/Jetta TDI do not use urea. It is believed that will change either later in '14 or for '15 with the introduction of an updated engine. The urea engine should provide better fuel economy since the urea allows for leaner running (diesels like that but they tend to pollute more) while improving emissions.
Don't like diesel? Good. Don't buy it. More for me.
http://www.racer.com/video-mazda-p2-diesel-in-car/article/324280/
I would defiantly take this diesel, not sure what the towing capacity is LOLz
Diesel makes sense for me. In the $4000 neighborhood it's hard to find a car that has a quarter of a million miles left on it, let alone one that'll deliver 50+ MPG. But that doesn't mean I think gas sucks.
volvoclearinghouse wrote: But when this Ford gets long in the tooth I already have my next truck purchase planned- the last of the pre-DEF Duramaxes. (No brand loyalty here. *grin*)
I just bought an LLY Duramax for those same reasons. It cost $2k more (used) than I paid for my last F-150 (used) in a similar trim level. Fuel spend is about a wash unloaded and much better while towing. I'm getting 20-21 unloaded and 17-18 towing vs 15.5 unloaded and 11 towing with the F-150.
All I need is for the trasmission to break one less time over 5 years of ownership and I'll break even.
Not a money-saving proposition, but it's nice to be able to tow in a more relaxed state of mind....and to be honest, I like that it makes cool turbo noises and can lay down stipes just about whenever I feel like it. 
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
My diesel Suburbans have been some of the most useful, well-rounded vehicles I've ever owned. If I could have bought my Fiat as a diesel, I would've.
So why does diesel fuel cost more that gasoline now. Taxes? The cost to remove sulfur?
Plain old BS?
So far, my experiences with diesel have been positive. I have a friend who loves diesel stuff. His daily driver is a real unicorn: a 1996 VW Passat manual TDI wagon. He also has a 2004 Chevy Silverado 4x4 2500 HD with a Duramax for his plow/tow rig. If you went to the Challenge this year, we towed the XJ-R down there with the truck and took the VW as a support vehicle.
The wagon cracked 250k miles on it on the way back from Gainesville, and after having the exhaust replaced and a couple other services performed, it runs better than when it was new. We were knocking down almost 50mpg with 3 dudes and loads of crap in the wagon. 
Try and do that with a 250k mile gas wagon.
The Silverado performed well, but the mileage was not nearly as stellar. We got 12-13mpg consistently and 13.95 mpg on our best tank, besting our previous towing best with Pseudosport's old Suburban by only .5 mpg. Then again, the Suburban did that only once, and was running without a MAP sensor and was getting 7-8mpg for much of the trip, so the diesel wins out in the long run. Also, the Silverado was not constantly trying to kill us like the Suburban was trying to do, so chalk that up as a plus. It towed like nothing was behind it.
Would I buy a new diesel car? Maybe. I have done a lot of research on the newer 2009-up VW 2.0 diesels, and while I like them, I'm weary. I owned a VW once, and it was THE WORST car I've ever had. All the maintenance that is required makes my head spin as well. I drive 26k+ miles a year, so it adds up quick. I'm pretty much waiting to see what Mazda does with the new Skyactiv-D.
You'll need to log in to post.
