Bean

iTrader: (1)

And FYI, just because a diesel makes more peak torque doesn't make it faster. If you have a wider powerband (and petrol engines of the same size do) with a higher average horsepower (petrol again) and the gearing to take advantage of it (no problem either way), then that car will be faster. The amount of torque you make over a given time period is horsepower; and that is what accelerates a car.

Diesels are slow compared to petrol engines (as in apples to apples comparisons here - you show me ***** to the wall diesel, I show you ***** to the wall petrol), they are noisy compared to petrol engines (anyone who says otherwise is deaf - I sat next to a BRAND NEW VW TDI today in traffic and it sounded like total ***), and the fuel costs A LOT more in the US... about 15% higher on average from what I've seen.

In the US, for now, it has no place except for HD trucks (where it has such a huge mileage and tow-friendly powerband advantage where it makes sense)

As for addressing global warming: Man-made global warming is a scam perpetuated by junk science and people/corporations trying to gain power and wealth. HOWEVER... the impending Energy Crisis IS real and conservation is very important in THAT regard.

rfx45

^^^ The price of diesel here in CA is only about 4%-6% difference, that's why I was curious. It would more than make up if the diesel car makes 35 mpg compared to about 25 mpg, or at least by my guess would be about the same.

Are diesel cars today, even in Europe, still loud?

-J-P-L-

In my area, regular is averaging $4.00. Diesel is averaging about $4.85.

If that price differance isn't enough, imagine if 75% of vehicles in the US were diesel? How much do you think diesel would cost then?

I think we'd be looking at $6+/gal.

It is why we've seen the recent spike for diesel shooting past the price of regular. DEMAND. Let's not create MORE demand by getting diesel cars.

That would create a huge economic problem as everything would go up even more do to shipping costs (almost everything including food is shipped by diesel trucks).

2010mRXsh

1. But, I don't think this was always the case. Wasn't diesel until recently, less expensive to operate mpg-wise? Diesel used to be cheap, I thought!

2. The Mercedes models I checked out were only $1000 more for the diesels. And that's Mercedes!

3. I don't think this is true. I thought diesel engines were simpler to understand and therefore easier to maintain. If not, I do know that for whatever reason, when you see diesels that have been maintained at all, it's easy to see ones that have gone beyond the 300,000 mile mark, no problems (mechanically). And I mean cars. I'm sure trucks are even wilder.

4. As with the above report, yes. But I don't think in the way people think. I don't know where these huge clouds of black smoke are coming from. Huge trucks run diesel, if not always, then often. Do you see huge clouds of black smoke coming from *every* truck you see on the road? I don't. I know all the Mercedes diesels (the late models) I've seen were just that--the badge only. No sound, no smoke, nothing.

5. Every car on the road wouldn't sound like they were diesel trucks, because diesel cars aren't diesel trucks! Old diesel cars still running around may sound awful, and I don't know the reason for this. Maybe extremely poor maintenance? Someone who was around back in the day could confirm.

6. Performance is not bad. Miles per gallon is better than gas. (What??)

7. Now THIS is likely true. As with the above report, there's less diesel in a barrel of oil than gas. I would think this would be a cause for major concern, actually. How much do we rely on trucks to get us stuff? If cars increased demand for diesel that trucks need, the price of everything will go up (more).

I think the ratio I read a little bit ago was something like 85/15 gas/diesel. But I could be wrong. This is what led up to the whole Spain thing.

This was not intended as a singling out of this poster, but there was a list of items that included others' points, and these struck me as mostly not exactly correct. This may seem to be the case now, given a limited sample, but not exactly.

Lil4X

The clouds of smoke you see coming from a diesel engine under load (known as blackstacking) is caused by incomplete combustion of the incoming fuel-air charge. Modern electronic controls have minimized this effect, but it still exists. Watch a diesel-electric locomotive strain hard to get a long string of heavy-laden freight cars underway or climb a steep grade. Even with very sophisticated fuel management, that black plume announces the presence of a diesel at work.

Because EPA standards tend to favor diesels, this emission of particulate carbon (soot) is not evaluated in most test procedures. While diesels are inherently low in CO emissions (they and electric vehicles are used exclusively in mines, for example, where CO could be a serious problem) and can be improved in NOx and SOx emissions, they are not really "clean" - as Lexmex and others have indicated.

Diesels like gas turbines are extremely efficient at constant speed - which accounts for their popularity in applications where constant-speed operation represents a good portion of their service, such as in ship's propulsion systems, generators, pumps, or over-the-road trucks. Their performance advantage falls off a bit when put into stop-and-go service, although they do retain a wide margin of reliability simply by eliminating most of the engines' electrical system.

As Ron noted, the American experience with passenger-car diesels was poisoned by the GM experiment with the 350 V8 Diesel. Buyers paid a premium price for their Cadillac or Oldsmobile to be delivered with a diesel engine, but most began to fail catastrophically within two years. Replacement was usually handled under warranty - replacement with another diesel engine. As you might expect these too failed, and some of the million-plus customers began to scream loudly and publicly.

They were trapped in a nightmare scenario from which there was no escape. The only way GM would honor their warranty was to replace the failing engine with another similarly flawed product that had been designed to be manufactured alongside gas 350's on many of the same assembly lines and rushed into production. GM did not understand the subtleties of a 4-stroke diesel (the popular "Jimmy" diesels used in commercial service were 2-stroke engines) and their dealer network was ill-prepared for the onslaught of troubles.

Many owners converted their diesel cars to gas engines at no small expense out of their own pockets. A cottage industry grew up across the country of shops that specialized in this conversion to a standard GM small block engine what was proven reliable. I had a couple of friends who owned Olds or Caddy diesels and took this option simply for economic reasons. While GM would replace their diesel with another diesel that might go a year or two without serious problems, used GM diesel cars fell to a price on the used market to HALF that of their gas-engined siblings. If you rolled off the lot in a $20K (1979) Oldsmobile 98, it was instantly discounted to $10K.

For $6K there were a number of shops that would yank that oil-burner and replace it with a gas engine. One of my friends took this option after fighting the diesel for over two years and ended up with a very nice Olds '98 that served his family well for over 120K miles. He even sold it for something near bluebook price too.

Add to this fiasco the shrinking difference between gasoline and diesel prices, and "diesel" no longer made economic sense. It was a sales "gimmick" like that of hybrids that could not justify their premium prices on savings at the pump. Jeep's recent experiment of offering their 4 cyl (Peugeot) and 6 cyl (Mercedes) "Common Rail Diesel" in some of their smaller lines looked promising, but never really took off in the domestic market, thanks to the GM fiasco with the 350 Diesel. Evidently the American public hasn't quite forgotten their experience with the little engine that couldn't.

mmarshall

No. That is not correct. Diesel now costs more than regular (and in some cases more than premium) because it is simply more expensive to produce. The EPA has mandated the new low-sulfur diesel fuel nationwide, which cannot be produced as cheaply as the former high-sulfur fuel we had. However, if demand eventually does increase enough, the price may come down a little simply due to economics of scale....right now, the oil companies don't have much demand for diesel fuel other then large trucks and diesel locomotives, and they are forced to produce an expensive fuel for limited demand in the auto market, thereby keeping economics of scale up.

marshmallo

I have never been a huge fan. This article from the IEEE explains some of
the minuses of the fuel.

http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/jun08/6341

SLegacy99

I believe that MB's profit margin is reduced on those vehicles because the premium is only $1000 and the technology costs more than that, specifically the bluetec.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

Not true in the UK - diesel is more expensive than gasoline.

Check it out:

http://www.petrolprices.com/

At pounds 1.45/ltr max for diesel, that's (x2 x 3.8) $11 a gallon!

Bean

iTrader: (1)

Nice find.

RON430

I thought that too. That's why I posted it in #15.

bob2200

I had a diesel Mercedes from 1975-1995. It had no acceleration, but other than that it was a great car. But today's diesels are quite different. They keep the glow plugs operating for a long period, for less smoking, and thus they burn out after a while. Also, there is a lot of electronics; whereas my old Mercedes had essentially no electronics. So, I don't think the high trouble-free mileages you got on older diesels can be expected with the new ones. On the other hand, you now get better acceleration and less smoke (but the smoke never bothered me, only the people behind me).

-J-P-L-

So it would only cost $2,200.00 to fill an 18-wheeler up in the UK. Not bad.

gengar

The average I mentioned is for all of Europe. I think there were three or four countries for which diesel is already more expensive than gas, with the UK being one of them.

Also, as I mentioned, diesel catching up to gasoline prices in Europe is a recent trend.

leedogg

A big thing that I havent seen mentioned is smell. Diesels smell. And they make cities smell. This was a big problem over in Europe.