Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

No diesel: A costly revolution the car companies could do without

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-01-18, 06:06 AM
  #16  
4TehNguyen
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
4TehNguyen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 26,059
Received 51 Likes on 46 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Lexus2000
I don't think this would turn out well. We've already seen what happens when auto makers are not regulated, they made gas guzzling death traps. IMO auto regulations are one of the rare cases where said regulations actually benefit the consumer and industry.
if regulations were removed, people would suddenly not care about having a safe car?
4TehNguyen is offline  
Old 03-01-18, 06:33 AM
  #17  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 31,367
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
if regulations were removed, people would suddenly not care about having a safe car?
People would still worry. Not all. But car manufacturers would not always put the safety systems in cars if they didn’t have to. I seem to remember someone on here who argues that ABS are not needed or unsafe, so manufacturers will not add if they don’t have to.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 03-01-18, 06:48 AM
  #18  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,409
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill


People would still worry. Not all. But car manufacturers would not always put the safety systems in cars if they didn’t have to. I seem to remember someone on here who argues that ABS are not needed or unsafe, so manufacturers will not add if they don’t have to.


I strongly disagree with that. In the 1950s and early 1960s, before safety-standards were mandated, there was relatively little concern for vehicle-safety, despite vehicle-injury and death statistics that, in comparison to today, would look like a slaughterhouse. Ford offered seat belts, padded dashes, and flexible, collapsing steering columns in the mid-1950s as an option...very few takers. The ill-fated Tucker Torpedo of 1948 went even further than that...no dice. Even after the first wave of regulations were implemented, in 1971, Lincoln and the Chrysler Imperial offered, as an option, a primitive version of what would be today's ABS...again, very few takers. GM tried a few years later, in the mid-70s, with air-bags......well, you get the picture.

Of course, that doesn't mean that manufacturers, at the time, were not also guilty of some serious (and inexcusable) neglect, either, usually due to cost-cutting, such as with the Ford Pinto's frame-rail/gas-tank location and the general underpinnings/suspension of early versions of the Chevy Corvair.

One must also remember that much of the advance in vehicle-safety was not only in the vehicles themselves, but in safer roads. Flush guard-rails, the re-engineering of steep mountain grades and sharp curves, the advent of the Interstate highway system, safety-medians to lessen head-on collisions, cloverleaf interchanges, traffic-flow/control devices, more vigorous enforcement of DUI/DW laws, and many other advances also greatly helped.

......now, back to diesels.

Last edited by mmarshall; 03-01-18 at 06:56 AM.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-01-18, 07:01 AM
  #19  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 31,367
Received 64 Likes on 55 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
I strongly disagree with that. In the 1950s and early 1960s, before safety-standards were mandated, there was relatively little concern for vehicle-safety, despite vehicle-injury and death statistics that, in comparison to today, would look like a slaughterhouse. Ford offered seat belts, padded dashes, and flexible, collapsing steering columns in the mid-1950s as an option...very few takers. The ill-fated Tucker Torpedo of 1948 went even further than that...no dice. Even after the first wave of regulations were implemented, in 1971, Lincoln and the Chrysler Imperial offered, as an option, a primitive version of what would be today's ABS...again, very few takers. GM tried a few years later, in the mid-70s, with air-bags......well, you get the picture.

Of course, that doesn't mean that manufacturers, at the time, were not also guilty of some serious (and inexcusable) neglect, either, usually due to cost-cutting, such as with the Ford Pinto's frame-rail/gas-tank location and the general underpinnings/suspension of early versions of the Chevy Corvair.

One must also remember that much of the advance in vehicle-safety was not only in the vehicles themselves, but in safer roads. Flush guard-rails, the re-engineering of steep mountain grades and sharp curves, the advent of the Interstate highway system, safety-medians to lessen head-on collisions, cloverleaf interchanges, traffic-flow/control devices, more vigorous enforcement of DUI/DW laws, and many other advances also greatly helped.

......now, back to diesels.
Your argument is not very strong. They were offered as an “option” to sell more and give Ford a competitive advantage. Everyone did this and they still do. The government requirements end up forcing car manufacturers to add them, this is an excellent thing we have in NA.


Allowing cities to ban diesels is a good thing for the city. Let the city make that decision
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 03-01-18, 10:24 AM
  #20  
UDel
Lexus Fanatic
 
UDel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: ------
Posts: 12,274
Received 296 Likes on 223 Posts
Default

Or they can stop taxing gasoline so much so there does not need to be so many diesels or electrics.
UDel is offline  
Old 03-01-18, 09:57 PM
  #21  
oldcajun
Racer
 
oldcajun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 1,419
Received 49 Likes on 34 Posts
Default

I'm at the point that the level of VW cheating deserves the "death penalty". No more VW sales in the US ever! Germany created this monster and will keep the company in business if only for the political issues. The rest of the world should not keep them in business. We may never know how many American lives were lost due to the foul emissions from the cheater VW diesels.
oldcajun is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 06:33 AM
  #22  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by geko29
As the happy owner of a 335d, thank you for making the distinction.
I added that specificially for ya!

Question for you tho - as a diesel owner, how do you feel about driving behind vehicles like this...





Last edited by bagwell; 03-02-18 at 06:40 AM.
bagwell is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 06:57 AM
  #23  
geko29
Super Moderator

 
geko29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: IL
Posts: 8,003
Received 309 Likes on 237 Posts
Default

I don't often drive in Mexico, so haven't experienced the first one. And the second appears to be a gasser with a blown head gasket or stuck injector, not a diesel at all. But yeah, not a fan.
geko29 is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 12:49 PM
  #24  
riredale
Instructor
 
riredale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Oregon
Posts: 857
Likes: 0
Received 47 Likes on 36 Posts
Default

Okay, my understanding is that new diesels have gotten a LOT cleaner over the past decade or so.

So are these cities and courts proposing banning the sale and use of even these clean diesels? If so, why?

Are car companies saying they won't be producing even the newer clean diesels? Why?

It's my impression that my RX450h is very comparable to a diesel-powered RX350 (if one were produced) in terms of mileage and pollution. And I assume that a diesel engine is somewhat more expensive than a comparable gasoline engine, so perhaps the cost of a hybrid RX450h would be comparable to an RX 350 diesel. If so, then by going hybrid we get substantial increased complexity but no more diesel odor. Is that the trade-off?
riredale is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 01:15 PM
  #25  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by riredale
It's my impression that my RX450h is very comparable to a diesel-powered RX350 (if one were produced) in terms of mileage and pollution. And I assume that a diesel engine is somewhat more expensive than a comparable gasoline engine, so perhaps the cost of a hybrid RX450h would be comparable to an RX 350 diesel. If so, then by going hybrid we get substantial increased complexity but no more diesel odor. Is that the trade-off?
NO, newer clean diesels still don't come close to Hybrid tech as far as pollution/emissions....mileage yes.
bagwell is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 03:23 PM
  #26  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,409
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by UDel
Or they can stop taxing gasoline so much so there does not need to be so many diesels or electrics.

That's one of the best suggestions of all.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 03:41 PM
  #27  
Sulu
Lexus Champion
Thread Starter
 
Sulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by riredale
Okay, my understanding is that new diesels have gotten a LOT cleaner over the past decade or so.

So are these cities and courts proposing banning the sale and use of even these clean diesels? If so, why?

Are car companies saying they won't be producing even the newer clean diesels? Why?

It's my impression that my RX450h is very comparable to a diesel-powered RX350 (if one were produced) in terms of mileage and pollution. And I assume that a diesel engine is somewhat more expensive than a comparable gasoline engine, so perhaps the cost of a hybrid RX450h would be comparable to an RX 350 diesel. If so, then by going hybrid we get substantial increased complexity but no more diesel odor. Is that the trade-off?
Yes, diesels in the USA are much cleaner since 1990; they must now meet the same emissions standards as gasoline-powered cars. Diesels were cleaned up to reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions (which contributes to ground-level ozone) and particulate matter (PM) emissions (the black soot).

But diesels in Europe (specifically, the European Union) were not subject to the same, stringent NOx and PM emissions. The EU was more concerned about CO2 emissions (which is dependent upon fuel efficiency) than dirty pollution, and since diesel cars are much more fuel efficient than gasoline cars, diesel was favoured.

The newest Euro 6 diesel emissions standards are much better but still do not quite match American diesel emission standards. The automakers have found it much easier to meet Euro standards than American standards. VW's small diesels could meet Euro standards without the diesel exhaust fluid but we find out now -- after the Dieselgate scandal -- that they really should have used the exhaust fluid in North America.

As a result, there are a lot of dirty Euro 1 to Euro 5 diesel cars on the streets in the EU. European cities are now trying to ban the use of diesels -- especially the older, dirtier models -- from their streets.

Hybrid gasoline-electric vehicles are very clean, pollution-wise, cleaner than straight gasoline vehicles (which are cleaner than diesel vehicles). Fuel efficiency of hybrid vehicles tend to be better in stop-and-go city driving than diesel vehicles (because hybrids may switch off the engine when not needed) but may not be as fuel efficient as diesel vehicles in highway driving.
Sulu is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 04:41 PM
  #28  
bagwell
Lexus Champion
 
bagwell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 11,205
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
That's one of the best suggestions of all.
Gas tax is only .38 in Houston area....no biggie.
bagwell is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 04:50 PM
  #29  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,409
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by bagwell
Gas tax is only .38 in Houston area....no biggie.
Houston is also the refining center of the nation's oil industry, so the transportation costs of getting the fuel to local stations is also quite low.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-02-18, 07:28 PM
  #30  
Sulu
Lexus Champion
Thread Starter
 
Sulu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,309
Likes: 0
Received 31 Likes on 24 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by UDel
Or they can stop taxing gasoline so much so there does not need to be so many diesels or electrics.
That may be one possible method to reduce diesel car use but you can't beat the effect and immediate impact of a ban on driving diesel cars. A diesel car ban is so immediately effective that some European cities already ban diesels during high pollution days -- if air pollution is terrifically high, ban diesels driving into the city for the next day or 2 or 3 and pollution levels go down.

I am thinking that a driving ban imposed by cities can be brought into effect much more quickly than changing fuel pump taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel. Municipal politics is usually much more quickly enacted than state or federal politics (I am assuming that fuel pump prices are imposed at the federal or state level).
Sulu is offline  


Quick Reply: No diesel: A costly revolution the car companies could do without



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 PM.