Re: Diesel Subaru at 200 hp - New version

I'm pretty sure that gallon is larger than the US gallon, and, the diesels tested are not the same as the clean-running ones we're about to get in the US.

Apples and oranges.

An Imp Gallon is larger than in the US, but why does that make a difference? As long as they are all measured in the same gallons, the relative difference is the same; the diesel gets 40-45% better mileage than the gas equivalent and the fuel is not 40-45% more expensive.

Don't get too excited about the greater efficiency of the diesels in the US. Every time the government crams cleaner diesel down our throats, mileage goes down, at least, that's what the diesel mechanic said who's computer I fix when I quizzed him on the subject. Something on the order of 30% less miles per gallon of diesel now than in '94, but take it as anecdotal. If I believed in conspiracies I might say the government is slowly removing the benefits of diesel, but I neither drive a diesel nor want to lose sleep at night over the powers that be.

~Brian

Hmmm... maybe. But, diesel fuel has a significantly higher energy density than gasoline and the engines seem to last a bunch longer. If Subaru brings them to this side of the pond, I'll certainly consider one.

If they built a gas engine as heavy as the average diesel it would possibly last longer too.

At any rate, in North America the cost per "therm" is about the same for gas vs diesel fuel on the open market, and if and when "clean diesel" becomes commonplace, the cost of deisel fuel will be adjusted so the advantage diesel provides efficiency-wize will be very close to cancelled out. They will leave a little "carrot" to encourage diesel use if refinery capacity produces adequate diesel to support it.

In Ontario, the price of diesel is less than 5% more expensive than gas. Diesel contains about 15% more energy per litre, so there is still a 10% efficiency gain; which is substantial.

Cool!

Here in Connecticut, 87 octane is ~ $3.25, diesel is $4.25.

I had a chance to ride in, then drive a VW Jetta deisel this week from Pittsburgh to College Station. The damn thing get 55 mpg on hilly state roads, and is a blast to drive. 600 miles on a tank of deisel? I'm definitely considering a deisel.

-John O

What year?

A.) Edmunds doesn't list a Jetta diesel for 2008

B.) Diesel fuel is 31% more costly in my state than regular gas ($3.25 vs. $4.25) Therefore, based on fuel cost per mile, you're getting a

36 MPG Highway gasoline car, and that doesn't include the higher purchase cost of the diesel engine.

The bottom line, just like hybrids, is to do ALL the math. Doing only the MPG math is pointless.

Maybe it'll be advantageous to you, but maybe it really won't.

Speaking of hybrids. Now that they've been around for a while, is there any preliminary data that tell what the real life battery longevity might be?

DK

Good question. I haven't seen anything.

I know someone with a 1st generation Prius that's still going very strong, and I still see some original Insights on the road.

Hmm, maybe 06 or 07. I don't know.

Good point, but still, 36 mpg is good for a car that size. It's not at all like a little 2.2l four cyl econobox optimized for economy...this is a nice car with a *lot* of power and quickness.

-John O

That is one of the beauties of diesel; they are generally not high horsepower (because they rev so low), but they have a lot of torque for their size.

No doubt about that at all, I've driven one myself.

Are you SURE it gets 55 MPG?

The last year Edmunds lists a TDI Jetta, 2006, the manual shift version is rated for 41 MPG, the automatic for 42, on the highway.

That's 28/29 when price adjusted to gas in my area, but the gas V6 version claims 30 MPG with an automatic transmission.

I'm not saying there aren't advantages to diesels, but...

Hi,

In talking w/ a Toyota salesman even before I read that particular article (late '06?), I got the impression the "clean running" models ARE the models that have been available in Europe for some time. His take on the diesel situation was that the US needed to complete the switch to "cleaner" diesel fuel (supposedly late '07--dunno if it's actually complete thoughout the country) before Toyota would consider bringing any of 'em in here. According to him, the older "dirty" fuel would cause endless problems w/ the "new" engines. OTOH, my next door neighbor, a truck driver, and the guys on a Mercedes group I was reading when trying to learn about some of their diesels, both claim some of the new engines have their problems w/ the "clean" fuel. I dunno which stories to believe, which to discount...

If it's apples to oranges, I think the problem probably goes deeper than simply whether the engines are identical on either side of the pond.

Rick

t to get in =A0the

You can count on anything going on sale here being designed for ultra low sulfur diesel. Don't think that's what's now available at every pump, but we've been running a fleet of 330+ buses on it for a couple of years. One tricky sidebar: new nanotube filter technology (like Audi uses in its race engines) blows a stream of superheated (1200+ degree) exhaust through the tubes to clear them. Works okay at the track or on a bus exhaust stack located 8' off the ground, but how do you vent that at ground level on the street? Liability risks aside, could be useful to discourage tailgaters.

Interesting sidebar to low-sulfur fuel...

I bicycle a lot. Most stations in my area now advertise low-sulfur fuel. As I ride in traffic, I notice a definite improvement in diesel cleanliness. A really BIG improvement! I can also pick out Bio-diesel.

I've also noticed that low sulfur kerosene burns far cleaner in my wood shop heater. My wife is very sensitive to smell, and even she comments how much cleaner the heater seems to be running, and she doesn't know different fuel is available.

I really wish I could have purchased a small turbo-diesel (like Toyota offers the rest of the world) in my '05 Tacoma 4x4, as I'd like trade the lugging power for the "car-like" V6 performance I have to pay for in order to have decent towing power. After all, I don't race my Tacoma, as it's a truck...

Europe's standards from Dieselnet.com:

Effective 1994.10, a maximum sulfur limit of 0.2% (wt.) was introduced for all gas oils, including diesel fuel. The minimum cetane number was 49.

1996.10: A maximum sulfur limit of 0.05% (wt.) = 500 ppm for diesel fuel. 2000.01: A maximum sulfur limit of 350 ppm and cetane number of 51 for diesel fuel. 2005.01: A maximum sulfur limit of 50 ppm for diesel fuel. "Sulfur-free" 10 ppm sulfur diesel fuel must be available for highway vehicles. 2009.01: A maximum sulfur limit of 10 ppm ("sulfur-free") for diesel fuel for highway and nonroad vehicles.

And the corresponding US standards:

Highway Diesel Fuel

500 ppm: Sulfur limit of 500 ppm = 0.05% (wt.) became effective in October 1993. This fuel, commonly referred to as the low sulfur diesel fuel, was introduced to facilitate sulfate particulate emission reductions, which were necessary for meeting the 1994 emission standards for heavy-duty highway engines. 15 ppm: Diesel fuel of maximum sulfur level of 15 ppm will be available for highway use beginning in June 2006. This fuel, referred to as the ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD), was legislated by the EPA to enable catalyst-based emission control devices, such as diesel particulate filters and NOx adsorbers, which will be necessary for meeting the 2007-2010 emission standards for heavy-duty engines, as well as the Tier 2 light-duty standards. Nonroad Diesel Fuels 500 ppm: Sulfur limit of 500 ppm becomes effective in June 2007 for nonroad, locomotive and marine fuels. 15 ppm: Sulfur limit of 15 ppm (ULSD) becomes effective in June 2010 for nonroad fuel, and in June 2012 for locomotive and marine fuels. The ULSD has been legislated for nonroad engines to enable advanced emission control systems for meeting the Tier 4 nonroad emission standards

Well, I wouldn't bet my life on it. But, the guy gets 600+ miles per tank in combined driving, has had the car for about a year, and says that the dashboard mpg display is accurate.

-John O