Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Audi’s U.S. Diesel Strategy  
User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7819 posts, RR: 5
Posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2763 times:

Some like to say diesel will never take off in the US, Audi appears to think they are wrong. Go Audi!

Quote:
In the next year or so, virtually every Audi model sold in the United States ranging from the compact A3 to the full-sized A8, will be available with a diesel engine.

Currently, only the A3 and the Q7 are available as oilburners, but starting in 2013 we will see diesel versions of the A6, A8, and Q5, followed by the next-generation Audi A4 TDI.

Today in the U.S., only four automakers (five if you count Porsche, which will start selling the Cayenne Diesel in September of this year) offer diesels, namely Audi, BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Volkswagen. Between the four, they offer a total of 14 models. More and more automakers are announcing diesels (expect a Volkswagen Beetle diesel before the end of the summer and a Cadillac ATS diesel in 2013).

The rest of the article can be read [url=http://www.thedieseldriver.com/2012/05/audis-u-s-diesel-strategy-an-interview-with-wayne-killen/]here[/quote]

82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8762 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

They are just proud Germans engaged in a massive pissing war with BMW and Mercedes. They are all using Diesel as a true blue German marketing ideal. It is of no practical value here, in light vehicles anyway. Take a look at the BMW 528i. Case closed. It gets diesel fuel economy without the cost. And the diesel USA compliant hardware is still very costly by all reputable sources. $5000 per car or so. It's not a business motivated move. It's about German nationalism at the core IMO, or "image" at best. That would provide a rationale for whizzing away money, which is what these diesel products represent AFAIK.

User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2698 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Thread starter):

Some like to say diesel will never take off in the US, Audi appears to think they are wrong.

It won't take off until:

1) The US government tells the trucking lobby (which includes the Teamsters Union, among others) to kiss off and allow the sale of higher Cetane diesel fuel. Current cetane levels are around 41-42. European diesel is 50-52 cetane. Big truck engines don't mind that stuff, but smaller, higher-reving diesel engines such as those in cars need higher cetane.

For those of you familiar with Octane levels, American diesel fuel is analogous to the crap gasoline they used to sell in Eastern Europe, India and other such places - around 78 Octane, as I recall. High-performance and fuel economy simply are not possible with crappy fuel. A VW Diesel 2.0L Golf is rated 42mpg (highway) in the US, and the same car gets 65mpg highway in Europe. While a few mpg might be explained by a different test, there is not much rocket science behind driving in a straight line ant about 70-75 MPH - the main difference is the quality of the fuel.

2) The government (Federal and State) stops excessive taxes on diesel and allows diesel to be sold at a price commensurate with its production and distribution cost, relative to gasoline. Diesel is cheaper to produce, and should by all accounts be 10-20% cheaper than gasoline at the pump.

3) The government needs to lighten up on the emissions standards for diesel. They are no longer the smokey black clouds of the past.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2695 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
It's about German nationalism at the core IMO, or "image" at best.

What are you talking about?

In Europe nearly 50% of the cars, sold by all makers, have Diesel engines.
They are also built by FIAT, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault, SEAT, Ford!, Opel (GM!), Vauxhall (GM!) and Japanese and Korean companys.

It's more about the lack of US buyers to be flexible.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/diesel/4330313

[Edited 2012-05-02 06:14:12]

[Edited 2012-05-02 06:15:20]


Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8762 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2680 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 3):
It's more about the lack of US buyers to be flexible.
Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 3):
In Europe nearly 50% of the cars, sold by all makers, have Diesel engines.
They are also built by FIAT, Peugeot-Citroen, Renault, SEAT, and Japanese and Korean companys.

AFAIK those vehicles are illegal here. Too much pollution. I always maintained this was an intentional Detroit lobbying effort, to exclude (foreign) diesel light vehicles, but that is only my speculation. Currently the US industry produces -zero- light duty diesel products AFAIK*! I would further extrapolate that that is no coincidence.

* to sell in the United States.

[Edited 2012-05-02 06:25:52]

User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7819 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2663 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
Take a look at the BMW 528i. Case closed. It gets diesel fuel economy without the cost.

It doesn't get anywhere near diesel fuel economy, it's not even close to the 320d. The F30 330d and 335d haven't been released yet but judging by the 5 series with the same engines the 328 is still going to be less economical than the diesels.

These are saloons and stationwagons diesel gets even better when it's powering an SUV, I can't understand why anyone would ever consider buying a petrol SUV.


User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2325 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2638 times:

Even Chrysler used to sell their minivans in Europe with VW 1.9 TDI diesel engine.

Too bad the USA will never see diesel take off due to lobbying and regulations..

TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12935 posts, RR: 25
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2584 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):
The government needs to lighten up on the emissions standards for diesel. They are no longer the smokey black clouds of the past.

Exactly because of emission standards.

Proof: Everywhere emission standards allow more pollution, more pollution is what happens.

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 3):
It's more about the lack of US buyers to be flexible.

There is some anxiety over availability of diesel fuel, but that is getting better with time.

I certainly will be considering diesel when it's time to replace my car, which is hopefully not too soon.

My friend has a new Jetta TDI he's very happy with, and getting 44+ MPG.

I've driven one, and think it's a great value for money. Nice low-end torque, nice interior fit and finish, half the price of my current 330i.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3719 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2585 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):
A VW Diesel 2.0L Golf is rated 42mpg (highway) in the US, and the same car gets 65mpg highway in Europe. While a few mpg might be explained by a different test, there is not much rocket science behind driving in a straight line ant about 70-75 MPH - the main difference is the quality of the fuel.

It's not a "few mpg", it's 20%. 13 mpg.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):
2) The government (Federal and State) stops excessive taxes on diesel and allows diesel to be sold at a price commensurate with its production and distribution cost, relative to gasoline. Diesel is cheaper to produce, and should by all accounts be 10-20% cheaper than gasoline at the pump.

Bogus argument, diesel is taxed $.05/gallon more than gas. Insignificant.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 2):
3) The government needs to lighten up on the emissions standards for diesel. They are no longer the smokey black clouds of the past.

Why? Do you believe because you can' see it, it won't kill you? Think again.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/07/110713211942.htm

I don't believe the diesel stubbornness of the German manufacturers (primarily Volkswagen AG) is nationalistic. Partly egotistical for sure, but mostly a business decision. They have invested billions into diesel and they want to retain their lead in a leading fuel source. You can bet that VW is watching other alternative sales with an eagle eye, they sold 58% of the diesels in the US last year..
The real Audi question becomes, will VW allow Audi to produce any or all of the electric and hybrid models they have been announcing recently. Or will they continue to play the media with electric vapor ware? Also, for a little perspective, Audi sold 604 diesels in the US last month. Total.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2572 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 7):
Exactly because of emission standards.

Proof: Everywhere emission standards allow more pollution, more pollution is what happens.

Emission standards which are extremely difficult to achieve (particularly with the low-quality fuel) were imposed apparently with the express purpose to get rid of diesel cars.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 8):
It's not a "few mpg", it's 20%. 13 mpg.

Oops, I used imperial. But still, 4.3 L/100 converts to 54.7 miles per US gallon, and 65.7 miles per Imperial gallon. That's a 30% improvement.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 8):
Bogus argument, diesel is taxed $.05/gallon more than gas. Insignificant.

Source?

Quoting mham001 (Reply 8):
I don't believe the diesel stubbornness of the German manufacturers (primarily Volkswagen AG) is nationalistic. Partly egotistical for sure, but mostly a business decision.

It was an energy policy decision by various European governments to promote diesel by taxing it less in order to reduce oil consumption and imports. France led the way, not Germany. 30-40 years ago, you had diesels all over France already - the Germans started building them to gain market share in France, before it caught on in other markets.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12935 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Emission standards which are extremely difficult to achieve (particularly with the low-quality fuel) were imposed apparently with the express purpose to get rid of diesel cars.

And not pollution?

Apologies to aloges, but:




Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinemham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3719 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 2541 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Oops, I used imperial. But still, 4.3 L/100 converts to 54.7 miles per US gallon, and 65.7 miles per Imperial gallon. That's a 30% improvement.

I was talking only about the US vs EU mpg test (~20%). I did not realize you used Imperial too. Knock off another 18% or so for that which gets you very close to that 42 mpg US you listed earlier.

It's starting to sound like the diesel guys are pushing this low cetene fuel argument now that the low-sulfur conversion has not magically produced these super cars they promised. Remember that? What has really been happening all this time is that the media starts quoting EU mpgs which are meaningless here, but they do wow the crowds.


Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 9):
Source?
www.epa.gov. (or something similar) Look for yourself.

[Edited 2012-05-02 12:24:29]

User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12935 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2524 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 11):

It's starting to sound like the diesel guys are pushing this low cetene fuel argument now that the low-sulfur conversion has not magically produced these super cars they promised.

42 MPG for a powerful engine on a mid-sized sedan that meets EPA requirements sounds like a super car to me!

Also seems to blow away the CAFE:

Quote:

standards for passenger vehicles will rise from the current 27.5 mpg to 35.7 mpg by 2015



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently onlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3761 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2511 times:

Problem with Diesel is the higher emission of nitrous oxides. This can be fixed, but it is relatively expensive. In Europe, the standards are different between gas and diesel driven cars - not much, but the difference is there.

User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2488 times:

Quoting mham001 (Reply 11):
I was talking only about the US vs EU mpg test (~20%). I did not realize you used Imperial too. Knock off another 18% or so for that which gets you very close to that 42 mpg US you listed earlier.

It's starting to sound like the diesel guys are pushing this low cetene fuel argument now that the low-sulfur conversion has not magically produced these super cars they promised. Remember that? What has really been happening all this time is that the media starts quoting EU mpgs which are meaningless here, but they do wow the crowds.

Oh the EPA - now THAT's an objective source these days  

Are you trying to tell me that cetane doesn't matter for mileage and emissions? Low cetane fuels contain high olefin levels, and it is the olefins that are the prime cause of the nasty side effects of diesel that caused diesel to fall out of favor in the US, like engine smoke, soot, gummy residue, poor engine power and even noise. Cetane improvers, such as alkyl nitrate, are sold in gas stations here and can be added to diesel fuel to improve its performance, but they don't compensate for high natural olefin content - i.e. you get some power improvement but it is no cleaner.

Tuning an engine to run on higher cetane is not that easy - not like a gasoline car. The right fuel injector pressure is particularly important (not too high, not too low), but once you find the balance, higher cetane fuels produce significantly less soot, smoke, NO2, and produce more power. You can't deny basic chemistry.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinestasisLAX From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 3287 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2421 times:

Quoting KiwiRob (Thread starter):
Some like to say diesel will never take off in the US, Audi appears to think they are wrong. Go Audi!

General Motors is FINALLY trying to market diesel cars again (after the fiasco of the Oldsmobile V-8s diesels of the late 1970s and early 1980s) with the introduction of the 2013 Chevy Cruze diesel sedan (2.0 liter diesel 4 cylinder motor, producing approximately 160 horsepower) here in the USA. Perhaps Ford will sell a diesel powered Focus in response. I would not be the least bit surprised to see the new Dodge Dart (based on a widened and lengthened Alfa Romeo platform) offered here with a diesel, given the large number of diesel motors that Fiat offers in Europe.



"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety!" B.Franklin
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6921 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2360 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 1):
light vehicles

Do those exist in the US ?

I agree that pollution must be minimized, in fact I'm against diesel engines in small cars myself (you can get a diesel Smart here). But what about the pollution that would be avoided would cars burn a lot less fuel ?



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 17, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2325 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
I agree that pollution must be minimized, in fact I'm against diesel engines in small cars myself (you can get a diesel Smart here). But what about the pollution that would be avoided would cars burn a lot less fuel ?

And the cost/pollution saved by not importing that fuel. And the easing of demand pressure, lowering the cost of fuel. And the fact that we will be sending less money to Saudi, Iran etc who use it to fund nefarious deeds. And (in the case of the US) making a big positive impact on our trade deficit, which will strengthen the dollar. The list of benefits goes on and on.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8763 posts, RR: 42
Reply 18, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2315 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 17):
The list of benefits goes on and on.

So there are many good reasons for steering demand away from wasteful vehicles, aren't there? I'm thinking of school run SUVs and other follies.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 19, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2294 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 18):
So there are many good reasons for steering demand away from wasteful vehicles, aren't there? I'm thinking of school run SUVs and other follies.

100% behind you on that one. You know of course that federal regulations (in the form of CAFE standards) created the SUV craze in the first place? They imposed restrictions on family cars, and left this big gaping loophole where if the automakers made family cars out of trucks, so instead of pushing everyone towards smaller cars, they pushed them towards bigger ones.




Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8763 posts, RR: 42
Reply 20, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2289 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 19):
You know of course that federal regulations (in the form of CAFE standards) created the SUV craze in the first place?

Yep. But unlike others, I don't think that government itself is the problem. Incompetence and bowing to lobbyism are the issues - I very much doubt A) that CAFE is the best way to reduce consumption and B) that SUVs would have been exempt from CAFE standards if not for lobbyism.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 21, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2280 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 20):
Yep. But unlike others, I don't think that government itself is the problem. Incompetence and bowing to lobbyism are the issues - I very much doubt A) that CAFE is the best way to reduce consumption and B) that SUVs would have been exempt from CAFE standards if not for lobbyism.

You can't stop lobbyism. It's gonna happen. You will always have people holding their hand out (maybe with cash in it) for government favors. It is government's job - no - their duty to say no, and to resist the proposals for complex, counterproductive solutions (such as CAFE), in favor of the simple, direct approach (such as increasing gasoline taxes).



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2359 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2280 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 19):

100% behind you on that one. You know of course that federal regulations (in the form of CAFE standards) created the SUV craze in the first place? They imposed restrictions on family cars, and left this big gaping loophole where if the automakers made family cars out of trucks, so instead of pushing everyone towards smaller cars, they pushed them towards bigger ones.

Of course now whenever they try and get stricter about SUV emissions you get people screaming about how the government is intervening in their lives and they should be able to buy whatever they want when they want it.

Quoting aloges (Reply 20):
B) that SUVs would have been exempt from CAFE standards if not for lobbyism.

The main reason that they are under a different standard is that when the CAFE laws were built SUVs were primarily used as work trucks, or as more recreational vehicles (hence the title SUV); they were too uncomfortable for most people for everyday use. Congress didn't want to hurt the businesses so they made the SUVs exempt from the stricter CAFE laws. Then the automakers learned how much money you can make catering SUVs to the mainstream public with Ford's success with the Explorer....


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8950 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

Quoting Polot (Reply 22):
Of course now whenever they try and get stricter about SUV emissions you get people screaming about how the government is intervening in their lives and they should be able to buy whatever they want when they want it.

Well, yeah, they push them towards bigger cars and then penalize the consumers for it.

If I had been dictator, I would have announce that, starting 5 years hence (to give people time to adjust their driving habits, sell off the gas guzzler they just bought while avoiding a fire sale, and give time for the automakers to design new cars), federal gas taxes would go up by X% per year, gradually. The purpose is not revenue, it's to push people towards buying more economical cars. Human behavior is to avoid penalties even if they are not in place yet, but is known to be coming.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12935 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2279 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 19):
You know of course that federal regulations (in the form of CAFE standards) created the SUV craze in the first place? They imposed restrictions on family cars, and left this big gaping loophole where if the automakers made family cars out of trucks, so instead of pushing everyone towards smaller cars, they pushed them towards bigger ones.

Plain old revisionist BS! The "family car" had long since been abandoned in favor of the minivan, and then there was the backlash against soccer moms and their minvans, so then it was on to the SUV, which thrived for a buying cycle or two, but are now totally being beat down due to their high gas cost and awkward handling, not CAFE. People know where to get their Expeditions and Yukons and Escalades and MXxyzs right now, as they have over the last few years, but they just don't want them, CAFE or not!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
25 Post contains images aloges : ...but you can elect a government whose members fulfill if you want. That's my main point.
26 Dreadnought : The minivan was a success, but not nearly as much as the SUV. Perhaps for the simple reason that men generally never wanted to be seen driving one. T
27 KiwiRob : CAFE should also apply to SUV's, then it would work as intended, allowing the SUV loophole has compromised the system. If CAFE was applied then SUV's
28 Revelation : Regardless, it is what killed off the "family car". The category of "minivan" was similarly tiny, the VW micro-bus is about all I can recall in that
29 BMI727 : That's not exactly why it happened. SUVs used to be for work and offroading, you're right about that. But it wasn't the car companies that drove SUVs
30 KiwiRob : Not at all, Bentley will sell all the SUV's they can produce, and this isn't Lambo's first foray into the SUV market, they can make a pretty good cla
31 BMI727 : That's completely the wrong thing to do. Gas costs what it costs. Taxes are a way for the government to raise the money it needs to operate and shoul
32 KiwiRob : so what's it to be, the ship has sailed or the SUV is doing just fine?
33 DiamondFlyer : Yes, up the fuel taxes to penalize those people who live in rural areas that do a majority of the work in agriculture in this country. Exactly what w
34 KiwiRob : Govt's since time began have been using taxes to influence peoples decisions and restrict freedoms, the only way to get around this is to drop tax co
35 aloges : Exempt agricultural equipment from the higher taxes. We've been doing that in Germany for ages and while there is of course some fraud, it's better t
36 KiwiRob : Just do what most other countries do and have untaxed fuel for agricultural use, then fine the crap out of people who use untaxed fuel in their passe
37 KiwiRob : I've been pulled over a couple of times for a fuel check, the cost of being found with red diesel in your tank is about 5,000 NOK, plus the residue f
38 Dreadnought : Is it not legitimate to use taxes to encourage certain behavior and discourage others? If it weren't for taxes, A pack of Marlboro would cost less th
39 Aesma : Does it ? Does it currently pay for all the military action in the middle east, patrolling of the seas to protect the tankers ?
40 Revelation : BS! The large sedans and wagons largely got torpedoed after the 70s Arab Oil Boycott. Sure, you could still get them, but that was the real tipping p
41 Post contains links mham001 : Sorry, should have been http://www.eere.energy.gov/[Edited 2012-05-03 13:29:59]
42 DiamondFlyer : It already is, at least for off road use. Doesn't change the fact that there are massive areas of this country that are hours away from large cities.
43 aloges : I think the same about urban sprawl anywhere, this just happened to be a thread about the US. Stop whining.
44 Polot : Bentley and Lamborghini will easily make it work because there are more than enough people out there who will buy their products based purely on the
45 B777LRF : The SUV is, by and large, an idiotic offering. You don't really get a lot more of usable space inside an ML or X5 than you do in an E-class or 5-serie
46 mham001 : That all seems a little hypocritical. Fact is, most suv's get better mileage than most hot cars with V12, 10 and 8's. And if you are going to trash s
47 aloges : Source, please.
48 Post contains links mham001 : Help yourself. http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/powerSearch.jsp Plenty of interesting things to see there. Lays a lot of myths to rest.
49 BMI727 : I like urban sprawl. The government should not be manipulating where I live, what I buy, or what I drive. No it's not legitimate. This is all very si
50 Revelation : Then you're agreeing with me: it's revisionist BS to say that CAFE caused the end of the land yacht. Portraying CAFE as some liberal plot to take awa
51 Dreadnought : I don't call it a liberal plot. It was simply a bad idea, spawned by cowardly politicians who did not want to be seen as increasing gasoline prices t
52 BMI727 : Not necessarily. It's just a matter of whether you believe that CAFE is useless or you believe that CAFE is a failure. Where did I say anything about
53 RayChuang : Here's why Audi can expand their turbodiesel sales in the USA: Euro6 emissions certification. Because Euro6 is very close to the EPA Tier 2 Bin 5 cert
54 Post contains links aloges : Interesting... SUVs vs. German 8 to 12 cyl vehicles (I limited it to that for the moment) tells a different story - they're no worse than SUVs.
55 KiwiRob : Clearly you've never been anywhere near a European city, I can't think of a single one which doesn't have suburbs and urban sprawl! So basically you
56 aloges : Cool! Let's start at abandoning all those backroads that nobody except the few people who on them uses.
57 Revelation : Didn't they teach you at that expensive aerospace school you are in that there is a difference between correlation and causation? You didn't. My rema
58 KiwiRob : And there were a lot of areas in the US like L.A. where they was a massive and far reaching public transport network, stupidly enough for a lot of US
59 BMI727 : Mandating airbags, seatbelts, crumple zones, and traction control is generally a good thing, although not free. But I should be able to buy as much g
60 Post contains images aloges : At some point, even you will come around and understand that certain necessities are best provided through a joint effort by the entire society - whi
61 Polot : You can already buy as much gas as you can afford, there is no cap on how much you can use. Why shouldn't the government promote being able to go far
62 BMI727 : That's fine. But I don't expect them to build an interstate to my front door (though I might move intentionally to be near one) or pay for flights to
63 Polot : But how do you propose the government pays for all the things they need? How do they maintain the highway that you want to use? How should they maint
64 BMI727 : ...but if I use more than the government thinks I should, they punish me. Straight from fueleconomy.gov: It is, so why do we need CAFE and the gas gu
65 Polot : You get a one time tax. That is not punishment on you, that is punishment on the automakers. Blame them for passing it on to you. Because the governm
66 BMI727 : It's still the same thing. The government absolutely should not be telling manufacturers what they can and cannot build outside of safety regulations
67 ikramerica : Actually, the different test is not insignificant. Nor is the fact that an MPG in the UK is not equal to an MPG in the US. UK 65mpg = US 54mpg. Imper
68 mham001 : That's an interesting approach. I did not limit suv's to 8 cyl, I didn't know that was the criteria. It is also notable that there is not a single 10
69 KiwiRob : They weren't really SUV's, the were really utility vehicles. You can't compare what was offered back then with what we have today.
70 Revelation : I guess they don't teach critical thinking there either. Why does it have to be one or the other? The early CAFE standards were not aggressive. Marke
71 RayChuang : If I remember correctly, Ricardo Engineering a few years ago demonstrated a turbodiesel engine that meets CARB ULEV-II emissions standards without goi
72 Revelation : That's unfortunate, because there are lots of reasons why Audi can fail that have nothing to do with the engine. When I last looked at cars to purcha
73 Dreadnought : Years ago my grandfather, who owned a ranch, wanted to replace his '71 Chevy C-10 pickup - which was pure utility vehicle that never left the farm (a
74 BMI727 : Then why pass CAFE? Why not just send a letter? Maybe include one of those "Way to go!!!" stickers too. And that is a line the government should not
75 Flighty : AFAIK that is a $3-5000 difference per car. Congrats, very efficient tax policy. It would also yield more urbanism which pays cash dividends as well.
76 BMI727 : What you are talking about is tyranny of the majority. People want efficient cars. And getting them is as easy as taking a trip down to the local car
77 KiwiRob : Unless you're thrashing the nuts off the car, which most people do not or are not capable of doing you'll never notice the difference, also Audi chan
78 mham001 : I read an interesting article last week on how VW is moving everything within the group to 3 platforms. Going back a few years, I recall American man
79 KiwiRob : The A3, TT, Q3 already share platforms with Seat. What VW is doing is building components sets which can be used over a variety of models.
80 Revelation : To set a direction, state an intention, to put a mechanism in place to use when needed, etc. ... and pollution be damned. Head to Beijing or Mexico C
81 BMI727 : Can the government also pass a law that mandates breathing? Reasonable emissions standards are okay, but that is not covered in CAFE or the gas guzzl
82 Revelation : Sure it is. Better fuel economy also means less pollutants in the air. There are many places in the US that don't meet clean air standards, including
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Diesel VW Passat Goes 1,527 Miles On One Tank posted Wed Oct 6 2010 01:50:39 by Springbok747
Price Of Diesel In France? posted Wed Aug 18 2010 10:06:56 by Cumulus
Unleaded V Diesel V. Hydrogen posted Fri Jul 30 2010 09:50:43 by mirrodie
US & Britain Seeking Exit Strategy In Afghanistan? posted Mon Jul 27 2009 17:42:38 by StasisLAX
European Diesel Car Sales Strong In U.S. posted Tue Jun 23 2009 18:27:09 by StasisLAX
Jaguar Introduces Twin-Turbo XF Diesel S Sedan posted Mon Dec 29 2008 23:01:23 by StasisLAX
Price Of Diesel Fuel posted Mon Dec 1 2008 12:54:50 by VC10
It's Official: First Porsche Car With A Diesel posted Fri Nov 21 2008 09:33:54 by A342
New BMW 335d Diesel Sedan Is EPA Rated At 36mpg! posted Tue Nov 11 2008 21:55:13 by StasisLAX
Diesel Fumes In London Paddington posted Tue Oct 14 2008 01:37:01 by Jush
Price Of Diesel In France? posted Wed Aug 18 2010 10:06:56 by Cumulus
Unleaded V Diesel V. Hydrogen posted Fri Jul 30 2010 09:50:43 by mirrodie
US & Britain Seeking Exit Strategy In Afghanistan? posted Mon Jul 27 2009 17:42:38 by StasisLAX
European Diesel Car Sales Strong In U.S. posted Tue Jun 23 2009 18:27:09 by StasisLAX
Jaguar Introduces Twin-Turbo XF Diesel S Sedan posted Mon Dec 29 2008 23:01:23 by StasisLAX
Price Of Diesel Fuel posted Mon Dec 1 2008 12:54:50 by VC10
It's Official: First Porsche Car With A Diesel posted Fri Nov 21 2008 09:33:54 by A342
New BMW 335d Diesel Sedan Is EPA Rated At 36mpg! posted Tue Nov 11 2008 21:55:13 by StasisLAX