Dieselgate - the cancer is spreading

[veeman]

http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/news/a33481/mercedes-benz-stops-selling-diesel-cars-in-the-united-states/

Looks like Mercedes is in trouble too.  Not going to sell diesel passenger cars in the U.S. anymore.  BMW diesel sales in the U.S. are a trickle and I don't know if GM will continue the diesel Cruze or not. 

[shp4man]

I heard Fiat Chrysler was about to get in trouble, too. Let's face it, diesels are dirty. 

[cawimmer430]

From what I've read, it is possible to make a diesel fulfill the stringent emissions regulations, but the extra cost involved will make the vehicle almost unaffordable for the consumer.

All cars are dirty and pollute. They pollute during their production process and they pollute during their operation. This applies to gasoline, diesel, electric etc. Most people seem to think that electric cars are clean because the electricity needed to charge their batteries magically comes out of the electrical socket in their garage... 

Still, all those people who hate on diesels while driving a big gas-guzzling SUV and think they are somehow doing something for the environment are hilarious, and the biggest hypocrites. For those types of cars a diesel is best suited!

[Tave]

From what I've read, it is possible to make a diesel fulfill the stringent emissions regulations, but the extra cost involved will make the vehicle almost unaffordable for the consumer.

All cars are dirty and pollute. They pollute during their production process and they pollute during their operation. This applies to gasoline, diesel, electric etc. Most people seem to think that electric cars are clean because the electricity needed to charge their batteries magically comes out of the electrical socket in their garage... 

Still, all those people who hate on diesels while driving a big gas-guzzling SUV and think they are somehow doing something for the environment are hilarious, and the biggest hypocrites. For those types of cars a diesel is best suited!

Dude come on. They intentionally lied to sell cars that aren't road-legal. Yes, all cars pollute, but that doesn't give automakers free reign to lie to the public and sell vehicles that pollute far more than what is legally allowed.

Did you type that because it's what you actually believe or because MB is your favorite carmaker?

[cawimmer430]

Dude come on. They intentionally lied to sell cars that aren't road-legal. Yes, all cars pollute, but that doesn't give automakers free reign to lie to the public and sell vehicles that pollute far more than what is legally allowed.

Did you type that because it's what you actually believe or because MB is your favorite carmaker?

I don't agree with what Volkswagen did. But I'm just annoyed with the folks who think their gas-guzzling SUV etc. is somehow "better" for the environment because it's not a Diesel.

To my knowledge Mercedes Diesels in the US were already checked and apparently they're legit. However, I can see why they are abandoning their Diesel plans for the US because the ever stricter emission mandates are going to make these cars too expensive to produce and sell.

Currently Mercedes is one of the few manufacturers in Europe which has compliant Euro-6 Diesels on sale.

[CaminoRacer]

Any modern gasoline engined SUV is cleaner than an equivalent diesel. Absolutely.

[MrH]

Any modern gasoline engined SUV is cleaner than an equivalent diesel. Absolutely.

Yep.  I'm totally ok with diesels dying in the US save for HD trucks.

[GoCougs]

Any modern gasoline engined SUV is cleaner than an equivalent diesel. Absolutely.

Yep, it's not even close. Americans don't buy diesels because we are not forced to - left to one's own devices/choices, gasoline is almost always the better choice - cheaper, cleaner, quieter, smoother.

As to HD pickups, they should be banned IMO, or in the least what with their size and power these days, they should require a CDL. Such things are a huge (negative) commentary on US culture.

[giant_mtb]

I don't agree with what Volkswagen did. But I'm just annoyed with the folks who think their gas-guzzling SUV etc. is somehow "better" for the environment because it's not a Diesel.

The "gas guzzling SUV" is such a European argument. lol

Also funny that you're totally trying to absolve Mercedes.  Like, it was bad for VW to do what they did, but now that Mercedes is under the spotlight you break out the "but, but..." arguments.

[Tave]

I don't agree with what Volkswagen did. But I'm just annoyed with the folks who think their gas-guzzling SUV etc. is somehow "better" for the environment because it's not a Diesel.

To my knowledge Mercedes Diesels in the US were already checked and apparently they're legit. However, I can see why they are abandoning their Diesel plans for the US because the ever stricter emission mandates are going to make these cars too expensive to produce and sell.

Currently Mercedes is one of the few manufacturers in Europe which has compliant Euro-6 Diesels on sale.

That's what Mercedes PR department says anyway. According to the class action filed against them, they installed emissions-defeat tech like VW. They're also currently under investigation by the Department of Justice.

The Sprinter was checked out and OK'd for further sales, but I'd imagine that has more to do with its classification as a truck/commercial vehicle.

[RomanChariot]

Yep, it's not even close. Americans don't buy diesels because we are not forced to - left to one's own devices/choices, gasoline is almost always the better choice - cheaper, cleaner, quieter, smoother.

As to HD pickups, they should be banned IMO, or in the least what with their size and power these days, they should require a CDL. Such things are a huge (negative) commentary on US culture.

So we should ban anything that is a negative commentary on US culture? If they can't meet emissions restrictions then keep them off of the road. If the emissions restrictions aren't stringent enough then make them more stringent. Banning them because you think they are silly is just ... silly.

[2o6]

GM got the Diesel Cruze and Equinox to pass emissions. 

[cawimmer430]

The "gas guzzling SUV" is such a European argument. lol

Also funny that you're totally trying to absolve Mercedes.  Like, it was bad for VW to do what they did, but now that Mercedes is under the spotlight you break out the "but, but..." arguments.

It's a perfectly logical argument: a gas-guzzling SUV is no fun if you literally constantly have to refuel. Even in a country where fuel is cheap it's gonna add up eventually, especially if you do a lot of driving. But hey, to each his own.

For large SUVs a Diesel engine makes perfect sense.

[Raza]

GM got the Diesel Cruze and Equinox to pass emissions. 

As far as we know.

[dazzleman]

From what I've read, it is possible to make a diesel fulfill the stringent emissions regulations, but the extra cost involved will make the vehicle almost unaffordable for the consumer.

All cars are dirty and pollute. They pollute during their production process and they pollute during their operation. This applies to gasoline, diesel, electric etc. Most people seem to think that electric cars are clean because the electricity needed to charge their batteries magically comes out of the electrical socket in their garage... 

Still, all those people who hate on diesels while driving a big gas-guzzling SUV and think they are somehow doing something for the environment are hilarious, and the biggest hypocrites. For those types of cars a diesel is best suited!

I thought about a diesel when I bought my Audi.  I decided against it because the extra cost didn't match up to the furl cost savings given the low number of miles that I drive.

That was before all of this, of course.  I imagine this will hurt the resale of diesel cars.

[giant_mtb]

It's a perfectly logical argument: a gas-guzzling SUV is no fun if you literally constantly have to refuel. Even in a country where fuel is cheap it's gonna add up eventually, especially if you do a lot of driving. But hey, to each his own.

For large SUVs a Diesel engine makes perfect sense.

"Literally constantly have to refuel."

A Chevy Tahoe has a 26-gallon tank. Let's assume you drive aggressively and only average 15mpg.  That's 390 miles on one tank. If you get closer to the average 17mpg, you're closer to 450 miles on a tank. On the highway (EPA says 23mpg)?  You're talking 500+ miles on one tank no problem. 

Locally, gasoline is $2.38/gallon. Diesel is $2.57/gallon.  For simple numbers' sake, let's say I drive 10k miles a year and get 15mpg on gad and 20mpg on diesel.  That's 667 gallons of gasoline vs. 500 gallons of diesel.  That's $1581/year for gasoline and $1285/year for diesel, or a difference of $296.  For the sake of comparison using a vehicle in America available with a gas or diesel engine in the SUV/truck realm, a diesel engine in a Silverado adds about $9k to the price tag. Which means, even if the diesel did have a 5mpg advantage over the gasoline as in the fake numbers above, you'd have to drive it for thirty years to offset the cost.

[MX793]

It's a perfectly logical argument: a gas-guzzling SUV is no fun if you literally constantly have to refuel. Even in a country where fuel is cheap it's gonna add up eventually, especially if you do a lot of driving. But hey, to each his own.

For large SUVs a Diesel engine makes perfect sense.

Maybe ze Germans should fit larger fuel tanks to their vehicles .

Standard tank in a Tahoe or Expedition is 26-28 gallons (98-106 L).  These trucks have a 450+ mile highway range between fill ups.  At 75 mph, that's about 6 hours in the seat, which by that time I want to stop, get out, and stretch my legs (not to mention sitting continuously for that long is really unhealthy for you).  If I'm staying hydrated, I generally need to stop to use a restroom every 3-4 hours anyway.

My brother's truck has ~700 mile highway range (IIRC, he has the larger optional tank).  He fills up like half as frequently as I do with my car, and drives slightly more miles in his daily commute.

[GoCougs]

It's a perfectly logical argument: a gas-guzzling SUV is no fun if you literally constantly have to refuel. Even in a country where fuel is cheap it's gonna add up eventually, especially if you do a lot of driving. But hey, to each his own.

For large SUVs a Diesel engine makes perfect sense.

No, it's not logical and it doesn't make sense, and why in the birthplace and sole land of large SUVs, there are no large SUV diesels for sale. Certainly it's been tried (GLS and Q7 diesels were canceled for MY2017, Ford Excursion, but the Suburban with its gas V8 was the better vehicle) but it has never held because the US market doesn't see an advantage - cost or otherwise.

As proven time and again, in the US, a gasoline passenger vehicle is cheaper to both purchase and to own (cheaper fuel, maintenance, repair bills), and let's not forget of course the diesel will be louder, dirtier, smellier and rougher. In most cases the diesel will pay off only well after typical US new car buyer keeps a vehicle (150,000+ miles). For example, as mentioned, the Chevy Cruze diesel is a ~$5,000 upcharge yet it nets only 3 mpg (30/40/34 vs. 31/47/37 as told by https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/2017_Chevrolet_Cruze.shtml), which means it would take 20+ years to pay off (which means it will never pay off).

There is still a ton of efficiency gains left in the gasoline engine - lots still to be done with ignition and transmissions and valve train and combustion chamber design. Since diesels are much simpler, there is little if any gain left, and especially considering that pretty much anything makes diesels cleaner also makes them less efficient. This is why in 2017 diesels don't have much of a mpg advantage for passenger vehicles.

Large SUVs have large gas tanks. 350 miles/560 km + miles per tank is the norm, as it is with most passenger vehicles sold in the US. Diesels these days only get ~10-15% better mileage, so with the same size fuel tank, refueling every 350 miles vs. 375-400 miles is a non factor for usability.

[giant_mtb]

No, guys, you're literally constantly putting fuel in SUVs.

[GoCougs]

So we should ban anything that is a negative commentary on US culture? If they can't meet emissions restrictions then keep them off of the road. If the emissions restrictions aren't stringent enough then make them more stringent. Banning them because you think they are silly is just ... silly.

Be careful of this error in logic. They should be banned for the average driver (require CDL) because they are huge, heavy and powerful. That you have to be a bit of a psycho to want to buy and drive one as a daily is simply social commentary.

[dazzleman]

Be careful of this error in logic. They should be banned for the average driver (require CDL) because they are huge, heavy and powerful. That you have to be a bit of a psycho to want to buy and drive one as a daily is simply social commentary.

Ever since I saw "American Beauty" and the Annette Benning character was driving a Mercedes SUV, I have associated Mercedes SUVs with psychotic women.  That was reinforced when Lizzie Grubman (some sleazy New York city publicity hack) ran over 16 people outside a nightclub in Southampton, NY in 2001 while driving a Mercedes SUV because she was angry that the bouncer wouldn't let her in.  Her defense was that she didn't understand how powerful the car was. 

[GoCougs]

I live right near a Mercedes Benz (and BMW and Audi and Lexus and Land Rover) Mecca enclave. Most are indeed psychos, either from working too much or being married to a workaholic and stuck at home snowflakin' the kids.

[12,000 RPM]

We need to fund Wimmer's automotive exchange trip here more than ever.... he's slipping further and further into his delusions of the American automotive landscape.

Diesel makes about as much sense as having to replace all the injectors on a ~5 year old car

[cawimmer430]

Speaking of Diesel SUVs, I met up with Colin today and he had a rental 2016 Range Rover Sport HSE SD V6.

I'm not into SUVs at all, but it was a nice, quality and refined car. And it's powered by a Jaguar Diesel engine. Great acceleration, quiet, refined and of course it offers much better efficiency than a comparable gasoline V6 motor.

Giving consumers a choice is a wonderful thing. For me a Diesel engine will always be the better choice in an SUV, especially a large and heavy one.

[mzziaz]

Got to side with wims. SUV's and diesels are a perfect match, at least until the EV's take over.

[FoMoJo]

Speaking of Diesel SUVs, I met up with Colin today and he had a rental 2016 Range Rover Sport HSE SD V6.

I'm not into SUVs at all, but it was a nice, quality and refined car. And it's powered by a Jaguar Diesel engine. Great acceleration, quiet, refined and of course it offers much better efficiency than a comparable gasoline V6 motor.

Giving consumers a choice is a wonderful thing. For me a Diesel engine will always be the better choice in an SUV, especially a large and heavy one.

The only engine available here is the 2.0T (EcoBoost).  Wouldn't mind the diesel.

[GoCougs]

Got to side with wims. SUV's and diesels are a perfect match, at least until the EV's take over.

How are they the perfect match? In the US it's they're at least a $5,000 upgrade and are generally slower, and always noisier, dirtier, smellier, and usually don't ever offer a payback on the minor efficiency gains.

Diesel will be gone in Europe within 10-15 years (i.e., will follow the lead of Paris, Madrid and Athens). They're just too dirty. Oh, and EVs are a "Mr. Fusion" or catastrophic levels of government intervention away from taking over.

[giant_mtb]

I've no issue with preferring a diesel.  Everybody has their own preferences. Shit, I wouldn't mind an SUV with a diesel.

However, the numbers do not lie, and they're rarely a benefit here in the United States. 

[AutobahnSHO]

I rented 2 vans in Yurrup. One was a giant 15pax diesel van. One was a 7pax gasoline. Went 3-4x as far in the giant van than the regular van on the same amount of fuel.

The "noisier and smellier" only holds water for the crappy diesels of long ago. Yurrup diesels you can barely tell it's a diesel, standing right next to it, if you're TRYING to discern.

[shp4man]

I occasionally drive a 2016-17 Super Duty with the 6.7L diesel at work. It's quiet and non stinky, and pretty quick for a big truck. Godawful expensive, though. Plus you have to fill the DEF tank every service interval. And it takes 15 quarts of oil, and has 5-6 thousand miles oil change interval.
DEF stands for diesel exhaust fluid, an emissions requirement.  Slang term - diesel  jiz. That's what it looks like.