Triumphrat

kdrake · 06-23-2007, 09:43 AM

Reading about the carjacking/stickshift. Didn't want to hijack the thread, so there is mention of a diesel van, something unheard of in the US. When we were looking for a new car, we looked at Jeeps, they theoretically offered a diesel, except it was a turbo, cost a bundle, and really wasn't in stock. Why, with fuel costs can't they actually make some decent diesel, and gasoline moderate power engines available. If you want anything more than an econobox you end up with a rather large V6. We had a Tracker with a 2 liter 4, but couldn't replace it with the same (ended up with a Kia Sportage--3.5 V6 and 5 speed auto). One of the best engines we ever had was (IMHO) was the old 2.5 iron Duke Pontiac, 30+ mpg, usable power, and simple throttle body FI. We had 2 similar vehicles with the same engine, except for the camming and timing, the lesser h.p. would actually outrun the other because of the torque at real driving speeds.

ggRAT · 06-23-2007, 12:19 PM

+1.

I want a small, basic pickup (not a dualie) with a diesel that gets 25-30mpg. Why won't Detroit build it?

I had a 2000 VW Jetta diesel automatic and put over 220,000 miles on it. It always got 44mpg...quiet, clean, torquey little motor. Concerns about diesel pollution are bogus when you consider that the gas powered car I traded in only got 22mpg. So what if the diesel puts out 10% more so called pollutants, it goes TWICE as far on a gallon of fuel.

My next car will be another diesel.

Catenaccio · 06-23-2007, 12:34 PM

I'm a Honda Ridgeline owner. It gets just north of 20 mpg on the highway. Rumor has it a small diesel motor is on the way for the Honda with an estimated 25-30 mpg. Every manufacturer will have to arrive at similar solution eventually.

The flip side of the argument is...my father's F250 diesel gets the same mileage as my Ridgeline and hauls a whole heck of a lot more in the process.

Tbirdnz · 06-23-2007, 12:36 PM

My 4WD is a diesel and it is the only way to go, modern diesel engines are cleaner, better power and more economical. In fact I have a 3 litre turbo engine and for the same engine power for a petrol engine the equivalent engine is 3.6 litres.

Here diesel fuel is 25% cheaper and the government has to tax diesel cars to bring it up to the petrol engined price.

Modern cars are all going diesel, even Jaguar now put out a diesel car, previously unheard of before and of course Mercedes have had them for 50 years or more.

-----------------
Ride on !

sweatmachine · 06-23-2007, 03:11 PM

I have a 2006 VW Jetta TDI (diesel).

No matter how hard I drive it in town I get 38mpg, straight highway I'll get 42-45mpg.

It is torquey, quiet, no diesel smell (although I like the smell). My brother has the same car, neither of us has had a problem, his is a couple years older than mine.

I drove a 2003 F250 Diesel 4x4 crew cab before this car, it got 12-15mpg in the city, and it got about 20mpg on the highway. It hauled ass, sounded fantastic, and I miss it a lot, but I was driving a lot at the time and I didn't need the ability to haul 17,000 lbs, and gas prices jumped up, so I traded it in on the Jetta.

[ This message was edited by: sweatmachine on 2007-06-23 13:14 ]

Wombat · 06-23-2007, 04:05 PM

It intrigues me as to why the major manufacturers of hybrid cars do not make a hybrid diesel/electric, instead of gasoline/electric.
Surely, in the interests of making a fuel efficient vehicle, that would be the way to go.

lanwanman · 06-23-2007, 05:30 PM

Diesel engined cars got a very bad rep in the US when GM tried to foist off some converted gasoline engines on the car buying public with predictably bad results. I've owned 2 diesel VW's and loved them both. I'd love to drop my Acura for a diesel vehicle but there is little to be found that offers the type of room I like at a price point that doesn't make me laugh. I'd jump on a Mazda Tribute with a decent diesel in a heartbeat.

KuzzinKenny · 06-23-2007, 06:32 PM

make yer own fuel !! Clicky !! when the still is f##ked i`ll be gettin a deezill cage :-D :razz:

KK

Tbirdnz · 06-24-2007, 07:38 AM

I see the new LandRover Freelander has come out with a 3.2 litre petrol engine and a 2.2 turbo diesel. With little price difference.

The tests show the petrol engine is quicker upto 100km at 8.9 secs as opposed to 11.2 secs but it states in the real world driving the petrol engine seems lethargic compared to the diesel.

The diesel also has a superior fuel economy, 8.5 litres per 100km as opposed to the petrol engines 11.2 litres.

As the test report states, "It's a no brainer which one to choose."

---------------------
Ride on !

richb · 06-25-2007, 03:33 AM

Have a 3 litre diesel BMW and an old diesel Landrover. The Beemer has immense grunt and at overtaking speeds (50-70mph area) will outpace a Porsche 911 (apparently). The Landy is a bit agricultural but it's done over 100k and I haven't changed the oil yet..

(joking!)

The only thing I have to watch is not putting diesel in the bike. Or rather, not doing it again. :???: :-D