Volkswagen exec reaffirms commitment to diesel: ‘Now it is absolutely clean’

oilhammer said:

The 091 transmission was built for the 70hp Type 4 engine.

Click to expand...

I've read the internals aren't much different than the bus transmissions, either way, the time/effort/money people throw at the vanagon transmissions to make them more reliable shows they are notably less reliable than most transmissions.

People set up trans fluid coolers and pressurized filtration systems for the manual trans, having 2 changes of fluid and changing it every 20,000 miles and letting the change you just took out settle then putting it back in in 20,000 miles, etc...

My sprinter trans is bulletproof by comparison.

oilhammer said:

of course, in my line of work we see plenty of things broken that leave me scratching my head.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you do. So do we. As an owner of several TDIs that are far from new, sometimes when customers call with a failure of one part or another I can't help but wonder how they broke that item. At this point in IBW's life I would assume what most of the things that are going to break, have. But perhaps not.

Rrusse11 said:

Cool! Never knew the vehicle existed. ~$9k on the used market.
Too bad you can't get it with a manual tranny. Presumably it could be
tuned for more power. Listed FE ain't the greatest.

Click to expand...

Sold my 2006 Liberty CRD with 77k miles in excellent condition that I bought new for $7500 in September when I bought my 2014 JSW. It had a Green Diesel tune but that requires a upgraded torque converter either after market of or for a re powered NON US version 2007 CRD. Boy would it move.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

I would not want to use one for road trips. I realize it can be done, but I wouldn't enjoy it. My bigger issue is I wouldn't spend $50,000 (or less, we don't need to argue about that) on ANY car.

Click to expand...

I agree on EVs being too expensive. I can buy a Ford Fiesta or Mitsubishi Mirage for just $12,000 so why get a Model 3 compact for 3 times the cost??? No reason I can think of

Another problem is longterm cost. I know several drivers who had yo replace the battery at 120-130,000 miles. It was $13,000 cost. Insane

ROAD TRIPS: Tesla has superchargers scattered across the country, along interstates. They recharge the car in just 20 minutes. Doing a roadtrip in a Tesla is just as convenient as using a normal car

.

It was my understanding that the superchargers degraded the battery pack when used exclusively or more often than not. Is there any merit to this or have they negated that issue already?

Yes superchargers should only be used for road trips (over 300 miles). Otherwise use slow charging at home. Also don’t charge more than 80%. This applies to anything that uses a nickel or lithium battery (laptop, phone, etc).

nwdiver said:

I can make my own energy at home from my roof. )

Click to expand...

What % of your power is solar and what % from the power company? From other homeowners I hear the solar gives just 1/4 their power demand, which means the EV is still receiving power from fossil fuel plants (not good)

Refueling at home is convenient. Instead of taking a 15 minute detour to a gas station as with TDIs, your EV uses zero minutes of your time (just the 5 seconds it takes to plugin to the wall).

BeetlePD said:

From other homeowners I hear the solar gives just 1/4 their power demand...

Click to expand...

Without knowing how large of a solar system has been installed and what their consumption is this statement means virtually nothing.

Do they live in Arizona and use lots of AC? Do they live in the northern rockies and heat the house with electricity? Do they have 6 kids? zero kids?

And most importantly, was their goal to instal a solar system that supplied all of their power needs, OR was their goal to instal a system that supplied 1/4 of their power needs?

EV/solar people are so defensive. I just want nwdiver to answer, because I am genuinely curious. When I contacted a solar installer for my parents, he determined they would need a solar panel 4 times larger than the roof! So we didn’t bother.

atc98002 said:

I did read an article the other day that ocean-going vessels are all going to have to switch from bunker fuel to something a little more refined.

Click to expand...

On January 1 ocean vessels switched to the same ULSD that we run in our cars. The goal is to reduce sulfur oxide pollution which causes acid rain & poisons catalysts.

- It is now impossible to buy a diesel sedan. Mercedes, BMW, VW, and Chevrolet all yanked diesel cars off the road. Which makes me sad because the Soot filters on diesels makes them more clean than gasoline cars (which continue to emit soot/particulates into the air). Stupid Volkswagen with their cheating scandal killed-off a viable alternative to standard gas cars

nwdiver said:

What exactly would cause EVs to 'bomb'? D

Click to expand...

Same reason hybrids bombed. In 1999 Toyota and Honda said hybrid cars would become popular, and eventually be standard equipment. It’s now two decades later, and hybrids are only 2% of new car sales.

Just because car companies offer clean technologies like EV and hybrid cars, does not mean the customer will buy.
.

I have a 6 kW solar system on my garage and it covers 99% of my home electric needs, but if I were charging a car regularly I'd need a bigger system.

They bombed because of batteries and their generally short lives and huge cost to replace. I looked at a Leaf the other day that you couldn't give away due to dead battery. Car was in very excellent shape except for that. Cost to replace the battery was about $8k IIRC. Plus installation. Some are hesitant to buy new and many are hesitant to buy used for this reason. Who wants to buy a car and then get hit with a $10K bill.

BeetlePD said:

What % of your power is solar and what % from the power company? From other homeowners I hear the solar gives just 1/4 their power demand, which means the EV is still receiving power from fossil fuel plants (not good)

Click to expand...

I have (42) 255w panels for 10.7kW total. Each panel is ~65" x 40" and the entire array is ~35' x 35'. In my area 10.7kW produces ~18MWh/y and I use ~12MWh/yr. ~8MWh/yr for my house and ~4MWh/yr for my car. I have done some efficiency improvements. My water heater is a heat pump and I have mini-splits so I only heat/cool rooms that are occupied.

Not sure what other homeowners you're 'hearing' from but most homes with decent solar exposure (South-ish facing roof and no shade) can cover ~100% of their use with solar PV. I have a rental in Bremerton, WA... pretty much the worst place in the country for solar, it's 100% electric and produces more energy annually than it consumes.

Also: My system is ~7 years old. Today the same size 255w panels are 320w. Premium panels are as high as 400w. So if I were to build the same system today it would be 25% more powerful and ~50% cheaper.

BeetlePD said:

Same reason hybrids bombed. In 1999 Toyota and Honda said hybrid cars would become popular, and eventually be standard equipment. It’s now two decades later, and hybrids are only 2% of new car sales.

Click to expand...

Non-PHEV hybrids offered no substantial advantage especially vs a TDI. I considered a hybrid briefly but why spend ~$5k more to go from 30mpg to 33mpg when I could spend $5k less on a used TDI and get ~40mpg?

Tesla was a game-changer. ~200% increase in efficiency. ~50% increase in cargo space. ~50% increase in performance. The convenience of refueling at home. Aside from the upfront cost it was a win-win-win-win. Now even the cost hurdle has largely been cut down. Compare the 10 year cost of ownership of a new TDI (if they still made them) and a Standard Range Plus Model 3. Battery issues are ~99% nonsense. I have 162k miles on my 7 y/o Model S with the original battery and >90% capacity remaining. And the new batteries are significantly better. Most current generation packs should easily last for ~500k miles.

Don't use the Leaf battery as an argument about short EV battery life. They don't have active cooling, and that alone is what kills them so quickly. And they are asking crazy prices for replacement batteries.

There's a company that uses Tesla Model S cars for a shuttle service and use the Superchargers extremely heavily. Most of their cars have gone well over 300,000 miles without batteries issues, and the few that did have problems had them replaced under warranty. For other EV manufacturers, they just don't have the years and mileage under their belts yet to really know how long they will last. But if you follow the recommendations of normally only charging to 80%, there's no reason the batteries won't last as long as the bodywork does.

BeetlePD said:

EV/solar people are so defensive.

Click to expand...

I don't consider myself a "solar person", just someone that can accurately assess many different types of operating systems and determine why they may fall short of expectations.

nwdiver said:

Compare the 10 year cost of ownership of a new TDI (if they still made them) and a Standard Range Plus Model 3.

Click to expand...

Let's do this in 2025/2027. I suspect the TDI will win on initial cost and depreciation alone.

Certainly most people don't choose a car based on TCO, and buyers choose EV's for a wide range of reasons, from political to economic to social. While I certainly claim that TCO is an important consideration among my buying parameters, it also falls within a framework of criteria that most cars cannot meet: manual transmission, hatchback, single-tank range, overall driver experience as an enthusiast, etc. There are a few economy cars that offer me a possible lower TCO at 10 years, but none that also meet these criteria (at either a similar TCO or total cost per mile).

If there was a Tesla that appealed to me (there isn't), I would still have shopped elsewhere based largely on TCO. We all know depreciation (and purchase price) is the single largest factor of TCO, and the savings (if any) between a Tesla model 3 and 2015 Gen 3 TDI based on fuel, maintenance, and labor are unlikely (in my case) to swing the finances in favor of the Tesla.

Now, there are people for whom the TCO outcome might be different, depending on how they paid for their car, how they maintain it, the cost of fuel/electric rates in their area, typical commute/usage, etc. Certainly some owners will have the circumstances and resources to fuel their vehicle via solar panels, the proportional cost of which must be rolled into fuel costs. For buyers who don't own their own homes, have the ability to charge where they park, have driving/criteria that aren't met by the Tesla/EV, etc., low TCO or low per/mile cost are irrelevant.

It's great that EV's have the potential to offer low fuel cost of operation per mile, but my interest is hampered in two general areas: (1) Low fuel cost per mile does not equal low TCO, just as focusing solely on tailpipe emissions does not equal a focus on overall environmental impact; and (2) I find the EVs that I have driven or looked at fail to meet my larger buying parameters. The Tesla might be cool tech, but I find the exterior and interior aesthetics unpleasing (which is marginally important), I can't row my own gears, the single-"tank" range is too small, and the purchase price too high.

Since I drive diesel powered hatchbacks with manual transmissions, I'm obviously in the minority of the marketplace. That being said, there are many others for whom an EV will not meet their buying criteria, regardless of TCO.

hskrdu said:

Let's do this in 2025/2027.

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that there will be new TDIs in 2025/2027? VW already announced they're no longer funding R&D. They're shifting their resources to BEVs. By 2025/2027 it's very likely that BEVs will retail for less than ICE.

hskrdu said:

(1) Low fuel cost per mile does not equal low TCO, just as focusing solely on tailpipe emissions does not equal a focus on overall environmental impact;

Click to expand...

???? In every TCO category Tesla trounces the competition. Lower Maintenance, lower depreciation, lower fuel cost... what else is there?

Study: Tesla Model S Holds Value Over 2X Better Than Average Gas Car

I actually WISH Teslas depreciated faster... I'd love to upgrade from a 7 y/o car to a 4 y/o car with w/o paying >$30k.

nwdiver said:

Are you suggesting that there will be new TDIs in 2025/2027? VW already announced they're no longer funding R&D. They're shifting their resources to BEVs. By 2025/2027 it's very likely that BEVs will retail for less than ICE.



???? In every TCO category Tesla trounces the competition. Lower Maintenance, lower depreciation, lower fuel cost... what else is there?

Study: Tesla Model S Holds Value Over 2X Better Than Average Gas Car

I actually WISH Teslas depreciated faster... I'd love to upgrade from a 7 y/o car to a 4 y/o car with w/o paying >$30k.

Click to expand...

My 10 year TCO comparison would begin in 2015, for the stated 2015 Gen 3 TDI (in this case, a GSW 6M), and 2017 (which is, IIRC, the initial release of the Tesla Model 3), and end, respectively, in 2025 and 2027. Sorry if that was unclear, but I assumed it would make sense that a 10-year TCO would end ten years after the last Gen 3 TDI engine referenced.

Depreciation, as a factor of TCO, is useful to us not as a comparison between the Tesla and other EV's (this might be useful to other people), or as a comparison between the Tesla and gasoline cars, but as a factor of TCO between my 2015 TDI and a 2017 Model 3 at the 10 year mark. It's peachy that Tesla trounces the competition, but I was responding to your TCO comparison between a Model 3 and TDI. Sorry if that was unclear.

For readers who find this thread and are interested in EVs, from a financial perspective, their interest in TCO is likely to push their search beyond Tesla alone, which is why I tried to widen some considerations to EV's, rather than solely Tesla.

Since I'm not attracted to the Tesla, I don't follow them much, and appreciate the link you provided. The current depreciation rates are impressive, but I'm curious what they will look like as time passes. Obviously the biggest depreciation hit typically occurs in the first transition from "new" to "used." After that, however, depreciation is not necessarily linear, and condition, mileage, and typical marketplace factors will play a key role in value. Given that (about) 80+% of the cars are fairly new (5 years or less) and has attracted (what seems to be) an eager following, it is not surprising that current depreciation numbers are low- the cars are relatively new, in good shape, and most without time to accrue mileage, age, or concerns (real or imagined) over battery condition, and have a market waiting to buy them. I expect depreciation rates to climb as the marketplace responds to cars sold at the 10-year mark, but time will tell, and no crystal ball is required. It was also unclear to me if the iseecars study included the federal and state subsidies (provided to boost the marketplace or offset production costs) when arriving at the 17.1% figure for the Model S. The same page linked to another iseecars study that lists the 5-year depreciation for a Model S at 61.5%?

Perhaps you favor Tesla over other EV's, but other members at Fred's who like discussions of TCO and cost per mile might enjoy research that spans the range of EVs. I was reading the newest AAA study on cost of ownership, which is very favorable towards EVs in general. I don't love all their previous formulas (see my thread on TCO), but it's better than most. AAA found that at the 5 year mark (or 75k miles) the COO of a new compact EV was $600 higher that the gasser compact. I would think generalizations like this are difficult, given how widely the cost per mile varies based on location and driving requirements. Again, if you are a Tesla fan, this won't mean much to you, but for others, they may find it interesting when doing COO/TCO studies.

Again, the AAA EV compared to gasser study doesn't fall in to my parameters of interest too much. At my 10-year TCO comparison, AAA rated small gasoline sedans at $0.464 "total" cost per mile, where my TDI was at $0.227 total cost per mile. Total is in quotes since AAA's numbers are not true totals, whereas mine reflect every cost involved to go a mile.

AAA also doesn't make clear if/how government subsidies play into their calculations. It will be interesting to see how TCO is impacted as these subsidies go away, or as states raise fees on EV's to make up for lost revenue from fuel sales.

hskrdu said:

... I can't row my own gears

Click to expand...

that's because there are no gears to row.

It's not an automatic, DSG, or any other gearbox. With my PHEV, I agree, I could make better gear selections because I can see the terrain ahead of me, and know when a hill is approaching. But a full EV only has a transfer case (some call it a one speed transmission) to better match the electric motor's rotational speed with the needs of a vehicle. Yes, the Taycan has a 2 speed transmission, but that's the outlier.

Certainly Tesla is a game changer for the luxury performance automotive market. The sales of Audis, Mercedes Benz, BMW, Lexus, Audi, etc. are going to be hurt so bad it is not even funny. Has this 'game changer' Tesla EV revolution become contagious to the rest of non-luxury automotive industry in North America? When there is going to be a waiting list and people lining up at the Kia, Nissan, GM US/Canada dealerships to buy a Kia Soul EV, a Leaf or a Bolt? Will Toyota be able to bring to the US and sell an RAV4 all electric for $35,000 average and 250 miles of range in the next three years, next five years, next ... ? What about a Honda CR-V electric with 250 miles of range in the next three years or so for $35K?

So partial 'game changer revolution' for passenger vehicles from Tesla but it does not look like we are embarking any time soon on a 10 year explosion of electrical vehicles in the United States like it occurred with smartphones and Apple in 2007!

tikal said:

Certainly Tesla is a game changer for the luxury performance automotive market. The sales of Audis, Mercedes Benz, BMW, Lexus, Audi, etc. are going to be hurt so bad it is not even funny. Has this 'game changer' Tesla EV revolution become contagious

So partial 'game changer revolution' for passenger vehicles from Tesla but it does not look like we are embarking any time soon on a 10 year explosion of electrical vehicles in the United States like it occurred with smartphones and Apple in 2007!

Click to expand...

The smart money on Wall St. sure seems to think that Tesla has initiated the EV revolution. I wouldn't argue.

I'm hoping VW knocks it out of the park with the ID.4. That's my first choice to replace my Kia when the lease is up. But if they flub it up, the Tesla Model Y or the Niro EV will work for me as well.

I have an extreme example of making EV ownership work. Friend of mine's daughter has a Model X. She lives in Harlem in a sublet apartment, street parking only. She doesn't use the car a whole lot during the week, probably not enough to require a charge. On weekends she'll take the family to shop in NJ or Westchester at a center that has superchargers. When I heard she was buying a Tesla it seemed illogical at best, but it works really well for her.

Another friend who lives in Brooklyn says some homeowners have strapped chargers to trees on the sidewalk outside their building. Of course having the space in front of the tree available is a gamble, but they seem to make that work as well.

Not sure I'd be happy with the uncertainty, but I wouldn't want to survive with on-street parking regardless. I don't even like leaving my cars outside overnight!

turbobrick240 said:

The smart money on Wall St. sure seems to think that Tesla has initiated the EV revolution. I wouldn't argue.

Click to expand...

Time will tell.

I had to replace the battery in two of my hybrids.... $2000 times two. I doubt EVs will be any different, requiring a battery replacement which erases any supposed savings

Also I already mentioned I can buy a Fiesta or Mitsubishi for only $12,000. That’s a hell lot cheaper than the Tesla. That’s about $25000 cheaper which will buy over 300,000 miles of gasoline. Of course I never keep cars past 200K so that means the Fiesta/Mitsubishi is cheaper on the longterm. I try to chose what is cheapest

And YES Teslas need maintenance like flushing the coolant, replacing the air filter, flushing brake fluid every two years, et cetera. Tesla owners who say “no maintenance” are lying to you

.

My 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid is at 230,000 mi and the batt's doing just fine.
There are now many thousands of EVs at or beyond that milage.
Your 2 hybrids are the outliers. I guess it just sucks to be you.
I'd have no problems ponying up $100 a year for maintenance on a Tesla...

Also, does anybody on this forum really want to drive a Mitsubishi Mirage for 200,000 miles?

The Mirage is not great, but a Ford Fiesta or Focus is no more sucky than the Model 3 compact. Except 25,000 dollars cheaper and their grills/styling look like compact Aston Martins. They are nice cars. (You could also get a Honda Civic or Toyota Corolla for $16,000.). Paying almost $40,000 for a compact car is just dumb.

And battery replacement is not an outlier. Goto any Honda or Prius forum, and you’ll find 1000s of threads about wornout batteries needing replacement. Here in California there are businesses that do nothing but battery replacement, all day long

Teslas are still relatively young, but as they age we will see more failures. I know several drivers that passed 120,000 miles and needed a new battery. That’s equivalent to a gasoline car needing a new engine at just 120-130,000 miles. Very poor lifespan


.

Several owners out of a half million isn't much cause for concern. For folks who prefer hard data to anecdotal stories, this graph shows what Tesla owners are experiencing for battery degradation:

tesla battery degradation graph.

Also, the battery longevity of Honda hybrids (many of which had highly-stressed high-charge/discharge rate aircooled NiMH packs) has nothing to do with the battery longevity of Teslas (comparatively much lower discharge rate liquid cooled/heated Li-ion packs).

highly-stressed high-charge/discharge rate

Click to expand...

Say what? My Honda barely uses its battery at all (about 1% of the time). EVs use their batteries 100% of the time and will burn them out faster.

Also ye are lying with statistics. Teslas that are older than 10 years (when battery failure becomes common) is only 500 units. That sample size is too dmall. The supermajority of Teslas are not old enough to drawva conclusion. They are still too young. Not until 2025 will we see how these aging batteries perform (or fail)

BTW Tesla owners remind me of religious zealots. They absolutely BELIEVE that tesla cars are perfect (Praise Elon Musk aaaamen). Put a pope hat on his holy head. Sometimes I expect EV owners to be carrying bibles, they are so zealot. Their FAITH has little basis in logic. They are running on rainbows & fairies not facts/rational thinking

They have eyes that appear brainwashed (like cult followers)

.

My dropnosky detector just went off.
Maybe it is the odd usage and capitalizations.