tadawson
Veteran Member
Drove the Nissan once - meh, just another generic $**tbox . . . No intetest in the Chebby (re)Volt . . . or any other GM turd for that matter, although they do rank negligibly above Ferd in my book . . .
Is The Diesel Dead?
- Thread starter jchull
- Start date
Sappington
Veteran Member
I'm actually pricing Chevy Volts right now as a possible replacement for my '03 Jetta Wagon TDI. The wagon has been great for me and I've loved it, but it will eventually need replacement. It might be a few more years, but it's good to have something in mind and not be caught unprepared. All the diesel options available to me now are unfavorable, as NOTHING can run B100 anymore. Diesel fuel is about $1/gal more expensive here than gas.
The Volt will get me in the HOV lane in Virginia, and the electric range will almost cover my entire commute (edit: 52 miles roundtrip). My uncle has a volt, so I got some up-close experience with it. That and his own experience has been very positive.
My other thought is to replace our family minivan with the Volt, as my wife's around-town driving would also be completely covered with the electric range, and nowadays she rarely needs all the minivan space. We'd probably keep the van, as a backup, for Costco shopping trips, and out-of-town trips.
What drew me to TDIs in the first place in 2003 were two things: Rated MPG (40/city and 50/highway) and B100 compatibility. It's a tragedy that we've actually REGRESSED in both of those areas in the following 12 years, instead of improving. That depresses me, and VW will lose my business because of it.
The Volt will get me in the HOV lane in Virginia, and the electric range will almost cover my entire commute (edit: 52 miles roundtrip). My uncle has a volt, so I got some up-close experience with it. That and his own experience has been very positive.
My other thought is to replace our family minivan with the Volt, as my wife's around-town driving would also be completely covered with the electric range, and nowadays she rarely needs all the minivan space. We'd probably keep the van, as a backup, for Costco shopping trips, and out-of-town trips.
What drew me to TDIs in the first place in 2003 were two things: Rated MPG (40/city and 50/highway) and B100 compatibility. It's a tragedy that we've actually REGRESSED in both of those areas in the following 12 years, instead of improving. That depresses me, and VW will lose my business because of it.
Last edited:
Chris
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2000
- Location
- Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, USA
The Volt should cover that distance (20-30 total?), except maybe if the temps drop below the mid-20's. Even then, a pint of gasoline a day at worst.
I commute 38 miles roundtrip in Michigan and burn about 12 gallons of gas a year in doing so.
Last edited:
atc98002
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
- Location
- Auburn WA
- TDI
- 2014 Passat TDI SEL Premium (sold back), 2009 Jetta (sold back), 80 Rabbit diesel (long gone)
High torque: yep, one of the reasons I drive a diesel
Long repower times: well, depends on your situation and how close a supercharger station is. Yes, takes longer than pumping liquid fuel into the tank. But with adequate range, you're only "refueling" at home overnight.
Negligible range: uh, no. Every other electric out there, yeah, you aren't going to get much more that 75 miles on a charge. But the Tesla, closer to 300. Unless I'm traveling somewhere, I rarely hit 50 miles a day. Maybe 75 on a weekend, again unless I'm going somewhere I don't normally. I could easily live with a Tesla Model S for 90+% of my driving.
rotarykid
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- TDI
- 1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
In parts of the US like the west which is so spread out you can run out of range easily on anything offered today. A trip to airport & back in Denver metro area would run out of charge on the way back home for most here.High torque: yep, one of the reasons I drive a diesel
Long repower times: well, depends on your situation and how close a supercharger station is. Yes, takes longer than pumping liquid fuel into the tank. But with adequate range, you're only "refueling" at home overnight.
Negligible range: uh, no. Every other electric out there, yeah, you aren't going to get much more that 75 miles on a charge. But the Tesla, closer to 300. Unless I'm traveling somewhere, I rarely hit 50 miles a day. Maybe 75 on a weekend, again unless I'm going somewhere I don't normally. I could easily live with a Tesla Model S for 90+% of my driving.
And a trip to one of the other local metro areas like CO Springs or Ft Collins or Pueblo is completely out of the question for most as you would not even make it there on a single charge today in all of what is offered today outside of perfect weather conditions.
Just going back & forth for work for most here would be a stretch with the possibility of leaving you stranded!........That is deal breaker for me at least on anything electric....
kjclow
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- TDI
- 2010 JSW TDI silver and black. 2017 Ram Ecodiesel dark red with brown and beige interior.
I work with people in the Charlotte area that have a 45 mile commute. If they had no other traffic, than an electric might work. Add in traffic and weather and all bets are out the window.
rotarykid
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- TDI
- 1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
You could keep that wagon going indefinitely if you keep after the maintenance. I have seen first hand VW's come close 1,000,000 miles with little other than regular maintenance needed. Shocks, t-belts, maybe paint and keep on driving it....
Or one the currently offered CRs can run on BD if you reprogram and remove or gut all of useless exhaust crap. So there are still options out there. I am sure your BD use has long ago de-activated the emissions stuff on your wagon.
So, like your aging baby they will take a little care and modification to accomplish what you say you want is all that is needed to go with a current car or to keep your old baby running a while longer...........
Sappington
Veteran Member
I'm pretty sure it's illegal for me to do what you're suggesting to make a modern car B100 compatible. Keeping the wagon is something I'd like to do, if economically feasible. Hence my other idea of replacing the minivan instead.
Sappington
Veteran Member
Emissions disabled? Please explain. Either way, there was no tampering with the actual equipment on my vehicle. VW would classify it "mis-fueling".
rotarykid
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- TDI
- 1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
Purposely "Misfueling", what an innocuous sounding term.......
Also the CR's emissions with or without the emissions crap would be less polluting than your current car under any circumstances.....
That was all I was pointing out. In no way was I suggesting anyone remove anything!
Just the pointing out the facts of what is going on right now..........
Running high %'s BD through the engine long ago disabled the CAT. It's emissions are for sure higher than was legally allowed when new.
I have seen these things tested after years of high % BD use and their CAT were every time disabled. That fact makes your emissions far exceed what was legally allowed at manufacture. ergo you have disabled your emissions the same as if you had removed the CAT or disabled the EGR...
Purposely "Misfueling", what an innocuous sounding term.......
But what you forget from past years going back to the introduction CATs on gasoline powered vehicles is Legally speaking what you have done, choosing to use the wrong fuel is no different than someone years ago putting leaded gas into a vehicle that requires Unleaded.
Either of these things disabled the exhaust treatment equipment increasing exhaust output beyond legal limits permanently! This is something which was long ago was worked out in law and enforcement of emissions rules on gasoline powered vehicles....
So under the law what you have done by choice, permanently disabling the car's CAT was no different than if you had actually removed the equipment!
Your current wagon with it's emissions disabled from years of BD use is no different legally speaking than suggested.....I'm pretty sure it's illegal for me to do what you're suggesting to make a modern car B100 compatible. Keeping the wagon is something I'd like to do, if economically feasible. Hence my other idea of replacing the minivan instead.
Also the CR's emissions with or without the emissions crap would be less polluting than your current car under any circumstances.....
That was all I was pointing out. In no way was I suggesting anyone remove anything!
Just the pointing out the facts of what is going on right now..........
Running high %'s BD through the engine long ago disabled the CAT. It's emissions are for sure higher than was legally allowed when new.
I have seen these things tested after years of high % BD use and their CAT were every time disabled. That fact makes your emissions far exceed what was legally allowed at manufacture. ergo you have disabled your emissions the same as if you had removed the CAT or disabled the EGR...
Purposely "Misfueling", what an innocuous sounding term.......
But what you forget from past years going back to the introduction CATs on gasoline powered vehicles is Legally speaking what you have done, choosing to use the wrong fuel is no different than someone years ago putting leaded gas into a vehicle that requires Unleaded.
Either of these things disabled the exhaust treatment equipment increasing exhaust output beyond legal limits permanently! This is something which was long ago was worked out in law and enforcement of emissions rules on gasoline powered vehicles....
So under the law what you have done by choice, permanently disabling the car's CAT was no different than if you had actually removed the equipment!
Sappington
Veteran Member
And yet my car continued to pass emissions inspections in Maryland....
Chris
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2000
- Location
- Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, USA
Don't let your actual experience get in the way of rotarykid's ideology
rotarykid
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- TDI
- 1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
According to what I have found, your state (MD) has no testing on diesels! So what kind of emissions test are you speaking of?
You have not passed one where they actually test to see if the car is exceeding manufacture and model year legal EPA limits. No state currently has a test which does this.....
Any of these plug in tests can easily be subverted by programming, IE a tune which fools the ECU into thinking all is good ignoring sensor data that is outside of spec's.....
And frankly I give a crap what anyone does with their diesel and it's emission's controls.....
But that doesn't change the FACT! That purposely misfueling any vehicle with something that disables exhaust equipment legally speaking is no different than just cutting it out and removing it....
Last edited:
n1das
TDIClub Enthusiast, Veteran Member
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2002
- Location
- Nashua, NH, USA
- TDI
- 2014 BMW 535xd ///M-Sport, 2012 BMW X5 Xdrive35d, former 3x TDI owner
n1das said:
I'm sticking with DIESEL, no matter what.tadawson said:
Diesel is far from dead IMHO.
atc98002
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2006
- Location
- Auburn WA
- TDI
- 2014 Passat TDI SEL Premium (sold back), 2009 Jetta (sold back), 80 Rabbit diesel (long gone)
Rotarykid: your list is inaccurate. They test diesels in some areas of Washington state (generally the Seattle-Tacoma-Everett area), along with gas engines. However, all diesels 2009 and newer do not require testing because they were certified under T2B5 regulations. So my Passat and Jetta don't require an emissions test, but my Ram 1500 and the daughter's Routan do.
I will state the they no longer actually sniff the exhaust any more. They now plug into the ODBII jack and read for codes. I guess the assumption is that if there's no code, it is compliant. I think it's just another way to get $14 from me.
I will state the they no longer actually sniff the exhaust any more. They now plug into the ODBII jack and read for codes. I guess the assumption is that if there's no code, it is compliant. I think it's just another way to get $14 from me.
waltzconmigo
Veteran Member
Rotary---can you explain exactly what you are trying to say in post #246, I have never read anything about B100 or anything else having a negative effect on the life of a cat. conv.. I realize the company in the following link has a bias (for obvious reasons) but they claim the opposite. (first link a google search came up with.)
http://www.berkeleybiodiesel.org/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-biodiesel.html
http://www.berkeleybiodiesel.org/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-biodiesel.html
tadawson
Veteran Member
Exactly - all I have ever heard of is possible oil dilution due to bio evaporating at a higher temp, and maybe faster DPF ash loading (but not certain on that . . .).
- Tim
- Tim
ssamalin
Veteran Member
Diesel less than RUG last two months.
Although I haven't seen this mentioned by anyone on this website or the newspapers etc., the last 2 months diesel has been a lot less than RUG in California, around 50 cents or more. Before, diesel has been a dollar? more than RUG since 2008 or so. I don't know why this isn't news.
Although I haven't seen this mentioned by anyone on this website or the newspapers etc., the last 2 months diesel has been a lot less than RUG in California, around 50 cents or more. Before, diesel has been a dollar? more than RUG since 2008 or so. I don't know why this isn't news.
kjclow
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2003
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- TDI
- 2010 JSW TDI silver and black. 2017 Ram Ecodiesel dark red with brown and beige interior.
Gasoline prices have been high due to a refinery fire and steel workers strike.
Sappington
Veteran Member
That will only apply to 2009+ TDIs. The context of those statements were for a 2003 ALH TDI.
tadawson
Veteran Member
Doesn't the 2003 run B100 fine? I was commenting on the statement that they no longer do, which definitely was nkt talking about a 2003 . . .
- Tim
- Tim
Sappington
Veteran Member
rotarykid is asserting that it disables the CAT of the older models.
tadawson
Veteran Member
Which still makes my comment relevant . . . no DPF == no problem there, and less chance of oil dilution, since no regen, all in the 2003 . . .
My main point being, of course, that hbo problems are mainly in recent diesels, and still not unmanageable . . .
- Tim
My main point being, of course, that hbo problems are mainly in recent diesels, and still not unmanageable . . .
- Tim
Last edited:
rotarykid
Top Post Dawg
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2003
- TDI
- 1997 Passat TDI White,99.5 Blue Jetta TDI
I am not a environmental scientist
and I did not stay at a holiday in express last night, but here is what I remember...........A little background first: The time frame here is from 96-03 model year produced VW diesels, ALH & 1Z engine'd mostly.
The above quote is quite right that these cars emissions wise bear no resemblance to post 09 cars.........
First the earlier cars only had an Oxy CAT and an egr system. The DOCs were a diesel oxidation catalyst to reduce CO and THC emissions, and to a certain extent, the soluble organic fraction of PMs. A device which was very susceptible to overfueling damage which high % of BD can simulate.
DOCs were a system which relied on precise fueling and the reliable characteristics of D2 to function. BD in higher %'s throws that balance off leading to unburned fuel making it into the exhaust when the engine and exhaust are cold.
While the current cars have NOx storage CATs, DPFs, and PM traps, the newest cars have Add Blue which neutralizes NOx compounds.....
The current cars use over-fueling on off strokes to make this stuff work, While the earlier cars used a precarious balance of fueling and D2's known flash points to make their CAT function. BD in higher %s' throws that balance out of whack leading to the CAT getting a coating which renders it inert in function. From what I remember this is similar to what happened in Eco-tds, 1.6 & 1.9 if you overfueled them.
In the late 90s to early 00s there were Co-ops in Boulder which were formed to make BD. I along with several friends of mine who had years of wrenching on diesels joined their groups to lend experience to repairing and dealing with what BD use caused.
Someone in this club who was going to CU for environmental sciences is who decided to check to see if his home made BD had damaged the exhaust system.
He got the idea from being around me with my Passat running on Dino fuel when he noticed the ammonia smell in the exhaust. His 02 Jetta wagon no longer produced this smell. He even stopped using BD for a while to see if the smell returned, but it did not. With an idea of what might be going on he got what he needed from school and ran the tests on several cars.....
I really don't recall the details about what he found in his tests but what has stuck with me is using BD in the 96-03 cars in higher %'s does something to the DOC Oxy CAT which disables it...........
That's all I got......
Last edited:
LarBear
Veteran Member
I finally took a look at this thread, and the OP's comments about oil from dinosaurs for instance is a crock. IMHO, lots and lots of bacteria and other microorganism that live and die in the gaps between the rocks and produce oily residues likely are the source of oil, and there's not enough unicorn flatulence or other sources of energy to do what oil does for us.
Aside from fuel and lubricating oils fossil fuels are used to produce plastics, synthetic fabrics, and many other products that we've come to need. I know that the environmentalists will say that we could do without all those things, but when they get old and sickly and need drugs and whatever they will likely not say, "just let me die instead of using those drugs".
If diesels are dead because the sources of oil are drying up, which they don't seem to be, then gasoline powered vehicles are too. And lots of luck with transporting goods and materials cross country too. Wagon trains won't make it and never did. Diesel electric locomotives and diesel trucks do that work.
Aside from fuel and lubricating oils fossil fuels are used to produce plastics, synthetic fabrics, and many other products that we've come to need. I know that the environmentalists will say that we could do without all those things, but when they get old and sickly and need drugs and whatever they will likely not say, "just let me die instead of using those drugs".
If diesels are dead because the sources of oil are drying up, which they don't seem to be, then gasoline powered vehicles are too. And lots of luck with transporting goods and materials cross country too. Wagon trains won't make it and never did. Diesel electric locomotives and diesel trucks do that work.
Sappington
Veteran Member
We're not going to "run out", per se, but it will become more scarce and more expensive, so better to have alternatives ready, especially when it's not hard to do. We're just too lazy or unwilling.
The point is, we don't have to have fossil fuels for fuel and energy: we've already got alternatives! Let's continue using fossil fuels for plastics, fabrics, and whatnot, but use other sources for fuel and energy, thus allowing us to stretch our oil reserves even further into the future.
We have a single point of failure, fossil oil, which makes us vulnerable. I'd also like to see the environmental benefits from burning renewables vs. fossils. Let's spread our energy reliance across a buffet of options (fossil, bio, solar, wind, hydro, nuclear) instead of just one.
waltzconmigo
Veteran Member
rotary---thanks for the explanation, never heard this before. I would be interested in reading this discussion if you have the time/desire to find a link.