Have You Considered The Price of Gasoline?

[bhtooefr]

It's worth noting that fueleconomy.gov results are showing that for MY2013, the Jetta Hybrid beats the DSG-equipped (although not the manual) 2013 Jetta TDI. 2014, same thing, although the hybrid is getting much better mileage, enough to beat the 2013 manual TDI (and there's a small sample size of 2014 manual TDIs). No samples of the 2015 hybrid, although the 2014 real world results would beat the 2015 TDIs.

And, I mean, that one isn't a very good hybrid, and as it calls for premium, a lot of cost benefit of going that route is wiped out.

Why, by the way, am I using hybrids instead of straight gassers? The weight and cost penalty of going hybrid is similar to that of diesel (although in some cases you do get a packaging penalty with hybrids that isn't present on the diesel).

 

[oilhammer]

You also get the driving penalty with the hybrids (except for maybe the GS or LS). If I hate the car I drive, I wouldn't drive as much, thus saving fuel.

As it is, I love the car I drive, so much so that I find myself driving WAY more than I absolutely need to, often taking the long winding way home instead of the more direct route, just because I like it so much. I especially like the sound of the open exhaust turbo diesel sound. With the windows down it is bliss.

Doing a burnout in 3rd up a hill the other day was fun, too.

 

[rfortson]

Typically diesels get 30% better FE than a comparable gasoline powered car. So if gasoline is $2/gallon diesel would have to cost $2.60 to wipe out the cost savings. Don't think that price gap has happened lately.

I moved from a Ford Escape Hybrid to the 2012 JSW TDI. Diesel for the first 3.5 years of ownership was 30-40 cents more per gallon than diesel. I ran the numbers once and from a pure fuel economy standpoint, I wasn't any better off with the TDI than I was with the FEH. Surprisingly enough, the JSW had about the same cargo space as the 2007 FEH. Both were good cars.

 

[rfortson]

You also get the driving penalty with the hybrids (except for maybe the GS or LS). If I hate the car I drive, I wouldn't drive as much, thus saving fuel.
As it is, I love the car I drive, so much so that I find myself driving WAY more than I absolutely need to, often taking the long winding way home instead of the more direct route, just because I like it so much. I especially like the sound of the open exhaust turbo diesel sound. With the windows down it is bliss.
Doing a burnout in 3rd up a hill the other day was fun, too.

Different price range, but there's certainly no driving penalty with the A3 e-tron. If I drive it hard/fast, I might drop to 40 mpg for that bit of driving. But driving back and forth to work, I'm not racing and so I'm getting 60-70 mpg (or better) given the plug in capability. If I fully charge it every night, I pay about $15 per month in electricity.

Since I do the majority of my driving around the city and short commute, the PHEV makes sense for me. When we take a road trip, the wife's TDI is the road king as we'll get 45 mpg averaging 80 mph. The e-tron would do 35-40 mpg under those conditions (since it's essentially running the gas turbo engine with occasional battery boost).

Horses for courses.

 

[MrSprdSheet]

You also get the driving penalty with the hybrids (except for maybe the GS or LS). If I hate the car I drive, I wouldn't drive as much, thus saving fuel.

I saw my first 918!! on some back roads, last weekend. He's local and must not drive it much. I hear you, but think that what can be worse is liking the car, and not driving it because of mileage.

 

[n1das]

You also get the driving penalty with the hybrids (except for maybe the GS or LS). If I hate the car I drive, I wouldn't drive as much, thus saving fuel.
As it is, I love the car I drive, so much so that I find myself driving WAY more than I absolutely need to, often taking the long winding way home instead of the more direct route, just because I like it so much. I especially like the sound of the open exhaust turbo diesel sound. With the windows down it is bliss.
Doing a burnout in 3rd up a hill the other day was fun, too.

I'm with oilhammer on this. Life is too short to drive a car that you have a love/hate (i.e., love to hate) relationship with.

With my BMW diesels and previously with my TDIs years ago, while there are some gassers that have the same or even a lower fuel cost per mile given the current fuel price situation, they aren't cars I want to drive. There are more things involved than fuel cost per mile numbers alone. Driveability and the fun factor also matters to me too.

I drive a lot, around 1k miles/week, and I for one also LIKE to drive. My work commute plus other driving as part of having a life outside of work adds up to around 1k miles/week. 100k miles represents a little under 2 years of driving for me. I look forward to the experience of driving instead of viewing driving as a hassle and a car only as something to get me from point A to point B. I'm way too addicted to the torque and efficiency of diesel to ever want to go back to anything running on gasoline. I like having my cake and eating it too.

In keeping with the thread topic, I haven't considered the price of gasoline at all since I totally stopped using the stuff more than 10 years ago. It is still not a consideration at all today. Whatever I own and drive absolutely HAS to be diesel.

Have fun!

 

[turbobrick240]

Looks like the cost of gasoline will be going up quite soon. OPEC just agreed to curtail production.

 

[oilhammer]

I think a lot (most) of the public who has/owns/needs a car thinks of them as a necessary tool, not very enthusiastic about them. Sure, there are enthusiasts for just about everything, but I would imagine that the levels of this are quite varying. I am a car guy, I admit it, and like most car guys I have my brand or genre of choice. I respect others who are car guys that fly a different flag, I really do. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[ZippyNH]

I find it amazing that folks will argue over a 1-5% difference....
Once you get things I to the same ballpark, it is IMO "good enough" to consider....then move onto other issues, such as driver experience, satisfaction, etc...
Not every choice is 100% about cost....let's face it. DIESEL cars can give most hybrids a good competition....yes, they dynamics of cost per mile, lifespans, city vs highway are all different...
Reading posts here, I really have to laugh.
Can I state that "anybody convinced against their will is still of the same opinion".
A hybrid can do great in city traffic, but can never be expected to tow....
An electric car can have incredible tourque when done right, buy can have a finite range, and issues in temperature extremes.
A diesel can get her good mpg, both highway, and city, and can tow, and can have uimited range...
It's about compromise....a diesel gets you the most flexibility vs a non-turbo gas car, and can beat a turbo gas car most if the time....with extra flexibility.
I made my choice....I drive a TDI, and I expect to for the foreseeable future....
Folks who have nothing invested (folks who are "cashing out" with a buyback)....as they are leaving, and moving on.
That's ok.... everybody's situation is different....we all do what is best for ourselves.
At the moment there are other competing technologies....none are quite ready imo.
Everytime a Prius, with its BARELY HONDA CIVIC sized interior is compared to larger cars mpg, I get mad...it's an example of a car that has been missed categorized for years cause many WANTED it to succede....
I can honestly say that success in the medium term is in doubt for small DIESEL cars due to rules and regulations placed in excess of cars that have WORSE issues pollution wise, like many GDI cars, but that is a political problem....with them trying to prod people to use electric.
Sure it MIGHT have promise....and the early adopters subsidize (and taxpayers) the pushing of these political goals...
Again, beyong the scope of this conversion...
RIGHT NOW based on the cars that are available to the typical consumer here in the USA/CANADA, my car makes the most sense at the moment...
No slam dunk...but it's an acceptable choice. Good mpg (measure it in co2, watts per mile, etc) with good flexibility, and long life....then add long range, etc, and it works for me. Sure ...
There is uncertainty....both due to VW, and nagging questions on reliability, but the same issues caused by VW also solves or limits those same reliability questions with added warranties....
A gas car is a better option than it was...and maybe the current GDI turbo gas cars (even with carbon issues that many have , especially early GDI cars have with valve issues) will be looked back upon as the pre DPF DIESEL cars....the best of the options, as they too get filters in newer models...
Nobody has a crystal ball...

 

[pparks1]

Everytime a Prius, with its BARELY HONDA CIVIC sized interior is compared to larger cars mpg, I get mad...it's an example of a car that has been missed categorized for years cause many WANTED it to succede....

Well, to be fair, a new Civic is quite spacious and the Prius isn't that bad either. Neither are quite the size of the Passat, but they arent 'uber tiny cars either.

I ended up switching back from diesel to a TDI when my TDI got wrecked. I planned to go buyback anyway, as I would have gotten almost all of my money back and I didn't have to be concerned with repairs and complicated emissions systems going forward.

I loved my diesel, going 700 miles on a tank of fuel was awesome. My new car doesn't get quite the mileage, but it also rids me of a few of the negatives of diesel
--Fuel that really stinks if you get it on you
--Fuel that foams when you fill up
--having to sit at a single pump or two waiting for the person in their gasser to move so I can get into the tank
--don't have to be concerned if gasoline was accidentally put into the car causing major damage
--can get a gasser fixed almost anywhere.

 

[turbobrick240]

Well, to be fair, a new Civic is quite spacious and the Prius isn't that bad either. Neither are quite the size of the Passat, but they arent 'uber tiny cars either.
I ended up switching back from diesel to a TDI when my TDI got wrecked. I planned to go buyback anyway, as I would have gotten almost all of my money back and I didn't have to be concerned with repairs and complicated emissions systems going forward.
I loved my diesel, going 700 miles on a tank of fuel was awesome. My new car doesn't get quite the mileage, but it also rids me of a few of the negatives of diesel
--Fuel that really stinks if you get it on you
--Fuel that foams when you fill up
--having to sit at a single pump or two waiting for the person in their gasser to move so I can get into the tank
--don't have to be concerned if gasoline was accidentally put into the car causing major damage
--can get a gasser fixed almost anywhere.

Gasoline doesn't really stink if you spill it on yourself too? Diesel may be greasier than gas, but I find it less obnoxious when spilled.

 

[PFCoppinger]

In my part of Mass., diesel is running maybe 20-25 cents higher than gasoline, which is well within the range that fuel costs are less for the TDI.

I have a JSW, and am torn about what to do. I have been shopping for something to replace it, and it seems to me that the claims that turbocharged gasoline engines are "just as effecient" are greatly, greatly exaggerated-- for the most part the comparison is to a smaller car.

A second factor is that, in my experience. gasoline powered cars are more sensitive to being loaded up than is my JSW. In other words, once you pack the car with people and gear, effeciency drops off a cliff, because you have to race the engine to move them all. I routinely load the JSW with four people, a Labrador, and a full load of gear, which drops me from 38ish to like 35ish.

A third factor is that once you introduce the turbocharger to the gasoline engine, then a big chunk of "future maintenance risk" is washed out.

Lastly, the unfortunate reality is that many of the vehicles that can replace a JSW from a utilitarian perspective have one of those godawful rubber band transmissions.

I think I shall decide in 2018.

 

[japedo]

Yes, I consider the price of gasoline regularily. Primarily because our other car is a 07 Altima 2.5 cvt that burns it,. Great car it has been.

I can haul 2000lbs of tent trailer, wife, kids, trunk load of fire wood etc.. with my tdi. And still use 30percent less fuel then Nissan .

I like diesels .

 

[El Dobro]

Looks like the tax is going up 23 cents in NJ and could be as soon as next week.

 

[flee]

I find it amazing that folks will argue over a 1-5% difference....
edit...
Can I state that "anybody convinced against their will is still of the same opinion".
A hybrid can do great in city traffic, but can never be expected to tow....
edit...

I sure am glad I didn't read this before I towed a U-Haul 5x8 enclosed trailer
packed full of furniture from IL to CA last year with our 2008 Escape Hybrid AWD.
BTW, 185,000 mi on the original battery, trans, etc.

 

[bennybmn]

--having to sit at a single pump or two waiting for the person in their gasser to move so I can get into the tank

Yeah but I didn't have to wait in ANY line after Sandy hit the island That's something I keep thinking about when considering a gasser...

A second factor is that, in my experience. gasoline powered cars are more sensitive to being loaded up than is my JSW. In other words, once you pack the car with people and gear, effeciency drops off a cliff, because you have to race the engine to move them all. I routinely load the JSW with four people, a Labrador, and a full load of gear, which drops me from 38ish to like 35ish.

Which is why it is a good choice for trucks.

One thing I'd like to stress, in all of these "this VS that" threads, I'm sure everyone has considered all of that. If I go gas, I'll definitely miss all of those things about the TDI that made me buy it in the first place. I'm sure a lot of people will make a decision based on a very small margin on the pro/con list.

 

[bizzle]

It also seems like people rely on decade+ old information.

It's been a really, really long time since a (modern) gas powered car has struggled to move four adults and a dog or taken an unsafe amount of time to get up to freeway speeds.

 

[oilhammer]

It also seems like people rely on decade+ old information.

It's been a really, really long time since a (modern) gas powered car has struggled to move four adults and a dog or taken an unsafe amount of time to get up to freeway speeds.

Yes, but you'd sure think that they still make them that way if you listen to what the automotive media blows up the butts of the average consumer.

I will always remember the two Chrysler minivan comparisons from two different journalists in two different places.

UK guy, comparing the three driveline choices of 4cyl diesel + manual, 4cyl gas + manual, 4cyl gas + automatic, V6 gas + automatic: "Loved the diesel. Clearly is without a doubt the best choice. Moved the van nicely, low fuel consumption, etc. Stay away from the V6, it is thirsty and it being ONLY available with the automatic made it even worse."

US guy, comparing the three driveline choices of 4cyl + automatic, V6 + automatic, BIGGER V6 + automatic (we got no diesel, and of course no manual): "Don't even bother with the 4cyl. You'll need the V6, and the 3.8L (the bigger one) is clearly the best of the group, and it is almost as easy on fuel as the 3.3L"

Same van, same box, same planet so the same gravity, weight, etc. Totally different perception.

 

[speedrye]

It also seems like people rely on decade+ old information.

It's been a really, really long time since a (modern) gas powered car has struggled to move four adults and a dog or taken an unsafe amount of time to get up to freeway speeds.

I'm gonna respectfully disagree to an extent. Sure, cars used to take 15+ seconds to get to the national 55 mph, but with the increase and later repeal of the national speed limit, higher speed limits are common and it takes some of these cars 15+ seconds to get to 70, much less the higher speed limits out west. (wow, sweet run-on sentence)

I could be biased however as I find acceleration to be a safety tool, just the same as I find good brakes to be the same. The more ways I have to avoid an accident, the better. Have I used my brakes to avoid an accident? Sure. Have I done the same with the gas pedal? Absolutely. Would I have been able to do the same in an inferior accelerating/braking/handling car such as a Prius C? No!

 

[bennybmn]

US guy, comparing the three driveline choices of 4cyl + automatic, V6 + automatic, BIGGER V6 + automatic (we got no diesel, and of course no manual):

I actually saw a manual caravan once. Way back. Helped the guy bump start it when the battery died. Must have been a weird market test unit or something... Vermont got the Outback sedan back in the 90s before anyone else did to see how it would do. Who knows? Maybe crysler did similar things.

That said, the perception thing is absolutely try across the board, and something everyone should take as their grain of salt when reading these threads.

 

[bhtooefr]

Manual Gen 1 and 2 Chrysler vans existed in the US market - they were uncommon, but they did exist. IIRC only 4-cylinder, but still.

 

[edge130]

I had a '78 Ford E150 van, actually had a four speed shifter on the floor
Had an inline 6

 

[oilhammer]

I've driven both manual Caravans and manual E-vans, LOL. You can get by with so much less power if you bolt the engine to a manual gearbox. Even a carburetted 2.2L feels "peppy" in a Caravan with a manual gearbox, pretty amazing.

The E-vans were side loaders, so if the linkage got worn out you could actually get them stuck between gears, and have to get out slide under the truck and wiggle the selector rods all back into the neutral position.

 

[bizzle]

I'm gonna respectfully disagree to an extent. Sure, cars used to take 15+ seconds to get to the national 55 mph, but with the increase and later repeal of the national speed limit, higher speed limits are common and it takes some of these cars 15+ seconds to get to 70, much less the higher speed limits out west. (wow, sweet run-on sentence)

I could be biased however as I find acceleration to be a safety tool, just the same as I find good brakes to be the same. The more ways I have to avoid an accident, the better. Have I used my brakes to avoid an accident? Sure. Have I done the same with the gas pedal? Absolutely. Would I have been able to do the same in an inferior accelerating/braking/handling car such as a Prius C? No!

One more way you can avoid an accident, in fact probably the safest and most reliable one, is to not floor your car from a dead stop to full acceleration

But just to set the record straight, we don't have speed limits faster than 70mph on the west coast, a Prius C is about 1 second slower than a JSW TDI under full acceleration, and a JSW TSI is about 1 second faster than a JSW TDI. My BMW is nearly 30 years old and it bests all of those times by nearly half...and that was when it was stock. The 55 MPH speed limit was repealed over 20 years ago. It's not even relevant.

I guess I'm just tired of reading all these comments regarding the diesel's torque and comparing our garden variety grocery getters to performance cars. There's about 2K of usable RPM range in our cars. Yes, you get grunt off the line and when you're tearing from one stop light to the next, but any current small block with a turbo is going to have as much or more torque through a much wider powerband.

 

[speedrye]

One more way you can avoid an accident, in fact probably the safest and most reliable one, is to not floor your car from a dead stop to full acceleration

But just to set the record straight, we don't have speed limits faster than 70mph on the west coast, a Prius C is about 1 second slower than a JSW TDI under full acceleration, and a JSW TSI is about 1 second faster than a JSW TDI. My BMW is nearly 30 years old and it bests all of those times by nearly half...and that was when it was stock. The 55 MPH speed limit was repealed over 20 years ago. It's not even relevant.

I guess I'm just tired of reading all these comments regarding the diesel's torque and comparing our garden variety grocery getters to performance cars. There's about 2K of usable RPM range in our cars. Yes, you get grunt off the line and when you're tearing from one stop light to the next, but any current small block with a turbo is going to have as much or more torque through a much wider powerband.

Oh, I completely agree with you and my post certainly was not an argument for a TDI nor its perceived power. After the past few vehicles, I'm returning to a car with more power and lower mpg. I'm not at all enamored with the direct-injection turbo engines and all of their related issues from HPFP problems to serious deposit buildup. Naturally-aspirated motors are still my preference, but these smaller 2.0-2.5 liter powerplants just aren't putting out enough oomph for me.

My point on the speed limit was that a vehicle in the early 80's that couldn't get to the speed limit by the end of an acceleration ramp is just as dangerous as a modern vehicle that can't get to the updated speed limits by the end of the acceleration ramp now. Of course, you'll always have drivers that want to merge on a 70mph highway at 40mph, but I'm trying to avoid ranting as much.

Unrelated- I'd love to see an acceleration test under load. Put the same four people and luggage in a Prius and JSW TDI and perform some tests. I really don't know what the results would be, but I'd be curious.

 

[pparks1]

Figured I would follow up on this thread, as I've now bee in my gasoline powered Honda Accord for about 1 year following the demise of my 2013 Passat TDI..

Overall stats on the Accord

• 18,000 miles
• 31.8 MPG according to Fuelly
• 34.5 MPG last 10 tanks according to Fuelly.
• Averaging 442 miles per fillup
• Best mileage ever on a tank: 36.6MPG
• Average price of gas: $2.14

Overall stats on my 2013 Passat TDI

• 52,800 miles tracked
• 40.8MPG according to Fuelly
• Averaged 620 miles per fillup.
• Best mileage ever on a tank: 50.2MPG
• Average price of diesel: $3.19

I do miss my 600-800 mile fill ups.
I do miss the fun DSG transmission.
I don't miss the Regens
I don't miss taking an extra 5 minutes filling it to the very top
I don't miss the Diesel Kleen additive
I do miss fact that I would be down to last 12 payments on TDI

But as far as fuel mileage goes, my average cost per mile after 1 year is
6.7c per mile on the Honda Accord
7.9c per mile on the VW Passat TDI.

So, thus far, even with less MPG, it's been cheaper.

 

[STLTDI]

Figured I would follow up on this thread, as I've now bee in my gasoline powered Honda Accord for about 1 year following the demise of my 2013 Passat TDI..
Overall stats on the Accord

• 18,000 miles
• 31.8 MPG according to Fuelly
• 34.5 MPG last 10 tanks according to Fuelly.
• Averaging 442 miles per fillup
• Best mileage ever on a tank: 36.6MPG
• Average price of gas: $2.14

Overall stats on my 2013 Passat TDI

• 52,800 miles tracked
• 40.8MPG according to Fuelly
• Averaged 620 miles per fillup.
• Best mileage ever on a tank: 50.2MPG
• Average price of diesel: $3.19

I do miss my 600-800 mile fill ups.
I do miss the fun DSG transmission.
I don't miss the Regens
I don't miss taking an extra 5 minutes filling it to the very top
I don't miss the Diesel Kleen additive
I do miss fact that I would be down to last 12 payments on TDI
But as far as fuel mileage goes, my average cost per mile after 1 year is
6.7c per mile on the Honda Accord
7.9c per mile on the VW Passat TDI.
So, thus far, even with less MPG, it's been cheaper.

Yep, so much is dependent on the prices paid. Here in MO, diesel is rarely more than 20 cents over regular and can actually be less than regular at certain times of the year. Diesel vs Gas is still a winner around here.

 

[tadawson]

That, and this is also comparing diesel prices in the past with gasoline prices in the present, pretty much negating any useful comparison. This kind of comparison is only meaningful when based on the delta between fuel prices at a single point in time.

 

[DieselMann99]

We also need to keep in mind what the actual dollars and cents difference is annually. It's not a big number. Lately, diesel prices are about the same, or slightly higher than Regular. Maybe a 20¢ difference at most.

So, just for example, if a TDI averages 40 mpg and a Jetta/Honda/Misc gaser averages 30 mpg, and you drive 18,000 miles per year, the TDI is going to burn 450 gals of fuel and the gaser will burn 600 gals of fuel. And the 150 additional gals might cost $300 - $350/yr more. But you then have to subtract a few dollars for the difference in cost of Diesel vs Regular.

In short, there is some savings, but it's not a huge number. You're not going to get rich or poor over $300/yr. Of course, if you drive 50,000 miles per year, that's another story.

 

[STLTDI]

We also need to keep in mind what the actual dollars and cents difference is annually. It's not a big number. Lately, diesel prices are about the same, or slightly higher than Regular. Maybe a 20¢ difference at most.

So, just for example, if a TDI averages 40 mpg and a Jetta/Honda/Misc gaser averages 30 mpg, and you drive 18,000 miles per year, the TDI is going to burn 450 gals of fuel and the gaser will burn 600 gals of fuel. And the 150 additional gals might cost $300 - $350/yr more. But you then have to subtract a few dollars for the difference in cost of Diesel vs Regular.

In short, there is some savings, but it's not a huge number. You're not going to get rich or poor over $300/yr. Of course, if you drive 50,000 miles per year, that's another story.

Agreed. Fuel cost savings have never been a huge factor for me. I went for another TDI because of two reasons:

1) I love how diesels drive.
2) I love the range that comes with diesels.