Have You Considered The Price of Gasoline?

[Fourplay]

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!

The 2.0L TDIs are slow. 0-60 are between high 7s and low 9s.

There aren't many cars out there that are slower to 60.

I always find it funny when people say they like driving TDIs because they are sporty or quick. Fun to drive from 0 to 30 and around town? Sure. But if you've ever driven anything resembling a performance car, these things are slow as molasses.

Diesel isn't worth it here in GA. Diesel is 20-40 cents a gallon more and gas is currently hovering around $2/gal. A 20% markup for slightly better fuel economy doesn't really work, especially considering the premium price for TDI models. The break even time is something like 10-11 years at 15k miles per year.

 

[DieselMann99]

I always find it funny when people say they like driving TDIs because they are sporty or quick. Fun to drive from 0 to 30 and around town? Sure. But if you've ever driven anything resembling a performance car, these things are slow as molasses.

You're right, it's not an M3.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

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.

I was thinking that, too, but in fact pparks1 made a choice to go to gasoline and fuel costs changed in his favor. So the numbers are useful, they're what he's paying. He gambled and won. At least for now.

Regarding TDIs and quick, they aren't. But they feel faster than a gasoline car that may get to 60 sooner because of the torque. Most people don't drive that fast anyway.

 

[STLTDI]

The 2.0L TDIs are slow. 0-60 are between high 7s and low 9s.

There aren't many cars out there that are slower to 60.

I always find it funny when people say they like driving TDIs because they are sporty or quick. Fun to drive from 0 to 30 and around town? Sure. But if you've ever driven anything resembling a performance car, these things are slow as molasses.

Diesel isn't worth it here in GA. Diesel is 20-40 cents a gallon more and gas is currently hovering around $2/gal. A 20% markup for slightly better fuel economy doesn't really work, especially considering the premium price for TDI models. The break even time is something like 10-11 years at 15k miles per year.

Literally at no time in my life have I ever described a TDI as sporty or quick. I just traded a Mk7 GTI pp and I wouldn't even describe that as super quick.

When I refer to liking how they drive, I mean low RPMs and available torque. Even under full acceleration, the TDI sounds like it's hardly working. Meanwhile, a NA 4 cylinder that returns similar MPG sounds like a cat being slowly crushed between two steel plates.

 

[Tankbuster]

Just had a great family trip in the impressive TDI.

We just just got back from are family vacation to Orlando, FL driving from middle Tenn. I drove doing over 1500 miles overall in six days and I averaged about 42 mpg in my Jetta TDI 6speed torque monster and this was driving with a fully loaded car trunk and family on mega hot days with the AC on full blast at all times and I was doing 80 to 85 miles per hour just about the whole trip on the interstates not even trying to get the best MPG I could. Going home I had to be back to work the next day!
In this part of Tenn Diesel runs $2.29 per gal and corn gas is 2.09 a gal so my point is their is nothing in my opinion that can match the Jetta TDI for this much family trip room, torque power and able to get this high a mpg plus the the Jetta looks pretty good. If I sell it back to VW I sure will miss it.

 

[DieselMann99]

. . . my point is their is nothing in my opinion that can match the Jetta TDI for this much family trip room, torque power and able to get this high a mpg plus the the Jetta looks pretty good. If I sell it back to VW I sure will miss it.

Ditto on all of that. Plus, it's a lot of fun to drive. A helluva lot more fun to drive than a Prius or Civic or Corolla.

I almost wish VW did not make the buyback so attractive, if you know what I mean.

 

[SkeeterMark]

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.

That there is known as Fake News.

Your cost per mile comparison is not relevant. Of course the TDI was higher, since you drove that while fuel costs were higher. You've only been driving the Honda since fuel got cheap.

By your methods, I could say my old '67 Impala with a V8 that got 15 mpg was more economic because gas was 31 cents per gallon back then and it only cost me 2c per mi.

Had you been driving your TDI during the last year at the same average of $2.14 per gallon (and the same 40 mpg you got), it would have cost you only 5.35c per mile. Let's add 10% to the fuel @$2.35 for diesel, and your still at .59 c per mile.

My average has been 45+ mpg, so that's only 4.7c per mile at the lower fuel prices. 2 cents a mile/30% cheaper than the civic.

 

[St.Hubbins]

Ditto on all of that. Plus, it's a lot of fun to drive. A helluva lot more fun to drive than a Prius or Civic or Corolla.

I almost wish VW did not make the buyback so attractive, if you know what I mean.

I know whatcha mean... our Golf was an absolute stalwart, fun, and good looking.
same with the A3 so far, though we really just bought it to sell back for a tidy profit, admittedly.
i hope to land in a diesel in a year or so, but unless gas prices shoot way up, a gasser Volvo V60 or the like is probably more likely. only place i'd drive a Prius is off a cliff to my watery grave.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

That there is known as Fake News.

Your cost per mile comparison is not relevant. Of course the TDI was higher, since you drove that while fuel costs were higher. You've only been driving the Honda since fuel got cheap.

By your methods, I could say my old '67 Impala with a V8 that got 15 mpg was more economic because gas was 31 cents per gallon back then and it only cost me 2c per mi.

Had you been driving your TDI during the last year at the same average of $2.14 per gallon (and the same 40 mpg you got), it would have cost you only 5.35c per mile. Let's add 10% to the fuel @$2.35 for diesel, and your still at .59 c per mile.

My average has been 45+ mpg, so that's only 4.7c per mile at the lower fuel prices. 2 cents a mile/30% cheaper than the civic.

Doesn't matter. He didn't drive the Accord last year. He drove it this year. The numbers are the numbers. They might change if fuel prices increase, but the dollars spent (or saved) on fuel are real.

 

[Tankbuster]

Doesn't matter. He didn't drive the Accord last year. He drove it this year. The numbers are the numbers. They might change if fuel prices increase, but the dollars spent (or saved) on fuel are real.

Doesn't matter??? No offense...but that rationale doesn't make any sense. Like the brilliant Skeetermark said you can't pick out two different times in history and make a fair fuel costs comparison and use that price at that time.

 

[flargabarg]

Sure you can. The money spent is the money spent. If you're paying $2/gal for fuel and using 75% as much as two years ago when you were paying $4/gal, you're still spending less per mile. Doesn't matter if the fuel is diesel, gasoline, or alien tears.

 

[n1das]

In keeping with the thread topic of "have you considered the price of gasoline?", 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 with my logging around 1k miles/week. Whatever I own and drive absolutely HAS to be diesel.

Have fun!

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

Most of us purchased a VW TDI at least in part because of the excellent fuel mileage they provide. Turbo-diesel fuel economy is almost always better than gasoline powered cars with the possible exception of several odd ball econoboxes that few would drive.

I'm surprised by the number of members who have so quickly abandoned their TDI for a new gasoline powered car. Gasoline prices are attractively low right now but low gas prices are never permanent.

The price of crude oil always fluctuates with world and US economies and supply and demand. How will new gasoline car owners feel about their cars when gasoline prices double as they surely will?

Here's the original post. And pparks1 posts that right now his costs are lower. You can't argue that. At the same time, it is possible that fuel prices could go up. I personally would welcome that, as I think the only time Americans conserve is when they're forced to economically. But it doesn't appear that prices are going to rise anytime soon. By the time they do many folks may have moved on from whatever gas guzzler they bought to replace their TDI.

Some of us like to get good FE regardless of the cost. I am still conscious of the 32 MPG my BMW gets compared to the 48 my VWs get. The actual cost of the fuel doesn't really matter, I just like to get around on as little fuel as possible.

 

[Tankbuster]

Here's the original post. And pparks1 posts that right now his costs are lower. You can't argue that.


Well don't mean to bust people's bubble, but everyone's fuel cost is lower now compared to a couple of years ago. Doesn't matter if you drive a 18 wheeler diesel or a tiny Honda fit gas car, they are lower.

A real world comparison between a gasser and a diesel would be to use prices at today's rates. Are local Kroger has Diesel for 2.29 a gal and corn gas for 2.09 a gal. Factor in diesel is 1/3 more efficient and it's a clear winner.

 

[cyclopropene]

That there is known as Fake News.

That's actual data. Data is not "Fake News." And his very brief interpretation is of a personal nature--it worked out for him. That's not "Fake News" either.

Your cost per mile comparison is not relevant. Of course the TDI was higher, since you drove that while fuel costs were higher. You've only been driving the Honda since fuel got cheap.

Since we're interpreting the data with respect to overall costs, I'd note here that he also didn't include MSRP (or, rather, whatever he paid). That's a key missing piece of data, though I suspect that it would work significantly in favor of the Accord as well.

By your methods, I could say my old '67 Impala with a V8 that got 15 mpg was more economic because gas was 31 cents per gallon back then and it only cost me 2c per mi.

If you adjusted for inflation it would be an interesting comparison, but a fifty year difference is far less relevant than a 1 year difference. By the way, do you remember how much did you paid for the Impala?

 

[Tankbuster]

That's actual data. Data is not "Fake News." And his very brief interpretation is of a personal nature--it worked out for him. That's not "Fake News" either.

Mr. Skeetermark is just pointing out the obvious fact that the data has a major flaw in that the diesel and gas prices are from two different times in history. Flawed data in results in flawed data out.

 

[Mark_J]

In our rea diesel is about .20 less than gas, and in the winter it will be more. It cycles like this every year, and if you average it out through out the year, diesel and gas are essential the same price.

 

[SkeeterMark]

Here's the original post. And pparks1 posts that right now his costs are lower. You can't argue that. At the same time, it is possible that fuel prices could go up. I personally would welcome that, as I think the only time Americans conserve is when they're forced to economically. But it doesn't appear that prices are going to rise anytime soon. By the time they do many folks may have moved on from whatever gas guzzler they bought to replace their TDI.

Some of us like to get good FE regardless of the cost. I am still conscious of the 32 MPG my BMW gets compared to the 48 my VWs get. The actual cost of the fuel doesn't really matter, I just like to get around on as little fuel as possible.

I'm not arguing that. But he presents it in a way that indicates his civic costs less per mile to drive than a TDI, which it does not. If he were driving the TDI for the last year, and took only those numbers against his previous 3 years, he would have a lower cost per mile than the Civic. In other words, he did not save money on fuel by driving the Civic.

As far as the OP, I agree with you. I believe his meaning is only to point out that if fuel prices go way up, then everyone will be looking to increase FE to save money, because the difference translates into more actual dollars, even though the percentage is the same.

 

[flargabarg]

Right now his Accord is costing him less to drive then his TDI did, though. He already spent the money at the higher fuel price. Of course "past performance is no indicator of future results". You could argue that a TDI might cost even less to run now. That's not what he said though. "I spent X per mile when I was driving the TDI and now I'm spending Y per mile driving the Accord" is true regardless of the past or current fuel prices, even if a newer TDI would be cheaper.

 

[tadawson]

True - yes, meaninful - questionable at best, of value to someone making a decision today - no.

 

[flargabarg]

I personally think the obsession with fuel prices is a bit of a red herring anyway. If you assume a 30k car (below new average) and a 150k life before major repairs, just the cost of the vehicle alone is $0.20/mile. At that point the two cent difference between a 30 mpg vehicle and a 45 mpg vehicle is a difference, sure, but it's just one ingredient in many. You'll save more by buying a cheaper vehicle than a new TDI. We aren't always rational when we buy cars and that's okay. And now that plenty of reasonably priced gasoline cars are breaking the high 30s for mileage the choice is not getting easier.

 

[ZippyNH]

My view...
One may sometimes be cheaper...and it might switch based in the economy or time if the year...
That means you are close enough $$ wise to be picking the one you like to drive better.
I like the TQ and lower rpms of the TDI....great on hills...it just powers up them.
Sure beats the typical 35+ mpg car that drops 2 gears and revs up every hill.

I actually find it funny when person A says ...I have save $3 a year by buying a gas car!! That adds up to nearly $30 after 10 years!! JK but reality is not all choices are $$ driven

The cost just needs to be close enough to not rule it out.
Sometimes it's cheaper.... sometimes it's a slight premium.

 

[STLTDI]

My view...
One may sometimes be cheaper...and it might switch based in the economy or time if the year...
That means you are close enough $$ wise to be picking the one you like to drive better.
I like the TQ and lower rpms of the TDI....great on hills...it just powers up them.
Sure beats the typical 35+ mpg car that drops 2 gears and revs up every hill.

I actually find it funny when person A says ...I have save $3 a year by buying a gas car!! That adds up to nearly $30 after 10 years!! JK but reality is not all choices are $$ driven

The cost just needs to be close enough to not rule it out.
Sometimes it's cheaper.... sometimes it's a slight premium.

That's how I feel. I ended up trading my GTI because I wanted a wagon/small SUV that could net me 450+ miles between fill-ups on the interstate. I HATE making more stops than I have to on long trips, and don't need a huge SUV with a 25 gallon tank. Once the '15s became available, it was a no-brainer.

 

[cyclopropene]

That's actual data. Data is not "Fake News." And his very brief interpretation is of a personal nature--it worked out for him. That's not "Fake News" either.
Mr. Skeetermark is just pointing out the obvious fact that the data has a major flaw in that the diesel and gas prices are from two different times in history. Flawed data in results in flawed data out.

I was responding to the use of the term "Fake News" because pparks1's post was neither "Fake" nor "News", and use of the term "Fake News" makes one look like a ... (I'll stop there, because we are well off topic now).
When I bought my Golf in 2014, I was paying >$4/gallon for 93 octane for my 2001.5 Jetta 1.8T and getting 27 mpg for my commute. I was between the TDI and GTI, and went TDI for the mileage (same price, basically). Diesel was also >$4/gallon then. I'm going to get a windfall for the buyback late next year, and I will miss aspects of the TDI, like the low end torque and relaxed, low RPM highway driving. But in the end, mpg didn't do much for me. I will be perfectly happy to drive a gasoline powered car for my next ride, should that make financial sense in the current environment. As someone mentioned above, purchase price is much more than fuel in the end...