Us car makers can't make diesel cars by law???

[Wisconsinwagen]

I was at the Chicago Auto Show yesterday. I got to the GM exhibit where they were showing off the new VOlt. I was talking to some of the guys I came with about hybrids and one asked why no one has done a diesel hybrid yet, and I said that VW was working on it but nothing official. Because the engine in the Violt is not connected to the drivetrain in anyway and all it does is spin the generator for the batteries, I said that a diesel would be the perfect engine for it because it could just run at 1200 RPM all day and make all the power you'd ever need.

Well the lady who walks and talks on the display heard me saying this and had to put her two cents in. She said they were testing the Volt with a diesel in EUrope but they couldn't sell it in the US because <b> by law, US car companies can't produce diesel vehicles for sale in the US.</b> She said that vehicles have to have a certain gross weight they need to be above to allow them to have a diesel, that this is a federal law, and that it is set to expire at the end of this year unless it gets renewed.

I have never heard this in all my years of asking why US car makers don't make diesels. If this is the case, why don't the car compnaies say so, or pressure the government to drop it? I think she's full of BS, but I can't say that with certainty. Anyone else ever heard of this?

 

[Powder Hound]

Her comments would be correct, but they have to be put in proper context for them to make sense.

E.g. US carmakers can make any diesels they want. They just can't sell them here in the US, until they meet EPA regs for NOx, particulate emissions, yada yada yada. The minimum gross weight would refer to different emissions regulations governing high gross weight vehicles. Another thing affecting the category is whether the vehicle is a car or a truck.

So, the limiting factors would be, is the perceived market size (if they made it, how many would really come?) large enough to justify the development costs associated with such an engine? Across how many units will you be able to spread the development costs? Will the car still sell if the diesel engine has a $1000 premium? $2000? $4000?

So, that woman's statement, taken by itself, sounds ludicrous. However, if you take into consideration that which she did not state, then it makes sense. Whether or not she knew exactly what it was she did not state makes no difference.

 

[McBrew]

In other words, they don't want to invest in new clean-diesel technology that they'd probably have to buy from Mercedes. The other way to look at her statement is, "we can't sell diesels unless they allow us to pollute as much as we want, like we can with trucks."

 

[40X40]

In other words, they don't want to invest in new clean-diesel technology that they'd probably have to buy from Mercedes. The other way to look at her statement is, "we can't sell diesels unless they allow us to pollute as much as we want, like we can with trucks."

A little over the top.....

Bill

 

[lkchris]

In other words, they don't want to invest in new clean-diesel technology that they'd probably have to buy from Mercedes.

Make that Bosch, of course.

The lady's response is typical Detroit avoidance of reality and promotion via misinformatin and indicative of the reason it's ready to be gone. Good riddance.

 

[Thorne]

Close to one half of all small trucks and vans sold in Europe are diesels -- so kinda hard to say that they wouldn't be able to recoup any development costs. But even if they used a mature tech like VW TDI or Renault diesels, they could build a nice car to go with the foreign engine -- kinda like the Jeep Liberty (only better, one hopes....)

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Close to one half of all small trucks and vans sold in Europe are diesels

Only one half? Sure? I don't believe there are more than 10% gassers in commercial vehicles.
I saw a natural gas Sprinter yesterday but never a gasser.

 

[VWWV]

Only one half? Sure? I don't believe there are more than 10% gassers in commercial vehicles.
I saw a natural gas Sprinter yesterday but never a gasser.

According to Boone Pickens (day before yesterday) there are some 5 or 6 million natural gas vehicles in use in the world and the US has about 375 thousand of them. He said this in the context of touting NG as the fuel we "MUST TRANSITION TO WITHIN 10 YEARS" on our way to electric and fuel cells. He really put down Al Gore and others who are touting batteries - mostly because 18 wheelers can't run on batteries. He highly supported commuter cars running on batteries, however. He said that the US and Canada has enough NG to provide our energy/transportation needs for 20 years...while the transition to renewables takes place. (All this was at a meeting of Governors) It's no wonder that guy is rich. He has a platinum tongue.

 

[kcfoxie]

I was at the Chicago Auto Show yesterday. I got to the GM exhibit where they were showing off the new VOlt. I was talking to some of the guys I came with about hybrids and one asked why no one has done a diesel hybrid yet, and I said that VW was working on it but nothing official. Because the engine in the Violt is not connected to the drivetrain in anyway and all it does is spin the generator for the batteries, I said that a diesel would be the perfect engine for it because it could just run at 1200 RPM all day and make all the power you'd ever need.

Well the lady who walks and talks on the display heard me saying this and had to put her two cents in. She said they were testing the Volt with a diesel in EUrope but they couldn't sell it in the US because <b> by law, US car companies can't produce diesel vehicles for sale in the US.</b> She said that vehicles have to have a certain gross weight they need to be above to allow them to have a diesel, that this is a federal law, and that it is set to expire at the end of this year unless it gets renewed.

I have never heard this in all my years of asking why US car makers don't make diesels. If this is the case, why don't the car compnaies say so, or pressure the government to drop it? I think she's full of BS, but I can't say that with certainty. Anyone else ever heard of this?

This is when you say "and this is why I will keep buying Volkswagens. They're upping their diesel output to 40% of all sold vehicles in the next two years due to popularity. Who does not love 50MPG highway without any batteries?"

And frankly, I stand by that. I drive 79.8 miles on 1.492 gallons in my 2006 the other day. Granted, it was all 45/55mph roads, 53mpg is what I got no matter how one cuts the numbers. Hybrid might have done better, but that's iffy. It wouldn't have handled the corners nearly as well.

 

[Russnut]

And why do they have to make all the hybrids look so stupid? We get it. It runs on batteries.

 

[McBrew]

And why do they have to make all the hybrids look so stupid?

Aerodynamics... something ALL cars could benefit from. Even little things like cleaning up the bottom of cars... ever seen the belly of a Prius?

 

[40X40]

Aerodynamics... something ALL cars could benefit from. Even little things like cleaning up the bottom of cars... ever seen the belly of a Prius?

Bingo! Low drag can look a bit lame..... but there is a lot of good to be done where you can't even see it.

Bill

 

[Wisconsinwagen]

GM figured out belly aerodynamics. Look at the underside of a ZR-1 Corvette. The problem is they are still stuck in the mindset that they can give the people one or two different options for alternative vehicles, and we'll be happy with that. I really think if they want to survive, they need to try a little of everything over the next 2-3 years, see what sticks, and cater to demand. The fact that they won't even attempt to make a concept diesel car for the US just shows how ignorant someone at the top of GM still is despite everytthing that's happened. All you'd have to do is take a rolling shell to an auto show, say it will have a diesel with these figures, this price range, and gauge people's reactions.

And here's a surprise, Ford killed off their diesel powered F-150 to be released this year citing, according to the man I talked to at the show who worked for Ford, the down economy as the reason for not making it. That doesn't even begin to make sense. They want us to buy pickups because they still advertise them like crazy, yet they kill off what would have been the most fuel efficient 1/2 ton money can buy. And he said maybe next year or the year after that they'd make them. Yeah, right.

 

[VeeDubTDI]

The lady's response is typical Detroit avoidance of reality and promotion via misinformatin and indicative of the reason it's ready to be gone. Good riddance.

Ding ding! WINNAR!

 

[BadMonKey]

And why do they have to make all the hybrids look so stupid? We get it. It runs on batteries.

The prius is the only hybrid offered on its own platform, the new insight will change that to 2. I don't think you do get it.

 

[rotarykid]

$%&^&&**- believable , can you say loophole vehicle abuse ........... what a load of crap " we can't sell diesel cars here " . What kind of stupid idiot did she take you for ???????????

They can sell any diesel powered model they wish here , no law blocking them from selling anything diesel powered . And in the shape they are in financially today I have no doubt that congress would lighten up light duty diesel regs if they asked .

Big 3 rest in pieces as it is what you deserve when your representatives quote crap like this . We shouldn't give them , the big two another dime . Let them go under as they will end up there anyway at some point if they keep on their current path . You should told that idiot that VW , MB & BMW are having no trouble selling diesel powered cars in the US today .........

 

[German_1er_diesel]

The prius is the only hybrid offered on its own platform, the new insight will change that to 2.

The Insight is on the same platform as the Fit.

 

[boutmuet]

They can probably put a diesel in any weight car they want to but there are probably several reasons why they choose not to - legitimate or not. GM is still recovering from their early 80's Oldsmobile diesels and they would rather not invest in building a clean diesel that would comply with current emissions laws here in the states. Another belief is they think the typical American consumer wouldn't want to spend the extra money for a diesel engine as opposed to a cheaper gasser motor, though aren't electric cars with motors more expensive than just a plain old diesel motor?

 

[MrMopar]

Well the lady who walks and talks on the display heard me saying this and had to put her two cents in.

Let me get this straight - at an auto show, which depends on eye candy to advertise the sex (err, cars) for sale, you're listening to the tarted up bimbo advertising the car give a detailed explanation as to why diesel engines aren't for sale in the USA? Unless she had multitudes of degrees and experience in Business Management, Finance, Sales, and other avenues of the professional skills needed to successfully run a car company, she's not the person to be giving the explanations about anything other than what color the car is and how it comes with big shiny wheels.

 

[McBrew]

Make that Bosch, of course.

Bluetec technology is owned by Daimler AG (aka Mercedes Benz), not Bosch. VW and BMW have both licensed the technology from Daimler AG.

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Bluetec technology is owned by Daimler AG (aka Mercedes Benz), not Bosch. VW and BMW have both licensed the technology from Daimler AG.

Bluetec is only a fancy name for SCR, and I'm pretty sure you don't need to license something as trivial as that.

 

[mavapa]

No matter how you slice that answer, it's wrong. If she said what she is supposed to have said, the clear implication is that European carmakers can sell diesel cars in the US but US automakers cannot. That is not true. If she was referring (however circuitously) to emission regulations, it's still not true, since VW and Mercedes sell diesel cars here and must meet the same standards as anyone else.

So why listen to the lady who walks and talks at the car display anyway? Don't they choose them based on how they look?

 

[VWWV]

No matter how you slice that answer, it's wrong. If she said what she is supposed to have said, the clear implication is that European carmakers can sell diesel cars in the US but US automakers cannot. That is not true. If she was referring (however circuitously) to emission regulations, it's still not true, since VW and Mercedes sell diesel cars here and must meet the same standards as anyone else.

So why listen to the lady who walks and talks at the car display anyway? Don't they choose them based on how they look?

Yep...chosen for "how they look".....just like the cars they are selling. For some reason that thought reminds me of that 70s semi-reggae tune about never marrying a pretty girl...but if you wanna be happy get a VW.

 

[frogger414]

And why do they have to make all the hybrids look so stupid? We get it. It runs on batteries.

*high five*

 

[McBrew]

Bluetec is only a fancy name for SCR, and I'm pretty sure you don't need to license something as trivial as that.

I don't think VW and Audi would have paid for the technology if they didn't have to. Here's a few quotes from wikipedia:

Daimler AG has entered into an agreement with Volkswagen and Audi to share BlueTec technology with them in order to increase the Diesel passenger-vehicle market in the US.

Volkswagen introduced the Jetta Clean TDI, the Tiguan concept, and the VW Touareg BlueTDI as part of the BlueTec licensing program.

In August 2007 VW Group announced that cooperation on BlueTec with Daimler AG would end. The reasoning for this change is due to the recognition of the VW TDI branding. VW did not want to use a competitor's branding for a product they would introduce into the market.

The article goes on to explain the four steps of the Bluetec process... the fourth step being SCR. In other words, SCR is just part of the Bluetec process. Bluetec is owned by Mercedes and has been licensed to other manufacturers. VW has decided to back out of that agreement for future models.

Sorry to drone on about it... but I don't understand why you are trying to argue that Mercedes doesn't own Bluetec technology and license it to other manufacturers.

 

[German_1er_diesel]

Maybe they licensed some of the components, but that Wikipedia article is a bit vague and lacks accuracy, the German-language Wikipedia article links straight from Bluetec to "SCR".

So according to the Wikipedia article Bluetec is 4 steps.

1. A Diesel oxidation catalyst - every diesel made in the last few decades has one. No need to license from Daimler

2. A DeNOx catalytic converter. Available from multiple suppliers, including Daimler's suppliers. No need to license from Daimler, but maybe buying components makes sense if they have a cost-effective version.

3. A particulate filter. Standard in most European-market diesels for about 10 years. Daimler was not a pioneer in that field.

4. SCR. Not patentable, too trivial. It's just basic chemistry. Maybe component sharing makes sense.

"Bluetec" is a trademark. I honestly don't believe anybody who wants to make a DeNOx catalytic converter or a SCR system has to knock on Daimler's door and license the technology.
The Wikipedia article on Bluetec claims that Mercedes calls the aqueous urea solution AdBlue. Which is not entirely accurate: Everybody else does too. AdBlue is not a Mercedes trademark. It's held by the VDA, and there's aDIN standard on it too. You can buy AdBlue at most European gas stations, because trucks of all manufacturers have been using it for years.

 

[mavapa]

Here's Navistar's approach to (not) urea injection. Sounds familiar.

 

[dieselyeti]

GM is still recovering from their early 80's Oldsmobile diesels and they would rather not invest in building a clean diesel that would comply with current emissions laws here in the states. Another belief is they think the typical American consumer wouldn't want to spend the extra money for a diesel engine as opposed to a cheaper gasser motor, though aren't electric cars with motors more expensive than just a plain old diesel motor?

So, some turntable twit thought she'd school the OP on the vagaries of the US diesel market eh? Sounds like she only had half of the story.

I don't know how relevant the "Spectre of old GM diesels" argument is anymore - I'm sure there are still lots of people who remember how bad they were but it's been 25 years since the last ones were bult. There's a much bigger segment of the buying population that had no experience with those clunkers so they're a blank canvas for the marketers.

To me, it's a chicken-or-the-egg scenario. Customers can't buy what's not offered, and mfrs won't build what their focus groups tell them won't sell. How do you break the stalemate? Well, the gov't already offers income tax credits for diesels and hybrids, and my state exempts these cars from the 6% state sales tax. It's a start, but if the federal gov't considered a subsidy similar to what Europe has to promote diesels that should be enough to get auto mfrs to overcome their inertia for diesels. Like somebody else mentioned, it wouldn't hurt if the EPA backed off on diesel emissions a bit and phased in standards gradually.

Dutch Mandel wrote a great pro-diesel editorial in AutoWeek (following Denise McCluggage's similar themed piece two weeks ago) in which he cited if 30% of the US auto fleet were diesel we'd save enough oil that we wouldn't have to import any from OPEC countries. I think the figure he quoted was 1.5 million barrels a day. Impressive.

 

[kcfoxie]

I don't know how relevant the "Spectre of old GM diesels" argument is anymore - I'm sure there are still lots of people who remember how bad they were but it's been 25 years since the last ones were bult. There's a much bigger segment of the buying population that had no experience with those clunkers so they're a blank canvas for the marketers.

To me, it's a chicken-or-the-egg scenario. Customers can't buy what's not offered, and mfrs won't build what their focus groups tell them won't sell. How do you break the stalemate? Well, the gov't already offers income tax credits for diesels and hybrids, and my state exempts these cars from the 6% state sales tax. It's a start, but if the federal gov't considered a subsidy similar to what Europe has to promote diesels that should be enough to get auto mfrs to overcome their inertia for diesels.

Dutch Mandel wrote a great pro-diesel editorial in AutoWeek (following Denise McCluggage's similar themed piece two weeks ago) in which he cited if 30% of the US auto fleet were diesel we'd save enough oil that we wouldn't have to import any from OPEC countries. I think the figure he quoted was 1.5 million barrels a day. Impressive.

They made them up till 86 and Goodwrench motors were installed until 88 I believe. I researched an Olds 88 for a brief time.

 

[McBrew]

Maybe they licensed some of the components, but that Wikipedia article is a bit vague and lacks accuracy, the German-language Wikipedia article links straight from Bluetec to "SCR".

So according to the Wikipedia article Bluetec is 4 steps.

1. A Diesel oxidation catalyst - every diesel made in the last few decades has one. No need to license from Daimler

2. A DeNOx catalytic converter. Available from multiple suppliers, including Daimler's suppliers. No need to license from Daimler, but maybe buying components makes sense if they have a cost-effective version.

3. A particulate filter. Standard in most European-market diesels for about 10 years. Daimler was not a pioneer in that field.

4. SCR. Not patentable, too trivial. It's just basic chemistry. Maybe component sharing makes sense.

"Bluetec" is a trademark. I honestly don't believe anybody who wants to make a DeNOx catalytic converter or a SCR system has to knock on Daimler's door and license the technology.
The Wikipedia article on Bluetec claims that Mercedes calls the aqueous urea solution AdBlue. Which is not entirely accurate: Everybody else does too. AdBlue is not a Mercedes trademark. It's held by the VDA, and there's aDIN standard on it too. You can buy AdBlue at most European gas stations, because trucks of all manufacturers have been using it for years.

Okay... so why did VW pay Daimler for the technology?