VW Won't Attempt to Regain Diesel Leadership in US; Many TDI Models May Never Return

[oilhammer]

It's like they told the stylists: "See what you can do to reduce rear head room and trunk space." And are they phasing out the classic MB grill?
The German concept of "4 door coupe" is a bad idea, and that goes for the VW CC as well.

The CC is hideous too. Although the facelifted version is better than the old version, but they are still in my mind just a B6 Passat with a serious birth defect. Not only do I think the Passat looks better, but you can actually get in and out of them without smashing your skull on either the ridiculously low slung roofline or the pointed edge of the door. MB CLS is the same way, it is an E-class with a serious birth defect. Only now they seem to be making ALL the cars look this way. You can't see out of them. Difficult to get in and out of them. The trunk space is a joke. The rear headroom is a joke unless you are 5 ft tall or less. And again it isn't like the underpinnings are anything special.

4 door coupe is indeed a bad idea, that sums it up nicely. The CC does have some neat seats, though. But there is no reason they could not be placed into a "normal" sedan.

 

[kjclow]

Only now they seem to be making ALL the cars look this way. You can't see out of them. Difficult to get in and out of them. The trunk space is a joke. The rear headroom is a joke unless you are 5 ft tall or less.

That's my biggest objection to the design of the Kias and Hyundais. They all have a sloped roof which makes the backseat less usable and the back window impossible to see out of. The Japanese sedans seem to all be following that trend too. Is that supposed to make it safer for the occupants?

 

[oilhammer]

Higher waistlines and thus higher rear decks are a result of trying to make the passenger cars safer in a side impact against all the giant behemoths so many Americans think they need to drive around in every day.

The bad part is, it DOES make the car harder to see out of, and thus LESS safe than it would have been otherwise. So, to make up for that deficit, enter back up cameras, blind spot monitors, lane departure systems, and now automatic braking.

Seriously, they are working hard to take the driver out of the equation, because the driver has been found to be too stupid evidently to operate his or her vehicle safely. Maybe better driver training so we don't have so many morons on the roads would be better.

I just saw yet another asshat watching a movie on his cell phone propped up in the instrument cluster of his Cobalt this morning. On the interstate. Doing 70+. WATCHING A FRACKING MOVIE.

 

[John Kuhn]

Higher waistlines and thus higher rear decks are a result of trying to make the passenger cars safer in a side impact against all the giant behemoths so many Americans think they need to drive around in every day.

I'd say styling has more to do with the 4 door coupe style than safety. Lower roofline and tapered trunks, which are the styling hallmarks, don't have anything to do with safety IMO, even though I agree on the higher waistline aspect. Look at the stupid crossover SUVs like Nissan Murano (Moron-o). It's like they deliberately design the rear and side windows so you can't see out of them, just so they have that style that everyone is copying now.

 

[bhtooefr]

Aerodynamics are also a factor in the "4-door coupe" - reducing rear headroom allows the transition from the roof apex to the trunk lid to be smoother. (This is yet another reason for high rear decks, too.)

Of course, there's other ways to do this - I own a car that went for making the roof apex taller, so there was still adequate headroom in the back, and then with a very high rear deck, but glass below the rear deck, so you can still see out the back. (And then it has a backup camera anyway.)

 

[Bora-chiara]

I think all the newer MB cars are hideous ugly things. The new E is just awful. It is like they wanted to out do Infiniti for the most vomit inducing styling they can. Shame because the W124, W126, and even the W210 were such well styled, timeless looking cars that still look good even today. Even the W115 and W123 cars while a bit stodgy still invoke the look of a sturdy, quality automobile.

At least they can't screw the Sprinters up too much with some swoopy oblong styling.

AGREE.
AGREE.
AGREE.

I'm interested in LOOKING/TEST DRIVING a chevy but I would never buy one. BMW beautiful but out of my price range now. Merc...they look like designed to be toys for children. I agree with the E, it seems Merc hired some design people who just recently were caught working for Nissan.

 

[Bora-chiara]

That's my biggest objection to the design of the Kias and Hyundais. They all have a sloped roof which makes the backseat less usable and the back window impossible to see out of. The Japanese sedans seem to all be following that trend too. Is that supposed to make it safer for the occupants?

Last night was the first time i've sat in the back seat of a MK5 Jetta. I was impressed how much leg room a 6'3" tall guy had with the front seat pretty far back. Not AS much as my B5.5 but pretty close! The BRM gets better mileage than the BHW too.

 

[TDI2000Zim]

The VW Beetle (not convertible), was sold in 1979, and did not return until 1998/1999.

So, if this thread is right, then VW wants to go thru that same 20 year oblivion window.

That only made sense when VW was a MUCH smaller company.

Such a move now would reduce VW from the USA for 20 years, and lose its most profitable market. Not only it doesn't make sense, but it would place VW behind KIA Motors...

Though I see VW executives hurting, and some nationalism slighted, I am convinced that VW will go out of its way to win back every TDI buyer in the USA, because they NEED this market.

So, I'm at peace, because I know that VAG is not going to stop selling TDI cars in the USA, because cash matters more than feelings, particularly when you become too big to not rely on the market.

 

[Sappington]

In the meantime, the plugin-hybrid will be a stepping stone to EV majority, because you can use the EV mode (20-50 miles) for most of your daily driving [a majority -- I know some people have longer commutes] but you can always switch to gasoline mode when you need to drive far, and can do a 5 minute fill up of your tank and keep going.

This is what nailed it for me. Once the 2nd-Generation Chevy Volt came online, it's EV range was enough to cover my round-trip daily commute. It's rated for 53 EV mile range, but I actually get 65-70 of EV miles. And I've got a 10-gallon gas tank that takes over once the battery is exhausted, and the gas engine is rated 42 city / 43 highway.

I had my 2003 Jetta Wagon TDI for 13 years and loved it for so many reasons. But I watched in dismay as VW continued to offer lower and lower fuel economy ratings, while at the same time eliminating my ability to run 100% Biodiesel. I finally decided it was time to replace my wagon, and opted for the Chevy Volt because of the afore-mentioned EV capabilities. No competitive diesel was available for me anymore, and my loyalty to VW was tenuous.

I've had the 2017 Chevy Volt LT for 5 months now. Do I love it as much as my Jetta Wagon TDI? Maybe ask me once the honeymoon is over, but I suspect my answer will favor the wagon. I certainly miss the 100% Biodiesel option and wagon's utility. But it is sweet to have driven 6,122 miles and only have burned 17 gallons of gas.

 

[oilhammer]

The VW Beetle (not convertible), was sold in 1979, and did not return until 1998/1999. Not sure what this means. In the US, the last hard top Beetle was sold for the 1977 model year, and they hardly sold any. In fact, the sales of Beetles topped in the 1969 model year, and started dropping after that, and dropped like a stone starting in 1975, the year the Rabbit (Golf) came out. The only reason the [Super] Beetle convertible continued through '79 was because Karmann couldn't figure out how to make the Golf into a convertible without its unibody folding in half. The answer was the Easter basket handle, and thus the convertible Rabbit came out in 1980 replacing the Beetle convertible in the lineup. The original Beetle still continued production in Brazil and Mexico for decades later.

So, if this thread is right, then VW wants to go thru that same 20 year oblivion window.

That only made sense when VW was a MUCH smaller company. Volkswagen has been a huge company for quite a while

Such a move now would reduce VW from the USA for 20 years, and lose its most profitable market. Not only it doesn't make sense, but it would place VW behind KIA Motors... the US is their most profitable market? Not hardly. Not even close. They could never sell a single car here again under the VW logo and it would barely be a blip on their radar. They sell more Audi models in China even

Though I see VW executives hurting, and some nationalism slighted, I am convinced that VW will go out of its way to win back every TDI buyer in the USA, because they NEED this market. they don't "need" it, see above. Volkswagen depends on US sales about as much as GM depends on Icelandic sales

So, I'm at peace, because I know that VAG is not going to stop selling TDI cars in the USA, because cash matters more than feelings, particularly when you become too big to not rely on the market.They have axed diesels before from this market, they will do it again, and this time it is very possible they won't bother to bring them back, in light of the changing times regarding emissions standards and our government's war on anything efficient. The amount of diesel sales in this country is but a blip on a blip on VAG's radar screen. Toyota sold more white Camrys here.

bold is mine. While I do not want to see an end to TDI sales here, I am pretty sure that is exactly what is going to happen. Which is why I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone would want to part ways with any that they already have.

 

[993er]

But it is sweet to have driven 6,122 miles and only have burned 17 gallons of gas.

But how much did all the charging cost, which you could only know if you had a separate meter at your charging station?

 

[kjclow]

bold is mine. While I do not want to see an end to TDI sales here, I am pretty sure that is exactly what is going to happen. Which is why I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone would want to part ways with any that they already have.

As I've posted earlier, I think the days of a VW branded TDI in North America are done. However, I think we will continue to see the TDIs offered in the Audi line up but probably only the 6 cyl. Audi has a larger profit margin that could absorb more of the diesel upcharge. Plus, with the larger overall car models, Audi may need help on the CAFE numbers.

 

[respond2us]

bold is mine. While I do not want to see an end to TDI sales here, I am pretty sure that is exactly what is going to happen. Which is why I cannot for the life of me fathom why anyone would want to part ways with any that they already have.

I'm struggling with a somewhat-related conundrum. I now have 2 JSW's with under 75k miles. Not sure if I should sell the A5 TDI or keep it for down the road. Can't imagine it would get driven much though, and it's not good for them to sit.

 

[Sappington]

But how much did all the charging cost, which you could only know if you had a separate meter at your charging station?

Actually, not quite true. You can estimate pretty closely. My electricity costs $0.11 per kWh. There is some efficiency lost in the process of charging (I don't have the numbers off hand, but they're floating around on the gm-volt forums), but it's not much.

When I've driven 70 miles, that has used 14.7 kWH (the battery capacity is 18.4 kWh, but 20% is reserved as buffer or something, so 14.7 is the max). So that's about $1.62 for 70 miles. Gas is $2.15 around me right now, and the same 70 miles in my Jetta Wagon TDI would have seen an efficiency rating of around 42 mpg. That would have taken 1.67 gallons of fuel, which would have cost about $3.59 for the same trip. My B100 cost $3.38/gallon, so the cleaner fuel would be $5.64 for the same trip.

Anecdotally, I bought my car April 30th, so I compared my electricity bills for April and May. Both were very mild months, where I hardly ran my AC in the house at all, but still the temperatures got gradually warmer in May and required a little more AC. I also was now powering my Volt in May, but had not in April. My bill went up only $10 in May, and not all of that was because of the Volt. All other electricity usage in the house was pretty much the same in those two months.

Emissions are another story, because a typical rebuttal is "oh, but what fuel source is providing that electricity to your home?". In Virginia, it's mostly fossil fuels providing my electricity, unfortunately (break-down below), but I do have the option of solar panels on my house in the future. I want to say that fuel burned at a power plant to provide electricity is more efficient and cleaner than a car doing the same, but I could be wrong there (please correct me). Still, it's more difficult to compare tailpipe diesel/gas emissions to, say, nuclear power or natural gas plants.

[B][U]Virginia[/U][/B]
Natural Gas: 36%
Nuclear: 35%
Coal: 20%
Hydro: 2%
Oil: 2%
Other: 5%
[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/[/url]

 

[bhtooefr]

Also, keep in mind that in some areas, you can change your energy plan to one that uses higher proportions of renewable energy, or change to a generation supplier that uses higher proportions of renewable energy.

Here in Ohio, we have the Energy Choice program that allows picking a different generation supplier, so I'm on IGS Energy's green plan, which is currently 100% wind.

(How it ultimately works is, I pay AEP Ohio (my distribution supplier) for my usage, but I'm telling them to agree to buy my usage from IGS Energy, rather than from themselves. I'm also telling IGS Energy to buy my usage from wind providers. Because they can't guarantee that every electron is green, it all works in the form of renewable energy credits - they buy my usage (however many kWh that is) worth of RECs from wind generators, who generated that power and put it on the grid. So, at any given moment, even coal may be the source of electrons powering my apartment, but somewhere else, or at some other time, wind is being used and reducing the demand for coal.)

 

[VeeDubTDI]

Emissions are another story, because a typical rebuttal is "oh, but what fuel source is providing that electricity to your home?". In Virginia, it's mostly fossil fuels providing my electricity, unfortunately (break-down below), but I do have the option of solar panels on my house in the future. I want to say that fuel burned at a power plant to provide electricity is more efficient and cleaner than a car doing the same, but I could be wrong there (please correct me). Still, it's more difficult to compare tailpipe diesel/gas emissions to, say, nuclear power or natural gas plants.

[B][U]Virginia[/U][/B]
Natural Gas: 36%
Nuclear: 35%
Coal: 20%
Hydro: 2%
Oil: 2%
Other: 5%
[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/[/url]

Like me, you're probably a Dominion Power customer. I have subscribed to Dominon's "green power program," which raised our rate from $0.11/kWh up to $0.135/kWh. While this arrangement isn't ideal (I'd much rather have solar on the roof), it's the best option we have at the moment.

 

[Sappington]

Like me, you're probably a Dominion Power customer. I have subscribed to Dominon's "green power program," which raised our rate from $0.11/kWh up to $0.135/kWh. While this arrangement isn't ideal (I'd much rather have solar on the roof), it's the best option we have at the moment.

Actually, I'm NOVEC. I need to look into those renewable energy options.

 

[tikal]

I am not sure if the statement "VW continued to offer lower and lower fuel economy ratings" is completely true when you take into account the loading capacity (and practicality) of the vehicle. Sure we can make very nice small cars that can do 200 MPG but they are not very versatile, correct? What would be the efficiency of a electrical scooter? 300 MPG?

Now make yourself a list of passenger cars under $30K that have at least 30 cubic feet of cargo capacity, seat comfortably four people and are capable of delivering a lifetime average of at least 35 MPG (is this too much to ask?). You are basically going to be left with two cars: the Volkswagen Golf SportWagen TDI and the Toyota Prius V.

Now raise the bar to a cargo of at least 35 cubic feet and you get exactly ZERO vehicles with the above conditions. Not even the latest Toyota RAV4 Hybrid makes the mark as it is only managing to get around 33 MPG as per latest averages on Fuelly. Now if that RAV4 would have come with the light duty diesel meeting the latest emissions standards in the US my bet would be that it would surpass the efficiency of its hybrid counterpart (and possibly make the list since I am not sure how much it will cost).

So let's try to compare apples to apples when it comes to efficiency of a passenger car please.

This is what nailed it for me. Once the 2nd-Generation Chevy Volt came online, it's EV range was enough to cover my round-trip daily commute. It's rated for 53 EV mile range, but I actually get 65-70 of EV miles. And I've got a 10-gallon gas tank that takes over once the battery is exhausted, and the gas engine is rated 42 city / 43 highway.

I had my 2003 Jetta Wagon TDI for 13 years and loved it for so many reasons. But I watched in dismay as VW continued to offer lower and lower fuel economy ratings, while at the same time eliminating my ability to run 100% Biodiesel. I finally decided it was time to replace my wagon, and opted for the Chevy Volt because of the afore-mentioned EV capabilities. No competitive diesel was available for me anymore, and my loyalty to VW was tenuous.

I've had the 2017 Chevy Volt LT for 5 months now. Do I love it as much as my Jetta Wagon TDI? Maybe ask me once the honeymoon is over, but I suspect my answer will favor the wagon. I certainly miss the 100% Biodiesel option and wagon's utility. But it is sweet to have driven 6,122 miles and only have burned 17 gallons of gas.

 

[bhtooefr]

Do note that diesel has 12-14% more energy, and 12-14% more CO2 emissions, per gallon than gasoline. So, if that's your concern, that biases things against the diesel.

 

[Sappington]

I am not sure if the statement "VW continued to offer lower and lower fuel economy ratings" is completely true when you take into account the loading capacity (and practicality) of the vehicle. Sure we can make very nice small cars that can do 200 MPG but they are not very versatile, correct? What would be the efficiency of a electrical scooter? 300 MPG?
So let's try to compare apples to apples when it comes to efficiency of a passenger car please.

Dude. I'm comparing my 2003 Jetta Wagon TDI, and the Mark IV ALH platform in general, to the later VW TDIs that came out. How much more apples to apples can you get than that? The generations of VWs that came out after the one I bought had increased HP, which lowered the MPG, different engine components (PD) that was not as suitable for Biodiesel, and then VW's "brilliant" solution to lower emissions makes it incompatible to run more than B-fricking-5 in the damn thing, when high blends of Biodiesel would address the emissions concerns. I blame CARB partly for this terrible irony, but I also blame VW for their solution design. Hell, the Chevy Cruze Diesel came on the scene about the same time as the 2009+ VWs, and those are compatible with up to B20!! WTH, VW?

I loved my wagon's cargo space and versatility for fuel and utility. I hauled loads to the landfill, large items from Home Depot, towed a trailer, loaded up the trunk with paver stones and bags of salt, etc. Not going to do much of that with my Volt, but I still am loving the car and the ability to do ~90% of my driving on all electric, switching to high-efficiency gasoline as needed. I've still got my minivan for hauling, if need be.

 

[tikal]

Do note that diesel has 12-14% more energy, and 12-14% more CO2 emissions, per gallon than gasoline. So, if that's your concern, that biases things against the diesel.

Yes I agree. There are different factors that biases against diesel and there are other factors that biases against gasoline, hybrids and electrical modes of private transportation. The most comprehensive study to account for all these 'biases factors' I have seen so far is the one by the National Academy of Sciences in the 2009 time frame titled "Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use". The following graph cortesy of user waxman illustrates the big picture of this study for various engine technologies used in 2016 passenger cars:

So by this study modern light duty diesel cars health impacts are on par to that of electrical vehicles using solar charging and are better than PHEV (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles).

In their study they project the above health costs to the year 2030 and if I recall correctly the light duty diesel technology still was one the top lowest contributors to health costs.

I personally think that it is a fairly complex topic and I have not read all the pages of the report. However from a layman's point of view the results make sense to me.

 

[turbobrick240]

I think most hybrid and ev owners would rather gloss over the hidden costs/impacts of those technologies. I'll probably switch over to ev when everyone else does, but I won't go around smugly sniffing my own farts.

 

[tikal]

Sappington, I agree that from the previous TDI engines (ALH and PD) were more efficient and that by putting too much emphasis on NOx emissions we are missing the bigger picture of taking advantage of the light duty diesel technology which is still the "most bang for the money" when it comes to passenger room and loading capacity. EVs and hybrid cars are a good match for smaller cars not requiring to haul too much stuff.

 

[n1das]

Sappington, I agree that from the previous TDI engines (ALH and PD) were more efficient and that by putting too much emphasis on NOx emissions we are missing the bigger picture of taking advantage of the light duty diesel technology which is still the "most bang for the money" when it comes to passenger room and loading capacity. EVs and hybrid cars are a good match for smaller cars not requiring to haul too much stuff.

IIRC, Drivbiwire posted some data a few years ago comparing efficiency of ALH and PD TDIs to the CR TDIs, and also compared them to a Toyota Prius. The most efficient of all of them was the CR TDIs. I may be wrong but I recall the Prius came in as the least efficient, which comes as no surprise given the mileage a Prius gets is laughable considering what a penalty box the car is to drive. Efficiency was expressed as grams fuel consumed per kilowatt of power output. (1 HP = 746 W = 0.746 kW) The lower the number of grams of fuel consumed for a given amount of power produced, the more efficient the power plant is. The lower the g/kW number is, the better. Note that efficiency and MPGs are not necessarily the same thing. We tend to use "efficiency", "fuel efficient", and "MPG" a bit too loosely around here. As a somewhat extreme example, if you compare a TDI to a diesel pickup truck, you'll notice the MPGs each vehicle gets are way different due to a number of factors. However, their efficiency in terms of g/kW will be similar given they are both diesels.

On another note....TDIs may never return which means I will never return to VW as a customer. Gassers, gasser-electric hype-brids, Hydrogen FCVs, and range crippled e-turds are not an option at all. Whatever I own and drive HAS to be diesel, first and foremost. Future TDIs may be dead as VW really screwed the pooch but IMHO diesel is still far from dead. The diesel pickup truck market does not appear to be threatened at all and is expanding (RAM1500, Chevy Colorado, Nissan Titan XD, Ford F-150 spy video). Diesel cars from a few other manufacturers are also appearing (BMW, Chevy, Jaguar, Jeep, MB, Range Rover). As quoted in a recent article about the Chevy Cruze diesel, Dieselgate has not hindered GM's plans for diesel and intends to capitalize on it. And as announced earlier tonight in Detroit, the Chevy Equinox is getting a diesel option for 2018. Wouldn't it be ironic if GM were to become the savior for diesel cars?
http://www.autoblog.com/2016/09/22/2018-chevy-equinox-turbo-diesel-engine/#slide-4072281

 

[bhtooefr]

Peak efficiency of the ALH is 197 g/kWh, or approximately 42.5% efficient per the conversion factor listed here:

Peak efficiency of the CBEA is 196 g/kWh - although it needs to be noted that the CBEA is likely cheating for this, and it's definitely not doing a regen - or approximately 42.7% efficient.

Peak efficiency of the ESTEC 2ZR-FXE (as used in the 2016+ Prius) is 40%: http://papers.sae.org/2016-01-0684/

So, on a raw efficiency basis, yes, the ALH and CBEA are more efficient than the ESTEC 2ZR-FXE.

However, it's how you use that power. Running lower cylinder pressures than optimal, or off of optimal RPMs? You fall off of that peak efficiency, and it only takes 209 g/kWh operation to get a diesel to match the 2ZR-FXE. And, let me get to another point.

I'm going to drop a BSFC map for the previous version of the 2ZR-FXE (as used in the Gen 3 Prius) here, I'd expect the ESTEC version to look similar, although with better efficiency in general. Ignore the green area, that's the Gen 2 Prius's 1NZ-FXE for comparison.

Note the operating line - outside of warmup, or a fully charged battery at vehicle speeds that prevent the engine from shutting off due to mechanical limits, the Gen 3 Prius will follow that line only - the worst case efficiency is, if they scaled this sanely, under 250 g/kWh (the increase in torque at 3500 RPM is due to shutting off the (rather high duty cycle) EGR). 250 g/kWh on a gas engine is roughly equivalent to 256 g/kWh on a diesel... and there's many situations where the ALH or CBEA will be worse off than that, when cruising, between suboptimal gearing, selecting a gear for vehicle responsiveness, and the lack of a hybrid system. And, the normal operation target is to stay under 230 g/kWh - 35.6+% efficient, and equivalent to about 235 g/kWh on a diesel. That's a lot of the time on the ALH and CBEA.

What the hybrid system enables, more than anything, is to keep the Prius's engine very close to its efficiency peak in most situations. If the vehicle power demands are lower than the minimum efficient power for the engine, rather than throttle the engine back, it can just shut the engine completely down, and use electricity. If the battery's low, it can then run the engine at its minimum efficient power, and use the excess to recharge the battery, cycling the engine as needed. Also, because it will shut the engine down when it's not needed, you don't waste fuel idling. (And, as far as descending hills... descending in gear means the engine's in overrun, and blowing cold air through the emissions system, which the Prius avoids unless engine braking is specifically desired. Descending in neutral wastes fuel idling (although less fuel than would be wasted getting back up to speed after descending in gear). The Prius gives you the choice between descending while regenerative braking, or giving it a touch of throttle to cancel out the regen, and descending in what's effectively engine off neutral.)

Now consider that the Gen 4 Prius's engine is more efficient than that, and it also has wider ranges of engine-off operation, more low-speed torque delivery from the electric motor, improved power electronics...

Basically, the clever part of a hybrid isn't that the engine's as efficient at the peak as a diesel, it's that the hybrid system keeps the engine that you have near its peak, as opposed to a conventional diesel that often falls below its peak.

Oh, and finally, Gen 4 ain't a penalty box, especially not compared to some of the garbage VW was shoving TDIs into.

 

[oilhammer]

Oh, tooef, you need to take the Prius stuff to another forum... What happened to you???

 

[jackbombay]

Thanks for the info tooef, good stuff, I'm also glad to see that in real world conditions my ALH is still king of the hill for TDIs!

 

[tikal]

I would be curious to know how two fully heavily loaded latest Golf Wagon TDI (fixed) and Prius V would do in the recent camping trip my family (two adults + two children) did from SE Texas to New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and Colorado going 70 to 80 MPH in the highway (posted speed limits +/- 5 MPH) and then up and down of many mountains with sometimes very steep gradients. My bet is that the Golf Wagon would beat the Prius V in MPG and performance (specially in the mountains climbing all the way to areas of 10,000 ft or slightly more).

 

[kjclow]

My favorite Prius story was when coming back from DC on I81. We had the JSW on cruise and we're passing a lot of cars without effort. A prius took exception and tried to keep up on one of the steeper, longer climbs but couldn't. Once we crested the rise and started down the other side, I looked in the mirror and here came that Prius sceaming down the road. I caught up to him about five miles later when he was explaining to the Virginia Highway Patrol why he was driving like a lunatic. I'm guessing his fun and games cost him close to $1k.

 

[bhtooefr]

I wouldn't take that bet, that's for sure, there's a few things working against the Prius v.

It's a huge car compared to the GSW (it's almost the size of what a Passat wagon would be, and taller), the gearing's even shorter than the standard Gen 3 Prius, the aerodynamics might actually be worse, steep ascents might drain the battery, it's down over 16 hp on the Golf (Toyota rated the Gen 3 (and Prius v) at 134 hp, but upon release of the Gen 4, said that that rating method was inaccurate, and it's actually less than 134), and descents can't be done with the engine off at anywhere near those speeds (in my Gen 4, at somewhere between 71 and 73 MPH, the engine can shut off on descents, but the Gen 3, that's lower, and the Prius v, that's lower yet).

The only thing really going for the Prius v is... As far as I know, the TDIs aren't turbonormalized, so both ICEs will lose power as altitude increases, but some of the Prius's power is electric, and therefore isn't subject to altitude losses (but it ultimately comes from the ICE, so...)

Oh, and you said MPG, not efficiency - gasoline has less energy per gallon, so even at the same efficiency, MPG is worse. I actually wouldn't be surprised if it's as efficient despite its size and the hybrid system not being able to work at its best in those scenarios, though.