if americans like torque, why not buy diesel engined cars?

[henk4]

Ford is actually addressing this by making a Diesel F150 option on the next gen. It's not a total fix, but it is a start.

you also should realise that proper "almost" sulphurfree has only become available in the USA at the beginning of this year. Another excuse gone of the big three not to develop suitable diesel technology for themselves (Ford went to PSA, Chrysler can use Mercedes and GM runs a little bit behind with Opel/Isuzu technology.

[Quiggs]

you also should realise that proper "almost" sulphurfree has only become available in the USA at the beginning of this year. Another excuse gone of the big three not to develop suitable diesel technology for themselves (Ford went to PSA, Chrysler can use Mercedes and GM runs a little bit behind with Opel/Isuzu technology.

Absolutely. It was supposed to be out last year, but after Hurricane Katrina, the oil companies bitched and moaned about production hardships, and the government let them delay the roll out.

That, along with the new CARB and EPA standards, have made the current gen TDI's and Mercedes diesels impossible to sell for the 07 model year. They're supposed to be back in 08 though.

[Waugh-terfall]

VW Touareg 5.0-V10 TDI ftw..
or even just wait for the
Audi Q7 S-Line V12 TDI

[Ferrer]

you also should realise that proper "almost" sulphurfree has only become available in the USA at the beginning of this year. Another excuse gone of the big three not to develop suitable diesel technology for themselves (Ford went to PSA, Chrysler can use Mercedes and GM runs a little bit behind with Opel/Isuzu technology.

GM motors also uses VM Motori diesel engines in some of their cars.

[lightweight]

the California requirement for Nox from passenger diesel cars is the same as the Euro 5 norm

Yes, but the Euro 5 is not implemented yet.

I really doubt that there is a consistent US Gvt energy policy, aiming at stimulating hybrids. The only reason why they may want to stimulate that now is to protect their own industry, having seen the success of Toyota...

I agree with you that they are trying to protect their industry. However, I do believe also that there is an effort to promote alternative ways of propulsion and in particular fuel cells and hybrids. There are many reports on pilot programmes that use these types of vehicles.

As far as the European use of diesel is concerned, there is an extra fact leading towards this direction. The European manufacturers and the EU have agreed on a certain level of emissions until 2008 (I think that is the year, could be wrong though). However, these targets cannot be met with petrol engines, as it will be too expensive to commercialize the technologies required in such a short timeframe. It was judged as a more efficient way to invest on Diesels. However, even with the Diesels being widely adopted by consumers (nearly 50% of the European car market), these targets will probably not be met

[Waugh-terfall]

Torque?

TRACTORS FOR THE WIN!!!! John Deer 6-Cylinder Diesels I hear Chris Butcher cry...

[rev440]

Diesal cars cost more as well the fuel is just more expensive.

[Slicks]

Yes, other than prejudice diesel fuel is still more expencive than our premium 93.

[Slicks]

Torque?

TRACTORS FOR THE WIN!!!! John Deer 6-Cylinder Diesels I hear Chris Butcher cry...

Ignorance FTW!
Your car accelerates on the torque curve exactly, for example if your making 300ft.lbs at 2000RPMs, and 300ft.lbs at 4000RPMs (same car),in a single gear its not going to be pulling any harder although the hp is double.

[The_Canuck]

Yes, other than prejudice diesel fuel is still more expencive than our premium 93.

Ignorance FTL!

You get better MPG with diesels so it evens out...

[Slicks]

Ignorance FTL!

You get better MPG with diesels so it evens out...

Uh, no. I said it was more expencive than our premium, which is usualy 30-40 cents more expencive than our regular grade, which economy cars run on. So chances are the slightly better mpg is not going to help with the 50+ cents per gallon difference in money.

[The_Canuck]

Uh, no. I said it was more expencive than our premium, which is usualy 30-40 cents more expencive than our regular grade, which economy cars run on. So chances are the slightly better mpg is not going to help with the 50+ cents per gallon difference in money.

It would be close...plus think of what kinda of cars run on premium and what ones run on Diesel.

[Ferrer]

Uh, no. I said it was more expencive than our premium, which is usualy 30-40 cents more expencive than our regular grade, which economy cars run on. So chances are the slightly better mpg is not going to help with the 50+ cents per gallon difference in money.

Sometimes and depending on the cars compared the difference in fuel consumption is not small.

[Mr.Tiv]

Uh, no. I said it was more expencive than our premium, which is usualy 30-40 cents more expencive than our regular grade, which economy cars run on. So chances are the slightly better mpg is not going to help with the 50+ cents per gallon difference in money.

I've never seen a gap that wide in fuel cost. In Maryland, by my observation, diesel is usually 20-30 cents more than regular grade petrol, and so is premium.

[lightweight]

I've never seen a gap that wide in fuel cost. In Maryland, by my observation, diesel is usually 20-30 cents more than regular grade petrol, and so is premium.

The fuel cost is highly dependent on the taxes that are implemented per fuel unit.

The final price of the car that is available to consumers, is also highly dependent on the taxes.

So, the total cost of using a diesel car, can vary significantly from country to country (or from state to state). The same applies to hybrid cars.

This is another reason for which I believe that there is a US Goverment policy that favours hybrids.

This is not meant in a bad way. They decided that their energy policy will be better by using hybrids. A logical assumption.