Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Pickups Diesels Diesels in the News
8143 messages, Last post on Nov 27, 2009 at 12:10 PM
You are in the Diesels Forum. Your Host is kcram
|
Replying to: larsb (Jun 18, 2008 6:30 am) My experience has been: USING the upgraded hp/torque. One of the neatest differences between the gasser/diesel is that very small upgrades and resultant smaller cost give such a boost to the hp/torque % wise.. Gassers typically cost more and once the upgrades are in, almost always effect/affect a loss of mpg. Diesels on the other hand, lose mpg ONLY when you get ON it. This is a HUGE difference. So while the writer in effect confesses his lack of diesel knowledge (which is VERY common) , that lack of knowledge does not do justice to diesels. It is however very representative of those who drive gassers but have not had the diesel experience. The other non sound bite able issue is the 0-60 second metric. This has been and probably will remain a major criticism. 0-60 metrics are pretty close to USELESS in the real world, but I understand it takes on the treasured measure mantle on par with the measure of classic french dishs when you go to different restaurants. Diesels are good from 40-125 mph. They really don't need to be a sub 4 second 0-60, nor are most diesels designed for that metric. Operation at altitude literally blows away a gasser. MPG is 20-40% better. Diesels are better adapted for the US road systems than gassers. Torque for like hp gassers is almost always MORE. |
|
|
We are already paying more "per mile driven" than European drivers by virture of the 27 mpg standards and the DEFACTO 22 mpg standard. Corner store 4.51 per gal/27-22= .167 cents, .205 cents per mile driven $7.53 per gal ( US) Average price of diesel Germany (if someone has a corner store price in a place in Germany, pipe it in) 7.53/50-45= .15 cents, .167 cents per mile driven. One reason why I like diesel 4.95/50= .099 cents per mile driven. Even the Civic is still more 4.51/38 mpg= .11868 cents per mile driven. |
|
|
Replying to: altair4 (Jun 18, 2008 6:18 am) And what you want to know is: the new engine. Any good? No. It’s crap. Normally, diesels are happiest at low revs in a high gear. Not the Legacy. It has the torque of a pencil sharpener, the life and soul of a corpse. Plus it has been neutered inside as well. Inside, it has five seats, a dashboard, some leather and a sat nav screen that works well. Except at night, when it stares out of the dash like a second-world-war searchlight. Oh yes, and either I’ve grown or the car’s shrunk since I last tried it out, because I can report that life for the taller driver is cramped. I was hoping for more from Subaru... Oh well... 
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jun 18, 2008 8:55 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jun 18, 2008 8:55 am) I didn't buy the last gen Subie because: 1) the interior looked cheap, 2) the body cladding on the Outback put my wife off, and 3) it was too small for my 6'2" frame to comfortably fit. I wanted at least one more notch on the fore-to-aft seat adjustment. Bought the 1.8T Passat instead. I'm hoping, when the time comes, that an alternative to a VW's Jetta diesel wagon will be available.
|
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (Jun 18, 2008 10:20 am) Having said that, it would have seemed to me their diesel engine while having a lower center of gravity would face significantly greater challenges. ..."The decision to stay with the boxer layout may have been an easy one for Subaru, but turning that into reality was more complicated. The challenge was to make the engine strong enough to handle the increased demands of diesel without outgrowing the engine bay."... (Ref Garice's link) |
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (Jun 18, 2008 10:20 am) I did one better. I got a second opinion. Motor Trend seems to like it. Powering the trio is a 2.0-liter DOHC horizontally opposed flat-four common-rail diesel putting out 148 horses and 258 pound-feet of torque. (VW's 2.0-liter turbodiesel, coming later this year, provides 140 horsepower and 235 pound-feet.) Its acceleration won't break any records, but its excellent torque, available at a measly 1800 rpm, ensures that this car effortlessly goes up grades in fifth gear and has no trouble merging at freeway speeds. The boxer layout provides the same advantages as in Subaru's gas-powered offerings: lower center of gravity, reduced vibration, lighter weight. This turbodiesel is surprisingly smooth, with little turbo lag. It hums along at freeway speed at 2000 rpm and eats up mountain roads in third gear 2nd opinion
|
|
|
|
http://www.leftlanenews.com/scratch-that-2010-diesel-maxima-to-come-with-only-au- tomatic-transmission.html
|
|
|
|
|
O.K., it's the Cayenne, but still? And a mid-2009 release. No mention of US, but I think we're the largest market for the Cayenne. http://www.leftlanenews.com/porsche-to-launch-diesel-powered-cayenne-by-mid-2009- -spy-photos-included.html |
|
|
Replying to: peachtree103 (Jun 18, 2008 10:47 am)  Using both Honda and VW as examples, will see what actually hits the market!  I still want a twin turbo diesel, 6 speed manual, Toyota Landcruiser  30-35 mpg!!! 
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
