Last post on May 20, 2013 at 8:22 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views
What is this discussion about?
Car Buying, Biodiesel, Diesel, Hybrid Cars, Coupe, Hatchback, SUV
#5883 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [ateixeira]
Jun 08, 2012 (8:18 am)
It's unkillable, you'll see junkyard cars with nice interiors. Modern leather ages well too though, seems to take a good 20+ years to show problems, and by then the car usually has bigger things to worry about.
#5884 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [byrn]
Jun 08, 2012 (9:07 am)
That attitude point of view is reminiscent of the late 70's and eighties. If you did not know to look for identifying badges (TDI's, bluetec, turbo diesel, etc.), you could not even tell you were behind a decade or so old ( ULSD) diesel passenger car. The interesting thing is that NO ONE harkens back to the time (mid to late 70's) when LEADED premium and LEADED regular were almost the 100% products !!! In addition, while still unknown the ppm sulfur was even HIGHER.
Now, if it is a choice between what you dislike/ like better; ULSD or RUG to PUG, EVERYBODY has their preferences. I also realize the above opinion is probably more prevalent, even as for whatever reasons "smellier" RUG/PUG users are tolerated and in some to a lot of cases, welcomed. As for greater toxicity and actual pollution, the majority of gassers make both volume and percentage much more. One sign post is ULSD get way better fuel mileage than GASSERS RUG/PUG. (aka, burn LESS????) As for the so called noxious fumes, I do not think anybody will say that diesel and RUG PUG do not BOTH emit.
So for example, RUG to PUG is delivered the pump from 30 ppm sulfur to 90 ppm sulfur (with off line FEE mitigation) ULSD is delivered from 5-7 ppm sulfur, with a standard of 15 ppm. So standard to standard, RUG/PUG is 2 times dirtier than ULSD. (30 ppm to 15 ppm) In terms of nominally delivered at the pumps, it can range from 6 to 18 times dirtier than ULSD. When you factor in biodiesel ZERO ppm sulfur, the figures almost become mathematically meaningless. But for conversational purposes, with a (artificial) value of 1 ppm biodiesel, RUG/PUG is actually more like 30 to 90 TIMES dirtier.
So defacto, many more people LIKE the smell of much dirtier RUG/PUG air while professing DIESEL/s being "dirtier." So really the opinion is not supported by the facts. I do know that many people when made aware of the facts are still of that expressed opinion.
Air quality districts have gone on record time and time again (CA metropolitan areas, i.e., LA, SF, SJ, ) saying that 5% of gasser polluters cause the majority of "over" pollution. Hence they encourage the general public to call specific phone numbers to report "GROSS" (assumption being gasser) polluters.
#5885 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [fintail]
Jun 08, 2012 (8:34 am)
A friend of a friend showed up at a party with an ancient Benz diesel, running like a champ of course. The seat padding had disintegrated, it was funny, but the vinyl was still OK, some 40 years later...
#5886 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [byrn]
Jun 08, 2012 (8:37 am)
"Make them so they stop belching noxious fumes. I hate being behind a diesel on the road, the fumes fill up the car, and that's when the diesel is 100 ft ahead."
I tested that just this last month. I drove home right behind a new VW TDI one day, and a new Mercedes diesel the next. In neither case did I smell anything, nor did I see the slightest puff of smoke.
I had your concerns with old diesels, I hated being behind them. But there is no reason to worry about the new ones.
#5888 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [ateixeira]
Jun 08, 2012 (9:09 am)
70s models in particular seem to have an aging issue where the padding shrinks. Easy fix, looks weird though.
#5889 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [ruking1]
by steve_ HOST
Jun 08, 2012 (9:22 am)
Trouble is that you still see and smell diesels passenger rigs out there (like the Jeep CRD guys "blowing their nose").
Occasionally you'll see a gasser smoking like a foundry too, but seems like they are way outnumbered by the smoking diesels (generally pickups).
Might be another two decades before most of them fade away.
I'm sure my wife could stand at a 4 way stop blindfolded and wearing earplugs and still be able to identify the diesel rigs stopping and going.
#5890 of 9309 Re: Ram 1500 diesel [ateixeira]
Jun 08, 2012 (9:51 am)
I am not sure I would want to be the one testing that VM diesel engine. I was hoping the Grand Cherokee would have the same engine as the ML350 Bluetec. I think they share chassis design. As many issues as the last Jeep diesel of Italian design had, makes me hesitant. I like the looks of the GC better than the Mercedes. Not ready to be a test bed for Italian engineering. In fairness most of the problems were caused by the added smog crapolla. The Germans seem to be designing their diesels cleaner to start with.
#5891 of 9309 Re: Ram 1500 diesel [gagrice]
Jun 08, 2012 (10:19 am)
I don't think that's a bad thing nowadays - the Italians have far more experience with diesels than Chrysler does.
I doubt the Benz powertrain is cheap to produce.
After the Jeep CRD fiasco, going Italian may not be a bad idea.
#5892 of 9309 Re: More down to earth... [steve_]
Jun 08, 2012 (10:25 am)
I think if you look at after market gasser and diesel parts, gasser modifications (95% gasser 5% diesel populations) almost TOTALLY outgun diesels. So if you are saying that gassers (by implication) do not smell (according to you and your ear plugged wife) the position is misleading at best.