give it a read
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../60601044/1111

so much for those EPA numbers.

 

I find it very interesting the way the auto mags have a sudden change of heart about the TDIs.

For years & years they could say nothing good about them. They were slow, not enough HP, loud & clacky, and <gasp> you had to touch that digusting diesel pump at the gas station.

The TDI has remained relatively unchanged for the better part of a decade & 1/2, but suddenly the same auto rags that derided the TDI are falling all over themselves about the diesel.

Why is this?

Because there is a new MPG king, and it's the hybrid. IMHO I think that the auto mags realize this, so they change their tune to saying the TDI is great for 2 reasons:

1) the TDI is even more scarce than most hybrids. Heck, they aren't even producing it here in the states in 2007. This allows them to push their "Real men guzzle gas" agenda while giving a token nod to fuel efficiency.

2) The TDI is the most like a "normal" car and is easier for them to wrap their ignorant luddite brains around.

 

42MPG highway in a Prius? Was he doing 90? I get 55MPG, round-trip to DC, going as fast as traffic permits (60-65). The author talks about driving it more patiently, but it's safe to assume he's not doing it well.

 

gang

i read the report. Of course a non hybrid wins the 'completely unbiased' test.

Since most automakers cant compete nor manufacter hybrids en masse to compete with honda and toyota, isnt this a 'lucky break' that it turns out gas cars (diesel inc) do as good as hybrids......?



Whew. Thank god the 'unbiased' testers think. Can you imagine what it would look like if our 'unbiased' test showed hybrids to have better mpg???? It would cost us tens of millions of dollars and made Toyota and Honda even MORE rich.



Thank god for these 'unbiased' test results..........

 

Bjaardker:
LOL saying TDIs have not changed in 15 years is like saying hybrids have not changed in 15 years. its a rediculus statement. So many advances in both technologies, and time marches on.

I admit to being biased twards the TDI as i own an older one 2002, which dosnt have as good a tdi engine as the 2006 version, which fule system deivery is quite diffrent. (not to mention the transmission etc... do i sound envious)

I looked into WHY VW isnt selling diesels in the usa in 2007. Its because the we are still using high sulfer diesel in the USA!

VW is changing from TDI technology to and even more advanced Comon Rail technology for thier diesles, so what does that mean, cleaner emissions, more economy etc. thing is that it requiers low sulfer diesel. Too bad the US lags behind europe and cant get thier act in gear and provide low sulfer diesel. sad huh.

we will have to wait till 2008. By then, the diesel fuel here is as good as what they use in europe. then VW can sell there more advanced comon rail diesels here. they are slated to be sold here in 2008. I am guessing that would be providing the usa does not slip the date AGAIN on low sulfer diesel.

The date slips put vw in a bad position as thier cars require it, and the us gov. mandated all diesel cars have to meet emission standards and use low sulfer diesel. VW has the car and will be selling it in europe. it beats the standard by a good margin... but...without the right fuel... you get the idea.

That wont stop the likes of gm etc... from selling thier diesel pickups i am sure.

You should write for the political mediia.
next time, all the facts would be nice.

Bias is a hell of a thing isn't it.

foo monkey:
I think they hinted that they did the test as a caravan, one behind the other type of thing. It would be interesting to get the details on how they did it. but ya have to figure a 349 mile trek is mostly highway. 349 miles, you think they could have driven around the block once to make it an even 350.

 

I bet if GM had a horse in the race they would have been on top

you would think there is more advertising dollars availablel from the other maufacturers.

Publishing the report was probably not the best move for autoweek.

 

No question that TDIs are very efficient-that is news to no one.The news is that they are quieter,a bit less stinky, and don't smoke like the bunch we had 1979-1986 did.Heck we-USA- bought lots of car diesels during the embargo.
Now this Autoweek test was just one test.It also was done rather simply-fillup-drive-fillup-divide.There is soooo much room for error in that method-especially when there was just one fillup involved.
Now there are 3 sources of scientific testing where the actual fuel use and miles are precisely measured.
1)The EPA- the Prius wins
2)The Euro EPA equivalent-Prius wins
3)Consumer Reports-they do the only real world testing with very careful measurements of fuel use, and distance traveled.The Prius was about 3 mpg highway, but waaaay better city.
Car and Driver did a test like Autoweek, and the Prius won by about 8 mpg.
TDIs are very good,and probably a better-more affordable-solution that full hybrids(but full plug in hybrids with a 15 mile EV range are another story).
TDIs are great.I would love to have a Zafira TDI as a US road trip vehicle.I could live with 40 mpg in an 8 passenger vehicle with lots of Home Depot type carrying/hauling potential(it is a squatty wide tall mini-minivan).Luck,Charlie

 

Some of y'alls post kill me.

Anytime some does a test or post a report that disagree's with your opinion you guys rip it for being biased, false, etc...

I don't see any bias in this report. Autoweek simply reported the results of their test. The data is what it is.

In this particular case, with the given set of test conditions, the Prius was outpeformed. No bias just facts.

 

B-100 biodiesel tips the advantage in favor of the diesel IMO. Our hybrids are burning non-renewable fuel while diesels can burn renewable. I'd have a diesel if they sold bio fuel within a hundred miles of were I live.

That said can a diesel do this?:

 

I'm not surprised. You said to guess, so I picked the TDi before reading the results, and I was right.