Future diesel models - response from MB - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

bbeardb · #1 10-21-2005, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diametricalbenz

Actually from an inside source at VW they plan to exit the diesel market by 2007 because of emissions stringency the only leverage is mass production use of biodiesel teamed with a catlytic converter which is still overcoming design issues.

Hopefully with higher fuel prices more interest will be placed on clean burning high mileage cars.

That sucks. I forgot about the new emissions rules coming out. I read something somewhere that they are really trying to get it to work without the catalytic converter. Something about it needing to be replaced and there is some 80,000 mile rule... Maybe it was some form or scrubber. I'll see if I can find the article, as it was a really good one.

You know, it might make diesels real cheap. Perceptions, that might have been getting better, will probably go back down the tubes if no one can sell them here anymore.

boneheaddoctor · #2 10-21-2005, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbeardb

That sucks. I forgot about the new emissions rules coming out. I read something somewhere that they are really trying to get it to work without the catalytic converter. Something about it needing to be replaced and there is some 80,000 mile rule... Maybe it was some form or scrubber. I'll see if I can find the article, as it was a really good one.

You know, it might make diesels real cheap. Perceptions, that might have been getting better, will probably go back down the tubes if no one can sell them here anymore.

No intent to make anything political out of this.....but blame your friendly enviro-nazies and the EPA......

I like clean air as much as the next guy..but enough is enough....

ANd I think they have gone way overboard...and its costing us..........we could have cars getting far better mileage than we will ever see with gasser engines. The rest of the world can have them...why not us.

#3 10-21-2005, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbeardb

You know, it might make diesels real cheap. Perceptions, that might have been getting better, will probably go back down the tubes if no one can sell them here anymore.

Don't forget about all the diesel SUV/pick-ups being sold in the US. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting one around here. I think they will help the public perception more than the VWs. Of course, the price of diesel fuel will have to be less than RUG for most people to be interested.

diametricalbenz · #4 10-21-2005, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bbeardb

That sucks. I forgot about the new emissions rules coming out. I read something somewhere that they are really trying to get it to work without the catalytic converter. Something about it needing to be replaced and there is some 80,000 mile rule... Maybe it was some form or scrubber. I'll see if I can find the article, as it was a really good one.

You know, it might make diesels real cheap. Perceptions, that might have been getting better, will probably go back down the tubes if no one can sell them here anymore.

I took some notes but what I can remember off the top of my head was that the accountants said that it would cost ~$5000 more per car to develop the catalyst or the urea injection system in the car and still make money. Even then the EPA has issues with that....

Therefore the marketing research says that people won't way 5k more on a $20k car for the diesel to offset the fuel cost which is more than premium at least right now. MB can do urea injection and still make money because the CDI will sell at $60k and so 5k per car of development would be recouped quicker.

bbeardb · #5 10-21-2005, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diametricalbenz

I took some notes but what I can remember off the top of my head was that the accountants said that it would cost ~$5000 more per car to develop the catalyst or the urea injection system in the car and still make money. Even then the EPA has issues with that....

Therefore the marketing research says that people won't way 5k more on a $20k car for the diesel to offset the fuel cost which is more than premium at least right now. MB can do urea injection and still make money because the CDI will sell at $60k and so 5k per car of development would be recouped quicker.

But people will pay a premium for hybrid technology. Go figure...

mdmsp1 · #6 10-21-2005, 02:45 PM

I had read on one of the sites that there was a change in diesel policy proposed by California's Air Quality board. California has typically set the standard that other states follow regarding emission rules. My understanding--and i will try to find the link--is that California has come to its senses and realized that current diesel technology is capable of producing a fuel efficient and quite "clean" alternative. This change in direction could have a positive impact on the availability of diesel cars both in California (where they have not been available) and elsewhere. Maybe some other contributor knows more...

I have to saya that I think it is crazy that there is so much emphasis on hybrids. They make sense for people who commute short distances in city traffic, but they do nothing for those of us who drive long highway distances. In the latter instance, a diesel is clearly more efficient.

A friend of mine thought the new Lexus suv hybrid would be the ticket for his family until he noticed that the highway mileage was so poor. They won't do diesels due to the same old perception issues (noisy, dirty, etc), so I doubt they'd even test drive a 320 CDI, even though it might be a great option for them.

I keep my mouth shut, as I already have bored my friends with how much I love my noisy, smelly (NOT!) diesel.
Mark
'93 300D 2.5

Bohous · #7 10-21-2005, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diametricalbenz

Actually from an inside source at VW they plan to exit the diesel market by 2007 because of emissions stringency the only leverage is mass production use of biodiesel teamed with a catlytic converter which is still overcoming design issues.
.

True. I went to look at a used Jetta TDI wagon at a dealer here in MA a couple weeks ago (sold) so I asked if they kept new TDI's on the lot. According to the salesman many states, including MA , require California Emissions requirements which exclude the sales of new diesels in those states. Any car that has less than 7,500 miles and is newer than '04 MY (I think) cannot be registered in those states, IOW, you can't go to Florida and buy a new TDI and register it in MA. I don't have time to dig up the link to the specifics at this time but a simple Google search should find it.

RUN-EM · #8 10-22-2005, 06:32 AM

The SLK model with the 3 turboed six. Hear it will do 0 to 60 in about 5.7 sec. and top out at a speed governed 156 mph.....and still get 47 mpg test figures. That would probably be the last new car I'd ever buy....yep, I'm 60 years old. Make mine blood red with a tan/palomino interior...7 speed automatic.....amg aero kit and wheels/sticky tires/handleing kit.

Run-em

Meta6981 · #9 10-22-2005, 11:49 AM

OK... so what is the real difference in burning bio versus Standard#2. Thkis thread has gotten me a litle bit confused. We as Americans want things bigger and better always, which will and is our biggest problem. The SUV boom is what brought about our current problems with fossil fuels. For the moment there is enough fuel to go around. No one is producing it. I got a slight history of different types of crude oil Light, Med.,and Dark. The US wants the light because it has the most gas whereas most of the light comes from the middle east (Iraq). If the Government wanted to receive different grades from elsewhere them wouldn't there be more diesel. Or we need to increase production and awareness of Biodiesel. Once the infastucture of Bio is established that would relive some on the strain on the planet... But one trouble is that there is too much of a debate going one between Gas and Diesel. People are too brainwashed by Hybird technology. They are looking at the immidiate solveing of the problem better fuel economy, but in the long run they will have to take into account of the batteries and what damage they will do when it comes time to replace them. THere isn't really a facility to handle the recycleing of the battery, and toyota has admitted that those battaries won't last longer than about 10 years, then they have to fork over 8 grand to get a new one. The biggest thing to solve this issue is awareness. Gas has its pros and cons, Diesels have thier as well. I feel that diesels have more pros, Longevity, versatility of fuels, More power (pulling). Also it really is not good that you cannot get a new passenger car powered via diesel in california, Yet they run many powerstokes, Duramaxs, etc. These vehicles eat the fuel right up. I was at a fueling station the oother day where a new power stoke took almost 80 dollars in fuel, then he pulled out gunning his engine the whole way out and down the street ii could hear the turbo whine from a block away. People like that need to get a slap to the face that they are fracking stuff up for everyone else. Because for every conservitive driver there are 5 more who drive like that guy. this got a little long but i guess i needed to let it out... oh yeah i wouild love a new E320CDI

NewBenzOwner · #10 10-22-2005, 08:17 PM

I agree with Meta, we need to have alternate fuels such as biodiesel, and ethanol and not be so caught up in having the hybrids. I for one am willing to try making some biodiesel after I do some research and fully understand the process. I also think it would be a big boon to our agriculture system to have an outlet for their production if biodiesel production increases.