25 Votes

Latest Study Indicates Hybrids Still Can't Touch Payback Times Of Diesels.

Agent009 submitted on 7/31/2009 Official Bell & Ross Timestamp: 3:14:21 PM

82 user comments | Category: Misc News | Source: | SOURCE: www.edmunds.com

With gasoline and diesel fuel prices staying low (and uncharacteristically consistent) as the summer progresses, data analysts at Edmunds conducted a recent crunch of the often-discussed payback times for the nation's two competing fuel-saving drivetrains: hybrid-electric and diesel vehicles.

The latest round goes to diesel. There are two factors currently working in diesel's favor. First, diesel fuel prices have dropped precipitously since last summer's explosion to $4 per gallon (and beyond) and normalized to pricing quite near regular unleaded gasoline.

Second, the price "premium" for diesel technologies is low — and in a few cases, combines with federal tax credits to make the diesel-powered vehicle actually cheaper than a comparable gasoline-engine variant of the same model. For those vehicles, diesel-engine payback time is immediate.

2009 Comicon Photo Gallery

2009 Frankfurt Auto Show Photo Gallery

AutoSpies.com Photo Galleries

If you want to see your photos running on our homepage photo ticker, be sure to upload your photos on the go by sending them to Mobile@AutoSpies.com

Share on Facebook

Read Article

Latest Study Indicates Hybrids Still Can't Touch Payback Times Of Diesels.

About the Author

"If everything seems under control, you're just not going fast enough."
— Agent009 (View Profile)

User Comments

How are has prices low?Its over $3.00 where I live for premium.
— rxh8me9000 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 3:51:09 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

I wanted to put this post nice and high on the page to save the time of anybody wanting to read the comments below. The comments, and the people that made them, are completely idiotic and they're really just having pissing contests with each other.

Bottom line is hybrids are made for city driving and diesels are made for autobahning or long distance driving. I personally drive 25 miles each way to work with little traffic, so that is why I have been looking for a diesel. If I had to drive 25 miles in gridlock...well I might consider a hybrid that has a gasoline-only sibling b/c it seems like everything that is just a hybrid is so ugly I'd probably drive it straight into a brick wall.

There are also benefits and drawbacks of both technologies. If you listed all of them and quantified all of them you'd probably come out in a draw. Neither vehicle is a cure-all to our fossil fuel consumption woes. So you should simply choose one or the other on personal preference and situation.

Finally, as I've said many times before, the ideal short-term solution that would make hybrids and diesels obsolete is to combine the two. Yes, a diesel hybrid. Stop and go efficiency and fuel sipping cruising. But hey, the public is apathetic enough to buy mass quantities of of vehicles with just one of the technologies, so why bother developing a new technology?

Read on, but you can't say I didn't warn you.
— budfrogS4 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 10:00:44 AM | | Votes: 1

rx - yesterday I drove by a Shell and regular was going for $2.54 and diesel was going for $2.44. I'm sure it all depends on how much your state gov't wants you to stick with gasoline.
— budfrogS4 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 10:05:44 AM | | Votes: 1

Gas/electric hybrids aren't about economics, they are about the warm fuzzy feeling that people get as well as the image people feel they project when they have a hybrid. Just like santa clause, the easter bunny, or hanuka harry; everyone knows that the hybrid myth is a sham but it is easier and more fun to believe. It is the same as quack, new age medicine that makes millions of dollars for the con artists who peddle them. Easy answers always sell, even when they are obvious lies. Ask Oprah! She became a billionaire from pushing every bit of silly nonsense that claims health and wealth with no basis in reality. PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR EASY ANSWERS... "Look at me! I am saving the planet by burning gas to lug around a huge battery!" Of course it makes no sense but it doesn't need to.

— camrydriver (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 1:46:34 PM | | Votes: 3

Go ahead believe that when the proof show it can take decades to recoup the cost of buying a hybrid. And Yes rxh8me9000 is correct gas prices have EVERYTHING to do with pay off of your hybrid purchase.
— Agent009 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 4:39:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Plus Hybrid is quiet and smooth and don't clatter like the engine is about to blow up. Diesel supporters seem to forget people don't like crudeness and is willing spend more for something else.

Hydrid is instant torque without commotion, diesel has turbo lag.

Driving a Hybrid is COOL, diesel are driven by dorks, who wants to be viewd as one?

If people think gasoline engine catalytic converters are expensive to replace, just wait til those cats that make diesels pass emission tests needs replacing.
— Badgewhore (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 3:50:01 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

"...Hybrids STILL (emph added) Can't Touch...."

"The latest round goes to diesel. "

Which is it?

Diesel fuel is relatively inexpensive right now, and mfrs (having sold so few) are still subject to the tax credit. But both these factors are way too variable to call the game for diesel.

When a diesel can touch the 50mpg combined (I dont want to hear about tiny Euro diesel specks either), then we'll see who wins in the end.

— thetruth01 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 5:46:46 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

"When a diesel can touch the 50mpg combined (I dont want to hear about tiny Euro diesel specks either), "

What exactly is wrong with a "tiny Euro diesel specks"?
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 9:34:49 PM | | Votes: 4

Just read the article. Wow they can spin anything over there, huh.

Comparing a Prius to an Insight to get its payback time is disingenuous. The car are not in the same class. It's as bad as the Prius/Corlla payback comparisons we used to get. What is the payback time when you compare the similarly priced Prius to other midsized gasoline vehicles?

Lumping "averages" when including the LS600 and the ridiculous GM trucks is unfair. Mainstream hybrids have similar paybacks to the diesels. "Using a 15,000-mile annual driving figure, the lowest hybrid payback time is slightly more than six months for the Camry Hybrid. The Lexus RX 450h, one of the market's most popular hybrids, requires six years' worth of 15,000-mile-per-year driving to pay back its $2,792 premium." "Other diesel payback times include Volkswagen's popular Jetta TDI, at 4.1 years to pay back its $1,760 premium; BMW's 335d, at 5.6 years to pay back a $2,558 premium; and BMW's X5 xDrive 35d at 4.6 years to pay back its $1,732 premium." Pretty close, if you ask me. The mathematics of averages is far too complicated for this brief summary.

Another probelm with the payback story is that with some diesels you get a price premium for an inferior vehicle. Comparing the GL320d with the powerful GL450? Why not calculate the SAVINGS you get when buying the hybrid Fusion instead of the loaded V6 Fusion?

spin, spin, sugar. I can do it too.
— thetruth01 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 6:01:46 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Well said. With diesel you pay a premium for a worse performing vehicle than its referenced gasoline counterpart, whereas with hybrids you pay a premium for a better performing vehicle than its gasoline counterpart. Batteries/electric motors are like emission-free superchargers. A sane person would not expect that extra boost to come at no cost.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 6:24:43 PM | | Votes: -5

That is a heavy ass supercharger.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 9:21:52 PM | | Votes: -1

You two clowns are assuming that everyone who purchases a diesel cares about raw performance. A GL320 CDI is powerful and quick enough by modern standards. You want something faster? Get a GL550 if you want to pay for the high fuel bills. The GL320 CDI is for people who want a nice premium SUV that is powerful and efficient. Raw performance is not an issue here.

Oh, and I've driven the GL320 CDI and I don't see anything "inferior" about it. It pulls nicely, is refined and is probably the best GL motorization choice out there as it combines efficiency with decent power.

Cut this bullshit about the GL320 CDI being "inferior" to the GL450. It's BS.
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 9:38:05 PM | | Votes: 6

The GL320 is only about 2 seconds slower to 60 than the GL450. I have every option available in mine that is available in the GL450. I don't think 2 seconds to 60 makes a vehicle inferior...in fact I'd say my better than EPA rated 26 mpg highway and 21 mpg combined mpg makes my GL320 superior.
— westy1974 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:19:33 PM | | Votes: 3

Wimmer & westy1974:
I like how you clowns try to suggest that performance is not worth any premium for the sake of your argument. By your logic the C220 CDI is "superior" to say C55 AMG because of far better fuel efficiency. Face it: the 335d costs $2,558 more than the 335i and is much slower. The Jetta TDI costs $1,760 more than the Jetta TSI and is much slower too. All diesels cost more than their equivalent gasoline counterparts (if there is one) and are slower. Hybrids on the other hand cost more and are properly faster. Performance is worth something, even if you pretend you didn't know that.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 11:35:52 PM | | Votes: -3

People going for diesels are interested in fuel economy first of all and are willing to pay for it. You need to get this whole "speed/price" crap out of your head, FanboyTruth.
— Willis (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 8:51:58 AM | | Votes: 4

Willis:
Isn't it clear enough already?

diesel = compromising speed for fuel economy
hybrid = having your cake and eat it too

End of story.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:45:22 AM | | Votes: 0

The way I see it... there are no modern clean diesel cars with any balls, they all tend to be low displacement engines tuned towards peak fuel efficiency. So yes for now Diesel cars will compromise top end speed (I want an inline 6 turbo diesel with 7liters of displacement in a sports car :) haha). And hybrid's are also a compromise for fuel efficiency. The only ones that get above 50mpg are ones with tiny engines that have been so tuned towards fuel sipping that they aren't fun either. (i.e. the prius has a 1.8 liter engine popping out 98hp...) sure it has the hybrid pack to make up for that lost power, but if it's making up for the lost power it is no longer a fun booster... it's just another added compromise.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 12:45:02 PM | | Votes: 3

"diesel = compromising speed for fuel economy"

So why is speed so important? I guess I am stuck with a bunch of silly kids on this website.

Tell me how often you use "speed" in your daily drives (if you can even drive). I'm assuming you live in the US. So tell me where speed is important? Tell me. I really want to know.

I've driven dozens of smaller diesel cars here in Europe and I've never had a problem with their performance. They were quick enough for my needs and most importantly they were fuel efficient. Speed? I had them up to 150-160 km/h on the Autobahn, which is a respectable speed and the cruising speed of most drivers on the Autobahn. What is the speed limit in the US again?

Also, you're claiming diesels are therefore slow, right? Is a BMW 335d "slow"? Or a Mercedes E320 CDI? If you think those cars are "slow" then you seriously have issues.

Maybe you should grow up first and mature before trying to convince me that diesels are worthless because they "sacrifice speed" for fuel economy. BS.
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:23:27 PM | | Votes: 1

Wimmer:
The point is that performance costs money; otherwise the C63 AMG wouldn't cost almost twice as much as a C250. It is ridiculous to evaluate the "premium" of hybrids versus the "premium" of diesels without factoring the key differences in performance. Euro fanboys usually know more about bragging about performance. I wonder what happened to them in this thread.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 3:02:02 PM | | Votes: 3

While that may be true in theory, both BMW 335d and X5 xdrive35d come with a 4,500 eco credit:
http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/FinancialServices/ecocredit.aspx

That makes them *CHEAPER* than their gasoline counter part.

These engines are quite refined compared.

They may be slower than the gasoline counter parts in top speed, BUT the insane torque you get at extremely low revs mean that for most city/highway driving, it will feel a lot faster. Passing is easy.

If you are looking for fun to drive vehicles that also give fantastic mileage, there are no other comparable cars selling in the USA today assuming you can afford 40-60k cars.
— rumnyc (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 8:26:34 PM | | Votes: 0

for the last time, you do NOT buy hybrids to save money, that doesnt make sense. you buy it to reduce carbon footprint and emissions, and also for the extra quietness from the powertrain.

latest study, diesels are more detrimental to the environment than hybrids
— LexusKindaGuy12 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 6:26:02 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4

Yeah, too bad the Insight and the Prius are built in Japan and then have to be shipped over here...I bet that doesn't add any polution to the environment or anything.
— westy1974 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:23:50 PM | | Votes: 2

...and other cars dont need to be shipped here?
— LexusKindaGuy12 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 11:01:50 PM | | Votes: -1

That's not the point. Of course there are plenty of cars shipped here. I'm just curious how many people take the shipping from Japan into account when considering the carbon footprint of a Prius or Insight. Get a Fusion hybrid which is at least built in North America.
— westy1974 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 11:13:16 PM | | Votes: 2

westy1974 you are such a clown. We are talking about diesel vs. hybrid and you are turning it into domestic vs. import. Get a brain.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 11:41:04 PM | | Votes: -3

The Prius has no gasoline equivalent while the base Jetta TDI with auto and rear airbags costs the same as the Prius.

Prius has a 0 year payback period because there is NO hybrid premium.
Buy a Prius and you save money and the environment IMMEDIATELY.

Diesel's popularity is working to its advantage. If more people purchases them, it'd lose its gov't subsidized price advantage, then there'd be no point in buying a diesel when you pay less for a superior hybrid. (its a toss up when you look at SUVs).

Wimmer,
The European diesel sardine cans can't hold a candle to a motorcycle if you don't care about the engine and vehicle getting smaller and smaller. The Prius is midsized and matches those tiny little toys while still spewing out lower emissions. Let's see a diesel do that.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:23:04 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

"popularity" should read "unpopularity"
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:24:01 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3

Got a question. Why do diesels even have a premium? They manufacture enough of them in Europe that productions costs should be the same as gasoline engines. Its not as though they've put any research into diesel technology (filters used to hide pollution aren't exactly cutting edge).

The diesel premium is pure PROFIT for the Germans who are laughing all the way to the bank (laughing at the customers, not with them, I might add).

The real question is why do diesels even have a premium payback period? The Prius doesn't.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:37:06 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -5

The moron Huu76 comments again. What a failure...

Modern diesel engines tend to be more complex than gasoline engines and they have to withstand higher pressures. That alone makes their production costs higher than a comparable gasoline engine.

If you really think the Germans overprice their diesels then you truly are one screwed up individual. Then again all your comments on this site are seriously borderline psychotic (bordering on the retard level). Go compare the prices of Japanese diesels sold in Europe and you will see that they're more expensive than their gasoline counterparts too.
— Willis (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:44:12 PM | | Votes: 3

Huu76 is a troll

— MSP6 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:46:46 AM | | Votes: 5

spelling is TWO!
— 800over (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 10:54:32 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

Willis,
If Europe is stupid, they only have themselves to blame.
If the Germans overcharge, why shouldn't Toyota get on the exploitation of the retarded who think they're saving the planet?

What's the cost of aluminum vs cast iron btw?
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 10:59:08 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

Huu76 = clueless

Sorry, I can't waste my time with you anymore. You turn everything around and always talk crap.
— Willis (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 8:52:58 AM | | Votes: 4

Once again, I must thank Agent001. He continues to provide a forum for some of the most ignorant fuckers the automotive world has ever been subjected to, to have a voice. For starters, if you want to beleive the marketting that Honda is using in order to excuse the also-ran fuel economy of the Insight, when compared to the Prius, then you people are truly sad. The Prius measures 176 inches in length, the Insight measures 172. Power from the gasoline engines are both 98hp. So how exactly are they not in the same class?

Another bit of dim-witted spinning was voiced to the tune of when you buy hybrid models you pay for a better performing vehicle than the gas-only model, but when you buy a diesel you get the model that is the lesser performing. Oh, I understand now. From where I sit, it seems that the Camry hybrid, for example, hit 60mph in 8.4 secs. The Camry XLE V6 does it in 6.5secs. No fair you say? One has an I4 and the other has a V6? Well, two can play the spin game. But in the interest of true fairness, let's compare McIntosh with Golden Delicious. The VW Jetta TDI gets to 60mph in 8.1 secs. The Jetta S does it in an identical 8.1 secs. Oh dear. Theory falls apart it seems.

The harsh reality is that diesels will be a God send for some, and hybrids will be a God send for others. Neither is the best thing since sliced bread as they both have advantages and disadvantages. What I can't deal with are the claims that these so-called "studies" prove. Aren't you people aware by now that "studies" can be doctored to give whatever result the person who pays for the study wants?
— tango (View Profile)

Posted on 7/31/2009 11:30:37 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 6

Prius puts out 134 hp (98 from its 1.8L gas engine), ....Insight puts out 98 (88 from its 1.3L gas engine). Torque generated by the electrical engine creates an even bigger disparaty at 153 foot lbs to 58 foot lbs. for the insight.
The vehicles are not comparable. Prius is much larger/more powerful/expensive. Using length as the only determinant is ridiculous. Using the articles argument we should all drive Yaris hatchbacks with no air. Comparing two vehicle because they're both hybrids is like comparing two vehicles because they both are 4wd. It's something but far from the most important thing.
— 800over (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:05:09 AM | | Votes: 6

1 lbs of Aluminum costs $0.84 (as high as $1.14/lb according to this site http://metalprices.com/FreeSite/metals/al/al.asp)
1 lbs of Iron ore costs $0.04 or $91 per metric tonne (2204lbs/tonne).

So why again is their a diesel premium? Is it because you have to pay more if you want to create more pollution? Maybe pay more for the honour of having to import more foreign oil? Maybe its just so you can "feel good and do little"?
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 12:25:55 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

Trollin' again
— MSP6 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:51:20 AM | | Votes: 1

lololol iron ore?? You can't make a car out of ore... Why don't you try steel, and not that mild 44ksi crap. It's gets well over a buck a pound once you get into your higher strength +100ksi 4140's and whatnot.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 2:33:32 AM | | Votes: 1

Joe_limon (aka diesel expert).
What do you think diesel engines are made of? Cast iron possibly? Where does cast iron come from?

Gasoline engines are made from steel, aluminium and even magnesium.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:28:52 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -4

lol, well of course all steel is made from iron ore, it's just been refined and heat treated to the point that it no longer costs 4 cents per pound... also, I thought that a lot of the newer diesels were starting to become aluminum blocks with high strength steel sleeves tow withstand the pressures...

What is really cool is there is a new type of hybrid aluminum matrix material with carbon mixed randomly throughout, it's stronger then a lot of steel's. But still hella expensive.

A better argument you could have had was not for the price of aluminum, but that the price of alluminum alloys gets very expensive.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 12:07:14 PM | | Votes: 1

Trollin', trollin', trollin', I'll keep my facts on rollin :)

Who's next? Batter up!

Diesels are made from lower cost materials yet diesel lovers feel blessed that the Germans decided to allow them to pay more for one.

You can't even argue on labour costs because both aluminum and cast iron are easy to cast.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:31:32 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

As a side thought, I hope you honestly don't believe they use just melted iron ore and just aluminum in their castings...
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 12:16:10 PM | | Votes: 1

Once again you don't bother looking a facts huu76, you just make crap up. The BMW 335d is an aluminium block. Why do diesel cost more? Same reason hybrids and turbo-charged cars cost more,TECHNOLOGY! If your price out a turbo-charger, intercooler,direct injections, and the strong block you see why the prices are higher.

You just let your hate for all thing European cloud you mind and let you live in you own small make believe world.

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2009/3/335dSedan/Features_and_Specs/default.aspx?enc=/eiUrYOZAxtXbrazY6tfknvs2p4czl6fdqlc7VGB7GNpoB4dHFB5te38H/ZEhJZoaIu73B2RkztMJz7Rv0NbL1ze2lqI+q+jVUq/7774bumQ+PYwXXs7RLcml2iZ0adKCVfZQgch5tm9luWLVmqDEq2FSa4hYMvteMcBYXjGUT/cuRBvjKpJewcsWI4qCX7awUYcE9n7wwXbRM6ZNpxxcw==
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:24:14 PM | | Votes: 2

"Diesels are made from lower cost materials yet diesel lovers feel blessed that the Germans decided to allow them to pay more for one."

LMAO. Willis was right about you.

MORON. Seriously. You take every opportunity to bash diesels or European cars while claiming that Toyota and Lexus are perfect and do everything right. Bullshit.

So diesel engines are made out of cheaper materials, huh? Where did you read that? In a Lexus magazine or advertisement that tries to promote its hybrids? Give me a break. Do some research first before posting such bullshit. The new generation of Mercedes or BMW diesel engines for instance even use light-weight-materials in order to conserve weight. These materials are light yet durable. And I can assure you they're not cheap.

Seriously shut the hell up if all you're going to do is talk smack and utter bullshit.
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:26:14 PM | | Votes: 2

Funny how all of a sudden performance = crap when in all other threads the Euro fanboys are trumpeting how superior the performance of their Euro machines are.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:49:21 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Joe_limon,
Doesn't matter what I think in regards to how they forge the engine block. I know making parts out of aluminum and cast iron are quite straightforward, even when they plate them.

Basic fact is iron ore is much cheaper to buy than aluminum and there's no defending why the Germans think dummies should have to pay more for it.

Diesels are one of the biggest scams Germany has going so of course they're going to fight hybrids tooth and manicured nail :)

Hybrids = more from less.
Diesels = pay more for less.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:18:32 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1

Huu76 = FAIL

Seriously.
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:26:56 PM | | Votes: 1

As for your first point.

2009 Jetta TDI engine block, cast iron/aluminum.
2009 Prius engine block, aluminum/aluminum.
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=141626/pageId=160291

Gotta love the comparison though, they tried to slant the hybrid pricing by loading it up with every option possible yet they use a stripper Jetta. I'd be surprised if they unloaded the cement bags from the Prius.

Even if diesel engines went entirely to the new aluminum materials the price at worst should be the same, but they'll go even higher because the Germans aren't going to abandon the premium that they worked so hard to trick everyone into believing they need to pay.

Diesels, biggest scam EVER and the only ones loving it are journalists and gov't policy makers who are paid to love it.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:26:25 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

"Diesels, biggest scam EVER and the only ones loving it are journalists and gov't policy makers who are paid to love it."

You're retarded. Seriously.

I usually don't loose my cool but your comments have really been at an all time low (for a troll who holds back) as of late.

If you know jack shit about engineering then please don't comment on the Prius gas engine and the Jetta diesel engine. Two completely different things with different requirements. Tell me, does Toyota build diesel engines completely out of aluminum?
— Wimmer (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:29:19 PM | | Votes: 3

Wimmer,
Boohoo. I'm not arguing whether diesel engines are all aluminum or not. If you learned to read, you'd see I'm questioniong why diesel engines, being cheaper to manufacture, carry a "premium"?

Trollin' trollin' trollin', still waiting for someone to prove me wrong. Still the Champion.

Who's really retarded, the one who provides facts or the one who can't offer a rebuttal?
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 1:58:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

"still waiting for someone to prove me wrong"

Well actually READ some of the comments. Why are diesels more?

Same reason hybrids and turbo-charged cars cost more,TECHNOLOGY! If your price out a turbo-charger, intercooler,direct injections, and the strong block you see why the prices are higher.

Your cast iron -vs- aluminum arguement is just a desperate attempt to try to justify to yourself. Noboy else is buying it.
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 2:30:50 PM | | Votes: 2

I already offered you a rebuttal, they don't make engines out of ore... on a cycle vs cycle basis, the diesel cycle has it's advantage in having a much higher compression ratio, the compression ratio allows the engine to extract more energy and thus be more efficient. What you see as being barbaric in utilizing steel sleeves (not cast iron...) ends up requiring much more of an engineering effort and looking at finer details then adding batteries and motors. This all being said, even though diesel engines have to be designed and built to withstand more extreme operating conditions, the cycle still hasn't been optimized, squirting fuel in after the initial combustion has started doesn't allow the engine to squeeze as much energy out of the fuel as possible. That is diesel's main drawback. If the otto cycle (gas cycle) could run at the same compression ratio's as diesel it would be more efficient. But due to knock it can't run that high without pre detonating. The ideal engine should be a hcci engine where it uses pressure not a spark plug to simultaneously ignite all of the fuel at the absolute highest pressure possible. Alas, these engines are still being researched 40 years later... though benz is close with one of their concepts, and GM is supposedly coming up with a hcci hybrid where the engine runs at a designed perfect operating speed to charge the batteries.

Long story short, modern clean diesels are fighting to keep emissions down and mpg up, they are far from barbaric with their use of steel components (note I said steel not iron ore...). But having to satisfy ecomentalists will keep these cars from developing any serious levels of power.

And as to hybrid's, the only hybrid's that will get super mileage are ones that have been tuned as far away as possible from performance and are getting 50-60hp per liter. The hybrid's that aren't tuned for fuel economy simply are getting mild gains in efficiency at the cost of adding hundreds of pounds in batteries electric motors all the while using environmentally unfriendly materials and costing extra for the price of those expensive batteries and motors.

Blehhh I hate eco cars, they are always one compromise after another. And if I am going to compromise, give me a good ole v8 where I can fix everything in my garage for cheap, keep it running well past a million clicks, have lots of performance at the cost of getting 13mpg.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 2:44:01 PM | | Votes: 3

Wimmer:
Of course everything is relative.

The 335d is "slow" because it is slower than the similarly-displaced 335i, the reference vehicle with which the "premium" in the Edmunds article was calculated.

The Camry Hybrid is "fast" because it is faster than the similarly-displaced Camry 2.4, while being far more frugal.

Hope this helps clear up your mind.
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 3:13:43 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

The BMW is slow right?

0-60 times by Car and Diver

BMW 335d 5.9 Seconds
Lexus IS 250 7.1
Lexus E3 350 6.2
Acura TL SH-AWD 6.5
Audi A4 2.0T Quattro 6.7

The 335d, not so slow!
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 3:53:44 PM | | Votes: 0

theoptimisticpessimist:
Can't you read? I said 335d is "slow" because it is slower than the similarly-displaced 335i, the reference vehicle with which the "premium" in the Edmunds article was calculated, which is the point of this whole article, about the "premium" one has to pay for diesel or hybrid versus its gasoline counterpart. People pay a premium for diesel to get better fuel efficiency but lower performance. People pay a premium for hybrid to get better fuel efficiency and higher performance. Clear?
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 5:07:36 PM | | Votes: 0

I can read, but as a "premium car" it is not slow.
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 6:26:14 PM | | Votes: -1

"Fast" and "slow" are relative terms. The Edmunds article tries to compare diesel and hybrid vehicles to their gasoline siblings so the gasoline siblings are the basis to be compared against when we talk about the benefits of diesels vs. hybrids.

The 335d is more expensive than the 335i and is slower. The Camry Hybrid is more expensive than the Camry 2.4 and is faster. How many times do I have to repeat myself to get the message across?
— FanboyOfTheTruth (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 6:41:53 PM | | Votes: 0

"Why does noone listen to me?"

Because we have all read your comments.
— theoptimisticpessimist (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 5:01:50 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Joe_limon,
Modern diesels are not trying to produce less emissions, they're just trying to hide more of them. Hybrids just don't create pollution in the first place.

As for higher compression ratios, it allows them to extract more torque, not more mileage, hence they're best used for towing and in large SUVs. Higher mileage in diesels is just a biproduct of more carbon content in the fuel, but it isn't the most efficient way of getting more mileage (see hybrids for correct answer).

Now back to price. Modern diesels may require more engineering to get more aluminium into them, but that should only bring them up to par with gasoline engines. The older diesels that are still predominantly made from iron (the engine block) are cheaper to make, yet still carry a premium. Its a scam, nothing more.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 8:34:58 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

Actually, that's where you would be wrong. With diesels of past they just put excess amounts of fuel into the engine to get extra power. This leads to the incomplete combustion spewing out larger amounts of toxic gases such as carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide. When you can get a complete burn you produce Carbon dioxide and water... the harmless gas that you breathe out. This being said, you will never produce as much power when you are burning the "cleanest" (think of it as taking extra energy to clean the exhaust if you will...) hence why clean diesels are lacking in power even if they are more efficient.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 9:50:58 PM | | Votes: 1

Fanboy,
Prius isn't much slower than a Jetta TDI, at most 1sec behind. A sacrifice well worth the 16mpg combined advantage that the Prius gets. Prius also uses 4 few barrels of oil a year vs the Jetta TDI.

335d vs GS450h. How is it both vehicles consume 14 barrels of oil a year? Same city mileage (GSh is heavier and has a bigger engine), nobody will dispute a smaller diesel wins on the highway. GSh is faster but not not likely worth the sacrifice on the highway, but it is a bigger car.
Compared to an E320 Bluetec, the GSh is fast. It too however loses on the highway, but by a smaller margin.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 8:42:04 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Joe_limon,
I forgot this since its been a while but with modern diesels, the new ULSD does most of the work when it comes to emissions. 95% less carbon into the fuel = 95% less carbon out the tailpipe.
ULSD actually loses 3-5% in mileage. Not clear on the difference in torque.

You also mention turbochargers = more price. Diesels needing turbochargers is diesel's problem. Gas engines charge more if the turbocharger is an option, but in gas's case, there's a significantly noticeable difference in performance (i.e VW 2.0L gas vs 1.8T).
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 10:09:57 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Ok, now you are spewing crap, ulsd stands for ultra low sulphur diesel, removing carbon from the diesel hahahaha you are a moron. It's the burning of hydrocarbons (carbon) which is where the energy in the fuel is stored. If you remove 95% of the carbon you remove 95% of the energy...

The only place I mentioned turbo's was in that I wanted a 7.0 liter turbo diesel lol. But that being said, you don't need a turbo on a diesel engine, it's just that it will have no balls if it is missing it. ;) With diesel engines not being able to produce high rev's you can't get it to put out larger amounts of power by revving the snot out of it, which is what naturally aspirated gasoline engines do.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 10:23:43 PM | | Votes: 2

wonder y ppl continue to entertain this huu guy. Why not just ignore him.
— 0to60 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 10:49:28 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 3

I like arguing.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/1/2009 11:07:41 PM | | Votes: 2

Joe_limon,
I mispoke but you still knew what I meant. ULSD does most of the work of cleaning up diesels. 95% less sulphur in the fuel = 95% less sulphur out the back. If you put the old diesel into the new engines, the filters would only be able to remove at most 10% of the sulphur. The Germans once again fool people into paying more for an engine that's essentially unchanged thanks to ULSD.

So diesels with no turbos are basically useless. No power, not much of an efficient gain in mileage, even cheaper to build. Why can no one justify why diesel engines have a premium? Probably why everybody who got suckered into buying one just shuts up, too embarassed to admit they've been had by the German marketing machine.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 11:37:10 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

The premium is for making an engine that runs at a higher compression ratio therefore more extreme conditions?
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 12:14:49 PM | | Votes: 1

I've noticed nobody has a reply to my comment that the Prius nas no hybrid premium. Why is that?

Joe_limon,
I like arguing too, especially watching people trying to defend a lost cause :)
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 11:38:20 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

the prius has no hybrid premium because it doesn't have a non hybrid version? :P
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 12:26:40 PM | | Votes: 0

Exactly! That's why the Prius has a 0 year payback period and nothing approaches its mileage.
Also, the 2010's price dropped $2500 from the 2009 model in Canada :) I remember when you could land a new Jetta TDI for under $20K CDN, now the cheapest one you can get (manual, no rear airbags) is over $24K.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 3:06:12 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1

So if lets say Toyota came up with a $90,000 100hp hydrogen powered 2 seater and called it the Hydrius... wouldn't it have a 0 year payback too? Since it wouldn't have a 0 year payback?

And I don't know, $25,000 is still a lot for a car with 135-140hp... I am sure that is where the payback period should be put into play. Compare equivalent power levels and their paybacks. i.e. if you took the similarly powered corrola the prius in comparison has a $10,000 markup. I know this isn't a fair comparison since the prius is apparently a "luxury midsized car" a better comparison would be with the camry and camry hybrid where it holds a $5000ish markup and jetta and jetta tdi markup is only $2000ish. Both cars will get about the same increase in mileage. But to be extra fair with the hybrid markup you are gaining some extra power and weight.

I dunno they both seem shitty and overpriced imo.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 3:41:37 PM | | Votes: 1

since it wouldn't have a non hydrogen model?*
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 3:52:51 PM | | Votes: 1

$27,000CDN for a 50mpg midsize car with tons of standards features is a bargain. Look at the stripper Jetta TDI or an equivalent gas car that gets nowhere near the mileage.

The closest thing VW has is the Lupo Bluemotion2, which also gets 72mpg combined, same as the Prius. Its 2sec slower and significantly smaller than the Prius and is a bit dirtier.
Granted the Lupo as about a $5000 advantage (no options yet) over the Prius.
Move up a size to the Jetta and the 1.9TDI matches in mileage but is nearly 50% dirtier, just as slow as the Lupo BM2 and is only $2000 cheaper, the 2.0TDI is about 80% dirtier, loses by about 10mpg, accel is close, but the price is the same as the Prius.

Diesels are overpriced and the Germans will stretch their scam for as long as people are stupid.
So as you can see, its the diesels that are disgustingly overpriced, whether in Europe or North America.

Now, about the "Hydrius". Technically it would have no payback period too if it had no gasoline equivalent. Since it would have to be a hybrid, then the premium would be compared to the Prius. If the "Hydrius" got 100mpg and was approx 2x the price then it would be worth it to those who could afford it. Relatively the same mileage but no fossil fuels. Since the FCX is rated at 60mpg, no hydrogen car right now could justify the price vs a Prius. Rich greenies would buy one though, I'm sure.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 5:14:33 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -2

If it's 2x the price of the prius and get's 50mpg more... assuming it's $2.50 a gallon and it costs $25,000 more... wouldn't it take (50/2.5)x25000=500,000miles before it would recoup the cost over the prius? I don't see that as having no payback period... that is a very long payback period and not worth the price. And yes rich greenies would buy it since it's not the cost of fuel that they are concerned about. But whoever isn't a greenie would have very little incentive to buy a underpowered car that takes that many miles before it finally balances out.
— Joe_Limon (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2009 6:29:03 PM | | Votes: 1

If price and mileage went up hand in hand, regardless of the payback period, it would be worth it financially even if its drawn out. You either pay upfront or over the life of the car.

If all you're thinking about is saving money hence the argument about how bad hybrid premiums are (if they even exist) then why don't we all just ride bikes, horses or better yet, walk. We can talk about a gasoline premium over a bicycle.

The underlying fact is that diesels have an unjustifiable premium. Its a big scam made all the worse when diesel prices surpass gasoline prices. You overpay for the engine, then you pay more for the fuel.
Hybrids have just exposed how Germany has been screwing the suckers of Europe.
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 12:23:46 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0

Bottom line is performance DOES count. 2 seconds slower than a gasoline version of a car is a lot. Having to keep flooring your car to merge on a highway or get around places is annoying. Feeling your transmission shifting constantly to keep up with traffic is annoying. I dont know how people can sit in a car thats so quiet either. If you want better gas mileage get a diesel. If you want to make a statement (which states "im cheap and drive a ugly,slow car that currently makes no sense" drive a hybrid. Honestly all jokes aside i dont have a problem with people that drive hybrids,but theres too many downsides currently to justify owning one.

#1 There are added registration fees in some states.
#2 They cost more - anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000 more the non-Hybrid version of the same vehicle.
#3 Hybrids have a more complex powertrain, which means more chances for failure and fewer fixes that your typical mechanic could do.
# Parts may cost a bit more and not be as readily available as typical car parts.
#4 Special high-mileage tires are smaller, but they cost more to replace.
#5 The acceleration capability of some (not all) Hybrids is less than that of comparable vehicles.
— rxh8me9000 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 12:50:28 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

rxh8me9000.
How do you feel about the diesel Polos in Europe that take 13 sec to get to 100km/h, or the gas ones that take 16.5sec? Or maybe the 50hp SMART/STUPID that took 19sec to merge into traffic? Compared to those cars, the Prius is a rocket that's twice the size, has the same mileage and for the diesel Polo, nearly the same price.

Numbers don't lie, just the German diesel makers. The only statements being made are by diesel drivers, the statement is "I'm stupid".
— huu76 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2009 8:38:45 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2

Add your Comments

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters): [img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent001.myautospies.com/images/sample.jpg[/img]

Email Me When Someone Replies To My Message

Latest Study Indicates Hybrids Still Can't Touch Payback Times Of Diesels.

About the Author

User Comments

Add your Comments

Submit an article

Photo Galleries

Cars

Autoshows

Latest Articles