|
I've personally outgrown the whole "fuel economy" thing for the most part, and with that small diesels. Diminishing returns for higher numbers, and the cost of enjoying driving for me is worth it. I can do 0-60 in 5.6 seconds with a pleasurable V8 rumble and get 30mpg highway. a 40mpg car is going to run like poo, sound like poo, drive like poo, and over 100,000 miles only save 833 gallons, or around $3332 at 4 bucks a gallon. Even if you do that in 5 years, that's $666 a year. That's 1 car payment on a newer diesel vehicle. half of an injector pump. one set of injectors. 1/20th of the first year depreciation. 1/5th of the 5th year depreciation. If i had a boring rush hour high traffic low speed soul killing time wasting commute already, what's one more nail in the coffin buying a boring commuter car. Luckily i don't, and most of my traveling involves a choice of 4 highways to do the job, some of which i've driven 200km on without seeing another car.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
IPowershift posted:I've personally outgrown the whole "fuel economy" thing for the most part, and with that small diesels. I have a Volt to commute in. My other car makes just north of 600hp, and still gets 25mpg cruising down the highway, if I can keep my foot out of it.  A commuter car just lets you get wackier and/or less sane with your fun car/truck. Something that would loving SUCK rear end to drive in traffic five days a week is just fine. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 00:01
|
|
|
My brother has a CRD Jeep Liberty and it's a terrible vehicle.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I've personally outgrown the whole "fuel economy" thing for the most part, and with that small diesels. You definitely make good points, but part of me still thinks it'd be pretty cool to own something with a true hot rodded diesel engine. Doubt it'll actually happen any time soon though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I You're the person that guy in the Cadillac ad wishes he was. God speed, my fellow American.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Mat_Drinks posted:You definitely make good points, but part of me still thinks it'd be pretty cool to own something with a true hot rodded diesel engine. Doubt it'll actually happen any time soon though. Yeah, I still want to put a powerstroke in my Lincoln but in terms of what's coming to North America these days on the diesel front there is nothing redeeming. The 5 liter Cummins in the Titan might be decent and the m550D looks like hilarious fun but we'll never get it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 01:17
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I've personally outgrown the whole "fuel economy" thing for the most part, and with that small diesels. At $7/gallon and an 80 mile commute, "fuel economy" isn't really something you "outgrow".
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
Nidhg00670000 posted:At $7/gallon and an 80 mile commute, "fuel economy" isn't really something you "outgrow". Yeah, but gas is cheap right now and that will last forever! Mat_Drinks posted:You definitely make good points, but part of me still thinks it'd be pretty cool to own something with a true hot rodded diesel engine. Doubt it'll actually happen any time soon though. It's not exactly a hot rod, but this is why I want the A4 with the 3.0TDI here. It gets 38 mpg in the A6 and I was able to get it to break the tires loose on dry pavement on a Q5 test drive. I think it would be a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 02:46
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Yeah, but gas is cheap right now and that will last forever! Naw, man, that's why we make money for a living. Seems to me like enjoying what I drive every day is worth a few extra bucks when it comes time to fill the tank. Or you could save that money, and hate your drive twice a day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 03:13
|
|
|
Raluek posted:Naw, man, that's why we make money for a living. Seems to me like enjoying what I drive every day is worth a few extra bucks when it comes time to fill the tank. Or you could save that money, and hate your drive twice a day. I can afford a fun car too. The only reason I haven't put a deposit down on an Alfa 4C is in case I get rid of my Golf. If I keep it I'll get something like that. If I don't I'll have to settle for something used.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Yeah, but gas is cheap right now and that will last forever! Gas is actually going down right now, time to bring the V10 excursion back. The big problem is the 3.0 TDI is a 3750 gbp option over the 2.0T we get. That's $6040. In the US A6, it's a $10,000 option over the 2.0T, but i'll use the UK numbers as they're favorable to the diesel. Over 100,000 miles, which is 5 years, 80 miles/day, 5 days a week for 50 weeks, based on the UK published numbers: If city driving, we'll call this best case scenario for the diesel: 2.0T: 3617 US gallons. At the current national average gas price of 3.120, that's $11,285 3.0 TDI: 2893 US gallons. At the current national average diesel price of 3.656, that's $10,577 A savings of $708. If the prices evened out as it rose, gas and diesel would have to be $9 a gallon to pay for the cost of the engine option(this is why it exists in europe, diesel is $8/US gallon in norway) If highway, this is the worst case scenario for the diesel: 2.0T: 2382 US gallons At the current national average gas price of 3.120, that's $7,432 3.0TDI: 2167 US gallons At the current national average diesel price of 3.656, that's $7922 A loss of $491. If the prices evened out as it rose, gas and diesel would have to be $29 a gallon to pay for the cost of the engine option If mixed, the most likely scenario: 2.0T: 2845 US gallons. At the current national average gas price of 3.120, that's $8876 3.0TDI: 2421 US gallons. At the current national average Diesel price of 3.656, that's $8851 A whomping savings of $25, that's $5 a year! If the prices evened out as it rose, gas and diesel would have to be $15.50 a gallon to pay for the cost of the engine option 
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 03:55
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I've personally outgrown the whole "fuel economy" thing for the most part, and with that small diesels. It's going to be really difficult for me to go from 50 MPG to anything less than 40 when it comes time to get another car.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:21
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Gas is actually going down right now, time to bring the V10 excursion back. This is all well and good but the A6 TDI base trim level is the Premium Plus at 58.7k while the gas Premium Plus is only on the 3.0 at 56.3k. You're comparing apples to oranges.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:36
|
|
|
Nidhg00670000 posted:At $7/gallon and an 80 mile commute, "fuel economy" isn't really something you "outgrow". That's the point when you consider changing jobs or living arrangements. The fuel costs would be completely overshadowed by having to waste 1/2 to 1/3 of your weekday leisure time sitting in traffic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 04:48
|
|
|
Powershift posted:I can do 0-60 in 5.6 seconds with a pleasurable V8 rumble and get 30mpg highway. Sorry, I don't remember what you drive, but am curious. That's slower than a C7 but relatively similar fuel economy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:01
|
|
|
Bovril Delight posted:This is all well and good but the A6 TDI base trim level is the Premium Plus at 58.7k while the gas Premium Plus is only on the 3.0 at 56.3k. He was commenting about the want of the 3.0 TDI A4, which is currently only available with the 2.0t. The S4 has the 3.0, but is a really different beast. The 3.0 TDI lies almost dead center between the 2.0 and 3.0 gas engines as far as performance goes, and adds at least 240lbs to the car. Using the stats on audi's website, the 3.0 TDI A4 is far closer in performance to the 2.0 A4 than the 3.0 S4. Therefore, i'm comparing oranges to slightly smaller oranges. The fact is, it's not an option that will pay for itself in fuel savings, not even considering the additional repair costs of a more complex engine. edit: the audi A6 TDI is $13,900 more, and the 3.0 gas is $11,500 more than the base A6. The audi S4 is $13,900 more than the base A4. The economics of the situation suggest that if they did ever offer the 3.0 TDI in the A4 in north america, you'd be getting hosed with no lube on the price. blk posted:Sorry, I don't remember what you drive, but am curious. That's slower than a C7 but relatively similar fuel economy. BMW 540i. I should mention that's with setting the cruise at 80mph, with a few passes on 2 lane roads. If you did that with a C7, it would probably do 35mpg. Powershift fucked around with this message at 05:38 on Oct 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
Hummer Driving human being posted:It's going to be really difficult for me to go from 50 MPG to anything less than 40 when it comes time to get another car. The marginal benefit from 40mpg to 50mpg is pretty small. It's not a linear scale. 1mpg going from 49 to 50 is basically insignificant, but 1mpg going from 11 to 12 is huge. Even if you drive 15,000 miles a year, the difference between 40mpg and 50mpg is 75 gallons. Even at $5/gal (the all-time record high in the US, way higher than what gas costs right now) that's $375/yr in difference. And more realistically let's say you only drive 10,000 miles a year and gas is $3.75. Your annual cost difference is less than $200. Then you figure that most cars that get 50+ mpg are more expensive hybrid or diesel variants, sometimes costing thousands of dollars more in up front purchase cost. If you'd give up a fun car to have a super-economy car over less than $200-400/yr that's not very AI. (But if you drive a 50mpg eco-penalty box in order to keep the miles off your 12mpg Viper than that's pretty AI).
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Guinness posted:(But if you drive a 50mpg eco-penalty box in order to keep the miles off your 12mpg Viper than that's pretty AI). What about if you ride a ~40mpg motorcycle that does mid 10's in the 1/4 mile to save on gas and keep miles off your ~21 mpg but much slower car? I can't tell if that's at the 'more AI' or 'less AI' end of the spectrum.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 08:22
|
|
|
Guinness posted:If you'd give up a fun car to have a super-economy car over less than $200-400/yr that's not very AI. A car doesn't have to be powerful or fast to be fun. I've had some of the most fun driving small cars that had to have their tits revved off to make progress.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 09:10
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Gas is actually going down right now, time to bring the V10 excursion back. And this is why I tell people that ask me about my gas mileage and are interested in the TDI who are actually trying to save money that they'd be way better going for something else that doesn't get much worse mileage and is cheaper. I drove those cars when I was shopping and hated them. The Golf was the most fun to drive by far. That's why I bought it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 10:51
|
|
|
Or you could buy a Tesla  I want one of these  Estoril Blue, of course (if that's even an option)
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
fknlo posted:And this is why I tell people that ask me about my gas mileage and are interested in the TDI who are actually trying to save money that they'd be way better going for something else that doesn't get much worse mileage and is cheaper. I drove those cars when I was shopping and hated them. The Golf was the most fun to drive by far. That's why I bought it. This. Different (types of power-)strokes for different folks. While I like the sound of, say, the Coyote, it just doesn't feel as 'gutsy' after a big diesel I6. The math doesn't work out in Diesel's favor, unless you like the feel of huge torque down low, which is a value proposition. It's awful, but I think I've outgrown performance metrics. I care more and more about how a car feels on acceleration and cornering than how fast it actually gets to 60 or how many g it pulls in a slalom.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 01:00
|
|
|
Powershift posted:BMW 540i. I should mention that's with setting the cruise at 80mph, with a few passes on 2 lane roads. If you did that with a C7, it would probably do 35mpg. That's insane, my new V6 Mustang gets like 24 on the highway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
Mat_Drinks posted:You definitely make good points, but part of me still thinks it'd be pretty cool to own something with a true hot rodded diesel engine. Doubt it'll actually happen any time soon though. Have you driven a diesel car before? They're pretty much the opposite of fun, even the bigger ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
fknlo posted:Sure. Those and something that isn't super huge yet can take 3-4 people and all their ski/snowboard gear on 10 hour drives to Colorado 5+ times a year in relative comfort. And also do some offroad work if I want to get my bike or kayak somewhere off the beaten path to do something with those. Well there's always custom coachbuilt cars...  The 2016 Wrangler will have a diesel option too. OXBALLS DOT COM fucked around with this message at 01:40 on Oct 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 01:36
|
|
|
a primate posted:
Holy hell a new BMW that looks decent, I didn't know they had it in them!
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 02:27
|
|
|
Ineptus Mechanicus posted:Holy hell a new BMW that looks decent, I didn't know they had it in them! The 2-series looks like a modernized E46, which is not a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Mange Mite posted:Have you driven a diesel car before? They're pretty much the opposite of fun, even the bigger ones. No, they're actually not at all bad. The low end torque is amazing for daily driving stuff. I guess an 80hp 1.2L diesel might be miserable but I've never driven one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 02:43
|
|
|
oRenj9 posted:That's insane, my new V6 Mustang gets like 24 on the highway. The v6 Mustang was designed to Ace the epa Highway test that doesn't go over 60mph. Your car is built to do 60mph and if you run it at 75 it suffers. Mine is the exact opposite. Mange Mite posted:Have you driven a diesel car before? They're pretty much the opposite of fun, even the bigger ones. My powerstroke is hilarious fun. Go into a corner, gun it, and once the turbo spools the rear end kicks out and there's smoke and noise and torque flying everywhere. That's 7.3 liters though. Pretty hard to make 7.3 liters and a turbo boring. As for the wrangler, aluminum 8 speed diesel sounds super expensive. Powershift fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Oct 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
Everyone always talks about that amazing low end torque but every diesel I've ever driven has seemed noticeably slower and less snappy than it's gas equivalent. One of the reasons I didn't give the TDI Golf a second glance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Pryor on Fire posted:Everyone always talks about that amazing low end torque but every diesel I've ever driven has seemed noticeably slower and less snappy than it's gas equivalent. One of the reasons I didn't give the TDI Golf a second glance. Most small modern turbo diesels are absolutely useless off boost. It's one of the things that makes something like a Colorado so unpleasant to drive - you get boatloads of lag, a rush of boost for a brief few revs and then it hits the wall again. Its even worse with a clunky long throw manual transmission.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
fknlo posted:No, they're actually not at all bad. The low end torque is amazing for daily driving stuff. I guess an 80hp 1.2L diesel might be miserable but I've never driven one. I dunno 53hp 1.2l feels pretty good to me so Id imagine 80 to be a riot
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
oRenj9 posted:That's insane, my new V6 Mustang gets like 24 on the highway. That's insane. My gf gets that in her 2012 v6 in almost all stop and go. She gets a solid 29-30 on the highway at 70-80.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Guys. Guys. Nobody buys a Mustang for fuel economy. Here's an ATS-V.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Those seats like serious! It also has HUD for sure in that pic. I wonder if this will be a coupe only thing? Please GM dont mess this up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:23
|
|
|
Friar Zucchini posted:Guys. Guys. Nobody buys a Mustang for fuel economy. Here's an ATS-V. That's gotta be Pretty close to production to already have badges and poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
I'd bet that's 100% production if it's running around with no camo
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
That front fascia is ugly as balls.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
With that line down the centre of the front it reminds me of a Camry? also that photo makes it look like its a fish with undersized fins (wing mirrors and antenna)
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
It looks really ugly to me. Maybe it's just distorted from whatever lens they were using for it. Something about the proportions is really bothering me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2014 03:02
|
|
