"The 65 MPG Ford the U.S. Can't Have" - Congress needs to CHANGE anomalies like this, NOW!

[Turborama]

The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can't Have

Ford's Fiesta ECOnetic gets an astonishing 65 mpg, but the carmaker can't afford to sell it in the U.S.

The ECOnetic will go on sale in Europe in November

By David Kiley
September 15, 2008

If ever there was a car made for the times, this would seem to be it: a sporty subcompact that seats five, offers a navigation system, and gets a whopping 65 miles to the gallon. Oh yes, and the car is made by Ford Motor (F), known widely for lumbering gas hogs.

Ford's 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic goes on sale in November. But here's the catch: Despite the car's potential to transform Ford's image and help it compete with Toyota Motor (TM) and Honda Motor (HMC) in its home market, the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe. "We know it's an awesome vehicle," says Ford America President Mark Fields. "But there are business reasons why we can't sell it in the U.S." The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.

Automakers such as Volkswagen (VLKAY) and Mercedes-Benz (DAI) have predicted for years that a technology called "clean diesel" would overcome many Americans' antipathy to a fuel still often thought of as the smelly stuff that powers tractor trailers. Diesel vehicles now hitting the market with pollution-fighting technology are as clean or cleaner than gasoline and at least 30% more fuel-efficient.

Yet while half of all cars sold in Europe last year ran on diesel, the U.S. market remains relatively unfriendly to the fuel. Taxes aimed at commercial trucks mean diesel costs anywhere from 40 cents to $1 more per gallon than gasoline. Add to this the success of the Toyota Prius, and you can see why only 3% of cars in the U.S. use diesel. "Americans see hybrids as the darling," says Global Insight auto analyst Philip Gott, "and diesel as old-tech."

Read More:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_37/b4099060491065.htm?chan=rss_topStories_ssi_5

Here's what Obama had to say about it:

Obama tells auto execs what part they played in their own downfall

Obama's May 2007 Address to the Detroit Economic Club

“Whenever an attempt was made to raise our fuel efficiency standards the auto companies would lobby against it, spending millions to prevent the very reform that could have saved their industry. Even as they shed thousands of jobs and billions in profits over the last few years, they’ve continued to reward failure, in some cases with lucrative bonuses for CEOs.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1nno1El3-g

Chrysler are in fact already making 35 MPG cars and SUVs in America, but American citizens can't buy them either. GM are making some great cars outside of the US too. To find out more, check out my journal... http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Turborama

[TexasProgresive]

1. In 1992 or 3 we rented a Ford Fiesta from Hertz

in Ireland that was diesel and got an astounding 80 MPG. I wish I had that little wonder car now.

[sweetpotato]

2. I drove diesel cars for several years

They were made by Volkswagen - I had a rabbit and a jetta. Both were dependable, and I bought fuel rarely. They were slow to warm up on a cold morning, but other than that - I loved both cars.

Why do they think we can't use diesel for cars again?

[juno jones]

5. In '78 my father bought a rabbit diesel. In '80 he bought another.

I grew up driving those cars and loved them. Especially since we could get alot lot of crusing in for just a few dollars. :) They both got 50+ mpg.

With care, those cars were still around for us to drive as young adults, I hauled my budding family around in one well into the '90's.

We really need to reconsider diesel cars, especially ones using clean diesels and biodiesels

[Fumesucker]

56. I had a diesel Rabbit too...

I put quick start glow plugs in mine, could start it in ten seconds in mild weather, under twenty at freezing.

Yep, 50 mpg plus and the little car would cruise at 75 with no problem.

I had a roof rack and was surprised at how much stuff I could get in and on it and still drive away.

[Occam Bandage]

3. It's really frustrating. The Big Three, in BRIC, make cheap small cars.

The Big Three, in Europe, make quality fuel-efficient cars. The Big Three, in the United States, make light trucks and SUVs.

[valerief]

4. They don't care about selling cars to the US. They care about selling OIL to the US.

The more gas-guzzlers, the more oil. The auto industry only exists in the US to sell AS MUCH OIL AS POSSIBLE.

We SHOULD be driving electric cars. With tires that don't blow out. SHOULD doesn't pay for Dubai, though.

[bluecollarcharlie]

12. With tires that don;t blow out????!!!!

That's the other problem i have with you neo-liberals on this board. You want these fantastic things and you want them NOW! as if you could flick some magic switch and it will come true. Well you know what? NOW! cost a hell of a lot of money! And if you are just going to point the fingers at The 3 for not having diesels on the road then point a damn finger at the other three too.
Toyota makes big heavy vehicles too but no-one around here wants to talk about that because that requires thinking fairly.

I tell you something else too, back when gas was 4.00 a gallon everybody wanted a small car " Oh i gotta get me a small car, these gas prices are killing me"! Environmentalist were jumping for joy. But now that gas has fallen back down below 2.00 guess what? In the last ten years except for one the sales of trucks ALWAYS outpaced cars in this country. Always.That's the consumer looking for that vehicle. But you neo-libs blame the companies for that. But, as always, not all of them. Toyota has a shiny new plant in Texas where they build trucks. Nissan has one in Mississippi. In all of this talk though, it is always "The Big Three" who are at fault. No mention of the hybrid vehicles we make or that are on the way. "It's always kill Detroit,kill Detroit"
Damned hypocrites.

[The Doctor.]

17. Aside from being barely coherent...

The problem is that we would have everything 'now' if the auto companies didn't fight so hard over the last few decades to keep CAFE standards so low. It doesn't cost that much more to to improve mileage... so what gives?

If they have been doing so much right, then do explain why they are failing.

[MindMatter]

60. And what are these "business reasons" Ford is talking about?

If they don't like the tax differences., I can certainly agree with that. However, I note that the fuel economy more than offsets the additional cost of taxes, so that is not a show-stopper. So what are the real "business reasons"?

The "Business reasons are that they figured it was a whole lot easier to just keep cranking out Explorers and F150s to make up 60+% of their business with virtually no R&D investment.

If by "business reasons" he means "short-term maximizing of profits", then I think he's onto something.

[The Doctor.]

64. Ah, one of the great failings of the US market...

No, it's not that the SEC sucks. No, it's not that publicly trading companies is a bad thing...

It's that the American investor is a greedy, impatient, shithead.

Every company has to produce a profit every quarter in order to satisfy their stockholders. If they don't, the short-sighted American stock holder sells, the stock takes a dive, and the assets of the company shrink.

So... 'Invest in R+D that will pay for itself a thousand fold in 5 years, but never see a profit until then' or... 'fire some workers, move jobs overseas, and keep producing the high mark-up junk we know we can sell a percentage of to keep next week's numbers looking good'

?

Anyone?

Anyone?


Without a doubt, the American market is the most myopic of the industrialized world.

[Obamanaut]

20. Step away from the keyboard. Breathe. Again. Chill. nt

[Turborama]

27. You're so protective you're not seeing the bigger picture...

The "Big 3" need to have this as part of the business plan they approach Congress with and tell them flat out that whatever is in the way of them doing it needs to be lifted NOW.
Edit: to fix typo

[JBear]

46. Just a minute...

GM, Ford and Chrysler ALL have diesel models in Europe today. They are a fairly sizable portion of their sales too. Toyota does not have nearly the market share on diesel cars as these others do. Pick up trucks is a different story...Nissan and Toyota both have good diesel pick-ups (though pick-ups in general are not really popular in Europe).

So, YES, we want them today. They sell them already over there!

Trucks always out paced cars (last 10 years except for one) because SUVs are classified as trucks whether they are built on truck platforms (as the first ones were) or not. I don't blame the car companies for that, I blame the republican congress that allowed them to have "less regulation as a truck than as a passenger car."

I don't want to kill Detroit. In fact I would LOVE to buy an American car for a change. They just don't sell the ones I want over here!

Until they can sell me a car that gets 45 MPG on the highway (what my current VW gets) I can not see even going to the dealership.

:bounce:

(Damned liberal engineers!)

[qwlauren35]

57. I was soooooo pissed...

When I found out that the kind of car I really wanted... was in Europe.

If you do the math, if diesel is 1.5x the cost of gas, and gets 2-3 times the mileage, WHY OH WHY can't we DEMAND those cars???????


I remember when the hybrids first came out, and I heard that Europe had no interest in them, because they were already doing fine with the technology they had. And I said to myself: "Self? What do they have that we don't already have?"

Someone has already talked about we could/should adopt more of Europe's transportation solutions. Rail... bicycle... SMALL CARS. Three things that Americans hate.

Small wonder we have the problems we do.

I guess it's like guns. Americans who have them will find every possible reason to keep them... even if they never need them.

Americans who have and like SUVs will find every possible reason to keep them... even if they really don't need them.

Space is always nice to have. But it's often not that necessary.

[valerief]

48. That's it. IGNORE my core point. OILMAN. nt

[wiggs]

59. Like...they sell us printers but they make money on the ink. nt

[tammywammy]

6. I have a 2006 VW Beetle TDI (diesel)

I love it! I'd be hard pressed to go back to gas after having the diesel.

[predfan]

7. I'm told that the new VW plant set for Chattanooga, which will build a totally new vehicle

for North America, will base that car on clean diesel technology, expecting a 45-50 mpg rating.

My fear is the world economy might force them to change their plans.

[tammywammy]

22. It's still in the plans to open in 2011, I believe n/t

[Dangerously Amused]

8. Important info. Happy to be the 5th rec.

[Seldona]

42. Agreed.

That is an awesome picture btw. Did you take it?

[Dangerously Amused]

55. Thanks.

No, I didn't take the pic (I wish!). :)

But it is one of my most favorite pics of him.

[IDemo]

9. And the Green Car of the Year Is...

Wired News
November 20, 2008 | 12:35:41 PM

LOS ANGELES -- The 2009 Volkswagen Jetta TDI was named Green Car of the Year Thursday, the first time a diesel has won the award presented each year at the L.A. Auto Show.

The 41-mpg TDI beat out a pair of hybrids, a sporty clean-diesel sedan, and the trendy little Smart ForTwo, to take top honors because, the judges said, it "epitomizes what the Green Car of the Year is all about."

"It raises the bar significantly in environmental performance," said Ron Cogan, editor of Green Car Journal and GreenCar.com, which has presented the award at the L.A. Auto Show since 2005. "This is all the more impressive when you consider the Jetta TDI is a clean diesel, achieving the kind of fuel efficiency offered by gasoline-electric hybrids but in a more affordable way."

--The Jetta got the nod over the Ford Fusion hybrid, the Saturn Vue Two-Mode Hybrid, the BMW 335d diesel and the ForTwo. (More on the nominees here.) The Jetta took top honors, Cogan said, because its 2.0-liter turbodiesel represents the state of the art in clean diesel injection and emissions technology, so the car is clean enough even for California -- no mean feat. It's also a comfortable five-passenger sedan with a list price of $21,990.

http://blog.wired.com/cars/2008/11/and-the-green-c.html

[loveandlight]

10. confused...

Isn't diesel still made from oil? Aren't we trying to get away from using oil? How can this be the greenest option? It certainly isn't sustainable because it still uses oil.

[tkmorris]

14. Of course, but you can't simply flip a switch

We couldn't just stop using oil if we wanted to, there is no suitable alternative energy in place yet. Obviously, we should work towards creating alternative energy sources and delivery systems but in the meantime we must focus on using LESS oil. High-mileage diesel vehicles accomplish that.

[IDemo]

18. It was the combination of fuel efficiency and emissions control technology

Ultimately, "getting away from oil" would be a great goal, but that is not going to happen for a long time. Clean diesel cars such as this represent a big improvement over the standard gasoline engined variety.

[rucky]

19. Biofuels are still viable. Just not from corn. n/t

[Turborama]

24. That's a very good question. And my answer is...

...algae diesel.

Some of this is taken from my journal:


It's time for this craziness to stop... If these cars go on sale in the US, surely this would be a really good way of helping themselves out? These vehicles can run on domestically produced 'new generation' biofuels made from algae, thus creating sustainable win win solutions for themselves, the environment and the dependence on foreign oil through creating a new domestic renewable fuel industry...


President (Elect) Obama has stated that part of the $15 Billion a year will be invested in "next generation biofuels". What are these "next generation biofuels"?

"Obama: A new chapter of American leadership on climate change"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hvG2XptIEJk

In search of sustainable fuel.

Threatened by the latest rises in fuel costs - visionary airlines and a leading fuel technology innovator join forces.

Leading global air carriers Air New Zealand, Continental, Virgin Atlantic Airways, and biofuel technology developer UOP LLC, a Honeywell company, today announced they will be the first wave of aviation-related members to join the newly formed Algal Biomass Organization (ABO).

Together with Boeing, which co-chairs the ABO, the airlines are advocating for the identification and acceleration of new generations of fuel sources for the industry that have lower life cycle carbon emissions; in this case sustainable algae-based biofuels.
http://www.4hoteliers.com/4hots_nshw.php?mwi=4650

With such big names already behind this, the automotive industry needs to get involved too by selling the cars people can run this new generation biofuel on (jatropha is the other one that they're are looking at too Air New Zealand and Boeing Sustainable Biofuels Test Flight Set for 3 December http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/11/air-new-zealand.html">Link).

Some facts and figures:

1 acre of corn = 18 gallons of oil per year

1 acre of palm = 7 to 800 gallons of oil per year

1 acre of open pond algae = 20,000 gallons of oil per year

1 acre of vertically grown algae = 100,000 gallons of oil per year

An area of land equal to 1/10th of the state of New Mexico would produce enough algae to supply the energy demands for the entire United States.

Paraphrased from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ToojK_MJd0
and
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1MeIgaRfyD4

PetroSun began operation of its commercial algae-to-biofuels facility on April 1st, 2008.

The facility, located in Rio Hondo Texas, will produce an estimated 4.4 million gallons of algal oil and 110 million lbs. of biomass per year off a series of saltwater ponds spanning 1,100 acres. Twenty of those acres will be reserved for the experimental production of a renewable JP8 jet-fuel.

More:

http://gas2.org/2008/03/29/first-algae-biodiesel-plant-goes-online-april-1-2008

I thoroughly recommend watching this presentation, I know it's nearly an hour long, but it's very informative...

The Biology and Business of Biofuels: Algae as Biofuel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0FrbMMwDccY

In conclusion. As evidenced by the success of the Prius (see below), consumers want cars that use less fuel NOW. There are waiting lists averaging 6 months, in May you could by them from the showroom (even though they were becoming hard to find even then http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/05/16/toyota-prius-hybrid-car-sales-hit-over-1-million-surely-this-eases-global-warming/) So, with good reason, there's clearly a huge demand for more fuel efficient cars in these belt tightening times we're going through...

Ballwin, MO (PRWEB) November 17, 2008 --

In a remarkably short period of time, especially for a relatively new automotive technology, drivers in North America have embraced Toyota's hybrid vehicles, the Toyota Prius Hybrid and the Toyota Camry Hybrid models in very respectable numbers. Right now, only 2.3% of the cars being driven in the U.S. are hybrids, but that number is expected to climb steeply over the next several years. Toyota is selling Prius Hybrids just as quickly as they can build them and expects to step up production by 60% when a new Prius plant opens in Mississippi in 2010.



Toyota Hybrid Sales Figures:
To put things in perspective, for the 2000 model year, only 9,400 hybrid cars of any kind were sold in the U.S. By 2004, that number climbed to just over 83,000 units sold. By 2007, that number soared to over 330, 000. These numbers represent staggering growth in the segment with Toyota Prius Hybrid sales leading by a wide margin. Worldwide, Prius Hybrid sales climbed from 29,500 units sold in 2001 to 126,000 in 2004 to 281,000 in 2007. From January to April of this year, over 107,000 Prius Hybrids were sold, and that number would likely have been even higher if production had kept pace with demand. At the time of this writing, the waiting list for new Prius Hybrids averages around six months, especially in states along the west coast where demand is highest.
http://www.ibtimes.com/prnews/20081117/toyota-extends-its-hybrid-vehicle-models-with-the-prius-and-the-camry.htm

However, I see the hybrid craze as a red herring that has been born out of necessity - no other choice. In essence they are a distraction from the real solution (I'll add more details to further back that up in another post on this thread). The "Big 3" need to introduce the turbo diesel cars they are making for the European market. Diesel in America has a bad name and is more expensive than gas. However, with the MPG taken into consideration, it actually works out cheaper and less Co2 emissions.

In the not too distant future, America will be able to make its own diesel and jet fuel on a big enough scale to be self sufficient. The military - through Boeing - and several major airlines are already looking at this very seriously (http://www.algalbiomass.org/), this is where the funding for the economic development of algae fuel is and will be coming from. If the big 3 in conjunction with Congress don't catch onto this and start selling their diesel cars in the US, it's their own fault for being ham strung by their "Big Oil" friends and their own neo-luddism. However, if Barack Obama were to take this common sense concept on board, I'm sure that this could be a big part of his "Green Revolution" by removing any barriers that are in the way.

[lumberjack_jeff]

65. I'm convinced that algae biodiesel is a major part of the solution.

It's the only biofuel which could meet our transportation needs, given the constraints of arable land in the world.

Even at the high yields anticipated, it still would take a land area comparable to arizona to meet the current US needs.

That said, there are nontrivial hurdles that must be overcome to collect lipids from algae on a commercial scale. I suspect it's a job for biotech; feed the algae to a bacteria which will eat the protein shell, leaving the oils.

[JBear]

47. Step one:

If we can get our average economy over 40 MPG, we will not have to import oil to drive. That is a HUGE step!

:bounce:

[TahitiNut]

13. Decent looking vehicle.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/9863692/112_0807_01z+2009_volkswagen_jetta_clean_TDI+front_three_quarter_view.jpg

http://image.automobilemag.com/f/features/news/9618590/0805_01z+2009_volkswagen_jetta_sportwagon+front_three_quarters_view.jpg

[tridim]

11. I looked a the Ford Focus last time I was in the market for a car

And passed it up because it got average to poor mileage for a small car. Ended up with a used Honda Civic instead.

Get a freaking clue Ford!

[Kalyke]

15. I'm assuming you didn't read the article.

Ford has a clue. They can't sell the auto here because of taxes on diesel-powered engines. I mean, they could try and sell it, but it would be so expensive no one could buy it who wasn't wealthy.

[noonwitch]

16. My Focus is a 2005-it gets about 35 mpg on the freeway

about 25-28 in the city. I never compared it to a foreign car, because I live in Detroit and my uncle gives me X plans for Fords.


I wouldn't drive a Fiesta if it was sold here, because it is too small for me. I like the Focus for it's size-it's slighly larger than the Escort was, but it still gets good mileage.


That said, I would like for my next car, if not a hybrid, than for it to get over 50 mpg. That is something the big 3 should shoot for. I'll be buying a new Ford in 2010.

[tridim]

21. Exactly, that's pretty average-low MPG for a small car.

My 1999 Civic gets about 33 city/40-ish hwy, and it's larger than the Focus.

[noonwitch]

40. But it's the best for an american car, and I buy american.

I don't drive foreign cars. I live in Michigan. Although I don't work in the auto industry, I am a UAW member.

I agree that they need to raise mileage standards, but not enough that I'll buy foreign cars until they get around to it. When I buy a new one in 2010, I expect that it will have better mileage than the 2005 one. I think Ford will remain in business whether they get bailed out or not. Their plan is to have the american version of the Focus get the same mileage as the ones made for european customers by 2010.

[EOTE]

44. How about comparing current cars?

The current Focus matches the fuel economy of the highest rated, non-hybrid Civic there is. And for a good deal cheaper to boot.

[Javaman]

23. Oh bullshit!

If they introduced a fucking car that did 65mph, I doubt very much that the american public, especially now would turn their nose up at it.

This is such colossal unmitigated bullshit.

this is how ford and other gas hog producers destroyed the US auto industry.

They didn't bring this car to the US because they wouldn't have made as much on it as they would have made on one of the SUV gas suckers.

greed, pure and simple.

fuckers.

:rant:

[Turborama]

25. Have you seen this comparison?

They're both the same price but the US one is twice the weight and horsepower, sure they can make money on them. It's the oil magnates that won't let them... (BTW it's MPG not MPH ;-))

[flvegan]

37. That price comparison isn't accurate.

I've noticed that most cars in the UK are priced MUCH higher. For example, that Focus at 14k quid would cost around $20k here. The price in pounds is about 2/3 the price in dollars here, rough guess.

Learned that watching Top Gear.

[Turborama]

41. The Dollar is at $0.67 to the Pound at the mo. Which would make it £18,931...

I have been thinking along the lines of cutting that price in half too (£1=$2), as the $ has sharply risen against the pound only very recently...

http://finance.yahoo.com/currency/convert?amt=28209&from=USD&to=GBP&submit=Convert

[Romulox]

28. If American consumers won't pay what green autos cost, aren't THEY the greedy ones?

:wtf:

[Javaman]

29. look at the post just above yours replying to my comment...

yes, a $100 dollar difference is a make or break choice on a 29k car.

:eyes:

[Romulox]

30. You don't get it. Americans won't pay $29k for a compact car. nt

[Javaman]

32. huh, odd, I'm an American and I would. kind of blows your theory, huh? nt

[Ex Lurker]

26. Drop that little diesel engine into a small pickup truck and I'll buy it right now n/t

[Atman]

31. Talked to a woman at the gas pump yesterday...her diesel VW Bug got 48mpg

But diesel in CT is nearly $1 more, so I guess it kinda evens out.

.

[keith the dem]

33. Ford and GM have the technology but

sell us crap!

Ten years ago I rented a cheap European Ford in Germany. The thing was fantastic! Every third car in Germany was a GM Opel, an obvious equal to VW's.

I've predicted this meltdown for years. It's the same thing that happened in the 1970's, except now the big cars are even bigger and more gas hungry SUVs.

The auto unions are at fault also, not because of their benefits, but because they went to Washington to lobby against increased CAFE standards.

[Turborama]

35. This is something that mystifies me. Why did they lobby against the CAFE standards?

Here's a good article by the NYT about the history of all this but I still don't get it...

American Energy Policy, Asleep at the Spigot
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/business/06oil.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&pagewanted=all

[99th_Monkey]

34. K & R - This information needs to be shouted from the rooftops far and wide

Can you hear us Obama? PLEASE factor this info into your US auto bailout proposal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Turborama]

36. Thanks for the K&R Here's some good news...

"Even some Democrats appeared wary. Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said the industry should be forced to meet average fuel economy standards of up to 50 miles per gallon by 2020, and transforming the companies means "new eyes, new ears to steer us out of this mess."
http://www.freep.com/article/20081118/BUSINESS01/811180314?imw=Y

[99th_Monkey]

38. I'd be more excited if Nelson was saying "...by 2010...damn .. 12 years? do we have that long? ~nt

[Turborama]

39. Me too, but at least something above the paultry 35 MPG's being discussed...

Just got to get them to speed it up...

[BrklynLiberal]

43. K & R

[JBear]

45. So here is an idea for bailing out the auto industry...

(sorry for the cross post)

The biggest reason that the auto industry doesn't sell diesel cars in the US is that certifying them for emissions is costly. There are lots of nuances about getting a car certified for sale in the US. Mercedes has even passed on bringing us the diesel Smart when they already sell it in Canada. Contrast that with VW who's US sales were propped up solely by the TDI lineup they had from 2000-2006.

MY2008 has brought us to the next level of diesel emissions. The US rules are even tougher than the EU rules. They require expensive emissions control devices that make the gas engine catalytic converter seem down right cheap.

A lot for a car company to swallow on a "niche" market right?? WRONG!

These cars already exist in Europe as noted above. The current EU emissions standards are still cleaner than the MY2005 EPA standard. They are simply measured in different ways. The simple answer is - change our emissions regs to allow an EU certified vehicle to be certified in the US.

Some of the savings to the car companies while adding a really cool line up of efficient vehicles to the US:

1) One emissions test, not two.
2) Harmonized standards - they don't have to figure out how to meet two different test criteria with one system
3) Allow EU road homologation to suffice for EU model cars brought to the US - No redesign necessary! OK, the down side is that they probably would start building these cars in Europe and importing them (yes, GM=Opel and Vauxhaul, Ford=Ford and Chrysler=Chrysler in the EU). The up side is that this gives them the cash to retool here at home to make them here too.
4) Expanded market - helps bring the cost down on the model specific parts

The naysayers all tell me that Americans don't want diesel cars. They remember the Oldsmobile Diesel and the Diesel Rabbit. I drive a diesel VW and can tell you first hand that this is a fine car to drive. Plenty of power (lots of torque!!) and great mileage. Don't believe me? Go down to your VW dealer and drive their demo TDI jetta. You will be surprised!!

Remember that if the AVERAGE fuel economy of cars driven in the US was up at 40 MPG (achievable with some of these cars in the mix), we would not need to import oil to drive our cars!!! Pretty incredible considering I drive a car that gets 44 MPG on the highway!

Just saying!

:bounce:

[leftchick]

49. The VW Jetta has a clen/diesel car sold here

why can't ford?

[a la izquierda]

50. I wonder if Ford will sell it in Mexico

They sell Fiestas here. If they do, I'm so going to get one and deal with the taxes to bring it up to the US...

[and-justice-for-all]

51. Those fucking pricks!!! Damn them!!!

this is utter bullshit!

[amandabeech]

52. Ford's plan is to bring the Fiesta, the Ka, the European Focus and the Mondeo here.

I'm so exhausted defending them here that I can't read straight to get you the cite, but I'm sure that you can google it yourself. Or just go over to their site.

There are media reports and I believe that their 10-Q sets out the basis of the plan. The Ford dealer from whom I bought a lovely pre-owned Taurus last month had all the details already. He was pretty excited. The Focus cabriolet is very sharp.

It's too bad Mulally didn't present what Ford has done and is planning to do very well in his Congressional testimony. The turned around Boeing, and I think that he's making good progress with Ford.

Very recently, all the Big 3 submitted their plans for using the re-tooling loans that they get as part of the 2007 energy bill. I don't think that the plans are on the net yet.

Ford will retool some of its truck, van and SUV plants to make the smaller cars from Europe. They are also working to get the most mileage out of gasoline engines.

If they get financing, they'll start up the line in December that's supposed to make the Fusion Hybrid, which is supposed to get better fuel mileage than the Hybrid Camry. The auto was supposed to be in showrooms in January, but who knows what's going on now.

[Turborama]

53. I've got a link to an MSNBC story about Ford's good intentions...

Posted on here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4510556&mesg_id=4511133

Here's some more info that allays the fears that most people have. In addition to answer 7, hybrids have a very quick depreciation in comparison and their lifespan is a lot shorter... Also (while on the topic of hybrids) - on an environmental note - what's going to happen to all the batteries when these hybrids go the the big car maker in the sky in less than a decade? :shrug:

Hybrids are a red herring and a distraction. The power that charges them come from those big ol' dirty power stations so if anyone is buying them thinking they are "going green", think again. More on my thoughts about the red herring thing and why diesel is the best choice environmentally http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4509092&mesg_id=4510016">here...

Sorry about the cross thread but it's not getting much traction on the other one and needs to be kept alive...

Diesel cars: 7 worries, 7 answers
Just as diesel cars are preparing to enter the U.S. market in a big way, misconceptions may be causing interest to wane.

By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: March 11, 2008: 11:12 AM EDT

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Diesel engines power half the passenger vehicles sold in Europe but almost none here. Stricter U.S. clean air regulations have meant that - until recently - they were simply too dirty to be sold in the most populous U.S. states, including California, New York and New Jersey.

This virtual shut-out means that American drivers have little experience with modern diesel engines. The last time diesel cars were sold here in any significant number was in the 1980s, and the ones we saw then were noisy, belched black smoke and were slow to move.

Recent survey data from Kelley Blue Book indicates that diesel perceptions haven't improved much. In fact, views seem to be getting worse just as car companies are preparing to introduce us to better performing, cleaner diesel engines.

Interest in diesels among new car buyers is trending downward, according to Kelley Blue Book. It now stands at 39% compared to 60% for gas-electric hybrids. It's even lower than consideration for hydrogen fuel cells, which are still decades away from hitting the market.

But a close look at seven common worries about diesel engines reveals that most of them don't reflect today's reality.

1. I just don't get the difference: Like gasoline engines, diesels burn liquid fuel derived from petroleum. But unlike gas engines, diesels don't use a spark to ignite the fuel. Instead, air is squeezed inside a hot cylinder. At just the right time, fuel is squirted into the cylinder where it instantly ignites in the super-heated compressed air. That releases energy that pushes the cylinder down, powering the vehicle.

That might seem like a minor difference - either way, stuff burns and pushes pistons - but it ultimately means that diesel engines behave differently from gas engines in a number of ways. Diesels have mostly been used in trucks and trains which benefit from the engine's low-speed pulling power and greater fuel efficiency.

Gas engines have traditionally been used in cars because they tend to be quieter, offer quicker acceleration and run more easily when cold. But newer diesel engines are closing - and even eliminating - differences in these areas.

2. Diesel engines get worse fuel economy: Surprisingly, fewer than half of respondents in Kelley Blue Book's survey agreed with the statement that diesels engines "are fuel efficient." Actually, that's their main selling point.

Because of how the engine uses fuel - creating lots of power at low engine speeds - and because the fuel contains more energy per gallon, diesels get much better fuel economy than gas-powered cars. In many cases, diesels get mileage similar to gasoline-hybrid cars of the same size and type.

3. Diesels are old technology: It's true that diesel is an old engine technology. Rudolf Diesel patented his engine design in the 1890s. But the spark-ignited gas-powered engine that powers most of our cars is even older.

Like the gas engine, diesel has been undergoing a lot of improvements in the last few decades as fuel economy demands have increased, so a modern diesel engine is no less "modern" than anything else.

4. Diesel engines are noisy: Old diesel engines used to make loud clanking and popping noises caused by the sudden, high-pressure ignition of fuel inside the engine. Gas engines ignite fuel under pressure, too, but the much greater pressures used in diesels resulted in a popping and banging noises.

New diesels create a more gentle increase in pressure by injecting small amounts of fuel into the cylinder even as the piston is rising. Those small ignitions aren't enough to push the piston back down, but they keep things warm and increase pressure slightly.

Then, when the piston reaches the top, a bigger push of fuel creates the big burst of energy that pushes the piston back down. Another series of smaller fuel injections then keep the piston moving down, easing decompression. The result is gentler, quieter combustion cycle that eliminates most of the noise.

5. Diesel engines spew filth into the air: This has been the real culprit keeping diesels out of the U.S. market. America's strict clean air rules simply couldn't be met.

The extremely high temperatures and pressures inside diesel engines create nasty pollutants like nitrous oxides and so-called "diesel particulate matter." In order to get diesels to meet the same requirements as gas engines, car companies are now using a variety of emission cleaning technologies including filters and devices that release cleaning substances into the exhaust stream.

To make all this possible, gas stations that sell diesel fuel are now required to sell "ultra clean diesel" that has much less sulfur. Sulfur used to be included to help lubricate the engine, but its presence would have interfered with these new emissions-cleaning technologies. With that sulfur taken out, diesel exhaust can now be held to the same standards as gasoline exhaust.

6. Diesel-powered cars are slow: While diesel engines have loads of pulling power - called torque - acceleration has been a traditional weak point. All modern diesel engines now have turbochargers that provide additional boost, which has made a big difference in performance.

Diesels have a gentler take-off before the turbochargers start adding boost. Once things get rolling, they can provide a surprising rush of acceleration. Most drivers would never miss the performance of a gasoline-powered car. In fact, diesel engines with less high-end power - or horsepower - can deliver similar, or even better, real-world performance.

7. They cost too much: While diesel offers a less technologically complex way to get hybrid-like fuel economy, it's not without added costs. Diesel engines cost more to make than gas engines because of the need to withstand high internal pressures, and because they require turbocharging to provide adequate performance.

Diesels also require expensive emission-cleaning technology. Like gasoline/electric hybrid cars, diesel cars will cost American buyers thousands more than comparable gas-powered versions.

Diesels could make up much of that added cost in better resale value, though. Diesel cars. They hold their value much better than gas-powered cars or hybrids, according to Kelley Blue Book.

--Bonus question: Due to a strong reader response, we added this worry to the list:

Diesels are hard to start in cold weather: Because they rely on engine heat and because diesel fuel tends to thicken in cold temperatures, diesels have traditionally been hard to start in cold temperatures.

Improvements in diesel engines and diesel fuels have helped eliminate these problems. Like gasoline, diesel fuels are reformulated for cold weather.

Improved fuel injectors help by better "atomizing" the fuel, spraying out a fine mist that ignites more easily. Newer "glow plugs" - internal heating elements that warm diesel engine cylinders - also heat up right away, providing quick starts even on cold days.
http://cnnmoney.printthis.clickability.com/pt/cpt?action=cpt&title=Diesel+misconceptions+-+Mar.+10,+2008&expire=-1&urlID=32606216&fb=Y&url=http://www.mutual-funds.us/2008/02/27/autos/diesel_worries/index.htm%3Fpostversion%3D2008031111&partnerID=2200

[amandabeech]

54. I think that we're writing at cross purposes.

1. The article safety standards has been a problem for years. That's why GM doesn't import the Opel like it used to. I had two of them and really loved the second, the Manta. It had a wicked third gear and got good gas mileage.

At this time, Ford will die if it does not get those small cars over here. It is WWII for them--they must win. I think that they'll get it done and that regulatory hurdles may be lowered in the process.

As to hybrids, the Ford hybrids are like the current Toyotas. They're recharged by regenerative breaking, not the electricity grid. The GM Volt will charge from an onboard generator and the grid.

I'm sure that you have all the info about eliminating coal-fired electrical generation. The number of rechargeable hybrids will have to be balanced with that goal and with the amount of off-peak electricity available. There's a lot that is generated and dumped. Might as well make use of it.

2. As to diesel, I'm not into it as much as you are, and I just don't have a lot to say except that it will get here eventually. You have pointed out some of the difficulties and I have no objection to diesel. You'll get them. We had them in the late '70s. It's just not going to happen as soon as you want. But keep up your advocacy. Good luck!

[Turborama]

58. Some sound advice from CnnMoney.com "The right way to buy a fuel sipper"

Just came across this and thought it was worth a share...

Look beyond city and highway numbers at the real costs and at your real needs.

By Peter Valdes-Dapena, CNNMoney.com staff writer

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Sky-high gas prices bring fuel economy front and center when it comes to buying a new car. But if you're not careful, your bargain gas-sipper could wind up costing you a lot more in the long-run.

"There's an element of penny-wise, pound foolish in all of this," says Jack Nerad, managing editor of Kelley Blue Book.

Getting started
The best tool for looking at fuel economy numbers is fueleconomy.gov. Operated jointly by the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, the site gives you the EPA-estimated city and highway fuel economy numbers for all mass-market passenger cars and trucks sold in the U.S.

These numbers are based on a new testing system introduced last year that produces more realistic figures. In most cases, the numbers will be lower than what you've seen in the past.

Other available information goes well beyond that. Click on any car, and you'll see the EPA's estimated combined fuel economy number. That gives you a single figure to compare instead of juggling separate city and highway numbers.

Even better, the detail page for each car provides estimated annual fuel costs, making for an easy direct comparison. You can see how a small difference in fuel economy has a bigger impact in a low miles-per-gallon vehicle, like a large SUV, than in a fuel-efficient small car.

For instance, the two-mpg difference between a Chevrolet Tahoe and a similar Ford Expedition might not seem like much, but the $435 difference in annual fuel costs certainly does. By contrast, the four-mpg difference between the Toyota Corolla compact car and the Toyota Camry midsize car saves $269 a year in gas.

Keeping an eye on estimated fuel costs can also save you from buying a vehicle that gets great fuel economy but requires expensive "premium" fuel.

Fueleconomy.gov's annual fuel cost estimates are based on 15,000 miles per year of driving almost evenly split between the city and highway. Keep your own driving habits in mind as you look at these numbers.

Factor in all other costs
Depreciation, the difference between what you pay for a car and what you can ultimately sell it for as a used car, is the single biggest cost car ownership by far, costing much more than gas or insurance.

The Honda Fit and Ford Focus, for example, are two similarly priced compact cars. The Focus is just slightly less fuel efficient. But the Focus will lose about $3,600 more in depreciation over that time, according to IntelliChoice.com. The Focus will also cost more to insure. Those costs will have a far bigger impact than the small difference in fuel economy. (See correction.)

In most cases, differences in the actual cost of depreciation between two similarly priced vehicles won't be that large, but it's still a significant factor that needs to be balanced against fuel costs.

Don't get caught up in hype
"One of the assumptions people often make is that fuel economy is only present in a hybrid car," says Phil Reed, consumer advice editor for the automotive Web site Edmunds.com.

Look at the real fuel costs and other costs first. You may find a slightly smaller, less expensive vehicle that can save on fuel without the additional cost of hybrid technology. Also, given the short supply of hybrid vehicles on the market, it's much easier to negotiate a good price on a non-hybrid vehicle.

For example, the Toyota Highlander Hybrid offers combined fuel economy of 26 mpg, which is excellent for a roomy, three-row SUV. Meanwhile, the Toyota Rav4 is a little smaller and its fuel mileage isn't quite as good, but it also costs about $10,000 less to start with.

If you're still thinking hybrid, make sure you're looking at a hybrid vehicle that offers a worthwhile benefit without sacrificing capability. Among hybrid vehicles that offer the biggest boost for your buck are the Toyota Prius, Honda Civic Hybrid and the Ford Escape Hybrid SUV.

General Motors' Saturn Vue Green Line uses a mild hybrid system - that means the SUV can't run on electric power alone - that offers surprisingly good fuel economy at a much lower added cost than other hybrids. As with other hybrids, though, supplies are tight.

Beginning this summer you'll also be seeing more diesel cars in showrooms, not just trucks and SUVs. While diesel cars can achieve hybrid-like fuel economy savings, they will also tend to have sticker prices a few thousand dollars above those of similar gas-powered models.

Right now, the high cost of diesel fuel would seem to make them a bad buy, but current diesel prices aren't the norm. Ordinarily, diesel fuel prices are similar to gasoline and often lower. Fuel economy gains and the higher resale value of diesel cars should make up the additional cost over a few years of ownership.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/31/autos/shopping_for_mpg/index.htm?postversion=2008040310

[Turborama]

61. "A cleaner diesel has foreign car makers revved up for US"...

The signs were there, you snooze you lose...

Foreign automakers are primed to start selling cars in the United States that produce less carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide and get 20 to 40 percent better mileage than vehicles already on the market.

And they do it by efficiently burning a cleaner type of diesel fuel.

Diesel vehicles have long deserved their reputation as loud, smoky, and dirty. In some states -- including Massachusetts -- new models have been banned for years because their exhaust systems were inefficient and diesel fuel contained too much sulfur to meet emissions standards.

But revised federal pollution rules that took effect in January reduce the allowable sulfur content of diesel fuel from 500 to 15 parts per million, and the new cars are outfitted with sophisticated exhaust and filtering systems that further cut pollution. As a result, they will be allowed for sale in all 50 states by the end of the year. Consumers will pay extra for a diesel, though not as much as the $2,000 to $7,000 tacked on to the price of gas-electric hybrids. For instance, a Mercedes-Benz E320 diesel sedan costs about $1,000 more than a similar gas model. But it gets more than 35 miles per gallon, about 10 miles per gallon better than a comparable gas-fueled Mercedes.

Makers of diesel vehicles say they also are prepared to seek a consumer tax break similar to the one hybrid buyers enjoy, about a $2,000 federal deduction.

Foreign companies sped ahead of of US automakers in introducing hybrids a decade ago, and now plan on being leaders in the diesel market. Chrysler, which is owned by German automaker DaimlerChrysler and also makes Dodge and Jeep brands, will offer diesel-powered passenger cars. But Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. plan to limit their diesel business to trucks until they see how the American market for passenger cars unfolds.

Consumers, however, may not want to wait, especially given the fuel-savings diesel offers. The results of a recent survey by Autobytel Inc., an online auto marketplace, showed 72 percent of Americans would "absolutely" consider buying a diesel vehicle. And the marketing and research firm J.D. Power and Associates forecasts that diesels, which currently account for just 3.4 percent of the cars on the road in the United States, will hit 15 percent within eight years. By comparison, J.D. Power projects that by 2011 hybrids will have only about 3 percent of the market, 11 years after the first one came ashore.

Even the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, which compiles an annual "greenest" and "meanest" vehicles list and is a long-time critic of diesel, is ready to accept the new cars.

"We would like to have seen them come into the market even sooner," said Therese Langer , the group's transportation program director.

DaimlerChrysler's Mercedes-Benz group, BMW, Audi, and Volkswagen will sell diesel-powered vehicles in the United States that use an elaborate exhaust and filter system, called Bluetec. Other automakers, including Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, and Mitsubishi, are planning to introduce diesels that use different exhaust and filter systems.

"We're looking heavily at diesel," said Len Hunt, chief operating officer of Kia North America. "I'm a believer in clean diesel because I had such a good experience in Europe with diesel." Hunt previously worked for Audi and Volkswagen.

Diesel cars have long been popular in Europe, largely because they are more powerful and responsive than gas-powered models. "In Europe we have the diesel just for driving pleasure," said Wolfgang Hatz, head of engine development for Audi.

The cars account for 60 to 70 percent of sales in some European markets, said Tom Purvis, chief executive of BMW North America.

Read More:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/24/a_cleaner_diesel_has_carmakers_revved_up_for_us/

[Kolesar]

62. Oh, geez. The reason Ford is not selling it here is because it is a DIESEL

It's right there in the excerpt by Turborama. Did anybody read it??

Diesels were "practically" withdrawn from the US market because none of them could meet the smog requirements for California, NYC, and other metro areas.

It's not some kind of "Ford Conspiracy"

Low sulphur standards mean that diesels can be viable in all of the US. It will take time to redevelop the marketplace.

[Turborama]

67. But surely this "redevoplmont" can be sped up dramatically now that we are at the helm?

I sure hope Ford et al bring this to the table when they go back to Congress...



Edit to fix typo

[goforit]

63. collusion with the oil industry.......tisk tisk tisk!!!

America????

FIRE their asses!!!

[Turborama]

66. I'm certain this has got to be the reason why America differs so massively in car efficiency from...

...the rest of the world.


Taken from: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/business/06oil.html">American Energy Policy, Asleep at the Spigot