Volkswagen Diesels

[Antibubba]

I want to make the switch to a fuel efficient car in the next year, and I've always liked diesels.  My area has quite a few biodiesel co-ops and groups, and learning to supply and make my own fuel appeals to me.  However, I'm not going to be able to pay a fortune, and any car I get will be "pre-owned".  Among the biodiesel crowd the old Mercedes, BMWs, Saabs, and (usually) Volvos command a premium, so I'm probably looking at a Volkswagen.  But I've heard some mixed reviews about VW reliability, and I want to know which models are my best choice.

Naturally,  if a good deal comes about on one of the Mercedes, I'll grab it.  A lot of the diesel Mercedes around here are so old, they have fins!  Refined and subdued, but still fins.   

[Scout26]

I knew that Saab had diesels in Europe, but I didn't think they ever made it over to this side of the pond.  Something to do with meeting US requirements.

Have you actually seen one ??

[LAK]

I'd like one of the old Merc' 300D stationwagons.

I had a retired friend who had one of the old diesel VW Rabbits. He never had a problem with that one that I knew of. And I have been quizzing some owners of newer VW diesels; most report favorably.

Incidently, you can import a vehicle that is over 25 years old with no DOT worries. I am looking at that option too.

[Iain]

Shouldn't be any real problems with VW's, or any of the VW group - so include Seat and Skoda if they are available.

The Skoda Octavia is nothing flashy but it's a very nice car, based on the Golf. The diesel VRS is a nippy car, nothing outrageous but should fun and claims 48mpg.

[S. Williamson]

Parts replacement will be a pain in the posterior. 

[old school]

I used to work with a some mechanics from eastern europe. They were amazed at how few deisel autos we have here in the states. They are big big fans of diesel. I have never had a deisel car, but at one time, I had a small fleet of pickups. The diesels used literally less than half as much fuel and never ever had engine trouble and next to no maintenance.

Diesel is over $4 per gallon here and is more expensive than premium. I really do not understand why diesel is more than gasoline. It has always been cheaper up until the last 5 or 6 years. I don't know why this has happened. I thought the refining process was actually simpler for diesel than gasoline.

[Tallpine]

A guy in our neighborhood has a yellow diesel VW Rabbit.  AFAIK he has no trouble with it.

He also has a yellow diesel Kenworth 

[Firethorn]

Diesel is over $4 per gallon here and is more expensive than premium. I really do not understand why diesel is more than gasoline. It has always been cheaper up until the last 5 or 6 years. I don't know why this has happened. I thought the refining process was actually simpler for diesel than gasoline.

The more minor cause I've heard about is that diesel has more taxes on it than gasoline.  Another is the low sulfur requirement.

The biggest reason I've heard is the industrialization of China and India - Their diesel usage is going up even faster than their gasoline usage.  After all, they're shipping more stuff internally as well.

[mckormicnavistar]

The EPA mandates for lower sulfur content and the additives needed to keep the fuel viable. BLAME IT ON THE CLIMATE CHANGE NAZIS!!!!!

[K Frame]

Friends of mine got 285,000 or so miles out of their 1978 diesel Rabbit before it had a serious body issue and had to be scrapped.

At one time I considered a diesel, but given how short my commute is now it wouldn't be a good option.

[Tuco]

I did similar research before settling on a 50 dollar Honda Civic (gasoline) with a bad head gasket and many other cosmetic/comfort issues.  It was the best bang for the buck when life cycled out 150,000 miles

I learned that the diesel in the Jetta (four cylinder) was a best bet.  Five generations reaching back to 1970s. 
The TD was a third generation, and the TDI was brought in with generation 4 (late 90s).  The fourth generation TDIs are the ticket, due to age (the cars are aging) and performance/economy.
The horsepower was increased in the fifth generation TDI, with a subsequent decrease in economy (2005?).  The fourth generation was a very desirable platform (98-'05), capable of terrible horsepower increasing modification and as a commuter, generally outlasting the tin wrapped around it.

I recall a five-cylinder plant in the Passats (03-05?).  These offered much less mpg economy, but I can imagine enormous amounts of torque.

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=54059

I knew I saved this for a reason - - -  Everything you could possibly want to know about the TDI

And another thing, unless you you want to go against the law, don't try saving mucho bucks by using off-road diesel fuel. 

[The Annoyed Man]

I owned a Rabbit diesel in the '80's, drove the snot out of it [200K] then gave it to my kid who wrecked it after a year. Fantastic little car. Consistent 45 mpg. Even cold starts in the Adirondack winters were not a problem, because it had "glowplugs" to prewarm the fuel. There was not much of an aftermarket parts availability so you were stuck with dealers, meaning pricey, but not too gruesome. But it was very reliable especially the engine. The drivetrain started needing things like CV joints and such at around 100 K which was to be expected, IMO.

My buddy presently drives a Golf diesel and is having the same experience as mine. About the same mileage. For all intents and purposes his Golf looks like a little wider version of my Rabbit.

Apparently VW's latest diesel can meet our stricter EPA standards and will be importing soon, if not already. They are claiming 60 mpg on at least one model. Looks like I'll have to retire the 91 Saab I've been driving since my Rabbit days.  

[Antibubba]

.

[HankB]

Former neighbor used to use furnace oil in his Mercedes diesel . . . though I understand that's frowned on since you're paying less in taxes. 

A local guy got harassed because he was making his own biodiesel from used restaurant oil . . . a tax issue, of course . . . but the only reason they knew it was because he said what he was doing in a couple of interviews.

So if you're fueling your diesel vehicle anywhere other than from a retail, heavily-taxed source, it pays to be discrete. 

[Balog]

I know it's been brought up before, but has any non-commercial vehicle ever been jacked for using red diesel? I just don't know how the police would find out, unless you wrecked or something. Any documentation of non-commercial vehicles getting busted?

[Tallpine]

I know it's been brought up before, but has any non-commercial vehicle ever been jacked for using red diesel? I just don't know how the police would find out, unless you wrecked or something. Any documentation of non-commercial vehicles getting busted?

Our neighbors have told me that they have been stopped for spot checks of their fuel tanks in their Dodge Cummins pickups 

Seems like a 4th amendment issue there, but then this is the USSA 

[alex_trebek]

I know it's been brought up before, but has any non-commercial vehicle ever been jacked for using red diesel? I just don't know how the police would find out, unless you wrecked or something. Any documentation of non-commercial vehicles getting busted?

i have never heard of a case, but the red dye will last several tanks.  So it is plausible that, even if it is months after you used the red diesel, you could get caught.  That is more time for accident, gas leak, etc to happen.

[Boomhauer]

Former neighbor used to use furnace oil in his Mercedes diesel . . . though I understand that's frowned on since you're paying less in taxes. 

A local guy got harassed because he was making his own biodiesel from used restaurant oil . . . a tax issue, of course . . . but the only reason they knew it was because he said what he was doing in a couple of interviews.

So if you're fueling your diesel vehicle anywhere other than from a retail, heavily-taxed source, it pays to be discrete. 

I have heard of people using biodesiel getting caught and charged...same as with red dyed diesel.

[ilbob]

Diesel is over $4 per gallon here and is more expensive than premium. I really do not understand why diesel is more than gasoline. It has always been cheaper up until the last 5 or 6 years. I don't know why this has happened. I thought the refining process was actually simpler for diesel than gasoline.

Diesel has more BTUs per gallon than gasoline does. I was always amazed that diesel was cheaper for so long.

[Firethorn]

Diesel has more BTUs per gallon than gasoline does. I was always amazed that diesel was cheaper for so long.

It's also easier to refine than gasoline.  Or at least was until the new sulfer requirements hit. 

Note- I like clean air, and the Europeans seem to have figured out refining low sulfer diesel long ago.  Matter of fact, the proposed ND refinery is mainly intended to produce diesel, and it does it using a different process that is more efficient(IE cheap) at producing low sulfer than most other refineries in the states.  It's also a design that's good for being low pollution.

[alex_trebek]

Note- I like clean air, and the Europeans seem to have figured out refining low sulfer diesel long ago.

Maybe in the past, but not now.  Our low sulfur diesel is much cleaner than Europe's, probably unnecessarily so.  IIRC the US rates pollution content of fuel much differently than the Europeans.  Our system is based on one unit of volume, where their's is based on pollution emitted per distance traveled.  This is where the problem occurs when comparing gasoline to diesel.  Since diesel is much more efficient, it is not a "fair" comparison to make based on volume.  If diesel was twice as dirty as gasoline but burned at a half the rate, then the overall pollution is equal between the two.  This is something the US government has quite figured out yet...

[ilbob]

Note- I like clean air, and the Europeans seem to have figured out refining low sulfer diesel long ago.

Maybe in the past, but not now.  Our low sulfur diesel is much cleaner than Europe's, probably unnecessarily so.  IIRC the US rates pollution content of fuel much differently than the Europeans.  Our system is based on one unit of volume, where their's is based on pollution emitted per distance traveled.  This is where the problem occurs when comparing gasoline to diesel.  Since diesel is much more efficient, it is not a "fair" comparison to make based on volume.  If diesel was twice as dirty as gasoline but burned at a half the rate, then the overall pollution is equal between the two.  This is something the US government has quite figured out yet...

The same issue applies to more fuel efficient cars. Less gas burned means less pollution, but emissions are rated at X ppm in the exhaust rather than the actual amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere.

Its like the insane rules they have for using river water. You can actually bring in river water, use it and release it back to the river cleaner in every respect than it came out of the river, and still be considered a polluter.

[Tallpine]

Twenty plus years ago, a nice guy who worked for the Forest Circus told me that when you work for the governmuck you can't allow yourself to think logically 

I don't think things are improving, either 

[alex_trebek]

The same issue applies to more fuel efficient cars. Less gas burned means less pollution, but emissions are rated at X ppm in the exhaust rather than the actual amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere.

I wish they would measure the concentration, and volumetric flow rate.  A mass flow rate would be a true number of pollution emitted.  I think the new low sulfur diesel is 15 ppm, and this is before combustion.  I wouldn't be too surprised if this was actually lower than atmospheric sulfur concentrations.  I could be wrong, I don't know what the natural sulfur conc is.

[Firethorn]

The same issue applies to more fuel efficient cars. Less gas burned means less pollution, but emissions are rated at X ppm in the exhaust rather than the actual amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere.

Its like the insane rules they have for using river water. You can actually bring in river water, use it and release it back to the river cleaner in every respect than it came out of the river, and still be considered a polluter.

If true, I think that it's something we seriously need to fix.  I'm all for creating a rating system that penalizes vehicles for poor performance in terms of people-miles or perhaps combined with cargo pound-miles(to cover cargo vehicles like semis and trucks).