Half a Dozen BLUETEC Models On The Way

We want Bluetec.

VW doesn't use GS/GLS anymore. But VW will sell every single TDI (Bluetec) that it can get here. VW has never had any problems selling its TDIs.

VW doesn't use GL/GLS trim designations anymore.

Yeah, the Prius is pretty overpriced for a shitbox on wheels that doesn't deliver the promised fuel economy.

Still better than any shitbox GM, Chysler/Dodge, of Fod have to offer.

Bluetec running on biodiesel in a GTI body would be a great combo..with DSG.

From Volkswagen press release (can't find the link): 2008 Jetta TDI will be a 2.0 I4, and will begin production for U.S. in January 2008. Same engine for the Tiguan. This engine--in the Jetta--will not use urea injection to attack NOx. It will use an adsorber of some type, so it will be all in-house. It will be fifty state legal. Expect to have to dealers in volume by Spring of '08.

My assumptions: I would guess around 140 hp, and 250 lbs of torque with piezo injectors, DPF, and fuel economy around 40-45 hwy. That will up the hp around 40; torque around 70 and fuel economy will remain roghly the same ( an amazing, 45% above the 2.5 I5). The engine will be lighter using modern, diesel engine designs, which will also help vehicle performance. Turbo lag will be reduced. Engine noise will be further muted. The block for the 1.9 was designed in the early 90's. Diesel tech. has come a long way since then, but the 1.9 is still valid in today's autoworld, because of the superiority of diesel power. Expect the new VW TDI to be an absolutely fabulous driving experience.

Costs will be an issue with the DPF and the adsorber. This is why VW has teamed up with DC. They are trying to drive down costs by sharing modular units for reducing NOx. Bosch will supply these units.

Consumers will have the addtional costs of more expensive motor oil than is required for typical, naturally-aspired, gas engines. It will require CJ-4 (low-ash) oil, which will be required for all diesel engines built after this month. The drain interval will probably remain at 10,000 miles.

VW--in my opinion--will approve this new engine for biodiesel blends up to B5, and will upgrade to B20 once a B20 fuel standard is established. It will not be long before this happens, as DC is working hard to get this mandated in the industry. Biodiesel is key to their plans of mass marketing diesels to America. A clean diesel that gets great fuel economy, and gets even cleaner running a renewable blend of fuel, while sacrificing nothing for the consumer. Sounds like a winning combination to me. I'm following that path right now with my '06 Jetta TDI. It's working out great for me.

VW jumped up the price of the TDI Jetta this fall by about $1,000, because demand was out the roof with limited supply and absolutely, no advertising. I expect they'll try not to jump it up more than another grand with the new edition in '08. VW and DC are committed to teaching America about all the benefits of modern, diesel power. They will work hard to be price competitive.

"Is that why MB/Chrysler only sell $70,000 versions of Bluetec?"

BlueTec just began sales in October, in only one, luxury sedan. The diesels are $1,000 more than the 3.5 gas-guzzlers, including the BlueTec. The prices are $45,000--ML320 CDI; $47,000--R320 CDI; $55,000--E320 BlueTec (all approx.). Where did you get $70,000? Haven't seen that one. MB sales were up 14% from last October having to do--mainly--with CDI/BlueTec sales. The V8s cost more than the CDIs/BlueTecs. Go attack folks choosing V8 gas guzzlers and V12s; not those concerned with reducing fuel consumption and see one avenue of accomplishing this through clean diesel technologies and biodiesel fuel.

All your points are invalid. Hybrid advocates are scared of clean diesel; not sure why. Diesel advocates aren't scared of hybrids. We embrace that technology as well, and don't preclude any technology that can responsibly reduce petroleum consumption in America.

Since Lexus sells a hybrid over 40 grand, does that make all hybrid technologies a waste of time.

"If VW really was concerned about getting us off oil, they would've come out with a cleaner TDI years ago so they wouldn't have to stockpile them when it became illegal to manufacture due to emissions standards."

...Oh, you make that sound so easy, but we still had the dirties diesel fuel in the world ten years after Europe had adopted a cleaner standard. Lets put lead and sulfur back in gasoline and see how they respond with emission rules. The diesel fuel just became available two months ago that was already the standard around the world for years. Diesel technologies can reduce overall emissions by 60% in one year using ULSD fuel and DPFs. Diesel technologies will be cleaner than comparable gas cars with respect to CO, THCs, CO2, and are now on par with respect to PM. Only diesel cars can use alternative fuels with no engine modifications or special builds. It is an EPA bias keeping diesels out, requiring a 70% reducion in NOx in one year. Besides, it doesn't matter how concerned car companies are about getting us off oil. Americans have to want to get off oil and tell car companies they want this. So far, we have told them we want gas guzzlers. They have to produce what we want or someone else will.

Hybrid sales for Nov'06 was 18,0000 units (75% were Toyota/Lexus).
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2006/12/us_sales_of_hyb.html

And what were the diesel car sales in Europe for November. The manufacuturing capacity, and corresponding oil reducing potential of clean diesel dwarfs that of hybrids or any other technologies. Hybrid technologies are good for America, but that--in no way--has anything to do with the opportunities afforded America by embracing clean diesel power.

I'll take a hybrid, but only if it is a diesel hybrid.

"In the U.S., VW sold about 3000 diesels in April 06 (normally a busier time to buy cars)."

Yes--but that 3,000 represents 30% of New Jetta and 15% of New Beetle sales from a company that doesn't sell near what Toyota sales from each model. Thirty percent diesels chosen is phenomenal, and shows the popularity of diesel power as a concept with sales limited to forty-five states and virtually no advertising.

I don't think VWs problems in North America stem from their decision to try to keep diesels in America against a biased regulatory environment. In fact, that is one of their strong points, and has been for years.

What percentage of Toyotas sold as hybrids in vehicles that offer both a regular, gas engine and a hybrid engine? The Prius is succesful, but I doubt that hybrids are selling 30% of total model sales for those cars that offer hybrids as an option. Prius buyers don't have a choice, so we don't know how it would sell if it had both a gas engine and a gas-electric hybrid.

If Toyota sold a Camry diesel that got 40 mpgs and cost $2,000 more than the V6, I think they would have to discontinue the hybrid.

"If they can get away with polluting just to make a $, they will. Don't be surprised if the new TDI's are even costlier, as they're "all new"."

I'll say again, diesels generally emit lower levels of CO, CO2, THCs, and VOCs as comparable, gas-powered cars. They score worse on PM and NOx, though new diesels will be on-par with respect to PM. This leaves only NOx with all those other advantages. Running B20, which can easily be done with no worries or scrifices in any diesel vehicle, will reduce those same substances even further.

Now, people can make up their own minds on whether or not diesels are more polluting, but I say--not!

The EPA makes the rules, and their rules were desgined so that gas cars could pass without regards to diesel technologies. VW has to live within a regulatory environment that is biased against diesel engines, so it is perfectly alright for them to "stock-pile" these 1.9s, especially since it is legal to sell unlimited, compact Bentley GTs that get 10 mpgs and three times the greenhouse gasses.

My Jetta, running on B20 pollutes more PM and NOx as gas cars, but less THCs, CO, CO2, and VOCs. I don't feel guilty in the least, especially since I'm one of the few that don't warm my vehicle; drive around parking lots; leave my car running to keep it warm/cool; or use drive thrus. I also keep it under 70 mph on the highway. There is more to it than what you drive. It's also "how" and "how much".

Don't be surprised if the new TDI's are even costlier, as they're "all new"."

Yes. Costs will be an issue with automakers being forced to employ advanced De-Nox devices in order to meet unrealistic reductions required by the EPA for NOx. We'll have to wait and see how they are priced.

Mercedes-Benz is pricing theirs $1,000 above standard, gas engine prices, but they have more margin to play with in these luxury lines. It will be a tougher challenge for VW and Honda. It seems as though, however, they have taken the challenge.

Superior resale value of diesels will offset this somewhat. My car has gained almost $1,000 in value in one year with 20K on the odometer. The same trim with the gas engine lost $3,700 (source: www.kbb.com-"private seller"--2006 New Jetta TDI versus 2006 New Jetta 2.5: both manual transmissions, no extra options).

New Volkswagen trims for the Jetta, since mid-2005 and the A5 chassis was introduced. No more of this GL, GLS stuff for the Jetta.

Value edition 2.5 I5 engine
2.5 2.5 I5 engine with many more features
TDI 1.9 diesel with same features as 2.5
2.0T 2.0 turbo, direct injection engine
with even more luxury features
GLI 2.0 turbo, direct-injection engine with
many sporty features.

2007 *No TDI as the 1.9 TDI cannot meet emission requirements. Engine could not be modified to meet standards since it used unit injection. VW had to totally redesign a new engine with common-rail so that emissions could be controlled via a central computer. All new diesels will require a diesel particulate filter to reduce PM to required limits. Unit injection cannot be combined with a DPF. Ford/International, likewise, had to switch from unit injection to common-rail for the 2007 Power Stroke Diesel. Mercedes-Benz chose common-rail back in 1997, where as VW chose unit injection. At that time, neither company knew that one had an advantage over the other in meeting future emissions requirements. Common rail is cheaper, but unit injection works better. In other words, Mercedes lucked out and chose the future injection system for diesels, and that is why they are ahead in bringing clean diesels to America.

2008 - TDI will be back, but this time, in all fifty states, since the EPA has finally mandated cleaner diesel fuel, so they can clean up emissions.

Any diesel can run on an empty tank if it has an additional, electric motor. I'm not disregarding the benefits of hybrid power, only defending the worth of diesel power. Yes a diesel can be a hybrid too, but of course, you know that.

How long can the Prius run without gasoline? My TDI can run for years without one drop of petroleum-based fuel in the fuel tank; hwy or city.

Since I run B20, which reduces CO2 by 78% X 20%, then I would say we're pretty close in CO2 emissions, however, I don't feel my car has to beat a hybrid in every category, in every instance to be considered a worthy alternative to spark-ignition power. The average diesel reduces CO2, 15% over comparable gas-powered engines. I don't really care how they stack up against hybrids. I welcome hybrid power, but compression-ignition is superior to spark-ignition, and that is my only point.

I'm not sure if the Prius is quicker but that doesn't really matter since both cars are acceptable at passing in the city and hwy. The Prius may win from a standstill, but turbo-lag gives me a 1/2 second handicap. I don't plan on drag racing so--to me--that is not an issue. My TDI passes and accelerates just fine. My TDI engine was designed in 1992 with the last update in 1997. The new diesel developed in 2005 is much faster, but VW needed ULSD fuel to employ it here. We're comparing early 90's diesel technology against new hybrid technology. From a technological standpoint, hybrids are not quicker.

Ninety diesel engines are cleaner than one diesel engine built in 1989. They get substantially cleaner and more refined each year. The transformation since 1990 is simply phenomenal.

On the emission issue. Emmission rules are systems that must be set up by an organization. You claim that ours is fair and that Europe's is biased towards diesel power. I contend that ours is biased against diesels and Europe's favor diesels, and neither is fair. As evidence, look at the emission standard for carbon monoxide, which diesels fair far superior. In 1989, it was 3.4 grams per mile. In 2007, it is 3.4 grams per mile. Even moderately-sized diesels will emit less than 1 gram of CO per mile. NOx is tough for diesels. We got cleaner fuel in October 2006 that make it possible for manufacturers to deal with this substance for diesel engines. Three months later, a diesel car must be 70% cleaner with respect to NOx. How can one deny that there is no bias?

The amount of petroleum it takes to run the average diesel car versus the average gas car is not even close. Even after figuring the extra petroleum in diesel fuel, diesels use 30% less petroleum, on average. If you disagree with this, take it up with the DoE and the EPA. The extra petroleum in the fuel is offset by the less energy required to refine diesel fuel as well.

I'm not a fan of using petroleum either, which is why I prefer diesels. I can run any blend of biodiesel without sacrifice.

When diesel fuel from coal becomes available in a few years, I don't have to wait on a coal-diesel car; it can go straight into my diesel car. This won't happen with spark-ignition cars. You have to buy a FFV.

I guess my biggest beef with many hybrid advocates is that many will not tolerate the mention of diesel power as a viable alternative for reducing petroleum in an environmentally, responsible manner no matter how much evidence shows to the contrary. In other words, many of you want to disregard a whole technology on the basis of preconceived ideas about that technology, or you feel that this technology threatens the prospect of future hybrids, which it doesn't. If this is not one of the two reasons clean diesels are constantly disregarded by your groups please explain.

If a diesel can be built and marketed at a competitive price that meets future emission standards for all fifty states, reduces petroleum consumption, is alternative-fuel ready, and can last for 350,000 miles; then why would hybrid advocates be against such a technology? Isn't petroleum savings and pollution reduction the motivation for your activism? Or, is there some other motivation for disregarding other means for reducing petroleum consumption besides gas-electric hybrid technologies?

I mean--when they show a VW Polo TDI on this site, which is a good-looking subcompact that gets 75 mpg; meets Euro 4 standards; has very little CO2 emissions; reduces nearly all particulates of matter; performs adequately-well; and can accept any blend of biodiesel or other alternative fuels to petroleum based fuels--then I can't figure out why one would criticize such a promising technology.

It shouldn't be seen as a threat to hybrid technologies, but as a way to enhance it, since it is proving to be a superior, internal-combustion engine. Are you guys really that hung up on the idea that electric motors have to be combined with inefficient, spark-ignition motors?

If a break-through happens tomorrow wherein spark ignition becomes 50% more efficient, on its own, then I will no longer support compression-ignition. I'm not hung up on that technology. I only want the technologies to succeed that can make a difference. If hybrids were being unfairly targeted by regulation or misinformation, then I would be fighting for that technology as well. But it is not; all of America is behind hybrid technologies as she should be, but there is alot of misinformation about modern diesels.

VW Jetta 2.5 gets 22/30 epa city/hwy est.
VW Jett TDI gets 36/41 epa city/hwy est.

How can someone conclude that diesels use more petroleum? It would mean that diesel fuel has 42% more petroleum in it than gasoline. That is just simply, not true.