NY Times: Cruze "Fossil fuel milage champ"; hybrids still win city, burbs

Sure it seems that way. I definitely think though the writer is just ignorant and likes diesels. I was shocked sometimes when I was a product manager, that some reports just parroted things in my press releases. You will find this goes for many car press releases. We do have the Car and Driver figures for cruise mpg, which are quite good on the highway. They seemed about 1 mpg bellow bob wilson's number at 65 mph and did better at 70-80 mph. Outside of California diesel is more expensive than gasoline though and it does have about 10% more energy than E10. Still prius like numbers according to car and driver on the highway. In the city though it only does about as well as the eco-cruise, much worse than the volt let alone the prius.

These are old ideas. In order to meet US emissions the cruze diesel got modified from its euro version. None of these new clean diesels aren't turbo charged. I don't know if they could pass emissions testing with the old normally aspirated method. They do quite well on pollution tests, just not quite as good as hybrids.

Going with the new clean diesels, they should have a higher maintenance cost than a hybrid, as long as the hybrid batteries don't go. Everyone but mazda is using DEF for SCR to get rid of NOx. This requires fairly low cost fluid. All the smaller engines have dpf that need inspection, and the method of cleaning them burning fuel outside the engine causes the need for more frequent oil changes than hybrids. The di makes cold starts much more dependable in cold weather, but this adds complexity. These are not your simple 1980s era simple diesels.

 

My point of more reliable was to explain why upon seeing a smoking diesel one shouldn't jump to the conclusion that the vehicle is actually new enough to have the latest, if any, emission controls.

 

I believe this true of VW and the other Europeans. The fuel for DPF regeneration goes through the engine first. So some of it will work its way into the crankcase over time. It also the reason for their lower biodiesel limits.

In order to allow the B20, GM and Ford are probably injected the fuel right into to exhaust. So this shouldn't mean shorter oil change intervals.

 

To summarize:

Nowadays one can buy a less dirty diesel for a ~ $3k premium, and enjoy poor reliability, higher fuel costs, mediocre CO2 emissions and high maintenance costs.

 

And btw, Bob Lutz has a new book out tittled: ‘Icons and Idiots’
Lutz Scorches, Praises Leaders in ‘Icons and Idiots’ | Management & Strategy content from WardsAuto

 

California is only one corner of the country though, and through most of the states diesel is significantly more expensive. Volkswagens, except the CC maybe, are no longer luxury cars. They have retained expensive repairs, but their interior quality has just vanished. VW even admits to throwing out quality to lower the pricepoint.

 

So, the upstream emissions might be 3-4% worse for diesel instead of the 2-3% better according to the summary of a pay-walled academic paper I found (maybe that was pre-ULSD?). I found it hard to find nicely summarized GREET results for conventional gasoline vs. conventional diesel CO2 emissions by volume (per gallon).

So, a "LOT" more might be 16% more CO2 than gasoline per gallon vs. the 14.5% when ignoring any upstream emission differences.

The bottom line is that diesel has more energy content than gasoline but it also has about the same ratio of higher CO2 emissions because the extra energy content comes from an increased ratio of carbon atoms.

Any significant difference in CO2 emissions will come from the efficiency of the powertrain. The diesel cycle is more efficient than the conventional gasoline Otto cycle but the Atkinson cycle used in the Prius and most other hybrids closes much of the gap. Start/stop plus regenerative braking and more efficient CVT engine ratios end up making gasoline hybrids more CO2 efficient.

 

I've got to say, I don't quite understand people that still listen to bob lutz. To be politically incorrect at the time of someone's death, I think it is a lot like the praise of Helen Thomas. This is a cult around those famous and old. People like to pretend they have wisdom, but mostly they just spout non-sense. Every time I saw her on tv in the last decade she was going on some rant of a speech pretending she was asking a question. Sometimes her speech was correct, but often it just was long winded and inappropriate for someone to say if they are supposed to be reporting the news instead of making it.

Now bob lutz is in the same boat. He may have done some good things earlier in his career. What I remember is his hostility toward fuel economy and global warming. He seemed personally insulted by the prius. From the previous link we see he still doesn't get the prius.

His math on diesels is much the same as his math on the prius. Reducing fuel consumption must decrease tco in his mind, the same thoughts he had when he helped lead GM into bankrupcy, and destroyed stock holder value. He's an octogenarian, don't hold a bankruptcy or past mistakes against him.

But even a stopped clock is right twice a day, and he is right that a gas tax would lead to a faster change in efficient vehicles. I"m sure he got this from other people, but if you parrot a correct response, and other people listen its not bad. He also, IMHO is likely right about small diesels not likely making a big impact in the US. Its not about TCO its about competing technology. Hybrids and plug ins look to be able to reduce their costs faster than diesels when emissions requirements in the US are met. Diesels may have an advantage in "feel" versus hsd type hybrids, but this is mainly diesels tied to manual transmissions. Very few Americans buy manuals. Diesels don't seem to have a driving feel as good as ever or bev plug-ins. Last month there were almost as many plug-ins sold as diesels, and the prius lift back sold better than all diesels combined. Much of diesel tech can be put into gasoline cars at a lower cost, hence the manual eco-cruise gets almost the same mpg (and better mpge) than the diesel cruise. Still choices are good, and when we get to heavier cars where price is not as much of an issue like the bmw 3 series, diesels can improve fuel economy, but you lose performance. On a heavy duty pickup truck, diesels often are the best choice.

 

The small diesel's future is most likely in trucks and SUVs. The point of the Cruze is to offer an option against the Jetta. It would probably be more successful in the Colorado though.

 

Look at the data in my post #59 comparing the Cruze diesel to the Pruis: Tailpipe + upstream emissions is 391/222 = 76% higher CO2 emissions in the Cruze. That is is what I meant by a LOT.

​

 

You are also invited to visit Europe...
Here diesels are above 50% of the light passenger cars, you can bring a mask...

 

WRONG, WRONG AND WRONG.

This is 2013 and we are still talking like this!!??
Please, the word "HYBRID" IS NOT SYNONYMOUS WITH "PRIUS. "

I love how you just interchanged the words "hybrid" and "Prius" in your post.
You said:
"Yes, the Cruze is more fun to drive than a hybrid" and
"Realize that car enthusiasts hate hybrids because they simply don't have sports car driving characteristics."
Really? Would these enthusiasts prefer a diesel(!) Cruze(!) to the Lexus GS 450h, Infinity M.......how about the Porsche 918? the new NSX? The LaFerrari? Is the Cruze more fun to drive than those hybrids? Do those hybrids not have "sports car driving characteristics"?How ridiculous do you want to get!?

These enthusiasts are full of SH!T and have a knee-jerk negative response to the word "hybrid" that comes straight from the "lizard" part of their brains....there is no reasoning with them, period. Even the NYT could not resist, this is a quote from the article:


"Hybrids still trump the efficiency of diesels in city and suburban driving — though they are invariably less fun and satisfying to drive."


This meme goes on unchallenged so much, that even we here in the PC community have internalized it and parrot it.
It needs to STOP.
We need a more robust defense of hybrid technology, which leads us on a path to plug-ins, while diesels lead us nowhere.
I am sick and tired of "enthusiasts" and a tech-illiterate media framing the debate about fuel tech with the same worn-out memes (always about environment, never about national security, not able to perform, etc.)
Well, apparently Porsche, Ferrari and others don't agree with these so-called "enthusiasts"

Look, the 1st generation of Prius was limited by the technology available in 1997, and every generation since was geared towards economy, not performance. How much longer are we going to keep painting hybrids as "lacking in performance"? I would think 18 years and the arrival of the above mentioned models would have changed things, but I guess some people are permanently stuck in 1999.

 

And yes, I realize the Cruze is not in the same league/price-point as the 918, NSX, LaFerrari, M or GS450h.

But that's not my point.....it is possible to build a "performance" hybrid at the Cruze's price point.
In fact, I'm willing to bet the Volt is WAY more fun to drive, though a tad pricier.
It's definitely quieter and faster 0-60.
I've also heard the CRZ is a fun-to-drive hybrid.

 

Sure, according to the EPA estimates. Based on average Fuelly mpgs, the Cruze has about half that much higher CO2 emissions than the Prius Liftback -- something around 33-37% higher.

 

Err .. Fuelly, with a handful of cars in it's dataset ?

You must be kidding.

 

Obviously it's hardly definitive but 3 out of 8 cars have averaged over 44 mpg diesel so far with 2 of the 8 getting around 48. It's entirely possible that this trend will continue with more data since people actually drawn to buying the Cruze diesel may tend to have a higher ratio of highway driving than a typical Prius or average typical EPA driver. What matters for CO2 emissions is the actual emissions of cars purchased not an all-purpose average city/highway ratio.

 

The Future is moving away from gas and diesel based cars and into EV cars. The hybrid is a small step to a big future. Diesel has been around for a long time. It is a Car that burns a fossil fuel. Fossil Fuel is dirty and it causes pollution. Perhaps the largest economic transfer in history was the result of oil. Diesel engines have been around for a very long time multiple decades. It is old hat. VW saying Diesel is the future is akin to the Buggy Salesman saying the Horse and Buggy is the future because he puts a younger horse in front of the buggy. Diesel is dying a slow death. It may take 20 years but you will see EV vehicles that charge while you drive them as a cell phone gets reception in a cell network.

EV is the future. We are early adopters in this transformation.

 

There is an interesting mckinsey graph for the american market
Expensive batteries are holding back electric cars. Can that change?


If you notice the 2011 box, you can see gas prices are just a little bellow where hybrids are competitive. At least according to mcKinsey, gas over $4 pushes hybrid competitiveness. There is of course a time lag between economics and when car companies market cars people want to buy. In Japan gas prices already are high enough to push hybrids. In Europe, driving behavior and attitudes are different. Gas prices are high, but that pushes diesels. The Euro 6 requirements that I believe are required at the start of 2015, will push the cost of diesel cars up. That means in the second half of this decade hybrids will likely make inroads there.

Many disagree with McKinsey, but this is in line with the DOE forecasts. The chart against lithium ends in 2005, its hard to believe the oponents of lithium are really watching technology if they chart doesn't even go to '11. We are looking out at least a decade for bevs to gain serious market share, there just is too much newness for them to gain inroads. The majority of people won't trust the batteries until they have been in cars 10 years. That is around 2021 before the battery fud articles and press releases from old line auto manufacturers start dying down.

 

If you aren't plugging in, you aren't EV.

It will take awhile before BEVs become the majority, if ever. I want to see it happen, but the PHV will get there first. So the various ICEs and possible OCEs are here for awhile.

Now a brief history lesson. Rudolph Diesel's fuel of choice for his engine was peanut oil. But petroleum soon became readily available, and thus cheaper. The fraction of distillate that worked best in the Diesel cycle engine was named after the engine.

So while diesel is a fossil fuel, a diesel engine is not limited to it for a fuel. Modern ones are mostly do to tuning for emissions and penny pinching by the manufacturer. Then again, the majority of gasoline engines aren't flex fuel either.

As it stands now, renewable and sustainable replacement for diesel fuel seems more likely than for gasoline. Hopefully, the EV fleet will grow, but there are roles where it won't work as a replacement.

 

Petrol is a mixture of hydrocarbons, but to the extent that short(er) chain linear hydrocarbons work, diesel can AFAIK simply be cracked.