Super Gas Saver » cars

Check Out These Fun Diesel Cars – High MPG / High MPH

Sat, 31 Oct 2009 07:26:19 +0000

Did you know that the EPA has calculated that if only one-third of the vehicles on American roads ran on clean diesel, the U.S. would use 1.5 million fewer barrels of oil each day. Remember, that’s barrels, not gallons! Would we be subjected to lifetime of merging difficulties and other symptoms of dull, boring, and slow vehicles if we were driving to swap our gas powered cars, trucks, and SUVs for force-fed oil burners? Hardly!

Modern clean diesel power plants are not only fuel efficient, but they’re pretty darn fun too. That is because they have prodigious torque, delivered low in the power band, at least compared to a similar sized gas engine.
Here are some of the fun, new clean diesel powered vehicles you can buy right off your local dealer’s lot this very day.

The 2010 A3 TDi - A heck of a lot of fun and it sips fuel, too.

2010 Audi A3 TDi – This new Audi is one really cool ride. It uses the same 2 liter turbo direct injection (Wait, aren’t most diesel engines direct injection?) diesel you can find under the hood of the new VW Jetta and Golf TDis. The compression ignition engine is coupled to Audi’s 6 speed automatic tranny, their acclaimed, dual-clutch DSG box. The 2010 A3 should be in showrooms about the time you’re done cleaning up your kid’s Halloween candy. One sad note to report; the A3 TDi is not yet available with Audi’s signature Quattro all wheel drive system.

Base MSRP $31,950 – Figure another $1,400 for the sport package, containing sport seats, 18″ five-tri-spoke wheels with 225/40 summer performance tires, and sport suspension, because really, why would you order this car any other way?
HP: 140 – Torque: 236 – Drive Wheels: front
EPA – 30mpg city, 42 mpg highway, 34 combined
0-60mph time = 9.0 seconds – That’s stock. The good news is that it is very easy to make these TDi powered cars much quicker, and sacrifice very little in terms of fuel economy. (Unless, of course, you just can’t seem to keep your foot out of it.)

The 2010 VW Jetta is easy on the wallet when you buy it and also when you feed it. (Just hope you don't have to take it to the doctor!)

2010 VW Jetta TDi – Kind of like a larger A3 for people with a smaller auto budget. Same power train, except you can have your Jetta with a 6sp manual trans, or the DSG automatic box.
HP: 140 – Torque: 236 – Drive Wheels: front
Base MSRP $22,660 – add $1,000 for the DSG automatic transmission…..or don’t. There have been several recalls for the DSG. In addition, it costs about $500USD for a fluid change every 40,000 miles. Ouch! Although it is one of the best functioning transmissions on the road from any manufacturer, it just may not be worth it. Might want to stick with the slick, 6sp manual tranny. Take the extra grand and spend it an intake and ecu upgrade. You’ll have cash left over and an even funner ride to boot.
EPA – 30mpg city, 41 mpg highway, 34 combined
0-60mph time = 8.2 seconds – Again, that’s stock. A simple intake, exhaust, new injectors, and an ECU mod = way more hp and torque, but still spectacular fuel mileage. Owners of modified TDi powered cars regularly display dyno sheets with torque figures near 300 lb-ft.

Light up the tires, but still get 35+ mpg......Awesome. Welcome to the 21st century!

2010 BMW 335d – Now we’re talkin’! This thing is really quick, courtesy of the 425 lb-ft of torque generated by the turbo diesel lurking under the standard 3 series skin. Not only can it scorch the 0-60 clock at 5.6 seconds, but it also returns 36 mpg on the highway. It’s a BMW 3 series, the same vehicle the car press fawns over every chance they get, so its driving dynamics are guaranteed to be superb. Add that to the BMW cachet, and you’ve got one heck of a great car. Keep your foot out of it though, or your rear tires will be going up in so much expensive smoke. The 335d is only offered with a 6-speed automatic trans, there’s no manual to be had here.

In Europe BMW offers other diesel power plants, such as 2.0 4 cylinder with 204 horsepower and 295 lb-ft of torque. Fitted to the smaller BMW 1 series coupe, the engine returns 45mpg on the freeway, while still giving a 7.0 0-60 time. The extra 200lbs in the 3 series would doubtlessly slow that figure somewhat, but it would still be around 7.3 seconds, not half bad for a 3 series that would be on the far side of 40mpg.
HP: 265 – Torque: 425 – Drive Wheels: rear
Base MSRP $43,900 (2 Jettas) Be careful, like many premium German vehicles, you can quickly get a bad case of optionits (for many items you’d think would be standard on such expensive vehicles) and tack on another $5,000 – $10,000 before you realize what happened.
EPA – 23mpg city, 36 mpg highway, 27 combined
0-60mph time = 5.6 seconds

So, you can get a diesel powered vehicle that is a blast to drive, yet will let you go sailing by gas stations with impunity. If BMW would bring the 120d over here, we’d really have some frugal fun, to the tune of 50+ mpg. Australian road tests of the 5 door hatchback version of the 120d averaged over 57mpg, which is doubly impressive, in light of how hard auto journalists tend to drive their test vehicles. Driven like you stole it, the Australian 120d also rips off 7.4 second 0-60 times. 57 + 7.4, now that’s good math.
If BMW and other automakers would bring cars like the 120d to the U.S., we’d have some nice, fun to drive cars that would keep us from spending all our money on fuel.,/p>

Obama Car Czar to Kill Performance Cars?

Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:06:39 +0000

As a condition of grazing at the public trough, Congress will be appointing a “Car Czar” to oversee the U.S. auto industry. As with many projects undertaken by Congress, there is a great chance the effort will be misguided and the execution flawed.

Will the incoming Czar know anything about the auto industry they’ll be entrusted to repair? Given they’ll have the reported authority to veto any expenses over $25 million, they will effectively control what vehicles the automakers will produce in the future. In this day and age, it’s pretty difficult to launch any vehicle development program for less than $25 million.

Performance vehicles don’t really fit well with the targets of the administration to reduce “man-made global climate change”. The fact that tens of thousands of climatologists, physicists, and other qualified scientists still say there is no clear indication that climate change is man made seems to play no part in the decision. See this for more information on the debate, and yes, it’s still far from closed, despite what so many would have you believe.

The incoming Obama administration is reportedly mulling over creating an entirely new Federal bureaucracy, dealing directly with climate change and energy policy. The Car Czar will no doubt be in constant communication with this new federal agency (if it ever comes to pass), the EPA, and the Energy Department to ensure the newly designed vehicles don’t step out of line.

Will all of this collaboration and oversight produce vehicles that people actually want to buy? Are performance vehicles even profitable for the automakers to produce in the first place? Because a high performance vehicle by its’ very nature is going to use more resources that one that gives tepid performance.

Or is it? Actually, this could force our automakers to start producing high performance vehicles that are much more “green” than their predecessors. It’s all in how they’re designed. One thing about electric vehicles is that they tend to develop prodigious torque at a very low RPM; 0 RPM to be precise. It’s due to the way electric motors function.

Since the majority of driving in American cities includes a large amount of stop and go situations, this gives electric and hybrid powered vehicles ample time to put their low RPM torque characteristics to good use. What if the high performance vehicle of the future is a diesel-electric hybrid? It’s recently been proven by Audi and Peugeot that diesels don’t have to be slow. In fact, they can be fairly fleet of foot. Audi has used their V-10 TDI power plant to great effect at LeMans.

BMW has just introduced a new, diesel powered 3 series, the 335d. It gives about 35mpg on the highway and can do a 0-60 sprint in 6.1 seconds. Combine a small, turbo diesel that uses modern high pressure injection and fuel management electronics, (like the new BMW) and a high efficiency electric motor(s) and you could be talking real performance with a minimum of environmental impact.

Toyota has been talking about reintroducing the Supra with a V-6 gas / electric hybrid power train. It would definitely be performance oriented, but give decent gas mileage.

Of course there will always be those that contest the need for anything high performance on the grounds that standard performance is all anyone really needs. Take that mindset to extremes and you’ll be walking or taking the bus to work. After all, does anyone really “need” personal transportation?

With new CAFÉ standards, an incoming environmentally friendly administration, and a possible governmental bailout then control of the automotive industry looming, are drivers witnessing the swan song of the performance automobile? Will there ever be another Cadillac CTS-V, Corvette ZR1, Porsche Turbo, or even Charger SRT-8?

Are we to behold a drab and boring future, devoid of automotive excitement? Is it the ‘80’s all over again? Remember the frighteningly tepid vehicles, with dubious quality, and lackluster design we were forced to endure in the dark days of the automobile? Does anyone not see how producing such vehicles pushed the Detroit automakers over a precipice from which they never extricated themselves?

If a “Car Czar” again forces our automakers to produce such rolling trash heaps, we may as well just shut the doors now. Maybe then the UAW would give some union concessions. By the way, how can I get paid $35 an hour to play cards?

New Car Incentives – You Can Really Save Some Money on Your Next Car

Mon, 08 Dec 2008 21:02:21 +0000

As Automakers are struggling to stem their cash burn rate and stay in business, they are offering some truly fantastic incentives to get conusmers into new vehicles. 2 for 1 cars anyone?? Not yet, but there are some fantastic buys available. Most dealers say that, despite the well publicised financing problems, there is financing to be had for these vehicles. In fact in many cases 0% or very attractive interest rates are part of the incentives.

Here are some of the latest new car purchase and lease incentives:

GM to Ditch Saturn, Saab, Pontiac, and Hummer?

Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:01:34 +0000

Many reports are circulating that General Motors is strongly considering “shedding” 4 of their brands; Saab, Saturn, Hummer, and Pontiac, in an attempt to return to profitability. They’ve been trying to rid themselves of Hummer for quite some time. If there were no takers when gas was expensive, one may step up now that it’s not so expensive. However, when the economy is in the tank, an SUV company whose product line starts at $30K, and screams “conspicuous consumption” is probably not a good bet to make.

It seems ironic that as they have been on Capitol Hill being told they should produce more futuristic, fuel efficient vehicles, they would consider dropping their 3 lines that are most skewed toward the small and fuel efficient. Saab makes no large vehicles. Pontiac makes a couple of larger sedans, but on the whole it tends toward small and mid sized cars. Saturn produces mostly smaller vehicles, with the 8 passenger Outlook SUV thrown in. Starting at less than $30,000, the outlook is a more value oriented alternative for those needing such a large vehicle. You’d think value would appeal to people in such restricted economic times.

A few years ago The General axed Oldsmobile and kept Buick. Once again, it seems Buick has survived corporate scrutiny, at least in the short term. As a car company that makes mostly larger cars and SUVs, you’d think Buick would be one of those GM looked to dump. After all, they’ve already dumped Tiger Woods, their spokesman aimed at shifting Buick’s image a few decades younger. Tiger was informed earlier this week that his lucrative endorsement contract would no longer be needed.

Until next time…………..

Higher Federal Fuel Taxes for All

Tue, 02 Dec 2008 15:21:50 +0000

Today is the day executives from the Big 3 Detroit automakers; Ford, GM and Chrylser go to see Congress, hat in hand, to ask for more money. In exchange for this largess, they’ll be told what kind of cars they need focus on in the future.

What do members of Congress know about the auto business? Well, nada, of course. What qualifies them to dictate to those who presumably have expertise in the business what kind of products will return them to profitably? As with many things Congress meddles in, they have no expertise. Of course, that hasn’t stopped them from meddling in the past, and I seriously doubt it will in the future.

One of the things that has been reported in various locations is that they’ll be strongly encouraged to produce new fuel efficient vehicles. The problem here is that car makers must produce what people actually want to buy. That’s one of the ways Detroit got into so much trouble in the first place. For about 30 years, until relatively recently, they made a fairly inferior product.

Oh, sure, there were exceptions, but on the whole, Detroit was soundly trounced in the product arena by offerings from overseas, such as the fine vehicles from Honda, Toyota, and Nissan. Americans responded as consumers always do, by voting with their checkbooks. The votes weren’t kind to Ford, GM, and Chrysler.

In the last decade they began to turn things around. Recently some pretty darned good vehicles have come from Detroit. World class, even. The new Cadillac CTS springs to mind. Other recent offerings from the Big 3 that bear mention in a positive light are the Silverado Pickup, the Corvette, Mustang, Chrysler 300, Pontiac G8, Ford Flex, and Chevy Impala. There’s also the upcoming Chevy Volt to consider, as a cutting-edge, new vehicle.

The problem now is that Congress wants the big three to produce the new, smaller, fuel efficient vehicle of the future. That sounds just great. Why is that a problem? It’s a problem because Americans are loathe to actually buy vehicles like that.

We want larger vehicles for larger families (and many times, smaller ones too), and American drivers have always had a love affair with power. As fuel prices recede from their record breaking spike of the summer, the chance of American drivers demanding cars like the Honda Fit in any kind of quantity will recede along with them. The fact is that the demand for these cars is almost purely economic. When people’s personal economies are impacted by high fuel prices, they turn to relatively fuel efficient vehicles.

Why would any of the big 3 auto makers want to produce smaller, more fuel efficient cars when the car buying public would rather be driving larger, less fuel efficient vehicles? Well the answer is, they wouldn’t.

They wouldn’t unless they could be guaranteed that there would be a demand for higher efficiency vehicles. Who could provide that demand? Why the meddlers we elected to Congress, of course. As incoming White House Chief of Staff Rohm Emanuel stated a couple of weeks ago, a crisis lets you do things you couldn’t get away with otherwise.

Many politicians and others would love to see higher fuel taxes. That would raise fuel prices, and that, in turn, would force American drivers to turn to smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles. Driving smaller vehicles that would consume something closer to “our fair share” of the world’s resources would make some tickled pink. That group would not include the majority of American drivers.

A bit of a back room deal would let so many groups be happy. The politicians would be saving the Big 3 and the environment at the same time. In addition, they can raise taxes on something with a fairly inelastic demand, so revenue will rise even as prices increase. You know they have to finance all these bailouts somehow.

The environmentalists would be thrilled that our resource consumption would be reduced. And the big three would be overjoyed to get their latest handout and the promise of some demand for their new products.

Over the long haul, more fuel efficient vehicles will have to be produced, as at some point in the future, prices will increase. The problem is that the development horizon, especially for advanced technology vehicles, is exceedingly long. That means that there will be a lag between when there is actually enough demand for these vehicles and when they begin rolling off the assembly lines.

There is also the question of cost. Such vehicles are very expensive, as new technologies always are. Does anyone remember the $4,000 PC? 15 years ago they were fairly common, but try to find one today that’s not a hot rodded, customized gaming rig. So it will be with new technology vehicles.

The problem for the average driver and taxpayer is that few drivers want to spring for the additional money it takes to purchase one of these cars. The new Chevy Volt will be about $37,000. That’s pretty steep for a 5 passenger sedan, when equivalents from Chevy, Honda and Toyota can be had for about 30% less than that. Toyota is still losing a bundle on every Prius they sell, even after almost a decade of production.

Why is this a problem for the taxpayer? Because you’ll be helping to pay for every one of these new vehicles that your neighbor parks in their garage, that’s why. There are hefty subsidies, in the form of income tax credits, to encourage their purchase by bringing their cost more in line with traditional vehicles. So, you’ll pay higher taxes to fund the industry bailout, the advanced technology vehicle subsidies, and the sure-to-be-on-the-horizon Federal fuel taxes. Make no mistake, driving will get expensive, even as fuel prices are dropping.

Who gets left out in all of this? Why the average, American driver, of course. Who kissers their ass in all this? Not those who they sent to Congress with their votes. Not the Big 3 execs, who will be glad to escape with a few billion and the promise of economic conditions that will favor the vehicles they’ve been directed to produce. Would someone please look out for the average driver?