Just One Important Issue

[Gaspar]

And that's funny because the prevailing public image on diesels is they are dirty burning vehicles.  Good points JC.

Far cleaner than gasoline and less CO2.  The soot filter is an amazing piece of technology.

[AquaMan]

The problem with a diesel that runs a good 500,000+ miles is that it outruns its vehicle body. When you build a vehicle so light and cheaply that it rusts out or systems begin to fail at 80-100,000 miles it makes no difference that the engine is still strong. You spend too much to keep the vehicle roadworthy and you foresake newer technologies and comforts that newer vehicles benefit from.

I look forward to some novel thinking on diesel vs hybrid thinking. Diesels are great for torque and longevity but not acceleration and handling. They are heavy and expensive to repair. Electrics are quick at the low end and also durable but seldom need repair. Combine the two in one vehicle and you have a diesel that easily generates power or recharges batteries and is great for heavy use and an electric motor that has immediate torque. Of course with today's techonology that is a very heavy chassis but it merits thought.

If GM were to pursue the "platform" plan I read about they could really affect profitability and the environment. That plan has a chassis/drivetrain that is durable and capable of being re-fitted with a new body at the end of the payment period. You simply take the vehicle to a qualified re-fit center, add the new cabin to fit your lifestyle, rework the loan and be on your way. GM then re-cycles the old body. That justifies a long term investment in diesel or electric motors by the consumer.

[Conan71]

The problem with a diesel that runs a good 500,000+ miles is that it outruns its vehicle body. When you build a vehicle so light and cheaply that it rusts out or systems begin to fail at 80-100,000 miles it makes no difference that the engine is still strong. You spend too much to keep the vehicle roadworthy and you foresake newer technologies and comforts that newer vehicles benefit from.

I look forward to some novel thinking on diesel vs hybrid thinking. Diesels are great for torque and longevity but not acceleration and handling. They are heavy and expensive to repair. Electrics are quick at the low end and also durable but seldom need repair. Combine the two in one vehicle and you have a diesel that easily generates power or recharges batteries and is great for heavy use and an electric motor that has immediate torque. Of course with today's techonology that is a very heavy chassis but it merits thought.

If GM were to pursue the "platform" plan I read about they could really affect profitability and the environment. That plan has a chassis/drivetrain that is durable and capable of being re-fitted with a new body at the end of the payment period. You simply take the vehicle to a qualified re-fit center, add the new cabin to fit your lifestyle, rework the loan and be on your way. GM then re-cycles the old body. That justifies a long term investment in diesel or electric motors by the consumer.

Hybrids are relatively heavy as well due to the batteries and electrical system.  Not sure how long it's been since you've driven a diesel car, but they actually accelerate a whole lot better than they did 30 years ago when they were coming into vogue.  We had a Mercedes 240D and that thing was a total dog. A friend's dad had a VW Dasher diesel and it sucked pretty bad performance-wise as well.

If someone drives 50,000 a year, they won't outrun the useful lifespan of the vehicle systems over 500,000 miles like someone who drives maybe 20,000 simply because age, and not mileage can be every bit as much an enemy to components.

I like diesel as a motor fuel as there are many different synthetic options for making diesel. 

[AquaMan]

But most people don't drive 50,000 miles a year. They drive 12-15k. Do a quick check on diesel trucks for sale on C-list and eliminate the obvious commercial vehicles. I found quite a few that were still low mileage for diesels, but had ragged out bodies. Even those less than 5 years old had lists of repairs needed and rust showing....but, "engine works great".

I drive a diesel now at work and I love their durability and yes they do have great torque at the lower part of their power band, but they are no comparison with the torque available at 0 rpm that an electric has. Diesel and CNG imo are much more valuable to our future than gasoline.

[Conan71]

But most people don't drive 50,000 miles a year. They drive 12-15k. Do a quick check on diesel trucks for sale on C-list and eliminate the obvious commercial vehicles. I found quite a few that were still low mileage for diesels, but had ragged out bodies. Even those less than 5 years old had lists of repairs needed and rust showing....but, "engine works great".

I drive a diesel now at work and I love their durability and yes they do have great torque at the lower part of their power band, but they are no comparison with the torque available at 0 rpm that an electric has. Diesel and CNG imo are much more valuable to our future than gasoline.

Very few do drive that far.  Just making the point that when it comes to vehicles, age and weather can be more of a factor than miles.  Also helps if a person keeps up with the regular maintenance.  I never seem to see much rust on newer vehicles at least in our area.

[Townsend]

  I never seem to see much rust on newer vehicles at least in our area.

Only if they've relocated from coastal or northern regions.

[Gaspar]

The problem with a diesel that runs a good 500,000+ miles is that it outruns its vehicle body. When you build a vehicle so light and cheaply that it rusts out or systems begin to fail at 80-100,000 miles it makes no difference that the engine is still strong. You spend too much to keep the vehicle roadworthy and you foresake newer technologies and comforts that newer vehicles benefit from.

I look forward to some novel thinking on diesel vs hybrid thinking. Diesels are great for torque and longevity but not acceleration and handling. They are heavy and expensive to repair. Electrics are quick at the low end and also durable but seldom need repair. Combine the two in one vehicle and you have a diesel that easily generates power or recharges batteries and is great for heavy use and an electric motor that has immediate torque. Of course with today's techonology that is a very heavy chassis but it merits thought.

If GM were to pursue the "platform" plan I read about they could really affect profitability and the environment. That plan has a chassis/drivetrain that is durable and capable of being re-fitted with a new body at the end of the payment period. You simply take the vehicle to a qualified re-fit center, add the new cabin to fit your lifestyle, rework the loan and be on your way. GM then re-cycles the old body. That justifies a long term investment in diesel or electric motors by the consumer.

Or. . .you could just build a higher quality vehicle.  I had a Mercedes 190TD that I almost put 300k on.  Was never in the shop except for once to replace a shift modulator, and looked like new until the day I sold it. 

[Red Arrow]

Or. . .you could just build a higher quality vehicle.  I had a Mercedes 190TD that I almost put 300k on.  Was never in the shop except for once to replace a shift modulator, and looked like new until the day I sold it. 

I put 278,000 on a 1981 Buick Skylark.  It didn't still look new and it had problems or I'd probably still be driving it.  I am thinking I am close to a record for a '81 X-body though.

[dbacks fan]

Good luck trying to buy that $15,500 gas Jetta.  When I was car shopping this time last year, they didn't exist, but you could have the next level up for $17,500 or so.  Great cars and fun to drive, but ultimately I bought a used Sonata.  Apparently each dealer gets a very limited number of loss-leader units.

I like the Jetta for it's size and what it does, but right now I'm enjoying my convertible. The funny thing is up here, I have seen over a half dozen diesel Rabbit pickups running around, and they are all in good shape. I will try to get a pic of one the next time I see one. A friend had a 1977 diesel Rabbit four door, and if he had nor wrecked it he would still be driving it today. He got 50 mpg on the highway back in the early 80's.

Anyway, I like diesel cars for practicality, but there doesen't seem to be a real payoff. As for hybrids, buy one if you want to feel good about yourself. As for total electric, I test drove a Chevy Volt and managed to walk away without third degree burns, but it just wasn't practical. If you want to spend the premium for it and you drive less than 50 miles a day, sure it's great. But it's not even something I would consider for anything else but a commuter csr, and for that price, I can buy an old beater Honda for commuting and a newer Miata for fun and road trips and have money left over for a road trip.

[AquaMan]

Or. . .you could just build a higher quality vehicle.  I had a Mercedes 190TD that I almost put 300k on.  Was never in the shop except for once to replace a shift modulator, and looked like new until the day I sold it. 

Would you like to sell bar-b-que sauce that lasted 3 times as long as your competitors but cost 4 times as much?  

Auto mfrs. need to build in obsolescence or charge higher prices like the German cars. It not only creates brand habits but enables them to sell financing. Right or wrong that's their plan since post WWII. Truthfully there are only so many improvements you can make using existing technology. Our needs have been met when you consider that today's passenger car Detroit steel outhandles a Ferrari from the 1980's and has better climate control to boot. Most cars change very little over a decade though they outwardly go through many "skins". That keeps the prices lower to avoid massive re-tooling.

All I'm saying is that diesels and electric motors outlast their car bodies and their creature comforts. Even in well built cars. Why not capitalize on that and institute replaceable bodies on durable chassis's. It is recycling in a big way and meets both consumer and manufacturer needs. Obviously GM thinks so or they wouldn't be exploring the process.

[Conan71]

Would you like to sell bar-b-que sauce that lasted 3 times as long as your competitors but cost 4 times as much?  

Auto mfrs. need to build in obsolescence or charge higher prices like the German cars. It not only creates brand habits but enables them to sell financing. Right or wrong that's their plan since post WWII. Truthfully there are only so many improvements you can make using existing technology. Our needs have been met when you consider that today's passenger car Detroit steel outhandles a Ferrari from the 1980's and has better climate control to boot. Most cars change very little over a decade though they outwardly go through many "skins". That keeps the prices lower to avoid massive re-tooling.

All I'm saying is that diesels and electric motors outlast their car bodies and their creature comforts. Even in well built cars. Why not capitalize on that and institute replaceable bodies on durable chassis's. It is recycling in a big way and meets both consumer and manufacturer needs. Obviously GM thinks so or they wouldn't be exploring the process.

Other than rear quarter panels and the roof, you can already do that with nothing more than a few different sized wrenches, screwdrivers, and in some cases specialty fasteners or adhesives.  If you are good with a plasma cutter and wire-feed welder you can also replace the roof and rear quarters.

[dbacks fan]

Would you like to sell bar-b-que sauce that lasted 3 times as long as your competitors but cost 4 times as much?  

Auto mfrs. need to build in obsolescence or charge higher prices like the German cars. It not only creates brand habits but enables them to sell financing. Right or wrong that's their plan since post WWII. Truthfully there are only so many improvements you can make using existing technology. Our needs have been met when you consider that today's passenger car Detroit steel outhandles a Ferrari from the 1980's and has better climate control to boot. Most cars change very little over a decade though they outwardly go through many "skins". That keeps the prices lower to avoid massive re-tooling.

All I'm saying is that diesels and electric motors outlast their car bodies and their creature comforts. Even in well built cars. Why not capitalize on that and institute replaceable bodies on durable chassis's. It is recycling in a big way and meets both consumer and manufacturer needs. Obviously GM thinks so or they wouldn't be exploring the process.

Tell that to this guy..... http://www.volvocars.com/intl/top/about/news-events/pages/default.aspx?itemid=192

[AquaMan]

Other than rear quarter panels and the roof, you can already do that.  If you are good with a plasma cutter and wire-feed welder you can also replace the roof and rear quarters.

I wonder when one of the big three will start to produce "Rat Rods"? After all they did the Prowler.

Just find a Chevy Caprice from 1973, chop it, french the rear tail lights, put on some laker pipes and paint flames on the side.

[JCnOwasso]

I am not sure you can quantify the arguement with the discussion on trucks and their wear and tear compared to others.  Diesel trucks (3/4 ton and above) are generally more abused than your normally everyday vehicle.  They are farm trucks or work trucks.  If they are farm trucks, you will generally see that they are not "well" taken care of and most likely have been exposed to a combination of chemicals which may not react well with the body.  If they are work trucks, they have probably been driven in every condition and have been exposed to a lot of salt without being properly cleaned.  I can't say that I have seen many rusted out TDI Jetta's or Older Merc's cruisin around.

[Conan71]

I wonder when one of the big three will start to produce "Rat Rods"? After all they did the Prowler.

Just find a Chevy Caprice from 1973, chop it, french the rear tail lights, put on some laker pipes and paint flames on the side.

With the tough economy, I don't see them doing any limited production vanity or statement vehicles.  The Volt is about as close as something coming out of Detroit I'd call a "statement" car.

Interesting story: The Arnie's Bar Mardi Gras float gets built at our shop every year.  The owner of Arnie's found an '86 Mercury woody style station wagon and he and my boss were going to cut it up as a vehicle for a float or give it the "Family Truckster" treatment.  Turns out, due to Cash For Klunkers, apparently many of these old sleds (I would assume a few of the Caprice boats wound up in there too) got crushed and now nice examples are starting to command a little more money.  Funny how that works.  Long and short of it, the woody will remain pristine.  Instead, they put the float elements on my boss' 1953 GMC fire engine.  It's tre' cool!

/drift