Michael,
I replied to your reply, not the OP's. You brought up the use of the
proper
vehicle for the job, which I agreed with, but your comparison of gas
vehicles as opposed to diesel ones, simply is incorrect. As the owner of a
Dodge ***mins and a Dodge ram with a 360 in Europe, I can personally
attest
to. As an additional note, the rule here in Europe is that the break even
point is 20,000km a year, where that and more the diesel is cheaper. If
you
drive less than that the gas vehicle is more economical.
Steve
"nunya" <nunya@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:sk9Gj.24315$dT.7011@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "Steve Lusardi" <stevenospam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:fsb4v1$uv9$00$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Nunya,
>> I think you got your math wrong. There is absolutely no way in hell
that
>> I will EVER own another gasoline driven vehicle. Fuel economy is one of
>> the lowest elements of the "Total Cost of Owner****p" (TCO). I do agree
>> that using a 3.5 ton truck to get groceries is improper use of the
>> vehicle. That's not my point. The fact that US auto makers are not
>> offereing 2 & 3 Liter diesels is the problem. The Europeans have it
>> correct. On another point, sulpher in the fuel does not help an engine
>> and it is not a lubricant. Sulpher in all oil is the main contributer
to
>> the formulation of sulpheric acid, which ac***ulates in the lube oil
>> because of water condensation that occurs every time the engine crosses
>> the dew point. This is what corrodes the oil. There are far more
diesels
>> in use in Europe and the fuel there has been sulpher free for a very
long
>> time with absolutely no ill effects. The small diesel vehicle in Europe
>> consistantly see mileage like 60 MPG regularly. Remember, engine wear
>> goes up with engine speed. Diesels have no air control and make their
>> power at lower engine speeds saving significant wear over the gasoline
>> driven couterparts. The run onto diesels in Europe has been so profound
>> that the governments in Europe have lost serious revenue as fuel is
>> severly taxed to the point that the road tax and duties on diesels and
>> diesel fuel have been drastically increased to compensate. Please also
>> note that diesel has 25% more latent energy by volume over gasoline and
>> if the fuel is ONLY $.50 more per gallon, you are still getting a super
>> deal. After all, you pay by volume, not weight.
>> Steve
>>
> <snip>
> the OP i was responding to was specifically about the fuel economy of
> dodge trucks. there were no references to european diesel cars. i
> usually spend a month in europe every year. it always astounds me how
> efficient our rental cars are. i usually rent opal turbo diesels. the
> last car i rented over there averaged about 55 mpg on diesel. it was as
> fast as a scalded cat and much more ergonomic than any american car i
have
> ever driven. if it was available here in the u.s. i would probably
> purchase one.
> i will agree that diesel has much more potential than gasoline. but
in
> american made full size trucks the numbers i quoted are correct. you
> cannot compare a european diesels stats to a 3/4 ton 4x4 truck with a
> ***mins. since this is a dodge truck forum i have to work under the
theory
> that we are discussing dodge trucks. and for overall cost of owner****p
> the gas burner is cheaper for the first quarter million miles. after
that
> the diesel becomes more cost effient due to the durability of the truck.
> heavier duty components combined with a slight increase in mileage
> eventually win out but it is it is a long time before that point is
> reached.
> michael
>
|
