Article about Texas goaltenders

[Q]Jeff Hopkins '82 Wrote:

"Dying is easy. Comedy is hard"[/q]

You mean, like:

"What's the secret of " -- "Timing!" -- "great comedy?"

[Q]Bill said:
Didn't see the article yet but if it's time to get back your investment on a diesel motor, it could vary depending on projected gas vs. diesel cost per driving mile and if the reporter was really sharp he'd include in a time value of the money not spent for the diesel (that calculation never happens). The Journal's auto writers, the main ones, especially Joe Healey, are bright guys, and...They're fine on math
[/q]

[q]Marty said:
OK, I'll bite the added cost of what? The fancy trunk insignia? For those of us who can barely guess that you're talking about a Mercedes please shed a little light.

Also no short cuts, I want to see all your calculations or I'm only giving you partial credit!
[/q]

Sorry. Yes, I was talking about the payback time on the new common rail direction diesel engine in the Mercedes Benz E-class. I really wasn't looking to beat the fuel economy horse anymore, but since you asked...

For the gearheads in the room, this ain't your fathers oldsmobile (ie loud and slow). The E320 CDI does 0-60 in 6.8s, 0.3s *faster* than the gasoline version. The CDI is 2 decibels louder at idle (44 v. 42 dB) and 4 decibles quieter at full-throttle (72 vs 76 dB). Can you tell I want one?

Anyway, as per the article, the CDI costs $575 more than the gasoline version. They assumed that both diesel and gasoline were both $2/gallon. This is not a bad assumption averaged over a year as diesel is more in winter but cheaper in summer. I then used EPA combined numbers from www.fueleconomy.gov. The CDI gets 30 (27/37) while the gas V6 gets 23 (20/28). So where does that leave us?

Gas  28339 miles / 23 mpg = 1232.13 gallons x $2/gallon = $2464.26
CDI  28339 miles / 30 mpg =  944.63 gallons x $2/gallon = $1889.27
                                                        -------------
                                                          $574.99 saved on fuel

Thus, at 28339 miles, the CDI owner has made up the extra cost on the engine.

At 40k, the CDI owner is ahead by $236 and has used 406 less gallons of fuel.
At 60k, the CDI owner is up $642 and has used 609 less gallons of fuel.

For comparison, break even on the Passat TDI occurs even sooner. VW only charges $205 more for the TDI over the 1.8T so you break even at just 13239 miles.

In short, Japanese hybrids are very cool, but modern German turbodiesels get the job done much cheaper and you don't need to wait a year to get one. Meanwhile, Detroit just doesn't get it. Jeep charges an extra $1,635 for the CRD Liberty. Better yet, Ford charges an extra $5100 on the F250.

(And for the record, Micaela is working the 6pm to 9am Labor and Delivery shift at the hospital, so no, I don't have anything better to do.)

jh
--

Just to be nit-picky, did the WSJ include any of the details of their 40k calculation? You have a number of variable parameters in there that effect the result. If they used different numbers their results may be different but it wouldn't be a "math error". (Yes, the difference is very significant so you'd need very different input, but I'm just saying...)

A straight MPG comparison would be off, say, if you commuted in LA/Orange County. Diesels use virtually no fuel idling or moving slowly, which is why Europeans love them as taxicabs.

I drove the BMW turbodiesel in Europe this summer and it *hauls*. And it's being superceded by a twin-sequential turbodiesel that is a tick or two faster than Mercedes, in the range of 6 seconds 0-60 in a 5 Series. The two turbos are in line, a tiny one that spools up in a hurry off the line and a bigger one for oomph once you're, say, passing somebody else. No matter what decibel figures you're quoted, inside the cockpit there is essentially no difference vs. gasoline-fueled, and outside you do hear a bit more clatter than a gasoline engine, enough to be noticeable to American ears but not to Europeans used to noisier diesels.

Prius and so forth are the poster children for fuel economy and clean air, but diesels may have a greater impact, especially now that we've go low-sulfur fuel coming in 2006. Europeans love diesels because they are concerned about global as much or more so than emissions, whereas American rules pretty much focus on fuel economy.

Americans will pay thousands not hundreds more for diesels - when you put them in crew cab pickups that haul 7500-pound boats and need lots of torque.

[Q]billhoward Wrote:

Jeff Hopkins '82 Wrote:

"Dying is easy. Comedy is hard"[/Q]
You mean, like:

"What's the secret of " -- "Timing!" -- "great comedy?" [/q]



Tragedy is what happens to me. Comedy is what happens to you.