I was watching a Top Gear episode from 2005 yesterday and they did a report on the Toyota Prius. Clarkson said that it made 45 mpg in his test and they then discussed how that wasn’t very good compared to the other high mileage cars available in the UK. (He also hated it as underpowered, over-complicated, with a cheap interior, & too expensive).
The cited a particular Volkswagen Diesel that made over 75 mpg. I know this is probably an imperial gallon but still, that’s 62 miles per US gallon. Why aren’t these high mileage cars being sold in America?
California emissions regulations, and probably those of a few other states, are particularly stringent. That’s a major hurdle for diesel manufacturers.
Very few Americans want to buy a tiny car with a manual transmission and no AC. In order to meet US safety regulations, a car maker would have to spend a lot of money.
The UK has the highest gasoline prices in the world, if not the second or third highest.
Americans still remember GM’s diesel fiasco from the 1970s, and are still reluctant to consider a diesel-powered car. Also, North America has a more extreme climate, and those in northern cities may be adverse to diesel cars.
US emissions standards regarding particulate matter are stricter than Europen standards.
The EU has different vehicle safety standards than the US and Canada. It takes a lot of work to modify a vehicle’s design to meet US/Canada safety standards. Supposedly it’s more difficult than what’s needed to make a car RHD for the UK and Ireland.
More manufacturers compete in the UK/European market than in North America, so there’s a larger choice of brands. Try to buy a new Fiat (at least until next year), Lancia, Puegeot, Renault, Citroen, SEAT, Skoda, Dacia, Proton, or upstart Chinese and Indian branded cars in the United States.
To sort of expound on what others have said, a big problem with selling ultra-efficient cars in the US is that the economics of buying a new car really don’t make sense. As a percentage of the cost of owning any car, but particularly a new car, the cost of fuel is almost completely negligible. The difference between getting 20 MPG instead of 40 really doesn’t look like much if you’re paying thousands a year in depreciation. If you’re really looking to save money on your transportation, you buy used. So therefore, people who would really be interested in super-economy cars are almost certainly buying used, and so car makers aren’t making cars for them. That was the genius of the Prius-- it had enough of a gaget factor that it made economy a luxury item and plus they had the good luck to ride the green trend. But I doubt that’s something you could pull off with a little tin-box with a diesel-powered lawnmower engine in it.
In other countries, the higher cost of fuel, higher costs of car ownership in general and lower depreciation make buying a new car a little less of a losing proposition and makes fuel economy (and engine displacement or HP in countries that that tax that) more of an issue for new car buyers.
In the recent past, diesels couldn’t meet stringent emission requirements for cars in many states. So domestic automakers haven’t bothered making them for decades. Foreign automakers have been making all sorts of diesels for the European market in particular, but until recently these couldn’t be sold in many states in the US. Better fuel refining and improved engine technologies have changed this, but there’s still little demand for diesels in the US market.
Still, foreign automakers like VW, BMW, and do sell a range of diesel cars in the US. But they mostly export luxury or performance models, not their tiniest diesel econoboxes. And the diesel models have less power than comparable gas-powered models.
I own a 2009 VW Jetta diesel. I get about 30 mpg in town, and around 47 on the highway. Its power is ample, and the healthy amount of torque makes it fun to drive, in stark contrast to the Prius (booooring) which I test drove several times. Oh yeah, it meets all 50 states’ emissions standards.
It costs a few thousand bucks more than a vanilla Jetta, but it is a good car.
However, I agree that US consumers aren’t really interested in diesels. I would have loved to have had the option of a diesel EOS convertible, for example, which is apparently available in Europe, but not here.
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve read that in some countries where cars depreciate quite a bit in value (UK, Japan), the lower cost of the car is either offset by higher insurance costs, or inspection requirements that are so strict cars more than a few years old aren’t considered roadworthy.
Looking at car-related Web sites from Australia and South Africa, it seems like cars just don’t depreciate much in value in those countries. Depreciation in the first year might be 10% to 20%, compared to 30% to 40% in the United States.
The same thing goes for houses, at least in the Rust Belt. Most new houses in the Buffalo, Cleveland and Rochester areas are quite large; there’s almost no new starter houses being built. The housing needs of lower-income and first-time homebuyers is met by the existing housing stock. Entry-level homebuyers just buy an older but larger house in a so-so neighborhood, rather than a new small house in a shiny suburb.
USA has EPA fuel mileage estimates that are a bit more accurate overall, and significantly lower.
Ergo, the 62 MPG VW would not be rated as such here in the USA.
To make sure you maintain apples-to-apples comparisons, you have to use the same standards for mileage when comparing cars. Can’t jump in and say a VW Diesel is rate for 62 MPH and then take the EPA rating of a car and compare it to that. You need to use the same standards.
They got 63 mpg from a Subaru Outback, 80 from a Polo, and I think 50 ish from a Jag (being driven un-economically) that can lap the Nurburgring in 10 min. The point of all this is to say that even though you cannot compare the manufacturer’s ratings to the EPA ratings, you can compare TG’s observed fuel economies.
There is no point to making hybrids. If we wanted to save the planet we would adjust the emissions regulations to make it easier for diesels to pass. Additionally, diesels are easier to modify to run on biofuel than gasoline engines are; just squeeze the oil out of whatever plant you want to burn – although I’m told modern diesels are not as easy to convert as the older ones.
If i were in the market for a new car, i think a diesel Jetta (or the new diesel Golf) would be near the top of my list, especially here in Southern California where about 80 percent of our miles are done on the freeway. Jettas and Golfs feel much more like real cars inside than the Prius, and the low=end torque of a diesel is nice, especially with a manual transmission. The only thing that might give me pause if the Jetta’s ongoing reputation for poor reliability.
If i had oodles of money, though, the BMW 335d looks fantastic. It’s only 0.4 seconds slower to 60 mph than the gas version (6.0 vs. 5.6), the 425 lb/ft (!!!) of torque means that passing and going uphill is a breeze, and long-term test drivers are reporting highway fuel efficiency in the high 30s and even up to 40 mpg. One sweet car.
My experience is strictly anecdotal (duh) but differs from their conclusion. I used to own a 2003 VW Jetta TDI (manual) and got ~43 mpg in Boston-area driving from August to October a few years ago. I currently own a 2009 Prius and have averaged 55 mpg for the last ~4 months . On some trips I get ~60 mpg. In neither case did I try to eek out the absolute best fuel economy. I would prefer to drive a VW TDI (I miss my stick!) but I’ve been pleasantly surprised with the Prius (which I’ve not-so-affectionately dubbed my “enviro-weenie” car).
Obviously my 2003 Jetta is a different car but my understanding is that the current American Jetta has a bit more power and gets slightly worse mpg.
I just spent the weekend buying a new car, and what turned me off buying a diesel is the cost of fuel. In my experience it costs 20-30 more than regular unleaded and is regularly more expensive than even premium unleaded. I looked at the Toyota Prius, but bought the Honda Fit in the end because it’s one of the highest mileage conventional cars, has those cool rear seats than can fold up in various ways and cost thousands less than the Prius. I’m unhappy that there are so few cars available in the US with mileage ratings above 30MPG.
I drive a 2002 Citroën C5 estate, 2L HDi, 100 BHP.
I get 32mpg in town and around 47mpg on longer runs.
Which is dismal for this type of car, other users do better.
I was out in the new model, four days old, C5 3L V6 HDi saloon. Far better performance, as expected but the fuel economy was about the same/slightly better.
This is totally different in Europe; Diesel is pretty much always cheaper than regular fuel. Here in Holland it used to be a bout half the price of regular (might still be, I haven’t checked lately). You do pay more road taxes though.
Basically the government makes used cars artificially expensive to own, so buying a new car becomes a better deal. Same sorta idea-- thrifty people are more likely to buy a new car and so a car maker is more likely to sell more new cars that appeal to thrifty people.
