Thoughs on VolksWagen TDI's? - Page 4 - Fuelly Forums

Android Users - Coming Soon! - Migrating from aCar 4.8 to 5.0

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-18-2007, 08:39 PM   #31
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Bill, stinkindiesel is correct in his statement, his "thoughts" about TDI and their advantages. I think it is a definate thing to put in the plus side for a TDI. Also I read that vegtable oil (renewable diesel fuel) is significantly more productive than ethanol, it returns 190% of energy put in v/s 125% for ethanol IIRC. And there's that Algae thing to consider too.

Most people don't want to think and figure priusus will fix everything, truth is that they make some new problems in the process.
__________________

__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 06:50 AM   #32
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,138
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by skewbe View Post
Bill, stinkindiesel is correct in his statement, .
Really? How much lead and acid is there in an Insight battery pack? I was pretty much with him until then. Even though my gas powered car also has a 10,000 mile OCI and holds less oil than his TDI. I was willing to let that slide.
__________________

__________________
Bill in Houston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 03:19 PM   #33
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 244
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill in Houston View Post
There's no need to even go down this road, is there? When TDI people sit around and wonder why everyone thinks they are so smug, just show them this post.

Then again, hybrid owners, by and large, are no better in my experience. Same for Chevy, Shelby, and BMW fans. Point being, smugness is not isolated to TDi fans...


One more thing I'd like to add: VW's have THE BEST instrument backlighting I've ever seen. The blue-and-red theme is fresh-looking, easy to read, easy on the eyes...and frankly, I just think it looks cool.
__________________
'67 Mustang - out of commission after an accident
'00 Echo - DD
'11 Kia Rio - Wife's DD
'09 Harley Nightster - 48mpg and 1/4 miles in the 12's
jcp123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2007, 05:38 PM   #34
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,138
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcp123 View Post
Then again, hybrid owners, by and large, are no better in my experience. Same for Chevy, Shelby, and BMW fans. Point being, smugness is not isolated to TDi fans...
Totally.
__________________
Bill in Houston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 06:15 AM   #35
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 682
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill in Houston View Post
Really? How much lead and acid is there in an Insight battery pack? I was pretty much with him until then. Even though my gas powered car also has a 10,000 mile OCI and holds less oil than his TDI. I was willing to let that slide.
I may be wrong about this particular case (i.e., the Insight), but most hybrids use non-toxic NiMH batteries.

And, the next generation of HEV/PHEV/EVs will use non-toxic, cheap and abundant LiFePO4 batteries. TDI owners will then have to find something else to be smug about.

Of course, the best of all possible worlds would be a hybrid with a small 20 kW diesel engine with a 100 kW electric motor and battery pack.
__________________
Capitalism: The cream rises. Socialism: The scum rises.
Sludgy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 08:49 AM   #36
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 40
Country: United States
I've been driving almost exclusively diesels for the last 10 years, and it's easy to seem smug when you compare them to their gas counterparts. Who drives an F-250 with a gas 7.5 liter and DOESN'T gives envious glances to a Dodge 2500 with a 5.9 Cummins? (mine gets 19/21MPG) Are there any Honda Civic or Accord drivers who haven't looked with jealousy at the TDIs? I'm reading these forums, and it seems that there are alot of people bashing the TDIs and I can't understand it. They are great, competent cars that return incredible fuel mileage with minimal fuss. No staying in the right lane at 50mph, or shifting at 2317rpm because that's the most efficient shiftpoint. Just regular driving gets you 45+ MPG. Smug? Naaaah. Grateful? YESSIR. Thank God for great mileage and cheap biodiesel.
stinkindiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:05 AM   #37
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 40
Country: United States
Just read Sludgy's post, and I've been PRAYING for somebody to develop a diesel/electric hybrid. Locomotives, tugboats, ships- they all got 'em... I want a scaled down version of the big boy's toys. Imagine moped MPG's from a car you could cruise to Vegas and back with 4 people. And luggage. We'll get there, eventually.
Whatever you build a battery with, you still can't just toss one in the trash- at least not in California. Not even an AAA. I'm curious, though- what does it take to make a NiMh battery in terms of resources, starting at the mine, through the smelter, the manufacturer and finally to the user. And what do they do with them when they've been exhausted? I'm not baiting anyone, I'm actually curious. I'd drop some coin on a diesel hybrid.
Robbo
stinkindiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:43 AM   #38
Registered Member
 
skewbe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 771
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sludgy View Post
I may be wrong about this particular case (i.e., the Insight), but most hybrids use non-toxic NiMH batteries.
The only thing you would be wrong about is labelling NIMH as "non-toxic". People talk about NIMH batteries like they are going to grind them into baby food. Aside from nasty things used in their manufacture, they contain:
oxide of nickel, cobalt, aluminum,. lanthanum, cerium, neodymium, and praseodymium. The Material Data sheet says it may release toxic materials, so lets just stop acting like nimh is an environmental free ride.

http://www.mahaenergy.com/download/p...ycell_msds.pdf
__________________
Standard Disclaimer
skewbe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 11:40 AM   #39
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 40
Country: United States
I just read omgwtfbyobbq's post about road tax. It gets better. Filing to pay the .19 cent excise gets me a .50 cent "blenders credit" against my fed return. Talk to your accountant. There's also a one-time fed credit available for the purchase of a biodiesel processor or the components to build one.
stinkindiesel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-20-2007, 09:24 PM   #40
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 557
Country: United States
Quote:
Originally Posted by SVOboy View Post
You state things just as deceptively, without actually talking about the issues you seem to bring up.
Gasoline engines are much better for air quality, you do not seem to debate that.
However, for GHG emissions, you claims "diesels are better." This is deceptive because CO2 emissions correlate directly to fuel used and the carbon content of the fuel, so, for example, when you compare two cars, you cannot simpy say diesel is better, because my car gets better gas mileage than yours, and allowing that the carbon content of the fuels is not too much different, has lower GHG emissions than yours. On top of that, it also has less sulfur and particulate emissions than yours.

However, unfortunately for TDIs, diesel has a higher carbon content than gasoline (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/420f05001.pdf), so, my car has even lower GHG emissions than yours.

If you want to count "ALL" emissions (as you say), I guess VW may win once we factor in the BS emission levels.
Well, from the top: I don't know just how much detail is needed to my assertions. The same government whose EPA you use to back up your selective claims, I believe funds the Argonne National Laboratories I use to back up my wider claim. Is that deceptive, or letting those that know make the claims. Just as you haven't done measurements yourself, and trust the government agencies given the responsibility to produce data to be truthful, so I also use a different agency of that same government for my data.

Air quality? What specifically is being quantified and measured? Particulate count? Gasoline engine emissions have a higher count of particulates. Diesel particulates are larger in size but fewer in number, so you pick one and I'll pick the other and we'll continue forever and both be wrong. There are claims that the smaller size particulates of gasoline combustion get deeper into the lungs and are harder to cough out. I can't debate that diesel particulate is larger in size than gasoline particulate.

Quote:
because my car gets better gas mileage than yours, and allowing that the carbon content of the fuels is not too much different, has lower GHG emissions than yours. On top of that, it also has less sulfur and particulate emissions than yours.
I see from your 'garage' that you get 40.17 mpg on gasoline. You can see from my garage that I get 46.29 on roughly an annual blend of B90.

A gallon of gasoline has the energy of 115,500 BTU. A gallon of petroleum diesel has 128,500 BTU, a gallon of B100 biodiesel has 117,090 BTU. My annual B90 would have an average of 118,231 BTU per gallon. My miles per gallon would have to be 2.36% better to be the same BTU/mile efficiency. Instead it is 15% better.

The same 115,500 BTU gallon of gasoline releases enough fossil carbon to create 10.874 kilograms of CO2. The same BTU equivalent in petrodiesel (.899 gallon) releases enough fossil carbon to produce 10.963 kilogram of CO2. The 115,500 BTU biodiesel equivalent (.986 gallon) releases a net of 2.746 kilograms of CO2 made from fossil carbon. My own B90 annual average contributes 3.568 Kg of fossil sourced CO2 to the atmosphere for each 115,500 BTU of work.

My 'work' is being performed 15% more efficiently and yet produces one third the GHG emission of you.

Petrodiesel has a maximum of 15 ppm sulfur. B100 biodiesel has zero. My 10% use of petrodiesel puts my average sulfur content at 1.5 ppm or less. Sorry, I don't know what gasoline sulfur content is so I can't debate this point.

When I talk of "all" emissions or "total" emissions, I want you to remember that the EPA regulated emissions are but a tiny fraction of the total environmental impact. NOx and CO and HC are measured in grams, the CO2 contribution is in the thousands of grams.

And I've just looked at the EPA site to which you link. They have neglected the emission impact of getting the fuel out of the ground, processing it, shipping it and such. That is why the number I use from the Argonne labs are higher than your numbers from the EPA. Must be some more of that "all" and "total" to which I keep referring...

Quote:
Originally Posted by rh77 View Post
Another thing, nobody mentioned the "Ego" emissions of the Passat :sigh:

RH77
Guilty as charged
__________________

Lug_Nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The international user. popkinson Fuelly Web Support and Community News 4 08-18-2008 07:11 AM
Wiki almost done Matt Timion Fuelly Web Support and Community News 0 03-23-2006 12:40 AM

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.