No US VW diesel ‘cars’ in for 2007

Posted By on May 30, 2006

TDIAlthough we have been hearing about it for sometime, I’ve still been hoping that the news of Volkswagen not having US diesel in 2007 was not true. Unfortunately I’m not able to bury my head in the sand any longer after reading Mark Phelan’s Detroit Freepress article. I kept thinking that the “German engineering” (see ads) ‘gears would have something up their sleeves to meet the US new diesel emission standards. Unfortunately it doesn’t look as if there is much hope.
:-(

According to the article, “VW will drop the diesel version of the Jetta, Golf and Beetle models for the 2007 model year, which begin this fall. The new U.S. limits for nitrogen oxide emissions are among the most stringent in the world.” Far be it from me to question the logic of the EPA that permits pickups and SUVs but restricts fuel sipping TDIs? I guess 45mpgs running Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) being introduced in 2006 isn’t good enough? You would think that keeping fuel efficient cars rolling along while we sweat over imported oil and reduce the existing sulfur from 500 ppm to 15 ppm would be a logical choice. Our government is brilliant! [/sarcasm]

Touareg dieselOn a positive note, Volkswagen’s diesel sales have risen to over twenty percent of their new car sales in recent months. The price of fuel has convinced many America’s to test drive a TDI and buy the frugal but comfortable cars. The good news is that VW will offer the diesel Touareg SUV in 2007, and is cranking up production of the 2006 Jetta TDIs in hopes to stretch into the next model year. (Touareg diesel … tell me more!) Also, a new diesel Jetta that meets emissions standards in all 50 states is being planned for 2008.

6/1/2006 EDIT: Jeep to Offer First Full-Size Diesel SUV

So you can’t get a fuel sipping VW TDI Beetle, Golf, Jetta or Passat in 2007 because they aren’t emissions ready … don’t worry buy a diesel Jeep. “The diesel-powered Grand Cherokee will get an estimated 19 miles per gallon in the city and 23 miles per gallon on the highway.” Not that I’m against having a few more diesel powered vehicles, but the car, suv, truck emission playbook bothers me. I can’t go out and purchase an economical and cleaner (ULSD) TDI in 2007, but I can buy less economical diesels that are bound to spew more pollutants than 45mpg TDIs? What am I’m missing here???

Comments

  • http://my.opera.com/bhtooefr/blog bhtooefr

    I’ve heard that it’s going to cost $59,000, and it’s going to be the same old V10 TDI that we got in 2004.

    A coworker of mine just last night picked up her new 2006 Jetta TDI… just in time?

    This does make me mad, though, that the option is being stifled… maybe they shouldn’t worry about emissions as much (or look at the fact that the “bad” diesel emissions either aren’t bad, or not as bad as the gasser equivalents of those emissions…), and instead look at oil usage?

    :x

  • http://my.opera.com/bhtooefr/blog bhtooefr

    I’ve heard that it’s going to cost $59,000, and it’s going to be the same old V10 TDI that we got in 2004.

    A coworker of mine just last night picked up her new 2006 Jetta TDI… just in time?

    This does make me mad, though, that the option is being stifled… maybe they shouldn’t worry about emissions as much (or look at the fact that the “bad” diesel emissions either aren’t bad, or not as bad as the gasser equivalents of those emissions…), and instead look at oil usage?

    :x

  • http://www.myarchive.us/richc/2003jettatdi RichC

    We are no doubt seeing things from the same perspective. Thanks for reading and posting your thoughts.

  • http://www.myarchive.us/richc/2003jettatdi RichC

    We are no doubt seeing things from the same perspective. Thanks for reading and posting your thoughts.

  • stevea

    It bothers me that there continues to be a double standard for vehicle emissions. It further bothers me that larger over-the-road vehicles, farm equipment and large construction machinery also gets preferential treatment. It does no good for the environment to only deal with a portion of a larger population. It emphasizes just how much our existing system operates in a vacuum with blinders.

    Until we deal with combustion engine emissions unilaterally in a manner that does not target a particular segment of the population more than another, we are not attacking the problem where it needs to be addressed. It is unfortunate that the VW TDI powered cars have not been allowed the same latitude as other diesel powered SUV’s etc.

  • stevea

    It bothers me that there continues to be a double standard for vehicle emissions. It further bothers me that larger over-the-road vehicles, farm equipment and large construction machinery also gets preferential treatment. It does no good for the environment to only deal with a portion of a larger population. It emphasizes just how much our existing system operates in a vacuum with blinders.

    Until we deal with combustion engine emissions unilaterally in a manner that does not target a particular segment of the population more than another, we are not attacking the problem where it needs to be addressed. It is unfortunate that the VW TDI powered cars have not been allowed the same latitude as other diesel powered SUV’s etc.

  • Stephan

    Just to let every one to know that the new ULSD has 15 ppm of sulfur. The process of removing the sulfur also takes away some of the lubricity content of the fuel. Pre ’07 diesels are likely to have fuel delivery problems. Fuel injection pumps and injectors could be wiped out. To reduce the likelyhood of this happening you need to add fuel additives every time you fuel up, like Power Service Diesel Clean or any other diesel fuel additive with lubricity.

    This is just some of the problems with ULSD. The new fuel has lower BTUs so now more will be used, so much for moving away from forign oil. One thing good about ULSD is it has a higher cetane rating.

    You should see the new exhaust after treatment systems being installed on ALL diesel powered vehicles, be it class 8 trucks or a car. It consists of a catalytic converter, a DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) and muffler. For heavy trucks this system need to be cleand out about 150,000 miles. Replacement? hope your sitting down…. about $5,000.00. Also there is another system that uses UREA, it is sprayed into the exhaust stream to neuturlize NOx. Mercedes Benz uses this technology and calls it Bluetech.

    We’ll see how all this new technology works in real world conditions.

  • Stephan

    Just to let every one to know that the new ULSD has 15 ppm of sulfur. The process of removing the sulfur also takes away some of the lubricity content of the fuel. Pre ’07 diesels are likely to have fuel delivery problems. Fuel injection pumps and injectors could be wiped out. To reduce the likelyhood of this happening you need to add fuel additives every time you fuel up, like Power Service Diesel Clean or any other diesel fuel additive with lubricity.

    This is just some of the problems with ULSD. The new fuel has lower BTUs so now more will be used, so much for moving away from forign oil. One thing good about ULSD is it has a higher cetane rating.

    You should see the new exhaust after treatment systems being installed on ALL diesel powered vehicles, be it class 8 trucks or a car. It consists of a catalytic converter, a DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) and muffler. For heavy trucks this system need to be cleand out about 150,000 miles. Replacement? hope your sitting down…. about $5,000.00. Also there is another system that uses UREA, it is sprayed into the exhaust stream to neuturlize NOx. Mercedes Benz uses this technology and calls it Bluetech.

    We’ll see how all this new technology works in real world conditions.

  • http://www.myarchive.us RichC

    Thanks for adding the comment and information Stephan. Interesting thoughts on the Particular Filters and the costly replacement cycles … although I doubt that it will be $5000. As for the BTU factor, the information I’ve read has indicated about a 1% BTU drop. I’m personally using biodiesel as a SUPER ALL AMERICAN lubricity additive — the best choice IMHO. On the other hand, I’ve talked with a lab technician at BP and they have indicated to me that additives are already be blended into their fuel and that users should not be concerned? (I’m still with you on using something)

    All in all, the new ULSD is a really good thing. The fuel reduces sulfur from the LSD 500ppm all the way down to 15ppm. Its a winner for America … and a change that is long overdue. (I was around when lead was still in gasoline and there was the same worries )

    Thanks again for your comment.

  • http://www.myarchive.us RichC

    Thanks for adding the comment and information Stephan. Interesting thoughts on the Particular Filters and the costly replacement cycles … although I doubt that it will be $5000. As for the BTU factor, the information I’ve read has indicated about a 1% BTU drop. I’m personally using biodiesel as a SUPER ALL AMERICAN lubricity additive — the best choice IMHO. On the other hand, I’ve talked with a lab technician at BP and they have indicated to me that additives are already be blended into their fuel and that users should not be concerned? (I’m still with you on using something)

    All in all, the new ULSD is a really good thing. The fuel reduces sulfur from the LSD 500ppm all the way down to 15ppm. Its a winner for America … and a change that is long overdue. (I was around when lead was still in gasoline and there was the same worries )

    Thanks again for your comment.

Desultory - des-uhl-tawr-ee, -tohr-ee

  1. lacking in consistency, constancy, or visible order, disconnected; fitful: desultory conversation.
  2. digressing from or unconnected with the main subject; random: a desultory remark.