Honda May Bring Diesel to U.S.

[basjoos]

One problem with diesel right now (in the US) is that it costs a lot more than regular gas ($2.49 versis $1.99/gal around here). So a car whose gas version gets 50mpg would have to get 62mpg as a diesel to break even in fuel costs. I suspect some of the increased cost we are seeing is the result the costs of tooling up to produce low sulfur diesel (just like unleaded gas was more expensive than regular when it first came out).

[omgwtfbyobbq]

We saw the same thing out here when we switched from MTBE to ethanol and they had to clean out all the tanks. For example, the first spike is associated with hurricane Katrina, and I'm guessing the second is associated with the switch. The thing with diesel, is that the consumer gets ~14-18% more energy per gallon because it has a higher BTU rating and the EPA takes this into account when doing FE testing, so the consumer who buys a diesel that gets 45mpg combined would see the equivalent of ~53mpg real world. I wouldn't be surpised if diesel and gasoline prices stabilized such that this disparity in energy was reflected in price, but I doubt this will happen because the majority of diesel use is OTR rigs, and industry likes to keep the bottom line on the low side.

Going on to diesel FE, something else that's a big confound is the use of high drag autos w/o LRR tires. Supposedly, a big wing and LRR tires on a TDI Beetle result in ~60mpg EPA highway, a ~23% increase. Toss a TDI in an Insight shell, and we'd probably see ~80-90mpg EPA highway, and well over 100mpg real world, with the cruise control set at ~50-55mph. One of VW's 3-cylinder 1.2L engines, as seen in the 3L Lupo would probably see ~120mpg@55mph in an Insight with a m/t.

Originally Posted by Ernie

THIS IS AN UPDATE ON THE BEETLE'S SUMMER MILEAGE

As expected, mileage during this last summer (2005) averaged about 65 miles per gallon, when traveling at a normal highway speed of 65 miles per hour. There is a rule of thumb that a car will get 10% better mileage by slowing down 5 mph on the highway. Or, if you slow down 10 miles per hour, your mileage should improve by a whopping 20%. So, you can calculate how well the car would do at a different driving speed. Remember, when figuring speed, you should include any headwind.

In early September, I traveled from Utah to Wisconsin to attend the annual meeting of the TDI Club, an on-line group of VW diesel car owners. I wanted to see just how good my mileage could be-- I drove all the way to the meeting at 55 miles per hour. Early on Wednesday morning, I topped off my tank (filled with 5% biodiesel blend) at Park City, Utah, waved goodby to the attendants, and headed out determined to see just how far I could get. I was blessed by perfect weather, almost no wind, all the way.

I finally stopped for fuel about noon the next day at Davenport, Iowa, a one-tank trip of 1,209 miles. (All at 55 mph, remember. I was honked at four times.) I filled the tank, taking 15.5 gallons. I had obtained a record --for me-- 78 miles per gallon.

Ernie Rogers

[omgwtfbyobbq]

An Insight is essentially the same thing as a 3L Lupo which gets ~80USmpg, they both weigh ~2k lbs, the biggest difference is in aerodynamics (Insight's better iirc) and transmission. The 3l Lupo has some wonky transmission that always makes sure the engine is operating as efficiently as possible, so that everyone who drives the cars according to the Euro driving schedule gets the listed mileage. I'm also betting this tranny has a few more losses than a standard, but still is better than how most people drive. So, I'm guessing that the slightly larger/less efficient 1.9L tdi with an m/t could see the same EPA that the 3L lupo does, and better with the more efficient 1.2L tdi and m/t.

Here's a blurb about the 3L's trip around the world, something like 95-100USmpg with a 50-55mph average speed, all in a vehicle that weighs the same, has a greater Cd (.29 versus .25), probably greater reference area, and I'm guessing slightly worse transmission in terms of losses. Here's where they mention speed.

Volkswagen had budgeted 1000 litres of diesel for the trip, but only ended up using 793, an average consumption of 2,38/100km at an average speed of 85km/h.

So ~99mpg@53mph average speed. I'm guessing a straight m/t Insight with one of these engines would improve on this significantly.

[Rstb88]

Sry for highjacking the thread. Heres a pick thats close to the F150 wheels. Only different centercaps.

[rh77]

Well, last night I did some calculations regarding the Prius vs. the Honda Diesel.

In Honda's case, they're limited to the 2.2, which will fit in the Civic, and drop right in the Accord, but probably not the Fit. Emissions: depending on fuel. Probably will be at least B50 compatible, which should reduce emissions.

Power-to-Weight:
Prius curb weight = 2930 lb.
Combined HP = 110 hp.
P/W Ratio = 0.0375

Projected curb weight of Accord with Diesel: Euro Accord Diesel 6MT (USDM TSX = 1477kg = 3256 lb). Acura TSX 6MT = 3257 lb. One pound heavier. The U.S. Accord 5MT with the K24 (TSX engine) weighs 3133 lb. + 1 lb. = 3144.
2.2iCDTi HP = 140 hp
P/W Ratio = 0.0445

The Honda will have more power-to-weight by 15.7%

FE for the Prius: 60/51/55
Projected Accord Diesel: 32/53/42

CO Emissions (g/km)
Prius: 104
Accord: 145

Welp, it looks like the Prius wins for better emissions and FE , with the Accord yielding a slightly better highway FE rating. Hypermilers should choose the Prius, and the general public perhaps the Diesel, as the EPA FE may be easier to achieve for the average lead-footed user -- introduce Bio-Diesel and less petroleum is used, which could outweigh the FE disparity in emissions.

So short answer, it would be tough.

Crap, I just talked myself out of a Diesel and into a Hybrid -- better yet, a Diesel-Hybrid!

RH77

[The Toecutter]

If only the Opel Eco Speedster would be produced(97 mpg, 160 mph top speed). Then I'd actually be interested in buying a car, instead of re-engineering one that is nearly 40 years old.

[rh77]

Originally Posted by The Toecutter

If only the Opel Eco Speedster would be produced(97 mpg, 160 mph top speed). Then I'd actually be interested in buying a car, instead of re-engineering one that is nearly 40 years old.

So true...sport and efficiency is rare, with the current architecture. The Lotus Elise, being a purist vehicle, has a great platform for hybrid conversion because it's light on its feet and still could retain its sport factor.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but has the Opel Speedster been transformed into the Saturn Sky roadster for the U.S.? If so, the idea is possible -- but sport and economy is too polar right now, especially for General Martyrs. IMHO, once the masses migrate from "go-fast" to "FE+", the sport factor is lost.

RH77

[omgwtfbyobbq]

I found something very interesting about the diesel Accord.

On the day following on it then, with exactly these two vehicles, the consumption travel of Papenburg from direction Wiesbaden started. With very moderate driving fashion and a maximum speed of approx. 140 km/h consumption shrank with the first vehicle on unbelievable 3.07 litres on 100 km. The second vehicle was somewhat more briskly on the way and one of the commissioners of the DMSB registered association, which drove the Begleitfahrzeug, said afterwards: “The driver also used really approx. 80% of the vehicle and was very quickly on the way. I had to remain sometimes trouble at him to. I was the more surprised, as I the consumption of under 4 litres on 100 km saw.”

With 3,07 l and 3.86 l to 100 km remained both Accord Diesels the far under ECE normal consumption of 5,4 l /100km. On average of both vehicles this results in a consumption of only 3.46 litres/100km.

Also the chief developer of the diesel engine Kenichi Nagahiro was surprised by the results. It had neither expected that an average maximum speed of more than 207 km/h was possible, nor that a consumption of under 5 litres on 100 km be achieved could. It had to state with a smile that it had underestimated its own engine.

Not to say that hypermiling isn't nice and all, but with diesels, you don't have to hypermile to get great mpg because they don't suffer from crankcase pumping losses in the first place. Just set the max speed at 55mph on the freeway and 30mph in town to blow away the EPA instead of doing the whole on/off accelerate/coast deal. Ideally, I'd fancy a 3L Lupo with a straight m/t. 81g/km carbon dioxide, ~100mpg@55mph. Bet a team hypermiling in that could do some serious damage at a 15mph average speed, probably well over 200mpg.

<rant>
The one thing that's really irritating is the EPA's over the top emissions mandates. The let manufacturers of large pickup trucks go balls out with NOx emissions compared to the EU (we have a max .93g/km and they have a max of .39g/km). We don't have as stringent CO emissions, and compared to them, out small car NOx regulations are draconian.

Taking into account the difference in engine type, they have allowed roughly twice as many HC emissions for gassers compared to diesels, and roughly twice as many NOx emissions for diesels compared to gassers. Because diesels tend to make more NOx and gassers more HCs. We'll ignore the concept that HCs are actually carcinogens, and while NOx is bad (smog/acid rain), it's not a carcinogen, and even more importantly, diesel doesn't evaporate at the gas station like gasoline. So when refueling, carcinogenic HC emissions are even greater for gassers, which they should include, but don't seem to (need to google this). It's just... yeah, and I have a feeling it's a kickback to the trucking/auto industry to a certain extent...
<end rant>

edit- EPA, EU.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

By that I mean in gassers the throttling of the engine results in a difference in pressure between crankcase/cylinder, not that the air going in and out of the crankcase is the problem. Both engines types suffer from pumping losses on the exhaust side to a certain extent.

[omgwtfbyobbq]

In an average car, a diesel results in about twice the mileage during the EPA combined cycle. As the percentage of load increases, i.e. we have smaller engines in bigger vehicles, or smaller engines doing more work, the advantage drops off. So with something like a small pickup that's always carrying a half ton, there's only a couple mpg difference. But for something that's generally not using all the engine has to offer, it's significant.

2005 Volkswagen Jetta
EPA Fuel Economy

Fuel Type Diesel
MPG (city) 38
MPG (highway) 46
MPG (combined) 41

Fuel Type Gasoline
MPG (city) 24
MPG (highway) 31
MPG (combined) 27

The EPA takes into account the extra ~16-18% energy per gallon diesel fuel has, so if driven according to the EPA schedule, the diesel will get something like 48mpg combined real world, versus 27 for the gas version. About a 78% increase in mileage compared to the 47% of a hybrid. Not to say gas hybrids aren't a good idea as well, in the same car a hybrid system makes for a big increase.

2006 Honda Civic
EPA Fuel Economy

Non-Hybrid
MPG (city) 30
MPG (highway) 40
MPG (combined) 34

Hybrid
MPG (city) 49
MPG (highway) 51
MPG (combined) 50

A hybrid diesel would be better than anything, but the extra weight of the hybrid system won't see the gains like in a gasser, and idle shut-off/free-wheeling transmission help out as much, so it's more economical to leave it out. At least until we start seeing 20-40 mile plug-ins.