Diesels vs hybrids: DaimlerChrysler vs Toyota
At the same time Toyota was announcing its hybrid technology product plans for the next five years Tuesday, DaimlerChrysler representatives were in Tokyo to promote their clean diesel technology for the Japanese market. Like the U.S., Japan has never embraced diesels for passenger vehicles, while fuel prices in Europe have driven diesel cars to about a 50 percent share of the new-car market.Hybrids have yet to take off in Europe the way they have in the U.S., because diesels achieve similar fuel economy and low CO2 emissions much more cheaply. In the U.S., EPA regulations and high-sulfur diesel fuel have kept diesels to a small part of the
product mix, although the availability of low-sulfur diesel fuel starting in 2006 is encouraging DaimlerChrysler to take a run at the U.S. with its clean diesel technology.Toyota's take on the future of the two technologies is that upcoming tighter emissions regulations, particularly in the U.S. and Japan, will require more advanced (and more expensive) diesel technology. At the same time, Toyota says it is on track to halve the cost for hybrids. With the diesel-hybrid price gap narrowing, and the fuel efficiency and ultra-low emissions potential of hybrids, Toyota sees the balance tipping in its favor before too long.
[Source: Reuters]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
M1EK 2:35PM (6/14/2006)
No, diesels don't come anywhere close in fuel economy - if you measure the same size vehicle. The only way the diesel guys ever win is to compare a subcompact diesel to a midsize hybrid.
Reply
ghughes 2:36PM (6/14/2006)
Why is DCX in tokyo promoting anything- the japanese will not buy foreign cars in any number, period!_ never have, never will-
Reply
emulous1974 2:43PM (6/14/2006)
This is just two companies marketing their initial invesments, if DCX would of invested into hybrid technologies, they'd be on that bandwagon, it's just the fact that they haven't is why they are pushing Mercedes Bluetech. Chrysler obviously hasn't invested much and has nothing to tought for itself.
These are both risky investments, but Toyota and Mercedes are decent rivals in technology they just take risks in different ways.
From a consumers point of view, at least Toyota is pushing fresh technologies and has the good business practicities to bring costs down quickly. I do think there will be a marketing nightmare when all these hybrids need to replace their batteries, but I'd rather have Toyota trying to find an answer than some Government Agency.
I love diesels and I'm happy to see new technologies applied to them, but it's still pushing a non renewable resource that tells me there is no longevity in that solution.
Reply
emulous1974 2:44PM (6/14/2006)
Yeah, ghughes, the same lame executives in the U.S. said the same thing when the Japanese started selling vehicles in the U.S.
Reply
Elliott 2:55PM (6/14/2006)
It seems that eventually customers will start requiring more electronics in their cars. I would think that hooking up a computer, nav system, premium sound, etc. would be easier in a hybrid than a diesel, especially if you wanted to run anything while the engine wasn't running.
Reply
Presto 3:09PM (6/14/2006)
How about a hybrid diesel?
Reply
Saracen 3:28PM (6/14/2006)
Stop comparing EPA ratings.
Real-world, the Prius gets about %20 less than its EPA rating. The Golf TDI can meet and in some cases exceed it's EPA rating. While delivering superior power and torque. It's also actually fun to drive. And it has a high quality interior. Go do research. Google is your friend.
Hybrids are overrated, overhyped and overpriced.
A hybrid system (engine, motor, transmission, generator, electrical) in a car shaped for low drag, with low friction tires, gets roughly the same mileage as a sporty german hatch with a diesel engine dropped in. Sad.
Reply
bhtooefr 3:33PM (6/14/2006)
M1EK: What metrics are we comparing, here?
EPA ratings that favor hybrids?
Or real-world numbers?
Real-world, a Mk5 (2005.5-2006) Jetta TDI gets about as much as a Mk2 Prius, from the numbers I've seen. Right about 50 MPG.
Also, diesels are MUCH stronger on the highway than hybrids, which have a city strength. Sure, they're more efficient than a regular gasser on the highway... but not as good as a diesel.
Reply
Casey 3:49PM (6/14/2006)
BH-
Have you driven a hybrid on the highway? I drove one 400 miles last week on a roadtrip and it handled the task very well.
Electric motor=instant torque :-). I know that diesels are inherently torquey as well, but I'd sacrifice a few milliseconds' acceleration so that I can look down with contempt on all of those un-enlightened whale-smothering drivers.
But seriously, hybrids are great on the highway...much quieter than a diesel, too.
Reply
sp 3:56PM (6/14/2006)
And who has the cleanest production diesel in the world? Toyota
:-).
Reply
Drew 4:10PM (6/14/2006)
A Camry Hybrid gets 41mpg highway. A heavier Benz E320 CDI gets 37mpg highway....and has more power.
Seems about the same to me....
That said, why can't we have hybrid diesels?
Reply
Dave Naylor 4:32PM (6/14/2006)
A diesel-electric hybrid just might do the trick for the states. I understand that it is now being tested in Europe
Reply
Dave Naylor 4:35PM (6/14/2006)
A diesel-electric hybrid just might do the trick for the states. I understand that it is now being tested in Europe.In Italy there are an number of hybrid combos, none of which include electric.
Reply
Jeff Banks 4:38PM (6/14/2006)
"How about a hybrid diesel?"
Yeah...what the hell. Trains have been doing it for like forever.
Reply
Dave Naylor 4:47PM (6/14/2006)
how about a diesel-electric hybrid? I understand that this now is being tested in Europe. Also, in Italy there are several hybrid combos that do not include electric.Ford,Toyota and others sell diesels in Europe by the thousands and yet in the states we have very few diesels choices.I hope that changes soon....
Reply
John Phillips 5:13PM (6/14/2006)
If you have ever owned or driven a diesel, you would know that they get double the mileage of a gasoline engine. The mileage improvement is available under all driving conditions, unlike the hybrid, which only improves mileage during during start-stop driving, when the hybrid's gasoline engine turns off. Not only that, but the diesel's torque and maintenance costs are far superior to any hybrid.
Reading between the lines, Toyota thinks their hybrid technology is superior because they paid off the Tokyo bureacrats to rig the environmental laws in their favor. Their environmental bureaucracy work just like ours.
Reply
Scott 5:13PM (6/14/2006)
Let face it Diesel is a proven technology. Hybrid is not, has anyone ever sceen a Hybrid with 300,000 miles on it? Both are viable methods of getting higher mileage, but for right now, Diesel is the only platform that is proven in the long run.
Reply
Buster Hymen 5:34PM (6/14/2006)
Diesel....easier to maintain and fix than hybrid. Deisel..no battery to litter and spoil the environment later on....Diesel....no complex software/chips to go bad and become a headache if they malfunction. I believe Toyota's system will not start or drive if the battery goes bad. I think the future will be with diesel as it will be cheaper, more powerful, and less a headache to maintain. It will be interesting to see if Honda can perfect and sell their plasma diesel tech.
Reply
JR 7:39AM (6/15/2006)
I was just in Europe, diesel fuel much cheaper than gasoline. Why is that?
Reply
Glenn A. 9:02AM (6/15/2006)
More of the same. "Batteries..." (we've discussed this on autoblog how many times? Toyota put a $300 bounty on them, it's plastered right on the battery pack - they therefore get recycled - if you want proof that junkyard men are smarter than GM and Ford executives, please note that GM and Ford - and most GM and Ford dealers - aren't making a profit, while virutually all junk yards are). "Batteries..." (so far, the batteries in hybrids have lasted the life of the car, in test cells and so far, in real life too).
Scott? "Horses, they're the only reliable means of transportation proven in the long run." (circa 1895).
As for hybrids not being any good on the highway, I just drove my wife & niece to & back from the Mackinac straits yesterday, and between Kalkaska and Traverse City (1/2 the return leg), after filling up with cheap gas in Kalkaska, I got 63 MPG by the time we got to TC. That's on a 55 mph 2-lane, very up & down.
From TC to the straits and back to Kalkaska (2/3 of the outbound trip at 70 plus on an interstate) the overall average was 53.5. I ran the AC as needed, didn't skimp; the outside temp varied from 68 to 75. I used cruise control about 1/3 of the time. Went the speed limit where possible, but didn't exceed it by much except on downhill stretches. I did two or three high-speed passes, including one during the 63 mpg jaunt.
Diesels more efficient?! I don't think so.
Reply