Filed under: LA Auto Show, Tech, BMW
BMW refines U.S. diesel plan
BMW is coming stag to the U.S. diesel party, despite hinting in October that they were close to joining fellow German automakers VW, Audi and DaimlerChrysler in marketing Bluetec technology in the U.S.
"We are in the process of thinking of a name that is different from Bluetec," a spokesman for BMW told Reuters on Wednesday.
Matt Davis over at Winding Road says you BMW fans yearning for diesel power should be appeased soon. But what BMW names their urea-injection technology remains to be seen. We'll probably find out for sure next week in L.A.
[Source: Reuters]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
gart 5:11PM (11/23/2006)
With Shell gas at$2.45/reg and diesel at$2.75 in WA today what is the economic incentive to pay more for diesel cars in the USA?
Reply
Faskev 5:21PM (11/23/2006)
If you research diesel powered cars that are currently available on the market (VW Jetta, Golf, Beetle) you will discover that these motors are much more fuel efficient than gasoline engines and in some cases have very similar fuel efficiency to hybrids.
Reply
Faskev 5:23PM (11/23/2006)
If you research diesel powered cars that are currently available on the market (VW Jetta, Golf, Beetle) you will discover that these motors are much more fuel efficient than gasoline engines and in some cases have very similar fuel efficiency to hybrids.
Reply
Keith 6:21PM (11/23/2006)
gart:
That is about a 12% price difference, what if you got 30, 40, 50% better mileage in real world driving? Also, the fact you have a car that is ultra-fun to drive in situations where you need to pass, merge, or do anything that requires torque.
Truth is, you cannot truly understand 'why' until you drive one.
Reply
Simone 9:04PM (11/23/2006)
Aren't the Germans jumping the gun a bit? Last I heard, urea injection hasn't been approved by the EPA because there is no reliable way to ensure that the urea would get refilled.
Reply
DKB_SATX 11:36PM (11/23/2006)
Diesels are also torque monsters. Efficiency is not the only reason Europeans buy lots of diesels, many of the top performers are diesels. I've been passed by more than a few diesels in Italy when *I* was running 90-100 mph on the Autostrada. It's nice when you don't have to compromise between efficiency and performance, but TANSTAAFL. The diesel engines cost a bit more up front.
Reply
Mike 9:06AM (11/24/2006)
Gart, you are quite the commedian - pretending to be a retard!
I'm sure that when diesel was cheaper than gasoline, there was no way you were driving a gasoline - I mean c'mon, that's only logical!
Reply
Critic 10:22AM (11/24/2006)
The BMW 520d looks like a Hundai. What an abortion!
Reply
MikeW 11:14AM (11/24/2006)
diesel has ~10% more energy per unit volume than gasoline.
Reply
Po?ciel We?niana 12:58PM (11/24/2006)
I agree with Critic, this BMW looks horrible!
Reply
Mark 2:31PM (11/24/2006)
Where's the Canadian market BMW cdis? :( :( :(
... waiting to trade in my Jetta TDI Sport Edition (and a lot of cash) for a nice 320cdi.
Reply
Gregory Faulkner 5:55PM (11/26/2006)
That is about a 12% price difference, what if you got 30, 40, 50% better mileage in real world driving?
Don't forget the fact that all diesels can accept alternative fuels with no engine modifications or loss in fuel economy. Biodiesel is here, and synthetic diesel fuels made from coal and/or natural gas are on the way. When they become avalable, you can put them right in your tank; you can blend them with petro-diesel--no problem. Just pump it in; pay; and drive. Great performance; great fuel economy; can run without petroleum-based fuels; and, you can take your choice in which alternative you want to run in it, and you can change your mind any time you want!
You'll not only have a petroleum-saving car, but a car that is fun to drive, and can run without funding terrorism one penny!
Reply
Gregory Faulkner 5:56PM (11/26/2006)
"Last I heard, urea injection hasn't been approved by the EPA because there is no reliable way to ensure that the urea would get refilled."
Officially it is not approved, but the EPA has said they will go along with the urea-injection plan proposed by Daimler Chrysler. I think there is just too much pressure from the administration that can see what an opportunity we are squandering for saving petroleum by not embracing clean diesel technologies for our light-duty markets.
The EPA estimates that with a one-third market share of diesels, we could save 1.4 million barrels per day. This number equals the amount we import from Saudi Arabia. Since 51% of all new car registrations in Europe will be diesel powered this year, it is easy to see that diesels have a manufacturing and ifrastructural advantage over other technologies for saving fuel in America.
It's a real shame we must have this elaborate scheme to bring diesels in that would be 60% cleaner burning than just one year ago, even without elaborate, NOx-reducing techniques.
NOx must react with volitile organic compounds to cause a worsening of ground-level ozone (smog). NOx must be reduced 70% for 2007 diesel autos from 2006 levels. The levels for VOCs, which comes mostly from gas-powered cars, require only modest reductions for 2007.
Go figure!
Reply
lawstdent 4:16PM (12/27/2006)
diesel gas in some parts of the country is cheaper than gas.
diesel cars will essentially double mileage for medium and small passenger cars. large SUVs will not benefit as much. Maybe from 15mpg to 22mpg, still pretty good (Diesel Cherokee figure)
Reply