Lexus Remains Lukewarm on Diesel

[Och]

Basically, all it comes down to is it's going to become a lot more expensive to drive in the next few years.

These emission requirements have turned diesels that ran forever into unreliable heaps of junk that require a lot of expensive maintenance, and are pretty much finished by the time they reach 100k miles. Not only that, but they don't run anywhere near their full efficiency during their life cycle due to early carbon build up that makes them run hotter, less efficient and make less power. Unfortunately, the same is true for modern direct injected petrol engines, especially if they are turbo charged. Fuel efficiency of these new engines is greatly overhyped as well, they are not nearly as efficient in real world driving compared to the EPA tests.

Right now people are not yet feeling these issues because these cars are new, and lease rates are still low. Once the public realizes how unreliable these new cars are, their used values are going to plummet, and lease rates will skyrocket. Mark my words.

 

[mmcartalk]

These emission requirements have turned diesels that ran forever into unreliable heaps of junk that require a lot of expensive maintenance, and are pretty much finished by the time they reach 100k miles. Not only that, but they don't run anywhere near their full efficiency during their life cycle due to early carbon build up that makes them run hotter, less efficient and make less power. Unfortunately, the same is true for modern direct injected petrol engines, especially if they are turbo charged. Fuel efficiency of these new engines is greatly overhyped as well, they are not nearly as efficient in real world driving compared to the EPA tests.

Right now people are not yet feeling these issues because these cars are new, and lease rates are still low. Once the public realizes how unreliable these new cars are, their used values are going to plummet, and lease rates will skyrocket. Mark my words.

Before you condemn today's automotive diesels as junk, are you (or, rather, were you) familiar with the automotive diesels of 30-40 years ago? Only two companies, Mercedes and Peugeot, made passenger-car diesels back then that could be considered reliable....and even then, they lacked a number of today's advanced diesel features. Most of the other ones......VW, Isuzu, Chevette, etc....and especially the notoriously bad GM 5.7L (350 c.i.) diesel V8 and its class-action suits, had (everyday) issues that would make you cringe when comparing them to today's nice Bluetec and TDI diesels. First, some of them came with two batteries, because when the temperatures went below freezing, the engines were often very difficult to crank, even with a lot of current-amps. Water and paraffin in the diesel fuel were constant problems, especially if the water-separators in the fuel system didn't work well. Then, even with the engine cranking, it wouldn't actually start until the glow plugs got hot enough to fire off the initial air/fuel mixture....which could take some time. Then, once it started, a visible cloud of black soot came out the tailpipe, and the engine vibrated, shook on its mounts, and idled with a loud Pock-Pock-Pock sound....sometimes getting a little quieter as it warmed up. Once underway, despite good low-end torque, it often took forever to get rolling....you didn't get the good response you do today. Last, some of those old diesels were converted gas engines, so the blocks, despite strengthening, were never intended to take the stress of 20:1 compression ratios (the typical gas engine runs about half of that, or 10:1)....with predictable results.

So, while I respect your opinion as always, I myself don't see how one can pass off the vast improvements of modern diesels as junk. Today's diesels, for the most part, start and run like gas engines. They have such efficient, quick-heating glow plugs and ignition systems that their wait-time on a cold start is very short, even in the winter. Once started, though they may be slightly noisier on actual decibel-meters than gas engines, it's relatively hard to tell the difference now unless you have really sensitive ears. No longer do they idle, sound, and vibrate like a can of marbles. Step on the throttle, and you now get instant, broad torque, although RPM red-lines are somewhat lower than for gas engines. Very little, if any, black soot still comes through the tailpipe. Modern low-sulfur diesel fuel has lessened or eliminated most of the problems with the earlier types of diesel fuel, including the water-separation issues, though the low-sulfur fuel does admittedly cost more....sometimes as much or more than 93-octane gas. Yes, the urea-solution injections are now an extra service-issue that did not exist before, but some manufacturers now include that in their warranty or free-maintenance programs....and that something that only has to be done once every 10,000, miles or so. So, given the choice between a BlueTec/TDI diesel of today, and something out of diesel history, I sure know which one I'd rather have in my driveway.

 

[Och]

Before you condemn today's automotive diesels as junk, are you (or, rather, were you) familiar with the automotive diesels of 30-40 years ago? Only two companies, Mercedes and Peugeot, made passenger-car diesels back then that could be considered reliable....and even then, they lacked a number of today's advanced diesel features. Most of the other ones......VW, Isuzu, Chevette, etc....and especially the notoriously bad GM 5.7L (350 c.i.) diesel V8 and its class-action suits, had (everyday) issues that would make you cringe when comparing them to today's nice Bluetec and TDI diesels. First, some of them came with two batteries, because when the temperatures went below freezing, the engines were often very difficult to crank, even with a lot of current-amps. Water and paraffin in the diesel fuel were constant problems, especially if the water-separators in the fuel system didn't work well. Then, even with the engine cranking, it wouldn't actually start until the glow plugs got hot enough to fire off the initial air/fuel mixture....which could take some time. Then, once it started, a visible cloud of black soot came out the tailpipe, and the engine vibrated, shook on its mounts, and idled with a loud Pock-Pock-Pock sound....sometimes getting a little quieter as it warmed up. Once underway, despite good low-end torque, it often took forever to get rolling....you didn't get the good response you do today. Last, some of those old diesels were converted gas engines, so the blocks, despite strengthening, were never intended to take the stress of 20:1 compression ratios (the typical gas engine runs about half of that, or 10:1)....with predictable results.

So, while I respect your opinion as always, I myself don't see how one can pass off the improvements of modern diesels as junk. Today's diesels, for the most part, start and run like gas engines. They have such efficient, quick-heating glow plugs and ignition systems that their wait-time on a cold start is very short, even in the winter. Once started, though they may be slightly noisier on actual decibel-meters than gas engines, it's relatively hard to tell the difference now unless you have really sensitive ears. No longer do they idle, sound, and vibrate like a can of marbles. Step on the throttle, and you now get instant, broad torque, although RPM red-lines are somewhat lower than for gas engines. Very little, if any, black soot still comes through the tailpipe. Modern low-sulfur diesel fuel has lessened or eliminated most of the problems with the earlier types of diesel fuel, including the water-separation issues, though the low-sulfur fuel does admittedly cost more....sometimes as much or more than 93-octane gas. Yes, the urea-solution injections are now an extra service-issue that did not exist before, but some manufacturers now include that in their warranty or free-maintenance programs....and that something that only has to be done every 10,000, miles or so. So, given the choice between a BlueTec/TDI diesel of today, and something out of diesel history, I sure know which one I'd rather have in my driveway.

Mike, you are comparing apples to oranges. Most of these unreliable old diesels were indeed half assed converted gasoline engines and therefore they ran the way you described. These converted engines were mostly experimental, used in passenger cars, and were never popular in USA. However dedicated traditional diesels were always very reliable. Go look at some youtube videos of Detroit diesels starting right up after sitting for 50-60 years. They didn't have any of the high pressure injectors, electronics, and especially all the multiple catalysts and EGR systems or SCR crap. With mechanical fuel pumps they didn't care for water in diesel, they could run on pretty much anything that resembled an oily substance, could be fully submerged into water, and go through hell and back without an issue. Older diesels used in Russia's northern region literally ran for years without ever being shut down, accumulating hundreds of thousands of miles in the harshest conditions.

That being said, I have some experience with modern diesels. I had a 2005 Ford with International 6.0 diesel, which is semi modern, and now have a 2015 Mercedes Sprinter with 3.0 Bluetec diesel. The Mercedes is quiet, refined, has zero visible emissions from the exhaust pipe (although produces ammonia like smell), runs great, has great pulling power, and is generally awesome. But I will not own it for more than 5 years, because I'm well aware that its going to become a maintenance nightmare and cost an arm and a leg to keep repairing. Even my Ford, which was not anywhere near as modern or advanced as the Merc, was already a money pit with constant repairs it required.

And its much the same with new direct injected forced induction petrol engines. They are absolutely awesome, but only for the first couple of years. Once they have substantial carbon build up, usually after 15-20k, they start running worse and worse, consume more and more fuel, and once all the high pressure components start failing its game over.

 

[mmcartalk]

Mike, you are comparing apples to oranges. Most of these unreliable old diesels were indeed half assed converted gasoline engines and therefore they ran the way you described.

Few if any, though, could compare to today's BlueTecs, whether they were converted gas engines or not.

These converted engines were mostly experimental, used in passenger cars, and were never popular in USA.

The ones on imported name-plates weren't that popular here in America back when (though VW sold a fair number of diesel Rabbits)...but GM screwed many hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of buyers with the diesel 350, which it used in vehicles from all six of its divisions. It was one of the largest class-action suits in automotive history.

However dedicated traditional diesels were always very reliable.

Yes, Mercedes and Peugeot could make reliable diesels back then...they won many endurance runs. But the Mercedes diesels were very expensive, and Peugeot, while not quite as expensive as the Mercedes, like most French-designed vehicles, had quality issues elsewhere on the vehicle.

That being said, I have some experience with modern diesels. I had a 2005 Ford with International 6.0 diesel, which is semi modern, and now have a 2015 Mercedes Sprinter with 3.0 Bluetec diesel. The Mercedes is quiet, refined, has zero visible emissions from the exhaust pipe, runs great, has great pulling power, and is generally awesome. But I will not own it for more than 5 years, because I'm well aware that its going to become a maintenance nightmare and cost an arm and a leg to keep repairing.

I agree with you there. I wouldn't keep ANY Mercedes product after the warranty runs out, gas or diesel.

(although produces ammonia like smell)

That's probably from the urea-solution in the exhaust. Urea converts to ammonia under the effect of some chemical reactions.

And its much the same with new direct injected forced induction petrol engines. They are absolutely awesome, but only for the first couple of years. Once they have substantial carbon build up, usually after 15-20k, they start running worse and worse, consume more and more fuel, and once all the high pressure components start failing its game over.

A simple can of BG44K fuel-system cleaner every couple of years (or maybe with the urea-solution refill at 10,000 miles) should quickly solve that problem. BG makes good stuff.....but you can only get it at service shops. It is not sold over-the-counter.

 

[Och]

Few if any, though, could compare to today's BlueTecs, whether they were converted gas engines or not.



The ones on imported name-plates weren't that popular here in America back when (though VW sold a fair number of diesel Rabbits)...but GM screwed many hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of buyers with the diesel 350, which it used in vehicles from all six of its divisions. It was one of the largest class-action suits in automotive history.





Yes, Mercedes and Peugeot could make reliable diesels back then...they won many endurance runs. But the Mercedes diesels were very expensive, and Peugeot, while not quite as expensive as the Mercedes, like most French-designed vehicles, had quality issues elsewhere on the vehicle.



I agree with you there. I wouldn't keep ANY Mercedes product after the warranty runs out, gas or diesel.



That's probably from the urea-solution in the exhaust. Urea converts to ammonia under the effect of some chemical reactions.



A simple can of BG44K fuel-system cleaner every couple of years (or maybe with the urea-solution refill at 10,000 miles) should quickly solve that problem. BG makes good stuff.....but you can only get it at service shops. It is not sold over-the-counter.

Mike, my point is this - all this new technology that is supposed to save us money on fuel ends up costing way more in the long run when repairs start. That bluetec diesel might run almost as smooth as petrol engine, but a traditional port injected petrol V8 that is well built will run even better, with minimal repair costs and easily outlast it. So even if it burns more fuel, it will still end up costing less in the long run.

One could argue that the increased cost of ownership is offset by reduced emissions, but thats also very questionable considering that there are so many reports of these new engines not living up to the claims, and reports of increased NOX emissions from DI engines. And they only pollute even more once carbon build up starts affecting efficiency. And FYI, fuel system cleaners like BG44k do absolutely nothing in direct injected engines.

But even more importantly, all the "green" nonsense really falls apart when you factor in the fact that these modern DI and diesel vehicles are not going to be repair worthy past 100k miles, so people will have to buy new cars more often, which translates into way more indirect pollution.

It will be very interesting to watch what happens to used car values and how new car lease rates are affected in the coming years.

 

[mikeavelli]

Diesel is also coming under fire in Europe.....Lexus hybrid strategy was always a long term move/gamble and it might pay off in spades..

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...rt-rules-Government-tackle-air-pollution.html

http://www.fleeteurope.com/news/diesel-losing-popularity-france

 

[mmcartalk]

Diesel is also coming under fire in Europe.....Lexus hybrid strategy was always a long term move/gamble and it might pay off in spades..

Europeans, though, seemed to like diesels because, in general, they offered economy better than gas engines without the hybrid's greater complexity and cost. There was also a very favorable tax-structure for diesels for years. I agree, though, that the Court's ruling could have a big impact down the road.

 

[IS-SV]

Diesels in Europe being a huge contributor to stink/filth and unhealthy levels of air pollution are under considerable scrutiny. And passenger car diesel sales growth has stalled.

Topic here being Lexus and its attitude regarding diesels, I think they see what's coming...

 

[mmcartalk]

Diesels in Europe being a huge contributor to stink/filth and unhealthy levels of air pollution are under considerable scrutiny. And passenger car diesel sales growth has stalled.

But is the stall due to changes in the tax structure or concern about diesel pollution? That part seems unclear. And it also seems unclear if diesels in Europe run as clean there as they do here in the U.S., with our clean low-sulfur diesel fuel and urea-injecions. Europe, of course, has the same fuel (they actually got it before we did in 2005)...but I'm not sure about the urea-injections.

 

[mikeavelli]

Diesels in Europe being a huge contributor to stink/filth and unhealthy levels of air pollution are under considerable scrutiny. And passenger car diesel sales growth has stalled.

Topic here being Lexus and its attitude regarding diesels, I think they see what's coming...

With VW admitting they manipulated diesel cars I can't see anyone pushing diesels right now. Unless of course the general public doesn't even notice what is happening to VW since they are still basically an unknown here, especially diesels.

 

[mmcartalk]

With VW admitting they manipulated diesel cars I can't see anyone pushing diesels right now. Unless of course the general public doesn't even notice what is happening to VW since they are still basically an unknown here, especially diesels.

I've known several persons that bought VW Jetta TDIs (one of my ex co-workers had two of them), and all those that did just loved them.

 

[IS-SV]

But is the stall due to changes in the tax structure or concern about diesel pollution? That part seems unclear. And it also seems unclear if diesels in Europe run as clean there as they do here in the U.S., with our clean low-sulfur diesel fuel and urea-injecions. Europe, of course, has the same fuel (they actually got it before we did in 2005)...but I'm not sure about the urea-injections.

Not worth dwelling on here, gets too off topic. But if you want a short answer, the diesel pollution is what's driving the scrutiny. Many there are realizing it was likely a mistake to incentify diesels all those years, and now they are paying for it (very unhealthy levels of air pollution).

Secondly truly clean diesels today are more expensive to build, more costly to maintain, and more repair-prone than clean gas engines.

Btw. Not sure why anybody would think TDI is a good clean diesel, knowing what we do not. It's not, it's nearly a gross polluter by 2015 standards. And if/when recall/fix is implemented I fully expect complaints of poor performance, mediocre fuel economy, and unexpected maintenance and repairs (versus when it ran as heavy polluter).

 

[mmcartalk]

Not worth dwelling on here, gets too off topic. But if you want a short answer, the diesel pollution is what's driving the scrutiny. Many there are realizing it was likely a mistake to incentify diesels all those years, and now they are paying for it (very unhealthy levels of air pollution).

I don't see it as that far off topic, considering that the topic is how Lexus itself approaches the issues of diesel-production. We do seem to be getting some answers in this thread, though, from a number of different posters and their comments, on the issue of what is causing the concern.

Btw. Not sure why anybody would think TDI is a good clean diesel, knowing what we do

He loved getting 55-60 MPG on the highway, not necessarily for its emission levels. Who wouldn't enjoy getting that kind of mileage?

 

[IS-SV]

I've known several persons that bought VW Jetta TDIs (one of my ex co-workers had two of them), and all those that did just loved them.

Loved them. I know somebody that put 200K miles on one and loved it too, no problems.

Might be game over TDI in US (which was about 15% sales)

Ask them tomorrow how they feel about being lied to. Ask them later after the recall when car runs like crap. Ask them how if they care about instant depreciation hit. Ask them when they will get a check from VW. If they were environmentally conscience (many were like Prius owners and now they found out the truth), ask them if they will buy another VW...

 

[mmcartalk]

Ask them tomorrow how they feel about being lied to. Ask them later after the recall when car runs like crap. Ask them how if they care about instant depreciation hit. Ask them when they will get a check from VW. If they were environmentally conscience (many were like Prius owners and now they found out the truth), ask them if they will buy another VW...

Not an issue anymore....no need to ask. Though they loved their Jetta TDIs when they had them, they have moved on to different vehicles. One of them, I believe, now has a 3-series.[/QUOTE]

 

[IS-SV]

I don't see it as that far off topic, considering that the topic is how Lexus itself approaches the issues of diesel-production. We do seem to be getting some answers in this thread, though, from a number of different posters and their comments, on the issue of what is causing the concern.

He loved getting 55-60 MPG on the highway, not necessarily for its emission levels. Who wouldn't enjoy getting that kind of mileage?

That's why I gave short answer, with the perspective of Lexus's attitude towards diesel. Europe's mistakes and pollution problems are noted for sure.

That's great mileage. But as of now, you don't know if he cares about being lied to or polluting at illegal levels.

 

[mmcartalk]

That's why I gave short answer, with the perspective of Lexus's attitude towards diesel. Europe's mistakes and pollution problems are noted for sure.

That's great mileage. But as of now, you don't know if he cares about being lied to or polluting at illegal levels.

Like I said just above, though, no need to ask. As he got more money, he moved on to more upmarket vehicles, and now (I think) drives a BMW 3-series.

 

[IS-SV]

Not an issue anymore....no need to ask. Though they loved their Jetta TDIs when they had them, they have moved on to different vehicles. One of them, I believe, now has a 3-series.

[/QUOTE]

No surprise. Low VW buyer loyalty in US, a trend that started months ago (before TDi thing)

 

[IS-SV]

As it relates to Lexus and diesels, the original posting by Krew refers to discussion with Australian website CarAdvice.

Australia has a higher take rate on diesels than US, but they lag behind Europe and US on emission standards and therefore cars can pollute more heavily (today).

 

[IS-SV]

Not an issue anymore....no need to ask. Though they loved their Jetta TDIs when they had them, they have moved on to different vehicles. One of them, I believe, now has a 3-series.

[/QUOTE]

Yes, the saying "ignorance is bliss" may or may not apply. Only he can answer that today (knowing about this fiasco now), notable if he is business savvy or environmentally conscience and expected a clean powertrain.

Stop sale on new and used TDIs today. VW is now a high profile automaker in the US (unfortunately), plenty of unsolicited press.

I'm curious how those in Toyota/Lexus (hybrid) sales will deal with this in discussions with customers...