[Dandon]

More than half of the cars sold here today are diesels (I think it's actually about 70%, and more than 90% in 4x4s), so I think I can share my point of view.
Let's focus on modern engines. There's no point in comparing obsolete technology and try to apply old prejudice to the latest models. Turbodiesel (TD) engines have seen an enormous evolution in the last 20 years. They are more powerful, silent and fuel efficient than ever, but they are still noisier and heavier that an equivalent gas engine. That's a fact and it can be read in any spec sheet. OTOH, diesel cars usually have a thicker noise insulation under the hood, so that the noise inside the cabin very similar to that of a gas version.
Whether diesel oil smells better or worse than gasoline is a matter of personal taste; I agree wih Schotts in that it stinks. And the odour is far more persistent than the more volatile gasoline. That's the reason why gas stations have disposable plastic gloves for filling up, which every diesel owner uses. I've never needed one except when I have rented a diesel car.
The main reason why people bought diesels was fuel economy. Diesel was cheaper than gas (up to 20 % or so), and the mileage was better. The first reason is no longer valid; in fact, now diesel oil is for the first time ever more expensive (3%) than gas. Modern TD s are still more fuel efficient than gas engines, but this is also quickly changing. Last generation turbo gas engines (VW TSI, TFSI and others) have greatly reduced the distance. They will probably never reach diesels, but the difference is much lower than it was a mere 10 years ago.
Also, to achieve this current performance, modern common-rail TDs are even more packed with ECUs, hi-tech valving, precision-engineered rotating parts, extreme pressure pumps and injectors than a gas engine. Thus the legendary durability of good ole' simple diesels is long ago history.
Another reason for many people preferring diesel engines is a (false) impression that they are more "powerful" having the same HP's. This is nonsense from a technical point of view, but torque and its relationship to power and rpms is a really difficult to understand concept. It has beeb very cleverly used by advertisement to attract buyers who can't tell "torque" from "Torx". The way of driving highly influences the perceived power, and the typical low-rpms shifting of the average driver favours the TD engines, which usually have max torque at a lower engine speed. Of course they also have a narrower usable range, after which the power abruptly drops. Gas engines are much more elastic from low rpms to red line, but most drivers will never use the full range.

Now let's get back to the HDJ100/UZJ100. The two only reasons I would consider buying the HDJ100 would be lower operating costs and higher range. A 450 km range is not really a problem while driving in Spain, it even isn't if you drive down to Morocco. It is if you travel further to, say, Mauritania. Anyway, the declared average mileage is 16,6 l/100 km for the UZJ, vs. 12,6 l/100 km for the HDJ. I can't say it's a negligible difference.
Other than that, the 4.7 is more powerful (235 HP vs. 204 HP), quieter, smoother and more responsive to the gas pedal than the 4.2 TD.

Derek, I don't know the US market. But most diesel passenger cars in Spain (and I believe in the rest of Europe) are at least slightly more expensive than their gas counterparts, with same equipment annd HP. There are some notable exceptions though, like BMW and MB.

BTW, the HDJ80 used the hybrid electrical system you mention. 24V for starting, 12V for everything else. Later models (HDJ100, KZJ90, KDJ120, etc.) use a simple 12V system. Even if they have a dual battery setup, these are just in parallel.

Sorry for the brick.