Who cares about looks! Is there a diesel option?? (1 Viewer)

[cruiser_guy]

Shouldn't it read At most until 2008

Hey, I'd take Bush any time over someone like Hilary Clinton! She is scary! Unfortunately she might be the president in 2009 the way things are going. Then we in Canada can laugh while the American taxpayer gets screwed over BIG TIME.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Reliability is a diesels forte!! Can your 100 series go for 300,000 miles without worry? Would you drive from Canada to Central America with it at that point? Folks I've been out with comment that when they follow behind my 25 year old diesel they can't smell the diesel odor. Newer engines are even better, it that is possible.

I agree reliability is everything and THAT is why it will be a diesel for me!!

The engines one small part. Duh! The VW Turdgeg is a vehicle slaughtered with trouble. One of the worst.

 

[hedydd]

The engines one small part. Duh! The VW Turdgeg is a vehicle slaughtered with trouble. One of the worst.

Do you base that on personal experience? They are ten a penny around here and I have heard no adverse comment. On the contrary, people who have the 3.0 and V10 diesel in particular are really pleased with them. The highest mileage one I know of has completed over 80,000 trouble free miles and is a comparitively new 3.0 diesel. This is reasuring because my Audi Q7 has the same engine and gearbox.

 

[cruiser_guy]

The engines one small part. Duh! The VW Turdgeg is a vehicle slaughtered with trouble. One of the worst.

I thought we were discussing TOYOTA diesels?!? My TOYOTA diesel has 300,000+ miles on it and I drive my 300,000+ mile TOYOTA diesel from Canada to Central America and back at least once a year, putting on an additional 6000 miles EACH WAY with no problems so far.

THATS what I call reliable!

If you want to talk s*** diesels talk to ANYONE who's owned a GM350 "diesel' (and I use the word diesel lightly in that context as it is not and never was a REAL diesel)! I doubt there is many or even any still on the road.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Do you base that on personal experience? They are ten a penny around here and I have heard no adverse comment. On the contrary, people who have the 3.0 and V10 diesel in particular are really pleased with them. The highest mileage one I know of has completed over 80,000 trouble free miles and is a comparitively new 3.0 diesel. This is reasuring because my Audi Q7 has the same engine and gearbox.

From Consumer Reports and on and on, the Reg's problems are very well documented.

 

[Waggoner5]

John , my post on my Touareg has only to do with power, mpg and driveability. My truck was never in the shop and would out run, out smooth, and out quiet a 100 series, but I do agree that VW had some issues with the first ones. Don't get me wrong. I am a Toyota guy to the bone, probably more than most people even on this board, but my point is that you should not dis a new gen diesel until after you have owned one. A V8 TDI LC if we ever get one in the US, will outperform the gasser in everyway including polution, quietness, mpg, and performance.

 

[twstrchasr]

From Consumer Reports and on and on, the Reg's problems are very well documented.

I'd take whatever CR 's says with a lot of trepidation. They want all of us to wear a Timex and drive a Corolla or Tercel. As far as the reliability issue is concerned, my 1991 Range Rover has had fewer isues than my 1989 Land Cruiser...Danm, I shouldn't have said that .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2001 UZJ100
1989 FJ62
1991 Range Rover Classic
2003 Mercedes CL55 AMG

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I'd take whatever CR 's says with a lot of trepidation. They want all of us to wear a Timex and drive a Corolla or Tercel. As far as the reliability issue is concerned, my 1991 Range Rover has had fewer isues than my 1989 Land Cruiser...Danm, I shouldn't have said that .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2001 UZJ100
1989 FJ62
1991 Range Rover Classic
2003 Mercedes CL55 AMG

You need to learn their procedures.

We're not talking testing in their case. We're talking reliability ratings which are 100% compiled by their subscibers. CR has no input on those submissions.

Besides, there's plenty of other documentation on how crappy the Turd has been, Rovers, Benz's.....damn, MB has went to hell in the reliability game.

 

[cruiser_guy]

A V8 TDI LC if we ever get one in the US, will outperform the gasser in everyway including polution, quietness, mpg, and performance.

THIS is the issue of this thread, NOT the reliability or whatever of VW's, or anyone elses, latest vehicles! We're here to talk 'Cruisers!!

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

THIS is the issue of this thread, NOT the reliability or whatever of VW's, or anyone elses, latest vehicles! We're here to talk 'Cruisers!!

Oh yes sir El Capitan!

 

[twstrchasr]

THIS is the issue of this thread, NOT the reliability or whatever of VW's, or anyone elses, latest vehicles! We're here to talk 'Cruisers!!

:shotts:

 

[Tapage]

Ok .. CA have the more tight emision rules right . ? what about Germany or Spain with tight EuroiV emision controls as well .. and they have all Diesel engines ( course talking about cruisers ) throught the time ..

I have a buddy that pas emusion in spain with a HJ-61 few weeks ago ..

 

[cruiser_guy]

Ok .. CA have the more tight emision rules right . ? what about Germany or Spain with tight EuroiV emision controls as well .. and they have all Diesel engines ( course talking about cruisers ) throught the time ..

I have a buddy that pas emusion in spain with a HJ-61 few weeks ago ..

David, the way the emissions testing works is that you need to pass emissions based on what the rules were when the particular vehicle was sold. In my case my BJ60 needs to pass based on the rules and regulations as they were in 1982 even though I might be tested in 2007.

So your friend's HJ61 needs only to pass the emissions standards based on when it was made or sold but not the current standards.

 

[Tapage]

David, the way the emissions testing works is that you need to pass emissions based on what the rules were when the particular vehicle was sold. In my case my BJ60 needs to pass based on the rules and regulations as they were in 1982 even though I might be tested in 2007.

So your friend's HJ61 needs only to pass the emissions standards based on when it was made or sold but not the current standards.

Yap .. I know that .. but at the end he share the same public road with diesel 80 series and 100 series ..

Sure it would do also when the 200 series release in Spain ..

 

[bulldog-yota]

I thought I would just give my 2cents on this.

Teh older diesel engines were very simplistic mechanical units made out of big ass steel components. Thus very reliable (not many things that can break) and would last a life time if maintained properly due to the super heavy duty engine and internal components. Unfortunately those heavy internals reduce the RPM range of the engine dramatically, thus while they can have great TQ with a turbo they still have a very narrow powerband, which irretated me beyond believe in the dunes in the Kalahari. All the diesels at the time (mid 90s) (turbo most of them) were struggling, while even the patehtic little gas engines would zing by on the soft sand dunes. Reason: the gas engines had a much wider powerband.

That has all changed with the latest and greatest marvels of diesel technology. COmmon high pressure computer controlled injectors allow much more precision and preiginition for the diesel. Thus they are a lot quiter and smoke a hell of a lot less. Add to that all the new emissions equipment and in the near future ( I believe next year) we will actually see diesels that can meet the new regulations in the US (specifically CA).

And yes we need those regulations. If we had a high % of diesels on the road similar to Europe the cities in the US would be unliveable from emissions, as folsk in the US drive their cars a hell of a lot more. Diesels require a hell of a lot of work to clean up the exhaust, not only particles, but the lean running engine and high compression create a lot of emissions problems they have very expensive and sophisticated solutions for now. Diesel has a only a few % more energy per volume than gas, the rest of the efficiency comes form direct injection, lean runnning and high compression, all of which creates a lot more emissions that need to be sorted out on the exhaust side. But I digress.

Added to the new injector control, they have variable vane turbos that allow low end torque while also allowign freer breathign at higher RPM (thus a wider power band). To go with all that new technology they also now make much lighter weight internal components (from aluminum as well) and also aluminum blocks and heads for diesels. That is great as the engine can actually go to high RPMs without destoying itself, adn doesn't weigh the front down like a boat anchor.

All goodness and great. Just a few catches. All this technology makes any modern gas engine look very simplistic. Thus expect it to be far more expensive than a similar gas engine. Added to that, this complexity will severely reduce reliability, especially compared to the good old diesel engines people think about. Longevity also takes a dive as it no longer uses "tank" parts inside either.

So don't simply add what was good of the old diesel engines with what is good of the new ones, as the only similarity between the 2 is that they use diesel. The new ones give all these benefits at a far greater cost, reduction in simplicity and thus reliability, as well as a reduction in longevity due the lightweight components used.

You can't have your cake and eat it.

Oh BTW the current hybrid technology is best suited to small light vehicles. Till the battery technology can catch up with the power requirements of large heavy vehciles, big hybrid vehicle benefits is pretty questionable.

Anyhow my 2c

 

[hedydd]

New technology is also used in engine materials. The latest high torque/high power small displacement diesel engines from the top manufacturers are now increasingly built of thin wall lightweight compacted graphite cast iron. An iron that is difficult and costly to machine but extremely strong and resistant to wear. Examples are those V6 and V8 diesels from VW/Audi and Ford/Land Rover/Range Rover/Peugeot.
More are on the way.

 

[Tapage]

You get a good point at dunes .. but how much dunes you really have .. or in the hole USA country . ?

Turbo Diesels are pretty nice for on road, rocks and mud use ..

 

[Dougal]

And yes we need those regulations. If we had a high % of diesels on the road similar to Europe the cities in the US would be unliveable from emissions, as folsk in the US drive their cars a hell of a lot more. Diesels require a hell of a lot of work to clean up the exhaust, not only particles, but the lean running engine and high compression create a lot of emissions problems they have very expensive and sophisticated solutions for now. Diesel has a only a few % more energy per volume than gas, the rest of the efficiency comes form direct injection, lean runnning and high compression, all of which creates a lot more emissions that need to be sorted out on the exhaust side. But I digress.

I disagree on the diesels having worse emissions and more expensive methods of controlling them. In fact everywhere in the world except the US (special emphasis on California) recognises this.
Petrols have catalytic converters to meet emissions, diesels have particle filters. Both have EGR systems (either internal via valve control or external). The cost and complexity is comparable.

The major US cities already have massive problems from vehicle pollution. Modern diesels will reduce this. But we have US automakers lobbying power and we have law makers (and citizens) who are prejudiced against diesel.

I also disagree on modern engines not lasting as long as old ones.

 

[cruiser_guy]

which irritated me beyond believe in the dunes in the Kalahari. All the diesels at the time (mid 90s) (turbo most of them) were struggling, while even the patehtic little gas engines would zing by on the soft sand dunes. Reason: the gas engines had a much wider powerband.

This is the ONLY time I have ever noticed a benefit of gas vs. diesel in nearly 20 years of owning my BJ60. In my case all that was needed was patience to let the diesel chug through. So what if I wasn't the first one across the dunes. The benefits in the other day to day areas FAR outweigh that minor inconvenience.

 

[Mike Shull]

While we are waiting how aobout signing this petition? I'm sure most of you have already seen it but pass it along....we are doing great...almost up to 300 signatures!!
http://www.petitiononline.com/TOYD4D/