That's a ton of torque! ;)

LOL, I think it's missing a decimal point, but it's *still* a lot of torque!

The current Q7 gets a Euro rated 23 mpg. It'll be interesting what the EPA rating comes to once they wring out 88% of the current NOx emissions.

I'm also curious what the vehicle does when the AdBlue solution is below its freezing point. Does the car not start until it liquifies? How long does that take?

I'm also wary of anything that depends on the end-user maintaining it, especially once the vehicle is out of warranty.

If it's just scraping by on emissions, I assume it's pretty bad compared to a SULEV vehicle like the Prius. Which exhaust would you prefer to breathe?

I'd prefer it lost 100hp. Then we'd really get some good MPG numbers.

"I'm also wary of anything that depends on the end-user maintaining it, especially once the vehicle is out of warranty."

You mean, like, engine oil, transmission fluid, washer fluid, steering fluid, tire pressure, brake pads, etc., etc.??

Please.

JN2: So, I suppose any vehicle that doesnt have SULEV status should be removed from the road then? Because there are many gas vehicles for sale now that would be be dirtier than these new diesels.

Mike127: Not that you didnt know, but you'll mostly get better economy by going with the smaller engine, not necessarily just dropping the power.

Agreed, Mike127, with 550 Nm torque does it crush other cars in its stainless steel teeth? Imagine if the Bavarian uber-techs were to embrace Hypercardom.

You mean, like, engine oil, transmission fluid, washer fluid, steering fluid, tire pressure, brake pads, etc., etc.??

Please.

No, more like things which will give me or others lung diseases, though the things you mention make it much more likely I'll get hurt by someone else on the road or have to deal with congestion from their car breaking down. So, yes, as much as vehicles can be made foolproof, I'm all for it. Or don't you care about air quality and such?

Yeah, youre on to me - I'm not a big fan of quality air. I mean, anyone that sees promise in diesel technology clearly can't be.

Yeah, youre on to me - I'm not a big fan of quality air. I mean, anyone that sees promise in diesel technology clearly can't be.

By the content of your prior comment, one could only conclude that you don't care about such things. These urea-based systems have a serious flaw in their designs -- human nature. People simply don't maintain their vehicles well, and it only gets worse the older the vehicles get.

If you're interested in the promise of diesel technology and the quality of the air, it's a fairly obvious concern to have. One would be more in favor of systems which don't need upkeep.

What like catalysts that burn out? Exhaust systems that fail? SPark plugs and leads that die?

The whole point of OBD since its inception is to remove the human element from the system and ensure that emission control systems are reliably maintained. This is no different for filling your Adblue tank than it is for replacing a dead cat converter on a gas engine.

If the state prefers not to inspect cars and check the fault code history, then that is the state's problem for not implementing the OBD and emissions control regs. The systems in place at the moment are more than adequate to remove the "human nature" issues you seem to ascribe purely to the new diesel emission control systems.

replacing a dead cat converter on a gas engine.

Never have needed to do that my entire life.

If the state prefers not to inspect cars and check the fault code history, then that is the state's problem for not implementing the OBD and emissions control regs. The systems in place at the moment are more than adequate to remove the "human nature" issues you seem to ascribe purely to the new diesel emission control systems.

Silly me, concerned for the lungs of innocent people. If they live in a state with weak regs, screw 'em, huh. If the systems in place are more than adequate to remove the human nature issues, then why is it so easily foreseen how the urea will run out and these emission systems made useless?

replacing a dead cat converter on a gas engine.

What does it convert the dead cat to?

Jack, come on. You can't be that stupid.

Between smog checks, and built-in vehicle systems, this is no different than any of a myriad of other emissions control challenges/systems that have already existed for decades.

The urea system will also be implemented on upcoming Mercedes SUVs. They all have warnings which come on if the urea tanks get low, and I believe that after it is empty for a short period of time, the car will not allow you to start it. I think that's why the EPA took so long to approve the system.

As to the argument that somehow new diesels are bad because some states have lax inspections, that just seems misguided. This would mean passing up cars with the potential for 30% better mileage for fear that a small percentage of those diesel owners would go so far as to not maintain their vehicles and also figure out a way to disable the ECU programming. Also remember that the urea system is only on the high dollar performance diesels and SUVs. The smaller diesels, like the new VW Jetta, do not need it. The simple answer is to push for new legislation in those states. I'm sure that those lax states are also lax on gasoline car inspections, so new legislation would help everyone.

But I don't think the urea systems will be around for long. They seem like a temporary fix, and I bet the auto companies will engineer better systems in the next few years that negate the need for urea. Probably in 50 years, there will be a couple of urea cars in the Henry Ford museum as interesting oddities.

I think we may see even smaller turbodiesel engines with the urea injection system probably by 2009. That could mean we'll see a Mercedes-Benz C230CDI with a 2.3-liter turbodiesel engine in the USA market.

The installation of this engine on the Audi A4 could mean we might just see the same engine on the US-market VW Passat by 2009, too.

Good funny Jack

I was wondering if we'll see 4cyl Audi diesels in the US. It seems reasonable that the engine from the Jetta will find it's way to the A3. Also I wonder how a diesel with a DSG will work and I hope I get the chance to try it.

Cool just checked and the diesel Jetta will come with DSG.

Between smog checks

Not all states have them. Covered that one already.

and built-in vehicle systems

The refillable tank? Next thing you'll tell me is that people always have all their fuids checked, filled, and/or replaced on a regular schedule. That's not the real world.

this is no different than any of a myriad of other emissions control challenges/systems that have already existed for decades.

Which emissions control systems have relied upon refilling a fluid?

They all have warnings which come on if the urea tanks get low, and I believe that after it is empty for a short period of time, the car will not allow you to start it.

You believe that or you know that? If that's true, I guess people now need to have their vehicle towed to make the emissions work if the fluid runs out?

My concern is that it seems the only way to get your urea is by going to an Audi dealership. If Audi has a program similar to BMW (all maintenance included in the cost of the vehicle) than it is not a concern as most people will probably make use of the maintenance services they already paid for rather than trying to change their own oil or go to the local "quick oil change place"...Anyone have any idea of the number of luxury SUV owners who actually do their own maintenance?

Anyone have any idea of the number of luxury SUV owners who actually do their own maintenance?

You have an idea where those vehicles eventually end up? Not in Bel-Air.

"You have any idea where those vehicles eventually end up"

So your implying that in ten years most of these cars would be in the driveways of the middle to lower middle class. And that they are TOO ENVIRONMENTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE to keep up the cars emission system. So much so that they should not be produced.

Really, Jack

So your implying that in ten years most of these cars would be in the driveways of the middle to lower middle class. And that they are TOO ENVIRONMENTALLY IRRESPONSIBLE to keep up the cars emission system. So much so that they should not be produced. Really, Jack

Hey, it's the board racist lecturing me about people in poverty. Cute!

Yes, Mr. Racist, vehicles end up going down the social strata as they get older. Poorer people aren't "environmentally irresponsible," they simply don't have much money and thus things not directly related to their personal well-being tend to be neglected. Perhaps if you stopped cowering in Whiteyville where you live, you would know that this is competely obvious.

"Racist"

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Whiteyville"

Really, Jack

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You believe I don't know what the word "racist" means? Perhaps you're even less intelligent than I first imagined.

Really, Jack

Really what? You live in a caucasian enclave and have openly stated your hatred for people who are not caucasian, blaming them for a variety of social ills.

I'll take it that you grant my point about any urea system as being highly vulnerable to not being maintained as a vehicles ages, since you feel compelled to dwell in the gutter of empty moralizing.