Honda develops new paint technology that shortens painting process; to be introduced at Yorii Plant in July 2013
Mayor of Indianapolis announces plan to modernize city fleet to plug-ins and CNG by 2025

German automotive companies launch “clean-diesel” marketing campaign in US

Six German automotive companies—passenger car manufacturers Audi, BMW, Daimler, Porsche and Volkswagen, and the supplier Bosch—launched their first joint campaign for diesels in the US. Under the slogan “Clean Diesel. Clearly Better.” they will argue for the advantages of modern diesel passenger car technology over gasoline engines in terms of cleanliness, consumption and performance.

The new vehicle market share of light-duty diesels in the US is quite low (2.6%) compared with a diesel share of 55% in Western Europe. However, sales of diesel passenger cars by German manufacturers—representing 100% of the market in diesel passenger cars in the US—have more than doubled over the last three years. In the first nine months of the current year, around 69,600 diesel cars were sold in the USA, compared to 30,600 for the same period in 2009.

Diesel vehicles have also shown strong gains among total light vehicles (passenger cars and light trucks). Up to September 2012, 284,400 light vehicles with diesel engines were sold, compared with only 160,000 units in the year 2009. The German manufacturers pushed up their market share of the diesel light vehicle segment from 25% to 37%. Their sales multiplied by two and a half (from 40,000 units to over 104,000).

The campaign, which has been developed jointly by the German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) and VDA member companies, comprises a website and flanking offline activities on the US market by the companies involved. Their common goal is to create a multi-brand information platform for clean diesels among the US population.

Using brief examples from everyday motoring in the US, the website explains the dynamics of the diesel drivetrain and its advantages in fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, low noise emissions and refueling costs and also addresses outdated concerns regarding diesel cars. For example, website users can not only easily calculate the consumption advantage of a diesel vehicle, but can also hear the difference in noise between a modern diesel drive train and one from the 1990s.

In addition, the participating companies present current models of diesel cars complying with the environmental standards in all 50 US states. On average, their fuel efficiency is 18% higher than corresponding models with gasoline engines.

The campaign participants aim to present the diesel alternative to interested US consumers in as much detail as possible, so the website also provides background information on research and development, and on the overall environmental framework in the USA.

The companies participating in the campaign, which other manufacturers and suppliers may join, will apply the campaign logo as a seal of quality on the US market in advertisements, on banners, in TV spots, product brochures and their showrooms. The campaign will appear at the North American International Auto Show (NAIAS), in Detroit in January 2013.

Comments

Bernard

18% higher efficiency isn't much. That's almost exactly the average cost disadvantage of diesel vs. regular gasoline (current eia.gov numbers). Does this mean that the fuel savings net-out to $0.00? That's a tough sell.


danschl

it is called marketing boys, Ford or any car maker will supply a high cost hybrid calculating how much above the non hybrid it needs to be priced so those evironmentally concerned buyers will pay the price and the cost concerned buyers will by the other one. just like the volkswagon diesel get a better mpg than the gas one does but strangley it cost more than enough to make up for the fuel costs.

Brotherkenny4

That's right, the car companies know how much they can make you pay and they will sell you something different to give you the idea that you have some kind of choice. Well done car companies, you have the population just where you intended. That is, consuming your product at your price and as often as you can get them to do it. Be sure you don't make anything built to last or that would give the dumb consumers a better value.

Herm

You will save about $10k in 10 years by purchasing a Prius vs a Golf TDI, likely to be far more reliable and no scheduled timing belt replacement.

Carl

Not sure why the fuel efficiency advantage (18%) they mention is so conservative.

Even EPA estimates have an average of over 27% higher fuel mileage for diesel versions than the equivalent gasoline versions. And the EPA estimates are notorious for underestimating fuel mileage of diesels.

The fuel mileage advantage in Consumer Reports testing is almost 45% for the half-dozen or so diesel versions of vehicles they've tested compared to the gasoline versions.

Maybe they mean 18% higher thermal efficiency?

Lad

"Clean Diesel"? Isn't that like "Clean Coal"? or another oxymoron, "Military Intelligence"? All PR for the car companies to try to recover their investments in the Governmental mandated requirement to remove cancer-causing soot from Diesel exhausts and to modify their engines to run on ultra low sulfur fuel.

There are no particular advantages to buying a diesel car, just the illusions of yesteryear.

Peter_XX

@Lad
If you want to reduce emissions of particles, modern cars with DPF have lower particle emissions than ambient air – they are cleaning the air. Modern gasoline cars with direct injection have 10 times higher particle emissions. The advantages regarding fuel consumption might be more apparent and easier for the consumer to check. However, it will take years to convince the US customers about these facts. Maybe you should have a look at the site.

Bernard

I think that the efficiency advantage of diesels is often overstated because it's hard to compare like-with-like.

Take VW for example. They offer three basic engines in the US: a modern diesel, a cheap and obsolete non-turbo gas, and a high performance DI turbo.
You can't compare the diesel to either gas engine. The base non-turbo uses 1980s tech and costs $10K less to purchase. The turbo is a high-strung screamer that's in a totally different performance category.

Comparing the Jetta TDI to a modern gas engine with similar performance reveals a different picture. The Dodge Dart Aero (aka Fiat Viaggio) has a modern DI turbocharged VVT engine and gets within 1 mpg of the Jetta TDI, with similar carrying capacity and performance. They're both European-designed compact sedans built in North America. One has a slightly bigger cabin (Dodge), one has a slightly bigger trunk (VW). It's hard to argue that the TDI is 18% more efficient; you would need to really mess with the maths. In the end, it really comes down to individual preference.

My guess is that the maths would be the same if VW offered their modern 1.4 DI Turbo in this market (they do in the Jetta Hybrid, but that's not a direct comparison).

ToppaTom

As long as there are people who think "the car companies know how much they can make you pay " there will a lot of PR BS in the advertising.

In reality they cannot make us buy any specific car.
So don't expect to be forced to buy a $50,000 TDI Polo anytime soon.

The same people that think we are under the car salesman's control want the Gov to mandate what we can buy.

Buyers will always buy the package that appeals to them, and purchase price as well as overall cost of ownership will remain prime driving forces.

Carl

@Bernard,

You may be correct about the few vehicles in the USA that have a diesel option, but there are many cars in Europe that have both a diesel option and a turbo-GDI option at similar performance that can be compared.

At the same or similar performance based on manufacturer's 0-100 km/hr times, the diesel options average 27% lower fuel consumption than the GDI versions in the NEDC. They also have nearly 18% lower CO2 emissions averaged over those same vehicles.

Peter9909

Bernard, I agree that making a direct comparison is difficult. It may be even more difficult than you imply. Diesel engines are torquier than gas engines. Take the Dart/Jetta comparison that you cite. The 2.0 TDI engine in the Jetta has 236 lb-ft of torque vs 184 lb-ft for the Dart. Although these two cars are roughly the same size, what this means is that the diesel engine can be (and in Europe is) used in larger vehicles that would normally get a six cylinder or even eight cylinder gas engine. For example that same 2.0 TDI engine can be found in the VW Multivan and Mercedes even offers a four cylinder Diesel in the S-Class in Europe. In these instances, the 18% improvement in fuel economy is probably an understatement, not an overstatement.

Carl

On more data point on turbo-GDI vs. diesel.

BMW published minimum BSFC values for both its 3.0 liter turbo-GDI gasoline engine, and for its 3.0 liter two-stage turbo diesel. Both have peak hp of 225 kW. The turbo-GDI engine has all of the latest GDI features, including a "twin-scroll" turbocharger, high-precision injectors, and "VALVETRONIC" fully-variable valve management.

According to BMW, the 3.0 diesel has a minimum BSFC of 197 g/kWh, while the turbo-GDI gasoline engine has a minimum BSFC of 245 g/kWh.

That's a fuel consumption reduction of nearly 20% BY MASS, and gasoline actually has slightly more energy per unit mass than diesel fuel (41.18 BTU/gram (gasoline); 40.39 BTU/gram (ULSD) per Argonne National Laboratory).

Bernard

Carl, Peter,
One technology typically has more power, one has more torque. Given the prevalence of 6+ speed gearboxes, the difference isn't all that great. I chose those two cars in part because measured performance is within a few tenths of a second in most tests.

Carl,
Those 2 BMW engines shouldn't be compared directly. It's the same issue as comparing the VW's 2.0l TDI to their 2.0 GDI. The GDI is a screaming performance engine that offers much more performance. It makes much more sense to compare engines that deliver similar real-world performance.

Carl

Bernard,

That's why I used the BMW 3.0 liter engines as an example. They have the same displacement (3.0 liters) and have EXACTLY the same peak power (225 kW, ~302 hp). The respective torque is 600 nm/442 lb-ft and 400 nm/295 lb-ft.

Performance in the X5 is 6.6 sec 0-100 km/hr for the diesel, and 6.8 sec 0-100 km/hr for the gasoline version (http://www.bmw.com/com/en/newvehicles/x/x5/2010/showroom/compare.html?model_1=xDrive35i&model_2=xDrive40d). Fuel consumption in the combined NEDC is 7.5 liters/100 km and 10.1 liters/100 km, respectively.

As I mentioned in a previous post, I have found at least 17 European vehicles with GDI gasoline and diesel options with essentially the same performance (within 5% based on manufacturers' 0-100 km/hr times). I would be happy to list them if you're interested.

SimonDM

Keep in mind also that diesel is more energy dense per unit volume than gasoline. That also adds considerable advantage in the seeming energy efficiency for diesel. The actual energy efficiency difference between diesel and gasoline is considerably less when comparing per kg of fuel instead of per liter.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)