Ford, GM have discussed merger, alliance

Tom Adkins wrote:
> I agree. Problem is diesels don't sell well in the US. They run a
> little different, smell a little different, feel a little different,
> need a little different care,

Here in Kansas City, you see F-250 Powerstrokes everywhere.
My local dealer always has a very large number of these on
their lot.

Mark Jones wrote:
> Tom Adkins wrote:
>
>> I agree. Problem is diesels don't sell well in the US. They run a
>>little different, smell a little different, feel a little different,
>>need a little different care,
>
>
> Here in Kansas City, you see F-250 Powerstrokes everywhere.
> My local dealer always has a very large number of these on
> their lot.
>
>
Yes, diesel trucks are popular. I was referring to cars.

> > I agree. Problem is diesels don't sell well in the US. They run a little
> > different, smell a little different, feel a little different, need a
> > little different care, YAAHH I can't handle change, I'll stay with what
> > I'm familiar with!! I don't wanna change...! I'll just stay in my comfort
> > zone and pay for gas.
>
> Diesels were selling pretty well until GM came out with the 350 diesel.
> Peugeot, GM, VW, Audi and DiamlerBenz all sold diesels in the 80s.
>
> > We, as a whole in the US, are so used to gasoline powered engines that we
> > are afraid of anything new (different).
>
> You mean like the scores of thousands of hybrids that have sold in the US?

I'm disappointed with the current hybrids they have out. You don't get
that much mileage improvement for the significant increase in price.
And the VW Jetta TDI gets better mileage thatn the Honda and Toyota
hybrids.

Mark Jones wrote:
> Tom Adkins wrote:
> > I agree. Problem is diesels don't sell well in the US. They run a
> > little different, smell a little different, feel a little different,
> > need a little different care,
>
> Here in Kansas City, you see F-250 Powerstrokes everywhere.
> My local dealer always has a very large number of these on
> their lot.

My problem is I have to buy a $35,000 F250 to get a diesel. I don't
really need something that big. It would be nice to be able to get a
300 CI diesel in an F150 or that European diesel Ranger, but nothing
like that is offered in the US by any manufacturer.

In article .com>, Nemisis wrote:

> Interesting, because having just visited Ford of Germany's website, the
> only available engine in the Ranger is a 2.5 L turbo-diesel. How tough
> would it be to bring that truck here?

Very. The oil companies do not produce diesel fuel in the US clean enough
(low enough in sulfur) to run them. That is slowly changing.

Tom Adkins wrote:
> Nemisis wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> What I'd really like to see is a Ranger with a small diesel. Something
>> with
>> 200-250 ft-lbs of torque. The V-6 doesn't get significantly different
>> gas mileage than the F-150.
>>
>> Mark
>>
> I agree. Problem is diesels don't sell well in the US. They run a
> little different, smell a little different, feel a little different,
> need a little different care, YAAHH I can't handle change, I'll stay
> with what I'm familiar with!! I don't wanna change...! I'll just stay in
> my comfort zone and pay for gas.
> We, as a whole in the US, are so used to gasoline powered engines that
> we are afraid of anything new (different).
> I had the chance to drive the prototype of the GM EV-1 (Battery
> Powered) back in the late 80s, called the Impact. It was amazing!! As a
> Prototype it lacked creature comforts like AC, power accessories,
> stereo, etc. It would gate a Corvette of that vintage and keep up
> respectably in a 1/4 mile race, had a range of ~200 miles, handled
> great, and looked pretty cool. GM morphed it into the EV-1. With styling
> changes and the addition of creature comforts, the range was lowered to
> about 80 miles per charge. IMHO, it was still viable as a commuter
> vehicle, as the average commute to work and back is ~28 miles last I
> read. The EV-1 died a quick death once the CARB "0" Emissions mandate
> was overturned.
> I would have bought an EV-1 if it had been available in Northern Ohio
> back then. I would now buy a diesel powered car\truck if available in my
> "need" range from the domestic auto makers, like the Ranger you mention.
> Sadly, none are available.


What about those 80's Toyota's with the diesels, were they landcruisers
or what.. i still see some of those (quite a surprising number for how
many would have been here to begin with) running quite well it seems.

"Brent P" > wrote in message
...
> In article .com>,
> Nemisis wrote:
>
>> Interesting, because having just visited Ford of Germany's website, the
>> only available engine in the Ranger is a 2.5 L turbo-diesel. How tough
>> would it be to bring that truck here?
>
> Very. The oil companies do not produce diesel fuel in the US clean enough
> (low enough in sulfur) to run them. That is slowly changing.

Actually, that will change in 2007 when new regulations go into effect.

Jeff

"Tom Adkins" > wrote in message
...
> Nemisis wrote:
>> Tom Adkins wrote:
>>
>>>Nemisis wrote:
>
>>
>> Jeep offers a diesel in their Liberty, but with automatic tranny only.
>> Being a die-hard clutch & stick fan, I did not even consider the
>> Liberty as a viable option.
>
> Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that.
>
They've already canceled it.

Getting back to the thread, I agree that a small truck with a deisel would
be a good thing to market in the states. Right now that would sell. They
don't really make small trucks at all any more. I get autoweek, and they had
a long-term Nissan Frontier (not a Titan) and that was getting 14 mpg, about
half what Nissan pickups used to get 15 years ago.

Obviously there's an opportunity there.

"Joe" > wrote in message
...
>
> Getting back to the thread, I agree that a small truck with a deisel would
> be a good thing to market in the states. Right now that would sell. They
> don't really make small trucks at all any more. I get autoweek, and they
had
> a long-term Nissan Frontier (not a Titan) and that was getting 14 mpg,
about
> half what Nissan pickups used to get 15 years ago.
>
> Obviously there's an opportunity there.
>
>
The big problem is diesel perceptions, some of which are true,
One their noisy, no doubt about that at all. The duramax is a lot
quieter than the power stroke and the cummins, but its still noisy,
especially'
when its cold and first started. The mercedes were noisy, the little Isuzu
diesel
used in the pup trucks, I-Mark, Chevette was a clattering beast, which a
lousy
valve train. VW was noisy, and if the timing belt broke trashed the
engine(The Isuzu
trashed the cylinder head)
They are expensive to repair. again true, however given proper maintenance
they
don't need repairs often.
They smell, cant argue that one at all, diesels stink.
On the repair front, they hard to get fixed, in that not every garage is
going to be able to work
on one that wont start. That's true only in the shade tree arena

while the general public has gotten better about oil changes, things like
air filters and with a diesel, fuel filters have not gotten better. We all
know the fastest way to shut a diesel down is feed it some dirty or water
contaminated fuel.

Whitelightning

Brent P wrote:
> In article .com>, Nemisis wrote:
>
> > Interesting, because having just visited Ford of Germany's website, the
> > only available engine in the Ranger is a 2.5 L turbo-diesel. How tough
> > would it be to bring that truck here?
>
> Very. The oil companies do not produce diesel fuel in the US clean enough
> (low enough in sulfur) to run them. That is slowly changing.

OK, explain what the sulfer content of the fuel has to do with these
Euro diesels.
Just curious to know as most of the old diesels would run on almost
anything.