Grant's Auto Rants

Diesel Engines: The "Black" Sheep of Automotive

Recent changes in energy prices have brought the magnifying glass back to fuel efficiency technologies. Such is the normal cycle, as seen during previous oil embargoes and perceived shortages. This latest examination, however, also illustrates what we can only consider two very different "marketing campaigns." Not that these two campaigns have different objectives -- they are both aimed at selling vehicles -- yet one has garnered all the fanfare and focus of the "good son," while the other seems to attract little attention, choosing rather to sit off in the corner.

When you boil it down, it's really about a contest between Toyota (Hybrids), with all the success of its brand over the last several years, combined with all the marketing clout and ad dollars that come with it, against a small band of merry "oil burners."

Playing the role of Robin Hood is the VW Golf/Jetta platform, which is the best selling diesel (car) in North America, leaving the pickup workhorses (Big John) aside for the moment.

If you think this looks like a very lopsided affair, well, you're right. Here, hybrid technology is brand new and has backing from those automotive and environmental experts: Leonardo DiCaprio and Ted Danson. Meanwhile, diesels live with the same legacy of that one Uncle in the family who still smokes. And trust me, all that soot has some real staying power (how do you think that one black sheep got its infamous hue? He drove a diesel).

When one considers the traditional combustion engine vs. hybrid vs. diesel question, a person’s underlying motive for driving must first be addressed, as it is often comprised of several different factors including financial, environmental, practical, and social (trendy) concerns. Each technology has its advantages and disadvantages, as well as overlaps in performance. So which is really best?

As there are so many factors involved, I won’t even try to answer this question; besides, I find the PR machine that labels these systems cool, un-cool, practical, impractical, etc. much more fascinating. Specifically, why hasn’t diesel technology taken off more than it has?

In reality, new diesel technology bares only a slight resemblance to the smokers of old. Developments on both sides of the pump have lead to a technology that offers the majority (if slightly different) of performance benefits of traditional engines. And if there are any lingering questions as to whether or not diesels are more pollutant, the full introduction of low sulfur diesel over the next year or so will definitively answer them.

If you care, diesel fuel is refined from crude oil the same way that gasoline, kerosene, jet fuel, and other fuels are, with the difference that diesel refining is simpler (read cheaper) than the other processes. The fact that diesel prices rise with crude prices is understandable, however why diesel pricing has recently begun to mirror gasoline prices is a very interesting question for Dubya and the rest of his Big Oil cronies.

The low-sulfur diesel being phased in will cut down on additional air born contaminants, which have traditionally given diesels the black-eye image they continue to carry today. On the vehicle side, common rail technology and Urea-laden particulate filters both increase performance while substantially lowering nitrogen oxide pollution.

Incidentally, the common rail technology is essentially the use of multiple, controlled injections of fuel during the combustion cycle versus what is essentially a short stream. Technology aside, though, some other very interesting points to consider are as follows:

Diesel technology is widely used for passenger vehicles around the rest of the world, but here in the U.S., it's raison d'être is primarily heavy duty and industrial use (Canada and Mexico both use considerably more diesel for passenger cars on a percentage basis). In 2004, you could count the number of available passenger diesel models for sale in the U.S. on one hand.

In addition to the fuel being cheaper to refine and offering up to 40% more fuel efficiency than traditional engines, the premium on a diesel vehicle is generally nominal over the gas-burning versions, unlike other current alternatives.

Performance of newer vehicles matches and even exceeds that of some gasoline models. Additionally, the low-end torque provided by a diesel is arguably the most appropriate delivery of power for North American driving conditions, which is a combination of "stop-and-go" versus highway cruising.

Finally, diesel fuel is readily available with a complete infrastructure, and -- barring politics -- consistent pricing. Also, diesel engines generally can run on bio-diesel, which while still in its infancy as a consumer product (due to limited availability and scale) offers a local source of energy with even fewer environmental and political concerns.

With all of these advantages, still only a small percentage of total U.S. auto sales are of the non-spark variety. It must come down to marketing, which brings up another very interesting point. GM, for example, has missed the boat entirely on hybrid technology and goes as far as to mock hybrids with its recent Charger campaign. This is partially due to pride, but more importantly, the company made one critical assumption that is the basis for most economic theory: People always act logically.

All of the marketing and social pressure can easily push people out of a sound decision for one reason or another. Even if the information that hybrid technologies don’t make financial sense is widely available and that it may simply transfer environmental impacts from operation to production, it doesn’t stop people from lining up to buy a Prius or RX 400h. That's not logic.

Diesel technology is no more perfect that hybrid technology. Engineers claim that they can still wring a few more miles out of traditional combustion engines, but that's nowhere near perfect, either. From what we have seen, it may not matter which one is best anyway, but rather which marketing scheme you happen to buy into. At the end of the day, you must live with the car day in and day out. Your perception is your reality. If it works for you, then the rest really doesn’t matter.

Until that diesel hybrid comes out, that is. 

3 German Stooges

If there ever was a time when the German marques were able to rest on their laurels and the terms “European” and “import” actually held some caché, this isn’t it.

With new brands showing up to fill niche markets in the most unlikely of places (even British icon MG has found a new suitor, though I hope they like Szechuan), long gone are the days when all you had to be was somehow different from the heavy metal coming out of Detroit either in style or size to make a name for yourself.

To generalize just a bit, that charge was led in North America by all those Mercedes-Benz diesels filling the luxury group, and offset at the other end of the economic spectrum by the ubiquitous Beetle, with a trickle of BMWs and Porsches for the sport-conscious doctor or lawyer. It seemed like a nice equilibrium, in which everyone had there own place and we could go on in harmony satisfying the needs of anyone longing for their European roots.

Today’s landscape, however, looks quite different. Why is it that all the manufacturers have to be everything to everyone? Even the once-boutique firms known for their specialty vehicles have long given in to chasing numbers (either sales volume or stock price) in lieu of continuing their trademark craft. What will the “classics” of tomorrow look like?

Consider for just a moment the current state of Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen, or even BMW. Their current affairs and concerns are such a departure from their storied pasts that it isn't surprising that they've lost their way. Sure they have grown and prospered, but all have recently taken their eye off the ball (or even more critically, the customer) -- with disastrous results.

The least egregious offense comes from BMW, even though just about anyone who has ever seen its blue and white emblem seems to have a very vocal opinion regarding the “unique” styling cues of recent Bangle designs. The BMW purists in particular have weighed in very heavily on the trunks of the 5 and 6 Series cars -- and don’t even mention the 7 series to them without first being outfitted with some sort of protection.

What BMW did was rush forward with innovative design, which one wouldn’t think would be considered a bad thing, however they did so without the full consent of their target audience. People were demanding Chris Bangle’s head even before the redesigns reached showrooms, but the folks in Munich simply shrugged these die-hards off as small faction of especially enthusiastic owners.

The reason I say this isn’t too terrible a foul is that, first off, BMW does (at least now) understand the power of its customer base and has taken steps to quell the public outcry with subtle tweaks. Secondly (iDrive excluded), the aesthetic design of the cars has not negatively affected the essence of a BMW, which is performance-minded luxury. Its vehicles are more potent than they have ever been before, and its record sales in the face of criticism are a testament to this.

The next culprit of consumer negligence is Mercedes-Benz. Just how does one go from being the undisputed champion of bulletproof engineering and design to the scrap heap right alongside the defunct Yugo in terms of reliability? I guess the MB story of hero to zero is a case of the "larger they are, the harder…they are to keep running."

Do they have an excuse? Well, yes and no. Obviously they had that little distraction of turning around one of Detroit’s big three, which was hardly a small task. Taking your eye off your firstborn however, and devoting all resources to Chrysler is like Michael Jordan leaving basketball at the height of his career to go play baseball… oh wait, bad example. Anyway, you get the idea; there were plenty of people warning against the “merger” right from the get go, and the best way they can spell “I told you so” is L-E-X-U-S.

The last example I have of how dangerous it is to forget your "peeps" (or in this case, "Volks") is, of course, Volkswagen. Now, here is a company that has made a living on providing the right car, at the right place, at the right time. On the one hand, it holds the record for the highest volume car ever produced. On the other, it recorded a loss of $1.3 billion (yes, that's with a “b”) in North America last year. Apparently it is either feast or famine with these guys.

As much as I believe in the work hard, play hard mantra, employee issues, recall disasters, and poor model replacement schedule have really taken their toll on VW. Now, Mr. Hunt has announced a 22-member task force (dubbed Moonraker -- no kidding) to take 13 months and basically hoot it up across North America for over a year. The idea is that such a sabbatical will provide a clear strategy and vision for the company’s future offering stateside.

Granted, it's probably a good idea to have authentic Germans who have seen things firsthand report back to the men in Wolfsburg. But the sad part is that Volkswagen owners have been some of the most devoted and vocal in the industry. To not hear them is to not have ears. They want affordable, reliable, transportation with personality…and that’s about it. As awesome as the Touareg and Phaeton are, the people don’t care for this push up-market. They asked for a new Microbus and you gave them a car Gerhard Schroeder rides around in.

Most importantly, these customers want to grow with the company’s products. There is simply no excuse for stretching product life cycles out as far as they have been recently, especially with the amount of shared platforms and access to the Audi parts bin. The new designs look good, but why on earth would you launch the next generation Passat within weeks of the all-new Jetta? Does staggering the product development cycles and launches not smooth the company’s cash flow stream, making it easier to invest in future R&D, deal with labor riffs, and invest in China?

It seems the company in the best shape may be Audi, which is remarkable when you consider what has gone on in their front office over the last year or so. It just goes to show you that people don’t buy cars because Juergen Schrempp or Bernd Pichetsreider or Wolfgang Bernhard is at the helm of the company. Heck, it could be Bernhard Langer for all anyone cares; it’s really about how the cars makes the driver feel on the way home from the office after a very long day.

Maybe Audi’s task to combat its tarnished image in North America somehow provided a single goal or effort for everyone to identify with and work toward. Well, if the others needed a catalyst, they sure have one now. Many of us are eagerly awaiting your climb back up to the top.

Wenn Sie noch Meinungen brauchen, ruf mir doch mal an.