2012 Volkswagen Passat TDI Sets Single-Tank Diesel Distance Record

[AVANTI R5]

A 2012 Volkswagen Passat TDI has set the record for the longest distance driven in a single passenger car on a single tank of clean diesel fuel. The Passat was a stock vehicle with six-speed manual transmission. John and Helen Taylor, experts in fuel-efficient driving techniques, drove in the record-breaking effort.

Over the course of the three-day, 1626-mile (2,615.79 km) journey, the Taylors averaged 84.1 miles per gallon (2.8 L/100km). The trip started May 3 in Houston, and covered nine states before ending in Sterling, Virginia.
To simulate real-world conditions, the Taylors brought along 120 pounds (54.43 kg) of luggage, and drove during daylight hours to experience normal traffic scenarios. The couple also did not travel more than 14 hours in a single day.

The vehicle’s 2.0-liter TDI Clean Diesel inline four-cylinder engine produces 140 horsepower, and 236 pound-feet of torque. The Passat has an EPA-estimated 43 mpg (5.47 L/100km) on the highway, and is also equipped with a Selective Catalytic Reduction System (SCR). The 2012 Volkswagen Passat TDI was built at the world’s only LEED Platinum certified automotive factory, in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

The previous record was set by a Volkswagen Passat 1.6 BlueMotion diesel at 1526.6 miles (2,456.82 km)

* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

[White out]

Just brought this up in the office and the secretary thought that diesel didn't get good mpg because she has never heard of a truck owner speaking positively about mpg. Herein lyes one of the problems with Diesel's in the US.

Nick

[subyski]

I'm just going to quote one of my previous posts in another thread:

Originally Posted by subyski

What continues to add to the "phobia" is the lack of diesel options and advertising in the U.S. market and that most Americans think of diesels are for trucks. If we pull out Trucks and Luxury Brands (Audi, MB, BMW), what diesels are available and priced for the common person? VW and VW. Well, what if I don't want a VW, well, I guess it's gas. So in turn, the manufacturers are fueling the lack of interest because there is a lack of options. Yet, manufacturers keep watching diesel sales before making a decision.

[Integra96]

84mpg?

[shikataganai]

Originally Posted by Integra96

84mpg?

Average of 45 mph, likely all lugging along in top gear or with pulse and glide techniques?

[b4wantab]

Yup, 1626 miles by 3 days of 14 hours max = 39 MPH.

No way they passed 50 MPH. That sounds brutal.

Peace,

Greg

[Calamity Jesus]

Originally Posted by shikataganai

Average of 45 mph, likely all lugging along in top gear or with pulse and glide techniques?

While tailgating a Dodge Sprinter.

[Yotsuya]

I was going to say, I thought the expected range of that car was supposed to be around 800 miles per tank of driving.

[sn13]

I drive 100 miles a day on interstate traffic. Even though I travel at 70mph, my average speed when I compare Miles driven to Hours driven, is 45mph. That's over a 100 hour timer via my onboard computer (timer runs while car is on). Traveled 4500 miles... 45mph... And I'm trying to go as fast as possible without getting a ticket.

[Skylab]

Out of boredom's sake, I tailgated a semi on the way home form work recently.
I got 57mpg going 65mph over a 20 mile section of freeway in my Golf TDI. Cheating, yes. But, if you aren't in a hurry, diesels can achieve unbelievable MPG's.

My best tank was 653 miles. I filled up in Monterey, Ca. Drove to San Francisco, and back to San Diego. I was definitely speeding going down the grapevine, with the A/C on most of the time in 95*F heat.

For the short term, diesels make more sense...to me at least. Torque kicks ass.

[shikataganai]

57 miles from a gallon of diesel equates to 51 miles from a gallon of gasoline, BTU-wise, or 52 gas mpg adjusting for price. Maintaining 57 mpg for 20 miles is impressive, I agree… but here's 49.8 mpg (on regular gas) maintained over 280 miles, most of it on the interstate save for the last 20 minutes, with A/C/stereo/HIDs/etc. all on and cranking away:



Mileage declined slightly later on after the stellar last 20 minutes or so in traffic, and was 49.1 mpg when my wife filled up the car later that week. The little green cars each denote regeneration of 50 Wh of electricity.

[lawn boy]

i can't get over how generic and boring the new passat and jetta look

[daveyboy]

And as an added bonus, being a VW, think of all the additional fuel you'll save while its in the shop for repairs!!

Incredible MPG, love the idea of a diesel, but was already burned owning a VW Passat... .

[Vostok 7]

I had a coworker that set one of the previous records for distance with an ancient diesel VW Rabbit Pickup.

[gggplaya]

Originally Posted by shikataganai

57 miles from a gallon of diesel equates to 51 miles from a gallon of gasoline, BTU-wise, or 52 gas mpg adjusting for price. Maintaining 57 mpg for 20 miles is impressive, I agree… but here's 49.8 mpg (on regular gas) maintained over 280 miles, most of it on the interstate save for the last 20 minutes, with A/C/stereo/HIDs/etc. all on and cranking away:



Mileage declined slightly later on after the stellar last 20 minutes or so in traffic, and was 49.1 mpg when my wife filled up the car later that week. The little green cars each denote regeneration of 50 Wh of electricity.

Yea, but you drive a prius hahahahaha

Anyways kidding aside, you also have to factor in the cost of you battery pack and how it declines in capacity over the course of several years. My coworker has a prius, the battery isn't much of anything now over the course of 6 years. His fuel mileage is about the same as any of the current econo gasoline only cars.

Whereas diesels due to a heavy iron block and heavier components designed for the extra torque, usually last much longer than comparable gasoline engines.

So for diesels the price of entry is higher, but maintains and eventually the extra cost pays for itself down the road. The turbo is probably the only extra part needing maintence as compared to gasoline. Although the trend for gasoline is small displacement turbo's so that point is moot. I did the math, and at about $150k miles you would break even if you consider about $3k more for a diesel engine as opposed to the gasoline counterpart.

Hybrids have a high cost of entry, the rewards dwindle over time as you lose battery capacity, and you have to pay to refurbish cells in the battery pack which is currently about $800 per cell in the prius, about $3k for a new refurb battery pack. I don't think you can actually buy the car and make up for the extra cost unless you simply trade it in when the battery pack goes. Not an ideal investment IMO, i usually run my cars until the wheels fall off.

Moral of the story, unless you plan on keeping the car for a very long time(over $150k miles), the benefits do not outweigh the extra costs. Many people buying these cars usually trade up when their payments end, so neither hybrid nor diesel make sense unless they cost the same as their gasoline counterpart. But if you're like me, and don't like to have paid off vehicles for a while, diesel makes sense by a hybrid still won't.

[shikataganai]

Your stories about Prii having diminished performance and requiring battery replacement simply don't hold up to scrutiny.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/m...rightYear=2012



Furthermore, my wife's Prius, as in the one behind that 49.8 mpg photo from this week, has 102,000 miles on it.

[neg_matnik]

Originally Posted by daveyboy

And as an added bonus, being a VW, think of all the additional fuel you'll save while its in the shop for repairs!!

Incredible MPG, love the idea of a diesel, but was already burned owning a VW Passat... .

Which is exactly why we need other manufacturers to enter the fray. Some people just won't buy a VW regardless of what they are offering .
In my case, I tried to get my wife to buy a Jetta Sportwagen TDI instead of the Forester that we now own but she couldn't stand the looks of the Sportwagen.

[gggplaya]

Originally Posted by shikataganai

Your stories about Prii having diminished performance and requiring battery replacement simply don't hold up to scrutiny.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/m...rightYear=2012



Furthermore, my wife's Prius, as in the one behind that 49.8 mpg photo from this week, has 102,000 miles on it.

I attribute that to the low weight of the vehicle for the era at 2700lbs, and the small 1.5L engine. How it got 2 more mpg city while old as compared to new is beyond me. 2000 miles is enough to break in the engine, and 200,000 should have a deterioted battery. NIMH Batteries just don't last 10 years of repeated use and have the same capacity, only iron edison batteries can do that. NIMH just doesn't work that way. So owners of gen1 prius's may never realize a diminish in MPG.

By law in a few states including mine, hybrids have a 10 year 150k mile warranty, but an 8 year 100k mile minimum. Toyota has replaced and refurbished packs, but they won't publish anywhere the exact figure. So until that time runs out on gen II's we won't see as many people complaining on the internet. And yes, i know there are cabbies driving prius, but they put on 200k miles in 2 years. But age of the battery also has an affect.

But even if you maintain full efficiency of your hybrid in 150k miles, you still only break even at that point assuming a $3k price difference in vehicle cost at today's gas prices. That breakeven point of course gets lower in mileage as gas prices go up.

[sizemic1]

Surprised the HPFP didn't blow up 100miles into their trip.

[AVANTI R5]

Originally Posted by neg_matnik

Which is exactly why we need other manufacturers to enter the fray. Some people just won't buy a VW regardless of what they are offering .
In my case, I tried to get my wife to buy a Jetta Sportwagen TDI instead of the Forester that we now own but she couldn't stand the looks of the Sportwagen.

Before I swapped the K3 to K4, I was getting 612 on 17 gallons (36mpg) on 87 not bad for 3600Lb AWD car (A4) with low rolling Pirrelli's. About 26/27 in the city.. Been more reliable then any of my past decade Subaru's.

[arghx7]

You guys are living in la-la land. Diesel engines are only going to get more expensive to buy and more troublesome to maintain in the future. You will not see a significant increase in market penetration in the US and you may see headwinds in Europe.

It's simple. The emissions equipment costs too much money when you consider how efficient gas engines are getting. If someone has to choose between a downsized turbo gas engine and a turbo diesel, with like 4mpg and thousands of dollars difference (plus urea injection etc), they're not going to jump on the diesel.

As I explained in another thread: gas engines, as currently implemented, only need conventional cats. Diesels need all sorts of stuff and it's only going to get worse. The major OEM's are not planning on aggressively expanding diesel offerings in the US. It doesn't make much sense, no matter what people on the internet say.

[hkerekes]

Originally Posted by arghx7

You guys are living in la-la land. Diesel engines are only going to get more expensive to buy and more troublesome to maintain in the future. You will not see a significant increase in market penetration in the US and you may see headwinds in Europe.

It's simple. The emissions equipment costs too much money when you consider how efficient gas engines are getting. If someone has to choose between a downsized turbo gas engine and a turbo diesel, with like 4mpg and thousands of dollars difference (plus urea injection etc), they're not going to jump on the diesel.

As I explained in another thread: gas engines, as currently implemented, only need conventional cats. Diesels need all sorts of stuff and it's only going to get worse. The major OEM's are not planning on aggressively expanding diesel offerings in the US. It doesn't make much sense, no matter what people on the internet say.

An egr and def injection = all sorts of stuff? Many manufacturers are starting to get rid of the Diesel Particulate Filters now that Diesel Exhaust Fluid is being mandated.

[Skylab]

Currently, 87 octane unleaded is $4.39/gal at the Shell station. Their diesel is $4.29/gal

I don't care about the VW maintenance you guys are whining about. The TDI's hold their value around my part of the country. Maybe your VW had issues, mine doesn't.

[gpshumway]

Originally Posted by hkerekes

An egr and def injection = all sorts of stuff? Many manufacturers are starting to get rid of the Diesel Particulate Filters now that Diesel Exhaust Fluid is being mandated.

Take a look at a schematic of the EGR system (or rather systems) in the VW diesels. There's a low pressure circuit for off-boost running and a high pressure circuit for boosted running. Both require valves controlled by the ECU. It's a lot more complicated than the EGR in your gasoline car.

Getting rid of DPF? Not something I've heard of. Most diesel cars today have both urea injection and DPF, they address different emissions. DPF is for particulates (soot), urea is for NOx. Is Diesel Exhaust Fluid different from urea?

[arghx7]

Originally Posted by hkerekes

An egr and def injection = all sorts of stuff? Many manufacturers are starting to get rid of the Diesel Particulate Filters now that Diesel Exhaust Fluid is being mandated.

Here's a basic rule about diesel emissions: generally speaking there is a tradeoff between NOx emissions and particulate/soot emissions. Particulates consist of soot (carbon compounds) and other junk in the combustion chamber like oil. On a gas engine, the tradeoff is between HC/CO & NOx emissions. When you reduce one, you increase the other unless you apply some new technology.

For a diesel, to decrease soot/particulate emissions you can advance the injection timing, but that increases NOx emissions. You can increase injection pressure, but that also increases NOx emissions. To decrease NOx emissions, you can retard the injection timing or decrease the injection pressure, but that leads to higher soot/particulate emissions. You also have problems with noise. Depending on injection timing and the mass of fuel injected, you get a high rate of pressure increase inside the cylinder. This contributes to the characteristic diesel noise.

What's been happening over the past 10 years or so is that you see adoption of the following strategies and technologies:

1) High injection pressure to reduce soot/particulates, up to a point anyway. The rest is handled by a particulate filter which needs to be regenerated as it gets clogged up.
2) High rates of cooled EGR to reduce NOx emissions. This involves either/or/both low pressure EGR (sourced after the turbo) and high pressure (sourced before the turbo) EGR. This doesn't solve the NOx problem completely; selective catalytic reduction (Urea injection) and/or a lean NOx trap also reduce NOx.
3) Expensive injection systems that can fire many times per cycle. This keeps noise down in part by keeping the pressure from rising too fast.
4) Complex and expensive turbo systems. The problem is that high EGR rates make sizing a turbo very difficult--during EGR operation there is much less mass flow through the turbocharger. So that requires variable vane turbos, and various 2-stage arrangements--something like the compound turbos BMW uses, or two stage compressor variable-vane single turbos like Ford uses.

All this costs money, and regulations are only getting tighter. It's even more expensive in the American market because California OBD regulations require more development time to make sure the diagnostic monitors work.

Meanwhile, a small turbo gas engine with a basic direct injection system can get away with just regular catalytic converters and doesn't have the same noise and smoke concerns. Of course they aren't as fuel efficient, but when you throw cost into the discussion the diesels have big drawbacks for many high volume and low-cost market segments for consumer (non-commercial) use.