Is buying a diesel car really worth it?

"MojoMotors.com" (MojoMotors)
08/20/2014 at 17:15 • Filed to: diesel

We already looked at if buying a hybrid was worth it !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! . In the comment section of that article, folks asked about diesels. We went ahead and ran the numbers to see how many miles need to be driven until the added cost of a diesel saves you money over the non-diesel.

- Average of 125,000 miles driven to break even on added cost of hybrid trim

- Average of 96,000 miles driven to break even on added cost of a diesel trim

- Average hybrid trim costs $4,100 more than non-hybrid trim

- Average diesel trim costs $2,100 more than non-diesel trim

- 12 is the average MPG increase of a hybrid trim over non-hybrid trim

- 6 is the average MPG increase of a diesel trim over non-diesel trim

We conducted this study in a similar fashion to the hybrid study. We found models available with both diesel and traditional unleaded gasoline engines, equipped them comparably and then found the difference in MSRP. We calculated how many miles someone would have to drive a diesel car for the savings in fuel consumption to outweigh the increased price. The only real difference between the two studies is accounting for the cost of diesel fuel.

As you can see, most of the cars we analyzed start saving you money before the 100,000 mile mark or shortly after. Of course, there are outliers. What isn't shown on the infographic is the Volkswagen Jetta which we couldn't fit because you would have to drive a staggering 848,057 miles to make up for the added cost of the diesel model.So, unless you plan on driving to the moon and back twice, don't count on the Jetta to save you money.

Another outlier from our analysis is the Jeep Grand Cherokee, which you would have to drive a total of 189,124 miles to make up for the extra cost. But keep in mind, the diesel engine in the Jeep puts out 420ft lbs of torque. Compared to the 260ft lbs from the unleaded gasoline V6, it might be worth shelling out the extra dough.

Despite the outliers, diesel cars fared much better in the analysis than the hybrids overall except for MPG. The average mileage the hybrids in our study needed to be driven before breaking even is about 125,000 miles (this number does not take into account abysmal BMW Active3). For diesels, this number is about 96,000. Plus, diesels cost significantly less to maintain. However, if you're looking to buy a new car and only expect own it for a couple years, it might pay to know how many miles you really need to drive.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

!!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

DISCUSSION (76)

Diesel > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:19

So you're saying that the BMW is most economical? Also, you are only referring to saved fuel costs, assuming that maintenance is equal?

Brian Silvestro > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:21

Hey my mom just got that last car on the list! yay

MonkeePuzzle > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:22

where's the diesel hybrids chart?

MojoMotors.com > Diesel
08/20/2014 at 17:22

Maintenance wasn't factored. Based on only the difference in price and MPG of a diesel VS non-diesel, BMW is the best value.

MonkeePuzzle > Diesel
08/20/2014 at 17:22

turns out this is a complicated issue that depends on many factors and not just those addressed by a single chart

bet you were disappointed the chart didn't include your picture

mcseanerson > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:22

It gets even worse if you compare different models of economy petrol cars to economy diesel cars. A Fiesta Ecoboost for instance is $7,000 cheaper than a Golf TDI and gets nearly the same mileage.

MojoMotors.com > MonkeePuzzle
08/20/2014 at 17:23

Nice one.

CRider > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:24

Are you getting your FE numbers from the EPA ratings or a site like Fuelly that tells you what people are really getting?

GhostZ > Diesel
08/20/2014 at 17:25

I think it's saying that the BMW's diesel trim is the least expensive relative to its gas savings, over its base trim. So it's a combination of fuel economy AND low cost for the high-MPG option. It doesn't really compare between models as much as it is comparing the difference between trims, between models.

I'd like to see a line chart that plotted overall operating cost monthly, and cumulative expense from that, but this is still a very good data set!

Manuél Ferrari > Brian Silvestro
08/20/2014 at 17:25

She should have got an E90 M3. WAY better mileage

GhostZ > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:25

This is awesome. Someone with more twitter clout than I should try and get this on the front page, this type of comparison between trim levels of almost never done mathematically.

Diesel > MonkeePuzzle
08/20/2014 at 17:26

I was.

dickbutt.jpg

KylesPerGallon > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:27

What about the Volt, owners use so little gas that the engine is forced to turn over to stay fresh.

MojoMotors.com > CRider
08/20/2014 at 17:27

OEM data.

crowmolly > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:31

Love the chart, and the research objective!

Here's the 'but' you may have expected:

1.) Did you use the EPA combined number?

2.) In my experience diesel vehicles tend to over deliver on MPG estimates as opposed to gas which is usually at or lower than advertised. You might get a different result using real world data. I'd be really curious to see how that works out!

MojoMotors.com > crowmolly
08/20/2014 at 17:33

1. Combined.

2. Real world data would definitely change this chart.

GhostZ > mcseanerson
08/20/2014 at 17:33

I think the problem with that is that the $7000 isn't all going into the diesel technology or marketing. It's going into the difference build on the Golf.

This chart doesn't say buy these cars as much as it says if you do buy these cars, the diesel option is only cheaper after XXX many miles, if you drive less than those, don't buy the Diesel .

I look at it as being set on a 3-series, but not knowing whether to get a diesel or gasoline version.

GhostZ > KylesPerGallon
08/20/2014 at 17:34

Volt doesn't have a non-hybrid (or a diesel) trim, so it would be irrelevant to this article, which says more plainly if you're getting these cars, this is the point where a more efficient trim becomes better. Not that these cars are overall cheaper than some other car that doesn't offer that trim.

mcseanerson > GhostZ
08/20/2014 at 17:44

I agree with that. The argument I present is someone who argues for diesel purely in the name of overall fuel economy it doesn't hold up well. If you want a Golf or a 3 series and simply want the most efficient model then by all means purchase the diesel if that is what you desire.

duurtlang > mcseanerson
08/20/2014 at 17:53

Well yes, and the Fiesta is far more than $7000 cheaper than a Passat TDI or the Cherokee diesel. Compare the Focus to the Golf.

nermal > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 17:53

You forgot the GLK250...

Also, for the Jeep you need to compare the cost to the V8, not to the V6.

At the end of the day, choosing a diesel vs gas car shouldn't be just about cost savings based on fuel usage. Other things to take into account include maintenance, reliability, and depreciation. The last one especially if you're leasing.

duurtlang > MonkeePuzzle
08/20/2014 at 17:55

From what I've read they're not doing all that great in real world economy compared to normal diesels. At least the PSA vehicles aren't, I'm not sure about the Volvo V60.

mcseanerson > duurtlang
08/20/2014 at 18:04

I'm comparing economy to economy. This is just an argument for the sake of what get's the best mileage nothing else matters. If we had tiny diesel hatchbacks in the US I'd compare to those.

anonsagainstanonymous > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 18:12

Saab 9-3.

+ £300
+9mpg(us)

Diesel £5.16 per us gallon
Petrol £4.97 per us gallon

9090,90 miles until I start saving money. Plus road tax is reduced by £80 per year.

Not much to save of course, but I can live with that.

RallyWrench > MojoMotors.com
08/20/2014 at 18:12

No doubt. I have lots of TDI VW clients who regularly see over 45-50mpg, whereas the gas cars rarely average over low 30's.

TheLOUDMUSIC- Put it in H! > MonkeePuzzle
08/20/2014 at 18:20

I've always wanted to see a bio-turbo-diesel hybrid with VVT and all of those goodies.

SamJackson > MonkeePuzzle
08/21/2014 at 09:56

Good call, that one will have to be next.

guppysb > MojoMotors.com
08/21/2014 at 16:45

When I was in Europe, diesel cars are heavily favored since diesel is significantly cheaper than gas there. I was paying close to $10 a gallon for E10 gas in France, when the diesel counterpart was only $6.50 a gallon (yes, I did all the conversions so you guys don't have to). Now, you also have to take into account the rising gasoline prices in the US. It's getting very close to that tipping point where diesel is cheaper than gasoline, and that will mean that more diesel cars enter or are produced in the US, and also more research into diesel engines. Diesel could be our future in the US, could be.....

StephenWuebker > nermal
08/21/2014 at 16:52

Agree on the Jeep. The torque of the diesel more closely compares with that of the hemi V8. If you are buying a JGC and need to tow a boat, you aren't going to be looking at the V6.

Another thing to consider is that you don't have to wait to tick over 100K on the odometer to see savings. The average cost to get a diesel variant ($2100) is paid for upfront. Generally with a loan. If you amortize that out for 5 years @ say 3%, the cost for a diesel version is just under $38 a month. Less than a tank of fuel. Average MPG increase of 6 means you can go an extra 90 miles on each tank (I used a 15 gallon tank). Based on my driving, I usually have to fill up once a week and get around 320 miles to a tank of gasoline (you probably get different results). So over the course of a month, I'd get about an extra tank's worth of mileage for less than the cost of an extra tank of fuel.

So while a diesel version won't completely pay for itself for nearly 100K miles, you do see savings immediately.

Hermann > MojoMotors.com
08/21/2014 at 19:01

As someone who grew up in a rural area, most people bought Diesel trucks. I remember one time GM put a giant billboard on the side of the road with a graph stating their new (revised actually) engines were the best option and had similar data stating you'd have to drive 60k miles to justify the price for the diesel.

This quickly became the subject of the moment on the local pub! Of course it did! And all diesel owners justified the maintenance costs alone were worth it. Mostly it was because the torque of the Diesel engines was obviously much better for rural work, but the maintenance (or lack of) was the main reason.

Is there any reliable data for costs to run each mile? Accounting fuel, maintenance, insurance, taxes...

EtrnL_Frost > MojoMotors.com
08/21/2014 at 19:19

One thing to point out is that this assumes diesel is more expensive than gas.

Problem is, when you're looking at >91 octane, diesel is actually less expensive than gas - and that's the octane recommended for many of these cars.

wallaby13 > MojoMotors.com
08/22/2014 at 01:46

I would really like to see a study that compares cars within a segment. Cars that a buyer might actually compare. Say the Prius, Jetta, Mazda3, civic, corrolla ect. Try to option them relatively the same with what an average buyer might choose and then do the comparison for a true ownership cost. You can use sites like TrueDelta to model vehicle reliability, and a quick call to dealerships should reveal a maintenance schedule and the associated costs. Then factor in depreciation based on the brand/model history, as well as accounting for finance rates, ect.

If you wanted to be even more ambitious you could build a simulation tool to allow buyers to adjust certain items for themselves, down payment, interest rate, and even City/Highway percentages.

MojoMotors.com > wallaby13
08/22/2014 at 08:20

Ambitious indeed.

anothermiatafanboy > MojoMotors.com
08/22/2014 at 10:52

Are you comparing combined or city or highway? Wondered the same with the hybrids.

bidou333 > MojoMotors.com
08/22/2014 at 16:24

This chart also fails to account for resale value, which is better for diesel than gas, at least for VWs. An mk4 diesel in the $1500 range is easily worth $3000 if all other things equal. The cars ability to retain value on resale is an added bonus that shouldn't be tossed aside either. That 100k miles on a Golf TDI could be reduced down to virtually nothing upon resale. Pay $2100 up front to get 75% of it back upon resale in 3, 5 or even 10 years? Yes please. In the case for VW as well, diesel engines have historically been more reliable than gas ones, saving money on the maintenance front as well, even if their scheduled maintenance can be a bit more costly, another area where you pay a bit more on the preventive side to save on costly breakdowns in the long-run.

Dusdaddy > MojoMotors.com
08/23/2014 at 10:08

Wonder how the diesel in the new Ram compares to the Hemi?

aruvqan-myers > crowmolly
08/24/2014 at 17:19

2006 diesel Jetta. 38 mpg in stop and go traffic. 43 on highway. No longer on any sort of warranty so I can run it on biodiesel. And I don't have the hazmat burden of manufacture waste stream or disposal of batteries. My only regret was that I could not find it in a manual, it is in that abyssmal faux manual automatic shit. Well, and it is in that grey green.

King_squid > MojoMotors.com
08/24/2014 at 17:42

One issue, the graph uses one cost for gas (regular) when at least the German cars shown take high octane. I just switched from a e61 530xi to a tdi touareg and went from $1.55 a liter at 11L/100 for the bmw to 8.6L/100km at $1.23 a liter for the touareg (in canada). you save money twice on a German vehicle diesel switch.

sadfasdf > MojoMotors.com
08/24/2014 at 19:13

What about resale value?

wallaby13 > MojoMotors.com
08/24/2014 at 20:32

The first 80% only requires 20% of the effort. The last 20% requires 80% of the effort. In reality the hardest part will be the depreciation/maintenance costs. Multipliers for downpayment, interest rate, and city/highway should be very easy to implement. Hell an excel spreadsheet would suffice.

DieNavinJohnson > MojoMotors.com
08/24/2014 at 22:00

Diesel costs about 10% more than regular where I live. It's fairly close in price to premium-but still a few cents a gallon more. It looks like most of the non-diesel comparison models use premium. Still, cents/dollars per mile would be a better comparison.

Alex87f > MojoMotors.com
08/25/2014 at 05:01

I don't know what makes you say a diesel costs less to maintain, but this is completely untrue.

I live in a country where 80% new cars are diesels, I've owned, driven, tracked and maintained a modern diesel, here's what I can say about this:

Modern diesels need more expensive oils, have a much higher stress level than gasoline engines and usually require other elements to be changed more often. Plus, the extra torque and low rpm power delivery increases wear on tires too. This results in higher maintenance costs than gasoline cars.
Also, reliability is usually not as good as their petrol counterparts (more complex engines). Last but not least, diesels being more expensive to buy, they're also more expensive to insure (higher value, simply), and more expensive to finance.

Alex87f > RallyWrench
08/25/2014 at 05:06

Not for all though.

I recently drove a 2014 Optima 2.4 for 2 000 miles, and got an average of 30mpg. This included city, highway, mountain roads, etc. With 3 people and luggage in the car, the A/C always on full, and temperatures usually between 80 and 110.

This is much higher than the advertised 27, despite bad conditions.

Alex87f > duurtlang
08/25/2014 at 05:07

Well they don't make much sense. If your engine is only going to run, say 40-50% of the time, it makes it that much harder to break even on the added costs of a diesel engine.

Alex87f > anonsagainstanonymous
08/25/2014 at 05:09

Power numbers?

Alex87f > StephenWuebker
08/25/2014 at 05:10

If you pay more upfront, that doesn't mean you start saving right now. You just spent more money.

Alex87f > wallaby13
08/25/2014 at 05:16

I remember seeing a similar comparison (all things included, over a 5 years ownership), for a TDI Golf 6 and its European 1.4 TSI equivalent (122hp).

Factor in the premium when buying, added maintenance and insurance costs, overall lower reliability, compensate with higher resale value and fuel savings (in an environment with $6/ga diesel and $7.5/ga petrol), and it turned out you needed to drive about 12-14 000 miles a year to break even, IIRC.

Sounds OK, until you realize the national average is about 9 500 miles / year.

Alex87f > MojoMotors.com
08/25/2014 at 05:25

Kinja'd!!!

You're comparing a 184hp diesel with a 245hp petrol car that's lighter. If you look at 0-60 times:

328d: 7.6s
328i: 6.0s
For comparison, 320i xdrive: 7.1s

Not exactly the same level of performance.

MojoMotors.com > Alex87f
08/25/2014 at 07:43

Analyzing the performance of a diesel versus petrol is a whole different study, but definitely an interesting slant.

duurtlang > Alex87f
08/25/2014 at 08:07

Depends on the market. In continental Europe diesel fuel is considerably cheaper than gasoline. The point I was trying to make was though that the difference in fuel economy between regular and hybrid gasoline vehicles appears to be larger than between regular diesel and hybrid diesel vehicles.

willconltd > MojoMotors.com
08/25/2014 at 10:43

Diesels have a higher resale value, so the cost of ownership is generally lower than the non-diesel counterparts. Plus you can go forever on a tank.

RallyWrench > Alex87f
08/25/2014 at 14:34

Definitely not for all. I only work on the Germans, and thus have limited feedback on others in real-world operation. It's always nice to hear of people exceeding the expected mileage without trying too hard. Much better than the recent spate of lower MPG claims & lawsuits.

wallaby13 > Alex87f
08/25/2014 at 20:51

I drive ~25,000 miles a year, my commute is 70 miles each day. Diesel is ~$3.8/ US Gallon, and gas is ~$3.6/gal. I bought a 2006 TDI, cheap on fuel, and less depreciation than a brand new car. It's saving me $1550 per year on fuel costs alone compared to my old ('96) Volvo. Not to mention the Jetta is 10x nicer, and more reliable.

Usually Consumer Reports will do a 5 year True Cost of Ownership in their comparisons which is handy.

Alex87f > wallaby13
08/26/2014 at 02:44

Your comparison is not very equal though. It's hard to compare an 8 years old sedan to an 18 years old other sedan.

While you might "save" $1 550 / year on fuel, how much did you have to add to get from your Volvo to your Passat? And how much more will the Passat depreciate compared to the Volvo, which, being 18 years old, had probably bottomed out in terms of resale value?

wallaby13 > Alex87f
08/26/2014 at 03:28

Jetta; the car cost me $10,000. The Volvo also needed ~$1,000 in A/C repair, as well as ~$1,500 in suspension/brake work (DIY). The Volvo was worth ~$1,500 as well. Over 2 years the Jetta would use $4200 in fuel to the Volvo's $73,00. The cars had roughly the same insurance, and fluid change costs, tire costs, so I'm leaving those out. Both cars would need a Timing belt, but I'd DIY the Volvo, and have a mechanic do the Jetta ($200 vs $800).
Jetta 2 year cost = $15,000
Volvo 2 year cost =$11,500

If the Volvo was still worth $1,500 I'd be at $10,000, and all the Jetta would owe me is $5000 to break even. The Jetta would be around 150K miles then. Since the older Mk4 tdi 5speed's are still bringing over $5,000 for cars @ 150K, I've decided 2 years is the break even point.

For sake of argument lets assume there was no repair cost to the Volvo (because I didn't tell you of them before). Then my break even point is around 3.5 years.

1.21 JIGGA WATTS!!! > MojoMotors.com
08/26/2014 at 22:12

Frankly, I think that while you're on this testing trend, test trucks. See which truck gets the best real world gas mileage (unless someone else already has). I'm talking extensive driving (big cities, 80/85 mph interstates, highways) while maintaining constant the big things. I know that Ram and Chevy throw out great numbers for fuel economy. But if you read the bottom, how many times does it say "V6, 2WD". I want someone to test the V8's, 4WD, extended cabs and give me honest numbers.

4play > MojoMotors.com
08/27/2014 at 16:07

The problem is that a lot of the time (especially with VW/Audi), the TDI version of the car has more/better options. For example, the TDI Sportwagen has many options that the regular 2.5S does not. So you really have to compare spec to spec to get a fair comparison.

smallblockelky > crowmolly
09/04/2014 at 10:58

couple weeks late here but yeah...you bring up a great point. Diesels tend to be criminally underrated in EPA testing. I know so many people who will easily get better than the EPA hwy rating in actual combined use.

schwartz > 1.21 JIGGA WATTS!!!
09/04/2014 at 11:34

www.fuelly.com is your answer for that...

durty > MojoMotors.com
09/04/2014 at 12:23

Another thing to take into account is that cars like the 535 take premium gasoline, which is not much of a price difference at all from diesel.

1.21 JIGGA WATTS!!! > schwartz
09/04/2014 at 12:57

I like it. I'll have to sign up and check it out. Thank you good sir!

dirtlumpio > MojoMotors.com
10/02/2014 at 11:31

your jeep comparison would be more apt if compared to the v8.

adonyc2014 > MojoMotors.com
10/02/2014 at 12:44

Don't forget that fuel economy is not the only reason that people buy diesels. Another reason is torque. Many people either need the torque that a diesel offers or prefer the feel of it.

Another aspect of people choosing diesels is the positional good factor, which is the exclusivity function of its ranking in desirability. For example, there are many well-healed people in the Hamptons who buy an Audi Q7 diesel (or similar) because of the exclusivity and certainly not to save a few cents per gallon.

adonyc2014 > Alex87f
10/02/2014 at 12:47

Who cares about 0-60. The diesel will easily keep up in traffic and not have to work as hard. And the advantage that the 328i has is negated as soon as it is carrying passengers. If you put 4 passengers plus luggage in each, the diesel will kill the gas and feel better for the driver.

His Stigness > MojoMotors.com
10/02/2014 at 16:50

And that's the problem. The EPA testing does not favor diesels so people are getting exponentially better mileage in the real world, as opposed to hybrids which get met much worse. I can break 50 MPG on my MKVI Golf TDI easily. And it's rated at 42 or so.

Moorebeer > MojoMotors.com
10/02/2014 at 17:03

The Mercedes-Benz E250 BlueTEC saves you $700 a year on fuel vs the E350 Gasoline. It also costs $500 LESS than the E350, and returns 10 mpg better fuel economy combined.

Alex87f > adonyc2014
10/03/2014 at 03:10

Well if you're buying a $40 000 BMW I guess you have some sort of interest in performance. And 0-60 reflects overall performance, too. 1.6s is a huge difference (about the difference between a Fiesta ST and a Boxster S..)

Also I don't see how it won't have to work as hard as the 328i's engine in order to keep up with traffic? It will spin at a higher percentage of its max RPM. Plus, the torque differential isn't that big. 255lb. ft for the 328i vs. 280lb. ft for the 328d. And the 328 has been repeatedly measured with 255+ tq at the wheels (so about 280 at the crank).

And no, four passengers won't make up for the performance difference. I've owned and driven diesels and there's nothing worse than a manual diesel full of people. That "lazy" part of the RPM's where the turbo hasn't spooled up yet becomes a gaping hole you can't get out of. Much more than in a petrol car, even turbocharged.

As I was saying the 320i would be a more adequate car to compared the 328d with.

DWFMBA > MojoMotors.com
10/03/2014 at 09:45

Yes there's the quantifiable money metric, but there's also the fact that early adopters (Its hilarious that I'm calling them early adopters in 2014 #America) of Diesels are helping to change a trend and provide alternatives to gasoline powered inefficiency... Back to $, as mentioned below, maintenance costs of a TDI vs a comparable petrol (or hybrid for that matter) are another thing to consider.

1UZ > MojoMotors.com
10/14/2014 at 01:10

I have a vw passat tdi se, and this is nonsense. If i were to drive a passat v6 like i do my passat, it would get 15 mpg. I cannot force my tdi to get less than 30 and i spin the tires at almost every light and mash the pedal so often that the little clicker at the end doesn't click so much any more.

CarMudgeon > MojoMotors.com
10/14/2014 at 12:53

I'm not sure how you crunched you Jetta numbers, but doing a quick scratchpad, a base Jetta is about $17, 325, the Sport is $20,895, and the TDI is $21,640. They get 34, 37 and 46 mpg. With your fuel prices, I get about 225K to recoup the difference above base, but only about 75K to recoup the difference from the sport. Did I miss some platinum option on the MSRPs you used, or did you drop a decimal point somewhere?

ErichLOL > MojoMotors.com
10/20/2014 at 17:44

Yeah, the EPA estimates on modern diesels are WAY underrated, I think you'd be hard pressed to find a gas Passat that gets anywhere close to 43MPG. I'd be more interested to see this chart compared to MPG averages compared from a real world source like Fuelly.

ErichLOL > mcseanerson
10/20/2014 at 17:53

Yeah, I don't think a lot of people would be cross-shopping the Fiesta with a Golf TDI, more like the Focus vs the Golf.

If you're shopping purely based upon economy and willing to accept compromises on creature comforts and driving dynamics, then it's not really sensible to be looking at any US diesels really, pretty much all of them currently force you into higher trim levels. You also shouldn't be considering a diesel or a hybrid unless you plan on keeping it for more than 4 years and/or 130,000mi.

ErichLOL > 1.21 JIGGA WATTS!!!
10/20/2014 at 17:59

I can sum this up very easily for you, don't buy a full-size diesel pickup unless you're going to use it as a daily driver AND cover at least 25% of its mileage towing something reasonably heavy: > 5,000lb. Unless, you just want a diesel, you won't be saving any money really. Also, plan on keeping said diesel pickup for more than 5 years and 200,000mi when purchased new.

ErichLOL > nermal
10/20/2014 at 18:01

Leasing any diesel or hybrid is easily determined as a money losing proposition. If you're basically leasing it because you want the alternative powertrain ok, but you are eating the depreciation costs and not saving money over the standard powertrain. You are simply not keeping the vehicle long enough or driving it far enough to offset the cost difference in a lease.

1.21 JIGGA WATTS!!! > ErichLOL
10/20/2014 at 19:53

I didn't specifically mean just diesel trucks. They have done a comparison on Hybrids: http://oppositelock.jalopnik.com/is-the-hybrid-… , which was a well thought out test, and they have done the same for diesels now. What I would like to see is that same testing criteria brought to the truck realm. They could test diesels like Ram's new EcoDiesel if they wanted, but I'd also like to see validation of manufacturer claims for their 2WD/V6 configurations as well as test the other configurations.

Bluecold > Alex87f
09/21/2015 at 05:31

Indeed. there is a reason the US 328d is called 320d in Europe.