May22
The U.S. EPA has released official fuel economy numbers for the Volkswagen Jetta TDI, which is a new entrant to the U.S. market for 2009. The car manages some very respectable numbers, but falls significantly short of Volkswagen’s predictions for mileage.
Earlier this year, Volkswagen said the TDI Jetta would deliver highway economy in the 50s and city milage in 40s. Some reports out of VW even indicated the car might be able to hit 60 mpg on the highway. But according to the new data released by the EPA, the TDI delivers 30 mpg in the city and 40 mpg on the highway.
The high cost of diesel fuel doesn’t help the Jetta TDI’s case either. With gas at $3.79 per gallon and diesel at $4.50, the latter is 19 percent more expensive. That means penny-for-penny, the TDI is equivalent to a gas car that delivers 33.6 mpg on the highway and 25.2 mpg in the city.
It’s possible the EPA has changed its testing methods even more drastically than expected, or perhaps VW will demand a recount, so we’ll keep you posted as this story develops.
I don’t believe the numbers. Someone must be pulling the EPA’s strings. I’ve calculated my own numbers on my friends’TDI on it the few times I’ve had to fill his tank because I borrowed his car, & the mileage was always in the 50’s on the highway.
JL - Agreed. I was averaging 51 MPG in mine. EPA Would rather pimp the hybrids than admit diesels are a valid alternative to regular gas guzzlers.
This is BS. Even old TDI engines were very economical. These new ones are even better.
And the new Jetta will also fall short of VW’s predictions for build quality.
Maybe the EPA put 4 average sized german egos in the vehicle while they conducted the test.
EPA site, which I got from this blog, indicates 4 cylinder Jetta producing 22/31 (4 cylinder uses premium, so it is not 3.79 it is closer to 4) and Jetta diesel 31/40. Diesel does 36% better mileage, even if to accept inaccurate number of 19% difference it is 15% more economical. Not that I would buy diesel of gasoline Jetta made in Mexico.
johnnycanuck, average size Germans ego do fit into Jetta, that is why they build Tigers and Leopards.
I think the EPAs numbers are very very skewed. Every car I have owned has gotten better than advertised fuel mileage.
I imagine in the EPA testing facility they pay their “testers” to floorboard the car up to “road speed” then slam on the brakes… then repeat… all with the windows up and the AC on full blast recirculate.
It is all a gimmick to make small cars look less fuel efficient than they actually are and to keep the American public stuck on SUVs. In reality small cars do better than rated… large trucks do worse than rated… and some (like the F-250/350 or Hummer H2) aren’t rated at all.
The new TDI has an emission system that is now clean enough to pass all 50 state pollution standards. The fuel economy takes hit because of this emission system. Also, the increased power of this new TDI won’t help the fuel economy either. The Prius is still the economy champ, while being significantly cleaner than even the newest most advanced diesels.
RaineMan, I recall that EPA rates only consumer vehicles. F250/350 are considered industrial, so does Hummer because of their bulk.
seasofcheese, we haven’t seen Honda diesel yet. Prius’s dominance in mileage may be threatened. Still, I would rather drive Civic hybrid then Prius - handles better.
give me a TDI over a ****in battery any day
Our 08 Focus….automatic… gets exactly what EPA says…33 MPG avg hwy miles(avg is 33-34MPG, sometimes as much as 37-38, all hwy, cruise control).
If that 2010 Fiesta(why didn’t they keep Verve name/B-class car) is 1/2 as good as they claim(It will be based upon the Mazda 2..would not mind the 3 door version…that is still a “maybe”), we’ll get one..with 40 MPG hwy(probabaly 30 city..just like this diesel, but supposedly, 15K to start).
I heard on a car talk show, that VW wants ot build a plant in Alabama, and if they build the Jetta here, it would lower the cost 1,500-2,000 dollars..Hmmmm. A 17K diesel?
it would be more like a $22k diesel…
and im assuming they went to the fiesta name to keep with the whole F theme for their cars… the only obvious exception being the Taurus for obvious reasons.
Prius was outdone by a BMW 520d in combined driving. If the owner’s manual says the Toyota will do low 60s then why did is get between 40-41? Seriously, what would everyone rather have: a cheaply built hybrid with chintzy plastics, smallish interior, and dismal performanceand roadholding (can you say understeer) or a proper 5 series with close to the petrol cars performance?
Why don’t they name it the Ford Failure… like all of the rest of the cars they produce.
The only recent Ford cars that have been selling successes haven’t had the “F” name. Taurus… Crown Vic… and Mustang.
As far as the diesel emissions go… why have all the fancy shmancy regulated power and economy killing stuff anyways? The majority of states don’t require emissions testing at all. Heck… my 89 Dodge that I use as a daily driver doesn’t even have a catalytic converter anymore.
You can’t save the world by requiring new cars to meet stricter and stricter requirements. The vast majority of cars on the road are 10 years old or older… where are the emissions controls there?
Diesel is just a stop-gap solution. 50MPG @ $4+/gallon is still ****ty, therefore there’s no point in wasting time with it. If more people go with diesel to get slightly better economy, demand for diesel will go up, and so will the price…
The day I can plug my car into my power outlet (or perhaps, park it near a WIRELESS power transmitter) and let it’s 500 mile range battery charge from power my house is generating, I’ll be impressed. Until then, spending anything more than $0.01/mile in energy is too expensive.
While these numbers are disappointing, I have never trusted the EPA, since the driving habits of people vary, thus causing fuel milage for each car to vary, I am sure you could get well into the 50’s with this vehicle.
While everybody fixated on econ.omy one fact is missing: small 4 cylinder diesel provides torque of V6 along with driving characteristics. I prefer diesel to my high RPM engine, where torque and ponies don’t come till it spinning above 4000. There is some perverted pleasure to shift at 1500 rpm and have ability to accelerate or passing in 5th without down shifting.
I grew up driving diesels and had fond memories of torque-blessed motors and rarely changing gear, but in modern turbodiesles I find the off-boost performance and the amount of cog-shifting required to keep it on the boil very disappointing.
.
I’ve got an Audi TDi that I use for cross-continental stuff because you get up into sixth and it seems to cruise forever between fuel stops, but for town and country driving I prefer my petrol motors.