Diesel Scandal Won't Slow Pickup Sales

2016-Chevrolet-Colorado-TrailBoss-065 II

As they say, you'd have to be living under a rock not to have heard about the Volkswagen "clean diesel" crisis that has taken over the headlines. In a nutshell, many VW and Audi diesel cars sold since the 2009 model year included software that allowed them to evade emissions testing. Those diesel cars were allegedly 40 times dirtier than expected when driving around town.

No doubt other automotive companies are watching VW and the EPA closely to see how this all plays out, but no matter how you slice it, the idea that diesels could be a strong "good for the environment" choice has taken a huge hit.

But that doesn't mean diesels still can't be a great choice for compact, half-ton or heavy-duty truck buyers.

In fact, it wouldn't surprise us if VW's diesel fallout has little impact on the buying habits of pickup shoppers for this simple reason: The matters that motivate pickup buyers (no matter the size of the truck) to look at diesel are different than those that motivate car buyers. Diesel car buyers look for better fuel economy, long-term cost savings and a reason to brag to their friends about being environmentally friendly. Diesel pickup buyers focus on power and capability.

Two new diesel trucks are coming to market soon: the heavy-duty Nissan Titan half-ton with a burly 5.0-liter V-8 from Cummins and the midsize Chevrolet Colorado, which offers a more diminutive 2.8-liter inline four-cylinder Duramax turbo-diesel. It's logical to wonder if the VW crisis will have an impact on sales of these new products. The short answer is that it won't matter in the slightest because they'll be purchased based on need and capability.

The Nissan-Cummins partnership is aimed at half-ton buyers who need a more powerful truck but who don't want to sacrifice their half-ton amenities, as well as three-quarter-ton users who might like a new truck with a little more comfort and luxury.

The new Colorado Duramax diesel is a little bit of a different story. Because of their smaller size, the Colorado and GMC Canyon are already luring people out of sedans, large SUVs and some crossovers. These folks know they want something smaller than a full-size pickup, but they like the Colorado because they have a reason (or two) to be in a pickup.

GM's baby Duramax — which has almost none of the traditional "diesel" truck compromises (sooty, slow, throttle lag, heavy) — delivers much better fuel economy, more confident towing and a better around-town feel. Yes, it's a little heavier and you'll have worry about diesel exhaust fluid levels, but for truck guys (or even people who want to pretend they're truck guys), this will be more of a badge of honor than anything else.

Worried that the VW fiasco will dilute future turbo-diesel choices? We don't think that's going to happen. As more of these modern small diesels get into compact and half-ton pickups — and we have no doubt we'll be seeing more of them from automakers such as Toyota, Nissan and Hyundai — we expect people will get smarter about the real benefits of these little torque monsters.

Cars.com photo by Mark Williams

Duramax 2.8L I-4 (Chevy Colorado, GMC Canyon)

2016-Chevrolet-Colorado-Duramax-TurboDiesel-052 II


EcoDiesel 3.0L V-6 (Ram 1500, Jeep Cherokee)

IMG_6424 II



The issue is not sales.

All manufactures have to abide by The Air Pollution Act of 1955 and later by The Clean Air Act of 1963. On that end we say the government acted responsibly to satisfy U.S. Public Health Service.

However the manufacturer - such as VW were cheating and they got exposed by an educational institute (West Virginia University’s Center for Alternative Fuels, Engines, and Emissions (CAFEE)).

There is no question that there will be more cheaters (Japanese -Lance Armstrong) - my money will be on Japanese they like to cut corners and they are aided by non-unionized workforce who are afraid to say anything thus they are guilty by association - U.S. Public Health should not be bought by couple dollars.

After it came out that they used the cheat to save $335/ vehicle by not putting in urea treatment and not because they couldn't meet emission standards, and especially after it came out that the BMW diesel they also tested when VW was busted easily passed emission testing, I figured that everyone else would pass re-testing.

I'd be willing to wager that all the other truck and auto makers will be showing in their advertising this along with a not so subtle dig at "that company from Germany".

These are "lifestyle" pickups, for the most part, so buyers aren't so concerned with the tow torque or max mpg. There's better choices for those.

Diesels in this class are for the 'big truck' clatter and rattle. Once the forbidden fruit, below big trucks. But most Americans will be getting over their fascination with diesels, fairly quick. I'm sure it's already happening.

Once they own a diesel, they'll miss the almost obscene reliability and simplicity of owning an 'ordinary' gasoline engine.

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles has made it clear that they do not use tools to cheat their emission tests, and I would hope that Ford and GM don't do this type of nonsense either. If an investigation were to ever bust any of these three, things would get pretty ugly...

Ya like any manufacture is going to say they are cheating emissions unless caught. Kind of make you wonder how cummins ram was able to hold off on urea for a few years while other manufactures required it to meet emissions. Heck ram sold there 4500/5500 with urea as it was needed while the 3500 and less meet emissions without urea. That went on for a couple years.

Yeah, I don't think it will be a problem with diesel trucks.


It has been reported that all of the diesels pollute more in the real world than in emissions tests. I'm willing to bet that it applies equally to gas engines. Companies build their products to pass the tests. They can not build to cover every type of duty cycle.

Yeah, my wife and I bought our 2010 diesel VW because of the power and how the fuel economy affected our bottom line. I couldn't give to flying f**ks if a bald eagle fell out of the sky every time she turns the key over. The car is a boatload of fun to whip around in traffic and with all economic factors included (yes even the $2,000 premium over the gas version and $100 oil changes) this car costs me about 30% less to run every month than an equivalent gas powered car. The only "betrayal I feel from this Diesel-Gate fiasco is that the regulators are going to choke then engine down to the point that it becomes a slow inefficient turd, and will likely hold any buyback/ class action money hostage for only those owners who submit to having their cars "fixed".

I test drove a Ram AEV Prospector Cummins. It didn't rattle or clatter. Quite and I never saw black smoke. I was impressed with the power. Less responsive than gas but very nice. These vehicles are the most capable off road trucks on the market. I hope to own one soon.


Hemi V8, You need a back up plan other than a slip and fall lawsuit to live your lifestyle of expensive trucks. If you can post on the internet, you can work to get one.

David Robertson,
Your comment;
"my money will be on Japanese they like to cut corners and they are aided by non-unionized workforce who are afraid to say anything"

So, Dave, VW isn't unionised.

That's a new and creative slant.

I do believe this article is correct in it's assumptions.

Also, even the person buying the SUV or large car is less likely to be overly green.

So, the sales of the diesel Ram 1500 and Colorado/Canyon will not be impacted as greatly as the greener customer after a small car with a diesel, like a VW.

Mark Longoria,
If what you state is correct, VW made a savings of $335 per vehicle, which by itself sound like a pittance, then multiply that by the 11 million or so affected vehicles.

The figure is saving VW nearly $350 million dollars, now that ain't chicken feed.

Mark Longoria,
Sorry my arithmetic was incorrect.

VW has made a $3 685 000 000..........3.685 billion dollar saving.

That's real chicken feed.

Sucks for a GREENIE who was a snob and bought a Diesel VW or Audi because of the so-called "Clean Diesel" its green for the environment...LOL,LOL,LOL !!!

Reminds me of the first Smart cars, they had a Diesel for the first few years in the U.S and Canada and then they banned them as they polluted , so they use a Mitshubishi 3 cyl gas...So much for being green Smart car, you are a FRAUD !!!!

This Green garbage they are cramming down on us with is a hoax !

No global warming for nearly 19 years , so evidence is in.. cooling trends/warming trends are officially called a cycle , like the majority already knew ! And we cannot control the weather..

@Mark Williams,
Totally agree this will have very little affect on vehicle choices. Diesels here in SUV's and Pickups are booming. If a manufacturer has a Gas engine in their Pickup line, it is termed as an " entry level" option

It's a pity Ram has that awful snout.

FCA should do a refresh on the Ram. Improve the front end with some sheet metal changes.

The engine/drivetrains seem to be okay, especially the diesel.

I do think the Rebel should be offered with the diesel, as the Rebel is touted more a "tough" 4x4 vehicle. Diesels perform far better off road.

It's a pity Ram has that awful snout.

FCA should do a refresh on the Ram. Improve the front end with some sheet metal changes.

The engine/drivetrains seem to be okay, especially the diesel.

I do think the Rebel should be offered with the diesel, as the Rebel is touted more a "tough" 4x4 vehicle. Diesels perform far better off road.

The commenter who states that diesel is a "fad" is quite naïve in his assumptions. He appears to be disconnected with the reality of the auto industry.

The future of the auto industry will be filled with many ideas and innovations.

You will see a greatly diversified assortment of technologies and vehicles and vehicle power.

I do believe that diesel, gasoline are here to stay for some time and the EV/hybrid vehicles can only be sustained via large government handouts.

Diesel is a great alternative and I do hope VW are disciplined for what they have done.

I would think many vehicles don't meet emission standards and the manufacturers do play the rules and regulations.

Just look at the EcoBoost from Ford. It was designed to work around emission and FE requirements, even though they don't produce good results in real life driving.

Big Al from Oz, My friend I have to agree with Mr. David Robertson about people that work for companies that are not Unionised .They are afraid to say anything about a miscoduct by the company they work for. All you have do ask the Wall Mart workers.

These vehicles are the most capable off road trucks on the market. I hope to own one soon.


The pickup does look nicer than the usual Rams.

It does need a bull bar to hide the front end as well.

You'd be better of with the money these guys are chasing to modify the pickup yourself.

You can do it cheaper and modify the vehicle to better suit your requirements.

I wonder how many who opt for this aftermarket package will off road? Or will most just cruise around shopping malls?

@Denver, I went diesel years ago and have not looked back, I can honestly say, I'm not sure I would ever buy a gasser again, now I actually use my truck and its a HD truck, but if I were to go to a halfton again, I would buy a diesel before the gas

Louis o or David Robertson or Mark Longoria or Big Al Supporter, etc

That what was not mentioned.

There was an inference THAT VW isn't unionised and the issue generated by VW was allowed to go on because of this.

Simple, try using some comprehension.

Maybe the next time when you are entering a comment under one of your pseudonyms you will be accurate.

Scott, aka Cummins, aka aulone (the ex Cummins Storeman)
If you had any knowledge regarding the work Cummins do, you would know Cummins is one of the global leaders in reducing diesel emissions.

The ISF 2.8 diesel when released hopefully in the US Navara/Frontier will use this tech along with the ISV Cummins powered Titan.

Use google my friend, there is quite a lot of information on how Cummins is tackling diesel emissions.

I'm in the same boat as you.

I had bought a 3.2 litre diesel Navara back in 97, it was an old school diesel.

My 3.2 BT50 is a great little engine. It's very economical, torqy and has more than enough power for driving in traffic.

I understand the lust for gasoline power. But a diesel is a far better option in larger vehicles, even midsizers.

Smaller vehicles I do understand the use of gasoline. But a vehicle that weighs over 2 tonnes like my midsizer does perform exceptionally well with the diesel.

The 3.2 is putting out more hp and torque than a V8 from 20 years ago. This is sufficient for my wants.

A lot of these third world countries are recieving pickups that are more technologically advanced than what you have. The recent NA Ranger is behind technologically than the Great Wall pickup from China.

Even your Taco's technology is behind the Hilux.

These new third world pickups have a 5 star safety rating, far more than what is being offered in any NA pickup.

More hp doesn't equate to technology. Even in NA there are alot of people who couldn't afford to run a 400hp vehicle.

The US is in a lot of debt and large contributing factor to your debt is the importation of oil. Use less oil and help the US recover, use diesel.

Other's on this site have attempted to travel down the path you are heading.

The reality is this, US pickups are great vehicles, but as in this article does allude to they are protected, their permanence isn't very secure.

It's not much different here with our pickups and utes.

They are mainly SUVs and toys, they have be migrating in that direction for many years.

CAFE alone is designed to reduce the number of large vehicles on US roads. Even if CAFE is friendlier to pickups. But, how friendly is CAFE when you need to build a full size out of aluminium and run quite small V6's that are turbo'd. Again increasing cost.

Aluminium and turbo'd gasoline engine starts to make diesel more attractive.

Diesel or gasoline, I really don't care. But my interest has been the general direction that the industry has been heading in. The trending of information and data. Many of you might not like my prognosis, but I try and remain objective.

I'm don't have the emotional attachment you have with Ford and Eco Boosts or Hemi V8 with Rams or any of the other fan boi's.

Gasoline offers advantages as does diesel. Currently diesel is more advantageous to achieve better results than gasoline just due to it's density. Gasoline can't achieve the FE advantage of diesel. Unless by some magical sorcery you are an alchemist.

Gasoline and diesel can both become more efficient.

Diesel regulations in the US are actually trade barriers like this chicken tax.

The US uses a different quality of diesel. It is more abrasive, contains more sulphur and has a lower cetane value.

This doesn't allow for the same engine that the Europeans can run. But, attaining the emissions standards in the Eurozone is becoming harder as well. US diesel doesn't allow for low enough compression of diesel engines to maximise the reduction of NOx. NOx is a big hurdle with diesel.

Gasoline might head down that track with particulates, we'll see.

Don't worry about an FTA between the US and the Japanese as Obama failed and I bet vehicle tariffs (chicken tax) and mainly agricultural protection are to blame.

You only have to worry about the US reaching an FTA with the Korean's. But the Korean's are similar to the Japanese with protectionism.

This is a pity as the Japanese and Korean's are two very significant players in the Pacific region.

The US and Asian's have to be able to play together a little better.

This show that the US's attempts in the East Asia region to increase it influence isn't as great as most would have liked.

I thought the article was pretty spot on too.

Most truck buyers are not generally the greenie sort.
Many diesel truck buyers go out of there way to defeat the modern emission systems and some delete them all together from their trucks, they do this just to get back the reliability, power, and fuel economy the EPA took from them over the past decade or so with the use of wildly restrictive regulations put on Diesel engines starting back in 2003 which then increased every 5 years or so after that.

I would imagine many diesels truck owners are likely only bothered by this scandal in the since that it put more of a spotlight on them, where the EPA could create more laws and more regulation to deal with those that simply want what the EPA says they cant have anymore. I am sure there are valid pro's and con's on both sides of that political argument.

Truth be told about the VW diesel car owners, if some company out there were selling that defeat program that VW was using, I am sure there would have been quite a few owners buying it, for both the power and fuel savings it was proving those owners. I am certain those VW owners have been benefiting from what VW did here. I am imagine many will not likely even go in to have the recall done unless somehow forced to do so. How many are really going to want to deal with adding DEF fluids and reduced power, and reduced fuel mileage, if they could avoid it.

I own a few 13+ diesel trucks and all of mine are 100% stock. And none ever put out any black smoke, none that I have ever seen anyway.
That said, I too am not wild about what the EPA has done here, and power they now seem to have acquired over what I can and cant do to my own property, and what I am now having to pay both in purchase price and at the pump.

Someone mentioned the Dodge Ram's from a few years ago that did not have the DEF system on them. Just want to remind them that those trucks were de-tuned in power and had plenty of DPF regeneration issues because of it, which also in turn caused a major drop in fuel mileage on those trucks, do to the amount of regeneration cycles those trucks had to perform in order to allow the DPF to do all the work. The 2013 + Ram Diesels do have the DEF system and power has been dialed up substantially, and fuel mileage is also up substantially over the 07-12 versions that did not have the DEF system. Basically I suspect those trucks were compliant based on all the down sides there were to not having a DEF system. If they could have gotten around those negatives and been legal, they likely would have.

The EPA needs to take a look at all the Ecoboost motors, they smoke black horribly on cold start up and from a stop.

The tailpipes are blacker than any diesel since 2005...

While they are at it, they should test them for real world fuel mileage.

I think Diesel is a great idea as long as DEF is not overly cumbersome which I understand is essentially replenished at oil change. Someone once made an off the cuff response with respect to getting diesel on one's hand and how smelly or greasy it is. I'm guessing you have to have a rag to get it off. My '89 M3 recently stopped getting spark and I'm thinking this wouldn't be an issue with a diesel. Now I'm checking relays, schematics, crank position sensors, wires, coils, with the dreaded DME (digital module electronic) ignition computer circuit board being the last. And it's not like schematics to those boards from BOSCH are necessarily floating around for anyone to look at.

Even the C172 airplane I fly has two sets of spark plugs per cylinder, and two magneto's for spark, but still has the possibility of failure. I have to check both sets of mags, separately, before I take off. With a diesel it would be one less think to check manually instead of just glancing at a DEF gauge. Jet engines and diesel engines use a similar form of diesel fuel, and lot's of work is going on with alternative engines like diesel in planes because of all the efficiency gains.

@nitro - I've been owning diesel cars and pickups since 1986, till now, but I'm done. It's been a blast, but over all, gasoline engines are where the saving are at, no matter the (light duty) class.

This isn't OZ or Europe where diesel fuel is subsidized. Look for that to change soon.

Even in medium duty trucks, when you add it all up, gas engines win every time.

There is, and will remain a niche market for diesels (in light duty applications) here, but those owners and eager buyers of diesel autos either don't realize or don't care of the over all, unfavorable economics, of owning a diesel today. I've moved on to better. Gasoline.

@ Angelo Pietroforte: All aircraft with gasoline recipes in them,to my knowledge still use the dual mags/sparkplugs,and of course during runup you do need to check for mag drop etc.

I haven't flown for over 40 years,but my ac was powered by an Allison T63A5A jet turbine.A whopping 317 shp/254 useable,lol.On those,we went by 5 or rpm,and torque.

That should read,"we went by % on rpms,and torque being pulled'.Dumb fingers today.

@anything but an ecoboost, what an IDIOT you are. All your post prove that point hands down.

That C182Jt-A is supposed to be the diesel (ie JetA) follow on but I read it has had delays that have not yet been disclosed. I think Piper and Cirrus have a diesel too, but of course add on >$50k for that option. I haven't flown in 11 months and I'm missing it. I've never had any experiences with turbines.

@ Angelo Pietroforte:There are like 3 oems of aircraft diesel that I admit,I haven't been following like I should.One of the oems is doing a turbo supercharged V4 config,and maybe a V6 config 2 stroke.I have watched some of the run ups on youtube a number of years ago.Fascinating,too me at least,lol.

I watched a vid with an older 172 up in Alaska maybe,did a VW diesel conversion.Rattled like hell,older turbo diesel,but it did really well.Overall,I think,at least for general aviation,rock on with diesels running on jet A,perfect.I enjoyed this gab with ya.It sure beats all the other off topic crap on here a lot of the time.

I think you'll find that there are some differences regarding how Class 3 and above vehicles are treated regarding emissions, even in the recent past.

Even right now the changes to Class 3 and above emissions and FE are not mandatory until 2018.

This means a manufacturer can put out vehicles that have very little changes in them compared to a few year ago.

This will all change within a year or so.

Diesel powered engines in the GA scene is becoming very popular.

Prop need torque at relatively low rpms. There are some light aircraft (not micro or ultra) that are returning 40mpg. That's cruising above 100 knots in some cases.

I did read an article regarding the VW engine that is being used in light aircraft.

Quite a bit of work is done to ensure compliance. The engine isn't just taken out of a car and placed into an airframe.

I did post an article regarding light diesels in aviation a few years ago or so here on PUTC.

I am confident the VW debacle will cause some additional scrutiny for all manufacturers. Im also confident that VW probably isn't the only one breaking or at least bending some rules. Im also confident no one is shattering the rules to the extent or the scale VW was. Im also sure that VW's diesel disaster will be every bit as bad for the image of diesel cars as GM's 70s/80s diesel cars were. I don't think trucks will be impacted at least not real trucks. I would be shocked if any stock HD diesel truck was not in compliance. Especially with all the complicated, power, performance, mileage, and reliability robbing and cost adding emissions systems that have been added through the years. The mystery comes into the Chevy and GMC pretender little diesel trucks. Which I have a hard time seeing the appeal of (other than the MPG). They aren't made for real work and people who tow don't buy little trucks. They wont go fast or be fun to drive (something that people who buy little trucks really care about). They will be expensive (something people who buy little trucks don't care about). They will get good MPG but the fuel is more expensive and at least at this moment fuel is cheap which will hurt their appeal (for the moment). So for more money I can have a truck that is less fun that can do a little bit more work and get good MPG but still costs more? For the 5 guys who will come out of the wood work crying about how hard it is to drive a full size half ton truck and they only tow 5K once every 2.2 years yea I got it and if we get all of you together we might be able to fill a thimble in the truck world. For the normal I gotta ride high look good go offroad and got money to burn and little or no work to do 95% of the very young and single or old and empty nest small truck market diesel isn't going to be really appealing especially when they stomp on the pedal next to a V6 Taco at a light. For those who don't know or understand diesel and flirting with the idea of buying a truck and thinking a little truck is their best option the VW scandal will taint their thinking unless they do a lot of research or they are open to the persuasion of the sales person.

@Clint - the only thing that kills smaller trucks for me is interior room. I've looked at both the 2015 Tacoma and Colorado and once I set the driver's seat to where I'm happy there is very little backseat leg room and I'm under 6 ft tall. My 2 sons are just becoming teenagers and already say that the leg room is too cramped for them. Those trucks would be fine for "new" families with young kids or just occasional short distance back passenger travel.

That's why the very old and the very young buy 95% of the little trucks Lou and the rest... don't. Cant haul... people, stuff, or do enough work to justify the expense and minimal difference in operating costs. These trucks do do real work outside the US. The roads are often smaller and more treacherous. Manual trannys are still common, mileage is way up and power is way down, and features are sparse. They can haul loads and ride hard because of it. NONE are features an average American small truck buyer would appreciate.

Cummins has announced the certification of a Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)- approved Cummins 6.7L Turbo Diesel for the Ram underground mining truck. This specially calibrated Cummins Turbo Diesel, which powers the Ram underground mining pickup, gives customers the pulling power they demand while safely meeting every underground mine need. - See more at: http://www.ccjdigital.com/msha-approves-cummins-powered-ram-underground-mining-truck/#sthash.x1WJvCJy.dpuf

June 29, 2011

I do agree with you that some midsizers do offer little in the back.

But, you will not an "anything midsize" offer the same level of space as a full size. Even a midsize car is smaller than a large car. I've even noticed here in Australia that a Commodore/Falcon has more space inside than a Camry. Odd that.

But, what is lacking in the NA market is a reasonable selection of midsizers. Some midsizers do offer better rear space than others. I have heard that the Amarok is okay.

I do believe my BT50 would be acceptable, unless you want to move adults long distances all of the time.

The Colorado don't have the same rear space as many of their competitors here.

But, many here who buy a pickup drive them to and from work alone and on the rare occasion use them to move the family or friends/whatever camping or fishing or just go down to the hardware to buy 50 nails and a few bags of fertiliser.

If you need a large vehicle and can afford one, buy it.

But, there are many with young families, retirees, couples, teenagers, etc who buy a midsizer for much the same reason people buy a full size. Versatility.

June 29, 2011

Posted by: KPTT1 | Oct 6, 2015 1:15:05 PM

yup and severely derated. This is old news.

You have some of this right
"These trucks do do real work outside the US. The roads are often smaller and more treacherous. Manual trannys are still common, mileage is way up and power is way down, and features are sparse. They can haul loads and ride hard because of it. NONE are features an average American small truck buyer would appreciate."

No roads are not necessarily smaller or treacherous. From my experience ,there were some awful roads in the US. No plenty of Automatics,features are getting on par or have passed US Pickups. Ride is acceptable, a F250 has a pretty ordinary ride

Big Al from Oz - your whole argument of lack of competition in the small truck market is true but if one looks at the globals, no one has a crew with more back seat room.

I have nothing against small trucks in general but I'm not going to buy something that won't fit my family. Try driving 500-600 miles with 2 whining uncomfortable kids. Crewcab trucks are supposed to carry a "crew". I prefer to carry them comfortably.

I don't know many teenagers or retirees that can afford 40-50k trucks.

@BAFO - The lack of midsize pickup "selection" comes out of lack of 'want'. We're not big fans of hatchbacks, so our selection is skimpy, compared to the rest of the world. The selection of hatchbacks in North America is corrected for market.

The last time I shopped for a new pickup, midsize crew cabs were my 1st choice, and there was plenty to choose from. That wasn't the problem. I was willing to overlook all their shortcomings, compared to fullsize pickups, except the price came out to about the same or slightly more for midsize, before fullsizer huge rebates.

When it comes to fullsize crew cabs, they sell in mass quantities for a reason. I couldn't tell you if those buyers could happily get by with much less rear seating, but the point is, when given the choice, real crew cabs win.

My personal opinion is these very expensive light duty diesels are just a fad. Most people are buying because they just think diesels are cool or for economy. Even though these engines burn less fuel than their gasoline counter parts they have a drastically higher up front cost and typically high priced fuel at the pump (I know areas differ). The bottom line is diesels provide lethargic high torque power with better economy that comes at a heavy premium. Diesels are for the person that might actually have their vehicle 10 years. It takes years to just break even on fuel economy savings verse engine cost, fuel, and maintenance. Give me a diesel with more horsepower and similar upfront cost and I will do it right now. Otherwise, I will take the many powerful and cheaper gas options available.

The comments to this entry are closed.