There are used Jetta diesels out there. You just have to look around. Plus its the new bodystyle.

Don't wait for the 2009 Jetta. Look for a TDI, Jetta or Golf, standard transmission if you're comfortable with a clutch, 75k miles or less. A new one has a downside - if you want to use biodiesel, you'll be in violation of the warrantee. My wife and I have TDIs - a golf and a Jetta wagon, 2002 and 2005, respectively. 40+mpg for around town, some on the highway. Highway only is 45mpg. VW isn't bringing the small cars here, the Polo, for instance. too bad.

The information in the last post about biodiesel is 100% false. Although VW does not back the use of biodiesel beyond a blend of 5% (B5), this approval/recommendation has not changed from one model year to another, and VW does not automatically void warranty for biodiesel use. VW does not provide any warranty for any bad fuel; biodiesel is no different.

The reason VW does not back high biodiesel blends is because there is no standard specs. for the fuel. This is changing as ASTM just voted for a standard B20 spec. that should take effect next June.

I drive a 2006 Jetta TDI with unit injection. It was assumed, by many, that using blends above B5 would be detrimental to the newer models using more advanced injection systems. This worry has turned out to be false and many drivers are driving 2005-2006 Jetta/Golf/Beetle TDIs with high blends of biodiesel without incident. I have driven my Jetta TDI, for two years, burning B20 without any problems.

With the 2009 TDI, the worry is the new exhaust-treatment devices and how biodiesel blends may have a negative effect on the diesel particulate filter. In my opinion, this new worry is also being overstated as have all past worries regarding biodiesel. Truth is, if you use high quality biodiesel and adjust your blend based on cold weather, you will not incur any problem with any diesel engine. In fact, biodiesel is better for all diesel engines than the low-lubricity ULSD fuel.

I'm getting 44 mpg (average) running B20 blend. I pay no more the fuel; I take no extra precaution other than keeping an extra fuel filter on hand; and I've had nothing but great performance and absolutely no problems for using this blend of fuel in a newer diesel engine. All one does with a diesel, is drive up to the biodiesel-blend pump; pump in the fuel; pay; and drive off. The result is reduced petroleum use; great fuel economy; and lower CO2 and harmful substance output out the tailpipe.

It's that easy with a diesel!

The assumed mpg figures for the upcoming TDI is way understated. VW expects about a 7% improvement in real world fuel economy as compared to the outgoing TDI model.

In the real world, the 2005-2006 Jetta TDI gets most people between 40 and 45 mpg in combined driving (see www.tdiclub.com). The 2007 epa estimate was 38 (combined which is way underestimated). The 2008 procedural changes lowers that estimate to around 35 mpg for the 2005-2006 TDI (even more underestimated). If the 2009 model gets an actual 7% improvement, the average driver can expect to get around 45 mpg (conservatively figured). If one uses a biodiesel blend, he or she will use even less petroleum without significantly reducing fuel economy as does ethanol users in gas-powered cars.

Diesel cars are underestimated for fuel economy by the EPA. The main reason is that the EPA does not account for diesel-engine break in which improves fuel economy an average of 10% after the first 10K miles. The new procedures for figuring fuel economy has made these estimates even more skewed against diesels.

Why is it so hard to find a car that gets over 45 mpg highway now compared to 15 years ago, not counting Hybrids? Hybrids are a good idea but the savings in fuel is offset by the upfront cost and maintenance of batteries and similar components.

Did people stop caring about fuel economy? GM doesn't even make anything close to the Metro as far as fuel economy (look at the poor mpg of the new Aveo). You'd think that the significantly higher gas prices over the last couple of years would make people demand inexpensive, high-mpg cars that used to be available from the late 70s through the early 00s.

For the person that asked the question why isn't there a good high millage diesel pickup. Well hold on to you hats fellows. Here is a link to an article about just that. It will be made in America as well. http://blogs.cars.com/kickingtires/2008/02/diesel-hybrid.html

Gentlemen,
My 2000 Jetta TDI was rated 49 mpg highway on the manufacturer's original sticker, and the car has actually achieved this average fuel consumption figure year after year. There was no exageration by VW.
In fact the car's efficiency and mechanical durability was greatly underplayed by VW. I had the car chipped (Upsolute) a year ago and although there has been a modest performance improvement there has been no noticable fuel penalty. I use the car for long haul commuting and currently have 320,000 miles on the engine. It has run on regular diesel, biodiesel, straight soybean oil, kerosene/Jet A, and mixtures of the above. All ran well in the car. Straight soybean oil was my favorite fuel however it has become too expensive. I keep the car on a regular maintenance schedule at the dealer. A recent inspection confirmed the overall excellent condition of the engine and drivetrain and there were no recommended repairs. While I am very keen to replace the car with another TDI, I am not very confident VW will release any new TDI's this year, so am prepared to keep my old Jetta just in case. A recent trip to Germany confirmed the facts in Europe - drivers there have a wide choice of diesel cars (many are actually made by US manufacturers) that perform as well or better than gasoline driven cars, with less carbon impact and greatly lower operating costs. There is no good reason these vehicles cannot be made available in the USA.
Kim Krumhar
Carlsbad, California

In answer to the inexplicable rise in average fuel consumption mentioned by a previous poster:

The primary reason is weight. Weight is linked to many things, but safety equipment has become regulated and includes airbags, side impact beams in the doors, overall bodywork improvements to achieve an acceptable score in crash testing. Also linked to the weight issue are the emissions systems required to meet some of the toughest regulations in the world. These systems add weight and bulk to the powertrain.

The second is the efect of the emissions systems and the neccersary "engine calibration" to make them work. The Hondas and Geo Metros of the day could reliably run lean in cruise and sip fuel. But today the NOx emissions that would result would violate the emissions regulations and the result is that the vehicles have to run richer under cruise conditions today than previously. The emissions systems also raise the backpressure of the exhaust which increases pumping losses.

The 3rd factor is marketing related. Americans have not rewarded manufacturers who built small vehicles with small engines by being prepared to hand over their money and buy them. Until the Aveo, the smallest engine on a US car was 2.2l which is more than double the smallest engines in Europe (almost 4x larger in fact if you count the Smart at 600cc). Even the Japanese have bloated engines with the Civic with one of the smallest at 1.7l (not counting exotics like the hybrids).

In my opinion, Smart USA is making a big mistake by not ramping up production of the ForTwo to meet demand in the US. Who the heck is going to wait 18 months for a new car ?

I have to agree with the others about how far off the estimates are for diesels. My 2005 Golf TDI, which I drive 90+% on city streets, gets 40-42 (depending on the temperature). The new estimate is 32 in the city!!!!! Even the old estimate (38MPG) was a bit low. On the highway, I get about 45MPG at 85mph and 53MPG at 70mph.

Why anyone would believe government numbers to be correct is far beyond me. Find out what real drivers get.

What are the manufacturers thinking about cars in the USA, when Europe has almost every make available in Diesel. I'd line up to get a FIAT 500 or a Smart Diesel, but what do we get here, a Japanese gas engine that runs only on hi-test. My CDI is averaging 38+overall. I owned a VW 2006 Jetta Diesel and it was great. Yesterday I tried out the new Jetta Diesel and it's also a great winner. Why can't we get a VW Lupo here? The Avion car with a Smart Diesel attained 114 MPG, not too bad, eh?

I can't understand it either. I get 24 mpg, around 750 miles per tank!!! It's an 02 Dodge Ram 2500 with a Cummings 5.9L TDI in it and a 6 speed trany. 140,000 miles, 4 doors, long bed, and heavy duty frame. Compared to the gasoline truck that gets 12-16 mpg. Shoot, It does better than most cars out there. It's got plenty of power on tap too. It makes around 400hp and 800 torque with the extras I've added. I embarrass those rice burners on a daily basis. It routinely pulls horse/car trailers and can do 1/4 mile in just over 12 sec. 7 years and never had a problem. That being said I can't understand why someone dosen't bring a compact diesel to the US in a small truck or car. I just returned from Afghanistan and there's Ford Ranger diesels everywhere over there!!!!