I just see no real reason to add the extra weight to a small vehichle when it isn't likely going to add much benificial to the overall use to the vehicle. In some vehicles, yes. In a small SUV, no.
Hmmm, I destinctly remember volkswagon rabbits in the mid 70's having the diesel engine option. The reason I know this is, my mom's uncle (my great uncle?) had one. And I remember my dad specifically asking him, "why would you want that smokey, noisy, rattling little car" And he said, "cause it gets 50-55 miles per gallon around town". That seems like a real good reason to me. The germans (and euro's in general) have been using diesel engine cars for quite a while. Our own EPA raised certain emission standards in the mid 80's, making small diesel engines unpratical or unfeasable until recent technology changes.
You see, most of our (american's) diesel engine experience is with large heavy trucks. With the main emphasis of the design of the engine going towards major power output first (cummins with 600 lb-ft torque or the 300 HP CAT engine as prime examples). But yet, they still give excellent fuel economy. And the reason these engines are so much heavier, is they literally are built to last under extreme abuse. I know one man that has a dump truck with over 1,000,000 miles on it, with the engine being rebuilt only once in that time.
I personally would like to see several vehicles with smaller diesel engines in them. I think what they will be capable of doing will surprise alot of people. The vast majority of americans have very little to no knowledge of diesel engines. Just remember back 15 years ago, nobody had diesel engines in their pick-up trucks, and now they are everywhere.
Oh, and what happened to that little rabbit, well it has been passed on to another family member now, and the last I heard, it had over 500,000 miles on it.
