RE: Diesel myths debunked
Discussion
Vladimir said:
Patrick Bateman said:
Christ, did I say it was an absolute?
It's not difficult to understand that you tend to have to rev a petrol engine a fair bit more for an overtake.
I'm not including every single bloody example so give the 335d thing a rest for once.
The reason I use that example is because the 335i and 335d are so similar in output, size and both have a pair of blowers. The 335i is quicker to 60 and 100 yet it's not completely clear cut and demonstrates that torque IS important even though so called hardcore PHers try and spout a load of tosh about gearing to attempt to "prove" that it's irrelevant. Well clearly it isn't.It's not difficult to understand that you tend to have to rev a petrol engine a fair bit more for an overtake.
I'm not including every single bloody example so give the 335d thing a rest for once.
The Ashtray diesel we had (!) is another example - 150bhp but quicker 50-70 by some margin) than the more powerful AND lighter but torque lacking 170bhp petrol variant.
I completely understand why many don't like diesels - I don't like many of them either. But what your average "look at how cool I am bashing diesels; aren't I hardcore?" PH bore does is brand every single one dreadful and attempts to make out that their dronesome 1.8T/2.0/whatever boring 4 pot is superior to ANY diesel. What these vacuous goons have done is driven a crummy diesel (i.e. most four pots), decided they don't like them based on that experience then gone on and on and on about how they hate dervs.
We were forced, thanks to vandalism, to sell a much loved Golf R32. We had to buy an invisible car but wanted something that went okay - we bought a new 1.9CDTi 150 Astra estate which had just been released. I HATED it at first - pathetic power band, foul noise, etc. But once I learned to drive ONLY in that power band using super quick shifting, I realised that it was actually a pretty rapid car and with a fairly decent chassis, it could he hustled along a fun A or B road at quite a serious pace (almost comparable to the R32 on some roads - I used to note corner entry and exit speeds).
The same with a 535d - I drove the inlaws new one and wasn't too impressed. Until I found the sport gearbox setting, recalibrated my driving and then grinned; a lot.
Good diesels, of which there are very few, are fast, they sound perfectly decent (most diesel bashers have only heard a decent diesel on start up) and they go like the absolute clappers when pushed.
So the next complete muppet that claims all diesels are dreadful has to ask himself (for it is always a male with a fragile ego) this - is a sub 200bhp, FWD hatch/whatever based very closely on a shopping car REALLY more fun than a 300+bhp RWD car with a sorted chassis and more torque than an AM DBS?
If the answer is still yes, then I seriously question your PH credentials.
I love cars, always have done, have done plenty of extra driver training to back this up but CHOSE two diesels. Yet I still think a loon petrol would be great fun and am considering adding one to the driveway soonish, but don't feel the need to bash every petrol and like ALL types of car whether fuelled by petrol, diesel or fart gas.
Edited by Vladimir on Friday 27th April 19:05
Lost soul said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
they forgot
1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
You must drive like a total mong if that is your experience 1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
Lar said:
Jeez, this is a tedious thread, but I'll add my opinion anyway.
I went from a diesel three series to a petrol (4-cylinder) 3 series, and felt the petrol car was gutless, the power was in an annoying place in the rev range for 80% of real world driving situations and the fuel economy was painful for something that gave me less performance.
That said, when the head gasket went on the diesel I was out of my depth (too many pipes and sensors I had no clue what did) and I had to a pay a clever man a lot of money to sort it. There's very few things on the petrol car that I wouldn't be confident in doing myself.
If I'd bought a petrol beemer with an adequate number of cylinders (6), it would not feel gutless, and the fuel economy would be worth it for the sound alone. Thus the petrol vs petrol decision is a little tricky; due to the amount of miles I do and the fact I think genuinely think diesel power delivery is better on the motorway, it would be sensible to go for a powerful diesel. That said, I'm a w
e for the sound of a proper engine...
This decision is also irrelevant, as a diesel 207 company car is arriving soon, which i've already decided is going to be a hateful piece of french crap (the fuel economy better be very good, else I'm likely to drive it off a cliff).
My thoughts re above:I went from a diesel three series to a petrol (4-cylinder) 3 series, and felt the petrol car was gutless, the power was in an annoying place in the rev range for 80% of real world driving situations and the fuel economy was painful for something that gave me less performance.
That said, when the head gasket went on the diesel I was out of my depth (too many pipes and sensors I had no clue what did) and I had to a pay a clever man a lot of money to sort it. There's very few things on the petrol car that I wouldn't be confident in doing myself.
If I'd bought a petrol beemer with an adequate number of cylinders (6), it would not feel gutless, and the fuel economy would be worth it for the sound alone. Thus the petrol vs petrol decision is a little tricky; due to the amount of miles I do and the fact I think genuinely think diesel power delivery is better on the motorway, it would be sensible to go for a powerful diesel. That said, I'm a w
e for the sound of a proper engine...This decision is also irrelevant, as a diesel 207 company car is arriving soon, which i've already decided is going to be a hateful piece of french crap (the fuel economy better be very good, else I'm likely to drive it off a cliff).
When I felt i needed a change of car, I looked at BMW diesels and got a fright re issues of swirl flap, turbo failures/ingestions/head gaskets etc, so I bought a well maintained petrol V8 540, ok it can have problems but the s/hand cost (low value V8 and st. 6 petrol now) versus similar diesel = savings was huge and compensated for most risk factors.
The petrol V8 has huge performance without bouncing of the red line, mine will do 27mpg mixed and cruise a just below bad licence problems, safe overtaking is not an issue and the transmission does not get the torque clout delivered by a turbo diesel.
Just another personal view.
Dont think I am diesel fan but do get blown away by 330d models, most being run as company cars and the bills go to the vehicle account and not the driver's pocket.
Devil2575 said:
BBL-Sean said:
In the U.S., the Golf GTI is not available with a diesel, but the base model Golf is:
2.5L 170 hp petrol, MT, 2-door w/no package options -- $17,995 US base price; 23/33 mpg (in U.S. gallons; combined mpg figure is not shown on the web page)
2.5L 170-hp petrol, MT, 2-door w/all package options -- $20,655 US base price; 23/33
2.0L 140-hp TDI, MT, 2-door w/no package options -- $24,235 US base price; 30/42 -- +$6,240 over petrol, with 7/9 mpg improvement (city/hwy)
2.0L 140-hp TDI, MT, 2-door w/all package options -- $27,640 US base price; 30/42 -- +$6,985 over petrol, with 7/9 mpg improvement
SOURCE: http://www.vw.com/en/models.html
So in the U.S., the diesel costs significantly more than the petrol version, has 30 less hp, and the published mileage differences are minimal. Coupled with the higher cost of diesel fuel - which was half the price of regular unleaded thirty years ago, but is now typically as much as or slightly more than premium unleaded - it is indeed a "no-brainer" for consumers in the U.S.
I'm interested as to why in the US the diesel gets such poor economy? A 2.5l petrol only gets 7/9 mpg worse than a 2 litre diesel?2.5L 170 hp petrol, MT, 2-door w/no package options -- $17,995 US base price; 23/33 mpg (in U.S. gallons; combined mpg figure is not shown on the web page)
2.5L 170-hp petrol, MT, 2-door w/all package options -- $20,655 US base price; 23/33
2.0L 140-hp TDI, MT, 2-door w/no package options -- $24,235 US base price; 30/42 -- +$6,240 over petrol, with 7/9 mpg improvement (city/hwy)
2.0L 140-hp TDI, MT, 2-door w/all package options -- $27,640 US base price; 30/42 -- +$6,985 over petrol, with 7/9 mpg improvement
SOURCE: http://www.vw.com/en/models.html
So in the U.S., the diesel costs significantly more than the petrol version, has 30 less hp, and the published mileage differences are minimal. Coupled with the higher cost of diesel fuel - which was half the price of regular unleaded thirty years ago, but is now typically as much as or slightly more than premium unleaded - it is indeed a "no-brainer" for consumers in the U.S.
Maybe there's something else going on here?
On paper the US 2.5 gets worse than the EURO GTI, which isn't supprising. What is supprising is that the US Diesel model gets a lot worse mpg than the Euro diesel. Combined of 58 for the Euro model but in the US thats 30-42 US which is 36-50mpg UK? So a combined which will be around 42mpg?
Doesn't make a lot of sense.
According to the US VW site they only list the 2.5 as an engine option, no diesel.
http://www.vw.com/en/models/golf/trims-specs.html#...
Call me suspicious about the US EPA estimated milages but IIRC these were the ones that stated the latest BMW M3 did about 10 mpg and the Boss Mustang did 25 mpg...
Edited by Devil2575 on Friday 27th April 17:30
Dave Hedgehog said:
Lost soul said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
they forgot
1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
You must drive like a total mong if that is your experience 1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
Lost soul said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
they forgot
1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
You must drive like a total mong if that is your experience 1) oil burners have very narrow power bands, so you will be either sitting there with the loud pedal pressed waiting for something to happen, or flying towards the car in front of you
urquattro said:
My thoughts re above:
When I felt i needed a change of car, I looked at BMW diesels and got a fright re issues of swirl flap, turbo failures/ingestions/head gaskets etc, so I bought a well maintained petrol V8 540, ok it can have problems but the s/hand cost (low value V8 and st. 6 petrol now) versus similar diesel = savings was huge and compensated for most risk factors.
The petrol V8 has huge performance without bouncing of the red line, mine will do 27mpg mixed and cruise a just below bad licence problems, safe overtaking is not an issue and the transmission does not get the torque clout delivered by a turbo diesel.
Just another personal view.
Dont think I am diesel fan but do get blown away by 330d models, most being run as company cars and the bills go to the vehicle account and not the driver's pocket.
Funny you should say that, i came very close to buying an e34 540 m-sport for very similar reasons. Primarily brought the diesel (a compact) because it was the most fun to drive out of everything I was considering at the time. This might have been influenced by the fact the test drive featured a favourite twisty B-road though...When I felt i needed a change of car, I looked at BMW diesels and got a fright re issues of swirl flap, turbo failures/ingestions/head gaskets etc, so I bought a well maintained petrol V8 540, ok it can have problems but the s/hand cost (low value V8 and st. 6 petrol now) versus similar diesel = savings was huge and compensated for most risk factors.
The petrol V8 has huge performance without bouncing of the red line, mine will do 27mpg mixed and cruise a just below bad licence problems, safe overtaking is not an issue and the transmission does not get the torque clout delivered by a turbo diesel.
Just another personal view.
Dont think I am diesel fan but do get blown away by 330d models, most being run as company cars and the bills go to the vehicle account and not the driver's pocket.
Vladimir said:
The reason I use that example is because the 335i and 335d are so similar in output, size and both have a pair of blowers. The 335i is quicker to 60 and 100 yet it's not completely clear cut and demonstrates that torque IS important even though so called hardcore PHers try and spout a load of tosh about gearing to attempt to "prove" that it's irrelevant. Well clearly it isn't.
The Ashtray diesel we had (!) is another example - 150bhp but quicker 50-70 by some margin) than the more powerful AND lighter but torque lacking 170bhp petrol variant.
I completely understand why many don't like diesels - I don't like many of them either. But what your average "look at how cool I am bashing diesels; aren't I hardcore?" PH bore does is brand every single one dreadful and attempts to make out that their dronesome 1.8T/2.0/whatever boring 4 pot is superior to ANY diesel. What these vacuous goons have done is driven a crummy diesel (i.e. most four pots), decided they don't like them based on that experience then gone on and on and on about how they hate dervs.
We were forced, thanks to vandalism, to sell a much loved Golf R32. We had to buy an invisible car but wanted something that went okay - we bought a new 1.9CDTi 150 Astra estate which had just been released. I HATED it at first - pathetic power band, foul noise, etc. But once I learned to drive ONLY in that power band using super quick shifting, I realised that it was actually a pretty rapid car and with a fairly decent chassis, it could he hustled along a fun A or B road at quite a serious pace (almost comparable to the R32 on some roads - I used to note corner entry and exit speeds).
The same with a 535d - I drove the inlaws new one and wasn't too impressed. Until I found the sport gearbox setting, recalibrated my driving and then grinned; a lot.
Good diesels, of which there are very few, are fast, they sound perfectly decent (most diesel bashers have only heard a decent diesel on start up) and they go like the absolute clappers when pushed.
So the next complete muppet that claims all diesels are dreadful has to ask himself (for it is always a male with a fragile ego) this - is a sub 200bhp, FWD hatch/whatever based very closely on a shopping car REALLY more fun than a 300+bhp RWD car with a sorted chassis and more torque than an AM DBS?
If the answer is still yes, then I seriously question your PH credentials.
I love cars, always have done, have done plenty of extra driver training to back this up but CHOSE two diesels. Yet I still think a loon petrol would be great fun and am considering adding one to the driveway soonish, but don't feel the need to bash every petrol and like ALL types of car whether fuelled by petrol, diesel or fart gas.
Sorry, but where the fThe Ashtray diesel we had (!) is another example - 150bhp but quicker 50-70 by some margin) than the more powerful AND lighter but torque lacking 170bhp petrol variant.
I completely understand why many don't like diesels - I don't like many of them either. But what your average "look at how cool I am bashing diesels; aren't I hardcore?" PH bore does is brand every single one dreadful and attempts to make out that their dronesome 1.8T/2.0/whatever boring 4 pot is superior to ANY diesel. What these vacuous goons have done is driven a crummy diesel (i.e. most four pots), decided they don't like them based on that experience then gone on and on and on about how they hate dervs.
We were forced, thanks to vandalism, to sell a much loved Golf R32. We had to buy an invisible car but wanted something that went okay - we bought a new 1.9CDTi 150 Astra estate which had just been released. I HATED it at first - pathetic power band, foul noise, etc. But once I learned to drive ONLY in that power band using super quick shifting, I realised that it was actually a pretty rapid car and with a fairly decent chassis, it could he hustled along a fun A or B road at quite a serious pace (almost comparable to the R32 on some roads - I used to note corner entry and exit speeds).
The same with a 535d - I drove the inlaws new one and wasn't too impressed. Until I found the sport gearbox setting, recalibrated my driving and then grinned; a lot.
Good diesels, of which there are very few, are fast, they sound perfectly decent (most diesel bashers have only heard a decent diesel on start up) and they go like the absolute clappers when pushed.
So the next complete muppet that claims all diesels are dreadful has to ask himself (for it is always a male with a fragile ego) this - is a sub 200bhp, FWD hatch/whatever based very closely on a shopping car REALLY more fun than a 300+bhp RWD car with a sorted chassis and more torque than an AM DBS?
If the answer is still yes, then I seriously question your PH credentials.
I love cars, always have done, have done plenty of extra driver training to back this up but CHOSE two diesels. Yet I still think a loon petrol would be great fun and am considering adding one to the driveway soonish, but don't feel the need to bash every petrol and like ALL types of car whether fuelled by petrol, diesel or fart gas.
Edited by Vladimir on Friday 27th April 19:05
k have you got this from?Have you read anything I've written in this thread? Point out where I've said anything about diesels being rubbish.
And of course torque is important, the problem is misinformed people talking about torque and horsepower as if they have nothing to do with each other.
I've read the first page only( I can guess the rest) . Just want to say. I've done over 12000 miles in 2.5 Subaru Legacy since Nov'11.
But still not thinking about diesel. Not saying I won't but looking at LPG instead. Then again I have also been looking at 330i tourings , with an eye to LPG.
Appreciate the whole economics of diesel , but there are far better engines that need to be tried, and on my radar none are diesels.
But still not thinking about diesel. Not saying I won't but looking at LPG instead. Then again I have also been looking at 330i tourings , with an eye to LPG.
Appreciate the whole economics of diesel , but there are far better engines that need to be tried, and on my radar none are diesels.
Patrick Bateman said:
Sorry, but where the fk have you got this from?
Have you read anything I've written in this thread? Point out where I've said anything about diesels being rubbish.
And of course torque is important, the problem is misinformed people talking about torque and horsepower as if they have nothing to do with each other.
Hang on, please point out where there is any indication my post is aimed at you?k have you got this from?Have you read anything I've written in this thread? Point out where I've said anything about diesels being rubbish.
And of course torque is important, the problem is misinformed people talking about torque and horsepower as if they have nothing to do with each other.
FYI, while I'm fairly clear you don't like diesels much, I think many of your posts are reasonably balanced and well informed. However if you assume my post was aimed at you and you alone, you may need to address a few insecurity issues.
Vladimir said:
Hang on, please point out where there is any indication my post is aimed at you?
FYI, while I'm fairly clear you don't like diesels much, I think many of your posts are reasonably balanced and well informed. However if you assume my post was aimed at you and you alone, you may need to address a few insecurity issues.
Given that your post was in direct reply to mine and then ended with 'If the answer is still yes, then I seriously question your PH credentials.'FYI, while I'm fairly clear you don't like diesels much, I think many of your posts are reasonably balanced and well informed. However if you assume my post was aimed at you and you alone, you may need to address a few insecurity issues.
Fair enough if it wasn't, just came across that way at first read.
RichTBiscuit said:
What he said.
Without taking running costs into account, I've not met one person (who knows about cars) who would buy a diesel over a petrol.
Wait for the trolls with the 3 series straight 6 Derv's, forgotten there names, cus there as forgettable as the cars they drive.Without taking running costs into account, I've not met one person (who knows about cars) who would buy a diesel over a petrol.
swerni said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
RS4 with a duel clutch would be better 
No it wouldn'tAs you mature a little you realise priorities change.
Drives cars are great when you want to drive.
When you just want to get from A to B they are a pain in the arse.
Also what you drive impacts how you drive ( well it does in my case), If I'm in a performance car I tend to be far less patient and driving becomes more competitive.
In a slow car you don't feel the need to put your foot down all the time so it's far more relaxing.
The RS4 would also be way to small for my needs
and too small? put the pies down
forget that I'm just back from the pub but FFS talk about the question of the viability of diesel vehicles in the US not the fking UK.
edit to add: if you can possibly talk about something that doesn't relate to your narrow experience that is.........
king UK.Edited by Motorrad on Friday 27th April 21:09
edit to add: if you can possibly talk about something that doesn't relate to your narrow experience that is.........
Edited by Motorrad on Friday 27th April 21:10
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff