RE: Diesel myths debunked

[kambites]

I sometimes wonder whether the problem that diesels suffer is partly caused by this kind of PR campaign. People seem to want to make out that diesels are the same as petrol engines, when I think the focus should be on pointing out that overall they're as good as petrol engines, with some distinct advantages and some distinct disadvantages.

[blueg33]

Dave Hedgehog said:

what a pointless response

why not strap a shuttle SRB motor on the roof? what relevance does a race car that exploits favorable rules have to a road car?

i have just put 1000 miles on a 2011 V6 A6 TDi and it was bloody terrible. Lag as you described then an almighty woof of power between 2-3k then dead as a door knob to the red line, so bloody hit and miss, incredibly tedious to drive unless you just want a luxo barge for cruising in, then it was superb, i dont!

Its not a pointless response. It was a response to a sweeping statement that you made, if you don't want an answer like that don't make dumb sweeping statements.

I have put 86k miles on my A6 tdi so think I am better qualified to make the point about power delivery in that particular car than you are. Its not at all dead from 3000rpm to the redline, but the beauty is that you have peak power available at cruising revs, that's why it makes such a good overtaking car, you don't have to spool the revs up, the power is just there, right on tap.

As with all cars you need to adapt the driving style to match the car. If I drove the petrol car with the same style as I drive the Audi, it would never ever get to max power as it is so far up the rev range it is less useable. Of course I can hold a lower gear for longer, but that makes the car seem noisier and more frantic. For an every day car I don't want that.

[66comanche]

Oh good a diesel v petrol thread.

[jamespink]

Sivraj said:

Only half of fuel stations in the US stock Diesel?

It sound like rolling out LPG over here.

Because the US could easily be self sufficient for natural gas, except the oil lobby is smothering it for financial gain. I find it funny the US is so blinkered about oil it is happy to pay over a trillion $ a year to OPEC.

[Dave Hedgehog]

blueg33 said:

Dave Hedgehog said:

what a pointless response

why not strap a shuttle SRB motor on the roof? what relevance does a race car that exploits favorable rules have to a road car?

i have just put 1000 miles on a 2011 V6 A6 TDi and it was bloody terrible. Lag as you described then an almighty woof of power between 2-3k then dead as a door knob to the red line, so bloody hit and miss, incredibly tedious to drive unless you just want a luxo barge for cruising in, then it was superb, i dont!

Its not a pointless response. It was a response to a sweeping statement that you made, if you don't want an answer like that don't make dumb sweeping statements.

I have put 86k miles on my A6 tdi so think I am better qualified to make the point about power delivery in that particular car than you are. Its not at all dead from 3000rpm to the redline, but the beauty is that you have peak power available at cruising revs, that's why it makes such a good overtaking car, you don't have to spool the revs up, the power is just there, right on tap.

As with all cars you need to adapt the driving style to match the car. If I drove the petrol car with the same style as I drive the Audi, it would never ever get to max power as it is so far up the rev range it is less useable. Of course I can hold a lower gear for longer, but that makes the car seem noisier and more frantic. For an every day car I don't want that.

for someone who drives like an 80 year old granny the A6 is a fine cruiser, i hated it, gutless in the extreme out of its tiny power band, pointless trying to push on it, you end up just going with the flow bored

the S3 whilst in reality a pretty average hot hatch felt like being given the keys to a vayron in comparison to the A6, whoosh red line, whoosh red line, whoosh red line, bliss.

all comes down to how you drive, if your a plodder driving for economy it makes sense. Except in heavy traffic where there as bad as petrol engines.

[Caulkhead]

Diesels make excellent sense for the US market. They like low down torque, they like slow-revving engines (that's why the Beetle found favour so easily stateside) and they invariably drive autos which removes the heavy-flywheel, slow throttle response issues when pulling away and accelerating through the gears. The fact that ranges will greatly increase in such a large country can only be a benefit.

I'm no particular fan of diesel, but as long as driver appeal isn't part of the requirement, diesels can be very effective.

[Devil2575]

doogz said:

Diesel's a no brainer. Except most people prefer driving a petrol,

The biggest mistake that petrolheads make when talking about cars is imagining that everyone else thinks like them. They don't. Most people prefer cars that cost them less to run. I'd suggest that many buyers in the UK care about the badge, the image and then about running costs. Very few will give a toss about peak power, engine note etc. Most people are not bothered about the thrill of driving and don't consider themselves to be enthusiastic drivers.
I suspect a few will like the mid range punch that a modern diesel has. My wife certainly prefers the power delivery in her Mazda 6 diesel to her last petrol car. Better MPG and far easier over taking.

WRT to price difference.

It's no worse than in the UK

http://www.newyorkstategasprices.com/index.aspx?fu...

Diesel $4 gallon
Premium $4 gallon
Mid grade $3.86 gallon
Regular $3.71 gallon

Like I said, given money no object i'd have a petrol, but in the real world for most people...

[Motorrad]

jamespink said:

Because the US could easily be self sufficient for natural gas, except the oil lobby is smothering it for financial gain. I find it funny the US is so blinkered about oil it is happy to pay over a trillion $ a year to OPEC.

They don't give a flying fk about handing over $$$ to their opec buddies.

1. It's a form of aid to keep the ruling elites over there in power so that radical islamists don't run the place.

2. They want to use up everybody else's oil first, leaving their considerable reserves in the ground so they can continue to rule the world for centuries to come.

3. They can just print up a whole new batch of the devalued fkers anyway.


Really this thread doesn't need to be petrol v diesel.

There's absolutely no need to even bother with diesel cars over in the states. Even the range isn't an advantage because you need to stop to take a whizz, buy slurpies and fried food.

It's a non-issue that most folk over there don't care about. The only reason people get uptight about it here is because they've mostly been forced down the route of smaller engines, turbochargers and fking motherfking fake C02 bullst by asshole politicians. fking effecient dynamics, I'd stick a fking toe up their ass.

[Devil2575]

Caulkhead said:

Diesels make excellent sense for the US market. They like low down torque, they like slow-revving engines (that's why the Beetle found favour so easily stateside) and they invariably drive autos which removes the heavy-flywheel, slow throttle response issues when pulling away and accelerating through the gears. The fact that ranges will greatly increase in such a large country can only be a benefit.

I'm no particular fan of diesel, but as long as driver appeal isn't part of the requirement, diesels can be very effective.

Well put. Once some of you realise that most people don't care about driver appeal etc then you might start to make a bit more sense.

[blueg33]

Dave Hedgehog said:

for someone who drives like an 80 year old granny the A6 is a fine cruiser, i hated it, gutless in the extreme out of its tiny power band, pointless trying to push on it, you end up just going with the flow bored

the S3 whilst in reality a pretty average hot hatch felt like being given the keys to a vayron in comparison to the A6, whoosh red line, whoosh red line, whoosh red line

all comes down to how you drive, if your a plodder driving for economy it makes sense. Except in heavy traffic where there as bad as petrol engines.

For the life of me, I really can't see how you reached your conclusion on the A6 unless you climbed into the car with that conclusion as a preconceived notion.

The A6 is in my garage along with a Tuscan and a 3.0 petrol Subaru, I can categorically state that the A6 is more interesting to drive in a performance sense than the Subaru and at least as interesting as the everyday petrol cars in the same class that I have had before.

The S3 is a totally different type of car a 2 tonne A6 is never going to be the same to drive as a hot hatch, the physics of inertia tells you that. You may just as well say that the M5 has a crap engine because its slower than a Tuscan which has a smaller engine, and we know that would be bks. Equally you could say that a lazy V8 petrol like an RV8 is crap as it delivers its power low down and is out of puff at 6000 rpm, that would also be bks.

So to say the same thing about an engine purely because its diesel is also bks

Do you really think that as a Tuscan owner I drive like an 80 year old granny?

[Motorrad]

Devil2575 said:

Well put. Once some of you realise that most people don't care about driver appeal etc then you might start to make a bit more sense.

They don't care, that's the point.

There is no way you're going to persuade them into diesel vehicles due to their relative high cost and complexity.

Take a car like a Golf GTi- a lower spec diesel engined Golf costs basically the same, being very generous there's a 15mpg difference in it overall. Like the UK diesel costs more but unlike the UK the cost of fuel is still relatively low. You're talking a saving of a few hundred dollars a year for a far less atrractive vehicle plus your average American isn't going to want to be bothered to hunt around looking for a place that sells diesel. They just want to drive in, tank up and fk off to Jack in the box.

Legislation is the only thing that will drive them into diesel vehicles.

[Froomee]

Petrol engines sound better and you don't have to wear gloves when filling up

Seriously though iv driven a few diesels and i can honestly say i don't see the appeal unless its for tax reasons. Yes they can be refined, relatively fast and comfortable but they don't really have any character and i wouldn't expect to see them in any type of serious sports car anytime soon. If they did appear it would purely be due to the cost of petrol and nothing more. I have nothing against them just that petrol is my prefered choice.

Its a bit like steak and a burger, yes they are both beef but given the choice i would pick steak everytime.

[blueg33]

On a track where you can access peak revs and power in a petrol most of the time, then petrol is IMO better. On the road it's nowhere near as clear cut.

[MartinM]

How about: Diesel engines are heavy? Diesel is expensive? Diesel is carcinogenic?

[dino ferrana]

Interesting this one as we are looking at it as Europeans. Over here our diesels conform to Euro 5 which allows around 10 times the amount of NOx in the exhaust when compared with petrol. US Tier II Bin 5 emission standard is actually a LOT stricter and I believe slightly tougher than the proposal for Euro 6. So diesel over there is cleaner, but only by the time it leaves the car as you need AdBlue or similar to get a passenger car to those levels.

It was one of the stranger decisions to change the rules for the congestion charge in London to make anything sub 100 g/km free to enter as that includes diesels. London has a MAJOR problem with NOx and is facing huge fines to get below the limits. This is definitely a bad thing as NOx is nasty stuff and is definitively linked to respiratory issues and deaths. This isn't one the deniers can debate, it is a proven fact.

Diesel is a lot more expensive than petrol in the US and that is a big issues. Many of the mpg gains would be offset by that. Also these very clever diesel engines are competeing with relatively simple, large petrol engines which are cheap to produce and maintain. The diesels are going to be more expensive to buy and maintain over there, unless the manufacturers are loss leading on them.

[Great Pretender]

sleep envy said:

Not trying to be provocative but if given the choice between two cars and everything (cost, mpg, servicing, etc) was the same with the exception of what fuel they used I'd be hard pressed to pick between the two.

90-95% of my miles are now driven in London (I did buy my diesel when I was doing 25k+ PA) and to be honest the way it delivers the power does make it quite an easy way to drive through traffic.

This.

Given the choice (everything else being equal), I'd probably take a 335d over a 335i.

[RobCrezz]

Diesel could make sense for a lot of Americans who have a travel by car a long way, purely for the increased range.

[angusc43]

StottyZr said:

Throttle response, power bands, torque and gearing.. Oh power delivery. Thinking about how many times these words will be repeated in the next few pages makes me feel sick.

You forgot to mention range.

[sealtt]

sleep envy said:

Not trying to be provocative but if given the choice between two cars and everything (cost, mpg, servicing, etc) was the same with the exception of what fuel they used I'd be hard pressed to pick between the two.

90-95% of my miles are now driven in London (I did buy my diesel when I was doing 25k+ PA) and to be honest the way it delivers the power does make it quite an easy way to drive through traffic.

I live in central London & work in the city - i drive in to work - this is about 3.0 miles and most of that journey - which can be 20mins-40mins - is spent sitting in congestion. However, I am sitting in a SL with big 5.5l supercharged V8... so every time i pull away i get to hear that great noise and i can still occasionally enjoy gunning it through a tunnel or empty street.

I am only doing about 40 miles per week and so 5mpg or 20mpg doesn't really make any material difference in cash terms. However, I spend a decent amount of actual time in the car each week and a big V8 is massively superior & more enjoyable than just about any diesel I can think of.

So for me, living in a major & congested city makes buying a big engine gas guzzler a no brainer - only if you are doing big mileage on motorways is a diesel worth it.

[Caulkhead]

olly22n said:

angusc43 said:

StottyZr said:

Throttle response, power bands, torque and gearing.. Oh power delivery. Thinking about how many times these words will be repeated in the next few pages makes me feel sick.

You forgot to mention range.

Diesels hit a high water mark with the Citroen ZX 1.9D. It's been downhill ever since.

Diesels certainly hit a high water reliability mark at about 60bhp/litre IMHO. It's trying to squeeze 100bhp/litre+ out of them that is the cause of much unreliability.