|
StottyZr
4,071 posts
32 months
|
Well we haven't had one of these for a while...
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.
|
|
|
Dave Hedgehog
5,320 posts
73 months
|
blueg33 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
2) oil burners are as boring as watching grass grow You are incorrect - power band is irrelevant in terms of the waiting etc, its what gears are for. If you mean turbo lag, then that happens with petrol turbos too. For the record I have a 3.0tdi and a 3.0 petrol both the same age, the tdi is the faster of the 2 cars and this is especially noticeable when overtaking as normal driving revs has you right where max power is, that is not the case in the petrol, you have to increase the revs by quite a bit to get the max power. (both are auto's) I wouldn't call this boring, tbh its very impressive  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!
|
|
|
bodhi
2,294 posts
98 months
|
Ah the replacement for Godwin's Law - the Diesel Law. How many posts into a disesl thread does it take for someone to meantion "Audi" and "Le Mans"?
|
|
|
doogz
18,667 posts
56 months
|
bodhi said: Ah the replacement for Godwin's Law - the Diesel Law. How many posts into a disesl thread does it take for someone to meantion "Audi" and "Le Mans"? The Le Mans paradox shouldn't appear til at least page 5, but you've jinxed it now. I'm leaving now. I'm driving home in my diesel. It's slow and noisy, and crap. But i love it anyway. But not as much as anything i own that drinks petrol.
|
|
|
Devil2575
4,382 posts
57 months
|
doogz said: Devil2575 said: Depends on how you look at it.
Relative to a decent petrol engine they are. However in absolute terms a decent modern diesel engine is relatively smooth, quiet and not at all dirty. Those 'Myths' are certainly no longer a reason not to buy a diesel for the bulk of the non petrolhead public. That's how most people look at it. That's what they're up against. On this forum that's what they're up against. Petrol heads tend to wax lyrical about petrol engines, myself included. However in the UK once people realised that diesels were generally speaking smooth enough, quiet enough, clean enough and economical then the battle was won. In the US, where people tend to cover much bigger milages on wide open freeways, diesel is a bit of a no brainer, there just hasn't been the imputus due to the low price of petrol. Get onto a motorway in a modern TD and drive at 70 mph and you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference between that and a petrol, except when you fill up. Given no cost constraints i'd go petrol every time, but in the real world I can't ignore the savings.
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
doogz
18,667 posts
56 months
|
Devil2575 said: On this forum that's what they're up against. Petrol heads tend to wax lyrical about petrol engines, myself included. However in the UK once people realised that diesels were generally speaking smooth enough, quiet enough, clean enough and economical then the battle was won.
In the US, where people tend to cover much bigger milages on wide open freeways, diesel is a bit of a no brainer, there just hasn't been the imputus due to the low price of petrol. Get onto a motorway in a modern TD and drive at 70 mph and you'd be hard pushed to tell the difference between that and a petrol, except when you fill up.
Given no cost constraints i'd go petrol every time, but in the real world I can't ignore the savings. Diesel's a no brainer. Except most people prefer driving a petrol, and the cost of fuel over there means you won't actually save much, if anything, driving a diesel. If that's what you prefer, there's no better reason to have one, but the only time you'll notice is when you fill up. Because it'll be less often, but cost you more.
|
|
|
kambites
32,840 posts
90 months
|
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
10,716 posts
93 months
|
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
2,369 posts
28 months
|
Oh good a diesel v petrol thread. 
|
|
|
jamespink
402 posts
73 months
|
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
5,320 posts
73 months
|
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
4,938 posts
26 months
|
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
4,382 posts
57 months
|
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
3,865 posts
56 months
|
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 f  k 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 f kers 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 f king motherf king fake C02 bulls t by asshole politicians. f king effecient dynamics, I'd stick a f king toe up their ass.
|
|
|
Devil2575
4,382 posts
57 months
|
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
10,716 posts
93 months
|
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 b ks. 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 b ks. So to say the same thing about an engine purely because its diesel is also b ks Do you really think that as a Tuscan owner I drive like an 80 year old granny?
|
|
|
Motorrad
3,865 posts
56 months
|
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 f k off to Jack in the box. Legislation is the only thing that will drive them into diesel vehicles.
|
|
|
Froomee
691 posts
38 months
|
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
10,716 posts
93 months
|
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
421 posts
76 months
|
How about: Diesel engines are heavy? Diesel is expensive? Diesel is carcinogenic?
|
|
