RE: PH Blog: diesel do nicely
Discussion
Dan Trent said:
There was definitely a phase of VWs where this happened but it seems to have been sorted out on more recent ones. I used to left-foot brake my DSG-equipped Caddy long-termer (pre-PH days!) and Riggers' Golf GTI Ed35 with no problems.
It does feel like you've run into a brick wall when it does happen though, I do recall that.
Tried it once in my first MK4 - a 'GTI' 1.8T. I've never repeated the same mistake in a VAG product since.It does feel like you've run into a brick wall when it does happen though, I do recall that.
Another annoying affliction that seems only to affect the diesel engines is that the ECU won't let you 'heel n toe' more than once, without lifting off the brake again. Very annoying.
Of course, you can sort this by removing a fuse, but then you lose your brake lights
VladD said:
Dan, I hadn't read the Blood Brothers piece, but I don't see why you're shocked by the reaction to it. There are plenty of car sites out there, but this is an enthusiasts site. People like me come here to read about exotics and budget heros, primarily to take a break form the mundaness of the working day. Talking about diesels, no matter how good, just doesn't really fit the bill for me.
I'm sure plenty of others will disagree though.
The sheds and low budget heroes are are fun but there's also a place for practical cars that don't destroy your soul every time you turn the key. I'm sure plenty of others will disagree though.
Ths looks like a good proposition for a daily that allows for a completely bonkers second car or for somebody who enjoys driving but due to circumstances can't justify something that's outright PH.
Not all of us can run sevens or V12 Ferraris every day of the week, they're either to impractical, delicate or plain expensive. This (with the possible exception of delicate) is not.
dublet said:
Who cares what it's powered by? It should be quick and fun to drive. Many Diesel cars have become both of those and can beat their petrol equivalent models. It's called technological progression. Some people like to venture outside their caves.
Good on PH for shining a light on this.
Diesels just don't give the crispness or rev happiness of a petrol. Due to the combustion differences between the two fuels they can never rev like a petrol. I don't disagree that they can be powerful (note the way this word is used instead of torquefull). Fun for me is feeling on edge, shivers down the spine, a rush of noise and the sense the engine is going to explode. I just don't get that in any diesel car.Good on PH for shining a light on this.
Put it this way, last time I was out in a BMW 330d I thought 'This is refined and feels powerful, I could live with this every day and like it'. Then some time later I went out in a petrol M3, and nearly died with laughter and a flood of tears at the excitement of a screaming V8 in second gear. My point is about the power, but the delivery.
I don't agree that diesels are a good buy once they are out of warranty. The 'technological progression' you mentioned could in some cases be translated as 'quite complicated and not economical to repair'
Edited by BeirutTaxi on Thursday 8th November 14:00
lewisf182 said:
Why dont they offer the bigger engine diesels throughout more of the range? surely the 3.0 V6 Tdi would fit as a push? Might be pretty heavy but would allow for a lot more power and a proper diesel hot hatch where you can get R32 performance without the R32 MPG for example.
Performance in a straight line, unless a nose heavy hippo with understeer floats your boat. Additionally consider the higher purchase price of A) a diesel engine
B) diesel
Also if the car is a long term keeper you may find that a heavier engines wears the front suspension out quicker.
BeirutTaxi said:
AlpinaB5s said:
Indeed
So PH should just peddle petrol powered carporn? The kind that 99.9% of its readers can't afford? with a bit of bargain barging thrown in for good measure (also powered by petrol of course)?
Diesels are more expensive to buy than their petrol equivalents.So PH should just peddle petrol powered carporn? The kind that 99.9% of its readers can't afford? with a bit of bargain barging thrown in for good measure (also powered by petrol of course)?
BeirutTaxi said:
AlpinaB5s said:
Is a car such as a D5 with "345bhp, a whopping 516lb ft of torque and can hit 62mph in 5.1sec before bludgeoning its way to a top speed of 171mph" not sporty and exotic enough for you just because its powered by the devils own semen?
So it's a car with a powerful engine.. that's not particularly impressive in itself. Power does not equal a sports car.Btw the torque figure is meaningless as you didn't quote the revs with it.
Edited by BeirutTaxi on Thursday 8th November 13:24
dublet said:
Who cares what it's powered by? It should be quick and fun to drive.
This. Surely the driving experience is the most important aspect to driving enthusiasts? There's nothing wrong with having a preference for a type of engine (noise, response, however you want to quantify it), but I don't understand why people slag off others' preferences.griffdude said:
Good article. Another derv convert here- as with petrol cars chassis is important. I bought an Alpina D3 Touring 18 months ago & really like it, ok it's pretty modest in output terms but the handling & ride are fantastic plus it makes my other car more special when not used day to day.
The Griffith comes out when I really feel like a blast.
Likewise. After 100,000 miles in my last E-class Merc estate sitting behind a super-creamy 4.3 litre V8 engine which was the bee's knees, when I decided that it was time to change it last year, with considerable trepidation I signed on the dotted line for a new 350CDI with 3-litre turbodiesel power. And I have to say that it was the best decision I could have made. As a car for putting in the miles (I have done 28,000 in just over a year) in the sort of road / traffic conditions we enjoy(!) in this sceptred isle of ours, it has no equal. The Griffith comes out when I really feel like a blast.
And, as with you and your Griffith, when I want to drive for the fun of driving, out comes the 911 (shortly to be joined by a 550 Maranello).
BeirutTaxi said:
Performance in a straight line, unless a nose heavy hippo with understeer floats your boat. Additionally consider the higher purchase price of
A) a diesel engine
B) diesel
Also if the car is a long term keeper you may find that a heavier engines wears the front suspension out quicker.
Cobblers (apart from additional outlay).A) a diesel engine
B) diesel
Also if the car is a long term keeper you may find that a heavier engines wears the front suspension out quicker.
Is this 2002 ? I am amazed as some people just having discovered the virtue of diesel and claiming it's "progress". Very good diesels have been around for a while.
They're great but having had my fair share of them as second or third cars, I've now come back to petrol. Can't be bothered with blown turbos, DPF blockages, gloves at the pump, heavy front ends etc etc. Great if you do loads of miles but up to a certain yearly mileage (in my case 15K), petrol cars are now cheaper to run as second hand prices are much more favourable (people are convinced that a diesel is cheaper to run regardless of how much cheaper equivalent petrol cars are to buy, which compounds the situation in favour of petrol for second hand buyers) and people do not take into account future unforeseen expenses.
They're great but having had my fair share of them as second or third cars, I've now come back to petrol. Can't be bothered with blown turbos, DPF blockages, gloves at the pump, heavy front ends etc etc. Great if you do loads of miles but up to a certain yearly mileage (in my case 15K), petrol cars are now cheaper to run as second hand prices are much more favourable (people are convinced that a diesel is cheaper to run regardless of how much cheaper equivalent petrol cars are to buy, which compounds the situation in favour of petrol for second hand buyers) and people do not take into account future unforeseen expenses.
I think this comes down to the definition of sporty.
There seems to be a large percentage of people who define sporty to mean 0-60 times, or top speed, or torque ............ and any number of other pointless stats, as some of the comments above demonstrate! (Also found in the GT86 threads!)
For me sporty means involving to drive. I want an engine to have character and be easy to "tweak" on the throttle (quick pick-up, quick drop off), I want a balanced chassis that allows me to play around with yaw angle and gives me a predictable breakaway point ......... not grip grip, some more grip ........ WOOOAAA here comes the hedge! Which unfortunately is what a lot of "sporty" cars give you these days (both petrol and diesel).
Can these attributes be found in a diesel car? Probably, have I found them yet ........ nope!
Diesels have their place, I would argue that for fast motorway use they are better than petrol, good torque, excellent pick-up and economical all traits that are ideal in that environment.
However where I find them lacking is when it comes to pushing on around some twisty roads. They don't drop revs off quick enough, plus any application of throttle tends to resort in instant torque. Unfortunately this means you loose the ability to correct throttle in mid corner as easily as a petrol. The extra weight of the engine seems something chassis engineers are yet to balance out properly as well.
Every time I have attempted to drive a diesel car fast (from the missus TDI TT through to a 330d I had as a loan car recently) I have found myself naturally adopting point and squirt approach as that's what they seem to do best. Efficient but in my humble opinion not sporty.
There seems to be a large percentage of people who define sporty to mean 0-60 times, or top speed, or torque ............ and any number of other pointless stats, as some of the comments above demonstrate! (Also found in the GT86 threads!)
For me sporty means involving to drive. I want an engine to have character and be easy to "tweak" on the throttle (quick pick-up, quick drop off), I want a balanced chassis that allows me to play around with yaw angle and gives me a predictable breakaway point ......... not grip grip, some more grip ........ WOOOAAA here comes the hedge! Which unfortunately is what a lot of "sporty" cars give you these days (both petrol and diesel).
Can these attributes be found in a diesel car? Probably, have I found them yet ........ nope!
Diesels have their place, I would argue that for fast motorway use they are better than petrol, good torque, excellent pick-up and economical all traits that are ideal in that environment.
However where I find them lacking is when it comes to pushing on around some twisty roads. They don't drop revs off quick enough, plus any application of throttle tends to resort in instant torque. Unfortunately this means you loose the ability to correct throttle in mid corner as easily as a petrol. The extra weight of the engine seems something chassis engineers are yet to balance out properly as well.
Every time I have attempted to drive a diesel car fast (from the missus TDI TT through to a 330d I had as a loan car recently) I have found myself naturally adopting point and squirt approach as that's what they seem to do best. Efficient but in my humble opinion not sporty.
Good article, but don't think its enough to "convert" some of the commentators from the Scirocco/ TT thread who clearly posses a total inability to understand why people would buy such cars.
Megane dci 175 looks interesting, didn't know it even existed! Think I'd prefer a Golf GTD though.
Megane dci 175 looks interesting, didn't know it even existed! Think I'd prefer a Golf GTD though.
Diesel car can be as fast as a petrol car shocker!
But what is it like to just drive for the sake of driving vs a fast spinning petrol?
Sunday morning out on the back roads, you stretch the revs out past 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, weeeee!
Ooor, you stretch out the diesel... 3000, 4000... oh... oh that is what I do every day, off every roundabout, doing every day driving. Doesn't have have anything more to give?
No.
Oh.
I'm all for fast diesels don't get me wrong. I really liked my tuned up 306 HDi, but it wasn't as good as the GTi6, despite the GTi6 being inferior in every metric you could measure, the petrol one was the one that made you want to go for a drive just so you could bounce off the limiter through 1st/2nd/3rd and revel in the noise!
Not to say the diesel wasn't good either, but it wasn't as good as the petrol.
Hmmmm
Dave
But what is it like to just drive for the sake of driving vs a fast spinning petrol?
Sunday morning out on the back roads, you stretch the revs out past 4000, 5000, 6000, 7000, weeeee!
Ooor, you stretch out the diesel... 3000, 4000... oh... oh that is what I do every day, off every roundabout, doing every day driving. Doesn't have have anything more to give?
No.
Oh.
I'm all for fast diesels don't get me wrong. I really liked my tuned up 306 HDi, but it wasn't as good as the GTi6, despite the GTi6 being inferior in every metric you could measure, the petrol one was the one that made you want to go for a drive just so you could bounce off the limiter through 1st/2nd/3rd and revel in the noise!
Not to say the diesel wasn't good either, but it wasn't as good as the petrol.
Hmmmm
Dave
Don't really understand the default anti-Diesel attitude shown by some here. No, if given a free choice I'd not choose it because I prefer the behaviour and performance of the typical petrol engine, but on the other hand diesel engines have some attributes over and above the perception of economy. When I first drove, on a consistent basis, a diesel car, the immediate torque and low-down slug of power was a hoot, especially on slow-fast roads. Yes the novelty wore off, but equally so did the novelty of a revving the nuts off my previous Celica. On that basis, in a way 'fun' and 'an involving driving experience' were arguably more accessible in the diesel car - you had to work harder in the Celica to move beyond 'just driving', which equally perhaps meant it brought its own rewards to an "enthusiastic helmsman". On balance if I were to choose between the diesel experience and the petrol experience, my preference would be petrol - but the diesel experience wasn't by any means bad. Smelly on occassion but overall no complaints.
It's like the RWD and FWD debate - neither is 'better' but each is better in someway that appeal to different people for different reasons.
Editted to add, it occured to me the first time I ever drove a diesel was a Fiat Bravo estate as a rent-a-car in Italy and at the time a diesel was about the only affordable way into a car with a turbo. Not that it was much of a car overall, but I did enjoy the way the turbo took a second or so to deliver the power and consequently having to drive like an 80s F1 driver, keeping the turbo spinning. Perhaps not the most PC thing or something I'd do in my own car, or ultimately anything beyond a cheap laugh but there we go.
Sorry for a balanced contribution, normal service of reccomending anyone who hase a different opinion be shot in the face with a howitzer will resume soon.
It's like the RWD and FWD debate - neither is 'better' but each is better in someway that appeal to different people for different reasons.
Editted to add, it occured to me the first time I ever drove a diesel was a Fiat Bravo estate as a rent-a-car in Italy and at the time a diesel was about the only affordable way into a car with a turbo. Not that it was much of a car overall, but I did enjoy the way the turbo took a second or so to deliver the power and consequently having to drive like an 80s F1 driver, keeping the turbo spinning. Perhaps not the most PC thing or something I'd do in my own car, or ultimately anything beyond a cheap laugh but there we go.
Sorry for a balanced contribution, normal service of reccomending anyone who hase a different opinion be shot in the face with a howitzer will resume soon.
Edited by forzaminardi on Thursday 8th November 14:18
va1o said:
Good article, but don't think its enough to "convert" some of the commentators from the Scirocco/ TT thread who clearly posses a total inability to understand why people would buy such cars.
I agree but conversely, quite a few diesel fans clearly possess a total inability to understand why some people wouldn't buy such cars.For instance, people who might prefer a more subtle power delivery where you can smoothly stay just within traction as you unwind the lock, which frankly, diesels are totally rubbish at, limited as they are by the short rev range and intrusive turbo boost.
acricha3 said:
I think this comes down to the definition of sporty.
There seems to be a large percentage of people who define sporty to mean 0-60 times, or top speed, or torque ............ and any number of other pointless stats, as some of the comments above demonstrate! (Also found in the GT86 threads!)
For me sporty means involving to drive. I want an engine to have character and be easy to "tweak" on the throttle (quick pick-up, quick drop off), I want a balanced chassis that allows me to play around with yaw angle and gives me a predictable breakaway point ......... not grip grip, some more grip ........ WOOOAAA here comes the hedge! Which unfortunately is what a lot of "sporty" cars give you these days (both petrol and diesel).
Can these attributes be found in a diesel car? Probably, have I found them yet ........ nope!
Diesels have their place, I would argue that for fast motorway use they are better than petrol, good torque, excellent pick-up and economical all traits that are ideal in that environment.
However where I find them lacking is when it comes to pushing on around some twisty roads. They don't drop revs off quick enough, plus any application of throttle tends to resort in instant torque. Unfortunately this means you loose the ability to correct throttle in mid corner as easily as a petrol. The extra weight of the engine seems something chassis engineers are yet to balance out properly as well.
Every time I have attempted to drive a diesel car fast (from the missus TDI TT through to a 330d I had as a loan car recently) I have found myself naturally adopting point and squirt approach as that's what they seem to do best. Efficient but in my humble opinion not sporty.
Precisely. Good post. Just because we are exposed to diesels all the time does'nt mean we become blind to their shortcomings or try to pretend they are more than they are. They can be good to drive, of course they can, but lets ease off the hyperbole. Personally, given the nightmare that is DPF for many, many VAG diesel drivers, if anything we should be looking ahead to the next generation hyper-efficient petrols coming out.There seems to be a large percentage of people who define sporty to mean 0-60 times, or top speed, or torque ............ and any number of other pointless stats, as some of the comments above demonstrate! (Also found in the GT86 threads!)
For me sporty means involving to drive. I want an engine to have character and be easy to "tweak" on the throttle (quick pick-up, quick drop off), I want a balanced chassis that allows me to play around with yaw angle and gives me a predictable breakaway point ......... not grip grip, some more grip ........ WOOOAAA here comes the hedge! Which unfortunately is what a lot of "sporty" cars give you these days (both petrol and diesel).
Can these attributes be found in a diesel car? Probably, have I found them yet ........ nope!
Diesels have their place, I would argue that for fast motorway use they are better than petrol, good torque, excellent pick-up and economical all traits that are ideal in that environment.
However where I find them lacking is when it comes to pushing on around some twisty roads. They don't drop revs off quick enough, plus any application of throttle tends to resort in instant torque. Unfortunately this means you loose the ability to correct throttle in mid corner as easily as a petrol. The extra weight of the engine seems something chassis engineers are yet to balance out properly as well.
Every time I have attempted to drive a diesel car fast (from the missus TDI TT through to a 330d I had as a loan car recently) I have found myself naturally adopting point and squirt approach as that's what they seem to do best. Efficient but in my humble opinion not sporty.
f
king hell, PH has employed Troy Queef!!
h? Did you spank it?
king hell, PH has employed Troy Queef!!Troy said:
The one I drove was a DSG and it demolished the roundabouts of Milton Keynes in an enjoyable sequence of understeer-quelling left-foot braking, rapid-fire shifts and suitably muscular mid-range that carried over to the real world of B-roads and corners too. He said, belatedly realising that selling the diesel dream was going to require something more emotive than recalling a drive around Milton Keynes in a VW TDI...
Was it a bh? Did you spank it?toppstuff said:
VladD said:
Dan, I hadn't read the Blood Brothers piece, but I don't see why you're shocked by the reaction to it. There are plenty of car sites out there, but this is an enthusiasts site. People like me come here to read about exotics and budget heros, primarily to take a break form the mundaness of the working day. Talking about diesels, no matter how good, just doesn't really fit the bill for me.
I'm sure plenty of others will disagree though.
I quite agree. The problem with the "Blood Brothers" piece is that it is poorly written. Suggesting that these two admittedly fine cars are sportscars at the start of the article is such clear, unambiguous cobblers that it can never recover from that. Hence the ridicule.I'm sure plenty of others will disagree though.
If, instead, PH editorial staff were saying " In the real world it is inevitable that some of us have to consider the diesel option, but here are two examples of diesels that are also a decent steer", then that would be fine.
But to call them "leading exponents of the sportscar breed" is just nonsense. And the article is rightly ridiculed for it.
If PH stands by these comments, then I look forward to seeing a diesel TT in the next group test with a Porsche Boxster. This of course won't happen. Which kind of demonstrates my point.
I'll have no problem with a sports car being powered by diesel, or hybrid, or all electric, or magic fairy dust - The point being a generic coupe thing is a far cry from a Boxster or Elise. Much like Mr. Harris will say a MX-5 is a decent enough "roadster", but not a sports car.
forzaminardi said:
Don't really understand the default anti-Diesel attitude shown by some here.
I don't view diesels as 'bad'. In fact I think they're great at what they can do in an every day car, and they can be powerful. Great for the motorway and the commute along the M27 towards Ringwood every morning.But they're not exciting. There is no real fizz or drama. It's like rice crispies without the snap, crackle and pop.
Perhaps it's also like dating a nice, attractive and faithful girl, but she's only ever interested in the missionary position. You could happily live with her every day, but secretly you sometimes want her to go a bit feral and surprise you with a pair of handcuffs and a corset.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff