Diesels About To Get Expensive????
Discussion
Captainawesome said:
daemon said:
CraigyMc said:
JonnyVTEC said:
Pan Pan said:
The problem with hybrids is that they must also carry a heavy, space consuming set of batteries, which leaves relatively little space for a fuel tank, passengers and their luggage, so even if they do achieve good MPG, (and bear in mind you must use fuel to lug around the batteries and extra electric motors)
What about that cast iron engine block with cast manifold, low efficiency 12V alternator, much larger lead acid battery, turbocharger and intercooler all stuffed under the bonnet on a diesel equivalent?The passat does 1000mile on a tank because it has a big tank!
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
neil1jnr said:
Captainawesome said:
daemon said:
CraigyMc said:
JonnyVTEC said:
Pan Pan said:
The problem with hybrids is that they must also carry a heavy, space consuming set of batteries, which leaves relatively little space for a fuel tank, passengers and their luggage, so even if they do achieve good MPG, (and bear in mind you must use fuel to lug around the batteries and extra electric motors)
What about that cast iron engine block with cast manifold, low efficiency 12V alternator, much larger lead acid battery, turbocharger and intercooler all stuffed under the bonnet on a diesel equivalent?The passat does 1000mile on a tank because it has a big tank!
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
daemon said:
MG CHRIS said:
What I don't get with the diesel are so much better at mpg so I must be saving money types are they completely forget the price difference between petrol to diesel 5-7p on average. Service cost are higher the oil in most modern diesel is also twice as expensive if not more then petrol oil, the likes of the vw longlife oil is double the price and merc specific oil is also rather expensive. Fuel filters the big block types found in citroens and the likes are more expensive too.
Yes. For a lot of people who drive diesels - they really shouldnt be.Personally - got 70.05mpg over the course of a brim to brim fill there, and doing 24K ish miles per year, so well in pocket.
Only needs serviced every 20K miles so not out a fortune on servicing, and it came with 2 free services anyway.
BUT, as i said, there are a percentage of people who assume diesel is the default choice for them when really its not.
MG CHRIS said:
Then you have dmf/dpf/egr valves/turbo/injector just a small list of potentially massive bills if one of them fails which are less likely to happen on a petrol variant.
Yup. Its a risk. But then the petrol variant of my car would be the 1.4TFSI which isnt exactly reknowned for reliability.MG CHRIS said:
On top of that is higher purchase price compared to petrol models.
But its a personal choice for what a person wants a car to do and as long as that the reason to buy the car compared to the its better on mpg so must be cheaper types then carry on.
Yup.But its a personal choice for what a person wants a car to do and as long as that the reason to buy the car compared to the its better on mpg so must be cheaper types then carry on.
MG CHRIS said:
Me personally will stick to my old jap mx5 cheap to run never goes wrong, massive smile factor but mpg well just fill up and forget it 250 miles on average to a full tank just under 30mpg. But no expensive parts to go wrong no complex ecu system to f
k up and everything is easy to get at with standard nuts and bolts not retarded torx bits etc like so many new cars.
Yes. Had a mx5 there recently - just a cheapie old one and my third so far - loved it, had a wail of a time. Took it to work a few times. Fun for a day or two, but quite draining - not really a commuting car, but love to have one when i can as a weekend toy.k up and everything is easy to get at with standard nuts and bolts not retarded torx bits etc like so many new cars.Me work 5 miles from home and only less than 10 times a year do any sort of long distance journeys so an old jap mx5 makes sense for me even a diesel for my commute wont do much better than the mx5 so will keep with that for the time being but any sort of long journeys isn't suited to a mx5 after 3 hrs or so becomes really un comfortable to keep going. Your car on the other hand wouldn't be fun up a country road flat out enjoying the roads which is what I do regular.
neil1jnr said:
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
*this is not common, but does happen occasionally.
This is from my car, and is in fact pessimistic by about 1mpg when compared with the brim-to-brim calculations.
As for your driving, if you're ever using the brakes, you're not driving as efficiently as you could. Check your tyre pressures too.
The ED is a beast at hypermiling so unless you're in one (or something similar), forget it.
The same car that did 84mpg calculated has also done 142mph in Germany (it averages about 50mpg when cruising at 100mph, and a lot less than that when going flat out!).
Driving for economy isn't always joyless - it can be a pervese sort of fun.
Driving fast in a road car on the road when you're used to race karts and race cars (single seaters, that sort of thing), to me that's just boring, supercharged M3 or not.
C
CraigyMc said:
neil1jnr said:
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
*this is not common, but does happen occasionally.
This is from my car, and is in fact pessimistic by about 1mpg when compared with the brim-to-brim calculations.
As for your driving, if you're ever using the brakes, you're not driving as efficiently as you could. Check your tyre pressures too.
The ED is a beast at hypermiling so unless you're in one (or something similar), forget it.
The same car that did 84mpg calculated has also done 142mph in Germany (it averages about 50mpg when cruising at 100mph, and a lot less than that when going flat out!).
Driving for economy isn't always joyless - it can be a pervese sort of fun.
Driving fast in a road car on the road when you're used to race karts and race cars (single seaters, that sort of thing), to me that's just boring, supercharged M3 or not.
C
I still can't see how on earth your 2l tdi manages 29mpg MORE than mines did when I roughly got 55mpg from a short 30 mile trip sitting at 55mph the whole time!?
How is it possible? I am sorry but I still don't see it, I'd maybe have believed 65mpg at a push but not 84. I assume your 3 series weighed more than my leon did too?
My long term average was circa 37-38mpg, less than HALF yours with a similar tdi engine... unless BMW has made a magic engine those figures sound like lab test conditions at the very best.
I may be in denial but I need it explained to me as it doesn't make logical sense?
Well, my Superb has averaged 50 more or less over two years and 34000 miles, that's from new. Since it went over 30,000 miles, average MPG hasn't dropped below an indicated 60.5, which is about 5 over. I recently did a 400 mile round trip and averaged 69 mpg. Motorway averages these days are consistently in the 60's, although a headwind can take a bit off that, but then again, heavy traffic improves things, I'm guessing due to the slipstream effect.
If I drive at 100 mph, which generally I don't as I have to pay for my own fuel, MPG drops below 40, but even on a brisk country drive getting into the 50's isn't difficult. Driving like a dick around town brings it down to the low 40's, but it's largely counter productive as other road users and traffic lights tend to get in the way.
Mine's the 2.0 170 bhp version.
If I drive at 100 mph, which generally I don't as I have to pay for my own fuel, MPG drops below 40, but even on a brisk country drive getting into the 50's isn't difficult. Driving like a dick around town brings it down to the low 40's, but it's largely counter productive as other road users and traffic lights tend to get in the way.
Mine's the 2.0 170 bhp version.
Super Slo Mo said:
Well, my Superb has averaged 50 more or less over two years and 34000 miles, that's from new. Since it went over 30,000 miles, average MPG hasn't dropped below an indicated 60.5, which is about 5 over. I recently did a 400 mile round trip and averaged 69 mpg. Motorway averages these days are consistently in the 60's, although a headwind can take a bit off that, but then again, heavy traffic improves things, I'm guessing due to the slipstream effect.
If I drive at 100 mph, which generally I don't as I have to pay for my own fuel, MPG drops below 40, but even on a brisk country drive getting into the 50's isn't difficult. Driving like a dick around town brings it down to the low 40's, but it's largely counter productive as other road users and traffic lights tend to get in the way.
Mine's the 2.0 170 bhp version.
Again, i had a 170 diesel too and never saw anything near 60mpg, if you reset the trip it would easy average 30 ish in town, I still don't understand it??If I drive at 100 mph, which generally I don't as I have to pay for my own fuel, MPG drops below 40, but even on a brisk country drive getting into the 50's isn't difficult. Driving like a dick around town brings it down to the low 40's, but it's largely counter productive as other road users and traffic lights tend to get in the way.
Mine's the 2.0 170 bhp version.
daemon said:
Captainawesome said:
Acceleration and handling not important to you then????
Have a look at this and come back when there is some lead in your pencil. MTFU!
Clearly it mustnt be that important if a smart car can keep up with a supercharged M3.Have a look at this and come back when there is some lead in your pencil. MTFU!
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Captainawesome said:
So, I am moving to the west coast of Scotland in a couple of months, an area full of very tight and twisty single-track roads. After a rather embarrassing incident in which I, in my M3, was unable to shake a Smart car from my bumper,
So you're on here willy waving about your supercharged M3, yet you're starting threads about how its not the right car for the roads you're now driving on and a Smart car can keep up with you???So you've got the WRONG car for your circumstances now, but yet you're poking us about the cars we drive which happen to be RIGHT for our circumstances?
Brilliant. You couldnt make it up.
Edited by daemon on Wednesday 20th August 21:33
Did we not look far enough back to see that I was asking advice about buying a car for those circumstances as I am soon to be permanently there??? You may also note that I wasn't in the supercharged M3 at the time.
Not willy waving just find you diesel folk hilarious. And before you go researching some more, I have owned 2 diesels, bought them for my wife and even she thought that they were a bag of s
t and bought a proper car. OOOOOOHH i get 7 gazillion miles from my diseasel Have fun chaps.
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Captainawesome said:
daemon said:
CraigyMc said:
JonnyVTEC said:
Pan Pan said:
The problem with hybrids is that they must also carry a heavy, space consuming set of batteries, which leaves relatively little space for a fuel tank, passengers and their luggage, so even if they do achieve good MPG, (and bear in mind you must use fuel to lug around the batteries and extra electric motors)
What about that cast iron engine block with cast manifold, low efficiency 12V alternator, much larger lead acid battery, turbocharger and intercooler all stuffed under the bonnet on a diesel equivalent?The passat does 1000mile on a tank because it has a big tank!
I'm not ashamed to say I couldn't shake him off. I'll bet you couldn't have either. Difference between me and you is I'm not a big hard internet warrior.
Don't know then, I can't explain that.
I log all my mileage on a spreadsheet 'cos I'm an obsessive. Worst I've ever seen to a tank is mid 40's, and that's solely urban mileage when I've not been out on the road. Most of my running is on the motorway of course, which helps the long term average.
Driving style can play a bit of a part. Then again, in steady and busy urban traffic when I don't get chance to boot it, it'll still easily get mid 50's indicated, which is more or less 50 mpg real.
I doubt the Superb is lighter than the Leon, or if it is, it's not by much. Kerb weight is 1,400 or so kg's, which is light for such a sodding big car, but it's still not light in the grand scheme of things.
I log all my mileage on a spreadsheet 'cos I'm an obsessive. Worst I've ever seen to a tank is mid 40's, and that's solely urban mileage when I've not been out on the road. Most of my running is on the motorway of course, which helps the long term average.
Driving style can play a bit of a part. Then again, in steady and busy urban traffic when I don't get chance to boot it, it'll still easily get mid 50's indicated, which is more or less 50 mpg real.
I doubt the Superb is lighter than the Leon, or if it is, it's not by much. Kerb weight is 1,400 or so kg's, which is light for such a sodding big car, but it's still not light in the grand scheme of things.
Super Slo Mo said:
Don't know then, I can't explain that.
I log all my mileage on a spreadsheet 'cos I'm an obsessive. Worst I've ever seen to a tank is mid 40's, and that's solely urban mileage when I've not been out on the road. Most of my running is on the motorway of course, which helps the long term average.
Driving style can play a bit of a part. Then again, in steady and busy urban traffic when I don't get chance to boot it, it'll still easily get mid 50's indicated, which is more or less 50 mpg real.
I doubt the Superb is lighter than the Leon, or if it is, it's not by much. Kerb weight is 1,400 or so kg's, which is light for such a sodding big car, but it's still not light in the grand scheme of things.
Maybe it's just the roads I drive on and way I drive. But I did try once and it was roughly 55mpg for the average of the distance I tried, I've tried the same i my Fiesta ST and it can do 47 ish. I tried the diesel and it had its good and bad points but the mpg advantage didn't seem good enough while I had it to warrent keeping it.I log all my mileage on a spreadsheet 'cos I'm an obsessive. Worst I've ever seen to a tank is mid 40's, and that's solely urban mileage when I've not been out on the road. Most of my running is on the motorway of course, which helps the long term average.
Driving style can play a bit of a part. Then again, in steady and busy urban traffic when I don't get chance to boot it, it'll still easily get mid 50's indicated, which is more or less 50 mpg real.
I doubt the Superb is lighter than the Leon, or if it is, it's not by much. Kerb weight is 1,400 or so kg's, which is light for such a sodding big car, but it's still not light in the grand scheme of things.
I just had to go back to petrol!
Would still like to know what technology is in that 3 series ED as to how it can apparently average 83 mpg...
Maybe, might have been a rogue car. Might have been that your driving style suits a petrol better, diesels seem to be most economical when using roll on 'torque' in a highish gear.
I had an ED during the Olympics, but it didn't average 80 mpg. Didn't average 50 either, but I was pretty much entirely in London traffic, although admittedly with the benefit of being able to use the Olympic lanes.
I suspect Craigy is quite gentle with the loud pedal. Driving style has to be a big factor in it, although whatever way you look at it, 80 mpg is impressive.
I had an ED during the Olympics, but it didn't average 80 mpg. Didn't average 50 either, but I was pretty much entirely in London traffic, although admittedly with the benefit of being able to use the Olympic lanes.
I suspect Craigy is quite gentle with the loud pedal. Driving style has to be a big factor in it, although whatever way you look at it, 80 mpg is impressive.
neil1jnr said:
I just wonder where you guys drive daily? Flat motorways? My last car was a diesel but the best I ever got was circa 55mpg on a trip. Not sure how many miles I could have got in a tank in total because I have a heavy right foot.... I just find it hard to believe 1000 miles from a tank when the best I got was less than half that from 55 litre tank.
39 miles - 8 miles of hill A roads, 10 miles dual carriageway, 19 miles motorway 2 miles city roads (but v early in the morning so little traffic)Last fill i got 70.05 miles per gallon brim to brim.
I do drive very easy though.
MG CHRIS said:
daemon said:
MG CHRIS said:
What I don't get with the diesel are so much better at mpg so I must be saving money types are they completely forget the price difference between petrol to diesel 5-7p on average. Service cost are higher the oil in most modern diesel is also twice as expensive if not more then petrol oil, the likes of the vw longlife oil is double the price and merc specific oil is also rather expensive. Fuel filters the big block types found in citroens and the likes are more expensive too.
Yes. For a lot of people who drive diesels - they really shouldnt be.Personally - got 70.05mpg over the course of a brim to brim fill there, and doing 24K ish miles per year, so well in pocket.
Only needs serviced every 20K miles so not out a fortune on servicing, and it came with 2 free services anyway.
BUT, as i said, there are a percentage of people who assume diesel is the default choice for them when really its not.
MG CHRIS said:
Then you have dmf/dpf/egr valves/turbo/injector just a small list of potentially massive bills if one of them fails which are less likely to happen on a petrol variant.
Yup. Its a risk. But then the petrol variant of my car would be the 1.4TFSI which isnt exactly reknowned for reliability.MG CHRIS said:
On top of that is higher purchase price compared to petrol models.
But its a personal choice for what a person wants a car to do and as long as that the reason to buy the car compared to the its better on mpg so must be cheaper types then carry on.
Yup.But its a personal choice for what a person wants a car to do and as long as that the reason to buy the car compared to the its better on mpg so must be cheaper types then carry on.
MG CHRIS said:
Me personally will stick to my old jap mx5 cheap to run never goes wrong, massive smile factor but mpg well just fill up and forget it 250 miles on average to a full tank just under 30mpg. But no expensive parts to go wrong no complex ecu system to fk up and everything is easy to get at with standard nuts and bolts not retarded torx bits etc like so many new cars.
Yes. Had a mx5 there recently - just a cheapie old one and my third so far - loved it, had a wail of a time. Took it to work a few times. Fun for a day or two, but quite draining - not really a commuting car, but love to have one when i can as a weekend toy.k up and everything is easy to get at with standard nuts and bolts not retarded torx bits etc like so many new cars.Me work 5 miles from home and only less than 10 times a year do any sort of long distance journeys so an old jap mx5 makes sense for me even a diesel for my commute wont do much better than the mx5 so will keep with that for the time being but any sort of long journeys isn't suited to a mx5 after 3 hrs or so becomes really un comfortable to keep going. Your car on the other hand wouldn't be fun up a country road flat out enjoying the roads which is what I do regular.
neil1jnr said:
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
The worst range I have ever had from a Passat Bluemotion was 820 miles, with the best being 1100+ plus miles, both on mixed town, back road, and motorway driving, where (conditions permitting) I always try to drive at least at the posted limit (I don't see the point of owning a motor vehicle, and doing anything less than the posted limit where road condition allows it)
I did once have a go at Hypermiling on a trip to Scotland and back, where I got over 1200 miles on one fill up, but its not a driving technique I would want to try again.
I do not recognize any of the so called faults that some here assign to diesels, so their comments must come from the fact that they either drive hand crafted V16 petrol engined cars that are so superb as to be virtually faultless so that ANY other car petrol or diesel is going to seem crude by comparison, or (more likely) they have not driven a half decent modern diesel engined car for sufficient time to understand how they perform in the longer term. I don't even understand, why some get so worked up by diesel engine cars. Diesel, like petrol is a fuel, the only real problem with fuel, any fuel, is not being able to get it it when you need it.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
Captainawesome said:
Did we not look far enough back to see that I was asking advice about buying a car for those circumstances as I am soon to be permanently there???
And did you not look on this thread to see this was people discussing and asking for advice on what their car might be? Or are only YOU allowed to ask?Captainawesome said:
Not willy waving just find you diesel folk hilarious.
Its a thread about fuel economy and under what circumstances a diesel might be viable going forward.What the f
k were you expecting us to be talking about?Out of curiosity, what was your "value add" going to be, when you decided to comment on this thread - "oh, oh, a thread about diesels, i must tell them i drive an m3"
Edited by daemon on Thursday 21st August 09:23
Edited by daemon on Thursday 21st August 09:25
Captainawesome said:
obviously the true driving gods all drive diesels.
No-one said that. But for all your willy waving, it turns out on the wrong road (or is that right road?) you cant shake off a 60BHP car.Brilliant. You couldnt make it up.
Captainawesome said:
I'm not ashamed to say I couldn't shake him off. I'll bet you couldn't have either.
I thought it was "all about the acceleration and the top speed, man"? Turns out its not then? Its about having the right car for the roads you're driving on?
I drive 90 miles a day in 55mph bumper to bumper traffic. Oh look, turns out a high mpg car is right for me.
Captainawesome said:
Difference between me and you is I'm not a big hard internet warrior.
Oh fk thats rich - Mr "mums net is this way >>>>>>>>" and "its all about the acceleration and the handling" and "diseasels" - turns out you can dish it out ok but cant take it??Edited by daemon on Thursday 21st August 09:26
Pan Pan said:
neil1jnr said:
daemon said:
neil1jnr said:
Pan Pan said:
I think it depends on how many miles you do, if you do high mileage especially on motorways, a diesel might be the better option, if you do average mileage, then a petrol engined car would be more suited.
I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
1000 miles between fill ups? Sorry I don't believe this. Unless the tank is a fair bit bigger than most cars?I do between 37000 and 42000 miles a year, so fuel type can make a useful difference in costs.
I can get around 1000 miles per fill up with a Passat Bluemotion, and the convenience of being able to drive past fuel station, after fuel station, whilst travelling at the NSL in near silence, with the engine barely turning above idle RPM is worth considering. (Particularly useful when travelling abroad)
The worst range I have ever had from a Passat Bluemotion was 820 miles, with the best being 1100+ plus miles, both on mixed town, back road, and motorway driving, where (conditions permitting) I always try to drive at least at the posted limit (I don't see the point of owning a motor vehicle, and doing anything less than the posted limit where road condition allows it)
I did once have a go at Hypermiling on a trip to Scotland and back, where I got over 1200 miles on one fill up, but its not a driving technique I would want to try again.
I do not recognize any of the so called faults that some here assign to diesels, so their comments must come from the fact that they either drive hand crafted V16 petrol engined cars that are so superb as to be virtually faultless so that ANY other car petrol or diesel is going to seem crude by comparison, or (more likely) they have not driven a half decent modern diesel engined car for sufficient time to understand how they perform in the longer term. I don't even understand, why some get so worked up by diesel engine cars. Diesel, like petrol is a fuel, the only real problem with fuel, any fuel, is not being able to get it it when you need it.
http://green.autoblog.com/2010/10/04/passat-bluemo...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff