My opinion on modern diesels. Do you agree?
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
If you were comparing a diesel with a typical petrol i.e. not a V8 and you're only doing low to average miles then I agree. However most V8s are rather thirsty.
Diesels can throw up big bills but then so can a petrol car.
My wife ran a Mazda 6 diesel for 5 years and it didn't have any major bills due to failures, at least not ones that were the cars fault! We bought it when it was 5 years old as well. My diesel Focus is the same aside from a DMF failure but the savings on fuel more than made up for this.
If you don't do lots of miles and do lots of short runs buy a petrol, but don't try and convince yourself that a V8 will be cheaper to run
I am comparing them with typical petrols - I was just using the v8 to demonstrate how much money diesels have cost me in failed parts - It literally would of been cheaper to run a v8! Diesels can throw up big bills but then so can a petrol car.
My wife ran a Mazda 6 diesel for 5 years and it didn't have any major bills due to failures, at least not ones that were the cars fault! We bought it when it was 5 years old as well. My diesel Focus is the same aside from a DMF failure but the savings on fuel more than made up for this.
If you don't do lots of miles and do lots of short runs buy a petrol, but don't try and convince yourself that a V8 will be cheaper to run
Ghost91 said:
Devil2575 said:
If you were comparing a diesel with a typical petrol i.e. not a V8 and you're only doing low to average miles then I agree. However most V8s are rather thirsty.
Diesels can throw up big bills but then so can a petrol car.
My wife ran a Mazda 6 diesel for 5 years and it didn't have any major bills due to failures, at least not ones that were the cars fault! We bought it when it was 5 years old as well. My diesel Focus is the same aside from a DMF failure but the savings on fuel more than made up for this.
If you don't do lots of miles and do lots of short runs buy a petrol, but don't try and convince yourself that a V8 will be cheaper to run
I am comparing them with typical petrols - I was just using the v8 to demonstrate how much money diesels have cost me in failed parts - It literally would of been cheaper to run a v8! Diesels can throw up big bills but then so can a petrol car.
My wife ran a Mazda 6 diesel for 5 years and it didn't have any major bills due to failures, at least not ones that were the cars fault! We bought it when it was 5 years old as well. My diesel Focus is the same aside from a DMF failure but the savings on fuel more than made up for this.
If you don't do lots of miles and do lots of short runs buy a petrol, but don't try and convince yourself that a V8 will be cheaper to run
I run a diesel and would't change it for the world, thats because I would be so s
t scared of anything newer I buy costing me thousands in repair costs. Mine has not had one thing go wrong with it in 5 years and I wont be changing until it wont go any more. The next change will be to a petrol, no way could I risk buying a more modern diesel.
t scared of anything newer I buy costing me thousands in repair costs. Mine has not had one thing go wrong with it in 5 years and I wont be changing until it wont go any more. The next change will be to a petrol, no way could I risk buying a more modern diesel.Ghost91 said:
I definitely would be weary of buying a new one now - I've thought about the lease scheme at work but there's only the choice of a Nissan quashqai or however you spell it, juke (puke) or note. I Like you would much rather hand the keys back and get a new one every year than worth about it myself...
I have been tempted recently by another VAG tdi, around the ten years old mark like the octavia I had, just got work and back, but been a bit scared by the potential bills. I suppose I don't want to spend time in a bland car for the fuel economy if it goes bad and I may as well off been in a massive luxobarge instead anyway
Well the scheme we get offered (Through Hitachi Capital) has a range of cars but all fall under I think 135kg of Co2 if you don't want your pants pulling down. Most expensive is £1500 a month for a specced up bluemotion merc. They tend to encourage the greener cars so things like electric cars and hybrids are cheaper - those Mitsu Outlander Hybrid things start at £250 a month just put fuel in and go, all else (maintenance, insurance etc) included and the BMW i3 starts at £270 or £340 for the Hybrid, which is ok for a 35 grand (or whatever after options) car. The Golf Hybrid is about £280 but the lead time is humungous on those I think. For a to b transport it's always an option, but I'd want a cheaper car I could enjoy myself in. Banger for a grand, big thirsty engine or turbo, a sticker on the dash saying "Dads car. Kids not allowed. Or wife."I have been tempted recently by another VAG tdi, around the ten years old mark like the octavia I had, just got work and back, but been a bit scared by the potential bills. I suppose I don't want to spend time in a bland car for the fuel economy if it goes bad and I may as well off been in a massive luxobarge instead anyway
My best mate is living his dream at the moment. Restores classic/yank cars for a living, has a Dodge Charger (68) with 475hp under the hood ready to go back together after a nut/bolt resto and full respray, just bought a Yank pickup v8 for a couple of grand, but day to day is a fiesta diesel which never gets washed or serviced and won't blow up. Which is odd seeing as the wifes tdci fiesta is a pile of crap that sometimes doesn't want to start and goes through exhausts (3 of those), coil springs (4 now) and clutches (3 in 75k) like you wouldn't believe. Shed.
Devil2575 said:
Except you have no idea what bills that V8 would have given you. I suspect you're working on the assumption that petrols never go wrong.
Even replacing generic suspension parts and a coil pack or 8 would of been cheaper seeing as my diesels needed suspension work as well - you never know what might go wrong on any car I agree, but with a diesel you have anything that could go wrong, plus all the diesel problems on top. I want to believe it would be better to drive an economical diesel, but if it only cost me slightly more to run a nice to drive big engined petrol then there's no contest - spending 2 hours a day behind the wheel for the last 5 years I wish I'd of bought a nice petrol ages before I did, but I've been suffering in bland mobiles for economy's sake... Or false economy!
Well one of the diesels wasn't bland - it was lovely, but that was the most costly of them all ha
ZX10R NIN said:
I say get yourself into one of these:
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
The reason I say this is because the 270cdi has the benefit of not having a DPF filter also being an auto no DMF issues either, as long as the gearbox fluids have been changed (£165 job over £100 in fluids & filters make sure you get genuine parts) they will just run.
They seem to knock out there electric booster at around 100k (this is a pre heater that means you get hot air within 20 secs of getting in the car) but it makes no difference to the car I never fixed mine.
Also there are no cambelts to worry about either so OP.
For what it costs to run my CLK63 or the 55 the 320 costs less than half for the same mileage my old 270 would have cost less again but only by £85.
With your Lexus averaging 27mpg at best if it's all motorway & something like the 270/320 getting 49's, plus with petrol/diesel at £5.30/£5.35 over 18K you'd need some big bills to swing it back in favor of the Lexus.
Look the OH won't know but you can admit to us that you bought a couple of dud TDCI's so you could have a bit of V8 in your life
we understand & salute your guile & cunning. 
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...
The reason I say this is because the 270cdi has the benefit of not having a DPF filter also being an auto no DMF issues either, as long as the gearbox fluids have been changed (£165 job over £100 in fluids & filters make sure you get genuine parts) they will just run.
They seem to knock out there electric booster at around 100k (this is a pre heater that means you get hot air within 20 secs of getting in the car) but it makes no difference to the car I never fixed mine.
Also there are no cambelts to worry about either so OP.
For what it costs to run my CLK63 or the 55 the 320 costs less than half for the same mileage my old 270 would have cost less again but only by £85.
With your Lexus averaging 27mpg at best if it's all motorway & something like the 270/320 getting 49's, plus with petrol/diesel at £5.30/£5.35 over 18K you'd need some big bills to swing it back in favor of the Lexus.
Look the OH won't know but you can admit to us that you bought a couple of dud TDCI's so you could have a bit of V8 in your life
we understand & salute your guile & cunning. Edited by ZX10R NIN on Friday 26th June 08:48
Ghost91 said:
I am comparing them with typical petrols - I was just using the v8 to demonstrate how much money diesels have cost me in failed parts - It literally would of been cheaper to run a v8!
Aforementioned mates Charger did 8mpg before one of the pistons turned it into a v7. It's not cheap to run (then again it was an 8 litre, now 7. something). guys at work with v8s tip toe around to get low 20s to the gallon. If you want to run a V8 every day you need to live in Saudi. 9p a litre one of the lads over there said last week. They still make money at that so it shows how much we get fleeced.I remember returning to the UK in 1991, I bought a newish E32 3.5 petrol, one of my staff thought I was mad, they had saved 15000 pound in cash are were going tom buy a ford escort diesel for the daily commute into Bristol, I thought this was madness then, even before the high maintenance cost on diesels, and advised the purchase of a nice 4.2 e type. Needless to say he bought the escort kept is 3 years lost a fortune. it's amazing how many people think fuel is the biggest issue issue.
Today I live in Malaysia petrol is 40p a liter and people are paying 45,000 pounds for a Toyota hybrid because it has good fuel economy, no reference to the finance cost, battery replacement etc,
Today I live in Malaysia petrol is 40p a liter and people are paying 45,000 pounds for a Toyota hybrid because it has good fuel economy, no reference to the finance cost, battery replacement etc,
apness said:
Well the scheme we get offered (Through Hitachi Capital) has a range of cars but all fall under I think 135kg of Co2 if you don't want your pants pulling down. Most expensive is £1500 a month for a specced up bluemotion merc. They tend to encourage the greener cars so things like electric cars and hybrids are cheaper - those Mitsu Outlander Hybrid things start at £250 a month just put fuel in and go, all else (maintenance, insurance etc) included and the BMW i3 starts at £270 or £340 for the Hybrid, which is ok for a 35 grand (or whatever after options) car. The Golf Hybrid is about £280 but the lead time is humungous on those I think. For a to b transport it's always an option, but I'd want a cheaper car I could enjoy myself in. Banger for a grand, big thirsty engine or turbo, a sticker on the dash saying "Dads car. Kids not allowed. Or wife."
My best mate is living his dream at the moment. Restores classic/yank cars for a living, has a Dodge Charger (68) with 475hp under the hood ready to go back together after a nut/bolt resto and full respray, just bought a Yank pickup v8 for a couple of grand, but day to day is a fiesta diesel which never gets washed or serviced and won't blow up. Which is odd seeing as the wifes tdci fiesta is a pile of crap that sometimes doesn't want to start and goes through exhausts (3 of those), coil springs (4 now) and clutches (3 in 75k) like you wouldn't believe. Shed.
Sounds like you have a much more interesting car scheme than we do! I think I'd do the same as you though, something cheap and interesting - the least you'd lose is the little money you'd paid and it's fun! My best mate is living his dream at the moment. Restores classic/yank cars for a living, has a Dodge Charger (68) with 475hp under the hood ready to go back together after a nut/bolt resto and full respray, just bought a Yank pickup v8 for a couple of grand, but day to day is a fiesta diesel which never gets washed or serviced and won't blow up. Which is odd seeing as the wifes tdci fiesta is a pile of crap that sometimes doesn't want to start and goes through exhausts (3 of those), coil springs (4 now) and clutches (3 in 75k) like you wouldn't believe. Shed.
It's funny how you can have two of the same car and one can be a pile of crap... I know a bloke who's got two dacias (yes, bad example I know...) one is fantastic and one is rubbish... Apparently one was made in a state of the art factory in eastern Europe and the other in North Africa if I remember rightly and apparently the North afrian ones aren't screwed together as well, perhaps this is the case with other manufacturers as well
ZX10R NIN said:
Haha!! Perhaps it's a bit of that.... Man maths at large! But....
When you take into account original purchase price - 5k for a 270 cdi merc, or 2k for a bmw 740 with an enthusiast ower and refreshed suspension and lots of love and care, the 3k saved can also be used for fuel!
I'll be honest, theres a bora highline that's caught my eye for the right price and I'm in need of another car - classic Saab needs to be for weekends really, panda 100hp is a bone shaker (Mrs car) and I got rid of my Alfa so I want every excuse possible not to buy the bland mobile and buy something more interesting, after being stung by diesels before! A merc might be a good compromise - and perhaps I'll get a v8 for occasional use if I find a daily that's cheap enough! I still maintain though that in the past I'd of been better off with petrol and this leads me to believe this will be true with my next car... Maybe I've been particularly unlucky but there does seem to be a trend
Edited by Ghost91 on Friday 26th June 09:18
I'm with you Op, two BM diesels a 330d and a 320d both went bang and left me massive bills, all correctly serviced etc, just it was their time.
I'm going powerful petrol and going to enjoy it!
Every 10 days I do around 500 miles with my shift pattern and trains etc. The 15mpg (hoped) difference is around 33% and not that ridiculous. Hopefully!
I'm going powerful petrol and going to enjoy it!
Every 10 days I do around 500 miles with my shift pattern and trains etc. The 15mpg (hoped) difference is around 33% and not that ridiculous. Hopefully!
My take on it is this, I think the majority of people that buy new diesels, new diesels don't require one.
The first diesel car I bought was a VAG group 170 common rail with DSG, it suited the 80mile round trip commute BUT I averaged about 40mpg, sometimes lower. I changed and bought a Fietsa ST becuase I got bored with it and low and behold the average mpg is only slightly worse by 2-3mpg. I now have another diesel (still have the ST too), a £1100 Mitsubishi Carisma 1.9 diesel. It is slow, comfortable, does 50mpg (becuase there is no performance to use), has leather, cruise control, 10 disc changer, aircon and has only 50K miles on the clock. To me, buying a diesel car is to save money, so my school of thought now is to buy the cheapest, slowest, best mpg, lowest miles diesel car I can.
To me, if you are buying a car for shed money for commuting then a diesel is the right choice. If you are spending anything upwards of say £10K, then I really can't see why you would buy a diesel, unless obviously you prefer driving them, a point of view I can't see. Now with modern petrol turbos giving a diesel like shove of torque low down in the rev range and getting pretty good mpg, I just can't see why you would buy the diesel. Take VW Golf for example, the GTD and GTI are roughly the same price, both get decent mpg, but the GTI will be so much better to drive, I just can't see why you would buy the diesel but there are so many of them!
The first diesel car I bought was a VAG group 170 common rail with DSG, it suited the 80mile round trip commute BUT I averaged about 40mpg, sometimes lower. I changed and bought a Fietsa ST becuase I got bored with it and low and behold the average mpg is only slightly worse by 2-3mpg. I now have another diesel (still have the ST too), a £1100 Mitsubishi Carisma 1.9 diesel. It is slow, comfortable, does 50mpg (becuase there is no performance to use), has leather, cruise control, 10 disc changer, aircon and has only 50K miles on the clock. To me, buying a diesel car is to save money, so my school of thought now is to buy the cheapest, slowest, best mpg, lowest miles diesel car I can.
To me, if you are buying a car for shed money for commuting then a diesel is the right choice. If you are spending anything upwards of say £10K, then I really can't see why you would buy a diesel, unless obviously you prefer driving them, a point of view I can't see. Now with modern petrol turbos giving a diesel like shove of torque low down in the rev range and getting pretty good mpg, I just can't see why you would buy the diesel. Take VW Golf for example, the GTD and GTI are roughly the same price, both get decent mpg, but the GTI will be so much better to drive, I just can't see why you would buy the diesel but there are so many of them!
RicksAlfas said:
OP, don't forget that modern petrol engines are becoming far more complicated too...
This.Diesels are becoming more complicated to clean them up, petrols are becoming more complicated to better the MPG. They also are getting smaller/lighter..... there will be a difference in a huge v8 and a small 1.0 3 cyl dragging a car along the road in terms of longevity.
Ghost91 said:
Sounds like you have a much more interesting car scheme than we do! I think I'd do the same as you though, something cheap and interesting - the least you'd lose is the little money you'd paid and it's fun!
It's funny how you can have two of the same car and one can be a pile of crap... I know a bloke who's got two dacias (yes, bad example I know...) one is fantastic and one is rubbish... Apparently one was made in a state of the art factory in eastern Europe and the other in North Africa if I remember rightly and apparently the North afrian ones aren't screwed together as well, perhaps this is the case with other manufacturers as well
Well, just make sure you don't fall for the Saab 'cheap and interesting' cause 'reliable' doesn't add to that. We bought a 'cheap interesting' Saab 9000 turbo for £400 for the Practical Performance Car challenge. I did the research, remapped it (wires, soldering, building a windows 98 machine that could talk to it, putting a map on from an aero) after putting on ebay scavenged aero bits and made it faster, with more to come. Only a week before the PPC it went bang at low speed thanks to oil pressure relief spring thing seized. Turns out that Saab bottom ends are bulletproof so long as they get oil. If not, then they weld themselves. Everything else had been fine, and it was even decent on fuel (for a 2.3 turbo), started first time, went well after the turbo addition and remap.It's funny how you can have two of the same car and one can be a pile of crap... I know a bloke who's got two dacias (yes, bad example I know...) one is fantastic and one is rubbish... Apparently one was made in a state of the art factory in eastern Europe and the other in North Africa if I remember rightly and apparently the North afrian ones aren't screwed together as well, perhaps this is the case with other manufacturers as well
It owed us nearly a grand, tripled our money after stripping and selling the bits, then weighing the carcass in.
In an effort not to learn from our mistakes, one of our trio of buffoons then bought a 9-5 aero which produced alarming lights on the dash not 5 miles from the sellers house after pottering away and sat in stop start traffic. By the time he'd limped it back there was oil gushing everywhere and smoke filling the street. To the sellers credit he refunded the cash instantly with an aghast look on his face. Seems he thought Saabs were reliable too.
So, Saabs. Cheap, interesting, fraught with <insert word, like hidden dangers, high chance of walking instead of driving, wallet destruction, cries of 'I told you so!' by mates who knew better and you ignored anyway>
Just my words of (hard learned) wisdom.
My experience of diesels is mainly good...but I've mainly had the old stuff.
1995 Mondeo 1.8 TD - bought very very veeeery cheap at the time with high miles 164k. No history of cam belt getting done and sure enough, at 168k, it went. However it was good, solid and robust and I think they've got a fairly good reputation for reliability. I should have put a cambelt on it and it would have lasted longer.
1993 and 1994 ZX TDs - I always remember these fondly. Out of my 19 cars...these still have the best performance/mpg/handling mix.
I had a 1996 306 DTurbo...which...whilst prettier than the ZXs...strangely didn't do it for me. It was somehow slower, not as good on diesel...and not as nice to drive..IMO.
I sold my second ZX to a bloke when I bought an AX 1.5D...(I was well in 'economy mode' as someone else mentioned) and the guy was like...'okaaaaaay' :s when I told him that the AX was replacing the ZX.
Sure enough, it was mightily economical (never got less than 60mpg)..but it was not nice to drive at all...felt very fragile like it would break at any minute...sprayed oil everywhere...sometimes lost major power (not that it had a lot to start with. (I look back now and realise it wasn't a good example, at least mechanically)
Erm...what else.
I had a Megane DTi (2000) I think these were fairly robust..it was actually quite smooth, for a diesel. But slow, being just the 80bhp model. 50+mpg usually.
I had a Focus TDDI (not the TDCI) and this was a bloody good car. Had it for nearly 2 years (usually change every few months). It was economical, 50+ , best nearly 63mpg on a long run, lovely to drive. But the engine was quite rough, you could tell it was from another era. Great car though. Tempted by another one or a TDCI but I gather these aren't as robust, reliability-wise?
Erm...
So...that's the old stuff.
More recent - used two Xsara Picasso 2.0 HDIs at work. I sure these DONT have the DMF or DPF so they may be quite a good option. However...in the Picasso...it just felt sloooowwwww and didn't give great mpg either..when I tried for it. Nice lazy engine though...and quite smooth compared to the XUD stuff..but lacking that 'punch'.
BUT....more recently, I bought a 2002 Mondeo TDCI 130 from a friend (extremely cheap, I think £200) as it needed some work and the MOT was coming up. Sure enough...it was going to cost over £1k to get through it's MOT...and that was at staff rates too...so I ebayed it and for £300.
Didn't loose out but it was scary how much It may have cost. The DMF was noisy, injectors were faulty (might have been 1 or two, may have been more. New brake lines, new suspension parts.
It's a shame as it was a lovely car to drive...very smooth, loads of torque...I would be very interested but having heard the horror stories of the Ford tdcis....I wouldn't go near one now...just in case!
So..in my experience...old stuff....noisy...rough...but tough.
Newer stuff...much smoother...faster...but much more to go wrong
1995 Mondeo 1.8 TD - bought very very veeeery cheap at the time with high miles 164k. No history of cam belt getting done and sure enough, at 168k, it went. However it was good, solid and robust and I think they've got a fairly good reputation for reliability. I should have put a cambelt on it and it would have lasted longer.
1993 and 1994 ZX TDs - I always remember these fondly. Out of my 19 cars...these still have the best performance/mpg/handling mix.
I had a 1996 306 DTurbo...which...whilst prettier than the ZXs...strangely didn't do it for me. It was somehow slower, not as good on diesel...and not as nice to drive..IMO.
I sold my second ZX to a bloke when I bought an AX 1.5D...(I was well in 'economy mode' as someone else mentioned) and the guy was like...'okaaaaaay' :s when I told him that the AX was replacing the ZX.
Sure enough, it was mightily economical (never got less than 60mpg)..but it was not nice to drive at all...felt very fragile like it would break at any minute...sprayed oil everywhere...sometimes lost major power (not that it had a lot to start with. (I look back now and realise it wasn't a good example, at least mechanically)
Erm...what else.
I had a Megane DTi (2000) I think these were fairly robust..it was actually quite smooth, for a diesel. But slow, being just the 80bhp model. 50+mpg usually.
I had a Focus TDDI (not the TDCI) and this was a bloody good car. Had it for nearly 2 years (usually change every few months). It was economical, 50+ , best nearly 63mpg on a long run, lovely to drive. But the engine was quite rough, you could tell it was from another era. Great car though. Tempted by another one or a TDCI but I gather these aren't as robust, reliability-wise?
Erm...
So...that's the old stuff.
More recent - used two Xsara Picasso 2.0 HDIs at work. I sure these DONT have the DMF or DPF so they may be quite a good option. However...in the Picasso...it just felt sloooowwwww and didn't give great mpg either..when I tried for it. Nice lazy engine though...and quite smooth compared to the XUD stuff..but lacking that 'punch'.
BUT....more recently, I bought a 2002 Mondeo TDCI 130 from a friend (extremely cheap, I think £200) as it needed some work and the MOT was coming up. Sure enough...it was going to cost over £1k to get through it's MOT...and that was at staff rates too...so I ebayed it and for £300.
Didn't loose out but it was scary how much It may have cost. The DMF was noisy, injectors were faulty (might have been 1 or two, may have been more. New brake lines, new suspension parts.
It's a shame as it was a lovely car to drive...very smooth, loads of torque...I would be very interested but having heard the horror stories of the Ford tdcis....I wouldn't go near one now...just in case!
So..in my experience...old stuff....noisy...rough...but tough.
Newer stuff...much smoother...faster...but much more to go wrong
I've almost always run petrol cars - just don't like the smell of diesel fuel or exhaust fumes nor the thrummy sound of the engines nor the way power is delivered. I bought an S40 2.0D some years back and it confirmed my view that diesels are not for me.
Bought it with 80k miles Within the next 40k miles the turbo failed, the EGR was replaced and the injector problems started. Got rid of it at 125k and couldn't have been more pleased to see the back of it. That was the much praised Ford/PSA TDCi engine so I hate to think what a bad one is like.
By comparison I ran a Volvo S70 T5 that I bought with 80k miles and an it to 220k before I sold it. Nothing needed doing aside from general maintenance (cambelt twice, oil and air filters) and 2 coilpacks failed - neither of which was more than £50 from memory. It also had a throttle body fail under warranty but that can happen to a modern diesel too.
It was a far more enjoyable drive (well it would be wouldn't it with all that power!) and was far more reliable.
MPG wise the S70 would average an easy 28mpg with as much as 38 being seen on occasion (long motorway trips on cruise).
The S40 averaged 48mpg but given the cost differential in fuel price equated to (in petrol terms) 45mpg. Over their lifetimes the overall cost was broadly similar but I know which one I miss and which one I don't!
I also ran an A8 4.2 Quattro Sport for a while - bought with 100k on the clock and sold with 212k. That did 25mpg most of the time with a best ever of 33mpg (Glasgow to Lancaster driving like Miss Daisy and using hypermiling techniques to eek out every drop). That over its lifetime needed nothing more than a cambelt, a water pump and plugs. Again a far more reliable experience than the TDCi based Volvo.
I've also owned a Defender 300TDi for the past 8 years (longest I've ever had a vehicle). It has no cat, no DPF, no electronics and has been (engine wise) reliable aside from a headgasket and cracked head, two waterpumps and a radiator (got clogged with mud and the cooling fins dissolved when it was cleaned with a hose).
The diesel engine quite suits the character of the vehicle (though I do keep thinking a V8 would be an excellent swap - maybe 350 chev...?) and is the only diesel vehicle I would now allow in the family fleet.
Given the likelihood of a government anti-diesel emissions tax of some kind plus my S40 experience I'd not consider a diesel again.
Bought it with 80k miles Within the next 40k miles the turbo failed, the EGR was replaced and the injector problems started. Got rid of it at 125k and couldn't have been more pleased to see the back of it. That was the much praised Ford/PSA TDCi engine so I hate to think what a bad one is like.
By comparison I ran a Volvo S70 T5 that I bought with 80k miles and an it to 220k before I sold it. Nothing needed doing aside from general maintenance (cambelt twice, oil and air filters) and 2 coilpacks failed - neither of which was more than £50 from memory. It also had a throttle body fail under warranty but that can happen to a modern diesel too.
It was a far more enjoyable drive (well it would be wouldn't it with all that power!) and was far more reliable.
MPG wise the S70 would average an easy 28mpg with as much as 38 being seen on occasion (long motorway trips on cruise).
The S40 averaged 48mpg but given the cost differential in fuel price equated to (in petrol terms) 45mpg. Over their lifetimes the overall cost was broadly similar but I know which one I miss and which one I don't!
I also ran an A8 4.2 Quattro Sport for a while - bought with 100k on the clock and sold with 212k. That did 25mpg most of the time with a best ever of 33mpg (Glasgow to Lancaster driving like Miss Daisy and using hypermiling techniques to eek out every drop). That over its lifetime needed nothing more than a cambelt, a water pump and plugs. Again a far more reliable experience than the TDCi based Volvo.
I've also owned a Defender 300TDi for the past 8 years (longest I've ever had a vehicle). It has no cat, no DPF, no electronics and has been (engine wise) reliable aside from a headgasket and cracked head, two waterpumps and a radiator (got clogged with mud and the cooling fins dissolved when it was cleaned with a hose).
The diesel engine quite suits the character of the vehicle (though I do keep thinking a V8 would be an excellent swap - maybe 350 chev...?) and is the only diesel vehicle I would now allow in the family fleet.
Given the likelihood of a government anti-diesel emissions tax of some kind plus my S40 experience I'd not consider a diesel again.
I don't know which are the more dreaded words, EGR or DPF for modern diesel car owners. Both (as far as I know) to do with emissions and both are costly to sort out or a pain in the arse.
Which reminds me I'm supposed to clean the father in laws CMax 2.0 TDCI EGR valve at some point as spraying the intake with cleaner didn't do much good. That's fine, I don't like my knuckle skin anyway, and it will be good practise for when it clogs up again in 6 months when its really cold cause it only does 4 miles a day at 20-25mph because '30mph is for racers'. *sigh*
When I borrowed it for a week I upped the average mpg from 28 to 38mpg by varying the driving, but it's still st for a diesel, and illustrates the point that unless you do the miles they really are no better than petrols unless you like the low down grunt a turbo gives. Not sure my father in law knows when the turbo kicks in, not seen him take it above 1500rpm.
From the outside, no one can hear you scream in a Cmax diesel driven by a 70 year old.
Which reminds me I'm supposed to clean the father in laws CMax 2.0 TDCI EGR valve at some point as spraying the intake with cleaner didn't do much good. That's fine, I don't like my knuckle skin anyway, and it will be good practise for when it clogs up again in 6 months when its really cold cause it only does 4 miles a day at 20-25mph because '30mph is for racers'. *sigh*
When I borrowed it for a week I upped the average mpg from 28 to 38mpg by varying the driving, but it's still s
t for a diesel, and illustrates the point that unless you do the miles they really are no better than petrols unless you like the low down grunt a turbo gives. Not sure my father in law knows when the turbo kicks in, not seen him take it above 1500rpm.From the outside, no one can hear you scream in a Cmax diesel driven by a 70 year old.
diesel for me, as its cheap. exactly what driving experience am I trying to magically trying to conjure up when I just chug to work, school, nursery in the thing ???
had them for 25 years now with no bother at all in any shape or form.
my current Mk IV mondeo, which I've now driven for 5 years has been fault free in every way. 39/40 ish mpg on the school/work commute. about 56 ish mpg at loads of leptons on the motorway.
my sisters had three skoda octavias- the scout (4 x 4 ones I think they're called) all done 150k plus, the one she has just changed is now at 170k miles.
good luck to you if you want to run a petrol car at 20 mpg: yr just probably not as tight as me.
what I don't do is fret, worry or careless that something "might" happen.
had them for 25 years now with no bother at all in any shape or form.
my current Mk IV mondeo, which I've now driven for 5 years has been fault free in every way. 39/40 ish mpg on the school/work commute. about 56 ish mpg at loads of leptons on the motorway.
my sisters had three skoda octavias- the scout (4 x 4 ones I think they're called) all done 150k plus, the one she has just changed is now at 170k miles.
good luck to you if you want to run a petrol car at 20 mpg: yr just probably not as tight as me.
what I don't do is fret, worry or careless that something "might" happen.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff