Why are people buying expensive diesels?
Discussion
phib said:
Wills2 said:
So you can't tell the difference between a petrol 4.0V8 TT with 450hp and a diesel 3.0V6 TT with 320hp?
Not any discernible difference, your talking 320bhp 8 speed v 414 bhp 7 speed, on the road its negligible. I would go onto say that even these day a golf gti or GTD would keep up with most things ON THE ROAD, Golf or audi will certainly keep up with a Ferrari 550 (478bhp) or 355 (I know not on subject but fact)
Phib
phib said:
I would go onto say that even these day a golf gti or GTD would keep up with most things ON THE ROAD, Golf or audi will certainly keep up with a Ferrari 550 (478bhp) or 355 (I know not on subject but fact)
Define 'most things', rally reps, lightweights, mid range bruisers, sports. That's a very big statement to make as a 'fact'Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 3rd September 12:16
For some of us, diesel was the only realistic fuel option for the car.
LR only did a V8 D3 in the UK for 2 years, dropped after terrible sales figures.
I would have loved a V8 model, if my old car had sold quicker, i would have got a v8 model as there was a silver with black interior HSE model for sale at the time. It had sold by the time i was ready.
So now it's diesel. Or get a different car.
I don't mind it, it's decent for driving, it suits the autobox nicely.
Low down torque is great for off roading and the diesel is a better towing car than the petrol, that low down torque etc is handy wheras the v8 needs to be revved to get similar.
It's all down to choice, many people have bought diesels when a petrol would have been better.
Not all of us have the financial means to justify a petrol for commutes etc so compromises have to be made.
My dad runs a diesel XF, it's quiet, comfortable and it wafts up and down the motorway perfectly.
It's also got 240bhp and 440+ lbft of torque so if needed, it can show a set of heels to plenty of other cars on the motorway. Still does 40mpg. Which means he can spend some of the savings on the Westfield style kitcar.
LR only did a V8 D3 in the UK for 2 years, dropped after terrible sales figures.
I would have loved a V8 model, if my old car had sold quicker, i would have got a v8 model as there was a silver with black interior HSE model for sale at the time. It had sold by the time i was ready.
So now it's diesel. Or get a different car.
I don't mind it, it's decent for driving, it suits the autobox nicely.
Low down torque is great for off roading and the diesel is a better towing car than the petrol, that low down torque etc is handy wheras the v8 needs to be revved to get similar.
It's all down to choice, many people have bought diesels when a petrol would have been better.
Not all of us have the financial means to justify a petrol for commutes etc so compromises have to be made.
My dad runs a diesel XF, it's quiet, comfortable and it wafts up and down the motorway perfectly.
It's also got 240bhp and 440+ lbft of torque so if needed, it can show a set of heels to plenty of other cars on the motorway. Still does 40mpg. Which means he can spend some of the savings on the Westfield style kitcar.
yonex said:
phib said:
I would go onto say that even these day a golf gti or GTD would keep up with most things ON THE ROAD, Golf or audi will certainly keep up with a Ferrari 550 (478bhp) or 355 (I know not on subject but fact)
Define 'most things', rally reps, lightweights, mid range bruisers, sports. That's a very big statement to make as a 'fact'Edited by yonex on Thursday 3rd September 12:16
neil1jnr said:
yonex said:
phib said:
I would go onto say that even these day a golf gti or GTD would keep up with most things ON THE ROAD, Golf or audi will certainly keep up with a Ferrari 550 (478bhp) or 355 (I know not on subject but fact)
Define 'most things', rally reps, lightweights, mid range bruisers, sports. That's a very big statement to make as a 'fact'Edited by yonex on Thursday 3rd September 12:16
9mm said:
Any tips for reducing the dullness of toilet breaks, cleaning teeth or preparing food?
Seriously, the frequency of going to a petrol station really bothers you?
It bothered me when I had the S4 Avant, every other morning standing there at 6am in the rain and 0ºc temperatures it got a bit annoying. Seriously, the frequency of going to a petrol station really bothers you?
I didn't swap for a diesel though, I swapped for a 335i touring. 18mpg vs 34mpg meant only having to do it every 4 days.
I have owned a few cars in diesel and petrol variant, fuel costs are not much when you compare like with like.
E39
530i 27mpg
530d 31mpg
E61
535d 27mpg
E91
335i 27mpg
E Class
E350cdi 34mpg
E350 29mpg
Audi A6 avant (C6)
3.2 Quattro 28mpg
3.0tdi Quattro 32mpg
E46
330d 33mpg
330i 29mpg
Audi A4 Avant
2.5tdi 36mpg
2.0T 33mpg
The big gains are when you go for something like the 320d ED and you see 50mpg average, and you compare it with your old 330i at 29mpg.
But modern petrols are getting better and better, I was lent the new A3 2.0tdi manual, doing my 90 mile round trip it returned 44.8mpg.
The following Sunday I borrowed the 1.4TFSI version, on that same 90 mile round trip it returned......44.8mpg. Exactly the same.
The 1.4TFSI was lighter, nicer gearbox and clutch and just felt like a nicer car all round. I would actually happily own one, I wouldn't want to drive the manual 2.0tdi for more than an hour.
For me doing 30-40k miles a year the difference in fuel was around £20-30 a week, however, most of my cars were depreciating at £700 a month, and the fuel bill £400-500 a month as well, now I am doing 20k miles a year the difference is about £10 a week choosing a similar powered petrol, on something that is still depreciating at £400 a month, and I am still putting £250 a month in in fuel anyway, so hardly worried about saving £10 a week.
However, I do have a diesel, an X3 20d, it never drops below 40mpg and will see 50mpg on a run no problem. But would I buy a 3.0tdi Bi-Turbo A6 avant over the 3.0T, or the 535d over the 535i? No, the difference will be so small and the loss of refinement so large I can't see the point.
Diesels are too much of a compromise imho, so if I do go derv, it has to be a real money saver and in the sort of car where it isn't anything but a comfy mile muncher.
Mind you, not much choice as you can never find a petrol version.
E39
530i 27mpg
530d 31mpg
E61
535d 27mpg
E91
335i 27mpg
E Class
E350cdi 34mpg
E350 29mpg
Audi A6 avant (C6)
3.2 Quattro 28mpg
3.0tdi Quattro 32mpg
E46
330d 33mpg
330i 29mpg
Audi A4 Avant
2.5tdi 36mpg
2.0T 33mpg
The big gains are when you go for something like the 320d ED and you see 50mpg average, and you compare it with your old 330i at 29mpg.
But modern petrols are getting better and better, I was lent the new A3 2.0tdi manual, doing my 90 mile round trip it returned 44.8mpg.
The following Sunday I borrowed the 1.4TFSI version, on that same 90 mile round trip it returned......44.8mpg. Exactly the same.
The 1.4TFSI was lighter, nicer gearbox and clutch and just felt like a nicer car all round. I would actually happily own one, I wouldn't want to drive the manual 2.0tdi for more than an hour.
For me doing 30-40k miles a year the difference in fuel was around £20-30 a week, however, most of my cars were depreciating at £700 a month, and the fuel bill £400-500 a month as well, now I am doing 20k miles a year the difference is about £10 a week choosing a similar powered petrol, on something that is still depreciating at £400 a month, and I am still putting £250 a month in in fuel anyway, so hardly worried about saving £10 a week.
However, I do have a diesel, an X3 20d, it never drops below 40mpg and will see 50mpg on a run no problem. But would I buy a 3.0tdi Bi-Turbo A6 avant over the 3.0T, or the 535d over the 535i? No, the difference will be so small and the loss of refinement so large I can't see the point.
Diesels are too much of a compromise imho, so if I do go derv, it has to be a real money saver and in the sort of car where it isn't anything but a comfy mile muncher.
Mind you, not much choice as you can never find a petrol version.
Shhhh! If you actually do the maths, pretty much nobody would buy diesel and the British car industry would be knackered overnight. Much better to have a completely absurd taxation system and pollute the air to the point where we die prematurely and have horrible standards of living...
ORD said:
Agreed. Utter nonsense and entirely un-PH. An extra 100bhp is quite useful, let alone 200 or 300
I think what is being said is on a normal motorway or b road unless completely empty and the driver is a very good or b very deranged a GTD would keep up with a lot of cars, how many people on the motorway drive what to exceed 100mph or can when there is any traffic.jbsportstech said:
ORD said:
Agreed. Utter nonsense and entirely un-PH. An extra 100bhp is quite useful, let alone 200 or 300
I think what is being said is on a normal motorway or b road unless completely empty and the driver is a very good or b very deranged a GTD would keep up with a lot of cars, how many people on the motorway drive what to exceed 100mph or can when there is any traffic.The difference is obviously almost nothing on a motorway, but then a 70bhp Fiesta is about as fast as a 918 on the motorway (assuming speed limits are obeyed). If he means "Car A is no faster than Car B when they are both going 70mph", I agree.
ORD said:
It is still complete nonsense insofar as it relates to proper roads. Only someone who has never driven a fast car could think that. The difference between a normal but reasonably fast car (say a bit under 200bhp) and a fast car (say 350bhp) on a mixed journey is very marked. Less time accelerating, less braking for well-sighted corners, more overtakes, etc etc etc.
The difference is obviously almost nothing on a motorway, but then a 70bhp Fiesta is about as fast as a 918 on the motorway (assuming speed limits are obeyed). If he means "Car A is no faster than Car B when they are both going 70mph", I agree.
but thats the rub on normal roads to and from work im no quicker in my E63amg then I am in our GTD. I may overtake a couple of cars but if Im driving sensibly then there will be hardly any difference in time to get home. The difference is obviously almost nothing on a motorway, but then a 70bhp Fiesta is about as fast as a 918 on the motorway (assuming speed limits are obeyed). If he means "Car A is no faster than Car B when they are both going 70mph", I agree.
Sure the E63 is fast/fun but to actually use it on B and unclassified roads over a 30min drive home compared to say GTD is bugger all. seconds if that. You just cant keep the average speed up for any length of time. Sure the E63 was more 'fun'
superlightr said:
ORD said:
It is still complete nonsense insofar as it relates to proper roads. Only someone who has never driven a fast car could think that. The difference between a normal but reasonably fast car (say a bit under 200bhp) and a fast car (say 350bhp) on a mixed journey is very marked. Less time accelerating, less braking for well-sighted corners, more overtakes, etc etc etc.
The difference is obviously almost nothing on a motorway, but then a 70bhp Fiesta is about as fast as a 918 on the motorway (assuming speed limits are obeyed). If he means "Car A is no faster than Car B when they are both going 70mph", I agree.
but thats the rub on normal roads to and from work im no quicker in my E63amg then I am in our GTD. I may overtake a couple of cars but if Im driving sensibly then there will be hardly any difference in time to get home. The difference is obviously almost nothing on a motorway, but then a 70bhp Fiesta is about as fast as a 918 on the motorway (assuming speed limits are obeyed). If he means "Car A is no faster than Car B when they are both going 70mph", I agree.
Sure the E63 is fast/fun but to actually use it on B and unclassified roads over a 30min drive home compared to say GTD is bugger all. seconds if that. You just cant keep the average speed up for any length of time. Sure the E63 was more 'fun'
hornetrider said:
Ares said:
But is a £20/25k petrol really going to be that inspiring compared to a £50k+ diesel?
What a dull life you lead if you can't think of a nice petrol engine to drive for around 25k 
None of these are that old, lots have manufacturer warranty too when you buy approved. I've gone from truly desireable to pretty sensible - and all with a nice big multi-cylinder mill under the bonnet. Go ahead and look at them all, it's an eclectic mix so there's plenty of choice!
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - Infinity FX50
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - Camaro 6.2 V8
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - S5
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - Z4 S-Drive M-Sport
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - Tasty M135i
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - C350 AMG
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015... - Skoda Superb V6
Edited by hornetrider on Thursday 3rd September 10:40
But you've kind of made my point. You have to go to a car that is out of warranty, or soon will be, and rely on a used 3/6/12mth insurance backed warranty. Of the ones you mentioned, I've love a go in the Camaro but wouldn't want to own it. The S5 would be nice, but at over 3yrs old would risk bigger bills. The 135i would be a hoot, but wouldn't likewise wouldn't tempt me away.
Everyone is different.
From an ownership prospect, there isn't a car there that makes me think 'I wish I'd got that instead' (of my £50k+ diesel). For many, they would take the gamble of a 3yr+ old car, with the running costs of such, JUST so their horses were petrol powered. Each to their own!
St John Smythe said:
You forgot to add E90 M3 to that list. Epic car.
Very very true. But remember I said:Ares said:
But is a £20/25k petrol really going to be that inspiring compared to a £50k+ diesel? Unless you go a fair bit older....in which case you end up sacrificing 3/4/5 years assured trouble free, luxury motoring for higher costs and the risk of big(ger) bills/reliability.
The reason I buy new is a) the deals are too good to be true compared to 12/18mth old version, but also b) that I get a minimum of 3 yrs trouble free, zero cost (AC Schnitzer aside
) motoring in a car that is a beautiful place to sit in (usually in traffic).
The reason I buy new is a) the deals are too good to be true compared to 12/18mth old version, but also b) that I get a minimum of 3 yrs trouble free, zero cost (AC Schnitzer aside
) motoring in a car that is a beautiful place to sit in (usually in traffic).Edited by Ares on Thursday 3rd September 15:27
TurboHatchback said:
matsoc said:
Buying petrol or diesel to cover the same motorway distance in a Audi A6 petrol and diesel V6 is the same thing that paying more for a business class air ticket on the same plane and route because the color of the seat is different...
Whether it's worth it depends on the car, the person and the circumstances.I am very happy with my A6 V8 petrol over the diesel (which I'm sure is also very good). At a fixed 70mph on the motorway there is probably little noticeable difference and yes it costs me more but only 10-15% more and it's more than worth it (to me).
On the other hand I tried a Jeep commander 3.0 CRD (which was superb) and 5.7 Hemi back to back, the petrol was definitely nicer (and I bought it) but 18 vs 30mpg was not worth it as it turned out, I should have bought the diesel.
Moreover in my personal experience the difference in consumption is bigger than on papers data might suggest, primarly because as a petrol engine is more pleasant to be pushed I inevitabily drive in a different way.
I think that everybody can judge what it is worth the extra pleasure of petrol driving and how often it can be achieved.
What I don't get is the idea that when spending £50k+ on a car the operating costs should not be considered...
MattHall91 said:
I would like to be a passenger for a day in the people's cars who are getting low 30s mpg from a non-4x4 diesel.
I drive my company car pretty hard day in day out and always see well above 40mpg, normally 45+.
My old Focus would do 40+ being ragged in every single gear by my 17 year old self.I drive my company car pretty hard day in day out and always see well above 40mpg, normally 45+.
Driving my Range Rover just cruising around normally would see 25ish mpg, considering there are NO motorways within 100 miles to be a motorway mpg.
Seeing this post
"E39
530d 31mpg
E46
330d 33mpg"
Correct me if im wrong but I have the same engine in the Range while being a lot heavier, automatic, shaped like a brick and 4wd?
Ares said:
Remember I said inspiring compared to a £50k+ diesel.....
But you've kind of made my point. You have to go to a car that is out of warranty, or soon will be, and rely on a used 3/6/12mth insurance backed warranty. Of the ones you mentioned, I've love a go in the Camaro but wouldn't want to own it. The S5 would be nice, but at over 3yrs old would risk bigger bills. The 135i would be a hoot, but wouldn't likewise wouldn't tempt me away.
Everyone is different.
From an ownership prospect, there isn't a car there that makes me think 'I wish I'd got that instead' (of my £50k+ diesel). For many, they would take the gamble of a 3yr+ old car, with the running costs of such, JUST so their horses were petrol powered. Each to their own!
I'm always amazed by this.....you accept loosing 7-9k/year on first 3 years on new 50k+ car, but you are afraid of potential BIG bills for repairs (and we don't talk 20 years old V12 here).....I just don't get it :-)But you've kind of made my point. You have to go to a car that is out of warranty, or soon will be, and rely on a used 3/6/12mth insurance backed warranty. Of the ones you mentioned, I've love a go in the Camaro but wouldn't want to own it. The S5 would be nice, but at over 3yrs old would risk bigger bills. The 135i would be a hoot, but wouldn't likewise wouldn't tempt me away.
Everyone is different.
From an ownership prospect, there isn't a car there that makes me think 'I wish I'd got that instead' (of my £50k+ diesel). For many, they would take the gamble of a 3yr+ old car, with the running costs of such, JUST so their horses were petrol powered. Each to their own!
I drive an 'expensive' diesel, a 2013 Cayenne S.
I do 30+k per year, it averages 30mpg with my typical driving and cruising speeds but I've had it as high as 37mpg on a run sticking to the limit. A Petrol V8 would probably get low 20's at best so basically I'd be at least 1500 quid a year worse off when the car wasn't really any more expensive to buy than the equivalent petrol and offers similar performance.
It's also plenty quick enough, the bottom end torque makes it very responsive in traffic and it's still fine (if not exactly as willing as a petrol) wringing it out to the limiter. The only single problem I have with the way it delivers the power is if you want to fire it off the line as it has a tendency to bog slightly with the turbo lag before it takes off.
It also genuinely sounds great. Recently I gave my team boss (a top class racer and huge petrol-head) a lift in it to pick up lunch for the lads; we were talking about the car he thought I was bulls
tting about the fuel consumption. It was only when he looked at the rev counter about 5 minutes into the drive that he realised it was powered by the fuel of satan. The only time it obviously sounds like a diesel is windows open driving at high revs through tunnels.
Yes I'd love to have a Cayenne Turbo but they're far more expensive to buy and run. For an everyday car though I genuinely don't see the point of the n/a petrol version. Oh and FWIW I drove a V6 diesel one and the buzzy idle gave it away instantly, it wasn't quick enough either. Wasn't a fan!
I do 30+k per year, it averages 30mpg with my typical driving and cruising speeds but I've had it as high as 37mpg on a run sticking to the limit. A Petrol V8 would probably get low 20's at best so basically I'd be at least 1500 quid a year worse off when the car wasn't really any more expensive to buy than the equivalent petrol and offers similar performance.
It's also plenty quick enough, the bottom end torque makes it very responsive in traffic and it's still fine (if not exactly as willing as a petrol) wringing it out to the limiter. The only single problem I have with the way it delivers the power is if you want to fire it off the line as it has a tendency to bog slightly with the turbo lag before it takes off.
It also genuinely sounds great. Recently I gave my team boss (a top class racer and huge petrol-head) a lift in it to pick up lunch for the lads; we were talking about the car he thought I was bulls
tting about the fuel consumption. It was only when he looked at the rev counter about 5 minutes into the drive that he realised it was powered by the fuel of satan. The only time it obviously sounds like a diesel is windows open driving at high revs through tunnels.Yes I'd love to have a Cayenne Turbo but they're far more expensive to buy and run. For an everyday car though I genuinely don't see the point of the n/a petrol version. Oh and FWIW I drove a V6 diesel one and the buzzy idle gave it away instantly, it wasn't quick enough either. Wasn't a fan!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff