RE: WTCC SEAT Leon TDI

[Ozone]

XitUp said:

Do the diesel cars still have to have a smaller fuel tank?

I think they should make the engine sizes, restrictors and fuel tanks the same.

Everything the same except the fuel. The petrol's seem to be hobbled and i don't understand why, it should be a level playing field.

[RacingPete]

XitUp said:

Do the diesel cars still have to have a smaller fuel tank?

I think they should make the engine sizes, restrictors and fuel tanks the same.

Can't speak for the LMP cars... but the WTCC Leon TDI has the same fuel economy as the petrol version.

[XitUp]

RacingPete said:

XitUp said:

Do the diesel cars still have to have a smaller fuel tank?

I think they should make the engine sizes, restrictors and fuel tanks the same.

Can't speak for the LMP cars... but the WTCC Leon TDI has the same fuel economy as the petrol version.

Huh? Did you mean fuel tank, not fuel economy?

[mainaman]

Muzzlehatch said:

collateral said:

The oft maligned LMP-1 rules - here

I'm not really seeing where the outrage comes from. Any manufacturer could make a 4L petrol boost monster if they felt like it

That's Wiki for you. LMP1 2008 regs...

4.0 litre petrol:
32.4mm inlet restrictors and 1.67bar boost limit

5.5 litre diesel:
39.9mm inlet restrictors and 2.94bar boost limit

That's why LeMans turned into farce.Nobody argues that road cars with diesel power are not more economical and less gear dependant,but in racing diesel is inferior.Who can design a compact 90 kilos diesel engine for F1 with 800 bhp,even if blowing is permitted?

[K50 DEL]

pgilc1 said:

Muzzlehatch said:

pgilc1 said:

Muzzlehatch said:

It still doesn't change the fact that a diesel engine is heavier and produces far less power than a similarly aspirated petrol engine of the same displacement.

That old chestnut.

Does that mean an RX8 should be compared to other 1300cc cars?

If an RX8 displaces 1300cc on each cycle, then yes.

(I don't know much about wankel engines, but I understand that they have twin rotors, making that 2.6 Litres?)

They displace 1.3 litres total. I think you need to start banging the drum that ford are making ridiculously underpowered 1.3 litre cars in their range when mazda can get an easy 230BHP out of theirs?

Oh, hang on, ITS A TOTALLY DIFFERENT TYPE OF ENGINE THEREFORE YOU CANT COMPARE BASED ON CUBIC CAPACITY.

You want to try telling the MSA that, they are allowing a Mazda RX8 rally car to compete in the 1400cc class in the BTRDA rally series this year, on the basis that it's a 1300cc car.

[pgilc1]

astrsxi77 said:

Tell me; does anyone on here who drives a Diesel actually drive it because they want to? Did you buy it or select it from the company car scheme because you had a desire for a Diesel car, or was it because of the financial incentives, partially created by misguided CO2bks politics?

I should imagine that VAG wouldn't even consider racing Diesels if they hadn't been forced to rely on Diesel car sales for survival.

Yup. I've a 535d. 0-60 6.2 secs, 155mph, 400lb/ft torque.

Before that a new x5 3.0d.

Before that a new 535d - remapped that one to 340BHP, 0-60 5.5s, 500lb/ft torque and delimited to 172mph. Whsts not to like about that?

"rely on diesel sales for survival" - you mean because so many people prefer diesels to petrols?

[pgilc1]

Muzzlehatch said:

I missed a paragraph in my previous post. Company car taxation is far more favourable to diesels (based on the political reasons given above), which adds enormous weight to that argument.

In the grand scheme of things (due to higher fuel costs) there isn't a great deal of saving on getting a diesel unless you do high mileage.

Missing the point that a lot of people buy diesels BECAUSE THEY LIKE THEM

[Muzzlehatch]

pgilc1 said:

Muzzlehatch said:

I missed a paragraph in my previous post. Company car taxation is far more favourable to diesels (based on the political reasons given above), which adds enormous weight to that argument.

In the grand scheme of things (due to higher fuel costs) there isn't a great deal of saving on getting a diesel unless you do high mileage.

Missing the point that a lot of people buy diesels BECAUSE THEY LIKE THEM

I've already exlained that it's not a petrol v diesel road car discussion. If you like diesels for road cars, that's fine, I have no objection. My point on thread is about why diesels receive rules in their favour in motor sport.

pgilc1 said:

535d - remapped

That is soooo tempting

[rsstman]

i suppose it must be a rubbish drive as like the new focus rs it is only fwd.

oh sorry no, it turns out a fwd car can also be a good drive and fast with it.

[Prometheus]

Does anyone have the output figures for that Seat's engine?

[pgilc1]

Muzzlehatch said:

pgilc1 said:

Muzzlehatch said:

I missed a paragraph in my previous post. Company car taxation is far more favourable to diesels (based on the political reasons given above), which adds enormous weight to that argument.

In the grand scheme of things (due to higher fuel costs) there isn't a great deal of saving on getting a diesel unless you do high mileage.

Missing the point that a lot of people buy diesels BECAUSE THEY LIKE THEM

I've already exlained that it's not a petrol v diesel road car discussion. If you like diesels for road cars, that's fine, I have no objection. My point on thread is about why diesels receive rules in their favour in motor sport.

pgilc1 said:

535d - remapped

That is soooo tempting

Aye, i was almost embarassed when typing it.....

[ih8thisname]

Nice write up!

[RacingPete]

Prometheus said:

Does anyone have the output figures for that Seat's engine?

Sorry for the delay, but the stats and figures for the car are as follows:

Engine

Type Turbocharged; 4-cylinder in line, transversally installed; distribution: two overhead
Distribution Two overhead camshafts, 16 valves.
Displacement 2.000 cc
Bore x stroke 81x95,5 mm
Maximum power 280 HP a 4000 rpm
Maximum torque 450 Nm a 2500 rpm
Lubrication Wet sump
Particle filter Dow Automotive

Transmission

Traction Front-wheel drive
Gearbox Hewland 6-speed, sequential shift
Clutch Twin-plate
Differential Mechanical limited slip differential

Chassis

Front suspension McPherson strut, coil springs, gas-filled dampers, anti-roll bar
Rear suspension multi-link axel, coil springs, gas-filled dampers, anti-roll bar
Steering Power assisted rack and pinion

Brakes
Type Not-assisted dual circuit system
Front brakes 4-piston calipers, 332 mm steel ventilated discs
Rear brakes 2-piston calipers, 280 mm steel discs

Dimensions
Length 4330 mm
Width 1849 mm
Wheelbase 2600 mm
Minimum weight 1170kg (including driver)

Rims / Tyres
Rims / Tyres 9x17 / Yokohama 240/610 R17

[Prometheus]

RacingPete said:

Prometheus said:

Does anyone have the output figures for that Seat's engine?

Sorry for the delay, but the stats and figures for the car are as follows:

Engine

Type Turbocharged; 4-cylinder in line, transversally installed; distribution: two overhead
Distribution Two overhead camshafts, 16 valves.
Displacement 2.000 cc
Bore x stroke 81x95,5 mm
Maximum power 280 HP a 4000 rpm
Maximum torque 450 Nm a 2500 rpm
Lubrication Wet sump
Particle filter Dow Automotive

Transmission

Traction Front-wheel drive
Gearbox Hewland 6-speed, sequential shift
Clutch Twin-plate
Differential Mechanical limited slip differential

Chassis

Front suspension McPherson strut, coil springs, gas-filled dampers, anti-roll bar
Rear suspension multi-link axel, coil springs, gas-filled dampers, anti-roll bar
Steering Power assisted rack and pinion

Brakes
Type Not-assisted dual circuit system
Front brakes 4-piston calipers, 332 mm steel ventilated discs
Rear brakes 2-piston calipers, 280 mm steel discs

Dimensions
Length 4330 mm
Width 1849 mm
Wheelbase 2600 mm
Minimum weight 1170kg (including driver)

Rims / Tyres
Rims / Tyres 9x17 / Yokohama 240/610 R17

Excellent.

Can I have one?

[RacingPete]

Prometheus said:

Excellent.
Can I have one?

Send me a signed blank cheque and I will get one shipped out to you

[Prometheus]

To quote Jack Burton, "the check is in the mail."

I think in the petrol/diesel debate we lose sight of the fact that only a few years back diesel engines were only fit for lorries. Now we have diesel production cars like the 123d that can do 0-60 in 6.5s yet still return excellent mpg. From a purely engineering viewpoint this is an amazing feat.

[tonym911]

DJC said:

Ppl dont care about Co2. They never have done, they never will, they care about £.

Disagree. VED rates are directly linked to CO2, and CO2 is directly linked to mpg, so they're gonna start caring as much about CO2 as they do about mpg and money because it's effectively all the same thing now. New VED bandings are coming in on 1 April which really make big differentiations between high CO2 cars and lower ones. Those over 226g/km are practically double the tax of those under 226g/km. There's another big step between sub-120g/km cars and those above that figure.

Edited by tonym911 on Thursday 12th February 17:57

[tonym911]

For those that are interested, there'll still be some decent PH-type cars coming in at lower VED rates (ie below 226g/km): Exige, Cayman 2.9 PDK, Carrera Coupe. If comfort is your thing, low VED luxo-barges include the Merc S320 CDI, Audi A8 2.8, Jag XJ 2.7 deezl, BMW 730d.

[Dilemna]

Is it so bad diesel engine cars now perform better and are more popular than their petrol variants? I am really pleased that SEAT/VW have been so successful with the Leon TDI. It means all maufacturers (BMW, Audi, Alfa....Porsche) have all raised their game on diesel engine refinement, performance, economy and cleanliness which has got to be better for the wider motoring public and the environment. If the engines weren't any good then no one would buy them with or without tax breaks and cheaper running costs. The fact is the modern diesel engine has raised the standard against the petrol engine. The petrol engine brigade have to respond but it is difficult to see how they will do this given the propensity of the petrol engine to guzzle fuel. I'm sure steam powered cars felt the same when the first combustion engines came along. I know for a fact that I could not afford to run a comparable high performance 2 litre petrol engine of my car. It's a no brainer when diesel engines give economy of 50-55 mpg day in day out against 20-27mpg if you're lucky with a comparable output 2.0l petrol engine. To get same economy 50-55mpg using a petrol engine one would have to run a 1.0 litre Micra or equivalent and scream it's nuts off when the car had any load to get it to move. I changed to diesel in 2001 and have not looked back although I still have 1998cc Lancia Delta Integrale, but only run this occasionally as the cost of fuel to go anywhere is like taking out a 2nd mortgage. See petrol engines for what they are - great but old technology.

As far as I can see hydrogen/electric powered cars are the way forward. The Japanese are pushing this re Honda. Diesel happens to be the engine of the moment.

That's my mile in this debate.

Alex Dilemna

[sosidge]

Dilemna said:

some stuff about road cars

The point is that in motorsport the governing bodies have skewed the regulations in favour of diesel engines.

On the road car debate, it is a shame that manufacturers haven't spent more time developing small capacity, forced induction petrol engines. These would have a much more competitive performance/economy balance.

VW's 1.4TSI is a very interesting engine, unfortunately it is very expensive in the Golf, but 8 seconds to 60 and 45mpg combined on paper is pretty impressive.

I think Saab were eveloping similar power plants in the past, haven't seen anything released though.

Edited by sosidge on Friday 13th February 17:15