Why is diesel now bad news?
Discussion
DPF's are not the cure on diesels .When our 62 plate VX Antara does a regen the recommendation is that you run it until the rgen has completed ,last weekend i had to do a 20 mile run (low gear high revs i've been told by VX dealer ) for this to happen and probably burnt about 1 1/2 gallons in the process ,how on earth can this help the environment or my pocket . I stupidly didn't do any research about DPF's before i bought otherwise i would've gone for a petrol instead .
I think that the problem with diesels is that people don't understand them. Diesel is a highly efficient fuel & vehicles with diesel engines should not be babied because if you baby it you end up choking it with soot so it runs less efficiently & is more harmful to the environment!
The boffins have tried to reduce the amount of soot that diesels emit by inventing the dreaded DPF. now in days of old, the the diesel engined vehicle was noted for the amount of smoke coming out of the exhaust, most of which fell to the road to be washed away with the rain.
now this was a good thing as the microscopic particles which do the most harm clung to the larger ones & fell to earth with them. Now these micro particles are the ones that cause most of the problems associated with diesel emissions. They are also the ones that the DPF does not stop!
So due to all the improvements that have been made to the diesel engine eg., DPF's, EGR'S & ECM'S that often malfunction, it now produces more harmful pollution than a 1980's tractor.
I own a 1998 VW 1.9 tdi Sharan, I have made various mods to it & now get about 58 mpg & that's a real world mpg not taken from the computer! It also produces very little smoke.
Hope this makes sense. Oh, it's t time. http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/imgs/10.gif
The boffins have tried to reduce the amount of soot that diesels emit by inventing the dreaded DPF. now in days of old, the the diesel engined vehicle was noted for the amount of smoke coming out of the exhaust, most of which fell to the road to be washed away with the rain.
now this was a good thing as the microscopic particles which do the most harm clung to the larger ones & fell to earth with them. Now these micro particles are the ones that cause most of the problems associated with diesel emissions. They are also the ones that the DPF does not stop!
So due to all the improvements that have been made to the diesel engine eg., DPF's, EGR'S & ECM'S that often malfunction, it now produces more harmful pollution than a 1980's tractor.
I own a 1998 VW 1.9 tdi Sharan, I have made various mods to it & now get about 58 mpg & that's a real world mpg not taken from the computer! It also produces very little smoke.
Hope this makes sense. Oh, it's t time. http://www.pistonheads.com/GASSING/imgs/10.gif
It has always been bad news, just finally people are waking up to the fact.
Friends of ours who are very "eco" (she works for the local wildlife authority, he is a sustainability planner, both vegetarian, only use Ecover products in the house etc.) have had two diesel cars for the last ten years. She commutes 2 miles each way, he 10. They would not listen to me when I said petrol would be better for both of them, as diesel "does more miles per gallon" therefore it must be better.
I bought a hybrid last year. Not because I care about saving polar bears (the Chinese are singlehandedly wiping them out with a day's pollution in Shanghai, for a start) but because it made the most sense for us as a family car. Lots of short trips in and around town, occasional long motorway journey (sadly meaning we couldn't go full electric).
The vegetarians (for that is what we call them) try to laud it over us that they get 60mpg from their diesel wagons, and we only get 55mpg. However their tax (based on emissions, I remind you) is over £200 a year, and mine is a tenner. Plus I never have to worry about DPF issues, waxed fuel lines or why diesel is so much more expensive than petrol...
Friends of ours who are very "eco" (she works for the local wildlife authority, he is a sustainability planner, both vegetarian, only use Ecover products in the house etc.) have had two diesel cars for the last ten years. She commutes 2 miles each way, he 10. They would not listen to me when I said petrol would be better for both of them, as diesel "does more miles per gallon" therefore it must be better.
I bought a hybrid last year. Not because I care about saving polar bears (the Chinese are singlehandedly wiping them out with a day's pollution in Shanghai, for a start) but because it made the most sense for us as a family car. Lots of short trips in and around town, occasional long motorway journey (sadly meaning we couldn't go full electric).
The vegetarians (for that is what we call them) try to laud it over us that they get 60mpg from their diesel wagons, and we only get 55mpg. However their tax (based on emissions, I remind you) is over £200 a year, and mine is a tenner. Plus I never have to worry about DPF issues, waxed fuel lines or why diesel is so much more expensive than petrol...
better than that ......your car would have been a shed load cheaper in the first instance. With the "Fleet" work i do it does amaze me how many folk buy diesels, do about 5000 miles a year, have dpf problems, plus other associated running problems as their cars never get up to a proper working temperature, and burn off the cobwebs. Salesmen are not asking the correct questions when selling these cars, or get better commision when selling an oil burner
Vegetarian tree hugging non leather wearing, bruised fruit eating home birth liberal/green voting should cycle or walk.....why does anyone one buy a car who drives 2 miles to work? She must earn too much money. I'm with you for not understanding folk like that.
Getting back to some of the "Fleet" drivers I talk to, when I ask them how much fuel they put into their "private" cars, some are only chucking in some £15-20 a week......blimey that's what?.......2-3 gallons? no wonder they nearly faint when I suggest I put in some times some £500+ a month, so my oil burner works out cheaper than a petrol, never had DPF probs, diesel is working as it should.
Vegetarian tree hugging non leather wearing, bruised fruit eating home birth liberal/green voting should cycle or walk.....why does anyone one buy a car who drives 2 miles to work? She must earn too much money. I'm with you for not understanding folk like that.
Getting back to some of the "Fleet" drivers I talk to, when I ask them how much fuel they put into their "private" cars, some are only chucking in some £15-20 a week......blimey that's what?.......2-3 gallons? no wonder they nearly faint when I suggest I put in some times some £500+ a month, so my oil burner works out cheaper than a petrol, never had DPF probs, diesel is working as it should.
watchnut said:
better than that ......your car would have been a shed load cheaper in the first instance. With the "Fleet" work i do it does amaze me how many folk buy diesels, do about 5000 miles a year, have dpf problems, plus other associated running problems as their cars never get up to a proper working temperature, and burn off the cobwebs. Salesmen are not asking the correct questions when selling these cars, or get better commission when selling an oil burner.
I have a car allowance and a mileage payment (at HMRC company car rates) and always get a laugh that the others with oil burners are just about breaking even while even with the £285 VED and 'only' 34-38mpg on a run I'm making money per (business) mile. In comparison my boss has an XF, he effectively pays out of his own pocket to do business miles!
watchnut said:
Getting back to some of the "Fleet" drivers I talk to, when I ask them how much fuel they put into their "private" cars, some are only chucking in some £15-20 a week......blimey that's what?.......2-3 gallons? no wonder they nearly faint when I suggest I put in some times some £500+ a month, so my oil burner works out cheaper than a petrol, never had DPF probs, diesel is working as it should.
I can't find a single car that fits my requirements where I'd be better off with the diesel version! Especially when you take into account the extra purchase cost. Actually that's not quite true, I did find one, the Mk4 Mondeo 2.0T vs the 2.2TDCI the diesel just wins.I love the way turbo diesels drive, all that low end torque goodness. Petrol would have to be a big turbo block to interest me. That would have dreadful fuel economy and cost a tone to insure and service.
However - bring on electric and decent AWD plug in hybrids. I am pretty sure I'll own one in the next 5-7 years.
However - bring on electric and decent AWD plug in hybrids. I am pretty sure I'll own one in the next 5-7 years.
dtr said:
I love the way turbo diesels drive, all that low end torque goodness. Petrol would have to be a big turbo block to interest me. That would have dreadful fuel economy and cost a tone to insure and service.
However - bring on electric and decent AWD plug in hybrids. I am pretty sure I'll own one in the next 5-7 years.
No. You like turbos. Diesels are frankly crap for torque spread and low down torque. They're good for a massive peak but it's narrow and with a few exceptions (eg multi-turbo diesels) there is nothing outside of it and so you end up waiting an age for the thing to finally get back in the torque.However - bring on electric and decent AWD plug in hybrids. I am pretty sure I'll own one in the next 5-7 years.
My petrol car has the same torque as the diesel version. Except it comes in earlier (1500rpm against ~1750rpm) and lasts for longer (~4500rpm against 2200rpm). It costs less to service and as it cost ~3-4k less than the diesel version will cost me less over the ~3 years I intend to keep it for.
On the downside it costs more for VED and more in fuel but I get more (in my pocket after accounting for the fuel and VED) per business mile than the diesel. Overall it costs me less to run a turbo petrol.
Although TBH I would happily pay £500-1000 a year to not drive a diesel. It really is worth that not to have to put up with the horrible things.
Car industry fumes about the 'demonisation' of diesel engines
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
heebeegeetee said:
Car industry fumes about the 'demonisation' of diesel engines
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
Of course it is. They have geared up to sell lots of diesel cars and are gutted that the big diesel scam is coming to an end.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
heebeegeetee said:
Car industry fumes about the 'demonisation' of diesel engines
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
You can almost smell the fear coming off the manufacturers.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
"We're almost up to par with the nox emissions of a petrol".
Yes, you are, but only after fitting Cats, DPFs, EGR, SCR, AddBlue etc. Which on the whole costs mega bucks when it goes wrong. But they don't care about that part as it brings in more money for them in parts sales and repairs.
jhfozzy said:
heebeegeetee said:
Car industry fumes about the 'demonisation' of diesel engines
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
You can almost smell the fear coming off the manufacturers.http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/tr...
"We're almost up to par with the nox emissions of a petrol".
Yes, you are, but only after fitting Cats, DPFs, EGR, SCR, AddBlue etc. Which on the whole costs mega bucks when it goes wrong. But they don't care about that part as it brings in more money for them in parts sales and repairs.
He said "The after-treatment cost and complexity is going to get crazy at the Euro 6.2 emissions level."
ORD said:
Of course it is. They have geared up to sell lots of diesel cars and are gutted that the big diesel scam is coming to an end.
jhfozzy said:
You can almost smell the fear coming off the manufacturers.
"We're almost up to par with the nox emissions of a petrol".
Yes, you are, but only after fitting Cats, DPFs, EGR, SCR, AddBlue etc. Which on the whole costs mega bucks when it goes wrong. But they don't care about that part as it brings in more money for them in parts sales and repairs.
Eh? Diesel is still cheaper than petrol all over Europe."We're almost up to par with the nox emissions of a petrol".
Yes, you are, but only after fitting Cats, DPFs, EGR, SCR, AddBlue etc. Which on the whole costs mega bucks when it goes wrong. But they don't care about that part as it brings in more money for them in parts sales and repairs.
The manufacturers will get paid for whatever they do, how can it work in any other way? if diesel cars die a death then petrols will be at a premium.
Petrols had cats years before diesels; petrols have had to downsize and take to mulitple, complex turbo arrangements. They have egr sysems too, which also block up. Adblue is not used in cars, but petrol won't work without additives. TEL (lead) was used for about 70 years, even though it was as known to be as harmful to health at the beginning as it was at the end, and indeed it was to negate the harmful effects of this additive that cats were introduced back in the seventies. TEL was replaced by highly carcinogenic substances like benzene, and cats have of course remained.
I think some Mercedes use Adblue in their Blue Efficiency vans and cars. I have a feeling we are going to have to revisit some of the prejudices against turbo diesels in next few years. The new generation of petrol engines run direct injection, higher compression ratios, turbochargers (often with intercoolers) and some are even running dual mass flywheels. My son has just bought a Fiesta ST, lovely machine and a great engine. However, with the exception of a DPF, it has all of the inherent weaknesses and expensive ancilliaries of a turbo diesel engine. The high pressure fuel pump, the injection system, DMF and turbo are all there and potentially vulnerable. We just have to recognise that to get engines to do more work with less fuel, in vehicles that are often heavier, requires technology that is not cheap to develop or replace.
Load of cobblers.
1) DMF's - They don't see the high stress in a petrol than they do in a diesel so they last the life time of the vehicle. I wouldn't worry about a DMF in a petrol any more than I would about the clutch going.
2) HP injection - Far lower pressures involved even with direct injection (GDI) than diesel so far less likely to go wrong. Normal injection has been here since the 80's and petrol injectors are reliable and if they do fail cheap and easy to replace. I'd be far more concerned about the inlet ports clogging up with GDI as there is no spray on the back of the valve to clean it (see Audi/Mazda/Mini etc issues).
3) Turbo's - Don't clog up in the same way as diesels. - Still have some issues but there are plenty of 90's petrol cars still on their original turbos with ~200k!
You didn't mention them but GPF's. Only fitted for GDI engines and the far lower amounts of black smoke a petrol puts out means they will in all likelihood last the life of the vehicle.
1) DMF's - They don't see the high stress in a petrol than they do in a diesel so they last the life time of the vehicle. I wouldn't worry about a DMF in a petrol any more than I would about the clutch going.
2) HP injection - Far lower pressures involved even with direct injection (GDI) than diesel so far less likely to go wrong. Normal injection has been here since the 80's and petrol injectors are reliable and if they do fail cheap and easy to replace. I'd be far more concerned about the inlet ports clogging up with GDI as there is no spray on the back of the valve to clean it (see Audi/Mazda/Mini etc issues).
3) Turbo's - Don't clog up in the same way as diesels. - Still have some issues but there are plenty of 90's petrol cars still on their original turbos with ~200k!
You didn't mention them but GPF's. Only fitted for GDI engines and the far lower amounts of black smoke a petrol puts out means they will in all likelihood last the life of the vehicle.
Here's a crazy idea - let's dump the absurd official cycle and concentrate on producing efficient, normally aspirated petrol engines to accompany electric motors. I cannot see how diesel was ever anything but a stop-gap, and turbos are probably not worth the added cost, complexity, etc.
What happened to Boris's ban on older diesel vans within the M25 ? I still see old smokers, and I'm sure they don't pay his extortionate 120 quid a day to drive in London ? I was forced to sell my 89 Transit to buy a Mk7 for 8 grand, and I've had more trouble with the overcomplicated Mk7 !!...........b
d !
d ! Flashback to the mid 90s.
The premium German manufacturers and PSA group were terrified of the Japanese. Honda looked like they were going to conquer the world with VTEC and were talking about Hydrogen, Toyota were launching Prius and Lexus was eroding Mercedes/BMW market share. The only weakness in the Japanese armoury was diesel. They had invested in petrol (and hybrid) for their main markets (Japan, Middle East, USA)
The EU car industry lobbyists got together and built a set of co2 taxation rules that would favour diesel engines. The emergence of MultiJets, Econetics and BluMotions saved their skin.
Toyota and Honda , partially due to the EU rules and partly due to the Nikkei downturn stopped gaining ground in Europe.
Twenty years ago, the increase in NoX in Europe is an issue.
The premium German manufacturers and PSA group were terrified of the Japanese. Honda looked like they were going to conquer the world with VTEC and were talking about Hydrogen, Toyota were launching Prius and Lexus was eroding Mercedes/BMW market share. The only weakness in the Japanese armoury was diesel. They had invested in petrol (and hybrid) for their main markets (Japan, Middle East, USA)
The EU car industry lobbyists got together and built a set of co2 taxation rules that would favour diesel engines. The emergence of MultiJets, Econetics and BluMotions saved their skin.
Toyota and Honda , partially due to the EU rules and partly due to the Nikkei downturn stopped gaining ground in Europe.
Twenty years ago, the increase in NoX in Europe is an issue.
Redlake27 said:
Flashback to the mid 90s.
The premium German manufacturers and PSA group were terrified of the Japanese. Honda looked like they were going to conquer the world with VTEC and were talking about Hydrogen, Toyota were launching Prius and Lexus was eroding Mercedes/BMW market share. The only weakness in the Japanese armoury was diesel. They had invested in petrol (and hybrid) for their main markets (Japan, Middle East, USA)
The EU car industry lobbyists got together and built a set of co2 taxation rules that would favour diesel engines. The emergence of MultiJets, Econetics and BluMotions saved their skin.
Toyota and Honda , partially due to the EU rules and partly due to the Nikkei downturn stopped gaining ground in Europe.
Twenty years ago, the increase in NoX in Europe is an issue.
Good post so a cartel stopped the Japanese advancing.The premium German manufacturers and PSA group were terrified of the Japanese. Honda looked like they were going to conquer the world with VTEC and were talking about Hydrogen, Toyota were launching Prius and Lexus was eroding Mercedes/BMW market share. The only weakness in the Japanese armoury was diesel. They had invested in petrol (and hybrid) for their main markets (Japan, Middle East, USA)
The EU car industry lobbyists got together and built a set of co2 taxation rules that would favour diesel engines. The emergence of MultiJets, Econetics and BluMotions saved their skin.
Toyota and Honda , partially due to the EU rules and partly due to the Nikkei downturn stopped gaining ground in Europe.
Twenty years ago, the increase in NoX in Europe is an issue.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff