which would be fastest?
Discussion
Just driving back from the girlfriends and i started mulling over the question of whether a fast sporty petrol car (say a subaru wrx for arguments sake) or a sensible run of the mill diesel (maybe a vw passat) would be quickest for the hour journey.
Easy i hear you say. But when the cost of fuel comes into it it becomes harder. As i would imagine i would push the passat harder and worry about mpg on the wrx and only thrash it occassionally thus making the passat quicker overall.
P.s. The thought came to me as i was on the motorway admiring a lovely wrx doing 60 mph to try and conserve fuel i think as a passat flew past me (i was doing 70 mph).
p.s.s. I am not trying to start any fights or divide just mulling it over and wondered what others thought on the subject.
Easy i hear you say. But when the cost of fuel comes into it it becomes harder. As i would imagine i would push the passat harder and worry about mpg on the wrx and only thrash it occassionally thus making the passat quicker overall.
P.s. The thought came to me as i was on the motorway admiring a lovely wrx doing 60 mph to try and conserve fuel i think as a passat flew past me (i was doing 70 mph).
p.s.s. I am not trying to start any fights or divide just mulling it over and wondered what others thought on the subject.
what sort of silly question is this?
with the turbo spooled on the wrx it will be guzzling the most fuel.
and before you ask.. Generally larger engines say a jag v8 are going to be 'more economical' when cruising at 100mph+
edit: all depends on how you value fuel and how you feel at the time.. I'm someone who will occasionally attempt to perform a journey at 65-70mph but will end up thrashing it at times through bordem.. Othertimes when I need to be somewhere I won't give a jott.
I often see big guzzlers crusing in the 'slow lane'
with the turbo spooled on the wrx it will be guzzling the most fuel.
and before you ask.. Generally larger engines say a jag v8 are going to be 'more economical' when cruising at 100mph+
edit: all depends on how you value fuel and how you feel at the time.. I'm someone who will occasionally attempt to perform a journey at 65-70mph but will end up thrashing it at times through bordem.. Othertimes when I need to be somewhere I won't give a jott.
I often see big guzzlers crusing in the 'slow lane'
Edited by gareth.e on Wednesday 27th April 17:21
Depends on your definition of quickest really. They'd be equally slow if you were trying to save fuel in both. However, WRX will be fun to thrash whereas diesel weasel will be boring and smokey, so you might as well extract max economy from that rather than attempt to save fuel in the WRX.
Thus, diesel weasel slower.
Thus, diesel weasel slower.
eh??
which is faster and which uses the least fuel are pretty incompatible aren't they as its fairly obvious a performance car will go faster and a diesel will use less fuel. Even if you push most TDIs you will struggle to get the MPG as low as an WRX being driven relatively sedately.
A better question, which car would you rather drive, the one going fast or the one using little fuel...
which is faster and which uses the least fuel are pretty incompatible aren't they as its fairly obvious a performance car will go faster and a diesel will use less fuel. Even if you push most TDIs you will struggle to get the MPG as low as an WRX being driven relatively sedately.
A better question, which car would you rather drive, the one going fast or the one using little fuel...
pimping said:
Just driving back from the girlfriends and i started mulling over the question of whether a fast sporty petrol car (say a subaru wrx for arguments sake) or a sensible run of the mill diesel (maybe a vw passat) would be quickest for the hour journey.
They would both take an hour. HTHI see where hes coming from.
If I buy an M5 for my 60 mile commute, will I find myself sitting at 65mph because I can't take the 20 MPG hit where I would happily sit at 85mph is a Derv smiling as I chug along getting 50MPG and the same commute?
How fast would you need to go in a Derv to get the same MPG as a carefully driven WRX?
If I buy an M5 for my 60 mile commute, will I find myself sitting at 65mph because I can't take the 20 MPG hit where I would happily sit at 85mph is a Derv smiling as I chug along getting 50MPG and the same commute?
How fast would you need to go in a Derv to get the same MPG as a carefully driven WRX?
I had a CBR1000F which i used to go from Cardiff to London. Cruising sensibly and boringly, it would do the trip on one tank but give it the beans and you had to come off the M4 to refuel 3/4 of the way there and given the glove removal, lid removal and faff, it was undoubtedly slower.
doogz said:
The faster car, is clearly faster.
If you want to talk about which one is cheaper, i'm not interested any more.
Since you mention them though, i sit at 70-80 in the motorway in a WRX and it averaged 29mpg over the last tank, including all the running about and getting stuck in traffic occasionally too.
"Pistonheads; fuel economy matters........just not to doogz"If you want to talk about which one is cheaper, i'm not interested any more.
Since you mention them though, i sit at 70-80 in the motorway in a WRX and it averaged 29mpg over the last tank, including all the running about and getting stuck in traffic occasionally too.
Liokault said:
I see where hes coming from.
If I buy an M5 for my 60 mile commute, will I find myself sitting at 65mph because I can't take the 20 MPG hit where I would happily sit at 85mph is a Derv smiling as I chug along getting 50MPG and the same commute?
How fast would you need to go in a Derv to get the same MPG as a carefully driven WRX?
Then you can't afford an M5.If I buy an M5 for my 60 mile commute, will I find myself sitting at 65mph because I can't take the 20 MPG hit where I would happily sit at 85mph is a Derv smiling as I chug along getting 50MPG and the same commute?
How fast would you need to go in a Derv to get the same MPG as a carefully driven WRX?
WTF would someone buy a powerful, thirsty car and then not be able to le tit stretch its legs like it's supposed to.
If you're worried about fuel consumption buy a car that gives good mpg, if you want to bomb along and bugger the cost, then buy a powerful car.
LuS1fer said:
I had a CBR1000F which i used to go from Cardiff to London. Cruising sensibly and boringly, it would do the trip on one tank but give it the beans and you had to come off the M4 to refuel 3/4 of the way there and given the glove removal, lid removal and faff, it was undoubtedly slower.
I find I get 120 miles to reserve on my current and previous litre bikes no matter how I ride it (apart from on track where it's sub 80)gareth.e said:
what sort of silly question is this?
with the turbo spooled on the wrx it will be guzzling the most fuel.
and before you ask.. Generally larger engines say a jag v8 are going to be 'more economical' when cruising at 100mph+
edit: all depends on how you value fuel and how you feel at the time.. I'm someone who will occasionally attempt to perform a journey at 65-70mph but will end up thrashing it at times through bordem.. Othertimes when I need to be somewhere I won't give a jott.
I often see big guzzlers crusing in the 'slow lane'
No. No they don'twith the turbo spooled on the wrx it will be guzzling the most fuel.
and before you ask.. Generally larger engines say a jag v8 are going to be 'more economical' when cruising at 100mph+
edit: all depends on how you value fuel and how you feel at the time.. I'm someone who will occasionally attempt to perform a journey at 65-70mph but will end up thrashing it at times through bordem.. Othertimes when I need to be somewhere I won't give a jott.
I often see big guzzlers crusing in the 'slow lane'
Edited by gareth.e on Wednesday 27th April 17:21
Which would be faster? I couldn't care less, I'd take a fast petrol over a fast diesel any day of the f
king week and not give a st about the cost. If I had to crush a huge commute a few times a week I might be tempted to buy a derv as a "work" car, but as it is I'll stick with fast petrols.
king week and not give a st about the cost. If I had to crush a huge commute a few times a week I might be tempted to buy a derv as a "work" car, but as it is I'll stick with fast petrols.Wrx's and their ilk give you acceleration and handling feel etc a bog standard saloon doesn't. Most modern saloons/hatches if driven hard will overtake any sensible person on a motorway/dual carriageway and many will do it and still cost less but they will be lacking in other areas to do this.
Cars are always a compromise which is why lots of folk have more than one as this gives you the option of having some of the models from the extremes. Economic and sporty, or family wagon and a two seater, saloon commuter and garage queen classic/exotic etc etc etc. Just having one car can be fine but you end up generally having to make a more compromised choice or if not you face the downsides of the particular car, generally more costly as you go more sporty and more dull as you go less costly!
Cars are always a compromise which is why lots of folk have more than one as this gives you the option of having some of the models from the extremes. Economic and sporty, or family wagon and a two seater, saloon commuter and garage queen classic/exotic etc etc etc. Just having one car can be fine but you end up generally having to make a more compromised choice or if not you face the downsides of the particular car, generally more costly as you go more sporty and more dull as you go less costly!
mike88 said:
I often ponder getting a diesel that does 50mpg, but i know i'd just drive it twice as much and thrash it more with no real purpose or destination.
Yep. I was actually harder up when I had a Vento TDI that averaged 59mpg than I am now with a car that averages 22mpg, simply on the grounds that I went out more, and when you go out more you spend more.Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone, but I'm happy being richer with a Jag, albeit slightly more anti-social.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff