Motorway muncher....why ever anything other than diesel?
Discussion
I love petrol, I really do.....but recently I've hired a few cars to do a 450 round trip and I don't see why you'd get a petrol engine for a motorway muncher. I had no choice in the cars I hired as I tell work I need one, and they get me it, so I've had a couple of Passat diesels, a Zafira petrol and an Insignia petrol. The Zafira and Insignia petrol engines were awful. Really gutless, no pull at all, had to change down to 4th from time to time when the motorway opened up in front of me and I wanted to pull away and still they didn't go anyway (the Insignia was particularly bad). After all this they returned 31.4mpg (Zafira) and 32.1mpg (Insignia) on 450 miles of motorway driving.
The Passat diesels had plenty of torque (as you'd expect from a diesel) and would happily gain speed with relative ease in 6th. After the exact same journey in almost identical conditions I got 52.3mpg.
I 'get' petrol for right car; something big and powerful where you get lots or torque through a broader rev range, or something very small like a city car where the car is cheaper to buy in the first place and still returns good mpg as it's only a 1.3. My daily drive is a 3.0 v6 and I love it for it's character, power, rev range etc and my wife has a small 1.3 city car.....so I'm petrol all the way, but I don't think I'd ever buy a 1.9 or 2.0 petrol engine as it doesn't seem to do anything well at all, and lots of things wrong.
So why are these still sold? Who buys them? Genuine question....I see lots of bad points and no good points to them. Please make me see the error in my thinking.
The Passat diesels had plenty of torque (as you'd expect from a diesel) and would happily gain speed with relative ease in 6th. After the exact same journey in almost identical conditions I got 52.3mpg.
I 'get' petrol for right car; something big and powerful where you get lots or torque through a broader rev range, or something very small like a city car where the car is cheaper to buy in the first place and still returns good mpg as it's only a 1.3. My daily drive is a 3.0 v6 and I love it for it's character, power, rev range etc and my wife has a small 1.3 city car.....so I'm petrol all the way, but I don't think I'd ever buy a 1.9 or 2.0 petrol engine as it doesn't seem to do anything well at all, and lots of things wrong.
So why are these still sold? Who buys them? Genuine question....I see lots of bad points and no good points to them. Please make me see the error in my thinking.
Lots of people had them before that is it really. Until very recently diesel has taken over for regular cars, they are genuinely a better drive for a regular car. Only issue lately is DPF failures on modern diesels which is now putting people off them & manufacturers suggest you dont buy a diesel unless doing big miles.
Modern petrols are all going smaller but turbo'd so lots of diesel like torque & taller gearing.
Personally I'm a tall gearing fan, the only petrols I previously used daily were the long legged variety but they were V6's with poor economy
Modern petrols are all going smaller but turbo'd so lots of diesel like torque & taller gearing.
Personally I'm a tall gearing fan, the only petrols I previously used daily were the long legged variety but they were V6's with poor economy
itz_baseline said:
I'd ever buy a 1.9 or 2.0 petrol engine as it doesn't seem to do anything well at all, and lots of things wrong.
So why are these still sold? Who buys them?
There are other roads than motorways. In our household we have two cars, a 1.8 Mondeo and a 1.4 i30, both petrol. The i30 does all the little runs which it's excellent at, but on longer journeys it's a bit tiring compared to the Mondeo. The 10mpg loss on the Mondeo is worth sacrificing for the extra comfort, and remarkably the little bit of extra power.So why are these still sold? Who buys them?
The i30 weighs near enough the same as the Mondeo, so can run out of puff in 5th on hills, where the bigger engine in the Mondeo will plough on regardless.
When the Mondeo dies, I'll most likely be going for another, probably a 2 litre or 2.5T petrol Mk4. For the limited miles it does, the petrol engine makes little difference in running costs, and has an advantage in warming up in winter quicker, doesn't die being used for short journeys, and doesn't sound like a John Deere.
itz_baseline said:
After all this they returned 31.4mpg (Zafira) and 32.1mpg (Insignia) on 450 miles of motorway driving.
What engines and what average speed (in leptons if you must 
) because in my Volvo T5 on the M'way I managed to return 34mpg the other day and did not have my "green" hat on... Dad following in a 540 auto managed to get the better side of 30mpg too...If I was to be doing serious motorway miles though regularly, I would agree a diesel is the best of both worlds and probably in this day and age the only way to go... Lots or torque and good mpg... Until the mpg becomes an issue i'll stick to my torquey and powerful petrol
tuffer said:
My 530D is awesome on motorways and A roads and I believe its hard to better for long haul real world driving (apart from the seat which I cannot get comfortable in).
The 530i is more progressive and sounds nicer. Some may prefer the huge torque in the 530d, although the 530i is hardly short of it.The 530d is still a very competent motorway car, mind.
I aim to never need a high efficiency "motorway muncher", but I'd resist buying a diesel even in that case. In fact, I'd not have one unless I need to pull heavy loads (e.g.: a Land Rover or something larger). Basically, I prefer (most) petrol engine noises and (as a pedestrian or cyclist) really dislike diesel fumes.
My car manages mid 30s - low 40 MPG on motorway runs, and with its inline 6 it pulls well keeping to fairly low revs, and improves from 3-6K RPM, sounds good whilst doing so, makes motorway driving very easy, and is quite fun to drive on twisty roads.
I'd not compromise any further towards MPG than that; for me, if the answer is diesel, then I'd be thinking about changing my life/work patterns instead.
My car manages mid 30s - low 40 MPG on motorway runs, and with its inline 6 it pulls well keeping to fairly low revs, and improves from 3-6K RPM, sounds good whilst doing so, makes motorway driving very easy, and is quite fun to drive on twisty roads.
I'd not compromise any further towards MPG than that; for me, if the answer is diesel, then I'd be thinking about changing my life/work patterns instead.
CommanderJameson said:
tuffer said:
My 530D is awesome on motorways and A roads and I believe its hard to better for long haul real world driving (apart from the seat which I cannot get comfortable in).
The 530i is more progressive and sounds nicer. Some may prefer the huge torque in the 530d, although the 530i is hardly short of it.The 530d is still a very competent motorway car, mind.
tuffer said:
How many miles from a tank? Another concern for me as I HATE stopping en-ruote to refuel.
The 530i is more fuel-efficient than my 528i, from which I can, with care, extract 500 miles of relaxed motorway driving (i.e. 75-80MPH), and I think it has a similar sized tank (70L, or thereabouts).I was trucking round in an ST170, and then an Impreza WRX PPP doing 20k+ business miles a year! I then chopped in the WRX for an Impreza STi and at the same time picked up my motorway slag – a Focus 1.8 Zetec Diesel and would now never consider using anything else for long motorway hacks... It’s no good round town when cold and in that scenario no more efficient than a good small engine petrol town car... But once warm on the motorway it goes on forever... 60MPG
-P
-P
You had the wrong petrol cars. I do 25k miles pa on motorways in my Omega 3.0v6. Its smooth, quiet and has lots of power which is needed for the slush box and cruise control to work effectively. I get a hair under 32mpg.
As its getting on now I'm looking to replace it with a Jag S type 3.0v6 (see the common theme here !)
I've looked at all sorts of diesels but they tend to go wrong in unusual and expensive ways (HP Pump failures, injector failures, DPF issues. turbo failures). The problem for me is that when a petrol goes wrong its a pain but not usually that expensive, but a diesel can run into thousands very quickly.
Now I tend to get my cars at ~4 years old with ~70k on the clock then run then up to 8 years old with 170-180k so I need a car that can do high miles and not break. From what I see of modern diesels high mileage is when it can get stupidly expensive.
So I'll stick with the old watf-o-matic petrol barges.
As its getting on now I'm looking to replace it with a Jag S type 3.0v6 (see the common theme here !)
I've looked at all sorts of diesels but they tend to go wrong in unusual and expensive ways (HP Pump failures, injector failures, DPF issues. turbo failures). The problem for me is that when a petrol goes wrong its a pain but not usually that expensive, but a diesel can run into thousands very quickly.
Now I tend to get my cars at ~4 years old with ~70k on the clock then run then up to 8 years old with 170-180k so I need a car that can do high miles and not break. From what I see of modern diesels high mileage is when it can get stupidly expensive.
So I'll stick with the old watf-o-matic petrol barges.
Edited by bigdods on Monday 7th March 15:04
jimbobsimmonds said:
What engines and what average speed (in leptons if you must ) because in my Volvo T5 on the M'way I managed to return 34mpg the other day and did not have my "green" hat on... Dad following in a 540 auto managed to get the better side of 30mpg too...
Speed wise there was a lot of 50mph average checks going. When not in the average speed checks I was sat with cruise control set to a sat-nav indicated 80mph.....then slowing down as needed by traffic but never going beyond this (as I had an eye on the consumption....I can only claim 12p per mile so was out of pocket by the trip as it is).) because in my Volvo T5 on the M'way I managed to return 34mpg the other day and did not have my "green" hat on... Dad following in a 540 auto managed to get the better side of 30mpg too...paulmoonraker said:
bigdods said:
You had the wrong petrol cars.
No s
t 
-P
I spend most of my driving life on the motorway and have a Jag S-Type 3.0 V6 petrol. Diesel would be sensible, but life is too short.
Even if I was going for a smaller engine, I'd still always go for petrol. I just can't bear the sound of diesel engines and owning one would cause serious depression.
Diesel is like homosexuality. Practically it makes more sense, but it's just not for me.
Even if I was going for a smaller engine, I'd still always go for petrol. I just can't bear the sound of diesel engines and owning one would cause serious depression.
Diesel is like homosexuality. Practically it makes more sense, but it's just not for me.
Edited by VladD on Monday 7th March 13:26
If your miles are gallactic, then diesel is definitely the only way to go.
In these current economical depressing days, however, everyone wants a diesel car to save money at the pumps. Diesel cars can attract a massive price premium over a petrol car of similar age, spec and mileage. Its always worth remembering that the cost of filling it up at the pumps is only one of the bills that must be paid to run your car.
Especially at the lower end of the market, with a limited budget of around the £1000 mark, you will get a better car if you go for the 1.6 petrol rather than a tired and abused 1.9TDi that Han Solo would reject on the grounds of excessive mileage ..... The total running costs over a given period, including the hit taken at px time (or scrapping) can often make the petrol car averaging 40mpg the cheaper car per mile than the 55mpg diesel equivilent ...... running cost of a car are NEVER about mpg, and ALWAYS about pence per mile (with all costs considered!)
In these current economical depressing days, however, everyone wants a diesel car to save money at the pumps. Diesel cars can attract a massive price premium over a petrol car of similar age, spec and mileage. Its always worth remembering that the cost of filling it up at the pumps is only one of the bills that must be paid to run your car.
Especially at the lower end of the market, with a limited budget of around the £1000 mark, you will get a better car if you go for the 1.6 petrol rather than a tired and abused 1.9TDi that Han Solo would reject on the grounds of excessive mileage ..... The total running costs over a given period, including the hit taken at px time (or scrapping) can often make the petrol car averaging 40mpg the cheaper car per mile than the 55mpg diesel equivilent ...... running cost of a car are NEVER about mpg, and ALWAYS about pence per mile (with all costs considered!)
VladD said:
I spend most of my driving life on the motorway and have a Jag S-Type 3.0 V6 petrol. Diesel would be sensible, but life is too short.
That's what I figured for about 100K miles... Then I realised that with 36ppm petrol claim I would be much better off in a derv... It's as dull as dish water by comparison however...paulmoonraker said:
VladD said:
I spend most of my driving life on the motorway and have a Jag S-Type 3.0 V6 petrol. Diesel would be sensible, but life is too short.
That's what I figured for about 100K miles... Then I realised that with 36ppm petrol claim I would be much better off in a derv... It's as dull as dish water by comparison however...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff