Diesel cash guzzlers: It can take 28 years for them to be cost-effective

[TW]Fox

[TW]Fox

[TW]Fox

Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
160,221
Now, I hate the Daily Mail but at least it seems the press are now starting to twig that diesel is generally a noisy, flawed way of not actually saving any money.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1128488/Diesel-cash-guzzlers-It-28-years-cost-effective.html

dmlolql9.jpg


I suspect thats a typo on the top right hand table, it should be 12000 and not 2000. Note thats the time to BREAK EVEN, so even after that time, your actual saving is.. nil pounds.

I'm sure somebody will be along to point out that, at resale time, a diesel will be worth a gazzilion pounds whereas the petrol will be 20p but this is frankly over-exagerated and if the average daily mail owner had any idea about residuals they wouldnt be buying new Golfs anyway.
 
Last edited:
That’s the ideal condition fuel economy though.

If you drive the petrol like a loon vs a diesel like a loon the diesel will be more forgiving.

Equally if your journeys are mainly motorway and you cruise above 70mph or urban below 30 the diesel will again return a greater margin.

Three of those D cars are company car list favourites. So it kind of negates the issue. I would hope bar the mini (although its not great) these aren’t the sort of cars people tend to buy from new for personal use.
 
Using that diesel they are saying the saving based on fuel alone is £100 a year with a diesel at 10-12k. Without getting down to nitty-gritty figures how would servicing compare between the petrol and derv on a yearly basis? Also, current road tax prices?

Also, why do diesel cars cost more new? Has this always been the case?
 
mrk1@1 said:
If you drive the petrol like a loon vs a diesel like a loon the diesel will be more forgiving.
Click to expand...

I have never found this to be the case. Plus why would you want to drive your average diesel like a loon? Driving a Focus TDCi hard is about as rewarding as overclocking your microwave.

Equally if your journeys are mainly motorway and you cruise above 70mph or urban below 30 the diesel will again return a greater margin.
Click to expand...

Not true - this is taken into account by the figures used. They are both combined figures which take into account an average of different usage.

Three of those D cars are company car list favourites. So it kind of negates the issue
Click to expand...

How does it? Did you know for example that you will pay MORE company car tax on a 530d than on a 530i?

Tesla said:
Also, why do diesel cars cost more new? Has this always been the case?
Click to expand...

A diesel car often has the added cost and compexity of high pressure injectors, turbochargers, particulate filters etc.
 
[TW]Fox;13365701 said:
Not true - this is taken into account by the figures used. They are both combined figures which take into account an average of different usage.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point not everyone will return an average combined figure though, and Extra Urban is ~ 56mph which not many do on motorways when the limit is 70. In rush hour you’re doing 10-30 on motorways with lots of stop-start.

How does it? Did you know for example that you will pay MORE company car tax on a 530d than on a 530i?
Click to expand...

You try finding a 530i on a company car list though, you’d be lucky to find a 530d tbh.

A diesel car often has the added cost and compexity of high pressure injectors, turbochargers, particulate filters etc.
Click to expand...

Since most people buying the above will be on a service contract lease hire it’s not an issue.

Company cars are selected on many things and all these interim range diesels that you think ‘why would the general public buy one?’ aren’t for them but to fit in with the company car pricing bands etc.
 
Its the sporty diesels where I struggle to see the point. Case in point is the Alfa 159 2.4 JTD that a guy has just bought at work. Sure its got plenty of poke with 210 BHP but he's struggling to hit 35 mpg with it.

EDIT- using the parkers link that Fox posted it will take a mere 816,505 miles to break even over the slightly less powerfull 2.2 petrol which takes a massive .4 seconds more to hit 60.

Link incase I've made a boob http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/petrol-vs-diesel/?deriv=38276#manu=1&model=1491&deriv=38276
 
Last edited:
mrk1@1 said:
Extra Urban is ~ 56mph
Click to expand...

No, it's not.

This cycle is conducted immediately following the urban cycle and consists of roughly half steady-speed driving and the remainder accelerations, decelerations, and some idling. Maximum speed is 75 mph (120 km/h), average speed is 39 mph (63 km/h) and the distance covered is 4.3 miles (7 km). The cycle is shown as Part Two in the diagram below.
Click to expand...

Please make an effort to understand something before you attempt to argue against it :) As you can see, the speed attained in some stages of the extra urban test is above the speed limit in the UK...

Infact to be honest none of the points you've made in this thread are particularly relevent. What company car owners do is beside the point - most people around here buy their own cars. It applies equally on the used market.

Since most people buying the above will be on a service contract lease hire it’s not an issue.
Click to expand...

Sigh. Please read replies before ranting. He specifically asked why diesel cars cost more to buy new. I explained why. He didnt ask about leasing costs. He didnt ask who buys them. He didn't ask if it was an issue. He asked why the list price of a diesel is higher. I explained why.
 
Last edited:
lordrobs said:
Its the sporty diesels where I struggle to see the point. Case in point is the Alfa 159 2.4 JTD that a guy has just bought at work. Sure its got plenty of poke with 210 BHP but he's struggling to hit 35 mpg with it.
Click to expand...

because its still more than the equivalent petrol would be returning on average i'd expect :p
 
They do make for nice second-hand cars though. Let some other fool pay the 2k+ more that the diesel will cost where he only gets a couple hundred premium on the used market.

The break even point then might be days or weeks instead of years.
 
I wonder how many times that will be posted in a "I want a diesel but only do 2k a year to the shops" thread.

Iirc Diesel prices will continue to rish where as petrol is likley to stay the same for a bit.
 
Diesels are hideous admittedly (unless fuel economy is your key criterion) but its a bit of a biased article in that they're using comparisons based on a 10k/12k which really doesn't show up enough of the potential differences. I would have liked to have seen their figures for 15k/20k/25k comparisons as well.

If you ask me, diesels only work for (a) high milers, or (b) someone who keeps the car for a set length of time before selling and thus avoiding the usual major diesel expenses of injectors, pump, EGR, glow plugs, turbo etc etc.

It must be a psychological thing, but I have to admit that there is a weird satisfaction in seeing your car average 50mpg even if you have paid £2k more or whatever for it.
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;13365734 said:
No, it's not.



Please make an effort to understand something before you attempt to argue against it :) As you can see, the speed attained in some stages of the extra urban test is above the speed limit in the UK...

Infact to be honest none of the points you've made in this thread are particularly relevent. What company car owners do is beside the point - most people around here buy their own cars. It applies equally on the used market.



Sigh. Please read replies before ranting. He specifically asked why diesel cars cost more to buy new. I explained why. He didnt ask about leasing costs. He didnt ask who buys them. He didn't ask if it was an issue. He asked why the list price of a diesel is higher. I explained why.
Click to expand...

Max speed 75mph average 39mph which means majority is less than 75mph.
 
Morba said:
diesel prices are coming down though, where are they rising?
Click to expand...

I remember reading something about the way diesel is made it's starting to cost too much cause we have too much petrol sitting around in storeage. Not 100% sure but something like that meaning the divide between petrol and diesel prices at the pump increasing.
 
I know I'm pouring petrol on a fire (oh the irony) here, but lets take a look at this from a different angle:

Audi Q7:
3.6 FSI Combined 22.2mpg (280hp) RRP: £39,930.00
3.0 TDI Combined 28.8mpg (240hp) RRP: £39,830.00
Time to break even: Before driven off the forecourt.


Range Rover sport (HSE spec):
3.6 TDV8 Combined 25.5mpg (272hp) RRP: £46,372.13
4.2 supercharged V8 (390hp) Combined 17.8 mpg RRP: £50,166.92
Time to break even: Before driven off the forecourt.


Ok so you might like to consider a 4x4 a "special case". Lets try a BMW instead
then:

BMW 7 series (closest engine match I can see)
730d SE (245hp) RRP: £53,730
740i (326hp) RRP: £57,080
Time to break even: Before driven off the forecourt.


While the millage quoted for the posted small-medium cars is in the 10,000-12,000/annum region, I would argue that diesels make a lot more sense for your average fleet sales rep, clocking up 40,000+ miles/year up and down the motorways where diesel is going to return an even greater economy difference to the petrol.

fox said:
the press are now starting to twig that diesel is generally a noisy, flawed way of not actually saving any money.
Click to expand...

Twaddle. In the right environment diesel makes a lot more sense than petrol. Small/medium family cars are not the right environment.
 
[TW]Fox;13365651 said:
I'm sure somebody will be along to point out that, at resale time, a diesel will be worth a gazzilion pounds whereas the petrol will be 20p but this is frankly over-exagerated and if the average daily mail owner had any idea about residuals they wouldnt be buying new Golfs anyway.
Click to expand...
Surely then if you're after a 2nd hand car, then it makes sense to get a derv if it's not that much more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom