Petrol/diesel education

Third Opinion · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:37

Is it me or our people just jumping on the diesel band wagon uneducated.

I have said before that I believe that 4x4's suit Diesel engines the best. Why would you want a petrol engine on a car that has the aerodynamics of a brick and the choice of car isn't correct if you want to belt along motorways.

But now the small little super mini's are coming with diesel engines that offer little in the way of saving as well as making them less drive able. My girlfriends mother has a Mitsubishi Colt in petrol that has amazing economy. She wants to upgrade it for something newer but all the guy went on about was getting something small in diesel.

MPV's probably suit diesel's the best if you are intending taking a full load of people which the low down torque is more useful than top end speed.

But why are people choosing sporty saloons and luxury barges with diesel engines? Surely at best a saving of a couple of hundred pounds a year isn't worth it in relation to the performance.

Not sure about the argument about diesels being more troublesome. Sure they have DMF, turbo's and other gadgets, but they lack the complicated ignition systems of Petrol models.

Why is it that everything seems to be in diesel nowadays despite the lack of saving unless you intend to go to the moon and back?

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:40

Third Opinion said:
Not sure about the argument about diesels being more troublesome. Sure they have DMF, turbo's and other gadgets, but they lack the complicated ignition systems of Petrol models.

Petrol models do not have complex ignition systems though*. It is pretty much accepted fact that the complex ancilliary components on a modern diesel make them inherently more unreliable than a petrol engine - EGR, DPF's, turbochargers, high pressure direct injection, it's all a bit of a nightmare especially if you dont do big miles.

* Direct injection petrol engines excepted. As you'd expect it seems the more common this becomes the more the problems associated with it on diesels migrate over to petrol engines..

mikeh501 · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:45

What's your point? I'd call it marketing, economics and basic consumer decision. Simples.

I'm looking for a land rover defender v8

Third Opinion · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:46

[TW]Fox;18290829 said:
Petrol models do not have complex ignition systems though*. It is pretty much accepted fact that the complex ancilliary components on a modern diesel make them inherently more unreliable than a petrol engine - EGR, DPF's, turbochargers, high pressure direct injection, it's all a bit of a nightmare especially if you dont do big miles.

* Direct injection petrol engines excepted. As you'd expect it seems the more common this becomes the more the problems associated with it on diesels migrate over to petrol engines..

Oh I don't doubt it can be a nightmare. But I heard from an AA technician that a majority of engine breakdowns in cars were electrical/ignition failure.

Any way I doubt a majority of car buyers are as clued up as you which goes back to the education point.

Third Opinion · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:49

mikeh501 said:
What's your point? I'd call it marketing, economics and basic consumer decision. Simples.

I'm looking for a land rover defender v8

My point is that why is nobody educating people about the difference? I mean do people believe that if they buy a diesel they are gonna save mega bucks over the next couple of years that will justify the higher purchase price?

The way I see it if this goes on the majority of cars on the British roads are gonna be diesel.

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:49

Third Opinion said:
Oh I don't doubt it can be a nightmare. But I heard from an AA technician that a majority of engine breakdowns in cars were electrical/ignition failure.

If this is the case stuff like a flat battery of a duff 10 quid coil would count..

RSClio · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:50

Less drivable? Don't know what you mean there. But IMO a small compact car would suite an oil burner engine. They are much easier to drive then the petrol. Lot less clutch action etc. Cant see how you call them less drivable.

Third Opinion · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:52

[TW]Fox;18290905 said:
If this is the case stuff like a flat battery of a duff 10 quid coil would count..

Yeah probably right. Plus the rubbish they work on is probably 10+ years old when a majority of cars were petrol.

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:53

RSClio said:
Less drivable? Don't know what you mean there. But IMO a small compact car would suite an oil burner engine. They are much easier to drive then the petrol. Lot less clutch action etc. Cant see how you call them less drivable.

Easier to drive? :confused:

There is nothing complicated about driving a 1.25 litre Fiesta. I'm not quite sure what he means about less driveable either, perhaps the lumpy power delivery of the diesel is what he's getting at. Nothing, nothing, nothing turbo time whoa torque oh its all over. Especially in small cars with horrible little 1.6 TDI's and stuff in.

Third Opinion · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:58

RSClio said:
Less drivable? Don't know what you mean there. But IMO a small compact car would suite an oil burner engine. They are much easier to drive then the petrol. Lot less clutch action etc. Cant see how you call them less drivable.

Yeah maybe but they don't save you hardly anything. In fact as Fox has corrected me you are far more likely to have big repair bills from the Diesel, is it really gonna save you loads with a couple of miles extra MPG?

RSClio · 22 Jan 2011 at 20:59

[TW]Fox;18290929 said:
Easier to drive?

There is nothing complicated about driving a 1.25 litre Fiesta. I'm not quite sure what he means about less driveable either, perhaps the lumpy power delivery of the diesel is what he's getting at. Nothing, nothing, nothing turbo time whoa torque oh its all over. Especially in small cars with horrible little 1.6 TDI's and stuff in.

Sat in slow moving city traffic I know which car I would prefer to be in!

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:00

RSClio said:
Sat in slow moving city traffic I know which car I would prefer to be in!

Yes, the petrol on every time - in traffic a small diesel car is a horrible place to be - the engine resonates throughout the cabin.

mjt · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:01

Diesels are better on the motorway. They use less fuel and have lots of low-down torque which is great for overtaking.
They're also better around town to the low-down torque.
You can roll around on the clutch in even a relatively low-powered diesel. You've got no chance in a small petrol.

Some people just prefer the accessability of the power in a diesel too. Not everyone's a petrolhead who loves and italian tune-up every time they pop to the shops

Janesy B · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:02

RSClio said:
Sat in slow moving city traffic I know which car I would prefer to be in!

CHUG CHUG CHUG RATTLE CHUG CHUG

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:02

mjt said:
Diesels are better on the motorway. They use less fuel and have lots of low-down torque which is great for overtaking.

You don't really need to nail the throttle to overtake on a Motorway! You just indicate and move out at a more or less constant speed

They're also better around town to the low-down torque.

Disagree - I found driving a petrol car around town far more pleasant. It's smoother, its quieter, and around town you simply don't need low down torque, especially not the sort thats noisily delivered in a lump.

For me the benefits of a diesel are covering longer distances - for less money, with a longer range between fillups. The power delivery thing is often (Though not always) a crutch for those who don't want to concede they bought a diesel for financial reasons.

RSClio · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:02

Just been looking at the new Fiat 500 Twinair Engine! Looks very impressive.

Hats off to the bright sparks at Fiat Powertrain Technologies, who’ve developed TwinAir - our revolutionary two cylinder turbocharged engine. It’s a giant leap forward in petrol engines, using MultiAir technology to dramatically reduce fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, while packing 23% more power than a 1.2 engine

mjt · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:04

I'm biased, after starting with a diesel and using it for town driving for a year.
I can't make a direct comparison as I've now got a big petrol with a slushbox, and the other's a (relatively) big-engined sports car.

Perhaps if I got back in a diesel hatchback the noise would put me off.
But if you don't know any better then it's hard to disagree

RSClio · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:05

Janesy B said:
CHUG CHUG CHUG RATTLE CHUG CHUG

Ha, window down and my N/A Miltek F4r engine idling. No oil burner is going to replace that noise. I am simlpy saying slow moving city traffic the petrol is the harder car, or should I say more involving to keep moving.

[TW]Fox · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:07

RSClio said:
I am simlpy saying slow moving city traffic the petrol is the harder car, or should I say more involving to keep moving.

This really is a non issue, there is nothing hard or involving about driving a normal car in a queue of traffic in town.

If you want to choose a car for the least faff around town then obviously what you really want is an automatic 3+ litre petrol engine, then you can waft with ease through traffic and the fact it does 18mpg is irrelevent because you cant cover 500 miles a day at 5mph anyway

Remember your petrol Clio is the other end of the spectrum - it's power is all right at the top of the rev range. Most petrol engines are not like this.

Janesy B · 22 Jan 2011 at 21:12

My petrol Fiesta is fine in town, I can also creep along in first and second gear without any throttle input. It's not hard at all, if anything I'd want an auto.