It's not that great at all tbh. My ancient relic 2.8l six will do 40s on a cruise.
Is it just me that prefers the drive of a diesel car?
- Thread starter -Mike-
- Start date
It's not that great at all tbh. My ancient relic 2.8l six will do 40s on a cruise.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
Exactly. Diesels are not, all other things being equal, a more lazy drive imo. They're the opposite of relaxing because of the stupid clatter noise when you accelerate.
Being a company car driver, sadly the only option is a Diesel for me, and if im honest, I don't mind em at all, my A4 isn't a clattery clatter box as people would have you believe, it does what it says on the tin. My previous Accord Dtec was also not too bad in terms of clatter either and that was fairly revvy for a diseasal. I love the way people go doolally over the clatter
That said I'd give my right testicle for the Focus ST I used to have, but not for the sodding fuel stops I used to have to do, back then I thought the change to diesel would kill me, but I still make as much swift progress I did then and can have as much fun in a car.
I'd certainly have a tdi over a 1.6 petrol etc, in fact I test drove the 2.0 petrol Accord before I plumped for the Diseasal and the Dtec was by far the better car.
That said I'd give my right testicle for the Focus ST I used to have, but not for the sodding fuel stops I used to have to do, back then I thought the change to diesel would kill me, but I still make as much swift progress I did then and can have as much fun in a car.
I'd certainly have a tdi over a 1.6 petrol etc, in fact I test drove the 2.0 petrol Accord before I plumped for the Diseasal and the Dtec was by far the better car.
Maybe I'll be bucking the trend but for everyday driving I much prefer a decent turbo diesel.
Sure you can't beat a decent petrol for when you can actually "drive", but for the general drudgery of A to B commuting I don't think you can beat the lazy driving style of an oil burner. And, dare I say it, an auto one would be even more preferable
Sure, come the weekend you'd be sorely regretting that particular combination, but for transporting yourself around rather than driving for pleasure I'd go diesel every time. Not that a well sorted diesel can't be fun, as I have a hoot in my wife's remapped Altea, but I still think petrol is the real enthusiasts choice.
Sure you can't beat a decent petrol for when you can actually "drive", but for the general drudgery of A to B commuting I don't think you can beat the lazy driving style of an oil burner. And, dare I say it, an auto one would be even more preferable
Sure, come the weekend you'd be sorely regretting that particular combination, but for transporting yourself around rather than driving for pleasure I'd go diesel every time. Not that a well sorted diesel can't be fun, as I have a hoot in my wife's remapped Altea, but I still think petrol is the real enthusiasts choice.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 5,365
- Location
- West Sussex
Diesel doesn't bother me really. My commuting car is diesel and I wouldn't swap it for petrol in terms of running costs. Ok, it is not as refined but does the job well. It is by no means underpowered and with sound proofing nowadays I can't really say I hear it.
There are cars which I would not swap a Petrol for diesel, for example a 4x4 which the low down torque works very well with.
There are cars which I would not swap a Petrol for diesel, for example a 4x4 which the low down torque works very well with.
My vote would be Honda (i-CDTI, DTEC) or Fiat (JTD - cracking workhorse engine), though I suspect most people would go for filthy VAG units judging by how many 1.9s there are choking up a cloud of soot every time they touch the loud pedal.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
Mercedes? Jaguar? Range Rover?
All compensated for by having a lovely, plush cabin. Is there anything more scornful than seeing an S320 CDI Merc? Why even bother.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 13 May 2003
- Posts
- 34,593
- Location
- Warwickshire
I was just answering the question. If you think a Honda diesel is less hated than a Mercedes diesel, carry on 
.
Ps - the S320 is not a 4 pot.
.Ps - the S320 is not a 4 pot.
Last edited:
I no longer care if the car is petrol or diesel my concern is does it go quick when I want it to and handle how I like. My 3.0DS XF is pretty quick along most roads and I doubt that the equivalent 3.0 Supercharged one would be any quicker or fun. My XFR was marginally quicker but with most cars of this type its a case of it accelerating a bit harder but usually you run out of road/courage long before you get close to revving out 3rd let alone any other gear and thats the same in the 3.0DS as well.
For day to day driving the 3.0DS and XFR were near to being identical, the noise levels in the cabin are virtually the same. Admittedly the XFRs v8 much sounded better with the windows opened but most the time you can't hear the difference inside especially with the stereo on.
Similarly I preferred the way my 335D drove over the 335i with the exception of the sound.
But does it really matter what the fuel is if its enjoyable to drive when you want to?
For day to day driving the 3.0DS and XFR were near to being identical, the noise levels in the cabin are virtually the same. Admittedly the XFRs v8 much sounded better with the windows opened but most the time you can't hear the difference inside especially with the stereo on.
Similarly I preferred the way my 335D drove over the 335i with the exception of the sound.
But does it really matter what the fuel is if its enjoyable to drive when you want to?
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 11,434
- Location
- Derbyshire
I like the low down surge that my remapped Focus has, but it is out of puff by 3000rpm and just feels strained after that. The engine sounds like a Transit at idle and normal (for a diesel) under load.
Nobody 'prefers a diesel' they simply like the surge that a small turbo gives low down.
I really want to test drive something like the Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost 125hp as it sounds like an excellent blend of power, economy, torque and refinement (refinement referring to not being a diesel!).
Nobody 'prefers a diesel' they simply like the surge that a small turbo gives low down.
I really want to test drive something like the Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost 125hp as it sounds like an excellent blend of power, economy, torque and refinement (refinement referring to not being a diesel!).
Last edited:
Having just bought a V8 Petrol Range Rover 4x4, i can assure you that the petrol engine suits it very well and has the added bonus of sounding superb too.
I was just answering the question. If you think a Honda diesel is less hated than a Mercedes diesel, carry on
Ps - the S320 is not a 4 pot.
But the answer is the same, the poor engine is compensated for by the fact that you're getting an otherwise plush vehicle. At least a low end diesel car is excusable, a high end executive car with a bottom of the range Diesel engine seems a bit.. I dunno, like an over stretch, doesn't it?
Turbo petrols are catching up. The latest VAG 1.4 tsi turbo petrol is capable of high 40's in real life, possibly even low 50's on a steady run and has similar performance to a 2.0 tdi. The tsi means no rattly diesel, no DPF issues, cheaper fuel per litre, cheaper to buy, less likely to have DMF & clutch issues.
It's simple, diesels offer economy benefits IF you do mega mileage. They also make sense as company cars due to the lower co2 and thus P11D tax. Aside from that far too many people look at MPG as the only running cost and get hung up on this. This is why many people end up with a diesel IMO.
As for N/A diesels, haven't seen any since the VAG ones about 10 years ago. My point was that the turbo gives that shove of torque and that, until recently, turbo diesels were much more common turbo'd engines in the mainstream car domain than turbo petrols.
I looked at a 2008 Golf 1.4 TSI (140) and I believe that as a realistic figure was around 40mpg.
Considering that the majority of diesel cars are turbo diesel and the majority of petrol cars are normally aspirated, is that an entirely unfair comparison to make?
It's a good point but I think it is. If only because, when people say they "prefer diesel", in many cases what they actually mean, is that they "prefer a turbo engine".
Now that many new cars come with the option of small capacity turbo petrols aimed at efficiency, it will be interesting to see if people still prefer the diesel when there's a suitably torquey and efficient petrol equivalent.
The noise is therapeutic and relaxing. I 100% prefer a Diesel over petrol for MPG and the torque. Petrol equivalents are expensive IMO.