Explain to me (in simple terms) this hate for diesel?

[grudas]

Well it is 5bho not 50 lol.

 

[Blackhawk47]

my step ma recently got herself a mk3 fabia (moving from a mk1) and despite "on paper" moving from 100 to 105 brake (1.9 down to 1.4 tdi) the practical power difference is rather lacking unless you're hammering it.

This is literally the most stupid thing I've read this year.

 

[adolf hamster]

Well it is 5bho not 50 lol.

This is literally the most stupid thing I've read this year.

how so? it's a simple equation, more power with a lighter car (smaller engine) should theoretically at least go as well as the older one.

but what you end up with is the evo vs kia 5th gear from 30 challenge only instead of power it's fuel economy.

 

[darknite]

Right you drive a 200BHP diesel (is it a 3 litre?) and you state if you changed to petrol you would want "something equivalent performance wise"

So why are you looking at a 1.0T ecoboost?
Or a 1.5 diesel?

Or even a 2 litre diesel for that matter?

Then you go on to state "2 litre diesel, £110 tax, 129g co2 0 - 60 8.5 seconds and I get about 45mpg from it.

Ok so

2 litre petrol, £195 tax, 197 co2 0 - 60 7.8 seconds which gets a bit over 27mpg"

You do realise that 0-60 7.8 and 8.5 aren't really the same thing performance wise? The petrol is faster and I can therefore imagine has more power therefore it's never going to be as economical.

If your going to use a 2 litre petrol (with a turbo) then compare it to a 2.5 litre diesel or even a 3 litre diesel. Which will likely cost you £5K+ more than the petrol That £5K+ you spend more on the diesel car to buy in the first place you will never see back in fuel savings unless you do 20K+ miles a year.

Basically what is it that you want? Do you want 200BHP? because it doesn't look like it if your looking at a 1.0 ecoboost. Or do you want a cheap to run car? Also how many miles per year do you do?

Diesel makes sense for some but not others. We need a much clearer picture. Currently your all over the place.

Please read my first post again and quote without cutting parts of it. In the very first line I put IF I changed to a petrol I would want something equivalent. I then go on to say I was looking at more sensible diesels for the commute I do. The last 2 cars are a comparison from a real mpg site coming the most eco petrol focus and diesel. The post is not about me hunting for a new car, it is about why the growing anti diesel movement all over the press lately. Talk of scrap-age schemes and road tax rises for diesels.

Also the compare of 2 litre diesel to 2 litre petrol. I drive a Insignia BiTurbo CDTi which is 195 ps, the 2 litre petrol is a insignia turbo 2 litre 215ps. 20ps different 0.7 seconds difference 0 - 60 which is not surprising given the weight saving from the huge diesel lump.

 

[darknite]

Hi Rainmaker

Insignia's were my compare. BiTurbo CDTi (my current car) 195PS compare to the 2 litre Turbo Insignia 215ps. I should have said more detail in the make/model engine.

The spec's for those engines you list, are they manufacture spec's or real mpg's? I tend to use honest john real mpg and I do not see a 1.4 TSI doing more then 48? Thats the 125ps version on a golf which says 0-60 9.3?

 

[Dis86]

how so? it's a simple equation, more power with a lighter car (smaller engine) should theoretically at least go as well as the older one.

but what you end up with is the evo vs kia 5th gear from 30 challenge only instead of power it's fuel economy.

Depends on more factors such as gearing and traction but 5bhp is going to be pretty much invisible to the average driver.

 

[Orionaut]

Diesel emissions are directly implicated in something like 10,000 heart attacks a year in London alone.

Names and addresses or it didn't happen!

Ok, perhaps that is a bit harsh, but there are so many factors at play here that any harmful consequences of NOX levels are pure guesswork. (Educated guesswork quite possibly, but still guesswork)

Wearing my foil hat, I have a nasty sneaking suspicion that organisations whose remit is to monitor levels of "Pollution" and recommend policy have a very strong personal interest in forever moving the goal posts.

They are after all going to have little interest in one day declaring "That's clean enough now, The job is done, please sack us all".

 

[thecremeegg]

If you're going to compare, at least do it somewhat like-for-like. I imagine the 2.0 TDI isn't very powerful, but let's suggest it's around 150 to 170BHP. Now compare it to a similar (i.e. turbo) petrol which is also 2 litres:

2.0 TSI, £145 VED (who cares?), 143g/km CO2 (plant food), 0-60 6.5 seconds, 45mpg

Or how about a 2.0 NA instead, if you insist?

2.0 SkyActiv, £110 VED (same as your diesel), 129g/km CO2 (oh look, same as your diesel but no NOx), 0-60 8.8 seconds, 51mpg

Now let's really go like for like, based more on power and performance. Let's take a smaller turbo petrol with similar torque and power to the average 2.0 diesel:

1.4 TSI, £30 VED, 118g/km CO2, 0-60 in 7.8 seconds, 55mpg

The petrols are cleaner, rev nicely, don't sound like skeletons making love in a filing cabinet, are fun to drive and return equally good MPG without worrying about EGRs, DPFs and filling up with urea for the exhaust. Your post focused on the 'environment', but even there diesel loses out significantly. Both fuels will emit CO2 at similar levels, but even if we accept this is a problem the diesels are spewing out a lot more besides.

Plus it's not all about exhaust emissions. Both vehicles will take up an absolute ton of resources and cause a mass of pollution during the mining, refining and build processes (metal, batteries, tyres, power generation and use etc) before you even get to the fuel.

You ask about the 'massive hate' for diesel, when in truth most of it will come from driving enthusiasts who just plain dislike the way they drive. Add in their NOx and particulate emissions (even during DPF regen) and their bork factor due to ridiculously impossible emissions targets, and there you have it. Just get a V8 and enjoy it.

Spot on!

 

[darknite]

From reading all this I think it is a lack of education and a lot of people buying a car without having a bit of understanding on petrol and diesel. Cheaper secondhand diesels being snapped up because of cheaper road tax by someone who needs it for a 2 mile shop run every couple of days.......

 

[Freefaller]

Hate for diesel? It's for trucks, not cars

Also bear in mind servicing costs and ancillaries tend to be more expensive for diesels (in general). And diesel fuel is not cheaper (as it is in the continent, though I believe this is changing), and modern petrols are reasonably economical now.

Lastly, diesels are just torque machines (all torque, no action.... ) - Okay I admit, the v8 diesels are pretty impressive but then you might as well get a v8 petrol instead as economy no longer becomes an item for discussion!

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Please read my first post again and quote without cutting parts of it. In the very first line I put IF I changed to a petrol I would want something equivalent. I then go on to say I was looking at more sensible diesels for the commute I do. The last 2 cars are a comparison from a real mpg site coming the most eco petrol focus and diesel. The post is not about me hunting for a new car, it is about why the growing anti diesel movement all over the press lately. Talk of scrap-age schemes and road tax rises for diesels.

Also the compare of 2 litre diesel to 2 litre petrol. I drive a Insignia BiTurbo CDTi which is 195 ps, the 2 litre petrol is a insignia turbo 2 litre 215ps. 20ps different 0.7 seconds difference 0 - 60 which is not surprising given the weight saving from the huge diesel lump.

that last thing I would want is a vauxhall engine never mind a diesel one. that is why those figures are so bad they don't know how to make engines tbh.

go look at VW, SKODA, etc.

 

[kaiowas]

I'm actually slightly concerned that I'm going to get caught in some sort of anti-diesel backlash and get taxed to high heaven despite the fact that I'm far from a typical diesel owner.

I'm not obsessed with MPGs, my diesel does about 30mpg average.
I don't do particularly high annual mileage

I do however need something big enough to tow my race car around. I chose a Volvo XC70, I'd have taken a V70 but an XC came up first and had the benefit of a couple of hundred extra kg towing capacity. At the time I had no preference for petrol or diesel however the only non-diesel engines offered were less plentiful, cost considerably more to tax and fuel (The petrol option was 3+ litres, £500+ tax and would struggle to get over 20mpg in the real world and whilst you might happily pay that for a fun car I wasn't going to for a workhorse) and would have been a royal pain in the backside to sell on afterwards so I bought the diesel. For me the equivalent petrol just didn't make sense on any level.

 

[lordrobs]

I'm not a fan of the way diesels drive even if they have more power for better economy, that is probably personal preference though. For me I like to be able to pin the throttle and get more out of an engine as the revs build. My company Focus (2.0 TDCi) though feels like it has stacks of go until you try to drive it quick and you realise that you were already tapping into a large percentage of what the engine has to give when just driving normally.

What I do find interesting is that of the three diesels I've had (2009 Focus, 2010 Passat, 2013 Focus) the fuel economy for each one (on paper) has been better with each new model and yet my real world economy measured over 10000 miles + is almost identical! Splitting hairs the current Focus is marginally less and the Passat was best but they are all within <2 mpg of each other.

 

[Joe T]

that last thing I would want is a vauxhall engine never mind a diesel one. that is why those figures are so bad they don't know how to make engines tbh.

go look at VW, SKODA, etc.

Did #dieselgate pass you by then?

 

[ChrisD.]

I do a lot of walking/running on country lanes.
Diesels stink and make my lungs burn. Petrols don't. Not very scientific but is enough for me to know that they're not good.
Even the minister who signed off on the CO2 tax system has admitted it was a huge mistake and NOx / particulates should have been considered too. The sooner diesel numbers are reduced on the roads the better in my opinion.

Agreed, if I'm out cycling and a diesel overtakes me it's pretty horrible breathing in the fumes.

 

[Psycho Sonny]

Did #dieselgate pass you by then?

they cheated some tests but their engines are reliable and cheap.

had a couple of diesels over the years however they did do high mileage with at least 2-3 hours of driving each day. sometimes 150 miles a day.

now i have a 3 litre straight 6 petrol and a mini cooper d. will be getting rid of the mini within the next couple of years for either something japanese and petrol like honda/toyota or possibly a focus in petrol guise. diesels just aren't that great unless your doing long distances regularly.

i'm also looking to get either the new supra or the new z4 to replace my other car when it's launched in a couple of years. both are the same car and engine with the z4 being the soft top and the supra being the coupe version. i doubt they will come in diesel but you never know.

 

[Nasher]

Heh, VAG diesels aren't that reliable. Top of reliability charts are pretty much dominated by Jap cars (though Ford rank quite highly now). German brands are down there with Alfa and Jeep

 

[Six6siX]

Because they sound like a loud rattly rattle can and smell? dag dag dag dag.

I'll take a V8 and the glourious smell of unburnt petrol thanks

 

[Jonny69]

To answer one of the earlier questions about CO2, if you burn 1kg of petrol in air, it produces about 2.4kg of CO2. If you burn 1kg of diesel it produces a little over 3kg CO2. Diesel is more carbon rich than petrol.

 

[Dis86]

To answer one of the earlier questions about CO2, if you burn 1kg of petrol in air, it produces about 2.4kg of CO2. If you burn 1kg of diesel it produces a little over 3kg CO2. Diesel is more carbon rich than petrol.

It's also more energy rich so you need to burn less of it to release the same amount of energy.