Petrol V Diesel

balsingh

Talking of bad diesel engines ... the Ford unit before the 1.8TD was awful. A non-turbo 2.3 litre used in Sierras and Granadas (late 80s). Woefully slow and due to the large capacity, it wasn't economical either.

tomstickland

TDs are quite highly stressed engines; they make the power, but it's not the same for reliability as the old normally aspirated diesels.

MooseRich

I've found my little Skoda 1.9TD can easily do 55mpg around town and 60+mpg on the m/way. Compared to a normal petrol of 35mpg, it seems a no brainer really to me. The trouble is that the refineries in this country have been set up for petrol, now everyone wants diesel hence the price increases.

vansboy

It was almost as bad as the 2.0D Perkins they used to put in the Montego. :eek:

You MUST be joking!! The Perkins Prima engine you refer to, was, at the time a remarkable result of reworking a petrol engine, to be en EXTREEEEEEMLY efficient, oil burner.

100mph, or 100mpg from 2litres - in 1986 - how many engines, or cars can boast that, in 2006??

Yes it was noisey, but so were plenty of others.

& they had an excellent reliability recod & many of the Maestro vans I sold, were worn out long before the engine. My own van left me a year ago, with only 337,000miles recrded - not bad for a K reg!!

Now my comments on the original post....

On small cars, it quite often isn't worth the extra up front & potential additional maintainence costs, with diesel. If you chose a used Fiesta, say, the older ones had 1.8 diesels = higher tax/insurance than 1.25 petrol. The petrol would still do 45+mpg, as would the diesel.

Medium , Astra sized are more fuel efficient & industry reckoning = 15,000 miles a year, before diesel really worth £$£$savings, as consideration.

Executive diesel does work more £$£$efficient, at lower miles & some are very refined.

MPV & 4x4, you'll find BIGGER bargains on BIGGER petrol engined motors, so if you don't do a high mileage, you'll save here!! Just look at how many owners, say, a 6 year old petrol Discovery, will have had & how long each person kept it, before the fuel costs hit home!!

Sportys/soft tops - you can now get Tigras to Audis in diesel - wonder how sexy you'll look, if you sit at the lights, top down chugging out black smoke, 'cos it's missed a couple of services, in a few years time!!

VB

jjames_3

Must agree on the old Montego/Maestro 2l diesel -- yeah it was a clattery old lump but it would last the car out 2 or 3 times over. Very good piece of Brit engineering, and certainly better than most of the rather poor diesels of the time.

Vansboy has hit the nail on the head, diesels are only really worth it as the car gets bigger and the miles increase. A small shopping car doing 8000 miles per year is a total waste of a diesel engine TBH.

Plus you need more sound deadening to make diesels even acceptably refined, and you can't fit enough in a small car for it to be worthwhile. In a big executive car you can cut almost 90% of the engine noise from the cabin, so that combined with the 6-speed gearbox doing 2500rpm at 90mph against the 3-4000 in a petrol engine these cars are supreme cruisers, which is exactly what they're designed for.

Put that same engine in a Clio and it's as 'orrible as the next small diesel

nearlyrich

Cardew

That said I don't like the way they run out off puff and you need to change gear,

I'm still waiting for mine to run out of puff anywhere;)

Cardew

MooseRich wrote:

I've found my little Skoda 1.9TD can easily do 55mpg around town and 60+mpg on the m/way. Compared to a normal petrol of 35mpg, it seems a no brainer really to me. The trouble is that the refineries in this country have been set up for petrol, now everyone wants diesel hence the price increases.

This I am afraid is typical of the exaggerated claims made for the advantages of diesel fuel consumption over petrol.

I don’t doubt that your car will do the MPG you claim if driven very gently, whether that can be described as “easily” is up to you. However a similar size petrol car driven in a similar manner will achieve far more than 35MPG.

In fact there have been plenty of tests concluding that, driven very gently, modern small petrol cars are capable of consumption figures very close to that of a similar diesel model.

Again plenty of tests by Which and motoring magazines show that in ‘real world’ everyday motoring, diesel cars have a advantage over their petrol equivalent of approx 20%.

Also there is a tendency to place too much emphasis on the cost of fuel when considering motoring costs. The savings for an average mileage motorist in a small car is in the region or £2-3 a week - worth having but not a fortune.

tomstickland

My father used to manage +50mpg in his piddly Petrol 1.1 Fiesta M reg.
Back to the small car, low weight thing really.

I can manage just over 40mpg in my 1990 BMW 318iS (1.8 16v) if I sit on the mway at 68mph. I've never managed to have the patience to do that more than once though.

jjames_3

I clear 45mpg in my 1.3l Hyundai Accent, 50mpg if I tootle at 60 (which I never do). Even if I cruise at 90 it still returns 40+.

I don't think I've ever had a tank which is less than 40mpg -- which is equivalent to 42mpg for a diesel factoring in the difference in the price between the fuels.

This on a car that is the next size up from the Fabia class, and with an engine that is not renowned for being especially frugal.

So the difference isn't earth-shattering really.

donnalou

I drive a BMW 320d the stats say average mpg is 49.6 and it is that with a full tank of diesel costing ave £46 I do between 560-700 miles