What car?

Ultrasonic

Mr_Thrifty wrote: »

Why do you want a diesel anyway? Petrols are cheaper to run, and faster too. The idea that diesels are cheaper is a myth. Just because they produce stinking fumes and clank about when idling, it doesn't necessarily follow that they're more efficient. They're just slow, smelly and loud! Like buses.

Was that a serious post? It is pretty much 100% wrong. Diesel cars have moved on somewhat in the last 20 years...

benham3160

Ultrasonic wrote: »

Was that a serious post? It is pretty much 100% wrong. Diesel cars have moved on somewhat in the last 20 years...

I own a modern diesel, and I must concur it is pretty "vile" to drive (even a small hatch with 160bhp on tap in my case), as are all diesel engines, despite how quick they are now, they're still absolutely second class engines beyond a shadow of a doubt when compared to a petrol engine. This will always be a fact.

Diesels are now "quick" are often quicker than their petrol counterparts however, they still smell dreadfully and knock a lot when they are cold, this is part of the diesel cycle, and nothing you can do about this. Their economy is good, so is a modern petrol engine, and both last as long (professional opinion) it's not a case of "no need to buy a petrol" anymore, it's now a case of thankfully "no reason to buy a diesel."

My last four cars have been diesel out of cost decision, but they're still pretty dreadful in the cold light of day. Beware the man that boats about his diesel, he's normally making up for something....

Modern diesels are also pretty fragile compared to a modern petrol engine, that is something else that's taken a completely 180-degree about turn.

Regards,
Andy

cepheus

benham3160 wrote: »

I own a modern diesel, and I must concur it is pretty "vile" to drive (even a small hatch with 160bhp on tap in my case), as are all diesel engines, despite how quick they are now, they're still absolutely second class engines beyond a shadow of a doubt when compared to a petrol engine. This will always be a fact.

Diesels are now "quick" are often quicker than their petrol counterparts however, they still smell dreadfully and knock a lot when they are cold, this is part of the diesel cycle, and nothing you can do about this. Their economy is good, so is a modern petrol engine, and both last as long (professional opinion) it's not a case of "no need to buy a petrol" anymore, it's now a case of thankfully "no reason to buy a diesel."

My last four cars have been diesel out of cost decision, but they're still pretty dreadful in the cold light of day. Beware the man that boats about his diesel, he's normally making up for something....

Modern diesels are also pretty fragile compared to a modern petrol engine, that is something else that's taken a completely 180-degree about turn.

Regards,
Andy

My problem is when you are behind one with an engine fault and you have to breathe in the cr@ap they spew out every time they accelerate. Whilst a lot cleaner on average nowadays they can still go wrong. Owners should be reported for this and they should need to take them in for repair within the week, especially in urban areas.

DUTR

Ultrasonic wrote: »

Was that a serious post? It is pretty much 100% wrong. Diesel cars have moved on somewhat in the last 20 years...

And so have petrol :cool: I run a 2 litre petrol turbo, high 20s to low 30mpg around town is usual, on a run mid to high 30s or low 40mpg, last year I had a1.4 Audi A3 diesel, naturally it was not sprited as my Golf and takes time even to accelerate from 30mph to 40mph, in the few weeks I had it, the return was 40mpg for the same driving routes, however the only 'bonus' was no VED on the A3, but never take part in a traffic light GP, my neighbours BMW 123D is spirited however the owner says they are getting mid 20s mpg. I will believe diesel is as good as petrol when I see diesel cars next to petrol in motor sports

Ultrasonic

First off a disclaimer: I own a Skoda Octavia 1.9TDi that I am very happy with.

benham3160 wrote: »

I own a modern diesel, and I must concur it is pretty "vile" to drive...

'Vile' in what way? Given you mention your Diesel is 160 bhp I suspect you are thinking in terms of sporty performance that wouldn't concern the majority of people who opt for Diesel cars. (My current car accelerates faster than I need.)

Diesels... still smell dreadfully...

Possibly my nose is just rubbish, but I've never noticed this.

...and knock a lot when they are cold, this is part of the diesel cycle, and nothing you can do about this.

Diesel engine noise is louder than petrols, especially when cold. In my car this is mostly noticeable round town, on long motorway runs it is the road noise that dominates. They also aren't that noisy anyway, and it never bothers me.

Their economy is good, so is a modern petrol engine

Diesels are still more efficient for similar size cars though.

and both last as long (professional opinion)

Are petrol engines now capable of covering as high lifetime mileages as Diesels? (I have no idea, I'm genuiney interested.)

Beware the man that boats about his diesel, he's normally making up for something....

I've never boasted about any car I've owned, petrol or Diesel .

Modern diesels are also pretty fragile compared to a modern petrol engine, that is something else that's taken a completely 180-degree about turn.

Is that mostly due to DPF and DMF issues?

Ultrasonic

cepheus wrote: »

My problem is when you are behind one with an engine fault and you have to breathe in the cr@ap they spew out every time they accelerate...

The thing is the driver of the car almost certainly doesn't know this. If my car was doing this I would genuinely want another driver to let me know, and I would then get it sorted.

Ultrasonic

DUTR wrote: »

And so have petrol :cool: I run a 2 litre petrol turbo, high 20s to low 30mpg around town is usual, on a run mid to high 30s or low 40mpg...

But those economy figures a crap compared to a decent diesel. I've got more than 60 mpg on long runs, and have averaged 55 mpg on all driving over the whole of the last year (including a 9 mile each way daily commute with lots of roundabouts to be slowed down for).

Driving style obviously has a big impact on fuel economy. It may be that if you buy a diesel to drive aggressively then you may as well buy a petrol (I don't know), but for people who buy a diesel for better fuel economy and drive accordingly I still would have thought they'd be better doing this than buying a petrol.

mikey72

We buy diesels for economy, just replaced a 1.5 106 with a 1.4 turbo C3. It is quieter, and more refined, than the earlier version, and still over overtakes. You know it's a diesel for the first mile or so, but then the 60mpg mixed urban makes up for it, and over 70mpg on motorways more than compensates as well. Is it worth paying another £1500 to £2000 a year more in fuel for a petrol that does mid twenties to thirties? I wouldn't.

cepheus

mikey72 wrote: »

We buy diesels for economy, just replaced a 1.5 106 with a 1.4 turbo C3. It is quieter, and more refined, than the earlier version, and still over overtakes. You know it's a diesel for the first mile or so, but then the 60mpg mixed urban makes up for it, and over 70mpg on motorways more than compensates as well. Is it worth paying another £1500 to £2000 a year more in fuel for a petrol that does mid twenties to thirties? I wouldn't.

The fuel consumption difference isn't that great. Figures are usually exaggerated but both to a similar extent
http://www.car-emissions.com/cars/model/peugeot/106

There is a silent majority of drivers who don't cover much mileage. For them capital cost, depreciation and servicing are the dominant factors to consider.

[Diesels] typically better fuel economy is offset by being more expensive, whether used or new, and car valuation expert Glass’s Guide says unless drivers do 10,000 miles a year for a used car and 6,000 for a new car, they will not recoup the cost.

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2130561/Diesel-vs-petrol-Used-diesel-car-cheaper-10-000-miles.html#ixzz1w3dtJfSk

Ultrasonic

cepheus wrote: »

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2130561/Diesel-vs-petrol-Used-diesel-car-cheaper-10-000-miles.html#ixzz1w3dtJfSk

Interesting link. One thing perhaps worth highlighting is that the above 10,000 mile threshold is based on the following (quoted from link):

It bases them on owning a vehicle for a typical three-year period and uses the price of a three-year-old vehicles for its used car model.

Whether it would hold for the older diesels that the OP was asking about I'm not sure. That said, the idea of there being a mileage threshold above which it becomes more economical to drive a diesel is hardly a new one, and I'm sure I remember a roughly 10,000 miles p.a. threshold being talked about years ago.