100+ miles a day, diesel or petrol in 2019?

AdrianC

iolanthe07 wrote: »

That said, servicing for diesels is generally cheaper - they are fundamentally a much simpler engine,

Diesels may be fundamentally a much simpler engine, but not when you add on all the parts needed to cut down NOx. It is the filters and ancillary equipment that causes the problems with diesels, not the fundamental design. Citroen used to produce a simple diesel that would run on practically anything and was bombproof. No such thing as a simple diesel car engine these days.

Yup.

Diesels got very complicated when common rail came in. You mentioned Citroen - remember how mechanics used to run screaming from the hydraulic suspension, with pressures of about 70 bar? Common rail injection runs at up to 2,500 bar now, with multi-firing piezo-electric injectors which are computer-paired to the engine management... Add in DMFs and DPFs and SCR and VVTs and the rest of the mcguffery, and they're ferociously complex - and more than a bit fragile if they're not used "properly".

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Yup.

Diesels got very complicated when common rail came in. You mentioned Citroen - remember how mechanics used to run screaming from the hydraulic suspension, with pressures of about 70 bar? Common rail injection runs at up to 2,500 bar now, with multi-firing piezo-electric injectors which are computer-paired to the engine management... Add in DMFs and DPFs and SCR and VVTs and the rest of the mcguffery, and they're ferociously complex - and more than a bit fragile if they're not used "properly".

It all turned to !!!! when they added in DPFs and DMFs. Two big cost problem areas that manufacturers STILL havent bottomed out after 10+ years.

Scrapit

agrinnall wrote: »

Not sure how that's relevant when the engine under discussion is a 1.0 125bhp petrol.

It's relevant when a focus is discussed. No you ain't gonna get them miles off a 1litre petrol, yes you are for the same car different engine.
How is that not apparent?

AdrianC

motorguy wrote: »

It all turned to !!!! when they added in DPFs and DMFs. Two big cost problem areas that manufacturers STILL havent bottomed out after 10+ years.

Longer than that. DMFs were first used in the BMW 525e in 1985.

agrinnall

Scrapit wrote: »

It's relevant when a focus is discussed. No you ain't gonna get them miles off a 1litre petrol, yes you are for the same car different engine.
How is that not apparent?

I suggest you read the posts that this part of the thread relates to so that you understand why your post was irrelevant.

motorguy

AdrianC wrote: »

Longer than that. DMFs were first used in the BMW 525e in 1985.

In the context of what you were saying, the subtext was - "when they added in DPFs and DMFs {to diesels}"

Never had a particular issue with DMFs on petrol cars, but they seemed to become problematic on diesels due to (allegedly) startup vibrations.

They seemed to become more prevalent around 2005 onwards - usually i would have seen them failing on Vauxhall 1.9CDTIs and Peugeot 407 2.0HDIs from memory.

It got to the point where on occasions if i was selling a Vauxhall CDTI the first question people asked was "has it had the flywheel replaced yet?"

For me diesels turned to !!!! around 2005-2007. DPFs, EGRs and DPFs together in one engine creating the perfect storm.

Scrapit

agrinnall wrote: »

I suggest you read the posts that this part of the thread relates to so that you understand why your post was irrelevant.

I suggest you think before posting and don't dare to be as bold to assume what another has or hasn't read. You make your self look foolish. The post is entirely relevant and you are highlighting the fact that you are trolling. Good luck with that.

agrinnall

Scrapit wrote: »

I suggest you think before posting and don't dare to be as bold to assume what another has or hasn't read. You make your self look foolish. The post is entirely relevant and you are highlighting the fact that you are trolling. Good luck with that.

My post was in response to post #4, where Tarambor specifically says:


"Looking at the Ford Focus 1.0 125BHP Ecoboost petrol it looks like it would return the same fuel economy, possibly slightly better."



If you had read that then you would realise that your post about an entirely different engine was not relevant.

Scrapit

agrinnall wrote: »

My post was in response to post #4, where Tarambor specifically says:


"Looking at the Ford Focus 1.0 125BHP Ecoboost petrol it looks like it would return the same fuel economy, possibly slightly better."



If you had read that then you would realise that your post about an entirely different engine was not relevant.

Are you mad? Can you justify in 300 words or less how a post detailing fuel economy of a diesel focus in response to a post about a petrol focus and fiesta in a thread titled " 100+ miles a day, diesel or petrol 2019"is "irrelevant"? You ain't gonna be able to, troll boy. But best of luck trying, focus on trying not being trying.:rotfl:

NellLondon

I do a 100 mile round trip commute and swapped my ancient Lupo for an e-Golf a couple of months ago.

Until speed became the key factor, I used public transport and found the drive fairly stressful in the Lupo. The money I used to spend on tube and train fares covers the finance cost of the e-Golf. Day to day charging costs equate to a cup of coffee at the station on my old commute.

In range terms, the e-Golf gets me to work and back with plenty to spare (real work range is quoted as 125 miles but that’s a very conservative estimate and my guessometer usually reads around 170 on a full charge (less in cold weather). I’m really noticing how much less tense I am driving the e-Golf.

For most of the motorway part of my commute, 65mph would indeed be dangerous. The speed limit is generally 40 or 50mph and with good reason. Where the limit is 70, anything between 60 and 70 mph is safe depending on traffic that day. The fastest part of the journey is generally a stretch of dual carriageway.