Petrol Vs Diesel

[IWantAnAudiRS6]

Originally Posted by drakkie

My Alto comes near it with 50 MPG or a little over it, with relative ease in daily driving and in mixed traffic (10 km country roads, 30 km highway and 8 km city driving daily). And I'm even very slightly faster than the Polo too Perhaps newer models with injection would be even more efficient.

Let me clarify here. A Polo does around 65mpg. Your Alto supposedly does 50mpg. I find this extremely difficult to believe, what with your 160km/h jaunts and your... addled... driving reports. Diesels can usefully extract the maximum economy- having driven an Audi with the 1.9TDi, I was getting 53mpg on the motorway whilst doing 110mph. My little Peugeot, no matter how I drive it, manages AT BEST 38mpg overall.

What everybody seems to forget though is that neither of the engines is perfect. A petrol engine for example is best in changing conditions, while a diesel is best in long running around the same rev range, for example Autobahn driving.

I agree with your first statement, neither are perfect. I'd say the petrol engine sucks for changing conditions. I ran into traffic today and my instant consumption dropped from around 42mpg to 30mpg- used over 3 litres of petrol for 1.2 miles of traffic, doing nasty things to my clutch. When I did the same thing in a diesel Auris, I was doing 46.3mpg in traffic, and 50mpg on the open road with a lot of fast downchanging and basically driving like a nutter.

Petrols are less fuel efficient than Diesels, but usually have a bit more "elasticity". Diesels emit more NOx then again...

You also forgot that petrols emit much more CO2 than diesels. How do you mean by elasticity? Unless you have a petrol engine with a rude amount of torque, you're gunna be changing gear a lot more than with a diesel. High torque and a useful rev range allow for you to stick in one gear more often with a diesel.

This argument will never be solved here, as everybody has it's personal preference. The individual engine types both have drawbacks and advantages. One weighs up against the other and because of this a decision can never be reached. It's as simple as that.

Diesel seems to be the 'better' fuel at the moment, it's cheaper than petrol here and lasts much longer. A Peugeot 306 DTurbo gets around 550 miles to a tank of diesel, the equivalent 1.6 with a similar amount of bhp and much less torque pulls around 330 miles to a tank. The diesel also has an excellent midrange flexibility for quick overtaking, very useful in the real world, and they cruise nicely. The only realistic penalties I can think of are that it sounds like a tractor and doesn't have the same handling sparkle as the lighter petrol model.

My personal preference lies with Diesels as they provide a nicer ride IMO. Because i drive almost 500 km a week (most highway), a diesel would also be the cheaper solution for me. Purchasing price is what stops me.. I also feel the Diesels have more development ahead of them. Just look at the ease with which some manufacturers achieve the Euro 4 &5 norms, even without particulate filters...

You're looking in the wrong places. Considered something older? And what the hell do you mean by 'they provide a nicer ride'? Try telling that to a Maybach or Rolls-Royce Phantom owner- both petrol, last time I looked. Also, a petrol will deliver handling less likely to understeer- less torque, less weight over the front axles- therefore making it a preferable drive.

[nota]

Originally Posted by -What-

37+ mpg?

When an AMERICAN tested the car, he received 27 mpg.

Who cares how dopey the tester was?

And while 7.3 seconds in the 0-62 test is decent, I'm sure the diesel's QUARTER MILE time was terrible...which is typical of diesels.

C&D's > as-tested < QUARTER MILE figure of 15.6 for the BMW 120d 4cyl diesel-automatic econocar is as terrible as one of > THESE <

You keep your dirty BMW 120d for $25,000...a bargain price I'm sure BMW has placed on the car in an effort to move diesel vehicles...and I'll take a cheaper, more powerful, faster, cleaner, better sounding, and equally real-world efficient GAS POWERED Honda Civic Si.

The BMW 120d is offered in my great country.


For every diesel you name with decent specs, I can name a cheaper and cleaner GAS powered vehicle with better specs.

Australian market:

Ford Falcon ute 4-litre I6 ute mono-LPG is currently cheaper to buy and costs less to run than 4cyl petrol OR diesel Toyota HiLux

Renault Megane Turbo-Diesel 6-speed sedan = Govt rated @ 5.8 L/100km = 48.7 mpg or 40 US-mpg

Aa adjudged by some recent local per-litre LPG pricings the Mitsubishi 380 Sequential-Gas-Injection dual-fuel 3.8 V6 could on gas easily deliver the petrol cost-equivalency of 70+ mpg hwy

Try finding a class-equivalent petrol vehicle to these for a cheaper AU list price

[drakkie]

Oi ! Here comes the long answering/clarifying my views.

[quote=jediali;749018]Im willing to let imature posts go by but if you talk technical...don't be woolly about it.....

I dont understand? in changing conditions (ie rapid rev changing and demands) you can take two view points:
1) a petrol will have better response
2) varying revs? you want good torque spread...so get VW FSI or any diesel..both of which have flatter torque curves.
Otherwise im confused

Yea I meant point #1 !

calrify...engine wont give you a better chassis/suspension setup. I assume you mean better cruising engine / more relaxing?

No offcourse it won't change the chassis or suspension. I meant it is more relaxing to drive, less shifting and such. From the diesels I have driven the clutch was also easier to operate. It is also one of the reasons why almost every Dutch driving school uses Diesels. When driving my dad's C5, I had serious trouble getting to learn the different feeling while clutching. Like hitting the throttle while clutching..

not so critically:

I would say the opossite actually, i think diesel development is slowing down.

Compared to petrol engines there are many more new technologies being developed. For example all the advances in EGR technolgies are very interesting, it goes very quick. I read a monthly magazine, written for the proffesional readers (dealerships,suppliers, students and eveybody else involved in the business). Each month they take on of the manufacturers new cars and literally disect it. Very interesting articles and very educative, though a bit too in-depth for some.. Perhaps I am biased a bit by them, but it seems to me that the best and most useful advances are made to diesel engines.

My teacher for engines and engine management also mentioned a few times Diesels have much more progress to make ! I assume he knows his stuff well, as i sometimes have trouble following him in his in-depth analysis/explanations of the engine/components difficult stuff to learn !

Im glad your into the tech. side Drakkie but im worried about guests who come on here and might believe some of your engineering stuff

We should assume they all know how to read with a critical eye. I am not always right, not at all, but which human being is ? Sometimes in my fatigue I do shout some stupid things, which I shouldn't.. But i'm glad I am learning about it and am always willing to learn. I can always appreciate a good explantion of something.. One should learn from his mistakes, shouldn't he ?

Originally Posted by IWantAnAudiRS6

Let me clarify here. A Polo does around 65mpg. Your Alto supposedly does 50mpg. I find this extremely difficult to believe, what with your 160km/h jaunts and your... addled... driving reports. Diesels can usefully extract the maximum economy- having driven an Audi with the 1.9TDi, I was getting 53mpg on the motorway whilst doing 110mph. My little Peugeot, no matter how I drive it, manages AT BEST 38mpg overall.

I do drive quick sometimes and the Alto surprises me and many other with that. This does not mean I always drive way to fast. On the school run i average around 100 km/h on the speedometer on the highway, almost idling in fifth. Even when in a "fast mood" I apply various fuel saving techniques, like braking on the engine or shifting very swiftly to higher gears (70 in fifth, 50 in 4th, 25 in 3rd and so on) if stuck behind someone.. It is one of the things I have learned while doing driving lessons and even the exam guy gave me a compliment about it I do feel sometimes I am one of the few on the road...

Somewhere on the forum I have posted the proof of my claim. I took a photo of the odometer and the ticket of the gas station. If you want i'll do it again !

You also forgot that petrols emit much more CO2 than diesels. How do you mean by elasticity? Unless you have a petrol engine with a rude amount of torque, you're gunna be changing gear a lot more than with a diesel. High torque and a useful rev range allow for you to stick in one gear more often with a diesel.

True, they emit more CO2 but this is mainly caused by the higher amount of fuel used in it. Looking at it strictly the Well-to-Wheel emissions are higher too, because of the extra refining needed.

Diesel seems to be the 'better' fuel at the moment, it's cheaper than petrol here and lasts much longer. A Peugeot 306 DTurbo gets around 550 miles to a tank of diesel, the equivalent 1.6 with a similar amount of bhp and much less torque pulls around 330 miles to a tank. The diesel also has an excellent midrange flexibility for quick overtaking, very useful in the real world, and they cruise nicely. The only realistic penalties I can think of are that it sounds like a tractor and doesn't have the same handling sparkle as the lighter petrol model.

You do forget that the size of the fuel tank is not neccesarily the same. I have heard of examples where the size is different with different petrol engine (80's Ford Escort for example). And a real tractor does sound bloody well if giving it all ! I was lucky enough to be at a classic tractor meeting in Germany this year and I loved it to bits. They did a kind of plow pulling competition in a field with 50 cm deep mud. What a nice sight/feeling. I actually enjoyed it more than the F1's racing through Rotterdam !!! Thankfully opinions vary !

You're looking in the wrong places. Considered something older? And what the hell do you mean by 'they provide a nicer ride'? Try telling that to a Maybach or Rolls-Royce Phantom owner- both petrol, last time I looked. Also, a petrol will deliver handling less likely to understeer- less torque, less weight over the front axles- therefore making it a preferable drive.

See the answer to the above post, I hope this answers it. If driven well a Diesel should create the same amount of understeer. The construction doesnt vary too much from most petrol cars and the engine is usually placed in about the same position. Don't forget that some manufacturers also tweak the suspension a bit, to provide the same handling throughout the model range...

[-What-]

Originally Posted by nota

Who cares how dopey the tester was?

C&D's > as-tested < QUARTER MILE figure of 15.6 for the BMW 120d 4cyl diesel-automatic econocar is as terrible as one of > THESE <

Don't turn into a sissy.

And since you wanna play games, one of THOSE is less terrible than THIS diesel...http://www.bandag.com/download/Image.../dumptruck.jpg

Originally Posted by nota

Australian market:

Ford Falcon ute 4-litre I6 ute mono-LPG is currently cheaper to buy and costs less to run than 4cyl petrol OR diesel Toyota HiLux

Renault Megane Turbo-Diesel 6-speed sedan = Govt rated @ 5.8 L/100km = 48.7 mpg or 40 US-mpg

Aa adjudged by some recent local per-litre LPG pricings the Mitsubishi 380 Sequential-Gas-Injection dual-fuel 3.8 V6 could on gas easily deliver the petrol cost-equivalency of 70+ mpg hwy

Try finding a class-equivalent petrol vehicle to these for a cheaper AU list price

First of all, I don't f*ck with AU or their list prices so don't ask me to search for that. Secondly, you throwin' all this foreign lingo at me that I'm not understanding. As an American, I was taught to communicate clearly. What is this mono-LPG? And what are those cars? We don't get those...they don't exist. I can't verify what you're talking about...all I know is that I said something about a Civic Si being more than some BMW DIESEL and you went off on some tangent with musclecars and Australia. I'm not chasing this topic around the world for you...and what is this forum's problem anyway? Are you car enthusiasts or bitches? Your diesel is better than my GAS car because it burns slightly less fuel at a sacrifice of driving enjoyment?

And don't bring your 80hp Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion to a discussion about dream vehicles. A man, you are not. Has that BlueMotion's efficiency been privately tested? BY AN AMERICAN? I stress for an American test because apparently, yall have got some corrupt corporations over there that'll morph specs to the public to push products...*cough* BBC...*cough*...


I'm a sports-car enthusiast. I don't want to talk mpg or lpg efficiency anymore.

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by -What-

Are you car enthusiasts or bitches? Your diesel is better than my GAS car because it burns slightly less fuel at a sacrifice of driving enjoyment?

Right, and what do you drive?

[-What-]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

Right, and what do you drive?

A modified 5-speed 1987 Mustang GT and a 2006 Lexus IS 250.

[Mr.Tiv]

Originally Posted by -What-

Don't turn into a sissy.

And since you wanna play games, one of THOSE is less terrible than THIS diesel...http://www.bandag.com/download/Image.../dumptruck.jpg


First of all, I don't f*ck with AU or their list prices so don't ask me to search for that. Secondly, you throwin' all this foreign lingo at me that I'm not understanding. As an American, I was taught to communicate clearly. What is this mono-LPG? And what are those cars? We don't get those...they don't exist. I can't verify what you're talking about...all I know is that I said something about a Civic Si being more than some BMW DIESEL and you went off on some tangent with musclecars and Australia. I'm not chasing this topic around the world for you...and what is this forum's problem anyway? Are you car enthusiasts or bitches? Your diesel is better than my GAS car because it burns slightly less fuel at a sacrifice of driving enjoyment?

And don't bring your 80hp Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion to a discussion about dream vehicles. A man, you are not. Has that BlueMotion's efficiency been privately tested? BY AN AMERICAN? I stress for an American test because apparently, yall have got some corrupt corporations over there that'll morph specs to the public to push products...*cough* BBC...*cough*...


I'm a sports-car enthusiast. I don't want to talk mpg or lpg efficiency anymore.

Why are you such an angry little twat? You really ought to do yourself and everyone else a favor and stop posting here.

[nota]

Originally Posted by -What-

Don't turn into a sissy.

Evidently it only takes a sissy to expose your specious claims

And since you wanna play games, one of THOSE is less terrible than THIS diesel...http://www.bandag.com/download/Image.../dumptruck.jpg

Huh?

Well What, what does this dumptruck whatnot have to do with QUARTER MILE times which is what you were on about, eh what?

Or should that be What?

Whatever

First of all, I don't f*ck with AU or their list prices so don't ask me to search for that.

I merely responded to your LITERAL claim, which is this:

"For every diesel you name with decent specs, I can name a cheaper and cleaner GAS powered vehicle with better specs."

So I took up your invitation and named a range of vehicles. Your only repsonse is to quickly capitulate to your own challenge.
Or can you cite a comparable US petrol sedan that delivers 40 US-mpg? (combined cycle aka city-hwy)

Secondly, you throwin' all this foreign lingo at me that I'm not understanding. As an American, I was taught to communicate clearly. What is this mono-LPG?

Let me dumb it down for those special-case "I'm not understanding" Americans like you.

Mono-LPG is a single-use fuel system that solely uses LPG, a-la mono. And gosh, a dual-fuel system can run on two fuels
LPG stands for liquid petroleum gas - which IS a gas, unlike your Duh-merican 'gas' - which turns out to be a liquid!

So much for your vaunted American teachings ..

Because, in the words of one fine American ... What we have here is a faylyahh to cuhhmoonicayt!

(apologies to Paul Newman )

And what are those cars? We don't get those...they don't exist. I can't verify what you're talking about...

Uh-oh, here comes the typical Not Invented Here syndrome. Well my dopey buckaroo these cars DO exist. And btw the world extends beyond your own personal limitations, even if you are too myopic to realise it.

And don't bring your 80hp Volkswagen Polo BlueMotion to a discussion about dream vehicles. A man, you are not. Has that BlueMotion's efficiency been privately tested? BY AN AMERICAN? I stress for an American test because apparently, yall have got some corrupt corporations over there that'll morph specs to the public to push products...*cough* BBC...*cough*...

For yea verily, in the words of Winston Churchill:

You can trust the Americans to do the right thing, after they have tried every other alternative

[The_Canuck]

Originally Posted by -What-

A modified 5-speed 1987 Mustang GT and a 2006 Lexus IS 250.

You realize those are arguably 'sports cars', however I see your perpective on diesels.

But, what is the point in having any high performance road car? Apart from a sports car which can be argued, fun to drive...

and when neither of those cars are considered sports cars they really have no signifigant 'fun to drive' factor over a diesel.

[henk4]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

You realize those are arguably 'sports cars', however I see your perpective on diesels.

Sports cars: Audi R10, Peugeot 908

[The_Canuck]

There you go, diesels can be sports cars

[MRR]

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

There you go, diesels can be sports cars

Absolutely!! I hope BMW will be shipping its fantastic 3.0 liter twin turbo diesel in the 335d, 535d, and X3 3.0sd to North America. The 3.0 liter gas 335i produces only 15 more hp than the diesel but the diesel produces around 410 lb-ft of torque (110 lb-ft more than the gas)! Only downside is it is a bit heavier but fuel economy and torque more than makes up for a few extra pounds.

[my porsche]

<3 Diesels.