|
Ashley, 650 miles for £28,are you sure?,that works out at about 85 mpg! for a car that is rated at 50+mpg.The only way you can work out the fuel consumption correctly is by filling the tank to the brim, running it to nearly empty, filling it again and then doing your sums as has been already mentioned by H.J.
|
Hi Mal,
Hmm, a bit too good a fuel consumption ain't it ?
I've worked it out and it's around the 500 miles a tank mark. I do 250 a week to work at 25 miles each way, and it costs me £15 ish a week. So, that works out to about 500 miles a tank.
Just for curiosity, what is the fuel economy on a 1.4 8v Polo ? A chap in work reckons he gets 50+mpg on a run, if that's true then why bother paying extra for a diesel when you can get similar economy out of the petrol equivalent ?
Regards,
Ash.
|
ashley
From the experience of friends with diesels, it seems that they are fine on economy 'till you start using the performance, especially with turbos. Then, yes, the economy drops to near petrol car levels. The general opinion was that they were not worth it - especially as my old company paid a much lower rate per mile for a diesel!
I had a Peugeot 406 on rent for a week recently, and whilst it was excellent for refinement, the fuel consumption varied dramatically depending on useage. A steady motorway run produced high 40's, but one day using A roads, and plenty of use of the gearbox dropped it by 10 miles/gall. (All based on brim to brim calculations). Also I think it was only the 90 bhp version, so the temptation is there to use plenty of throttle to keep it moving.
Given that my 2.0l Vectra gets near the 40 on a decent run in the summer, Overall I'd have preferred the performance of a petrol engine.
regards
John
|
|
|
Ashley - As HJ has repeatedly said, so many factors affect fuel consumption that only rough comparisons can be made between vehicles. For my own 2-penn'orth, I can offer my results found over several '000 miles with each of the following (no, I don't work for Peugeot):
205: petrol 1.4 47 (XS 44) mpg petrol 1.6 40 D-turbo 53
306: petrol 2-litre 35 1.9 D-turbo 53
Fiat Punto 75 (1.25 petrol) 50
At least these comparisons are for the same driver (not too much welly).
|
At the risk of broadening the discussion I submit just some of the advantages of driving Diesel.
Diesel engines outlast petrol-stray fuel acts as a lubricant.Petrol is an oil cutting solvent.
Diesels are more reliable- no ignition system
Diesels produce significant torque at low engine speeds-reduced engine wear & allowing high gearing.
Diesel engines are more efficient, averaging 40+% of fuel energy to power the car as against 25% for petrol.
Diesel fuel is safer than petrol/gas-fire risk,crashes.
Diesel exhaust systems have greater lengevity & simpler cats.
Noise/refinement? Drive a quality CDI & its virtually undetectable from its petrol counterpart -except in terms of fuel consumption!
|
On the point of noise difference. On a recent 'Driven' programme they tested three diesels, Mondeo, Passatt and the new Laguna. They also had a 2.0 Mondeo petrol to compare with the diesels ( this was recorded at 41 decibels started at cold and warm ). They then started the three diesels from cold, they were around 3-4 decibels noisier than the petrol.
Then they were run for a few minutes, switched off and re-started. The Mondeo was the loudest diesel (43 db) the Laguna (41 db) and the Passatt (41 db). when they drove the three cars the Passatt was the punchiest ( 130 bhp if i remember correctly ), the Luguna was a very close second and the Mondeo was last ( they did comment that Ford are developing a new diesel and it is needed ), but the general agreement was that diesels are much better than years ago, and they are on a par with petrol in the noise and refinement stakes.
Regards,
Ash.
|
One big problem is that diesels seem to vary so much in refinement. Certainly the Peugeot/Citroen HDI units are quite refined, and I'm sure a Mercedes CDI is too, but there are some surprises. Ever driven a Saab 9-3 diesel? It's noisy, gruff and more like a taxi for noise. I could not believe how bad it was. Top Gear love the petrol Mondeo, but not the diesel. Its clearly a case of try your chosen diesel and see if you like it.
Regards
John
|
|
|
|
If you want economy the VW lupo 3l is probably the most economic
car you can buy, 3 liters for a 100km but what a bore to drive.
|
|
|
|
I switched to diesel in 1990. My present ones are a Maestro 2.0 perkins diesel turbo bought new in 1993 and a Vectra 2.0 DTI which also had new in 1998.
I could never imagine going back to petrol for many reasons.
The economy is superior 51mpg with the Maestro and 48 with the vectra.
But there are other reasons including the superior tractability of the diesel engine. The vectra will pick up smoothly from around 800rpm in 4th gear when with a petrol one would be down to 2nd. The torque is so high that in 2nd gear on tickover it will drift along in traffic even up slight inclines.
I drive to Portugal every year and find on the Continent diesel cars are far more prevalant than here and the fuel is much cheaper. (At least it was last year) Diesels are immensly reliable and rarely break down.
I am not so happy with the latest gizmos which have entered the diesel fuel systems incorporating a CPU which controls everything from fuel delivery to the injectors to engine timing. All this is of course is to conform to the latest emission standards but brings with it the more things to go wrong syndrome.
The older diesels such as the maestro simply have a mechanically driven fuel pump feeding injectors which means there is very little to go wrong. The only elecrtic used on the engine is to the fuel solenoid which cuts off the fuel supply to the pump when the key is turned off to stop the engine.
My other gripe is that when I first had a diesel the fuel was so cheap compared to petrol but in the usual way as more and more drivers converted to diesel so the price has gradually gone up. I have read the various reasons as to why but I feel that Government taxation will always be calculated to make sure their revenues will remain high. People switching to LPG should remember that big brother Blair and Brown will be watching you and if you get more numerous they will find a reason why you should be taxed more heavily. If its not the environment this time it will be somethinig just as an excuse to tax you. Perhaps a £200 annual tax to be licenced to carry a gas bottle around in your boot. Just a thought................
Alvin booth
|
|
You've got a point about the complexity of diesels, and for the better noise and refinement levels, there will be a price to pay. Soem of the fuel pumps run at something like 3000 psi.
|
|
|
|
