On 05/03/2017 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.

My son does silly mileage in a Mazda petrol. It's amazingly economical
on a motorway cruise - must do something odd like lean burn.

It also has a 15:1 compression ratio!

Andy

On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 14:21:01 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

tim... wrote:


"TheChief" wrote in message
news
Hi all

I have been looking at cars today with a view to replacing my aging
Focus.
I have found that the vast majority of mid range cars are that spawn
of Satan known as diesels.

seriously?

can you really not get every step on the ladder in a choice of either
petrol or diesel

No! In the early days of the "diesel takeover" manufacturers offered a
choice of engines on most models but increasingly it's diesel, diesel,
diesel and maybe one sporty petrol.

I had the choice of all diesels apart from one gutless petrol, and one
sporty 4WD petrol (I'd have liked the latter, but out of my price range).

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 18:06:24 +0000, charles wrote:

In article ,
Chris Green wrote:
charles wrote:
I have been driving a diesel car for nearly 30 years (not the same
one). Originally bought for 400 mile runs up the motorway and kept
because I still do regular motorway runs - the 400 mile one is down
to 2 or 3 time a year,

Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if any
more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for stop
start driving, hence the London taxi.

general round the local area 44mpg, motorway 56mpg - I doubt if any cars
do that.

I drive back from Gordano services on the M5, to East Kent, last week.
Including some time in queues on the M25, I still managed 55 mpg in a 2
litre diesel S-Max.



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

TheChief Wrote in message:
Hi all

I have been looking at cars today with a view to replacing my
aging Focus.
I have found that the vast majority of mid range cars are that
spawn of Satan known as diesels.

Not only that but the estate car we are looking for is like
rocking horse doodoo
even in the diesel version.

So all in all not the most productive of shopping trips.

Phil
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/


Thanks for the comments guys.

To clarify, yes this would be a 2nd hand car I would be looking at
prob 2 years old.
My current car is a Focus diesel estate and I have been generally
happy with it. Not so good in town driving, but pulls well up to
90 on a run if needed and returns an overall average of around
45mpg with a lot of short distance runs to/from work.
As for a replacement, estates are rare with all these SUV type
machines taking over - not really my thing.
The Focus is an ideal size and gets good handling reviews etc. The
problem seems to be that most seem to be fitted with the 1 litre
ecoboost engines. The salesmen claim they are ok for the saloons,
but not too good for a loaded estate.
There is a 1.5 ecoboost petrol version, but the engine is rare and
combined with the estate requirement it looks like a pipe dream
or a 200 mile journey.

Phil


--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 05/03/17 19:30, Tim Watts wrote:
I really think the gov has absolutely no idea what they are doing.

In the 90's they wanted everyone to buy diesels.

Now they are doing a panic punishment with talk of "diesel charging" in
London and other cities.

And yet they are removing all the controls that discourage diesels.

Climate change crap has always been virtue signalling cosmetic
legislation. There is no rationale beyond making it looks as though they
are doing something and collecting extra revenue.

Once we leave the EU we may be able to force them to do something useful
instead.
Possibly.


--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
someone else's pocket.

On 05/03/17 19:37, ARW wrote:
On 05/03/2017 19:30, Tim Watts wrote:

I really think the gov has absolutely no idea what they are doing.

I would not be surprised if you were correct.

Of course I blame the voters....

IN the EU, there are no voters.


--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 05/03/17 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
ARW wrote:
On 05/03/2017 18:06, charles wrote:
In article ,
Chris Green wrote:
charles wrote:
I have been driving a diesel car for nearly 30 years (not the same one).
Originally bought for 400 mile runs up the motorway and kept because I
still do regular motorway runs - the 400 mile one is down to 2 or 3 time a
year,

Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

general round the local area 44mpg, motorway 56mpg - I doubt if any cars do
that.



My Scudo van does about 44MPG to and from work (usually nice clear A
roads and B roads and a 20 mile journey). About 30 to 35MPG around town
and about 25MPG on the motorway. I can improve the motorway MPG if I
slow down to less than 90MPH.

I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.

Diesels have always been more economical mostly because of the higher
temperatures and pressures in the combustion chamber.

Only at full smoky throttle when the air fuel ratio was at its lowest
did they start to chew fuel, and turbocharging fixed that.

When was the last time you saw a petrol powered commercial vehicle of
more than 3 tonnes?

Lean burn stopped because of NOx emissions.

Petrol engines are at their most efficient at higher throttle settings
as well. Diesels like to be a tad over tickover to be really parsimonious.



--
"If you dont read the news paper, you are un-informed. If you read the
news paper, you are mis-informed."

Mark Twain

On 05/03/17 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.


My 1980s Maestro with a Perkins diesel did 50+mpg and was pretty swift.

2l diesel VW Touran did upto 60mpg in max eco driving style on a motorway.

On 05/03/17 20:26, ARW wrote:

I have no intentions of slowing down to 70mph.


A steady 90mph is fine.


But not around the M25

On 05/03/17 22:36, Tim Streater wrote:

Doesn't exist any more - the working class I mean.


Of course they do. How else would you classify a bloke who works in say
a distribution depot on minimum wage (or less if it's some joker of a
company that does "security checks" on your time, not theirs) and
struggles to make ends meet?

On 06/03/17 07:40, Tim Watts wrote:
On 05/03/17 22:36, Tim Streater wrote:

Doesn't exist any more - the working class I mean.


Of course they do. How else would you classify a bloke who works in say
a distribution depot on minimum wage (or less if it's some joker of a
company that does "security checks" on your time, not theirs) and
struggles to make ends meet?

The marxist working class were factory workers who supplied the labour
to work the capital intensive machines.

They no longer exist in Britain.

The 'bloke who works in say a distribution depot on minimum wage' is in
marxist terms merely an impoverished petit bourgeois...



--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

"ARW" wrote in message ...

On 05/03/2017 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
ARW wrote:
On 05/03/2017 18:06, charles wrote:
In article ,
Chris Green wrote:
charles wrote:
I have been driving a diesel car for nearly 30 years (not the same
one).
Originally bought for 400 mile runs up the motorway and kept because
I
still do regular motorway runs - the 400 mile one is down to 2 or 3
time a
year,

Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

general round the local area 44mpg, motorway 56mpg - I doubt if any
cars do
that.



My Scudo van does about 44MPG to and from work (usually nice clear A
roads and B roads and a 20 mile journey). About 30 to 35MPG around town
and about 25MPG on the motorway. I can improve the motorway MPG if I
slow down to less than 90MPH.

I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them.


I have no intentions of slowing down to 70mph.


A steady 90mph is fine.

... penalty points, fine, penalty points.

Tim+ Wrote in message:
tim... wrote:


"TheChief" wrote in message
news
Hi all

I have been looking at cars today with a view to replacing my
aging Focus.
I have found that the vast majority of mid range cars are that
spawn of Satan known as diesels.

seriously?

can you really not get every step on the ladder in a choice of either petrol
or diesel

No! In the early days of the "diesel takeover" manufacturers offered a
choice of engines on most models but increasingly it's diesel, diesel,
diesel and maybe one sporty petrol.

Tim


Tis true, also entry level gutless petrol for lower "price from"
headlines, or top available spec unavailable with petrol option
(no 4x4 on petrol but available w diesel).
--
Jim K


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 05/03/17 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.


My 1980s Maestro with a Perkins diesel did 50+mpg and was pretty swift.

2l diesel VW Touran did upto 60mpg in max eco driving style on a motorway.

I can get that if I keep down to 60mph.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

"Chris Green" wrote in message
...
charles wrote:
I have been driving a diesel car for nearly 30 years (not the same one).
Originally bought for 400 mile runs up the motorway and kept because I
still do regular motorway runs - the 400 mile one is down to 2 or 3 time
a
year,

Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs [1]

the reason that taxis are diesels is because the life of a diesel engine is
three time that of a petrol, when you do 50,000 miles a year, that fact is
mega important

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32 mpg
for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of which makes
the numbers a bit closer

tim

In article ,
tim... wrote:
Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs [1]

Nonsense. One reason a diesel excels in low speeds/heavy traffic is the
lack of pumping losses in the engine caused by the throttle in (most)
petrol engines. They also need less mixture enrichment than a petrol
engine when warming up, so will also use les fuel on short journeys. Even
allowing for the fact they generally take longer to warm up fully.

If you'd ever driven two similar cars round town - one diesel, one petrol,
you's know this for yourself.

--
*After the game, the King and the pawn go into the same box.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs
[1]

Nonsense. One reason a diesel excels in low speeds/heavy traffic is the
lack of pumping losses in the engine caused by the throttle in (most)
petrol engines. They also need less mixture enrichment than a petrol
engine when warming up, so will also use les fuel on short journeys. Even
allowing for the fact they generally take longer to warm up fully.

If you'd ever driven two similar cars round town - one diesel, one petrol,
you's know this for yourself.

I have

the bit you snipped told you so

tim

In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs
[1]

Nonsense. One reason a diesel excels in low speeds/heavy traffic is
the lack of pumping losses in the engine caused by the throttle in
(most) petrol engines. They also need less mixture enrichment than a
petrol engine when warming up, so will also use les fuel on short
journeys. Even allowing for the fact they generally take longer to
warm up fully.

If you'd ever driven two similar cars round town - one diesel, one
petrol, you's know this for yourself.

I have

the bit you snipped told you so

No it didn't. It merely gave your figures for one diesel you owned.

Very few petrol cars will do over 30 mpg with short town journeys only.

--
*One of us is thinking about sex... OK, it's me.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 2:43:30 AM UTC, TheChief wrote:
TheChief Wrote in message:
Hi all

I have been looking at cars today with a view to replacing my
aging Focus.
I have found that the vast majority of mid range cars are that
spawn of Satan known as diesels.

Not only that but the estate car we are looking for is like
rocking horse doodoo
even in the diesel version.

So all in all not the most productive of shopping trips.

Phil
--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/


Thanks for the comments guys.

To clarify, yes this would be a 2nd hand car I would be looking at
prob 2 years old.
My current car is a Focus diesel estate and I have been generally
happy with it. Not so good in town driving, but pulls well up to
90 on a run if needed and returns an overall average of around
45mpg with a lot of short distance runs to/from work.
As for a replacement, estates are rare with all these SUV type
machines taking over - not really my thing.
The Focus is an ideal size and gets good handling reviews etc. The
problem seems to be that most seem to be fitted with the 1 litre
ecoboost engines. The salesmen claim they are ok for the saloons,
but not too good for a loaded estate.
There is a 1.5 ecoboost petrol version, but the engine is rare and
combined with the estate requirement it looks like a pipe dream
or a 200 mile journey.

Phil


--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Over the last 10-12 years I've had 4 BMW 7 series. Petrol and diesel. Petrol got 22-26 mpg. Diesel gets 38mpg.

If someones else was buying the fuel I would prefer petrol but having said that driving diesel is no hardship.

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy
for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs
[1]

Nonsense. One reason a diesel excels in low speeds/heavy traffic is
the lack of pumping losses in the engine caused by the throttle in
(most) petrol engines. They also need less mixture enrichment than a
petrol engine when warming up, so will also use les fuel on short
journeys. Even allowing for the fact they generally take longer to
warm up fully.

If you'd ever driven two similar cars round town - one diesel, one
petrol, you's know this for yourself.

Diesels are more efficient than petrols in (as far as I can tell) all
circumstances - assuming you compare roughly like for like: a small-engine
petrol car driven gently and mainly at 40-50 with few stops will be better
than a bus driven mainly around town. But if you compare the same car with
petrol and diesel engines of similar power and same transmission, driven in
a similar way, I think you'll always get better economy from the diesel.

Even if diesels were not more economical, I'd still go for one because they
are nicer to drive: more torque means you aren't having to change down so
far every time you come to a roundabout in order to have enough acceleration
to get back to your former speed after the roundabout.

Someone commented about the smell of diesel fuel and exhaust. I much prefer
the smell of diesel fuel to petrol (which is sickly and makes me feel
light-headed). Diesel exhaust is only really a problem for an older engine
when it's cold and the glow plugs aren't working too well, when you get that
acrid light-blue smoke until the engine has warmed up. Having said that,
when you get lots of diesel vehicles (buses, trains) in a badly-ventilated
station, the smell can be pretty evil.

If designers could come up with a petrol engine that had the low-end torque
and the 50-90 acceleration without running out of puff of a diesel, that
would be the best of both worlds.

I wonder what an electric car is like to drive, given that it has a single
gear ratio and a motor that can pull from stationary to motorway speed
without needing to change gear - so for the first time you are controlling
the road speed/acceleration directly, rather than the engine speed and then
the road speed via manually or automatically selected gear ratios. Of course
the big thing that lets down a purely electric (as opposed to hybrid diesel-
or petrol-electric) car is its range and its recharge time once that range
is used up. For short journeys with long stops (eg to work then charge it
while you're working) that's fine. But who wants to have to buy two cars:
one for shorter long-stop journeys and another for all other longer journeys
with only loo-break/lunch stops?

On 06/03/17 09:45, tim... wrote:

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32
mpg for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of which
makes the numbers a bit closer

My car is horrible around town (26 mpg) but I have a run to Devon next
month so that should be interesting.

On 06/03/17 11:54, fred wrote:
If someones else was buying the fuel I would prefer petrol but having
said that driving diesel is no hardship.


I much prefer diesel - I like the low down torque.

On 06/03/17 09:03, jim wrote:
Tim+ Wrote in message:
tim... wrote:


"TheChief" wrote in message
news Hi all

I have been looking at cars today with a view to replacing my
aging Focus.
I have found that the vast majority of mid range cars are that
spawn of Satan known as diesels.

seriously?

can you really not get every step on the ladder in a choice of either petrol
or diesel

No! In the early days of the "diesel takeover" manufacturers offered a
choice of engines on most models but increasingly it's diesel, diesel,
diesel and maybe one sporty petrol.

Tim


Tis true, also entry level gutless petrol for lower "price from"
headlines, or top available spec unavailable with petrol option
(no 4x4 on petrol but available w diesel).

Back in the day, my mum bought a Mk1 Ford Escort 1100. It was a gutless
piece of *****, and used MORE petrol than the 1300 did.

*It was a toss up whether it would lose the front or the back first. On
many occasions it did both.

--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On 06/03/17 09:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 05/03/17 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.


My 1980s Maestro with a Perkins diesel did 50+mpg and was pretty swift.

2l diesel VW Touran did upto 60mpg in max eco driving style on a motorway.

I can get that if I keep down to 60mph.

I lent my XK8 to a girlfriend and reset the trip meter before I did. I
used to get 20-24mpg.

She got nearly 50mpg. I have no idea how she did that.



--
"Corbyn talks about equality, justice, opportunity, health care, peace,
community, compassion, investment, security, housing...."
"What kind of person is not interested in those things?"

"Jeremy Corbyn?"

On 06/03/17 12:13, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 09:45, tim... wrote:

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32
mpg for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of which
makes the numbers a bit closer

My car is horrible around town (26 mpg) but I have a run to Devon next
month so that should be interesting.

My 4WD auto diesel freelander 1 gets around 38 on a run and as low as 27
round town.

Mind you, its better than a supercharged jaguar, which averaged 11mpg
(and about 11mph) from Apex corner to Putney Bridge one day.

London should be ethnically cleansed.



--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first centurys developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

On 06/03/17 12:19, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 11:54, fred wrote:
If someones else was buying the fuel I would prefer petrol but having
said that driving diesel is no hardship.


I much prefer diesel - I like the low down torque.

With an auto box who's noticing?

I dont have a real preference.


--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

In article ,
fred wrote:
Over the last 10-12 years I've had 4 BMW 7 series. Petrol and diesel.
Petrol got 22-26 mpg.

You didn't do much town/heavy traffic driving then?

--
*Save the whale - I'll have it for my supper*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
NY wrote:
Even if diesels were not more economical, I'd still go for one because
they are nicer to drive: more torque means you aren't having to change
down so far every time you come to a roundabout in order to have enough
acceleration to get back to your former speed after the roundabout.

Then get a decent petrol car with a bigger engine.

The one thing all diesels suffer from is a narrow usable rev range. Which
can actually mean more gear changing than a petrol when pressing on.

--
*Change is inevitable, except from a vending machine*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news

On 06/03/17 12:13, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 09:45, tim... wrote:

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32
mpg for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of which
makes the numbers a bit closer

My car is horrible around town (26 mpg) but I have a run to Devon next
month so that should be interesting.

My 4WD auto diesel freelander 1 gets around 38 on a run and as low as 27
round town.

Mind you, its better than a supercharged jaguar, which averaged 11mpg (and
about 11mph) from Apex corner to Putney Bridge one day.

London should be ethnically cleansed.

It mostly has been

On 06/03/17 14:45, Richard wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
news

On 06/03/17 12:13, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 09:45, tim... wrote:

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32
mpg for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of
which
makes the numbers a bit closer

My car is horrible around town (26 mpg) but I have a run to Devon next
month so that should be interesting.

My 4WD auto diesel freelander 1 gets around 38 on a run and as low as
27 round town.

Mind you, its better than a supercharged jaguar, which averaged 11mpg
(and about 11mph) from Apex corner to Putney Bridge one day.

London should be ethnically cleansed.

It mostly has been

Yes. I think I read somewhere that greater london is now less than 45%
'white, British'


--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
tim... wrote:
Isn't that the one sort of journey where a diesel is very little if
any more economical than a petrol engine? Diesels win on economy
for
stop start driving, hence the London taxi.

No, they don't

their economy is pants for stop start driving, they excel on long runs
[1]

Nonsense. One reason a diesel excels in low speeds/heavy traffic is
the lack of pumping losses in the engine caused by the throttle in
(most) petrol engines. They also need less mixture enrichment than a
petrol engine when warming up, so will also use les fuel on short
journeys. Even allowing for the fact they generally take longer to
warm up fully.

If you'd ever driven two similar cars round town - one diesel, one
petrol, you's know this for yourself.

I have

the bit you snipped told you so

No it didn't. It merely gave your figures for one diesel you owned.

for 11 years

tim

On 06/03/17 14:37, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 06/03/17 09:34, charles wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 05/03/17 20:15, Chris Green wrote:
I *think* if you compare a diesel at a steady 70mph on the motorway
with a similar powered petrol engine at the same speed there's very
little to choose between them. It *used* to be that the petrol engine
was more economical but maybe the pressure to make better diesel
engines has meant that they've caught up.

It's a great pity that the 'lean burn' developments of petrol engines
petered out.


My 1980s Maestro with a Perkins diesel did 50+mpg and was pretty swift.

2l diesel VW Touran did upto 60mpg in max eco driving style on a
motorway.

I can get that if I keep down to 60mph.

I lent my XK8 to a girlfriend and reset the trip meter before I did. I
used to get 20-24mpg.

She got nearly 50mpg. I have no idea how she did that.

D'ye drive like an Italian, perhaps? Y'know, either no throttle or full
throttle - no half measures.

Nope. But a 4 liter V8 is not something that

--
"I am inclined to tell the truth and dislike people who lie consistently.
This makes me unfit for the company of people of a Left persuasion, and
all women"

On 05/03/2017 14:21, Tim+ wrote:
GB wrote:

well there's a reason for there being an excess of diesels on the market

it's the same one that's causing you not to want to buy one.

tim


Years ago, there was a Wankel engined car that people converted. NSU
RO80??? Something like that. Some V4 petrol engine was an easy swap.
Will people start doing the same for diesels?

I doubt it. The RO80 engine was prone to premature and expensive death. An
engine swap makes economic sense in this kind of case, not generally
otherwise.

Tim

Plus the RO80 was an expensive car to buy.

On Monday, 6 March 2017 12:13:50 UTC, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 09:45, tim... wrote:

[1] my own figures for when I ran a diesel was 66 mpg on long runs, 32
mpg for town driving - this predated turbo diesel, the addition of which
makes the numbers a bit closer

My car is horrible around town (26 mpg) but I have a run to Devon next
month so that should be interesting.

I have one car that costs nothing to run in Summer.
And another that can do as little as 7mpg.

On 06/03/2017 06:42, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Lean burn stopped because of NOx emissions.

Diesels are lean unless on full throttle - and they have oxidising cats
to sort that out. Why couldn't that work on a petrol?

Andy

On 06/03/2017 12:01, NY wrote:
Even if diesels were not more economical, I'd still go for one because
they are nicer to drive: more torque means you aren't having to change
down so far every time you come to a roundabout in order to have enough
acceleration to get back to your former speed after the roundabout.

Even though diesels are more economical, I won't go for one because they
are so horrible to drive: Peak power is at such low revs you're always
changing gear, and there's that turbo lag so nothing happens for a bit
after you put your foot down.

My petrol car will amble along in top at 30MPH (1500RPM) on the flat. Or
I could rev the nuts off it, and be in 1st at the same speed.

Obviously our experiences are different.

Andy

Vir Campestris wrote:
On 06/03/2017 12:01, NY wrote:
Even if diesels were not more economical, I'd still go for one because
they are nicer to drive: more torque means you aren't having to change
down so far every time you come to a roundabout in order to have enough
acceleration to get back to your former speed after the roundabout.

Even though diesels are more economical, I won't go for one because they
are so horrible to drive: Peak power is at such low revs you're always
changing gear, and there's that turbo lag so nothing happens for a bit
after you put your foot down.

Sorry, but you're just showing off your lack of experience. I can assure
you that my wife's 150bhp 2L diesel is really quite fun to drive. The
engine is smooth and willing. Of course it doesn't rev like a petrol engine
but if you're trying to rev a diesel like a petrol engine, you're just
driving it wrong.

My 3L V6 240bhp is even more fun when you're in a hurry (although not as
much fun in the twisty bits due to its size.


My petrol car will amble along in top at 30MPH (1500RPM) on the flat.

I think thats about 70 mph in my car. Yours must be horridly frenetic at
any speed.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Mon, 06 Mar 2017 21:02:20 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

Vir Campestris wrote:
On 06/03/2017 12:01, NY wrote:
Even if diesels were not more economical, I'd still go for one because
they are nicer to drive: more torque means you aren't having to change
down so far every time you come to a roundabout in order to have
enough acceleration to get back to your former speed after the
roundabout.

Even though diesels are more economical, I won't go for one because
they are so horrible to drive: Peak power is at such low revs you're
always changing gear, and there's that turbo lag so nothing happens for
a bit after you put your foot down.

Sorry, but you're just showing off your lack of experience. I can
assure you that my wife's 150bhp 2L diesel is really quite fun to drive.
The engine is smooth and willing. Of course it doesn't rev like a petrol
engine but if you're trying to rev a diesel like a petrol engine, you're
just driving it wrong.

I too have a 150PS 2 litre diesel - quite a heavy car (5/7 seater). And
it too is quite fun to drive. I have driven a *lot* of vehicles, and I
was pleasantly surprised when I got my first diesel about 4 years ago.
This is the second, and even better.

Only downside is that I managed to mis-fuel the first one TWICE - the
second time defeating a Fuel Angel that I'd fitted!



--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

In article ,
Tim+ wrote:
Sorry, but you're just showing off your lack of experience. I can
assure you that my wife's 150bhp 2L diesel is really quite fun to drive.
The engine is smooth and willing. Of course it doesn't rev like a petrol
engine but if you're trying to rev a diesel like a petrol engine, you're
just driving it wrong.

At least you have the choice to rev a decent petrol engine. And they don't
suddenly go from full power to nothing in an instant.

Basically, decent engine management has made a diesel behave more like a
petrol engine. One day they may get all the way.

There's nothing magical about making a turbo engine produce a vast amount
of torque at lowish revs. Petrol or diesel.

--
*Re-elect nobody

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Monday, March 6, 2017 at 1:31:33 PM UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 06/03/17 12:19, Tim Watts wrote:
On 06/03/17 11:54, fred wrote:
If someones else was buying the fuel I would prefer petrol but having
said that driving diesel is no hardship.


I much prefer diesel - I like the low down torque.

With an auto box who's noticing?

I dont have a real preference.


--
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
..I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

There is a difference. Petrol is much smoother and the torque curve is different. Even with and 8 speed auto the difference is noticeable. On paper 0-60 acceleration times may be similar but on the road the difference is noticeable