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/

On Sat, 04 Mar 2017 21:39:14 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:

We just bought a hybrid. Petrol. After 1000 miles it's returning 57mpg,

Her indoors Suzuki SX4 diesel returns 52 mpg (long term). Mixture of
short (5 mile) trips and longer, 40 miles, rural A roads.

--
Cheers
Dave.

"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

tim

"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.

I've just had a thought

are you talking about 2nd hand?

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

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?

On 3/5/2017 1:25 PM, 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

tim



My thought too.

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

--
Please don't feed the trolls

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

--
Please don't feed the trolls

In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
they¹re going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I don¹t think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Diesel John

In article ,
Another John wrote:
In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
they¹re going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I don¹t think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

Paddington Station anybody or even Kings Cross? And buses/coaches and
delivery vehicles. Not to forget the London Taxi.

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,

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

In message , tim...
writes
are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

But it hasn't appeared to cause much, if any, slump in the prices of s/h
diesel vehicles, much to my annoyance.

Cities are becoming obsolete anyway.
--
Bill

On 05/03/17 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.

Mazda had a rotary IIRC - good race engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_RX-7

Tim



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

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)

On 05/03/17 15:13, Another John wrote:
In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
they¹re going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I don¹t think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Diesel John


Of course if they really wanted to limit diesel, they would tax the
diesel, instead of taxing the car.

For those of us who do very low mileage we pay a lot on road tax and
cannot afford to own two cars - a low emissions one for local use and a
long distance one for the occasional trip


--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 05/03/17 15:48, Bill wrote:
Cities are becoming obsolete anyway.

Yes, and no. There is no point to them, except as places for morons to
live surrounded by moronicity.

I suppose they do make good targets of opportunity.

Imagine the UK without London, Bradford, Birmingham., Manchester...how
pleasant it would be.



--
To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.

On 05/03/2017 16:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/03/17 15:48, Bill wrote:
Cities are becoming obsolete anyway.

Yes, and no. There is no point to them, except as places for morons to
live surrounded by moronicity.

I suppose they do make good targets of opportunity.

Imagine the UK without London, Bradford, Birmingham., Manchester...how
pleasant it would be.




And who is going to miss Birmingham (apart from dennis)?

It's a ****ing **** hole.

--
Adam

On Sunday, 5 March 2017 16:16:22 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Imagine the UK without London, Bradford, Birmingham., Manchester...how
pleasant it would be.

Unless you're talking about genocide, the populations of those cities would have to live somewhere else - possibly near you.

France is another possibility, of course. Or Spain.

Owain

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.

--
Chris Green
·

On Sunday, 5 March 2017 15:13:13 UTC, Another John wrote:
In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
theyıre going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I donıt think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Diesel John

Afaik vehicle pollution isn't killing people here - it may be a different story in the developing world, but not here. So the best vehicles pollution-wise in the UK are the high mpg achieving ones, which generally means diesel. Having driven modern diesels they're great, I'd choose them over petrols any time.

The government of course is as lost as usual.


NT

"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.

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

fenestrating

On 05/03/17 17:08, wrote:
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 16:16:22 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Imagine the UK without London, Bradford, Birmingham., Manchester...how
pleasant it would be.

Unless you're talking about genocide,

I am talking about well not genocide, more like ethnic cleansing

the populations of those cities would have to live somewhere else -
possibly near you.

They already do


France is another possibility, of course. Or Spain.

Owain



--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

On 05/03/17 17:09, 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.

Nope. Diesels are most efficient at light throttle openings - i.e.
medium constant speed.


Why else would trucks have diesels?

--
Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's
too dark to read.

Groucho Marx

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.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:08:42 UTC, 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.

some diesels do far better

On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 16:14:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:


If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Diesel John


Of course if they really wanted to limit diesel, they would tax the
diesel, instead of taxing the car.

For those of us who do very low mileage we pay a lot on road tax and
cannot afford to own two cars - a low emissions one for local use and a
long distance one for the occasional trip

We got Mothers Aygo when she voluntary gave up driving due to age
related conditions. I had been driving her on longer journeys for a
while so it made sense that we keep it here and pick her up as
required,it might not be the coolest car to be seen in but we use it
for any short trip under around 10 miles. This means the diesel car
is not used on the sort of journey where the particulate filter never
gets hot so I hope it will resist the clogging some vehicles have
suffered from,another bonus was that the diesel being a larger more
powerful vehicle was more costly to insure but deducting all those
short journeys enabled a saving to be made on the premium by dropping
the estimated annual mileage . The Aygo is only £20 a year to tax and
goes for ages on a tank of petrol, its also surprising fun to drive
and harks back to the days when belting around in an old Mini you felt
a connection with the road and seem to be going faster than you really
are without all those traction packages etc.

G.Harman

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.

--
Adam

On Sun, 05 Mar 2017 15:13:09 +0000, Another John wrote:

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

Pretty obvious for some time that diesels will be banned/scrapped at
some stage.

In article ,
Huge wrote:
The TVR never managed better than 23mpg.

That's surprising with a RV8. Is it very low geared?

My SD1, which is an auto and injection, will just better 30 mph at legal
speeds provided you don't accelerate hard too.

--
*This message has been ROT-13 encrypted twice for extra security *

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

On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 09:16:45 -0800 (PST), wrote:

Afaik vehicle pollution isn't killing people here -

Nonsense, respiratory disease is a killer.

In article ,
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 don't think it was an easy swap. More that someone made a conversion kit
for it. A one off is always going to be far more difficult.

--
*Income tax service - We‘ve got what it takes to take what you've got.

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

On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 17:19:01 -0000, Jim GM4DHJ ... 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.

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

fenestrating

I think you mean trolling.

In article ,
wrote:
On Sunday, 5 March 2017 18:08:42 UTC, 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
petrol cars do that.

some diesels do far better

smaller ones will do better, I don't disagree.

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

On 04-Mar-17 9:39 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , TheChief
wrote:

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.

We just bought a hybrid. Petrol. After 1000 miles it's returning 57mpg,
a bit better than our dizzle C4 and a lot better than most petrol cars,
near as I can tell.

But how much extra did the hybrid version cost and will you recover that
in the fuel savings?



--
--

Colin Bignell

On 05/03/17 14:21, 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.

Tim


Rather the opposite IME - I just got a Hyundai Tucson and there are no
decent petrol options. The "sporty" version is a 2l diesel lump. And
it's not very efficient either, compared to my old VW.

I do very low milage so the other attributes of the car sold it to me
with MPG being a low priority - especially getting 10% off just for
working for a certain employer (The Affinity programme, if anyone's
interested - large discounts for about 100+ employers: Higher Ed (me),
EE, Onestop,... it's a long list).


There's no reason they couldn't sell a big petrol version - I think the
same model has a 2l petrol in the USA.

So something about the EU has encouraged the manufacturers to do this -
and I don't think it can be all down to consumers.

For a long time diesels were encourage by UK Gov - partly as they tended
to be very efficient, and partly diesel was cheaper.

So rather than Sadiq Khan suddenly whining, they need to regulate to
encourage petrols over diesels at the point of sale rather than randomly
attacking the drivers after the fact.

On 05/03/17 16:14, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/03/17 15:13, Another John wrote:
In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
they¹re going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I don¹t think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Diesel John


Of course if they really wanted to limit diesel, they would tax the
diesel, instead of taxing the car.

For those of us who do very low mileage we pay a lot on road tax and
cannot afford to own two cars - a low emissions one for local use and a
long distance one for the occasional trip



They were doing this through VED but now (for new cars registered this
year) they are going back to a flat rate.

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.

On 05/03/17 16:40, ARW wrote:
On 05/03/2017 16:16, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/03/17 15:48, Bill wrote:
Cities are becoming obsolete anyway.

Yes, and no. There is no point to them, except as places for morons to
live surrounded by moronicity.

I suppose they do make good targets of opportunity.

Imagine the UK without London, Bradford, Birmingham., Manchester...how
pleasant it would be.




And who is going to miss Birmingham (apart from dennis)?

It's a ****ing **** hole.


Which produces the highest number of muslim terrorists per muslim capita
- out of all proportion to Yorkshire - according to the paper today.

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....

--
Adam

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....



That and the fact that there are few politicians of calibre any more -
just careerists.

Labour has been taken over (again) by wet liberal types who would rather
solve non problems as long as they can add the label "diversity" to it -
fiddling whilst Rome burns. Corbyn is a joke - a caricature of Lenin
without the character.

What happened to the proper Labour party as started by Kier Hardy, when
the remit was to represent the working man?

I have some socialist ideals - the NHS is conceptually a good idea (but
poorly run and with unrealistic expectations now). Benefits are
necessary for many people - sometimes just briefly, sometimes longer.
But at the same time you have **** takers left right and centre. I
worked in a South London jobcentre on the front desk in the 90s - saw
both sides.

But I am mostly pro capitalism. Except that what we have is not
capitalism proper. We have Google et al getting away with fiddling its
taxes to bugger all whilst Hammond just announced that everyone gets to
do 4 returns to HMRC a year instead of one. Small businesses are stifled
by excessive onuses which are more appropriate to a corporation.


And RBS should have been allowed to die as well as Northern Rock. And
those in charged tried and gaoled like Nick Leeson.

Private savers would have been reimbursed to the standard protection
limit anyway.


Rant over...

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.

--
Chris Green
·

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.

--
Adam

Another John wrote:
In article ,
"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.

I've just had a thought are you talking about 2nd hand?

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.

Quite. It was on 25th February that Transport Minister Chris Grayling
said:

"People should take a long, hard think about what they need, about where
theyıre going to be driving, and should make best endeavours to buy the
least polluting vehicle they can.
I donıt think diesel is going to disappear but someone who is buying a
car to drive around a busy city may think about buying a low-emission
vehicle rather than a diesel."

That's what he said (apparently). But it was *universally* headlined in
the media, including the now-tabloid BBC outlets, as "Think twice before
buying a diesel, Transport Minister warns"

Thus, at one stroke, ****ing up the car market for millions of diesel
owners.

(As you might guess) I have recently bought a diesel (63-reg Skoda Yeti
--- for the OP 'The Chief': it's damn' good might I add). It's a 2.0l
TDI, 110bhp.

After a lifetime of avoiding diesel because I don't like the noise, and
I like even less the stink, of exhaust and fuel alike.

However I bought this one precisely because of the gist of this thread:
diesels are very hard indeed to avoid. "And anyway: they're much, much
better than they ever were," to quote owners, manufacturers, and dealers
for the last decade or so.

Ha! I bet you believe in the tooth fairy too. ;-)

Yes, in terms of power, smoothness, noise, economy etc. they are very good
now, especially the VW ones. If there is one lesson to be learned from
"Dieselgate" though it's that in real world terms (from the pollution POV),
they all still suck mightily.

Trouble is, who to believe over which is cleaner? Setting standard tests
does nothing to make engines cleaner in everyday driving, it just makes
manufacturers better at making engines that pass one-off tests.



But now Grayling wades in, with his size 14s. There has *never been a
mention* of making allowances for modern engines, with their particulate
filters, and their engine management, in contrast to the guy at the end
of our street who has been driving a clapped out transit since about
1992.

I believe that the "failing" VWs all had particulate filters. They help,
but how much in real world driving?


I would suggest that by far the vast bulk of diesel pollution in London
(which is where this all kicked off, of course) is caused by the
thousands of clapped out vehicles that are still driving around (or
sitting around, engines running).

If Chris Grayling wants to do something serious about car pollution, he
should *very forcefully* tighten up the MOT, *and all its testers*.

Probably wouldn't help much as the standards for MOT don't bear much
relationship to real world conditions.
Setting much higher standards would probably have every three year old
diesel failing.

Tim



--
Please don't feed the trolls