Diesel Vs Petrol

[mrface]

yes you are actually correct (as you normally are, ole crashy)

 

[Gintok]

I've generally preferred diesel given that with most modern cars it can often be cleaner for the enviroment, more economical in terms of both pricing and mileage while giving a similar amount of power to it's petrol counterpart.

There are many issues which face diesel motorists though. The old stigma that diesel cars are dirty, slow and noisy are slowly becoming debunked only to be replaced with new stigmas (for tightwads and enviromentalists).

Supply, demand and beaurocracy. Kind of sad really when diesel is less refined and theoretically should cost less. I've lived in many countries and see there is a substantial difference in pricing for diesel cars and fuel.

Having said that I'd only buy a diesel from certain makes, VAG, Benz and PSA.

 

[N19h7M4r3]

diesel is the best out of these two... diesel simply has more chemical energy per liter so in theory you have more miles in your tank... and especially since diesel today is even cheaper then gasoline/petrol, its just a better choise.
In terms of effenciency i dont know how it actually stacks up in energy spent per mile, but id say even if its less efficient at the moment, in the future what will matter is that chemical energy, so when both types of engine have reached near perfect efficiency (chances are will run out of crude long before that) diesel will be better, but also gasoline/petrol will be a bit cheaper because crude usually has more gasoline then diesel, so as there is more gasoline/petrol and diesel will be better, gasoline will always be the choice for our every day lives, and start imagining ferraris and lambos with diesel engines, cause its just a matter of time lol

 

[wip99gt]

For the most part I prefer diesel. They're dependable and can take a lot of abuse. I don't like Canadian and American emission regulations concerning diesel though. A lot of very good engines never make it over here because of that bs. It's good to control emissions but it should be a globally accepted standard not different for every country. Now the issue I do see with that is diesel fuel varies per climate, the colder it gets the lower the wax content. Newer ECM controlled engines make up for that by changing injection duration and timing though.
I like what Crashman stated about the recycling of cars using a large amount of energy. Very few people actually look in to that and nobody looks at the environmental impact of the production of a vehicle. Take any hybrid out there and do a little research about how the batteries are made. I think Top Gear did a thing about this a few seasons back and found that by 200000km the prius does as much pollution as a land rover.

 

[Slim Shady]

I have just changed back to diesel after having a petrol Primera 1.8 for the past 2 years. I'd always had diesel until then and have always loved it. The only downside is that parts are usually more expensive, but diesels are more reliable so this shouldn't be a big problem.

 

[Crashman]

I have just changed back to diesel after having a petrol Primera 1.8 for the past 2 years. I'd always had diesel until then and have always loved it. The only downside is that parts are usually more expensive, but diesels are more reliable so this shouldn't be a big problem.

I keep hearing that "more reliable" mantra. Yet I rarely have a encountered internal engine problems. Breakdowns are typically caused by something outside the engine, and that's where diesel and gasoline cars are remarkably similar.

Don't get me wrong, Diesels do get better mileage and wear slower, but today's gasoline cars are typically falling apart before the engine is completely worn out. So from the wear standpoint you end up with what, a better engine in that car that's sitting in a junkyard because...like any other car...it fell apart after 15 years? All four cylinders firing while the gasoline car next to it in the same junkyard burns oil and fires on only three?

What I'm really saying is that of all diesel's advantages, lower engine wear is the one that impresses me least.

 

[Tonkyboy]

I don't drive a performance car. I do however drive a Ford Fusion 1.6 Turbo Diesel, because not only is it faster than the petrol version, and it accelerates quicker than the petrol version, but according to the trip computer, I get 63 mpg out of it. Show me a petrol engine that does all of that, and I may be interested. Until then, I'm keeping my diesel.

 

[mitch074]

I had a 1991 Golf 2, which used indirect injection and a fixed size turbo charger. Due to its age, exhaust was unfiltered - but it didn't smoke, it didn't smell, and it had terrific fuel economy.
Too bad 1.6L RA VW engines were so unreliable! I'd gladly take a 1.9 over it - with the same turbocharger and intercooler.

Aside from its unreliability (the engine was prone to heat strokes), it is a spitfire - easily leaving similarly sized gas engines in the dust. But, and this is where I'll tell all of you to be careful, while a well made Diesel engine will indeed have more torque at a given RPM than a similarly sized gas engine, it's not always the case.

The most impressive of all small size Diesel engines I've tried were those found on Peugeot 205 turbo Diesel: not only did Peugeot make the most punchy diesel engines of its time, the Peugeot 205 frame (sweet handling, excellent grip, very light) and the turbo on that machine really kick ass.

Too bad it can't be found in the States, moreover it's all manual - for real drivers (I drive sticks myself )

 

[Crashman]

I had a 1991 Golf 2, which used indirect injection and a fixed size turbo charger. Due to its age, exhaust was unfiltered - but it didn't smoke, it didn't smell, and it had terrific fuel economy.
Too bad 1.6L RA VW engines were so unreliable! I'd gladly take a 1.9 over it - with the same turbocharger and intercooler.

Aside from its unreliability (the engine was prone to heat strokes), it is a spitfire - easily leaving similarly sized gas engines in the dust. But, and this is where I'll tell all of you to be careful, while a well made Diesel engine will indeed have more torque at a given RPM than a similarly sized gas engine, it's not always the case.

The most impressive of all small size Diesel engines I've tried were those found on Peugeot 205 turbo Diesel: not only did Peugeot make the most punchy diesel engines of its time, the Peugeot 205 frame (sweet handling, excellent grip, very light) and the turbo on that machine really kick ass.

Too bad it can't be found in the States, moreover it's all manual - for real drivers (I drive sticks myself )

I used to drive manual transmissions, but that's kind of like the argument over diesel: Automatics hold up to more instantaneous toque, manuals hold up over the long haul. Anyway, it would be tough to drive a HEAVY vehicle from stoplight to stoplight using a manual transmission, and that's mostly what I do now.

Now if I could afford a PLEASURE DRIVING car, I'd be all over the manual option.

 

[ulysses35]

I switched to diesel to get better fuel economy - however there was some reliability issues too.

Ford 1.6 Zetec used to go through coil packs regularly - they tell me due to poor quality control on the manufacturere of the the coil pack.s

Diesel 1.8 TDCI has no coil pack... no more failures

 

[ahslan]

im so jealous...wish we had more diesels here in the US....for some reason, all the luxury brands have them (audi, bmw, mercedes benz...and vw<--not luxury)

 

[Crashman]

im so jealous...wish we had more diesels here in the US....for some reason, all the luxury brands have them (audi, bmw, mercedes benz...and vw<--not luxury)

You should say, all the German brands. You see, fuel is expensive in Europe, and has been for many years. This is the primary reason behind the popularity of Diesel there, and is the reason it almost took-off here in 1979.

 

[wip99gt]

Hell I want the Isuzu Dmax with the 4JJ engine over here. I've dealt with a good few of the industrial variants of those engines and they are really impressive. I've dealt with a few customers that have 25000+ plus hours on them. Only thing they've done is replaced front seal, rear seal, waterpump, and the egr reed valves. The valves probably would have been fine on one but they ran it under a light load for a long time so there was lot of carbon buildup. Now 25000 hours isn't a long time but by looking at how they are running right now I'd be suprised if they got less than 40000 hours. These engines are also running 24/7 year round in the arctic circle at a gas plant.

I think another reason it's been taking so long for European and Asian diesel to come to North America was because our diesel is crap. We've only just switched to low sulfer diesel in the past few years. The old diesel we used was horrible in the tier 3 and 4 engines. We ran a few tier 3 engines on the old diesel and they smoked like no tomorrow and were very hard to start.

 

[wip99gt]

Oh and what crashman said about being more reliable. I know of 2 people with more than 750000km on their dodge 1 tons. That is without new mains rolled in. I see industrial engines with 50000+ hours on them without any major work done on them except for seals and oil coolers. My examples are mostly industrial uses but for me the lower engine wear is most important. Dependablity is needed when you're 6 hours away from the closest gas station, in -40C weather, and with no cell phone service. Some of the places I go to you can't even get gas. I do understand what you're saying though because usually something else on the car will break before the engine.