Volkswagen / Audi have invested all that Money in Motorsport for Diesel Hybrids.

Their future was to be Electric Supercharger & Turbos with Diesels.

 

The Factories to build the Engines are already built in Hungary & in South America.

The first vehicles were revealed.

 

Qatar Holding have their share of the Volkswagen Group and they were not planning on stopping manufacturing Diesel Engine Passenger and Light Goods Vehicles any time soon.

I think the fact that all of the hybrids available now are petrol/electric, tells us manufacturers don't see a long term future for diesel.

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/motoring/car-reviews/range-rover-sport-hybrid-review-4945600

Thanks for that insight.  Do you know what kind of mpg you get out of a GTE on a longer journey where the battery has been exhausted?  Or is this an impossible question as mixed driving could result in no petrol consumed one day, and lots the next?  All a bit alien to me, though as a company car driver, the low headline co2 would get the BIK rate down - to then be offset by the high list price!  (4 year lease car, so nothing to do until July 2017... .... ....)

I'm averaging about 80mpg long term, over 2.5k. Mainly round the town trips, with the odd 50 or so mile up and down the A1.

 

even if the battery is at zero you can charge it while driving, there's a couple of modes you can change to suit the terrain, type of journey etc.

 

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/344708-i-am-having-hybrid-thoughtsnow-ordered-a-golf-gte/page-6#entry4384622

http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/motoring/car-reviews/range-rover-sport-hybrid-review-4945600

My apologies, I'm not well up to date on £80,000 + Chelsea tractors. ☺

I think the fact that all of the hybrids available now are petrol/electric, tells us manufacturers don't see a long term future for diesel.

 

Apart from Volvo that is. Reason most are petrol is due to probably weight and refinement issue relating to diesel engine (though this is just a suggestion not the answer).

 

The V60 hybrid is a very nice car to drive, shame about it's price £50k!!!

 

Though Volvo's latest Hybrid the XC90 is petrol, this is for refinement (so the dealer told me that is).

 

The price is the only thing against the Hybrid at the moment.

I think the fact that all of the hybrids available now are petrol/electric, tells us manufacturers don't see a long term future for diesel.

Volvo makes diesel hybrids. At least the V60 has it.

You can still buy a new Mercedes Diesel Hybrid can you not?

Has anyone been contacted by SUK over this, they should have the details by now.

You can still buy a new Mercedes Diesel Hybrid can you not?

 

Yes the C300, the C350e is the petrol version.

 

The C300 is basically a diesel with a electric motor to help performance mostly. Unlike most PHEV's it cannot actually run on electric only (apart from startup with 1 mile range).

 

I would have happy had a PHEV if they was not so stupid expensive!

I think the fact that all of the hybrids available now are petrol/electric, tells us manufacturers don't see a long term future for diesel.

 

Not really, they only introduce petrol/hybrid in a bid to reduce C02 so that they are more competative for VED & company car tax bands.

Exactly the same reason why you get "Stop/Start" on a Ferrari.

Remember, EU emissions legislation is currently heavily weighted towards C02 (where diesel is already good) with quite lenient NOx levels.

If in the future there is tighter taxation of N0x I'm sure you will see diesel hybrids also.

 

In the end any kind of hybrid is definately not a "environmentally friendly" solution for the majority of drivers.

The cars are heavier (as the have electric & fuel drivetrains) & thus use more fuel & have higher emissions (for a journey longer than the battery range).

They are only really a solution for people who would drive only short distances in cities to stop localised polution.

Edited 1 October, 201510 yr by Gabbo

Or drive where there is a Congestion Charge, are getting the Tax Benefits or even Grants to Buy / Lease.

 

The UK Government went right in there and encouraged Diesels, 

then are encouraging Hybrids that might only be run of liquid fuels, other than when it needs to be an Electric Vehicle to travel free in some Cities.

Heavy and not as Economic on Fuel 90 % of the time because of having to pretend to be green on the limited occassion.

 

Not Technology, it is Kidology.

 

EDIT.

Sorry scrolling on the phone i missed most of the previous post.

Doh.

Bl00dy technology.

Not quite true, the GTE is actually a fair bit quicker than the GTD, its actually been under rated by VW strangely. And having used both for work, Ive never noticed the "extra" weight in the GTE.

The battery can be charged when driving, and also from a normal house 3 pin socket, as well as the many free to use charge points out there.

The max mileage on electric is also not an issue as the idea is to use electric alongside the ICE engine to lower its mpg.

Hybrid is definitely the way to go at the moment, lower tax, lower fuel bills etc.

I can see there being less and less diesel cars made, and the demand falling. If nothing this emissions "scandal" will be an excuse for government's, or whoever to impose higher taxes

Revvier, sharper throttle response, torque characteristics of the electric motor.....I wouldnt argue its probably quicker off the mark more due to its longer gearing and quicker throttle reponse...DSG also perhaps playing a part but on the move particularly when the GTD is in its at reasonable speed/right gear sweet spot there wont be alot to tell between the two.

I think the GTD being diesel, with lazier throttle response and quite smooth linear power delivery is probably a still a bit quicker than it feels.....I at times feel its acceleration is a little underwhelming until I look in the rear view mirror to realise how quickly the car behind is disappearing...... the GTE I suspect feels a bit quicker than it probably actually is. GTE probably more exciting because the revs, sound and electric thrust.

My twincharged Fabia vRS was similar....the supercharger chiming in at barely above idle and its revvy 7k red line made it great fun to thrash....but it felt quicker than it actually was.

They both have a nigh on identical 130ish hp/ton power to weight ratio....so you cant really argue with the laws of physics.

Also real world exploting the performance of both vehicles...the GTD will almost certainly return better economy...particuarly when the battery gets low and you end up relying more on the go of the 150hp motor to pull its +1.5 ton around.

Its a no brainer as a company car choice of you are lucky enough.....GTD still my choice of the two for my own money....IMHO its still the purer Performance Golf of the two...the GTE being that little bit more compromised.

The gte is "advertised " as 0-60 in 7.6 but many are getting under 7 even 6.5.

Faster than the gti is advertised.

Also, battery gives 100bhp, petrol 150. The car can use both at same time for amazing pull.

If your sat on a motorway doing 70 odd all day, yes the gtd would return better mpg, however the battery can be charged while driving, so once you get into towns you go pure battery, and enjoy all the free fuel, and free parking also!!.

Each has their own pros and cons, if it where my money the gte is a no brained, the gtd residuals will suffer because of the emissions issue, whether the engine is identified as a problem one or not. Guilty by association.

The gte is "advertised " as 0-60 in 7.6 but many are getting under 7 even 6.5.

Faster than the gti is advertised.

Also, battery gives 100bhp, petrol 150. The car can use both at same time for amazing pull.

If your sat on a motorway doing 70 odd all day, yes the gtd would return better mpg, however the battery can be charged while driving, so once you get into towns you go pure battery, and enjoy all the free fuel, and free parking also!!.

Each has their own pros and cons, if it where my money the gte is a no brained, the gtd residuals will suffer because of the emissions issue, whether the engine is identified as a problem one or not. Guilty by association.

No I agree, both have their pros and cons and ultimately it boils down to ones preference.

A couple of points of note though......whilst the GTE does have a 102hp elec motor and 148hp petrol motor....combined they are diluted down to produce 201hp.....so not 250hp of course. Also same for the torque.....258lb/ft.....a v v healthy figure but still 22lb/ft less than a GTD's peak output.

As ive said before diesels arent that great off the mark...the lag the high torque output and need to change gear 3 times to reach 60 hurts their ability to really make good off the mark times.....7.5 secs aint shabby at all though and by the same token Ive seen a YouTube vid of a stock manual GTD being launched in 7.2 secs and not v well...meaning high 6's would be possible on a perfect run I am sure.

But put it down to plain unarguable calculations regardless of 0-60 sprint (as thats not the be all and end all).....nigh on the samw power to weight....torque to weight advantage clearly to the GTD, both having more of it and weighing alot less....Id argue the GTD probably still holds the trump card.

Residuals of the GTD wont be affected like you suggest....its the most popular Performance Golf due to its conpromise between efficiency and dynamics....also its a damn sight less complicated than a GTE which would be a concern for longer term ownership. The EA288 as yet is not officially implicated in the saga in the UK and quite honestly if it were to be I am sure VW UK would have made that announcement by now. The EU6 184 motor fitted to the GTD is not of concern at all.

Once you get a GTE to the same spec as a GTD you are looking at a seriously expensive car and I personally think because its a bit new wave and as yet unproven I think it will be the worse depreciator of the two in time to come nut thats just opinion.

The gte is "advertised " as 0-60 in 7.6 but many are getting under 7 even 6.5.

Faster than the gti is advertised.

Also, battery gives 100bhp, petrol 150. The car can use both at same time for amazing pull.

If your sat on a motorway doing 70 odd all day, yes the gtd would return better mpg, however the battery can be charged while driving, so once you get into towns you go pure battery, and enjoy all the free fuel, and free parking also!!.

Each has their own pros and cons, if it where my money the gte is a no brained, the gtd residuals will suffer because of the emissions issue, whether the engine is identified as a problem one or not. Guilty by association.

No I agree, both have their pros and cons and ultimately it boils down to ones preference.

A couple of points of note though......whilst the GTE does have a 102hp elec motor and 148hp petrol motor....combined they are diluted down to produce 201hp.....so not 250hp of course. Also same for the torque.....258lb/ft.....a v v healthy figure but still 22lb/ft less than a GTD's peak output.

As ive said before diesels arent that great off the mark...the lag the high torque output and need to change gear 3 times to reach 60 hurts their ability to really make good off the mark times.....7.5 secs aint shabby at all though and by the same token Ive seen a YouTube vid of a stock manual GTD being launched in 7.2 secs and not v well...meaning high 6's would be possible on a perfect run I am sure.

But put it down to plain unarguable calculations regardless of 0-60 sprint (as thats not the be all and end all).....nigh on the samw power to weight....torque to weight advantage clearly to the GTD, both having more of it and weighing alot less....Id argue the GTD probably still holds the trump card.

Residuals of the GTD wont be affected like you suggest....its the most popular Performance Golf due to its conpromise between efficiency and dynamics....also its a damn sight less complicated than a GTE which would be a concern for longer term ownership. The EA288 as yet is not officially implicated in the saga in the UK and quite honestly if it were to be I am sure VW UK would have made that announcement by now. The EU6 184 motor fitted to the GTD is not of concern at all.

Once you get a GTE to the same spec as a GTD you are looking at a seriously expensive car (even with the 5k govt grant) and I personally think because its a bit new wave and as yet unproven I think it will be the worse depreciator of the two in time to come nut thats just opinion.

I don't see what the torque to weight ratio, or the max engine trorque btw, has to do with the performances. Would you elaborate?

I don't see what the torque to weight ratio, or the max engine trorque btw, has to do with the performances. Would you elaborate?

Not sure exactly what there is to explain.....

All TDI's are hampered acceleration wise because of their power characteristics, low rev lag/throttle response but more so their very short intial gearing.

Makes getting a vRS TDI/GTD hard to get off the mark quickly.....for example you are at around 3250rpm in 3rd gear in a 184 TDI when you hit 60mph.....I expect a GTE could hit 60 quite readily in 2nd gear.

Point being that the GTE despite its 204ps v 184ps of the GTD, weighs a shedload more....compare the power to weight ratios of the two cars there is next to nothing in it.

The GTD also outputs more torque with less mass to overcome so arguably will be more forceful at its torque peak at throwing you down the road..even if its rev range is more limited.

In no way am I suggesting the GTE is a bad car or really in anyway inferior....but it isnt the GTI slayer others would like to believe it is.....in the real world its on a par with the GTD and probably doesnt handle so well....pretty much what all the notable motoring press suggest too and they cant all be wrong.

If id been offered one as a company vehicle id have bitten my employers hand off as it would have saved me a **** ton of tax and offered a similar drive but to buy privately as an eco focused performance Golf my money would be on a GTD......Id probably rather a GTI than either but thats beside the point.

What do you mean about

"once you get the Gte to the same spec"??

I like diesel, been driving them for over 11 years now. Technology as improved since my first diesel, but in honestly I don't think in the pocket it's improved.

 

Yes they are cleaner and put out less co2, but I don't think they are overly much better on fuel.

 

So as a diesel fanboy why you ask did I not get diesel again? Simple regardless of the environment impact, the impact on my pocket is more important. The diesel didn't make sense for my current driving pattern, low mileage and town work for most. Yes petrol is probably worse or the same as diesel on the environment lets face it they are all bad. 

 

I really tried and wanted to go Hybrid, but the numbers just did not work on the cars that fitted what I wanted from the car.

 

So my point I'm trying to make, regardless of the environment, we all chose the car in the same way, pocket first. Even if we want to take the moral high ground and be cleaner, sometimes it just is not possible.

 

Will resales take a hit, probably until the next fad comes along.

 

None of them are bad or good, just what works for the person who has chosen that transport.

What do you mean about

"once you get the Gte to the same spec"??

GTE might have LED lights but they are not adaptive. Not a biggy for most but the Bi-Xenons are arguably better and a costly option on the GTE. Bi-Xenons are standard on a GTD.

The GTE doesnt come with Winter Pack...this is now standard on a GTD.

I think the GTE has keyless start but not full KESSY. KESSY is now standard on the GTD.

To spec Nav on a GTE you have to have DNS Pro...you cant just spec Discover Nav. Another costly option.....also Discover Nav is now standard on a GTD.

Dont know the specifics off the top of my head but a GTD is well sub-30k..a GTE with equivalent spec minus the 5k govt grant is still well in excess of 30k. I saw one in a dealership yesterday with v similar spec to my own GTD which cost 28.5k....its sticker price was nearly 39k....33.5-34k minus the grant. Thats still one damn expensive car.

OK, lol.

 

LED lights are great, especially on Battery as Xenon's would just drain it. I had them on my MK3 octy, not worth the £1200 price tag.

 

the others are just extras thrown at the "dirty diesel" to bribe people to buy. lol.

 

anyway, to lease its costing me £260 month, and with all the free electric i can eat, so was a no brainer really.

 

equivalent for the GTD is "from 299"

 

cheers

I like diesel, been driving them for over 11 years now. Technology as improved since my first diesel, but in honestly I don't think in the pocket it's improved.

...

I am sad enough to record litres and miles in Excel when I fill up, and enough of a squirrel to never delete anything. All estate cars.

 

VW Passat 2.0D     Nov 1999 to Mar 2004  87000 miles 50.6mpg

Honda Accord 2.2D Mar 2004 to Feb 2008 68000 miles 46.5 mpg

Volvo V50 2.0D     Feb 2008 to June 2009  19000 miles 48.6 mpg

Audi A4 2.0D        July 2009 to June 2013  60000 miles 51.0 mpg

Skoda Octavia 2.0D       July 2013 to date  38000 miles 62.0 mpg

 

For me, that is an improvement in the pocket. Especially when my employer pays me 11p/mile for business mileage (company car) and I am burning 7 to 8p/mile...

Edited 2 October, 201510 yr by Juniperz

Not sure exactly what there is to explain.....

All TDI's are hampered acceleration wise because of their power characteristics, low rev lag/throttle response but more so their very short intial gearing.

Makes getting a vRS TDI/GTD hard to get off the mark quickly.....for example you are at around 3250rpm in 3rd gear in a 184 TDI when you hit 60mph.....I expect a GTE could hit 60 quite readily in 2nd gear.

Point being that the GTE despite its 204ps v 184ps of the GTD, weighs a shedload more....compare the power to weight ratios of the two cars there is next to nothing in it.

The GTD also outputs more torque with less mass to overcome so arguably will be more forceful at its torque peak at throwing you down the road..even if its rev range is more limited.

In no way am I suggesting the GTE is a bad car or really in anyway inferior....but it isnt the GTI slayer others would like to believe it is.....in the real world its on a par with the GTD and probably doesnt handle so well....pretty much what all the notable motoring press suggest too and they cant all be wrong.

If id been offered one as a company vehicle id have bitten my employers hand off as it would have saved me a **** ton of tax and offered a similar drive but to buy privately as an eco focused performance Golf my money would be on a GTD......Id probably rather a GTI than either but thats beside the point.

 

The point is the engine torque has nothing to do with the force that makes the car move.

This is all a question of Power. The transmission will transmit   the power to the wheels.

For the same force (meaning also the same engine power) a car with lower torque will use a shorter gear ratio and its engine will turn quicker.

 

The engine torque is only a representation of the engine rpm at which the power is delivered. The higher the torque, the slower the engine for the same power, that's all.

That's the only takeaway you can get from the engine torque.

Edited 2 October, 201510 yr by JPH0091

The point is the engine torque has nothing to do with the force that makes the car move.

This is all a question of Power. The transmission will transmit the power to the wheels.

For the same force (meaning also the same engine power) a car with lower torque will use a shorter gear ratio and its engine will turn quicker.

The engine torque is only a representation of the engine rpm at which the power is delivered. The highest the torque, the slower the engine for the same power, that's all.

That's the only takeover you can get from the engine torque.

Errr.... I think you have misunderstood some basic physics. Power and torque are different values. You can't say 'torque is a representation of the engine rpm at which power is delivered'

Torque has EVERYTHING to do with making the car move. This Is why cars such as the Tesla with electric motors which have very high torque at nearly zero revs can give astonishing acceleration figures.

Power is what keeps the vehicle moving once the torque has made it move.

Torque is turning moment or force. Power is the rate of doing work.

You can have an extremely powerful engine with high torque at low revs AND high HP at high revs. Try driving an Audi RS4 444 hp at 8250rpm, 300nm torque at 1200rpm' 400lb Nm plus at 6000 rpm. Not a turbo in sight.

Add a turbo and you can make even greater gains in both power and torque.

Edited 2 October, 201510 yr by Bristolf2b

Errr.... I think you have misunderstood some basic physics. Power and torque are different values. You can't say 'torque is a representation of the engine rpm at which power is delivered'

Torque has EVERYTHING to do with making the car move. This Is why cars such as the Tesla with electric motors which have very high torque at nearly zero revs can give astonishing acceleration figures.

Power is what keeps the vehicle moving once the torque has made it move

Torque is turning moment or force. You can have an extremely powerful engine with high torque at low revs AND high HP at high revs. Try driving an Audi RS4 444 hp at 8250rpm, 300nm torque at 1200rpm' 400lb Nm plus at 6000 rpm. Not a turbo in sight.

Add a turbo and you can make even greater gains in both power and torque.

 

The torque that makes the car move is the torque at wheels, not the engine torque.

The torque at wheels is depending on the engine power and on the car speed.

 

The relationship is as follows: Torque (at wheel) = R . Power / Speed.

R is the wheel radius, and Speed the speed of the car.

 

The transmission of the cars are designed so that the maximum power can be transmitted to the wheels.

 

Regarding the relationship between Power and engine Torque, it is the following: P = 2 Pi . W . T with W the rotational speed of the engine.

A way to read it is the torque represents the way the Power is increasing with rpm.

 

I'm ready to review your own basic physics.

Edited 2 October, 201510 yr by JPH0091