Anti diesel will this effect your next engine choice

[Sad555]

I didn't buy a diesel purely for economics(yeti is my third diesel I've purchased)I have driven diesel vans for years but for style of driving with a modern Diesel engine that all diesel drivers will understand but over the last few months it appears DIESEL has had a big X or kiss of death placed upon it after an ill informed government jumped headlong to persuade motorists"go diesel"save tax,cheaper mpg ,car scrappage deals and motor manufacturers investing large amounts of money into improving Diesel engines (Honda had never produced a Diesel engine) now the pendulum appears to be swinging the other way,the polluting petrol engines are now everybody's best friend (no car tax reduction YET if ever) but next year the yeti will be 3 years old and IF I were to change the car I'm starting to wonder which way to go and wonder if I do change what will it be,if vag dieselgate and government anti diesel didn't occur it would be another diesel,no problem,but things are about to change so I have about 6 to 18 months to consider my choices and wondered if any other people are started to be made to think about their options.?

Edited 10 November, 2016 by Sad555

[skomaz]

it'll be diesel for me regardless...   I now simply prefer the way they drive for a daily runner...

[The Plumber]

I think in the near distant future there will be many changes to what and how we drive/travel, particularly if population growth goes on unchecked. Will self drive convoy cars becoming the norm like in the Will Smith Si-Fi film I Robot for example.

 

However getting back to reality, then I will be sticking to diesel as petrol still is not that economical, even these modern small TSI's get quite thirsty if you have to work them even slightly hard, such as regular hill climbs. Hence why I've swapped our TSI Rapid for a TDI version.

 

 

TP

[mikey vrs]

I have just bought my first diesel after 25 years of having petrol cars.....

[Expatman]

It must depend on the type of driving and the distances you drive. If you regularly drive longish distances and do 18,000 miles + per annum then diesel is probably the better option. If you do fewer miles and particularly a lot of short journeys then petrol is the better, and cheaper, option. There are many petrol v diesel calculators on the internet and generally they find you break even at approx 40 - 50,000 miles - fuel might be cheaper but generally offset by much higher initial price. However, the unknown is what the residual value of the vehicle will be even after you have broken even at whatever mileage, already there is a clear swing back to petrol and if that continues then residual value of diesel vehicles will continue to fall. Many cities are considering diesel bans and once introduced then diesel cars will certainly fall in popularity and second hand and residual values will plummet. I don't think it is a simple decision, I will stick to petrol cars because my mileage is only 12k a year and I get an acceptable average of 42.2 MPG (over 48,000 miles) from my Yeti 1.2 Tsi DSG. Also, while not being a mad environmentalist, I don't want to be responsible for pumping carcinogens and dangerous particulates into the atmosphere. The people who should be answerable for all this are the politicians and the mad environmental scientists who encouraged the insane increase in the use of diesel engines. I am an organic chemist and it was clear to me and my colleagues that this was insane, even some of the motoring press made the point but it was overlooked in the mad rush to "reduce CO2 and global warming" - which it did nothing to help.

Incidentally the biggest environmental disaster will come when there is a particularly long cold spell with little wind or sun - a typical English weather condition - and the government are forced to turn on the phalanxes of dirty diesel generators scattered across the country to keep the lights on. The weather conditions will be perfect for the diesel smog to spread out and blanket built up areas, and the lungs of those living anywhere near.

[Llanigraham]

You've forgotten what use you make of the vehicle.

We now hardly use the car but there is no other Yeti engine that will pull my caravan, therefore we have a diesel.

Plus off-road a diesel is far better as you don't need to use revs to get the power down.

[weasley]

I d out I'll get another diesel. Petrol engines have done a good job of catching up on torque and efficiency and remain more engaging in terms of power and noise, and are less encumbered by emissions systems. Furthermore, the longer term outlook for diesel is not good in terms of availability and therefore price. The Yeti is my third diesel and I love it, but I suspect the next one will be petrol.

[bluecar1]

diesel is dead for me,

 

I changed in 2015 after nearly 30 years of driving diesels, my first fabia GLII with a DPF put me off modern diesel due to constant regens, now with the SCR / AdBlue in the mix as well and the £2k premium to have a diesel it is just not economical to drive diesels for me any more even as I do 25,000-30,000 mile a year

 

I don't miss the noise of a diesel either

 

currently driving a 1.2 non turbo i20 and getting 50mpg out of it, next car looks like being a hybrid,

 

if you look at other manufacturers like Renault they are dropping small diesels from their ranges, so I think the writing is on the wall for non commercial vehicles, and if you look at lorries, more are saying on the side they run on compressed natural gas, even buses are starting to go hybrid etc

 

draw your own conclusions

[gumdrop]

This should only affect the older diesels.

I hope the more up to date dpf fettered engines

with Blu additives will escape any stupidity.

 

The boss says;

My caravanning days look as if they are numbered

so the Yeti may go and be replaced with a petrol car

Edited 11 November, 2016 by gumdrop

[KenONeill]

What is potentially killing the diesel for me is the DPF and urea nonsense!

 

They simply drive better for a "normal daily driver". I've heard stuff like Honda's "VTEC just kicked in" and immediately think "yeah but I don't want to be trying to stick in the top quarter of the rev band just to keep up with the traffic".

[ejstubbs]

government jumped headlong to persuade motorists"go diesel"save tax,cheaper mpg ,car scrappage deals

 

I don't think there has ever been a scrappage deal to persuade people to switch from petrol to diesel, has there?

 

According to this IFS report (see figure 3) fuel tax (aka Hydrocarbon Oil Duty) is not lower in terms of pence per litre for diesel than for petrol, and hasn't been since 1995.  I doubt many vehicles from that date will still be on the roads (note I said many, not any - your granny's old T-reg Micra does not disprove that statement).  And this is especially likely given that the one (fuel agnostic) scrappage scheme that has been run in this country, following the financial crisis, is supposed to have taken a lot of older, more polluting cars off the road.  Fuel tax was briefly higher for diesel, between 1998 and 2000 IIRC, until it was effectively brought back in line with petrol with the reduction of duty on ultra-low sulphur diesel (aka ULSD, or 'city diesel' - as I believe it is still called on Sainsbury's forecourts).

 

The cheaper mpg is basically down to diesels being more calorifically efficient, and the fact that the raw cost of the fuel (ie before tax) is generally lower - although I well remember a period a few years ago when that was not the case.  Obviously the government could choose to offset that inherent advantage by taxing diesel more heavily, but I suspect that no government would dare risk enraging the haulage lobby and the ABD by doing such a thing, especially with memories of the fuel protests of 2000 (and to a lesser extent in 2005 and 2007) still clear in some people's minds.

 

As I think has been stated elsewhere on this thread, the supposed 'advantages' of diesel really need to be analysed quite carefully, taking in to account the higher purchase price of diesel vehicles, expected mileage etc, before making the move on financial grounds.  Other factors should also be taken in to account, such as the intended uses to which the vehicle will be put eg towing.

 

In summary: I'm not convinced that any government actually did "jump headlong" into encouraging diesel use.  However, the perception certainly seems to exist that it happened, even apparently in the mind of at least one ex-minister (who, bizarrely, manages to turn a 3p cut in duty bringing ULSD in to line with petrol as a 'subsidy').

[peter312]

I am undecided on whether my next car should be a diesel. Adblue etc. doesn't bother me per se and I do wonder whether a diesel car doing 60 mpg is really any worse a polluter overall than petrol car car doing 40 mpg, when all things (CO2, NOx, particulates etc) are taken into account. Diesels get a bad press at the moment but most petrol cars are not as economical as their official figures suggest.

 

My quandary is that whilst I am very pleased with my car, my faith in anything built by VAG has been severely dented by the diesel scandal. I wonder what else they have done that we don't yet know about.

[Norry]

I am undecided on whether my next car should be a diesel. Adblue etc. doesn't bother me per se and I do wonder whether a diesel car doing 60 mpg is really any worse a polluter overall than petrol car car doing 40 mpg, when all things (CO2, NOx, particulates etc) are taken into account. Diesels get a bad press at the moment but most petrol cars are not as economical as their official figures suggest.

 

My quandary is that whilst I am very pleased with my car, my faith in anything built by VAG has been severely dented by the diesel scandal. I wonder what else they have done that we don't yet know about.

 

I don't think that is a logical conclusion to draw!!

 

Norry

[Sad555]

Ejstubbs.........

"I don't think there has ever been a scrappage deal to persuade people to switch from petrol to diesel, has there?"............................. don't know if I didn't explain properly or if you did understand my post but I was referring to THE scrapage of older car some YEARS AGO when a lot of petrol cars were scrapped and the cheaper tax structure and better economy of diesels lead people to the change to diesel with this government incentive.

[Falmouthboy]

Popped into the dealer today as I was passing to say hi and how happy I am with the car. Chatting to the salesman he was saying how he is amazed how the pendulum has swung back to petrol across the range. He reckons that anyone buying a new petrol today will certainly benefit with better residuals as diesel becomes even more of a periah. His main gripe (often discussed on here) is the number of buyers wanting a 1.4 TSI in a SE/SE L trim and with the options of DSG and 4x2. 1.2 sales are booming but for many, they want a bit more grunt and he has lost sales to other manufacturers as a result.

[weasley]

They simply drive better for a "normal daily driver". I've heard stuff like Honda's "VTEC just kicked in" and immediately think "yeah but I don't want to be trying to stick in the top quarter of the rev band just to keep up with the traffic".

It's not 1989 any more though! I did the Honda VTEC thing (and Mazda RX-8) and loved it... revving out an engine that loves to be revved is a pure joy, but as you say this isn't how we drive every day. However, almost all petrols are going turbocharged now, with flat torque curves and low speed grunt. My Audi A1 is an example of this. Sadly it doesn't like to be revved out, which is a shame as it is a nice sounding engine.

I was lucky enough to be driving a number of Aston Martins last week... revving out a nat-asp V12 on a standing mile might not happen every day, but oooooh, that noise....

Edited 11 November, 2016 by weasley

[x19]

It's not 1989 any more though! I did the Honda VTEC thing (and Mazda RX-8) and loved it... revving out an engine that loves to be revved is a pure joy, but as you say this isn't how we drive every day. However, almost all petrols are going turbocharged now, with flat torque curves and low speed grunt. My Audi A1 is an example of this. Sadly it doesn't like to be revved out, which is a shame as it is a nice sounding engine.

I was lucky enough to be driving a number of Aston Martins last week... revving out a nat-asp V12 on a standing mile might not happen every day, but oooooh, that noise....

What is potentially killing the diesel for me is the DPF and urea nonsense!

 

They simply drive better for a "normal daily driver". I've heard stuff like Honda's "VTEC just kicked in" and immediately think "yeah but I don't want to be trying to stick in the top quarter of the rev band just to keep up with the traffic".

My CR-V has got a 2litre I-V tec engine coupled to an auto box. I drive it in Eco mode all the time and I've never had to use high revs (or even kick down) to keep up with traffic. It does it very easily.

[bluecar1]

the hybrids pull like a train from low down as the torque of the electric motor is not rev dependant

 

only issue for many here I have yet to see one with a rating for towing :(

[bluecar1]

I am undecided on whether my next car should be a diesel. Adblue etc. doesn't bother me per se and I do wonder whether a diesel car doing 60 mpg is really any worse a polluter overall than petrol car car doing 40 mpg, when all things (CO2, NOx, particulates etc) are taken into account. Diesels get a bad press at the moment but most petrol cars are not as economical as their official figures suggest.

 

My quandary is that whilst I am very pleased with my car, my faith in anything built by VAG has been severely dented by the diesel scandal. I wonder what else they have done that we don't yet know about.

next VAG scandal?/

 

try this one

 

http://blog.caranddriver.com/another-emissions-cheat-device-found-this-time-on-audi-gasoline-and-diesel-vehicles/

 

 

Bild said that CARB found software that would recognize if the steering wheel was turning less than 15 degrees in either direction while in use. That would indicate that the vehicle was being tested. In response, the program would alter the way the automatic transmission shifted, adopting a more efficient driving mode. In the test results, it would show that the car was emitting less carbon dioxide than it did in normal use. When the wheel turned more than 15 degrees, this program would shut off. The Wall Street Journal story even claims that Audi management specifically detailed the defeats in meetings.

Bild said that the programming was not specific to one engine but was for Audis with an automatic transmission, reporting that it was found on both diesel and gasoline models. Audi reportedly stopped using the software in May of this year.

Edited 11 November, 2016 by bluecar1

[graham47]

 

They simply drive better for a "normal daily driver". I've heard stuff like Honda's "VTEC just kicked in" and immediately think "yeah but I don't want to be trying to stick in the top quarter of the rev band just to keep up with the traffic".

I think you'll find that Honda's VTEC system is designed to come into effect between 3-3500 revs... Hardly "top quarter" !!

[Brijo]

.....I was lucky enough to be driving a number of Aston Martins last week...

 

Oh come on!!  That really is OTT by serious miles!  Just one would have been enough to turn most of us green :envy:

[weasley]

I think you'll find that Honda's VTEC system is designed to come into effect between 3-3500 revs... Hardly "top quarter" !!

It depends on the system. The original, full-fat VTEC (launched in 1989, as fitted to the Integra, Civic, CRX, NSX, Prelude) switched cams around 5,500 rpm, but then they did reach 8,000 so it was still just over half way around the range. Later systems such i-VTEC and others (which switched valves on and off rather than switching cam profiles) had varying activation points.

Of course the whole point of VTEC was to have a broader torque curve, with useful low-rev pull AND the ability to reach high revs to make power.

[weasley]

Oh come on!!  That really is OTT by serious miles!  Just one would have been enough to turn most of us green :envy:

I've been waiting for the chance to mention it! I thought I'd shoehorned it in without being noticed.

I'll admit, it was a good day at work. And no, I do not work for AML.

[AllanDJ]

There are certainly a few more nasty emissions from diesel engined cars than petrol, my last car a diesel Mondeo would often belch out a large plume of black smoke when I accelerated hard with it. My current Octavia just doesn't behave like that at all, with its DPF system to burn off a lot of the larger visible sooty particulates, which of course leaves the air somewhat cleaner but isn't an end in itself because of the other toxic stuff which the DPF can't deal with. In this instance after nearly twenty years with diesel engined cars, I'm currently waiting on a petrol engined Yeti and the reason for that is that my PCP Octavia is in effect worthless and I decided to save some money and go down the PCH route and right now the Yeti L & K 1.4 model is remarkably inexpensive compared to taking the diesel engined version and given that I don't do a massive mileage I think that I may as well spend the money that I'm saving from not taking the more expensive diesel and just spend that on petrol instead. Diesel engines really make sense if you're doing a high mileage, over the last three years I've only averaged 8000 miles PA, which doesn't really justify the extra cost of the diesel version over petrol plus my DPF often gets stuck in regeneration mode for days with the short journeys that I'm doing.

[skomaz]

I actually find tis discussion quite interesting s the majority of people are purely talking economics... Are there so few people who actually like the torque rich 'drive' of a diesel on a daily basis and tat push in the back when you boot it tat you don't get with petrol???