Did people even read my original post?

 

18 hours ago, mk4gtiturbo said:

I have to admit as a result of doing less miles and the new diesel hype I am now considering swapping for a petrol, thing is I can't find anything that I'd like to swap for.  I don't really want to put any cash in and there is nothing really out their I'd swap mine for as it's a really decent spec vRS. 

 

Has anyone actually got rid of their diesel because of the government tightening up and what did you get instead?

 

Additional info: I've had the DPF light on three times recently and I've managed to clear it each time.  Is it only a matter of time before the DPF clogs and gives me a £1,000 problem?  Or I could look into swapping now and do away with the problem?

Edited 30 January, 20188 yr by mk4gtiturbo

Different matter that then.

So best get shot of if you recon that is cheaper than just maintaining and running the car you have since you are doing low mileage.

 

As to what you will get for it as a trade in,  VW Group says their Emission Scandal has not reduced the value of TDI's.  

But then they have admitted to being lying cheating barstewards.

2 hours ago, BLZeebub said:

Taken from the Autoexpress article:

 

Emissions testing will also get tougher, with changes that will, according to a Government blog on the subject: “lower the limits for diesel cars”. The draft MoT inspection manual for May’s changes explains that if the “exhaust on a vehicle fitted with a diesel particulate filter emits visible smoke of any colour” the car should be marked as having a Major defect, and fail its test. 

This is typical of the hype surrounding emissions - read the FULL story.

 

The problem is people have been tampering with or even removing altogether their DPF's which under the old system wasn't an MOT failure. This is to change under the new system (and quite right too!). The easiest way to suspect foul play is visible smoke coming from a car with a DPF fitted.

 

So unless the owner has removed / tampered with their DPF, or their DPF is broken, (no different to any other car failing an MOT because of a broken component) why would these changes prompt anyone to change from diesel to petrol?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited 30 January, 20188 yr by Guest

Loose steering wheels that may detach,  'Dangerous; Major or Minor.

 

These Civil Servants would still be dangerous if they had even twice as much common sense as they do.

 

?

What exactly are these EU Regulations that the DfT / DVSA / UK Government Agency are using as an excuse to give the UK Motor Industry and garages a leg up with

by getting cars off the road, or in for repairs.?

?

When are we going to hear about the old story, Must Trailer failures away only,  no use of A Frames or Dollies, no Tyres on the Public Highway.

 

We can expect more 'We collect and scrap any car apps'. 

My (company) 'daily' weighs 2.4 tons unladen, seats five very comfortably, has a 3.2l 200bhp 5 cyl diesel and kicks out a filthy 230g(ish) of co2. It is 4x4 (switchable, rwd by default) can tow up to 3.5 tons and does about 25mpg on a good day. Heated leather, heated windscreen, electric folding mirrors, electric driver's seat...similar spec as my Octavia (but no sunroof  )

 

I pay just £60 p.m. in BIK including fuel benefit as it is a commercial. I only pay BIK tax as I do occasionally use it privately. Feels a bit like giving the narrow minded govt the finger when I drive it, which is nice.

 

Quite happy with diesel for now 

Edited 30 January, 20188 yr by pist0nbr0ke

2 hours ago, Scot5 said:

This is typical of the hype surrounding emissions - read the FULL story.

 

The problem is people have been tampering with or even removing altogether their DPF's which under the old system wasn't an MOT failure. This is to change under the new system (and quite right too!). The easiest way to suspect foul play is visible smoke coming from a car with a DPF fitted.

 

So unless the owner has removed / tampered with their DPF, or their DPF is broken, (no different to any other car failing an MOT because of a broken component) why would these changes prompt anyone to change from diesel to petrol?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I did read the full story, hence saying it was taken from the article, and i agree that there is a lot of hype. However, i think that particular snippet highlights two things:

Firstly, that emission tests will become stricter and i suspect it is the first stage in tightening up even more in the future. 

Secondly, can you guarantee that a fully functional DPF won't still emit any 'smoke' at all? If the 'smoke' test is visual then at the very least i can see some enterprising MOT stations finding some DPF work to do. If it was purely on the actual emissions then it wouldn't bring out my cynical side so much.

I was looking at a diesel vRS as at around 12000 miles a year it still seems to work out cheaper than petrol for me and as i a cash buyer i was planning to keep the car for some time. Now i am seriously wondering if that is going to end up a mistake if in 5-10yrs the car is effectively legislated off the road or made next-to-worthless.

Personally i think it's ridiculous but i'm not in charge of making up stupid rules!

B-)

The only change in the regulations was an increase in the initial tax on diesels that went in a year or two ago. Plus now they are going to effectively outlaw DPF-delete operations at the MOT emissions test. 

The old economies still hold - Diesel is more expensive to buy but cheaper to fuel, so if you are a high-miler then Diesel works out cheaper. 

Personally I think the new emissions testing is going to punish a lot of Ford diesel drivers, making VW-group cars look better in comparison, and as long as your DPF is working properly you should have nothing to worry about.  

2 minutes ago, BLZeebub said:

I did read the full story, hence saying it was taken from the article, and i agree that there is a lot of hype. However, i think that particular snippet highlights two things:

Firstly, that emission tests will become stricter and i suspect it is the first stage in tightening up even more in the future. 

Secondly, can you guarantee that a fully functional DPF won't still emit any 'smoke' at all? If the 'smoke' test is visual then at the very least i can see some enterprising MOT stations finding some DPF work to do. If it was purely on the actual emissions then it wouldn't bring out my cynical side so much.

I was looking at a diesel vRS as at around 12000 miles a year it still seems to work out cheaper than petrol for me and as i a cash buyer i was planning to keep the car for some time. Now i am seriously wondering if that is going to end up a mistake if in 5-10yrs the car is effectively legislated off the road or made next-to-worthless.

Personally i think it's ridiculous but i'm not in charge of making up stupid rules!

B-)

 

I don't agree with that at all.  The MOT test will only catch those who have not properly maintained their vehicles. If anyone takes care of their car (which I'd suggest everyone who takes the time to sign up to a forum does) then no matter how tight they make the rules, their car will pass an MOT with flying colours.

 

What has 'enterprising' MOT stations got to do with matters? Thru their very nature, an 'enterprising' MOT station will find something wrong with any car no matter how good it is.

 

Suggesting a fully functioning, perfectly maintained, DPF will fail the test? I think we're getting in to the realms of fantasy. I see plenty of petrol cars emiting clouds of blue smoke... begs the question does blue smoke pass the test but black smoke fails? I just can't see what the issue is with smoke.     

 

The tests are being tightened up. Bottom line is that any car which isn't properly maintained SHOULD fail the test - petrol, diesel, hybrid or whatever. If someone has a perfectly well maintained diesel I can't for the life of me understand what fear they have.

 

As for future values - well nobody can predict future values, and anyone who tells you they can are lying. How much are expecting to get for your 120,000 miles Skoda in 10 years time? You'd get more for it in scrappage!  Or if diesel is unpopular at the moment, that means you're more chance of securing a great discount on it at the beginning therefore even if you give your car away for nothing in 10 years time, depreciation isn't going to be affected. By the way, when talking of those sorts of mileages, you do realise a diesel engine will outlast a petrol.  People who buy that 120,000 miles petrol engine can expect what... another 20-30k before it dies?

 

An electric car will be worth nothing as the batteries will be dud, a petrol car will only last a little while before it's dead therefore if depreciation is your only concern, diesel is easily the best option. How's that for glass half full rather than half empty?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I already run a diesel and it's got 190,000 on the clock so i'm fully aware of their benefits - i've been running diesels for many years.

My cynical side sees the new MOT regs, alongside dieselgate and all the doomsayers jumping on the bandwagon of bashing the evil oilburners, on top of the Low Emission Zones popping up and being planned seem to indicate a trend to reduce the number on the road.

MOT's already have a number of areas left to the inspector's eye and i know of a number of commercial and private users that have had failures due to the inspector's interpretational eye. I have no issue with a fail for something that should fail but when it is down to something such as visible smoke then, as you rightly mentioned, why is it only a diesel and not any vehicle. Why do the emission regulations on the test need to be stricter? If i have a Euro* compliant motor then that has an emission limit that it should adhere to and that is what it should be tested to.

Also, there is only one way any further changes will go and that is even stricter. The ULEZ in London is Euro 6 before you pay so with Euro 7 due in the next few years it wouldn't be unreasonable to expect the UULEZ in force a few years after that and once people accept the idea it's easier to implement elsewhere.

As for getting a discount, my current experience with Skoda dealers has me wondering if they need to sell anything as they haven't been very willing! Of course, as i'm not interested in finance of any sort and can actually afford to buy a car i'm not regarded as a good sell...Maybe the new MOT regs will change that...

B->

2 hours ago, TDIum said:

The only change in the regulations was an increase in the initial tax on diesels that went in a year or two ago. Plus now they are going to effectively outlaw DPF-delete operations at the MOT emissions test. 

The old economies still hold - Diesel is more expensive to buy but cheaper to fuel, so if you are a high-miler then Diesel works out cheaper. 

Personally I think the new emissions testing is going to punish a lot of Ford diesel drivers, making VW-group cars look better in comparison, and as long as your DPF is working properly you should have nothing to worry about.  

Why Ford?

Anyone with VW Group diesels under 10 years old with any wuckin worries about smoke should just book that beast into a VW Group Main Franchised Dealership that does MOT's and you can then see how good the examiner there's eyesight is when it comes to visible smoke.

Looks like the MOT is changing from "is it mechanically safe on the test day" (i.e. brake pads have a little material left, all 4 wheels are on car etc) to "is it safe to other road users and environmentally OK" (as before, plus HID lights and DPF/smoke etc). Closes a lot of legal loopholes.

 

@Scot5 With petrol engine longevity - seen plenty of petrol Octavias and Hyundais used as taxis in Turkey, with 3-400,000km on the clock! No diesel taxis there.

19 hours ago, themanwithnoaim said:

I've got a gentle broken in 245 if you're interested, never raced or ragged well, sort of...

 

Surely you're not getting rid already T?!?

If you're happy with a diesel I see absolutely no reason to change for a petrol car of similar age/mileage unless a new car was in the plan anyway. It will almost certainly cost you money to change.  Saying that I'd take some convincing to buy a new diesel car

I swapped my 65 plate VRS diesel and bought a 67 plate 230 VRS. 

It is cheaper a month and also cheaper to insure(Not by much, although that surprised me a lot!)

Edited 30 January, 20188 yr by Tim1631

53 minutes ago, MattChr said:

 

 

@Scot5 With petrol engine longevity - seen plenty of petrol Octavias and Hyundais used as taxis in Turkey, with 3-400,000km on the clock! No diesel taxis there.

 

Just going to leave this here.... 

 

 

Never going to happen to the 230 / 245's.   Well maybe not many will go that way..

Admittedly the Turk taxis are at the budget end of the Skoda range, def not VRS ;-)

To just answer on my own perspective to this:

Best of all worlds. Petrol vRS for the full on beast mode or just a more luxurious drive takes fancy.

Pre DPF Fabia vRS BLT for running into the ground as its technically worthless to me so I don't care what happens in regard to diesel longer term hence and its possible it will be eventually be legislated off the road, but then this is worthless, maybe there will be some scrappage incentive or something.

 

The Octavia overall is way more exciting, the Fabia is just lazy and easy to drive really, by no means slow ( actually the lazy torque driving ) but shadows to the TFSI.

They are bloody dirty things though, having decoked an EGR at high miles is a dirty, dirty job you just wouldn't have the same on a petrol I'm sure.

So not surprised with the DPF issues, its a cludge for an effectively dirty fuel and long term it will fail.

That said, petrol has its own longevity.

Indeed what has been said above is completely true, the real issue being address in the shorter term is those who are cheating the system ( put in place for Mr Dirty Diesel ) and bypassing these cleaning systems for performance gains, less problems etc.

Indeed I certainly wouldn't want a diesel car with DPF sound like a right headache.

 

But right now if I was in the OP's boots, to change and get reasonable money back on it to go for petrol ? You bet I would. I doubt its even the same car, they should call one the vRS and the other the dRS or something

 

Longer term I'd even be thinking more modern now and not rule out battery in my next purchase, if they ever do something like the MF emotion that is. Skoda will never be allowed to produce anything that interesting though

Edited 30 January, 20188 yr by vRSAnt

My current is a diesel.  The three previous were diesel.  Before that, two petrols and another diesel.

I am a diesel lover, especially modern variants.  Quieter, more powerful, more efficient and now arguably as clean as a petrol of the same capacity - don't forget that petrol emissions are bloody awful until the catalytic converter is up to temperature.

I admit that I drive around 20,000 miles a year and pull a 1300kg caravan for 3-4,000 of those miles.

Diesel may be a couple of pennies more expensive but I've just driven back from Cornwall and averaged 59.7mpg at an average speed of 60mph.  I don't know of a single 2.0 petrol that even comes close to that.  My current, real-word figure (according to Fuelly) is an average of 44.8mpg covering 6,000 miles.

I will keep buying diesels until they are either banned or the motor industry and Government sort out fuel cell technology.

The 'Proposed' MOT changes in May make no difference do they to Diesels that are pre Diesel Particulate Filter?

 

Any sooty / smoggy / visible smoking Derv burners going in for testing that passed last year are just as likely to pass this year later on are they not 

unless that steering wheel really is deemed to be likely to fall off at this test.

20 minutes ago, AwaoffSki said:

The 'Proposed' MOT changes in May make no difference do they to Diesels that are pre Diesel Particulate Filter?

 

Any sooty / smoggy / visible smoking Derv burners going in for testing that passed last year are just as likely to pass this year later on are they not 

unless that steering wheel really is deemed to be likely to fall off at this test.

 

No changes in MOT for these pre-DPF vehicles, but they will incur a daily tax to drive into large cities around the UK and within the north/south London circular.

 

There's a considerable number of large, old, diesel 4x4s (Range Rover, x5 etc) which are bought more as fashion statements for the school run, left idling to keep the car warm or a/c running, rather than for longer-distance motorway/towing driving. When these school run costs become too pricey they'll shift quickly to hybrids and/or smaller cars.

& maybe charges for going into Low Emission Zones in towns in Scotland that are not large cities, or just excluded from them altogether. 

(Because no point of low emission zones where you can just pay more to enter, that is just like the con that was 'Carbon Trading' done by Corporations and Countries.)

Not regulatory related, but I'll be ditching combustion engine for EV when my current Octavia dies / cost too much to maintain.

 

EV are just so much better in every single way. By that time in 3-5 years, I honestly don't see any reason to buy oil burners, and fuel cell doesn't really make any sense for family car.

18 hours ago, ords said:

Why Ford?

 

 Because you always see them belching clouds of black soot when they pull away!