>>Petrol engines are down the tubes as well in the long term so go cry about that<<
Nooooooooooooooooo.
Actually Gramps, I think you're wrong. Because for every person that is concerned about economy and how far they can drive on one tank, there'll always be two others that don't give a toss and would rather hear the sound of a nice petrol engine at full belt.
|
|
Won't it be nice when we are all driving hydrogen powered fuel cell cars? I can't wait...
|
Won't it be nice when we are all driving hydrogen powered fuel cell cars? I can't wait...
Can't wait either.
Then we won't argue about petrol and diesel engine which are the cleaner, but then we will argue who has the most Torque or BHP.
|
|
What will they do with all of the fuel? Of course the petroleum industry will decide what the law is at the end of the day as their owners (Rothschilds, Rockefellar) run the governments.
|
|
|
If you think a diesel engine will be 90% or somore expensive than petrol by 2014.. then wait for a hydrogen car..
Minus 250C or so to keep the hydrogen liquid presents a lot of expensive problems... and no spilling of any on forecourts.
A drop of diesel on your fingers can ve washed off. A drop of liquid hydrogen and your fingers break off.. As for scrap yards/repairs/back street garages.... Aprilia complains about common rail diesels .. hydrogen powered engines require space station cleanliness.. coupled with F1 fuel unions in event of a crash ... any hydrogen leakage in a crash could be lethal due to the cold and have interesting effects on rescue attempts...
The Health and Safety Exec would have kittens imo..
And we don't have enough power stations to generate the electricity to generate the hydrogen. Witha lead time of 10 years plus, volume hydrogen cars appear 20 years away.. we should be planning to double our electricty generating capacity.. now. So coal fired or nuclear?
Nice environmental problem?
madf
|
As long as we are directly burning fluid hydrocarbons, the diesel will be a clear winner in terms of efficiency. Who in their right mind would burn hydrocarbons at a constant air/fuel ratio?
659.
|
I'm only happy when I'm burning hydrocarbons at a constant air/fuel ratio.
|
I shall be burning a guy in less than a month.
Which guy?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
|
|
Totally agree 659 but efficiency and emissions are different when burning different fuels.
If engines were sold in terms of efficiency, diesel would win hands down. Diesel engines are even more efficient than petrol hybrids - but cars/engines are sold according to emission standards and diesels cannot compete with petrol on that front.
|
|
Of course there is always the possibility of nuclear powered cars--plenty of bangs for your bucks
|
North Korean nuclear cars perhaps?
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
Quote attributed to leader of said country (somewhat off topic):
"I know I'm an object of criticism in the world, but if I am being talked about, I must be doing the right things" - Kim Jong-il
Frightening.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What\'s for you won\'t pass you by
|
>>Kim Jong-il<<
I bet he drives a diesel.
|
Good news indeed!
If petrol cars are going on sale which will give me 50-plus mpg without pussy-footing it, gutsy mid-range acceleration for safe overtaking, and cruising at the motorway speed limit with 1800 rpm on the tacho I'll certainly consider swapping my diesel for one.
Where can I buy one?
|
Good news as far as I am concerned.
If it means that my next door neighbour, who has owned a succession of old diesel cars which ALL sound like tractors, isn't going to wake me up every flamin' morning with his noisy jalopy I'll be a happy man.
Diesels may be great for the first owner. Old diesels are a noisy menace and I'd ban them if it was up to me.
|
Diesels may be great for the first owner. Old diesels are a noisy menace and I'd ban them if it was up to me.
Try RAP 'music'. Makes diesels sound like, 'The Sound of Music'.
History is for learning from. Not for re-visiting!!
VBR................MD.
|
"I know I'm an object of criticism in the world, but if I am being talked about, I must be doing the right things" - Kim Jong-il
There's only one thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about.
|
|
Unfortunately for Type s thesis, DI petrols produce ultra fines in similar quantities to diesel. With the additional benefit of added benzene:)
|
|
|
The whole hydrogen thing is a white elephant.
Hydrogen in itself is not a fuel, but a means of transporting energy. Given that you have to put considerable energy into creating the hydrogen, handle it with kid gloves to avoid catastrophic cold burns or explosions, only to get considerably less out when you burn it or shove it through a fuell cell, it can't really be called efficient or practical either.
|
Surely the only point of hydrogen is that it is totally clean - or almost - as the only combustion product is water. There will undoubtedly be some N02, and miniscule amounts of CO2 from burnt lubricant, but these will be much less than any hydrocarbon fuel. However as already said producing it in quantity may be just as polluting.
Someone earlier in another thread mentioned that the H2O waste product was a disadvantage of hydrogen, but of course hydrocarbon fuels produce just as much water, a gallon of water for every gallon of fuel, or thereabouts. Hence the dripping exhaust on a cold morning!
|
"Surely the only point of hydrogen is that it is totally clean - or almost - as the only combustion product is water. "
The only combustion product at the point of use is water - but bear in mind the considerable amount of electricity required to obtain that hydrogen from electrolysis of water in the first place. Generating that electricity can be a very polluting business.
When the Japanese considered hydrogen as a fuel in the early days of fuel cell research, their conclusion AFAIK was that the only way to make a genuinely "clean" technology of it was to conduct the electrolysis using electricity generated from wind or wave power - which would severely restrict the amount of hydrogen available.
Conclusion: combustion engines have had their day. Eventually, we'll be driving fuel cell/electric hybrids. Or a horse and buggy.
|
Eventually we'll all be driving fuel cell/electric hybrids.
Apologies if you?ve already seen this. Saw something in the paper about it recently so googled it.
BMW is to launch a hydrogen powered 7 series in April 2007. The car is so expensive that it will only be leased to selected customers, one source says just 100 will be produced in 2007. It is not a fuel cell car but has a tank that holds 8kg of liquid hydrogen. Most sources say it burns hydrogen in the engine (dont ask me how that works), BMW are choosing not to go the fuel cell route to hydrogen power (but 4Car website seems to think it generates its own electricity on-board).
The power output of the 6 litre V12 is reduced to 260bhp. It has a range of only 125 miles on hydrogen, and 300 miles on petrol. BMW says at the moment the system will only be installed in the 7-series because of the space required for the twin fuel tanks. They concede that it could be decades before a refuelling infrastructure is in place to take over from petrol/diesel.
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14798876/
www.easier.com/view/News/Motoring/BMW/article-7089...l
After that steam-hybrid 3-series, what are they going to think of next?
;o)
|
|
|
|
A drop of diesel on your fingers can ve washed off. A drop of liquid hydrogen and your fingers break off.. madf
Sez who? I appreciate that liquid hydrogen is pretty cold, but I've plunged my hand into a pot of liquid nitrogen for a bet before and been absolutely fine. It would just boil around your hand, or on your finger, and you'd be protected by the layer of gas.
|
Nutter!
Life on the edge...
|
Like soaking your hand in lighter fuel and setting it alight. Doesn't hurt a bit as long as you can put it out before the fuel burns away. Otherwise it smarts. A lot.
Or hold the tip of your forefinger on an ice cube until it goes numb and then place a lit cigarette vertically between thumb and forefinger with lighted end against the part you numbed. Again, no pain whatsoever.
Misspent youth and all that.
Cheers
DP
|
Do you know something? Years ago I was filling a posh lighter up with gas and then went to light it triumphantly. I must have overfilled it because the whole thing caught fire.
Suffice it to say, I dropped it and then WHOOOMPH!! The carpet went up. I frantically stamped on it to put out the fire and to my amazment, the carpet was unscathed. (As was my hand).
I had a guess it was the fact that the fuel was burning and not the carpet but it's nice to have my genius confirmed.
Adam
P.S - At the time, the prospect of the house burning down was scary but in retrospect I imagine it was hilarious.
|
If petrol cars are going on sale which will give me 50-plus mpg without pussy-footing it, gutsy mid-range acceleration for safe overtaking, and cruising at the motorway speed limit with 1800 rpm on the tacho I'll certainly consider swapping my diesel for one.
Where can I buy one?
I think one of the first would be the Golf 1.4TSI.
Maybe not quite there yet but I think this is the first of many more petrol engine designs that we will be seeing with the characteristics of a diesel.
I'll wait for the follow up thread that goes into a finite level of detail explaining why the TSI is not like a diesel YET - but the point is this is the direction of petrol engine design.
Honda are also working on continuous VTEC that will give improved fuel consumption and torque like a diesel - due out in 3 years.
And just think AlanGowdy all this while not poisening everyone with diesel fumes.
|
|
My sentiments exactly, and the reason I am having a Golf TSi in February!
|
You've only just got an Audi!
|
|
I "have" to have a new car every six months as part of the loan agreement...
|
It's a tough life! Actually it is, the car offsets a lot of job-related lunacy....
Seriously, it does mean I get to try out new stuff that to be honest I could not afford otherwise.
|
|
Diesel will still be king in five years.
|
I wonder if the Honda fans would be campagning so hard for the end of diesel if Honda could make a decent one that was economical and did'nt blow up.
I read somewhere that more pollution is caused by lawn mowers, generators etc than vehicles on the road.
If I were to rid myself of cars, buy a Horse for transport, used the horse emmisions to grow Rhubarb, would I live to be an Oldman?
|
What do you mean? Honda make what is one of the finest (if not the finest) 4 cylinder diesel currently in production.
|
Speaking as a diesel driver, and enjoying the torque and all that, I have to say that if I could get the same mpg and performance from a petrol it would be petrol every time.
Revving is fun. Petrol engines sound inherently nicer. Engines are lighter. Etc.
Honda's diesel is pretty good, as is BMW's. Would still have a petrol in an "apples with apples" scenario.
|
Where did that come from? Honda diesels blowing up? Evidence?
Honda diesels seem to be one of the few CR diesels that *don't* blow up from where I'm standing.
|
Probably said because early Honda diesels had a (now fixed) problem with the turbo.
It is a lovely engine, but four up and cruising at 75-80 on the motorway I still only get 41 mpg. Not bad but not brilliant. Saying that, I did notice that the kerb weight of my Accord is about 1600 kg. I'd be interested to find out how much more that is than the Octavia, which regularly gets 50 mpg, for example.
|
I guess as long as there are people who believe having two new cars a year is the norm it doesn't really matter whether you burn petrol or diesel - the waste of resources involved means any environmental arguments are straight out of the window.
|
Who's that aimed at Mike? If it's at who I think it is then it's not really very fair.
|
I take it that dig was aimed at me! I don't think it's the "norm", it just happens to be the way our company car scheme operates.
I am fairly convinced that the cars would be built anyway, there aren't that many of us.
If this is the "norm" for me, then I obviously look at how it impacts me: I am not made of money, so I weigh up mpg versus cost etc. and I am looking at the Golf TSi because in an ideal world I want a petrol car with diesel economy.
I am sorry I am not a tree-hugger, and yes maybe I should opt-out as a protest.... but I'm not going to. And that probably says a lot about me, I suppose.
|
It's nothing personal - don't mean to offend. It just seems like a huge waste of basic resources to me.
I'm not a tree-hugger either...
|
>>I wonder if the Honda fans would be campagning so hard for the end of diesel if Honda could make a decent one that was economical and did'nt blow up.<<
Eh ???????
Nobody is campaigning for the end of diesels - Fiats top powertrain man is saying that the focus will be back on petrol engines because they can achieve the EuroV and VI emissions standards much cheaper than diesel can.
And as for the statement above that diesel will be king in 5 years time - that may just be about correct because the diesel killing legislation does not really come into force until 2014, although 2009 will see the start of the demise, unless of course the car makers come up with some other diesel technology, like Honda has done and will be with us in 3 years time - kinda kills the argument above that dox made.
|
He said diesel will STILL be king in 5 years time which I'm not sure I agree with because it assumes it's king now....and I don't think it is.
|
3 Years, if they have this technology why does it take 3 whole years to put into production?
Sounds like the PR guy at Honda has done a degree course on Winston Chirchill
|
No offence taken now I've read that. Just didn't like the phrase "as long as there are people who..." wouldn't have given two figs if you'd put "as long as there are COMPANIES who..".
I kind of agree with you, although I still think the cars get sold on at 6 months via auction and all it does is create an artificial supply of 6 month old cars... but I suppose the resource argument does hold a fair bit of water.
|
But your old cars after two years enter the used market. Someone buys it at somewhat less than a used car. This affect ripples through the market and an old, dangerous, polluting car is scrapped.
Because of how the used market works, fed by ex-company and ex-hire cars, we can all get newer, safer, less polluting cars at a decent price.
Me... I have a company car which has a 4 year or 80k limit. At close to 3 years it's not reached 50k yet so stuck with it a while longer. Which I'm fine with because no current problems with it (and few anyway) and being a Euro IV diesel registered before 2006 I do not pay the 3% BIK charge for being diesel ... a saving.
Rob
|
Hi type 's' - how're they hangin'? (I wonder what that means. On second thoughts, I think I know).
I don't drive a diesel through any religious or otherwise blinkered conviction - I drive one because I find the overall experience superior to that of all the previous petrol cars I've owned. I'll keep an eye on VW's TSI developments and if they or any other manufacturer's petrol engines can be made to match the characteristics that I value, and quoted in my earlier posting, I would seriously consider one. That goes for any alternative fuel that might become available.
Incidentally I forgot to include "bucketfuls of low rev torque" as another essential requisite.
|
>>Sounds like the PR guy at Honda has done a degree course on Winston Chirchill<<
Sounds more like a Company that will not put a technology into production until it is proven and can be produced with the levels of built in quality that customers expect.
Anybody with any knowledge of manufacturing knows there is a big difference between inventing a technology and then proving it for the long term and putting it into volume production - and I include all product makers in that. e.g. common rail diesel systems were not invented on Monday and in production on Tuesday.
corporate.honda.com/press/article.aspx?id=20060925...0
AlanGowdy - enjoy the diesel while you can because according to some of the experts it's days are numbered - not my views by the way.
By the way they are hanging just fine - what is that man smoking ?
|
I can settle this very easily.
If you want a car that has bags of torque and is more economical but sounds rattly, noisy, revs less and belches smoke then get a diesel.
If you want a car that is quiet, cheaper to buy, thirstier, needs you to rev the living daylights out of it to get anywhere but has a bit of soul, get a petrol.
|
|
Well put Adam - by those criteria mine's a diesel. It's a free choice and I don't much care what others buy - I'm a happy bunny.
|
>>Well put Adam<<
Thanks. With masterpiece posts like that, sometimes I think I should be a motoring journalist.
|
|
Well - you couldn't be worse that that ghastly Clarkson bloke!
|
"rattly, noisy, and belches smoke ."
Well, I've got a diesel, so has my wife, my son and my daughter and we are missing out on these characteristics - where can I get a diesel with these extras? Do I have to pay more.! On yet another trip up to your part of the world last weekend (bloomin' outlaws again!) via M1, A 50, (a very congested) M6, M56 and M 53 I did not see one car or truck belching smoke.
The inaccuracy of your post does not, however disqualify you from being "a motoring journalist"!!
--
Phil
|
I think I can also settle this.
Whatever we want, whether it be diesel or petrol, it will be mandated by the future legislative bodies and the limit they put on emissions and the subsequent expense at which car makers can then meet these limits with the technology available and sell at an affordable price.
I will now sign off with my new signature (I have no idea whta it means but it's fun and I thank AlanGowdy for it.)
They continue to hang just fine man.
|
Oh and I should have added - if the makers can do this with the torque and consumption of diesel with the refinement and exhaust of a petrol then it's win win for all.
They continue to hang just fine man.
|
"If you want a car that has bags of torque and is more economical but sounds rattly, noisy, revs less and belches smoke then get a diesel.
If you want a car that is quiet, cheaper to buy, thirstier, needs you to rev the living daylights out of it to get anywhere but has a bit of soul, get a petrol."
Adam: awesome post! I tried really hard to like diesels when I last replaced my company car (there's a big tax incentive) but in the end the dreadful noise at turnover and lack of revs ruled them out. I do find the torque of modern diesels amusing, but I like the simple equation underpinning multi-valve petrol engines - more revs = more power!
|
If you want a car that is quiet, cheaper to buy, thirstier, needs you to rev the living daylights out of it to get anywhere but has a bit of soul, get a petrol.
That'll be me then. Petrol engines generally sound happy at 6000rpm - 60mph in 2nd anyone? I like working the engine and gearbox, that's what manual cars are for. People who complain that petrol engines are gutless obviously never venture over 3000rpm before changing up.
If I wanted a car that clattered into life, sent a rocket up my a*se between 1500 and 4000 revs, and then had absolutely nothing at all from then until the governer stopped the engine from going "pop" at 5500rpm, I'd buy a turbo-diesel.
I don't like clattery engines. I don't like the sound of mechanical components being tortured so loudly and harshly as a diesel engine sitting on 5000 rpm. But..... I'd like to keep the rocket bit, because it's fun. So I think it's about time someone made a turbo-petrol. Or has that already been done? ;-)
|
"I don't like the sound of mechanical components being tortured so loudly and harshly as a diesel engine sitting on 5000 rpm. "
But why take a diesel to 5000 revs? I could equally say that I don't like the sound of a Focus petrol at 8000 revs.
By the way, at 5000 revs in top gear my Berlingo (!) would be doing 140ish mph! (as if!!!)
I prefer to be doing a virtually silent, apart from wind noise, 80 mph at less than 3000 revs.
As Alan says, each to his own.
--
Phil
|
Peter & Greg,
Exactly!!! I don't think I'll ever get tired of hearing a petrol engine nearing the limiter. Today, I dropped my sister off and took the scenic route home and didn't get lost per se....just didn't know exactly where I was precisely. Anyway - I stumbled across a fantastic country road - really nice sweeping bends leading into long straights and I thought - "Why the hell not?". Started accelerating and I thought...I'll change up now....I'll change up now....I'll change up now....but I couldn't...the noise is addictive.
Of course, I'll need to put a load more petrol in tomorrow but the noise of it cooling down when I got out of it more than makes up for it; it's all part of the fun.
I could have gone equally as quick in a diesel but I wouldn't have had half as much fun. That's just me though.
Each to their own!
|
"I don't think I'll ever get tired of hearing a petrol engine nearing the limiter"
What have you got in that Focus Adam? A V8? If so then I would agree!
If you want the sound of "a petrol engine nearing the limiter" then come and mow my lawn - a Mountfield at max revs sounds as good as a standard Focus!! And then there's SWMBO's sewing machine, oh, and the Panasonic vacuum cleaner! - great on full suction!
Each to their own!
--
Phil
|
I really don't want to put a black mark next to your name Phil but I will if you force me to. ;-)
|
"I really don't want to put a black mark next to your name Phil but I will if you force me to. ;-)
This may do it!!
Are you sure it's the sound of the engine or is it really you going Brmm brmmm as you scorch round west lancs!!
;-)
--
Phil
|
>>This may do it!!
Are you sure it's the sound of the engine or is it really you going Brmm brmmm as you scorch round west lancs!!
;-)<<
If that weren't true then I would have to be amending your details on the list but it just so happens that I have been known, on occasion, to make engine noises when making progress.
Consider it your reprieve.
|
"Consider it your reprieve"
I knew you couldn't do it - those of us with beige cars have to stick together!!
--
Phil
|
If you're a taxi-driver or a sales rep, buy a diesel.
Maybe it's just people who drive because they want to, not because they have to, who buy petrols to hear that noise and to feel a different sort of power-delivery. Besides, I can do 80mph at 3500rpm in my 1.4 litre petrol, and still get around 45mpg. My girlfriend's diesel Clio returns 60mpg, but driving along a twisty country lane without ever changing out of 4th is boring.
|
It's nice to read such biased and ignorant rubbish... makes a change for the normal stuff here.:-))
Lets face it, if you are stuck in a slow moving line of traffic in a manual car, would you prefer a diesle or a petrol engine?
No choice.. A diesel anytime for the torque.
And what are British roads? Crowded or empty?
Crowded.
And is diesel cheaper to run than petrol overall ? Yes.
So in conclusion, the majority of posts anti -diesel on this thread are by drivers who never ever get caught in traffic jams and have an infinite supply of money and sheer prejudice.
:-)))
Oh and with a complete lack of knowledge of economics and the rela costs and pollution consequences of electrical power generation..
Hydrogen powered cars! Next it will be solar powered cars (which incidentally are of course far more environmentally friendly than hybrids or hydrogen powered cars but of course are neither fashionable or practical in the UK.
Hybrids and hydrogen powered cars are for the Notting Hill set where form beats function anytime and PR and spin triumphs over reality anytime...
Rant over...:-)))))))))))))))
madf
|
"have an infinite supply of money"
Really? I thought it took several years' use to offset the extra purchase cost of most diesels?
The difference in fuel cost is pretty trivial compared to all the other expenses. I appreciate that there are other reasons for buying them, although none appeals to me...
|
Don't buy one then. Bottom line once diesel has had its day, the highest polluter will be the petrol engine, so make sure you record 8000 +RPM VTECs for posterity before you lose your freedom of choice too
Doomed, were all doomed
|
|
|
|
|
