All very sensible - so why does Gordon Brown insist on penalising diesels on road tax? >>
Simple:
Because he is going to lose up to a third on the fuel duty due to lower consumption.
|
|
Yes but, I thought the government wants to reduce CO2 emissions. So,they should be encouraging the use of diesel/biodiesel and make diesels more attractive to buy. However, logic doesn't seem to be an attribute of any government.
|
volvod5 dude
You have fallen into the trap of thinking that the left hand in government knows what the right hand is doing.
There are so many examples that quoting them is like shooting fish in a barrel.
Like keeping Dartford tolls to slow traffic then spending £145 million to speed it up.
Like getting the low paid to take up pensions then putting in a minimum income guarantee which makes it pointless them contributing.
Like widening roads then imposing a lower speed limit.
Like introducing self assessment of tax but making the system too complicated for anyone to understand.
Like reducing VAT on electricity to make it cheaper then imposing a climate change levy to make it dearer.
Add you own examples, it's easy.
|
|
|
Yes but, I thought the government wants to reduce CO2 emissions. So,they should be encouraging the use of diesel/biodiesel and make diesels more attractive to buy. However, logic doesn't seem to be an attribute of any government.
I believe that Germany have 100,000 cars that run on biodiesel. I think that there are about 1000 filling stations that handle biodiesel compared to, i believe, 0 (zero) in this country.
Until alternative fuel sources come along surely this is the way to go, killing so many birds with one stone
- helps out the CAP
- stops us being at the mercy of OPEC/terrorists
- environmental benefits
- jobs for UK
- Chancellor can still get his mits on the tax
- etc etc
|
well frankly I find as I grow older:
diesels seem to get rougher and more noisy
I dislike noise and roughness
Petrol engines grow smoother and more economical
I don't drive 20,000 miles a year and so MUCH prefer a petrol car.
(Audi/VW diesels are very economical but round town the 1.9 is just horrible..)
As for anyone believing anything any politician in power says:
we are committed to producing 20% of all electricity by 2010? by non fossil fuels.
The Government is investing heavily in windfarms as the technology works.
The logical place to put windfarms where there is always wind and least environmental impact is along the coastline about 100-600 metres offshore.
The Ministry of Defence has successfullly objected to most offshore developments as it interferes with the low flying radar (presumably preventing them from detecting low flying Russian bombers carrying nuclear warheads).:-(
Rearrange the following words into a description of the planning abilities of politicians:
"Organise in a brewery a cannot p###up"
|
"well frankly I find as I grow older:
diesels seem to get rougher and more noisy
I dislike noise and roughness
Petrol engines grow smoother and more economical"
I agree totally.
|
|
You have obviously not driven the latest Beem & M.Benz common rail motors, which are absolutely the dogs danglers. - see H.J.`s report even on the 4 cylinder B.M.W. 320dSe Compact, if you need more convincing!!!
|
You have obviously not driven the latest Beem & M.Benz common rail motors, which are absolutely the dogs danglers. - see H.J.`s report even on the 4 cylinder B.M.W. 320dSe Compact, if you need more convincing!!!
I would add PSA /Citroen 2.2 HDI (with balancer shafts and particle filter.) Having driven my new C5 for 6 months can't imagine why I'd want to go back to petrol.Impressively smooth, flexible and quiet at ALL speeds, fast as...., much cleaner than a petrol (absolutely NO smoke, smell etc)a dream for towing...Oh! and rather economical too.
I don't doubt the BMW and M.Benz are even better - although funds won't quite stretch!
Graeme
|
|
Althought not wanting to start a petrol vs diesel debate the advantages of a diesal have to be recognised the higher levels of torque, lower fuel economy. Sure a petrol has loads of andvatages but one persons steak, well you know the rest. The i9dea that the government want to creata better environment is right they do want a better environment but just so that they will get the green vote so they can aford to run there jags. The government would love to give the honest hard working people (well ok anyone with the vote) more money but only to make sure they get re-elected.
|
|
|
"..with balancer shafts.."
Those would be to reduce the vibration, I take it? Anything that uses compression ignition is bound to vibrate more than something that uses a spark, as well as containing hideous mechanical stresses. I also don't like the weight, the smell, the noise or the narrow power band. Sorry.
|
"..with balancer shafts.." Those would be to reduce the vibration, I take it? Anything that uses compression ignition is bound to vibrate more than something that uses a spark, as well as containing hideous mechanical stresses. I also don't like the weight, the smell, the noise or the narrow power band. Sorry.
I appreciate that this won't alter your opinion, but VAG's current V6 2.5 turbodiesel is smooth as, well, something not quite as smooth as silk and the power band runs all the way from 1800 to 4000 rpm.
It could be a bit quieter, tho (damn, blew it at the last fence. Again).
Blimey! Is that the time?
|
|
|
|
"Audi/VW diesels are very economical but round town the 1.9 is just horrible".
I've just borrowed the Audi A6 1.8T Petrol and that engine is as rough as a bear's backside.
It sounded (and felt - co's it sends vibration through) ghastly like a diesel but with none of the advantages. Must help their diesel sales though.
|
|
|
You need to try the new Volvo D5 diesel engine, the V70 D5 has been voted best diesel car of the year, and best estate for the 2nd year running.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes but, I thought the government wants to reduce CO2 emissions.
Don't be silly, all the government cares about is ripping us off! (the more money they get the bigger Jaguar John Prescott can have!) they could'nt give a monkeys about reducing Co2 emissions! It's all about money at the end of the day.
|
|
|
|
|
...and if we all move to LPG, the price (because of tax) will shoot up - fuel tax is nothing to do with pollution, it's a useful reason though, but the govt. would soon think of a new one.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't realise diesels were more penalised than petrol cars on road tax! How much more is the diesel tax than the petrol one please? Hope this isn't going to come as a nasty shock to me.
|
HF
The emissions figure for diesels is artificially increased by three percentage points IIRC.
Doesn't make an awful lot of difference but it keeps the Greens happy.
|
Brian - sorry for sounding thick here - the fact that I have a diesel means the emission levels go up, I understand from your post, thanks - and I take your point about it keeping the Greens happy - Does my artificial increase of 3 percentage points mean a big hike in tax? (only driven petrol before, tax end of the year, am quite anxious to know what they will want from me this year!
Thanks Brian
HF
|
IIRC the extra, if it takes it into the next band, is only £10 per year.
The banded system, at present IMHO, is a waste of time for private cars, as the difference between low and high emission duty is a tiny proportion of the overall running costs.
For company cars, where the Benefit in Kind for tax purposes is affected, it is a greater issue.
|
|
|
HF, the diesel penalty is small (offset by the fuel savings) and only applies to cars 01Y or newer. Sorry, J-reg Astra estates are out. You'll have to pay £160 per year (or £88 per 6 months), the same as me.
A 1.4 litre car or smaller would have been £105 per year, but the £55 or so is nothing compared to the potential fuel savings and also the generally greater durability of diesel engines, although I'm not sure how good the Vauxhall 1.7 diesel actually is.
|
|
Thanks, Brian and David. I'm not sure either how good the 1.7D is, no doubt I'll be finding out over the next year!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
