Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
Apr 5th 2014, 1:29 am
#16
Born again atheist
Joined: Jul 2005
Location: Europe (to be specified).
Posts: 30,259
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
OTOH, in Europe, specifically France, diesel is available in the smallest of communities and is 10-15% cheaper than gas.
No brainer there.
Apr 5th 2014, 7:19 am
#17
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: High River AB
Posts: 571
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
In the UK at least, newer (post-2006) diesels have a particulate filter in the exhaust system, which if kept in good condition will do an exceptionally good job of keeping particulates pollution at bay. Problem is, though, those filters clog easily if the engine isn't run long enough or hot enough to burn off the particulates. Londoners who pop down to the local Waitrose in their eco-conscious diesel Golf will be likely be running a pretty dirty and inefficient engine unless they also regularly make longer journeys.
Petrol engines produce different pollution. Fewer particulates, to be sure, which might keep the asthmatics happy, but (at least in part due to the typically worse fuel economy of a petrol motor) more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases per mile than the equivalent diesel motor.
There's also the consideration of suitability for purpose. The torque and power delivery characteristics are different for diesel vs petrol engines. A diesel is inherently more suitable for big, heavy, slower-moving vehicles (trucks, buses, even F-150s, come to that...) while free-revving petrol motors are the better option (though not necessarily the best, you'd need a properly sorted petrol-electric hybrid for that) for lighter point-and-squirtier vehicles.
ETA: I should qualify. By "properly sorted petrol-electric hybrid" I instantly discount any such vehicle on the road today, especially a Pious or any of those stupid behemoth hybrid SUV idiot-wagons that are the most cynical government-regulation-skewing exercise in marketing ever to come out of the notoriously cynical auto industry.
Petrol engines produce different pollution. Fewer particulates, to be sure, which might keep the asthmatics happy, but (at least in part due to the typically worse fuel economy of a petrol motor) more carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases per mile than the equivalent diesel motor.
There's also the consideration of suitability for purpose. The torque and power delivery characteristics are different for diesel vs petrol engines. A diesel is inherently more suitable for big, heavy, slower-moving vehicles (trucks, buses, even F-150s, come to that...) while free-revving petrol motors are the better option (though not necessarily the best, you'd need a properly sorted petrol-electric hybrid for that) for lighter point-and-squirtier vehicles.
ETA: I should qualify. By "properly sorted petrol-electric hybrid" I instantly discount any such vehicle on the road today, especially a Pious or any of those stupid behemoth hybrid SUV idiot-wagons that are the most cynical government-regulation-skewing exercise in marketing ever to come out of the notoriously cynical auto industry.
In "03" I had a Seat with the 1.9 TDi. It chucked out 130bhp, then I got it Superchipped for 300 quid & that upped it to just over 200bhp. It then produced more torque than a Porche Boxter 3.2 ltr.
It constantly returned 65+ mpg & never dipped below 60mpg.
Today's diesels are nothing like they were 20 yrs ago. Audi have won LeMans 3 or 4 times with their 4.2 ltr TDi.
They have incredible in gear acceleration compared to a petrol version, as was demonstrated on, I think Top Gear when a M5 BMW was raced against the 535TDi & got hammered.
Now saying all that, they are all European versions of those cars.
The Canadian equivalent of my VW engine 10 yrs later gives 20mpg less than my car when I inquired last year.
There are more diesel models on the market now, but they need to bring the European technology with them.
Apr 6th 2014, 2:38 am
#18
Assimilated Pauper
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2005
Location: Ontario
Posts: 40,018
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
Apr 6th 2014, 2:54 am
#19
Born again atheist
Joined: Jul 2005
Location: Europe (to be specified).
Posts: 30,259
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
But wait!
Them diesels are bunging up the lungs of people in the UK:
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...s-saharan-dust
What's the truth of all this?
Apr 6th 2014, 6:44 am
#20
Forum Regular
Joined: Aug 2013
Location: Italy
Posts: 178
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
but Ford offers nothing of the sort in NA.
Apr 7th 2014, 12:44 am
#22
BE Enthusiast
Joined: Mar 2014
Location: Mission and loving it
Posts: 464
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
Sorry to disappoint you mate, but it's very unlikely that you were achieving that kind of fuel consumption. It's a well known fact, that the method the "tuning boxes" employ to achieve more power is generally altering the resistance reading given by the temperature sensor, causing the engine management system to inject more fuel for a given throttle opening, or map.
What this does, is make your trip computer read incorrectly high.
The only way to work out your true consumption is to brim your tank, reset your trip, drive till your next fuelling, take note of how much fuel you put in to brim to the same level and work out your consumption via simple maths.
I have ran many cars with many different tuning boxes over the years, think they are great things, but you achieve nowhere near the mileage your trip says you are doing!
What this does, is make your trip computer read incorrectly high.
The only way to work out your true consumption is to brim your tank, reset your trip, drive till your next fuelling, take note of how much fuel you put in to brim to the same level and work out your consumption via simple maths.
I have ran many cars with many different tuning boxes over the years, think they are great things, but you achieve nowhere near the mileage your trip says you are doing!
Apr 7th 2014, 2:05 am
#23
Born again atheist
Joined: Jul 2005
Location: Europe (to be specified).
Posts: 30,259
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
Sorry to disappoint you mate, but it's very unlikely that you were achieving that kind of fuel consumption. It's a well known fact, that the method the "tuning boxes" employ to achieve more power is generally altering the resistance reading given by the temperature sensor, causing the engine management system to inject more fuel for a given throttle opening, or map.
What this does, is make your trip computer read incorrectly high.
The only way to work out your true consumption is to brim your tank, reset your trip, drive till your next fuelling, take note of how much fuel you put in to brim to the same level and work out your consumption via simple maths.
I have ran many cars with many different tuning boxes over the years, think they are great things, but you achieve nowhere near the mileage your trip says you are doing!
What this does, is make your trip computer read incorrectly high.
The only way to work out your true consumption is to brim your tank, reset your trip, drive till your next fuelling, take note of how much fuel you put in to brim to the same level and work out your consumption via simple maths.
I have ran many cars with many different tuning boxes over the years, think they are great things, but you achieve nowhere near the mileage your trip says you are doing!
Apr 7th 2014, 4:52 am
#24
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2005
Location: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Posts: 4,104
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
You didn't exactly need to do much more than watch the clouds of smoke belching out the exhausts of buses and diesel cars to realise it probably wasn't doing your lungs much good.
Apr 7th 2014, 1:02 pm
#25
Moderαtor Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Upstate South Carolina
Posts: 30,768
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
Want you want is one of these... http://www.teslamotors.com/en_CA/models/features
A snip at less than $80K, but you can rip around Ontario at ludicrous speeds for absolutely no fuel cost (if you have the sense to plug it in at work).
A snip at less than $80K, but you can rip around Ontario at ludicrous speeds for absolutely no fuel cost (if you have the sense to plug it in at work).
Apr 7th 2014, 1:41 pm
#26
Magnificently Withering
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Oakville, ON
Posts: 6,891
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
That (aside from the $80k cost, of course) is what would worry me about owning one of those in Canada. I could quite happily commute in one, the range and mix of roads is just about ideal for a Tesla. But in the wintertime, when you've got heaters, demisters, lights, wipers, heated seats, etc all draining the battery the quoted performance and range figures would likely drop considerably. There was a report a while back on a guy in Winnipeg whose electric car (NIssan Leaf? the weirdly-named Mitsubishi thing?) more than halved its effective range when the temperature got into the minus 20s.
Apr 7th 2014, 1:52 pm
#27
Magnificently Withering
Joined: Jan 2007
Location: Oakville, ON
Posts: 6,891
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
I disagree with your 3rd paragraph altogether.
In "03" I had a Seat with the 1.9 TDi. It chucked out 130bhp, then I got it Superchipped for 300 quid & that upped it to just over 200bhp. It then produced more torque than a Porche Boxter 3.2 ltr.
It constantly returned 65+ mpg & never dipped below 60mpg.
Today's diesels are nothing like they were 20 yrs ago. Audi have won LeMans 3 or 4 times with their 4.2 ltr TDi.
They have incredible in gear acceleration compared to a petrol version, as was demonstrated on, I think Top Gear when a M5 BMW was raced against the 535TDi & got hammered.
Now saying all that, they are all European versions of those cars.
The Canadian equivalent of my VW engine 10 yrs later gives 20mpg less than my car when I inquired last year.
There are more diesel models on the market now, but they need to bring the European technology with them.
In "03" I had a Seat with the 1.9 TDi. It chucked out 130bhp, then I got it Superchipped for 300 quid & that upped it to just over 200bhp. It then produced more torque than a Porche Boxter 3.2 ltr.
It constantly returned 65+ mpg & never dipped below 60mpg.
Today's diesels are nothing like they were 20 yrs ago. Audi have won LeMans 3 or 4 times with their 4.2 ltr TDi.
They have incredible in gear acceleration compared to a petrol version, as was demonstrated on, I think Top Gear when a M5 BMW was raced against the 535TDi & got hammered.
Now saying all that, they are all European versions of those cars.
The Canadian equivalent of my VW engine 10 yrs later gives 20mpg less than my car when I inquired last year.
There are more diesel models on the market now, but they need to bring the European technology with them.
It is an inescapable fact that for a given output, the nature of a compression-ignition engine means it will be of heavier construction. For sure, they typically generate peak power at lower revs and a flatter torque curve through that smaller rev range, but there's a good reason Audi's Le Mans car is an idiosyncracy, and it's newsworthy when a 535d beats a petrol-engined equivalent in a drag race.
Apr 7th 2014, 2:12 pm
#28
Stand-up Philosopher
Joined: Apr 2009
Location: Regina Saskatchewan
Posts: 16,344
Re: Gas guzzlers better for people who breathe?
I love my mini-van, and when it isn't worth fixing anymore (just coming to 400,000 K) I will almost certainly get another one. Comfy to drive, enough power (3.8 l) holds all my gear where it doesn't get wet, and not too bad on gas.
