Peugeot 508 2.2HDi GT - talk to me...

[PeterN]

One of the reasons (apart from money) that I don't run a modern car is the complexity and unreliability of them, although I do think that the PSA engines are a little better than most of the others, but if you want a really reliable car you need to go back to the first Hdi 8 valve engines as used in the 406 and others, they have no DPF and are relatively easy to work on although they don't very often need it, and can be good for 300-400k miles if properly maintained.

I spend very little in maintenance on mine 406's and they have much better build quality than many contemporary and certainly newer cars, I don't find them noisy at all, certainly not at normal cruising speeds. My wife now has a 206 hdi and that is noisy but mainly road noise, its a pleasure to get back into the 406 after I have been driving it.

Peter

[Bailes1992]

Modern diesels aren't half as bad as people make them out to be. I know plenty of people who do nothing but short journeys, fill up with nothing but the cheapest diesel going and neglect to service the car for years on end and they haven't gone wrong.

Our Duster does two 3 mile journeys most days, a quick 20 min blast down the motorway once or twice a month keeps it running sweet!

I've also read numerous articles now suggesting that Euro 6 diesels produce less particulate matter and NOx than a modern DI petrol engine. They went on to suggest in the near future manufacturers will have to start installing particulate filters on their DI petrol engines also. Other than the DPF a modern turbocharged DI petrol engine has all the same components as a diesel, why have all the expensive turbochargers and high pressure fuel system without the fuel economy?

I also have yet to see an equivalent petrol engine yet anywhere near the fuel economy of it's diesel counterpart. Hybrids are even more of a con.

My 1.5TDCi Focus does around 55 to 60mpg. I had a 1.0 ecoburst fiesta on numerous occasions and doing the same driving it will average 40mpg. That's a long way off the diesel!

I was talking to a sales rep for a lighting company a few weeks ago. They had a fleet of BMW 320d's which they replaced with 330e hybrids. They're sending them all back because they're all doing around 30mpg maximum.

Colleague of mine has had Toyota Rav4's for years. Always 2.2 diesels until his last one. Toyota dropped the four wheel drive on the 2.2 diesel, the only model available with four wheel drive was the hybrid. The 2.2 diesels used to get 40-45mpg. The hybrid does 28-33mpg.

Petrols just aren't there yet!

[Welly]

replaced with 330e hybrids

Those 330e's are very quick! ask my Volvo

[Doggy]

Thou doesn't get owt for nowt!

[frog]

One of the reasons (apart from money) that I don't run a modern car is the complexity and unreliability of them, although I do think that the PSA engines are a little better than most of the others, but if you want a really reliable car you need to go back to the first Hdi 8 valve engines as used in the 406 and others, they have no DPF and are relatively easy to work on although they don't very often need it, and can be good for 300-400k miles if properly maintained.

I spend very little in maintenance on mine 406's and they have much better build quality than many contemporary and certainly newer cars, I don't find them noisy at all, certainly not at normal cruising speeds. My wife now has a 206 hdi and that is noisy but mainly road noise, its a pleasure to get back into the 406 after I have been driving it.

Peter

Hear, hear!

[Welly]

Modern diesels aren't half as bad as people make them out to be.

Thinking again, I don't know how much more complex our DV6 is compared to new chod but with an 'electronic' manual gearbox, exploding Turbo and a DPF with Fluid I guess I'm pretty high on the "do not touch" rankings.

However, in 3 years and 35,000 miles we have encountered no problems. None at all. And all miles performed in local traffic, short journeys, unsympathetic engine revs from cold and various other female owner attributes* of regular use.

The only thing I do different to 'what the manual says' is double up on the oil changes i.e. it gets changed every 26 weeks without fail so, like, every 6000 miles. And I use the proper C2 oil.

It also gets a very Italian Tune Up when I'm driving it and feeling it's charm* and enjoyable* driving character

[piglet]

I also have yet to see an equivalent petrol engine yet anywhere near the fuel economy of it's diesel counterpart.

I don't disagree but,
Bear in mind that Diesel fuel has a higher energy density per volume than petrol. 11% according to Wikipedia.
So when comparing Mpg figures knock 11% off the Diesel figure first.

[caprixpack]

As much as I love our diesel passat and the get up and go it has for a 1.9, you can't beat the smell of burnt petrol out the back of a 30 odd year old car. Realistically you'll never get 50+ mpg out of a petrol in the real world regardless what the manufacturer says.

[Bailes1992]

I also have yet to see an equivalent petrol engine yet anywhere near the fuel economy of it's diesel counterpart.

I don't disagree but,
Bear in mind that Diesel fuel has a higher energy density per volume than petrol. 11% according to Wikipedia.
So when comparing Mpg figures knock 11% off the Diesel figure first.

But that doesn't change the fact you still buy it by the litre and in South Wales at least there isn't 11% difference in price.

[rwb]

I was rather surprised when I read the specs for new 508 (attached) how close patrol is to diesel now.

[Welly]

Equally impressive is the new generation of slushmatic boxes which give better fuel economy than changing gears yourself over the old torque-converter types.

Looking at the above you'd need a serious think about buying the diesel, the pez engine spews out a lot of CO there?

[Bailes1992]

I still don't believe for a second you would get anywhere near the figures advertised without driving like a complete tool.

I'm going to try push for a Vauxhall Astra 1.4 Turbo Auto petrol in Sept as a company car. If it's approved it will be interesting to see what sort of fuel economy I get from it.

[piglet]

I also have yet to see an equivalent petrol engine yet anywhere near the fuel economy of it's diesel counterpart.

I don't disagree but,
Bear in mind that Diesel fuel has a higher energy density per volume than petrol. 11% according to Wikipedia.
So when comparing Mpg figures knock 11% off the Diesel figure first.

But that doesn't change the fact you still buy it by the litre and in South Wales at least there isn't 11% difference in price.

Agreed
But from the polution aspect 1l of Diesel will produce 11% more CO2 than 1l of petrol, plus all the other stuff people get upset about.
I'm not being blase about polution but I think the anti-Diesel thing is media driven not science driven.

[Welly]

I have a theory about diesel pollution, I am an idiot.........but here goes.

Years ago a big belchy shitty diesel fumes would spew out black sh*t from the exhaust, this was large particles of sh*t, you could see it up against garage doors, back bumpers, on the road etc. so it would belch out and fall onto something and stay there. Now though the 'big bits' are kept in a DPF but the tiny tiny bits that escape are very fine and AIRBOURNE - I think this is what makes people ill, if you inhale a modern CR diesel exhaust fumes it's like dust it almost makes you sick.

It makes me wonder that's all....

[trufflehunt]

I just think that if manufacturers are going through hoops, DPF's , and I understand Bosch say they have found
some new way to make things cleaner......, all for a fuel which is basically dirty, I just think all that energy,
R&D, manufacturing.... is going in the wrong direction.

In a time when every car manufacturer is busting a gut to get their electric car offerings onto the road,
green, renewable energy is taking over from coal fired power stations, it seems to me that the tide is going out
for diesels. As the slumped sales of new diesels indicate.