Petrol strikes back

[TooT]

In this months Fleet News magazine there is an article about running cost differences of Petrol and Diesel. Basically the article dribbles on about cost per mile and resale values and so on but its the examples they give which are truly shocking.

An example printed -

BMW 318i ES, Price £21,465 Economy 47mpg Price per litre 91.5
BMW 318d ES, Price £24,180 Economy 60mpg Price per litre 100.0

Extra cost of diesel model £2,715
Saving per 1,000 miles £12.74
Miles to break even 213,188 or if doing 12,000 miles a year it will take 18 years

Ok some of the figures are not really real world (mpg) but you get the general idea.

Looks like petrol is the wise choice nowadays, what do you think?

[steve_earwig]

I think you can't spell

Plus diesels seem to have a lot to go wrong with them I'm still kicking myself for not buying a petrol and having it converted to lpg (41.2761 p/l)

[eoin27]

I'd prefer to drive a 406 HDi 90 than my mothers 307 1.4 Petrol 90. Her car has no torque in it whatsoever. Im used to diesels now and i like the grumbly low revving

[TooT]

I know i can't spell

I was thinking about how i like the torque of a diesel but then new cars such as a Golf 1.4 TSI (170bhp) and Insignia 1.6T (180bhp) are going to be close to the torque levels of there diesel equivalent.

[swiss]

Plus diesels seem to have a lot to go wrong with them

I dunno, I've never had any trouble with the spark plugs or coil packs on my diesel

Diesels are inherently simpler than petrol engines... just depends on what the designer decides to bolt on to it.

But, yes, with the price difference now at least 10p it's not like the good old days of diesel economy. Mind you I'm not about to buy a brand new 318 or Insignia

[steve_earwig]

I don't mean your old taxi engine I'm talking about more modern stuff like my rubber tank. it's all the emissions gizmos and the stuff to make them run for millions of miles on a teaspoon of diesel, all the tecknowleji costs (and bears all the hallmarks of being pushed into production before it actually works reliably )

[Doggy]

I'd prefer to drive a 406 HDi 90 than my mothers 307 1.4 Petrol 90. Her car has no torque in it whatsoever. Im used to diesels now and i like the grumbly low revving

I was thinking about how i like the torque of a diesel but then new cars such as a Golf 1.4 TSI (170bhp) and Insignia 1.6T (180bhp) are going to be close to the torque levels of there diesel equivalent.

232 lb/ft
44 mpg

Next?

[Welly]

I've switched to petrol and have no regrets at all but you do need a powerful petrol engine to win back that torque

The thing that annoyed me a bit about the common rail diesel was that you were never really sure whether it was working properly (the piezo injector spray pattern and the like) it became apparent to me that out of 20 HDi's they'd all probably sound different, go differently, and return different economy. Settling on a good one therefore would be either luck or a lot of hard work

If you do a lot of miles then you have to go diesel really but if not petrol is certainly worth another look.

It makes me laugh though when old people spend an extra £2,000.00 or whatever on a diesel version but still only do 3,124 miles per year, but hey, it's "economical"

[mjb]

Should all get petrol 3.0 V6 or bigger engines from before march 2001 just to shove a middle finger up at those ar*eholes in parliament

[totaleclipse]

i have 2 cars, a 150hp petrol honda engined rover, and a 110 hp diesel 406

the 406 is 400Kg heavier than the rover.

rover has the a much better 0-60 time
peugeot has a slightly better 0 - 100 time.

rover does around 20mpg
pug does around 45

both win win, but as rule of thumb if traveling round town on my own, use the rover, taking the family or going a long way, take the pug.

plus if you have a petrol car you lose the option of the odd 20ltr jerry can your mate with a works van can slink your way, lol.

[MikeBX16V]

This business about torque of diesals is rather overstated.

The fuel economy is the real reason to like an oil burner.

They only have that torque because they have a turbo charger.

If you have a turbo in a petrol car, you also have lots of torque, plus power at high rpm too.

A Turbo D is more complicated than a non turbo petrol, and they can go wrong in very expensive ways, and need more servicing.

A V6 petrol has all the torque of a 2 litre turbo D, and loads more power up to over 6000 rpm.

If you like a D, thats fine, but I suggest a v6 on LPG gives the best of both worlds.

That what I drive, 7.7p a mile on a run.

A happy 406 driver

Mike

[neildavies]

I agree about the extra torque of diesel engines. The 406 coupe 2.2HDi has more torque than the 3.0 V6 petrol.

And there's all round performance these days. Take our 307cc for example, the diesel engine in ours is faster 0-60 and top end than the 2.0 petrol engine.

Also, to offset the cost slightly, the road tax on diesels is less.

[pugsport]

plus if you have a petrol car you lose the option of the odd 20ltr jerry can your mate with a works van can slink your way, lol.

95% of theft is committed by staff, if these blaggards did not indulge in theft we would all be paying approx 25% LESS for products and services!!

Three of our ex-drivers have just been sentenced to 5 years each, all 3 had their assetts and homes seized, they stole an estimated 375,000 quids worth of deisel of the last 3 years!

[steve_earwig]

I never stole nuffink! (I don't dislike double-negatives )

[Welly]

I never stole nuffink! (I don't dislike double-negatives )

Ooo - that reminds me Steve, can I have some more tie wraps please? (you said you had 'plenty' )