# The smog is your fault diesel drivers!!!!!



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Listening to the news tonight, it seems quite a few people say the current smog down south is being assisted with our contribution from diesel cars.

Do you think episodes like this will finally make people realise how dirty diesel cars are, or not?


----------



## Soul boy 68 (Sep 8, 2013)

It's a good job I drive a petrol car


----------



## R14CKE (Aug 10, 2012)

I love my diesel!


----------



## Blackmondie (Mar 13, 2011)

but us diesel drivers do make them nice hot summers. so we're doing alright


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Blackmondie said:


> but us diesel drivers do make them nice hot summers. so we're doing alright


You also flooded out parts of England with the global warming.


----------



## Naddy37 (Oct 27, 2005)

My diesel isn't dirty, it's got one of the most advanced 'cats' on it.....so ner....


----------



## andy monty (Dec 29, 2007)

Its what the green leve have wanted for ages UK shrouded in Smog.... Up taxes, more congestion zones The Congestion zone in london was intended to cut air polution and they have it now worse than most...

Thing is most of the crap in the air has come from the North / Eastern area of Europe mixed with African sand...

http://metro.co.uk/2014/04/02/uk-weather-saharan-desert-pollution-covers-britain-in-smog-4686527/

This with all our new cars bound with Cat converters, DPF filters, HGV's Running Addblue, Our industries strictly regulated and the like.. Compared to others we are relatively clean.. Just look at China the US and the like


----------



## James Bagguley (Jul 13, 2013)

If everything wasnt so bloody expensive i guess people would be less inclined to lean towards diesel for its perceived MPG benefits.
(I heard that annual mileage has to be high for any appreciable saving though, maybe that has changed?)


----------



## Blackmondie (Mar 13, 2011)

the amount of kilometers I drive for work, just wouldn't be justified with a petrol. I have to fill up every 2-3 days... imagine that with a petrol...


----------



## PeanuckleJive (Oct 28, 2012)

I'm going to sit here and pretend I'm not in the second highest tax band for emissions and blame the diesel drivers too :thumb:


----------



## James Bagguley (Jul 13, 2013)

Blackmondie said:


> the amount of kilometers I drive for work, just wouldn't be justified with a petrol. I have to fill up every 2-3 days... imagine that with a petrol...


Agreed, they definitely have their place, someone who has to travel like you it is the right solution.

However, many people are blinded by MPG figures and buy a diesel for a shopping car, coupled with the whole DPF thing and higher costs for diesel, i doubt there is much of a saving.


----------



## Impulse22 (Mar 30, 2014)

Diesels have their place, lorries etc and long distance commutes. However smog is also common from petrol cars. One of the worst parts of smog is ozone, which can be formed from exhaust gases after an effective cat


----------



## Rayner (Aug 16, 2012)

Never mind the smog, my neighbour's rattling old, stinky diseasel truck wakes me up every morning! 

Hate the stuff but I know I wouldn't want to be filling my van up with petrol!


----------



## rf860 (Jul 24, 2011)

My diesel doesn't emit any smoke. The tailpipes are never dirty. It's also in the second lowest tax group.


----------



## Rundie (Oct 2, 2007)

So it's down to my diesel X5 then with so much filtration on the exhaust, nothing to do with all the crap China, India, US and the Eastern block are churning out ?? As we all know this polution stops at their borders and only creates problems for them :thumb:


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

rf860 said:


> My diesel doesn't emit any smoke. The tailpipes are never dirty. It's also in the second lowest tax group.


Cars are taxed on CO2 levels which isn't the issue with diesel engines.


----------



## Impulse22 (Mar 30, 2014)

Kerr said:


> Cars are taxed on CO2 levels which isn't the issue with diesel engines.


Correct. CO2 also isn't the issue when it comes to smog. CO2 is a relatively safe product from combustion


----------



## uruk hai (Apr 5, 2009)

My understanding is that the thing that pushed it to its highest ever recorded level is industrial pollution from the continent and the sand and dust from the Sahara ?

One thing I found quite alarming is that the levels recorded today are still only one tenth of those recorded in parts of China as a daily average !


----------



## 4d_dc2 (Mar 28, 2008)

My accord only emits water aparently.


----------



## rf860 (Jul 24, 2011)

Kerr said:


> Cars are taxed on CO2 levels which isn't the issue with diesel engines.


Fair enough. But my car doesn't emit smoke lol.

Tbh, this might be heavily criticised but I'm not overly bothered about global warming...


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

rf860 said:


> Fair enough. But my car doesn't emit smoke lol.
> 
> Tbh, this might be heavily criticised but I'm not overly bothered about global warming...


It only floods England, so we're happy. :lol:

We have another 15 degrees to go before we get sunburn.


----------



## rf860 (Jul 24, 2011)

Kerr said:


> It only floods England, so we're happy. :lol:
> 
> We have another 15 degrees to go before we get sunburn.


Just as well I tan great ha ha!


----------



## SteveTDCi (Feb 8, 2006)

I blame our flawed tax system where people will spend an extra £2000 on a diesel to save £100 on a tax disc. Then they cover start stop journeys and never get the benefits. I know they have dpf's but let's not forget that the soot it collects gets burnt off in the regen. You can still smell and taste the fumes out of even the most modern diesel.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

rf860 said:


> Just as well I tan great ha ha!


Even though you're in Aberdeen, you'll have to settle for a Glasgow tan.


----------



## rf860 (Jul 24, 2011)

Kerr said:


> Even though you're in Aberdeen, you'll have to settle for a Glasgow tan.


Wasn't too bad in September! It's a lot drier in the east at least.


----------



## knightstemplar (Jun 18, 2010)

When it was proven there is no global warming they changed its name to climate change,  con men


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Am I the only one who has walked through a busy town and not noticed the
smell of the cars, trucks etc.
I smell nothing, have no breathing problems, nor have I ever heard a single person face to face complain about air pollution.
All being well my next car will be a 330d, not prepared to pay the extra fuel costs of a petrol for sake of global warming either tbh, i pay my tax when it comes to motor vehicles set by government
Job done


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

You can feel diesel fumes catch your throat especially when you don't smoke.

More and more people are removing their DPFs which is adding to the problem.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Cant say ive noticed it tbh but you watch, first thing tomorrow il start choking whilst next to a diesel


----------



## should_do_more (Apr 30, 2008)

It's the taxis and buses I find the worst in London. They all stink and no idea why taxis still have big dirty engines in them. The smell of chlorine is pretty bad today as there's hardly a breeze. Annoying that the most used vehicles seem to be allowed to be the dirtiest.


----------



## Mike_Wizz (Aug 5, 2013)

I love my diesel... I drive a few hundred miles a week on the m5 and have to fill up just over weekly


----------



## SteveTDCi (Feb 8, 2006)

I drive a few hundred miles a week in my mini and it's not diesel. I'm looking for a cheap run around for biking and taking stuff to the tip, it's hard work trying to find a v5 passat or v6 mondeo estate for 500 quid, the 528i is a bit ropey around that age - mire do than the vw or fords.


----------



## Mugwump (Feb 17, 2008)

Kerr said:


> Do you think episodes like this will finally make people realise how dirty diesel cars are, or not?


I doubt it.

Most diesel fans live in a similar degree of denial about the negative side of such a fuel as most smokers exhibit with regard to the damage to health from tobacco.

Added to which, overall there is little to choose between derv and petrol as far as damaging pollution goes. The percieved benefits of one over the other amount to but a very tiny proportion of the total harmful pollution that each causes.


----------



## dholdi (Oct 1, 2008)

Kerr said:


> Listening to the news tonight, it seems quite a few people say the current smog down south is being assisted with our contribution from diesel cars.
> 
> Do you think episodes like this will finally make people realise how dirty diesel cars are, or not?


You do realise April Fools was yesterday ?


----------



## Mugwump (Feb 17, 2008)

You did read the first line of the OP? (posted at 7:24pm on the 2nd April) :


Kerr said:


> Listening to the news tonight......


----------



## dholdi (Oct 1, 2008)

Mugwump said:


> You did read the first line of the OP? (posted at 7:24pm on the 2nd April) :


If you are asking me then yes, obviously gone right over your head.


----------



## Alzak (Aug 31, 2010)

Kerr said:


> Listening to the news tonight, it seems quite a few people say the current smog down south is being assisted with our contribution from diesel cars.
> 
> Do you think episodes like this will finally make people realise how dirty diesel cars are, or not?


Diesel it may be dirty fuel but you have to consider the fact that diesel is "left over" product from petrol production and it has to be used in some way, for each 10L of petrol used in your "clean" car there is just over 5L of diesel.

And most important air pollution is not just particulates PM ... it is also hydrocarbons HC, carbon monoxide CO, oxides of nitrogen NOx, oxides of sulfur SOx, as you see gasoleum exhaust gases are as bad as diesel with the difference that diesel exhaust gases contain PM.

So as much as diesel car owners are contributing to air pollution petrol engined cars owners are at fault as well.

There was study on net somewhere with air pollution levels from few sources and diesel cars are not main factor causing high level of pollution.

Air pollution by country :

http://www.statisticbrain.com/countries-ranked-by-air-pollution/


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Alzak said:


> Diesel it may be dirty fuel but you have to consider the fact that diesel is "left over" product from petrol production and it has to be used in some way, for each 10L of petrol used in your "clean" car there is just over 5L of diesel.
> 
> And most important air pollution is not just particulates PM ... it is also hydrocarbons HC, carbon monoxide CO, oxides of nitrogen NOx, oxides of sulfur SOx, as you see gasoleum exhaust gases are as bad as diesel with the difference that diesel exhaust gases contain PM.
> 
> ...


I'm just about to leave for work so haven't the time to read fully, but it does strike me that a country with the love of huge engined cars, The US, beats us.

The problem we have in The UK is we have far too many diesels for a start.

Not only do we use up all the diesel we produce, we have to import it from other countries to keep up with demand. So we are using more diesel than most countries.

Manufacturers are struggling to make diesel emission levels. Then it gets worse as a high percentage of people have been removing tthe barrier set in place to reduce emissions.

Look how many people have removed their DPF to either gain more power out of their car, or because of the cost of a new one.

A lot of people have seen this problem coming for years. When you get events of the last few days it should hopefully strike home how serious this could be.


----------



## Chris79100 (Jan 27, 2011)

DPF only work at 1cm of the exhaust, the particules reforms 1 or 2 meters after and finer, dpf are just to make people and some governement think it work.
Co2 is.not a polluant, it.contribute to climate heating, particules are very dangerous and kill.
It cause more than 40000 dead by year here, more than anything...
It is calling the next " amiante scandal ".
And like it it will be years before we know everything, too much € in this story.
In some country/town diesel is (or was, don't know if it's allways the case with the pressure of some group ) forbidden because it.can cause death...


----------



## Alzak (Aug 31, 2010)

Kerr said:


> I'm just about to leave for work so haven't the time to read fully, but it does strike me that a country with the love of huge engined cars, The US, beats us.
> 
> The problem we have in The UK is we have far too many diesels for a start.
> 
> ...


Reason why we import diesel fuel is the fact that all of our road transport is based on diesel powered cars.

I'm also surprised that USA is not higher on the list as according to many other sources US are second biggest pollutant.

Regarding DPF look how many people use to remove CATs, give just couple of years when technology improve and no one will have to remove their DPF as for now most of removal are caused by DPF failure not power gain.

From your past post you concentrate too much on particulates and remember air pollution is not just what you can see ...


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

Alzak said:


> Reason why we import diesel fuel is the fact that all of our road transport is based on diesel powered cars.
> 
> I'm also surprised that USA is not higher on the list as according to many other sources US are second biggest pollutant.
> 
> ...


The reason we import more diesel is demand has shot through the roof. More diesel cars are sold than petrol.

Every other country in the world also uses diesel lorries etc.

I'd say people removing theirs CATS is very rare these days. Maybe a reasonable amount removing the pre CATS or secondary CATS, yet still pass emissions tests.

There is lots of people removing their DPFs. Look how many companies advertise this as a service they offer. It is big business.

I agree for many it does come down to cost, it still shouldn't be allowed to happen. People seem educated enough to know about the removal of it and most should have been aware of that prior to purchase.

Buy a diesel and it is something you should budget for.

Read any of the car forums and people are more concerned about not having their removal detected than anything else since the MOT changed.

DPFs have been a real problem ever since they were introduced and they are getting no better. Is there any forthcoming technology to overcome the issues?

All I keep reading is manufacturers are struggling to meet guidelines concerning diesel engines.


----------



## Alzak (Aug 31, 2010)

Kerr said:


> The reason we import more diesel is demand has shot through the roof. More diesel cars are sold than petrol.
> 
> Every other country in the world also uses diesel lorries etc.
> 
> ...


Are you sure people are educated enough ...

It was the same story with CATs few years ago so many people were running cars without CATs and now there is no point to do this as technology improoved so much that exhaust gases flow restriction is limited.

So many DPF were added just as add on to old designed engines where now we see manufactures designing engines and fuel injection systems around DPFs, for example VAG PD engine with DPF was just nuts and CR TDI engine works so much better with DPF there is no more reasons to remove DPF due to failure.


----------



## Kiashuma (May 4, 2011)

Its all my fault with my 54 plate Santa Fe diesel


----------



## Stezz (Apr 29, 2011)

I'm yet to be convinced....

You see on the news all these scientists trying to tell the world "man is speeding up global warming"...

OK, show me your evidence, as yet nobody has.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

I took my old Golf to over 220bhp and 360lb ft, it was diesel, did 650 miles to a tank and could stick with a Boxster S

So franky I couldn't care. As they're great.

I have a GTI now but would go back to a diesel without issues.


----------



## Kriminal (Jan 11, 2007)

How many diesels are there in the Sahara desert?


----------



## 182_Blue (Oct 25, 2005)

I'm a petrol driver but I'm under no illusion that my car is doing less damage than a diesel to the environment, we get one and a half a days smog (and my understanding is this is mostly made up of sand from the desert and pollutants from Europe mixed with a slight bit of pollutant from the UK) and all of a sudden it's ban diesel time LOL. 

If people are that bothered then buy a pushbike or walk to work or get a electric car and don't use a petrol/diesel powered car. 

All IMO of course.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

xJay1337 said:


> I took my old Golf to over 220bhp and 360lb ft, it was diesel, did 650 miles to a tank and could stick with a Boxster S
> 
> So franky I couldn't care. As they're great.
> 
> I have a GTI now but would go back to a diesel without issues.


No, they're not. They're foul smelling and sound like tractors.

There's no confusing a derv with a petrol.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Kriminal said:


> How many diesels are there in the Sahara desert?


Dakar rally has sensible petrol cars like the wildcat


----------



## GNshaving (Feb 13, 2014)

Love diesels here,Power and good mpg. Yes please.


----------



## phillipnoke (Apr 1, 2011)

At one time they said diesel was better for the so called climate change


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

Too many people who don't NEED a diesel are taken in by the so called 'savings', but don't do enough to realise those 'savings'

They are happy to pay more for the diesel lump over the petrol equivalent & then don't cover the mileage to claw back the extra spend in fuel economy return, I am of course taking about school run mums, OAP's.....cars that only pootle to the shops & back etc

I'm happy driving my 1.4TSi SEAT Leon, I regularly achieve 40mpg on my daily commute to/from work & the most I've had id 57mpg on a run. 
I've done Manchester - Edinburgh - Manchester on 1 tank of petrol not bad going for a petrol

Diesel...pah!

We have a London Taxi in the family a 12 plate TX4, which is Euro4 Standard for a Diesel, we bought this in May 2012. At the time we had a choice, we could of had a Euro 5 Emission rated TX4, but this came with a DPF

Now as we know, the majority of the time, a Taxi will be doing its work making short stop start journey's in the city, very occasionally you might get a run, for example from where I live to Manchester Airport.
We were told by the LTI Dealer to 'take it on a lap of the M60' to clear the DPF every so often. FECK THAT, hence buying the NON DPF Euro 4 model


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

so out of interest, the thing of getting a diesel for better mpg, what amount of miles a week do you guys think warrants a diesel...?

i ask as have been following this thread with interest, not because of concerns about the recent smog (we get sahara sand every year!) but more for the discussion of diesel vs petrol for mpg...

i have at the moment as a "cheap" runabout/work car, a 54 reg vauxhall astravan 2.0l dti...diesel obviously and i do roughly 50 miles a day, 5 days a week (sometimes 6) so 250 miles a week, 1000 per month...its mainly motorway and fastish A roads and i usually travel at 65-70mph on the Mway and 50-40 most of the rest of the journey.
i accelerate fairly hard whenever possible and basically don't hang about, and for all this, i still get 48mpg on average...

as ginger nuts said in his post, "_Love diesels here,Power and good mpg. Yes please. _" i totally agree with him...:thumb:

i'm planning on getting a car before the winter though (fed up with the cold and noise of the van!) and at 12k miles a year on average, i've been assuming i'll get a diesel, but what do you guys think?


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

sfstu said:


> so out of interest, the thing of getting a diesel for better mpg, what amount of miles a week do you guys think warrants a diesel...?
> 
> i ask as have been following this thread with interest, not because of concerns about the recent smog (we get sahara sand every year!) but more for the discussion of diesel vs petrol for mpg...
> 
> ...


12K Miles per year....

How much do you pay for your fuel?
What is your MPG return?

work out how much your spending on fuel per year, then do the same for the petrol equivalent

Difference between the 2 divide into the extra cost of buying the Diesel over the petrol to work out how long it'll take you (extra miles) to see the cost savings.....

That's my thoughts anyhow on working it out

hope that helps


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

sfstu said:


> so out of interest, the thing of getting a diesel for better mpg, what amount of miles a week do you guys think warrants a diesel...?
> 
> i ask as have been following this thread with interest, not because of concerns about the recent smog (we get sahara sand every year!) but more for the discussion of diesel vs petrol for mpg...
> 
> ...


Not 12k.

I do ~41 miles a day and a smaller petrol would be fine, but it's quite easy to get 28mpg in the zed if not more.

I can only assume that those who don't are constantly on and off the throttle and brake in smaller petrols.


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

RisingPower said:


> Not 12k.
> 
> I do ~41 miles a day and a smaller petrol would be fine, but it's quite easy to get 28mpg in the zed if not more.
> 
> I can only assume that those who don't are constantly on and off the throttle and brake in smaller petrols.


but can i sit in a smaller petrol on the motorway at 70 for 20 miles and get 48mpg?
probably with newer cars/engines but personally i'll be looking at 7-8yo cars as mine is mainly for going to work only and will be a relatively cheap car...?


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

Andyg_TSi said:


> 12K Miles per year....
> 
> How much do you pay for your fuel?
> What is your MPG return?
> ...


at the moment, £1.33 per litre and am averaging 48mpg...

off to find some paper and a pencil...


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

STFU,

Just re-read your post

48mpg, to cover 12,000miles, you'd need 250 gallons of Diesel at 'say' £1.41 a litre,
(£6.34) a gallon, you'd spend £1,585

If a petrol returned 'say' 35mpg, then to cover the same distance, you'd need 342 gallons at 'say' £1.39 a litre (£6.25) a gallon, you'd spend £2,137.50

£2137.50 - £1585 = £552.50 more in petrol over diesel

But if the diesel cost £2K more to buy, it'd take 4 years to see any benefit of savings

Hope my maths/workings are right lol


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

sfstu said:


> but can i sit in a smaller petrol on the motorway at 70 for 20 miles and get 48mpg?
> probably with newer cars/engines but personally i'll be looking at 7-8yo cars as mine is mainly for going to work only and will be a relatively cheap car...?


Sitting at 60mph, I can return 57mpg in my 1.4 Turbo petrol :wave:


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

Andyg_TSi said:


> STFU,
> 
> Just re-read your post
> 
> ...





Andyg_TSi said:


> Sitting at 60mph, I can return 57mpg in my 1.4 Turbo petrol :wave:


it's 133.9 per litre (at the moment) with petrol showing as 127.9..

looking at the age, and price (2k-ish) of the sort of cars i'd be looking at, i'd guess there wouldn't be that much of a difference in price for a diesel car or a petrol car...


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

sfstu said:


> but can i sit in a smaller petrol on the motorway at 70 for 20 miles and get 48mpg?
> probably with newer cars/engines but personally i'll be looking at 7-8yo cars as mine is mainly for going to work only and will be a relatively cheap car...?


Of course you can, the newer c180 gets that easy. I don't think it's only newer cars either.

Diesel just means people who are constantly on off brakes and throttle get better mpg.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

Andyg_TSi said:


> STFU,
> 
> Just re-read your post
> 
> ...


This is the thing, you're really not going to save that much unless you do a lot of miles, which 12k isn't.


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

RisingPower said:


> Diesel just means people who are constantly on off brakes and throttle get better mpg.


that'd be me then...


----------



## Andyg_TSi (Sep 6, 2013)

sfstu said:


> it's 133.9 per litre (at the moment) with petrol showing as 127.9..
> 
> looking at the age, and price (2k-ish) of the sort of cars i'd be looking at, i'd guess there wouldn't be that much of a difference in price for a diesel car or a petrol car...


Very true mate, hardly any difference at all at that price range of cars

Once thing I'd be inclined to do, is get the Terraclean treatment done for £100 to remove any carbon build up so the engine is running as efficiently as possible, as your looking at an old(ish) car with plenty of mileage on it


----------



## ScottHannah (Dec 28, 2012)

Why is everyone getting so bothered anyway, if someone wants to drive a diesel then I don't see what it's got to do with anyone else...

I chose to get a diesel as the petrol equivalent of my car returns 27mpg around town and 32mpg on the motorway where as mines is 45mpg around town and 68-70mpg on the motorway. Plus the diesel version is faster lol.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

sfstu said:


> that'd be me then...


Sorry, but I just don't get people who are incapable of maintaining a constant speed in traffic. They are the cause of traffic jams. They are the same people that overtake at +.1 mph.


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

RisingPower said:


> Sorry, but I just don't get people who are incapable of maintaining a constant speed in traffic. They are the cause of traffic jams. They are the same people that overtake at +.1 mph.


when i'm in traffic, i do try to maintain a constant speed, usually 65mph on the motorway, only altering this by speeding up or slowing down to get around or away from other people who are usually the ones driving randomly!

also, i drive hgv 1 for a living so i'm fairly used to people's erratic driving...:thumb: lane changing divebombers pulling in on the brakes in front of me when i'm weighing up to 32 ton and doing up to 56mph tends to make you pay attention to speeds...:doublesho also, being limited to a set speed just means i plan my overtakes a lot earlier than the average car driver and spend a lot more time on maintaining constant speeds

and probably because i drive at a set max of 56mph a lot of the time at work, it's nice to put my foot down and change my speed from time to time when i'm not at work or limited, (other than the speed limits...) 
and i do tend to stick to the speed limits, or at least to within 5mph of them, and use this as a way to measure my progress on my commute rather than just the time. i could just drive faster every day beating my time but it's more of a challenge to have a constant such as set speed limits and instead rely on my driving progress to beat my best time...

i should add also, as i do shift work, most of my travelling to and from work is either very early in the morning or very late in the evening with rarely more than a handful of other cars about until i get to within 5 miles of work...:thumb:

quite simply, i enjoy driving. 
even in a rattley old van...:lol: i can still enjoy the turbo rush and the cornering and general sense of acceleration and movement and as it's fairly economical mpg wise, for me a diesel means i don't have one eye on the fuel guage that i've had in the past with petrols...


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

Andyg_TSi said:


> Very true mate, hardly any difference at all at that price range of cars
> 
> Once thing I'd be inclined to do, is get the Terraclean treatment done for £100 to remove any carbon build up so the engine is running as efficiently as possible, as your looking at an old(ish) car with plenty of mileage on it


hopefully on oldish car with not that many miles on...:lol:
have read the thread on here about the terracleaning, i'd definately consider it...:thumb:


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

sfstu said:


> when i'm in traffic, i do try to maintain a constant speed, usually 65mph on the motorway, only altering this by speeding up or slowing down to get around or away from other people who are usually the ones driving randomly!
> 
> also, i drive hgv 1 for a living so i'm fairly used to people's erratic driving...:thumb: lane changing divebombers pulling in on the brakes in front of me when i'm weighing up to 32 ton and doing up to 56mph tends to make you pay attention to speeds...:doublesho also, being limited to a set speed just means i plan my overtakes a lot earlier than the average car driver and spend a lot more time on maintaining constant speeds
> 
> ...


Yes, but changing speeds is fine, whilst not impeding the progress of other road users.

There are muppets who simply refuse to overtake in a sensible amount of time, who don't plan their overtakes and as you say, cut right in front of hgvs.

They seem to lack the ability to judge how traffic is moving and simply floor it into stationary traffic then brake hard.


----------



## sfstu (Aug 3, 2010)

the ones that get me are the cars sitting in lane 1 at 54mph, 2mph slower than most hgvs and when you pull out to start (an often long) overtake, they speed up by a couple of mph, leaving you stranded in the middle lane with every one around you cursing you...:lol:

driving standards over here are pretty poor tbh...seems to me that people have gotten very selfish when driving with a ****you attitude to every one around them, plus everyone is in a hurry...:wall:

i'm pretty courteous when driving, letting people in when i can, giving people room wherever possible but driving any vehicle, especially round busy areas such as heathrow or london or pretty much anywhere within the m25, is just plain frustrating... the amount of times i go out of my way to slow down or stop for someone to pull in and then get no thankyou or acknowledgement at all, sooner or later, you just stop letting people in and start becoming as selfish as everyone else, constantly in a battle to defend your space...
gotta say though, i love being up in the centre of london in an artic seeing off swarms of private cabs/minbuses...:devil:


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

RisingPower said:


> No, they're not. They're foul smelling and sound like tractors.
> 
> There's no confusing a derv with a petrol.


To be honest mate, since I've owned the SAME car with the different engines (both 2005 Golf Mk5s) I'd say I'm pretty well judged to say ... you're chatting poop! :lol::lol:

Sounds like a tractor does it?





she did 50-70 in 3rd in about 2.5 seconds? that's merc c63 amg territory.

:lol::lol:

It's unfair to compare a heavily modified diesel to a stock GTI engine but driving a petrol is a crisper, more fun experience. but day to day driving a diesel is better.

I'm quite a "lazy" driver being I generally prefer to ride torque waves than chase peak RPM power so a diesel suits my driving style really well.

Now you may not like diesels and that's fine but for many people, including me who was doing upwards of 30k miles a year, it made absolute sense to have a diesel as the costs of a petrol would have been far too high.


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

xJay1337 said:


> To be honest mate, since I've owned the SAME car with the different engines (both 2005 Golf Mk5s) I'd say I'm pretty well judged to say ... you're chatting poop! :lol::lol:
> 
> Sounds like a tractor does it?
> Golf 1.9 TDI - YouTube
> ...


Yes, it does sound like a tractor. Then again a lot of small petrol engines sound crap also.

The tiny rev range on diesels, does not appeal to me at all.

This is the point, a lot of miles, makes a diesel more economical, if, it has the same size engine as a petrol.


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

Oh no its turned into another petrol v diesel thread. Can't we all just get along lol. Who ever said it earlier if we all didn't have to pay a stupid amount per ltr of fuel people wouldn't be forced to own a diesel. The way I see climate change is that the earth has been here allot longer than us and will have its own way of adapting. Just chill everyone and don't listen to what the media tells you as they like to patronise and scare people. I mean for fecks sake they went way way over board on this smog thing.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

xJay1337 said:


> To be honest mate, since I've owned the SAME car with the different engines (both 2005 Golf Mk5s) I'd say I'm pretty well judged to say ... you're chatting poop! :lol::lol:
> 
> Sounds like a tractor does it?
> Golf 1.9 TDI - YouTube
> ...


Being a lazy driver you wouldn't want to drop to 3rd gear to blast from 50-70mph. Isn't the point of diesels that you don't have to find the exact power band and you can use the torque and stay in a higher gear?

3rd gear at 50mph must be near where max power is for the Golf diesel whereas the C63 is geared for far higher speeds so 50mph in 3rd would be out of its real power band.

So you've found one little irrelevant set of circumstances that makes the Golf look good. What would happen if the C63 was at the optimal rev range in 2nd?

Why does it specifically have to be 3rd gear?

The C63, according to figures does 30-70mph in 3.4 secs. 0-100mph is 9.7secs.

The Golf would be blown to bits at anywhere other than an irrelevantly restricted 3rd gear time frame of 2.5 secs.

2.5secs seems quick for the Golf. Can't I remember reading your quarter mile time before?


----------



## SteveTDCi (Feb 8, 2006)

Yes it sounds like a diesel, having owned a golf diesel and a Leon cupra I think I can say the diesel is rough and sounds horrible. Having said that my cooper s sounds like something is loose but is much smoother than a diesel. It has a reasonable exhaust note too. I'm looking for a cheap banger at the minute and I'm leaning towards a v6 mg zt.


----------



## possul (Nov 14, 2008)

Get the V8 Steve :lol:


----------



## SteveTDCi (Feb 8, 2006)

possul said:


> Get the V8 Steve :lol:


i'd love too but there aren't many around for £600


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Kerr said:


> Being a lazy driver you wouldn't want to drop to 3rd gear to blast from 50-70mph. Isn't the point of diesels that you don't have to find the exact power band and you can use the torque and stay in a higher gear?


I built my old car to drive quickly. Which I did. But it was very much a time and a place. When I am driving around to the shops or heading off to a show then why would I be chasing peak power when I'm driving for economy 



> 3rd gear at 50mph must be near where max power is for the Golf diesel whereas the C63 is geared for far higher speeds so 50mph in 3rd would be out of its real power band.


Yes very true - but we're talking about on road performance here. In the gears and up to about 100mph my little diesel was pretty quick.



> So you've found one little irrelevant set of circumstances that makes the Golf look good. What would happen if the C63 was at the optimal rev range in 2nd?


Why do you think i chose that particular figure. 
It's not making it look good or bad.
I am not a moron. I know a c63 would destroy my old Golf in any sort of race. But it shows the midrange performance that is available, you can't deny that it's an impressive number.

i had a very early revision of i think was the first mafless map on a bkc engine in the uk. it spooled very slowly at low revs (making about 95bhp at 1500rpm) and needed further vnt adjustment and changes to the mapping. 
above 2500rpm it was great, peak power was at about 3700rpm compared to about 2500rpm with the standard turbo.



> 2.5secs seems quick for the Golf. Can't I remember reading your quarter mile time before?







my 1/4 times are **** because i couldn't get it to launch.
[email protected] 99mph with a strong headwind and a hole in my gearbox. I was happy. I wish I had taken it down the strip again to get a true rating on it's actual ability on a not-windy day but after blowing the gearbox I gave up.

All this is irrelevant anyway
people who say "diesels sound like tractors" obviously are those relinquished from PH forums or out to troll.
diesels can and do sound very nice. you've not heard anything till you've heard a modified compression engine at full chat.
both petrols and diesels have a place.
there's no "better" or "worse".


----------



## RisingPower (Sep 21, 2007)

xJay1337 said:


> .
> diesels can and do sound very nice. you've not heard anything till you've heard a modified compression engine at full chat.
> both petrols and diesels have a place.
> there's no "better" or "worse".


Which diesels sound like a zonda/aventador/corvette/viper/f430?


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Everything is subjective
You can't say it sounds "like"... you are comparing Jazz music to hip hop.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

xJay1337 said:


> I built my old car to drive quickly. Which I did. But it was very much a time and a place. When I am driving around to the shops or heading off to a show then why would I be chasing peak power when I'm driving for economy
> 
> Yes very true - but we're talking about on road performance here. In the gears and up to about 100mph my little diesel was pretty quick.
> 
> ...


A time of 15.6secs is very poor for a 99mph terminal speed. Many of the older hot hatches do very low 15s at low 90mph passes. My old MK4 Astra GSi turbo when standard was [email protected]

99mph is very very fast for a hatch back with 220bhp. The 300bhp Focus RS seem to have a terminal of 97mph, but over a second faster. Then you think the headwind and a gearbox fault reduced that more?

It doesn't seem to be an extreme amount of power and torque to struggle so badly. Something wrong somewhere.

How did you come up with this 2.5secs for 50-70mph? Obviously the car would be even faster at lower speeds when it has traction.

99mph makes little sense at 15.6secs. Neither does having a 50-70mph time of 2.5secs when the car takes nearer 16secs to reach 100mph. It has to be slow everywhere other than 50-70mph to give the figures you have.

A hot hatch reaching 99mph terminals should be very low 14s. Losing 1.5 secs must be impossible going down a quarter mile.

In my days of doing loads of drag days, even at Crail in the wet with practically zero grip, my times weren't 1.5secs slower than my best when tuned.

Often in road tests cars are tested 50-70mph in top gear. This varies a lot due to the gearing and the power available.

What you find is when the gears are used, a fast car is fast anywhere. You'd rarely get a freak zone of randomness.

Nothing to do with PH, but loads of people think diesels sound bad. Some of the bigger diesel engines sound a bit better, but I've never heard a good 4 pot diesel. The one you posted up sounds like a normal diesel before it starts banging off the limit, which you're not going to do all day.


----------



## PugIain (Jun 28, 2006)

My car does 0-60 in 9.5 seconds, does mid 50s mpg and has big comfy leather armchairs. So according to the rules that I Haven't just made up, I Win.
Thank you and goodbye :wave:


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Kerr said:


> A time of 15.6secs is very poor for a 99mph terminal speed. Many of the older hot hatches do very low 15s at low 90mph passes. My old MK4 Astra GSi turbo when standard was [email protected]
> 
> 99mph is very very fast for a hatch back with 220bhp. The 300bhp Focus RS seem to have a terminal of 97mph, but over a second faster. Then you think the headwind and a gearbox fault reduced that more?
> 
> ...


Kerr you don't half like trying to pick on what I say.

The car, once it was off the line, was very quick. I was right up the chuff of a early newish model (2007) Boxster S without any problems.

Despite very sticky tyres and pods obviously sticky surface it was wheelspinning into oblivion in first and second or bogging down.
Due to the mapping and the TYPE of map, which as I explained was an early revision of the first of it's type in the country, as well as the large turbo, from launching you either had all the power (and lots of wheelspin) or no power at all and it bogged.

It had 221bhp and 365lb ft of torque, have you tried launching nearly 400lb ft of torque with a 2000rpm powerband? Let alone a diesel. It is well known that TDI's do not launch well from a standing start. They don't have enough revs available.

I don't have the timing slip from the Pod, because I am not one of those people to go bragging about times (not that the time is anything to brag hahaha :lol

But I don't really care if you think something was wrong. The time was a 15.7 at 99mph and if that sounds odd to you or that it's not right then that's up for you to decide. It really suffers up in first and second before it finally hooks in 3rd which was around 55mph. The car would very happily (and pretty quickly) pull to the redline in top gear and bounce off the limiter which was an indicated 160 (probably a true 145), I really needed to upgrade the gearbox to the 6 speed from the 2.0TDI but I gave up on the project.

The 50-70 time was taken from a video that I did for my tuning company, as part of a 30-70 pull. The 30-70 time was pretty poor on the big turbo conversion, as I said because of the lag - causing it to lose time from 30-40 while it pulls and spools - demonstrating the difference between a normal remap and post big turbo and injector transformation. As it was from Youtube you can't time it exactly but I measured it about 5 times and the average time from my stopwatch app was about 2.5 seconds.

Again this is a car that I built from the ground up and ran for over 50,000 miles. So i know how it drives and it quirks. 
Not the fastest car in the world but surprised many, many vehicles and once it was under way it was like a train. A tuned diesel is a good thing.

I am not going to keep going back and forth with you, simply because you and I never agree, everything you say always feel like a dig as I'm sure things I say do for you. So we've had our discussion and I have nothing more to add. :driver:


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

xJay1337 said:


> Kerr you don't half like trying to pick on what I say.
> 
> The car, once it was off the line, was very quick. I was right up the chuff of a early newish model (2007) Boxster S without any problems.
> 
> ...


I'm not taking a dig I'm just questioning your very questionable figures.

As you have now said, you got 2.5secs from watching a youtube clip. I'm sure you realise there is so many factors that make that a pointless and innaccurate measurement?

I would guess that a 2007 Boxter would be 265bhp. With a 45bhp difference the gap wouldn't be huge. A 295bhp Boxter would have no issues at all.

Cars rarely zoom away with the difference people expect unless the power gap is huge.

For example, remap a turbo charged hot hatch and it will feel significantly faster because it is. However you will likely find that on a quarter mile the car will likely add about 6-7mph which seems to be quite a common variance.

People seem to think a car just easing away is close when in real terms, the gap is significant.

A 265bhp Boxter S is in the [email protected] over 100mph. The 295bhp version is over 105mph which is much faster.

I've had a few goes with diesel cars with far more torque. Remapped BMW 330d and 335d spring to mind.

I do agree about many of the diesels been poor to launch. 1st gear often seems to be too short.

But if you can't launch, got bad lag and a powerband of 2000rpm, that's everything that makes a car bad to drive.

365lb/ft shouldn't be an issue putting down at the Pod of all places. Everyone else seems to manage with significantly more.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Video is here.






Dyno chart is here : http://www.darksidedevelopments.co.uk/golf-mk5-1-9-8v-bkc/

There are many factors indeed but it was on a level piece of road, a section of dual carraigeway that I know well. So without getting proper timing gear strapped to it, it's fine for the home enthusiast 

365lb ft through a front wheel drive car with an open diff? an LSD'd 6 speed box was lined up but jacked it in for the GTI project instead.
We all know through touring cars how better rear wheel drives launch, not to mention to mention the weight transfer.
Maybe I should have launched in reverse.....

First only went to about 32/33.. if it ran to say 45 or 50 then it would have shaved a 3/4 of a second I believe quite easily.


----------



## Kerr (Mar 27, 2012)

xJay1337 said:


> Video is here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My old GSi Turbo was around 330lb/ft when running in its highest state of tune with an open diff.

It was was in the 13s.

If you are going straight the open diff, only once you break traction in one wheel, will all the power go to that one wheel. Obviously the main aim is to control wheelspin yourself.

Open diffs can spin up both wheels going straight.

LSDs aren't standard on many high powered cars.

It's only the last breed of hot hatches where a LSD has become usual. The Focus ST doesn't have one.

In recent years only M BMWs have LSDs(optional new M235i) and even the C63 AMG didn't have one as standard either.

Many of the very fast Corsa and Novas running big power and torque using 2.0 turbo engine and doing so without one.


----------



## xJay1337 (Jul 20, 2012)

Golfs have unequal length driveshafts. So one side will always spin regardless of traction with an open differential.

Many cars, Caymans, C63s, etc, when test driven always have it mentioned that the car would be better with an LSD.

The best drivers cars in terms of front wheel drive hatchbacks all have LSDs of some sort whether mechanical or electronical. People don't put them in modified cars often because they are pricey
an LSD makes a huge difference.


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

Anyone can drive fast in a straight line. Its in the corners where its at. I can't see why people are going on about drag strips and 50-70 times because no one drives like that day to day. The way I see drag strips is that there is always someone faster so what's the point. The figures are meaningless. Its just a great way of killing a cars clutch and gearbox. Back to the topic though. THE SMOG HAS GONE SO THIS THREAD CAN NOW BE LOCKED


----------



## uruk hai (Apr 5, 2009)

Talk about the evolution/devolution of a thread, from "your diesel's dirty" to a quatre mile debate. :lol::lol:


----------



## Paintmaster1982 (Oct 23, 2007)

uruk hai said:


> Talk about the evolution/devolution of a thread, from "your diesel's dirty" to a quatre mile debate. :lol::lol:


A pointless quarter mile debate you mean lol


----------



## Starbuck88 (Nov 12, 2013)

It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winnings winning.


----------



## WhiteRoc_170 (Jan 31, 2013)

asonda said:


> It doesn't matter if you win by an inch or a mile, winnings winning.


I believe thats a quote from the 1st fast and furious? Rip paul walker. Anyway this threads getting boring now. Petrol vs diesel argument again. And now its all about drag racing.


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

buy a range rover and warm the country back up?


----------



## Starbuck88 (Nov 12, 2013)

WhiteRoc_170 said:


> I believe thats a quote from the 1st fast and furious? Rip paul walker. Anyway this threads getting boring now. Petrol vs diesel argument again. And now its all about drag racing.


I had nothing to say or add to this weird thread so thought I'd make a funny.

RIP Paul Walker.


----------



## Steve (Mar 18, 2014)

asonda said:


> I had nothing to say or add to this weird thread so thought I'd make a funny.
> 
> RIP Paul Walker.


:thumb:

Ride or die .


----------

