Apologies if this has been answered here already but why are diesel cars costlier to buy than an equivalent petrol version?
Is this unique to the UK or is there a price difference on the continent too?
|
Since petrol and diesel combustion technologies are bit different from one another, there are different components in engines.
Usually diesel engine is more complex (and heavier too) which leads to higher price.
Diesel cars are usually more expensive than petrol ones (similar spec) everywhere.
For a detailed understanding of how petrol and diesel cars are different, have a look at HowStuffWorks site.
|
Manufacturers charge a premium because they can.
To the basic Layman, in the simplest of terms, ignoring preferences etc. If car one does more miles to the gallon than car two then you would buy car one, this means the manufacturer would sell a lot less of car two. But if car one costs more then you would have to work out your usage and decide, thus the manufacturer sells both variants.
|
Diesel car engines employ much stronger components due to higher stresses.. eg forged versus cast crankshafts, cooling oil jets to the underneath of pistons to cool them and high precision fuel pumps and injection systems. These are neither cheap to make nor to buy.
(Think aircraft quality).
And each diesel nowadays has a turbo and intercooler.. which most petrol cars do not have..
And the extra strength and components means more weight and hence beefed up suspension and brakes..
(My diesel Yaris weighs approx 100kg more than its petrol equivalent)
Last edited by: madf on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 14:57
|
|
I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe. Diesels are smoother, free revving, more powerful for a given size, more economical, and nicer to drive. A no brainer.
|
>> I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe. Diesels
>> are smoother, free revving, more powerful for a given size, more economical, and nicer to
>> drive. A no brainer.
>>
Except when the diesel turbo /intercooler /dmf drops a bill of £2000 on your lap
|
"Except when the diesel turbo /intercooler /dmf drops a bill of £2000 on your lap"
Mainly on owners of Renaults....
|
£3k differance last year between two cars same spec but petrol was cheaper.
Worth buying the diesel if your going to be doing 15k plus and keeping it 5 years or more the better.
|
|
Diesel car will also be worth more as a trade in so the break even is probably less than 5year 75k miles if finance is the only deciding factor
|
Smoother, free revving, more powerful and nicer to drive?
My VW 1.4-litre 170 TSi petrol engine beats virtually any diesel on all of these and is almost as economical as a two-litre diesel unit...:-)
What's more being much lighter than a diesel unit, the steering is much superior all round.
|
>> I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe
For those who don't drive too many miles, petrol makes sense from overall cost of ownership point of view.
Last edited by: movilogo on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 15:49
|
>> >> My VW 1.4-litre 170 TSi petrol engine >>
Sounds like a little screamer, is it related to Japanese motorbike technology?
|
>>Sounds like a little screamer, is it related to Japanese motorbike technology?>>
See:
www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/67063/volkswagen_golf_gt.html (my car is a Jetta Sports 170; bit of a wolf in sheep's clothing)...:-)
www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=36654
Won European Engine of the Year Award in 2006 and 2007. Bit like a Lexus 400 engine as it's often difficult to tell if it's running at tickover without looking at the rev counter.
Last edited by: Stuartli on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 17:24
|
"My VW 1.4-litre 170 TSi petrol engine beats virtually any diesel on all of these and is almost as economical as a two-litre diesel unit...:-)"
And if you converted it to LPG, like millions of Central and Eastern Europeans, would cost 40% of the price of diesel to fill up.
|
Petrols are much better for lower milleages. There is no filters and such like to get clogged up due to lack of loose. Modern diesels are not suitable for low milleages.
Smaller diesels seem to be more problematic than the smaller petrol engines too and not every car needs 120bhp.
Many people simply still prefer petrols too.
If you look at smaller cars you will find that most of the sales are still petrols.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 16:22
|
>> Petrols are much better for lower milleages. There is no filters and such like to
>> get clogged up due to lack of loose. Modern diesels are not suitable for low
>> milleages.
>>
>> Smaller diesels seem to be more problematic than the smaller petrol engines too
Hmm fascinating. So my average 6k miles/year in a Yaris diesel trouble free is a fluke?
(average journey is 5 miles long)
Of course, if you insist on buying a badly designed heap of junk like a Mazda diesel or a not fit for purpose diesel which clogs up after 500 miles short journeys .. then you are correct..
Last edited by: madf on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 16:47
|
Your driving/owning experience of diesels is what, Rattle? And btw all of my diesels have been sub 105bhp!
Its quite true that some petrols such as the TSi's of the VAG group are getting there re flexibility (who'd have thought people would want TD type performance from their petrol!), but they still have a fair way to go on economy, despite the earlier comment... (Looking at the Skoda site, the same bhp diesel in the Fabia estate is still 25% more economical)...
Last edited by: hobby on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 17:36
|
>>..but they still have a fair way to go on economy, despite the earlier comment..>>
The Jetta Sports can be driven with normal small engine economy or, if the opportunity arises for a bit of fun, it can be enjoyed to the full without hurting fuel consumption too much.
In fact It's certainly more fuel efficient than my previous VW Bora 1.6 petrol and, on motorways in particular, it's usually easy to keep the dashboard's information panel's "current fuel consumption" figure in three figures at steady speeds in sixth gear.
|
Does your yaris have the dreaded DPF or a dual mass flywheel?
No doubt old diesels are fine for short journeys but I thought this thread was about new cars.
I have no experience of driving diesels but for my need why pay a lot extra for something I do not need? I do 4000 miles a year (maybe a bit more) but no more than 5000 a 50mpg petrol is just fine.
I personaly would only consider a diesel if it was cheaper to run, in my case they are because the cars are a lot more expensive to buy.
If I was doing 20k a year then do doubt a diesel would make a lot of sense on may levels. I like to keep things simply on a small city car though.
I never said I don't like diesels, I have never driven one, I simply said for my specific needs they don't make any more sense than a small petrol.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 17:41
|
My point is that for you to say people shouldn't have one you should really have at least driven one, if not owned one...
The first two paragraphs of your earlier post made sweeping comments concerning something you have no practical experience of... I'll go into detail if you wish?
Stu, I have said that the TSi is certainly getting there, I seriously looked at one and it drove nicely... but it still has a fair way to go to get to diesel economy... have you seen the mpg a 6 gear Superb TDi can get?! And I don't go revving cars these days, so have never seen the need to get an engine where I'm expected to rev to 4/6k to get more performance...
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Feb 11 at 00:32
|
>>so have never seen the need to get an engine where I'm expected to rev to 4/6k to get more performance.>>
My TSi has the ability when required to deliver maximum torque from 1,750rpm to 4,500rpm and then a minimum of 80 per cent from that point to 6,000rpm in one smooth, diesel like flow...:-)
A friend, who has the latest three-litre Jaguar XJ diesel (which I've driven and thoroughly enjoyed) was amazed at the Jetta's performance and didn't initially believe the engine size.
I've driven many, many different cars, both petrol and diesel, over the years and much prefer a petrol unit overall.
|
Does your yaris have the dreaded DPF or a dual mass flywheel?
DMF...
|
"I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe. Diesels are smoother, free revving, more powerful for a given size, more economical, and nicer to drive. A no brainer"
According to this study ( www.eagleaid.com/dieselcarprospectsstudy.htm ) which, at £2,295 I'm not buying, diesel sales in Europe peaked in 2007 at 53.3% and fell sharply in 08 and 09, before bouncing back in 2010. That hardly makes diesel a minority, which surprises me; I thought that the EU share for diesel would be higher
I'd always assumed that the reason that diesels were more powerful for a given size and nicer to drive (I'd disagree with smoother and free rev'ing) was down to the turbo and the flat(ish) torque delivery from low revs.
Now that emissions regs are driving petrol engines down the turbo route I think they are more powerful than a diesel for a given size - the VAG 1.4TSI (petrol) generates similar outputs to the 2.0 diesel IIRC, with similar torque delivery and the ability to rev higher.
The economy is supposed to be closer too, though my experience of a 2.0T petrol engine (Audi) vs. a 2.0D (BMW) is that there's still a gap. I've averaged 34mpg over 40k miles in the petrol, compared to 41mpg in the diesel (albeit over 30k miles)
Peter
|
I think diesel share is higher in some countries than others, Peter... For instance its always been high in France...
|
>> I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe. Diesels
>> are smoother, free revving, more powerful for a given size, more economical, and nicer to
>> drive. A no brainer.
Well, it depends what you're comparing it to. No way is a diesel smoother or more free revving than my 2.5 straight six, not even the diesel equivalent. I will concede it is more economical and torquier though.
|
>> I can't understand why manufacturers bother making the minority sales petrol engines in Europe.
Diesels are smoother, free revving, more powerful for a given size, more economical, and nicer to drive. A no brainer.>>
That load of cobblers woke up the petrolheads. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 18:22
|
>> That load of cobblers woke up the petrolheads. :-)
I must admit though that I would look at the diesel focus if I was to buy one. I drove the Mondeo with the 2.0 litre Duratec engine and found it rough and torqueless. It may be different in a lighter car like the Focus, but a 2.0 TDCi like your previous car would (should) be a pleasant thing. Nothing to do with costs - more to do with the way it would drive.
The thing about my petrol engine is that it has more torque than power, presumably down to a restricted manifold to produce 170bhp rather than the originals 192bhp. So although it isn't torquey in the way a diesel is, it is still pretty usable and you don't need to rev it to make progress. It's amusing to drive down a busy road between traffic lights in summer with the window down, changing gears at low revs and still keeping up with the car alongside that is revving it nuts off.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 1 Feb 11 at 00:32
|
>>. It may be different in a lighter car like the Focus,
>> but a 2.0 TDCi like your previous car would (should) be a pleasant thing. Nothing
>> to do with costs - more to do with the way it would drive.
>>
The 2.0 TDCI engine is well matched to the Focus and is pleasant to drive, having said that, my 1.6 CRDI Ceed is smoother and quieter and in everyday driving I do not miss the power. The Ceed 1.6 Crdi is advertised to produce 113bhp and 188ft lbs, but is claimed by many who have had them chipped or remapped to produce far more than that in standard form.
|
The Ceed 1.6 Crdi is advertised to produce 113bhp
>> and 188ft lbs, but is claimed by many who have had them chipped or remapped
>> to produce far more than that in standard form.
But can the chassis handle it (considering how good the Focus one is)?
|
>> But can the chassis handle it (considering how good the Focus one is)?
>>
>>
It certainly can, the rear suspension is remarkably similar to the focus set up. And similarities can be seen in many other parts of the car to various other makes.
It is sold with a 128bhp CRDI engine in some countries.
I must admit I was surprised when I first drove the Ceed, I did not expect it to come near the Focus for handling and ride comfort but there is little difference. I prefer the Ceed as the controls are lighter in feel, the only change I would make would be to fit the Focus seats, they are a little more comfortable.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Tue 25 Jan 11 at 19:40
|
>> why are diesel cars costlier to buy than an equivalent petrol version?
Compliance with emissions regulations is part of the price difference.
>> is there a price difference on the continent too?
Yeah there difference is there too. Costs more to make.
|
Here's funny thing. We've got two Qashqais. Mine is a diesel 2.0 4wd auto and my wife's is a 1.6 manual 2wd petrol. Mine averages 36.5 mpg. Her one gets 42.5 mpg. Factor in the price differential for diesel and the petrol one is a lot cheaper to fuel. I do know it's a slightly apples and oranges comparison given the different gearboxes but nonetheless they are to all intents and purposes the same car with the same levels of real world usefulness. Nigh on ten grand retail price difference too when new mind you albeit the two opposite ends of the trim options spectrum.
Would take quite a lot of explaining to a Martian why the one was supposed to be worth so much more than the other though wouldn't it?
|
|
Residual value is something that people forget to factor into the overall cost of ownership. My car is leased and there was no difference between the petrol and derv models per month so it was a simple choice for me (plus the diesel engine suits the car better anyway)
|
|
I had the use of an Audi Q7 the last 2 months or so. I averaged 23mpg in that time, or around half what I get with my BMW 530d. It was a 3.0TDI so I dread to think what mpg a petrol version would have achieved. A horrible car by the way, but that's a different story.
|
|
Humph -that's disappointing economy with the squashy, despite 4Wd and auto. I wonder whether some Diesels have a fault of some sort. A lad at work has a newish 1.6 Diesel Fiesta that only does 48 overall. Almost all his journies are A roads and motorways. I get that from the 2 litre Octy down my B road commute. he assures me he's within the limits and gentle on acceleration. I'd have expected far better than 48.
|
|
It does seem as though VAG have really got fuel economy sorted in their diesels, though...
|
>> he assures me he's within the limits and gentle on acceleration.
Ah well yes, y'see, slight compliance issue there re mine...
|
Bike roof rack might cost you an mpg or two, particularly at speed.
|
|
You would think so I agree but it doesn't seem to make any difference when measured over time. Maybe the car is so pudding shaped anyway for it not to matter.
|
What did you get out of Betsy?
|
...45-47 pretty steadily...
I might get somewhere close to that in the CC3 in summer, more like 42-43 in this weather.
Even giving it some beans now and again, 36-37 from the Qashqai is a bit poor.
|
|
my parents 1.5 dci sqashy does 50mpg brim to brim but not auto or 4wd
|
|
That is good. I've heard the 1.5d is a nice little engine too.
|
|
for all of his working life he's been a long distance truck driver or a chauffer so he's learned to drive gently.
|
>> I wonder whether some Diesels have a fault of some sort
Me too. My final minicab was a 53 Peugeot 406 HDi 90 (chosen by the cab firm, not me) and it did 34mpg no matter how gently I drove it. The Octavia SDi estate before it would give high 50s mpg all day long, and no worse than 44mpg on a flat-out Saturday night.
|
>> I had the use of an Audi Q7
Apparently 2 sets of tyres all round and a set of discs & pads is normal by 15k miles!
Motoring madf would appreciate i'm sure ;-)
|
>> Apparently 2 sets of tyres all round and a set of discs & pads is normal by 15k miles!
Doesn't surprise me. You can feel the two and a half tons furiously battling the laws of physics when changing direction or braking from high speed. Got it sideways on an icy road as well, though I was trying.
|
>> My car is leased and there was no difference between the petrol and derv models
>> per month so it was a simple choice for me
Similar thing with me, the only difference is the Advance Payment on the Motability car... Having said that on the cars I'm looking at the difference between petrol and diesel is very little, in fact they tend to be plugging diesels at the moment, though they are careful to check that the type of driving you do would suit you having a DPF.
I had a look at the Hybrids as well, though the only one within price range (ie sub £1k advance payment) was the Insight, the Prius started at over £3k, which doesn't make financial sense.
|
cost of diesel cars - movilogo
