petrol vs diesel car

bungaro79

thinking about trading in my car in the next 12 months before my nct and and hoping to buy a brand new car around the 12k mark (maybe more depending on trade in and scrappage scheme). have never driven a diesel engine before and don't really know much about them so wondering what the pros and cons are for each engine??? the price of diesel seems to be alot cheaper around the place now which is a big pro!
also if anyone would have any recommendations of cars around that price would appreciate it, bit of a novice!

rugbyman

there are many factors to take into account.

type of car you want to buy, engine size, your annual mileage.

you would need to give more details

rugbyman

bungaro79

to be honest with you rugbyman it doesn't really matter what type of car (although i've been told to keep away from fiats!) but am thinking anything over a 1.4l and as for milage i live very near my work so i don't think i do over 12,00 miles a year.

For a budget of €12000 brand new I would think petrol would be the best option, not many diesels in that price range is there ?

bungaro79

didn't know about the price difference roverjames, this is what kinda stuff i was hoping to learn from the thread! any other differences?!

I reckon you would have quite a choice of cars new for €12000 but the majority would be petrol I would imagine. If you are doing mainly town driving a petrol super mini would prove quite efficient

Diesels are quite nice to drive with the low down torque, many folks who drive diesel never are tempted to buy a petrol car again. Best thing to do is to complile a little list of cars in budget and see what you can buy
My knowledge of new car prices is next to nil to be honest.

-Corkie-

The mate got a new skoda fabia diesel with a few extras for 13k. Their nice and 100 euro road tax as well

decotipp

i suppose im being biased here as iv been driving diesels for the past 3 years and would def not go near a petrol again. you should look into a vw polo bluemotion maybe a year or so old tax is e104 per annum and youl be gettin up on a whopping 70mpg which is great... the skoda mentioned in the previous thread is probably the same as the polo as there from the same family.

testarossa40

Rule of thumb is:
If you do mainly city driving (ie stop/start, traffic lights etc) and rarely venture on motorway or national routes for distance driving, stick to petrol. This is because turbo diesel mpg drops like a stone in these conditions and your spend on petrol would be less despite the current price difference.

If you do frequently drive longer distances at speed & cruise then diesel economy is in it's element.

james998964

12,000!!! Second hand Market at the moment is brill. Buy a 08 diesal. Cheap tax cheap run big mpg and exellent resale value.

pajo1981

testarossa40 wrote: »

Rule of thumb is:
If you do mainly city driving (ie stop/start, traffic lights etc) and rarely venture on motorway or national routes for distance driving, stick to petrol. This is because turbo diesel mpg drops like a stone in these conditions and your spend on petrol would be less despite the current price difference.

If you do frequently drive longer distances at speed & cruise then diesel economy is in it's element.

Sorry man, but you are talking through your hole. A diesel car will consume less on motorways AND around town.

Original poster, don't take our word for it - check out the published figures!

testarossa40

pajo1981 wrote: »

Sorry man, but you are talking through your hole. A diesel car will consume less on motorways AND around town.

Original poster, don't take our word for it - check out the published figures!

Plug yours. Man. I provided a Rule of Thumb. And having compared derv & petrol driving myself I find it to be quite reliable too.

james998964

Something like this may suite you http://cars.donedeal.ie/for-sale/cars/1215509

Anan1

Let's keep it civil, lads. FWIW, i've generally found diesel fuel economy to vary less than that of petrol between city and open road driving.

james998964

testarossa40 wrote: »

Plug yours. Man. I provided a Rule of Thumb. And having compared derv & petrol driving myself I find it to be quite reliable too.

As a rule of thumb they never are are. Diesals are way more economical. But of course you know a 1.1 petrol and a 3.0 tdi can't be compared. Although they can provide similar mpg depending how driven.

testarossa40

testarossa40 wrote: »

Plug yours. Man. I provided a Rule of Thumb. And having compared derv & petrol driving myself I find it to be quite reliable too.

As other folks mentioned this is not really the case, I had a new Mondeo in 2005/2006, 2.0TDdi and it returned close to 50mpg on a run, 40 odd mixed. I was off work for a fortnight and did completely urban short spins in it and it returned close to 35mpg. I have had petrols ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 that all returned shocking mpg in the urban driving that I did in that Mondeo.

bungaro79

thanks for all the replies!

it seems that anyone who has driven a diesel doesn't go back. main thing i've taken from the replies is that they've a better mpg. lots of food for thought there!!

testarossa40

RoverJames wrote: »

As other folks mentioned this is not really the case, I had a new Mondeo in 2005/2006, 2.0TDdi and it returned close to 50mpg on a run, 40 odd mixed. I was off work for a fortnight and did completely urban short spins in it and it returned close to 35mpg. I have had petrols ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 that all returned shocking mpg in the urban driving that I did in that Mondeo.

Well, I'll happily defer to other people's experience with their cars. On reflection I should probably have considered engine capacities & relative performance more.

My most direct comparison is between an '00 Astra 1.4 and my current '03 320D. My current - mainly M50 - commute is 32 mile round trip per day. The Astra would use 25-30ls Petrol per week. The same with the 320D uses 18-20l Diesel tops. When I worked in Blanchardstown (via Phoenix Park or Knockmaroon Hill), the Astra used ~13l every week. I can't give an equivalent on diesel because I haven't really driven often enough through town with mine, but, I notice that if I've driven through town or the suburbs more than once or twice between tank-fills, I find myself refilling a couple of days earlier that expected.

In any case, one reason why I believe TDs may be a less economical bet for city driving is that under acceleration the turbo being worked harder and so more fuel is being used. This is less of a factor during open cruise due to less stop/starting. Regular petrol car engines tend not to be turbo-charged but there is a new generation of small-capacity turbocharged petrol engines coming on stream that according to published stats seem to be remarkably economical.

So no doubt improvements the newer generation of engines are narrowing the gap etc.

SV

Depends, do you want your car to sound like a car or.. A tractor?


Personally I wouldn't drive a diesel into a lake.

Roanmore

SV wrote: »

Depends, do you want your car to sound like a car or.. A tractor?


Personally I wouldn't drive a diesel into a lake.

Didn't tractors were that quiet.

testarossa40

testarossa40 wrote: »

In any case, one reason why I believe TDs may be a less economical bet for city driving is that under acceleration the turbo being worked harder and so more fuel is being used

If you think about that most turbos won't spool up till 2000rpm ish, in city driving there is little requirement to bring a diesel to 2000rpm. Around town you would rarely need to accelerate under boost in a diesel, one has a gearbox and lots of low down torque

james998964

testarossa40 wrote: »

Well, I'll happily defer to other people's experience with their cars. On reflection I should probably have considered engine capacities & relative performance more.

My most direct comparison is between an '00 Astra 1.4 and my current '03 320D. My current - mainly M50 - commute is 32 mile round trip per day. The Astra would use 25-30ls Petrol per week. The same with the 320D uses 18-20l Diesel tops. When I worked in Blanchardstown (via Phoenix Park or Knockmaroon Hill), the Astra used ~13l every week. I can't give an equivalent on diesel because I haven't really driven often enough through town with mine, but, I notice that if I've driven through town or the suburbs more than once or twice between tank-fills, I find myself refilling a couple of days earlier that expected.

In any case, one reason why I believe TDs may be a less economical bet for city driving is that under acceleration the turbo being worked harder and so more fuel is being used. This is less of a factor during open cruise due to less stop/starting. Regular petrol car engines tend not to be turbo-charged but there is a new generation of small-capacity turbocharged petrol engines coming on stream that according to published stats seem to be remarkably economical.

So no doubt improvements the newer generation of engines are narrowing the gap etc.

No offence but your figures aren't the most accurate and parts of what you said about the turbo show you don't really know much about this.

JHMEG

james998964 wrote: »

No offence but your figures aren't the most accurate and parts of what you said about the turbo show you don't really know much about this.

If you believe the OP is wrong, why don't you prove it with your own figures?

JHMEG

RoverJames wrote: »

If you think about that most turbos won't spool up till 2000rpm ish, in city driving there is little requirement to bring a diesel to 2000rpm. Around town you would rarely need to accelerate under boost in a diesel, one has a gearbox and lots of low down torque

Depends very much on the type of city driving. Stop start bumper to bumper crawl there'd be little need, but around the outer city limits where it's all traffic lights, roundabouts, junctions, and other obstacles (as opposed to the bumper of the car in front) you'd get into turbo territory. Diesel has such a narrow power band that it's near impossible to miss the turbo.

Yeah, no doubt you will get the into turbo territoty but there is rarely a need not to change up to the next gear around town. Speed limit being 50km/hour too.

Stinicker

RoverJames wrote: »

As other folks mentioned this is not really the case, I had a new Mondeo in 2005/2006, 2.0TDdi and it returned close to 50mpg on a run, 40 odd mixed. I was off work for a fortnight and did completely urban short spins in it and it returned close to 35mpg. I have had petrols ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 that all returned shocking mpg in the urban driving that I did in that Mondeo.

Forget
Or
Regret/repair
Daily



There are some manufacturers that just can't do Diesel properly and alot of Japanese Diesels and the likes of Fords are not good at it or only make a half baked attempt with the technology. There are a few usual suspects of manufacturers whoses Diesels I'd be suspect of and you'd be safer in a Ford petrol and than Diesel any day lest the massive Diesel repair bills give you a coronary!

Any VAG Diesel are good VW, Skoda, Audi, (Seat :rolleyes:), The germans have the TDI technology down to a fine art and they are brilliant fuelwise. All cars fare a little worse in start stop traffic but the drop should never be as significant as RoverJames suggested with his mondeo.

decotipp wrote: »

i suppose im being biased here as iv been driving diesels for the past 3 years and would def not go near a petrol again. you should look into a vw polo bluemotion maybe a year or so old tax is e104 per annum and youl be gettin up on a whopping 70mpg which is great... the skoda mentioned in the previous thread is probably the same as the polo as there from the same family.

The polos have now exceeded 80MPG (Prius fanboys lol!!) Although quite a bit more than the 12K budget the OP has I'd rather one 2nd hand than a new supermini (Micra :eek:), low tax, low fuel, and light on the Co2, basically you can do your part for the earth without having to look like a total plonker in a pontificating Prius

http://www.whatgreencar.com/news-item.php?VW-launches-new-80mpg-Polo-Bluemotion

http://www.cleanmpg.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17679

Stinicker

Stinicker wrote: »

Forget
Or
Regret/repair
Daily



There are some manufacturers that just can't do Diesel properly and alot of Japanese Diesels and the likes of Fords are not good at it or only make a half baked attempt with the technology. There are a few usual suspects of manufacturers whoses Diesels I'd be suspect of and you'd be safer in a Ford petrol and than Diesel any day lest the massive Diesel repair bills give you a coronary!

Any VAG Diesel are good VW, Skoda, Audi, (Seat :rolleyes:), The germans have the TDI technology down to a fine art and they are brilliant fuelwise. All cars fare a little worse in start stop traffic but the drop should never be as significant as RoverJames suggested with his mondeo.

For a start it was a company car that I didn't choose I wouldn't buy one in a fit. I must disagree with the comment you make about the figures I suggested. On a run a car is going about 60 / 70 miles an hour in top gear with revs of less than 2500 (in a 2.0 diesel anyway). Urban (my idea of urban driving) a car is rarely in 4th, rarely doing 30mph for long and doing short spins. The rpm is either at idle when stopped or at the guts of 2000 with an average speed much less than 30mph. 35mpg in that is quite good. 35 /50% less than the urban figures, again it's real world figures not manufacturers claimed toss The driving I experience in the urban cycle is crawling around Cork City at less than walking pace or quick spins less than a mile in length.

testarossa40

james998964 wrote: »

No offence but your figures aren't the most accurate and parts of what you said about the turbo show you don't really know much about this.

:rolleyes:
How would you know if my figures not accurate when they are specific to me? I stand over my figures, thanks. Provide your own if you want. And what exactly do I not know about turbos?

Thoroughly useless post. At least there are others providing actual information...

kwacker76

I'm on my fourth Golf TDi, i commute from Cavan to Dublin in it every day, it does on average 700 miles per week. it has 205,000 on the clock. It drives up and down knockmaroon sometimes too... I'm reading this thread and yes it isn't very good because all these others are bickering over what mpg does what etc.. but to answer the question diesel v petrol, categorically diesel diesel diesel! someone mentioned a skoda fabia or vw polo, you can get 2005/6 ones with a 1.4TDi 75bhp engine and they will give you fantastic economy, reliability and value. €12k would get a great German diesel car. Just shop around, if its used make sure the mileage matches the car's condition and that the timing belt is ok. Of course I service my Golf reguarly with that kind of driving but hand on heart, it's driving as good as they day I got it in 2006. Only had to put a clutch it at after 175,000. Diesel, every time. Even love the noise they make

mumblin deaf ro

OP asked for some general differences between petrol and diesel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_engine#Advantages_and_disadvantages_versus_spark-ignition_engines

Play around with the search function on carzone to see what you might need to spend - from a quick search I couldn't find any new diesels for €12K.

http://www.carzone.ie/newcars/

If you're looking at new prices of €12K I guessing that you have €8K-€10K of your own money, in which case you may do better by trading in your own car for a second hand car, rather than being drawn in to getting a new car just to avail of the scrappage discount.

kwacker76

mumblin deaf ro wrote: »

OP asked for some general differences between petrol and diesel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_engine#Advantages_and_disadvantages_versus_spark-ignition_engines

Play around with the search function on carzone to see what you might need to spend - from a quick search I couldn't find any new diesels for €12K.

http://www.carzone.ie/newcars/

If you're looking at new prices of €12K I guessing that you have €8K-€10K of your own money, in which case you may do better by trading in your own car for a second hand car, rather than being drawn in to getting a new car just to avail of the scrappage discount.

mumblin deaf ro - apologies, i meant you'd get a great USED german car for 12000 euros or so... personally, I wouldn't buy a new car now regardless of the scrappage scheme on offer here.. cars are a poor investment. If you're really after economy, go for a 2007/8 Citroen Berlingo 1.6HDi. 800 miles on a tank-full, very easy to run, comfort, reliable, seriously how many of these things are on the road?! Not only that, buy one in the North for £5000 or £6000 with really low miles, the VRT is only 50euros if it has more than 6000 miles on it (after that you're liable for VAT I think)... a van is so practical too, ideal second vehicle and insurance is cheaper cause you can only carry one passenger. The Berlingo Enterprise comes with a side sliding door, electric windows, a rear wash-wipe, remote locking, remote stereo - soon as I get married, I'm getting one

vintagevrs

If I was buying a car for that money I would first of all decide on a number of cars that I can afford to buy. Most well come in both petrol and diesel unless it's an Integra or something.

Next is annual mileage and how long I expect to keep the car. Use MPG figures to calculate how much of a saving the diesel will make you if any, including annual motor tax and insurance.

With all that in mind make your decision on cost versus what you really like.

From my own experience, I had a 1.3 petrol, then a 1.8 petrol, then a 3.5 petrol. I changed 6 months ago to 2.0 diesel and dont think I would buy petrol again.

I do roughly 35k miles a year and the diesel often returns 50+ mpg. The last car did 20mpg and factor in petrol is more expensive and the savings are huge.

Also the Diesel will normally hold it's value better than an equivalent petrol so initial cost might be higher but remember that the depreciation is the biggest thing not the actual cost. If I could buy a car for €30K that didn't lose any value I would.

When the Mini first came out a 2nd hand one could fetch more than a new one due to waiting lists.

Only thing that diesel has against it really is the noise in my opinion. I miss the note of my last car. However, it is much easier to cover miles rapidly in a diesel than a petrol. Less work, less gear changes, less people looking at you as you hit 7k rpm.

In a word.....diesel;)

SV

what 3.5 petrol was it?

vintagevrs

It was a 350z, great car, couldnt fault it but would need to be my 2nd car not a daily runner.

SV

vintagevrs wrote: »

It was a 350z, great car, couldnt fault it but would need to be my 2nd car not a daily runner.

Very nice! But to be fair.. Can ya really compare a 350z to any 2litre diesel?

For your needs obviously the diesel does suit.. But they're different machines and shouldn't be compared.

vintagevrs

To be honest I would say the diesel wouldn't be far behind the 350z to 60. For instance overtaking from 50-70 and the diesel flies in 3rd. No need for anything more powerful. But as you say, two different cars for two different environments. Would be great to have both

I do miss the LSD.

The inside wheel just lets go now which isnt as much fun

Tea 1000

vintagevrs wrote: »

To be honest I would say the diesel wouldn't be far behind the 350z to 60.

Ah it would. Don't be fooled. Look at the figures, not the feel of the delivery. Not many 2 litre diesels get under 10 secs to 60, even less under 8.5 but the 350Z would be under 6 seconds. That's a lot!

vintagevrs

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Ah it would. Don't be fooled. Look at the figures, not the feel of the delivery. Not many 2 litre diesels get under 10 secs to 60, even less under 8.5 but the 350Z would be under 6 seconds. That's a lot!

Think my car from factory is 7.9s to 60 but I had it remapped and it does feel as quick now. I really dont think the 350 would embarass the diesel. Ill try and upload a video later

Tea 1000

vintagevrs wrote: »

Think my car from factory is 7.9s to 60 but I had it remapped and it does feel as quick now. I really dont think the 350 would embarass the diesel. Ill try and upload a video later

What have you?

EPM

Tea 1000 wrote: »

What have you?

I feel a t-didily coming on

roosterman71

Stinicker wrote: »

There are some manufacturers that just can't do Diesel properly and alot of Japanese Diesels and the likes of Fords are not good at it or only make a half baked attempt with the technology. There are a few usual suspects of manufacturers whoses Diesels I'd be suspect of and you'd be safer in a Ford petrol and than Diesel any day lest the massive Diesel repair bills give you a coronary!

Any VAG Diesel are good VW, Skoda, Audi, (Seat :rolleyes:), The germans have the TDI technology down to a fine art and they are brilliant fuelwise.

Why the :rolleyes: beside Seat? They use the same engines as the rest of the VAG group, and their take on the current Common Rail diesel is outshining everything else in the British Touring Car championships. So to say Seat diesels are questionable (as thats what it looks like your saying) is utter tosh.

And finally, to say Japs can't do diesel is crazy. "Bullet proof" is a term often used in the same breath as Honda.

Tea 1000

EPM wrote: »

I feel a t-didily coming on

I reckon a BMW 320d. Still, I've driven one and they don't feel anything special. A remap adding another 30-40bhp couldn't take 2 seconds off the 0-60.

vintagevrs

Yeah its a 320d, I am not trying to say it is faster,of course it is not. But still dont think the 350z would be much faster. Esp when overtaking like 50-70mph and in real life driving conditions. Never did I have the 350 around a track or at silly speeds. Also it is much easier to get the performance out of the diesel.

http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/1046/240320100141.mp4

You can barely make it out but the OBC says 53.3 mpg

Stinicker

roosterman71 wrote: »

Why the :rolleyes: beside Seat? They use the same engines as the rest of the VAG group, and their take on the current Common Rail diesel is outshining everything else in the British Touring Car championships. So to say Seat diesels are questionable (as thats what it looks like your saying) is utter tosh.

And finally, to say Japs can't do diesel is crazy. "Bullet proof" is a term often used in the same breath as Honda.

No, rooster Seats are good quality and just the same as other VAG cars except they always get the ugly end of the stick as they are poorly designed and styled unlike the VW or Skodas. Plus in Ireland they seem to attract a balding hairline with beerbelly type of man and fat women as their customer base, its just my perception of the car as turns me of it in Ireland.

r3nu4l

SV wrote: »

Very nice! But to be fair.. Can ya really compare a 350z to any 2litre diesel?

For your needs obviously the diesel does suit.. But they're different machines and shouldn't be compared.

Definitely

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Ah it would. Don't be fooled. Look at the figures, not the feel of the delivery. Not many 2 litre diesels get under 10 secs to 60, even less under 8.5 but the 350Z would be under 6 seconds. That's a lot!

Yup, my 2.0L TDI is a 170 bhp and gets from 0-60 in under 8 seconds but it's no 350z The OP should be comparing petrols and diesels that are someway comparable. Otherwise it's like me comparing my car to my first car (a 1.0L Opel Corsa) and saying that diesels are better than all petrols as a result

EPM wrote: »

I feel a t-didily coming on

Oh give it a rest ffs, this T-didily-I crap is getting soooo very, very old!!

MojoMaker

OP, if you care about driving your car you will probably enjoy a petrol more, if you care about operating your vehicle from A to B at the lost overall consumption cost then you will probably enjoy a diesel more.

Some people prefer different driving characteristics and are prepared to forego some economy to spend time in a car they actually enjoy driving rather than just operating as a means of transport. The line between diesel and petrol on the overall ownership satisfaction chart is relatively personal in nature. Outside of big mileages where operating cost is a make or break factor you may find a reasonably frugal petrol engine to be as good a contender as a diesel econo box.

At the end of the day however large capacity petrol engines which give the most enjoyable driving experience are by their very nature never going to be economical - however remember that one man's 50mpg is another man's 25mpg. Weigh up your own attitude to driving and your own enjoyment of car ownership I'm afraid.

rabbitinlights

Went from a 2.0 140bhp FWD TDI A4 to a 2.2 Petrol 170bhp RWD 5 Series and I don't think I would go back to diesel untill costs forced me to. It's gone from a boring 45mpg to a smiles all round 30mpg.

It's smiles per gallon, not miles per gallon for me!!

The refinement of that 6cyl petrol compared to a 4pot diesel is worth every penny. I do 40,000 miles a year.

S.

r3nu4l

rabbitinlights wrote: »

Went from a 2.0 140bhp FWD TDI A4

I take it that was the older TDI and not the new Common-rail TDI engine? I'm not saying the new common-rail engine is as refined as a petrol but it's a hell of a lot better than the old TDI engines...at least, on the A3 it is. I imagine it's the same for the A4.

EPM

r3nu4l wrote: »

Oh give it a rest ffs, this T-didily-I crap is getting soooo very, very old!!

Did I touch a nerve? Aw...

SV

r3nu4l wrote: »

Oh give it a rest ffs, this T-didily-I crap is getting soooo very, very old!!

When ye all stop trying to make out that they're rocket ships it will stop.

Until then..

r3nu4l

EPM wrote: »

Did I touch a nerve? Aw...

As someone who doesn't care about the fuel used to power my car either way, you didn't touch a nerve I've owned petrol cars before and definitely will again. I choose a car to suit my needs not because I want approval from anyone else.

However, it's very tiresome reading the same old put downs every day. If you've nothing original to add than T-didily I then perhaps you shouldn't post, that's all. It was funny(ish) the first few times it was posted but now it's just aping something that is no longer funny...a bit like how 'Yore Ma' got boring very quickly in the AFter Hours forum.

So if you want to be unoriginal, uninspriing and generally try to gain self-validation and approval from other posters by using tired old put downs then fire away but just remember that not everyone thinks you're 'cool' for posting it...some of us are a bit more mature than that.