Which focus - 1.6 , 1.8 diesel or petrol

E92

JHMEG wrote: »

IIRC the 1.6's with VVT should have slightly more bhp than those 1.6's without?

113 as opposed to 99 and 3 extra lb ft of torque. Only available in Ghia and Titanium trim and identical fuel/CO2 data to the 1.4.

maidhc

E92 wrote: »

A BMW 318i averages 47.9 mpg and that is a 2.0 litre with 143 bhp, as foes the 118i which also averages 47.9 mpg. A 320i which has 170 bhp averages 46.3 mpg 1.5 more than a Lexus IS220d (diesel) and also has 2.0 litres by the way. Of course these are the EU claimed tests, and therefore are by no means what the cars will actually do in reality. Most 2.0 litre cars seem to be getting close to the 40mpg mark these days, only a few years ago a good 2.0 litre would hit 35 mpg, so no matter what way you spin that it is progress.

I'm not denying there is progress, just that the progress is slow whereas Deisel development has been simply astonishingly fast (thanks to Fiat really).

maidhc

JHMEG wrote: »

Compare the difference between a 34 year old petrol which runs on a version of the fuel that you can't buy any more (leaded), and a decent modern petrol. I think the difference is even more profound.

I dunno. I think the petrol engine matured many years ago. Of course new ones are better in every respect, but not by a huge amount. By contrast diesels are only maturing now.

E92

maidhc wrote: »

I'm not denying there is progress, just that the progress is slow whereas Deisel development has been simply astonishingly fast (thanks to Fiat really).

And Bosch! Fiat developed it in conjunction with Bosch. Its thanks to BMW and Bosch(it might have been Siemens, correct me if I'm wrong but I'd be 99% sure it was Bosch because BMW were first to bring 2nd Generation Common Rail diesel to the market, and that system was part done by Bosch) that we have High precision Injection in new BMWs(in all 4 and 6 cylinder models bar the Z4 and 7 series models), which is basically a common rail type system fitted to a petrol engine. As I have demonstrated in my example, it can achieve quite dramatic results(in conjunction with other technologies like the EfficientDynamics measures).

JHMEG

maidhc wrote: »

I dunno. I think the petrol engine matured many years ago. Of course new ones are better in every respect, but not by a huge amount. By contrast diesels are only maturing now.

Yes, I agree. Petrol matured within the last 30 years... more realistically within the last 20.

Again I agree, diesel has been behind and is currently maturing.

maidhc

E92 wrote: »

And Bosch! Fiat developed it in conjunction with Bosch. Its thanks to BMW and Bosch that we have High precision Injection in new BMWs(in all 4 and 6 cylinder models bar the Z4 and 7 series models), which is basically a common rail type system fitted to a petrol engine. As I have demonstrated in my example, it can achieve quite dramatic results(in conjunction with other technologies like the EfficientDynamics measures).

Bosch bought the design.

BMW are lots of things, many of them positive, but they are not a particularly innovative company. I'm sorry to burst your bubble on this.

Even efficient dynamics and the fancy alternator... a bog standard 1.4 focus has an ECU controlled alternator that stops charging when the battery is charged.. this is about 80% of what BMW boast about. Michelin energy tyres were fitted to the corsa 10 years ago, etc etc

Reality is BMW can't afford to develop too many fancy things!!!

E92

maidhc wrote: »

I dunno. I think the petrol engine matured many years ago. Of course new ones are better in every respect, but not by a huge amount. By contrast diesels are only maturing now.

I don't think diesels have really changed a lot at all in the past few years in terms of fuel economy/technology. They only reason they have gotten so much more powerful is because they use bigger turbos and sometimes twin turbos and twin sequential turbos now. Common rail has been in widespread use for a good 5 years now(only VAG didn't bother with it for the 4 pots and now they are changing over as per the new A4).

The petrol engine is surley due a massive revolution just like the one diesels have had in the past few years. There is no reason why the old days of a big power advantage and not that much of a fuel penalty can't come back. I think there will be a petrol revolution. Ironically having revolutionised diesel, VAG and BMW are starting to revolutionise petrol, with the widespread adoption of direct injection which has closed back the economy gap and now turbo charging which will give petrols a lot more torque and an increase in power. If you consider that BMW can get 306 bhp out of their 3.0 litre twin turbo with the turbos only set to 0.4 bar imagine how much power they could get if the turbos were set to the boost level of their turbo diesel! After giving us diesels with petrol like power and refinement now we're getting petrols with diesel like torque and fuel economy!

maidhc

E92 wrote: »

I don't think diesels have really changed a lot at all in the past few years in terms of fuel economy/technology. They only reason they have gotten so much more powerful is because they use bigger turbos and sometimes twin turbos and twin sequential turbos now. Common rail has been in widespread use for a good 5 years now(only VAG didn't bother with it for the 4 pots and now they are changing over as per the new A4).

The petrol engine is surley due a massive revolution just like the one diesels have had in the past few years. There is no reason why the old days of a big power advantage and not that much of a fuel penalty can't come back. I think there will be a petrol revolution. Ironically having revolutionised diesel, VAG and BMW are starting to revolutionise petrol, with the widespread adoption of direct injection which has closed back the economy gap and now turbo charging which will give petrols a lot more torque and an increase in power. If you consider that BMW can get 306 bhp out of their 3.0 litre twin turbo with the turbos only set to 0.4 bar imagine how much power they could get if the turbos were set to the boost level of their turbo diesel! After giving us diesels with petrol like power and refinement now we're getting petrols with diesel like torque and fuel economy!

They will never do it to the same extent as diesel has a higher content of energy than petrol.

Of course diesels havn't changed much over the past 5 years, Anyone who drove something like a 1996 Primera 2.0D (still wating for a confirmation of the 0-60 time, as none have made it yet) will tell you there have been some fundamental changs over the past 10 though... largely due to common rail... and FIAT!

E92

maidhc wrote: »

Bosch bought the design.

Which design?

I don't think the petrol engine is dead just yet. A 330i Auto petrol has 272 bhp and averages 39.2 mpg, a 330d Auto averages 42.8 mpg or only 3.6 mpg more but has 233 bhp. The 330dA even pollutes more CO2 too!(the manual returns 46.3 mpg though compared to the 330i manual's 39.2 mpg)

And the 4 cylinder 3 series petrol models are around the same as rival diesel models for mpg and better for CO2.(the 4 cylinder diesels are around 10 g/km better for CO2 and 10 mpg better though).

A lot of the reason why diesel is so popular in the continent is apart from the superior performance but diesels are only a shade dearer(as in €1k more at most) to buy than a petrol because they have no VRT, and crucially diesel can be as much as 20 cents a litre less than petrol. The financial incentive for a diesel in the continent is much stronger there than here, hence their popularity, and of course in terms of noise etc. they have improved no end(I remember the days of really noisy diesels, I've had the misfortune of travelling in a Nissan Serena diesel, a truly hateful car). Its going to be so strange the way diesels are not just going to be a bit dearer like they have been in the continent for so long, but in some cases cheaper:eek: to buy than their petrol sisters here.

Btw, the market growth for diesels has more or less stopped, the diesel share of the entire European market has been at just under 50% now the past 2 or 3 years, it might change in 2009 which will be the first full year of the new VRT changes for us because they are saying there will be a shift from around 25% to 65-70% of new cars being sold as diesel here once the new system beds in.

maidhc

E92 wrote: »

Which design?

Common rail.

E92 wrote: »

I don't think the petrol engine is dead just yet. A 330i Auto petrol has 272 bhp and averages 39.2 mpg, a 330d Auto averages 42.8 mpg or only 3.6 mpg more but has 233 bhp. The 330dA even pollutes more CO2 too!(the manual returns 46.3 mpg though compared to the 330i manual's 39.2 mpg)

I don't think the petrol is dead either. I think the era of the 1.4 petrol in ordinary cars is dead, when it can be replaced by a more powerful, less polluting and more efficient petrol. That is a good thing.

3.0 cars are going to be expensive to run anyway, so you can argue the toss. Personally if I was shelling out big money for tax and so forth anyway I go for a petrol that makes angry noises when you cane it.

E92

maidhc wrote: »

Common rail.

I don't think the petrol is dead either. I think the era of the 1.4 petrol in ordinary cars is dead, when it can be replaced by a more powerful, less polluting and more efficient petrol. That is a good thing.

3.0 cars are going to be expensive to run anyway, so you can argue the toss. Personally if I was shelling out big money for tax and so forth anyway I go for a petrol that makes angry noises when you cane it.

Didn't realise Bosch bought it off them. Always thought it was a joint development.

I don't know whether you meant the petrol engine isn't dead in Ireland or in the car industry in general. I'll stick with here cause I'd be like opening a Pandora's box if I did both:D.

I don't think it is dead in Ireland either because of examples like the one I have pointed out with the Beemers. Both those cars will cost €600 to tax under the new system, compared to €1,291 under the old system(after the price goes up), which is only a tenner more than a 2.0 litre car costs now to tax!

I agree that the days of 1.4 and 1.6 petrols in cars like the Focus and Avensis respectively are well and truly numbered come July. I think most 1.4s in cars like the Focus will be going up by about a grand or so because they will be in the 24% VRT band, and the larger 1.6s will also be in the 24% band,the price gap between a 1.4 and 1.6 will be a lot slimmer, so I'm sure plenty of people will give a 1.6 a lot more consideration than they used to. The other side of the coin is how the diesels will be priced. If they are very similar to even the 1.6s then maybe people will just change over to diesel and bypass the 1.6 altogether!

I know from examples like the Toyota Avensis, the diesel is only a few hundred euro more than the 1.6 never mind the 1.8 so, I don't see many family cars with a petrol under the bonnet in the future(the Mazda 6 might be an exception because its petrols are @ 24% VRT while most rival petrol are 28% VRT). Funnily enough cars like the 3 series there should still be some demand for petrol, all 3 series petrols will still be cheaper(bar the 335i) than the diesel I think, and the Audi A4 has frugal enough petrol engines too. A 5 series also has this distinction too because its petrol models(not the V8s of course) are clean relatively speaking(though the 520d will be the biggest seller by a mile because its only €150 to tax and will cost a full 12 grand less than a 523i) and the 525i and 530i are cheaper than a 525d or 530d. An Audi A8 2.8 could be a real surprise, the greenest luxury car you can buy bar none, and the only A8 to attract the 32% VRT band, and along with the 730d and S320CDI and LS600h are the only luxury cars to avoid the top €2k tax and 36% VRT. MPVs and 4X4s were always very popular in diesel format, and this certainly won't change.

Oilrig

Guys, talking about bursting bubbles here...

Bosch designed & patented the modern common rail diesel injection system. Basically it allows precise control of the firing period, reducing the explosive knock - allowing for lighter components (no explosive type forces to be resisted) and thus higher revs and still maintaining the efficiency of a direct injection.

Diesel hasn't a significantly higher calorific value than petrol as a fuel (4% typically) but the key is that the diesel system (compression ignition) is twice as efficient as spark ignition in terms utilising the energy released by the combustion of fuel. Both being heat engines, ie they use the production of heat to create a turning force.

Using energy more efficiently tends to tie up with lest waste products, hence low emissions.

The Ford "Smartcharge" alternator doesn't stop output once the battery is charged, it behaves as a normal alternator, supplying the load etc. What it will do is whack a low battery with up to 16 volts and the commensurate current when tha battery is low. Apart from that, its the same as just about every other modern ECU connected alternator in that it will drop off charge during acceleration etc etc.

If you want complex, look at the modern Mazdas, the voltage regulator is in the ECU...:(

JHMEG

Europe is the only real mass market for diesel, driven by the high cost of fuel relative to other markets.

@E92, I don't think it's possible to take the 4-stroke petrol engine much further. Hybrid stuff can be added but that's not petrol specific.

@maidhc, the savings from BMW's E-D would only in a small part come from the alternator. All cars alternators stop charging the battery when it's charged, but they still create the same drag on the engine. BMW's E-D really is a lot more that you give it credit for. It's half way (or more) to a hybrid.

Some advances in diesel like common rail are cheaper to make and that's the reason for them. The additional economy is a side effect.

E92

From Wikipedia:

In the mid-nineties, Dr. Shohei Itoh and Masahiko Miyaki, of the Denso Corporation, a Japanese automotive parts manufacturer, developed the Common Rail Fuel System for Heavy Duty Vehicles and finally turned into its first practical use on their ECD-U2 Common Rail system, which was mounted on the Hino Raising Ranger truck and sold for general use in 1995.

So it wasn't Fiat that were first with the technology or even Bosch!

The modern ECU controlled common rail system whilst working on the same principle, is controlled by an electronic control unit which opens each injector electronically, rather than mechanically. This was extensively prototyped in the 1990s, with collaboration between Magneti Marelli, Centro Ricerche Fiat and Elasis. After research and development by the Fiat Group, the design was acquired by the German company Robert Bosch GmbH for completion of development and making suitable for mass-production. In 1997 they extended its use for passenger cars.

However, Fiat were the first to develop it for a car though, nothing to do with Bosch!

As for Europe being the only real market for paraffin stoves, a lot of other markets are starting to show an interest in diesel. 20% of US E-classes are now diesel(and they're still not available in 8 of the 50 states, but that will change soon). Ford have for the very first time decided to offer Australians a diesel(in the Mondeo). A lot of cars in Australia are now being offered with a diesel option(anything from Europe can be had with an oil burner anyway, but apparently Aussies thus far aren't interested in diesel, not that the Australian Labour party is in power and they have committed to signing up to Kyoto etc. diesel might become a lot more appealing there too). And the US is reckoned to break the 10% barrier by 2012(I think JD Power said that diesel will account for 12% of the US car market by then).

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

[/I]However, Fiat were the first to develop it for a car though, nothing to do with Bosch!

Which would make sense as the Japs had (and still have) no interest in running diesel in cars.

E92

JHMEG wrote: »

Which would make sense as the Japs had (and still have) no interest in running diesel in cars.

Not in their home market but they certainly are intent on selling it elsewhere a la Honda and the new Euro 6 engine which will be sold worldwide AFAIK. And they're all at diesel now, Toyota, Honda, even Subaru and now Mitsubishi are developing their own diesels.

bazz26

Ford really need to update their entry level petrol engines. They were ok 10 years ago but these days while petrol engine advancement has been relatively slower than diesel, it still has advanced. Variable Valve Timing, direct injection, turbo & super charging are all available now. 80bhp from a 1.4 litre petrol or 100bhp from a 1.6 litre Focus is woeful in 2007. Why do you have to spend around €24k for a top of the range Focus to get access to variable valve technology? Rover introduced a 1.4 litre K-Series engine with 104bhp way back in 1990, granted it ate head gaskets but by some of today's competition it still had pretty good power. Even VW have now upped the basic 1.4 litre Golf to 80bhp and are now starting to phase out these ancient engines with newer, more powerful, cleaner FSi engines. Well over due for Ford to start concentrating on doing similar, not just devoting all their efforts on their chassis design.

Regarding the original question about the TDCi diesel engines. I have a 1.6 TDCi (110bhp) Focus and cannot really fault it. It is not a rocket but it is quite nippy and definately more lively than most similar size petrol engines. Overtaking most times without having to drop a gear is very nice too. The trip computer is also telling me it is on average doing 48mpg, that translates into about 600 miles from a tank of diesel, not bad considering I do mostly suberban driving these days. One thing I will say though is that the car could do with improved sound proofing to mask that diesel clatter a little more.

Also looking at the links that the OP is posting I reckon there is a typo. The ad for the first Focus states that it is a 1.8 TDCi, afaik the 1.8 TDCi was not introduced in to the MkII Focus until mid 2006. In 2005 the UK MkII Focus had both a 1.6 and 2.0 TDCi unit available.