Are diesels more efficient in city driving now?

vectra

650Ginge wrote: »

What a bunch of big Jessie's I said, you said, my car is better than your car? I can worked mpg better than u, oh no u can't, oh yes you can.

Some have been asked for an ev sub forum, should be a take your unfounded arguments in here sub forum.

Is any of this helping the op?

Could be helping it hell of a lot more than what you just posted.
I am stating what I know.
I cannot help if someone decides to not believe.

I was posting for the OP's benefit.

Nissan doctor

vectra wrote: »

Not calculating over 100% 30second trips.
Sometimes do 5 mile trips. Sometimes 20 odd to Cork and back.
Rarely go over 30 miles each way.
So yes, It is mainly short stop/start runs that I average 44mpg.
If you do not want to believe it then that is fine by me. I have nothing to prove to anyone,
I know I am getting that, I am happy with the fuel return this gives me.. and the comfort..and the bit of power when needed.. So much so i am ordering a new one this week :P




Should that not say Diesels CAN BE less reliable. You should not paint them all with the one brush really.

I have more than a negligible improvement in mpg.
As for your comment about my counter of my car being perfectly reliable.??
Why in the name of god would I say otherwiuse?? Just to please you or anyone else?
I have had zero relability issues with this car and my last diesel car.

I am happy.
You may think otherwise.
Doesn't bother me

How old is your current diesel ca(VRS isn't it?)r, and how many kms on it?
If its less then a couple of years old with low KMS then you have no gauge on its long term reliability for your current use of it.


Modern diesels require getting up to full temperature to be fully efficient, they also require full operating temperature for systems such as the DPF and EGR system to function properly, if it isn't getting regular longer drives, at the required revs/speed, for the correct function of the DPF, then they WILL give trouble.

Constant short, stop/start trips will also prematurely wear the DMF as its a moving serviceable part(rightly or wrongly) so more use = more wear.

So in short, a new small diesel car is simply does not fit the requirement that the OP mentioned.

With a small petrol, the tax would likely be the same, service/maintenance costs will be cheaper, fuel costs would be of almost no relevance when doing only a few kms each week and would be vastly more suited to pensioners who, I'm sure, just want to have a car with the least hassle as possible.

Surprisingly, I would actually suggest they look at a Prius, even a second hand one as these are the best value and have proven to be extremely reliable and will give them the diesel fuel economy(or better if driven correctly) with the trouble free driving of a petrol.

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

Please include the post where I said I was getting 44mpg on ONLY short runs.

You're not really doing city driving though. In the city your average speed would be a lot lower, and the fuel economy would suffer.

One of the advantage of the electric motor is how it delivers torque. I wonder would that have an impact on economy. One of the cars I drive a lot in the city is a 16v 1L, and you tend to have to rev it hard for the nip and tuck of traffic especially at peak. So I don't tend to get good MPG out it. I generally only drive it in the city at peak times. When I did the same journey in a 2L Petrol Primera GT I would see low 20's, even lower on occasions. The same car would return 44 mpg on a decent run down the country driving at economical speed.

Probably which ever has the best seats and most cup holders and easy radio would be more important. Also decent room for the grand kids and their stuff in the boot. Room for kid seats in the back. Or maybe what ever comes in violent violet, or that burnt amber color you seem to like when you get older.

Or this

http://www.flickr.com/photos/met_pics/4574300771/in/photostream/

coolbeans

Vectra, you're some man for missing the point. The point is to give the best answer to the Op's query but you can't do that because you don't want to miss a chance to blow on about your old Skoda. you've been doing this for ages and ages now man and I gotta tell you, it's old, really old.

Slattsy

Nissan doctor wrote: »

How old is your current diesel ca(VRS isn't it?)r, and how many kms on it?
If its less then a couple of years old with low KMS then you have no gauge on its long term reliability for your current use of it.


Modern diesels require getting up to full temperature to be fully efficient, they also require full operating temperature for systems such as the DPF and EGR system to function properly, if it isn't getting regular longer drives, at the required revs/speed, for the correct function of the DPF, then they WILL give trouble.

Can i ask on your point above, firstly, can you define what regular longer drives entail (ie daily, twice a week, weekly etc) and also if you drive a diesel mostly short stops, but reach a certain speed, does this negate the possible problems with the DPF ??

vectra

vectra wrote: »

..........

My average MPG is 44mpg mostly around town..............

vectra wrote: »

..............

Those would be mostly my trips.

...............

RoverJames wrote: »

.... and what other trips make up the 40 odd mpg you are claiming?............

RoverJames wrote: »

................ I do not believe your car returns 44 mpg over the trips you have detailed, hence why I queried what other trips bring about that figure besides the ones you detailed as most of you're driving.

vectra wrote: »

Please include the post where I said I was getting 44mpg on ONLY short runs.

I asked you what other trips account for the 44mpg average, you eventually added in that trips to Cork are part of it

I stated I did not believe your 44mpg claim based on the "mostly" trips you detailed.

I am fairly sure you won't reveal what your car returns on short spins only.

BostonB

Unless the OP is going to buy his car its kinda of a pointless sidetrack. Can ye let it go.

BostonB

BostonB wrote: »

Unless the OP is going to buy his car its kinda of a pointless sidetrack. Can ye let it go.

Well I imagine it might be beneficial to the OP to learn that 44mpg is not a realistic figure on single figure short spins. Skoda claim sub 37mpg on the urban cycle.

vectra

RoverJames wrote: »

Well I imagine it might be beneficial to the OP to learn that 44mpg is not a realistic figure on single figure short spins. Skoda claim sub 37mpg on the urban cycle.

Just to keep you happy this is what they quote
50 mpg (combined UK)

I never once said I get 44 mpg on continuous short around town trips.
But YOU are banging on about it not being possible to AVERAGE 44mpg as I stated by MOSTLY short trips. ( put those words in caps in case you missed them )

I fill my tank and drive it until it is near empty ( less than 1/8 of a tank left ) then fill it again.

I may or may not have had a trip to Cork or elsewhere of considerable miles included in that. I DO however have a weekly 5 mile trip and return again. However if you feel this is adequate for your argument then fine by me. But I would suggest you go and buy a car same as mine and drive it yourself for several months. But OH..Hold on.. Maybe you have first hand experience on this already to hold up your denial of what i do get?


@ Nissan Doctor.
I know you know your stuff about a car but when you say driving around short trips is bad for a dmf, then the same could be said about an old fogie driving around with their leg on the clutch.
ie.
I would assume driving style with have a much bigger affect on a dmf than driving around town.

My car has only 23k kms on it.
However, I know someone who went through 2 clutches in a much shorter time than that.
Again, I don't see the relevance.

@ Coolbeans

I have no idea what you are on about.
I am simply stating how my car is by using it for short trips.
I am not blowing about it. I am simply being honest.


I amazes me how many people knock certain cars without every experiencing owning one of them to back up their comments.

Big Nasty

Skoda Ireland are lookong for a new man in marketing - I know just the lad!

vectra

vectra wrote: »

.............

I may or may not have had a trip to Cork or elsewhere of considerable miles included in that. I DO however have a weekly 5 mile trip and return again. However if you feel this is adequate for your argument then fine by me. But I would suggest you go and buy a car same as mine and drive it yourself for several months. But OH..Hold on.. Maybe you have first hand experience on this already to hold up your denial of what i do get?...........

I drove a 140bhp diesel A3 for a few hundred miles, it averaged less than 40mpg.

A return trip to Cork would be 40 miles at least of motorway driving, the fact that you can't actually confirm if you "may or may not" have had such a trip in attaining your 44mpg average says a lot.

I don't need to buy a car to know it won't return 44mpg on the urban cycle, to suggest one has to buy a car to find out what mpg it returns is nothing short of retarded.

vectra

RoverJames wrote: »

I drove a 140bhp diesel A3 for a few hundred miles, it averaged less than 40mpg.

A return trip to Cork would be 40 miles at least of motorway driving, the fact that you can't actually confirm if you "may or may not" have had such a trip in attaining your 44mpg average says a lot.

I don't need to buy a car to know it won't return 44mpg on the urban cycle, to suggest one has to buy a car to find out what mpg it returns is nothing short of retarded.

I wont even attempt to discuss with someone that implies I am retarded..
I take personal offence to this.

Tea 1000

vectra wrote: »

Just to keep you happy this is what they quote
50 mpg (combined UK)

I never once said I get 44 mpg on continuous short around town trips.
But YOU are banging on about it not being possible to AVERAGE 44mpg as I stated by MOSTLY short trips. ( put those words in caps in case you missed them )

I fill my tank and drive it until it is near empty ( less than 1/8 of a tank left ) then fill it again.

I may or may not have had a trip to Cork or elsewhere of considerable miles included in that. I DO however have a weekly 5 mile trip and return again. However if you feel this is adequate for your argument then fine by me. But I would suggest you go and buy a car same as mine and drive it yourself for several months. But OH..Hold on.. Maybe you have first hand experience on this already to hold up your denial of what i do get?


@ Nissan Doctor.
I know you know your stuff about a car but when you say driving around short trips is bad for a dmf, then the same could be said about an old fogie driving around with their leg on the clutch.
ie.
I would assume driving style with have a much bigger affect on a dmf than driving around town.

My car has only 23k kms on it.
However, I know someone who went through 2 clutches in a much shorter time than that.
Again, I don't see the relevance.

@ Coolbeans

I have no idea what you are on about.
I am simply stating how my car is by using it for short trips.
I am not blowing about it. I am simply being honest.


I amazes me how many people knock certain cars without every experiencing owning one of them to back up their comments.

23k kms? Isn't your car a 2011 car? There's far more than short trips on that engine!

RoverJames

RoverJames wrote: »

................ to suggest one has to buy a car to find out what mpg it returns is nothing short of retarded.

vectra wrote: »

I wont even attempt to discuss with someone that implies I am retarded................

Bit of a stretch to say I implied you were retarded.

TestTransmission

Lads, please , we're all adults here

vectra

Tea 1000 wrote: »

23k kms? Isn't your car a 2011 car? There's far more than short trips on that engine!

2010
Coming on 2 years old now and sold

Nissan doctor

vectra wrote: »

@ Nissan Doctor.
I know you know your stuff about a car but when you say driving around short trips is bad for a dmf, then the same could be said about an old fogie driving around with their leg on the clutch.
ie.
I would assume driving style with have a much bigger affect on a dmf than driving around town.

My car has only 23k kms on it.
However, I know someone who went through 2 clutches in a much shorter time than that.
Again, I don't see the relevance.

I'm sure you know someone who went through clutches in less then 23k, everyone does when they are making a point. But if they did then they simply can't drive so that's not a relevant point.

Yes driving style effects things, but a DMF is a wearable part, like brake pads, disks etc, so using it more(urban driving) will wear it faster, there isn't really any opinion involved.

You like your car, that's fine, the VRS is a good car IMO, but I get a little miffed when people who change their car every 2 years with feck all mileage try to argue about premature wear on items being rubbish, Try keeping your car for 5 years/100,000kms or whatever, doing the same type of driving and report back then with your opinions on DMF/DPF etc etc.

Slattsy wrote: »

Can i ask on your point above, firstly, can you define what regular longer drives entail (ie daily, twice a week, weekly etc) and also if you drive a diesel mostly short stops, but reach a certain speed, does this negate the possible problems with the DPF ??

It depends on the car and DPF type, some have a fluid that is supposed to regenerate it automatically, some inject extra fuel to burn off the deposits, both of these systems are supposed to be to allow the regeneration of the DPF without needing specific higher rpm driving, but both have so far proved to be extremely flawed. The simplest systems, and the ones that work when used properly are the ones that regenerate once the car is driven at higher RPM/speed(motorway, N roads etc), this heats up the DPF to a level where the deposits can burn off themselves. Not doing this sort of driving on a car with this system will cause it to clog up very quickly, especially if the engine is only run for a short time each trip as the engine never gets up to full operating temperature.

vectra

Nissan doctor wrote: »

I'm sure you know someone who went through clutches in less then 23k, everyone does when they are making a point. But if they did then they simply can't drive so that's not a relevant point.

Of course it is a relevant point, to say it is not is plain and simply wrong.

Nissan doctor wrote: »

Yes driving style effects things, but a DMF is a wearable part, like brake pads, disks etc, so using it more(urban driving) will wear it faster, there isn't really any opinion involved.

You like your car, that's fine, the VRS is a good car IMO, but I get a little miffed when people who change their car every 2 years with feck all mileage try to argue about premature wear on items being rubbish, Try keeping your car for 5 years/100,000kms or whatever, doing the same type of driving and report back then with your opinions on DMF/DPF etc etc.

First you say it is not relevant,
Then you come back with "Yes, driving style effects things."

My point was this,

I myself am very smooth at clutch use / gearchanges.
Are you telling me that another driver that Dogs a gearbox when changing gears... Hard off the clutch on upshifts & downshifts.. or a driver that toddles along labouring in too high a gear is going to suffer no more DMF issues than a driver like myself?
I would estimate that I would have covered approximately well over 600,000 miles in my driving years. and never once burned out a clutch. I would like to think my car's would be a better buy for someone than a car off someone not as careful.

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

Of course it is a relevant point, to say it is not is plain and simply wrong.



First you say it is not relevant,
Then you come back with "Yes, driving style effects things."...

Its not relevant to someone buying a new car, ie this thread.

Its not relevant to the DMF issue and city driving.

Short journeys in the country are not the same as short journeys in the city.

Every thread is not about you.

Zubeneschamali

Not every dpf or dmf will fail on a schedule. I have 160,000 km up on an 08 diesel, and no dpf or dmf issues so far.

People are saying (quite rightly) that a modern turbodiesel with a dpf and dmf is more likely to suffer a breakdown than a simple old Golf diesel tractor, particularly in city driving.

That doesn't mean every modern diesel will break down after x city miles, and one car that makes through 2 years doesn't disprove anything.

vectra

BostonB wrote: »

Its not relevant to someone buying a new car, ie this thread.

Its not relevant to the DMF issue and city driving.

Short journeys in the country are not the same as short journeys in the city.

Every thread is not about you.

Have you driven around the town where I live from Thursday to Sunday? Give me a city any day.

There is relevance right there.
Who said any thread was about me??

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

Have you driven around the town where I live from Thursday to Sunday? Give me a city any day.

There is relevance right there.
Who said any thread was about me??

At least you agree your driving is different to city driving.

vectra

BostonB wrote: »

At least you agree your driving is different to city driving.

Yes,
City driving would be more free flowing than this damned town on weekends

Nissan doctor

vectra wrote: »

Of course it is a relevant point, to say it is not is plain and simply wrong.



First you say it is not relevant,
Then you come back with "Yes, driving style effects things."

My point was this,

I myself am very smooth at clutch use / gearchanges.
Are you telling me that another driver that Dogs a gearbox when changing gears... Hard off the clutch on upshifts & downshifts.. or a driver that toddles along labouring in too high a gear is going to suffer no more DMF issues than a driver like myself?
I would estimate that I would have covered approximately well over 600,000 miles in my driving years. and never once burned out a clutch. I would like to think my car's would be a better buy for someone than a car off someone not as careful.

I said that the fact that you know someone who went through 2 clutches in less then your 23k is not relevant as that has less to do with driving style and more to do with a complete inability to drive.

You may be very easy on your clutch/flywheel or what ever, fantastic driver etc, but using it easily in urban driving WILL still make it wear quicker then using it just as easy for extra urban driving.

I haven't posted anything new or unheard of here, low mileage DMF failures are extremely common and well known on many marques including VAG.

With regards to DPF's, the most common types require regular higher speed/rpm driving to regenerate, its how they work and not regenerating properly WILL lead to them failing.

Diesel engines take much longer then petrol engines to get up to full operating temperature and while they are operating below this temperature, they are producing excess soot/deposits etc this is the cause of the DPF issues, but also leads to excess build up within the engine and also causing blockages and failures of EGR valves.

These are all technical facts, not urban legend or opinion, which clearly display the unsuitability of the latest generation of diesel systems for use solely for short trips. How long the parts/systems last may well vary from driver to driver and car type to car type but it does not change the fact that they WILL fail prematurely when not used as required by their design.

Lets not forget that the thread is about the requirements of the OP's parents(I think it was), not your use of your car(I personally can't grasp why someone doing tiny mileage like yourself would not have chosen the 2.0T VRS) and the only reason that the dealer is trying to sell them a diesel is because thats what they have in stock, the salesman couldn't give a flying f**k what happens to the car after he has made the sale.

vectra

Nissan doctor wrote: »

I said that the fact that you know someone who went through 2 clutches in less then your 23k is not relevant as that has less to do with driving style and more to do with a complete inability to drive.

You may be very easy on your clutch/flywheel or what ever, fantastic driver etc, but using it easily in urban driving WILL still make it wear quicker then using it just as easy for extra urban driving.



Lets not forget that the thread is about the requirements of the OP's parents(I think it was), not your use of your car(I personally can't grasp why someone doing tiny mileage like yourself would not have chosen the 2.0T VRS) and the only reason that the dealer is trying to sell them a diesel is because thats what they have in stock, the salesman couldn't give a flying f**k what happens to the car after he has made the sale.

I understrand the situation about the DPF but as for DMF, naturally the more something gets used the faster it will wear out. That's a given. But to say it will go in record time solely because of this would be a bit scaremongering. I spoke to a highly rated mechanic today and brought this up with him. He said it is a load of Bo**ox to say a DMF Will fail due to all town driving. He said it will go if you Dog it or Labour it much quicker.


As for the salesman selling me a diesel because that is what is in stock?
Absolute rubbish as I do not order "Off the shelf cars"
In fact my order went in today for my new one.
And yes. it is another vRS :P

Wear quicker and will fail are not the same thing. No one said anything about things failing in record time expert for your two clutch example. Regarding what was in stock, ND was clearly refering to the OPs parents experience not yours.

vectra

RoverJames wrote: »

Regarding what was in stock, ND was clearly refering to the OPs parents experience not yours.

Mis read it first time round.:pac:

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

...but as for DMF, naturally the more something gets used the faster it will wear out. That's a given. ....He said it will go if you Dog it or Labour it much quicker.....

..and where does it get used and misused most. City driving.

vectra

BostonB wrote: »

..and where does it get used and misused most. City driving.

Not necessarily,

Smooth city driver versus a Country driver dragging trailors and labouring in too high a gear..

I know which I would prefer anyhow but hey, The choice is yours.

When i am retired and need a little run around, i am getting a hummer and to hell with all those crappy little cars.

vectra

vectra wrote: »

Not necessarily,

Smooth city driver versus a Country driver dragging trailors and labouring in too high a gear..

I know which I would prefer anyhow but hey, The choice is yours.

..... what about a car used mainly extra urban by a driver as mechanically sympathetic as you claim to be, much less gear changes, no labouring, no trailers, DPF in optimum conditions? Not doing mainly 30 second trips so mostly driven when cold ....

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

Not necessarily,

Smooth city driver versus a Country driver dragging trailors and labouring in too high a gear..

Unless there's a lot of drivers out there who have this Jekyll and Hyde driving style, its a completely irrelevant comparison.

Though I don't see what being in too high a gear or towing has to do with gearbox wear. Unless they aren't doing it right, but then its not like they are going to be a good driver in the city then a bad driver out of the city. Makes no sense.

vectra

RoverJames wrote: »

..... what about a car used mainly extra urban by a driver as mechanically sympathetic as you claim to be, much less gear changes, no labouring, no trailers, DPF in optimum conditions? Not doing mainly 30 second trips so mostly driven when cold ....

DPF?
One decent spin a month sorts that.
Nothing to worry about.
How many CR engines do you know of that has given DPF issues?

BostonB wrote: »

Unless there's a lot of drivers out there who have this Jekyll and Hyde driving style, its a completely irrelevant comparison.

Though I don't see what being in too high a gear or towing has to do with gearbox wear. Unless they aren't doing it right, but then its not like they are going to be a good driver in the city then a bad driver out of the city. Makes no sense.

The discussion was about DMF and not Gearbox wear.
So is relevant

Leonard Hofstadter

vectra wrote: »

DPF?
One decent spin a month sorts that.
Nothing to worry about.

This comment is laughable really.
What you're basically saying is they have to drive more so that they won't have failure - which means that they spend more on fuel costs in the first place! The per mile fuel costs will be lower, but in order to keep the DPF happy they'll have to drive a more miles, meaning that they could easily be spending more on fuel!

At least you've acknowledged (eventually) that DPFs can fail though - that is progress.

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

DPF?
....The discussion was about DMF and not Gearbox wear.
So is relevant

Its not relevant because the OP requirement isn't towing and isn't in the country. A normal driver driving normally puts more stress on the drive train, be clutch, gearbox, DMF in city driving.

But even if you ignore all that the majority of DMF failures seem to with diesel not petrol.

Leonard Hofstadter

BostonB wrote: »

Its not relevant because the OP requirement isn't towing and isn't in the country. A normal driver driving normally puts more stress on the drive train, be clutch, gearbox, DMF in city driving.

But even if you ignore all that the majority of DMF failures seem to with diesel not petrol.

Correct, and the reason is simple - a DMF is designed to smother out vibrations the engine makes, so as to give the driver the impression of a much smoother running engine.

Petrol engines are obviously much smoother running engines than diesels are (the fact that modern diesels in the main feel nearly as smooth as a petrol is because of the DMF doing its thing), so the DMF in a petrol has hardly any work to do, which is why DMFs in petrol engines rarely, if ever, give trouble. Indeed one wonders why manufacturers bother at all with fitting a dual mass flywheel to their petrol engined models, since they really are not needed and just end up costing them (and therefore us) more money.

BostonB

I assume its to improve pickup and economy.

vectra

captainspeed wrote: »

This comment is laughable really.
What you're basically saying is they have to drive more so that they won't have failure - which means that they spend more on fuel costs in the first place! The per mile fuel costs will be lower, but in order to keep the DPF happy they'll have to drive a more miles, meaning that they could easily be spending more on fuel!

At least you've acknowledged (eventually) that DPFs can fail though - that is progress.

So waht you are saying is that you know for a fact these people will never do a trip other than a run to the corner shop?
Which by the way I what I do quite a lot of myself so no I am not in any way admit anything about DPF's failing especially in modern Common rail engines.
Possibly you have evidence to say otherwise?

BostonB wrote: »

Its not relevant because the OP requirement isn't towing and isn't in the country. A normal driver driving normally puts more stress on the drive train, be clutch, gearbox, DMF in city driving.

But even if you ignore all that the majority of DMF failures seem to with diesel not petrol.

Missing the point?
Again, You might also have evidence of exactly why the DMF's fail? Or have personal experience of some of these failing?
Or even have evidence of what particular driving style may in fact be the culprit?

captainspeed wrote: »

Correct, and the reason is simple - a DMF is designed to smother out vibrations the engine makes, so as to give the driver the impression of a much smoother running engine.

Petrol engines are obviously much smoother running engines than diesels are (the fact that modern diesels in the main feel nearly as smooth as a petrol is because of the DMF doing its thing), so the DMF in a petrol has hardly any work to do, which is why DMFs in petrol engines rarely, if ever, give trouble. Indeed one wonders why manufacturers bother at all with fitting a dual mass flywheel to their petrol engined models, since they really are not needed and just end up costing them (and therefore us) more money.

Not entirely correct.

Modern diesels are in fact smoother running than their older counterparts.

650Ginge

Vectra knock the chip off your shoulder, get off the soapbox, go off start another thread about how great you are???? And what a great driver you are and get more mpg than anyone else in the whole world tells in that thread how a vrs is the best car for everyones needs.

I just unfollowed this thread because your posts are just self back slapping and correcting everyone the doesn't agree with u. Nite nite hope I never get stuck in a lift with you.

BostonB

vectra wrote: »

....
Again, You might also have evidence of exactly why the DMF's fail? Or have personal experience of some of these failing?
Or even have evidence of what particular driving style may in fact be the culprit?....

Its a pity I must have personal experience to learn something, that I can't learn from a book, magazine, or some form of computer network, or the experience of loads of other people. Maybe they'll invent those things some day. ....oh wait....

Nissan doctor

vectra wrote: »

I understrand the situation about the DPF but as for DMF, naturally the more something gets used the faster it will wear out. That's a given. But to say it will go in record time solely because of this would be a bit scaremongering. I spoke to a highly rated mechanic today and brought this up with him. He said it is a load of Bo**ox to say a DMF Will fail due to all town driving. He said it will go if you Dog it or Labour it much quicker.

The wear rate, as specified by the main manufacturers of DMF's(LUK), is that in 'average use', the DMF should last the life of 2 clutches. Now a manufacturers 'average use' is generally a very different thing to the average Joe Soaps average use and the OP's parents(you do still realise the thread is about them?), from the sounds of it, will not be giving the car this average use.

Its strange that your mechanic friend said that as I'd imagine that, like myself, any mechanic working daily in the trade, especially in the major city's, will be regularly changing prematurely worn DMF's. And in the vast majority of cases, when tested(presumably this highly rated mechanic has the manufacturer spec testing equipment for DMF's?), I've found that the vast majority of DMF's are right on or very close to their maximum tolerance after the first clutch is worn, meaning they need to be changed as they won't last the life of the second clutch. There are also countless cases of DMF's failing long before the first clutch has worn out.

Having said all this, I'm not certain why someone who, regardless of how they drive, doesn't keep their car long enough for anything to wear out, is trying to enter a debate about weather or not parts are likely to wear prematurely? Its not a problem you have or are likely to have with your modern CR engine so how you can have an opinion on something you have no experience of? Your trying to say that they won't have a problem because you haven't in a tiny proportion of an average cars life/mileage.

vectra

^^ I am not denying the fact that DPF's and DMF's crap out before their time, but my point again is that a lot of it depends on the way they were driven.

As for me not keeping my cars for a long time?

well, if the OP's parents are only going to be trotting around then they wont be hitting big miles for a long long time.

One question for you.
My previous car.
Cordoba 1.4 tdi sport.
Did that have dpf/dmf?

The J Stands for Jay

vectra wrote: »

All the advice given above stating petrol/hybrid over diesel, take with a pinch of salt. Take a stroll around any town or city and compare the amount of diesel > Petrol etc Taxi drivers have.
That should answer your query.

Would'be said that in the past, but there's to many x5 taxis about these days.

BostonB

McGaggs wrote: »

Would'be said that in the past, but there's to many x5 taxis about these days.

+1

I'm amazed at the number of big petrol cars being used as taxi's.

BostonB

Nissan doctor wrote: »

... I've found that the vast majority of DMF's are right on or very close to their maximum tolerance after the first clutch is worn, meaning they need to be changed as they won't last the life of the second clutch. There are also countless cases of DMF's failing long before the first clutch has worn out....

In all my years of driving, I don't think I know anyone who needed a clutch changing apart from one case. And that was due to it being contaminated with oil. While obviously they do get changed with high mileage and abuse. We've run a few cars to 250k and I don't remember any of them needing a clutch either. Though they wouldn't be great by then.

How common are clutch changes these days?

Merch

BostonB wrote: »

In all my years of driving, I don't think I know anyone who needed a clutch changing apart from one case. And that was due to it being contaminated with oil. While obviously they do get changed with high mileage and abuse. We've run a few cars to 250k and I don't remember any of them needing a clutch either. Though they wouldn't be great by then.

How common are clutch changes these days?

250k miles or 250k km's?
km's surely?
While I dont do that much mileage these days probably comparable to an older person (mostly), a smallish petrol no less than 1.2 might do, but it really depends what they intend to do with the car OP.If it needs to have bigger carrying capacity maybe a bigger engine would do, is one of them at least mechanically minded to know what type of remedial stuff is required for a diesel, personally i think a petrol could do, if they even do some moderate mileage every now and again a bigger car with load carrying ability and engine (maybe diesel) would do.

vectra

vectra wrote: »

Not necessarily,

Smooth city driver versus a Country driver dragging trailors and labouring in too high a gear..

I know which I would prefer anyhow but hey, The choice is yours.

RoverJames wrote: »

..... what about a car used mainly extra urban by a driver as mechanically sympathetic as you claim to be, much less gear changes, no labouring, no trailers, DPF in optimum conditions? Not doing mainly 30 second trips so mostly driven when cold ....

vectra wrote: »

DPF?
One decent spin a month sorts that.
Nothing to worry about.
How many CR engines do you know of that has given DPF issues?



The discussion was about DMF and not Gearbox wear.
So is relevant

....what about the rest of the post, you focussed just on the DPF there bud

vectra

RoverJames wrote: »

....what about the rest of the post, you focussed just on the DPF there bud

Until you own a car over a decent period of time that has DPF and DMF and you have experience of their plus and minus points I wouldn't be Ar$ed even wasting time discussing it with you.

BostonB

Merch wrote: »

250k miles or 250k km's?
km's surely? ...

No miles. They were hackney's and taxi's. It was a few years back.

ShadowHearth

650Ginge wrote: »

Vectra knock the chip off your shoulder, get off the soapbox, go off start another thread about how great you are???? And what a great driver you are and get more mpg than anyone else in the whole world tells in that thread how a vrs is the best car for everyones needs.

I just unfollowed this thread because your posts are just self back slapping and correcting everyone the doesn't agree with u. Nite nite hope I never get stuck in a lift with you.

This made me laugh!


I can only imagine situation:

650ginge is in elevator and some fella jumps in, just when doors about to close. Your man then just looks at 650ginge and says:
- hello there, it's a lovely day, eh? Btw I have new skooooooooooodaaa Vyyyyyyy eeeeeRRRREeeeeeeeSSSSsssssss. ( in smug clarkson voice, same way he says jaaaaag )
- a jaysus, won't you be that fella Vectra from boards?! Where the fecking stop button!