Diesel, Diesel EVERYWHERE !!!

ian87

goz83 wrote: »

Unless you're VAT registered, you can't claim it back on diesel either. I wonder what percentage of diesel car purchases since July 2008 were business purchases. Not very high would be my guess.



And that's great, if you do the miles. The OP was more focused on the huge number of people buying diesels, who don't do the miles, who buy to save money on tax and fuel, but who likely spend more on maintenance and repair bills as a result.

ian87 wrote: »

I'm surprised you didn't mention the kids driving. My 3 year old is an animal behind the wheel :pac:

I did but the edit got messed up!!

toastedpickles

visual wrote: »

Diesel smoke is much more visible especially in a diesel badly needing a service or has faulty injectors but it's exhausted fumes being more visible doesn't make it more polluting than less visible petrol exhaust. Its why the focus is on CO2

We had a diesel with dodgy injectors in work there the other day, we ended up having to bring it outside and do the job outside, the garage had a shroud of black around it it was that bad

I drive a petrol, a rather large engined one at that, I don't mind the fuel bills, as I only go to college and back nowadays, and anywhere else usually involved being paid so it doesn't really effect me, but if i was to tally up my annual fuel bill, I'd probably cry

HandsomeDan

Augeo wrote: »

This crap is worse than foglights chat

+1

People buying what they want to buy with their money... Shock horror.

goz83

HandsomeDan wrote: »

+1

People buying what they want to buy with their money... Shock horror.

More aply put, would be, people buying what they think will save them money, but will likely cost them more money. Baaaaaad decision.

Sam Kade

corglass wrote: »

:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

ninty9er

Apart from the tax, most diesels drive better than the petrol ****e offered by manufacturers these days.

1.4 D4-D Corolla is much more refined and pokey than the 1.33 VVTi
1.3 CDTI Astra is much more balanced than the standard 1.4 petrol (one of the worst new engines on offer- asthmatic is an understatement)
1.0 EcoBoost Focus needs a lot of effort to keep up, but while being vastly superior to the old 1.4, it's no competition for the 1.6 TDCI

The only flip side is the 1.2 TSI VAG engine which performs just as well as the 1.6 TDI in the Golf and Leon, not so much in the heavier Octavia.

The 1.4 TSI is as good as the 2.0 TDI in the Passat

If anyone needed a reason to drive diesel, just test drive the petrol versions on offer and you'll understand the market share diesel gas.

goz83

ninty9er wrote: »

Apart from the tax, most diesels drive better than the petrol ****e offered by manufacturers these days.

1.4 D4-D Corolla is much more refined and pokey than the 1.33 VVTi
1.3 CDTI Astra is much more balanced than the standard 1.4 petrol (one of the worst new engines on offer- asthmatic is an understatement)
1.0 EcoBoost Focus needs a lot of effort to keep up, but while being vastly superior to the old 1.4, it's no competition for the 1.6 TDCI

The only flip side is the 1.2 TSI VAG engine which performs just as well as the 1.6 TDI in the Golf and Leon, not so much in the heavier Octavia.

The 1.4 TSI is as good as the 2.0 TDI in the Passat

If anyone needed a reason to drive diesel, just test drive the petrol versions on offer and you'll understand the market share diesel gas.

While there may be some relevance to your post, it holds no relevance to the op. Performance isn't coming into question. Cost for low miles, for mainly city dwellers who buy diesels, because they think driving a diesel will be cheaper, is what was relevant to the op.

The only time I drive diesel cars is when they are rentals. No complaints with performance, but as I don't do big miles, I wouldn't buy a diesel, even if it gave me cheaper tax and lower fuel costs. Maintenance and repairs would end up losing me money.

corkgsxr

visual wrote: »

Diesel smoke is much more visible especially in a diesel badly needing a service or has faulty injectors but it's exhausted fumes being more visible doesn't make it more polluting than less visible petrol exhaust. Its why the focus is on CO2

Co2 is a minor problem. Biggest problem is nox gasses. Which diesels are brutal for and petrols are a fraction of

And the smaller and more turboed the diesel is the more nox it emits

CiniO

visual wrote: »

Diesel smoke is much more visible especially in a diesel badly needing a service or has faulty injectors but it's exhausted fumes being more visible doesn't make it more polluting than less visible petrol exhaust. Its why the focus is on CO2

No.
The focus on CO2 is becauseIrish Government want to fight with Global warming which is supposably caused by excessive CO2 emissions globally.

The main problem though they are missing is that Ireland accounts for "feck all" 0.00000001 or less % of global CO2 emissions, and no matter what we do here, it won't change a thing.

On the other side, tax privileges for low CO2 emission cars caused lots of diesels to be desired, purchased and driven, and while this might help against Global Warming, they surely cause much more pollution of poisonous gasses to air we breathe every day here in Ireland.

And that's where the whole government plan stops making sense.

Chris_Heilong

Your right Goz there are too many diesels everywhere and the 2nd hand car market is going to be saturated with them, almost everyone I know buy petrol but in a few years time they wont have a choice but to go the way of the Black as dealers are looking at what makes the easiest money for them and are only ordering those kind of cars(ie diesel)

The only reason diesels have any poke at all is because they have Turbos, an equivalent Petrol turbo is always going to be better for poke, a NA diesel cant do jack.

Senecio

goz83 wrote: »

While there may be some relevance to your post, it holds no relevance to the op. Performance isn't coming into question. Cost for low miles, for mainly city dwellers who buy diesels, because they think driving a diesel will be cheaper, is what was relevant to the op.

The only time I drive diesel cars is when they are rentals. No complaints with performance, but as I don't do big miles, I wouldn't buy a diesel, even if it gave me cheaper tax and lower fuel costs. Maintenance and repairs would end up losing me money.

You have to take into account the maintenance, repairs and depreciation to compare total running costs. It's the depreciation that kills petrol as it will be hard to move on once you're done with it.

advertsfox

OP shhhh, it means the nice petrol cars remain cheap because people are obsessed with tax based on emissions

Cleveland Hot Pocket

advertsfox wrote: »

OP shhhh, it means the nice petrol cars remain cheap because people are obsessed with tax based emissions

But in 10 years time there will be no bangernomics v8 barges.

advertsfox

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

But in 10 years time there will be no bangernomics v8 barges.

ShadowHearth

In my humble opinion the most to be blamed are people who spend 25k eu on brand new car to save 200eu per year on tax.

They just see low tax cost and they become flies that go for lovely blue sparkly thing. On top of that someone said that diesel gives more mpg ( without explaining in which kind of situation) and the diesel becomes best thing since blow job/cunnilingus was invented.

Hachiko

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I've driven a few petrols and find them weedy, underpowered and just not as nice, unless u where to get a larger engined petrol that will murder me with fuel cost.
A lot of guff about "oh how great petrols are" but to get to that territory you're talking 8 to maybe 30 (if you're lucky) mpg and a serious tax bill.
While with a diesel, if you do the miles you won't be ruined.
And I like them. I don't like cars where I have to wring their neck to get anything out of them.
So you won't see me in an RX8 anytime soon.

what petrols have you driven? my 2.5 v6 lexus can chew up 450miles or so comfortably on long runs, its not like you need to be a billionaire to run a car like that.

Hachiko

ShadowHearth wrote: »

In my humble opinion the most to be blamed are people who spend 25k eu on brand new car to save 200eu per year on tax.

They just see low tax cost and they become flies that go for lovely blue sparkly thing. On top of that someone said that diesel gives more mpg ( without explaining in which kind of situation) and the diesel becomes best thing since blow job/cunnilingus was invented.

but its the cheap tax jo...

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Hachiko wrote: »

what petrols have you driven? my 2.5 v6 lexus can chew up 450miles or so comfortably on long runs, its not like you need to be a billionaire to run a car like that.

So does my v8 gmc, 350-400 miles but at a cost of €120-130 per fill whereas to do that in my 1.8 diesel would cost me €40, you can see why I do my 1500-2000 odd miles a month in my diesel mostly!

Foxhole Norman

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

So does my v8 gmc, 350-400 miles but at a cost of €120-130 per fill whereas to do that in my 1.8 diesel would cost me €40, you can see why I do my 1500-2000 odd miles a month in my diesel mostly!

Most of the extra cost is offset by that oh so nice engine and comfort!

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

Most of the extra cost is offset by that oh so nice engine and comfort!

It is, but it gets a bit annoying putting in 130 odd quid, driving to Cork, and playing "can we make it" on the way back!
If I was keeping it, I would be LPG'ing it and daily driving it. Get another yanktank for shows.

However (sad as I am about it) I can't keep it.

dr.fuzzenstein

Hachiko wrote: »

what petrols have you driven? my 2.5 v6 lexus can chew up 450miles or so comfortably on long runs, its not like you need to be a billionaire to run a car like that.

I commute 120 km a day to work and at my salary that Lexus is just not a possibility. The difference in running costs is in the thousands. And that is fuel alone.
So that is my point confirmed, this is a seriously nice petrol car, but running costs on that would be a joke, unless I gave up having a house and eating.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I commute 120 km a day to work and at my salary that Lexus is just not a possibility. The difference in running costs is in the thousands. And that is fuel alone.
So that is my point confirmed, this is a seriously nice petrol car, but running costs on that would be a joke, unless I gave up having a house and eating.

My commute is just under 50km each way.
Much as I'd love to have a mile muncher like a 750li or a cadillac STS, I'm stuck with my trusty diesel at least for the next 3-4 months.

Agreeing with your point earlier about diesels being the only viable option for any sort of commuting.

Hachiko

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

I commute 120 km a day to work and at my salary that Lexus is just not a possibility. The difference in running costs is in the thousands. And that is fuel alone.
So that is my point confirmed, this is a seriously nice petrol car, but running costs on that would be a joke, unless I gave up having a house and eating.

point taken, 120km is loads, the running costs are not as bad as one would make out, the plus side is the very nice drive and extremely reliable car overall. But I dont do big miles probably sub 10k a year.

HandsomeDan

CiniO wrote: »

The main problem though they are missing is that Ireland accounts for "feck all" 0.00000001 or less % of global CO2 emissions, and no matter what we do here, it won't change a thing.

That makes no sense. If an individual or small group's emissions are small to the point of being insignificant globally, they should be exempt from controlling their emissions? Can you not see how that is total nonsense.

FWIW: Irish per-person emissions are considerably higher than the world average.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

HandsomeDan wrote: »

That makes no sense. If an individual or small group's emissions are small to the point of being insignificant globally, they should be exempt from controlling their emissions? Can you not see how that is total nonsense.

FWIW: Irish per-person emissions are considerably higher than the world average.

If everyone in Ireland tripled their emissions, not a global effect would be felt (or even noticed)

HandsomeDan

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

If everyone in Ireland tripled their emissions, not a global effect would be felt (or even noticed)

Great logic. Lets divide the whole world into Ireland size groups and make them all exempt from emission control, as individually their emissions are not significant... That'll fix it.

Francie Barrett

These threads are always fun. Of all the people complaining, how many of them actually bought a new petrol car in the last few years that wasn't a "poverty-spec" model? It's all well and good shouting about how we should all be buying V8 engines with all the gadgets, but unless people here are doing that and taking these massive lumps of depreciation, then I don't think they have any right to complain.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

HandsomeDan wrote: »

Great logic. Lets divide the whole world into Ireland size groups and make them all exempt from emission control, as individually their emissions are not significant... That'll fix it.

But the whole world isnt broken up into irish sized groups.
Other countries are much more significant (US, CN) and they don't do enough emission control.

For example, still most cars sold in the US are large 4pot (by our "large" definition, >2.0 liter) or bigger. Same in china.

If they both switched to EU econobox engined cars then we would be on target for global emissions targets for years sure.

(not that I want that to happen)

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Francie Barrett wrote: »

These threads are always fun. Of all the people complaining, how many of them actually bought a new petrol car in the last few years that wasn't a "poverty-spec" model? It's all well and good shouting about how we should all be buying V8 engines with all the gadgets, but unless people here are doing that and taking these massive lumps of depreciation, then I don't think they have any right to complain.

What new car have you bought in the past 12 months?
And why does what "new car" purchased have anything to do with the conversation.

I spent 14.5k gross there on a new car (to me). I could have bought a crappy 142 econobox diesel but instead I bought a 550bhp v8. We need people to buy the v8 cars new, so that others can buy them second hand!

Zubeneschamali

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

CO2 is not a harmful gas, it exists in nature and makes up c79% of the air that we breathe.

No, in ordinary air, CO2 is about 0.04%.

10% CO2 is fatal.

Chris_Heilong

Agreed, If China and the US stopped producing so much pollution then there would be no Co2 problem at all, the "doing my part" BS really annoys me.

Zubeneschamali

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

If China and the US stopped producing so much pollution then there would be no Co2 problem at all

CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't care if it comes for Ireland or China - and you produce a lot more than the average Chinese person.

Chris_Heilong

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't care if it comes for Ireland or China - and you produce a lot more than the average Chinese person.

it does matter, there is a huge difference in amount produced, Co2 naturally occurs from different sources, for example farts. Ireland's Co2 production is so minuscule from a global stand point it shouldn't be seen as anything but a fart. Ireland is always wanting to seem cosmopolitan and happening like the big boys but we should be looking after its people and making sure everyone can live happily and Cheaply first.

Francie Barrett

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

What new car have you bought in the past 12 months?

I am what you are all complaining about. All my cars are 2.0 TDI Passats, I buy them new and sell after 3 years when the warranty expires. I don't bother with built in sat-nav's, sports packs or any of the other pointless things. Base spec is more than enough for what I require.

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

And why does what "new car" purchased have anything to do with the conversation.
...
We need people to buy the v8 cars new, so that others can buy them second hand!

That is exactly the nub of the issue. Until you have willingly bought a brand new car that will depreciate precipitously in the first 3 years of ownership and have high running costs (tax/fuel/etc), then you really can't be throwing stones in glasshouses.

People should buy what they can afford and what fits their requirements. They shouldn't be derided so you can go buy the car off them for half nothing only after they've taken most of the crippling depreciation costs!

MadYaker

Were getting screwed by a CO2 based tax system and the chinese are building a new coal fired power station every other week.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

No, in ordinary air, CO2 is about 0.04%.

10% CO2 is fatal.

I already corrected myself on that one, to be fair :cool:

Chris_Heilong wrote: »

Agreed, If China and the US stopped producing so much pollution then there would be no Co2 problem at all, the "doing my part" BS really annoys me.

+1

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

CO2 in the atmosphere doesn't care if it comes for Ireland or China - and you produce a lot more than the average Chinese person.

It doesn't, but when there are a billion people in china, and another perhaps 0.3 billion in the US (more, by all accounts), and those that drive in both of those countries are driving cars that would dramatically fail EU emissions tests, where do Ireland's 0.0004 billion people come into it?

wrt40

Economy\low CO2 petrol engines will overtake diesel engines. Diesel cars run like tractors, are unreliable and have high maintenance costs. That's my sweepingly generalised opinion. They're also brutally bad for the local environment as anyone with asthma or hay fever can vouch.

Now that new cars are coming in the "petrol engine with the efficiency\low emissions of a diesel" variety you'll start to see petrol make a comeback. When you see 1.4 litre engines with 140bhp or the 1.0 litre 125PS Ford Ecoboost, a 2.0 litre diesel tractor doesn't look so appealing anymore.

jimgoose

Is it me, or does the exhaust from newer turbodiesels reek with a chemical stink that could not be healthy, and will cause big trouble one of these days? My theory is that they're blowing orders-of-magnitude more carcinogens and what-have-you like aldehydes, which aren't even tested for given the current obsession with CO2.

jimgoose

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

I already corrected myself on that one, to be fair :cool:...

You were probably thinking of nitrogen. Anyway, it seems to me that people like me and you are the real heroes here, saving the whales and accelerating the advent of world peace by burning up all that nasty oil that seems to be causing all the fighting and poisoning. Hooray for us!! :D:D

Cleveland Hot Pocket

jimgoose wrote: »

Is it me, or does the exhaust from newer turbodiesels reek with a chemical stink that could not be healthy, and will cause big trouble one of these days? My theory is that they're blowing orders-of-magnitude more carcinogens and what-have-you like aldehydes, which aren't even tested for given the current obsession with CO2.

Is that the DPF regen that you are smelling?
I've had two diesels with DPFs and both of them would smell absolutely foul during the regen cycle.

jimgoose

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Is that the DPF regen that you are smelling?
I've had two diesels with DPFs and both of them would smell absolutely foul during the regen cycle.

Possibly, but I doubt it. I notice an awful lot of German yokes - Audi, Merc, BMW - reeking like that.

goz83

Oh....my.....god!

Mod, please move this thread to the "save the world" forum. It has descended into a discussion about farts and other emissions.

People who buy diesel cars, who only drive to the local Supervalu and back a couple of days a week, should have to wrap their car in cotton wool. The lesson from this thread has been taken. Ireland is full of sheeple.

HandsomeDan

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

I already corrected myself on that one, to be fair :cool:



+1


It doesn't, but when there are a billion people in china, and another perhaps 0.3 billion in the US (more, by all accounts), and those that drive in both of those countries are driving cars that would dramatically fail EU emissions tests, where do Ireland's 0.0004 billion people come into it?

Ya mean .004 billion

Average Irish person pollutes more than average chinaman, yet you think it's ok to preach to chinese about pollution while maintaining we should be exempt 'sure we're only a small country.

The yanks are the biggest polluter per person by such a large margin it's actually ****ed up.

Morpheus

Theres a tree that needs hugging somewhere in this thread....

Petrol or Diesel for a balbriggan to tallaght daily commute... thats my only concern right now.

please continue, ive just switched the option from diesel to petrol in my car search engines and my heart has skipped a beat...

micks_address

Morpheus wrote: »

Theres a tree that needs hugging somewhere in this thread....

Petrol or Diesel for a balbriggan to tallaght daily commute... thats my only concern right now.

please continue, ive just switched the option from diesel to petrol in my car search engines and my heart has skipped a beat...

If it's any use I do the same commute and I'm now driving a 1.6 diesel civic tourer. Only a month old but checked two weeks ago and mpg was working out at 63. That's leaving at 655 though so no stop/start. Same on way home unless of course there are crashes. There's no right or wrong here... Only opinions

Zen 2nd

I have a new Audi A3 TFSI myself and checked the average fuel consumption there this morning and got 6.5l per 100km (36 43 MPG). Driving to work I would have a lot of stopping and going so I don't think it is too bad?

MuppetCheck

Zen 2nd wrote: »

I have a new Audi A3 TFSI myself and checked the average fuel consumption there this morning and got 6.5l per 100km (36 MPG). Driving to work I would have a lot of stopping and going so I don't think it is too bad?

That's 43 MPG actually. Pretty decent tbh.

Zen 2nd

MuppetCheck wrote: »

That's 43 MPG actually. Pretty decent tbh.

Ah okay, I just threw it into Google and that's what it told me.

Zubeneschamali

Zen 2nd wrote: »

Ah okay, I just threw it into Google and that's what it told me.

US gallons, maybe. That's why american mileage looks so bad to us.

micks_address

Zen 2nd wrote: »

Ah okay, I just threw it into Google and that's what it told me.

http://www.unitjuggler.com/convert-fuelconsumption-from-lper100km-to-mpgimperial.html

im not sure if this is accurate?