The Death of Diesel Engines Finally A step Closer !

CiniO

Deleted User wrote: »

Our Government still allows solid fuel to be burnt, and you don't get much more polluting and unregulated and completely backward than this.

Because solid fuel like turf is pretty much the only source of home heating available in Ireland.
Everything else is important.

Why would you want to prohibit something like that?

gctest50

Deleted User wrote: »

It's only now we're beginning to see more plug ins such as the Outlander PHEV , though I'm opposed to the outlander being allowed to use the fast chargers which take up an essential charger on a full battery car owner who absolutely needs it, the outlander can continue on the ice !

the outlander only seems to have a little battery though - charges in 20mins ?

the Outlander PHEV is the perfect school-run yoke if thats what yer into

no "range anxiety"

about 90 "miles per gallon"
SUV-height n shape so less back bending
same price as the diesel Outlander

no diesel-dpf-common-rail-pump-turbo €€€€€€ explosions because of short runs to worry about

petrol engine so yer missus won't smell like a diesel truck after refuelling ops

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFMitmZgaCY

The model has now sold more units than any other plug-in vehicle on the market, including the Nissan Leaf which has been on sale since 2011.

By the end of March, sales of the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV will have passed the 10,000 mark.

Mitsubishi’s Outlander plug-in electric vehicle has an all-electric range of up to 32.5miles, emits 44g/km of CO2, and has an official combined fuel consumption figure of 148mpg.

.

gctest50

gctest50 wrote: »

the outlander only seems to have a little battery though - charges in 20mins ?

.

It has about 11 Kwh and the Leaf has 24Kwh 21 usable. The Outlander is bigger heavier and less aerodynamic.

It can fast charge at only 20 Kw compared to about 48 Kw for the Leaf charging from a very low charge %.

90 mpg ? don't know about that, depends if you have power in the battery.

Point is though if you buy a full electric why should someone with an engine be able to use a charger that is essential to the battery car owner?

Seriously, if someone wants more electric range buy a full electric and don't take up chargers for those who need it.

Lofty123

When the emissions from millions of Chinese and Indian vehicles, factories, power stations etc are regulated and controlled I will give up my diesel, but I can't see that happening anytime soon...

Special Circumstances

Lofty123 wrote: »

When the emissions from millions of Chinese and Indian vehicles, factories, power stations etc are regulated and controlled I will give up my diesel, but I can't see that happening anytime soon...

Roflcakes, because an overnight change in tax policy and "green" fuel levies have never influenced the public's car choice before...

Lofty123

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Roflcakes, because an overnight change in tax policy and "green" fuel levies have never influenced the public's car choice before...

I have no idea what this means?
My vehicle is 10 years old and is 790 euros per year to tax, thanks in part to the green parties one and only stint in power. I drive it because I like it and it suits my needs.

If everyone in Ireland was forced to abandon our vehicles, petrol or diesel, It would make little difference to the world's pollution problem.

Special Circumstances

I think the thread is a more general thing like, rather than your love for your particular diesel. So it's all very noble sticking by it but but the general public will buy what they're told to buy!

Hachiko

Diesels are pure filth, I bought my is250 a year ago and economy is fine. People are brainwashed into diesel. I can get well over 400 miles on a full tank on long runs.

I remember when I just recently had my car and stepping out of it onto a car park and being startled by the noise of a diesel parked near me, I was so used to the quietness of my own. Even diesels a few years old have a terrible rattle out of them.

Unless you do a crap load of miles there should be no need to ever get one, and with Petrols and Batteries slowly emerging into powerful hybrid drive trains that will offer good economy and less of the plume of cancerous smoke I think they will slowly phased out.

munchkin_utd

Lofty123 wrote: »

I have no idea what this means?
My vehicle is 10 years old and is 790 euros per year to tax, thanks in part to the green parties one and only stint in power. <snip>

really? The green party brought in high motor tax in ireland?
really?

I can blame the green parties (internationally, wherever they get their hippy fingers into) for many things, but they absolutely did not invent or introduce high motor tax in Ireland.

Thats a policy from previous governments who have had to make up for unsustainably low income tax, unsustainably low PRSI, unsustainably cancelling council tax, and giving a long term benefits pallete that is unrivalled worldwide, by hiking indirect taxes like motor tax and excise.

The greens REDUCED motor tax, slashed the hell out of it, for low CO2 cars, but the high rates for old cars are not their doing.

munchkin_utd

munchkin_utd wrote: »

I can blame the green parties (internationally, wherever they get their hippy fingers into) for many things, but they absolutely did not invent or introduce high motor tax in Ireland.

Thats a policy from previous governments who have had to make up for unsustainably low income tax, unsustainably low PRSI, unsustainably cancelling council tax, and giving a long term benefits pallete that is unrivalled worldwide, by hiking indirect taxes like motor tax and excise.

The greens REDUCED motor tax, slashed the hell out of it, for low CO2 cars, but the high rates for old cars are not their doing.

Don't forget to add wastage in Governmental departments. Paying stupidly high wages etc due to Unions. subsidies to Farmers etc. And good O'l corruption !

creedp

Deleted User wrote: »

Don't forget to add wastage in Governmental departments. Paying stupidly high wages etc due to Unions. subsidies to Farmers etc. And good O'l corruption !

don't forget giving unecessary tax reliefs to drivers of electric cars. Given the undoubted benefits attached to owning these cars, teh decision to provide these tax breaks was at best wasteful.

creedp

creedp wrote: »

don't forget giving unecessary tax reliefs to drivers of electric cars. Given the undoubted benefits attached to owning these cars, teh decision to provide these tax breaks was at best wasteful.

Tax relief was necessary for electric cars in order to drive the cost down, but this probably keeps the cost of ev's artificially inflated.

The Government has a target of X amount of ev's on the road by I think 2020, so it's not completely unnecessary.

They brought the cost of Diesels down from much lower taxation don't forget.

Anyone who buys a car has a choice what to buy and if tax relief on electrics removes one Diesel off the road, be it new or old, or one ICE then that's a good thing imo and money well spent. Anyone has the choice to buy ice or EV.

I'd be in favor of paying higher motor tax if it was invested in the fast charging infrastructure But I am opposed of ICE plug ins from using this critical infrastructure for EV only cars.

Lofty123

munchkin_utd wrote: »

really? The green party brought in high motor tax in ireland?
really?

I can blame the green parties (internationally, wherever they get their hippy fingers into) for many things, but they absolutely did not invent or introduce high motor tax in Ireland.

Thats a policy from previous governments who have had to make up for unsustainably low income tax, unsustainably low PRSI, unsustainably cancelling council tax, and giving a long term benefits pallete that is unrivalled worldwide, by hiking indirect taxes like motor tax and excise.

The greens REDUCED motor tax, slashed the hell out of it, for low CO2 cars, but the high rates for old cars are not their doing.

I stand corrected on this relatively insignificant part of my post :rolleyes:

I wonder how many of the diesel haters on here drive petrol cars with non standard exhaust systems spewing out god knows what into the atmosphere?
Not to mention the noise pollution...:eek:

Diesels are pure filth, I bought my is250 a year ago and economy is fine. People are brainwashed into diesel. I can get well over 400 miles on a full tank on long runs.

I remember when I just recently had my car and stepping out of it onto a car park and being startled by the noise of a diesel parked near me, I was so used to the quietness of my own. Even diesels a few years old have a terrible rattle out of them.

Unless you do a crap load of miles there should be no need to ever get one, and with Petrols and Batteries slowly emerging into powerful hybrid drive trains that will offer good economy and less of the plume of cancerous smoke I think they will slowly phased out.

You'd be a nervous wreck if you were around Clonmel (or most other towns) on a weekend night, with all the clowns "cruisin" in petrol cars with ridiculously noisy exhausts

Dartz

I remember when I just recently had my car and stepping out of it onto a car park and being startled by the noise of a diesel parked near me, I was so used to the quietness of my own. Even diesels a few years old have a terrible rattle out of them.

Took a trip to the states and was amazed at how quiet all the cars over there were.

****,even the RX whispers along at low speeds around town.... more a whirrrr than the clatter of a diesel. Petrol is just so much nicer. Although I'm pretty sure I'm also single-handedly responsible for the recent warm spot. At least the fumes smell better.

Hachiko

Diesels would stand out like a sore thumb in the States, are they even legal there? i know in California they are banned, like they ban everything else there from leaded solder flux to K&N CAIs.

Foxhole Norman

Had my dad in the car today on the link, he was amazed at how quiet it was inside for a 13 year old car. He's only driven diesels for around the past 12 years due to them being fleet cars and going from being in his 4 pot 1.6TDCi to my 6 cylinder Petrol was like being in another world!

Hachiko

yeah when you drive large (ish) petrols they tend to be more solid and insulated, I had loads of petrols before but the 250 is very quiet, I had to put a Typhoon filter onto it to give me some indication it was a 200hp car and not a 80hp one.

gctest50

Dartz wrote: »

Took a trip to the states and was amazed at how quiet all the cars over there were.
......

you missed this kids daily driver, used to be her mums car so ..... re-use, recycle :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJMVKdsBG1w

*Kol*

Hachiko wrote: »

Diesels are pure filth, I bought my is250 a year ago and economy is fine. People are brainwashed into diesel. I can get well over 400 miles on a full tank on long runs.

I remember when I just recently had my car and stepping out of it onto a car park and being startled by the noise of a diesel parked near me, I was so used to the quietness of my own. Even diesels a few years old have a terrible rattle out of them.

Unless you do a crap load of miles there should be no need to ever get one, and with Petrols and Batteries slowly emerging into powerful hybrid drive trains that will offer good economy and less of the plume of cancerous smoke I think they will slowly phased out.

400 miles is not good on long runs. That's only 640 km. An A4 2.0 TDi will do around 850 km. I drove a Citroen DS3 for a week recently and got nearly 1,000km on long runs. When I filled it it took €40 of diesel. There is a lot to be said for that kind of economy.

jimgoose

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

Had my dad in the car today on the link, he was amazed at how quiet it was inside for a 13 year old car. He's only driven diesels for around the past 12 years due to them being fleet cars and going from being in his 4 pot 1.6TDCi to my 6 cylinder Petrol was like being in another world!

Yeah, my dad was somewhat similar and used to comment like that on my old Bristol Blenheim. :pac:

Special Circumstances

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

Had my dad in the car today on the link, he was amazed at how quiet it was inside for a 13 year old car. He's only driven diesels for around the past 12 years due to them being fleet cars and going from being in his 4 pot 1.6TDCi to my 6 cylinder Petrol was like being in another world!

All those people in public places talking sh1t at an unnecessarily loud volume that you can't block out of your head? Diesel drivers, every one of them.

Jesus.

Dartz wrote: »

Petrol is just so much nicer.

Not performance wise for Motorway use. The torque and low revs make it so much more comfortable cruising at 75mph out on the Highway.

Everyday turbo'd petrol cars have only really starting coming on stream in the last few years in any great numbers. The majority of petrols on the roads are still NA and you have to cane the smaller ones to get anything out of them.

I know I'm in the minority when I say I like the drive of a diesel better (provided its not just tipping about town where they can be a bit rough).

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

Had my dad in the car today on the link, he was amazed at how quiet it was inside for a 13 year old car. He's only driven diesels for around the past 12 years due to them being fleet cars and going from being in his 4 pot 1.6TDCi to my 6 cylinder Petrol was like being in another world!

Going from a 1.6 four banger to a 6 pot would make a difference though to be fair. At Motorway speeds, 1.6 NA petrols are louder than their turbo'd diesel counterparts. There's no comparison imo.

Foxhole Norman

Jesus. wrote: »

Not performance wise for Motorway use. The torque and low revs make it so much more comfortable cruising at 75mph out on the Highway.

Everyday turbo'd petrol cars have only really starting coming on stream in the last few years in any great numbers. The majority of petrols on the roads are still NA and you have to cane the smaller ones to get anything out of them.

I know I'm in the minority when I say I like the drive of a diesel better (provided its not just tipping about town where they can be a bit rough).

That's just wrong. Petrol is well suited to Motorway use, fair enough if you're talking about something like a Yaris/focus or the like but anything that is Turbo'd or a higher displacement like a 2.0 or above has plenty of torque for motorway cruising.

Take for example the VAG 1.9TDI, my car throws out the same amount of torque and paired with either the auto or manual will pull like a train up to 4th at higher speeds.

galwaytt

Jesus. wrote: »

Not performance wise for Motorway use. The torque and low revs make it so much more comfortable cruising at 75mph out on the Highway.

...my 3.6L petrol disagrees. No shortage of torque, believe me - and with no turbos' or other paranphenalia it's a comparatively simple engine.


All of the tech in the world is useless to diesel if its a)unreliable or b)prone to poor maintenance which brings us back to a) again which brings us to.............we've all been sold the diesel 'pup' by the Green Party et al.

Don't get me wrong - I like diesels - good ones - the SO's car is one, but I'm not blind to their weaknesses.........

What annoys me about modern diesels is the gearing is wrong, 4th is too tall for town 30 ish mph and 3rd is too low, reving high, no I really hate modern manual diesels. CVT or Twin Clutch is much better.

But you still can't beat electric for the instant throttle response, smoothness and quietness. I think a lot of diesel drivers would absolutely love them, giving they talk about the torque so much.

jimgoose

Jesus. wrote: »

Not performance wise for Motorway use. The torque and low revs make it so much more comfortable cruising at 75mph out on the Highway...

<AHEM!>

galwaytt

munchkin_utd wrote: »

really? The green party brought in high motor tax in ireland?
really?

I can blame the green parties (internationally, wherever they get their hippy fingers into) for many things, but they absolutely did not invent or introduce high motor tax in Ireland.

Thats a policy from previous governments who have had to make up for unsustainably low income tax, unsustainably low PRSI, unsustainably cancelling council tax, and giving a long term benefits pallete that is unrivalled worldwide, by hiking indirect taxes like motor tax and excise.

The greens REDUCED motor tax, slashed the hell out of it, for low CO2 cars, but the high rates for old cars are not their doing.

Factually incorrect.

look up the top band on www.motortax.ie - that is entirely the Green's work. It put, in one go, cars on 226g from 1800 to 2350 in one go - 30%.

Jesus.

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

That's just wrong. Petrol is well suited to Motorway use, fair enough if you're talking about something like a Yaris/focus or the like but anything that is Turbo'd or a higher displacement like a 2.0 or above has plenty of torque for motorway cruising.

Anything that's above 2.0, yes. But between a sub 2 L turbo diesel compared to the average petrol, which is still NA, then its the diesel all the way.

For example, we have a 1.6 Laguna and a little 1.5 diesel Rio and you couldn't compare them at decent speeds. The smaller diesel car is just turning over at Motorway speed whereas the petrol is revving hard and LOUD.

Considering most cars in Ireland are sub 2 liter, it'll be a few years before the average petrol will be comparable to diesels for Motorway driving when they're all turbocharged like diesels currently are. They are starting to come online now but the the majority are still NA which have to be caned at speed.

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

Take for example the VAG 1.9TDI, my car throws out the same amount of torque and paired with either the auto or manual will pull like a train up to 4th at higher speeds.

But yours is a 6 cylinder petrol and its only throwing out the same torque as a 1.9 Daysul! That's my point!

galwaytt wrote: »

my 3.6L petrol disagrees

I don't think the average driver has a 3.6L petrol engine under his hood!

thierry14

galwaytt wrote: »

...my 3.6L petrol disagrees. No shortage of torque, believe me - and with no turbos' or other paranphenalia it's a comparatively simple engine.


All of the tech in the world is useless to diesel if its a)unreliable or b)prone to poor maintenance which brings us back to a) again which brings us to.............we've all been sold the diesel 'pup' by the Green Party et al.

Don't get me wrong - I like diesels - good ones - the SO's car is one, but I'm not blind to their weaknesses.........

He's talking about normal sized petrol's not 3.6l!

A 1.6 litre na petrol Focus is absolute **** on the motorway compared to the equivalent 1.6 diesel in gear.

Just like your na 3.6 petrol would be **** in gear compared to a a big modern 3.0+ diesel in gear.

John T Carroll

Bpmull wrote: »

Am no they are not carcinogenic. The issue is that some pm can get deep down in your lungs and affect asthma. Anyway that argument is void with the introduction of Dpf's.

Yes, as long as the "introduction" of DPF deletes is itself deleted.

FR85

John T Carroll wrote: »

Yes, as long as the "introduction" of DPF deletes is itself deleted.

The whole thing about a DPF is that is uses more fuel to do a re-gen, does this not in turn then create more gases during the burn off process and high idle? Yes I do know they are there to cut down on soot particulates but what is the byproduct of the re-gen?

Foxhole Norman

Jesus. wrote: »

But yours is a 6 cylinder petrol and its only throwing out the same torque as a 1.9 Daysul! That's my point!



I don't think the average driver has a 3.6L petrol engine under his hood!

Even if you compare like with like, the Petrol will still be more refined, quiet and a more comfortable drive. If you take today's cars you are pretty much only offered Turbo Diesels or Turbo Petrol, for example the Golf. Even the 1.2 is Turbo'd which gives it a decent amount of torque.

Jesus.

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

If you take today's cars you are pretty much only offered Turbo Diesels or Turbo Petrol, for example the Golf. Even the 1.2 is Turbo'd which gives it a decent amount of torque.

If you're buying new (or nearly new) yes. But like I said, it will take a few more years before the turbo'd petrols catch up with diesels which are entirely turbocharged. At the moment, the majority of petrol cars on the road are NA.

And they're not nice to drive on the Motorway

Foxhole Norman

Jesus. wrote: »

If you're buying new (or nearly new) yes. But like I said, it will take a few more years before the turbo'd petrols catch up with diesels which are entirely turbocharged. At the moment, the majority of petrol cars on the road are NA.

And they're not nice to drive on the Motorway

I don't know, I found our 1.2 Clio grand on the Motorway, wasn't strained or loud, that was a 2011 though. I think I'd still rather have a more refined petrol than more torque in a Diesel tbh. My opinion anyway. Now, with the Yaris I'm driving at the moment, give a diesel any day over it :pac:

Jesus.

Now that we're at it Norman, why has it taken until this point for turbo'd petrols to make headway? With better economy, more power, more torque its a wonder the average petrol motor wasn't turbocharged before this.

The only thing I can think of being an issue is reliability. Were manufacturers afraid that the turbo would go "ping" on their petrol engines?

Foxhole Norman

Jesus. wrote: »

Now that we're at it Norman, why has it taken until this point for turbo'd petrols to make headway? With better economy, more power, more torque its a wonder the average petrol motor wasn't turbocharged before this.

The only thing I can think of being an issue is reliability. Were manufacturers afraid that the turbo would go "ping" on their petrol engines?

I think it was emissions regulation. Wasn't as strict 10/15 years ago when the standard petrol engines were large ish 2.0 or above.

jimgoose

Jesus. wrote: »

Now that we're at it Norman, why has it taken until this point for turbo'd petrols to make headway? With better economy, more power, more torque its a wonder the average petrol motor wasn't turbocharged before this.

The only thing I can think of being an issue is reliability. Were manufacturers afraid that the turbo would go "ping" on their petrol engines?

Turbocharging is incredibly well-suited to diesels because of the high exhaust temperature (and therefore energy) and the fact that they pull hard at low revs and run out of puff at higher revs. The weight and compression of diesels is always going to limit their operating speed, and therefore potential power output, compared to petrols as well. The turbo helps greatly with this. As FN says, aside from certain high-performance/racing cars there was no great net benefit to turbocharging petrols until strict emissions regulation became an issue recently.

Turbochargers bring a complexity to any engine - incredibly high component speeds mean more specialised oils, service/component costs, points-of-failure, etc. - that weren't hitherto considered worth the benefit in petrol engines. Some of us remember the turbocharged motorcycle fad of the '80s - the Kawasaki ZX750E1, Suzuki XN85, Yamaha XJ650LJ and the Honda CX500TC - and the amount of them that popped because people didn't read the manual and hence switched off the engine immediately after stopping, thus starving the turbo of oil.

Oh and - petrol engines have indeed been turbocharged, at the factory, before this. This is a 1963 Oldsmobile 215-inch V8 with a "Jetfire" turbo:

John T Carroll

FR85 wrote: »

The whole thing about a DPF is that is uses more fuel to do a re-gen, does this not in turn then create more gases during the burn off process and high idle? Yes I do know they are there to cut down on soot particulates but what is the byproduct of the re-gen?

Ash, after burning the soot particles at high temperatures.

dieselbug

Nitrogen oxides are the current hot topic. This causes smog and will linger in certain weather conditions. It effects peoples lungs and diesels are particularly good at making it.

Soot particles are controlled with dpf's

FR85

dieselbug wrote: »

Nitrogen oxides are the current hot topic. This causes smog and will linger in certain weather conditions. It effects peoples lungs and diesels are particularly good at making it.

Soot particles are controlled with dpf's

With a DPF using more fuel to regen surely more nitrogen oxides are produced?

Hachiko

*Kol* wrote: »

400 miles is not good on long runs. That's only 640 km. An A4 2.0 TDi will do around 850 km. I drove a Citroen DS3 for a week recently and got nearly 1,000km on long runs. When I filled it it took €40 of diesel. There is a lot to be said for that kind of economy.

Its good for a 2.5 litre lump that is 1 million more times refined than a diesel. You cant compare Citroens to a high spec Lexus. In fact some people have got well north of 400 miles on long runs on the is250.

jprboy

Hachiko wrote: »

Its good for a 2.5 litre lump that is 1 million more times refined than a diesel. You cant compare Citroens to a high spec Lexus. In fact some people have got well north of 400 miles on long runs on the is250.

Ok, but different cars have different tank sizes. What does the 400 plus miles per tank on the IS250 equate to in MPG?

ABC101

Bpmull wrote: »

The funny thing is that people go on about dirty diesels and that they should be banned. Yet if you put a petrol engine on a bench with a diesel it will produce over 3 times more NOx as well as all other emissions I mention above are higher. However the cat saves the petrol on emissions and NOx a diesel with a cat would have lower emisions than a petrol with a cat including NOx so to say a petrol engine is cleaner than a diesel is incorrect as the petrol is producing more emissions than the diesel it's just the cat that's saving it.

The important thing to know about this is that when a cat is cold it doesn't work at all so when you cold start a petrol engine it's putting out 3-4 times more NOx than a cold diesel. Also if the cat becomes defective which they often do you are producing a serious amount more emissions including NOx than a diesel. Anyway I'm not going to argue it out anymore.

I'm a bit confused here, I was of the understanding that due to the higher compression ratio of the Diesel engine coupled with higher temperatures Nox emissions are higher than that in a petrol engne. Because Nox is formed at higher temps and pressures.

In addition I read somewhere that a molecule of Nox is 30 times more damaging to the environment than a molecule of Co2.

Therefore I would have thought the diesel whilst giving out less Co2 is actually more harmful to the environment / humans etc.

I think Diesels should be for intercity driving, ie Dublin to Waterford etc. I can see hybrids becomming mandatory for cities, run on battery power and when outside the M50 switch off battery and run on the ICE.

Interesting read here... There could be hope for diesels with SCR's!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10862975/Emission-tests-substantially-underestimate-pollution-pumped-out-by-diesels.html

Foxhole Norman

For some more reference, my 2.5 had an estimate of around 500 miles to a full 70L tank while cruising at 120Km on the Cork-Dublin Motorway. I often get around 300 miles to a tank with my combined city/dual carriageway so I'd believe it would get 500 on the Motorway, where diesels are also at home.

thierry14

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

For some more reference, my 2.5 had an estimate of around 500 miles to a full 70L tank while cruising at 120Km on the Cork-Dublin Motorway. I often get around 300 miles to a tank with my combined city/dual carriageway so I'd believe it would get 500 on the Motorway, where diesels are also at home.

32mpg motorway driving, not bad I suppose for a 2.5 N/A petrol.

At those speeds even 3.0l diesels with alot more power would get 10 -15mpg more and a much nicer place to be.

Foxhole Norman

thierry14 wrote: »

32mpg motorway driving, not bad I suppose for a 2.5 N/A petrol.

At those speeds even 3.0l diesels with alot more power would get 10 -15mpg more and a much nicer place to be.

I dont think so. If you take the 3.0 diesel lump that's the equivalent of mine in the E39 you'll find the Petrol far more refined in noise levels, even mine sits quite happily between 2/2.5K RPM which is nothing at all.

Special Circumstances

Q: I have been fortunate enough to afford a refined, reliable, clean and environmentally friendly diesel. This has brought many benefits in terms of fuel savings and tax savings. Despite the cleanliness and reliability endorsed by many boards members, my dpf appears to have lasted a maximum of 4 years. Replacing this will cancel out some of the savings I have made. What should I do?

A: Delete it, tis only to reduce cancer and respiratory condition causing particles.

B: Delete it, but make it subtle hai. More shmoke more poke, yahoo!

C: Delete it, but if anyone asks diesel is still awesome right.

Delete it, despite modern diesels being whisper quiet and refined, removing your DPF will turn a Passat into a race tuned animal that sounds BETTER than a petrol.

E: Delete it, keep the money for a DMF.


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057395416

Hachiko

diesels will never be a nicer place to be compared to a large refined petrol.

and an even less nicer place to be with constant trips to the garage deleting stuff, cleaning filters, adding moar torques, then deleting more egr's. zzzzz

jimgoose

Foxhole Norman wrote: »

I dont think so. If you take the 3.0 diesel lump that's the equivalent of mine in the E39 you'll find the Petrol far more refined in noise levels, even mine sits quite happily between 2/2.5K RPM which is nothing at all.

But fierce boo outta her hi, on Strawberry laaad! Now go avay or I vill dogfight you mitt mein Motorenfabrik Oberursel Klöckner-Humboldt-Deutz. :cool:

Tea 1000

jprboy wrote: »

Ok, but different cars have different tank sizes. What does the 400 plus miles per tank on the IS250 equate to in MPG?

I know the Passat has at least a 10 litre bigger tank than the IS, so I'd assume the A4 has the same.

thierry14 wrote: »

32mpg motorway driving, not bad I suppose for a 2.5 N/A petrol.

At those speeds even 3.0l diesels with alot more power would get 10 -15mpg more and a much nicer place to be.

A petrol 6 cylinder is nicer than a diesel 6 cylinder. And as regards "nicer place to be", that depends on the car itself. An IS is much nicer than an E90 inside, but not as nice as an E60 or F10.