The Autoshite Mass-Debating Society

[CreepingJesus]

How does common rail petrol differ from multi point injection?

 

Much, much higher pressure, basically.

 

The 'death' of diesel is a travesty of political pigheadedness. In the early 90's the emergent technology in diesel engines showed realistic promise of 100mpg engines (albeit small-ish ones). The Euro Emissions Regs forced the engineers to employ methods to remove heavy particulates which effectively slaughtered the potential fuel efficiency.

So instead of twice as economical engines, which relied on workable technology; we've ended up with impossible to repair economically engines, which don't offer a significant advantage once the differential in fuel price is accounted.

It's an over-simplification, I'll grant you, but it's essentially true.

Further; diesel isn't as refined as petrol, therefore involves less process. Why does it cost more?

The final nail in the coffin of economical engines came from the futurists in the marketing department. They set the course of development towards more spacious, comfy luxurious cars with outstanding safety features in every sector, and so cars got absurdly heavy, because that was a direct consequence of that course.

If we could rewind by 20 years or so and put wrongs right, or find an alternative universe where none of this unnecessarily stupid shit happened...(and breathe)...we'd find what the diesel is truly capable of. It's not for everyone, I know, but its' merits should be manifest. Sadly they aren't.

 

Oh, and 'nothing to fear from electric cars'? Great for city folks, but they don't build power stations in cities any more...

[dieselnutjob]

I like diesels but I like the old ones better. I like the 5 cyl TDI as found in Audi 100/Volvo 850/Caravelle best of all. The early TDIs were probably the pinnacle with good power/torque, fantastic economy and pretty simple. Okay they were computer controlled but only 300 bar injection, no DPF and no DMF.

 

The newer diesels seem to be getting more and more like petrol engines with smaller displacement so no stump pulling torque and more and more emissions controls that make them fragile, so yes you might as well go LPG really.

 

That said my 607 is a relaxing old barge to drive and is a bit simpler now that the EGR, DPF and cat have all been removed. I think the economy is pretty outstanding for a big auto driven hard around London. Our 806 HDI is also an outstanding lugger and easily pulls our caravan at 70mph (on French motorways of course). I just need to keep this old diesel shite running because frankly the newer stuff leaves me cold.

 

I don't know what I'll do if/when the 607 expires.

[catsinthewelder]

I really like my diesel BX, the engine suits the car and it's a pleasure to drive. The same could be said for our petrol powered 1100, fitted with a small modern diesel it would have epic mpg but be shit. I love the A series noise too much to ever want to remove it.

 

If I could drop an XUD in the camper without major cooling headaches I would however. Mostly to dispose of the (never in any form of balance) twin carbs.

[e287yba]

My daily driver is a 309SR, a 1600 that just about gets 30mpg day-to-day; on the summer holiday to Norfolk last Summer, aiming for a 60mph maximum and leaving the thing in fifth wherever possible, it gave 42mpg. My dad had a couple of 205GTI 1.6s in the late 80s, and the sounds aren't unfamiliar - the 309 also sounds like the Mk II Cortina in Get Carter under power in some aspects...

 

My "mid life crisis" is a left hand drive MG Maestro 1600 that does about 25mpg day-to-day and 35mpg on a 70mph run - but OH! THE SOUND!!! The driver's window is usually open ...

 

A friend had a 205XLD in the '90s that gave 56.5mpg in my temporary stewardship - a 50/50 mix of intra-Manchester commuting and long distance A-road/motorway stuff wasn't bad bearing in mind the thing "kept up with traffic" *cough". Others have alluded to the XUD "keeping up with traffic"... What a cheap way to do it! Another friend currently commutes from Huddersfield to Manchester with no problems, and his lowest fuel consumption is about 48mpg from memory.

 

Before the GTIs, my dad had an early 205GR - the 205 1800XUD Diesels were its match on the torque and BHP figures - and my dad got 38.9mpg from his GR whereas I can report regular figures between 48 and 56.5mpg from its Diesel equivalent...

 

The figures/performance balance are muddied nowadays, but "the olden days" are what WE are about???

[STUNO]

I've had one diesel, it was not as cheap as it seemed due to much higher servicing costs than the equivilent petrol car. Plus the tax regime for us makes diesel cars marginal anyway (taxed as a truck ). Our top Govt fleet for PM etc is all BMW 7 series diesels but of course they all just sit in the back and we pay.

But I could use an unsophisticated electric for commuting and shopping etc, my commute is only 6 minutes and the City centre is 4km away, so to work then the supermarket then home for instance is only about 10km (6 miles?). Running costs would be tiny even with lead/acid batteries.

For the immediate future it's petrol for me!

[baldrickthecunning]

I have owned a variety of petrol and diesel cars, but more recently just diesels. When I moved closer to work I seriously considered going back to a petrol as the economy was less important on a daily basis, but then the 306 turned up and I am glad it did. Something I really like as a characteristic of all the diesel cars i've owned is the low revs when on the motorway and a boost from the turbo just when its needed. Over the weekend I drove 260 miles and the placid, detuned 2.0 HDi was just the ticket.

[barefoot]

OK to put this here? Only I didn't think it worth a separate thread.

 

It's an extract from a book "You are awful" - a bloke masquerading as a traveling salesman in a Maestro, visits the worst places in the UK.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/9051 ... itain.html

 

It's a good, long extract which I suspect will lead to me buying the book since it is piss you self funny!

[scooters]

I wouldn't have a diesel at the moment - simply because these days 99% of my driving is around town and apart from clogged particle filters unless you get 50mpg + the price difference in the cost of diesel doesn't make it worth it.

 

Petro cars with 1.6 and smaller engines seem to make sense -

 

if I were buying a new car just now it would have a fiat twin air engine every time

[scooters]

Perhaps controversial but here goes: We have nothing to fear from electric cars, epically in cities they make a lot of sense. A lot of city families will have two cars a small electric car (replacing their current smart/polo) and a Petrol/Diesel car much as they do now.

 

+1.

 

I don't really understand the hatred for electric cars on here at times to be honest. Can't see the problem in them and I'd roll one no danger if it saves a few quid.

 

Oh great, you've a saved a good few quid, maybe a tenner a day.

You've got rid of some pollution and moved the rest somewhere else.

 

Except you haven't saved any money because you spent half as much again as a normal new you car to buy the thing.

So you're gonna have to drive a lot of miles to make the sums work against a petrol.

And at some point it will run out of juice, at which point piddling range and glacial recharge time will ruin your day.

 

Or you wait until its 6 to 10 years old and run the gauntlet of a full battery replacement at a cost of way more than the car's value.

By 2020 electric cars will have the long term ownership prospects that a mid-2000s Renault does now.

 

 

And death of diesel?

Tough one.

 

As all cars are now engineered to emit as little CO2 as possible on a hopelessly unrealistic EU driving cycle official figures are become further from reality.

For the new car buyer a diesel (90% of its official fuel economy figure) makes some sense against a tiny petrol engine that only gets 50% of its official figure (Fiat Multiair anyone...).

Now if the diesel goes bang at 4 years old due to all the crap bolted to it to make it behave like a petrol there's not a lot you, I, the car buying public or the manufacturers will do about it.

Likewise, who wants to bet on the longevity of a 1.0 Ecoboost petrol engine as fitted to an S-max.

Driven by a woman with three small kids.

Who doesn't maintain her car.

 

I don't claim to have any answers.

 

 

I think leccy cars and the debate around them once again shows how policy is set by the south east - a leccy carin London - great if they can give me 200 miles range at town speeds and make some atificial noise so that pedestrians don't walk out in front of me. However, living where I do with many steep hills and with the weekly 100-200 mile road trips an electric car is about as much use as a cock flavoured lollipop. Ask my cousin, who lives on Harris, and he will just laugh - a lot!

[Pete-M]

Hydrogen fuel cells are the only way to get away from diseasel, petrol, lpg.

 

Electric cars just don't work. Take a Pious in "EV" mode. It'll do about 27 mph for a mile or two then wants the engine on to charge the battery. That's a crock of shit. I've driven a couple of 'em now and they're all the same, they'll creep about at 5 mph and then want the engine on. Pointless. Ferdinand Porsche had the Lohner-Porsche hybrid working in 1900 - not much has changed since other than smaller batteries. It's still shit technology.

 

"Proper" Electric vehicles don't work either. I don't want the country littered with charge points for technology that's a joke before it even begins.

 

They should encourage LPG again, and increase the hydrogen fuel availability. OK, I don't have a clue where all the hydrogen is gonna come from, but it's the only realistic alternative to what is out there now.

[Cavcraft]

Hmm, horses for courses.

I can't really see a problem if people want to save money (by which I mean if any given diesel is proven to be cheaper to run than a petrol) as why throw money down the drain if you don't have to or don't want to?

Not for a minute suggesting we all start hugging trees, knitting lentils or going all 'Friends Of The Earth' and I do appreciate petrols are generally more fun to drive, but the economy of some diesels is ace and why chuck loads of money at the government if you don't have to? Yes, the tax on diesel is a rip off, worse than petrol, but if you factor in the cost per mile then an economical car makes sense if you're hard up.

[RobT]

Hydrogen fuel cells are the only way to get away from diseasel, petrol, lpg.

 

 

I remember seeing a feature in the late 80s on Tomorrows World/Top Gear where they showed a BMW 7 -series running on hydrogen, with all the experts saying it was the way forward and a significant step to moving away from fossils. We're still waiting. They probably don't know wheere all the hydrogen will come from either!

 

On the diesel front, as much as I like my diesel BX, having to rag the thing to get it moving does get tiring after a while. I did a couple of long trips on Saturday and felt the effects afterwards, whereas if I’d been in the petrol Montego I know Id’ve just breezed along and felt more refreshed at the end of it. Fair enough it’s less economical (atleast a 10mpg difference) but the added driving pleasure is worth it for me.

 

I’m not particularly anti-diesel and the XUD has impressed me with it’s reliability and economy in the short time I’ve owned it, oil changes every 4,000 miles has no doubt helped. Modern diesels I’m less bothered with.

[meggersdog]

The extra cost of servicing and expensive parts replacement of modern diesels has already been discussed but also there is the residual value when buying second-hand.The general public think buying a diesel will save them money yet in many cases buying like for like the diesel version can be £1000.00 more second-hand.Not only does the fuel cost more but you can buy alot of petrol for a grand.

At the moment I'm running a 200TDi Discovery and also a 300 series 3.9 V8 on LPG.Now just running locally pound for pound they cost about the same to run.The V8 wins hands down on the driving experience but it's not ideal as when I go on those "pay and play" days using the under-slung gas tanks as rock sliders is probably not a good idea.The point I'm trying to make is a similar condition 300TDi would be atleast £500.00 more to buy than what I paid for the V8.

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

Hydrogen fuel cells are the only way to get away from diseasel, petrol, lpg.

 

I remember seeing a feature in the late 80s on Tomorrows World/Top Gear where they showed a BMW 7 -series running on hydrogen, with all the experts saying it was the way forward and a significant step to moving away from fossils. We're still waiting. They probably don't know wheere all the hydrogen will come from either!

 

BMW's hydrogen prototypes have been normal petrol engines modified to burn hydrogen, which is a dead end. Their current hydrogen 7 series has a 12 cyl engine which returns a dismal 5½ mpg on hydrogen, or 17mpg on petrol. The massive hydrogen tank has a dismal range of under 130 miles, and the hydrogen escapes from it quite rapidly. If you went on holiday and left your car in the airport car park, it'd be empty when you got back.

 

Hydrogen is probably the future (as fuel cell powered electrics, not ICE) but it's so poor compared to petrol/diesel we'll only switch out of desperation, not because of its benefits.

[Tartan58]

Here begins a sweeping ill-thought out statement:

Never mind all this crap about making cars 'better' - they're fine as they are, there's nothing new they can add that will be any real improvement whatsoever over what you can already buy (new or second hand) - the only way to reduce pollution from cars is to reduce the number of cars - this is painfully simple, just stop making new ones, we have enough. The money that would have been spent on making cars can go into giving us a proper high quality public transport system so that we don't "need" to drive anymore. You will only be allowed to own a car if you can demonstrate that you have a certain level of knowledge and enthusiasm - this will also form part of the driving test. Driving (or as I prefer it, Motoring, will become a pleasurable past-time once more.

This will result in quieter roads, cleaner air, fewer accidents due to a higher standard of driving, there really isn't a single drawback to this.

[cobblers]

Until we can make hydrogen without putting in more energy than comes out of the hydrogen in the end, Hydrogen will only remain a fuel store, rather than a fuel source.

 

It's not currently a competitor to Petrol/Diesel, The rivals are the various battery types.

 

On the upside, it's faster to "fill up" with hydrogen than it is to charge a battery.

On the downside, you've got to make the hydrogen to start with, and then convert it back to electricity to viably use it. You lose efficiency at each stage.

 

Besides these, it'll become a fight for the best energy density, which for an electric car to become commonplace needs to become much better than it is (unless there is a breakthrough that allows them to be charged up in 15 minutes)

[Pete-M]

unless there is a breakthrough that allows them to be charged up in 15 minutes

 

This is why electric cars will never work.

[dollywobbler]

unless there is a breakthrough that allows them to be charged up in 15 minutes

 

This is why electric cars will never work.

 

Not necessarily. If you pulled into a fuel station and just swapped your battery for a fully charged one, you're sorted. The big problem with electric power is that everyone keeps trying to charge the car. Stupid idea. Charge the battery! It surely isn't that difficult to develop a quick and efficient battery change method. Surely that's better than having to slosh highly flammable petrol around?

 

I'm still against electric cars overall though.

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

unless there is a breakthrough that allows them to be charged up in 15 minutes

 

This is why electric cars will never work.

 

Ultracapacitors charge very quickly (quicker than you can fill with petrol even) and don't decay like normal batteries. They're probably the only viable way to have a battery electric vehicle. However, that still leaves the problem of generating a vast amount of electricity for the 'filling stations'.

[cobblers]

Yeah - Even if a car full of ultracaps is capable of being charged at the same rate as tipping pez into a tank, we somehow need to safely get 1.21 jigawatts over a bit of wire that a normal everyday person is able to plug in.

 

Now the obvious solution is to just use really high voltage so the cable can be reasonably handleable, but thats 1: unsafe (rain?), and 2: the car would need a lot of tackle to drop this to somewhere like a reasonable voltage to charge the batteries.

 

The alternative is to have mega thick cables, but at ~250V, ( worked it out once while bored at uni, could be miles off) you'd need a pair of cables with about 120mm diameter each or something equally crackers.

[Pete-M]

The thing about highly flammable petrol, or even the evil that is diesel fuel is that they are both far, far better energy storage mediums than batteries.

 

They should stop messing about with electric cars and find something else that burns like petrol instead. Don't need to replace diesels, just ban them.

[Conrad D. Conelrad]

Yeah - Even if a car full of ultracaps is capable of being charged at the same rate as tipping pez into a tank, we somehow need to safely get 1.21 jigawatts over a bit of wire that a normal everyday person is able to plug in.

 

Now the obvious solution is to just use really high voltage so the cable can be reasonably handleable, but thats 1: unsafe (rain?), and 2: the car would need a lot of tackle to drop this to somewhere like a reasonable voltage to charge the batteries.

 

The alternative is to have mega thick cables, but at ~250V, ( worked it out once while bored at uni, could be miles off) you'd need a pair of cables with about 120mm diameter each or something equally crackers.

 

The safety aspect isn't really a problem. There are some ultracap buses running in China - they have a trolleybus style thing on the roof which rises at bus stops and makes contact with a charging point. A charging station could have the contacts on the ground and all cars have a retractable probe underneath, or whatever.

 

That just leaves the problem of every Shell and Esso station needing its own Windscale on site, which wouldn't leave any room for the jet wash.

[Pillock]

Even battery charging isn't an issue, there are phones being released soon that do a 100% charge in 10 minutes instead of 2 hours.

Yes - it's a 3.6v phone battery but the concept remains the same, a change in chemistry can lead to quick charging.

 

What 'leccy cars need is to be better than fossil-fuel ones. Not just comparable, and forget all that green nonsense as that doesn't matter to a large chunk of the population. They need to be better at being a car - they need to have more range than petrol, or go faster, or accelerate quicker. We're struggling to make electric cars that get reviews along the lines of "well it's ok, but x y and z mean that it'll never replace petrol".

 

As a random example - there's a battery powered drag Beetle doing quarter miles. It's doing 10 second runs which makes it BETTER than a lot of petrol-powered stuff that it runs against. It has to be, otherwise there's no point.

[CIH]

Re; hydrogen vs leccy

IMO what we need is for the Govenments to get together with the auto manufacturers and for someone to make a decision. While everyone pulls in different directions nothing will get done. Politicans like to talk about leadership - this is the perfect example where genuine leadership can make a difference but it will never happen ofcourse.

 

Mute point, though I appreciate the sentiment.

The basic dirtyness of diesel, the higher cost of the fuel specifically, common rail petrol injection and trick turbos means diesel has had it's day already.

How does common rail petrol differ from multi point injection?

 

I can't recall the specifics but the main difference for CRD was moving the metering of fuel delivery from the pump to the injectors themselves, as it allows for much more precise control. Alot of the development and principles put into making a common rail diesels work can be applied to petrol but all the development was going into derv-untill recently.

[Craig the Princess]

Good thread, bit of a range of views!

 

Electric cars make no sense in the countryside (well except for my wife's 8 mile each way commute). But in London, Birmingham, Manchester or Edinburgh they do, start stop technology is ok but an electric car does it far better. Also servicing costs are the square root of sod all.

 

Would they work for me, well almost (30 mile commute each way no charge point at work) 60 miles would be acheivable in most weathers and I'd never have to fill up at a petrol station as my car would charge in the 12 hours I'm a home. I would still need a petrol/diesel car as back up but I would save a fair bit (Espically using economy 7 electricity).

 

Could power stations cope? Clearly there would need to be more built but I think some of the claims on here are a little OTT. This home brew electric car (http://www.forkenswift.com/) does 195 watt hours per km with wank second hand batteries. So my 60 mile commute would be 18.87kWh or £2.36. Current car does 35 mpg on petrol so £10.24.

[Pete-M]

A 'lecky car in their present state would never work for me.

 

Yesterday I drove to Cardiff and back. 460 mile round trip from here.

Today I drove to deepest Yorkshite - not far from Hirst Cabs main office - 200 mile round trip. I've also nipped to the office and back which is a 6 mile each way commute in heavy traffic.

Tomorrow, I'm driving to Milton Keynes in the morning. 175 miles from here.

 

That's 847 miles in three days. How many hours of charge would that take in the most efficient electric car available today?

[Craig the Princess]

A 'lecky car in their present state would never work for me.

 

Yesterday I drove to Cardiff and back. 460 mile round trip from here.

Today I drove to deepest Yorkshite - not far from Hirst Cabs main office - 200 mile round trip. I've also nipped to the office and back which is a 6 mile each way commute in heavy traffic.

Tomorrow, I'm driving to Milton Keynes in the morning. 175 miles from here.

 

That's 847 miles in three days. How many hours of charge would that take in the most efficient electric car available today?

 

They clearly aren't the answer for you, the more Petrol saved by electric cars in cities the better though.

 

But for those sat in London Traffic Jams (3.5 miles in just under an hour was my commute to school) they can' be beaten.

[scaryoldcortina]

But for those sat in London Traffic Jams (3.5 miles in just under an hour was my commute to school) they can' be beaten.

 

By walking?

[coalnotdole]

As a random example - there's a battery powered drag Beetle doing quarter miles. It's doing 10 second runs which makes it BETTER than a lot of petrol-powered stuff that it runs against.

 

Its still a beetle though...

[Guest]

I don't have a particular problem with electric cars other than the fact that they usually style them to look stupid - even when they make a "hybrid" version of an existing car they can't resist giving them dumb-looking wheels at the very least. What's all that about?

 

I live in a "city", my commute is about 2 miles and for the past few years I've been doing it in various petrol saloons. I like the presence and style of a three-box car, I like the smoothness/sound of petrol engines and I don't see why driving a short distance means you should automatically be in some little hatchback or an electric car or a bloody bicycle (of all things). It's one of the few pleasures I have left.