There is no such thing as a modern diesel

[PJH]

Who else but LJK Setright

 

[Satch]

And there I was thinking he was dead.

 

[andy_k]

and more rambling from the old man

http://motoring.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=542677&host=32&dir=1093

Andy

 

[C240Sport97]

he writes so well. his pieces are always a good read. he's a motoring journalist icon

 

[Satch]

Icon or not, like most motoring journalists he can still spout generalist nonsense posing as wisdom:

"The folk who wax lyrical about low-speed torque from diesels are either too lazy or too incompetent to change gear, and too mean to invest in automatic transmission."

 

[Brian WH]

Icon or not, like most motoring journalists he can still spout generalist nonsense posing as wisdom:

"The folk who wax lyrical about low-speed torque from diesels are either too lazy or too incompetent to change gear, and too mean to invest in automatic transmission."

Am I supposed to agree with that. I have both.

 

[C240Sport97]

He's just scrapping the barrel to support his assertion .. but it's so eloquently put :bannana:

Icon or not, like most motoring journalists he can still spout generalist nonsense posing as wisdom:

"The folk who wax lyrical about low-speed torque from diesels are either too lazy or too incompetent to change gear, and too mean to invest in automatic transmission."

 

[Satch]

He's just scrapping the barrel to support his assertion .. but it's so eloquently put :bannana:

Yes, I suppose so. At least he writes real books as well

http://mercedes.cars-books.com/search~L.J.K.~Setright_searchBy~Author.html

 

[C240Sport97]

A whole book would be too much eloquence ... a bit like eating a whole 500ml liter of Haagen Daz or Ben & Jerry's in one go by yourself ... actually that's quite doable ...

http://mercedes.cars-books.com/search~L.J.K.~Setright_searchBy~Author.html

 

[Dieselman]

The man is a dinosaur.

He has jumped on the anti-diesel campaign as a means of selling his space in the paper. As usual with the popular press his facts are out of date and incorrect. Note the issue mentioned regarding power output and efficiency...err both wrong, cost...wrong, weight...partially right, but all alloy diesels are available.
Doesn't the extra strength of construction say something about the engine output?

Torque is what pushes the car along, not power. If a piston can't exert any torque onto a cranckshaft then there is no turning moment and the engine will stop.
Power is a theoretical figure dependant on high revs, whereas torque is real output at any engine speed.

If petrol engines actually create more usable output why aren't they used on heavy duty applications such as lorries, trains and ships.
A diesel has a higher thermal efficiency...fact, so more of the fuel is converted into motion.

The carcenergenic properties of diesel fumes is disproven, as found by a fifty year study by the Health and Safety Executive. They found no supporting evidence at all.
On the other hand we know the carcenergenic properties of unleaded petrol as it contains benzine, a known carcenergenic, with a safe level of 5 ppm as set by the World Health Organisation. When people fill their cars they are subject to upto 1200 ppm. Seriously..hold your breath whilst filling a petrol car.
Apparently filling station attendants are subject to a higher than average risk of Lukemia and cancer.

This was not meant to be a rant about petrol verses diesel but it's difficult not to when a national paper prints such rubbish from an apparently revered source.

 

[se97mlm]

Just a question, but if it's torque that pushes a car a long and not power, why is an unladen 7,5 tonner at 3,5 tonnes, with 580Nm accelerate faster than a 3,5 tonne armoured benz with a similar value?

I always thought that it was power that was important, as it is the rate of producing torque. A cdi will be faster at 2000rpm because if it's torque at 2000rpm is higher so will be it's power. The petrol will only be quicker say at 5000 rpm and above where the power is the greater. This means though that in everyday the diesel is quicker because there is more power available at the revs that people drive at normally.

I totally agree by the way that LJK Setright's comments are totally out of date. i would love a cdi as i worked with DaimlerChrysler in Stuttgart to do my Masters dissertation on the 220cdi (143ps OM611DE22LA) and fell in love with the motor on the test bench! It's only finance holding me back from buying one (all that foreign studying didn't help!!) Maybe one day

 

[Brian WH]

I always thought that it was power that was important, as it is the rate of producing torque. A cdi will be faster at 2000rpm because if it's torque at 2000rpm is higher so will be it's power. The petrol will only be quicker say at 5000 rpm and above where the power is the greater. This means though that in everyday the diesel is quicker because there is more power available at the revs that people drive at normally.

My E320 CDI is faster than a E320 petrol at all speeds. Its maximum torque is at 1800-2600 rpm and as the top rpm is 4000 is has max torque most of the way, whereas the petrol engine relies on more rpm to get the same speed.

E320CDI 500Nm torque @ 1800-2600
E320 315Nm torque @ 3000-4800

E320CDI 0-62.5mph = 7.7
E320 0-62.5mph = 7.7

E320CDI Top Speed = 151mph
E320 Top Speed = 149mph

E320CDI fuel average 40.9 mpg
E320 fuel average 28.5 mpg

Enough said

 

[GRAV888]

a bit like eating a whole 500ml liter of Haagen Daz or Ben & Jerry's in one go by yourself ... actually that's quite doable ...

And been done :bannana: :bannana:

 

[C240Sport97]

by me too ... far too many times to count ... but that was in the past

And been done :bannana: :bannana: