Why buy new diesel cars?

[Lennox]

Therein lies another issue with diesels. Owners are clearly delighted with their choices - because they don't have to stand outside them when they're driving. It's not the driver who has to breath in the high levels of particulate matter belching out of the back, it's the poor kids in pushchairs by the side of the road.

Also it's those who are outside who have to put up with the extra noise from diesels. Of course owners will say that their diesels are quiet, one even said in this very thread that diesels are quieter than petrol! But all that's happened in reality is that they've become immune to the rattles, they no longer hear them. So again it's the pedestrians in urban environments who suffer.

No doubt some will now say "diesels are much quieter now, you're talking about older cars". Well I've been in a few new diesels in the last four years when being driven to and from my dealership for services to my car. Without exception they were noisy. I once made the mistake of driving one of their cars myself- a new B180 cdi. God it was awful. Noisy, rough, totally unrefined. But not real a fair comparison with my C-class I'll admit. Then earlier this year I had a brand new Audi A4 2 litre diesel as a hire car in Spain (instead of the petrol 3-series BMW I'd ordered grrr). Better than the B-class but still not for me. It was rattly at tick over and low speed, a rattle that could be heard when the windows were open and felt through the throttle pedal. It was nice and quiet once up to a 60/70 kph though. (What a boring car it was however, but that's another story comparing Mercedes with Audi.) So as I said, I can only assume diesel lovers become insensitive to the characteristics that I don't like. It's probably wrong of me to say they don't care, it's more that they don't know.

But you could and maybe you do on some other forum apply your anger at diesel noise and pollution at supercar owners. (Or all Merc 63 drivers) Especially the Eastern gentlemen in London that hammer their HyperCars around Kensington.

Yes lower in number but from daily experience on Glasgows city centre it's not the cars that are the issue but buses, bin lorries and taxis. All diesel. So to address your hate and finger pointing at diesel cars, unless you drive a Tesla charged from your solar panels we are all in the wrong.

Until the government leads by example and taxes the issue directly it's not going to change. Also their is a high level of disbelief and even millions (if not billions) being spent by the oil giants to lobby the government.

I just wish Elon Musks dream of the Giga factory expansion happens and we all benefit more from the thermonuclear reactor in the sky. Plus the carbon research into generating fuel from the Co2 in the atmosphere gathers support.

But again why?? More choice, economy, love the torque and the wife doesn't hear a loud engine note so is less aware of the progress being made.

But i would currently buy an E43 AMG of Alfa Quadrifoglio if I could..... see how good the accountant relativity is. But she in doors will be getting a diesel Disco 5. Why?? The petrol options is not an option (cost and mpg)

 

[Doodle]

Drive an EV. Suddenly everything else, petrol or diesel, seems noisy and uncouth.

 

[DRIVER200]

This is how I see it. I currently drive an Audi SQ5 which has a 3.0l bi-turbo engine knocking out around 310 BHP. Audi have installed a fake sound enhancer to make the diesel engine sound like a V8. They have achieved this. I will soon sell this car and buy a C43 AMG petrol which -I hope- will please me more. The yearly road tax on the Audi is £210 and the upcoming C43 is £230. So I will be paying more to tax a petrol engine car so assume its knocking out more pollution than my diesel?

 

[Yugguy]

Noise my ****. Far worse is every wretched chav with his 1.0 car and stupid ****ing ******* droning booming tin can exhaust. Much worse than the odd diesel rattle.

Don't get me wrong I like the sound and feel of a proper n/z revvy hot hatch, I've had a few. And I LOVE the sound of V engines, V8s in particular. There are a couple of nice V8s on our estate, you can hear them, they are a little louder than normal, but it's a good noise, not just a mindless boom.

 

[DRIVER200]

Normally I would agree but don't think a car capable of 0-60 in 5.1 seconds and costing over £50,000 and housing one of the best 3.0 diesels engines in production is exactly chavy but I get your sentiment.

 

[Delayed Steve]

The people who drive ,buses,taxi's and bin Lorry's in Glasgow city center aren't driving them to try to impress their neighbors though!
There 32 million cars registered in the UK and less than a million commercials !
So I think it more likely that cars both petrol and diesel cause the most damage to the air quality.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Noise my ****. Far worse is every wretched chav with his 1.0 car and stupid ****ing ******* droning booming tin can exhaust. Much worse than the odd diesel rattle. Don't get me wrong I like the sound and feel of a proper n/z revvy hot hatch, I've had a few. And I LOVE the sound of V engines, V8s in particular. There are a couple of nice V8s on our estate, you can hear them, they are a little louder than normal, but it's a good noise, not just a mindless boom.

I don't know how noisy your **** is, but at least you give the impression of understanding what I'm saying. It's not just the volume, it's the quality. Those who like the sound of diesels are perfectly entitled to their audio choices, I'm only saying that I don't like them. I liken the difference between petrols and diesels as comparable to that between Beethoven and Bieber. It's more than likely that Bieber has far more fans in the UK than Beethoven, and possibly even the world. Those Bieber fans love his songs, very many will scream ecstatically when his music is played. They're not interested in Beethoven and no doubt a high proportion of them have never even heard of the German composer. Bieber' music gets played far more on the radio than Beethoven's, it's more readily available. I don't have a problem with that, as long as I don't have to listen to the young Canadian. What's far harder to avoid is the diesel "music". Cars account for about 80% of motor vehicle traffic, the higher proportion of car miles being by diesel cars. That's a lot of boxes of nails insulting our ears. Perhaps I too will become immune one day and stop complaining about them. You can only hope

 

[Deleted member 6183]

You are getting desperate now.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

You are getting desperate now.

Not at all. I'm just worried about HB who is struggling to understand so thinks it's boring. Poor thing.

 

[Yugguy]

If you stand next to my friend's E350cdi as it drives off you would be hard-pushed to tell it is a diesel. The sound of the V comes through much more than any diesel clatter. It really is an extraordinarily quiet engine, inside and out.

 

[Lit91]

I don't know how noisy your **** is, but at least you give the impression of understanding what I'm saying. It's not just the volume, it's the quality. Those who like the sound of diesels are perfectly entitled to their audio choices, I'm only saying that I don't like them. I liken the difference between petrols and diesels as comparable to that between Beethoven and Bieber. It's more than likely that Bieber has far more fans in the UK than Beethoven, and possibly even the world. Those Bieber fans love his songs, very many will scream ecstatically when his music is played. They're not interested in Beethoven and no doubt a high proportion of them have never even heard of the German composer. Bieber' music gets played far more on the radio than Beethoven's, it's more readily available. I don't have a problem with that, as long as I don't have to listen to the young Canadian. What's far harder to avoid is the diesel "music". Cars account for about 80% of motor vehicle traffic, the higher proportion of car miles being by diesel cars. That's a lot of boxes of nails insulting our ears. Perhaps I too will become immune one day and stop complaining about them. You can only hope

Given the fact that there seems to be a personal issue with diesel powered cars, I didn't think you'd hear diesel engine noise with all of that selective hearing that you've been demonstrating in this thread.

Apply the same principle or get a pair of those if diesel engine noise really bothers you that much?

Anyway, I though this was about potentially dangerous emissions rather than engine noise?

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Pardon?

 

[David404]

Fascinating discussion.

knighterrant thanks for the link to the DoT road use paper, will take a read later.

I've commented before about trading one risk for another, pollution in one part of the chain/life-cycle for another. This got me thinking and I googled the Euro standards, link below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_emission_standards

Now we all know the test is flawed and its way off real world results and whilst the test should probably be updated to more closely approximate real world usage we have to accept that no test will replicate real world results because the test has to be standardized and repeatable and the real word is, well variable... Also if we change the test we'll also have to re-set the 'pass mark'.

Anyway, looking at the Euro standards 1 through 6 it would seem evident that big advances have been made in both petrol and diesel engine environmental performance. But as with all technology the first reductions are the easiest to make as we tighten the standard it will get increasingly difficult to achieve further reduction and reductions will be less. Example - many years ago I swapped all the 100W light bulbs in the house for the coil tube energy savers of about 10W to 13W BIG saving. More recently I've swapped to LED bulbs that use even less 3W to 7W a saving but not so much. I also decided that in some locations I would only swap to LED as the energy savers failed to reduce the electronic waste I generate. The energy savers I believe contain some nasty stuff.

So further reductions to internal combustion engines petrol and diesel will get harder - when do we get to the point that early replacement will be counter productive, when we've had the low hanging fruit to made from engine efficiency and it would be easier to reduce pollution by looking at other issues involved in car usage.

We could look at the fuel we put into vehicles. I use Shell Nitro+ diesel in part because its said to burn cleaner (but that could be marketing crap from Shell) in part because its said to have cleaning agents that keep my injectors and pump clean and in good health, a clean injector will also pollute less then a dirty injector.

How about smarter traffic control to make the traffic flow better?

Both of the above have the potential to hit every car on the road, petrol and diesel.

 

[HB]

Not at all. I'm just worried about HB who is struggling to understand so thinks it's boring. Poor thing.

I am really struggling to keep up.

Seriously , give it a rest, you're making a fool of yourself.

 

[Deleted member 37751]

I am really struggling to keep up.

Seriously , give it a rest, you're making a fool of yourself.

Be quiet you child killer you!

 

[HB]

Be quiet you child killer you!

I've only got 2 diesels Lee, can't do much with that.

But, does the 63 make up for it ???

 

[Deleted member 37751]

I've only got 2 diesels Lee, can't do much with that.

But, does the 63 make up for it ???

You've got both angles covered:

E350 CDI = child killer.

E63 Bi-Turbo = dolphin slayer.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Thank you David for some adult views on the matter. Best to leave the children to play on their own so they don't get bored.

I think you make an excellent point about the rate of advances with what we already have, the progress curve possibly closing in on its asymptotic best. The add-ons for the internal combustion engines such as catalytic converters and DPFs initially made huge differences to the emissions but significant further developments in those areas must surely be a trade off with engine performance and costs. There's the additional risk with performance sapping add-ons that they'll be removed by owners seeking extra speed from their cars, something that's already happening with a lot with DPFs (including those of many members of this forum).

We've already seen that vehicle manufacturers have the power to effectively lobby government to downgrade some aspect of standards such as Euro 6 "to allow them time to develop the necessary engine modifications". It could well be the case that unrealistic standards have been set for internal combustion engines. Are the figures simply arbitrary targets; "Wouldn't it be nice if we could achieve ..." figures? Or could they be achieve with relative ease but at high cost, a cost that may not be acceptable to the consumer?

The answer on where to go certainly isn't simple. There's no shortage of greener ways to run a car. How viable they are is another story. And where should the incentive to explore all the options come from: government, manufacturers or consumers? I believe it should be all three. Electricity would appear to be in the lead as an alternative fuel to petrol and diesel, but like the other alternatives such as natural gas, vegetable oil and sunlight they face significant handicaps. They're all limited by a lack of infrastructure for refuelling or recharging. Without the infrastructure in place there's no incentive to manufacture or purchase the alternatives other than as commuter cars. Without the alternative fuel cars in sufficient numbers, there's no incentive to put the infrastructure in place. It's a massive risk on both sides. Chicken and egg.

The easy answer is to sit back, accept what we have and carry on as we are. It's far from perfect but it works reasonably well. But is that the right attitude? Do we just leave it up to others (government and manufacturers) as being their problem? If not, what can we do about it? Can we vary our purchasing decisions, even if those decisions may not be the most convenient and financially advantageous for us in the short-term?

 

[Yugguy]

Ring the northern coast of Scotland with wave power devices. The Scots won't like it but needs must.

Use the power to crack sea water. Oxygen can be sold on, hydrogen goes to fuel cars. Even the salt could likely be used in industrial applications.

Burn the hydrogen in car engines.

Get water back.

Simples.

 

[grober]

Not much mention has been made of LPG [the fuel of choice of many a hefty 4x4] I was actually surprised at just how many outlets there are hidden away in the corner of your local filling station. LPG Autogas - the greener, cleaner and cheaper fuel alternative

As usual UK purchasers are denied the chance to buy a switchable install warranted from factory version of popular models available to European buyers. {Ford, Opel, VW, Audi, Skoda, Seat and Renault} I always felt that the "converted vehicle" nature of the UK market put off many purchasers from the undoubted financial advantages

New LPG vehicles