Why buy new diesel cars?

[Lennox]

Cheap rent interior



80K for that , no way.

Have you actually been in one and driven it??

 

[Deleted member 65149]

What do you think of the responses so far then?

Simply put, pretty much as expected. A mix of denial, excuses, ridiculous comments and a few sensible responses.

My thoughts on some generalisations in the replies:

1) It's the government's fault, they made/encouraged us to buy diesel. So all these respondents do everything the government tells them without question do they? The government says we must not break speed limits, so of course these people never do. I'm pretty sure that the real answer is that it suited them to go for an option that appeared to make more financial sense. That's completely fair enough and I don't blame them, but just admit it and stop blaming the government.

2) There's little or no choice other than diesel. This can be considered as a self-fulfilling prophecy. We think there's no choice so we only buy what's easy to find. Manufacturers (or more particularly in this case the UK distributors) see that the greatest vehicle sales are diesels, so they react to the market and provide a greater proportion of diesels. So the choice gets further restricted leading to more diesel sales leading to more diesels being offered for sale. And so the cycle spirals into the present situation. And what do must of us do? We shrug and shoulders and accept this enforced restriction instead of reacting to the limitations by not buying what's on offer to us. So the manufacturers and distributors remain oblivious to what very many of their customers really want.

3) I didn't know about the pollutants. Fair enough; perhaps this IS where the government needs to act. Perhaps this IS where they need to admit to being misled and misleading (as they were with Iraq, Brexit and many other issues) and better publicise these findings so that buyers are better equipped to make the right choice - which may still be diesel.

4) The deaths figures are just media-led statistics without any real substance. Perhaps they are. But you could say that about everything from global warming to tobacco to "bad cholesterol". Completely ignore them at your risk.

So thank you everyone for all the sensible replies, including those from people with diesels. They confirm my understanding of the reasons why people continue to buy new diesels, even if I don't necessarily agree.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Missing the point here, as the choice of the car could be far more environmentally friendly (if this was the main concern).

The same type of response can be given in answer to your question, with a diesel car which only covers an average of 4000 miles a year.

I tried not to respond to the ridiculous comments, but couldn't help myself here. I think it's you and not me who's missing the point. I asked why people continue to buy new cars that are very likely to be contributing to the deaths of very many people. At no time have I been tree-hugging green and wanting everything banned that may adversely effect our environment. You question my choice of car, well I wanted a V6 Mercedes that wasn't diesel (because I could experience first hand the noxious fumes and deposits thrown out of their exhausts). My C350 was the smallest available and ticked all the boxes for me.

As for the notion that a diesel car that only covers 4000 miles a year and is the sole family car is a sensible healthier option, you are joking aren't you? It's reasonable to surmise that those 4000 miles would mainly consist of short journeys and most of us in the motoring fraternity know that diesels are poorly suited to this.

 

[grober]

Leaving aside the broader arguements for a moment and simply looking at it pragmatically the political writing may be on the wall for diesel engined cars both in terms of tax breaks and possibly future inner city access. For someone faced with buying a new Mercedes in the next few months- assuming there is powerplant availability in their model of choice, they might be wise to consider a petrol or hybrid powered version.

 

[Alex225]

The way I see it is that diesel when I was first driving was seen as an option you didn't really go for. This was early 1999/2000 and I recall someone having a 1.9 diesel Clio which I don't believe was turbo charged.

In the years that followed diesel suddenly came up in people's opinions, they realised they weren't slow by default, you could see 40mpg+ most of the time and with tax for new diesels being stupidly low, people flocked to them.

The irony being that I'm sure many who bought them didn't need one but were tempted into it.

Now, among petrol heads it's come full circle and they are beginning to realise they're not suited to certain types of driving and they're actually not great for the environment. By this point so many people have them and will swear by them even though they probably don't reap the benefit.

I own a diesel (E320) and although I only do 8-9k a year, 7k+ of that is motorway driving and that's when this car is in it's stride in terms of efficiency. My Mrs on the other hand sold her diesel soon after landing a job 7 miles from home rather than 50 miles from home!

Sadly people don't think like that and diesel has become quite acceptable among the masses and for some a preference. Diesels have gone the way of automatics. Older autos were deemed inferior to manual, now autos are preferred by many and diesel has become accepted in the same way. Shame so much of the reason for buying a diesel was b*llocks!

 

[Dippo]

So people can't buy diesels because of the environment, but it's OK to buy a V6 Mercedes because you want one and it ticks your boxes?

 

[Abcan]

60% of the time, statistics are right every time.

 

[Dryce]

For someone faced with buying a new Mercedes in the next few months- assuming there is powerplant availability in their model of choice, they might be wise to consider a petrol or hybrid powered version.

But saying "I will buy a big petrol car instead of a big diesel car" doesn't really solve the problem to the extent that it should.

If you really worry about this then buy a smaller car. A modern hatchback is all most familes *actually* need. It may not meet what they expect these days. But it gets the majority of the job done.

I would add - I have no illusions - I drive a car that is much bigger than I need. I mitigate that by using it with some thought and care. But that's not an excuse for the purchasding decision - just a sort of aftermarket apology.

 

[Dryce]

So people can't buy diesels because of the environment, but it's OK to buy a V6 Mercedes because you want one and it ticks your boxes?

I think the phrase 'among petrol heads' was used so ..... in that context it was appropriate logic.

 

[DamianH]

Not wishing to discuss the merits of petrol or diesel, but on the facts. Unfortunately the UK is breaching (quite comfortably) air pollution limits, particularly in London (where I live). These are legally binding limits (this side of Brexit at least!) and the government has fought and lost legal cases aimed at forcing them to act.

Now the facts end, and this is why I did not buy a diesel (before the emissions scandals broke): diesel engines are the major cause of the pollution, and just as importantly one of the few levers the government can attempt to pull. They will try and tax them off the road. Very unfair as people were encouraged to buy them, but what the government giveth, the government can take away - and more. I would also note that Sadiq Khan is getting ready to act on his own accord, as he is able to do.

Summary: I would not want to own a diesel car in London!

 

[Deleted member 65149]

So people can't buy diesels because of the environment, but it's OK to buy a V6 Mercedes because you want one and it ticks your boxes?

Who said people can't buy diesels?

The newest 350 V6 petrol engine (that I have) emits far less NOx and particulate matter than most (if not all) Diesel engines. It's those pollutants reaching the pavement where young children are that worries me. What's the point in trying to save the earth by reducing CO2 if there's going to be nobody left to live on it? (For the confrontational out there, no that doesn't mean we should forget about restricting CO2, it obviously means we should think about everything rather than cherry picking!)

 

[Dippo]

Sadiq Khan is proposing an Ultra Low Emission Zone to be introduced in central London from 2020. Diesel cars entering the zone must conform to certain standards, or they will have to pay a charge. That standard is EU6, which is the current standard.

 

[HB]

Have you actually been in one and driven it??

Yes and yes.

Had one for a day. Crazy quick but I felt like i was in an Avensis with a massive ipad in it.

 

[whitenemesis]

Sadiq Khan is proposing an Ultra Low Emission Zone to be introduced in central London from 2020. Diesel cars entering the zone must conform to certain standards, or they will have to pay a charge. That standard is EU6, which is the current standard.

And how is that charge going to be used? To help those suffering complications from the pollution?

 

[Giantvanman]

I remember reading a report on Friends of the Earth or some similar greenie website that Hope St in Glasgow was the most polluted street in Europe and being invited to sign a petition to ban cars from it .

I don't think it went down well when I posted a comment that a good part of said street was already BUSES AND TAXIS ONLY , and that these same vehicles , together with vans and trucks , constitute the majority of traffic there .

Like the annual 'you're all going to die' report that harangues car drivers and especially diesel car drivers but uses the data from the monitoring station in Oxford Street, London......the end where there are buses and taxis only.

If anyone wishes to investigate pollution fully and properly, they should take account of weather patterns; it's not just dust from the sahara that is blown our way and publishing data based on a windless day from a street that acts as a 'bucket' destroys all credibility when used for fear tactics.

 

[DRIVER200]

Just to put a spanner in the works. I currently drive an Audi SQ5 which has a 3l Bi-Turbo Diesel engine. Soon I will sell this and buy a C43 AMG 3l Bi-Turbo Petrol engine. The tax on the SQ5 is currently £210 P.A. and the Mercedes C43 £230 P.A!!!
Crazy but true.

 

[Giantvanman]

Who said people can't buy diesels?

The newest 350 V6 petrol engine (that I have) emits far less NOx and particulate matter than most (if not all) Diesel engines. It's those pollutants reaching the pavement where young children are that worries me. What's the point in trying to save the earth by reducing CO2 if there's going to be nobody left to live on it? (For the confrontational out there, no that doesn't mean we should forget about restricting CO2, it obviously means we should think about everything rather than cherry picking!)

In global terms, the amount of any pollution we produce pales into insignificance compared to the big two, China and USA.

In terms of vehicle pollution, the percentage of pollution produced (CO2 in particular) is very small when compared to that produced by industry, nationally and globally.

I believe....it's been a few years since I researched this to any degree.

 

[400ixl]

Who said people can't buy diesels?

The newest 350 V6 petrol engine (that I have) emits far less NOx and particulate matter than most (if not all) Diesel engines. It's those pollutants reaching the pavement where young children are that worries me. What's the point in trying to save the earth by reducing CO2 if there's going to be nobody left to live on it? (For the confrontational out there, no that doesn't mean we should forget about restricting CO2, it obviously means we should think about everything rather than cherry picking!)

That is making the assumption that NOx is the worst poison coming out of either, Petrol produces more hydrocarbons than diesel which many studies have found to be more harmful to humans.

Whilst diesel is pretty bad for people in one way, petrol is equally bad in another.

Its more than one issue that needs to be resolved to solve the concerns you should have with what reaches the pavement.

Petrol has been going the right way with smaller capacity turbo engines which are more efficient and cleaner burning. producing fewer hydrocarbons then the larger capacity V6 / V8 engines.

 

[Dryce]

What's the point in trying to save the earth by reducing CO2 if there's going to be nobody left to live on it?

I think this is where statistics break down a bit in terms of how meaningful they are.

How many of the '12000' in the original headline stat would have had - or had the opportunity to have had - children.

12000 alleged victims of a pollutant vs the consequences of global warming

Which is maybe why in Europe it's CO2 that is the strategic focus and the effect of diesels in town a tactical issue.

Somebody has maybe done the calculations in some back room and figured that shifting away from diesel is going to cause more problems than it actually solves.

The solution is really to cut personal journeys. If people don't travel as much then the energy and any emissions associated with it drop - whether generated by the vehicle or by a powerstation used to charge the vehicle or by other facets of the supply chaain asociated with energy supply.

 

[Lennox]

Yes and yes.

Had one for a day. Crazy quick but I felt like i was in an Avensis with a massive ipad in it.

Sorry but I do find that bizarre as the door card for example for very bespoke and made from aluminium and leather, as is the dash. Imho the cheap parts are the Merc switch gear.

The steering wheel is junk but the series 2 comfort seats are superb.