|
Presume you can catch it on Iplayer later if you wanna see it.
|
Shock horror!
Watchdog comes to the party late ( as ever) blame the makers ( as ever )
Poor poor consumer.
Shocking program, should be taken off. or sold to the Daily Mail as a comic strip.
|
|
Just letting people know it was on if they wanted to catch it, keep thee hair on.
|
|
makes my blood boil; that program
|
|
Then stick your head in a fridge, lifes too short.
|
|
thought your PC was broke?
|
|
Its not a PC, but it was broke, this question has already been asked, talk about coming late to the point, you a Watchdog researcher? :-p
|
>> makes my blood boil; that program
You are the weakest link
Oh hang on, wrong show.
|
There's a similar consumer program on my local BBC radio that I try to catch if I'm in the car.
They restore my faith in human nature, that there's one born every minute.
Annoys SWMBO no end.
|
|
Not seen the Watchdog program and can't be bothered watching it - life's too short. I do get annoyed about the car manufacturers releasing half hearted DPF solutions on an unsuspecting car buying public though. DPF technology has been around since the early 80s, plenty of time to get it sorted out.
|
Ridiculous programme. They take legitimate consumer issues (such as the issues around DPF systems) and present them so sensationally and from such a skewed perspective that it's actually detrimental to an otherwise legit complaint.
I have had inside knowledge on a couple of issues they've covered from close family who've worked in the companies involved. Watchdog wouldn't know honest, balanced journalism if it smacked them between the eyes.
I agree with the comment above. This is the Daily Mail equivalent of TV programmes. All angry, outraged and shouty.
|
|
Dont watch it often for the same reasons as others on here, but did catch it a couple of weeks ago when the featured Pontins. The woman from Pontins made Anne Robinson look like a pussy cat, and also managed to get in that her team has asked their film crew to view some of the "new" accomodation, but they couldnt be bothered
|
I can't be bothered with that programme. There can be issues with DPF (I know oil levels went up on the Mazda) but it's all in the handbook etc.
I see my VW diesel also uses Adblue additive. Filled at the service etc. Not that it worries me.
|
|
Sorry for mentioning it, really I am. Will keep gob shut in future.
|
|
I didn't mean to be negative. I think many are unaware of the DPF issue in some cars. Main gripe was against the program and not you Stu!
Last edited by: rtj70 on Thu 20 Oct 11 at 22:22
|
|
Honest to god on high, this place is like a meeting place for male menopausal miseries sometimes.
|
|
hey! you started a thread and it got lively! what do you expect here? you would soon get peed off if we all ignored you!
|
>> like a meeting place for male menopausal miseries sometimes
Ooh heck, I hope I've got a few more years 'til I reach that stage ;)
|
|
Pop into HJ for a larf then: retarded drivel is commonplace there now.
|
If the program raised the issue of DPFs with the car buying public, surely that's a good thing?
Yes, it's old news to us here, but, we must remember, we're all a bit deviant in one way or another about motor cars.
Some friends who live round the corner have recently bought a modern diesel second hand - I can't think why, they work at the same company, and thir commute is less than 2 miles - they had the car a few weeks before the DPF lamp came on. They asked me about it, and I explained, and their faces dropped - effectively they were mis-sold the car, and it isn't fit for purpose. The Watchdog program shows that isn't an unusual situation.
|
|
If that is how watch dog covered it, that would be a valid view.
|
They did make a valid point though, sales staff should clearly point out that they are not much use as a run around.
I know this, but Mrs Smith at number 77 wouldn't have a clue that a diesel 500 is no use for going to the doctors every Thursday and the B&Q pensioners discount day on Wednesday.
|
I think the valid point made, albeit badly and in a puerile way, by Watchdog was that many DPFs are unfit for any purpose really. 15 minutes + at 38mph and 1800 rpm (as specified by Fiat according to this link)
www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2011/10/diesel_particulate_filters.html
is not realistic. Even a high mileage driver isn't going to buy another car if his routine changes for a couple of weeks. My colleague with a Cashcow has problems every school holiday because her journeys shorten, and regularly has to drive 20 miles out of her way to put the light out.
Frankly I'm surprised at rtj70 being so 'understanding'. The Mazda 6 diesels were a scandal.
The oil level in my Outlander has gone up nearly 10mm in 7,000 miles (still some way to go) and servicing is every 9,000, not 12,500 as on the PSA-engined versions - simply to manage the oil level issue, according to the dealer. What a feeble solution.
Neither have the manufacturers been at all willing to explain how the things work. If I drive so as to use less fuel, will I bung it up more, or less? I have no idea. Somebody on here suggested a good thrash clears the DPF - sounds illogical to me, but who knows?
The fact that it isn't unusual doesn't make it OK. Ditto Nikasil and cracked alloy wheels.
|
>>The fact that it isn't unusual doesn't make it OK.
I agree, and I hope I didn't imply that I thought it was OK.
Technically, I am a big fan of the efficiency of the diesel engine, particularly a turbo diesel engine. With a short gap for a couple of years, I've had diesel cars since the mid 80's, and while I wasn't too fussed about the NVH problems of older engines, I have always felt a bit guilty about particulate emissions.
That the diesel engine does produce some very small particles which do go very deep into the lungs' structure makes the newly found popularity of the diesel engine problematic.
There was an idea kicking about where the particles were to be trapped in a chamber, and then burnt off with microwaves - what happened to that idea?
|
hembrow.blogspot.com/2011/10/how-dutch-got-their-cycling.html?
Maybe this will save our longs in the long run,less traffic in towns.
Cyclist can be dangerous do.>:)
|
When the DPF re-generates what happens to the poor sod driving behind them?! They're going to a lungful of crud. No fossil fuel car is suitable for silly short journeys now. If you piddle to and from somewhere that is under 2 miles away you should walk or get an electric car. The latter are perfectly suited to regular short journeys.
|
|
I think it's a massively overrated problem anyway. The DPF on the BMW can do a regen in a 15 minute journey, and apart from being slightly annoying because the gearbox keeps lower gears to keep engine revs up, that's all you know about it. Well, there's also a delicious waft of caramel coming from the exhaust when you get out.
|
Having done more than 110,000miles in two DPF equipped Focuses, I fail to see the problem.
There's no outward signs of regeneration and no filling of the sump.
Ford produce a properly engineered car, so buying one of those is the safe option.
No doubt there are other makes which perform as well.
|
I think half the problem is people are too afraid to put their foot down and clear the cobwebs.
That and nearly everywhere in residential areas becoming 20 mph zones.
|
>> I think half the problem is people are too afraid to put their foot down
>> and clear the cobwebs.
>>
>> That and nearly everywhere in residential areas becoming 20 mph zones.
you can still drive them in first gear, its just a little noisier, but you keep your engine unclogged.
The main problem is the low down torque, pleople wont use the full rev range. Use the revs and the car will keep clean.
|
>> Frankly I'm surprised at rtj70 being so 'understanding'
But in the four years I had the car the DPF light never came on. Oil levels did rise and I did have some interim oil changes for peace of mind.
And I did a lot of short journeys in the car too. Sometimes weeks would go buy before I did more than 10 miles a day.
But I did know about the DPF because it is in the manual and knew what to keep an eye on etc. RTFM :-)
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 11:35
|
|
Not every body drives a car to hammer hell out of it.Should't be necessary.
|
Why does it rev that high? why does it have a red line.
Its there as a guidance to USE IT ALL
|
>> Why does it rev that high? why does it have a red line.
>>
>> Its there as a guidance to USE IT ALL
>>
>>
Totally agree Z, I believe Ford fitted a monitoring system to some of their cars used by "average" owners. I can't remember the exact figure, but most only used something like 25 - 30% of the engines power. Must be why some people drive as if they have a lawnmower engine in their car. Had one yesterday as I approached at 60mph he pulled out of a junction in front of me and took about a half a mile to accelerate up to 50 mph.
|
>> Not every body drives a car to hammer hell out of it.
No one is suggesting that, but it's quite a known fact that diesels soot up and eventually run sluggishly if you pootle about in them.
Similarly with petrol engines, you need to occasionally take it over 4,000 RPM to allow the inlet and outlet valves to rotate.
|
>> No one is suggesting that, but it's quite a known fact that diesels soot up
>> and eventually run sluggishly if you pootle about in them.
Indeed, but the need to drive in this manner should be minimal, an Italian tune up shouldn't be the normal way to drive, unless the design is wrong in the first place.
I've driven Diesel trucks for some time now, some of which would not rev over 1800rpm, even those capable of 2500rpm are not really designed to run at those revs, indeed the auto gearboxes are set up to change up at around 1500 to 1700 rpm, and spend most of their life at around 1300rpm.
One of ours has just gone over 1 million km's and pulls better than all the others, it's normal rev range is 900 to 1700 rpm, above that it pulls no better and wastes fuel.
No trucks need thrashing to make them run right, something wrong with the design of cars that are not capable of running well indefinately at their peak torque revs, between 1500 and 2500 rpm in most cases.
|
You are a professional driver Gordon.How many people know what a Italian tune up means.?
A friend of ours has a motorboat nice job but he tootles along on small rivers.Its' got two powerfull diesels capable of 25 knots.I suggested taking it to sea next year for a good blow out of the engine.Might persuade him when spring is back.
|
>> Indeed, but the need to drive in this manner should be minimal, an Italian tune
>> up shouldn't be the normal way to drive, unless the design is wrong in the
>> first place.
Its not a tune up its called normal driving. Some donkeys never go above a 1/2 of the rev range.
>> No trucks need thrashing to make them run right, something wrong with the design of
>> cars that are not capable of running well indefinately at their peak torque revs, between
>> 1500 and 2500 rpm in most cases.
You cant compare driving trucks with huge torque at 600 revs, breathless at 2000, limited to 2500 revs and 3 thousand gear ratios to a car diesel engine.
|
>> >> No trucks need thrashing to make them run right, something wrong with the design
>> of
>> >> cars that are not capable of running well indefinately at their peak torque revs,
>> between
>> >> 1500 and 2500 rpm in most cases.
>>
>> You cant compare driving trucks with huge torque at 600 revs, breathless at 2000, limited
>> to 2500 revs and 3 thousand gear ratios to a car diesel engine.
>>
The big difference is that a truck is worked with a heavy load, a car engine rarely works hard, even when fully loaded.
EDIT:- Unless I am driving it. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 14:34
|
Could be an ideal service to offer. Clean your DPF for £99.... ie just take car for a blast up the nearest dual carriageway. Easy money :-)
Beats me why manufacturers make their cars designed for economic low rev driving then fit something that needs the exact opposite to stop it gumming up! Utterly stupid solution.
|
>> Beats me why manufacturers make their cars designed for economic low rev driving then fit
>> something that needs the exact opposite to stop it gumming up! Utterly stupid solution.
>>
Spot on, you don't buy a Diesel to cane the living daylights out of it.
|
>> Spot on, you don't buy a Diesel to cane the living daylights out of it.
>>
Impossible, GB, they have rev limiters. There is a difference between using power and "thrashing it".
|
>>Spot on, you don't buy a Diesel to cane the living daylights out of it<<
In essence, anyone who lives in a built up area should buy a petrol because DPF laden cars are not fit for purpose for a city dweller - look at Rattle - can you imagine how many times his car would be in at the dealers if it had DPF...
Of course, manufacturers dont want ordinary people to know about DPF issues...£££...
|
|
If manufactures don't want us to know it's there problem.Goods should be fit for purpose and it is up to the salesman to tell customers..There are loads of people who drive cars who haven;t got a clue what is under the bonnett.Engine.What.?>:)
|
Try explaining DPF to a granny buying her last new car, not going to happen.
Car sales people are not on the whole the most moral of characters - some are, many arent, ive known many personally and I wouldnt trust them not to say anything to make a sale.
They will be 99% legal, but theres plenty out there that will sell Maureen who goes to shops once a week a DPF diesel, telling her all about the cheap tax and how cheap to run it will be, forgetting to mention its totally unsuitable for how she uses a car - that said, many car sales people are quite ignorant about the technical side of cars themselves, intelligence isnt required as part of the job.
|
...Could be an ideal service to offer. Clean your DPF for £99.... ie just take car for a blast up the nearest dual carriageway. Easy money :-)...
We used to service a DeTomaso Pantera which was owned by two eccentric brothers who were farmers.
It needed a good blast every time it came in.
No easy task in one of those things on UK roads.
I wasn't allowed to drive it, but the favoured route included the straight bit of the M5 past Strensham services.
|
|
On a bigger scale, many times I have seen harbour tugs that have been used for light work then have to work hard to shift a ship. The plume of diesel soot is impressive as they clear their exhaust, and the crew say they run better for it.
|
They use cheap fuel Old Navy a bit like tar should have been banned years ago .All down to cost.
The Broere Tankers used this type of fuel,had to be preheated before use.
|
>> They use cheap fuel Old Navy a bit like tar should have been banned years
>> ago .All down to cost.
>>
>> The Broere Tankers used this type of fuel,had to be preheated before use.
>>
>>
These modern diesel tugs used standard diesel, I have heard that it worked well in road vehicles. ;-)
|
>> On a bigger scale, many times I have seen harbour tugs that have been used
>> for light work then have to work hard to shift a ship. The plume of
>> diesel soot is impressive as they clear their exhaust, and the crew say they run
>> better for it.
I believe it's called clagg. Plenty of it in this beast. Turn the volume up.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Irnq8JEJec
|
>>
>> I believe it's called clagg. Plenty of it in this beast. Turn the volume up.
>>
>> www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Irnq8JEJec
>>
LOL, I just knew that was going to be a video of a 'tractor' :-)
|
>> LOL, I just knew that was going to be a video of a 'tractor' :-)
How dare you!
I was stuck behind a Skoda Fabia estate Tdi yesterday. Driven at a steadfast 20 in a 30 zone 'just to be on the safe side'. The flat cap behind the wheel turned into the next road and I was smothered in thick black plumes. Probably bought for economy, and driven at 1000 revs everywhere.
|
Now this is really clearing the pipes...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=13IZmOUnusI
|
|
Thats funny worth about 50 smokes.
|
>>>We used to service a DeTomaso Pantera which was owned by two eccentric brothers who were farmers.
Broadly speaking Iffy which part of the country?
|
...Broadly speaking Iffy which part of the country?...
There was a strong clue in the road test route - Strensham services on the M5 - nearest town is Upton-upon-Severn, south Worcestershire.
The brothers' farm was nearby, and the car was light blue, if I recall.
You can have their name if you want it, but we're talking 30-odd years ago, so the pair of them will be getting on a bit, even assuming they are still with us.
|
I tended to use the revs a bit on the Mazda6 and the Mondeo before it. Perhaps why I didn't have problems. Although two EGRs went on the Mondeo.
On the Passat I find it will get to 60mph in second. Not tried how fast it will go in third yet ;-) Acceleration in fourth and fifth still very good from just below 2000rpm. Again no way to find out legally how fast it goes in fourth and fifth! :-)
|
>>>There was a strong clue in the road test route - Strensham services on the M5
Ha ha they do always say how strong forum coincidences can be... They were Mrs F's relatives so I can't say too much more about them. I remember well being shown the Pantera 30 something years ago. They had a Ford Galaxy too for running about the farm.... like this.
carphotos.cardomain.com/ride_images/3/3266/1341/33163170003_large.jpg
Last edited by: Fenlander on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 13:42
|
DPF in the C5 has never given any trouble. Regens about once per tank, so every 700 miles or so.
My journey is 12 miles each way to work, about 25 minutes, and a bit of local work.
Never seen the DPF light so I guess the PSA system works OK
|
|
For my first 18mths with the C5 I was doing a similar commute, now and again the fuel consumption would drop on the readout by around 15mpg. I assumed this was during a regeneration??
|
...they had a Ford Galaxy too for running about the farm.... like this...
I'd forgotten about their other car until you posted that.
I think we just knew it as their Yank tank.
As you say, it was rarely, if ever, on the road, so I only saw it when we were returning the DeTomaso.
Was I right it was pale metallic blue?
|
Do you know I have the image stuck in my mind of the shed it was in and the whole experience looking it over... but the exact colour escapes me. Either pale blue or white... or perhaps both colors two-tone... or either colour with broad stripes of the other colour??
It was kept in a rough old barn with the Galaxy and when they said you must be interested in cars have a look at this (I guess they thought that as we were visiting in my gleaming silver CX Pallas)... well it was the last thing I'd expected when they opened the doors... as you would know having met the old boys. A Morris Minor Traveller would have been more likely really.
I guess I last saw it around 1978 and it was probably a 1975 model or earlier.... about 23k on the clock I reckon.
Last edited by: Fenlander on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 14:40
|
...I guess I last saw it around 1978...
Same time roughly as I last saw it.
Speaking of tasty old cars, another titled customer had a Rolls Phantom V or VI.
She turned up on the forecourt one day in a new Silver Spirit and told me Rolls had lent it to her in the hope she would buy one.
The Phantom was a big old beast.
It had a mechanically driven brake servo, which meant it was difficult to hold still in drive at idle, because the servo needed revs to provide full assistance.
Easiest thing in the world to creep gently into the back of the car in front at a junction or traffic lights.
|
Reading this thread with interest.
Iffy has said he's had two cars now with DPF not so much as a hiccough, rtj has had a couple from different manufacturers, the Ford has had a couple of replacement parts don't think the Mondeo was DPF equipped - could be wrong, the Mazda rising oil level but nothing disasterous which left him at the side of the road.
My own experience is with a car we've had for 30 months now, used daily on the kind of journey described as totally unsuitable in some of the posts - driven 5kms to Kindergarten, engine switched off, 5kms home twice a day plus the occassional run to the supermarket 3kms/swimming pool 20kms/local running it might cover 200kms some weeks. The car only stretches its legs two or three times per year.
Never had any exhaust related problems. Citroën equivalent setup to Iffy's Ford system.
I also drive a EuroIII diesel, that you can smell from a cold start, the DPF car only the diesel rattle of the engine gives it away.
Didn't see the program so no idea what the problem was.
|
The fundamental decision of buying diesel car is based on high mileage. If you do high mileage (~ 20k miles/yr or above) then you are very likely to drive in a way which will not cause any DPF issue.
What surprises me is why people buy diesel cars when they are only doing few thousand miles around town!
|
Maybe they prefer the driving characteristics?
Using the above logic I would question why they make tracksuits bigger than a size 8 for women, medium for men and sell them to over 30's ?
|
>> What surprises me is why people buy diesel cars when they are only doing few
>> thousand miles around town!
Because some people actually prefer the way a diesel drives. And of course for a long time they were more economical round town.
|
I know I do, I loved the way my diesel Rover would just tug along in that relentless way, never revving much, just a gentle surge, whatever gear I was in.
True, modern diesels arent like that, they seem rather less torquey at the bottom end, but the 207 hdi I drove earlier this year was still more relaxing to drive than a petrol.
|
To argue that not using all the revs constitutes misuse is absurd. I have a hi-fi amplifier whose volume knob never passes halfway (or the windows might fall out) and a room thermostat that's never been near its maximum setting. Am I misusing these just because they do the job I bought them for without being pushed to the limit?
The real problem with DPFs is that they arrived after a long period when you really could treat a typical car as an appliance, which is what many people had been getting away with doing. Ease of use meant increased sales for the volume makers, and then suddenly they betrayed the trust they'd earned by introducing something that will fail if used as users typically use it.
|
The Diesel is spoiled with to much gizmos.Mechanic told me,one little pipe from the turbo blocks and renders the turbo useless.This pipe supposed to be on the service item,very difficult to reach so nobody bothers.Customer doesn't know.
Like to go back to simple diesels,but getting cancer from small soot particles isn't helpfull to our future generations.
|
>>
>> What surprises me is why people buy diesel cars when they are only doing few
>> thousand miles around town!
>>
Probably a neighbour/bloke down the pub has told them that diesels are cheap to run, therefore they go and lose thousands on a trade-in so they can save 300 quid a year in fuel bills. Many people seem incapable or unwilling to actually 'do the maths', which is their prerogative of course.
|
|
I am quite capable of "doing the maths", I choose to drive a diesel because I prefer the engine characteristics. I am prepared to pay the extra cash. My next car may have to be petrol powered due to the DPF issues but not for any other reason (my current car is DPF free).
|
S'funny, I'd never really come across many heavy oil engined cars until I left sowf London in 87,
Moved to Hastings in that year and it amused me to see so many diesels being used for very short journeys,
FF to Cornwall (another relatively poor area) and ya get the same thing here i.e 9 out of 10 cats people drive oil burners (probably on the red stuff)
|
>> S'funny, I'd never really come across many heavy oil engined cars until I left sowf
>> London in 87,
Why would anyone need a car in London? Superb public transport and everything you could wish for on your doorstep.
|
>> Why would anyone need a car in London? Superb public transport and everything you could
>> wish for on your doorstep.
>>
To get out of London. Sure it's a great, great city with lots of wonderful things. But you know what, I prefer the countryside and need the car to get out and about every weekend.
|
>> To get out of London.
I got out years ago, and stayed out!
|
>> >> To get out of London.
>>
>> I got out years ago, and stayed out!
>>
As you keep telling us.
|
Its the only thing of my tax pounds sent up to Scotland that I get value for.....;P
|
>> As you keep telling us.
>>
I will continue to, I find it disconcerting that I can walk through areas of London that I know, or knew, well, and not hear English spoken. And yes they do speak English where I live, and far better than many southern residents.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 20:10
|
>> I will continue to, I find it disconcerting that I can walk through areas of
>> London that I know, or knew, well, and not hear English spoken. And yes they
>> do speak English where I live, and far better than many southern residents.
Ye Ken!
|
|
Its like living in a foreign country.;)
|
>> I find it disconcerting..............
>>
I see that someone has a problem with the truth. Sorry I don't do political correctness.
|
"As you keep telling us."
Methinks Old Navy doth protest too much. I suspect he'd love to return to the balmy south really. ;-)
|
>> >> S'funny, I'd never really come across many heavy oil engined cars until I left
>> sowf
>> >> London in 87,
>>
>> Why would anyone need a car in London?
Plenty dont.
|
>> Plenty dont.
But I do, and have ever since I had a car let alone a proper legal licence to drive it.
In 1986 I inherited an almost new early Peugeot 205 diesel. It was a great car, fast, comfortable and frugal, let down only by its heavy low-geared unassisted steering and in that example troublesome brakes, misassembly I think. It did about 35 mpg in London and 50ish on the road where it was happy to cruise at 90. My wife loved it and didn't mind the steering having learned to drive in a tractor-like Lada. It was stolen in the end and must have ended up in East Europe.
It did occasionally belch out clouds of smoke under heavy pedal, although I understand the small sticky carcinogenic particles N_C refers to aren't necessarily visible. Of course unlike N_C I dislike Heath Robinson add-on devices which I see as efficiency-sapping and unnecessarily do-gooding. But I agree with him about the need to suppress carcinogens. I am still trying to give up tobacco after 54 years. I say that without pride, but to indicate that I know what I am talking about.
Hooray! Up to the Smoke tomorrow, absurdly early, to hare about for what I hope will be a gruelling weekend. Cheap parking, no congstion zone rubbish and recession traffic levels. YEE-hah! It's an ill wind eh...
|
|
I had a Lada once Armel.>:)One of my lads hated the car.Solid machine chain kept slackening and heavy to drive.Nice comfy seats do.
|
>>Of course unlike N_C I dislike Heath Robinson add-on devices
Eh?
May I humbly suggest you're misrepresenting my point of view sir?
|
>> May I humbly suggest you're misrepresenting my point of view sir?
Very sorry NC. Of course I didn't mean you would like Heath Robinson devices on principle.
It's just that whenever I complain about them you call me a Luddite. Anyway that's an impression I have registered over time.
Actually you are one of the people who have complained about my nostalgia for carburettors and contact breaker ignition. And you can't get much more (successfully though) Heath Robinson than either of those...
You have given me gyp for rubbishing warning lights and preferring gauges too.
Yes, I had it the wrong way round. I like Heath Robinson. You don't.
Must be going gaga eh...
|
The way I view engine technology now is that over the last 30 - 40 years, our expectations have moved on significantly.
In an era when it wasn't unusual to be lifting the cylinder head off for a decoke, fiddling about with points and carburettors wasn't seen as a problem.
Now, we wxpect cars to go further between oil changes than they used to go between decokes!
As well as this massive change in reliability and usability, we've made demands of the engines to reduce their polluting output.
I don't really agree with the way we are currently doing this mangement of pollution, with either cataltic convertors for petrols, or with DPFs for diesels, but, they're the best solutions we have on the market at the moment.
Unlike those who want to turn the clock back, I take the view that further development will overcome these problems, and the devices, whatever they develop into, will become acceptable.
The doom and gloom in the early 90's about catalytic convertors needing to be regularly changed didn't come to pass after all.
I'm sure there will be some who say that we, the customers, shouldn't be doing the development. Well, actually, the customers have been doing just that for virtually every product on the market, and certainly have been doing for the motor car since they were first sold.
|
|
If everything was fully developed and tested before it came to market, nothing would come to market.
|
>> If everything was fully developed and tested before it came to market, nothing would come
>> to market.
>>
Yes. I agree.
Without riduculous over engineering, it's difficult to see how cars could ever be "fully developed" before being brought to market. I would say that manufacturers development testing programs usually do a good job of weeding out poor designs.
|
>> it amused me to see so many diesels being used for very short journeys
A bit like the adverts for Vitaras etc., which state "never used offroad"... Why did you buy it then?
I drive a diesel because most of my journeys are on motorways and the economy can't be matched by a similarly aged and sized petrol car. The driving characteristics of the Mondeo are actually not that great, with a fairly narrow power band and a pronounced flywheel effect making smooth gearchanges quite difficult, but once it's up to cruising speed it's fantastic.
10,000 mile running report coming very soon.
Last edited by: Dave_TDCi on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 19:34
|
Just done another short 400 miles today in my fairly large diesel car and according to it's thingy it got 48 mpg today.
That's what diesels are for.
|
>> my fairly large diesel car and according to it's thingy
This is driving me mad Humph. I know it's a Benz but I missed the announcement.
Just reassure me that it's not a little vertical thing but a proper car. A 300D estate full of rawhide clogs or something or something or something.
Please.
My friend the Homph he is joinin the waBenzi...
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 21:02
|
Its done the decent thing, and gone for a big, very big, gentleman's shooting brake. An E class.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
but shod with ballet heels, not boots.
|
Next petrol cars many will buy are likely to be turbo petrols.... with some new problems to worry about :-) It's the way things are going. 1.6T instead of a 2.0. 1.2T instead of a 1.6.
I like how power is delivered in diesels but I'd like a petrol turbo (2.0) if I'm honest. But BIK for a diesel is so much lower at the moment. Even the base 1.8T Passat CC would have cost me more per month than the 2.0 170PS diesel Passat CC GT I just got due to BIK. And been lower specified as well.
In three years I am sure some 'DPF' type technology will be available on petrol cars to make them cleaner so make them more expensive to buy and fix but make emissions lower.
The detuned 2.0T in the A5 Sportback (180PS) was probably a bit cheaper than the 2.0d of the same model based on monthly rental and BIK. But the Passat CC was cheaper still and better equipped.
|
>> I know it's a Benz but I missed the announcement.
www.car4play.com/forum/post/index.htm?f=2&t=8158
|
>> it got 48 mpg today.
And you've checked that figure brim to brim?
|
Have I heck. Too busy but more importantly, it's a company car so who cares ?
:-)
|
|
Who cares? Not all company cars come with personal fuel allowances ;-) But you do pay tax on it. So I assume you do enough miles to justify having the company pay for personal miles?
|
On the Passat it might be quite accurate. On the last tankful put in I got a real world 38mpg I think. The computer averaged about 40mpg.
In my real world driving (unless it is all local like it can be) I know I can get a lot better. How do I expect better? I've did the Snake Pass, Woodhead Pass, Cat and Fiddle (both directions) and cross country (with traffic between Bradford to Haworth and on to Colne in that fuel (529 miles). So lots of acceleration.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 21 Oct 11 at 22:50
|
More importantly, from a purely practical perspective, what's the range like?
The previous shape 'E' in avantgarde trim came with an 80 litre tank, so 600 miles between fuel stops was easy, and 800 miles achievable on a run. I see the new one only has a 59 litre tank; I hope the economy has improved enough to offset the reduction!! Though given that an 80 litre tank is a (£100) option I suspect it might not ;-)
Peter
|
59 litres! My Passat has 70 litres. The 529 miles I mentioned (some of it having fun on windy roads) was about 62.5 litres. Not brilliant but I didn't drive for economy.
I know I can drive this to get a lot more mpg and sometimes I will. Often I won't. DPF won't bother me again. Standing starts.... I use a bit of acceleration normally. To beat a local/temp set of lights I realised were on green last week.... my better half complained a bit. My car only does 0-62mph in 8.6s so hardly quick.
|
>> 59 litres! My Passat has 70 litres. The 529 miles I mentioned (some of it
>> having fun on windy roads) was about 62.5 litres. Not brilliant but I didn't drive
>> for economy.
That's only about 10% more than I get out of the A4 cab with a 2.0 T engine!! Running until the light comes on (different thread I know) give me a range of between 440 and 480 miles, and it's generally driven sympthetically, but in "making progress" kind of way ;-) I hadn't really thought about it, but from previous diesel experience I had expected a range of nearer 600 miles than 500 from the MB - looks like that's unlikely!!
Peter
|
>> My car only does 0-62mph in 8.6s so hardly quick.
How times change. Not that long ago 0-60 in under 10s was regarded as GT performance.
|
Well, put it this way, on the days I do a round trip to London which I do at least once a week, the Qashqai would use a full tank of diesel on the round trip and would cost about £65 to re-fill. The Merc after the same journey still has about 1/3 of a tank left and costs about £50 to re-fill. Got to be better. One of these days I'll get around to measuring it properly.
I only pay for the fuel I use for private mileage which will amount to less than 5000 miles a year so no great savings on any personal level but still. it'll be a wee bit cheaper.
|
Can we have a proper in depth car report at your convenience please Hump, i know you regularly note events in your humourous style, but i'm hoping for a bit more in depth from a driver who uses it for it's purpose and it's pleasures not it's image.
I'd be particularly interested as the well maintained E220 Diesel auto saloons as used by Addison Lee are sold through their own defleet dept at good prices circa 3 years and 115k, i know of manual boxed versions locally of these about to go over 400k miles with very little in the way of problems.
|
Not that long ago 0-60 in under 10s was regarded as GT performance.
...and 38mpg from a medium-sized diesel was regarded as shockingly thirsty.
}:---)
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Sat 22 Oct 11 at 10:53
|
Sorry but I'm not one of "I didn't see it, but it's rubbish" reviewers at the beginning of the thread, but just downloaded it, and thought it was a reasonable item. Put the case is a balanced fashion.
How Nissan have been allowed to continue with the "urbanproof" advertising should have been further explored.
|
If you mean me I was watching it at the time.
|
I don't watch a lot of Watchdog - too much like going to work.
But they generally do a reasonable job of highlighting a problem.
One of its strengths is they usually get a response from someone in authority at the company, which is something the consumer often struggles to do on their own.
|
DPFs on Watchdog now - Zero
