Diesel vs Petrol

[ThysleRoux]

Johannes, ek verstaan die verbruikstorie heelteemal, maar die genot van 'n petrolvoertuig is vir MY baie meer werd as die besparing in brandstof. To each his own. As ek so na die internasionale tendense kyk, is VW se onderduimsheid besig om diesel in ligte voertuie se kraantjie toe te draai.

Het al genoem dat dieseldampe STINK...................................
................ en dat die goed RAAS.........................
................ en LUIGAT is (selfs mét turbo's)




en natuurlik dat dieseldampe STINK ?

Ek verstaan oom !! Ek verstaan !!
Ek hou nogals van daai stink reuk van kinder jare af ! Trekkers op plaas Beter as petrol reuk En daai ou trekkers kon n rokie maak !

Diesel is great vir Trekkers, treine, kragopwekkers, GROOT vragmotors en grondverskuiwingsmasjienerie - maar daar eindig dit.

[XJ Junkie]

The original Haval 2.0 did drink fuel but there is a upgraded version. “Peak power is up from 160kW to 180kW, and maximum torque from 324Nm to 350Nm – sufficient to lug the 2230kg beast from 0–100km/h in around 10 seconds”.

“combined-cycle fuel economy of 10.9L/100km, which lines up pretty well against our return of 11.7L/100km during a 283km mixed drive loop with an average speed of 73km/h”

[Rabbiddog RIP 7/6/21]

I like my Diesel for where I drive.

I gave up the V6 and V8 petrol's due to fuel consumption in daily usage

[XJ Junkie]

I like my Diesel for where I drive.

I gave up the V6 and V8 petrol's due to fuel consumption in daily usage

Agreed. But this is why there’s a move towards smaller cc turbo petrol engines as a replacement for diesel.

[Oppies3800]

The original Haval 2.0 did drink fuel but there is a upgraded version. “Peak power is up from 160kW to 180kW, and maximum torque from 324Nm to 350Nm – sufficient to lug the 2230kg beast from 0–100km/h in around 10 seconds”.

“combined-cycle fuel economy of 10.9L/100km, which lines up pretty well against our return of 11.7L/100km during a 283km mixed drive loop with an average speed of 73km/h”

Yes because anyone will do 283km at 73km/h.

You will never see that claimed fuel consumption

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[XJ Junkie]

Yes because anyone will do 283km at 73km/h.

You will never see that claimed fuel consumption

Granted. But they were testing so I doubt they were hanging around. Other tests I’ve read get similar. 12L is very good

[Mad Manny]

Agreed.
But this is why there’s a move towards smaller cc turbo petrol engines as a replacement for diesel.

Unfortunately XJ Junkie is 100% correct.
A few years ago a 1.4TSi Polo was getting similar consumption (& performance) as a 1.4TDi.
So, now that Petrol has stolen Diesel technology (Common Rail, Turbo, Intercooler, High Pressure Injection etc) it is no longer beneficial to make a smaller diesel.
Remember the Petrol Engine is cheaper to manufacture & with the Euro anti-soot laws, Diesel can easily be replaced by a Turbo Petrol.

I think in a few years all cars will be Turbo Petrol & you will only find Diesels in Pick Ups, SUV's & then Commercial vehicles.

But Diesel will not go down without a fight, Bosch & VW are working on Diesel tech which will reduce emissions to below that of a Petrol & will drastically reduce Soot deposits.

[XJ Junkie]

But Diesel will not go down without a fight, Bosch & VW are working on Diesel tech which will reduce emissions to below that of a Petrol & will drastically reduce Soot deposits.
[/color]

This might be the case but they haven’t got the best track record. But they aren’t alone.

The problem with Diesel engines in passenger vehicles is that they simply can’t meet the stricter & stricter emissions standards, especially in europe.
Diesels are at their peak & any attempts to extract better emissions has become prohibitively expensive. So manufacturers are throwing in the towel.

We must remember that engine availability isn’t driven by what customers want, but rather by what emissions legislation will allow.

It’s got nothing to do with which engines are better or suitability to a particular application.

[Rabbiddog RIP 7/6/21]

I like my Diesel for where I drive.

I gave up the V6 and V8 petrol's due to fuel consumption in daily usage

Agreed. But this is why there’s a move towards smaller cc turbo petrol engines as a replacement for diesel.

Yup.

Seen this for a while now.

Even Landy's are now coming out with smaller turbo petrol engines. No more massive V8's

[XJ Junkie]

It’s why Toyota’s don’t sell in China. Not enough suitable engines.

[Mike Nel]

I can now compare a bit better since I bought the FJ again.

We had a instance in Sutherland where my Fuel Warning light came on. Water in the filter, but apparently this is very common with a Diesel Toyota. No such issues with the petrol.

Tell you what. If it was in any way possible to fit the 4.5 V8 D4D into the FJ, I would be all over it like the ANC and the State coffers.

The low down power and grunt of the 200 is awesome. I honestly believed that there would be a significant difference power wise between the FJ and the 200 Cruiser. Well, there isn't or I am just to doff to notice it.

The FJ steers a bit better that the 200 but that is just the sheer size difference between the two.

Petrol vs Diesel????

With these two vehicles of mine I can honestly say that I cannot say which is better

[Oppies3800]

Mike, we have seen the 200 in the dunes...

We will tell you, petrol

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Mike Nel]

Mike, we have seen the 200 in the dunes...

We will tell you, petrol

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Yip. FJ for dunes. No doubt

[XJ Junkie]

For dunes = Petrol.
For everything else = diesel.

For out or warranty ownership = Petrol

They won’t make a diesel FJ because it’s developed for [emoji631]

[Oppies3800]

For dunes = Petrol.
For everything else = diesel.

For out or warranty ownership = Petrol

They won’t make a diesel FJ because it’s developed for [emoji631]

Matroosberg was not kind on diesels this past weekend

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk