Bristol is set to become the UK's first city to ban diesel cars from entering parts of the city centre

AndrewFlannigan said:
  • Domestic Pig weight range 50 to 350 kg
  • BL mini weight range 580 to 686 kg
  • BMW Mini weight range 1,050 to 1,240 kg
So not correct.
Click to expand...

LOL. It's a super light weight car, that's the point.
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
  • Domestic Pig weight range 50 to 350 kg
  • BL mini weight range 580 to 686 kg
  • BMW Mini weight range 1,050 to 1,240 kg
So not correct.
Click to expand...

Ours is the Clubman so it weighs 1360kg.

The 5 series G30 520i weighs 1540kg according to parkers.

Sure, its going to be less in terms of MPG than the Clubman.

Honestjohn shows the 'real world' mpg of the 5 series and the Clubman Cooper S as 34.5 which is probably a little low for combined in my experience, more like 38mpg but as I said you can easily get 50mpg on the motorway.
 
Well, my power steering packed up on the cmax. And the new car is petrol, so this no longer effects me.

Those Ford Ecoboost engines are quite pokey though.
 
vintageman said:
We've just had a multiplicity of routes flooded up to 3ft (0.9m) deep. EVs all have their battery at the lowest part so many would get written off in storm conditions!
Click to expand...

That is interesting. Are you saying one can't be driven through a deeper puddle? And if so are there / or will there be more rugged all terrain version?
 
Are there many cars that would fare well after being emerged in nearly a meter of water?
 
bass_junkie83 said:
Are there many cars that would fare well after being emerged in nearly a meter of water?
Click to expand...
Around 1980 I drove my Renault 16 into something over 2 feet of water (it was night on a country lane and raining hard). The thing I still don't get is that I managed to reverse out! :thinking:
 
vintageman said:
We've just had a multiplicity of routes flooded up to 3ft (0.9m) deep. EVs all have their battery at the lowest part so many would get written off in storm conditions!
Click to expand...


So would both our ICE cars and my motorbikes.
 
It reminds me in a funny way of Nigeria where I worked in the 1970's - traffic jams were so bad that the Government decreed that cars with an even number at the end of the registration plate could only be used on even dates, (days), in the month and cars with an odd number could only be used on odd dates in the month.

Solution - most people bought two cars
 
Last edited:
vintageman said:
We've just had a multiplicity of routes flooded up to 3ft (0.9m) deep. EVs all have their battery at the lowest part so many would get written off in storm conditions!
Click to expand...
No use for 900mm.

But this shows early Nissan Leaf tested at 700mm, water going way above the battery pack.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9plRzRZ_PY


Looks like Leaf can go through deeper water than Land Rover Disco Sport:
https://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/1541...cars-that-can-drive-through-the-deepest-water

Generally, EV's seems to do better than similar class ICE. Because EV battery packs are sealed.
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-x-survives-deep-flood-video/
IIRC Rich Rebuilds on youtube daily drives a Model S that has a battery salvaged from another flood damaged Tesla.


Of course, if the seal is broken, you'd be sitting on an explosive hotbed. Just another way to make waves ;)
 
BillN_33 said:
It reminds me in a funny way of Nigeria where I worked in the 1970's - traffic jams were so bad that the Government decreed that cars with an even number at the end of the registration plate could only be used on even dates, (days), in the month and cars with an odd number could only be used on odd dates in the month.

Solution - most people bought two cars
Click to expand...

IIRC Paris did the same and it had an adverse effect on the air quality - the second car was a cheap old banger belching noxious fumes from its tail pipe.
 
Nod said:
IIRC Paris did the same and it had an adverse effect on the air quality - the second car was a cheap old banger belching noxious fumes from its tail pipe.
Click to expand...

Paris still do it. You need an air quality sticker on your car, when local pollution is bad, they ban cars that don't meet a certain criteria and it helps the air quality improve.
 
This is a very interesting discussion. I have read through all the posts.


I am coming from the city in the world that has potentially come the furthest in banning cars: Oslo. After the "green party" won the local election, they tried to shut down the cars in the city center as much as possible [source]. To be fair, I thought I would hate it - but it turned out super great.

The only negative thing about this is the fact that a lot of physical stores die out. The shop owners blame the politicians, but if you look at the statistics, I would reckon that online shopping would be the right thing to blame?
 
KitsuneAndy said:
Paris still do it. You need an air quality sticker on your car, when local pollution is bad, they ban cars that don't meet a certain criteria and it helps the air quality improve.
Click to expand...

Not quite the same, but it is advisable that if you are visiting France by car, to get a Crit'Air Certificate/Sticker for your car as they are introducing this in other parts of France and the "zones" will include some ring-roads, so you don't have to drive into the "City" to be fined if it is a "bad pollution" day
(In typical French fashion I also think that THEY can fine you even if you do not have a sticker on display)

The stickers are cheap and you can buy them on-line

https://www.certificat-air.gouv.fr/en/

but my point is that if the authorities are not careful there can be unintended consequences of their actions, which can result in a worst situation than the one that they are trying to prevent
 
Last edited:
wuyanxu said:
No use for 900mm.

But this shows early Nissan Leaf tested at 700mm, water going way above the battery pack.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9plRzRZ_PY


Looks like Leaf can go through deeper water than Land Rover Disco Sport:
https://www.buyacar.co.uk/cars/1541...cars-that-can-drive-through-the-deepest-water

Generally, EV's seems to do better than similar class ICE. Because EV battery packs are sealed.
https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-x-survives-deep-flood-video/
IIRC Rich Rebuilds on youtube daily drives a Model S that has a battery salvaged from another flood damaged Tesla.


Of course, if the seal is broken, you'd be sitting on an explosive hotbed. Just another way to make waves ;)
Click to expand...
The depth of water an ice vehicle can go in is only limited by the position of the air intake. Fit a snorkel to the air inlet and you can go deeper. Hence why off roading Land Rovers have a snorkel that runs up the A pillar to the roof line.
 
nilagin said:
The depth of water an ice vehicle can go in is only limited by the position of the air intake. Fit a snorkel to the air inlet and you can go deeper. Hence why off roading Land Rovers have a snorkel that runs up the A pillar to the roof line.
Click to expand...

I am sure there is more to it than that. Firstly there is the difference between a quick drive through a flooded road and being subjected to longer term flood waters. Door seals may be sufficient in the short term but I doubt that they would resist three days of being submerged.
There are other routes into the car also, Ie. cabin pressure equalisation extracts and door cavity drips, electronics could be affected also. There would be very little difference between an ICE and EV car.
Then there is he issue of buoyancy, maybe an EV would have the advantage here with the heavy battery pack?

Either way, it's hardly something to score points over for 99% of people.
 
I doubt flood water is much of an issue for an EV anyway. From the looks of it, most parts of an EV, including the battery, have an IP rating for water of either 6 or 8, depending on whether that part is water cooled or not. Meaning the electronics are pretty much waterproof. The batteries are definitely waterproof in the kind of weather we'd get here.

Won't do it any good obviously, but nothing immediately catastrophic.
 
bass_junkie83 said:
I am sure there is more to it than that. Firstly there is the difference between a quick drive through a flooded road and being subjected to longer term flood waters. Door seals may be sufficient in the short term but I doubt that they would resist three days of being submerged.
.
Click to expand...
We were only talking about capability of driving through deep water, not ingress into the cabin.
 
bass_junkie83 said:
Either way, it's hardly something to score points over for 99% of people.
Click to expand...
Correct, unlike EV's instant acceleration and driving refinement, water wading depth is nothing to score points over. Unless, of course, it's a purpose built off-road vehicle.

But it has to be pointed out to correct misconceptions on EV powertrain by some people:

vintageman said:
EVs all have their battery at the lowest part so many would get written off in storm conditions!
Click to expand...
EV with all their battery will not be written off because of being an EV. As Dave and other many people have pointed out, at 90cm, it's other parts of the car that will get ruined first.
 
The cost or replacing sodden trim, carpets, seats etc would probably result in an insurance write-off for most vehicles these days & that's before you even consider the impact on 'drowned' electronics
 
broc said:
The cost or replacing sodden trim, carpets, seats etc would probably result in an insurance write-off for most vehicles these days & that's before you even consider the impact on 'drowned' electronics
Click to expand...
The amount of water that gets inside depends on whether you are just driving through deep water or whether it is set in it for a long period of time. Very little if any should get inside the car from just driving through the water. Years ago I had a mk1 Fiesta and drove through a section of a flooded road. The wheels were fully submerged and the car drove through just fine and no water got inside. Door seals etc have got a lot better over the last 40yrs.
 
nilagin said:
The amount of water that gets inside depends on whether you are just driving through deep water or whether it is set in it for a long period of time. Very little if any should get inside the car from just driving through the water. Years ago I had a mk1 Fiesta and drove through a section of a flooded road. The wheels were fully submerged and the car drove through just fine and no water got inside. Door seals etc have got a lot better over the last 40yrs.
Click to expand...
I was thinking about cars which had stood in deep floodwater for days......
 
I'm sure there's more than just the air intake to worry about when driving through deep water such as breathers, transmission, electrics etc. But for absolute emergencies the air intake is probably the main issue. Mine is at the top of the front grill so nice and high, but there's a fair amount of electrics lower down.

I'm mind watching a video of a defender driving through very deep water and the footwells had water pouring in. Someone commented that this was deliberate to reduce buoyancy, not sure how much truth there is with that though.
 
gman said:
I'm mind watching a video of a defender driving through very deep water and the footwells had water pouring in. Someone commented that this was deliberate to reduce buoyancy, not sure how much truth there is with that though.
Click to expand...

I once saw a video of a Defender driving through a river so deep they had a guy on the roof giving hand signals in front of the windscreen (which was almost completely under water) to the driver to tell him which way to go. I remember thinking at the time if I did that in mine I'd just drown........ I don't think the doors are that well sealed to start with, but once they've had a few years of burly farmers pulling themselves up in they sag on the hinges. Interestingly the handbook quotes a wading depth of a mere 18in, but I think that's what any idiot could go through flat out and still come out the other side. I've been through far deeper (judging by the vegatation I pulled out of the top of the grille the next day. Even then nothing through the doors as I created a bow wave effect so the water around the sides was slightly lower. Nothing underneath that's going to worry about being splashed, being a nasty smelly diesel...............
 
Last edited:
I've been through over bonnet deep water in a properly wading prepared 90. As gman says, there's more to it than just a snorkel - extended axle and gearbox breathers, loosen fan belt, open doors wide etc.. Seen a video of one being driven through up to roof level with an extended snorkel - the driver was stood out of the door with his foot on the throttle pedal. Apparently there was a rope attached to the front hook in case the thing conked out but it made it through.

The V8 Landies (including the RangeRover) had the added problem of the fan hurling water up at the distributor. Suitably applied silicon sealant helped but it's still a good idea to avoid deep water in them.
 
Not sure I need to make my confession public..... been off the forum a good while as I am building an extension on my retirement h ok me in Ireland!

Finally retired my 3 year old Diesel Ford Kuga.... will miss it.

So it has been replaced by a Peugeot 5008 SUV, 1.6 130 1.2 Diesel.

I actually struggled to find a vehicle to do the job and even when I ordered a Vauxhall Grandland..... 4 months wait minimum. A hybrid on the far horizon....

So the ‘British’ Vauxhall GrandLand, buill in the Opel factory in Russelheim (where my Mantas and Monzas were built id now part of PSA.... lead times too long as was the PSA owned Citroen C5 AirCross... tried out VW, Fiat etc. The Peugeot kept winning, lead time on Petrol version... too long

Hopefully in 3 years time there will be an easy choice. In passing Peugeot are sailing from South West France to the UK with their Rennes built 2008 and 5008 models so BREXIT is not holding PSA back. Nissan Qashqai anyone?
 
Last edited:
I'm sure I remember that Peugeot diesels were always considered the best, certainly in early days. Not sure about modern ones but I see no reason to think they still aren't very good.
 
gman said:
I'm sure I remember that Peugeot diesels were always considered the best, certainly in early days. Not sure about modern ones but I see no reason to think they still aren't very good.
Click to expand...

I think there was a peugeot 1.6 diesel engine in some Ford Focus models that ate the turbos
 
KitsuneAndy said:
I think there was a peugeot 1.6 diesel engine in some Ford Focus models that ate the turbos
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, it could have possibly been due to incomplete regens or the wrong oil being recommended. I remember something about the recommended oil not being low saps so a gauze filter would get clogged - but I'm not sure if that was the Focus or an actual Peugeot car. There was something about the 1.0 ecoboost petrol engines having turbo issues because they weren't idled before turning off, I'm assuming being such a small engine the turbos had to work hard and became very hot.

Neil, do you know about the Peugeot engine/Focus turbo issue and what is was?
 
gman said:
I'm not sure, it could have possibly been due to incomplete regens or the wrong oil being recommended. I remember something about the recommended oil not being low saps so a gauze filter would get clogged - but I'm not sure if that was the Focus or an actual Peugeot car. There was something about the 1.0 ecoboost petrol engines having turbo issues because they weren't idled before turning off, I'm assuming being such a small engine the turbos had to work hard and became very hot.

Neil, do you know about the Peugeot engine/Focus turbo issue and what is was?
Click to expand...
The turbo issue on the diesels is pretty much down to poor servicing and poor quality fuel. Carbon builds up on the injectors and gets into the oil. The filter in the turbo bearing oil feed gets blocked and as a result the turbo is starved of oil.

As for the 1.0 EcoBoost, any turbo engine should be allow to cool a bit before switching off, they don't take long to cool to a reasonable temperature before switching off.
 
nilagin said:
The turbo issue on the diesels is pretty much down to poor servicing and poor quality fuel. Carbon builds up on the injectors and gets into the oil. The filter in the turbo bearing oil feed gets blocked and as a result the turbo is starved of oil.

As for the 1.0 EcoBoost, any turbo engine should be allow to cool a bit before switching off, they don't take long to cool to a reasonable temperature before switching off.
Click to expand...

When I was looking at cars, the 1.6 Diesel Focus with the peugeot engine (or was it a cmax?) had loads of issues coming up about turbo failures unless you changed the oil every 6000 miles as the filter was getting too easily blocked. So while it was an oil issue, it seemed a generally accepted issue with the engine.

Didn't have any issues at all with my 2.0 TDCI Cmax though with the duratorq engine in it.

And now have the 1.6 ecoboost, which is surprisingly quick.
 
gman said:
I'm not sure, it could have possibly been due to incomplete regens or the wrong oil being recommended. I remember something about the recommended oil not being low saps so a gauze filter would get clogged - but I'm not sure if that was the Focus or an actual Peugeot car. There was something about the 1.0 ecoboost petrol engines having turbo issues because they weren't idled before turning off, I'm assuming being such a small engine the turbos had to work hard and became very hot.

Neil, do you know about the Peugeot engine/Focus turbo issue and what is was?
Click to expand...

Yeah the reports I came across was oil related failures, but that even using the correct spec oil it was failing earlier than you'd ever expect. And when the turbo went, there were even extra instructions to flush the system several times and change filters several times to hopefully stop it happening again.

I'm enjoying my ecoboost though, really good mpg.
 
nilagin said:
150PS or 180PS?
I have a 2.3 EcoBoost, 350PS, unsurprisingly quick. ;)
Click to expand...

150, titanium spec.

Same engine as the 180 though isn't it? Just limited to 150 in the map?

Haha, yours probably gets worse MPG though
 
nilagin said:
The turbo issue on the diesels is pretty much down to poor servicing and poor quality fuel. Carbon builds up on the injectors and gets into the oil. The filter in the turbo bearing oil feed gets blocked and as a result the turbo is starved of oil.

As for the 1.0 EcoBoost, any turbo engine should be allow to cool a bit before switching off, they don't take long to cool to a reasonable temperature before switching off.
Click to expand...
Something I have often wondered about, how does letting the turbo engine ( run after stopping) to cool off square with stop-start technology?
 
KitsuneAndy said:
150, titanium spec.

Same engine as the 180 though isn't it? Just limited to 150 in the map?

Haha, yours probably gets worse MPG though
Click to expand...
Yes the 150 and 180 are just different maps on the same engine

For what mine is the 30mpg average that I get is acceptable, it gets up to around 38mpg average on a 70mph motorway run though. I had a 2.0 EcoBoost 250PS before that and was around 1-2mpg better.
 
broc said:
Something I have often wondered about, how does letting the turbo engine ( run after stopping) to cool off square with stop-start technology?
Click to expand...
The engine will have various temperature sensors. If they register too high a temperature, the stop/start shouldn't operate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top