Car buyers should have 'long, hard think' about diesel

Status
Not open for further replies.
I did................I bought a 2.2 turbo diesel :D

My daughter called today with her new Volvo XC90
 
Last edited:
For many years Diesels were actively encouraged, now they have changed their minds on this (their being the government) alas the car I drive is only available with a 3.0 TDV6 in the UK / EU market but as mine is 7 years old I'd hope it's not coming under this old diesels bracket just yet :lol: :lol:
 
OldCarlos said:
I did................I bought a 2.2 turbo diesel :D

My daughter called today with her new Volvo XC90
Click to expand...
My youngest son got the last of the Kuga 180bhp Diesels before the facelift 2017 model. His mileage justifies the use of diesel. The real problems with diesels is the lack of maintenance and idling in traffic in the cities.....

I have bought diesels on and off since 1993 due to mileage and running cost. Living in a rural location, most 'working" vehicles are diesel users.

Frankly, unless there is a fair buyback system introduced, the current (cleaner) diesels will be on the road for 300K+ miles before scrapping. My 1993 Peugeot 405 GRD is still on the road in Swansea in use by the guy I sold it to in 1997.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
My youngest son got the last of the Kuga 180bhp Diesels before the facelift 2017 model. His mileage justifies the use of diesel. The real problems with diesels is the lack of maintenance and idling in traffic in the cities.....

I have bought diesels on and off since 1993 due to mileage and running cost. Living in a rural location, most 'working" vehicles are diesel users.

Frankly, unless there is a fair buyback system introduced, the current (cleaner) diesels will be on the road for 300K+ miles before scrapping. My 1993 Peugeot 405 GRD is still on the road in Swansea in use by the guy I sold it to in 1997.
Click to expand...
And that's the real problem. People who live in rural communities often NEED to drive off road vehicles.. We do have one petrol off roader on our farm, it's great but it's a daihatsu four track - very old and tiny. My own car weighs over 2 tons and would be unaffordable to run if it wasn't diesel. It's OK for government ministers to waffle on about these things, but they need to learn that there is a world outside of London.
 
Go on, make my next purchase - the X5 or Tuareg - that much cheaper. This will p*** off so many people so quickly that it will never work and will fizzle out as another environmental scam.

We all know the future is electric. All they have to do is make a few cars that will cost similar, look just as good and do at least 300 miles in one charge. Tesla is nearly there by all measures but price tag. Once we are there the transition will happen naturally so there is no need for scaremongering.
 
Let's get this straight late 20th century 1997 the then labour government encouraged people to buy diesel to be green. What are we trying to say now is they are bad. THEY NEW what was in the fumes then. If they want to make cities cleaner then target the ageing buses and lorries and vans of the council first. Let's see them spend before the duped public who thought they were doing the right thing
 
wave01 said:
Let's get this straight late 20th century 1997 the then labour government encouraged people to buy diesel to be green. What are we trying to say now is they are bad. THEY NEW what was in the fumes then. If they want to make cities cleaner then target the ageing buses and lorries and vans of the council first. Let's see them spend before the duped public who thought they were doing the right thing
Click to expand...
The NOX particulates from diesel is a consequence of direct injection as it is on petrol cars. Direct injection on most cars didn't really start that early. probably a few years later. But having said that more modern diesels are still cleaner than the early 2000 cars.
 
Why does op say at last?
What effect do dpf filters have to modern diesels compared to lorry and bus engines.
 
This 'problem' like plenty of others aren't really about what they seem to be.

Successive governments have promoted squeezing so much into London at the cost of everywhere else.

Diesel fumes in London might be off the charts, but the rest of the country is fine. That's because there's too many people in a small amount of space.

Housing costs and many other of societies ills are down to the same issue.

Why do we have the biggest city in Europe by miles, and an infrastructure system designed to keep that going instead of moving some of that money / people / infrastructure to somewhere else.
 
What we have is a lot of mouthing off by a politically astute and ambitious mayor of London ,yes as Phil rightly says London is to overcrowded and suffers from air pollution badly ,but hold on tell me something new ,I grew up in London I still remember the smog of the 50's and the bad fogs every winter ,the problem is not Diesel engines the problem is London is built in the wrong place .its in a river valley where the fogs and mists tend to sit and not move .
The best solution in fact would be to move London to a better location ,ALL major cities worldwide are built besides rivers a fundamental need in days of old but as we move into a different way of transport living besides damp rivers is not really the ideal ,but we still seem to cling to the old ways I.e building on flood plains .
Coming back to diesel cars ,my gut feeling says it's just a ploy to get money out of joe public yet again ,so for now unless there gonna give me a brand new petrol car capable of towing my caravan ,I'm holding on to my 2.4 Volvo S60 auto ,can't be giving up my heated leather seats can I :wave:
 
Ive had my diesel for 9 1/2 years, just flew through another mot and will keep it as long as I can. When I get to a point of looking for a replacement it will be petrol. I dont do the mileage to justify diesel and my short journey to work is a killer for dpf's (mine doesn't have one).
 
I'm going to buy a Diesel as a protest against the government. Who foolishly listened to advice that most governments around the world were given some years ago. They should be thinking about me rather than listening to children who foolishly choose to go to schools in areas of air pollution from cars that will never be driven off road or tow anything ever. I thought, after Brexit and Trump that we'd heard the last of these green namby pambies. With their "scientific" facts.
 
Last edited:
Phil V said:
This 'problem' like plenty of others aren't really about what they seem to be.

Successive governments have promoted squeezing so much into London at the cost of everywhere else.

Diesel fumes in London might be off the charts, but the rest of the country is fine. That's because there's too many people in a small amount of space.

Housing costs and many other of societies ills are down to the same issue.

Why do we have the biggest city in Europe by miles, and an infrastructure system designed to keep that going instead of moving some of that money / people / infrastructure to somewhere else.
Click to expand...
They do in some cases. For instance. Many it jobs are now based outside of London.
 
my best diesel by far was my recently departed mondeo 2.0tdi it had been played around with before i bought it and returned normally around 60-65 mpg .unfortunately time and mechanical failure caught up with it and just as the m.o.t was looming my grandson bought me this volvo s.60 i now feel like a proper o.a.p but driving a wolf in sheep clothing as i know what this beast will do when needed ..
then again if h.m gov offer me a 5K trade in deal i'll bite there bloody arm off , but i'll buy from the dealership where the grandson works to get a even better deal :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:
 
If anyone thinks diesel engines are inherently a bad idea then search out this documentary.

"The Engine That Powers the World"
 
Garry Edwards said:
And that's the real problem. People who live in rural communities often NEED to drive off road vehicles.. We do have one petrol off roader on our farm, it's great but it's a daihatsu four track - very old and tiny. My own car weighs over 2 tons and would be unaffordable to run if it wasn't diesel. It's OK for government ministers to waffle on about these things, but they need to learn that there is a world outside of London.
Click to expand...
Agree entirely. Most of the people I know who live off the beaten track in the various hill areas of Somerset and Devon have a need of 4WD type vehicles to over their work needs or access to work at times. Where I live, things are generally fine but it changes rapidly when winter sets in. Even a small snow episode can cause severe conditions. A given is when the First Bus services to Bath and Bristol cannot get in or out of the village. Stay at home warnings are pointless as, for many, not turning up for work means wages docked or other services suffer (care workers visiting the old and ill etc). Agricultural workers not turning up has (as you will know) the wider issues of animal welfare and even flood prevention matters that need to be attended to.

I agree that for many a diesel powered vehicle does not make financial sense in a low mileage world but for many it will be first choice. Most 4WD off roaders around here are diesel.

A blanket ban/road charging scheme on diesel powered vehocles in cities etc may soothe the conscirnces of some politicians but to what end? Any money raised will do what exactly? Remove the fallout from Chernobyl that can still be found in the UK? More likely it will just be swallowed up in the structure put in to police any ban....
 
The primary issue is older engines (diesel and petrol) in towns and cities.

Copy the German Umweltsplakatte system - create emission zones in the most affected cities and towns and restrict entry to vehicles that meet a defined cut-off in terms of emissions standards. The German system is colour-coded based on the Euro emissions standard - Black (Euro 1), Red (2), Yellow (3), Green (4), Blue (5) and Purple (6). You get a sticker for your car based on the performance standard it's built to (which admittedly still leaves the VW problem). Most of the cities that have adopted the system have progressed to Green, prohibiting pre-Euro 4 (pre-2005) vehicles from entering the emission control zone. There's still one or two Yellow (Euro 3) systems. Pressure is building to move the worst polluted cities from Green to Blue or Purple where air quality still fails to meet targets. But any changes are debated, advertised years in advance and mitigation mechanisms are put in place for those least able to cope with the change (hardship extensions and disability exemptions).

The advantage of this system is that it can be progressive over time (Yellow > Green > Blue, extent of zone) and it targets the problem where it occurs without adversely affecting rural areas and drivers that don't drive into the major towns, cities and conurbations. But someone would have to stand up and announce it now for introduction 2-4 years down the line so that everyone can plan for it.

The UK has to tackle some of it's exemptions:
  • New black cabs aren't required to stop using diesel and adopt hybrid technologies until 2018 and existing cabs can be run until they expire.
  • Stationary engines (generators) and construction plant needs to be brought into line with emissions control legislation. Crossrail made a start on this but only required Euro 3b compliance.
  • Buses need to be addressed, although cleaner per passenger mile than a fossil fuel car they are a significant problem and only around 20% of the TfL fleet are low or lower emission.

Which reminds me, I need to apply for an Umweltsplakatte (Blue) before my next trip.
 
I hope they don't forget to ban all busses, lorries and planes. Yes, planes run on ultra-premium diesel fuel. Let's ban it all so we are back to cave age.
 
Alastair said:
  • Stationary engines (generators) and construction plant needs to be brought into line with emissions control legislation. Crossrail made a start on this but only required Euro 3b compliance.
Click to expand...
With the number of construction sites in London that is a major part of the problem, I'd hazard a guess that the majority of diesel cars used in London are complying to a later emissions regulation.
London already has an emissions zone.
 
Alastair said:
The primary issue is older engines (diesel and petrol) in towns and cities.

Copy the German Umweltsplakatte system - create emission zones in the most affected cities and towns and restrict entry to vehicles that meet a defined cut-off in terms of emissions standards. The German system is colour-coded based on the Euro emissions standard - Black (Euro 1), Red (2), Yellow (3), Green (4), Blue (5) and Purple (6). You get a sticker for your car based on the performance standard it's built to (which admittedly still leaves the VW problem). Most of the cities that have adopted the system have progressed to Green, prohibiting pre-Euro 4 (pre-2005) vehicles from entering the emission control zone. There's still one or two Yellow (Euro 3) systems. Pressure is building to move the worst polluted cities from Green to Blue or Purple where air quality still fails to meet targets. But any changes are debated, advertised years in advance and mitigation mechanisms are put in place for those least able to cope with the change (hardship extensions and disability exemptions).

The advantage of this system is that it can be progressive over time (Yellow > Green > Blue, extent of zone) and it targets the problem where it occurs without adversely affecting rural areas and drivers that don't drive into the major towns, cities and conurbations. But someone would have to stand up and announce it now for introduction 2-4 years down the line so that everyone can plan for it.

The UK has to tackle some of it's exemptions:
  • New black cabs aren't required to stop using diesel and adopt hybrid technologies until 2018 and existing cabs can be run until they expire.
  • Stationary engines (generators) and construction plant needs to be brought into line with emissions control legislation. Crossrail made a start on this but only required Euro 3b compliance.
  • Buses need to be addressed, although cleaner per passenger mile than a fossil fuel car they are a significant problem and only around 20% of the TfL fleet are low or lower emission.

Which reminds me, I need to apply for an Umweltsplakatte (Blue) before my next trip.
Click to expand...
Alastair

It is a workable susyem but very unlikely to be adopted.

The 'green' fiesel concept was badly flawed BUT even government ministers cars were moved over to diesel when the then current petrol engined fleet went through it's 3 year cycle. The Prius was added in (controversial as construction materials were seen in a bad light from how they were sourced and disposed of). Volvos were trialled using natural gas but filling technology at the time was affected by cold weather, which made filling the tanks slow!

I am doubtful that the will to really tackle the particulate issue with Diesel exists. Duty levels and free market conditions will always be a barrier. Technology is coming but slowly. The park and ride buses in bath recover energy from braking and as 2 out of the 3 main routes are on hills it makes good PR.....

Good intent but where is the push? Manchester's new tram route is a start but London? Not a chance.
 
Hugh Jarse said:
Good intent but where is the push? Manchester's new tram route is a start but London? Not a chance.
Click to expand...
London's a mess of small-scale trials - electric battery buses, embedded induction chargers, diesel-electric hybrids, hydrogen, methane, LPG - that's a victim of political meddling. Boris' new Routemasters are diesel-electric hybrids but are themselves falling short on NOx and particulates. Any funds for a diesel scrappage scheme would be better applied to upgrading public transport and lowering the emissions from buses and taxis. I did a 14001 project for a client in London several years ago that was required to operate ultra low emission vehicles (might have been connected to the very early phases of Crossrail), at the time there were no viable/affordable (within the contract) battery/hybrid options and the only available choice was LPG. Turns out LPG is a terrible solution for inner cities as the planning requirements for an LPG filling station make it just about impossible to site one.

For buses.. maybe if there was an existing proven technology that's less infrastructure intensive than trams but with the same benefit of separating the generation of power from it's local application.. link
 
Last edited:
Biodiesel has a higher NOx output than conventional diesel, due to having a lower burn rate and using more fuel per mile. So stop buying cheap supermarket fuel for a start it has a higher bio content than the main fuel suppliers like Shell, BP, Esso etc which still use the lower percentage bio content in their fuel.

It's a catch 22 situation. You improve the performance and economy of an engine but some of the emissions actually worsen, so other means are required to try to combat those emissions.

It strikes me odd that no filtration systems are installed in cities to further combat the problem. Many cities like London already have a congestion charge, put that money to good effect. Install a dpf and gpf filters onto lampposts or any other street furniture to help clean up the air.
 
Or just get everyone using electric power within cities. If you don't get the air dirty in the first place you have a lot less to clean up.
 
srichards said:
Or just get everyone using electric power within cities. If you don't get the air dirty in the first place you have a lot less to clean up.
Click to expand...
Not many, if any, electric commercial vehicles around though. Ford are currently developing electric Transits and a fleet of such vehicles will be introduced into London as part of their testing and development program.
 
ianp5a said:
C'mon guys. Get this fixed. Being seen as the dirty man of Europe is not good for business.
Click to expand...
We're not alone.. the EU issued the same final warnings to the UK, Germany, France, Italy and Spain for breaches of NO2 limits - link.

But good news chaps:
  • It's not our fault - link :thinking:; and
  • In two years we're walking away from such petty rules and enforcement by the CJEU. :exit:
:banghead:
 
Hugh Jarse said:
My youngest son got the last of the Kuga 180bhp Diesels before the facelift 2017 model. His mileage justifies the use of diesel. The real problems with diesels is the lack of maintenance and idling in traffic in the cities.....

I have bought diesels on and off since 1993 due to mileage and running cost. Living in a rural location, most 'working" vehicles are diesel users.

Frankly, unless there is a fair buyback system introduced, the current (cleaner) diesels will be on the road for 300K+ miles before scrapping. My 1993 Peugeot 405 GRD is still on the road in Swansea in use by the guy I sold it to in 1997.
Click to expand...
He must have the poshest car in the street in Swansea. Next you'll be telling us he's got a TV too! ;)
 
rjbell said:
He must have the poshest car in the street in Swansea. Next you'll be telling us he's got a TV too! ;)
Click to expand...
Yep I bet he has ,no t.v licence though :banana:
 
Phil V said:
This 'problem' like plenty of others aren't really about what they seem to be.

Successive governments have promoted squeezing so much into London at the cost of everywhere else.

Diesel fumes in London might be off the charts, but the rest of the country is fine. That's because there's too many people in a small amount of space.

Housing costs and many other of societies ills are down to the same issue.

Why do we have the biggest city in Europe by miles, and an infrastructure system designed to keep that going instead of moving some of that money / people / infrastructure to somewhere else.
Click to expand...
Southampton just got record levels of air pollution too.

Not that I'm ditching diesel any time soon.
 
My wifes new Honda Civic diesel has to pay no road tax because the emmissions are too low. So all this about diesel cars is a load of scare mongering rubbish, More than likely started by petrol companies in the hope of boosting petrol sales.
The proper way to judge a vehicle emmissions is by how much road tax they have to pay
 
realspeed said:
The proper way to judge a vehicle emmissions is by how much road tax they have to pay
Click to expand...
I always thought measuring what came out the exhaust would be a more direct measure of actual emissions. Seems a bit more scientific.
 
realspeed said:
My wifes new Honda Civic diesel has to pay no road tax because the emmissions are too low. So all this about diesel cars is a load of scare mongering rubbish, More than likely started by petrol companies in the hope of boosting petrol sales.
Click to expand...
The oil companies make both petrol and diesel from the crude oil they extract (a process called cracking). More than likely not started by them.
 
realspeed said:
My wifes new Honda Civic diesel has to pay no road tax because the emmissions are too low.
Click to expand...

Just to nitpick, only the carbon dioxide emissions are taken into account for tax. It could be spitting dead acid-filled whales out of the exhaust and still be tax free as long as the CO2 was low.

I'd love to switch over to electric - I've driven a few electric cars now, and I'd really enjoy the instant torque and quietness even if they were no better for the environment. Not a chance of me affording one for a very, very long time though, no matter what subsidies or handouts the government can come up with.

So, I shall stick to my smoky old diesel, unless someone wants to buy me that shiny Tesla S I drove a few months ago and fell in love with. :D
 
realspeed said:
My wifes new Honda Civic diesel has to pay no road tax because the emmissions are too low. So all this about diesel cars is a load of scare mongering rubbish, More than likely started by petrol companies in the hope of boosting petrol sales.
The proper way to judge a vehicle emmissions is by how much road tax they have to pay
Click to expand...

that is because at the moment as has been said diesels are taxed on co2 emmisions not the deadly no and particulates.
in the next 10 years i see a radical shift in testing as the VW saga has shown how poor it is now, maybe not the next generation of cars but the one after will have to be cleaner than clean or it will simply be taxed of the road.
regardless of leaving the EU and sitting side by side with their emiisions targets parts of our country are in the worst air pollution ranks in europe and our government cannot keep that up for long.

it will still make tax as most vehicles will run on a liquid fuel for i iimagine the next 20 years but i see them switching the tax to diesel in the next 5 years and then we shall see.
 
Mr Bump said:
that is because at the moment as has been said diesels are taxed on co2 emmisions not the deadly no and particulates.
in the next 10 years i see a radical shift in testing as the VW saga has shown how poor it is now, maybe not the next generation of cars but the one after will have to be cleaner than clean or it will simply be taxed of the road.
regardless of leaving the EU and sitting side by side with their emiisions targets parts of our country are in the worst air pollution ranks in europe and our government cannot keep that up for long.

it will still make tax as most vehicles will run on a liquid fuel for i iimagine the next 20 years but i see them switching the tax to diesel in the next 5 years and then we shall see.
Click to expand...
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Nox and other particulates are a consequence of reducing the CO2 emissions. Even direct injection petrol engines suffer from the same but the particulates are smaller in size and number. The next level of emissions is already stricter and already happening with real world testing taking over from laboratory testing. Plus the accepted emissions levels are lower too.
 
nilagin said:
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Nox and other particulates are a consequence of reducing the CO2 emissions. Even direct injection petrol engines suffer from the same but the particulates are smaller in size and number. The next level of emissions is already stricter and already happening with real world testing taking over from laboratory testing. Plus the accepted emissions levels are lower too.
Click to expand...

yeah it needs to be massively tested and enforced, its time that people understood to drive these expensive and complicated vehicles it will cost a lot more.
i suspect as well much more engine management forcing people to go and have more servicing on these emission systems.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top