Important for petrol car owners.

[LongLensPhotography]

I'd be frankly selling your pre-2011 petrol cars while you still can and certainly not buying any unless you absolutely sure they are already compatible or at least "upgradeable".

I told they'd find ways to kill all older petrol cars as well as pre Euro-6 diesels by regulation and taxation. There you go - vindicated once again.

 

[Mr Bump]

Only in words. He clearly drives and ICE car, well he drove one extremely slowly on motorway, got rear-ended and is now looking for the same to replace it!

He should live up to his words and COUGH UP for EV!

You have to back up your words with actions!

Nope I have never said I would buy an EV if you read my stuff what I have always said is I will never buy a diesel and I have consistently said hybrid cars are the future for the next XXX years
and you are right I was travelling very slowly when I got rear ended the other day on the M62, so slowly in fact I was stopped with my foot on the brake but hey how.

I have also replaced my 10 year old Citroen with a lovely 2.5 year old Citroen C3

Its pretty close to what I wanted with emissions at 107g/km and does between 50-64 mpg and as a petrol does not emit any harmful particulates.

 

[gremlin16]

I’ve walked to my last two appointments. Every little helps

 

[Cobra]

I’ve walked to my last two appointments. Every little helps

Thanks I've used your share, doing my regular 250-300 miles per day return trip in my diesel van

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Thanks I've used your share, doing my regular 250-300 miles per day return trip in my diesel van

Only 70 miles today, but it was Euro ZERO derv

 

[cambsno]

Nope I have never said I would buy an EV if you read my stuff what I have always said is I will never buy a diesel and I have consistently said hybrid cars are the future for the next XXX years
and you are right I was travelling very slowly when I got rear ended the other day on the M62, so slowly in fact I was stopped with my foot on the brake but hey how.

I have also replaced my 10 year old Citroen with a lovely 2.5 year old Citroen C3

Its pretty close to what I wanted with emissions at 107g/km and does between 50-64 mpg and as a petrol does not emit any harmful particulates.

Could have gone greener if you really were bothered about pollution.

Why didn’t you replace your 10 yo car before it got shunted? How many kids now have asthma because of this??

 

[Mr Bump]

Could have gone greener if you really were bothered about pollution.

Why didn’t you replace your 10 yo car before it got shunted? How many kids now have asthma because of this??

you really don't get it do you? Whilst petrol cars do emit CO2 and my 10 year old Petrol C3 1.4i produced 145g/km it didn't produce any of the damaging particulates that are the biggest cause of respiratory diseases associated with childhood asthma in our towns and cities, that is DIESEL FUEL.

I could have got a new car that would have taken my CO2 emissions down to 99g/km (instead of 109g/km for my new car) but it would have been a hybrid or a small 1 litre engine which probably would have been unsuitable for motorway driving?

What car(s) do you own and what are there emissions etc?

 

[cambsno]

you really don't get it do you? Whilst petrol cars do emit CO2 and my 10 year old Petrol C3 1.4i produced 145g/km it didn't produce any of the damaging particulates that are the biggest cause of respiratory diseases associated with childhood asthma in our towns and cities, that is DIESEL FUEL.

I could have got a new car that would have taken my CO2 emissions down to 99g/km (instead of 109g/km for my new car) but it would have been a hybrid or a small 1 litre engine which probably would have been unsuitable for motorway driving?

What car(s) do you own and what are there emissions etc?

Why do you need to drive on motorways, why not use public transport? Seeing as you think its fine for those that cant afford to upgrade their car to have to go without and rely on public transport for the sake of pollution, you could lead by example. You are still polluting 10% more than you could have done by not getting the 99g/km car.

 

[Mr Bump]

Why do you need to drive on motorways, why not use public transport? Seeing as you think its fine for those that cant afford to upgrade their car to have to go without and rely on public transport for the sake of pollution, you could lead by example. You are still polluting 10% more than you could have done by not getting the 99g/km car.

So answer the question I asked to you?
What are your contributions to our environment?
list your vehicles, choices and emmisions?

 

[nilagin]

you really don't get it do you? Whilst petrol cars do emit CO2 and my 10 year old Petrol C3 1.4i produced 145g/km it didn't produce any of the damaging particulates that are the biggest cause of respiratory diseases associated with childhood asthma in our towns and cities, that is DIESEL FUEL.

I could have got a new car that would have taken my CO2 emissions down to 99g/km (instead of 109g/km for my new car) but it would have been a hybrid or a small 1 litre engine which probably would have been unsuitable for motorway driving?

What car(s) do you own and what are there emissions etc?

Petrol cars produce particulates as well, that is why manufacturers are having to fit Gpf's to petrol cars.

A 1.0 turbo engine is more powerful than your 1.4 and would be much better suited to motorway driving than the under powered 1.4

 

[bass_junkie83]

Petrol cars produce particulates as well, that is why manufacturers are having to fit Gpf's to petrol cars.

I may well be wrong, but I am sure I read somewhere that the downside to these new small capacity turbo charged high efficiency engines is that they produce particulates comparable to a diesel engine. Is there any truth in that?

 

[nilagin]

I may well be wrong, but I am sure I read somewhere that the downside to these new small capacity turbo charged high efficiency engines is that they produce particulates comparable to a diesel engine. Is there any truth in that?

Making petrol engines more economical, increases emissions but the particulates are still less and smaller than those created by diesels.

 

[Mr Bump]

Petrol cars produce particulates as well, that is why manufacturers are having to fit Gpf's to petrol cars.

A 1.0 turbo engine is more powerful than your 1.4 and would be much better suited to motorway driving than the under powered 1.4

And that would be true if I had purchased a turbo charged petrol engine, but I didn't.
I went for the 82bhp 1.2 naturally aspirated model.
and you are correct my old 1.4i produced 70bhp so I have gained more power for much less co2.

 

[Mr Bump]

Making petrol engines more economical, increases emissions but the particulates are still less and smaller than those created by diesels.

That is correct, diesel engines are the biggest cause of particulates and respiratory disease

 

[bass_junkie83]

Ok that's cool, it must have been the general emissions I was thinking of then.

 

[nilagin]

And that would be true if I had purchased a turbo charged petrol engine, but I didn't.
I went for the 82bhp 1.2 naturally aspirated model.
and you are correct my old 1.4i produced 70bhp so I have gained more power for much less co2.

82bhp isn't exactly much more suited to motorway driving. At least with a 1.0 turbo you would have 100bhp+ and more torque from lower down in the rev range. It would be capable of a much more relaxed drive without having to lean on the gas pedal so hard.
You would also find it producing less CO2 as well.

 

[Mr Bump]

82bhp isn't exactly much more suited to motorway driving. At least with a 1.0 turbo you would have 100bhp+ and more torque from lower down in the rev range. It would be capable of a much more relaxed drive without having to lean on the gas pedal so hard.
You would also find it producing less CO2 as well.

stop going on about your need for speed turbo waffle.
the car performs very well on the motorway at a steady 70 mph on cruise control it did huddsfield to Glasgow last weekend at a lovely relaxed 56mpg.
I chose the car because I wanted a balance of comfort and adequate performance along with very good eco credentials.

so mooooove on

 

[cambsno]

So answer the question I asked to you?
What are your contributions to our environment?
list your vehicles, choices and emmisions?

Pug 307 1.6 06 plate if you need to know. The difference is that I am not bothered about the emissions from the car or others in a similar situation. I am not preaching to others or wanting high taxes/or bans for certain vehicles/fuels or looking to massively inconvenience people.

 

[Mr Bump]

Pug 307 1.6 06 plate if you need to know. The difference is that I am not bothered about the emissions from the car or others in a similar situation. I am not preaching to others or wanting high taxes/or bans for certain vehicles/fuels or looking to massively inconvenience people.

Petrol of Diesel?

 

[nilagin]

stop going on about your need for speed turbo waffle.
the car performs very well on the motorway at a steady 70 mph on cruise control it did huddsfield to Glasgow last weekend at a lovely relaxed 56mpg.
I chose the car because I wanted a balance of comfort and adequate performance along with very good eco credentials.

so mooooove on

You really do know fa about cars. Just because it has a turbo, it doesn't mean you have to go speeding around. It is about getting a small engine to work more efficiently, cleaner and more economically than a larger capacity engine producing similar power. The higher torque covering more of the rev range means the engine is a lot more versatile and can deal with hills etc. without the need for selecting lower gears like a small na engine and finding that the car still struggles to maintain speed.

Your 1.2 n.a. produces 118Nm of torque but you have to rev the engine to 3000rpm before you can achieve it, a 1.0 100ps turbo engine would have given you 170nm of torque from 1400rpm. Much more relaxed drive, much more mpg. and less CO2.

 

[cambsno]

Petrol of Diesel?

Petrol

 

[Mr Bump]

You really do know fa about cars. Just because it has a turbo, it doesn't mean you have to go speeding around. It is about getting a small engine to work more efficiently, cleaner and more economically than a larger capacity engine producing similar power. The higher torque covering more of the rev range means the engine is a lot more versatile and can deal with hills etc. without the need for selecting lower gears like a small na engine and finding that the car still struggles to maintain speed.

Your 1.2 n.a. produces 118Nm of torque but you have to rev the engine to 3000rpm before you can achieve it, a 1.0 100ps turbo engine would have given you 170nm of torque from 1400rpm. Much more relaxed drive, much more mpg. and less CO2.

and you know FA about the 2016 Citroen C3 they don't do a turbo version in that car, they only do it on the next version up the aircross which would have cost me £3k more and is a 110bhp engine.

so neerrrrrrrrr

 

[nilagin]

and you know FA about the 2016 Citroen C3 they don't do a turbo version in that car, they only do it on the next version up the aircross which would have cost me £3k more and is a 110bhp engine.

so neerrrrrrrrr

I didn't say it had to be a Citroen.
I know enough about a C3 to not even consider buying one.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

That is correct, diesel engines are the biggest cause of particulates and respiratory disease

Rinse and repeat after me.

It is surprising how people without chemistry or medical degrees proclaim the gospel of BBC and the Guardian so loudly to advance more poverty and reduction in life quality.

Give up your car if you want to lead by example. We are waiting.

The fact is that you are yourself producing lots of CO2 just like any other living thing on the planet. Plants also use the CO2 to grow and convert it to biomaterials. It is part of carbon and thus life cycle. The problem is when assholes start cutting down the forests, but maybe we should just fit a gas meter on your nose and tax you just so you feel better?

Your claim that your petrol only produces CO2 and water is just an idealised dream. It is spewing out incomplete combustion products, small volatile organic molecules that may contribute far more to toxicity of air and global warming. But until you read it on BBC you just wont care.

I also wonder if you smoke, or light up BBQs or coal fireplace at home? Anything else? I bet there is something significant lurking out there if we dig deep down enough.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

I didn't say it had to be a Citroen.
I know enough about a C3 to not even consider buying one.

Buying something better and faster would mean he might actually like which would make it harder to be so anti-car.

 

[Mr Bump]

Buying something better and faster would mean he might actually like which would make it harder to be so anti-car.

Nope it wouldn't in fact given the fact I very rarely even approach the speed limit never mind exceed it might give you an insight.
Maybe one day you can check out the back of it sat behind me doing 29 in a 30 its a lovely colour.

 

[Marc]

I very rarely even approach the speed limit

me doing 29 in a 30

 

[Cobra]

 

[LongLensPhotography]

Nope it wouldn't in fact given the fact I very rarely even approach the speed limit never mind exceed it might give you an insight.
Maybe one day you can check out the back of it sat behind me doing 29 in a 30 its a lovely colour.

There is a lot more to a car than going faster than 29... comfy seats, good infotainment, ease of driving, nice smooth auto tranny, engine that is quiet and does what you need, safety, visibility, cargo space... none of which C3 gets even close to.

 

[cambsno]

I very rarely even approach the speed limit .

Should you be on the road? That does not sound like safe or considerate driving to me?

 

[nilagin]

Should you be on the road? That does not sound like safe or considerate driving to me?

He readily admits he likes to hold people up. I dread to think what he is like joining motorways and dual carriageways. Probably like the others I often encounter who refuse to go any faster than 40mph on the slip road preventing all the cars behind from getting up to a safe merging speed and driving right to the very end of the slip road because they haven't enough speed to merge.

 

[Tigger.ufo]

He readily admits he likes to hold people up. I dread to think what he is like joining motorways and dual carriageways. Probably like the others I often encounter who refuse to go any faster than 40mph on the slip road preventing all the cars behind from getting up to a safe merging speed and driving right to the very end of the slip road because they haven't enough speed to merge.

.... and then hooting because people like me don't allow people like him in as I have maintained the (safe) speed I was doing in the inside lane ....

 

[Cobra]

because people like me don't allow people like him in as I have maintained the (safe) speed I was doing in the inside lane ....

Exactly! So many people don't realise or don't care, that the onus is on them joining to filter safely,
and not go blasting (?!) across a lane or two, just because they *think* they can
or force their way into a gap that wasn't there **

**I saw 2 lorries recently, both doing about 60 / slightly less in lane one the 2nd was right up the arse of the first, possibly waiting for an opportunity to whip out and over take.
The other 2 lanes were busy but moving.
A car poodles down the on ramp, matching the lorries speed,
and forced his way into a gap that wasn't there... how he never got squished I really don't know.

 

[LongLensPhotography]

He readily admits he likes to hold people up. I dread to think what he is like joining motorways and dual carriageways. Probably like the others I often encounter who refuse to go any faster than 40mph on the slip road preventing all the cars behind from getting up to a safe merging speed and driving right to the very end of the slip road because they haven't enough speed to merge.

Dreadful beahaviour

If it is only a single lane and I spot someone either genuinely slow (old caravan) or deliberately and obnoxiously slow in front I would just wait moving slowly at the start till there is enough of a gap to speed up and merge properly and safely. I always merge well before them this way.

 

[gman]

Just because it has a turbo, it doesn't mean you have to go speeding around. It is about getting a small engine to work more efficiently, cleaner and more economically than a larger capacity engine producing similar power. The higher torque covering more of the rev range means the engine is a lot more versatile and can deal with hills etc. without the need for selecting lower gears like a small na engine and finding that the car still struggles to maintain speed.

This does seem to be something that Honda have addressed, especially with the CRV. The 2.0 n/a petrol really wasn't suited for this type of car and it either needed the lovely 2.4 from the Accord or to be turbocharged because to get any acceleration you need to be over 4000rpm. It's really a car you need to get to know in order to get the best from it unlike diesels where it's effectively "plug and play" for even the dumbest of drivers. Fortunately, with the 8th Gen CRV it's now a 1.5 turbo petrol although I'm not sure if maybe it's still a little under powered as you can get a 7 seat version now but at least there's the option to remap it later on if the engine and other elements can cope.