| Page 1 of 3 |
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
 Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 12:58 Post subject: |
|
|
lol Diesel in Swiss and Italy is quite expensive. Here I can get it for 1.36€
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 13:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Didn't look at prices for puny diesel engines 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 13:48 Post subject: |
|
|
Seriously, diesel costs less, diesel engines are more economical, have more torque, are more durable and it's downsides are only that it is a little bit rougher on the environment (with particle filters even less so) and costs more on the taxes.
So why not go for diesel?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 13:58 Post subject: |
|
|
For NL? Taxes. You need to do at least 30000 km per year or so to make it worth it. It's taxed really, really heavily here. A 2.0 TDI (150/320 Nm) Golf 7 for example is 3.5k more expensive than the 1.4 TSI version (140/200 Nm)...but then there's the GTI (220/350 Nm) for another 3.5k on top of that. Road tax for the GTI is some 20% more than for the 1.4 TSI; but the 2.0 TDI is twice as expensive as the GTI in turn, 2.5 times more than the 1.4 TSI. It's a little crazy, but a hot hatch like the GTI is more economical than a diesel unless you drive crazy amounts (i.e. salesmen) and obviously much more fun to drive 
And the torque is a tradeoff for a petrol engine's power obviously
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 14:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| PumpAction wrote: | Seriously, diesel costs less, diesel engines are more economical, have more torque, are more durable and it's downsides are only that it is a little bit rougher on the environment (with particle filters even less so) and costs more on the taxes.
So why not go for diesel? |
Diesel was the future, but here in Norway we found out even with filters its actually just as (or worse) for the environment -.- (not getting into if its right or not)
so the taxes went up quite a bit. Its still cheaper than gas, but not that much anymore.
There are lots of people with 5-10 year old diesel cars that are pretty angry.
When it comes to performance I guess it doesn't matter that much IF you got a good turbo, but I just don't like the sound of diesel engines. Back when I was 18 I drove a diesel Astra and it was just so slow and boring :/
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 15:07 Post subject: |
|
|
OK so a similarly powered (1.4 T-Jet, 120HP) bravo would cost ~100 euro tax, my 1.9 Diesel costs 300, so it's 3 times as much. After that I calculated the KM I would reach with 200€ which is about 2400KM. I drive more than 18000KM a year, so I assume that I am already on the safe side as diesel costs 1.36€ compared to 1.62€...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 15:27 Post subject: |
|
|
I assume that your road tax is quarterly? Not hard to calculate
So assuming 1:15 for the petrol and 1:20 for the Diesel (consumption in L:km - no idea what it is in reality for the Bravo, but these are fairly average numbers):
- 4 * 100 + ((18000 / 15) * 1.62) = 2344 / year in tax + fuel for petrol
- 4 * 300 + ((18000 / 20) * 1.36) = 2424 / year in tax + fuel for diesel
So you're almost at the breaking point 
Not sure what it's like in Germany price wise, but in the above I didn't factor in the additional purchase cost for the diesel (which, as I showed above, is quite substantial here).
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 16:35 Post subject: |
|
|
tax is yearly
So my car is consuming 5,7 L per 100KM = 17,54 L/KM
(18.000 / 17,54) * 1.36 + 300 = 1.695,67 €
And now lets take the Bravo 1.4 T Jet with 120 HP, it uses approx 7,8 L per 100KM = 12,82 L/KM
(18.000 / 12,82) * 1.62 + 100 = 2.374,57 €
Or a Golf 1.4 TSI (122HP) which should be around 7 L per 100KM = 14,28 L/KM
(18.000 / 14,2 * 1.62 + 100 = 2.142,02 €
So in any case I save >35€ a month And as I bought a used Bravo, there is virtually no difference to the petrol version, regarding the initial price 
Edit: But the 5.7 is only if I drive a little bit more carefully... Meaning that I try to stay <170 on my way to work and with only me in the car. If I don't mind any upper limits (this does not mean that I push the car on every straight or hill  ) and with 5 people in the car, I have a usage of 6.0-6.1 :[
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 16:57 Post subject: |
|
|
Well that explains it then, our taxes are quarterly. Also drastically changes it for you. Your breaking point is at 4000-5000 KM already :/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 17:24 Post subject: |
|
|
with the new small turbo gasoline engines i dont see why one would pick diesel especially with prices rising for any fuel making diesel percentage wise less and less cheaper.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 17:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Just ran the calculation for myself. Between my 2.0 FSI or a 2.0 TDI I'd have to drive around 31000-32000 Km/year to break even, based on 5 years of use. Even calculated on 10 years, it's still around 20000 Km 
And yes, even used diesels still cost more than their petrol counterparts. Damn you Germans - as if the crazy taxes embedded in showroom prices weren't enough, you have cheap taxes too
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 17:50 Post subject: |
|
|
| PumpAction wrote: | Seriously, diesel costs less, diesel engines are more economical, have more torque, are more durable and it's downsides are only that it is a little bit rougher on the environment (with particle filters even less so) and costs more on the taxes.
So why not go for diesel? |
1 drop of diesel pollutes 75000 gallons of drinking water (about the size of an olympic swimming pool).
"a little bit rougher on the environment", lol.
Yes, yes I'm back.
Somewhat.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 17:51 Post subject: |
|
|
| fisk wrote: | | PumpAction wrote: | Seriously, diesel costs less, diesel engines are more economical, have more torque, are more durable and it's downsides are only that it is a little bit rougher on the environment (with particle filters even less so) and costs more on the taxes.
So why not go for diesel? |
1 drop of diesel pollutes 75000 gallons of drinking water (about the size of an olympic swimming pool).
"a little bit rougher on the environment", lol. |
source?
and how much pollution does regular gasoline produce?
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
deelix
PDIP Member
Posts: 32062
Location: Norway
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 18:26 Post subject: |
|
|
my daily car is a opel 2.0 dti diesel remaped, it usually does 7.0l , diesel cost 1.31€
if i had a 2.0 turbo gasoline i bet it cost more and pollute a lot more..
| Sin317 wrote: | | while you can't "turn gay", you can cut off your balls. believe me, you'll never think of women again. |
| zmed wrote: | | Or just a defense mechanism. If you fart, you'll most definitely smell it so your brain tells you it ain't bad as strangerfarts. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fisk
Posts: 9145
Location: Von Oben
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 12th Aug 2013 19:38 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, you are not supposed to pour it into your pool The normal usage is in your car with a particle filter. If Diesel would be unproblematic, they wouldn't hand out free diesel-gloves at the gas stations...
@Paul: Yeah, used cars in germany are always a good deal. It's quite common that the top of the line cars with good extras just cost a little more than the base cars without any extras tbh that is one of the reasons why I would be really REALLY picky choosing "extras" for my car.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 00:25 Post subject: |
|
|
| PumpAction wrote: | Seriously, diesel costs less, diesel engines are more economical, have more torque, are more durable and it's downsides are only that it is a little bit rougher on the environment (with particle filters even less so) and costs more on the taxes.
So why not go for diesel? |
My diesel needs special fuel in winter, very hard on my car battery and thus needs very good jumper cables and needs longer drives to keep it full in a city environment where i start the car a lot. A big fucking hassle. Id take a petrol car any day of the week. They dont sound pathetic either.
E: just remembered that in the winter at least diesel is more expensive than petrol and any other time the price is very similar.
i5-3570k @4.4gHz, MSI GTX 970 GAMING 4g OC'd, MSI z77a-g45, Corsair Vengeance 8gb 1600mHz, Corsair TX650 PSU, Crucial M4 128gb, WD 1.5 TB HDD, Seagate 1TB HDD, LG 27MB85R-B 1440p
RSI name: ctulu
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ixigia
[Moderator] Consigliere
Posts: 65086
Location: Italy
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 02:08 Post subject: |
|
|
Many lucky fellas that live in the North end up saving a large sum of money every year by just crossing the border and refueling in Sinland. Some of them even bring fuel tanks. I'd do it too if I could Gas is the new gold!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 13:40 Post subject: |
|
|
I want to ask about the new trend of making small turbo engines.
When comparing the engine with an older, bigger cubature, turbo one:
It doesn't have the same power
It consumes more fuel if under pressure, and doesn't deliver the same peak power
It has very slightly less fuel consumption when cruising
soo.. why bother?
| Lutzifer wrote: | | and yes, mine is only average |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Werelds
Special Little Man
Posts: 15098
Location: 0100111001001100
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 13:56 Post subject: |
|
|
You mean how VW for example no longer do my glorious 2.0 FSI and instead do 1.4 TSI's even for the new Touran/Tiguan?
Consumption and thus environmental impact. The *theoretical* consumption is much, much better and thus there's less penalties from governments. In reality you're right though, the consumption difference isn't that big.
You're wrong about the power though; the example above for example is 140 BHP (TSI) vs 150 (FSI) BHP. But the FSI goes up to 200 Nm torque at 3500 RPM, whereas the TSI does 220 at 1500 RPM already. For most people, that works out better, as most people tend to drive in cities and don't like going up to 3500 RPM to get the acceleration going. It's very much a tradeoff, one that works fine for the average consumer
The consumption and power/torque tradeoff is not the big issue though. It's the fact that it's a turbocharged engine. That turbo's going to require more maintenance.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 13:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Something very strange that I realized today:
I drove fairly normal for the last weeks to work and back (mostly 130+ and while overtaking up to 190) and had a fuel consumption of ~5.7. Then we went to visit my parents and we were 5 people in the car, I also drove a little faster (130-160) and the average went up to 6.0
Yesterday on my way home from work I reset the counter and drove really slow-> On the autobahn ~100km/h and on the country roads 70-90 (there was also some heavy traffic where I had a lot of stop and go for ~10 minutes). I had an average of ~5.4 (which is really good).
This morning I went to work and just drove constant 130 on the autobahn. My average is now at 6.2. WTF? Did my DPF start working just because I was driving slowly yesterday or why did my average skyrocket? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 13th Aug 2013 13:59 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm not really sure the the average fuel consumption is really that accurate on the car. Given the fact that it calculates the fuel based on the air intake Maybe the air temperature was higher/lower?
You should calculate the exact fuel consumption by making a big trip and then filling the car by the same mark, and see how much fuel it took from the pump.
@Werelds
My dad is driving the new twincharged 1.4 TSI 180hp - epic little engine, but compare it to 1.8T that was from 2002..
1.4 TSI 132 kilowatts (179 PS; 177 bhp) @ 6,200 rpm; 250 newton metres (184 lbf·ft) @ 2,000–4,500 rpm
vs
1.8 T 2002–2006 I4 20V 132 kW (179 PS; 177 hp) @ 5500 rpm 235 N·m (173 lb·ft) @ 1950–4700 rpm
meeeh.. the 1.4 still eats 6/100+ outside city limits and 8+ in city limits, and that's with a light foot 
| Lutzifer wrote: | | and yes, mine is only average |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 14th Aug 2013 13:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Also, same problem with Hybrids in Europe - totally not worth it imo. Give 10k to get -2/100 city driving and almost same mileage out of city.
Now for 'merica - it is great.
| Lutzifer wrote: | | and yes, mine is only average |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spankie
VIP Member
Posts: 2958
Location: Belgium
|
| Posted: Wed, 14th Aug 2013 14:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Well, my dad has a Prius. Thanks to some clever tax regulations he paid like 10k or so for a new car. Dunno the exact number, but there were green tax deductions higher than 100% . So you bought a car at 20k and could bring in costs of 25k. And in belgium, with a tax rate ~50%, this means a 12k cut... Agree that fuel consumption is not profitable compared to the high price of the cars, but with the tax breaks, you basically score a free homerun.
I have to say, the fuel consumption is efficient. City driving is extremely efficient (3-4/100k -ish) when driving busy city streets where you have start/stop a lot and drive like 30kmh ish. Highway is also efficient up to 110-120kmh. 5.5 ish, which is nice for a car which must be ~7-8 years now. You gain a lot of profit in sections where you typically burn fuel like crazy (mountains, lots of turning and slowing down). And it is a relatively big car, so nice specs on fuel consumption for such a car.
Btw, did you know they used to use fuel (diesel or kerosene if i remember) as a herbicide in carrot fields? Apparently, carrots do not take up fuel or are harmed by it. Grass dies. So in the '40-50, they poured it onto their fields Those babyboomers!!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 14th Aug 2013 14:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I am fairly sure that the DPF kicked in the other day. Today I was driving ~120 on the autobahn and my average is down to 5.7 (from 6.2!!), so it must have been less than 5.4 today I assume 
Something fishy happening in my engines!
But you are right streagle, I should probably measure what I actually tank at the gas station
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 3 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
