Diesel>Petrol

[bornwild]

Before you go 'dohhhh' read this...if you understand german

http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/news/auto_-_produkte/hxcms_article_502922_14387.hbs

But I'll translate it.

You know the 335d(twin-turbo diesel) that BMW has in Europe? The one with 580Nm?

Yeah, stupid amount of torque...anyhow, BMW has put that sequential bi-turbo technique into their 2.0L diesel and guess the results?

150kw(204bhp)@4,400rpm and 400Nm@2,000rpm

Imagine that power in an Astra........*masturbates*

edit: extra link in english

http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/newsID/2070323.003/page/3/lang/eng/country/gcf/bmw/bmw-efficientdynamics-in-detail

[DirtyHarry]

you could drag a wrx up a hill and kick its ass

[bornwild]

you could drag a wrx up a hill and kick its ass

You could probably drag it in a straight line and still kick its arse :D:D:D


BMW:iloveyou::clap:

[Wraith]

You could get a petrol turbo to give those figures and even better with the correct upgrade/tune.

O/S there's a VXR high torque upgrade, which gives a total of 467nm and developes 400nm from around 2500-3000rpm.

The same tune also gives you 228kw !

The oiler's no match, but on the flip side, it will give you much better range and lower fuel running costs :)

I believe there's also a local diesel tune, for the AH which developes 147kw and 420nm.

[dieselhead]

my tuned 1.9 CDTI has about 147 kW and 400 Nm. who needs a beamer? :)
see here (the tuned kW power figure is wrong, read 200 PS)
http://www.dieseltuninguk.com/vehicle_results.php?make=VAUXHALL&model=ASTRA&type=1.9+CDTI+16V

i bet the Astra is also lighter than a 3 series.
all that torque, starting 2,000 rpm... very, very intoxicating thing i tell ya!

[bornwild]

Yeah but this is from stock, so no warranty voiding or insurance premiums and it's in a 1 series, namely the 120d.....plus it's rear wheel drive :D

I've heard of DTUK and yeah it is amazing :D

[dieselhead]

yeah, the BMW is stock but will cost 3X the Astra. if you can afford it, go and get one. meantime i'll be driving my angry oiler, thankyou very much :D
don't see what the warranty problem is, since it takes minutes to remove the tuning box, haha

[digifish]

my tuned 1.9 CDTI has about 147 kW and 400 Nm. who needs a beamer? :)
see here (the tuned kW power figure is wrong, read 200 PS)
http://www.dieseltuninguk.com/vehicle_results.php?make=VAUXHALL&model=ASTRA&type=1.9+CDTI+16V

i bet the Astra is also lighter than a 3 series.
all that torque, starting 2,000 rpm... very, very intoxicating thing i tell ya!

Hmmm...I really am waiting for your clutch and or gearbox to go 'PING!'...I worry about the stock torque and power :confused:

digifish

[digifish]

O/S there's a VXR high torque upgrade, which gives a total of 467nm and developes 400nm from around 2500-3000rpm.

The same tune also gives you 228kw !

The oiler's no match, but on the flip side, it will give you much better range and lower fuel running costs :)

I believe there's also a local diesel tune, for the AH which developes 147kw and 420nm.

I really think that is over-stretching the internals of the Astra petrol engine. If I had the choice (which I do and I am saying no), I'd take the tuned diesel over the VXR any day. The VXR engine and drivetrain really won't last long in that state of tune.

digifish

[dieselhead]

the clutch will handle 400Nm, no worries there. check the 888s Astras in UK-not a single issue so far, and rest assured those cars are being driven hard. can't see how the gearbox would be damaged since the clutch would die first anyway. if i was to fit a heavy duty clutch, the the gearbox would be at risk, no question about that. but i won't do it.
the setting i've got is the highest i would ever go for in this car. let's not forget, those high figures are really only peaks that are not normaly reached when driving on the road. not if you care about your licence one bit... don't plan to belt the car every weekend on racetracks either.
but let me tell you, that torque feels sooo goood, just accelerate and bang! off she goes :)

[xplosv57]

Well with the current BMW range in Australia, all the diesel equivalents of the petrol models have more power and torque and use less petrol, so in my opinion diesels have always been the way to go!!!

Unfortunately due to the still relatively poor diesel fuel quality here, we wont see the 225kW 535d/335d here for a while, but is pretty much a performance car with stupidly low fuel consumption!!!

[rjastra]

Unfortunately due to the still relatively poor diesel fuel quality here, we wont see the 225kW 535d/335d here for a while, but is pretty much a performance car with stupidly low fuel consumption!!!

210kw actually :)

But with a price more than the twin turbo 335i who would buy one?
And the fuel economy drops off significantly compared to the other diesels in the BMW range. Performance = fuel usage.

[dieselhead]

Opel is playing with a 1.9l DTI biturbo that has 177kW and about 440 torques. let's hope they're successful and that this is what's cooking for the next gen Astras.
the fuel here is just fine. that's why you see more and more high performance engines comming over. the worst thing for diesels is winter cold, so as long fuel is within the new standards, these engines will feel better here than they ever will in Europe. 2 years ago i was there, in winter, at -27C... not the best time to fire up the 1.7 Isuzu turbodiesel i used to drive around...

[Wraith]

I don't think they'll be too many issues with drivetrain reliability with these power numbers we're looking at here....

I've never been a fan of oilers, BUT if we start seeing power levels of over 200kw for turbo diesel 4 potters, I'll give them serious consideration :) until then, petrol turbo all the way ;)

[dieselhead]

200kw from a 4 cyl engine? how many are out there, when stock? let's see... STi and Evo... excuse my ignorance, but is there anything else, have i missed any?

it would be interesting to compare petrol vs. diesel engines that have the same power, same number of cylinders and same engine capacity. a good start would be to compare the SRi Turbo with the CDTi, both Holden, hatch and turbo. by tuning the diesel a bit, the way i did, the engine reaches the same power as the petrol turbo. one might argue that's not fair because the diesel is not stock anymore. but how would you compare them otherwise? don't you see manufacturers are not keen to bring them up to same power levels, because the choice would be a no brainer? why is the diesel advertised as a 8.9 seconds to 100km/h, when we all know that's bull, and it's actually low 8 seconds? they do it just to make the petrol turbo look much sexier at 7.8 seconds imho... we are being taken for fools when asked to chose petrol for power and diesel for torque, when actually the oiler has them both!
my thoughts do not apply to very hot hatches like VXR, Mazda 3 MPS, WRX or others in the over $40k league. that's for the future biturbo 4 pot diesel engines to deal with, haha

what do you guys think? :)

[luvpsi]

I really think that is over-stretching the internals of the Astra petrol engine. If I had the choice (which I do and I am saying no), I'd take the tuned diesel over the VXR any day. The VXR engine and drivetrain really won't last long in that state of tune.

digifish

The Astra G sri-t gearbox (F23) can handle around 450hp from what i know;) the 6 speed box used on the AH models should easily match this

[digifish]

don't you see manufacturers are not keen to bring them up to same power levels, because the choice would be a no brainer? why is the diesel advertised as a 8.9 seconds to 100km/h, when we all know that's bull, and it's actually low 8 seconds? they do it just to make the petrol turbo look much sexier at 7.8 seconds imho... we are being taken for fools when asked to chose petrol for power and diesel for torque, when actually the oiler has them both! :)

I have seen the CDTi get 7.9 in European testing, 8.6 is typical.

digifish

[entice]

???

and my dad's better than your dad.....


this thread is funny.
my 2c.

Out of the box the STI makes the 200Kw from 8.0 compression, running 16-7psi. Very safe levels, and can be tracked hard all day long as stock, and driven to work the next morning without an oil change

very few dollars spent on turbo management, and exhaust, and it will see 260+ flywheel KW's no problems, and still be trackable all day, every day.

I have seen some cars with 240All.W.KW (yes at all 4 wheels) being tracked all day without skipping a beat, standard engine internals (just bolt ons and electronics, fuel rails injectors etc etc).

These things I know from personal experience, not from what a friend told a friend from which he read in a magazine...

I havent seen a diesel in a 2.0l capacity come close to these figures, nor this punishment.

My anecdotal experience tells me that capacity for capacity, a diesel is not as powerful as the petrol equivalent.

all that said, bear in mind I am not bagging the diesel at all. I'm actually looking at purchasing one sometime this year (or maybe a Lotus Elise.. all depends on a few little things) to have for a couple of years. I just think that we need to be a tad realistic about it's potential and existing tuning experience on the market. (again, I know that DTUK is great, but there are many more petrol tuners and experience with the petrol motor out there)....

[bornwild]

???

and my dad's better than your dad.....


this thread is funny.
my 2c.

Out of the box the STI makes the 200Kw from 8.0 compression, running 16-7psi. Very safe levels, and can be tracked hard all day long as stock, and driven to work the next morning without an oil change

very few dollars spent on turbo management, and exhaust, and it will see 260+ flywheel KW's no problems, and still be trackable all day, every day.

I have seen some cars with 240All.W.KW (yes at all 4 wheels) being tracked all day without skipping a beat, standard engine internals (just bolt ons and electronics, fuel rails injectors etc etc).

These things I know from personal experience, not from what a friend told a friend from which he read in a magazine...

I havent seen a diesel in a 2.0l capacity come close to these figures, nor this punishment.

My anecdotal experience tells me that capacity for capacity, a diesel is not as powerful as the petrol equivalent.

all that said, bear in mind I am not bagging the diesel at all. I'm actually looking at purchasing one sometime this year (or maybe a Lotus Elise.. all depends on a few little things) to have for a couple of years. I just think that we need to be a tad realistic about it's potential and existing tuning experience on the market. (again, I know that DTUK is great, but there are many more petrol tuners and experience with the petrol motor out there)....

Torque with me about those WRXs.....leave the power out of it, quote me the torque figures, whats the fuel consumption on those WRXs.....15L/100km? :)

We're not talking about power here, we're talking about Power/$ ratio, capiche?

And diesels put out more power per litre than any petrol can ever dream of....eg. the BMW [email protected] power

(note: thats not even the sports version, thats just a normally tuned oiler....ghahhahaha....i wet my pants)

[entice]

Umm.. no.. Kw's are more important on a track.. last time i looked cars on a track have their neck wrung out, and dont fodder around at 2000rpm

Power is a multpilication of torque and revs.

if i was concerned about towing a boat, then I'd be more interested in the torque figures...


btw, that STI with the rear wheel power returns under 13l/100Km's in day-day driving

[bornwild]

Torque? Warranty?

lol...racecars....a diesel is dominating LeMans at the moment, you are aware of that?

[bornwild]

hmmm kw's go to waste if you don't have enough torque to pull you out of a corner, sad but true

[entice]

uh huh.. that's right.. talking of lemans reminded me of teh diesel technology used.. which helped Ferrari win the Melb GP...
both excellent road cars.


oh, and VW.. are they the largest Diesel market?

How much did they spend on the Veyron?
Nice diesel motor in that one...

[entice]

Look, no-one's ever changed someones mind in an arguement, and I dont wish to argue, just state my opinion... I think i have done so. Also, I have stated my affinity for the diesel, but am mindful (in my opinion) of it's current limitations/limited experience.

[bornwild]

I'm not trying to change your mind....I'm trying to convince you to cut down on your greenhouse gas emitions by sporting around in a diesel....:P

[entice]

Like I said, there are currently 2 cars I'm closely looking at, one that I might be convinced into...

number 1 is the elise, but depends on spatial requirements at the time.
number 2 on the want list is the CDTi (above and beyond the sri, sriT, and VXR). this is looking most likely
number 3 is a SSVcommodore.
(I am biased, i can access discounted pirces on GM stuff, hence weighted to the Holdens)

I turn cars over pretty frequently, so it's not a decision i'd make thinking long term anyway

But you make an interesting point re emissions. I was chatting to someone at the GP who was talking about the environmental impact of our fuels. Now this looked at not just the emissions that come ouyt of the tailpipe, but the accumulative emissions that come from drilling teh stuff out of the ground, refining, and transporting it to you, and then what you end up creating.
IF I remember correctly, diesel aint that environmentally friendly.
He then continued to talk about the likelyhood of (now this is where I cant recall if it was ethanol or electic) new "fuel" service stations along australia's most popular truck routes. Apparently it would save the companies mega bucks, and significantly reduce teh ecological impact these vehicles create.


Food for thought

[dieselhead]

entice, why would you keep comparing extreme engines, like the STi, with a humble 1.9 turbodiesel?! the Subaru is more than twice the price, and twice the fuel consumption. sure, is 1.5 seconds faster to 100km/h, but i'll give that a miss for $35k, thanks. add insurance, maintenance and fuel costs and see how punishing is driving a supercar like the STi or Evo.
the tuned Astra is a 7 and change seconds car, with plenty of grunt and torque. when driven hard is still as frugal as a bloody Yaris. that's the bottom line for me, that's exactly why i bought it. as said above, the kW/$ and Nm/$ ratios are outstanding, just as the 72% Redbook resale value.

and one more thing: could people that haven't driven yet a modern turbodiesel just stop talking about how superior petrol engines are? they're just different animals, you need to sit behind the wheel for a while before making an relatively objective opinion! thanks :)

[entice]

hrm interesting points dieselhead.

I dunno about you, but i think most cars are purchased as total packages. Not due to 0-100km/h times.

The sti wasnt brought into teh equation byme, but by someone else... I was merely using a car with a similar capcity to the 1.9cdti for power figures. the dollar/power bit you mention. I didnt mention it.. if i recall correctly someone else did...when they referred to the powerful 120d.. no trhanks, i'd take the sti anyday over that

Now, for teh power, the cdti represents excellent VFM.. read my above post. itr's on my shortlist for that very reason. But, a tuning platform for a trackweapon it is certainly not. By the time you prend some dough at AP Brakes and get the suspension sorted, it no longer is a $35K car for the track. Granted, very few STI's are brought to the tracks, but horses for courses.

again, i re-state (4th time?) I like the CDTI.. it's on my shortlist I definitely am NOT bagging it.

[bornwild]

Entice, if I were you I'd avoid the Elise at any cost if practicallity plays any role in the buying. The diesel Astra in Australia is too low spec, you can't order leather seats, sports seats, sat-nav etc etc. The ideal car to buy, I must say, is the Commodore SS-V, since fuel consumption doesn't seem to play a big role in your decision making. The commodore will be the most fun car but don't expect any Astra like quality in ride, handling or finish.

I've worked on the new line in the Holden factory, designed the hydraulic lifts for the engines and so on and it gave me a glimpse on how they weld and put together the car and so on and I must say I'm quite disappointed. That's another story altogether.

Anyhow, get the SS-V, since you'll get it with a GM discount, so you won't lose much on resale value. The same applies for the diesel, it's just the lackluster option sheet that begs for more.
Unfortunately, thats the way it works, Australia gets the cars that they can't sell to the smart Europeans, a perfect example would be the CDTi Auto and the SRi 2.2.

[bornwild]

PS. Tho' if you do plan on putting the DTUK chip in, you'll destroy any SS-V in the 80-150 acceleration gap, just a thought

[entice]

:)

you're spot on.

If the car is for personal commute, elise is just fine. If I need to carry extra's, it's a different story..

The commo I like, but it's just.. so Big..

I've always had nimble cars, ut I must say that driving teh 6.0L brought a smile to my face....

The astra.. well the only bit I dont like is the MFD.. it's not quite up to par with teh CDX, and that's way behind the euro bretheren.. but that can be arranged :).. quitre easily....

oh, the sri 2.2 is now avail in aus...

[Vectracious]

Why is everyone having a go at entice for putting a rational argument up against a diesel? So far, he's the only one that has actually made multiple points against diesel - however I don't need to hear 8 diesel fans keep saying "Torque" a million times - yes diesels are economical and more efficient in terms of converting dinosaur bones to power than petrol engines, but they still sound like crap and you need to wear a glove to fill them up - when you find a servo that the pump's nozzle fits into your car.... and you pay equal or more to petrol for a less refined product......

Having 400Nm in an Astra or 120i?? Big deal - doesnt mean that it can tow a horsefloat or a twin axle trailer....

[dieselhead]

entice, don't think i ever said you 're bagging the Astra :) sorry if it looked like i did
i can't say i'm a diehard diesel fan. sure, i love my car. that's because it puts a smile on my face every time i get behind the wheel. i agree the CDTi is pretty low spec. would have loved some leather and sport seats, satnav maybe... i had an Astra CDX wagon before this and i miss the better BC and the better sounding stereo... but at the end of the day, for me, the car is mainly about the engine, handling and brakes. all of them better in the CDTi.
VW Golf could be a diesel option, but the conservative style, serious extra $$$ and the less vigurous engine (in my view) are issues can't go past... i also have a problem with the arrogance of the local VW dealer. otherwise, there's not much to chose from in this league, is it?

now, about fuel: done 4,600km and used 300 litres. figures read on odo and fuel bills, not on the BC. that's an average of 6.52 l/100km. never had problems at the bowser and never got my hands too dirty either-seems that stations are improving with the increasing number of oil burners. diesel purchased at 118-119 c/litre. and believe you me, i never drive for economy and never left the Metro area. performance AND economy? all i can say is QED.

[digifish]

and one more thing: could people that haven't driven yet a modern turbodiesel just stop talking about how superior petrol engines are?

I was thinking about that. The torque from the turbo-diesel and the torque from the turbo-petrol happen at very different points in the rev-range and come on in a different way, there is no comparison to how they feel.

I was driving up into the Adelaide hills yesterday (steep drive up to windy-point for people who know it) and I was amazed at how effortless the Astra CDTi did it. I could not feel the hill through the accelerator, it was like I was on the flat. It's an amazing feeling.

The torque curve for the CDTi is a much nicer, relaxed and satisfyingly meaty wave to ride than that from the SRi (not driven a VRX).

digifish

[entice]

UH HUH...

But that all depends on your style of driving

it seems "effortless" in a diesel as your cruising in it's torque/power band....

it also would be "effortless" for a ptrol engined car if you were in it's powerband.

But I still maintain.. having driven petrols N/a and FI modern and old, and diesels, modern and old (aint it grand you dont need to "glow" it anymore?), that when the going gets tough and things are happening fast and your in twisty bits etc etc (lets call it, extreme spirited driving), I'd still suggest that the Petrol engined car be more practical in that application..

as I said, it all depends on your application and style of driving

[Wraith]

I'm not trying to change your mind....I'm trying to convince you to cut down on your greenhouse gas emitions by sporting around in a diesel....:P

Is this indeed the case ??

I thought diesels emissions were way greater/dirtier than petrol engines ??

I agree with you guys as you've all stated regarding petrol vs diesel, it's a personal choice, as I've stated I'm not a fan of the oilers, I particularly hate the black plume you constantly have following you around with spirited driving in a diesel and like I've stated before elsewhere, you'll probably cop a nature freak dobbing you into the EPA - when chances are you've got a diesel to help the enviroment as stated above LOL, but like Entice, I may one day have one - but only as an everyday run-a-bout, due to it's frugal nature, nothing else...

For all my hi-po wants, I'll stick to forced induction petrol engines, I don't think diesels will ever be able to match the kw capability of petrol engines and the petrol engines can always match or beat the nm output of the diesels, especially now that direct injection is becoming more common ;)

The new BMW 335ci twin turbo petrol 3.0ltr inline six, produces it's peak torque of 400nm at just 1,200rpm !!! :)

[rjastra]

Didn't Topgear do a comparison of a top spec diesel BMW 5 series diesel versus an equivalently priced petrol version?

The petrol one blitzed it round the test circuit. The diesel had just too small a rev range and not enough KWs.

[digifish]

Didn't Topgear do a comparison of a top spec diesel BMW 5 series diesel versus an equivalently priced petrol version?

The petrol one blitzed it round the test circuit. The diesel had just too small a rev range and not enough KWs.

Clarkson hates diesels, so what do you expect :)

Fith gear did the Astra VRX aginst the 888 CDTi...the result after a lap of the track was less than a second in favour of the VRX.

digifish

[dieselhead]

well, the same Clarkson was slower driving a diesel Jag at Nurbungring than a German chick in a Ford van! sure he hates diesels, or he just can't drive, one ot the two. do i need to say more? :D

[Wraith]

Clarkson hates diesels, so what do you expect :)

Fith gear did the Astra VRX aginst the 888 CDTi...the result after a lap of the track was less than a second in favour of the VRX.

digifish

This is true, BUT the 888 CDTi is tuned up and the VXR was stock and it still beat the oiler !

Give a similar tune to the VXR and the 888 will be a smudge in the rear view !

Also on that same show, did you notice the black plume I've refered to in my other post ??

That's one thing that really puts me off the oilers....:(

[mintaka]

The old Diesel V Petrol argument...

Remember, that the following is from a total, self confessed diesel fan...

I have two cars. The CDTi, and a '91 Carolla GTi. The engine stats come to the following;

CDTi 1.9 L - 110 kw @ 4000 rpm - 320 nm @2000 - 2700 rpm
GTI 1.6 L - 100 kw @ 7200 rpm - 148 nm @ 5000 (approx)

Now get this, I love driving both cars!

Clearly the Astra urinates all over the Carolla for torque. In fact the CDTi has more torque at idle that the GTI max torque. What that means in practice is that the Astra has more kw that the GTI right through the rev range. The CDTi in fact will have more kw than a Commodore V6 until 3000 rpm!

This is why it feels relaxing and powerful to drive a diesel at low to middling revs. And remember, that's were you do 90% of normal driving.

Now, I can get the GTI to go like a scalled cat, but I have to rev it well past 4000 rpm before it feels powerful. And I have to keep it above that rev point in order to keep that powerful feeling. Don't get me wrong, I love wringing its neck, and it loves being thrashed.

BUT

Try driving it from here (Sydney) to Melbourne. Not that relaxing, and not the same feeling of instant omph under the foot. I would have to drive constantly in 4th gear to get the same sort of feeling that the CDTi has in 6th.

And really, that's what I like. The feeling of V6 levels of torque for small petrol 4 levels of consumption.

On a race track, you bring an engine to the top of it's rev range and try to keep it there. Although torque is important, in that situation, it's how fast you can rev and multiply that torque that will win the day for you. That's why petrol engines will continue to dominate because they can rev well past the 5000 rpm (or so) limit of a diesel, and thus make much more power from much less torque.

But in real world driving, if you had your petrol motor close to peak power all the time, a number of things would happen;
- The cops would think your a hoon
- Your engine life would be considerably shorter
- Your fuel consumption would be appalling
- It wouldn't be very nice for your passengers

Now because a diesel produces huge amounts of torque at low revs, it means that you can gear them much higher than a petrol engine. Even though a diesel can be out reved by a petrol, it can do more 'work' with the revs it's got. So I get the same "feeling" of instant power at much lower revs. Yes, I know that is a bit deceptive, but I've done the numbers (yes, I have no life) and for all intents I've got V6 under the bonnet, not a 1.9 L 4, for 95% of my diving experience.

So, what, it any conclusion can be drawn from the above ramblings?

If you want to drive at 10/10 th's all the time, get a petrol car, something like a WRX or SS.

If you want to have a car that "feels" powerful enough when being driven at 3/10 th's to 9/10 th's (normal driving) get a turbo - diesel.

Of course, this is just my opinion. I respect the differing opinions of the others here today.

:-)

Mintaka

[entice]

Well put Mintaka. By far the most rational of the diesel bunch. I disagree with your logic on syd/mel run, as most of the time both engines wouldnt be labopuring at all.. but the efficiently undoubtedly would be with the CDTI (as a side note, my 225 width sticky rubber clad 18" wheels on my CDX astra wagon with Tubby me driving, returns an average of 8.6L/100Kms... the difference in efficiency isnt really THAT much)

But, dont forget, you have a 16 yr gap in engines that you're comparing, and a naturally aspirated 1.6 Vs a forced induction 1.9.

Now, dare I ask... which one is more "FUN" to drive.....

[Wraith]

Yes that's all well and good, but what about these newer petrol turbo engines as I've stated above which produce their 100% torque outputs at well below 1,500rpm ?? ....... and you still have the benefit of the rest of the petrol engine performance regime !

The only good agreeable/sellable point for the oilers is their frugality.....

[mintaka]

No Entice, I haven't forgotten that my GTI is 16 years old. What amazes me is that after all these years, there still isn't many 1.6 L stock normally aspirated engines that can give better power figures. (The Honda VTEC 1.6 comes to mind, can anyone think of others?)

Certianally the GTI doesn't labor in anyway in 5th gear doing freeway speeds. But to highlight the difference, if anyone here is familiar with the Hume freeway by-passing Mittagong, there is a number of really long, steep sections. The GTI will need to change down to 4th near the top of the climbs, while the CDTi barrels over them in 6th like they're not there. It's that level of constant pull that I find so appealing.

Of course the more "Fun" thing to do would be to put the GTI into 3rd at the start of the climb and give it the beans! And when I was 22 that's exactly what I did.

But now I'm nearing 40, I want something a bit different.

The Astra is more "FUN". It's newer, more powerful (whether by kw or torque) much better handler and much more comfortable. But for short trips I'm never disappointed that I may have to take the Carolla. And there are some roads in the Blue Mountains, in the right time of day, with no traffic around where the old girl can still put the same smile on my face she did 16 years ago!

Any car is a compromise. A balance between power - economy, handling - ride comfort, price, size etc. Very often the car that suits you and your particular set of circumstances would be the very things that put some else off. And you're own requirements change over time. The car you want at 21 is not always the car you buy at 35 (when you have the money!)

For my own situation, semi rural trips within a hilly / mountainous environment interspersed with long intrastate runs, a high performance long legged turbo-diesel hatch fits the bill nicely.

Of course if I had the money, I would have a chipped BMW 535 D :D

Mintaka

[dieselhead]

mintaka, that's very well written. i couldn't spell it that well myself cuz i'm an engineer, and you know what they say about us: intelligent folk, but can't express themselves... :)

just got back to the office from a 3 hour trip, driving a VE on gas. what a joke of a car that is, compared to my Astra! it is a Berlina, $38k plus onroads, with a boot not much larger than my Astra's due to the gas tank... i really struggle to understand it's use to be honest.

[Wraith]

I'm an engineer, but hopefully I'm having no problems expressing myself too :)

So far none of the diesel people have responded to any of my comments....

Now I think we all know that you can't seriously compare an atmo LPG powered engine to a petrol or diesel turbo engine :rolleyes: BTW was it an 8 or 6....

I don't think you'll have too much to complain about regarding torque output, from even a stock atmo V8 on LPG or not ;)

[entice]

:)


now....

umm...

i'l watch this one out.. for the moment....

my head hurts. Too many words! can't remember what I was going to respond to.

Maybe, in this case I'm not qualified to.

wrong letters after my name :)

[mintaka]

I'm an engineer, but hopefully I'm having no problems expressing myself too :)

So far none of the diesel people have responded to any of my comments....



LOL Sorry Wraith I can't type that quick!

Your comment in your earlier post is true, but I guess it's the way you look at it. I prefer to think that with the CDTi, I get the same performance experience as turbo-petrol for 95% of my driving and get 30% better fuel economy. And at this point in my life, fuel economy IS a big deal. Again, if I was 21 and wanted the ultimate, bleeding edge experience (and had the money and willingness) then I might make a difference choice.

Dieselhead - I too have to drive alot of hire cars, Falcodores for the most part. I find them to be a bland, truth be told. I don't get the same sort of turbo 'kick' that I get from the CDTi (I would assume the same holds true for a turbo-petrol)

To throw a spanner in the works, go to this site http://www.teslamotors.com/performance/performance.php and take a look at the torque curve on that!!! Holy freaking Mother.... Love to have a drive of that!!! :eek:


Mintaka

[entice]

100 ft-pds torque.. that aint that much

also they dont graph the petrol power curve.. wonder why

[digifish]

...while the CDTi barrels over them in 6th like they're not there. It's that level of constant pull that I find so appealing.


That was the point I was making also. It's the way the manual CDTi makes hills dissapear. It's an addictive sensation...as is the mid-range acceleration, it has a V8 like quality about it.

I am approaching 40 too, perhaps it's an age thing :)

digifish

[mintaka]

100 ft-pds torque.. that aint that much

also they dont graph the petrol power curve.. wonder why

Sorry Entice, but they are quoting 200 ft-pds (red line) which is 271 nm from Zero rpm. A turbo-Petrol Golf GTI has 280 nm, but doesn't produce that until well into the rev range.

You've got 271 nm from the moment you touch the accelerator. No petrol or diesel engine can ever do that (at least, not one that I could afford!) That's instant response! Wish I could buy one.

Mintaka

[mintaka]

That was the point I was making also. It's the way the manual CDTi makes hills dissapear. It's an addictive sensation...as is the mid-range acceleration, it has a V8 like quality about it.

I am approaching 40 too, perhaps it's an age thing :)

digifish


LOL - Our poor old ears don't like the sound of screaming petrol engines anymore! :p

Mintaka

[dieselhead]

Now I think we all know that you can't seriously compare an atmo LPG powered engine to a petrol or diesel turbo engine :rolleyes: BTW was it an 8 or 6....

i was giving the example of a V6 VE Berlina just to show how fuel saving can go stupid. a $40k car, with no poke and a minuscule boot, and with a fabulous with 350km range! . i had no idea you can LPG a V8, now that's really something to laugh about, haha! why on earth would you do that to a high performance car? hm, wonder how an Evo of the STi would run on LPG... at least they would be very green like that, full of gas, we can all agree on that. cleaner than diesels for sure.

i'm aproaching 40, too. the love for diesels-could be a symptom of the "grumpy old man" syndrome? :D

[entice]

ummm..careful with those thoughts, dieselhead...

I recall reading many many moons ago, about a modified sigma, 2.6L turbo, running on LPG. Now, one thing that they mentioned, was upping the engines static CR. Yep. Instead of dropping it, they upped it.

The reasoning was that the flammability/combustability/ and therefore "octane rating" (if you like) of LPG was greater than that of petrol. However, LPG required a greater CR to enable that combustability. Hence, they upped the CR, modified teh bejeesus out of teh car, and still remained epa compliant. I also am not sure if it ran some kind of water injection for temps.

So, why hasnt it taken off? Who knows..

More interestingly, arent we the only country that uses LPG in our fleets (eg Taxi's etc). No-one here is disputing it's "greenness", so why isnt it mainstream? I'm typically not a conspiracy theorist, but lets face it, the large oil companies have the power in this world.
Otherwise, we'd all be nuclear, have powerful battery celled vehicles, with no emissions and we'd be patching up the ozone layer with our electric motors....(oh, btw, the "powerful petrol performance car that the link in the post of that batt car had, was listed at 100ftlb ..something I seriously doubt)

wow..all thos technical terms and I'm not even an engineer!

:)

[Alix]

OK, I've lurked long enough. Time I put my 2c worth in.
No, diesel isn't better than petrol. It's different.
I don't want the BMW - they're overpriced for what you get. I prefer value for money. (Which is partially why I bought a CDTi - which I think is outstanding value for money for a new car.)
I'm interested in the DTUK box o'tricks, but I'm not all that keen on taking the insurance risk, and truth be told, my regular driving regime wouldn't do it justice - I don't do track work, and I'm not always going for an out-and-out fang either.
From the limited research I did, diesel is less polluting than petrol - but there's not a lot in it. One is ahead in some areas, the other in others. Depends what you're measuring. Oh, and diesel takes less refining, but again, there isn't much in it.
Trucks aren't going to run on ethanol anytime soon - they'd need new engines. Biodiesel they can switch to with modifications. The CDTi's manual says you can only use up to 5% biodiesel anyway.
Bang-for-buck is certainly the CDTi's strong point. Paying extra for the Golf TDI or the Peugeot HDI and getting pretty much the same or lower performance dulls this argument somewhat - this is a CDTI advantage, not a turbo-diesel advantage.
I don't like leather seats! And the upgraded screen looks a pain to read/use, especially on the go on a sunny day.
The sound of diesels is different, not "crap". Not that you notice when you're behind the driver's seat at anything more than about 50kph anyway.
You don't need a glove to fill them - only if you're going to spill diesel on yourself when you fill up. When was the last time you spilt petrol on yourself when you filled up?
I've only ever come across one servo that didn't have the right sized nozzles on their diesel pumps (Shell just off the Hume just south of Gundagai if anyone wants to avoid it - the BP just north has the right ones). That's because there are plenty of diesel cars out there, and have been for years. Mostly 4WDs, but they count if they encourage the servos to fit decent pumps instead of forcing diesel drivers around the back with the big rigs and busses.
When I filled up on Monday diesel was cheaper than regular unleaded. This wasn't the first time. Diesel doesn't have the big price variability that petrol does. Probably because the big users - trucking companies etc. - have enough clout to stop the petrol companies playing silly buggers with the price each week.
I enjoy twisty roads too. Brake - Point - Squirt work is great in my CDTi because the torque is ready to fling you out of each corner. Even uphill. In my experience, anyway. :angel:
The CDTi has glowplugs. Not that I've yet seen the indicator light come on saying they're turned on, but it has them. Living in Canberra, and parking outside, I daresay I will sometime over winter.
Top Gear also tested a bunch of older "supercars" around a track - against a Astra diesel. Guess which won?
I love long trips in the CDTi = effortless. Seriously, put it in 6th as you leave Sydney, leave it there until you arrive in Canberra. I do know the bit near Mittagong too.
Actually, IMHO its around town that the diesel is closer to a regular petrol car. Unless you plant your foot a bit, that it, when you're going to leap away from the usual traffic drudgery, no matter which "performance" model you're driving.
Syd/Mel @ 8.6L/100km? On country roads I get 5.5L/100km in the CDTi. With only 4000kms on it now. That's quite a saving by my calculator - about 35%. In fact, my fuel consumption was up a bit on the last tank, because I'd done a lot of short trips to and from work on a cold engine (<10mins) and dragged a lot of trailers full of gravel around. With 100km to go I was showing an average of 7.8L/100km. I went for a fang last weekend out along Cotter Road, east of Canberra - some nice twisty bits there. 70kms later the average consumption reading had dropped to 7.7L/100km. There's no fuel penalty in driving the CDTi harder - which is part of the attraction.
The particulate filters stop the black smoke. Next year's Opel Astra models have them as standard. Don't know what Holden's plans for the CDTi are though.
The Tesla has a range of what - 300kms? Maybe 350? Will this go down as the batteries age? And how much is the battery pack going to cost to replace? Niche car, not a valid comparision.Not having a go at anyone here, it was just too much to go through a quote all the replies!

The CDTi's advantages are higher performance per dollar; lower emissions per kilometre; and lower cost per kilometer. If those things float your boat, go for it.

Now that diesel fuel regs in Australia match what they are in Europe (at least until the Euros next tighten them), and while the AU$ is so strong, and while Australians in general are fairly well-off, then importing and selling euro diesels makes sense. As enviro-awareness takes off and we all try to reduce our fuel usage I reckon the government might go the same way as the euros and try to encourage lower-usage by encouraging diesel take-up in the passenger car market through the same tax-fiddles the euros have used. So, the running costs would get even lower.

Overall, I'm really happy I bought a CDTi, and I think for the time I own this car, I'm going to end up in front than if I'd bought a comparable petrol model - I simply wouldn't have found anything near it for the price. Your milage may - of course - vary. Depends what you want the car for. But neither is "better" per say - just "better for You".

[digifish]

LOL - Our poor old ears don't like the sound of screaming petrol engines anymore! :p

Mintaka

:)

...that and it's tiring keeping highly strung petrol engines on the boil.

I will admit the CDTi is a little fussy (lots of gears to choose from, very powerful brakes and firmish suspension), around town in stop/start peak hour city traffic (not that I drive in it much) and the clutch is a tad heavier than most other cars of it's class.

...my wifes car is a 2003 Passat...it's a completely different experience, soft, quiet and smooth, if I was doing the peak-hour crawl, I'd much rather be in that...but it feels so blunt and slow after the Astra :)

digifish

[digifish]

1. The sound of diesels is different, not "crap". Not that you notice when you're behind the driver's seat at anything more than about 50kph anyway.

2. The particulate filters stop the black smoke. Next year's Opel Astra models have them as standard. Don't know what Holden's plans for the CDTi are though.



1 - I love the sound it makes...a brutal, animal sound 'grawwwwwwww' sound...it leaves you feeling a little dazed...doing 100 in a 60 zone :(

2 - The manual CDTi doesn't have particulate filters and IMO doesn't need them. At worst it creates a grey haze on full song, and that's only sometimes...I am not sure why. Particulate filters are also something else to go wrong. BTW most petrol cars do the same when given the boot and more than 50K on the clock.

digifish

[entice]

Syd/Mel @ 8.6L/100km? On country roads I get 5.5L/100km in the CDTi. With only 4000kms on it now. That's quite a saving by my calculator - about 35%. In fact, my fuel consumption was up a bit on the last tank, because I'd done a lot of short trips to and from work on a cold engine (<10mins) and dragged a lot of trailers full of gravel around. With 100km to go I was showing an average of 7.8L/100km. I went for a fang last weekend out along Cotter Road, east of Canberra - some nice twisty bits there. 70kms later the average consumption reading had dropped to 7.7L/100km. There's no fuel penalty in driving the CDTi harder - which is part of the attraction.]".

All reasonably put until this part.. and perhaps it's cos u didnt quote that you got it wrong at this point. 8.6L/100 k's is on the wider tyres, heavier platform, and day to day CITY driving only. On a recent longish trip I returned 6.8L/100km's, with the aircon ON.

Having driven the CDTI, in my opinion, it aint the one for spirited driving when you want fun in the tisties, but that's just my opinion....

for city driving, I think it'd be the one....

[Alix]

All reasonably put until this part.. and perhaps it's cos u didnt quote that you got it wrong at this point. 8.6L/100 k's is on the wider tyres, heavier platform, and day to day CITY driving only. On a recent longish trip I returned 6.8L/100km's, with the aircon ON.

Fair point - I stand corrected. For the record, my 5.5 was with aircon on too.

EDIT: I had a brochure handy, so I checked. CDX Wagon Manual = 1325kg. CDTi Hatch Manual = 1372kg. And I'm no lightweight either. How much difference are the tyres really going to make?

I couldn't tell you my purely-city economy ATM - haven't had a purely-city tankful yet.

[digifish]

Having driven the CDTI, in my opinion, it aint the one for spirited driving when you want fun in the tisties, but that's just my opinion....

My experience is that it's a joy and revelation in the twisties...X10 if they are also twisting up hill. The more I own this car (6 months now), the more I love it....apart from the oil leak :mad:

Every time I get mine in the country = :D , my sig is for real BTW.

digifish

[mintaka]

Alix, I certianally agree that BMW's are over priced. I mean I would pay maybe a 15% - 20% premium for an equivalent Opel (which is what it is in Germany, I think). But in Australia, there is a 100% to 200% difference and I just can't justify that.

Yes the CDTi is great value for money, compared to a petrol or diesel. There's not a lot around with the same level of performance for the money, another reason why I'm talking in the OpelAus forums and not the VW forums. It was a 6 grand difference when I went to compare and buy. No contest really.

As for the sound, well, I worked in bus depot's for 18 years, so the sound of a diesel engine working hard is something I'm very comfortable with. And let me tell you, the CDTi's diesel is very quiet by diesel standards. OK, nosier than a petrol, but then that's to my advantage. My wife doesn't like modern petrol cars because, and I quote "I can't hear the engine!" Before you ask, I do point out that there is a tacho, but she grew up driving a '72 Escort that she drove by ear (no tacho). So she finds being able to hear the engine a very good thing.

Alway nice to have the misses on side! :D

Entice, I've driven my CDTi on some of the twistist roads in NSW. I had an absolute blast. OK, I'm sure that I would have had just as good a time in a VRX but I get the other benefits too. (fuel economy, blah, blah blah)

What would be interesting would be to get a VXR, SRi and CDTi, on the same steep, tight road driven by, oh The Stig maybe and see what they would be like. The VXR would win, but by how much? Then factor the costs of the things, see how that works out.

Oh, who I'm I trying to kid, I'd just like to have a chance to bore up a hill in someone else's car!!!! :angel:

Mintaka

[digifish]

This is true, BUT the 888 CDTi is tuned up and the VXR was stock and it still beat the oiler !

Give a similar tune to the VXR and the 888 will be a smudge in the rear view !

Hang on!

The VXR is a tuned up Astra! How you decide this is 'stock' is beyond me?

SRi = CDTi

VXR = 888

IMO, in terms of 'state of tune'.

digifish

[dieselhead]

that's one point i tried to make, too! the VXR is a tuned SRi, for sure!

[digifish]

The old Diesel V Petrol argument...

On a race track, you bring an engine to the top of it's rev range and try to keep it there. Although torque is important, in that situation, it's how fast you can rev and multiply that torque that will win the day for you. That's why petrol engines will continue to dominate because they can rev well past the 5000 rpm (or so) limit of a diesel, and thus make much more power from much less torque.


But they don't...Audi R10 anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzDbNWZsDOQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfS32l92MFs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuNtw5XbxJg

:D

[mintaka]

But they don't...Audi R10 anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfS32l92MFs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OuNtw5XbxJg

:D

I was kind of hoping you didn't bring that up!?!?!? :p

True the R10 did kick arse and take names. But (and as a diesel fan I'm happy to be corrected) I think the main reason they win those races is less pit stops / shorter pit stops for fuel???

How do they go in the shorter races?

Mintaka

[dieselhead]

may i ask how many races Schumi won by being smart at pit stops? these stops are part of the game, aren't they? if you can save a few, why not?! :)
boy that V10 is quiet... what a silent killer that is. so much about the diesels being noisy.

[mintaka]

may i ask how many races Schumi won by being smart at pit stops? these stops are part of the game, aren't they? if you can save a few, why not?! :)
boy that V10 is quiet... what a silent killer that is. so much about the diesels being noisy.

No argument there. Good pit stop strategy is a perfectly legit method of winning races. It would have a bigger effect with longer, endurance races than with shorter sprint style races (I'm supposing)

I had heard that the R10 was quiet, but then, race cars aren't exactly the most quiet things around generally.

Imagine Bathurst with V8 petrols vs V8 diesels :clap:

Separate question for you dieselhead, have you noticed any black smoke since you chipped it? Also, has there been a drop in fuel consumption?

[dieselhead]

no, race cars are anything but quiet. petrol race cars, to be specific. could be that is the other around way with diesels, unlike petrol cars, they become more quiet as performance increases? :D

there's no black smoke at my tailpipe. but then, my box is tuned to the most conservative setting at the moment. i want to drive the engine in a bit more before getting more aggresive with the tuning. say 15,000km at least, i'm now close to 5,000km.
the fuel consumption seem to be stationary. i am anything but a sedated driver, you know... my average in a 1.8 Astra wagon auto over 30,000km was 9.3 l/100km. with the diesel i get 6.5 while going much, much harder, so i'm happy.

[Alix]

so much about the diesels being noisy.

Ahh, but the usual complaint about diesel noise is at idle - I don't think a race car is going to spend too much time idling...

[Wraith]

Hang on!

The VXR is a tuned up Astra! How you decide this is 'stock' is beyond me?

SRi = CDTi

VXR = 888

IMO, in terms of 'state of tune'.

digifish

Hi again guys, lots going on here still LOL :)

This is going off topic but the way I see it the VXR in that clip was indeed stock !

Stock standard by definition means - untouched as released from the showroom floor from the manufacturer....unmodified by any aftermarket items.

It may be an uprated Astra but it is still stock standard.

The 888 is a tuned up diesel from a performance outfit and done as an aftermarket upgrade...It's not released in that state of tune stock standard from the manufacturer.

To me that would be similar to bringing your VXR in for a tune at Regals or Courtenays and getting it uprated - in which case as I've stated, the oiler is no match power/performance wise and you wont have that awful black cloud following you around all day LOL :D

[digifish]

Stock standard by definition means - untouched as released from the showroom floor from the manufacturer....unmodified by any aftermarket items.

It may be an uprated Astra but it is still stock standard.

The 888 is a tuned up diesel from a performance outfit and done as an aftermarket upgrade...It's not released in that state of tune stock standard from the manufacturer.



The 888 simply has uprated brakes, suspension, lower profile tires and is re-chipped as far as I could see. This makes it the equivalent of a VXR in terms of the level of extra work done to it. It doesn't matter if it's the factory or an after-market place that did it...why? This discussion started as you were suggesting diesels would be whipped on a track. The fact is they aren't, once you compare apples with apples.

The CDTi vs VXR isn't fair...let us spend another 15K on our CDTi at the factory and see what happens. If there was a VXR diesel it would be the 888 IMO.

Tuning of diesels for performance is still in it's infancy, I'd expect to see (given the situation in Europe where 70-80% of new car sales are diesel) this to be the new frontier of motor-sport. Indeed Peugeot is now getting into diesel race cars for Le Mans.

digifish

[entice]

You guys still crack me up!

Lots has been said, but i cant be bothered and dont have time to comment on them all.

yep.. tuning for diesels is in its infancy....

and that's what i was referring to prior in the petrolvs diesel debate, regarding power and tunability.

Now, regarding the R10...

OK. SOLD. you got me on that one! I Want one now. WHere can I go and buy one? No wait a second.. you cant...

But I can go and buy a Veyron...

[mintaka]

You guys still crack me up!

Lots has been said, but i cant be bothered and dont have time to comment on them all.

yep.. tuning for diesels is in its infancy....

and that's what i was referring to prior in the petrolvs diesel debate, regarding power and tunability.

Now, regarding the R10...

OK. SOLD. you got me on that one! I Want one now. WHere can I go and buy one? No wait a second.. you cant...

But I can go and buy a Veyron...

You can afford to buy a Veyron!?!?!?!!? :eek: Maaate, could you spare me some change?;)

[Wraith]

While we're off topic, mmmmmm Veyron :drool:

[rjastra]

A few quick points.....

1. VE Clubsport puts out 400nm at.....1000rpm ;)
2. My Polo GTi now has 320Nm at 1800-3300rpm. It will easily get <7L/100km on a highway cruise. You can run it down to 40km/h in top gear and accelerate away smoothly. Effective rev range is therefore about 5500rpm.

3. Most mainstream turbo petrol engines now deliver max torque low in the rev range. And usually have significantly less turbo lag than equivalent turbo diesels.

4. The option of diesel is quite high. 2500 on a golf, more on the Astra. Thats a lot of money people are trying to recoup via fuel economy benefits of diesel.

5. The smaller the car the less benefical the economy benefits of diesel.

6. Diesels are much harder to design to pass more stringent emission laws that petrol. They totally dissappeared from the US market for 1-2yrs because of this.

7. Diesel engines are heavier and more complex (expensive) than their petrol counterparts. You add a fair slab of weight over the front end (40+kg).

8. Diesels don't seem well suited to Hybrid solutions.

9. BMW has just released an update of its 3L 6 petrol engine. It halves the current efficient difference between their old 3L petrol engine and their inline 6 turbo diesel. Silky smooth, high revving petrol with the economy of a diesel.

[Wraith]

Very well put together factual post rjastra !

Could not agree more :)

However somehow I think it still won't be enough for the pro diesel crowd :rolleyes:

[digifish]

A few quick points.....

1. VE Clubsport puts out 400nm at.....1000rpm ;)

2. My Polo GTi now has 320Nm at 1800-3300rpm. It will easily get <7L/100km on a highway cruise. You can run it down to 40km/h in top gear and accelerate away smoothly. Effective rev range is therefore about 5500rpm.

3. Most mainstream turbo petrol engines now deliver max torque low in the rev range. And usually have significantly less turbo lag than equivalent turbo diesels.

4. The option of diesel is quite high. 2500 on a golf, more on the Astra. Thats a lot of money people are trying to recoup via fuel economy benefits of diesel.

5. The smaller the car the less benefical the economy benefits of diesel.

6. Diesels are much harder to design to pass more stringent emission laws that petrol. They totally dissappeared from the US market for 1-2yrs because of this.

7. Diesel engines are heavier and more complex (expensive) than their petrol counterparts. You add a fair slab of weight over the front end (40+kg).

8. Diesels don't seem well suited to Hybrid solutions.

9. BMW has just released an update of its 3L 6 petrol engine. It halves the current efficient difference between their old 3L petrol engine and their inline 6 turbo diesel. Silky smooth, high revving petrol with the economy of a diesel.

1. OK now compare that to the similar same size turbo diesel, what is your point? (500-700 Nm anyone).

2. Your polo is modified. The factory doesn't build them that way. Again, you can similarly mod a CDTi and have 420 nM and 175 kW, what's your point?

3. Based on what evidence?

4. But diesels have better resale value and longer engine lives.

5. Eh? Based on what reasoning? It's all about mass needing to be moved. Compare the fuel consumption of a Polo TDI to the Touareg TDI.

EDIT: 0-100, L/100km, Weight(kg), 1 litre moves Xkg 100 km.

The Polo TDI = 10.1sec, 5.0 l/100km, 1222kg, 244 kg/100km/l
The Touareg TDI V5 = 12.9sec, 10.0 l/100km, 2235kg, 223 kg/100km/l

looks like the smaller diesel is not only more efficient but faster to boot.

6. That's not our problem and the reason you see new technology coming on stream for them. BTW petrol engines went through the exact same problems in the 80s with tougher emissions standards...it ruined the performance of a whole generation of vehicles. Anyway it's now a moot point, diesels are back and better than ever thanks to these restrictions.

7. Fair enough. But you get a tougher engine.

8. Based on what reasoning? Diesels are the perfect match to electric propulsion given they are happy pulling at a constant load and rpm for hours. Heard of diesel-electric?

9. Twin turbo diesels are also coming on stream soon...it's a sea-saw of technology, one benefiting from the other. Where do you think the direct-injection technology currently going into petrol engines came from.

You are making out like it's an either/or proposition. It's not, diesel is the dominant fuel in Europe, so is garanteed to be around and developed as will petrol.

digifish.

[blueraven]

Hang on!

The VXR is a tuned up Astra! How you decide this is 'stock' is beyond me?

digifish


that's one point i tried to make, too! the VXR is a tuned SRi, for sure!

hate to point out to you guys that the VXR has a different engine to the SRI.

Z20leh vs Z20ler (same as Z20let)

the LEH has completely different internals, different gearbox, different turbo, different intercooler, different injectors, different intake and obviously needs different programing to compensate.

I'm not arguing about diesels, just this "stock" point. Is a VE SS a stock car? or is it a tuned omega? Is the HSV GTS merely a tuned SS? or is a tuned omega? see my point? If you can buy it off the floor or its a factory option, its stock.

[digifish]

hate to point out to you guys that the VXR has a different engine to the SRI.

Z20leh vs Z20ler (same as Z20let)

the LEH has completely different internals, different gearbox, different turbo, different intercooler, different injectors, different intake and obviously needs different programing to compensate.



If this is the case then you are only serving to support the 888 vs VXR assessment. Since all those modifications work in favour of the VXR and the 888 is only superficially changed from the CDTi.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/203619/thurlby_888_astra_cdti.html

Diesel can easily be as fast/fun as petrol, and let's not lose sight that this part of the discussion was about whether petrol would kick diesel butt on a track. It doesn't.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zo987X-Au48&mode=related&search=

digifish

[mintaka]

8. Diesels don't seem well suited to Hybrid solutions.



Got to stop you there...

In the heavy haul game, diesel-electric has been the only way to go for 60 years! In fact, diesels work best in this environment (long constant revs, high thermic efficancy). Same with the biggest of the mining trucks.

There is a very good reason why there are no petrol powered trains, buses, heavy haul trucks. The fuel consumption for big petrol engines (6 litres +) under load is appalling. And for transport organisation, fuel consumption is your biggest expense.

And there is a lot of work happening right now for Hybrid-diesel trucks. see http://www.greencarcongress.com/hybrids/index.html

The only reason we haven't seen "Hybrid diesel" cars is because of the USA and Japan. Both countries have few, if any, diesel cars and therefor the focus is improving petrol fuel consumption.

In Europe, conventional diesel cars have been returning petrol-hybrid levels of fuel consumption without the added expense of the electric hybrid system. Only now are the Europeans looking at diesel-hybrid cars - Peugeot will release one shortly.

In practice the diesel-electric hybrid is a very well proven, very well understood technology. There just hasn't been the demand to put its expensive drive-train into a car when conventional drive-trains have managed well thus far. But this is now changing.

Mintaka

[bornwild]

Anyhow, what I wanted to conclude is this:

Diesels are superior in both Motorsports and commuting.

Based on what?

BMW 530d vs BMW530i, the BMW 530i accelerates in 6.7s to 100 while the diesel does it in 7.2 and thats the old diesel engine with 'only' 480Nm.
Diesel are experiencing a boom in development, there is still a heck of a lot of room for improvement for the diesel whereas the petrol has reached it's age, we've been using it for more than a 100yrs now, time to go old friend.

Also, the BMW335d Coupe. This review from worldcarfans sums it up:
http://www.worldcarfans.com/features.cfm/featureID/1070316.001/bmw/wcf-test-drive-bmw-335d

Someone mentioned that the diesel engines are heavy....guess what, the new generation of diesels is up to 20kg(new BMW120d) lighter than the last generation.

I also saw someone saying, 'but the diesel only revs to 4000'. The new engines rev to well beyond 5000. What does your 80's 2.0L petrol rev up to?

Diesels are the way to go, both on track and off track. In 10yrs time you'll be seeing diesel engines which rev to 7-8k and produce peak torques of well beyond a 1000Nm at a reasonable price and fuel efficiency.

And what is more important to combat air resistance, power or torque? ;)

As for electric engines, diesel is the closes thing to them atm. Electric engines produce peak torque instantly up to a certain rev limit, which the diesel mimicks in a way. But if diesel is an infant, then the electric engine is yet to be conceived.

I'm pointing BMW out as an example because they seem to be leading the development of high-powered diesels at the moment. All the tech they develop for their diesels will eventually filter down to Hiyunday even.

Audi will also release a supercar based on their 6.0L V12 Diesel, which uses a BOSCH fuel pump, pumping away at 2000bar(28000psi for you English folk) and makes 1000Nm from 1500 to 3000 revs @ 11.9L of fuel per 100km!!!!! Mind you, this engine is capable of 1500Nm+ with a simple tune. The fuel pump has been one of the critical things for diesels. The higher the pressure, the more power, the more efficiency.

Now I must admit, that it is unfair comparing the Petrol engines and the Diesel engines. It's like comparing a playstation2 and a playstation3. Diesel is just next-gen, not an enemy of petrol, it's the next step, evolution of engines.
ou also have to consider that the chassis of diesel cars is stronger, thus allowing better cornering. The CDTi chassis is different to the normal CD chassis, it has a few more welding spots to absorb the greater vibrations.

I also have to address one more thing, the VRX vs 888CDTi comparison. Companies like Opel have to keep their diesels low profile, otherwise they won't have a market for cars like the VRX. I'll put my money on it that the VRX in 2 to 3 generatins time will have a diesel under the bonnet. I can say the same for BMW's M-series, Mercs AMG cars and AUDI's RS line-up of cars. They will all start utilising diesels.

ps. I still want Ferrari to keep making those petrol V8's(just for the sound), though it would be nice to see what they can do with diesel

[dieselhead]

However somehow I think it still won't be enough for the pro diesel crowd :rolleyes:

well, most of the pro diesel crowd IS DRIVING diesels. the same crowd has been driving petrol cars, and are now oiler converts.
i wonder what's the percentage of the pro petrol crowd that ever driven a, say, CDTI or a TDI.
reading specs on websites and magazines is good, but hey, there's nothing as good as a test drive! at the end of the day, the only thing that matters is if you enjoy driving a car or not, regardless of the way it burns fuel.
but please, don't judge unless you know what you're dealing with here. high performance diesels are very new down under, so makes you wonder how come there are so many experts in this field around... ;)

[Vectracious]

Fark me... :rolleyes:

If Diesel ownership is going to turn me into a person who writes long ass posts on internet forums trying to convert everyone into buying one, then I definately don't want one. :p

[bornwild]

Lol, I don't even own a diesel atm. I used to drive around in a 55kw VW Vento TDi when I lived in Berlin.

[shoey85]

well hows this, im only 21 not an old fart! i have got a vectra c with 3.2ltr v6 petrol engine, i just bought a cdti, it is a far more superior motor to the petrol, and will use half the fuel i use in the vectra.

diesel is the way to go.

[dieselhead]

I started saving money for my next Astra. This is why:


"Excellent basis: New generation of 1.9 CDTI ECOTEC engines

The twin-turbo system was developed by a team of specialists in the Opel motor sport department OPC (Opel Performance Center) led by Donatus Wichelhaus. “The enormous potential of our twin-turbo engine can be seen from the mean effective pressure values it achieves: Whereas traditional turbo-diesels have a mean effective pressure of 17 to 19 bar, the 1.9-litre twin-turbo reaches 26 bar," explains Wichelhaus. The mean effective pressure of an engine is average working pressure acting on the pistons during the combustion process – the higher the value, the higher the power output. Wichelhaus continues: “For the twin-turbo principle to be applied successfully, the engine block must be particularly robust and capable of withstanding the enormous pressures, even after the vehicle has covered a high mileage. In the new generation of 1.9 CDTI ECOTEC engines we have an excellent basis.”

Vectra OPC: 212 hp from 1.9-liter engine with fuel consumption of only 6.0 l/100 km

Depending on the development objective, the twin-turbo can be designed either for high performance or for maximum efficiency in its consumption of fuel. Compared with a naturally aspirated diesel engine, power outputs can be raised by up to 50 percent without increasing fuel consumption. Alternatively, consumption can be reduced by as much as a quarter without loss of power. Opel has chosen the first route for the 1.9 CDTI twin-turbo engine used in the Vectra OPC study. This high-tech engine delivers a peak power output of 156 kW (212 hp) from just 1.9 liters displacement. The resulting specific power output of 82 kW (112 hp) per liter is a world record, not matched by any turbo-diesel in a standard production car.
Two-stage turbocharging combined with the latest common-rail fuel supply, variable multi stage fuel injection and twin charge-air intercoolers provide the increase in power and the maximum torque of 400 Nm, which is available over a wide engine-speed range from 1400 to 3600 rpm. With this engine the Vectra OPC accelerates from 0 to 100 in 6.5 seconds; the top speed is an electronically regulated 250 km/h. At 6.0 liters per 100 km in the European test cycle, fuel consumption is at the same low level as the production 1.9 CDTI units, and like these the twin-turbo engine can be fitted with a maintenance-free diesel particulate filter (DPF) that works without additives. Exhaust emissions already comply with the Euro 4 standard for new vehicles registered after January 1, 2006."



Not bad for the oilburners imho. Something to challange the fancy VW Twinchargers! :)

[Vectracious]

OMG - FFS we get it :p :D

[dieselhead]

... or maybe I should be saving a helluva lot more for the new BMW 123d?

http://www.worldcarfans.com/news.cfm/newsid/2070627.001/country/gcf/new-2008-bmw-123d-revealed


"For the first time in the model year 2008, the new 4-cylinder diesel engine with Variable Twin Turbo is available both for the 5 and 3-door models. The 150 kW/204 bhp power unit gives the BMW 123d a unique status in a number of disciplines. The new model has a particular fascination due to its degree of pulling power, which is unique within its segment, and it also has outstanding fuel consumption levels. The 5-door and 3-door models make do with 5.2 litres of diesel for 100 kilometres in the EU test cycle. The CO2 level of the BMW 123d is 138 g per kilometre."

[digifish]

...I hope they do put one in the Astra, as I am addicted now and will be wanting to upgrade in a couple of years, 156 kW and 400 Nm would be a nice reason to get a new one :)

digifish

[MatsHolden]

Am I alone when I say that a large part of a car that appeals to me is the kind of sound it makes? Diesels just don't do it for me in the sound department.

[bornwild]

I also have to address one more thing, the VRX vs 888CDTi comparison. Companies like Opel have to keep their diesels low profile, otherwise they won't have a market for cars like the VRX. I'll put my money on it that the VXR in 2 to 3 generations time will have a diesel under the bonnet. I can say the same for BMW's M-series, Mercs AMG cars and AUDI's RS line-up of cars. They will all start utilising diesels.


I believe it is official that the next-gen Astra VXR is going to have a diesel option?

Was I right or was I right? :D:D:clap:

[digifish]

Am I alone when I say that a large part of a car that appeals to me is the kind of sound it makes? Diesels just don't do it for me in the sound department.

A nice engine note is a bonus...but for every day driving, to be honest, I like my cars fairly quiet. The CDTi is very quiet on the move, particularly over 60 km/hr, just < 30 km/hr is a tad clattery.

That said, I like the sound the CDTi makes on-boost under hard acceleration...sounds deep and grunty.

digifish

[sasrit]

1. OK now compare that to the similar same size turbo diesel, what is your point? (500-700 Nm anyone).

2. Your polo is modified. The factory doesn't build them that way. Again, you can similarly mod a CDTi and have 420 nM and 175 kW, what's your point?

3. Based on what evidence?

4. But diesels have better resale value and longer engine lives.

5. Eh? Based on what reasoning? It's all about mass needing to be moved. Compare the fuel consumption of a Polo TDI to the Touareg TDI.

EDIT: 0-100, L/100km, Weight(kg), 1 litre moves Xkg 100 km.

The Polo TDI = 10.1sec, 5.0 l/100km, 1222kg, 244 kg/100km/l
The Touareg TDI V5 = 12.9sec, 10.0 l/100km, 2235kg, 223 kg/100km/l

looks like the smaller diesel is not only more efficient but faster to boot.

6. That's not our problem and the reason you see new technology coming on stream for them. BTW petrol engines went through the exact same problems in the 80s with tougher emissions standards...it ruined the performance of a whole generation of vehicles. Anyway it's now a moot point, diesels are back and better than ever thanks to these restrictions.

7. Fair enough. But you get a tougher engine.

8. Based on what reasoning? Diesels are the perfect match to electric propulsion given they are happy pulling at a constant load and rpm for hours. Heard of diesel-electric?

9. Twin turbo diesels are also coming on stream soon...it's a sea-saw of technology, one benefiting from the other. Where do you think the direct-injection technology currently going into petrol engines came from.

You are making out like it's an either/or proposition. It's not, diesel is the dominant fuel in Europe, so is garanteed to be around and developed as will petrol.

digifish.

Regarding point number 3, the Astra G sriT develops maximum torque at 1950rpm...............all the way to 5600rpm. A golf GTi develops max torque at 1800rpm.

[rjastra]

Am I alone when I say that a large part of a car that appeals to me is the kind of sound it makes? Diesels just don't do it for me in the sound department.


Am I alone in wondering why they are producing all these new higher powered diesel engines. Where are the examples of producing smaller more economical diesels? Surely instead of making a 150kw/400nm 1.9 they could make a 1.3L version that gets the same 100kw/300nm as the current 1.9L and make it get 4L/100km.

[Tfer]

Actually atm not that fussed on the diesels.... I can understand why they make sense etc, and why people choose them, but as I have a Veccy C CDXi, I am not lacking for power/torque (for my own purposes), so at this stage, and no plans to get rid of the Veccy C in the near future, I am settled with petrol ;)

[digifish]

Am I alone in wondering why they are producing all these new higher powered diesel engines. Where are the examples of producing smaller more economical diesels? Surely instead of making a 150kw/400nm 1.9 they could make a 1.3L version that gets the same 100kw/300nm as the current 1.9L and make it get 4L/100km.

....aaaaawwwww, that's no fun :)

but a good point. I suppose with new technology they need to change a premium to recoup R&D costs and cause a marketing splash. Launching the hero engines first is probably the way to go. VW recently launcged the GT with the petrol 1.4 which is an example of what you suggest.

digifish.

[sasrit]

Yes, the Golf TSi GT is an example of the designers of petrol engines not standing still, and it the end it is us who win, with better engines using both types of fuel.

[bornwild]

Am I alone in wondering why they are producing all these new higher powered diesel engines. Where are the examples of producing smaller more economical diesels? Surely instead of making a 150kw/400nm 1.9 they could make a 1.3L version that gets the same 100kw/300nm as the current 1.9L and make it get 4L/100km.

Good Point! Though it has been addressed...in Europe :D

The smaller 1.0l to 1.6l TDi's are being sold in Europe, since a couple of years back. They are not willing to bring them over here, because people here lack the IQ to figure out that 'smaller engine+same power as a large engine=fun while saving'.

Fiat are currently the only willing company to bring over their 1.3TDi which produces 200Nm and 66kW; and considering this is the last-gen of diesels; the new, sequential biturbo 1.3l diesel, should produce around 90kW and 230-280Nm.

For example; Ford Europe has a 1.6Tdi with 80kW and 240Nm from just 1750rpm connected to a CVT in the Fiesta/Focus/Mondeo range!!!!
Opel does the same, they have a 1.3CDTi which develops 66kW and 200Nm between 1750-2000rpm matched with either a 6sp manual or a 6sp automatic in their Corsa/Astra/Vectra range of cars. Opel also has a 1.7CDTi which develops 81kW and 260Nm from 2300 to 3000rpm.
If you tried to sell a large car such as a Vectra/Mondeo here with a 1.3l engine, people would go "What the heck am I gonna do with that midget under the bonnet??" because they lack general intelligence.

There is another aspect to this as well; Fuel Quality. FQ in Australia is rather poor, especially with diesels. In Europe, the diesel has a much lower sulphur content than here. Ever wonder why Mercedes Bluetec don't sell here??? Or their VW counterparts??? Because of fuel. We need to fix our fuel before asking for advanced diesel engines to come over here.


ps. I think Holden should start using the same CDTi engine found in the Astra, the 1.9CDTi(110kw, 320Nm@2000-2750rpm), in the Commodores. That's when I'd go, "Look, Holden are really trying to make a great car!".

[xplosv57]

Am I alone when I say that a large part of a car that appeals to me is the kind of sound it makes? Diesels just don't do it for me in the sound department.

LOL Mat, when ya stall up an older BMW diesel and it doses like a VL Turbo, then you'll enjoy the sound of a diesel!!!!

Ive heard a CDTi, and theyre very rough and rowdy on idle, the new bmw diesels have a cyclonic particulate filter which makes the exhaust fumes cleaner, less smelly and also makes the car sound like a petrol car, very quiet!!!!

Not too sure we will see the 123d here, if we eventually do, i hope they also bring the monster 535d (272hp/560Nm) twin turbo rocketship here, oh baby!!!!!!!!!!!

P.S. The Commodore would go nowhere with a 110kW/320Nm motor under the bonnet, shes just a little bit heavier than the Astra!!!!!! So it wouldn't be a great car...

[bornwild]

It's only 40Nm shy of their V6 Ecotec.....so I don't see the reason why it shouldn't be enough :)

[MatsHolden]

It's only 40Nm shy of their V6 Ecotec.....so I don't see the reason why it shouldn't be enough :)

They're playing with a 3.0L Diesel at the minute for the Commodore... The Astra Diesel may only be 20Nm shy of the Alloytec V6 (195kw) but don't forget the power difference... Yes torque is important, but can't neglect power in a large car, if you're wanting a car that isn't a total slug.

[dieselhead]

I agree, a 1.9 CDTi won't cut it in a Commodore. Not in Australia, anyway. Could be another story in Europe though. They are happy to drive Astras with 1.4 petrol there...
3.0 V6 turbodiesel would be a smashing engine for the Commo'. The only problem would be the price, because I bet the diesel version would cost more than a V8! Combine that with the local ignorance when it comes to high-performance diesels and you see Holden can't mount a compelling case for them...

[bornwild]

And why aren't we willing to drive 1.4l petrols here in Australia???

It get's you from A to B just as well as a 2.0L V4, no slower, no quicker....especially in today's traffic.

[rjastra]

And why aren't we willing to drive 1.4l petrols here in Australia???

It get's you from A to B just as well as a 2.0L V4, no slower, no quicker....especially in today's traffic.

We are... look at all the yaris, barinas, colts etc sold. Fastest growing market in Australia at the moment.

Manufacturers should be more concerned with getting weight out of cars than foisting expensive engine tech upon us as a substitute.

Have a look at the new Mazda2. 65-100kg LIGHTER than the model it replaces. And it reaps performance and economy benefits from that.


Ever wonder why Mercedes Bluetec don't sell here???
Because our emission regs don't require it at the moment? The USA does and so do future EURO changes. NOt to mention it adds $$$ to the price of a vehicle

No diesel passenger vehicle can pass current USA TIER2 emission regs without using some/all of the bluetec technologies (other manufactures use it for US models including VW). This requires ultra low sulpher fuel (15ppm compared to our current 50ppm)

I don't think people realise fully that current diesel cars fail to match the emission standards imposed on equivalent petrol cars.
The USA enfforced common emission levels recently and it wiped out every diesel vehicle sold for the 2007 model year. Bluetec was the response to allow diesels to meet TIER2. They are much more complex than the tech used to clean up petrol powered vehicles.

[digifish]

Ive heard a CDTi, and theyre very rough and rowdy on idle, the new bmw diesels have a cyclonic particulate filter which makes the exhaust fumes cleaner, less smelly and also makes the car sound like a petrol car, very quiet!!!!

The noise is not from the exhaust system, it comes directly from the engine.

digifish

[Wraith]

Am I alone in wondering why they are producing all these new higher powered diesel engines. Where are the examples of producing smaller more economical diesels? Surely instead of making a 150kw/400nm 1.9 they could make a 1.3L version that gets the same 100kw/300nm as the current 1.9L and make it get 4L/100km.

Good point ;)

VW is doing so - but - with it's petrol turbo engines.

The new Golf 'Gt' with it's 'twin charger' 1.4ltr is designed to give the power/response of a petrol engine, with the efficiency of a diesel.

It uses a supercharger for low revs/bottom end, then switches to a turbo charger for high revs/top end.

Of memory it produces something like 140kw and 320nm, with similar economy to current 2.0ltr turbo diesels.......

So it looks like petrol turbos are also being developed to match the good qualities of the diesels, whilst diesels are being improved to try and match the better qualities of the petrol engines.

[corsa2nv]

Torque with me about those WRXs.....leave the power out of it, quote me the torque figures, whats the fuel consumption on those WRXs.....15L/100km? :)

We're not talking about power here, we're talking about Power/$ ratio, capiche?

And diesels put out more power per litre than any petrol can ever dream of....eg. the BMW [email protected] power

(note: thats not even the sports version, thats just a normally tuned oiler....ghahhahaha....i wet my pants)

actually, 10.9L + AWD so theres your reason for incresed fuel economy

[Wraith]

I know V8's don't come into this discussion, but just as a reference the current V8's in the VE HSV range develop 400nm @ just 1000rpm ! and in highway mode can return around 12ltrs/100km, dosn't sound that good - coming soon displacement on demand will fix the efficiecy side of things and all that grunt still there for the taking :)

[dieselhead]

So how exactly is DoD going to work when cruising on the highway at 110 km/h? I thought that's only for busy cities when crawling at 5 km/h average between signaled intersections.

[bornwild]

Displacement on demand is something Mercedes has had for over 10yrs now, I believe?

Anywho, the WRX has a 11L consumption when you drive it like a girly man....meaning a normally aspirated 1.8L petrol offers the same performance for less fuel.


As for the V8's....where did you get that figure from? I can't seem to find it....?!

But OK, let's assume it is correct. Take a a TDi of the same capacity, namely Audi's 6.0TDi, it develops 550Nm at 1000rpm, whilst consuming 8.0-10.0L of diesel.

[entice]

:) all this talk about power and grunt and commodores with 1.9L diesel's..

i dunno...

I drove the Calais V V8 after the diesel the other day (actually went for a nice sedate city drive in teh Calais V)....

anyone who thinks that the diesel astrs can give that v8 a run for its money.. well... has rocksin their head (same rocks used to crush togetehr to get diesel fuel)

it's a shame they even offer a lesser engine in the commo range.. they should just drop teh 6, and spend the money n technology in making teh 8 more efficient.. DoD or whatever...

that 6L engine is just soooo tractable!

[bornwild]

:) all this talk about power and grunt and commodores with 1.9L diesel's..

i dunno...

I drove the Calais V V8 after the diesel the other day (actually went for a nice sedate city drive in teh Calais V)....

anyone who thinks that the diesel astrs can give that v8 a run for its money.. well... has rocksin their head (same rocks used to crush togetehr to get diesel fuel)

it's a shame they even offer a lesser engine in the commo range.. they should just drop teh 6, and spend the money n technology in making teh 8 more efficient.. DoD or whatever...

that 6L engine is just soooo tractable!

You are living evidence proving that we do live in Australia and not Europe. :)

[mintaka]

Good point ;)

VW is doing so - but - with it's petrol turbo engines.

The new Golf 'Gt' with it's 'twin charger' 1.4ltr is designed to give the power/response of a petrol engine, with the efficiency of a diesel.

It uses a supercharger for low revs/bottom end, then switches to a turbo charger for high revs/top end.

Of memory it produces something like 140kw and 320nm, with similar economy to current 2.0ltr turbo diesels.......



Wraith,

VW GOLF GT = 125 kW, 240 Nm, 7.7 L/100 km *
VW GOLF TDI = 103 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km *
Astra CDTi = 110 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km

* From the VW Australia site

So better power to the GT TSI engine, but not in torque or fuel consumption.

Would love to have a go in one, but I don't think I would swap my diesel for it anytime soon.

That said, it's a good step in the right direction and maybe one this sort of this will match a diesel in torque and economy. If so, I would be very interested.

Cheers.

Mintaka

[digifish]

Wraith,

VW GOLF GT = 125 kW, 240 Nm, 7.7 L/100 km *
VW GOLF TDI = 103 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km *
Astra CDTi = 110 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km

That said, it's a good step in the right direction and maybe one this sort of this will match a diesel in torque and economy. If so, I would be very interested.

Cheers.

Mintaka

The thing is the next gen twin-turbo diesels swing the pendulum the other way again...

156 kw @ 400 nM 6/L/100 km

digifish

[bornwild]

The thing is the next gen twin-turbo diesels swing the pendulum the other way again...

156 kw @ 400 nM 6/L/100 km

digifish

Amen, brother....AMEN! :pray::pray:

[MatsHolden]

So how exactly is DoD going to work when cruising on the highway at 110 km/h? I thought that's only for busy cities when crawling at 5 km/h average between signaled intersections.

It works pretty much as the title describes... Displacement on Demand. When cruising at 110km/h cutting out 2, even 4 cylinders is quite fine... you don't need all 8. If you need power (ie. to overtake) then all 8 cylinders will come in to play.

[FiestaFreak]

oh yeh dieselz are sik ay... how about NO.,

[bornwild]

It works pretty much as the title describes... Displacement on Demand. When cruising at 110km/h cutting out 2, even 4 cylinders is quite fine... you don't need all 8. If you need power (ie. to overtake) then all 8 cylinders will come in to play.

Pretty much what Merc has for almost 20yrs now I believe it is.

[MatsHolden]

Pretty much what Merc has for almost 20yrs now I believe it is.

Most automotive innovations have been developed by manufacturers like Mercedes and BMW... Don't think anyone would dispute that. But believe it or not it was Cadillac that first introduced cylinder deactivation in a mass produced vehicle. Mercedes followed with a more efficient way of cylinder deactivation. They call it Active Cylinder Control (ACC) GM call it DoD but it's all cylinder deactivation or displacement on demand.. whatever floats your boat.

[rjastra]

The first Mercedes models to appear with cylinder deactivation were the European-spec 1999 CL600, S600 and CL500. These vehicles were powered by either a DOHC 6.0 litre V12 or DOHC 5.0 litre V8.


I am not aware of current model (Oz spec) Mercs with this technology.

The GM units deactivate 1/2 the cylinders.
So a V6 becomes a V3 and a V8 becomes a V4.

Deactivation occurs at light loads. So its not that effective in stop start traffic.


VW GOLF GT = 125 kW, 240 Nm, 7.7 L/100 km *
VW GOLF TDI = 103 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km *
Astra CDTi = 110 kW, 320 Nm, 6 L/100 km

* From the VW Australia site

So better power to the GT TSI engine, but not in torque or fuel consumption.

Except the Golf GT is much faster than than other diesel car and has a rev range nearly twice a large.

[digifish]

Most automotive innovations have been developed by manufacturers like Mercedes and BMW...

Actually I'd despute that, there has been very little real change to automotive engineering from a conceptual point of view for a long time. I am (BTW) talking about things like...

Overhead cams. Disk brakes. Power steering etc.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blcar.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile

Mercedies and BMW (to a lesser extent) tend to be early adopters of technology, not inventors.

digifish

[Wraith]

Displacement on demand is something Mercedes has had for over 10yrs now, I believe?

Anywho, the WRX has a 11L consumption when you drive it like a girly man....meaning a normally aspirated 1.8L petrol offers the same performance for less fuel.


As for the V8's....where did you get that figure from? I can't seem to find it....?!

But OK, let's assume it is correct. Take a a TDi of the same capacity, namely Audi's 6.0TDi, it develops 550Nm at 1000rpm, whilst consuming 8.0-10.0L of diesel.


Better late than never :)

Myself after years of owning V8's....in regards to my LS1 V8 R8, I could achieve between 10-11ltrs/100km in Highway mode and it was an auto, I'd do even better with a 6spd manual - alot on economy running does also depend on the person behind the wheel and how the car is driven.

True, maybe petrol engines will never be able to achieve the efficiency of diesels and diesels will never achieve the better points of the petrol engines, but as discussed with developments continuing on both, the future's good on both fronts :)

With regards to that VW 1.4ltr twin charger, they do state that it's power and torque output have been purposely restricted - it can produce heaps more - so as not to outshine the current very popular and award winning VW 2.0ltr TFSI which is fitted to so many models :)

What Entice said regarding comparison between V8's and the current crop of turbo diesels is also true ;)

[sasrit]

Except the Golf GT is much faster than than other diesel car and has a rev range nearly twice a large.

Yes, the petrol is much more flexible, revs to 7000rpm and has big torque off idle due to the supercharger, the diesel has the (even more) torque down low but runs out of puff by 4000rpm, so relies on gearing to keep it in the torque band. The GT performs as well or better for more of the time, with a relatively small penalty in consumption.......unless you flog it mercilessly. As they say, "yer pays yer money and yer makes yer choice". I'd personally go for petrol as it feels more responsive and sporty, just my 2 cents worth.

[shoey85]

Yes, the petrol is much more flexible, revs to 7000rpm and has big torque off idle due to the supercharger, the diesel has the (even more) torque down low but runs out of puff by 4000rpm, so relies on gearing to keep it in the torque band. The GT performs as well or better for more of the time, with a relatively small penalty in consumption.......unless you flog it mercilessly. As they say, "yer pays yer money and yer makes yer choice". I'd personally go for petrol as it feels more responsive and sporty, just my 2 cents worth.



i take it u have not driven a diesel astra, verry responsive & is actually sporty especially when you press the SPORT button!

[entice]

no matter how many sport buttons you press in teh CDTi, it will NEVER have the tractability and brute force of THAT sweet 6.0L V8.

let's not get into the debate of "have you driven a...".

I've driven the lot. the tractability of the 6.0L is amazing...the CDTi did NOT live up to teh expectations that I had given the rave rantings of you guys here. As to teh sport button...

why would you drive it in any other mode? if you market the car as a powerhouse, then make the damn button be an ECO button.. not a sport button...

[sasrit]

i take it u have not driven a diesel astra, verry responsive & is actually sporty especially when you press the SPORT button!


I guess I just don't really want one, doesn't mean its no good though. I drove a Skoda Octavia TDi in Europe (essentially Golf TDi) and quite liked its torque and economy, but was uninspired. Good as a rental car, but didn't desire to own one. I've always had cars with a revvy sporty nature as that is my preference. I'm glad you enjoy your car, but TD's just don't do it for me. To me it would be like having similar bottom end torque to my SRiT, without the top end power. I can short-shift the SriT and use the torque if I want, and can give it a rev and really fly as well. As I do low mileage, petrol costs are less relevant to me.

[dieselhead]

The Displacement on Demand is a quite hilarious feature if you ask me. Is like saying "look, I've got Einstein IQ, but half of my brain is like dead because don't feel like using it too often". Why on earth would you buy a 6.0 litre SS if you can't afford belting it all day?
To buy a high performance car and then drive like a bloke born in early 1920's just to save fuel, now that must be the pinnacle of moron-ism imho :)

My diesel doesn't mind me driving it like it's stolen. I averaged 6.3 l/100km over the first 10,000 km, while never leaving the metro area. It does 0-100 km/h in low 7s and cost me $30k to get it on the road. Show me one petrol car that match all that, price, economy and speed.
All this comparison with V8s is simply irrelevant, really. Totally different leagues, both engines and cars...

[MatsHolden]

Actually I'd despute that, there has been very little real change to automotive engineering from a conceptual point of view for a long time. I am (BTW) talking about things like...

Overhead cams. Disk brakes. Power steering etc.

http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blcar.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile

Mercedies and BMW (to a lesser extent) tend to be early adopters of technology, not inventors.

digifish

I did say developed... not invented. They take on technology in it's embryonic stages and develop it to make it feasible for automotive application.

[digifish]

no matter how many sport buttons you press in teh CDTi, it will NEVER have the tractability and brute force of THAT sweet 6.0L V8.

let's not get into the debate of "have you driven a...".



Oh come on!

Now you are telling us a 6 litre V8 is better to drive than a 1.9 litre turbo diesel...now that's a 200 foot high straw-man if ever I saw one.

digifish

[digifish]

i take it u have not driven a diesel astra, verry responsive & is actually sporty especially when you press the SPORT button!

And the reviewers say the same thing.


I have yet to see one that was ‘disappointed’ in the performance of the CDTi.

digifish

[digifish]

I did say developed... not invented. They take on technology in it's embryonic stages and develop it to make it feasible for automotive application.

OK fair enough. And that's also probably one reason why BMW and Mercedies fall at the bottom end of the reliability heap...because they load their cars up with lots of new technology.

digifish

[xplosv57]

OK fair enough. And that's also probably one reason why BMW and Mercedies fall at the bottom end of the reliability heap...because they load their cars up with lots of new technology.

digifish

LOL where'd ya pull that from, BMW and Mercedes are very reliable, sure new technology is gonna have its failures, but those Germans know how to make a car last a long time!!!!!

[xplosv57]

The Displacement on Demand is a quite hilarious feature if you ask me. Is like saying "look, I've got Einstein IQ, but half of my brain is like dead because don't feel like using it too often". Why on earth would you buy a 6.0 litre SS if you can't afford belting it all day?
To buy a high performance car and then drive like a bloke born in early 1920's just to save fuel, now that must be the pinnacle of moron-ism imho :)


So how come you can't have your cake and eat it too???

I'd love to have an SS with DoD so i can have a car to drive during the week to work and back with great fuel consumption on the highway, then on the weekends have a bit of fun with the V8 power, to me it's a great technology which means you can have the best of both worlds!!!

[Wraith]

The Displacement on Demand is a quite hilarious feature if you ask me. Is like saying "look, I've got Einstein IQ, but half of my brain is like dead because don't feel like using it too often". Why on earth would you buy a 6.0 litre SS if you can't afford belting it all day?
To buy a high performance car and then drive like a bloke born in early 1920's just to save fuel, now that must be the pinnacle of moron-ism imho :)

My diesel doesn't mind me driving it like it's stolen. I averaged 6.3 l/100km over the first 10,000 km, while never leaving the metro area. It does 0-100 km/h in low 7s and cost me $30k to get it on the road. Show me one petrol car that match all that, price, economy and speed.
All this comparison with V8s is simply irrelevant, really. Totally different leagues, both engines and cars...

Each to their own with V8's but the above reasoning in the 1st paragraph, simply dosn't make sense to me at all....:confused: you know I really don't think 'all' people by a V8 only because they can afford to belt it around all day - (It's certainly not one of my reasons for having owned V8's all my life) - sorry but that and the rest of your 1st paragraph is simply idiotic to me, paragraph 2 is more to the point and makes good sense ;)

DOD is a great feature for a modern V8, it gives you the 'flexibilty' of being very frugal with a large displacement high power engine - BUT - only when you want it to be !

Why wouldn't anybody want a high performance engine which also returns great fuel economy - Isn't that the main reason all you diesel heads purchased a diesel.......

So if your going on a long trip or whatever, with DOD, you can get there with a similar amount of fuel as a much smaller car with a smaller engine and when you want to drive the car like it's stolen lol go for it :)

Anyone considering a V8 powered car will see that feature as a bonus, because it dosn't take away any of the good points, but adds a new dimension in economy, that definitely makes it more attractive/desirable ;)

[MatsHolden]

OK fair enough. And that's also probably one reason why BMW and Mercedies fall at the bottom end of the reliability heap...because they load their cars up with lots of new technology.

digifish

that's true.. take the voice recognition that Mercedes use in some of their cars. Doesn't always do exactly what you tell it to.

And Wraith, very true what you say there. Cylinder deactivation is a fantastic feature.. I don't know many people who drive their V8's at full tilt ALL the time. We can't go any faster than 110km/h legally so why be using all cylinders if you don't need them?

[digifish]

LOL where'd ya pull that from, BMW and Mercedes are very reliable, sure new technology is gonna have its failures, but those Germans know how to make a car last a long time!!!!!

This comes from every large scale reliability survey that I have seen in the last 10 years...

http://autos.msn.com/advice/CRArt.aspx?contentid=4023544

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=39115

...it's a fact, not an opinion.

digifish

[entice]

"look, I've got Einstein IQ, but half of my brain is like dead because don't feel like using it too often".

kind of like having a "sport" button on a car taunted to be sporting.. but with the default position being "off"

Now it makes perfect sense to me...

[dieselhead]

I take it you don't know what the "sport" button does. There's no change in power or torque output, only the throttle is more responsive and the steering is quickened a bit.
Sure, it's possible to have the engine remapped so the higher power and torque only flows with the button pressed. Don't see why that wouldn't be an interesting feature to be honest. I've got one question for you entice: how much power does a BMW M6 have before pressing the M button? when you find the answer ask yourself if it makes sense or not in a $300,000 car.

Talking about the DoD again: if it's so great guys, why isn't popular already? I remember reading about it when I was a teenager. And that my friends was a long, long time ago :)

[MatsHolden]

Talking about the DoD again: if it's so great guys, why isn't popular already? I remember reading about it when I was a teenager. And that my friends was a long, long time ago :)

Cost of implementation and the fact that it has only recently been fully refined. There have been a lot of issues with getting cylinder deactivation to an acceptable standard.

[xplosv57]

It has to be developed so it works very well to outweigh the cost of designing and fitting the technology. Petrol wasn't much of an issue back in the day as it was relatively affordable, nowadays its getting very pricey and so companies are trying different ways to reduce fuel consumtion, DoD being one of them, might be an old technology, but if it can be used now then its all good!!!

P.S. The M5/M6 has 400hp before and 507hp after, which i believe is a similar thing to DoD, you get the power only when you need it..............

[entice]

so the sport button makes the "sporting" car more "sporting"????

i carry the same thoughts across to the M range...

a pointless button just wasting space... now.. having the car "know" or learn the "modes" without user preselection (intuitive switching) would be a benefit.. but manual selection is a waste.

some may liek it, but I dont. Preselection to sport and eco manual selection would be my preference..not that I'd ever see myself ever selecting it anyway....

[Wraith]

I take it you don't know what the "sport" button does. There's no change in power or torque output, only the throttle is more responsive and the steering is quickened a bit.
Sure, it's possible to have the engine remapped so the higher power and torque only flows with the button pressed. Don't see why that wouldn't be an interesting feature to be honest. I've got one question for you entice: how much power does a BMW M6 have before pressing the M button? when you find the answer ask yourself if it makes sense or not in a $300,000 car.

Talking about the DoD again: if it's so great guys, why isn't popular already? I remember reading about it when I was a teenager. And that my friends was a long, long time ago :)

M5 is the same, personally I think it's a good feature, maybe you just want the car to be tamer when the missus or one of your kids is driving it, maybe you just want it to be safer in bad weather conditions, or you want to get that extra milage out of the tank without running out of fuel if your country driving etc. etc.

In either case it's just gives the owner greater flexibility, if you don't want or like it - simple - just leave it in M mode all the time LOL :)

And appologies for answering, I'm obviously not Entice :)

[dieselhead]

I think large petrol engines are getting closer to extinction, fast. Why? Because for the same power output a supercharged or turbocharged V6 is a better option. Just look at the new BMW 335i bi-turbo! It's got diesel like torque from 1,400 rpm and you get 230 kW out of 3.0 litres only. And consumption is more than decent, too. Why would you need a thirsty 6.0 V8 when a 4.0 force fed V6 would do a better job?

Want economy? Forget DoD, that's as handy as carbon sequestration :) You could run a few maps in the turbocharged engine's ECU. Say one for economy while driving through heavy traffic in the city and one for racing when you feel like it, just by pressing one of those buttons. That's so easy to do, isn't it?

[xplosv57]

I think large petrol engines are getting closer to extinction, fast. Why? Because for the same power output a supercharged or turbocharged V6 is a better option. Just look at the new BMW 335i bi-turbo! It's got diesel like torque from 1,400 rpm and you get 230 kW out of 3.0 litres only. And consumption is more than decent, too. Why would you need a thirsty 6.0 V8 when a 4.0 force fed V6 would do a better job?


Okay just so you know, the straight 6 225kW 335i is a great car, lots of power and torque, but its fuel consumption is not so great, would be very comparable to a current model V8 Holden, especially considering how small the two turbos are!

Speaking of 4.0l force fed 6's the XR6T another great car with great power and torque, but not a more economical alternative to a V8, actually most are worse on fuel than V8s!!!

Technology will get better and better, for all types of motors so we can all be happy with what we want out of our cars!!!!

[dieselhead]

My point was that is quite easy to play with different engine maps to balance power and economy. Not sure how that works in an aspirated V8 though... probably that's exactly why GM is chasing difficult solutions such as DoD.

[MatsHolden]

And then there's the sound of a bent 8.. almost reason enough to buy one.

[xplosv57]

And then there's the sound of a bent 8.. almost reason enough to buy one.

LOL that's my excuse.................:D

[dieselhead]

fair enough, I can't argue with that. V8s sound great.
Still not enough in my view to justify burning 3 X the fuel my diesel uses...
Look, I know myself, I'm anything but a sedated driver. I drove a V6 Commodore for about a year, brand new one, and averaged 14 l/100 km. You can imagine how much fuel I would burn in a V8...

Well, the diesel is for me like lung cancer proof cigarettes, even when smoking 79 a day :)

[Wraith]

My point was that is quite easy to play with different engine maps to balance power and economy. Not sure how that works in an aspirated V8 though... probably that's exactly why GM is chasing difficult solutions such as DoD.

DOD is now not really a difficult solution, it seems to be working well on the Chrysler V8's ATM.

It also produces a far greater effect than any map change.

We'll have to wait to see what it's all about and how well or not it all is, when it arrives on GMH V8's and it may even have an activation button, rather than being built in to operate autonomously.

[Wraith]

And then there's the sound of a bent 8.. almost reason enough to buy one.

Now that I'll admit to, as one of my main reasons for being head over heels about V8's :)

Nothing sounds better !

[digifish]

Now that I'll admit to, as one of my main reasons for being head over heels about V8's :)

Nothing sounds better !

Actually I think V10's sound better than V8s or 12s.

digifish

[bornwild]

Actually I think V10's sound better than V8s or 12s.

digifish

Agreed. :D:D:D

[digifish]

Agreed. :D:D:D

Of the sound of a W16 in the Veyron, Jeremy Clarkson said (and I agree with him)

"It sounds like Victorian pluming"

:)

[Wraith]

Each to their own, I havn't heard the W16 myself in person - they sound different when it's there in front of you, rather than on TV or on an audio track, until then 'for me' V8's rule the sound department :)

I have a CD which features audio tracks of the exhaust note of a multitude of car types, every single one of them that I've heard in real life, dosn't sound the same as on that CD...especially the IL6 of the M3.

I've heard an M5 in person, sounds good, but no where near as good as a V8 IMHO.

And also, the beauty of V8's is that different types produce distinctly different sounds, mainly due to different firing orders, the newer LS1's etc. sound great, but the old school V8's sounded even better, then there's the Ferrari V8's, again for eg: an F430's V8 sounds awesome, but different to say an LS1 :)

[bornwild]

That's because the F360 and F430 V8s rev much, much higher than the LS1. Have you heard the new AMG 6.3L?

Sounds ridiculously good, and is perhaps louder than the V8 Supercars. :)



Never the less, I'm more of a fan of the V10 than the V8 sounds just because it's very rare.

[rjastra]

That's because the F360 and F430 V8s rev much, much higher than the LS1. Have you heard the new AMG 6.3L?

Sounds ridiculously good, and is perhaps louder than the V8 Supercars. :)



Never the less, I'm more of a fan of the V10 than the V8 sounds just because it's very rare.

Ferarri F360/430 sound the way they do because they have flat plane cranks.
Its not a "traditional" sounding V8 at all.

The LS1 sounded weird because of the strange firing order. The new LS7 will happily rev to 7000+rpm which is not far of the 6.2L AMG engine.

[Wraith]

Correct, as I've mentioned, the firing order makes V8's sound different and the Ferrari's sound different because of that and the reason mentioned above - nothing to do with revs Bornwild....

I've been in an F430, even at low revs it sounds different from and LS1 or older V8 ;) I love the sound, but it's not as good as an old Chev :) all the older V8's had a much deeper and gruntier sound aaarrrghhhhh :drool:

[xplosv57]

.

The LS1 sounded weird because of the strange firing order.

?????

I don't have any sound issues with mine................

Any M car sounds awesome, wait till you all hear the M3 V8, game over!!!!

[Wraith]

In an engine sound off comp. it's game over with any V8 ;)

One of these days, I'll have to get my mate to bring down he's heavily worked 70's Cleveland 351 ZD Fairlane to a Melb. meet - believe me this thing will make anyones pants explode just listening to it idling and when it's being revved or hammered it'll blow your mind :D

[WLD-18L]

In an engine sound off comp. it's game over with any V8 ;)

One of these days, I'll have to get my mate to bring down he's heavily worked 70's Cleveland 351 ZD Fairlane to a Melb. meet - believe me this thing will make anyones pants explode just listening to it idling and when it's being revved or hammered it'll blow your mind :D

My cousin has a havile worked XY GT, front left wheel gets off the deck with a good launch, very loud car.

[dieselhead]

Talking V8s... Have you read the latest Wheels? There's some stuff about the new Audi Q7 4.2 TDI. 240 kW and 760 Nm of oil burner grunt.
You have to admit guys, an engine that's shifting 2,300 kilos of luxury SUV from still to 100 km/h in 6.4 seconds and needs only 11.1 l/100km deserves respect regardless of what's burning!
Oh, Audi won't stop there. By the end of the year they will unleash a V12 6.0 bi-turbo diesel, good for 350 kW and 1,000 Nm. Sporty enough you reckon? :D

[Wraith]

Yes indeed :)

With regards to myself, I've said it before and I'll say it again, once those sorts of power/performance levels become available from turbo diesels, I'll consider getting one too - if I can afford one of those ie ;)

As for the smaller more affordable 4 potters, if there was at least something in the order of 200kw I'd seriously consider it too :)

[xplosv57]

Yes indeed :)

With regards to myself, I've said it before and I'll say it again, once those sorts of power/performance levels become available from turbo diesels, I'll consider getting one too - if I can afford one of those ie ;)

As for the smaller more affordable 4 potters, if there was at least something in the order of 200kw I'd seriously consider it too :)

Agreed!!!

Took a BMW 530d out for a spin today, great car, lots of power and torque and also very quiet and smooth!!! Plus it doses like a VL LOL!!!! But when i jumped out and saw the price tag, i screamed and ran the other way!!!!

If anyone makes a 200+kW diesel that is affordable and sounds good than i may be interested!!! Till then the petrol guzzling V8 stays!!!

[dieselhead]

As for the smaller more affordable 4 potters, if there was at least something in the order of 200kw I'd seriously consider it too :)

Well, it's a bit rich to ask 200 kW from a 4 pot oiler, don't you think? I mean, how may petrol examples are there, other than Evo and the STi? I'd be happy with 170 kW to be honest. Remember that a WRX has only 169 kW and still considered being a sports car...

[Wraith]

It might be a bit rich, but that's what I'd want :) I'm sure they'll be at those power levels in the future ;)

Most petrol 2.0ltr turbo 4 potters these days will do those numbers and over quite easily....

Until then I too will stick with petrol turbo and V8's, just my choice :)

[EL BURITO]

i would take the golf GTI desiel if we cot it over here. its only 1 sec slower than the petrol counterpart from wat i was reading. daily commute is now 130km round trip daily so i at least have to consider the fuel cost

[MatsHolden]

i would take the golf GTI desiel if we cot it over here. its only 1 sec slower than the petrol counterpart from wat i was reading. daily commute is now 130km round trip daily so i at least have to consider the fuel cost

lol coz the Corsa just guzzles fuel ay.

[EL BURITO]

lol coz the Corsa just guzzles fuel ay.
In reguards to a new car.

but i am getting under 6L per 100km from the C

[MatsHolden]

but i am getting under 6L per 100km from the C

nice work.

[bornwild]

Golf GTi Diesel...huh?

[EL BURITO]

sorry its GT spec,

still dose 0-100 in 8.2

[Shaun]

Hmmm...I really am waiting for your clutch and or gearbox to go 'PING!'...I worry about the stock torque and power :confused:

digifish
One min your saying conserned about the CDTi going " PING" as you put it.


I really think that is over-stretching the internals of the Astra petrol engine. If I had the choice (which I do and I am saying no), I'd take the tuned diesel over the VXR any day. The VXR engine and drivetrain really won't last long in that state of tune.

digifish

The next your saying that your car is stronger then the VXR????? Make up your mind would you.


the clutch will handle 400Nm, no worries there. check the 888s Astras in UK-not a single issue so far, and rest assured those cars are being driven hard. can't see how the gearbox would be damaged since the clutch would die first anyway. if i was to fit a heavy duty clutch, the the gearbox would be at risk, no question about that. but i won't do it.
the setting i've got is the highest i would ever go for in this car. let's not forget, those high figures are really only peaks that are not normaly reached when driving on the road. not if you care about your licence one bit... don't plan to belt the car every weekend on racetracks either.
but let me tell you, that torque feels sooo goood, just accelerate and bang! off she goes :)

Proof in the pudding i think. No MAJOR issues with Tuning noir are the guys overseas having an issue.

[Shaun]

Hang on!

The VXR is a tuned up Astra! How you decide this is 'stock' is beyond me?

SRi = CDTi

VXR = 888

IMO, in terms of 'state of tune'.

digifish

You are lossing an Up Hill battle here and have got to look at it that the VXR comes off the production line as it is sold in the show room as Stock Product from the Factory. The are built to factory Spec with no change on the preformance side but with appointment options (IE leather trim Xenon lighting etc). 888 CDTi how ever has been redesigned and there for has been an enhanced from another source. Abeit that they are a the Offical Vauxhall BTCC Team they are not owned by Vauxhall. They are under contract to race as the offical Vauxhall team. If you were to argue a VXRPC Tuned VXR against the 888 CDTi (both are done by the same company) then you would have an argument with the VXR being " A tuned VXR Astra" as you have put it. Until there is a test between a VXRPC VXR and a 888 CDTi you have no arguement.

SRi and CDTi in stock for can not be compared. both are aimed at different Marks both here and overseas. One is a Sports / Luxury and the other is not . How can you compare two cars aimed at different markets. It would be like comparing a Hyundai Getz against a HSV GTS. they are in different segments . Start comparing the CDTi against the Golf TDi in standard trim. Lucky you dont work for wheels because we would have Diesel Astra's being compared to Lotus Elise next.




Most automotive innovations have been developed by manufacturers like Mercedes and BMW... Don't think anyone would dispute that. But believe it or not it was Cadillac that first introduced cylinder deactivation in a mass produced vehicle. Mercedes followed with a more efficient way of cylinder deactivation. They call it Active Cylinder Control (ACC) GM call it DoD but it's all cylinder deactivation or displacement on demand.. whatever floats your boat.

As for Daimler Chrysler . (Well as of now Daimler AG since the Sale of the of Chrysler Corp) You are correct. Example of Daimler AG with Leading the way of Tech is ESP. It is a registered trade mark to Daimler AG (As Mercedes is a Brand of Daimler AG under the Parent company name) Every other Manafactuer has to pay for the rights to uses technology .

[dieselhead]

I just read in the Wheels mag about the GTL (gas to liquid) fuel. Looks quite promising, allowing diesels to run cleaner and stronger. It's basically made of natural gas and water, it even has higher cetanic figure than the oil based diesel (70 vs 50) and is sulfur free. In other words, a cleaner fuel that would give you more power! Pretty well suited to Oz conditions, where there's plenty of gas, and not much crude left. In addition, modern diesel engines don't need major mods, a remap would do apparently. Shell is selling a higher grade diesel fuel in UK already, that has 10% of this GTL stuff in it. Audi's Le Mans team uses fuel with 30% GTL, so there must be something good about this thing.
Bring it on I say :)

[Wraith]

That does sound good for the future of diesel usage, as diesel fuel is such a dirty pollutant...

[dieselhead]

Petrol fumes are not exactly mountain fresh either...

[shoey85]

I just read in the Wheels mag about the GTL (gas to liquid) fuel. Looks quite promising, allowing diesels to run cleaner and stronger. It's basically made of natural gas and water, it even has higher cetanic figure than the oil based diesel (70 vs 50) and is sulfur free. In other words, a cleaner fuel that would give you more power! Pretty well suited to Oz conditions, where there's plenty of gas, and not much crude left. In addition, modern diesel engines don't need major mods, a remap would do apparently. Shell is selling a higher grade diesel fuel in UK already, that has 10% of this GTL stuff in it. Audi's Le Mans team uses fuel with 30% GTL, so there must be something good about this thing.
Bring it on I say :)


haha thats funny, oh thats right its not a joke as someone said to me in the past

same as adding lpg to your mixture

[dieselhead]

shoey, GTL is not LPG, there's still a long way to go from one to the other...

[cbrmale]

A long an interesting thread on the pros and cons of diesel cars, especially at the high performance end of the market. For me when I bought my SRi 2.2, the choice was simple. Because of a minor disability in my right leg I can't swing my leg from accelerator pedal to the brake pedal, which means I only drive automatics because I can left foot brake. Now the Astra diesel automatic is a pretty awful engine, detuned because they don't have a gearbox to cope with more torque. Looking at competitive cars, only VW had a reasonably high-performance diesel automatic, but the Golf is quite a bit smaller than what I want in a car.

This is one problem for diesels in Australia at least, the lack automatic gearboxes to take the torque of diesel engines.

The SRi 2.2 as you all probably know is unique to Australia and New Zealand, and probably an answer to the need for a sporty Astra with automatic for the local market. Certainly the 2.2 is very torquey for a petrol engine, and runs beautifully as a auto. Driving from Canberra to Sydney and return, it ate all those long climbs like it was on the flat. You think you're gonna need to turn off cruise control, but it just eats the hills effortlessly. And if you rev it a bit, it goes hard.

I started by riding motorcycles, some with incredibly narrow rev ranges. From age 18, I have equated going faster with dialing in more revs. I haven't tried driving a diesel, but I have driven the old Commodore OHV V6 and I just couldn't get my head around the fact that the harder you revved it, the slower it went. This is another problem for diesels, setting up an automatic gearbox NOT to kick down on full throttle. On a similar note, even if I could drive a manual it would take me a long time (if ever) to get my head around not changing down and revving the engine to go faster.

Probably diesels are the way of the future, certainly more than hybrids which are an answer to a peculiar Japanese eversion to diesel cars. But turbo diesels are more expensive to build than normally aspirated petrol, the lack of automatic diesels is a problem, and there is a need to make diesel engines to run as clean as petrol petrol, especially particulate emissions. Particulate emissions are deadly, because they are cancerous.

[entice]

I drove a Manual SRI 5 door yesterday aswell..

Must say, it's ahead in teh race for my money. Those seats are just brilliant compared to the standard fair.

And, it's a silky smooth engione, nice power delivery. Admittedly, not as much torque as the diesel, but a much broader power/torque band in teh rev range. Well, that's how it felt to drive

[cbrmale]

I drove a Manual SRI 5 door yesterday aswell..

Must say, it's ahead in teh race for my money. Those seats are just brilliant compared to the standard fair.

And, it's a silky smooth engione, nice power delivery. Admittedly, not as much torque as the diesel, but a much broader power/torque band in teh rev range. Well, that's how it felt to drive

I'll agree with you on that, and not just because I own one either. The effective power band is roughly 1,500 to 6,000: which is a very broad spread. The first time I drove it I found myself doing 80+ in 60 zones because there was no sensation of speed, no noise from the engine, nothing.

I don't think it is super-fast in the vein of a SRi turbo, but it is effortless in terms of mid-range power which is where we spend most of our time driving. Economical too.

[bornwild]

Whoever compares the CDTi astra to the VXR is a tool beyond the borders of this universe.

VXR is in the hot hatch segment.....whereas the CDTi is in the....HATCH segment........notice the difference?!....there is no 'HOT'.

When Opel brings out the OPC Diesel Astra...that's when we can start comparing them.

And yeah, I have to go test drive that 2.2l engine....though I'd expect the economy to be around 9-10l/100km en route to my uni, from my house.

[cbrmale]

Whoever compares the CDTi astra to the VXR is a tool beyond the borders of this universe.

VXR is in the hot hatch segment.....whereas the CDTi is in the....HATCH segment........notice the difference?!....there is no 'HOT'.

When Opel brings out the OPC Diesel Astra...that's when we can start comparing them.

And yeah, I have to go test drive that 2.2l engine....though I'd expect the economy to be around 9-10l/100km en route to my uni, from my house.

My 2.2 automatic has done almost 3,000km, and fuel economy has remained constant throughout. In Canberra peak hour driving it does 9 l/100km and on the highway it does 7.5. Of course Canberra is very free-flowing, although it is still hard on petrol 'cause you are either doing 80 or braking to a traffic light or accelerating from a traffic light back up to 80 again. The 80 - 0 - 80 sequence you can repeat several times on the way to work.

My auto possibly uses more than a manual, although in non-sport mode it changes up very early and lets the engine torque do its job, so maybe it isn't that much thirstier.

[dieselhead]

Guys, have a look at this comparo. Not easy to read if you don't speak German, but the main figures speak for themselves. The comparison is between the new BMW 123d and the good old Golf GTI. Both hatches, turbo and about 2.0 litres capacity. Even the power rating is identical, at about 200 HP (147 kW). Sure, the GTI wins (just) in the end, probably because it is more practical and cheaper. Let's keep the discussion strictly about engines... Look at power, torque, engine capacity and fuel economy.

http://www.autozeitung.de/online/render.php?render=78619

[entice]

and what about cost?

[dieselhead]

What about cost entice? The Golf is cheaper, that's because it is a VW while the 123d is a BMW.
Can't wait to see GMs twinturbo Diesel!

[bornwild]

I read the article(I speak german). The BMW lost cause it has less passenger space and boot space and is not as practical and the golf is the more comfortable car. Engine wise it won.

[entice]

yes.. but how much over the petrol equivalent is the diesel..

ie, at what cost diesel V Petrol

[bornwild]

Petrol drinks 3l more whilst performing less.

I think the BMW123D there was 30k Euros while the GTi was 27k Euros. That's purely cause it's a BMW...

[dieselhead]

entice, I guess the correct comparo would have been between 123d and Audi's A3 with the same 2.0 petrol turbo. Then you have the price equity, too.
Also, let's not forget the beemer is RWD, GTI being FWD... That additional shaft cost some money ya know.

[rjastra]

entice, I guess the correct comparo would have been between 123d and Audi's A3 with the same 2.0 petrol turbo. Then you have the price equity, too.
Also, let's not forget the beemer is RWD, GTI being FWD... That additional shaft cost some money ya know.

BMW 123d is about the same price as a Audi A3 Sportback Quattro 2L TFSI.

Interestingly an APR chip reflash for the Audi (< $2000) will get you similar Nm figures to the BMW 123d. Make torque occurs at about the same RPM as well. Think I would take the Audi and its 6500+ rev limit and exhaust note thanks :)

[bornwild]

BMW 123d is about the same price as a Audi A3 Sportback Quattro 2L TFSI.

Interestingly an APR chip reflash for the Audi (< $2000) will get you similar Nm figures to the BMW 123d. Make torque occurs at about the same RPM as well. Think I would take the Audi and its 6500+ rev limit and exhaust note thanks :)

It's about advancing technology....not just power...jeez

[dieselhead]

B Think I would take the Audi and its 6500+ rev limit and exhaust note thanks :)

yeah, take all that, along with the 16 l/100km "economy" as well. but then, if fuel bills are not an issue, why not get a proper V8 HSV for small Audi money?
the idea is, look how much performance you get from the 123d for less than 7 l/100km! I can't see any petrol engine with similar performance to match that.

[bornwild]

yeah, take all that, along with the 16 l/100km "economy" as well. but then, if fuel bills are not an issue, why not get a proper V8 HSV for small Audi money?
the idea is, look how much performance you get from the 123d for less than 7 l/100km! I can't see any petrol engine with similar performance to match that.

Exactly right...for the money of a 2.0ltr turbo Audi you can get a 6.0l V8 with 500kW potential....:D

[dieselhead]

OK petrolheads, try to beat this: Adelaide-Geelong-Adelaide (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAmxVc--inA)
via the Great Ocean Road. Not driven with economy in mind, not for a second. You don't get 88 km/h average speed over that distance by driving like a 77 years old retiree :)