Who needs a VR6 when youve got a TDI....

Lol, of course I was driving it like a pterolhead. There's a very good reason for that. I AM a petrolhead. I figured out pretty quickly how to make it shift, like you say keeping it in the meat of the torque, but I wouldn't call it a fun experience in the slightest. More relaxing yes, more fun? No. The scream of the engine is part of the fun imo, the clatter and clonk of a diesel doesn't stir the emotions one bit. Can't say I found it any more relaxing for everyday work either tbh, due to the excessive amount of gearchanges required when the engine runs out of ideas at a frankly pathetic 3500rpm. Sorry folks, but 2000rpm is still a hideously narrow power band - even an early VTEC can manage better than that.

But anyway, there's a chap in the UK Motoring press who has managed to sum up all my problems with diesels, and manages to do it whilst reviewing the best diesel engine on the planet.

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12529-1074061_1, 00.html

I'm sorry, but you can't argue with a word he's saying. Diesels are good for economy, and if you put a big enough turbo on them they go fairly quickly aswell. But petrol engines are still way way out in front.

 

Narrow? No it's not.

In a diesel 0-100% of max revs is about 4,500 rpm. So 2000 rpm is about 45% of the rev range.

Compare that to your average 16v engine. 0-100% of max revs is about 7,500rpm. So to have the same width 'power band' the petrol engine here has to rev 3,375, which if I remember my mk2 and mk3 16v's well (i.e. they did bugger all under 4000 rpm) makes the width of the interesting power band almost exactly the same size. (i.e. 4000-7300rpm as opposed to 1500-3500 in the diesel)

If tachometers were calibrated in percent rather than rpms we'd get rid of this 'narrow diesel power band' nonsense.

Remember diesels have much longer gearing, so a 2000rpm increase in engine speed in 5th gear in a diesel means a much larger increase in road speed than a petrol car.

Cheers,

Drew.
Edited by: drew

 

yep just like my luton transit ive had all week, change between 2-3k no point going higher you just kill it.

 

That's a very nice way of turning the diesel weakness into a strength, however my old 8v (to a lesser extent) and my new 16v will whip round from 3000 to 5000 just as quickly as any diesel i've driven will get through it's torque band (and I haven't just driven the PD - I'm counting BMW diesels here aswell). And what's more, the 16v has 2000rpm left after which it gets even faster. I'm sorry, but if you want to go REALLY quickly, diesels are about as much use as a 1.2 litre Punto. For your sake I won't even compare my dad's 320d to my mother's 325i Sport. Cos it really doesn't look good for the diesel. Unless you like clatters and black smoke.

 

Your completely missing what he's saying.

In that 2000rpm the diesel pulls a lot more speed then the petrol will.

Its geared to take full advantage of that 2000rpm

Example per 1000rpm in 4th my MK3 TDI is 25mph.
So between gear changes "in the power band" I can go from 30 to 80 and the power will surge in around 40mph.

I've not driven that many cars, of those I have the diesels have been far nicer to drive then the petrols.

I do agree with the noise issue, mine sounds awful, except for the nice turbo whistle

 

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,12529-1074061,00 .html

^ The artical Bodhi_16v tried to link

 

Sorry, that is simply not true in any given gear, but even if it was - as rippsy pointed out, you won't be getting the equivalent increase in road speed over the same rev range.

If you don't like diesels, fair do's. But they are a performance alternative. A 150TD is more than a match for a VR6, in everything save the noise.

Oh, and Jeremy Clarkson is a very entertaining chap, but he's not the most objective of people. He writes to entertain, not to inform.

Cheers,

Drew.
Edited by: drew

 

PD150 0-60 8.6 seconds.

GTi 16v 0-60 7.9 seconds.


Figures taken from evo magazine. Sorry, but the PD150 can't touch a VR6, which gets to 60 even faster. You can't argue with cold hard facts. You can quote in-gear acceleration times all you want, but if you do you're missing how to drive a petrol engine properly. You want to go faster floor it. You want to go a lot faster, change down a gear and then floor it. Your typical diesel will get raped by a well driven petrol motor, end of discussion.

BTW on the A34 today I tested your theory. Your typical TDi driver came up behind me, expecting to burn past whilst cutting me up in the process (Seriously has anyone else noticed the Golf TDi has replaced the 318i as the car of choice of the inconsiderate rep?). Judging by the progress he was making it was a PD150. I let him draw alongside then dropped to third and mashed the loud pedal. He soon dropped several car lengths behind, clouds of black smoke pouring out the back as he gave his paraffin stove all it had. I almost slowed down out of pity, but in the end decided it's far more fun to keep the diesel skinflints in their place. But then of course they are a performance alternative. That will explain all the diesel Lamborghinis Porsches and Ferraris you see. I mean if it's an alternative surely the creme de la creme of performance motoring would offer at least one model. Right?

Oh and Clarkson writes to inform. That's why I used one of his reviews (you know those things people use to help them decide what car to buy) rather than a column.

 

Bodhi, I really do not see how you can compare a rep driving on a public road to you. Im sure he really wanted a full bore race.

You make yourself sound like a kev'ed up nova driver. Who "Blasted that porsche from the lights" regardless of the fact the porsche driver didn't really care that the lights had even gone green

Petrol engines have been researched heavily for the past 50 years. They really are reaching the end of their lifespan the new FSI engines in the Mk5 are using DIESEL injection technology to inject the fuel directly into the cylinder. Diesel reserach on the other hand has barely begun in the last 10/15 years due to the 'tractor' principle (which you so heavily use as to demand that no diesel can be a 'performance' car)

Since diesels are getting quieter, and the research is now comming along due to the hightening fuel prices and desire for better MPG then fuel thirsty muscle cars. The research which is being put into diesels will show that they have a long way to go yet before they are anything near as refined as your beloved petrol engine.

Diesels are the engine of the future imo. Effency and performance can both be paramount in a diesel, the same cannot be same for a petrol.

If you want argue facts,

You completely failed to read my post which Drew also pointed out about how the 'in-gear' time of a diesel is lower. Yes, but it also translates into a much higher actual road-speed then the same for a petrol.

 

Well I understand clearly that is what you think, but the truth of the matter is elsewhere.

You quote 0-60 times as 'fact' (which are debatable in themselves and EVOs figures are controversial anyway) and then use a totally non factual and subjective account of a race down the A34 to back this up.

Unfortunately 0-60 times do not translate well to real world performance. For example. My mk1 Golf GTI is quicker on a track and on a sprint than a Mk4 1.8T 150bhp, despite having a slower 0-60 time than the mk4 petrol. However, my mk1 is not as fast as a Mk4 150 TDI which has a slower 0-60 time than my mk1. The reason being? In gear acceleration, regardless of whether or not you've changed down a gear.

If you want to play top trumps down at the pub your petrol engines will win every time (other than torque of course). If you're a little more sophisticated you'll appreciate that diesel cars are practically (in the literal sense) quicker, more economical and cheaper to run and own.

I've met the chap and I know this definitely isn't true as I have it from the horses mouth, it's a job he gets paid to do, he stirs up controversy as it sells papers and mags, accuracy is not interesting. Have you actually watched his Top Gear show? Does the name 'Ford' ring any bells?

Cheers,

Drew.
Cheers,

Drew.
Edited by: drew

 

One of my mates has got a Golf gt tdi with a tuning box on it and the torque on it is unbeliveable it's so much easier to drive than my VR,all it want's to do is spin the wheels in 1st & 2nd (even with the traction control on)
Maybe it isn't as fast to 60 as the VR, but it definetly feels like it !!

 

Petrol engines reaching the end of their developmet eh? I really beg to differ. We've recently reached 100bhp/litre from a naturally aspirated petrol engine (BMW M3, Ferrari 360CS - /me briefly looks to for the diesel derivatives of these - oh look they don't exist), however this is only the beginning. Through improvements in Variable Valve Timing, "camless" engines, ringless pistons and mangnetic-field bearings 150bhp/litre is achievable. Sounds like there's still a lot of development stil to go to me. By the time they figure out how to get diesels above 100bhp/litre (undoubtedly still using turbos, which is kinda cheating and means diesels will always be "blessed" with soft and flaccid throttle response - useless for the keen driver), petrol will prolly have hit 130/140. And they'll STILL be faster in the power band than diesels are in the torque band. And like I said, you can stop bleating on about in-geear acceleration times. Changing gear isn't actually a hassle you know. It's a prod of one pedal, a snick-snick through the box and a mash of the pedal again. A diesel will pull out a car length twhilst you're doing this at most, then you can just use the power to blat past them.

I'm pretty sure the rep was up for a drag race actually, i could see his efforts to keep up. evo's figures debatable? Oh I'd love to see your reasoning for that considering the lengths tho go to to ensure accuracy. But then I'm sure you know more than them.

Practically quicker? No. They aren't. The torque is nice, but it's power that is the ultimate determinant of performance. Whilst a PD150 might have the same peak power figure as my 16, the extra weight of the diesel engine negates this meaning it loses about 20bhp/ton to the 16v. Which is why the 16v is much faster, except at low revs. You can still say you prefer the diesel driving experience (someone has to I suppose), but to claim diesels are faster (even in the real world - however a trip home following my dad's BMW 320d in my 8v proved this wasn't the case - he was trying all he could but could shake that pesky Golf GTi) is simply plain wrong.

 

Sorry. This tells those in the know you really don't understand what you're talking about!

Cheers,

Drew.

 

v10 diesel twin turbo? i might be mad, but i'd have that over a vr6

 

/me stops arguing against brickwalls

 

I'd have a TDI over a petrol anyday, its just i can't afford to TDI my jetta [:^(]

 

As an aside to this, I spent a week driving a brand new Bora tdi 110 while
on holiday last week- I drove it respectfully hard at times, and cruised at
others and covered a real mix of autoroute and back roads over 1050km,
keeping a tab of the fuel bill as I did so. It was my little experiment to
compare to the 25mpg I get from my Bora V6...

I have to say I was a bit disappointed, - 35.4 mpg was not the stuff of
diseasal legend that I was hoping for...

 

Surley the prospect of having a car that sounds like a tractor is enough to put anyone off have a tdi???

 

So would I, but I'd have the V10 Petrol out of the new M5 over that.

And yes, power is the ultimate determinant of performance. Torque just tells you how quickly you have access to the power.

 

Ok, explain this further.....

I jus want a laugh