Petrol versus Diesel - The Myths Explored!

[E Class Newbie]

As a former 'petrol head' who thought they'd sooner endure a holiday in Iraq than drive a diesel car, I thought I'd share my thoughts on why I moved from 15 years of driving petrol cars to diesel versions - and at the same time dispel some of the ridiculous myths and inaccuracies so often reported in the motoring press and TV.

Myth 1 - Diesel cars are slower than petrol cars - Incorrect. Nowadays the opposite is mostly the case. Whilst 0-60 times may be quicker in petrol cars, torque (or mid-range acceleration) is far, far superior in a diesel car and is, after all, far more useful in everyday driving. As a rule, your petrol equivalent needs to be 1000cc greater to match the acceleration of any given diesel (i.e. a 2000cc diesel will perform similarly to a 3000cc petrol).

Myth 2 - Diesel cars are noisy - Not any more. It's true they used to all sound like tractors and I'd have to admit that you can still tell if a car's a diesel from outside (even a 320cdi has a charcteristic 'rattle') - but from inside you will only know it's a diesel in 1st gear. At normal running speeds, decent makes (Merc, BMW etc) are near silent.

Myth 3 - The fuel saving isn't worth the extra cost - Everyone would need to do their own sums on this, but an average 10-15mpg improvement over a petrol equivalent soon adds up.

Myth 4 - When filling up with fuel you stand in a pool of diesel and get it all over your hands - Absolute nonsence. I have read this sort of comment so many times, but just think about it. How many petrol stations have stand alone diesel pumps? You park and stand in exactly the same place as your petrol brethren! I never use the plastic gloves, never get splash back or any other 'problem' you read about and never smell of diesel afterwards. Important point to also remember here is that you'll stop far less often to fill up. My last petrol car needed a pit stop very 340 miles - my current diesel E class lasts 650 to 700+ miles. There are few things more irritating on a dark wet and windy winter night than to stop for fuel - why do it more than you have to?

Myth 5 - Diesel cars are no longer advantageous as company cars - Untrue. This incorrect view stems from the 3% surcharge applied to diesels. The fact is that diesel CO2 emissions are so low that even with a 3% surcharge your diesel company car will still be around 5% lower than the petrol equivalent - and often the gap is nearer to 10%. This can represent a huge £ difference. The benefit in kind tax on a £35k diesel car with 25% tax liability is identical to the tax on a £25k petrol car with a 35%. Do the maths! NOTE - Euro 4 compliant diesels are currently exempt from the 3% surcharge, but only for vehicles registered by 31st December this year. Any diesel car registered from 1st Jan 2006 will have the 3% surcharge added - regardless of Euro 4 compliance (another stealth tax I'm afraid).

Myth 6 - Diesels chuck out loads of black smoke - Old Ford's do (but that includes the petrol ones!) but modern diesels don't. You may pick up a slight acrid smell from outside the car in a garage, but not from inside the car.

So, I'm now on my third diesel car and have to ask myself would I go back to petrol? Given that this would mean getting a slower car, having to stop for fuel twice as often, reducing my mpg by probably 10 or 15 mpg and increasing my company car tax by around £200 per month - all of that in return for a slightly more refined engine note. Now let me think...........

[boopolo]

I disagree with myth 2, still bloody noisey to me!!myth 4, didnt even know that existed
myth 6, yes it does, when on motorway behind a diesel, including audi, mercs etc, when they accelrate, it pours out!!

[pascal]

As a rule, your petrol equivalent needs to be 1000cc greater to match the acceleration of any given diesel (i.e. a 2000cc diesel will perform similarly to a 3000cc petrol).


Are you for real Newbie.
IE: Take your E220cdi(turbo) 0-60 = Some time tomorrow
Take E320 (with Turbo or Supercharger) 0-60 = s-i-x-t-y
Take the turbo off and allow you an advantage. Is that newbie I see in my mirror. He seems stopped.

MB petrols are detuned ok, mainly for emmisions. But to say a 2,000cc diesel is equilivent to a 3,000cc petrol:-) .

A good example is if you took two 3.2 Es, one petrol, one diesel. No turbos or kompressors. The diesel would be a dot in the rear view mirror of the petrol one:-)

[Copiertech]

petrol cars are much cheaper secondhand, and less likely to be neglected by penny pinchering owners, and are undeniably smoother with a wider rev range. save a couple of grand and get a petrol motor, spend £700 on a decent sequential LPG injection kit and drive off smugly knowing your only paying 33 pence a litre for a fuel that is cleaner than both the others. my old 735i used to cost me less to run than my turdo-diesel mondeo.

[E Class Newbie]

Thought this would start a healthy debate!!

Pascal misses the point entirely and is also incorrect. As I had already said, 0-60 times are irrelevant nowadays. In gear accleration is what matters. As for the engine size comparisons, don't take my word for it, here are the facts. E350 petrol torque 350nm, E220CDi torque 340nm. I rest my case.

I moved from a 3 litre petrol car to a 2 litre diesel a few years back and whilst it was a little slower off the line, the mid range shove was as good if not better - hence the comparison. I speak from experience, not ignorance or preconception.

As for Boopolo's exhaust clouds, I guess these are seen as the diesel accelerates away ahead of him. First rule of Italian driving - it's not what's behind you that matters, only what's ahead!!

[Copiertech]

i agree with you about diesel mid range shove, a tdci 130 mondeo i had on hire wasn`t too far off the 735 between 2-3500rpm but it hit a dead end there and was gutless before 2000. horses for courses though, diesels are dearer to buy so you have to do a lot of mileage to catch up, and it takes a while to get used to the abrupt tail off at high revs.

[boopolo]

No actually,
if it is a real powerful powerful diesel then yes it will pull away but on motorway it can keep up with them no probs plsu they have way more power than me,

[jberks]

I have to disagree with point 2.
I run a petrol E240 - they don't come any smoother or quieter. At full pelt it sounds like a sweet electric motor and produces as much vibration. I had an E320CDI loan car recently. Top spec, very fast, very luxurious, but I couldn't get the image of my old transit van out of my head every time I booted it. It doesn't exactly whirr!
That said, I am seriously looking at an C/E270/E320cdi for my next motor. I figure I'll get used to it, and the £100 per month fuel saving, would come in handy, not to mention, not having to fill up twice a week. Would have to be an EU3 though, the EU4s are pointless.

[Mmmm]

E200kompressor £27,000
combined MPG 32.8
0-62.5 mph 9.6 seconds
141mph top speed

E220CDI £28,640
combined Mpg 44.8
0-62.5 10.1 seconds
135 mph top speed

Performance
As long as you use the gears properly the petrol should be quicker everywhere.

Economy
The petrol is £1640 cheaper, the diesel 12mpg more econmical
Say fuel is roughly £4.05 a gallon
So to do 10,000 miles in Diesel costs 223 galons at £4.05 = £904
So to do 10,000 miles in Petrol costs 305 galons at £4.05 = £1,234

So if you do 10,000 miles per annum, petrol costs £330 more in fuel so at this mileage it would take nearly 5 years to use up saving.

This may be offset by 220cdi having a bit higher resale value but sometimes diesels aren't the economic solution you think (30,000 miles a year is another matter), this can also be more pronounced with 2nd hand buys.

Refinement
Petrol's still usually have the edge in smoothness and noise. As mentioned above a wider powerband is usually better for sportier driving, the pertrols tend to be a bit lighter with better weight distribution.

I think it boils down to wether you like the lower down grunt type power delivery makes for easy to go quicker for less effort, or hwether you prefer the revier (arguably slightly more refined ?) drive.

Horses for courses :D

[pascal]

Pascal misses the point entirely and is also incorrect. As I had already said, 0-60 times are irrelevant nowadays. In gear accleration is what matters.

Newbie my fellow member.
Who says 0-60 times are irrelivant nowadays? You!
In gear acceleration as you say (i presume you mean torque). Yes a petrol will usually drop a gear well before a diesel. So what. Thats what the gears are there for in the first place.
I don't know where you get your definition of fast from. To me fast is best 0-60, best 0-100, best 1/4 mile, best 0-145, best top speed; using your gearbox to achieve this. Fast is nothing got to do with a car being able to pull from a gear higher than the next car. Fast is numbers. How you can even compare a 320petrol to a 220cdi is beyond me. Getting from my SL320 to a C220cdi regularly, the petrol is way 'faster' and it is much heavier also. But I will not knock the cdi, as it is a very relaxed drive.
I agree that BHP, isn't everything. But Torque isn't either. A good engine will have enough of both.
If you want to trundle down the road at ease all the time, I suppose a diesel is the right choice; my dad has a 220cdi.
If you want a more lively drive, get a V6 petrol.

Newbie, I am by far 'not' a diesel hater. I've owned 3 shoguns (great torque, but slow) and I like to drive my dads cdi, although I fell it needs more power. But it suits his style of driving just fine.
This new V6 diesel seems to be a big improvement and would consider it myself if I was buying a saloon.

Pascal

[Myros]

We have a 2ltr turbo diesel which does 0-60 in 9.2 or similar. Also a C280 which does 0-60 in 9.2. and a 500SL which in theory can crack 0-60 in 7.5.
I like driving them all, and am aware of all the costs, advantages and all the other arguments. and I still went and spent my own cash on the C280 when I was doing 30k a year. Simply because I like the plush, swish, hushed way it does things. It's still my car of choice for a trip. The diesel is my missus's works job, and 54mpg is not to be sniffed at, but I can tell its a diesel at any speed, eyes shut , euro IV or no. The 500 I save for high days and holidays because it's a bit older, and I'm not Rockefeller. But compared to the horrible Peugeot 405 1.9 diesel I had as works jobby 12 years ago, I'll take any new merc or BMW or VW diesel in a flash.
It's still down to personal choice with a car. You can do the maths, but if you don't like the way it drives, as we didn't with the Honda Accord 2.2 cdti, you don't buy, or you hate driving it.

[E Class Newbie]

Ref the numerous responses.

I agree that the case for diesel is much lessened with low mileage. I do 35k a year so it's a no brainer for me. I just hate having to stop for fuel so the 700+ mile range on my 80 litre tank is brilliant for a big exec barge.

I also agree that standing start times to any speed will be quicker in a petrol equivalent. Perhaps I'm different from some on here, but I don't find myself doing full acceleration from 0 to top speed (or even 60 for that matter) as it's near impossible in today's traffic - other than on a track.

What I do find myself doing a lot is overtaking (say 30 - 60, 40 - 70, 50-80 etc). In that sort of driving, the diesel torque wins over petrol (as supported by road tests). That's why I feel that the 'useable' performance is better in a diesel. My "diesels perform like a petrol that's 1000cc bigger" assertion was mocked - but then we heard how a 2000cc diesel Mondeo performed similarly to a 3500cc petrol BMW - again in 'real' driving conditions.

There are undoubtedly some characteristics you need to get used to, notably the narrow torque range. But once you get used to it (usually in days) the benefits outweigh it (I reckon most petrol die hards are put off by driving a diesel exactly the same way as a petrol and dissmissing it).

Of course I'd rather have the aural delights of a V6 petrol (as I did for many years) but nowadays decent diesels give you so many advantages over their petrol equivalents that it's a very small price to pay.

Interestingly, I've noticed many car mags now describing the diesel versions as 'the drivers choice' and even ' the performance alternative'. I recently drove a new 5 series BMW with the 530D engine. Didn't like the car (interior) but have to say it was the best engine of any car I've driven (petrol or diesel) and by God did it shift!

[GlynC]

Must say I think everyone has a valid point
As an owner of mainly petrol cars for some years with fairly large V6 and V8 engines I have to agree that they are a sweeter drive and probably better if your blasting round the A roads more. If you doing a lot of miles on the motorways then the Diesel comes into a league of it's own, for both the way the performance is delivered and the economy.
I personally haven't had an occassion where anyone has left me behind!

As far as clouds of smoke are concerned that is a thing of the past or a badly set up motor. Some motors are worse than others for it but it is not anywhere near the sh*te that previously belched out of the old generation oil burners.
If I didn't have to cover a fair amount of mileage, and hadn't already lost a packet on large petrol engine motors after they had covered a fair mileage, I would opt for the petrol version and have a stonkin E55 on the drive. But having had a nice thirsty 430 Lexus which meant a trip to the pumps every other day and masses of points on my credit card, I'll stay with my oil burner for now. Thinking of getting hold of a nice Caterham for the weekend to play with now.. and they don't do a black pump version of that!

[mlc]

E Class,

An interesting topic.

Items I can agree with - fuel economy and engine life expectation.
Itmes not sure on - tax liability - gave up the company car rat race 10 years ago.
Items where I think you have lost the plot - the rest!

Regardless of all the sales pushes - and over half the new cars in the UK are diesel - its still remains a dirty fuel which produces a dirty exhaust and a noisy engine. You wake up the neighbours when you leave early in the morning, you put down a smoke screen when you accelerate hard, especially if you have a turbo, not sure if it is still the case but the MOT emmisions used to be higher for turbo diesels and as for diesel spillage on the forecourt you clearly dont buy your diesel in South Manchester. If you are not sure about the emissions have a look around the company car park, diesels have dirty exhaust pipes and "wet look" rear ends.

So are their any good diesel engined cars - of course, but why, because fleet managers are pushing company car drivers into them. Mondeo has a wonderful 2 ltr turbo diesel engine - is it faster / better than the 3ltr petrol - of course not. Does it go fast - on the Autobahn it goes like the wind - would I swap it for my 2ltr petrol engined Mondeo - not a chance. The 330d was quoted as the fastest diesel in its class - would the company drivers have prefered to have been allowed a petrol 325 instead - in the main yes.

Bottom line, if you want to do 700 miles to the tank then you need a diesel, if you dont want to drive a taxi for a living then join the real world with Petrol power.

I could of course be wrong :)
Mark.

[peterchurch]

I had the roof down in traffic this morning and one of the new honda crds was next to me..
I turned the radio down (no engine noise !)
I turned my engine off. Still no noise out this honda !!!

In the end I waved at the guy and asked him to rev the engine for me :-P

Diesels _are_ getting better :shock:

[GlynC]

Well said
:wink:

[fernar]

I have a MB 320 CDI - my very first diesel car - the reason I went for a the 320 CDI rather than the 320 (petrol) version was the tax I would have to pay on the petrol version of the car. So yes, my diesel is supposed to do 0 - 60 under 8 sec. and yes it does the overtaking thing very well and yes it does have a very good range on a tank of fuel and yes at any speed above 40MPH you cant hear that it's a diesel. However when chosing the car I also test drove a MB 320 (petrol) and to tell the truth, if it was not for the silly tax situations here in the UK I would have opted for the petrol version over the diesel. It was a smother (at all speeds) and didnt make the diesel noise thing at any speed.

[mercman_1]

E200kompressor £27,000
combined MPG 32.8
0-62.5 mph 9.6 seconds
141mph top speed

E220CDI £28,640
combined Mpg 44.8
0-62.5 10.1 seconds
135 mph top speed

Performance
As long as you use the gears properly the petrol should be quicker everywhere.

Economy
The petrol is £1640 cheaper, the diesel 12mpg more econmical
Say fuel is roughly £4.05 a gallon
So to do 10,000 miles in Diesel costs 223 galons at £4.05 = £904
So to do 10,000 miles in Petrol costs 305 galons at £4.05 = £1,234

So if you do 10,000 miles per annum, petrol costs £330 more in fuel so at this mileage it would take nearly 5 years to use up saving.

This may be offset by 220cdi having a bit higher resale value but sometimes diesels aren't the economic solution you think (30,000 miles a year is another matter), this can also be more pronounced with 2nd hand buys.

Refinement
Petrol's still usually have the edge in smoothness and noise. As mentioned above a wider powerband is usually better for sportier driving, the pertrols tend to be a bit lighter with better weight distribution.

I think it boils down to wether you like the lower down grunt type power delivery makes for easy to go quicker for less effort, or hwether you prefer the revier (arguably slightly more refined ?) drive.

Horses for courses :D
Don`t Know prices in your area but where I stay Diesel is 4p a litre dearer than petrol which would invalidate your calculations.?

[angus falconer]

I drove a BMW 320 D on holiday last year (Iwas in france where ALL hire cars seem to be diesel) and I must say I was pleasantly surprised at progress. Still hated the clatter on start up and getting all that diesel c**p on my feet and hands filling up. More recently I raced a 33O D coupe down a slip road and it took off pretty well.

BUT as I do low miles it's C43 V8 petrol every time for me - no bottom end lag and big top end.

The new diesels are light years ahead of the old ones but until they all have a twin turno set up like the new BMW's you're still going to get the turbo lag at the bottom end followed by a surge followed by an abrupt drop in power. Seven speen auto helps here. Add a DMS chip (400lb/ft torque from a 3.3...) and you're on to something.

Meanwhile I'll keep driving the C43.

PS why almost no diesels in motorsport? Because sudden turbo lag makes them VERY hard to drive - see Jethro Bovington's recent efforts in EVO.

Conclusion; we petrolheads are not called petrolheads for nothing....

[c250 turbo diesel]

Me, I have diesel motors since 1970, mostly because "not much went wrong" they just kept going" where as a petrol could allways let you down through different reasons, times have well changed now ! with modern technology we have the superfast cdi sytem that even we can chip that makes it go faster still!
Most petrol heads like Clarkson who drive fast petrols, will hate diesels, and I see there logic, people who want to economise like diesels.
I have been lucky, I have had some great diesels, ie Toyota Landcrusier 4.2 Nissan patrol 4.2 several mercs, Range rovers, Land rovers Dhiatsu, none of wich ever let me down because of engine breakdowns!

Now this is my word of warning !!!!! when the new cdi systems go wrong on the latest diesels out of warrenty, one is talking about horrendas charges from the dealers or non dealers to repair them, that is when the real problem starts ! keep driving whatever well you can what ever government is in power in this country, they will price us from the roads in the end !!! Roy

[mlc]

I find it interesting how this has gone, started off with the assumption that we should all drive these wonderful diesels and now seems to be a surge of petrol lovers coming up - and of course overtaking the smokey diesels :)

I think a fair summary would be:

* Diesels are very good these days.
* Petrols are still even better.
* In the main if you do a high mileage you need a diesel for economy / tax reasons.

I am lucky that I only do 6000 miles a year, and 2000 of those are in my classic 350SL. That means that even at 12 mpg in the SL it only equates to a tankful per month.

This has been one of the most enjoyable threads for ages.

Mark.

[GlynC]

over 200 miles today at 80-90 mph
41.6 at the end
enough said?
I bought my car... pay for my own fuel
Sensible choice
Would love a stonkin V8 again by refuse to finance the exchequer!

[mlc]

over 200 miles today at 80-90 mph
41.6 at the end
enough said?
I bought my car... pay for my own fuel
Sensible choice
Would love a stonkin V8 again by refuse to finance the exchequer!
Glyn,

Doesnt your quote agree with everything I have said?

you have a sensible car with good fuel economy, however you would love a (petrol) V8 but for financial reasons you have eleced to run the lesser car.

I am not saying you are wrong, my point throughout is that in most cases people are driving a diesel out of economic need rather than choice.

Mark

[jberks]

I have to agree. If it wasn't for the running costs, I wouldn't consider a diesel. Mercs are luxury cars that are renowned for their refinement and silence. No matter how good (and the 320CDI is VERY good), it is patently obvious to all that they are sitting behind a diesel engine. I would say, having driven one for a day, even at motorway speeds, anyone who has a 6 cylinder or above petrol can audibly tell the difference instantly.
I bought my E240 for 3 reasons. Firstly I wanted a refined V6 and secondly, it was a bargain, at considerably less that the equivalent C class and thirdly as I was doing 6k per year, fuel consumption didn't matter. As it is, now that I am doing 30k per year, I won't consider petrol for my next car.

Interestingly, the argument I have used in the past is that the diesels are more expensive and it takes several years to make the difference back in fuel. (ignoring depreciation admittedly) However, looking at the MB used web site, whilst there are still silly prices for each, both an E240 and E270CDI on a 03 plate can be had for similar money. Perhaps the difference is less of a factor now as most sub S class MBs seem to be oil burners these days and the petrol ones are hard to come by!.

[GlynC]

Glyn,

Doesnt your quote agree with everything I have said?

you have a sensible car with good fuel economy, however you would love a (petrol) V8 but for financial reasons you have eleced to run the lesser car.

I am not saying you are wrong, my point throughout is that in most cases people are driving a diesel out of economic need rather than choice.

Mark

Hi Mark
Yes I don't deny it
I do think the oil burners are great on the motorways though where high reving engines can be a pain. Best sound on earth is a throaty V8 . Mate of mine just fitted an RS6 exhaust to his 4.2Q A6 sounds lovely. Problem for me would be the 20 to the gallon.
Diesel halves my fuel bill.
I just don't think people should knock them so hard, they serve a purpose and are so much improved on the early ones. Look at the new B*W 535D what a belter that is and not a bad sound either.
If I stop doing the mileage I'll have an E55 and wear a bigger smile! 8)

[angus falconer]

MLC,

You some it up well;

* Diesels are very good these days.
* Petrols are still even better.
* In the main if you do a high mileage you need a diesel for economy / tax reasons.

I wouldn't do 30,000 miles a year in V8 petrol.....

Meanwhile, as a 5,000 miles a year man, 3-5 year old V8 petrols are insanely cheap.

[Copiertech]

What I do find myself doing a lot is overtaking (say 30 - 60, 40 - 70, 50-80 etc). In that sort of driving, the diesel torque wins over petrol (as supported by road tests). That's why I feel that the 'useable' performance is better in a diesel. My "diesels perform like a petrol that's 1000cc bigger" assertion was mocked - but then we heard how a 2000cc diesel Mondeo performed similarly to a 3500cc petrol BMW - again in 'real' driving conditions.

i think your taking my comments a bit wrong there, i said the mundano had similar torque in a very small part of the rev range whic is indeed impressive but the car as a whole performs nowhere near as good as even a 2 litre petrol because 1. pulling out of junctions the turbo lag was enough as to be dangerous sometimes 2. because power tails off so rapidly overtaking is dangerous on fast a roads as you need to change gear when a petrol would keep revving.
real driving conditions like when you pull out to overtake somebody doing about 50 in a 60 and they take a dislike and floor it (as people do sometimes) in a petrol you can keep revving till you hit the limiter to get you past safely but in a diesel you feel like you hit a brick wall and you either have to change gear and spend longer on the wrong side of the road or abort and be stuck behind them until your really ****ed off.
diesels are ok, but i dont like driving them personally.

[Copiertech]

all the folk saying you need a diesel for high mileage, get a decent sequential injection lpg kit on a powerful petrol motor and enjoy the benefits of a petrol motor with less than half the cost of diesel.

[E Class Newbie]

Mine's an auto (as I guess are most MB's) so it's not an issue - if you need to boot it, it will kick down just like a petrol so you're never left wanting.

Have to say though, my last car (BMW) was a manual diesel and once you understand how to master the narrower rev band, you don't notice the lag or power drop, off as you stick within the mountainous torque range.

As the instigator of this thread (glad you're all enjoying it!!) I fully admit that most of us find our way to diesel through running costs or the punitive company car taxation system (which hugely advantages diesel drivers). That said, I'm glad I was 'forced' down that route as (like GlynC) I would happily run one privately now due to the huge overall benefits I've discovered.

[angus falconer]

E Class Newbie,

You make a good point of surfing the torque - one thing that you can do in both moderns diesels AND petrol V8's.

I was able to drive the BMW 320D on open roads in Provence pretty fast without alerting my other half to the real speed. Same in the C43 which will barrel along very nicely without even passing 3000rpm.

Very relaxing for both driver and passenger.

[pascal]

The figures you guys refer to 30-50, 50-70, etc. as being faster in diesels is not totally accurate. These figures are for a given gear, usually top, and not 'through the gears', or in kickdown. Equivelent petrols will beat diesels, 0-30, 30-60, 40-70, 50-70. But in a given higher gear (no downshift) the diesels extra torque, beats equilivent petrols.

Another point, Diesels don't do twice as many MPG as petrols, or nowhere near it.
Example, SL320(heavier than E-class)..... Motorway drive 120kph ....... 31/33 mpg.
E320 cdi (much lighter) = low/mid 40s mpg?

Having said that, if one drives a lot of miles per year (i don't), and economy is first priority, diesels win hands down.

Like myself & some of the other petrol drivers, it's not the main priority, so that's why we actually drive petrol cars, and others drive diesels.

Thank God we all have different needs; as this forum (and life in general), would be pretty boring if we all drove same model, in same colour, with same engine, & same CDs in changer etc. :)

Pascal

[Wezzel]

Something that nobody has mentioned and the big reason for my buying a diesel is longevity.

Trying to sell petrol cars with high mileages is like trying to sell leprosy. When I sold my last car, a Peugeot 405 diesel with 167K on the clock, I was almost inundated with offers because "them old diesels go on forever". To my knowledge it is still going strong at well over 170k and is still on the original clutch.

The Merc I purchased to replace it is a '99 C220 cdi sport with 135k on the clock. This car still drives like new and I know that if I wanted to sell it tomorrow I would not have a problem due to the public's perception (whether right or wrong) of the longevity of both Mercs and diesels in general.

[mikemoss]

What a fabulous thread! Last time I had to make the petrol/diesel decision I opted for an E320 rather than E320CDI simply because it looked as though I would have needed to pay £3000 more for a similar car with similar mileage. So petrol won (again), and as I only cover around 8000 miles a year and petrol around here is 4p a litre cheaper than diesel I'm happy to put up with fuel economy of 17-20mpg around the city and 28-30mpg on long runs.

Having said all that, my 3.2 petrol-engined car will be much trickier to sell on to anyone who doesn't do a low mileage and as I use it to tow a hefty caravan the extra torque of the 320CDI would have come in handy (even though the petrol version makes a cracking tow car).

I'm self employed, so company car tax doesn't come into it and yes, at the end of the day, I love the smoothness, quietness and general responsiveness of a petrol engine. Which side of the fence I'll come down on next time I change is anybody's guess!

[Nelliecat]

petrol cars are much cheaper secondhand, and less likely to be neglected by penny pinchering owners, and are undeniably smoother with a wider rev range. save a couple of grand and get a petrol motor, spend £700 on a decent sequential LPG injection kit and drive off smugly knowing your only paying 33 pence a litre for a fuel that is cleaner than both the others. my old 735i used to cost me less to run than my turdo-diesel mondeo.
as the owner of a W124 E220 doing 20,000 per annum, where can i get a LPG kit for £700 ??

[OlafMaxwell]

I must add a few words, I have driven diesel out of choice for last 20 years, some of them pretty basic. I did find even with the typical diesel in 1985 if you used the torque they worked well and held their own in any kind of driving. The driving technique is totally different to driving a petrol car. The Peugeot 405 comment is noted, I still have mine and enjoy it. If only Mercedes could be as reliable and rust free. The fact that it has never gone wrong speaks for itself. The Merc was a nightmare trying to deal with poor service.

There is little to beat the 320 CDI, its very fast and certainly faster than the equivalent 320 petrol. It seems well balanced and that's where some cars go wrong. When I got the 320CDI the literature quoted a faster time to 100km/h for the diesel over the petrol 320. There is no way a petrol 320 will leave the 320CDI back on the horizon, they are probably quite evenly matched when empty but given a hill or a full car the diesel will be ahead. Any kind of a load or decent hill will kill the petrol car's performance. Over a long distance the range of the diesel counts for much, especially if you keep a diesel tank at home allowing you to more or less avoid petrol stations altogether. The lower revving engine is very relaxing. A couple of times a year I have to do a 480 mile straight run and not sure I would do it in a petrol car.

I agree about the great sound of a V8 but for me a V8 would now be something for weekend driving.....preferably inside an XKR convertible......

Would I buy another diesel? The new BMW seems to be a really fast one...

[jberks]

as the owner of a W124 E220 doing 20,000 per annum, where can i get a LPG kit for £700 ??
Quote for LPG for my W210 E240 - £2000 - thats a lot of fuel to save!

[Copiertech]

FES autogas, they run a lot of specials, and they are helpful. that price is for the parts, to fit yourself, but its not rocket science. also you can partially fit it and have a garage finish it off for you

[niva441]

If you do go LPG make sure the installer is COP11 approved. I investigated fitting a system to a Range Rover a couple of years ago. There was a lot of cowboys around and carrying a pressurised flammable liquid is serious business.

More practically where does the tank go, do you lose the spare wheel and have a minute tank, or a chunk of the boot. Noting that the tank can only be filled to approx 70% of it's quoted volume.

I ended up calculating it would take 4 years approx to break even on the investment in the LPG system, assuming that the Chancellor didn't diminish the LPG tax advantage. Also I'd have a slower car that would burn more fuel, with a smaller boot.

Due to concerns about quality of installation I'm not sure it would be worth anymore when you sell it, possibly less.

[pascal]

When I got the 320CDI the literature quoted a faster time to 100km/h for the diesel over the petrol 320.

Em Olaf. They are almost the same. Petrol: 8.7 secs. 320Cdi 8.8. (PS autocar test figuires are lower for both cars but in the same ratio) Not worth arguing over. Both cars have now improved in performance. The petrol (E350) has now got 0-62: 6.9sec. The BHP is up by 47 to 268, & torque up 26 to 258. The diesels are not hanging around either. The new diesel V6 seems (on paper) to be another great engine.

If I required an estate to carry heavy loads, and I covered lots of miles per annum, the cdi would be my choice also.

Pascal

[Silver Arrow]

I agree with the comments made about LPG conversions on Range Rovers, generally they seem to fetch lower prices second hand than non converted. Also LPG tends to be 'hotter' and older engines can suffer. I remember reading someplace that someone converted his twin Volvos in his boat to LPG (A bit scary in itself) and they expired next season! My old 240D was built like a tank and never gave any trouble. (Drove a bit like one too!).

[Copiertech]

yes you will get problems if you fit a singlepoint mixer system but thats a cowboy way around it anyway

[996jimbo]

I had a Range Rover last time which I had converted to LPG for £2,000. I reckon it took 30,000 miles to pay for itself, which I did in a year. Whilst you may be able to fit LPG yourself, having a non-certificated installation will do nothing for the re-sale value (regardless of any safety issues). As it was I sold my Range Rover pretty quickly in a market where they tend to hang around.

Concerns about where to put the LPG tank are a little over played I think. I had a 90L spare wheel well tank. I had 3 punctures but even had I carried a spare wouldn't have troubled to fit it; never had a punture that prevented me from getting to a garage.

So far as V8's being for weekends only, I've now got a C43 and expect to do another 30,000 miles this year. If I'm going to do the miles, I'd rather do it in something I like to drive.

I did briefly look at an E320CDi which was mighty impressive and went like stink, which was quite a revelation. In the end though it was a choice between a high mileage later E320CDi or a low mileage older rocket ship. I decided it was time for a car that could take corners!

[pascal]

Maybe Newbie should change the name of this thread to:

Petrol v. Diesel v. LPG - The Myths Explored

LOL, Pascal

[SLinKyjoe]

is it me or.......do the people who decide to buy a deisel need to point out why they chose to spend money on a car they thought was best for them? or is it that the people they meet are uneducated in the merits of choice and always annoy them by suggesting that carcogenic asthma inducing particulate spreading heavy fuel in a car is worse than carcogenic enviromental damaging expensive to refine petrol?

this is how i see it. you choose what you need. if economy is top then either a deisel, hybird, electric or very small petrol engine is best. if you need a bigger car or with towing capability then diesel engines are better. If you wish to have better performance then you buy petrol and if you need to listen to your car then it has to be petrol.

So the question really is, if you need a deisel buy one, if you need a petrol buy one. simple really.

thing is...you tend to get a bigger smile from a large petrol engine car than you do with a large diesel engine. but you get a bigger fuel bill too. You pay for your happiness. Diesels are more efficient tho.

[mlc]

At the risk of repeating myself - I think this is one of the most interesting threads we have ever had.

I followed an 04 plate CLK 270 (I think) off the M60 today at Stockport and up the hill heading off to the south.

Three things struck:

How beautiful the car looked in silver.

How quick it was.

How dirty the exhaust was! I dont really know the MB engine range, hwoever I assume that this is a turbo diesel - I base this on the fact that whenever he was on boost the exhaust turned black. I needed my aircon on recirculating to hide the smell. We even passed a Sprinter going up the hill which was making less smoke.

A beautiful car to view, and an embarrasement to call an MB :(

Mark.

[Nelliecat]

Thanks to all for the info on LPG stuff. Have decided to follow the "smile" concept, now just need to know how to replace the 2.2 four cyl with one of those 5.0 V8. Would i need to upgrade the gearbox and brakes ....................?

[Brett]

I'm about to return to the petrol fold after my last two cars were diesels (both S320CDIs). I pick up an W211 E320 Estate on Wednesday. My preferred choice was an E320CDI but I managed to negotiate a good deal on the E320 and will use the savings to fund the increased fuel bills in the coming years. I saved £7.5k on the purchase price of two similarly specc'd estates, of similar vintage and mileage.

I will miss the torque of the diesel when on the move, but I won't miss the clatter.

[GlynC]

I am amazed at how sad some of you can be :-D
What was a decent discussion has now turned into a diesel knocking ( pardon the pun) session
Please grow up and realise there are reasons for both. Petrol exhausts are also dirty. But then I haven't got a membership for Friends of the Earth and I have three cars all of which polute the air. :confused:

[shrekky]

fundamentally i agree with you newbie.........i own a 190D........2.0 litre deisel...manual gearbox...........she's 20 years old and still does 50 mpg.......you would be hard pushed to show me a clean pair of heals in anything petrol ! unless its tuned.................because you can have all the numbers you want...........no good if you can't drive the damn thing :lol:

[pascal]

I am amazed at how sad some of you can be :D
What was a decent discussion has now turned into a diesel knocking ( pardon the pun) session
Please grow up and realise there are reasons for both. Petrol exhausts are also dirty. But then I haven't got a membership for Friends of the Earth and I have three cars all of which polute the air. :confused:
Are you reading the same thread as I am. I think it is a very well balanced thread, for both diesel and petrol owners to reply to (& LPG).

It was not started by Newbie as a tribute to diesels, even though he drives a diesel. Members are giving their views on why the prefer diesel or petrol. So far it is about 50/50. No one is really knocking either (except in jest).

I think that it gives a good insight into what individuals want from their motor.

Very good thread, Newbie

Pascal

[blassberg]

If you wish to have better performance then you buy petrol

I'm looking forward to the performance of my C320CDI 7spd auto

[blassberg]

If you wish to have better performance then you buy petrol

and the SLK320CDI Triturbo 0-60 in 5.3 seconds sounds fairly quick :lol:

[angus falconer]

But no one should EVER drive a diesel convertible. Some things are just not meant to me.

[pascal]

But no one should EVER drive a diesel convertible. Some things are just not meant to me.
Well I wouldn't anyway,. But you'd never know in twenty years ....................... I could be eating my words.

[angus falconer]

I am being slightly tongue in cheek but I did see a diesel CLK convetible which looked very nice as it approached. When it passed though it left an incongruous soundtrack in its wake. My brain could not process the image and the sound. It was odd as the contrast between the first and second halves of the UEFA cup final but not nearly as much fun.

[tonytup]

Well, thanks for the input that invites thoughts. But I do have a question about the diesel relevance for the S-class.

Yes, agreed, diesel engines have improved dramatically. But would you say they have achieved absolutely equal performance of its petrol brother? In terms of comfort, quiteness and overal performance, I guess not.

Until now, the whole point is about SAVING money on fuel. So here comes my suspecion of its relevance to S-class users.

If as an average user you cover 20,000 miles a year in an S-class which costs you, say 50k to buy, would you really bother how much fuel you'd save (a hundred quid perhaps??)? I just fail to get the logic behind this.

In an S-class, the priority is about luxury, comfort, image and performance. Would someone tade some of these for a few hundred quid?? This sounds like living in a million pound house but having to shut the boiler in winter to save money.

Or have I missed out anything in the diesel-petrol debate?

[GrahamC230K]

I think newbies aregument was let down from the outset but not accepting that his comparisons are based on turbo charged diesel engines and normally aspirated diesel engines.

Otherwise, a typical diesel vs. petrol debate.

[GlynC]

Are you reading the same thread as I am. I think it is a very well balanced thread, for both diesel and petrol owners to reply to (& LPG).

It was not started by Newbie as a tribute to diesels, even though he drives a diesel. Members are giving their views on why the prefer diesel or petrol. So far it is about 50/50. No one is really knocking either (except in jest).

I think that it gives a good insight into what individuals want from their motor.

Very good thread, Newbie

Pascal

Pascal
You may have missed the smilies in my post
Perhaps it is you who isn't reading ?
I made my remark in a light hearted fashion
I was merely amazed to see how people get on the box so easily :?:

[E Class Newbie]

I think newbies aregument was let down from the outset but not accepting that his comparisons are based on turbo charged diesel engines and normally aspirated diesel engines.

Otherwise, a typical diesel vs. petrol debate.

Graham - virtually all new diesels (and certainly those provided by any decent manufacturer such as MB) are turbo diesels. I guess that some old runabouts, agricultural / military vehicles and Land Rovers might perform like tractors, but we're talking about modern cars here.

I accept that there are arguements in favour of petrol, especially for low mileage private owners buying second hand, but let's compare apples with apples please!

[GrahamC230K]

Graham - virtually all new diesels (and certainly those provided by any decent manufacturer such as MB) are turbo diesels. I guess that some old runabouts, agricultural / military vehicles and Land Rovers might perform like tractors, but we're talking about modern cars here.

I accept that there are arguements in favour of petrol, especially for low mileage private owners buying second hand, but let's compare apples with apples please!


Easy. Come on, don't take me for a fool, I know most modern diesels are turbos.

My post did not offer an opinion on the debate at all.

I WAS trying to aid your argument however, but was just pointing out if you had been more up-front hat you are comparing a modern forced induction diesel engine to a modern normally aspirated petrol engine, you wouldn't have got half the responses you did.

And here you are now saying "but let's compare apples with apples please!".

It's horses for courses anyway and each to their own.

[pascal]

Pascal
You may have missed the smilies in my post
Perhaps it is you who isn't reading ?
I made my remark in a light hearted fashion
I was merely amazed to see how people get on the box so easily :?:

No problem Glyn. Yes I did see the one 'Smile' smiley after the first line.
After that it sounded serious, but as you say now it was meant to be light hearted, and I accept that.

Actually, if you read my posts, I agree with most sides of the arguement. Have had 4 diesels alltold, 3 4x4s from new, and they were what I wanted at the time.

Pascal

[SLinKyjoe]

there is no argument here. it is about choice..the point i was making earlier for thos who missed it, was that some people need educating about deisels. they have advantages that petrol dont, and vice versa. its the uneducated about cars who need telling, not us.

and I am not ever buying an SLK with a diesel engine. Same as I probably wouldn't buy a c class estate in petrol. nothing wrong with either as they are both geared up for different jobs...but that how i would chose. no myths here then.


have seen a JCB with a 5.7L V8 petrol...called the JCB GT. it isnt the same tho is it?

oh, and as regards better performance from a petrol.....I like this new diesel Formula One dont you? and how many porsche, ferraris and TVR's have diesels...or lotus come to that.

[GlynC]

Before this Merc I dabbled with a new Audi Cab for a while after 3 years fighting with Lexus
When I was looking I saw the diesel version which appeared Ok
But when you popped the roof down.... nOOOOOOOOOO! Didn't sound right!
I bought a 3 litre Sport which sounded the puppies bits and gave me 30 to the gallon
But sadly I didn't find her a good motorway beast and she went off to someone who would appreciate her finer points... bit girlie too and I couldn't get the misses out of the damn thing.
Saw a lovely 500sl today..... also saw the new Cls on the road.. looks better in the flesh than in the pictures!
Oh well!

[blassberg]

But would you say they have achieved absolutely equal performance of its petrol brother?

In terms of comfort, quiteness and overal performance, I guess not.

Until now, the whole point is about SAVING money on fuel. So here comes my suspecion of its relevance to S-class users.

Or have I missed out anything in the diesel-petrol debate?

you've omitted to remember the "until now" comment in your own post and you should test not guess.

C320 petrol V6 manual 218bhp, 310Nm, 100kmh in 7.7, max 154
C320 CDI V6 7 sp auto 221bhp, 510Nm, 100kmh in 6.9, max 155

Comfort - no data (no difference)
Quietness - petrol please, everytime
Overall Performance - diesel beats (previously available) petrol

Yes - there are financial gains to a diesel but previous diesels were underdeveloped.

Web press considers more to come from petrol engines too so should prolong the debate for a few years yet. Seems that we should be glad of this particular technology race?

I drove the Sub Legacy Spec B and concluded that "high" powered petrol cars are like women with nice figures. Cars with "high" torque are like women who can cook. The up to date diesels look nice and can cook.

[pascal]

Overall Performance - diesel beats (previously available) petrol
'Previously available' 320cdi engine had only 197bhp, 7bhp more than 230k.
Previous 320 V6 petrol had 221bhp. Stick a turbo/supercharger on it, about 300/350 Bhp. LOL

Pascal

[SLinKyjoe]

i see that it is still about choice. the merits for both are obvious but it seems to me that people are attempting to defend the diesel and suggest they are better than petrol. chips on shoulders spring to mind here.

[davidsl500]

Well I have 2 diesels and 1 Petrol. Lets face it the V8 petrol is a glorious sound and with the top down its like Beethovens "symphony for engines" - not that he ever wrote it..well he couldnt could he?

My Golf GT TDI does 50mpg if I drive it and 60mpg if the better half drives it. It also goes like stink but you know its a diesel. I drive the Golf in the week for my 50mile daily commute and the SL comes out on the weekend - just economic sense really. Makes me appreciate the Petrol V8 even more.

In the old days to get the same performance out of a diesel engine it would have to be 50% bigger, not the case now though thanks to the turbocharger or supercharger and this explains why 3litre petrol and diesel engines are now so similar in performance - its the turbo that makes the difference along with the developments in diesel engine technology. Stick a turbo on the petrol and the gap will be in favour of the petrol again in terms of performance.

Mind you in heavy rain and when the local village floods then there's nothing like a diesel to pull the waterlogged petrol engined cars out of the deep bits...

Petrol or diesel, manual or automatic - you still own a mercedes so just enjoy it!

[pascal]

Mind you in heavy rain and when the local village floods then there's nothing like a diesel to pull the waterlogged petrol engined cars out of the deep bits...

Well I have never heard of anyones engine being totally ruined from driving through floods. But I know several people who done thousands in damage afer their breather inhaled H2o. The MBs are better than most in this respect, but if someone coming towards your ML270 creating a bow wave, its advisable to switch off your engine.

I think modern petrols can withstand splashing water a lot better than older ones, where the fan splashed up water onto the distributer cap, causing some or total power loss.

The new diesels have as much electrics as the petrols. My dads 03 C220cdi, was running badly, and MB changed the whole ECU.

It has being recalled for a faulty battery now. (the old C had a similar problem in 99 I recall). I see the 180s are being recalled also. No-one on the forums seems to have got these letters from MB. I know three people here that have got the in the last few weeks. http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?t=11232 I haven't found anything on the www either. Can someone ring MB in the UK to find out more on this.

As most of you know I've been unfortunate enough to have had a self-combusting battery in the past.

Pascal

[blassberg]

Can someone ring MB in the UK to find out more on this.

Found this on www re a different recall

Mercedes-Benz has set up a special hotline to answer customers´ questions:
Hotline for Europe: 00800 1 777 7777

[pascal]

Em, all RHD W203s are affected. Suppose I better put up a new notice.

Pascal.

[angus falconer]

See this month's Car magazine - features on upcoming bi- and TRI-turbo SL and SLK diesels......

Interesting.......

[peterchurch]

See this month's Car magazine - features on upcoming bi- and TRI-turbo SL and SLK diesels......

Interesting.......

Woops :( You was doing so well :( a Diesel SL is like a virgin bride! A nice idea but not much fun in practice :D Convertibles have no soundproofing and as such the engine note _MATTERS_. No if you need more poke than a 350 then you buy an SL500 or SL55. There is no market for a diesel SL as anyone that can buy one new and lose 40K doesn't need to worry about 50mpg vs 20 - 30 mpg...

An SL is one place that should never see a Diesel....

[littlebrooklyn]

I actually like diesel and petrol cars equally and I agree with whoever it was that said that if you aren't going to doing lots of mileage then you may as well stick with a petrol model.

My sister has the same C Class Estate that we have, although hers is a diesel. She travels from Surrey to Devon a lot, so having a diesel makes a lot of sense. We only did 19,000 in 5yrs in our last car, we don't really go heavy on the mileage as you can tell, so a petrol car suited us.

But hey I'm female, what would I know :-P

Lyn

[pascal]

See this month's Car magazine - features on upcoming bi- and TRI-turbo SL and SLK diesels......

Interesting.......
What is the point though. I think that its more got to do with public relations.
People see the word diesel, and they think 'half price fuel'
But the fact is, when they add bi & tri flow turbos etc., the actual saving, (like for like) is nearer to 25% (or less).
Put a tri-flow turbo on an SL350, and you have a Supercar.
What people are forgeting is that the development of petrol engines is also being improved (for economy) at the same time.

Pascal

[angus falconer]

In reply to Peter Church I was only trying to balanced (or aleast pretend to be) as there was a sense of humour loss earlier in this thread.

You (and Pascal of course) are correct of course about the depreciation issue wiping out any fuel savings. And as they say in the test if you reverse at high speed with the roof down the SL stinks. So it's a like a vigin bride with flatulence. Nice.

I look forward to hiring my next tri-turbo diesel seven speed Mercedes van.

There, is that better?

[peterchurch]

In reply to Peter Church I was only trying to balanced (or aleast pretend to be) as there was a sense of humour loss earlier in this thread.

You (and Pascal of course) are correct of course about the depreciation issue wiping out any fuel savings. And as they say in the test if you reverse at high speed with the roof down the SL stinks. So it's a like a vigin bride with flatulence. Nice.

I look forward to hiring my next tri-turbo diesel seven speed Mercedes van.

There, is that better?

Sorry my dry whit was getting the better of me this morning :D my post was ment tongue in cheek :D

[angus falconer]

Hi Peter - No offence taken!

I also have a dry wit :-)

By the way look out for a new thread I am about to start - I suspect I have though of an equally contentious topic.....

[blassberg]

Peugeot have outlined ambitious plans to become the first company to win the Le Mans 24 Hours with a diesel car.

Link Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/4094486.stm)

[996jimbo]

What's a tri flow? Is it just three turbo's? Bi turbo's I've heard of (as in Maserati), but never tri's.

[peterchurch]

What's a tri flow? Is it just three turbo's? Bi turbo's I've heard of (as in Maserati), but never tri's.

Yes Three Turbos :D

[996jimbo]

That sounds like fun. What sort of engine configuration would that be good for though? Straight six presumably?

[angus falconer]

Peugeot have outlined ambitious plans to become the first company to win the Le Mans 24 Hours with a diesel car.

Link Here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/4094486.stm)

Ahh - sneaky. Basically all they need is an ever-so-slightly leaky overflow and a little bit of rain and hey presto half the field spin off.

[996jimbo]

Peugeot have outlined ambitious plans to become the first company to win the Le Mans 24 Hours with a diesel car.

I wonder if their plans are along the lines of:

"Let's build a diesel car to win Le Mans"
"Yeah, lets"

end of plans for now...

[The Editor]

No.... - Now what WOULD be impressive is an electric car to win Le Mans (without a re-charge!!)

[shrekky]

hmmmmmmmmmmm you may mock.....lol................they all laughed at volvo when they said they were going to race an ESTATE CAR ! in the BTCC......lol........and they had the last laugh !............tell ya what........alright my baby aint turboed or supercharged but there aint many things can leave her for dead(well upto 110....lol).....and of all the cars i have come across,other mercs,beamers,lexus's.........only one make leave me for a spot on the horizion and thats a new GOLF TDi,damn they are quick !

[The Editor]

Mmmmm.... so are them Audi 'S' thingermejiggies as well !!

[mlc]

Shrekky,

Am I missing something or are you suggesting that a 1986 190D is a particularly quick car to 110 mph, do you know what the 0 - 60 time is by any chance?

Mark.

[shrekky]

I wouldn't say particularly quick, just not as slow as people have the misconception of them being...............hey i play tag with 735i beamers on the motorways......lol.............never timed it.........maybe i should because it defintely gets there faster than the book suggests

[gchurch]

This thread is getting a bit old now but I felt like a general blither. But, yes I agree that diesels do offer an improvement compared to petrol engine with regard to mid range acceleration but this is only because of the turbo charger. A non turbo diesel would be much slower. Diesel engines are particularly suited to turbo charging for reasons I quite remember but it's to do with the compression ratio and the volume of gas which is expelled. However, look at the performance you get if you turbo charge a petrol engine - Sierra cosworths, Suburu Imprezza etc.. So yes, turbo-diesel engine can be faster than a normally aspirated diesel engine but they're not the same beast really. Petrol engines are more flexible as well. A decent, say 2 litre, petrol engine will typically pull say 4th gear from 1000rpm to 6000rpm which is 5/6th of the rev range. My C220CDI will only really pull 4th happily from 1500rpm to 4000rpm which is 3/4 of the rev range. However, I did drive a BMW 320d which would pull from about 1200rpm so they're getting better. In the ideal world I think we should all drive enormous normally aspirated petrol engines - 600SL would be a good start.


Yes torque does give acceleration but you can't just compare the two figures for a petrol and diesel engine as the gear ratios come into the equation as well.
Yes, all diesel cars produce loots of soot under acceleration - just floor it away from the lights at night and watch in the mirror - you'll get a great vortex of swirling smoke - very Goldfingeresque...

[blassberg]

My C220CDI will only really pull 4th happily from 1500rpm to 4000rpm which is 3/4 of the rev range. However, I did drive a BMW 320d which would pull from about 1200rpm so they're getting better. In the ideal world I think we should all drive enormous normally aspirated petrol engines - 600SL would be a good start.It's my birthday so I'm going to allow myself to say how happy I am with my C320CDI.

[Blobcat]

It's my birthday so I'm going to allow myself to say how happy I am with my C320CDI.
Happy Birthday blasberg, I'm happy that your happy with your C320cdi. Doing anything nice for your birthday?

[television]

Happy birthday Blassberg, Im away to Sweden in the morning, touring so it will be like a birthday everyday for the next three weeks. :D :D

malcolm