Go to Ultimatecarpage.com

Go Back   Ultimatecarpage.com forums > Automotive forums > General Automotive


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #316  
Old 05-02-2013, 04:11 PM
Matra et Alpine's Avatar
Matra et Alpine Matra et Alpine is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27,781
nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
Based on driving experience Ferrer, that's not the subjective case and I suspect it's because you are only looking at peak torque and not torque available at the revs the gears are running in.
Until it's reviewed what gear ratios and revs then it's not a safe comparison
__________________
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Reply With Quote
  #317  
Old 05-02-2013, 07:52 PM
Kitdy's Avatar
Kitdy Kitdy is offline
Furniture
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,072
You know what would actually be a very interesting read? A comprehensive technical, test, and drive review by an automotive journalist outlet comparing like model cars with diesels vs ottos, akin to the cars mentioned by RM. Grab and test a whole whack in the range.

Matra hits it with peak torque. Things are complicated in these comparos when you start talking about peak torque, torque curve, redline/peak power, gearing, etc etc.

I am curious what boost the Cummins/Powerstroke/Duramax are pushing.
Reply With Quote
  #318  
Old 05-04-2013, 01:11 PM
jcp123's Avatar
jcp123 jcp123 is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,138
Californian by nature, living in Teggsas.
Send a message via AIM to jcp123
For some reason I am having a hard time pulling what the stock boost on those bad boys are, only that they can usually take up to ca. 50lbs of boost...
__________________
An it harm none, do as ye will

Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.
Reply With Quote
  #319  
Old 05-06-2013, 09:40 PM
culver culver is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,508
For US pickups diesels do have an added benefit if you live at altitude. Like all turbos they don't have the fear of heights a NA motor gets at 3000m. I was in the Rockies two years ago. I never noticed a drop in power associated with altitude thanks to my SAAB's turbo. At 3000m I think the fall off in power is around 30% for an NA car. Turbos do lose power but not nearly as much. Most trucks are not turbos though all the diesels are so if you are going up the hills a diesel is a nice thing to have.


In other news, Car and Driver did an interesting comparison. Jetta vs Jetta vs Jetta vs Jetta
2013 VW Jetta Comparison Test: Hybrid vs. TDI vs. GLI vs. 2.5 Car and Driver
The real test was 2.0T vs 2.0 diesel vs 2.5L I5 vs hybrid.
The observed mileage and 0-60mph times were
2.5L: 26 mpg 8.9s
2.0T: 31 mpg 6.4s
Hybrid: 38 mpg 7.9s
diesel: 39 mpg 8.4s

The 2.5L was a clear loser but really that motor has always been a bit of a dog. The hybrid is compelling given the lower fuel costs and negligible loss in mileage. There is fear of the battery losing performance later in life. However, the US VW diesel's have a nasty expensive particle filter that is likely to need service after 100k miles for around $3k.
Reply With Quote
  #320  
Old 05-06-2013, 11:07 PM
Ferrer's Avatar
Ferrer Ferrer is offline
Furniture
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 33,266
Barcelona
Send a message via MSN to Ferrer
Interesting comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Car & Driver
According to the EPA, the TDI should be good for 30 mpg in the city, 42 on the highway, and 34 combined. (Those results are with the manual or the quick-shifting DSG automatic, which was the transmission in our car.) We logged an impressive 39 mpg, which was—and this is significant—better than we achieved with the hybrid.
I don't find it significant at all. The diesel should be much better than the other three.

Does anyone know the test route, conditions and speed?

It's also interesting to see how shot geared is the USDM diesel automatic, only 50,1km/h @ 1,000rpm in top gear which is shorter the EDM 1.6 TDI engine (50,7km/h @ 1,000rpm in the 5 speed manual, 51,6km/h @ 1,000rpm in the 7 speed auto).

The manual EDM Jetta 2.0 TDI has 58,4km/h @ 1,000rpm, which if it is the same in the USDM model would have greatly improved fuel consumption.
__________________
Lack of charisma can be fatal.
Visca Catalunya!
Reply With Quote
  #321  
Old 05-06-2013, 11:12 PM
pimento's Avatar
pimento pimento is offline
Fanatic
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,536
Perth, Australia
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferrer View Post
I don't find it significant at all. The diesel should be much better than the other three.
It's significant if you're an average US consumer. Hybrids will save the world!
__________________
Life's too short to drive bad cars.
Reply With Quote
  #322  
Old 05-06-2013, 11:20 PM
jcp123's Avatar
jcp123 jcp123 is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4,138
Californian by nature, living in Teggsas.
Send a message via AIM to jcp123
Most hybrids, compared to Toyota HSD, do have shorter battery life. Just as in your cell phone, they do not simply just go out, they deteriorate. Honda hybrids are notorious for this and although there are charging strategies and recals which can go part way towards pluggimg the gap, no Hybrid really has the financial advantage save perhaps for the Fords. Hyundai may prove an exception as well.
__________________
An it harm none, do as ye will

Approximately 79% of statistics are made up.
Reply With Quote
  #323  
Old 05-28-2013, 12:35 AM
johnhash63 johnhash63 is offline
Novice
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 7
new upcoming Audi A8 L
Reply With Quote
  #324  
Old 08-23-2013, 05:50 AM
Clivey's Avatar
Clivey Clivey is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,193
Derby, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitdy View Post
And here is the crux of the environmental argument. Someone else's "freedom," is actually negatively impacting all other members of the human race. A Northern North American is producing huge amounts of garbage and emissions, and they pay for it, but those that pay for it most are those who are already worse off.

Evidence points to anthropological climate change being real. The majority of evidence points to this change being potentially catastrophic. I would rather operate with the precautionary principle in hand and aim to reduce potentially catastrophic damage. If the potential risk is widespread death and destruction, and the relative cost to stop this is high (but still low compared to well, widespread death and destruction) then I'd rather err on the side of caution then let myself in older life and subsequent generations of humans and non-human beings on this planet suffer for our grandiose.

jcb, see what The Economist has to say on climate change. They fully embrace the fact that anthropological climate change and global warming is real and accept that it will likely be absolutely devastating. They had a very coolly discussed podcast about the widespread ramifications of this issue where they attempted to come up with some solutions.

I say: build approximately 29837420938472908347238 nuclear fission reactors. Canada and Australia has the world covered for uranium.

EDIT: Fund these reactors, and use the reactors to create desalination plans, by seizing the assets of, and repatriating users of tax havens.
All well and good...but what proportion of pollution is actually caused by privately owned motor vehicles? It's not as high as you thought, is it?

So why do governments seemingly spend most of the time / effort regarding environmental issues scrutinising, regulating and penalising car manufacturers and drivers?

What's the point in me trading my petrol BMW for a miserable eco box when our dumb society is still relying on coal-fired power stations and when food production creates multiples of the pollution we will ever do driving our cars?
__________________
"This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S
Reply With Quote
  #325  
Old 08-23-2013, 07:22 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,312
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivey View Post
What's the point in me trading my petrol BMW for a miserable eco box when our dumb society is still relying on coal-fired power stations and when food production creates multiples of the pollution we will ever do driving our cars?
perhaps because we can do without a car, but hardly without food....? And currently the coal powered fuel stations are having a hard time because natural gas is cheaper than coal.
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #326  
Old 08-23-2013, 10:48 AM
Kitdy's Avatar
Kitdy Kitdy is offline
Furniture
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,072
No, its as low as I thought. Commuters at what, 18%? Henk, food is needed to live but not meat, and certainly not the amount of meat "we" eat, and meat production/animal husbandry is a horribly inefficient system of converting sunlight into caloric energy for humans compared to plants, and of course it produces I believe in both percentage and absolute terms far more co2 emissions than crop harvesting.
Reply With Quote
  #327  
Old 08-23-2013, 10:49 AM
Clivey's Avatar
Clivey Clivey is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,193
Derby, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
perhaps because we can do without a car, but hardly without food....?
You've missed the point. - Why not spend some of the time and effort we use to obsessively scrutinise every last aspect of cars to make a bigger difference in making food production less destructive (this would make a MUCH bigger difference to the state of the planet)?

For example: In the last couple of weeks, in vitro meat has been making headlines. - Beef production is massively destructive; if we could "grow" meat without having to farm cattle, we could make a monumental difference, not least by essentially giving the land we currently use to house livestock "back to nature".

The same thing goes for growing plants aero and hydroponically. - If we spent even a fraction of the $Millions we currently waste on chasing dubious CO2 targets on improving farming methods, we'd see a much larger overall improvement to the environment.

Alas...I know why it isn't being done: $$$. - At the moment, there isn't the political will because a viable business case hasn't been put forward. The only reason everyone's circle-jerking over "eco" stuff at the moment is that some people are raking in the Dollars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by henk4 View Post
And currently the coal powered fuel stations are having a hard time because natural gas is cheaper than coal.
Generation 4 nuclear reactors are better than both.
__________________
"This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S
Reply With Quote
  #328  
Old 08-23-2013, 11:46 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,312
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivey View Post
You've missed the point. - Why not spend some of the time and effort we use to obsessively scrutinise every last aspect of cars to make a bigger difference in making food production less destructive (this would make a MUCH bigger difference to the state of the planet)?

For example: In the last couple of weeks, in vitro meat has been making headlines. - Beef production is massively destructive; if we could "grow" meat without having to farm cattle, we could make a monumental difference, not least by essentially giving the land we currently use to house livestock "back to nature".

The same thing goes for growing plants aero and hydroponically. - If we spent even a fraction of the $Millions we currently waste on chasing dubious CO2 targets on improving farming methods, we'd see a much larger overall improvement to the environment.

Alas...I know why it isn't being done: $$$. - At the moment, there isn't the political will because a viable business case hasn't been put forward. The only reason everyone's circle-jerking over "eco" stuff at the moment is that some people are raking in the Dollars.



Generation 4 nuclear reactors are better than both.
If that is your point then aren't it the same $$$ that are driving the oil based car industry?
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #329  
Old 08-23-2013, 11:54 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,312
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kitdy View Post
No, its as low as I thought. Commuters at what, 18%? Henk, food is needed to live but not meat, and certainly not the amount of meat "we" eat, and meat production/animal husbandry is a horribly inefficient system of converting sunlight into caloric energy for humans compared to plants, and of course it produces I believe in both percentage and absolute terms far more co2 emissions than crop harvesting.
Having just been to the USA, I agree that food production could be more geared to actual needs than to the unhealthy desires from the Great Consumer, however the same goes for the automotive industry, so saying that somebody else does something wrong, is no a reason to justify your own mistakes.
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #330  
Old 09-04-2013, 11:39 PM
VictorSheed VictorSheed is offline
Novice
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 22
Diesel power is all about great fuel economy, and unlike hybrid power it delivers on the highway as well as city streets. Cool invention.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UK police replacing the Imprezas with Lexus IS-F cruisers 4wheelsonline General Automotive 112 10-14-2009 07:25 AM
if americans like torque, why not buy diesel engined cars? teatako General Automotive 157 01-06-2007 01:24 PM
The fastest street cars in america rev440 Multimedia 7 11-27-2006 07:39 PM
Pixar Cars 90ft Multimedia 25 06-08-2006 08:03 AM
RWD diesel powered cars QBridge Car comparison 41 11-07-2005 01:17 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:39 AM.

 

© 1998 - 2019 Ultimatecarpage.com