Diesel vs Petrol
20 December 2011, 06:58 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diesel vs Petrol
Im curious to know where the benefits outweigh the negatives when comparing these two...?
ATM, we're looking at selling our facelift X5 and getting a damaged 3 series. Now I can either go for the pre LCi model diesel, or the LCi petrol. On checking the MPG values, they are far off each other, but being that diesel is dearer to buy and the car itself is dearer to buy, but tax is cheaper and resale value is better, what way do you suggest going?
I'd actually prefer a 5 series, but don't want to go too old and I'd ALSO like to get a touring, but they are of the rather rare variety.
ATM, we're looking at selling our facelift X5 and getting a damaged 3 series. Now I can either go for the pre LCi model diesel, or the LCi petrol. On checking the MPG values, they are far off each other, but being that diesel is dearer to buy and the car itself is dearer to buy, but tax is cheaper and resale value is better, what way do you suggest going?
I'd actually prefer a 5 series, but don't want to go too old and I'd ALSO like to get a touring, but they are of the rather rare variety.
20 December 2011, 07:04 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add, we do circa 6-7k a year, which straight off says get a petrol, but there is still more to diesel than just economy. 
Tax and resale still plays a part, as well as being more fun and more performance in a real world kind of way....
Tax and resale still plays a part, as well as being more fun and more performance in a real world kind of way....
20 December 2011, 09:16 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sherwood Forest
Posts: 1,245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was thinking the same. Decided on a 330d M Sport Touring. Beautiful car Pre LCI. Wouldn't entertain a petrol nowadays as things are only going to get worse and will make petrol's harder to sell on in a few years. 
Mine.
Mine.
20 December 2011, 09:45 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks the part Frosticles and knowing full well how good the 3 litres are, I'd love to have one, but MPG is playing a part unfortunately.
Mind me asking what price it was, or at least rough price?
Mind me asking what price it was, or at least rough price?
Trending Topics
20 December 2011, 10:38 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 3,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last time i sat down and tried to figure this out i worked it out to 15000 miles PA.
Diesel cost more to fix imo, when they do go wrong, a DMF failure on mine cost me circa £700 and that was a case of when it would happen, not if.
Diesel cost more to fix imo, when they do go wrong, a DMF failure on mine cost me circa £700 and that was a case of when it would happen, not if.
21 December 2011, 09:25 AM
#12
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is why i need to consider petrol powered motors. Especially when it'll be the misses using it most and she won't care if it has torque or not.
Sounds like a lot of money Frosticles...what miles/age?
Sounds like a lot of money Frosticles...what miles/age?
21 December 2011, 10:11 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 10,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 2006 Coupe 330d (E92) and that around town gets about 35-36mpg. On a motorway run at 80ish its 40-42mpg. Not remapped yet which should see an extra couple of mpg on both those figures. In comparison my old Leon Cupra would get 25- 26 and 30 on a run. So to me thats loads better. Tank range on the cupra average 300 tops, on the bmw its 450-550 and costs no more to fill up.
21 December 2011, 12:35 PM
#16
Only 6k to 8k miles p.a. & if those are mainly town miles, you would be better off with a petrol. I had a similar dilemma a few months ago when deciding what family car to buy for the Mrs to drive. Mainly town & mixed 7k miles a year & had to be auto. (previously drove an BMW E46 330d auto)
Looked & test drove a few diesels inc Passat CC GT; Honda Accord tourer esgt, Honda CRV exgt, Bmw 320d sport efficient dynamics estate, Bmw 520d sport efficient dynamics, Audi A6 2.7tdi lemans. All diesels upto 3 years old, low mileage, auto gearboxes & budget between £16k to £18k.
All the above manufacturers love to state the combined & motorway miles for these diesel cars but not so easy trying to get an accurate real world, town mpg figure for them, especially with an auto box. The reason being they are not as good around town as you may think, the mpg difference between a petrol or diesel was minimal in these circumstances.
To add to that: increased weight of the diesel engine over the front axle, increased service costs, petrol being anywhere from 7p to 5p approx cheaper, per litre than diesel & most importantly the fact that you could buy an equivalent petrol car a lot cheaper than a diesel made my mind up for me.
In the end I picked up a Honda Accord Tourer ES GT Auto (2008 8th Gen), fully loaded sat nav, rear cameras, leathers etc with only 11k miles from Honda for under £13k! That was approx £4k cheaper than the same car in a 2.2 dtec engine. Doing 7k mainly town miles a year there was no calculation that was going to make it cheaper to buy & run a diesel than petrol in above scenario for me. Currently it does 37mpg motorway, 28 mpg combined & 24 mpg around town, all approx & with a light foot!
Looked & test drove a few diesels inc Passat CC GT; Honda Accord tourer esgt, Honda CRV exgt, Bmw 320d sport efficient dynamics estate, Bmw 520d sport efficient dynamics, Audi A6 2.7tdi lemans. All diesels upto 3 years old, low mileage, auto gearboxes & budget between £16k to £18k.
All the above manufacturers love to state the combined & motorway miles for these diesel cars but not so easy trying to get an accurate real world, town mpg figure for them, especially with an auto box. The reason being they are not as good around town as you may think, the mpg difference between a petrol or diesel was minimal in these circumstances.
To add to that: increased weight of the diesel engine over the front axle, increased service costs, petrol being anywhere from 7p to 5p approx cheaper, per litre than diesel & most importantly the fact that you could buy an equivalent petrol car a lot cheaper than a diesel made my mind up for me.
In the end I picked up a Honda Accord Tourer ES GT Auto (2008 8th Gen), fully loaded sat nav, rear cameras, leathers etc with only 11k miles from Honda for under £13k! That was approx £4k cheaper than the same car in a 2.2 dtec engine. Doing 7k mainly town miles a year there was no calculation that was going to make it cheaper to buy & run a diesel than petrol in above scenario for me. Currently it does 37mpg motorway, 28 mpg combined & 24 mpg around town, all approx & with a light foot!
Last edited by rickya; 21 December 2011 at 12:39 PM.
21 December 2011, 01:17 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I wouldn't tolerate a normally aspirated 4 cylinder petrol engine lack of torque for a road car, but I wouldn't tolerate the repair costs of many modern diesels out of warranty - pumps, injectors, DPF, flywheels.
Automatic, big capacity port injection normally aspirated petrol with cam chain, bought for a low price is my choice for an used car for low miles.
Automatic, big capacity port injection normally aspirated petrol with cam chain, bought for a low price is my choice for an used car for low miles.
21 December 2011, 01:30 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
50+ mpg is great, then you pay for a repalcement dpf and your jaw hits the ground with the cost, also diesel tend to have as many general issues as petrols so i think the idea that they are more reliable is a bit of a myth.
in all truth i think its much of a muchness between a petrol and diesel and alot of it is situation, no large petrol or diesel car will be economical inner city. yet no small diesel or petrol will be a good motorway cruncher.
You pay more for a diesel and yet you get more for it when you sell it.
I've got a bmw 528 petrol and in town mpg aint great, but on the motorway my sky rockets, on long runs i can get ni on 500miles on 45L which is just over 50mpg according to this http://www.mpg-calculator.co.uk so even petrols will do 50+.
in all truth i think its much of a muchness between a petrol and diesel and alot of it is situation, no large petrol or diesel car will be economical inner city. yet no small diesel or petrol will be a good motorway cruncher.
You pay more for a diesel and yet you get more for it when you sell it.
I've got a bmw 528 petrol and in town mpg aint great, but on the motorway my sky rockets, on long runs i can get ni on 500miles on 45L which is just over 50mpg according to this http://www.mpg-calculator.co.uk so even petrols will do 50+.
21 December 2011, 01:36 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheers guys.
Big capacity petrol sounds lush, but not going to happen unfortunately. On having a quick look on Autotrader you can get a 60k, 3 year old 320i touring for around 7k, but to get a similar diesel your paying nearly 9k. 520d appears to be around 8k, but it'll either be just before Lci, or bang on the change and won't be a touring.
Big capacity petrol sounds lush, but not going to happen unfortunately.
On having a quick look on Autotrader you can get a 60k, 3 year old 320i touring for around 7k, but to get a similar diesel your paying nearly 9k. 520d appears to be around 8k, but it'll either be just before Lci, or bang on the change and won't be a touring.
21 December 2011, 01:43 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
totally different cars, but we needed a mpv for my wife. I could have bought a much newer petrol, but went for a slightly older diesel.
I never borrow money to buy cars, its cash in full, my theory being you can bargain harder and pick and choose all day long. buying a car is easy, its paying insurance, tax and fuel.
the day to day running costs then become the issues, not yr up front purchase.
so anyway, her diesel mpv is doing a proper 55 mpg urban: i.e home, shops, nursery. it'll crack 65 on motorway......the mythical motorway that no one every really goes on much.
petrol cars these days at 1.40 a litre... forget it.
resale must be nil on them: yes you get an upfront bargain, but try shifting it later.
I never borrow money to buy cars, its cash in full, my theory being you can bargain harder and pick and choose all day long. buying a car is easy, its paying insurance, tax and fuel.
the day to day running costs then become the issues, not yr up front purchase.
so anyway, her diesel mpv is doing a proper 55 mpg urban: i.e home, shops, nursery. it'll crack 65 on motorway......the mythical motorway that no one every really goes on much.
petrol cars these days at 1.40 a litre... forget it.
resale must be nil on them: yes you get an upfront bargain, but try shifting it later.
21 December 2011, 01:47 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being that i'm looking to buy damaged(probably), as long as i can break even in a couple years time, if i keep it that long, then i'll be quite happy. I do panel beating to trade, so it's in my interest to go this route, but sales through Ebay, Auto Trader etc give me a good idea of values pre-accident.
21 December 2011, 08:16 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
I wouldn't tolerate a normally aspirated 4 cylinder petrol engine lack of torque for a road car, but I wouldn't tolerate the repair costs of many modern diesels out of warranty - pumps, injectors, DPF, flywheels.
Automatic, big capacity port injection normally aspirated petrol with cam chain, bought for a low price is my choice for an used car for low miles.
Automatic, big capacity port injection normally aspirated petrol with cam chain, bought for a low price is my choice for an used car for low miles.
Last edited by SRSport; 21 December 2011 at 08:18 PM.
21 December 2011, 09:53 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Our Golf V GTI (2.0T petrol) has very good fuel economy and avoids the DPF being petrol, the direct injection system is lower pressure so you'd hope the injectors and pumps would be cheaper, but I bet they're still a right headache if they go wrong, along with boost leaks, dodgy dump valve, and potential replacement intercooler/turbo costs in future. It wouldn't surprise me if it has a silly flywheel, but for a four cylinder that does this economy with its running costs (now it has stopped breaking things) so far and low depreciation, I'm feeling a little warmer towards it.
The curious thing though is that if my brother in law's early E92 320d got on the power first it was hard work to catch up because of his torque. Yet the GTI has peak torque at low RPM and on paper should have the edge with less weight and more power, and a wide power band. Yet it doesn't obviously. The four cylinder turbodiesel can be surprisingly fast.
When I hire a car it is hugely out of proportion price wise to get something nice, so I usually get a group B or whatever. Often they have a completely dire 1.3 petrol NA engine. Occasionally got a 1.6 or 2.0 diesel, and even at similar power I find them so much nicer to drive than a NA petrol that you can rev the nuts off and just make noise and little forward progress. When you have to downshift to first on the corners to get up to the mountains in Madeira for example, you know you haven't got enough engine and worry about rolling backwards. The diesels are much easier, and I can see why people love to drive them compared to most non-performance cars as they often feel like a six or even eight cylinder in terms of their torque.
The curious thing though is that if my brother in law's early E92 320d got on the power first it was hard work to catch up because of his torque. Yet the GTI has peak torque at low RPM and on paper should have the edge with less weight and more power, and a wide power band. Yet it doesn't obviously. The four cylinder turbodiesel can be surprisingly fast.
When I hire a car it is hugely out of proportion price wise to get something nice, so I usually get a group B or whatever. Often they have a completely dire 1.3 petrol NA engine. Occasionally got a 1.6 or 2.0 diesel, and even at similar power I find them so much nicer to drive than a NA petrol that you can rev the nuts off and just make noise and little forward progress. When you have to downshift to first on the corners to get up to the mountains in Madeira for example, you know you haven't got enough engine and worry about rolling backwards. The diesels are much easier, and I can see why people love to drive them compared to most non-performance cars as they often feel like a six or even eight cylinder in terms of their torque.
21 December 2011, 10:38 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree and I would suggest where possible to get a 4 cylinder turbo petrol car. With my B200 Turbo I can get 40mpg taking it easy when averaging 30-50mph, yet with similar torque/power to a V6. I mainly do town driving and Im am very sure that when everything is taken into consideration it would have cost me less than if I had bought the diesel version (which is much lower power) due to my annual milage of 6000-8000miles when taking into consideration of the above.
21 December 2011, 10:49 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotchland
Posts: 9,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Our Golf V GTI (2.0T petrol) has very good fuel economy and avoids the DPF being petrol, the direct injection system is lower pressure so you'd hope the injectors and pumps would be cheaper, but I bet they're still a right headache if they go wrong, along with boost leaks, dodgy dump valve, and potential replacement intercooler/turbo costs in future. It wouldn't surprise me if it has a silly flywheel, but for a four cylinder that does this economy with its running costs (now it has stopped breaking things) so far and low depreciation, I'm feeling a little warmer towards it.
The curious thing though is that if my brother in law's early E92 320d got on the power first it was hard work to catch up because of his torque. Yet the GTI has peak torque at low RPM and on paper should have the edge with less weight and more power, and a wide power band. Yet it doesn't obviously. The four cylinder turbodiesel can be surprisingly fast.
When I hire a car it is hugely out of proportion price wise to get something nice, so I usually get a group B or whatever. Often they have a completely dire 1.3 petrol NA engine. Occasionally got a 1.6 or 2.0 diesel, and even at similar power I find them so much nicer to drive than a NA petrol that you can rev the nuts off and just make noise and little forward progress. When you have to downshift to first on the corners to get up to the mountains in Madeira for example, you know you haven't got enough engine and worry about rolling backwards. The diesels are much easier, and I can see why people love to drive them compared to most non-performance cars as they often feel like a six or even eight cylinder in terms of their torque.
The curious thing though is that if my brother in law's early E92 320d got on the power first it was hard work to catch up because of his torque. Yet the GTI has peak torque at low RPM and on paper should have the edge with less weight and more power, and a wide power band. Yet it doesn't obviously. The four cylinder turbodiesel can be surprisingly fast.
When I hire a car it is hugely out of proportion price wise to get something nice, so I usually get a group B or whatever. Often they have a completely dire 1.3 petrol NA engine. Occasionally got a 1.6 or 2.0 diesel, and even at similar power I find them so much nicer to drive than a NA petrol that you can rev the nuts off and just make noise and little forward progress. When you have to downshift to first on the corners to get up to the mountains in Madeira for example, you know you haven't got enough engine and worry about rolling backwards. The diesels are much easier, and I can see why people love to drive them compared to most non-performance cars as they often feel like a six or even eight cylinder in terms of their torque.
Diesel power has came on massively and it looks like BMW are leading the way for economy and power. I say to myself I should go the diesel route, but I can't help think a newer version petrol is the more sensible answer...
21 December 2011, 11:18 PM
#28
Scooby Regular
I really like the BMW 3 series and nearly went for one before buying the Mercedes but I just read too many tales of woe regarding their reliability and it put me off. These were typically 06 and 07 models so I dont know if the 08+ were improved but its something to be weary of. The 320i and d were worst of the bunch. I think I remember that the 6cylinder models were considerably better (325, 330 and 335).