Diesal v Petrol question in relation to information gathered

[CliveV]

Thanks for the info cris - probably best that I keep my thoughts to myself at the moment!

As for your comments cris - Yes a 4x4 is a good candidate for an LPG conversion.

But there is a firm in Surrey that converts Smart cars - and they prove very successful in the Red Ken Zone! Not that good for towing tho'.

But in the context of this Forum - where presumably we all want a good tow vehicle - my own personal experience is that a LPG converted vehicle is a far better option that a petrol one being literally half the running costs and considerably less CO2 and particulate emissions. It also gives diesel a real "run for the money" on cost, and particulate emissions but the CO2 emissions whilst better are not as significantly better than for petrol.

Also diesels tend to have more torque than petrol/LPG but only the modern diesels have the quiet running that I like.

I have been amazed at the modern diesels - the one I lust after is a TDV6 or even better the new TDV8! but a bit to rich for my blood just yet.

But the Smart cars on LPG make a really good city car. The tank generally goes in the spare wheel well and the wheels treated with self sealing "goo" to prevent punctures.

So I am just amazed that so few people bother to take up the grants - see www.boostlpg.co.uk

 

[seth1]

hello again emmerson,there,s pro,s and con,s for both sides im not saying forget the idea of lpg.i new a guy who run stuff on it. saved 250k a year plus the grant.but what mither he had.but what is fact is to repair them by law you,ve got to be a gas engineer with a certificate.now if i remember rightly hydrocarbons is a measurement up the exhaust to see the carbon/oil content .now if the levels are high its a good indication of an engine in trouble,but you lpg guys will know that.but im yet to see a diesel be tested for hc,bearing in mind they need compression to start.

 

[cris_408518]

I guess for a lot of people finding the cash for their set of wheels takes some effort leaving another

 

[emmerson2]

I've got to go out now, late already,but we'll continue this debate later, OK?

 

[cris_408518]

That's OK Emmerson. Permission granted ;-)

 

[emmerson2]

Gee, thanks cris!! I'm back now! Lovely dinner at son and wifes. Ref the cost of conversion; yes I take your point that it may be a stretch too far, but when my mate had his Disco done, the selling garage added it to the price of the car, so he paid for it in the finance.My own car was a relative cheapy which I paid for, but the

 

[cris_408518]

It must be a hard step to take for some though. If you are on a budget. Do you buy a 12K car or buy a lesser or older version of the same and spend

 

[emmerson2]

Morning everybody.cris, I spend around

 

[cris_408518]

I can't and have no intention of knocking your reasons Emmerson and fair play to you!

Just pointing oy that for some that conversion price might be just a hard step to take and take about two years to recoup.

 

[emmerson2]

cris, there is a term in debating societies for a draw, but I can't think what it is, but I think we've reached it!

 

[cris_408518]

Impasse - may be ;-)

 

[emmerson2]

That about sums it up!!!

 

[Guest]

We're sidetracking? You've just introduced holiday homes into the towcars thread! Are but, I've just realised that your holiday home could have diesel fueled heating!!! Is that the connection? he he he

Nice one. But I think I am valid in my comment. The discussion was about torque and costs so the point about saving vehicle costs and using it for a holiday home, which may be an investement rather than an expense as is the case with a vehicle, is valid perchance?

 

[xtrailman]

As usual the thread has been hijacked by the egos. However having read most of the relevant replies I don't recall anyone suggesting a turbo petrol engine as an alternative to a turbo diesel engine.

In my experience both the diesel and petrol four-cylinder engine is low on torque with out a TURBO.

I have run a 1.8t Quattro Audi avant that gave out 180bhp, but more importantly for towing 172 pound feet of torque over 1950 rpm up to 4500 rpm. Now what diesel engine gives torque out over that range?

The latest vag engines the 2.0 t is even better.

I now tow with an xtrail 2.2 dci that gives out 134bhp and 231 pound feet of torque at 2000 rpm, but drops of dramatically after that.

Having towed the same van with both I can confirm the Audi was quicker. Returning around 23 to 25 mpg. Against the Xtrail 29 to 31 mpg.

However the xtrail is the more able tow car due to the 100kg allowed nose weight against the Audi 75. The extra weight, the extra ground clearance, the extra luggage area. The six-speed gearbox.

But don't right off the turbo petrol engine, not so long ago the Subaru forester? Was tow car of the year.

 

[emmerson2]

Ray, I don't understand your opening sentence. To whom are you refering as "egos"?

 

[seth1]

hello ray,im sure you,ll admit 172 pounds feet torque is not monumental pulling power is it?a 2.0 pd tdi rated at 100 hp puts out more.and what use is having torque high up the range when towing.4000rpm in 5th gear must equate to 120mph with a van on ,dont thing so.and with a van on would it make that far up the rev range without running out of grunt.i think the answer is no.at least with the v8 case youve got diesel like torque with the engine being so big.and the economy with the gas.its the next best option to a diesel.

 

[MichaelofKent]

What about the V6 diesel Jeep Commander, develops 376lbs/ft at 1600 rpm! Now that is pulling power. Picking one up tomorrow for a 48 hour test drive.

 

[seth1]

What about the V6 diesel Jeep Commander, develops 376lbs/ft at 1600 rpm! Now that is pulling power. Picking one up tomorrow for a 48 hour test drive.

that is serious pulling power ,so low down as well right were you need it.

 

[seth1]

What about the V6 diesel Jeep Commander, develops 376lbs/ft at 1600 rpm! Now that is pulling power. Picking one up tomorrow for a 48 hour test drive.

mega pulling power right at the bottom were you want it

 

[HomerMarge]

Hi Ray, it was actually a Nissan Xtrail that we opted for yesterday, 2.2 diesel, as it had the noseweight, was not too big for us (tried Terrano and a few other's) and I was amazed out the power compared with my current car. Also tried the Kia Sorenta and liked that very much, but a bit out of our price range. We were offered an excellent PX deal but on the way home were involed in an accident so our Rover is now trashed and I guess the deal is off as we were using a lot of the money from the cost of the px. Anyway, would like to hear more on your thoughts about the X-trail as I am sure we will continue to hunt and start all over again when the Rover is repared. I did read some nightmare reviews on another site about problems, but the dealer yesterday assured me these were sorted on cars that were re-called?

 

[xtrailman]

Homer & Marge

The Xtrail is a great car, spoilt only by the Nissan dealers.

The Dixon group I have found most unhelpful in general. Obviously some of the employees are very good. But Nissan work very hard at not being helpful. On the yahoo website you will find this to be the most common complaint.

That said my 2004 sve 2.2dci has been totally reliable over the two years and 15k miles I have had it.

The drive is comfortable the handling good for a high sided car. I always run the car in Auto select and find the engagement of the four-wheel drive to be almost foolproof, very impressive. The tyres are only half worn at 15k miles. The brake pads have very little wear, and nothing has broke on the car.

Problems are documented on the honest john website, and are briefly.

2000-2004 timing chain rattle.

2004-2006 turbo failure, oil leaking from intercooler.

2006 faults with the engine management, resulting in misfiring around 2.2k revs. New software has sorted this.

I have had the boost sensor recall, to cure the turbo over boost problem.

Also the fuel tank inlet nozzle recall.

The intercooler was changed due to an oil leak (the leak is always on the front lhs). The leak is a very slow seepage. After 18months the replacement is still oil tight. Note the oil is from the cylinder head not the turbo.

The car is slow off the mark but this is due I believe to engine management protecting the drive train, the Audi Quattro was the same. Once on the move as with any turbo powered car the flexibility in gear is very impressive. The economy is excellent for a 1600kg plus slab sided car. The xtrail gives a very relaxing drive with excellent rear view, and is easy to park. The car takes speed humps in its stride.

My dislikes are the easy scratch plastics mainly in the boot. I always thought the Audi carpet lined boot impractical due to it getting dirty, but scratched plastic looks a lot worse.

Also the diesel rattle on a cold engine is unwelcome.

I tow a 1333kg bailey Vermont with ease. A Speedo indicating 60mph in sixth gear is just over max torque at 2.2k rpm. The X will pull in sixth most of the time on the motorway.

I have the birds eye view satnav, which is great, however it may cover parts of Europe, but does not take postcodes!

Don't forget forums dedicated to single models tend to only have complaining owners posting, the vast majority of owners are very happy.

I recently looked at the whatcar reader reviews for the Honda CRV diesel. And was surprised to see owners with similar miss firing problems to the euro four xtrail engines, makes you wonder if all the Japanese manufactures use the same software provider.

My wife loves driving the X, more than any other car we have had.

I love the central instrument binnacle this gives me my own personal glove box exactly where you want in.

I recently viewed the Honda CRV; it has a great diesel engine. But I came away very let down. The leather seats look thin a down market, the rear view is terrible for a 4 x4. The car looks a bit odd to me also. Very little storage for the driver sealed the verdict for me.

I would like to apologise for the disjointed post, but I am also trying to converse with her indoors at the same time, multitasking is not my strong point.

While I am taking the time to reply to the Simpson's I might as well reply to Seth.

Yes 172 pound feet of torque does not impress in the year 2007, but in the year 2000 it did.

The xtrail di at that time only managed 199 pound feet. So the Audi was not that far behind and at the time the torque of an Audi v6 petrol was around the 172 mark.

I went for the Audi 1.8t because it gave v6 torque with four-cylinder economy.

The latest Audi Quattro 2t petrol gives out 221 pound feet of torque and 217 bhp. Easily on a par with a 2 litre tdi for all round towing performance. Take your choice, petrol for performance, or diesel for economy. Both will easily tow a 1300kg van.

 

[HomerMarge]

HI Ray

Thanks for the info, very much appreciated. Ineterested to hear that the Sat Nav does not take postcodes, that explains why we had trouble getting back to the garage as we took it for a long run in an area we were not used too! Lucky had my tomtom to, but I will be looking for satnav in the spec of car and also cruise. I have been advised to go for 2004 facelift with the improved 2.2 turbo diesel engine. I did discuss the recalls with the dealer and hopefully cars of this age should of been recalled and replaced for the problems you noted. As you may , may not be aware, we had an accident on the way home from the Nissan dealer so we are now in limbo...Just had a Vauxhall Zafira turn up that is diesal, again like the high driving position and am definately getting used to the sound and feel of diesels having had nothing but V6' petrol engines for many year. I am converted and cannot wait to get my Rover repaired so I can continue the hunt for a new vehicle. In the meantime I will enjoy the Zafira, no tow bar though (but I think it has a low nose weight anyway) so caravanning on hold at the moment.

Cheers

H&H