-- Edited by Cupie on Thursday 3rd of May 2018 09:22:38 AM
dave48 said
09:38 AM May 3, 2018
Yes indeed. But can you trust them
Dave
Eaglemax said
11:45 AM May 3, 2018
NOPE!
Recently Mazda for example have refined their petrol engines to be quite economical. My Hyundai i30 CRDI gets 5.3-5.8 L/100kms of diesel. The 2 litre petrol Mazda CX3 gets 6.2-6.8 L/100km approx.
Good enough for me as a choice for our next new car.
The CX3 doesn't have a turbo (I blew a turbo in the i30 and it cost $3500). No risk of unleaded disappearing in my lifetime left to worry about. Often unleaded is cheaper than diesel. In the case of the CX3 petrol compared to their diesel model - many thousands of dollars dearer for the latter. Not worth to buy the diesel.
But as a tug for the larger vans its a different story.
SouthernComfort said
08:16 AM May 4, 2018
I'd agree with that. Our current and previous daily runabouts have been small cap. turbo petrol engines, real fuel misers. That's where the petrol over diesel concept works. However our current turbo diesel tug beats its petrol predecessor hands down, both in torque and fuel efficiency - not even comparable.
HandyWalter said
07:20 PM May 4, 2018
However when comparing the petrol V diesel debate you need to consider all costs over the life of the vehicle. Ie Diesel dearer on purchase but only slightly dearer (if at all on resale). Service costs dearer on diesel, and because of the very high fuel pressures on diesels, injectors are an expensive service item in the future. If all you do is runaround town with no long outback trips then petrol wins hands down. I find that diesel seems to be nearly always dearer than petrol (in Melb metro) but in country reverse is noted. Also petrol motors have been developed to almost replicate diesel for towing so there is really little difference. in modern NEW cars. It ios not worth comparing even petrol motors of 2 years ago given the advancement to technology. Mind you I own a diesel primarily because my vehicle is diesel powered only!!
The Belmont Bear said
11:00 PM May 4, 2018
I just got back from a return trip from Lake Macquarie to Canberra in my new diesel Jeep GC (860km) - I used 3/4 tank of fuel. i havent filled it yet to check actual against the computer but it says that I averaged 7,8km/100kms. Considering the heavy traffic through Sydney I,m pretty happy with that. The real test will come next week when I hook up the van and head up the coast.
Cheers BB
Sorry just to clarify I didn,t have anything on the back as I can.t tow until I have the first 1500km service
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Friday 4th of May 2018 11:06:29 PM
HandyWalter said
07:57 AM May 5, 2018
Belmont Bear, I would not trust the car computer, they are very optomistic! About the only thing the computer will be "reasonably" accurate with will be the odometer. Speed shown is usually 7% faster than actual (for litigation purposes) and fuel usage is at least the same. My car says I get 8 lphk, but in reality it is more like 9.5. My mazda is the same error factot so I think they like to make you feel good and frugel when infact they are not. The only way to do it properly is to use a gps that measures your distance accurately and fill your tank to the same level as when you started the measurement exercise.
SouthernComfort said
11:42 AM May 5, 2018
HandyWalter wrote:
Belmont Bear, I would not trust the car computer, they are very optomistic! About the only thing the computer will be "reasonably" accurate with will be the odometer. Speed shown is usually 7% faster than actual (for litigation purposes) and fuel usage is at least the same. My car says I get 8 lphk, but in reality it is more like 9.5. My mazda is the same error factot so I think they like to make you feel good and frugel when infact they are not. The only way to do it properly is to use a gps that measures your distance accurately and fill your tank to the same level as when you started the measurement exercise.
Certainly a more scientific method, but each measurement will still only be a snap-shot based on conditions at the time (weight, road surface, wind direction etc). However for the sake of basic comparisons, car computers are good enough i.e. let's say most car computers are calibrated with roughly the same discrepancy factor, then you can reasonably compare fuel consumption between one car against another e.g. a petrol vs. diesel (of similar size/weight, of course), or compare towing vs. non-towing consumption on one vehicle. I know my previous petrol Territory drank much more fuel than my current Jeep GC diesel to the tune of around 9L/100k more over the same journey when towing identical weight. Personally, that's really all I need to know. At least with diesel prices being more consistent you don't get stung if needing to fill up on the high point of the ULP pricing cycle.
Another article on the much mooted demise of diesel vehicles ... Great news ... if you can trust Bosch & VW technologists.
https://mr4x4.com.au/diesel-not-dead/?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Report%3A+Diesel+is+not+dead&utm_campaign=PC+Newsletter+%23209
-- Edited by Cupie on Thursday 3rd of May 2018 09:22:38 AM
Dave
NOPE!
Recently Mazda for example have refined their petrol engines to be quite economical. My Hyundai i30 CRDI gets 5.3-5.8 L/100kms of diesel. The 2 litre petrol Mazda CX3 gets 6.2-6.8 L/100km approx.
Good enough for me as a choice for our next new car.
The CX3 doesn't have a turbo (I blew a turbo in the i30 and it cost $3500). No risk of unleaded disappearing in my lifetime left to worry about. Often unleaded is cheaper than diesel. In the case of the CX3 petrol compared to their diesel model - many thousands of dollars dearer for the latter. Not worth to buy the diesel.
But as a tug for the larger vans its a different story.
I just got back from a return trip from Lake Macquarie to Canberra in my new diesel Jeep GC (860km) - I used 3/4 tank of fuel. i havent filled it yet to check actual against the computer but it says that I averaged 7,8km/100kms. Considering the heavy traffic through Sydney I,m pretty happy with that. The real test will come next week when I hook up the van and head up the coast.
Cheers
BB
Sorry just to clarify I didn,t have anything on the back as I can.t tow until I have the first 1500km service
-- Edited by The Belmont Bear on Friday 4th of May 2018 11:06:29 PM
Certainly a more scientific method, but each measurement will still only be a snap-shot based on conditions at the time (weight, road surface, wind direction etc). However for the sake of basic comparisons, car computers are good enough i.e. let's say most car computers are calibrated with roughly the same discrepancy factor, then you can reasonably compare fuel consumption between one car against another e.g. a petrol vs. diesel (of similar size/weight, of course), or compare towing vs. non-towing consumption on one vehicle. I know my previous petrol Territory drank much more fuel than my current Jeep GC diesel to the tune of around 9L/100k more over the same journey when towing identical weight. Personally, that's really all I need to know. At least with diesel prices being more consistent you don't get stung if needing to fill up on the high point of the ULP pricing cycle.