diesel-con from a UK news Paper

Submitted: Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 15:49
ThreadID: 108192 Views:2447 Replies:15 FollowUps:22
This Thread has been Archived
Is this one of the reasons why Nissan put a a new petrol patrol

diesel-con

My guess is that diesels are on the way out. A few years ago there probably were arguments in their favour, for high-mileage drivers of, as I said, large powerful cars. But petrol-engine technology is advancing in leaps and bounds. By 2022 I would guess the diesel may be more or less extinct (along with Hybrids, but that is another story). And good riddance

quote from this UK reporter
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 16:16

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 16:16
We all buy on preference, what suits our needs. I'm tired of the " which one is cheaper, what's more economical, which one has a longer service interval, Bla Bla bla! Who cares! I think Diesels are just getting going, I drove my sisters Hyundai Sonata 2.5L Diesel to Dubbo from Sydney and return with 5 adults aboard, 5.4L per 100 over the trip of 820ks. My wifes Corolla 1.8L petrol does fare that well with two aboard, I think the reporter will be shown to be wrong in the longer term, regards Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 534080

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:37

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:37
have to pay for one fule syetem rebuild due to fuel contamination you can not sucessfully blame on someone else and any economy of diesel goes out the window.


And we are not running turbo petrol cars .....that would increase the efficiency by about 25% or more.

cheers
1
FollowupID: 817619

Reply By: Bigfish - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:01

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:01
Just watched a you-tube clip of the Isle of Mann TT Race. An electric bike averaged around 116 mph!!!

I personally think that this is the way of the future. Look at how batteries have dramatically changed over the last decade....
AnswerID: 534082

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:51

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:51
Yeh I know that electric vehicles are on the rise...and they may have a roll to play especially in the short range light weight market.


BUT consider this......if we ran our diesel on a clean fuel source like natural gass or LPG.....instead of the dirty industrial byproduct that is pump diesel.......there would be no need for highly complex diesel fuel systems to achieve acceptable emmissions performance.....which is what common rail is all about.

OH wait......Brisbane City Council is running it whole public transport fleet on Compressed natural gas....busses, ferries and a few of their trucks.

But you could run both diesel and spark ignition engines on gas.....done right it performs better, runs cleaner and the engines last longer.


So why are we moving away from the pricing advantge for a cleaner fuel that we have plenty of in this country.

cheers
1
FollowupID: 817620

Follow Up By: Slow one - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:40

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:40
Bigfish,
I heard on the radio that a fuel company is going to bring out a new battery that has awesome capacity. It is a little way off but they said it will revolutionises our mode of transport. They also said the google car concept will be the way of the future. Apparently during the last 2 years driving around in the states, it has been involved in 2 accidents and both were caused by other vehicles running into it.

Bantam,
I know that the 3516 cats running on gas used to drop valves regularly and have detonation problems. A 3516 running on diesel produces around 1500 Kw depending on altitude, the same engine on gas will only produce around 900 Kw at the same altitude.
1
FollowupID: 817623

Follow Up By: Ron N - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:19

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:19
Slow one - I've owned and operated hundreds of Cat engines and Cat equipment over several decades, and I can tell you that Cat engines drop valves like no other engine - no matter what fuel they are run on.
Every Cat engine I have ever owned, dropped at least one valve - and in some cases, several valves. Nothing to do with gas, all these engines ran on diesel. It's a design fault in Cat engines that they struggle to solve.
1
FollowupID: 817654

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:33

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:33
one of the problems with engines and gass fuels, has been, that the engines have been "converted" and often not very well to run on gas.

This became very obvious to me when I drove taxis back in the 90's....some of the vehicles just drove like dogs because the tight ass owners would not cough up for a good conversion.
The last cab I drove was great.....the owner made sure the conversion was done well and this thing went like a shower of ####.
I had frequent comments that pasengers did not believe it was running on gas.

Around the same time I crewed for a bloke who ran rally cars on gas due to gas company sponsorship
One of the cars was a dog....money was tight and the conversion was not clever....another of his cas on the other hand picked up Hp as measured on the dyno when converted from a webber carb to a custom gas carb.


There are known issues with gas a valves.....but still many conversions the valve issue is not addressed adequately

Of course the real advantage to gas with diesel is running it in conjunction with conventional pump diesel.....its a fiddle to carry both gas and diesel fuel...but the engines develop more considerably power and run much cleaner.

All too often when considering alternative fuels...only half the job gets done.

cheers
1
FollowupID: 817655

Follow Up By: Slow one - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 06:04

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 06:04
Ron,
the engines I was referring to run side by side with 3516 diesel engines and they don't have the same problem with valves. The only time the diesels have problems with valves, is when they are run past their service lives without a refresh.

Bantam,
The second engines I was referring are a gas engine built to run only on gas.
1
FollowupID: 817661

Reply By: Les PK Ranger - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:16

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:16
Not sure why Nissan only bought out the latest Patrol in petrol, but I reckon that will bite their sales a lot.

Not sure if the OP is in agreement with the UK reporters quote, but you can't beat diesel low end torque / power for off roading or towing.
As for clean, CRDs are leaps and bounds ahead of older diesels, and improvements coming all the time to make even better.

Reading most of the Mail Online comments, pretty much says it all.
AnswerID: 534084

Follow Up By: Phil B (WA) - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:38

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:38
The biggest market for Patrols and Cruisers is the Middle east and they want petrols.
There is a lot of difference between
‘Human Being’ and ‘Being Human’.





Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 817600

Follow Up By: Steve - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:50

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:50
because running costs don't matter
1
FollowupID: 817630

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:53

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:53
Yeh ya can beat a diesel for torque and most certainly power.

Compare a modern variable valve timimg petrol motor with the same level of technology and capacity common rail motor and in most cases the petrol motor is producing more torque and much more power....This is inspite of the comparison being unfair, because the petrol motor is not turbocharged......it will be higher in the rev range, but diesel and petrol are driven differently.

Have a look at how much power the rice rocket boys can ring out of the 2.7 liter toyota petrol motor once they turbo it.

remember most of the diesels are 15 to 20% larger capacity motors than fitted to the same model in petrol....and up to 30% heavier.

The americans still seem to like their V8 petrol motors for towing.

cheers
1
FollowupID: 817658

Follow Up By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:57

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:57
Oh the other rteason they want petrol motors in the middle east is....they are mad buggers and like to go fast...petrol will do that way better than diesel.

cheers
1
FollowupID: 817659

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:48

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 09:48
Diesel / petrol * low end * torque / power.

I know what I'd want to drive anywhere off road, or tow anything of substance over hill and dale, and not have to rev the engine like billy-o to get what is needed.

Really don't care about going fast, well nothing more than what I have is needed for our hwy laws in any case.

TB, I am interested if you can show me any links to a suitable petrol engined vehicle that has similar low end torque / power.
0
FollowupID: 817745

Reply By: Les PK Ranger - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:23

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 17:23
Oh yeah, perhaps the diesel con story should be why is it now up to 20c/lt more than petrol, when it used to be the other way around ?
Larger diesel market now should bring prices down with economies of scale.

The author noted 'diesel is now significantly more expensive than petrol' in the UK too, so it's not just our local market having a go, well not all of that difference.
AnswerID: 534085

Reply By: The Bantam - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:42

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 18:42
SEE, Im not the only one that thinks that diesel may not be the clear choice that it once was.


As for diesel and scales of economy........dream on....fuel is a demand related comodity.......the bigger the demand the higher the price.

now...think on this......most of our diesel is imported from singapore......because it is cheaper than refining it here from crude sourced in this country.


As far as those scales of economy......compared with the wider diesel market......the Australian consumption is a fart in a sewer.

There would be single large trucking compaines in the US that woul consume more diesel than Australia.

cheers
AnswerID: 534089

Follow Up By: Les PK Ranger - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:24

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:24
Yeah, you're fairly right re S&D for fuel Bantam, I was think moe of % of users (growth) and the infrastructure to supply.

But it will be a fair while yet before petrol overtakes diesel as a better choice for either offroad / towing in this country . . . or small pax vehicle econ, from what I've seen with peoples mileage from diesels.
1
FollowupID: 817621

Reply By: pop2jocem - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:28

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:28
What a lovely balanced article without the slightest trace of the use of emotionally charged language. HAHAHAHA. Must have been another slow news day.
Nice picture too. A drag truck on the start line. Not much effort put into emission control with those bad boys.
Interesting little read re our erstwhile reporter on the RH top of the page too.
"Only people who travel more than 18000 miles" according to this scribe will benefit from diesel. Probably true for many, especially in the good Old Dart, and maybe some in Australia and other countries. Unfortunately many in other countries do multiples of that distance.
"There are other reasons to avoid this dreadful fuel. Firstly the modern diesel is unreliable."
Oh really, wow, I better not let Doug T know that.
Hang on it gets better.
"This is largely down to one thing, the particulate filter that must be plumbed into the exhaust system to stop these cars belching the lung-clogging clouds of smoke that we associate with grease burning engines."
Well I learnt something there, I'd better stop pumping grease into the air intake of my car at every service. I was thinking better upper cylinder lubrication.
Funny thing is, there were a great number of road trains accelerating on the highway to get up a bit of momentum to climb the hill that started just outside my business premises. No great plume of smoke like the 30 year old Macks did until the turbo caught up. Just a slight increase in the heat haze from the exhaust stack and a whole heap of grunt.
Sorry I lost interest in reading this diatribe about there.
IMHO just another desperado try hard thinking that the way to the top is by sensational journalism, somewhat like our local "shock jocks".

Cheers
Pop
AnswerID: 534092

Follow Up By: Slow one - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:48

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:48
Pop,
that is shocking you thinking it is a drag truck, it is actually 007's new ute putting out a smoke screen to evade the bad dudes.
1
FollowupID: 817627

Follow Up By: pop2jocem - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 20:00

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 20:00
Lol, you could be right mate. Them "bad dudes" eye's will be watering more than the eyes of the latest lovely he loved and left. (;-D)
1
FollowupID: 817634

Follow Up By: Member - Silverchrome - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:53

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:53
I think DPF technology is being phased out and replaced with SCR (Selective Catalytic Reduction) and using adblue. This gives a very clean burn. The vast majority of trucks I see on the highway exhibit no visible exhaust (certainly not like the emotive picture in the News article).
Also what a weird argument....saying diesel vehicles are "bad" because you might accidentally put petrol in them by mistake.
Thats like saying I should give up my job in the city beacuse I might accidentally catch the wrong train home!!!
The facts are diesels are here to stay. Their market share is increasing. Just look at the array of diesel cars available now compared with 10 years ago. In Australia 70% of landcruiser 200 series sold are diesel despite a clear choice for consumers with the exact petrol model $10,000 cheaper.
That article is hardly worth the time and effort to comment on it.
1
FollowupID: 817652

Follow Up By: Ron N - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:51

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:51
Interestingly, JCB's latest (own design) diesel engine meets all current emission levels and tests - and doesn't need, or use - EGR, SCR, or DPF!

It just goes to show that too many diesel manufacturers are happy to produce designs that need all this emission-control crap - because it means more parts sales and higher maintenance levels - for their benefit!
1
FollowupID: 817657

Follow Up By: Bob Y. - Qld - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 08:52

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 08:52
Spot on, Pop!

Think he must have had a thesaurus thrust up his bodily orifice, to produce so many negative terms for that "greasy" fuel.

Being a good Pom, it's a wonder he didn't come up with at least one "dastardly diesel" somewhere in the diatribe?

Bob

Seen it all, Done it all.
Can't remember most of it.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

1
FollowupID: 817741

Reply By: steamfire01 - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:38

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:38
Allein
Interesting to note that last year when the new larger petrol Patrol was sent out on a test towing a reasonable sized van it averaged 35 litres / 100 km.
Sort of shoots the no diesel theory right up the you know what !!
Stay safe out there.
Regards
TJ
AnswerID: 534095

Reply By: Steve - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:53

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 19:53
the Daily Mail is second only to Murdoch's Sun in the credibility stakes. Nobody takes it seriously.
AnswerID: 534097

Reply By: Robin Miller - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 20:47

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 20:47
I'm sure he got his material from a post I put out 10 years ago !
Robin Miller

Member
My Profile  Send Message

AnswerID: 534099

Reply By: Ron N - Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:44

Monday, Jun 09, 2014 at 22:44
That Daily Mail article is a load of uninformed journalistic drivel produced to sell a newspaper which is noted for sensationalism over accuracy. Besides, it's aimed at Poms and Pommy cars, that operate under vastly different conditions to Australian conditions.

There's virtually no case to be made for a diesel in an urban environment, where the average trip distance rarely exceeds 10 or 12kms. A petrol engine is a vastly better performer in cities, where short trips, stop-go driving, quicker warm-up, and a cleaner exhaust, is their forte.

However, if you want to travel long distances at a time, or tow a trailer or 'van, diesel has it over petrol every time - particularly if you sit the diesel on a steady RPM at around 1/2 to 2/3rds throttle.
The superior torque of a diesel engine is unquestioned - as is the longer life of the diesel engine.

Despite that, there is concern amongst many, that modern diesels are losing their edge with their design complexity. In the old days, diesels only needed fuel and air, and they ran.
Now, you need a diagnostic computer if your diesel stops - and you need to be much more careful about fuel quality and filtration, and corrosive environments that play havoc with the vastly-increased amount of electrics and electronics on todays diesels.

The vastly increased cost of diesel repairs today is also a worrying factor. Injection pumps and injectors were always a bit pricey - now the diesel injection repair costs are ballistic.
In that respect, the journalist is correct (and I noticed at least a couple of commenters, including a used-car dealer, noted the same).
When used-car dealers start shying away from your used diesel because they're worried about warranty and repair costs when selling a used diesel, it's a factor that will impinge on used diesel values in the future.

Of course, we can all hope that diesel repair parts will drop substantially as more aftermarket suppliers invade the market - but at present, you can be assured that you''ll get the BOHICA treatment every time, with genuine diesel repair parts.
AnswerID: 534102

Reply By: Echucan Bob - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 01:20

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 01:20
I passed one of the reasons yesterday.

About 30 km north of Heathcote on the Heathcote Rochester Road I came up behind a Patrol, well actually I didn't know it was a Patrol just yet because my view of the vehicle was obscured by a thick plume of black/grey smoke coming from somewhere under the vehicle. He was doing about 60 kph and pulled over to the left to let me past. I would have stopped and offered him a tow, but he had that determined do or die look on his face and I didn't have time to tow someone 30 ks at 20 kph when I was due at work in Melb in just over an hour.

Sadly, Nissan always seem to have the smokiest engines, and its not just the 3.0 before it is about to detonate.

Bob
AnswerID: 534106

Reply By: The Bantam - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:13

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:13
Like so many other things in this world, the choices we are offered are not equal choices, or presented on a "level playing field".
Nor are those products we are offered built bassed primarily on good engineering and consumer interest.

There is a lot of polotics, intentional misinformation, product packaging, vested interest, manufacturer and other self interest involved in the choices we are being offered.

The fuel industry and the auto manufacturers have a very long history of manipulating the sutuation to their specific advantage at the distinct cost of the consumer and the environment.

The fuel companies and the auto manufacturers have been well known for buying up and surpressing emerging technologies that they consider may threaten their idea for the market.

If we where being offered a diesel V petrol choice that was made on an equal basis, not manipulated by one vested interest or another, things might be different.

Back in the 70's and early 80s when polution gear became mandatory in this country there was a great deal of difference between the methods used to achieve the specifications...some of those methods where just crude inefficent tack ons and of questionable benifit to the environment.
I am old enough to remember some of the debate on the various mandated measures we had in this country and questions about the validity of the engineering.
There was a lot of polotics and self interest involved in what emmission controlls where mandated.


The diesel engine is not being presented on an equal footing to petrol in so many ways.
we can only speculate on the various reasons for this.

But the fact remains, the factors to consider and the choices to be made are not as clear or the same as they where a decade or more ago.

20 years ago the small diesel engine was by far more reliable and cheaper to run and service than a similar petrol engine especially in a high milage application...but that is no longer an open and shut case.


The consumer in general is short term benifit focused and also obsessed with the fuel bill.
They all want to save money.
But very rarely will the consumer think enough to consider long term, whole cost.

As I have mentioned before, the deal breaker for me on Common rail diesel, is the huge cost of a fuel system rebuild.

One single case of a fuel system rebuild due to contaminated fuel that can not be pinned on the fuel company and the whole economics of a common rail diesel go out the window...and that is on a vehicle baught new.
AND contaminated fuel is not confined to remote locations.

In the case of a high milage used vehicle, a fuel system rebuild due to normal wear and tear can cost the major part or more than the value of an otherwise perfectly servicable used vehicle.

This whole senario comes in a different light in this country where we do not, as a matter of course dismantle perfeclty servicable 5 year old vehicles for scrap...like they do in japan and parts of europe.

cheers
AnswerID: 534108

Reply By: mikehzz - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:20

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 08:20
My wife's car is petrol but needs the premium stuff. That's dearer than diesel. My last Subaru was a 3 litre Outback and it required premium unleaded as well. That's a double whammy, higher mpg and higher price. The Subaru was a nice car but I didn't feel like burning the extra $$ so sold it early as I was disappointed in the fuel economy. My view is that the extra $$ in fuel cost over 300-400K is a CERTAINTY with a petrol engine. The extra cost of repairs on a deisel is not a certainty if nothing goes wrong. If I save $20,000 in fuel over 300K then the money is in my pocket. If it goes out in repairs I am even. My cars are worth nothing when I finish with them anyway. Having driven mainly LPG vehicles for 30 years I must say I really like how my diesels drive. I quit LPG because the price was getting too high in comparison.

PS I'm really glad I didn't accidently put petrol in my LPG tank over all those years. What a rubbish argument in the article.
AnswerID: 534110

Follow Up By: Ron N - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:44

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:44
Mike - The problem of fuel efficiency and choices will not go away, because car manufacturers share common directors with oil companies.

A director can sit on as many as 8 or 10 company boards, and these people are chosen for these positions, because in the corporate world, they are viewed as having "extensive directorship skills and contacts".

Add to those skills, a wide range of conflicting interests, and you can see why fuel choice will always become a toss-up - and why we will never get the fuel efficiency we could get, if technological design improvements were allowed full rein.

Like you, I'm spewing about LPG cost. LPG has always been 40% of the price of petrol - up until the day a couple of years ago, when some people in oil companies decided it was becoming a threat to petrol and diesel sales.
So the LPG price was then conveniently ramped to ensure LPG no longer had any economic attraction.

LPG is a waste product from refining and natural gas production, and W.A. produces an enormous surplus of LPG.
When I was a kid, it was burnt off as a totally useless waste product, and I can still remember the Kwinana refinery gas chimney flare, burning day and night.
1
FollowupID: 817674

Follow Up By: mikehzz - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:02

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 13:02
There have also been a few comments about how diesels are now becoming a less attractive option. I couldn't disagree more. It's only in the last few years in Australia that diesels have caught up with what is normal in Europe. Good power and amazing economy. I wouldn't buy a diesel in the past because they were slow, gutless and noisy so was happy to drive LPG in preference. They are in my view more appealing now than before. This is reflected in the sales trends.
1
FollowupID: 817679

Reply By: allein m - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:54

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:54
Thank you for your opinions

one thing I have learned in my time on the earth is when it comes to new papers when it come to telling a good story is the truth should never get in the way of a good story .

AnswerID: 534120

Reply By: Emerging I.T. - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 20:10

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 20:10
He forgets to talk about low down torque and suitability to towing. Try selling a petrol 200 series cruiser over a diesel or check out the re-sale prices, they are virtually giving away Petrol versions. Love to know what the fuel consumption is on the new Patrol towing a 2 tonne caravan.?
AnswerID: 534151

Follow Up By: steamfire01 - Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 20:29

Tuesday, Jun 10, 2014 at 20:29
Emerging IT
There was a comparative test last year, Cruiser V8 v new petrol Patrol, both with similar large vans. The new petrol Patrol registered 35 litres / 100 km.
Regards
TJ
0
FollowupID: 817718

Follow Up By: allein m - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:43

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:43
Pickles auctions had a Petrol 2012 200 landcruser $41,000 70k on the clock


almost giving it away
0
FollowupID: 817747

Follow Up By: allein m - Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:44

Wednesday, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:44
opps 2010 wrong year
0
FollowupID: 817748

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)