Re: Mercedes-Benz hit with suit

Page 11 of 14  
In


I've had a go 'round or two with Huw. If you can separate his politics from lubricated nuts and bolts, he's a pretty well read fella.
--
* Philip

"I'm dreaming of a white Christmas,
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@sonic.net (Timothy J. Lee) wrote in message

Gas engines not so much more of these pollutants than Diesel engines as these do others more concerning pollutants as irritant NOx and carcinogenic particulates, which are particularly more intense closer to the ground than CO and HC.
No wonder many European cities ban cars circulation in one way or another...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

closer
They make no difference between petrol and modern diesels.
Huw
--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If Diesel is so clean, making up about 30% of all the cars in circulation, why are they banned too?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have made no claim that any form of oil based propulsion is pollution free. Diesel engines typically use 20% less fuel per mile, which in itself is of significance. I notice that you have not replied to the fuel consumption comparison between FSi and TDi Audi 130hp engines fitted to Audi A4 cars LOL
Huw
--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In being of bellicose mind posted:

Some nice info with cutaway pictures of Audi A4 FS-i http://www.audiworld.com/news/02/fsi/content4.shtml
--
* Philip

"I'm dreaming of a white Christmas,
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How so? You tend to hide behing your opinion as if it were self-evident. It's not, how about some facts?

What I said was out of a table of EU fuel consumption. What did you say then?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

mile,
I have given you the true Euro figures elsewhere. You again state that these are opinions. They are not. These figures are current and accurate.
Huw
--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I qouted before the figures from the Audi web site in the UK...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

that
One selective figure which may flatter the petrol and which is not confirmed by my figures for the same horsepower engines. The figures you and I quote should be identical because only official consumption figures are quoted in the UK.
The figures are for A4 petrol which is the only one with the FSi:-
FSi 2.0litre 150hp. 28.5/52.3/39.7
The Golf TDi150 due to this engine not being used in A4 TDi 1.9litre 150hp. 39.8/62.8/52.3
The last of the three figures is about what motorists achieve in practice.
If you insist on only comparing the A4 then the diesel has to be the TDi130. No matter because of the torque advantage the FSI 150 has been tested by 'What Car' magazine as having a 0/60 time of 10.6 seconds while the TDi 130 achieves 0/60 in only 9.9 seconds, thoroughly trouncing the petrol car even in this landmark figure let alone the mid range acceleration.
Here the faster TDi 130 A4 achieves 38.2/64.2/51.4 mpg. The secret to its superior performance is the torque output of 210lbs/ft compared with the FSi's output of 148lbs/ft.
The figures speak for themselves.
Huw
--
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Banned where, exactly? Were the cities listed in an earlier posting on this?
If there is a large population of older diesels then that's a different matter.
DAS --
--
NB: To reply directly replace "nospam" with "schmetterling"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why are all cars banned circulation indistinctively, Diesel included? Some cities, as Milan, have sooth issues and Diesel engines are more of a problem in this regard than gas engines.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The point made by several people is that they are not (low performance) any more. Don't compare a modern turbodiesel with a version from 1980.
I had a look at the emission control history site. To me the most interesting statistic that already in 1930 there was a car for every three people. Ten years later the car ratio was even higher (2.8m for 7m people). Bearing in mind that a large percentage is under driving age this is truly stunning. Shows you how rich the area was/is.
Given the poor location of LA weatherwise it's not surprising something had to be done to curb emissions.
DAS --
--
NB: To reply directly replace "nospam" with "schmetterling"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

They may look the same on paper, but Diesel engines lose steam much earlier (about half way through the red-line) than gas engines.
Diesel engines are so poor that they need a turbocharger to match a gas engine...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Yes, that's my point here. Modern diesels are turbocharged (that's what "turbodiesel" implies...)
My W123 200D from 1980 onlyhad 60 PS to 'carry' a weight of 1400 kg. Of course it was slow. 0 - 60 in a week, as I have stated several times (and Juergen also keeps saying about his W123 240D ). No comparison with today's turbo engines.
DAS --
--
NB: To reply directly replace "nospam" with "schmetterling"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dori Schmetterling wrote:

My W123 240D auto Euro sedan with 72 PS needs 24,7 sec from 0-62.1 mph and has a top speed of 86 mph so it is _really_ slow.

Of course not.
But the old non-turbo engines are much simpler which also means much easier to maintain, need cheap low-quality dino oil only and are very reliable as they simply do not have parts like turbochargers, intercoolers or electronics.
That is the reason why Indian car manufacturer Bajaj-Tempo still uses this ancient OM 616 in their current verhicles, e.g. an ambulance car <http://www.tempoindia.com/htmlsite/prodspec.asp?prodids&catid=1&back=products.asp
Most other Bajaj-Tempo engines are derivates of the OM 616.
Juergen - drove all the different W123 diesels with 55 to 125 PS in the past 20+ years
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In being of bellicose mind posted:

Yeah ... Peugot slow!
--
~~Philip "Never let school interfere
with your education - Mark Twain"
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Much quieter than before, but quite noisier than a gas engine. And the noise is creepting up with multiple jets in the injection...

Because it's cheaper to run. Most people who buy those "top" MB and BMW (let's face it, about half of their sales come from the C and 3 series) stretch their finances fot the status symbol. Not to mention that lower ranks get company cars in Europe than in America...
Keep in mind that BMW doesn't sell 4-cylinder cars in America because power is more important to Americans than fuel economy. Few wealth distribution schemes make all the difference in this case...

Europe started controlling emissions in the late 80s because CARB started doing the same in the early 70s...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
See below.
DAS --
--
NB: To reply directly replace "nospam" with "schmetterling"
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

So don't taut Diesel as the engine of choice except for those short on cash. In America gas is about 4x as cheap as in Europe. Most cars have 150HP plus and at least 6 cylinders. We don't need stinking Diesel when gas is taxed at 30%, not 300%.

As I said...

Yeah, but not because Diesel are so refined that even top MB and BMW use them, as the post to which I replied implied...

From what I hear, it's not uncommon for middle managers throughout Europe to have company cars, something that only general managers and vice-presidents of companies get here in the US.

No, you're assuming that traffic patterns in the US are like in Europe. It is not. My average speed commuting is 40MPH and average fuel consumption of either of my 3400 and 3700lbs, 200+HP V6 cars is 22-24MPG (around 10Km/l).

I spend about $110 (about 6 to 7 tanks) per month to have both cars in use by both I and my wife. Why would I ever want Diesel??? You may have a hard time thinking that not everything that's good for Europe is good for the rest of the world...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.