Re: Mercedes-Benz hit with suit

Ah, yes, the mighty oil industry... It only takes a couple of neurons to go to the Internet and find out that the value, revenue and profits from the oil industry is at its lowest. Yet, Cassandras cry about its "dark power"...

Oh, boy. When did you forget that you said that gas is bad because it has MTBE? Does gas in Europe have MTBE too?

Sure, right around the corner... Meanwhile, let's buy more and more Diesel cars, in the future they'll be better... Pitiful...

There's no acceptable safe level of particulates Diesel cars emit.

Methanol IS polluting and is extracted from natural gas in refineries. How dumb the dark powers of the mighty oil industry are, huh?

I defend truth. I don't like any industry in particular, but can't stand at the lies spread about any as you do.

Not needed??? So it was added just to poison us not to address any technical probelm with full knowledge of its intoxication mechanism from tail pipes to people? Go and do some research about it before trying to demonize an industry! For starters, try items 4.3 and 4.6 in

formatting link
and get out ofyour ignorance and self-righteousness. There, you'll notice that ittook the US just 10 years between the realization of lead toxicity andits being phased out, whereas it took the hypocrite Europeans over 30years.

I agree, oxygenates have not been conclusevily proved to reduce pollution in modern, closed-loop fuel-injection engines.

Reply to
Neo
Loading thread data ...

Toque curve is of no significance, right?

Or for people who think that they save more running Diesel?

Which show the Diesel version slower than the gas version?

That's not what your quotes showed...

Torque peaking at 1500RPM that declines to half its peak at just

3000RPM is hardly something to celebrate...
Reply to
Neo

No, typical Diesel engines loose steam quickly right after the peak torque RPM. The torque curve of most Diesel engines is close to a square triangle, unlike most gas engines.

Reply to
Neo

In news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com, Neo being of bellicose mind posted:

More than a pen is bringing down the MTBE curtain:

formatting link

Reply to
Philip®

In news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com, Neo being of bellicose mind posted:

BRAVO, Neo!

Reply to
Philip®

Straw man. The figures speak for themselves. How it produces the power is totally unimportant. The engines are from the same family with the same displacement fitted to the same model cars and cost approximately the same so the comparison cannot be more valid.

Which petrol engine in the BMW range has a turbo and which diesel has not? The turbo is a feature of all modern car diesels just as much as high pressure direct injection with pilot injection and full authority electronic fly-by wire.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

Rubbish. These engines spin up past their peak power point easily and smoothly. The torque curve is indeed rather peaky but the peak is very high indeed in comparison to equivalent power petrol engines. In other words they have a comparatively high 'torque rise'. This torque rise ensures that power is high at low and high revs. Not quite, but almost, 'constant power' across the rev range. This feature is not as pronounced as in medium diesels but nevertheless explains the high mid range 'in-gear' performance of modern diesels.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

It may surprise you that I study and have studied more torque curves than you have probably had hot dinners. I have probably owned and do own or operate a greater variety of vehicles, both petrol and diesel than you could imagine. For you to suggest that the diesels torque curve and its position in a scale is somehow defficient compared to petrol engines is laughable. This is precisely the reason that the diesel 3.0 BMW engine trounces the 3.0 BMW petrol engine even with Valvetronic enhancement.

Of course. Most people who have tried them choose diesel.

In a 0-60 drag it is oh so slightly slower. In gear or in the mid range it is significanty faster which is why the diesel version feels so much better to drive. Normal driving is not done by dropping the clutch at high revs and snatching gears to hit 60 but even there the diesel is only a fraction behind despite the lower rev range.

stands

The latest version has not been tested for in-gear mid range accelleration by the magazine. However the 320 has been tested and the

30-70 time for the petrol is 9.6 seconds and the diesel is 9.3 seconds. The new generation 3.0 diesel has a more pronounced advantage reportedly but the actual figures are not available yet.

The peak torque is at 2000erpm. You may know that torque is a measure of the twisting force on a shaft and is read for an engine from the high rev side of a chart downwards. This is why the toque rise [looking right to left] is measured and not a torque fall [looking left to right]. A high torque rise means that the twisting moment on the shaft increases as revs fall and therefore the resistance to the revs actually falling rises as revs fall. In other words the engines hang on to loads to an extraordinary degree. In other words, they are 'torquey' engines.

I hope this has been educational for you LOL

Huw

Reply to
Huw

"Philip®" wrote >

Please see my reply to Neo ROTFLMAO

Huw

Reply to
Huw

significant

I am dealing with how things are. American diesel fuel is unacceptably dirty compared with the fuel available in most of the developed World. Most of the developed World's new generation diesels are clean running and getting very much cleaner in the short term but need the clean fuel available in most civilised areas to provide this advantage. That your oil companies have dragged their feet in this area and in others should be a major source of embarrassment. That Europe blindly follow the US in using these additives in petrol is our embarrassment.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

petroleum

neurons

profits

My heart bleeds for them..... not.

Yes. Nasty stuff that it is. And Benzene which is even nastier. All in all it is a nasty, dirty fuel. Lets not even delve into its flamability and voltility or the picture becomes trully frightening.

They are better here and now. Next year petrol and diesels will be better still. In 2005 there will be nothing to choose between them in any significant exhaust pollutant. If diesels are dirty where you are, look towards your inferior fuel standards and your refiners who apparently are not capable of employing the same technology that they utilise here where you are.

Both petrol and diesels emit particulates. The larger particulates have been virtually eliminated in modern diesels while many new models now trap pm10's and prevent their emmission from the tail pipe to make them as clean as the petrol engines. To say that there is no acceptable level of particulates is totally inaccurate because it is not a neurotoxin, is nowhere near the same league as a carcinogen compared with the two petrol components which make the fuel itself toxic as well as the exhaust.

refineries.

MTBE is made from toxic refinery products and is itself toxic and polluting, especially so to water supplies. Methanol can be produced from biodegradable crops and waste and it contains 35% oxygen. It is water soluble, biodegradeable, relitively non toxic and easily made from non oil products, which is why the oil industry does not like it and does its best to ensure it is not used by fair means and foul.

I resent that. You are an apologist who believes everything they tell you. Are you paid by them? Are you employed by them? Or are you as gullible and gormless as you sound?

Methanol was used until lobbied against and replaced by oil based toxic additives. I am not the ignorant or self righteous one here. Pot calling kettle black.

There, you'll notice that it

Come off it! Lead toxicity was well known as far back as the early

20th Century and its toxicity in fuel was well known in the Fifties yet the oil industry lobbied for its continued use, minimised its toxic impact and predicted dire consequences for engines if its use was discontinued until the last minute.

I am not an apologist for the industry or the Government, neither am I self righteous and therefore will not attempt to defend the use of lead either here or in the USA. You surely did not think I would? LOL

It is a scandal that the oil industry was allowed to use the most polluting way of avoiding pollution that they possibly could when clean alternatives already existed. Their history would indicate that this is typical behaviour. Your diesel fuel is another example of pathetic foot dragging.

Huw

Reply to
Huw

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

Reply to
Huw

And here is where I leave this argument. :-)

-- Regards Dan.

Reply to
Dan---

In news:3fcd00cd snipped-for-privacy@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com, Huw being of bellicose mind posted:

Recall when I quoted "As California goes, so goes the nation"?? "We" reach overseas too! LOL Can I interest you in a Prius or a Honda hybrid? LOL

Reply to
Philip®

In news:3fcd00c7 snipped-for-privacy@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com, Huw being of bellicose mind posted:

Well then if a turbo is an unimportant matter then ... take it off the diesel. >:-) The difference between diesel and gasoline should be ONLY that fact with all else being equal. A turbo's effect has to be enjoyed by both or neither for a valid comparison. I'm not letting my bias have sway on this point.

BMW has traditionally wrinkled up their corporate nose at turbocharging gasoline engines. Has that changed "over there?"

Reply to
Philip®

In news:3fcd00cf snipped-for-privacy@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com, Huw being of bellicose mind posted:

Methanol has the same effect as MTBE in pressuring fuel mileage .... downward.

Reply to
Philip®

In news:3fcd032b snipped-for-privacy@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com, Huw being of bellicose mind posted:

Some nice info with cutaway pictures of Audi A4 FS-i

formatting link

Reply to
Philip®

You mean Ethanol, not Methanol...

Ethanol can be made from corn; however, there currently isn't enough Ethanol production to satisfy every State that requires oxygenated fuel.

Had States required the use of Ethanol in the first place, instead of allowing MTBE, there wouldn't be a problem today. The States have only themselves to blame for MTBE contamination.

BTW, the reason that you get 10% less gas mileage on oxygenated fuel is that 10% of what is going through your engine isn't fuel. Think about it...

--Dan

Reply to
Dan O'Connor

should

letting

There are few if any European diesels in production without a turbo. It is as much a part of a modern diesel engine as a high pressure fuel system. A diesel engine is not a petrol engine, get over it. We are not comparing the specific power output per cubic inch of capacity here, just two engines on different fuel from the same manufacturer which a consumer will choose against each other. Many of the purchasers of the diesel will not even be aware that a turbo is fitted. Boasting of a turbo has long gone because it is there on all diesels except one, maybe a small Renault IIRC.

Who cares if an engine has a turbo or not these days? Consumers buy cars with engines which provide the power output and performance they want, whether it has a turbo or not. BMW and almost all manufacturers seldom mention whether an engine is turbocharged and never do with a diesel, because they all have them. It is no more unusual than an air cleaner. It is a means to an end. It is a part of the engine. It is completely irrelevant to the comparison of the two engines. It is a diesel engine and modern diesels have turbo's fitted in the price. They are not available without any more than a petrol engine is available without a spark ignition system. Get it now?

Huw

Reply to
Huw

ohmygod.... there were 63 corpses and over 100 seriously injured because of methanol (methanol was sold instead of bootleg vodka) last autumn. In addition methanol is chemically aggressive and not all plastic and rubber and metals are suitable for methanol transportation

Helar

Reply to
Helar Laasik

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.