Diesel Registrations up 103.7% in 5 Years

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by EF_6

12k....Eeeesh!

That's the extreme though, some are around 3-6 grand.

[GTMOND]

Modern diesels are efficient for sure, as I had a Tdci mondeo but te running costs are quite expensive oil in particular as it has to suit Dpf filter ect. High milage second hand one could be a expensive prospect with the price of injectors and pumps for common rail diesels. But if you can afford to turn over your vehicles after the warranty period expires well you can't go wrong with them

[a-total-tool]

Seeing that a few others have put up figures.

My 2012 Mazda 3 Diesel costs $60-65 to fill up (takes 45L) and I get 750km out of a tank, driving along the M4 to and from work. Traffic flowing in the morning, crawling in the afternoon. I have had it for a year now, and have done 31,000km
Trip comp shows 6.0L/100 - seems about right.

[GASWAGON]

Originally Posted by GTMOND

Modern diesels are efficient for sure, as I had a Tdci mondeo but te running costs are quite expensive oil in particular as it has to suit Dpf filter ect. High milage second hand one could be a expensive prospect with the price of injectors and pumps for common rail diesels. But if you can afford to turn over your vehicles after the warranty period expires well you can't go wrong with them

But this is the whole problem we are facing.....WHAT are these manufacturers building? Product that only lasts the warranty period?
For Gods sake this is getting out of control!

I service ALL of my cars myself to save a bit where I can and its not even a hard thing to do anyways...a bit of oil and a filter...WOW!

And with cars like the EcoLPi there ar'nt even any fuel filters!

[2011G6E]

I just filled up our Triton twin cab with the four cylinder turbo diesel and five speed auto. It cost me a little over $100.

Of course, out of the 65 liters or so I put in it I did get about 600km of highway and around town use, as well as a few trips up into the bush behind town with my son and grandson while they visited recently...

On the highway, it gets well under 10ltr/100, usually sitting down around 8.5 to 9ltr/100. Perfectly happy with that given the size and utility of the Triton for us.

Yes, they can cost a little more to service (but certainly no more expensive than the Falcon G6E was), but given the longevity and comfort of it over the Falcon on real world roads, it makes an awful lot of sense.

[Itsme]

The XLT Ranger ticked all the boxes for my requirements & must admit it is a great vehicle which is more economical than my previous FG XR6 ute.
I'm surprised with the results & can understand the popularity of new diesel vehicles sales increasing, doubt if I ever would go back to petrol engine car.

[sgt_doofey]

Damn, we missed out on contribution to this hike by a couple of years. We bought our Peugeot 7 years ago. Maybe we helped start the trend?

Those that worry about servicing costs and so forth, it's the same as a petrol engine. Find a good mechanic that isn't a dealer and you'll save yourself a bit of $$$$.

I considered the servicing costs and so forth when buying the Pug, comparing petrol and diesel. The petrol engine has a dealer service interval of 15,000kms and the diesel 20,000kms, so less servicing. Yes, it costs more to service, but less service intervals means it evens out in the long run. Having said that, we still get the oil and filter changed every 10,000kms for less than $200. Minor service sees us somewhere around the $300 and a major up past $500.
The timing belt interval is 180,000kms on the diesel compared to I think 120,000km on the petrol engine, so less cost over time there.

We've even got the FAP filter on our car and never had any troubles with it. Having said that, we live out of the metro area, so we regularly do long drives which allows it to do it's regeneration. City driving is where people will see problems with these due to driving short distances and not allowing the FAP to do it's regeneration process.

It's about doing your research and comparing all the costs of the car.
7 years, 140,000kms and nothing has fallen off of it, and it's a Peugeot!

[burnz]

iv got no petrol vehicles at all anymore, everything is diesel.
cruze to kenworth..

service cost are within a few dollars of each other petrol/diesel..
when I read the thread title I thought govco was introducing a new tax. phew.

[kate648]

Well I've got one registered diesel, the Ranger, and one petrol, the Falcon. Soon to have another petrol/lpg registered.
As much as I love the Ranger and enjoy the fuel economy, there's no way I'd say I won't own a petrol again!!! Love my fuel guzzlers

[Franco Cozzo]

The only more expensive thing on my Focus with servicing is the fuel and oil filters.

Oil filter is around $25 and the fuel filter is like $60.

Mine doesn't have a DPF I'm fairly sure, it blows a nice black cloud of soot when you boot it.

DPF and SCR systems for diesels are junk, ruining what are fantastic engines, these are just bandaid fixes. I'll never own a diesel with a SCR system, DPF no worries as I do tonnes of highway driving.

[burnz]

$25 oil filter maybe the cartridge type, don't throw it out,, check it cause it maybe be reusable same as a k&n filter "washable"..

fuel filter check with cummins "fleetguard" filter water drain in one $12.00 replace every 2yrs.

[jimt3te50]

I don't own anything that isn't a petrol V8 and will never contribute to the diesel sales figures.

The XY GT, an FG GT and an Audi Q7 (even a 5.0L in the boat) All of them suck the fuel like you wouldn't believe and I don't care one bit

A workmate told me he got 8L per 100km out of his work supplied Ford Ranger and I asked him "how much fun did you have doing that?"

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by jimt3te50

I don't own anything that isn't a petrol V8 and will never contribute to the diesel sales figures.

The XY GT, an FG GT and an Audi Q7 (even a 5.0L in the boat) All of them suck the fuel like you wouldn't believe and I don't care one bit

A workmate told me he got 8L per 100km out of his work supplied Ford Ranger and I asked him "how much fun did you have doing that?"

http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/d.../photo_05.html

500HP at 1750 RPM, 2100NM+ at just before 2000 RPM Cummins 5.9/6.7 is the F6 of the diesel world, compound turbo setup

[GTMOND]

Originally Posted by EF_6

But this is the whole problem we are facing.....WHAT are these manufacturers building? Product that only lasts the warranty period?
For Gods sake this is getting out of control!

I service ALL of my cars myself to save a bit where I can and its not even a hard thing to do anyways...a bit of oil and a filter...WOW!

And with cars like the EcoLPi there ar'nt even any fuel filters!

Calm down EF_6, if you read I own one and service one myself, just stating that from a second hand high kilometer market perspective when probs start to rise it will be expensive , thats another discusion. But I would have no probs buying another (NEW) one. So I'm not for or against , just having my say.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

The only more expensive thing on my Focus with servicing is the fuel and oil filters.

Oil filter is around $25 and the fuel filter is like $60.

Mine doesn't have a DPF I'm fairly sure, it blows a nice black cloud of soot when you boot it.

DPF and SCR systems for diesels are junk, ruining what are fantastic engines, these are just bandaid fixes. I'll never own a diesel with a SCR system, DPF no worries as I do tonnes of highway driving.

As you probably know already, the SCR injects urea/Adblue into the exhaust to reduce the NOX
from efficient combustion, that's all it does without changing the engine's fuel economy.
I'm hoping that Euro 6 and US EPA regs actually force down the cost of diesel emission equipment
which seems to be a huge impediment at the moment.

The concern I have is with DPF systems that need to regen with sufficient heat to burn off trapped diesel particles.
I hear regen can can begin to act up if you don't do regular highway running which is a thought for peak hour commuters.

[sgt_doofey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The concern I have is with DPF systems that need to regen with sufficient heat to burn off trapped diesel particles.
I hear regen can can begin to act up if you don't do regular highway running which is a thought for peak hour commuters.

Yep, that's completely correct. Speaking to my mechanic, he's seen plenty of cars fitted with FAP particulate filter (DPF) systems in Peugeot cars with clogged filters. This does cause issue, usually resulting in replacing the FAP at a reasonable cost.
Cars fitted with these systems are not designed to be driven to church on Sundays, only turning left. They need regular long drives (around half an hour I think) to effectively perform the regeneration process and clear the filter.

An yes, they do inject a EOLY fluid in to the fuel at time of fill up, so that's another thing that needs replacing, sometimes at considerable cost.

[spvd02]

Originally Posted by Matty4

Well we've contributed to 2 of those diesel registrations.
My Jeep gets over 1100k's out on the highway and around 950k's around town from a 93lt tank. It doesn't get a whole lot of use during the week so I only fill it once a month.
My wifes Focus gets 720 around town from the 55lt tank. This gets filled every 3rd week.

Don't think we'll be going back to petrol anytime soon.

Interesting figures for your TDCI Focus, as my GDI (petrol) Focus (2012 Trend) can also achieve 700km around town, and consistently (no reset) displays 6.9L/100km. You say you'd never go back to petrol, but the current model petrol Focus is not bad! Much quieter and smoother than the diesel, in fact, as well as more responsive and free-revving, with no DPF or diesel service costs to worry about. Modern petrol-power can be pretty good, even without a turbo-charger.

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by spvd02

Modern petrol-power can be pretty good, even without a turbo-charger.

Considering the economy many are getting from their over 10 year old AUs with only 4 speed autos ect,it makes me wonder how efficient these new turbo diesels really are .....
I wonder how a new say ranger would go with a turboed 4 L barra donk
It would leave the 3.2 L TD for dead on power and would it be much dearer at weeks end ....
Turbo diesels are good for what they are, but the ford barra turbo donk shows a decent largish capacity petrol engine with a turbo isn't a force to reckon with
Turbo is worth what 1.5 L give or take ,the barra in n/a guise are 190 KW, the 2.5 L navara TD is 140 KW,makes the turbo advantage seems dismal

[GASWAGON]

I think the new 4 cylinder Ecoboost would be more impressive even in a Ranger.

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

Considering the economy many are getting from their over 10 year old AUs with only 4 speed autos ect,it makes me wonder how efficient these new turbo diesels really are .....
I wonder how a new say ranger would go with a turboed 4 L barra donk
It would leave the 3.2 L TD for dead on power and would it be much dearer at weeks end ....
Turbo diesels are good for what they are, but the ford barra turbo donk shows a decent largish capacity petrol engine with a turbo isn't a force to reckon with
Turbo is worth what 1.5 L give or take ,the barra in n/a guise are 190 KW, the 2.5 L navara TD is 140 KW,makes the turbo advantage seems dismal

Might have a bit more power but the 3.2 will kill it on economy & last longer.

[tranquilized]

As long as I have a pulse I'll never own a diesel powered car.

I realise they have come a long way, make lots of torque, are efficient etc etc. But they dont rev, sound awful, and are significantly heavier over the front axle line. They're about as sporty as John Howard with a cricket bat, and while most of you here obviously don't care about that (and thats fine, if not a bit weird for a car enthusiast forum) I'd prefer to buy something that I can enjoy taking for a blast through the mountains or to a track day.

For an A to B conveyance they make a lot of sense for a lot of people, but definitely not for me.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

As long as I have a pulse I'll never own a diesel powered car.

I realise they have come a long way, make lots of torque, are efficient etc etc. But they dont rev, sound awful, and are significantly heavier over the front axle line. They're about as sporty as John Howard with a cricket bat, and while most of you here obviously don't care about that (and thats fine, if not a bit weird for a car enthusiast forum) I'd prefer to buy something that I can enjoy taking for a blast through the mountains or to a track day.

For an A to B conveyance they make a lot of sense for a lot of people, but definitely not for me.

Did you read the recent test in July WHEELS where the Audi A6 3L TT diesel sedan blew away a G6ET, 300SRT8 and VF 6L Calais over the 0-100 and 0-400?

0-100 4.9
0-400 13.36@171.5 km/h

Which, when using figures from the same magazine, makes it quicker that all the HSVs and all the FPVs except current F6 sedan, current GT sedan and GT-RSpec sedan.

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by trublu

Might have a bit more power but the 3.2 will kill it on economy & last longer.

We will see in 10 years , or when they have done a million or so Ks ...
Be interesting how the I6 would go in a ranger compared to the TD

[Itsme]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

We will see in 10 years , or when they have done a million or so Ks ...
Be interesting how the I6 would go in a ranger compared to the TD

It will be like the territory but the ranger has a bigger diesel engine.

Cheers.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by flappist

Did you read the recent test in July WHEELS where the Audi A6 3L TT diesel sedan blew away a G6ET, 300SRT8 and VF 6L Calais over the 0-100 and 0-400?

0-100 4.9
0-400 13.36@171.5 km/h

Which, when using figures from the same magazine, makes it quicker that all the HSVs and all the FPVs except current F6 sedan, current GT sedan and GT-RSpec sedan.

I did read that actually. The review described the Audi as "lifeless, and devoid of character and driver involvement" which isn't surprising given its an Audi, and a diesel one at that.

Oh, and it cost $118,000, $129,000 as tested. Now, if I had that kind of money to spend on a car I'd be taking a look at Porsche Cayman's and BMW M3's, but thats just me.

And, as was discussed at great length in the Toyota 86 thread, acceleration ability is only one of many factors that can make a car fun.

It was an interesting test though hey, I was impressed with how well the Ford did, and how poorly the Chrysler did...

[ute83]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

As long as I have a pulse I'll never own a diesel powered car.

I realise they have come a long way, make lots of torque, are efficient etc etc. But they dont rev, sound awful, and are significantly heavier over the front axle line. They're about as sporty as John Howard with a cricket bat, and while most of you here obviously don't care about that (and thats fine, if not a bit weird for a car enthusiast forum) I'd prefer to buy something that I can enjoy taking for a blast through the mountains or to a track day.

Just saw a new V dub R line Touareg the other day. V8 Tdi. No diesel noise at all, and I mean AT ALL. Simply amazing.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by EF_6

But this is the whole problem we are facing.....WHAT are these manufacturers building? Product that only lasts the warranty period?

I guess some of those buying diesels (including me) are looking at the sort of longevity you don't get in a turbo-petrol.

"The EcoBoost approach eliminates several customer worries from previous turbocharger applications. Designed for long-life reliability, EcoBoost’s turbochargers feature water-cooled bearing jackets. This architecture is designed to prevent oil “coking” that could occur in previous-generation turbochargers. The new design means that EcoBoost drivers don’t need to observe special operating precautions, such as idling the engine before switching it off. The turbochargers are designed for a life cycle of at least 150,000 miles or 10 years."

[SumoDog68]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

As long as I have a pulse I'll never own a diesel powered car.

I realise they have come a long way, make lots of torque, are efficient etc etc. But they dont rev, sound awful, and are significantly heavier over the front axle line. They're about as sporty as John Howard with a cricket bat, and while most of you here obviously don't care about that (and thats fine, if not a bit weird for a car enthusiast forum) I'd prefer to buy something that I can enjoy taking for a blast through the mountains or to a track day.

For an A to B conveyance they make a lot of sense for a lot of people, but definitely not for me.

You obviously havent driven a modern diesel. As for not sporty Audi Has won 12 Le Mans with their diesel car. Diesel can be sporty but its main strenght is drivability and efficiency.

[KIWI-1]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

I realise they have come a long way, make lots of torque, are efficient etc etc. But they dont rev, sound awful, and are significantly heavier over the front axle line.

I'll tell that to the missus next time the rev limiter cuts in @ 5200rpm. The only drivability issue I find is that with 400Nm of torque you need to work the gearbox. You cant just brake and let it potter around a corner like you can with a petrol.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by jpd80

As you probably know already, the SCR injects urea/Adblue into the exhaust to reduce the NOX
from efficient combustion, that's all it does without changing the engine's fuel economy.
I'm hoping that Euro 6 and US EPA regs actually force down the cost of diesel emission equipment
which seems to be a huge impediment at the moment.

The concern I have is with DPF systems that need to regen with sufficient heat to burn off trapped diesel particles.
I hear regen can can begin to act up if you don't do regular highway running which is a thought for peak hour commuters.

The only problem being what will be the cost to fill the DEF tank? How long between fills? What happens if you let it run dry?

I know the 2013 Dodge RAM will cut engine output if the DEF tank runs dry, I don't want that ****.

I do at least 110km of highway cruising to/from work 5 days a week, so a DPF is a non issue for me as it has plenty of time to do its crap, ideally I'd like no DPF either though lol.

Originally Posted by spvd02

Interesting figures for your TDCI Focus, as my GDI (petrol) Focus (2012 Trend) can also achieve 700km around town, and consistently (no reset) displays 6.9L/100km. You say you'd never go back to petrol, but the current model petrol Focus is not bad! Much quieter and smoother than the diesel, in fact, as well as more responsive and free-revving, with no DPF or diesel service costs to worry about. Modern petrol-power can be pretty good, even without a turbo-charger.

Mine did 823KM out of 46L when I filled up Friday, 53L tank, the difference between your Focus and ours, is that ours will have no problems pulling up a steep hill at 1750 RPM, in 6th gear doing 100km/h ;)

Once you've had that torque you can't really go back lol.

What really annoys me with this thing though is the throttle response is absolutely **** house, theres a good half a second delay between it actually registering you're doing something with the accelerator, you can push it in all the way and let it out and it won't even register you've actually done anything with the accelerator if you do it within half a second, even if its in neutral.

Or you can be slowly accelerating along, take your foot off the accelerator and press in the clutch change up gear and it will rev up a little bit as if you still had your foot on the accelerator when you pushed the clutch in.

I think this is isolated to my car though, as my diesel Sierra revs up the moment you move the accelerator in a tiny bit, no lag in registering that you're on the accelerator.. I've also driven a mates 80s N/A diesel land cruiser which was fine (albeit the slowest thing I've ever driven).