Hybrid vs Diesel vs Petrol #1
I was disappointed by the article written by
Julian Edgar on the diesel vs hybrid situation.
Comfort Ride and Handling: While the
economy is an issue, how the car rides, hanldes and the safety features are
Safety: The VW has excellent safety
ratings as well as more air bags than I can count.
Auto vs Manual: Not every one can
drive a manual (physical limitations in our case).
My wife has driven a friends hybrid (Prius) and
both agreed that it was ok, but it was not up to the comfort levels nor as fun
to drive as the VW (or close types).
We didn’t say “diresel are polluters, no matter what”. What we said was: “Diesels, intrinsically, have higher polluting levels of oxides of nitrogen and particulates. The latest diesels are vastly better in these regards, but they still struggle against the quality of petrol engine emissions, let alone hybrid emissions. Band-aids such as the widely-billed Mercedes BlueTec treatments are all well and good, but the emissions road for diesels is still steeply uphill.” We stand by that statement.
Hybrid vs Diesel vs Petrol #2
Damn. The article is short on facts. You just
brushed off the petrol engine. A Jazz can do 4.5l/100km. If that was a debate
then it is a poor quality one at that. What was the conclusion?
In any situation where a Jazz can achieve 4.5 litres/100, a similar size diesel or hybrid will do much better. And where, precisely, are all those hybrid batteries in landfill? As one Prius enthusiast said on a discussion group: tell me where they are so I can go dig them up! In other words, recycling and repacking will see few or any go to landfill.
Hybrid vs Diesel vs Petrol #3
I read this article with an open mind and am
somewhat puzzled by a couple of comments.
The idea that environmental decisions are assessed solely by financials (in this case, payback time) hasn’t been current since at least the 1980s. The story used the cars I own as examples: none was bought on the basis of a payback period on fuel savings.
Performance is similar so again think you
might be reading wrong data? As you know our motoring companies are a little coy
with performance data but I think you will find thers not much in
Your conclusion states " (I think that conventional petrol engine cars are now right out of the race for economy and emissions.)" yet in opening paragraphs you state "Diesels, intrinsically, have higher polluting levels of oxides of nitrogen and particulates. The latest diesels are vastly better in these regards, but they still struggle against the quality of petrol engine emissions, let alone hybrid emissions." so contradicting your own argument.
Not at all. We identified which pollutants diesels have difficulty with – oxides of nitrogen and particulates – but in terms of what is now the most important emission – CO2 – the lower fuel consumption of diesels gives them an advantage over petrol engine cars.
The statement "What people might believe they are saying is that, in the same vehicle and with the same power, a diesel will give better country road results than a hybrid. That may in fact be the case... except we don’t currently have cars that fit those criteria." contradicts many a word of previous autospeed articles that power is not only factor, torque and how these numbers are developed play a crutial role in how a vehicle drives and I believe has a direct impact on fuel economy. Car with good low down torque doesn't need> to work as hard to get to speed thus potentially using less fuel as a car developing less torque at higher revs needing more energy to produce similar amount of work. The closest comparable I can think of at moment is say a VW 2.0 TFSI and 2.0 TDI same sweep volume different power and torque - but achieve vastly different results in performance and fuel economy, throw in the 1.6 TSFSI and argument becomes even more blurred.
Sure – we should have said ‘average power through the most used rev range’ but that’s a bit clumsy isn’t it?
You brag about your insights economy yet how practical is it for daily family commuting. That is a driver and two kids to school – normal stuff done by millions each day around the world.
It’s my car – and it suits this family’s commuting very well.
You'd have to make two trips so even at 3.0l/100, two trips make it really 6l/100 so not as flash as initially thought - not to mention time lost, irresponsible parenting with leaving a child at home on their own etc, etc And this is only using the best economy you've achieved. Hell we have a Liberty 3.0 R-B and I've done a trip with 6.6l/100 as average but that doesn't tell real story of 10.2-10.4 as being our real normal average over 35000+ kms
The Insight averages high Threes in winter use,
low Fours in summer use with the air con running continuously.
Hybrid vs Diesel vs Petrol #4
The REAL winner [always take not of what taxi
drivers use, no matter where u are in the world]
Is the AUSSIE made
fuel..............L P G. Stand up and be counted LPG, cleanest, cheapest,
local-made = WINNER
You definitely need to update your HOW-TO
article, DIRTY AIR FILTER WARNING, as well as POWERING UP THE PRESSURE SWITCH
and any other articles that use the Micro Pneumatic Logic switches, especially
the newer ones, aka MP-500 series.
Intake Modification Relevance
I'm a big fan of your magazine and I love all
your fantastic, in-depth technical articles. Recently I've been enjoying your
intake experiments - but I often wonder how relevant these articles are to the
type of people who own these particular cars.
I wish you could do an article like this with something more geared toward the performance market. I personally own a MkV Golf GTI, and currently there is much debate amongst members on whether a forced induction car would even benefit from a "cold air" intake. The general consensus seems to be that these "filters on a stick" are there more for looks and noise, as opposed to any real performance gains.
Anyway, it would be nice if we could see some of these articles aimed at (I believe) drivers who would more likely be interested in these types of modifications to improve their cars. Just my .02c.
The intake modification and testing techniques that we have shown are able to be done on all cars, at little cost, by anyone. It’s up to you to apply those techniques to the cars of your choice.
No More Disjointed Individuals
I do not normally write to magazine editors,
but I am doing so this time because I seriously believe that the current
narrow-minded attitude that the government shows towards reducing the road toll
through bullish enforcing speeding related offences is not only short sighted,
but moraly wrong. You know something is wrong when the majority of people are
classed as "criminals" by the authorities! The current climate is one of
restlessness on behalf of both enthusiasts and regular motorists alike and I
believe that a large enough "push" from the public will cause politicians in the
government to take notice, or at least be a catalyst for change.
Let me make it clear, that I am no way endorsing dangerous or unsafe speeds, but rather a more "mature" look at the whole issue of road safety, with pre-concieved ideas and budget left aside.
think that if you could include both a "template" letter to send, along with the
names and addresses of all major political persons this could kick-start a
movement (obviously local government officials are to numerous to mention, but
perhaps you could include where to find this information).
I do believe very strongly about this issue, as there have been so many problems and mistakes on behalf of the speeding cameras/guns/etc, and so many well-documented and professional studies into the *decreased* rate of fatalities through better roads and higher motorway speed limits.
Just wanted to add to your Cutting Edge Aerodynamics story: In 1990 VW developed a similar system on the Corrado.... An "active" rear spoiler extended automatically when the car reached 45 mph to reduce aerodynamic lift. As speed dropped below 12 mph, the spoiler retracted again." And again in 1998 with the New Beetle: "The speed-activated rear spoiler, which comes standard with the Turbo S and other Beetle turbos, is located just above the rear hatch. The spoiler pops up when the car exceeds 45 mph and lowers when speed drops below 10 mph."
I was reading your article on the evolution of the 4G63 mitsubishi motor and I believe the 4g63 turbo Starion as featured in some of your other articles precedes the Vr4 in it's use of a turbocharged 4g63 factory application. It may be a black sheep of the Mitsubishi family but not totally invisible I hope.
I have seen a few articles on aerodynamics and I found this article on the New Inventors webpage claiming it is a fuel saver. Who know if it works, ut it looks similar to the thing on BMWs, which I have assumed is a car phone antenna. www.abc.net.au
See our four-part series that starts at Blowing the Vortex, Part 1
I think it is a pity that autospeed appears to be republishing a lot old material these days and what new content there is, is quite lame. It looks to me like there is only one person left on deck and that person is waiting for the order to turn off the light switches.
There has been no change in 12 months in the use of old articles. We’re very happy with how AutoSpeed is currently going - perhaps you are not aware of our changes – see long-time-reader-read-this. Also: in the last blog of the year we will be covering our plans for 2008.
I was just wondering if you ever used the fuel adjuster (Jaycar) kit with your R32 GTR? If so how did it go? I don't have enough money to get a PFC or Haltech just yet. All i'm keen to do is lean out the high load mixtures down to something a bit more realistric.
The GTR was sold many years before the DFA was developed. We suggest it would work well but since the GTR has two airflow meters, you’d need two of them...