Diesel - no longer dirty and slow - no longer cost effective>>>>????

HDi fun

TC ModFather
Buckinghamshire UK
Passat 2.0 TDi
Right, then: Diesel......

No longer a dirty word. The performance has been sorted out. The refinement has been sorted out. The driveability has been sorted out. I was the original diesel hater, BTW.

But - is it really the economical fuel any longer?

I love the way modern diesel cars drive, with immense muscle from little over idle speed right through to the rev limiter. It's hard to ignore diesel as the performance option now. To some extent diesel has started to become the preferred performance option for many.

Now let's consider real total cost of ownership rather than fuel economy alone.

1. The fuel costs more per litre.

2. Servicing in usually more frequent (and if it's not prescribed by the manufacturer maybe it's just them trying to make the car seem competitive against it's petrol powered brethren).

3. Servicing is usually more costly. Diesel engines require very specific oils these days and it can cost upwards of fifty quid for a fill. Fuel filters need to be replaced constantly. Particle filters often require a specific additive to be replenished.

4. Dual mass flywheels - most 4 cylinder diesels use these to reduce vibration. But they seem to fail regularly, possibly due to the ridiculous torque figures that diesels produce.

I reckon, all up, that you're possibly better off with a 3-3.5 litre NASP petrol engine over a 2 - 2.5 litre turbo diesel with similar performance.

Diesel's (as in Rudolf) original brainchild was economy. That seems to me to have died of late.

Perhaps another ten years or so of development will see some significant improvements.

FOr me - next purchase is to be put to the jury. I like the idea of a Mondeo 2.2 ST TDCi with a remap. But, would I be any worse off overall (say 5 years of ownership) with a 2nd user BMW 535i in stock tune?

I shall continue to extol the virtues of diesel and the driving characteristics of such engines but I suspect that we need to consider more than fuel economy from both sides. Don't necessarily buy petrol for performance - diesel engines will serve you well in those stakes but I don't think you should plump for diesel simply to save money.

Ignoring engine size and ignore the cc for cc comparions even £ for £ at purchase - diesels will generally win this contest in the performance stakes.

But total cost of buying, owning, running I don't think is reason enough anymore to buy diesel.
Hdi I don't agree.
You can't compare a diesel with a petrol of the same cc. I'm sorry but petrol will win the performance stakes everytime. Diesel will win the Mpg but not performance.
He wasn't ;) The example given was for a much larger petrol engine giving similar power.

Also with Turbos (both petrol and diesel) there are lots of variables to take into account so baseline engine size comparisons are a little ambiguous.

I think HDI has summed up the current state of the Diesel world. Now more people are buying them and there is more demand for fuel the price has shot up.

Years ago a high mileage driver would have benefitted from a big saving by using diesel but now this just does not happen.
Hdi I don't agree.
You can't compare a diesel with a petrol of the same cc. I'm sorry but petrol will win the performance stakes everytime. Diesel will win the Mpg but not performance.

CC for CC the a diesel turbo will effortlessly outrun a petrol Naturally aspirated car.

£ for £ at car purchase you will get more performance for your money with high end diesel engines.

New Mondeo 2.3 petrol: 158bhp; 129mph; 0-60: 10.2

" " 2.2 TDCi: 172bhp; 139mph; 0-60: 8.4

This is by no means the only example.
Last edited:
But you also can't compare turbo petrol with turbo diesel at the same purchase price point.

Additionally, though, it wasn't so many years ago that the TD would still lose to a similar sized petrol NASP engine.
Comes down to how many miles you do I suppose. Do silly silly mileage and a diesel probably is more cost effective, but I agree with most of the points you've made; it's debatable now.

Turbo Petrol is the way forwards tbh. Drive off boost constantly even in something like a 200SX and you'll see 30mpg+ but still plenty of get up and go when you need it.
VW's 1.4 litre 168bhp petrol is stunning. 170bhp !!!!

It's hard to ignore this. Petrol engines have been developed for far longer than diesels.

Once someone can make a dual mass flywheel that lasts indefinitely and a particle filter that requires no maintenance then diesel might attract me again. I like the drive - I'm not so keen on the servicing costs.

Hence my interest in a second user 5 series with a straight six 3 litre plus petrol engine. I also don't like automatic diesels that much at all.
Last edited:
That 1.4 VW unit is both turbo- and super- charged though, and is uprated internally (standard tune is 122hp, moderate is 157hp, do any vehicles currently get the 168hp varient?).

The other thing is a sporty diesel is probably cheaper to insure than a sporty petrol.
Latest Superb has the 170bhp unit I think. Whether available in UK don't know.

AS for insurance I think the underwriters are catching on now. They won't miss the chance to ramp up premiums.
*Shrug* Couldn't find any 1.4/170s on the Audi, Skoda or VW sites, so I guess they aren't available here just yet.

As for image, odds are that Insurers will spot it long before the average driver in the street.
rocco does as theres complaints that they arnt fitting the 122 varient into in in the UK only the 140 and 170

certain the golf has it as well possibly the A3 as well. there was talk of them being fitted to the skoda octivia
FOr me - next purchase is to be put to the jury. I like the idea of a Mondeo 2.2 ST TDCi with a remap. But, would I be any worse off overall (say 5 years of ownership) with a 2nd user BMW 535i in stock tune?

This is exactly where I am at. COnsidering my next purchase. (hopefully in next 6 months) I only do 12-15k miles a year currently.

Funnily enough I am considering the TDCI st (was traditionally always looking at BHP but research Ive done suggests that lb/ft and torque very important too) also however I am also considering one of the VAG petrol turbo units - 2.0t @ 197bhp and possibility to remap turbo also

My main priority is to get something with decent power / torque (torque mainly I think as through research I believe this to be the throw you back in your seat mid range punch which diesels give) Not that concerned with top speed as never really get chance. Its all about the quickness in gear for me

However in saying that I do also try to strick a balance with economy and for me that includes both petrol costs and insurance groups.

Example, I had a v6 cougar 170bhp which i loved, was beautifully smooth to drive and lots of power IMO. BUT lucky to get 29mpg and after a while this was an issue for me. How I know that people talk about initial outlay for car etc and over period of time costs levelling out, but I notice the petrol costs coming out of my pocket much more.

So im in the same thought process. High performance diesel (hoping to break 40mpg - group 15ish insurance)
or Skoda / audi / volkswagon 2.0t with hopefully mid 30s mpg (maybe an economy map which although not increasing performance might increase MPG and not take away from performance) and alot smoother ride (low gears available), no more issues with DMF or injectors etc
both the petrol and diesel 2.0 vag units also have DMF

Well minus that issue then.

What would you go for yourself given the circumstances.
SHould prob mention to that ddiesel only costs me 95p a litre given that I live beside republic of ireland and taking sterling into account - but then again. I dont know how much it is on the mainland. Maybe cheaper
no but its still likely to brake. remember that its also being asked to spin alot faster which is putting strain on the springs. not sure how the new one holds up. the old ones fromthe 1.8 and 1.9 werent too bad as long as you werent rough with starts
The red line in my 406 was 5300rpm. That is very high for a 4 cylinder diesel engine. I suppose it was delivering sod all torque at that speed so perhaps it all evens out eventually.

I'm still likely to go for a large capacity straight six petrol next (so, BMW or Lexus are the options) simply for the mechanical simplicity such engines bring to the party.
Don't know now. I loved the v6 smoothness. Def something special. Economy just too sore. If I could find something in the middle. Maybe the vag2.0 t is the answer
The V6 Cougar was a 2.5 engine lifted form the Mondeo if I'm correct.

Not the smoothest and quickest of V6s (not by a big margin either) but without a doubt it was nigh on indestructible.
The V6 Cougar was a 2.5 engine lifted form the Mondeo if I'm correct.
Not the smoothest and quickest of V6s

yup straight out of mondy. I guess since it was the first v6 I ever had or drove it just seemed so much smoother to me. No wasn't amazingly fast either but made a big diff from my xsara before that. What kinda v6 is available out there these days with slightly better economy? Maybe I just need to forget about economy if I'm looking for performance. Def need to get myself something enjoyable cause the old car change only comes around every 2 years at the least. In fact I'm a bit obseessed at the mo.
V6 engines are not in perfect primary and secondary balance. Straight sixes are. But they can suffer from torsional balance problems due to the longer crankshaft length.

I happen to adore the deep chested mid range shove that modern diesels offer. But it comes at a cost. Servicing is more frequent and more costly.

Turning things upside down, I think that a user/driver/owner/chooser would go for diesel over petrol for performance in the same price bracket.
For a long term ownership prospect I still feel that the jury is out - petrol cars are much simpler to maintain.
Servicing is more frequent and more costly.


I dont really understand why this is. The VAG PD engines can be serviced every 20k I think and even if it was 12k is that not the same as petrol engines? Never thought the cost differed but then again, I talking about an independent mechanic or garage doing it def not the dealers (rip off)

I do understand that diesels really do need regular servicing and a more prone to damage without and that such things as injectors/turbos/dmf come into play. Is it this kind of thing your refering to?

I too love that mid range shove but would like one where the 2nd gear isnt so short either
the PD engines were something else and could be put on the 20k long life sedules. but the more modern common rail engines do need looked after more, youve also go the partical filters that cleaned every so often - this requires an additive HDi will be able to say more on this
Still considering one of the VAG PD TDI 170 engines which give a respectable 400+ torque and 200+bhp when chipped

Does the mondy have a diesel particulate filter? When or how often does it need cleaned?
think all diesels after 2004 had to have them fitted
you need to watch for the change overs if your going for vag. some were PD and some were common rail. thay are now all common rail
yeah the 06 / 07 models are PD and the new CR I think 08. For some reason the AUdi a4 with the 170bhp tdi can be chipped to more than the other seat / volks / skodas. (bluefin projections) Why would this be the case?
not sure as they all use the same engines.
bewarned its not as clear cut as 06 and 08 for the change overs. the b7/8 (?) a4 audis to get the 2.0 were common rail when VW skoda were still running the PD system
seat for instance ran the 140 pd engine up to may 2009 where they started fitting the CR engine
This is what i have learned from My Kia.

Its a 1.6 Turbo Diesel - 140bhp (modded) insurance group 4

i get about 45mpg when giving it s fair bit of shoe, taking it easy i get around 55mpg and over 600 miles to a tank (45ltr tank)
The turbo in my kia seems very old school, you get the boost all at once, no gradual increase, its all there in one big dolop

Compare this to a Vauxhall VXR Corsa 1.6 turbo petrol - 192bhp insurance group 16

gets about 350 miles to a tank (45ltr tank), yes is quicker by a good margin, but the costs of buying a VXR compared to my kia are alot more.

We'll go witht The ProCeed as its about £500 cheaper than a regualr ceed

Pro Ceed 1.6 CRDi 113BHP - OTRP - £15,525.00 (Top of the range model)
Vauxhall Corsa VXR - OTRP - £18,600.86 (Top of the Range Model)
The new astra Prices start at £16,338.80 (so it will cost even more than the VXR Corsa

serviceing will probably cost an arm and a leg unless you go to a VAT Registered Machanic and get him to do the servicing (so you can keep your warrenty)

so to me the whole thing about diesel not being what they once were is abit of an over exagguration.

Please correct me if you think im wrong though

Similar threads

Please watch this on my YouTube channel & Subscribe.