Things Most Likely To Go Wrong

[Bigjeeze]

To be honest I was just being silly - when I said that Diesel is the answer! It all depends on the question - I am on my third diesel and am very happy with it for all the reasons quoted by Tim & others .

 

 

 

Me admit a possible mistake!! Never!!!!!!! :lol:

 

 

 

One other major benefit is that with a diesel I can stay out of garages for longer as I can get 600 miles to the tank.

 

 

 

Bet you can't do that in a petrol model! :angry2:

 

That' something I can't disagree with... I HATE standing at the pumps filling up. :lol:

(Probably due to the fact that I was born in a garage, and worked the pumps as a part-time job.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well I 've heard of a Son of a Gun - but what does that make you? :lol:

[gregers]

defo diesel i got 532 miles out of just under

[big_kev]

From my own observations (I live along the road from an MPV 'specialist' seller), your figures for price and depreciation are way off the mark. However, if we assume that the initial purchase price makes the critical difference (and that is what you are claiming), then why on earth did you choose a Galaxy over an Alhambra?

 

Anyway, this purchase price argument is pretty tenuous at best. For example, you have said that anyone buying new would be mad to buy the 2.3 petrol version over the diesel (which leads to the interesting conclusion that 2.3 Galaxy owners are either mad, or rely on others being mad...). When buying seconhand, most people will be buying within a budget, and so the purchase price will be the same whether diesel or petrol - it's just that the diesel may be a little older and / or have slightly more miles on it. If you also consider that depreciation slows down as a car gets older, and that diesels depreciate more slowly anyway, by buying a slightly older diesel, the depreciation will be much lower - so, savings all round.

 

As regards noise, the diesel is not at all unpleasant ( although opinions are obviously subjective and differ from person to person), and is quieter when cruising at the legal limit (2000rpm).

 

As regards overtaking performance, consider the following (very common) scenario:

You are following a lorry at 40mph along an A road, and you pull out to overtake. What gear would you use? I would guess that you would use 3rd or 4th, and, in this case, the diesel would leave the 2.3 petrol for dust. The only way you could keep up is to use 2nd gear (which is the gear that is used at this speed during 0 - 60 and 30 - 70 through-the-gears tests), and then any noise advantage has disappeared as quickly as the fuel through your injectors. Don't be deceived by what you feel - changing down and revving the engine may feel faster, but it often isn't.

 

For most drivers, the diesel would also accelerate to 60mph more quickly, because the power and torque are much more accessible.

 

To quote some actual measured figures:

50 to 100kph - diesel in 6th - 12.9 seconds

50 to 100kph - 2.3 in 5th - 13.5 seconds

 

This test is actually very unfair on the diesel (very few would actually drive in 6th at 50kph - this is below idling speed), although, as you will see, the diesel is still better. If this was 70 to 100kph, or the diesel was in 5th, the difference would be far bigger.

 

So, amazed though you may be, the real life overtaking performance of the diesel is much better than the 2.3 - fact.

 

I have also driven a 2.3 Galaxy (and a 2.0 Sharan), and with 5 adults on board, there was far more gearchanging needed when driving through the hills of the lake district - in these situations, my diesel was vastly superior and far more relaxing. The other owners were highly impressed by the way my diesel accelerated up hills in 4th gear for which they needed to use 3rd gear to maintain speed. To be honest, although the performance of the 2.3 Galaxy was better than that of the 2.0 Sharan, the difference was nowhere near as big as I expected. I have also recently tried the latest 2.0 TDI Sharan - if you get the chance, try one. If you do, and still have any doubts about diesel afterwards, I'll be amazed.

 

But, if you bought your car because you like it, then that's great - enjoy it. If I was going to be irrational and buy a petrol version, I would definitely go the whole hog and get a VR6 - although you would be spending even more at the pumps, at least you would be able to enjoy the pinnacle of performance and refinement.

 

I have got to disagree with some of the statements in here regarding performance.

 

After having driven the 2.0l, 2.3l and Tdi versions of the Galaxy I can safely state the following.

 

Both the 2.0l and 2.3l will leave the Tdi version for dead when it comes to acceleration.

The diesel would not even get close to either of them, admittedly the 2.3l is far superior than the 2.0l in every way but both leave the diesel way way behind.

 

Yes the diesel will maintain its speed up a hill in 4th that you might need to change down to 3rd in a petrol, however the petrol will accelerate up the hill faster than the diesel will.

Personnaly I would always go for an auto anyway given the choice ( my current version is a manual and my last 2 were autos )

 

Engine noise for the diesel is much more at low speeds than either of the petrols.

At high speeds the engine noise even for the diesel becomes insignificant compared to the road and wind noise and therefore there is little difference between them.

 

It is like comparing a fat old Husky dog against a whippet, you know who is going to win the sprint but you also know who you would want pulling your sled.

[tim-spam]

After having driven the 2.0l, 2.3l and Tdi versions of the Galaxy I can safely state the following.

 

Both the 2.0l and 2.3l will leave the Tdi version for dead when it comes to acceleration.

The diesel would not even get close to either of them, admittedly the 2.3l is far superior than the 2.0l in every way but both leave the diesel way way behind.

But, you clearly have not actually measured anything. Look at the figures - apart from the 2.3 having a very slightly faster 0-60 time (and that will be screaming up to the red line before every gearchange - hardly relevant day to day) than the 115 TDI, you are completely and utterly wrong. And, both the 130 and 150 TDI's are quicker to 60 anyway. As I said before, driving a car where the rate of acceleration tends to increase with rising revs, and revving the engine to higher revs, may feel faster, but, in this case, is not.

If you followed a well driven TDI (excluding the 90 bhp version of course), with the driver using no more than 3000 rpm, you would have to drive a 2.3 pretty hard to keep up. The TDI delivers its power in a much more relaxed way and consequently may not feel as fast, but in normal day-to-day driving is far better.

 

As for the earlier comments about the 2.0 TDI Audi A4 - ridiculous! And those about petrol cars being more 'carbon friendly' (whatever that's supposed to mean) - even more ridiculous!

[Guest gooner52]

:( mine takes about

[tim-spam]

Vote for lower tax for people that HAVE to own people carriers due to the number of dependents you have and higher tax for the people that have people carriers just because they can afford to!!!!! :ninja: :( :blush:

Now that really is a good idea.....

[NikpV]

:( mine takes about

[El Dingo]

Well Tim-Spam, you keep going on about facts.

I just gave you some facts, however ridiculous they might seem to you. Don't you read the 'papers? Our government is preparing us for peak time road pricing, all in the name of reducing carbon emmissions. If you drive a company car, the amount of tax you pay is calulated based on it's carbon emmissions (also it's OTR list price and whether you are a higher rate tax payer). The diesel particulate issue has been raging for some time now, our government having given a limited time reduction in tax on diesels for Euro IV compliancy, with diesel already loaded due to the particulate pollution.

 

The TDI isn't relaxed - it's just turbocharged, and delivers all it's torque in a narrow power band at low revs. Believe me, my A4 TDi is nearly the same engine as the Galaxy TDi, and if you keep your foot down the fuel consumption really suffers. The ideal (IMHO) would be a lower capacity turbo petrol - an Alhambra 1.8T perhaps?

 

Tim-spam, it sounds like you want to have a race! I don't really care about 0-60 times, or whether I could keep up with a Galaxy TDi. I like driving my petrol engined Galaxy more than my diesel engined Audi because it is quieter, more refined and a smoother drive, and if I want to take off fast I can let it rev it's nuts off. I don't feel comfortable overtaking in my Audi because the power/torque curve is so abrupt (because the damn thing is overboosted IMHO).

 

Shall we take a breath and relax a bit chaps?

 

Big Kev made some good and sensible observations. But it's Gooner who really got it right. :(

[NikpV]

vote 4 lower tax on diesel owners

and high tax on 2.3 owners

 

 

:( :( :blush: :ninja: ;)

 

I'll agree with that and so apparentlly does El Doggo Dingo :ninja: :wub: :lol: :(

 

..... But it's Gooner who really got it right. :lol:

[Guest gooner52]

el

 

:ninja:

 

frankly i dont give a damm

 

if you want power why buy a van in the first place :wub: :(

 

:blush: :ninja:

[tim-spam]

I just gave you some facts, however ridiculous they might seem to you.

So, the Audi A4 is 'overboosted'. What does this 'fact' mean?

 

The TDI isn't relaxed - it's just turbocharged, and delivers all it's torque in a narrow power band at low revs.

TDI power band:- 1350rpm to 4700 rpm. Maximum torque:- 310Nm at 1900rpm - no need to use more than 2500rpm in normal driving. Sounds pretty relaxed to me.

 

The diesel particulate issue has been raging for some time now...

Euro 4 emissions compliancy requires particulates emissions to be reduced by 99% - enough said.

 

if you keep your foot down the fuel consumption really suffers.

What a surprise - can you name me a car where this isn't the case?

 

Our government is preparing us for peak time road pricing, all in the name of reducing carbon emmissions.

I thought it was all in the name of reducing congestion. Either way, it won't work, as its just yet another example of the government trying to raise yet more motoring taxes.

 

it sounds like you want to have a race!

Totally untrue (it's an MPV for heaven's sake!) - but in a good diesel, it is possible to cover ground pretty quickly with very little effort, and without consuming excessive amounts of fuel.

 

You have mentioned two things about your Audi A4 which are probably linked. You find it difficult to drive it smoothly, and your fuel consumption is disappointing - you seem to get less mpg than I do in my Alhambra (which is heavier than an A4 and has a much larger frontal area). You also comment on the noise (I would guess that the measured interior noise in an A4 is lower than that in a Galaxy, petrol or otherwise) - all this points to a problem of driving style...

 

The way in which a diesel delivers its power, together with its far superior efficiency, makes it an ideal partner with heavier vehicles such as MPV's - look at the relative sales figures if you have any doubts. Even when towing, I rarely need to use more than 2500 - 3000rpm.

 

The overall running costs and the superior driving characteristics are the main reasons why I, and the vast majority of other MPV owners, choose diesel.

 

Oh, and two more facts for you:

1) Toyota Avensis 1.8 petrol - combined fuel consumption 39.2mpg

2) Audi A4 2.0 TDI - combined fuel consumption 49.6mpg

 

And another two:

1) VW Sharan 1.8T petrol - combined fuel consumption 29.1mpg

2) VW Sharan TDI - combined fuel consumption 43.5mpg

[big_kev]

"But, you clearly have not actually measured anything. Look at the figures "

 

Yep your right I have not measured anything, this is based on my experience of driving them rather than manufacturers dodgy figures.

 

I will concede that I have not driven the 130 and 150 diesels and cant comment on their performance although it is highly unlikely that they could keep up with the 2.3 petrol.

 

The petrol engines are more responsive than the diesels, ie they rev quicker and in the case of the 2.3l has more power than any of the diesels apart from the 150.

Therefore it has more power and engine acceleration than the other diesels, given this I cant think of a reason why it would be slower to accelrate can you ?

 

The comment about the ! well driven ! diesel doing 3000rpm and the petrol having to be hard driven to keep up beggars belief.

A diesel doing 3000rpm is being flogged this is the equivalent of the petrol doing over 5000rpm.

 

 

 

Maybe I am wrong this would most likely explain all the diesel racing cars out there !

[Guest gooner52]

A diesel doing 3000rpm is being flogged this is the equivalent of the petrol doing over 5000rpm.

 

 

defo not my diesel is defo not floged at 3000rpm very smooth :lol:

[big_kev]

Yes but yours is an AUTOMATIC

[Jimbo73]

What have I started.....

 

i only wanted to find out things that may go wrong on my Gal.........

[teresa]

geeez the poor bloke only asked what could go wrong ..............you lot go raving on about whats best petrol or diesel

well im gonna have the last word

 

 

 

IT DOESNT MATTER WHATS BEST AS LONG AS IT BLOODY WORKS

 

 

phew feel better for that

[NikpV]

 

well im gonna have the last word

 

 

 

typical woman :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Bigjeeze]

Ok then

 

 

 

Which would go faster downhill - a diesel or a petrol? :lol:

 

 

 

What looks better - petrol or diesel? :)

 

 

 

Which one is a better fanny magnet - diesel or petrol? :lol:

 

 

 

Which tastes better diesel or petrol? :lol:

 

 

 

How many diesel drivers does it take to change a cam belt on a 2.3L? B)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Still think my diesel is best!!! :lol:

[Guest gooner52]

What have I started.....

 

i only wanted to find out things that may go wrong on my Gal.........

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :) dont worry it goes on all the time

[tim-spam]

Yep your right I have not measured anything...

 

Maybe I am wrong this would most likely explain all the diesel racing cars out there !

So, you do not actually know - and, yes, you are wrong - Le Mans 2006.

Just one more figure for you to consider when talking of real life acceleration - at between 1900rpm and 2500rpm, the TDI 115 has between 53% and 60% more pulling 'power' than a 2.3 petrol.

 

 

But, to return to the original question - things likely to go wrong...

 

On a petrol version, check that the fuel filler flap pivot is not worn out from over use.

 

On a diesel, check that the fuel filler flap pivot is lubricated to prevent siezure from infrequent use.

[NikpV]

Yep your right I have not measured anything...

 

Maybe I am wrong this would most likely explain all the diesel racing cars out there !

So, you do not actually know - and, yes, you are wrong - Le Mans 2006.

Just one more figure for you to consider when talking of real life acceleration - at between 1900rpm and 2500rpm, the TDI 115 has between 53% and 60% more pulling 'power' than a 2.3 petrol.

 

 

But, to return to the original question - things likely to go wrong...

 

On a petrol version, check that the fuel filler flap pivot is not worn out from over use.

 

On a diesel, check that the fuel filler flap pivot is lubricated to prevent siezure from infrequent use.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[mumof4]

 

 

On a diesel, check that the fuel filler flap pivot is lubricated to prevent siezure from infrequent use.

 

 

must admit..i usually have to prise mine open :lol: :lol:

 

 

i like the diesel as i do actually like the noise it makes....besides..i can tell when something is wrong if the sound changes :lol:

[big_kev]

 

But, to return to the original question......

 

 

Aah the sweet sound of admitting defeat is music to my ears ! :)

[NikpV]

 

But, to return to the original question......

 

 

Aah the sweet sound of admitting defeat is music to my ears ! :o

 

I suspect the sweet sound is just some echoes in the empty caverns :) :) :lol: :o

[tim-spam]

Aah the sweet sound of admitting defeat is music to my ears ! :)

Interesting......makes about as much sense as choosing a petrol powered MPV.....