Peugeot's threat to diesel

[Transporter]

I also agree with what kaanage said - diesels in my experience can actually achieve their stated fuel economy easily.. Petrols not so much..

- A

That's a very valid point. The petrol engine's fuel economy is valid on the paper and hardly ever on the road in the real life driving and it was always like that for a decades. The Honda comes very close in their advertised fuel consumptions, the others are just a good liars. Just load the petrol car a bit, drive in the city or on highway in 110km/h and the fuel economy is far from the stated. Where the diesel will almost always be better than specified, especially on the Euro cars/vans.

[Johnbu]

Another thing is driving enjoyment. I much prefer the way a petrol turbo drives and revs in comparisons.

Also don't forget to factor in how much cheaper petrol is and also cheaper insurance.

Small or medium car- petrol.

SUV or 4WD- go the diesel.

[Ryeman]

If the 1.6 version was available in a Yeti style vehicle I'd be hard pressed to justify the added weight, costs and emission issues a diesel now faces.
remember this 3pot doesn't rev to perform.
it has such a diesel-like driving character which in my 70 years goes against all my previous experience of small capacity petrol engines.
My Yeti will chug up my driveway just like you would expect a diesel, the traded NA Jazz wouldn't without prodding the throttle but the Pug at idle rips up the drive even faster than the diesel .....must be a v tight converter.

[Ryeman]

RTFM....it's programmed that way for parking.

[gldgti]

Personally, regardless of any of the cost factors, using 3l/100km as opposed to 4l/100km to me is very attractive. I'm not so concerned with the fuel cost/saving as I am with the fact thats its actually using less of it.

Some of us care about these things yaknow?

[Ryeman]

After 1010km of the tortuous snowy mountains ie euroa to euroa via beechworth corryong thredbow jindabine adaminaby tumut tumbarumba jingelic beechworth
I jammed in 50.5L
Exactly 56.5 mpg in my old language or 5L/100km or 20km/L
Lots of lost energy with engine braking in 2nd and 3rd gear plus brakes anything but ideal for determining cruising economy.
At Euroa it cost $58.53 for the 1010km.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Ryeman]

Personally, regardless of any of the cost factors, using 3l/100km as opposed to 4l/100km to me is very attractive. I'm not so concerned with the fuel cost/saving as I am with the fact thats its actually using less of it.

Some of us care about these things yaknow?

Less of it?
Marginally!
Even if it's more polluting more expensive, heavier (tyre/brake wear) DPF equipped etc?
RACV rated it as below about 6 others in its 'best small' category.
Oh well you can lead a,horse to water......
yaknow


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[gldgti]

I was going to comment that your 1010km run was impressive, but then...

[Mysticality]

Less of it?
Marginally!

25% less is really impressive - thats a large percentage when we're talking about economy.

[Ryeman]

I was going to comment that your 1010km run was impressive, but then...

i agree, some people have no idea.