WTF? BMW M Power...

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
... have gone diesel.



Disgusted? Sign of the times? Don't give a toss?

I know Bodhi's not a fan of diesels, and as good as modern diesels are they just aren't sporty in my opinion, let alone qualify for an M product.
 

Himse

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
2,179
I don't understand really? Diesels have come on leaps and bounds from the old chuggers they were before. Wasn't the Audi that won Le Mans a diesel too?
 

TdC

Trem's hunky sex love muffin
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
30,693
diesels rock tbh. my ex boss had a v6 Bimmer diesel that went like the clappers.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,704
I don't understand really? Diesels have come on leaps and bounds from the old chuggers they were before. Wasn't the Audi that won Le Mans a diesel too?
Find a diesel engine that revs past 5.5K. Or one that performs anything like a petrol, without a turbo.
 

Himse

FH is my second home
Joined
Jan 31, 2004
Messages
2,179
Find a diesel engine that revs past 5.5K. Or one that performs anything like a petrol, without a turbo.
Oh yeah it wouldn't!

To be honest I think if you buy a 'sports' car or whatever, you shouldn't be crying about fuel consumption! If you can afford a 50k+ car then dont whine when it costs an arm to fill!
 

TdC

Trem's hunky sex love muffin
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
30,693
just for the sake of argument, why would you want to rev past 5.5k exactly? I mean, my GT revs to about 8k, but it has the most horses between 4.5 and 5.5k rpm, so why do I want to go to 8? for me, cars at high revs sound shit and it doesn't really seem to have a point when my max horses are behind me in the power curve.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,704
Your car might sound shit at that rpm, but mine sounds beautiful. Maybe you have a 4-cylinder engine, I've never heard a nice sounding 4-pot.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
Personally I think those diesels are awesome; you won't see any in the UK (or Ireland) though as they're not being engineered for RHD.

Your car might sound shit at that rpm, but mine sounds beautiful. Maybe you have a 4-cylinder engine, I've never heard a nice sounding 4-pot.
Ahem. Alfa Twin Cam. If you think there are no nice-sounding four cylinder engines you've not been paying attention. I can think of at least three other Italian engines, one British one (16-valve DOHC used in the Dolomite Sprint; piece of unreliable crap but it sounded immense), and a couple of Germans (the original 2.0 in the BMW M3, and the 2.5 16v in the 190 Cosworth). All amazing sounding.
alfa twin cam.JPG
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,704
Personally I think those diesels are awesome; you won't see any in the UK (or Ireland) though as they're not being engineered for RHD.



Ahem. Alfa Twin Cam. If you think there are no nice-sounding four cylinder engines you've not been paying attention. I can think of at least three other Italian engines, one British one (16-valve DOHC used in the Dolomite Sprint; piece of unreliable crap but it sounded immense), and a couple of Germans (the original 2.0 in the BMW M3, and the 2.5 16v in the 190 Cosworth). All amazing sounding.
I suppose they sound ok if you enjoy putting wasps in biscuit tins.
 

soze

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Jan 22, 2004
Messages
12,508
Surely this is more about the suspension ect that also come as part of the M Package. I have driven a few Diesels in work and they are fine. I am not sure this would bother me.
 

TdC

Trem's hunky sex love muffin
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
30,693
Your car might sound shit at that rpm, but mine sounds beautiful. Maybe you have a 4-cylinder engine, I've never heard a nice sounding 4-pot.
lol where did I say that? I'm sure your car sounds beautiful, Tom, and don't worry: I'm certain my GT doesn't sound as nice by far. Enjoy driving everywhere at 8000 rpm too, I'll just dwadle along at 2.5 and be happy.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
Find a diesel engine that revs past 5.5K. Or one that performs anything like a petrol, without a turbo.
Irrelevant because turbos are also the future for petrol engines. The latest petrol M5 is a twin turbo V8 compared to the previous naturally aspirated V10. The only way petrol engines are going to survive the next round of emissions laws is with turbos; which is why BMW are turbocharging everything and lopping off cylinders left right and centre. So as high-revving petrol engines start to disappear, the performance characteristics gap between petrol and diesel will start to get closer; petrol will always have the edge on power, and usually petrol engines are lighter than diesels, which obviously aids handling, but the advantage of the latest diesels is massive torque, accessible anywhere, which makes overtaking a breeze (and of course the tax savings). These new BMW engines have so much torque in fact that they'll only be put into 4x4 models.
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,704
There's nothing irrelevant about pointing out the simple fact that n/a petrol engines are invariably more powerful than n/a diesel engines, and that they deliver that power across a far wider spectrum.

When we see a diesel-powered Formula One car, then you may call my argument irrelevant. Diesels have their place in society, performance motoring is not that place and never will be with the constraints that diesel fuel places on engine design.

I sympathise with those people now buying the newest diesels. At least with a standard turbodiesel (of which I've owned two, a VAG 1.9 4-cylinder and a Mercedes 3.0 straight 6) repairs are simple. Try telling that to someone doing 5,000 miles per year who buys a modern diesel-engined car in the belief they'll save money over its equivalent petrol. Who wonders why their engine oil level keeps rising as unburnt fuel washes past the piston rings. Who gets a 4-figure invoice for replacing an injector.

To hell with that. I'll stick with old technology that can be fixed with a hammer.
 

Reno

One of Freddy's beloved
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
967
Yeah , cause there are still so many new diesel engines coming out without turbo charging ( or for that matter petrol engines).
Makes using the argument of comparing n/a petrol versus n/a diesel engines a thing of the past.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
There's nothing irrelevant about pointing out the simple fact that n/a petrol engines are invariably more powerful than n/a diesel engines, and that they deliver that power across a far wider spectrum.
Nice bit of goalpost setting there. How many production cars have normally aspirated diesels these days? It may be "a simple fact" but its also a completely irrelevant one.

When we see a diesel-powered Formula One car, then you may call my argument irrelevant. Diesels have their place in society, performance motoring is not that place and never will be with the constraints that diesel fuel places on engine design.
You'll see a diesel powered F1 car when F1 decides to run diesel powered cars, which is entirely possible. Motorsport tells you nothing since development is done within a framework of rules, nothing to do with intrinsic physical ability. As others have already pointed out, Audi (and Peugeot) have already made a fairly decent stab at diesel racing cars.

I sympathise with those people now buying the newest diesels. At least with a standard turbodiesel (of which I've owned two, a VAG 1.9 4-cylinder and a Mercedes 3.0 straight 6) repairs are simple. Try telling that to someone doing 5,000 miles per year who buys a modern diesel-engined car in the belief they'll save money over its equivalent petrol. Who wonders why their engine oil level keeps rising as unburnt fuel washes past the piston rings. Who gets a 4-figure invoice for replacing an injector.
Different argument. And tbh no-one will save money on running costs unless they do huge mileages. In a lot of countries they will save an absolute shitload on road tax though. As for reliability; I have no reason to disbelieve you, but I think this is going to be an issue for all new cars, because as I said, they're all going to have turbos, they're all going to have 8-speed gearboxes (or CVT or whatever), or even worse they're going to have hybrid systems and none of these things are going to be cheap to fix.

To hell with that. I'll stick with old technology that can be fixed with a hammer.
That'll work until it stops working and your car is legislated off the road (which is sadly inevitable).
 

Tom

I am a FH squatter
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,704
Nice bit of goalpost setting there. How many production cars have normally aspirated diesels these days? It may be "a simple fact" but its also a completely irrelevant one.
No, it isn't. Modern diesel engines are only "fast" because they have a turbo bolted to their exhaust. Stick a turbo on an equivalent sized petrol and it's game over.

You'll see a diesel powered F1 car when F1 decides to run diesel powered cars, which is entirely possible. Motorsport tells you nothing since development is done within a framework of rules, nothing to do with intrinsic physical ability. As others have already pointed out, Audi (and Peugeot) have already made a fairly decent stab at diesel racing cars.
I'll bet money that Audi only raced that diesel to draw attention to their diesel passenger cars. To give those people who think that in their diesel Mondeo they "overtook a 911 the other day, blew him away". I see them all the time, entering a motorway slip road for instance they usually pull out expecting to easily overtake the big Datsun, only to get a big surprise when the Datsun disappears off into the distance, effortlessly.

And diesel in F1? Not a chance, ever.

Different argument. And tbh no-one will save money on running costs unless they do huge mileages. In a lot of countries they will save an absolute shitload on road tax though. As for reliability; I have no reason to disbelieve you, but I think this is going to be an issue for all new cars, because as I said, they're all going to have turbos, they're all going to have 8-speed gearboxes (or CVT or whatever), or even worse they're going to have hybrid systems and none of these things are going to be cheap to fix.
Saving money on running costs is exactly why many people buy a diesel, unfortunately a good proportion of that demographic doesn't think beyond VED and mpg. I think a great many modern diesels will end up costing their owners much more than they bargained for.

That'll work until it stops working and your car is legislated off the road (which is sadly inevitable).
No government in this country will ever pass such a law. Old cars can easily be removed through normal wear and tear, especially as most people buy a car like they buy a fridge. Those people who choose to keep and maintain such vehicles will be very much in the minority.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
No, it isn't. Modern diesel engines are only "fast" because they have a turbo bolted to their exhaust. Stick a turbo on an equivalent sized petrol and it's game over.
So what? It doesn't matter that litre for litre a petrol engine is more powerful (not actually true in practical terms btw, since power is often a function of the ECU rather than intrinsic to the engine). If you can't actually get a diesel without a turbo, what's your point?

I'll bet money that Audi only raced that diesel to draw attention to their diesel passenger cars. To give those people who think that in their diesel Mondeo they "overtook a 911 the other day, blew him away". I see them all the time, entering a motorway slip road for instance they usually pull out expecting to easily overtake the big Datsun, only to get a big surprise when the Datsun disappears off into the distance, effortlessly.

And diesel in F1? Not a chance, ever.
Of course Audi only raced a diesel to draw attention to their diesel passenger cars! Why the hell else would they do it? As for diesel in F1; if Bernie thought viewing figures would go up if they raced diesels, then they'd race diesels. As it happens I think F1's future is probably hybrid/electric because they've already started down that road with KERS, but my point was that diesel can be used for racing, and succesfully, in any formula if there's a will (or a marketing reason) to do it. Case in point, bike racing's ban on 2-strokes.

Saving money on running costs is exactly why many people buy a diesel, unfortunately a good proportion of that demographic doesn't think beyond VED and mpg. I think a great many modern diesels will end up costing their owners much more than they bargained for.
No, for most people, saving tax is why they buy a diesel, certainly in the UK where the company car market is still huge. Anyone getting a company car Golf sized or above is really, really, incentivised to get the lowest C02 possible, and that usually means diesel because hybrids have too high a list price.

No government in this country will ever pass such a law. Old cars can easily be removed through normal wear and tear, especially as most people buy a car like they buy a fridge. Those people who choose to keep and maintain such vehicles will be very much in the minority.
Don't bet on it. Like the smoking ban, the death of the old car market will probably come from an unexpected direction like EU Health & Safety legislation. I don't doubt "classics" may find a way through (on some kind of National Heritage register), but the days of finding an old clunker in the classifieds may be numbered.
 

Scouse

Dennis Quaid lover
FH Subscriber
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
33,578
No, for most people, saving tax is why they buy a diesel
To be fair Gaff, the only argument I've ever heard for buying a diesel is that the running costs (i.e. fuel) are lower. I've never even heard the low tax argument until this thread...
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
To be fair Gaff, the only argument I've ever heard for buying a diesel is that the running costs (i.e. fuel) are lower. I've never even heard the low tax argument until this thread...
Most car magazines have been pointing out the running costs argument is a myth for years now. The company car tax thing certainly isn't, e.g:

BMW 520i SE (Petrol) - Tax payable at 40% £2602
BMW 520D SE (Diesel) - Tax payable at 40% £2158

In other countries around Europe (like over here) the savings are even more extreme.
 

TdC

Trem's hunky sex love muffin
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
30,693
road tax is higher on a Diesel here in the NL, also initial purchase costs. Diesel's tend to be efficient, and the fuel for them is (here in NL) somewhat cheaper, so the government has to slide it in somewhere else.

My current petrol GT is actually cheaper to run than my former diesel Polo due to insane tax policies.
 

DaGaffer

Down With That Sorta Thing
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
17,989
road tax is higher on a Diesel here in the NL, also initial purchase costs. Diesel's tend to be efficient, and the fuel for them is (here in NL) somewhat cheaper, so the government has to slide it in somewhere else.

My current petrol GT is actually cheaper to run than my former diesel Polo due to insane tax policies.
Isn't that because Holland has some batshit calculation that includes the wieght of the car?

In most EU countries, diesels are more expensive than their petrol equivalent (in the BMW example I showed above, the diesel costs 2 grand more, but you still pay £500 less tax), and diesel fuel is more expensive, but Tax is the killer; in Ireland, your annual road tax for a car less than 120g is €160 a year. For a car over 226 grams? A whopping €2258 a year. So you can see why emissions matter, and in most (not all) cases the best way to get your tax bill down is with a diesel. My old BMW 330Ci, or my old 350Z, would basically be worthless over here because your tax would cost you a significant fraction of the car's worth every year.
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
Stick a turbo on an equivalent sized petrol and it's game over.
Well, yes and no.

I understand where you're coming from with that point of view in that for a given displacement, you'll be able to get more power from a petrol. That said, modern diesels can be just as powerful and more powerful in certain circumstances.

BMW have just launched the 125d which is a 1995cc twin turbo unit putting out 218 bhp and a whopping 450 Nm of torque which will get the new 1 series to 62 mph in 6.5 seconds. It'll still return close to 60 mpg on motorway runs and it's only 18% BIK on company car tax. Take the equivalent Golf GTi which is a blown 2 litre petrol, 208 bhp and gets to 62 in 6.9 seconds and won't get close to 60mpg. So, you can see the appeal for company car drivers who a) do a lot of miles and b) need to keep the CO2 down c) want performance without sacrificing MPG. It's a no brainer if you don't mind a diesel.

However, as I say, I understand that given the right internals (rods, crank and turbo) you could tune a 2 litre petrol to far higher than a diesel unit.

Stuff about car tax
Absolutely.
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
road tax is higher on a Diesel here in the NL
It's higher here in the UK for company car drivers, 3% addition for diesel drivers on their BIK figure.
 

Bodhi

Once agreed with Scouse and a LibDem at same time
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
9,002
These aren't really M-Cars in fairness, all BMW have done is create a sub brand below the proper performance motors, kind of like Audi have with the S range and the RS range. Probably in an effort to sell more cars to people who can't have an M-Car on the company because they aren't diesel. This gives the M-Division moe money to make batshit stuff like this



Which the rest of us can buy and leave the dieseasels to those boring types you hear in the pub droning on and on about torques and mpgzzzzzzzzzz in a sad attempt to justify themselves to their peers for not buying an M5.
 

old.user4556

Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.
Joined
Dec 22, 2003
Messages
16,163
You won't get an M5 on a company car scheme though, will you :).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom