I never post on this board but why isn't everyone fawning over the superiority of diesel cars like they should?

I never post on this board but why isn't everyone fawning over the superiority of diesel cars like they should?

There is literally no downside to running on diesel and it's cheaper in many places of the world.

Attached: imagesvc.timeincapp.com.jpg (1440x810, 73K)

REV

CANCER

Diesel is actually more expensive in the US though. Shit sucks.

Do you have a single real argument?

Attached: 23490207434.jpg (400x289, 17K)

>no downside

Heavier, much slower to reach operating temperature, much more cold sensitive, doesnt like short drives, increased regulation in Europe, not as "balanced", useless for modern vehicles without a turbo, slower to raise RPM/less responsive

Hi there!

You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of Veeky Forums are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!

Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bit to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!

>much slower to reach operating temperature, much more cold sensitive
Are you from 1960? They fixed those issues 2 decades ago.

>Heavier
Who cares. It manages to consume less than gasoline engines.

>doesnt like short drives
>useless for modern vehicles without a turbo
Complete non issue.

>increased regulation in Europe
Because the petro industry doesn't like diminished returns from Europeans favoring diesel for smaller cars as well as trucks.

>slower to raise RPM/less responsive
No one cares unless you enjoy driving recklessly and street racing.

Attached: 1306_SBR_CONFESSION_ILLO.jpg.CROP.article568-large.jpg (568x309, 26K)

>Engine Longevity
>Excellent for towing
>Great Fuel economy
>Can use alternative fuel if you're a liberal hippy
>Much easier to fix and repair due to design simplicity
>Much more reliable on the long term, can last for decades
>Readily available since truckers use those anyway

Downsides
>Emits a bit more noise and smoke which makes sensitive hipsters upset

>Are you from 1960? They fixed those issues 2 decades ago.
Didnt say it was an issue. We're comparing gas to diesel, no?
>Who cares. It manages to consume less than gasoline engines.
Impacts driving characteristics, brake wear/stopping distance
>Complete non issue.
No they arent. Short drives where it doesnt get to warm up or "recharge" the battery aint healthy. Turbo isnt detrimental or anything, but it is a system that petrols can work without fine in modern cars.
>Because the petro industry doesn't like diminished returns from Europeans favoring diesel for smaller cars as well as trucks
Thats still a fucking downside
>No one cares unless you enjoy driving recklessly and street racing
Except those who want a more responsive engine?

We're comparing here. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with diesels, I'm just listing where petrol/gas does it better

After driving a 6.7 Cummins all day it feels nice going back to a gas engine. The on/off switch like throttle on most diesels is really annoying. It's either slow and no power or speeding. Also not getting a facefull of pig piss vape every time you get out is pretty nice

>Except those who want a more responsive engine?
Why would you trade durability, fuel economy and DIY maintenance for negligible improvements in response if you don't confuse your car for a racing vehicle?

The only real cars that are offered in the US are gasoline, there are so few deisel cars that only VW and some german cars are actually deisel. Everything else is a diesel truck, big rig that sort of thing.

Also Diesel is more expensive than gasoline in the US, any advantage won't over come the fact that you're paying like 20-30 cents per gallon more over regular

>20-30 cents more
That's not too bad actually. It's at least 60 cents more where I live. Depending on the station it costs at least as much as premium gas

>durability
An engine being cared for and not driven by a retard will be durable wether it runs on gas or diesel
>fuel economy
Because you need to make a little sacrifice to achieve better things? Come on, this is an autoboard. Not everybody has pulling out as many MPGs as possible as their interest. Besides, modern engines drink little enough fuel, the economical difference between diesel and gas isnt all that big
>DIY maintenance
Are you saying that gas engines arent maintanable on your own? Or at the very least; what makes a diesel so much more self-serviceable?

>Also Diesel is more expensive than gasoline in the US
Sucks to be American.

>any advantage won't over come the fact that you're paying like 20-30 cents per gallon more over regular
The increase in economy on average is more significant

well its actually pretty bad because unless your car gets a ludicrous amount of mpg over a gasoline you're basically pissing away your mpg advantage so at that point on a passenger car there isn't really a benefit. Not to mention your heavily limited selection of diesel cars in the US

>The increase in economy on average is more significant
Not really, like I said you can pick certain VW, Mercedes and Audis thats really it.

>No they arent. Short drives where it doesnt get to warm up or "recharge" the battery aint healthy
I used to daily drive an old jap diesel(car was from 2000 but the engine design was like 90-93 or so).
Commute distance to work was like 5 miles, have never had a battery issue or engine issue.
Had that car till like a year ago and for the ~5 years I owned it the only things I've had to change are oil/liquids, a timing belt, some suspension parts that had worn out and a power steering cable that had cracked in the cold.

Modern diesels need 5 computers and a 12'' bundle of wires to run. If even one of your emission system sensors shits the bed it'll put your shit into limp mode.

>t. has done several hours with truck buzzers screaming at you while doing 30mph down the highway

>being forced to drive with the superior fuel
>a bad thing

That "economy" is going to be erased by your first emission system repair.

>durability and DIY maintenance
Hate to break it to you but modern diesels are a fucking nightmare, and I've been driving diesels for like 10 years now.
>DPF
>Turbo
>Injectors and high pressure pump
While petrol cars have injectors too they are way less expensive and require less pressure which equals less wear overall.

>The increase in economy on average is more significant
Except its not, the Jetta TDI gets 31-46mph. A civic 32-42. That extra 5mpg on the highway isn't worth the added cost in fuel.

>No they arent. Short drives where it doesnt get to warm up or "recharge" the battery aint healthy.
Dude the alternator recharges your battery, I've never heard of a car having a battery die because their car didn't warm up

>Are you saying that gas engines arent maintanable on your own?
Modern gas engines aren't. You talk like you haven't opened a hood in 2 decades and looked at the ungodly mess they have become.

>Or at the very least; what makes a diesel so much more self-serviceable?
Diesels use a single master fuel pump, and there is no spark system

>Jetta TDI gets 31-46mpg. A civic 32-42.

Fucking hell. Falling for the small engine/diesel meme....

Attached: vettempg.jpg (738x415, 37K)

>omg spark plugs and a fuel pump
>you can't possible replace a fuel pump on your gas engine, you can't replace plugs wow so ez thanks diesel

Spark plugs and fuel pump are the parts that breaks all the time and mechanics have to deal with the most.

Getting rid of them is a blessing.

No they fucking don't. I can't remember the last time I had to change a fucking spark plug and its been 30 fucking years of owning cars. This isn't the 70's you fucking cherry picking moron.

Err you do realise you're confusing thermal efficiency with fuel efficiency? The fuel efficiency of a car depends on power, weight, drag, gearing etc etc

The only advantage diesel has is more torque when pulling heavy loads. In that instance only is when they are guaranteed to be more efficient than a petrol motor.

Tldr; you're a faggot

Attached: 1481207416337.jpg (800x546, 75K)

Early 90's japanese diesel means it was almost certainly an "old type" diesel with a mechanical pump, and no EGR - which is what shits up these engined. These engines also were way more inefficient than the diesels of today, heating up alot quicker. Because the fuel systems were mechanical you also had alot less draw from the battery

5 miles is also plenty, even here in the arctic circle mid-winter. Its the ones that do barely a mile from a -20c start two times per day that gets fucked

What temps did you mostly drive in?

>alternator recharges your battery
No shit Sherlock - but it needs time to do any significant charging. Add that with the fact that diesels draw more power on startup + glowplugs than gas engines and you can figure out why it can cause issues

>No shit Sherlock - but it needs time to do any significant charging.
No it doesn't, the car idling is more than enough for the alternator to charge a battery. Does the alternator push 14v idling? Yes? Oh man your battery is fine!

>The only advantage diesel has
>t. stuck with a gas shitbox for the next 10 years

It charges right away, sure - that doesnt mean it magically tops up your battery in seconds, ESPECIALLY when the temperatures are going below freezing.

holy fuck you are literally retarded, the battery charges fucking fine. Your starter constantly cranking it before your alternator isn't able to charge the fucking battery.

>that doesnt mean it magically tops up your battery in seconds,
Yes actually it does. The alternator pushes way more voltage than the battery uses in one fucking start. Within seconds your battery is fine. I've never heard of this "issue" with diesel engines or any car. They use the same batteries, the same starters, the same alternators. Nothing fucking changes here

Ok, I'll go a bit more into it in an attempt to make you understand.

Battery holds electric charge
Starter takes some charge to start engine
Engine runs alternator
Alternator charges battery

What happens when one doesnt drive far enough to let the alternator recharge what was drained on startup?

So why is it a very common thing up here when people commute very short distances and also dont charge their batteries with a seperate charger?

You are fucking retarded, this is bait. There is NO way your starter will pull on the battery SO hard the car's alternator doesn't immediately out do it in 30 seconds.

>why is it a common thing
Its fucking not you're making bullshit up by pulling anecdotes out of your ass like "oh why does it happen to people"

Do you really believe that? Because I had my car running every day for 10 minutes right before the summer (so it wasn't a weather issue), before I got my driver's license and drove it in the yard. After a week the battery was depleted. And that was a brand new battery rated with higher CCA than stock.

>What happens when one doesnt drive far enough to let the alternator recharge what was drained on startup?
If this was true then it has nothing to do with what type of engine you have and it has more to do with the fact that you're apparently starting and stopping your car every 30 seconds.

>Do you really believe that?
Holy fuck go plug a multimeter onto the terminals on your battery then your alternator and you can easily see how LITTLE the battery is being used vs how much the alternator is pushing. Your alternator will ALWAYS charge your battery faster than it can use electricity. If it didn't then your car would die mid travel.

>because I have an anecdote that goes against every norm, my anecdote is totally verified and I couldn't possibly be engineering a story to support my claim pls believe me

It leads back to diesels being both cold sensitive. The colder it is the more it resists starting, the glow plugs have to run longer, the battery itself isnt at its peak. All these things, coupled together with short distances, beats up your battery

This is literally MINIMAL

For a Civic-sized engine (1.8 liters), this US DOE worksheet estimates about 0.3 US gallon/hour fuel consumption at idle.

Here is a conservative starter calculation:

The Civic starter is rated at 1.0 kW (83A×

12V). A 3 second start therefore produces 3 kJ. Assume an additional 25% in battery internal dissipation that must be replaced.
As you note, this energy must be replenished by the ICE (internal combustion engine). Max ICE efficiency is only 30%. The incremental efficiency, which is what matters for this small additional load, is no doubt higher, but I’ll use 25% as a conservative estimate.

Alternator efficiency is not great either; I’ll use a conservative 50%.

With these values, it requires 3.0 kJ×

(1.25 / 0.25 / 0.5) = 30 kJ worth of fuel to recharge the battery (Note the overall charging efficiency is only 10%!).

Now, the energy density of gasoline is 120 MJ per US gallon (42.4 MJ/kg), so the amount of fuel required to recharge the battery, including all the inefficiencies, is 30 kJ ÷

120 MJ/gal = 0.00025 US gallon.

So, the “crossover” idle time in this case, above which it is more efficient to stop and restart, is 0.00025 gal ÷
0.3 gal/hour ≊ 8.3 ×10−4 hours, or about 3 seconds.

>No one cares unless you enjoy driving recklessly and street racing.
You're on an auto enthusiast board.
What the fuck did you expect.
If fuel economy is your priority, get a bus pass and a bike, and fuck off back to /n/ where you belong

Attached: Black_b49993_5554979.gif (500x260, 217K)

wow btfo

I want next time when you get in your car to test your theory. Just to prove it. I want you to start the car and every time measure how long it takes after it starts cranking until the engine is running. Then take that time and add 50% to it, just to smooth out the errors. See if the car will ever run out of battery.

>no your physics are wrong go measure it yourself

>oh and just add 50% extra time because I said so and I don't want to admit I'm fucking wrong

>gets btfo
>gets mad and makes up more arbitrary shit

I am saying that world isn't perfect and if it this works I would be impressed.

>its not perfect
Man its like I already knew that and purposely underestimated by efficiencies by giving the battery a 10% efficiency in charging against the rest of the system. Wow I must just be completely wrong, math isn't real and physics is all made up.

Attached: bait.jpg (480x360, 10K)

I am not arguing his math isn't right, or some shit. It is just that theory and practice are two different things, if you weren't retarded, you would have seen that I am not the tripfag that was arguing.

I'll admit to not being the greatest physicist or mathmatician, but I think I understand well enough. Does your calculation take into account such things as power draw from the rest of the car, the fact that a cold engine is even less effective than the 25%, and that batteries cant just have power poured into them like water, aka how you might plug a 15a charger to a motorcycle battery, but the battery would charge just as fast with a 4a charger

You are arguing against the math, I've drastically underestimated EVERY single thing in the system on what it takes to recharge a battery using conservative estimates and yet you won't admit you're wrong because you're a fucking retard making up shit.

And apparently I'm retarded for proving you wrong in every conceivable way. Fuck off back to the autism institute of bullshit.

>and fuck off back to /n/ where you belong
How do you know I post there

Attached: d9a.png (506x536, 161K)

>Does your calculation take into account such things as power draw from the rest of the car
Yes actually we can figure that out too.

Now suppose an air conditioner is consuming 1 kW of electrical power Which is a fucking lot considering the compressor doesn't use anywhere near that much.

With the engine running, the A/C requires (via the alternator) an additional engine fuel consumption equivalent to 1 kW / 0.5 / 0.25 = 8 kW, or 29 MJ/hour, or 0.24 gal/hour of gasoline. For a duration t

the total fuel consumption with the engine running is (0.3 + 0.24)t = 0.54t (with t
in hours).
With the engine stopped, the A/C still consumes 1 kW, or 3.6 MJ per hour. With that low 10% charging efficiency, it requires 36 MJ worth of fuel (or 0.3 gal) to recharge an hour’s worth of A/C operation. Adding in the starter contribution, the total fuel requirement is 0.00025 + 0.3t
(with t again in hours).

Equating these two new fuel requirements, the crossover time with the A/C on increases, but only to about 4 seconds.

You could be running nearly everything in your car that draws electricity which idk why you ever would ALL at the same time and this time to recoupe wouldn't break 30 seconds.

I have not made any fucking claims to being right, retard. I just came in the thread and asked you to this, just to test your theory.

>and that batteries cant just have power poured into them like water
Yes! and today we have smart alternators that regulate their charge rate against the battery. If they didn't then the battery would overheat and probably catch fire. This rate is usually 5A/h which is a little more than the battery will use keeping it topped off at virtually all times.

The only instances where your car won't start and won't recharge is if your alternator is bad which has nothing to do with what you're proposing, your battery is bad and won't accept a charge anymore which has nothing to do with what you're proposing. So in essence, your car would fail to start due to electricity shortage because your car's parts are old and need replacing.

Then it becomes even weirder, because as said above it really is an issue here. Now, it is generally a good bit colder here than most of the world, but if it should be topped off in under ten seconds then it should be fine no matter what

Lets take this Suzuki as an example. Gets driven 1.5 miles twice a day each day through the winter. Usually idles about 5 minutes before each drive. 2 year old Exide battery in good condition, running charge at 13.8, 2.0 diesel. Even with two weeks of barely -5c/23f it will start to noticeably lack power after 10-11 days, requiring an overnight charge to start reliably again

This only became a problem when it switched departments. It used to drive about 7 miles twice per day, where half of those miles were on steeper sections, requiring a lower gear. Back then it ran the whole winter on a smaller battery without ever needing a charge or a jump.

If its not the battery not being well enough recharged then what is it?

Attached: 20180301_073358-1152x648.jpg (1152x648, 174K)

>because as said above it really is an issue here.
Your batteries and starters and alternators are old and if you can't start them successively you should replace them. Its really this simple. Sure, thermodynamic efficiency drops at cold temperatures but even then your car WILL recharge given the appropriate parts.

As stated; its in perfect condition. The alternator was replaced four years ago, battery is just two years. There is nothing mechanically wrong with it

Because of the environment.
We're all tree huggers here, fag.

Interesting, but I think there's a mistake. The charging currency of a battery is not infinite, thus it will generally not be charged with the maximum power the alternator can provide. Thus, the alternator will only draw little power from the engine and most of the fuel will still be used for keeping the engine going (when idling) or driving the wheels.
Of course the charging currency goes up the lower the battery is, so things get complicated.

>1 mile commute
Who would do that? You are better off walking that distance.

Bruh you change spark plugs like every 5 years, and a fuel pump? My bimmer is 11 years old I’ve never even imagined needing to change the fuel pump

The diesel might be cheaper than gasoline, but the government here taxes the shit out of diesel cars so in the end it's more expensive to own a diesel car.

Why did you revive that thread, mongol?

Blame , you retarded nigger.

Okay, Fuck you you inbred fuck.

Gas fags confirmed salty.

I drive on LPG.

Nigga, my commute car is an automatic diesel.

Because not everybody likes walking to work in the dark at -20c

Also, there exists the elderly, fat people, people with kids, those who have a bit of personal equipment/tools to bring with

Attached: 936.jpg (625x626, 27K)

My diesel engine just hit 300,000 kms (186,500 miles). How fucked am I?

Disgusting

They're disgusting to drive. That's it. I don't like them.

I don't want to start the day with 20 minutes of boring hell and end it with the same damn thing.

>extensive research, laws, testimonies and measures
>a funny picture of Christian Bale
Gee I don't know

Are you jealous of my higher octane rating?

>The only advantage diesel has is more torque when pulling heavy loads. In that instance only is when they are guaranteed to be more efficient than a petrol motor.

Is that why every single small diesel econobox gets about twice the gas mileage that its petrol counterpart does, even when not hauling anything?

>that one guy that always posts the same picture of some one instance of a corvette once getting good mileage that will never happen in a real world scenario

wew lad

Dieselfags have done nothing but ensure the demise of ice, and accelerate the rise of electric

I want a car, not a tractor.

Your only fucking argument is "it's cheaper". No one cares. You want something even cheaper? Get a bike.

Im not saying that a diesel engine is neccesarily more "efficient" if you look at the % of power used from the oil you incredible nerd, im saying it gets better fuel milage and costs less to drive since it has better fuel economy.

Guy i originally replied to said that diesels only had an advantage when pulling heavy loads, yet my diesel car can go much much further on one tank, makes almost double the torque, even when not hauling anything, has much more horsepower, and will outlast the petrol engines, those are all facts.

Will also make 90% more horsepower and around 170% more torque than the same trim petrol car after i remap it, you will care when i blow the doors off your shitty 'murican V8 with my shitty diesel 4 banger

Seems like you don't understand shit, but okay.

At least be fair and compare it to forced induction petrol cars. It's not very hard to crank up the psi on your turbo and make lots of power, no matter if it's a diesel or a petrol.

I saw a Duramax beat a built WRX boy was that dude angry. Duramax was 2500hd with some mild engine work dude just had injectors and a tuner. WRX was twin turbo had a water to air intercooler also had a tuner and some fancy clutch. And the Duramax blew his doors in boy was he pissed and i know his car is fast because I raced him in my 73 Camaro

You can crow all you want about them lasting longer, but they are double the cost to rebuild

Will they last longer though? I constantly see early 2000s diesels being sold for scrap metal prices because of fucked injectors.

*Supposedly
Sorry, you're right