Thread: EV general discussion

Originally Posted by Captain_Rightfoot

I'm sorry I didn't explain myself very well.

I have a friend who is an electrical engineer who designs ECU's for custom and race cars. He's on all this stuff.

Basically all the new diesels, with all the emissions controls to try and make them cleaner has reduced the gap between diesel and petrol. Petrols have a throttle body so suffer from pumping losses. These are now appearing on diesels too. So you use fuel to create a vacuum at low engine speeds. Very wasteful.

That's not so much of a problem in hybrids as they should never really be operating at idle. Small turbo petrols are also smaller and lighter and can be set up to be very economical.

Modern turbo diesels running addblue etc are proving to be problematic too. I'd avoid them as I don't like big repair bills. Around 2015 seems to be the last of the decent cars before everythign went stupid. I'd avoid most cars build after this time. Actually, recently I found they imported chrysler 300 diesels into australia ..... Hmmm.... I should drive one someday. if its american, its going to be like buying 20 year old technology, so it might actually be reliable as well as fast and economical... not a lithium battery to be found

Originally Posted by DoubleChevron

Modern turbo diesels running addblue etc are proving to be problematic too. I'd avoid them as I don't like big repair bills. Around 2015 seems to be the last of the decent cars before everythign went stupid. I'd avoid most cars build after this time. Actually, recently I found they imported chrysler 300 diesels into australia ..... Hmmm.... I should drive one someday. if its american, its going to be like buying 20 year old technology, so it might actually be reliable as well as fast and economical... not a lithium battery to be found

If I was to buy a new car now, given the relatively small difference in petrol consumption between modern diesels and modern petrols - I would go petrol as long as I could fit a big enough tank. A friend has a landcruiser 105 ?? with a v8 petrol and a 250l tank. Great for a trip car.

Originally Posted by Captain_Rightfoot

If I was to buy a new car now, given the relatively small difference in petrol consumption between modern diesels and modern petrols - I would go petrol as long as I could fit a big enough tank. A friend has a landcruiser 105 ?? with a v8 petrol and a 250l tank. Great for a trip car.

My youngest has just got back from a Fraser/Morton Island trip, one of the vehicles, a Land Cruiser 105 with the petrol straight 6 averaged 45L/100km for the week on Morton slightly better for the week on Fraser.
The D1 did about15L/100 in the sand.

Tony

Originally Posted by TonyC

My youngest has just got back from a Fraser/Morton Island trip, one of the vehicles, a Land Cruiser 105 with the petrol straight 6 averaged 45L/100km for the week on Morton slightly better for the week on Fraser.
The D1 did about15L/100 in the sand.

Tony

In fairness to me.. I did say modern petrols.

The old ones used to really like a drink.. especially in sand. I've seen older petrols do that in the simpson too. Comical. The modern ones are much better. And diesels have if anything gotten slightly worse.

If I was buying a car of the 105 vintage I'd be definitely going diesel. Although if you can carry the fuel why not go petrol.

Originally Posted by Captain_Rightfoot

If I was to buy a new car now, given the relatively small difference in petrol consumption between modern diesels and modern petrols - I would go petrol as long as I could fit a big enough tank. A friend has a landcruiser 105 ?? with a v8 petrol and a 250l tank. Great for a trip car.

Good range for a "Highway" trip car. (Which, if that's the case, you don't need a Landcruiser.)

On roads that need a 4bee, that v8 is going to be in the 17-25 L/100km category. Something like the Gunbarrel or Simmo, will make you think you've ruptured the fuel tanks. My old '93 'cruiser 1HZ, with 180 litres fuel, will have a better range. Not as comfy, though!

My brother has a v8 petrol 'cruiser and I carry jerries of ULP for him, on Fraser trips. 25-30 litre/100 km is par for him there. And don't mention heavy towing!

Hi,
Dare I mention around 10L /100 on dirt and a bit more on highways?
Yep, the kids call me Snail.
Cheers

Originally Posted by Tins

Neighbour's Corolla arrived home on the back of a Nationwide truck on Thursday. Sure, it's not a new one, and it was only the water pump that had failed, but it's done less than half the ks my D2 has......
Still, they aren't car people, it's an appliance. RACV got them a hire MG. Ugh. But she now wants one because the "Bluetooth works". Sigh.

The neighbours Epoke,what a nightmare it has been

It is around 8 yrs old,8 weeks ago it had a highly expensive engine repair at the dealer.One of many repairs over the years.

Then it died two weeks ago,seems a new engine is needed,LR are not much help.

It is back in thier front yard,they seem to think it is only worth scrapping.I have told them to call MR auto,LR Indies,but i think they have had enough of the car.

Their comment is their 6 1/2 yr old Great Wall has yet to have a problem.....

As for the difference between petrol and diesel,we have both in the same model hi Aces,these run loaded all day,manuals.
Petrols do around 11s,Diesels do around 9 to 10L/100.So in the whole scheme of things bugga all difference.
Petrol services are cheaper,and no timing belts,valve clearences,etc.
Petrols are also nicer to drive and not as noisy.

The latest model Hi Ace is only available in diesel auto does 8 to 9s all day,it is heavier and 300mm wider,also slightly longer,but the tray is around 300mm shorter.
Also more powerfull,the older diesel,1KD,is detuned in the vans.

The diesel utes we have,all loaded,close to GVM,dual cabs,the Ranger 2.2L does identicle fuelb urn as the 2.8 Hi Lux.
Both around 10 to 11l/100.
The Hi Luxs drive much nicer,more power,faster,and do not spend all day reving their arse off like the Fords.