The largest Civic Type R club forum

Established in 2002 it brings together people from all over the world to discuss their one love of Type R's.

Reviews, News & rumours relating to all things Honda.
#3711540
karl wrote:
cheapskate wrote:
karl wrote:the high MPG of dervs has saved me an absolute fortune over the years. I could, of course, take extreme metrics to calculate a fixed 'variable' in order to convince myself that my petrol car was cheaper to run, but I'm not Flipping stupid, I own a derv and am well aware of the savings :salut:
Here are the figures and calculation method I used. Do please identify the 'extreme metrics':

From the VW site I chose petrol and diesel models that were within 5ps of each other. I took the combined cycle fuel economy figures as stated by VW and calcualated the the total cost of the fuel required to do 100K km. I used VW statement of the tax band to work out the total tax for each car for 5 years assuming 20K Km per year. So purchase price + fuel cost + tax = total.

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/new/polo-v/ ... s/overview

I got the fuel price from the BBC website:
The average price of petrol in the UK is about £1.30 a litre or £1.37 for diesel
So; the figures for the 1.4 85PS are:

Purchase price £13,520
L/100K 5.9
Fuel used 5900 L
cost per L £1.30
Total Fuel cost £7,670
Tax for 5Y £625
Total cost £21,815

For the 1.6 TDI 90Ps
£16,415
4.6
£1.37
4600 L
£6,302
150
£22,867

Where have I exaggerated or made an error?

As for matching the cars - I would have gone for an exact HP match but that wasn't possible. The acceleration times for the two cars are 11.9 sec and 11.5 respectively so they are a reasonably close performance match.

The cost savings for diesels are a myth as far as I am concerned, unless you can show me the numbers that would indicate otherwise.
you've deliberately chosen the more expensive 1.6 to make your calculation work, why not try it with the more evenly matched 1.2?
No I haven't. I chose cars with as near as possible matching performance. The 1.2 diesel is 13.9 sec vs 11.9 and it is 10ps shy. The two I picked are 0.4 sec apart in performance and only 5ps apart.
#3711543
EvoStu wrote:
cheapskate wrote:
EvoStu wrote:
cheapskate wrote:
EvoStu wrote:The numbers for smaller cars don't lie at all. Its the bigger cars where the savings lie.

For instance in Karls case, the 535i vs the 535d, there is simply no way the 535i can match the diesel brother for its performance and economy.
By my calculations a 535d luxury will cost you £1,261 more over 5 years and 100K km than a 535i luxury.
Not a chance mate. On the motorway the 535i can't even touch 30mpg, a 535d will happily touch 45mpg all day.
Well BMW are liars then.
No they aren't. I've driven both petrol and diesel back to back and the 535 petrol can't get close to the diesel in its natural habitat of the motorway, where most of these cars will spend their days.
What I meant was that BMW are lying about the fuel economy. I made my calculations on the combined fuel economy that BMW states for the two models I mentioned. You said the actual fuel economy of the 535i is nothing close to what BMW claim - hence my comment.
#3711581
cheapskate wrote:
EvoStu wrote:
cheapskate wrote:
EvoStu wrote:
cheapskate wrote: By my calculations a 535d luxury will cost you £1,261 more over 5 years and 100K km than a 535i luxury.
Not a chance mate. On the motorway the 535i can't even touch 30mpg, a 535d will happily touch 45mpg all day.
Well BMW are liars then.
No they aren't. I've driven both petrol and diesel back to back and the 535 petrol can't get close to the diesel in its natural habitat of the motorway, where most of these cars will spend their days.
What I meant was that BMW are lying about the fuel economy. I made my calculations on the combined fuel economy that BMW states for the two models I mentioned. You said the actual fuel economy of the 535i is nothing close to what BMW claim - hence my comment.
Then yes I agree with you. To be honest I don't know a manufacturer who doesn't lie about their figures.
#3711588
cheapskate wrote:
What I meant was that BMW are lying about the fuel economy. I made my calculations on the combined fuel economy that BMW states for the two models I mentioned. You said the actual fuel economy of the 535i is nothing close to what BMW claim - hence my comment.
BMW didn't lie at all. They genuinely achieve what they quote for the fuel consumption figures…..in lab conditions…..running the NEDC (New European Drive Cycle). The engine maps are tweaked to provide the best fuel consumption to that cycle, but It just turns out that no one drives a car like anywhere near the NEDC.

You could see it more as misleading. The whole thing has been argued with the EU that these figures are misleading and that the tests need to be changed.
#3711596
As above, the test is not a true representation of the actual usage of a car in town driving etc. is more to do with gearing of the cars in question.

Was great piece done by Harry Metcalfe of ex Evo fame in his column few months back about it. really put it in perspective.
#3711756
smartie wrote:What car has the 535i as a grand cheaper to run over 3 years. :lol: (Going on BMW figures)
If you throw in the service plans as well (which apparently 90% of new owners take) the difference comes down to fuel and mileage.

The claimed fuel ranges of the big petrol vs diesel is hugely different. In my 5 it cost me approx £4 per tank more to fill my car than the equivalent petrol, yet I got around double the mpg on my drives than the equivalent petrol version.
#3711761
EvoStu wrote:
smartie wrote:What car has the 535i as a grand cheaper to run over 3 years. :lol: (Going on BMW figures)
If you throw in the service plans as well (which apparently 90% of new owners take) the difference comes down to fuel and mileage.

The claimed fuel ranges of the big petrol vs diesel is hugely different. In my 5 it cost me approx £4 per tank more to fill my car than the equivalent petrol, yet I got around double the mpg on my drives than the equivalent petrol version.
Makes sense if you do 20k miles a year. Not if you do 10. :salut:
#3711763
smartie wrote:
EvoStu wrote:
smartie wrote:What car has the 535i as a grand cheaper to run over 3 years. :lol: (Going on BMW figures)
If you throw in the service plans as well (which apparently 90% of new owners take) the difference comes down to fuel and mileage.

The claimed fuel ranges of the big petrol vs diesel is hugely different. In my 5 it cost me approx £4 per tank more to fill my car than the equivalent petrol, yet I got around double the mpg on my drives than the equivalent petrol version.
Makes sense if you do 20k miles a year. Not if you do 10. :salut:
Even over £10K it saves money on that size of car, plus the road tax was cheaper, and I refuse to give the government anymore money than I need to. :bigthumb:
#3711866
cheapskate wrote:No I haven't. I chose cars with as near as possible matching performance. The 1.2 diesel is 13.9 sec vs 11.9 and it is 10ps shy. The two I picked are 0.4 sec apart in performance and only 5ps apart.
oh I see, so when you go out looking for a car, apparently like everybody else, you have a BHP figure in your mind, and you buy to that, so you set yourself a 90BHP limit, yeah? rather than you go out with a certain monetary budget, and compare cars within that, like, say, £12k or so? get real, or keep trying to convince yourself that you're saving yourself money with a petrol with your pre-weighted calculations :rotflmao:
#3712075
Cockpiss Analfist wrote:
pulpmelon_r wrote:Are these new vtec systems dual cam profile and vvt on the intake plus exhaust side?

This was never intended to be a thread about the new CTR mate, you should have realised that.
What the phuck was I thinking.
#3712095
karl wrote:
cheapskate wrote:No I haven't. I chose cars with as near as possible matching performance. The 1.2 diesel is 13.9 sec vs 11.9 and it is 10ps shy. The two I picked are 0.4 sec apart in performance and only 5ps apart.
oh I see, so when you go out looking for a car, apparently like everybody else, you have a BHP figure in your mind, and you buy to that, so you set yourself a 90BHP limit, yeah? rather than you go out with a certain monetary budget, and compare cars within that, like, say, £12k or so? get real, or keep trying to convince yourself that you're saving yourself money with a petrol with your pre-weighted calculations :rotflmao:
No, actually I went out and got a CTR. The petrol diesel trade-off calculations were done when we were last looking for a vehicle for my wife. She is highly intelligent, did the numbers and bought the petrol version as it represented a large saving over the diesel.

You are really trying hard to push this one uphill, but then grace isn't in your vocabulary. Now come back for the last word, you know you won't be able to sleep until you do.
#3712115
try all the empty analogies you want, I showed a fatal flaw in your lopsided argument, and you know it, hence you not even addressing or attempting to prove it wrong. and you know I'm right, because you go from facts and figures to attacking the poster, which is what the majority do when they hear something they know is true and have got nothing else to say to counter it, but credit to you for not fulfilling the steteo-type and resorting to name calling, too :salut:

anyways, just accept that your wife bought the wrong car, and you now know that it was your I'll informed advice, as described above in your silly calculations, that made her do so. flol at making new car purchases using BHP as your criteria :rotflmao:

PS; I slept the night through, it was awesome, but then I know how much dollar I'm saving with my big twin turbo 6 pot derv
#3718407
cheapskate wrote:
karl wrote:
cheapskate wrote:No I haven't. I chose cars with as near as possible matching performance. The 1.2 diesel is 13.9 sec vs 11.9 and it is 10ps shy. The two I picked are 0.4 sec apart in performance and only 5ps apart.
oh I see, so when you go out looking for a car, apparently like everybody else, you have a BHP figure in your mind, and you buy to that, so you set yourself a 90BHP limit, yeah? rather than you go out with a certain monetary budget, and compare cars within that, like, say, £12k or so? get real, or keep trying to convince yourself that you're saving yourself money with a petrol with your pre-weighted calculations :rotflmao:
No, actually I went out and got a CTR. The petrol diesel trade-off calculations were done when we were last looking for a vehicle for my wife. She is highly intelligent, did the numbers and bought the petrol version as it represented a large saving over the diesel.

You are really trying hard to push this one uphill, but then grace isn't in your vocabulary. Now come back for the last word, you know you won't be able to sleep until you do.
Pics?

Long time ago I had and Ep3 for 220k kilometers in[…]