Still taxing diesel?

[Janic]

Hello hack

I have a question, what is the current longevity of diesel / petrol engines?

I have not yet seen gasoline with the odometer 650 km, on the other hand diesel yes I had one.
I also had a 4l with 280 or not far I don't know but very old. roughly half the life, so two petrol cars for the life of a diesel
shouldn't that be taken into account too?

The longevity of diesel engines is linked to several factors:
a) Oversizing to resist pressure during ignition. The compression ratio is about twice that of a petrol engine.
b) Engine rotation speed: a petrol can rotate at 8.000 rpm, but more frequently around 5.000 rpm (compared to 18.000 for an F1, but the dimensioning is different: short stroke of the piston (about 1/2) and therefore of the crankshaft ). Everything will depend on the user vrom vrom or cépère.
c) The diesel is fatter, lubricates the upper part of the jacket better and reduces wear on the fire protection segment.
d) A diesel turns around max. around 4.000 and usually runs around 2.000. On the other hand, the turbos boust the diesel and generate more wear linked to starting, to the driving mode. Since the building materials are the same liners, pistons, crankshafts, etc., they are not involved.
For 4L and renault in general the body loose before the engine. I have an R25 which no longer passes the CT but which must curl the 400.000 (HS counter) which runs like a clock and does not consume a bit of oil, but I drive cushy, rarely above 100 and to double.

[Alain G]

bonsoir,


I have not yet seen gasoline with the odometer 650 km, on the other hand diesel yes I had one.
I also had a 4l with 280 or not far I don't know but very old. roughly half as long, so two petrol cars for the life of a diesel.

Do you want to laugh?

Get out of Europe a bit!


Look at this and multiply the mileage by 1.6 to get the mileage and you will see that a diesel is not superior unless it is called Cummins!
http://www.allpar.com/old/club/view400.php


I had 5 Chrysler petrol cars which have made more than 350 km including 000 of more than 2 without consuming oil and scrapped for bodywork for the latter resold, most have only the city.

[bamboo]

I have not yet seen gasoline with the odometer 650 km, on the other hand diesel yes I had one.
I also had a 4l with 280 or not far I don't know but very old. roughly half as long, so two petrol cars for the life of a diesel.

What neni:
A Prius that still drives 788 km
Honda Accor Exceeds One Million MILES

[Did67]

I think that "in the old days", Diesel was considered to be more durable than gasoline. But :

a) today the Diesel have become faster, they have been "shrunken" and turbocharged, with unit injectors ...

b) in the gasoline engine, it was often the accessories that failed: less and less clean carburettors, more and more faulty ignition ... "delco" cracked, spark plug seats "messed up", etc ... So to at one point, it "jerked", no longer "started in wet weather, and we said it was the engine!

Today, it is generalized electronic injection and ignition ...

I do not think there is a "technical" rasion which would prevent the construction of gasoline engines as drutable as the Diesels. As proof, the testimonies of our friends across the Atlantic!

But I persist. The basis of the debate is: "why today tax favor the Diesel ???" (because that's the situation).

Yesterday, the France 2 JT raised the argument that zero-rating dates back to the time of nuclear development in France in the 70s. The heavy fuel oil plants were then removed. From where an excess of fuel oil / diesel (heavier part resulting from the distillation of petroleum), which it was necessary to burn ... The tax exemption would date from there. I admit I don't remember.

Today, I would remind you that France has a serious deficit in diesel fuel, which is imported.

[Remundo]

Did67 is absolutely right.

It has been a long time since the advantages granted to Diesel should have been limited, to rebalance the fleet.

Even today, almost 4 out of 5 new cars are Diesel.

This does not include the fleet of heavy goods vehicles 100% Diesel,

While we are in very serious deficit of Diesel leaving the refinery, forcing us to export our gasoline to buy diesel ...

Or else to build expensive petrol / diesel conversion installations, installations that are not really done ...

Overall a very poorly managed affair.

[Macro]

Published by Remundo

Message assumed to be entirely from Did67

Favoring one or the other for tax purposes will always come back to the same problem ...

In my mind, it would be a question of no longer favoring, but of putting on an equal footing. What :

a) restore a more normal "parity"

b) would provide an outlet for all the fuel we produce from the oil we import

c) reduce emissions of particles and Nox, therefore improve (a little! and in the long term) ... public health.

Instead, doing nothing is continuing to make the problems worse ...!

[Did67]

OKAY. Let's admit it all!

The fact remains that modern Diesels are much faster (even if it's not the injector pumps, but common rails ...), turbocharged (often) ...

The fact remains that the "gasoline" technology is also gaining in reliability and "converges" with Diesel (see TSI from VW) - even if your friend's Daewo LPG is dead we do not know why (that a ignition failure gun a motor surprises me a bit - usually it stops! A valve problem would surprise me less ...)

Indeed, the comparison with the other side of the Atlantic has many limits. I admit. It was just to say that it exists.

For importation, it is better to import the crude oil and process it in the country rather than buying the finished product. It seems obvious to me. In terms of jobs (talking to employees of refineries that are closing) and "capturing surplus value", it's not the same.

Finally, nothing against the use of frying oils in Diesel ... But this constitutes a small niche for a few, an opportunity if you want, not an element of debate on a national policy!

I remember that I'm just for theabandonment of a tax benefit for which I do not see the justification - technical, economic, strategic, medical, etc. - today ... And so far, factually, technically, on this "macroeconomic fact", I do not find any serious contradiction.

After that the current owners of Diesel defend their tax advantage, what could be more natural. Let them claim the right to pollute more, why not ...

[sen-no-sen]

Did67 wrote:

Finally, nothing against the use of frying oils in Diesel ... But this constitutes a small niche for a few, an opportunity if you want, not an element of debate on a national policy!

Absolutely!
How many people use frying oil to drive? (Knowing that most of them don't already run 100% on this fuel)

Well the answer is something between 0,5% and 1% and I am very very nice.
It is therefore advisable not to consider the situation of a minority-minority alongside the overwhelming majority.

[Remundo]

frying oil is not the debate ...

Did67 sums it up well.

The heart of the matter:
1) industrial lobbies: road and Diesel manufacturers.
2) the electoral aspect millions of individuals driving with 2/3 to 4/5 of Diesel cars

For the moment, the Government prefers to please the majority than to decide rationally.

Moreover, the taxation of fuels is very nice, but we should also think of driving differently than with fuels, when possible, of course.

[chatelot16]

it would be quite logical to put gasoline and diesel on an equal tax basis ... it would be normal for diesel to be a little more expensive than petrol since it contains a little more energy

equalizing the tax is only correcting an error, which leads to choosing diesel in cases where it is not justified

what I criticize is the principle of wanting to do more than restore the equality, but want to culpapilize the consumer with the health problem, and believe that with strong tax it will make inventing solution

we let the manufacturers believe that the diesel was more solid, as at the time of the 404 diesel!

the error is maintained by all the old petrol car which had 5-digit meters ... so you never knew how many times 100 km it had driven

and yet the stresses in a petrol engine are lower: it can run for a very long time if there is no multiple weak point too expensive to repair

among all the cars that I used, the diesel all ended in breakdown due to the worn cylinder ... the petrol all ended because of the whole of the used car but still usable engine

the unleaded gasoline containing too much aggressive chemical eats all the seal of the engine: that makes that the old engine always turn but fleeing oil everywhere ... and in general it is necessary a complete disassembly too expensive to put them back in state

we need a new engine design with less weak point of sealing, with better accessibility of everything that needs to be changed to make it last