Why does every dealer insist on Diesel

Nissan use to sell a 2.5 petrol and a 2L diesel Xtrail, very few petrol cars were sold and now you can only buy a diesel Xtrail, its the customer that dictates the market, not a dealer or manufacturer, a car has to sell to make money.

I don't buy a diesel to save money but to provide the power to pull a caravan, I would certainly consider a turbo petrol or large capacity engine, but then you have to consider resale value, and the fact is that in the uk the second hand demand is for a diesel engine, which usually has a lower VED, and generally more MPG.

PDF's were a problem on the first generation of diesels cars, but that is longer the same, I have done 26K miles in 4.5 years, mainly short trips, and have never had a PDF light come on, have never had to carry out a 20 min run with revs over 2K to clean it.

The Mazda problem isn't asking for a run to clean a filter, apparently the problem is over fuelling on the regen resulting in wasted fuel and rising oil levels.

Theirs lots of advise out there, but a lot of it is based in the past not the present.

xtrailman said:

The Mazda problem isn't asking for a run to clean a filter, apparently the problem is over fuelling on the regen resulting in wasted fuel and rising oil levels.

Theirs lots of advise out there, but a lot of it is based in the past not the present.

Click to expand...

That is probably the best way to sum up the premature oil rising issue as well.

In particular where you say based on past, not present and then of course we will have the future.

Also you are right regards consumer demand dictating fuel options, America & Canada proves that out. Europe however, different story, look at Germany (VW Group, Mercedes) & France (Peugeot Citroen) for example, nearly always diesel and the engines are more reliable than some of their petrol options, hardly anybody buys a petrol Mercedes in Europe, if they do the resale value is usually pretty poor.

Alex

ARRY said:

There is no point in me getting a diesel
As I dont do enough miles per year 6K max
My journeys wouldn't get a diesel engine warm enough to take advantage of the MPG that a diesels offer
I know the advantages of driving diesel torque etc... As I have a works vehicle that's diesel. but this my own private car .
I did a cost comparison where you enter the costs of the car and the average mpg and the price of fuel and the miles done in a year
I compared the CX5 2.0 PETROL SEL AND CX5 2.2 D SEL with 6000 miles a year it would take me 20yrs for a diesel to be advantageous so is really a no brainer for me .
Both the Mazda Dealers asked how many miles per year and both immediately said Petrol .
But unlike alot of other deales Mazda dealers can offer the same spec in petrol or diesel where as many of the others cant ..

TOYOTA rav 4 only offers a petrol in auto and i hate auto's
Audi only offer a petrol in permanent 4 wheel drive , don't need 4wd
Tiguan too small and VED tax is high
Honda VED TAX is way too high ,,

A work colleague has recently brought a Ford diesel ( he said he had to buy it it was a bargain brand new )and is disappointed in the MPG he gets , but when he took it back to the dealer he was asked about his use of the car , and was told he didn't drive it far enough or even get it anywhere near the optimum operating temp for a diesel also he should make sure he does a 20 -30 minute trip down a motorway or equivalent to burn of the excess diesel or he would be facing a big bill for a new particular filter .. that wasn't covered under warranty and would be down to driver misuse ..
So rather seems pointless to have to go and burn more fuel just to keep your engine / filter in good condition rather defeats the object IMO ...

I have told him he has been mis-sold his car as it doesn't suit his lifestyle i.e doesn't need a diesel

But I suppose if a sales person can quote better MPG at you over a petrol , its a great selling tool , the fact that you wont benefit from a diesel because of the type of trips you do is no concern to the sales person , the only concern to him is how big is your wallet ...

So my main concern is that in the UK we are being sold Diesel cars that customers don't actually need ..

So my advice is do your homework 1st
Diesel at the pump cost more than petrol per liter
Diesel Engines have higher maintenance costs
Diesels Engined Vehicles Variants cost more
All this equals you have to do allot more miles to get the Benefits of a diesel .
I do also accept though some might require a diesel for the Torque etc.. but again that's dependent on their driving lifestyle

In my case a Petrol wins hands down
But don't let the salesman sell you s diesel based on MPG , do your homework 1st .

Click to expand...

Arry, you said in your previous post it would take 33 years to get your money back now you say 20. The diesel / petrol price gap narrows during summer months and increases in the winter months. but not enough to make that difference?

Seriously though I overheard my dealer informing a retired couple who wanted a cx-5 NOT to get the diesel as 'you don't do the mileage'. So not all salesmen are evil. The cx-5 is the bigger of the 2 cars in my household and I'll do around 9000 miles a year in it. We also have a daihatsu sirion 1.3 petrol. So we take that on short trips, or where parking is difficult. I like driving both cars, but the torque of the diesel is what I wanted for the bigger car. Yes I paid more for it than the petrol model, but as you say, do your homework first.

Generally small city cars with diesel engines dont make sense (if of course you commute a few miles a day into the city or use it for a short school runs.) Bigger cars generally suit diesels better. If you're daft enough to take your massive diesel Chelsea tractor on regular trips of only a couple of miles or less then don't be surprised if your dpf gets clogged!

I was brought up with the advise that engine wear takes place with a cold start, and was a killer to petrol engines, back then the advise was to avoid short trips in a petrol because the engine would never reach working temperature, and the engine would coke up.

That's not changed, both diesel and petrol are best not used in crawling city driving.

That's were a cycle, bike, bus, train, or electric car is best employed.

A salesman will always try to push a slow seller, I could go out and buy a couple of petrol CX5's tomorrow with no waiting list.

xtrailman said:

I was brought up with the advise that engine wear takes place with a cold start, and was a killer to petrol engines, back then the advise was to avoid short trips in a petrol because the engine would never reach working temperature, and the engine would coke up.

That's not changed, both diesel and petrol are best not used in crawling city driving.

That's were a cycle, bike, bus, train, or electric car is best employed.

Click to expand...

granted city driving is not the best for cars but a diesel with DPF will still complain at that sort of trip long before a petrol engine will.

Also note that there are specific warnings in the mazda manual about short / slow journeys that can cause problems with dpf cars but no such mention for the petrol.

I often cycle short distances. But if weather is bad or carrying stuff I'd take our petrol car.

xtrailman said:

I could go out and buy a couple of petrol CX5's tomorrow with no waiting list.

Click to expand...

So could I but they are more expensive than a New one after the dealer has thrown in mats, boot liner , tank of fuel , paint protection , mudflaps + 500 discount for no PX ,
I have looked at all the 2nd mazdas in the UK and you can get new cheaper than 2nd hand , who would want a year old car with 10k on the clock for the same price or more than a new one ???
I think they are playing on the fact you cant get a new one very quick !!! 4 month waiting list

dad of jon said:

Arry, you said in your previous post it would take 33 years to get your money back now you say 20. The diesel / petrol price gap narrows during summer months and increases in the winter months. but not enough to make that difference?

Click to expand...

I changed the mileage and put it higher as i thought maybe I put it too low ... it 1st came out as 66 yrs but i think that was my fault i put a decimal point in the wrong place .

I also did it again as i found a nearly new diesel with only 700 miles on the clock for the same price as a new petrol one at 6000 miles per year they came out almost the same over 4years the petrol overall though still came out best by about 500 ... But the 500 i could put up with given that i would be getting better torque however i then had to ask myself would i ever get anywhere near a decent MPG on the diesel being that most of the time i would not be getting it up to temperature .
I dont have anything against diesels its just i am not sure if I would benefit from one or loose

After trying what seems 20 ish cars there are only 2 that i am comfortable in were i can see out of the wind screen and my eye level not looking at a sun visor directly in front of me is the CX5 and a BMW 3 series in these 2 cars i don't even have to lower the seat all the way down ... being 6'2" I hate looking at sun visors ,
Eg the AUDI Q3 i went for a test drive in the sales man was no more than 5'2" when we swapped seats for me to drive i went to lower the seat only to find he already had it as low as it would go , i spent the next 5 miles stooping to see out of the screen , he asked how did i like it , explained if he had the seat that low i stood no chance , didnt go back another ticked of the list ,,,

Frankly, I wish they offered diesel in the US. The torque specification would make this car a beast!

ARRY said:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...money-petrol-models-economical-makes-car.html

Click to expand...

Absolutely shocking.......the fact that you read that junk, the Daily Mail!!!

The sticker prices are only a starting point, a dealer will always discount or offer an inflated trade in price, but still ends up with the same profit margin.

Reasonable discounts are available on new cars, I got over 2200 discount. Some dealer offer a lot less.
Its the worldwide demand that's keeping discounts low. On my present car I got over 8K off.

ARRY said:

So could I but they are more expensive than a New one after the dealer has thrown in mats, boot liner , tank of fuel , paint protection , mudflaps + 500 discount for no PX ,
I have looked at all the 2nd mazdas in the UK and you can get new cheaper than 2nd hand , who would want a year old car with 10k on the clock for the same price or more than a new one ???
I think they are playing on the fact you cant get a new one very quick !!! 4 month waiting list

Click to expand...

dad of jon said:

granted city driving is not the best for cars but a diesel with DPF will still complain at that sort of trip long before a petrol engine will.

Also note that there are specific warnings in the mazda manual about short / slow journeys that can cause problems with dpf cars but no such mention for the petrol.

I often cycle short distances. But if weather is bad or carrying stuff I'd take our petrol car.

Click to expand...

You're right Dad, my handbook says the same, but obviously my driving routine isn't a problem going on the last 4.5 driving a PDF car.

To day we go to the local shops, two miles there, two back.
Tomorrow a trip to the daughters 5mile there 5mile back, at no time will speed be above 45mph, speed humps and traffic lights on both routes.

ARRY said:

After trying what seems 20 ish cars there are only 2 that i am comfortable in were i can see out of the wind screen and my eye level not looking at a sun visor directly in front of me is the CX5 and a BMW 3 series in these 2 cars i don't even have to lower the seat all the way down ... being 6'2" I hate looking at sun visors ,
Eg the AUDI Q3 i went for a test drive in the sales man was no more than 5'2" when we swapped seats for me to drive i went to lower the seat only to find he already had it as low as it would go , i spent the next 5 miles stooping to see out of the screen , he asked how did i like it , explained if he had the seat that low i stood no chance , didnt go back another ticked of the list ,,,

Click to expand...

I surprised you had so much trouble, 6'2" isn't exactly oversize for men today. Perhaps you are long in the body but short in the legs?
I would have thought a Mondeo, Passat, etc would be ok?

I didn't even bother to test drive the Q3, or a Q5, didn't think they looked that appealing, the BMW X3 drove well the the interior was low rent, besides the CX5 175 diesel has more torque than the X3 2L.

Dr_Watson said:

Absolutely shocking.......the fact that you read that junk, the Daily Mail!!!

Click to expand...

Actually I did not read it, but perused the specs on the Skyactiv D engine, noting it was not available in the US. Diesels do not sell well here for a variety of reasons.

ARRY said:

I changed the mileage and put it higher as i thought maybe I put it too low ... it 1st came out as 66 yrs but i think that was my fault i put a decimal point in the wrong place .

I also did it again as i found a nearly new diesel with only 700 miles on the clock for the same price as a new petrol one at 6000 miles per year they came out almost the same over 4years the petrol overall though still came out best by about 500 ... But the 500 i could put up with given that i would be getting better torque however i then had to ask myself would i ever get anywhere near a decent MPG on the diesel being that most of the time i would not be getting it up to temperature .
I dont have anything against diesels its just i am not sure if I would benefit from one or loose

Click to expand...

I have both a petrol and diesel in the household they each have their own benefits. I prefer driving the diesel but if the journey is less than 5 miles or 10 mins I'm in the petrol car. Fortunately my work commute is 6.5 miles and 20 mins and I get 45-50 mpg on that.

xtrailman said:

Ok so you can go back to a NA engine, but why would you want too?

Click to expand...

Primarily for the reason I mentioned previously - that I much prefer the sporty nature of an engine that builds power more strongly as rpm's rise. It provides a more engaging driving experience.

But there are a lot of other reasons.

1) Significantly lighter engine weight. This provides for sportier handling and better tire wear when the mass of metal bolted between the front wheels is not such a lump.

2) Lower cost up front. I am an investor and have more profitable places to invest the money than having it sit under my hood. With the higher cost of diesel fuel it takes years of getting higher mpg to pay off the initial investment. I can put the money to work more profitably elsewhere.

3) Less availability of diesel - limits my choices of where and when I fuel up. Every station carries regular unleaded.

4) While fueling the diesel pump handle is often contaminated with diesel fuel and this smell transfers to my hands requiring soap and water. Or I can use a paper towel to grab the pump handle. Either way it is less convenient and smells stronger than petrol.

5) Short trips. The petrol engine is better for short trips in cold weather.

Advantages of a diesel engine:

1) Better MPG. As I've already explained, this is not a financial advantage once all ownership costs (and lost investment potential) are considered. But I would appreciate the extra range because it would somewhat reduce the number of times I need to refuel. But, to me, this convenience is negated by the lower availability of diesel and the potential for lingering odors of raw diesel.

2) More torque. Big torque numbers are vastly over-rated by amateur Internet auto/truck enthusiasts. When I feel a particular vehicle is limited in power, it is always peak power that I am lamenting is too low, not peak torque. If I want to climb a steeper hill or accelerate faster I can always downshift another gear to get the desired torque to the pavement (up to the point that I am limited by peak horsepower). Torque to the pavement is achieved through engine horsepower, not engine torque. The tires do not know or care what rpm the engine is at, all they "see" is the level of power being delivered, they do not care how that power is generated. And with modern 6 speed transmissions, engine torque is less relevant than ever.

Aha, but still, more torque is better, no? To answer that question one needs to determine if they have enough and whether more torque would offer any real benefit. Because assuming more torque is better is analogous in many ways to assuming that more cargo capacity is better. In that case everyone should be driving around in full sized vans (or bigger). But the reality is that vehicle size is chosen to suit the typical requirements. Some people need vans, most don't. If the purpose of my CX-5 was to tow a boat over the mountains with a sport box on the roof, then the higher torque and horsepower of the diesel would be welcome additions. But as a passenger vehicle to go skiing with family and friends the little 2.0L petrol engine is plenty gutsy to get the job done (with power to spare). And I prefer it's sporting nature. Not to mention the many practical advantages I've outlined previously.

Obviously, everyone has different needs and personalities and I don't mean to diminish your obvious enjoyment of the torque of the diesel. Different strokes for different folks.

As you say, I've had the NA petrol cars, now I've had a turbo petrol and turbo diesel, along with AWD, I now know which I prefer, and that would be anything with a turbo, petrol or diesel with a decent CC thrown it.

I'm more interested in driving pleasure than working out the costs.

If I was making any claims about saving money, then I wouldn't be a mug and buy a new car every 4.5 years, now would I?

Buying a new car is the quickest way to loose money, as depreciation is and always has been the largest cost of buying new, I estimate I will loose around 7K in year one.

xtrailman said:

I'm more interested in driving pleasure than working out the costs.

Click to expand...

You must have glossed over the PRIMARY reason I provided for my preference of the light, sporty naturally aspirated 2.0L petrol engine over larger diesels with flatter torque curves. (Hint: it had nothing to do with money and everything to do with my driving pleasure). As I stated in the beginning of my last post, I would rather drive a car with an engine that builds power more strongly as the rpm's rise with peak power happening at higher rpm's rather than the tractor like flat torque curve of a forced induction diesel. I find it more engaging and feel it provides a more sporting driving experience.

Of course I provided plenty of other secondary reasons why I prefer petrol to diesel and most of them are not financial in nature either.

I respect your right to have different preferences. Please remember, what started your rant on the wonders of big torque was a ridiculous pronouncement that, once anybody had experienced the wonderful torque of a diesel or any forced induction engine, they could never be happy with less torque.

I am in no way bragging here but you will just have to take my word that my discretionary spending budget wouldn't have even sneezed if I spent three or four times as much on a vehicle. The truth is, I love the nature of the 2.0L engine in the CX-5 and it suits my needs to a "T". Does that mean everybody wants what I want? Of course not, but I would never be so pretentious to proclaim they should (or would).

I think you seriously need to accept that my preferences aren't yours.

That won't change no matter how long your post is, or how many times you repeat the same thing.

Turbo is for me, if you want to rev to the red line, to get performance, do it if it makes you happy.

xtrailman said:

Once you have driven a turbo powered car, petrol or diesel, going back to a normally aspirated engine isn't a option, not unless it comes with more than 4 cylinders.

Click to expand...

Really?