Diesel Vs Petrol

[erad]

MTN-KAT: I worked for quite a while in SE Asia, mainly Bangkok and Jakarta, plus associated country areas as well. In the cities, the soot from dirty diesels is incredible. I used to walk to and from work - about 30 minutes each way. When I got back home, I would blow my nose lots of black soot/snot was the result.I would hate to live in these places permanently. Singapore and Kuala Lumpur are better - far better.

Having said this, petrol caused smog in Los Angeles in the 1970's was horrible, and I am sure that if they had not done something about it the air would be totally unbreathable now. Diesels are more efficient for sure but they have limitations. I prefer LPG- if they can use LPG on forklifts inside, that is not a bad option for general usage. I have seen what happens with diesel driven equipment inside tunnels, even with scrubbers fitted to the exhausts. After a week or so of operation, the air inside the tunnel is virtually unbreathable, even with excellent ventilation.

I used to have a NL Pajero running on LPG and occasionally on petrol. It was very clean and economical. I now have a NW Pajero diesel. No comparison. The old NL was far cheaper to run than the NW. If you only do say 10000 km per year, I would go for petrol any day. Yes - it uses more fuel but the costs of maintenance are far less than for the diesel equivalent. And certainly the costs of replacement injectors or fuel pumps is a fraction of the diesel equivalent. Overall, for me I am happy with my diesel because I do typically 25000 plus per year and that is mostly country running where stuff like turbo lag is not a problem, but If I lived and worked in a city I think I would still have a petrol engine. But then I probably wouldn't have a big 4WD either. There is nothing in city life that would draw me to that lifestyle so a diesel engined pajero is my choice. And a bullbar as well....

[vrx26]

Just made the jump recently from a V6 VRX outlander to a 2009 V6 NT Pajero. I never had cars with diesel engine before. When I was planning to upgrade my Outlander to a Pajero I test drove both diesel (NW) and petrol (NT).

There is not much difference in drivability in both (test drive it on my usual way to and from work - highway plus start stop traffic). Handles almost the same except for diesel turbo lag on acceleration from stop. I have been encouraged as well by my wormates that if I am getting a big 4x4 go diesel and the reviews I read online seems to be bias towards diesel engine.

What made me go and decide to go the petrol route is the overall refinement of the engine. Its a 2009 model with more than 107K and the engine is very quiet compared to the diesel inside and out of the car. At idle the V6 petrol is quiet muted while the diesel is like having a tractor right beside you. Knowing as well that service would be cheaper than diesel is just an added bonus. Im averaging around 16.5L/100Klm on my daily drive. Haven't towed anything yet. Very happy with the car and looking forward to a more gas guzzling years I might say.

[dolphin]

i owned the NM pajero 3.5 litre petrol and then the NS 3.2 litre deisel, yes the petrol NM did have better power but thats about all it had over tyhe deisel powered NS. the petrol was a 6 cylinder and the Deisel is a 4 cylinder , so not only do i save heaps on fuel bills i also save on registration [ 6 cylinder versus 4 cylinder rego ] all i do is keep my engine oil and filters up to date in services that i do myself and thats it until another quick servise is due. no more petrol power for me i am sorry, they just eat too much juice.