Feb 18 2021, 01:28 AM
QUOTE(ceo684 @ Feb 16 2021, 07:14 PM)
It weighs like a pickup truck.
In diesel pickups idling is cheap + with low end torque ~1800rpm.
The 1700kg + petrol engine will not save much petrol if at all especially in stop start traffic/standstill jam compared to current 2.5L.
If petrol cost is ballooning like crazy a diesel sedan like 320D might be a better idea.
Roadtax wise 400-odd bucks difference, and usually for used cars between 2.4 and 2.0 (camry) always prefer the 2.4 for better features and better FC due to it having adequate power rather than underpowered feel of 2.0 which lead to heavier right foot and no savings in fuel as a consequence.
2.5 is 880 (green diesel)
2.4 is 742 (camry 2.4)
2.0 is 379 (camry 2.0)
2.4 impossible to have good fc over 2.0, its not logical. If want to compare, need to compare same throttle input. definitely 2.0 need to rev more la since it is less power, but it does not means its use more fuel.In diesel pickups idling is cheap + with low end torque ~1800rpm.
The 1700kg + petrol engine will not save much petrol if at all especially in stop start traffic/standstill jam compared to current 2.5L.
If petrol cost is ballooning like crazy a diesel sedan like 320D might be a better idea.
Roadtax wise 400-odd bucks difference, and usually for used cars between 2.4 and 2.0 (camry) always prefer the 2.4 for better features and better FC due to it having adequate power rather than underpowered feel of 2.0 which lead to heavier right foot and no savings in fuel as a consequence.
2.5 is 880 (green diesel)
2.4 is 742 (camry 2.4)
2.0 is 379 (camry 2.0)
now compare camry 2.4 vs camry 3.5, if use ur logic, 3.5 will become more jimat since only use less throttle input.
btw each engine got lowest and highest fc reading. u need to compare lowest vs lowest and highest vs highest not lowest 2.4 vs highest 2.0
Quote
0.0169sec
0.74
7 queries
GZIP Disabled