A 24 hour race is not the same as a 1/4 mile dash, diesels have lots of torque, but what good is it unless you have the bhp to go with it? It would have to be a very big diesel engine to compete with a performance petrol car.
I'm not saying a diesel engine is better than a petrol engine. Just pointing out that diesel engines can be quick cars in response to the person that said all diesel cars are slow. Chill out, it's a discussion not an interrogation.
I agree totally with you, the BMW 535d, 335d etc. are all very quick for diesels, and I can appreciate why people would buy them; reasonable economy and stonking performance for 45mpg, very impressive.
I just get a bit riled when people say how the Audi r8 tdi LeMans is the best out there just because it's diesel, which is correct it is the fastest, but only because the petrol cars are handicapped compared.
But I won't disagree about quick diesels, I myself drive a heavily modified stripped out Clio 172 with throttle bodies, which is extremely rapid on 'cam', but below sort of 5500rpm a half decent diesel will keep up despite 315bhp per tonne! LOL.
For low to mid end grunt I don't think you can beat a good diesel really (or for fuel economy), but having said all of that, a modern diesel is still using technology, like common rail, which is still relatively new, as well as dual mass flywheels on the VWs, and a lot of this new technology is in its infancy, so is prone to failure on a lot of new cars unfortunately.
In another 5 to 10 years, diesels will never fail! (the basic engine block and internals themselves are solid), they just need to develop the rest of the parts a bit more, i.e. the injection systems and flywheels etc. to be completely reliable.
But so far the manufacturers are doing a grand job of making diesels better, don't think they will ever be better than their petrol equivalents, but they're getting closer.
I reckon diesels will all but disappear from everyday runabout cars in the next 10-15 years. Euro IV emissions has wrecked the reliability and fuel economy, and Euro V and onwards will make it even worse. Diesel engines are now overcomplicated, and have lost their inherent reliability, with particulate filter problems, common rail problems and flywheel failures now writing off 5 year old cars quite easily. Look at the adverts for diesel cars now and you will find disclaimers telling you they are not suitable for short journeys any more because the particulate filters block up.
The future for bread and butter runabouts is small capacity direct injection petrol engines with forced induction, such as the VAG 1.4 TSI, and Vauxhall's new 1.4 turbo engine going into the new Astra. Lighter and more powerful than an equivalent diesel, almost as fuel efficient, and actually technically simpler and more reliable. They meet emissions regs without the need for expensive, unreliable, economy sapping, Heath Robinson bolt on crap in the exhaust, which almost all modern diesels now have to have. Also no need for a failure prone dual mass flywheel, no £2,000+ high pressure fuel pump, no £300 individually coded fuel injectors etc etc.
Ford, BMW and others are working on small turbo petrols to power their next gen models. It is rumoured the next Ford Focus will have a 1.0 petrol engine with up to 160 bhp!
Hmm this person clearly knows nothing about Ford then. Let's not forget the success Ford has had and continues to have in motorsport (cast your mind back to the Escort, the single most successful rally car ever!), And that's before we get to the Cosworth Sierra. Oh, and did you forget the GT40. Another exceptional class car in the 60's, so to say Honda is better, you clearly need to do your research before bringing your comments here!
That comment was posted 6 years ago... and in their defence they were clearly pointing out the difference in pedigree in terms of engines only (and considering Honda's reputation for reliable engines, they were justified in their opinion). They specifically said they weren't talking about motorsports...
Just to add I was the one who posted all the info about the Honda Integras, and many years down the line I now drive... a Honda Integra dc5. My 5th Integra actually.
After all the debate on here, I ran my turbo dc2 on a t3/t4 turbo at 1 bar of pressure. I ran the car with JE lower compression pistons (standard compression was 11:1, and I lowered this to 9:0), uprated fuel pump and injectors, and correct fueling via S300 at 1 bar of pressure, which isn't much. I was running at 402.3 BHP still on the 1.8 engine. I had a second map at 8.7 PSI, which was for every day use running at 320 BHP. I sold that after a year or so because I needed some money.
On a side note, I still averaged 25 MPG on 400 HP, which I thought wasn't bad.
Now my dc5 only has bolt-ons of I/H/E with decat, and is due to be tuned in a couple of weeks time, and I'm fully expecting it to be between 240-250 BHP, which is the average for my mods, as proved on forums time and time again. I think I will be more than satisfied with that for now LOL.
Anyway, I'm getting on now (34) and have a family, but still enjoy driving lots, and having the odd play with similar performance cars from time to time, and still VTEC puts a smile on my face.
Now just to clarify, I never once said the Cosworth engine was a bad engine. I actually think it's very good, and the debate for which engine is better can and will be debated at length by people on both sides of the fence. Let's just leave it with I will stick with Honda, and you can stick with Ford.