}
Jerry wrote:cough .....350 Chev
TJ wrote:Have you been stuck in traffic behind a diesel burner? Enough said, go petrol.
As for the false pretence that diesel is more economical, well better do the complete comparison from cradel-to-grave of the engines and not just the pump price. The pump price for diesel does not include the road user charges to start with. Then there is the higher expense of fixing should something go wrong with the engine, so on and so forth.
My 4.0l I6 petrol engine has lots of low end torque (not all petrol engines are low on low end torque). The only thing missing in my case is aerodynamics of the body, but then it wouldn't be a Jeep.
krawlr wrote:yep when diesels break they arnt cheap! but longer life depending on servicing intervals etc
go the 1kz with lpg injection.....works for me
nstg8a wrote:just out of curiousity, who pays ruc's the way you should?
as i understand it, you only need ruc's when on the road, so when playing in the mud there is nothing wrong with having a switchable odometer? that way you can save money by not clocking up unneceessery km's....
or run the risk of having it completely disconnected? which i am not suggesting by the way.
rangimotors wrote:nstg8a wrote:just out of curiousity, who pays ruc's the way you should?
as i understand it, you only need ruc's when on the road, so when playing in the mud there is nothing wrong with having a switchable odometer? that way you can save money by not clocking up unneceessery km's....
or run the risk of having it completely disconnected? which i am not suggesting by the way.
Just about a new topic don't ya reckon? I think there was a thread on it a while back but no idea where.
my vote went to petrol because i have a company car so its only my weekend toy but as stated everyones situation is different
edit. the other reason my vote is with petrol is im happy to have a good play with a petrol engine and have done many times before, I no next to nothing about diesel engines
nstg8a wrote:just out of curiousity, who pays ruc's the way you should?
as i understand it, you only need ruc's when on the road, so when playing in the mud there is nothing wrong with having a switchable odometer? that way you can save money by not clocking up unneceessery km's....
or run the risk of having it completely disconnected? which i am not suggesting by the way.
KiwiBacon wrote:The old 4L straight six jep could only do 200Ftlbs, that's 275Nm.
TJ wrote:KiwiBacon wrote:The old 4L straight six jep could only do 200Ftlbs, that's 275Nm.
It was (and still is on TJs) 235 ftlbs (or 319 Nm) @ 3,200 rpm but that would be being picky on my part
None of the big rigs are desinged for high speed or stop/start use and that is where a petrol engine comes handy. If you do long haul heavy load trips on a daily basis, yes diesel would make more sense because the engine would not need as frequent servicing. I wonder why they switch big ships to HSD from marine diesel when in port (oh yes, for a quicker enginer response and ease of manouverability).
I am not anti diesel, but it depends on the application.
KiwiBacon wrote:What is this HSD you're talking about in ships and what is this extra maintenance you're referring to with a diesel?
Mine gets oil and filter changes at 10,000km. My petrol car also gets oil changes at 10,000km (up to 18,000km in the manual, but I know they did nothing in japan) and also requires me to pull the spark plugs to check their condition.
Have you driven many diesels? They don't normally have a problem with engine response or manouverability.
Unless you're talking about the old 2.5L non turbo mazda at work, that one's constipated.
About the only situation I'd buy a petrol car for again would be very cold conditions. Petrol doesn't turn into candles in your tank and the extra waste engine heat heats the cabin up quicker. My petrol japanese car will be replaced with a diesel when the time comes.
The economy, range, torque and ease of maintenance are all winners for me.
You must be overpaid 
