[ant234]

Originally Posted by KoenG

So to short cut... the 125d wins hands down. And I guess that it is this experience that prevails.

That might be true for your very limited example, but driving the 125i and 125d as intended, the 125i will cream the 125d like for like.

[tawia]

I can torque about in me d and rarely break the speed limit. Maximum enjoyment, minimum effort.
The brain registers torque as power. I like torque, not speed. Torque torque torque!!!!

[ant234]

But to be honest, both the 125i and the 125d are both sweet engines... very different characteristic.
Don't get me wrong I fell in love with diesel engines 7years ago with a golf TDI, and I still have another diesel car other then the 125i, but I use it mainly for family long trips.
For fun factor, I take the 125i (also because its a manual )

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by Alpine*

Change back to second gear, bye bye diesel.

No, the 125i is not capable to smoke the 125d. Both have the same power. So a sluggish driven 125d will be capable to trail a frantic revved 125i.

The Golf GTI performance will remain in front of both and will not require to be driven on the rpm edge like the 125i to do so.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by ovekvam

And why does it win? Because it has slightly more power in this engine speed range.

As was also pointed out, if you select a more suitable gear for the petrol engine, the diesel car will struggle to keep up.

To make it more clear what matters, consider a race between me on a bicycle, and a motorcycle:

Me on bicycle:
400 Nm @ 0 RPM, 0.5 hp @ 90 RPM. 100 kg

MC
70Nm @ 10000 RPM, 100 hp @ 14000 RPM, 250 kg

I have a clear advantage on weight and torque, but who will win a 60 meter sprint with standing start? Obviously the motorcycle, since it has more power.

Of course, but you refer to the theorie. Although I admit I'am the joker putting formula's in this post. LOL

The excercise I refer to is very real and it happens exactly almost constantly when you drive your car. I can't imagine many people are keeping the car in their best power band. That would mean that you almost select lowest gear whatever you're doing in the 125i! Come on, get real!?

So when you leave it in a higher gear (I state here expliclitly: this happens 99% of the time), the 125d wins over and over again.

So on a hot lap, both are equal, but in daily traffic, the 125d is superior. And not by a small margin I guess.

[ovekvam]

Originally Posted by KoenG

The excercise I refer to is very real and it happens exactly almost constantly when you drive your car. I can't imagine many people are keeping the car in their best power band. That would mean that you almost select lowest gear whatever you're doing in the 125i! Come on, get real!?

I drive a 116i, and I very rarely use full throttle on public roads. I am just rolling along with the traffic at low RPM. However, if I want maximum acceleration, I always select a gear that will ensure maximum power from the engine. It is by no means frantic. I have maximum power from 4400 RPM.

I do however agree that a 125d could be faster than a 125i, although BMW indicates that the 125i is one tenth quicker from 0-100 km/h than the diesel car.

[elstoof]

Originally Posted by KoenG

That would mean that you almost select lowest gear whatever you're doing in the 125i! Come on, get real!?

So when you leave it in a higher gear (I state here expliclitly: this happens 99% of the time), the 125d wins over and over again.

If you're at all worried about obtaining maximum output, why wouldn't you want to be selecting appropriate gear?

[macar]

Originally Posted by KoenG

...
The excercise I refer to is very real and it happens exactly almost constantly when you drive your car. I can't imagine many people are keeping the car in their best power band. That would mean that you almost select lowest gear whatever you're doing in the 125i! Come on, get real!?
...

I disagree here. When do you go full throttle on public roads? I would say as much as a driver with a 125i willing to go up in revs and accelerate hard.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by elstoof

If you're at all worried about obtaining maximum output, why wouldn't you want to be selecting appropriate gear?

1) both are equally fast (or almost) when given the stick 2) in daily driving conditions the d provides much more immediate push in the back since no shift down required. You feel this every time you move your right foot a bit. When you don't believe the physics behind it, just try it yourself. Agree that you can down shift, but you don't in relaxed driving conditions.

It's not that you buy an 65 AMG that you're only interest in doing 100-200 in a few seconds, no, it's because you appreciate the enormuous wave of torque popping up out of the void and that makes you feel like a little grain of sand in an endless vortex that you control with an effortless nod of the foot. When you're not interested in this, buy the F458 instead.

[PeterPure]

Originally Posted by KoenG

1) both are equally fast (or almost) when given the stick 2) in daily driving conditions the d provides much more immediate push in the back since no shift down required. You feel this every time you move your right foot a bit. When you don't believe the physics behind it, just try it yourself. Agree that you can down shift, but you don't in relaxed driving conditions.

It's not that you buy an 65 AMG that you're only interest in doing 100-200 in a few seconds, no, it's because you appreciate the enormuous wave of torque popping up out of the void and that makes you feel like a little grain of sand in an endless vortex that you control with an effortless nod of the foot. When you're not interested in this, buy the F458 instead.

Lol Koen I totally disagree with most of your posts.
I have driven a chipped E92 325D (260HP and 550NM tq) with the 3.0 litre engine. Next I have driven a chipped VW Scirocco 2.0TSI (250HP and 380NM tq). Then I also drove an E90 M3 (420HP and 400NM tq) and now a F20 M135i (320HP and 450NM tq).

And while the 3.0D E92 325D had the most torque it was by far the most un-exciting car to drive. Ok yes its more fun to drive than my wifes current F11 520D but other than that even my VW Scirocco was more fun to drive. Was it the sound, the higher RPM you could make... It just is more fun to drive a petrol engine car.

Diesel cars are not for petrolheads. But for the lazy drivers that dont want to spend money on fuel. Now dont get me wrong I dont think it makes sense in a logical way. But petrol engine cars you buy with your heart and not with your brains

[elstoof]

Originally Posted by KoenG

Agree that you can down shift, but you don't in relaxed driving conditions.
.

This is the part I'm struggling with. You go on about effortless torque in "relaxed driving situations" - tell me why you want this again? It's sort of the opposite of a relaxing drive if you ask me. On the other side of the coin, if I'm driving on the limit then why would I be lazy enough to leave it in the same gear all the time?

[ovekvam]

Originally Posted by elstoof

This is the part I'm struggling with. You go on about effortless torque in "relaxed driving situations" - tell me why you want this again? It's sort of the opposite of a relaxing drive if you ask me. On the other side of the coin, if I'm driving on the limit then why would I be lazy enough to leave it in the same gear all the time?

And if you should select to really push the car around a track or twisty mountain road, you have to shift more with a diesel engine than a petrol engine, since the diesel has a shorter power band.

Also during overtaking, I find I can usually just leave it in the current gear with a petrol engine, and it will be able to accelerate a long way without running out of steam. With a diesel, you typically have to shift up.

I understand about the relaxed part, though. I tend to adapt a very relaxed driving style with diesel cars. With high strung petrol cars, I am more tempted to drive in a more spirited way.

[jhbodle]

Normally, I would agree that the petrol driver would merely shift down a gear to defeat the diesel. However, the 125i engine has been neutered and detuned so that this is not the case in this particular instance. 218bhp plays 218bhp whatever engine you pick. Put the M Performance Power kit on the 125i and then it would be different.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by Darkhold

Lol Koen I totally disagree with most of your posts.
I have driven a chipped E92 325D (260HP and 550NM tq) with the 3.0 litre engine. Next I have driven a chipped VW Scirocco 2.0TSI (250HP and 380NM tq). Then I also drove an E90 M3 (420HP and 400NM tq) and now a F20 M135i (320HP and 450NM tq).

And while the 3.0D E92 325D had the most torque it was by far the most un-exciting car to drive. Ok yes its more fun to drive than my wifes current F11 520D but other than that even my VW Scirocco was more fun to drive. Was it the sound, the higher RPM you could make... It just is more fun to drive a petrol engine car.

Diesel cars are not for petrolheads. But for the lazy drivers that dont want to spend money on fuel. Now dont get me wrong I dont think it makes sense in a logical way. But petrol engine cars you buy with your heart and not with your brains

I think discussion is gone the wrong way.

I stated earlier that more torque is always wanted and that BMW left an easy win to the Golf since they just detuned their 28i engine they have at hand. For a hot hatch, diesel is probably not the best pick since the character is not as playfull or free revving.

Now I'am stuck in a pointless discussion diesel versus petrol because the 125i adepts question that more torque is usefull and other criticise the revving culture (or the lack of it) of the diesel. Pffff.....

Yes, more torque is better, else the entire car industry is on dope.
Yes, for a hot hatch or sports car petrol has the edge for most of us.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by elstoof

This is the part I'm struggling with. You go on about effortless torque in "relaxed driving situations" - tell me why you want this again? It's sort of the opposite of a relaxing drive if you ask me. On the other side of the coin, if I'm driving on the limit then why would I be lazy enough to leave it in the same gear all the time?

Elstoof, I can't better explain, read any random review on a M550d or 535d or alpina D5, or 65AMG, or E350CDI, or... maybe their explanation is better.

[tawia]

I ain't owned a petrol in 12 odd years so I guess I'm bias

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by macar

I disagree here. When do you go full throttle on public roads? I would say as much as a driver with a 125i willing to go up in revs and accelerate hard.

I go full throttle at 1150rpm almost every time I accelerate. That is about a few hundred times a day. Then I shift up at 1800rpm.

Instead of leaving your car in a lower gear, upping the revs, you will learn to shift early and open up throttle more. That's what every tutor will instruct you on any "efficient driving" course.

Like for instance the one of BMW I got a couple of months ago. When you understand frictional losses and rotational inertions, you'll understand why low rpms are key for efficiency.

[macar]

Yes, my father taught me right on fuel consumption

However, with my 125i, if I go full throttle every time I accelerate, I would not have my driving license anymore. And I'm in comfort mode, so the RPM are around 1400

[ovekvam]

Originally Posted by KoenG

I go full throttle at 1150rpm almost every time I accelerate. That is about a few hundred times a day. Then I shift up at 1800rpm.

Instead of leaving your car in a lower gear, upping the revs, you will learn to shift early and open up throttle more. That's what every tutor will instruct you on any "efficient driving" course.

Like for instance the one of BMW I got a couple of months ago. When you understand frictional losses and rotational inertions, you'll understand why low rpms are key for efficiency.

1150 sounds a bit low. If you drop the RPM too much, the turbo is not able to produce boost. Most data I have seen from engine efficiency, indicates that it is highest around the torque peak at high load. With a driving style like yours, you risk soot buildup and a clogged particle filter in the long run.

[mowflow]

Beyond motorsport who honestly believes all that anal engineering equation stuff will make much of a difference when you stick 3 cars with almost identical statistics in the hands of Joe Public with his accelerator mashing right foot, dodgy gear shifts, poo braking, limited concept of an apex etc etc..... you get my drift. None of us are Vettel.

I've had a few quick Golfs but I'm not sure I'd go rushing into another. For some strange reason i have a deep seeded desire in me to love them hence why I have owned a few. However, despite driving nearly every generation of fast golf since the Mk1 for some reason they just never keep me occupied for long. They are just a bit dull to drive, I think it;s why the modding scene focusses more on making the cars look like they have no suspension with the wring tyres fitted. I mean, no matter what you do it's never going to be that great to drive so why not just make it look interesting instead.

[KoenG]

Originally Posted by mowflow

Beyond motorsport who honestly believes all that anal engineering equation stuff will make much of a difference when you stick 3 cars with almost identical statistics in the hands of Joe Public with his accelerator mashing right foot, dodgy gear shifts, poo braking, limited concept of an apex etc etc..... you get my drift. None of us are Vettel.

I've had a few quick Golfs but I'm not sure I'd go rushing into another. For some strange reason i have a deep seeded desire in me to love them hence why I have owned a few. However, despite driving nearly every generation of fast golf since the Mk1 for some reason they just never keep me occupied for long. They are just a bit dull to drive, I think it;s why the modding scene focusses more on making the cars look like they have no suspension with the wring tyres fitted. I mean, no matter what you do it's never going to be that great to drive so why not just make it look interesting instead.

Yeah, but maybe this one, with the progressive steering, the much upped torque, the e controlled diff, is indeed a much more engaging ride than before?

Every single review uptil now seems to put this new Golf on top of the food chain.

[mowflow]

Maybe it will be.

What i will say is that I've read the same thing written about every generation of Golf GTi since god was a boy. I'm too young to remember what they said about the mk1 but i remember them all fawning over the Mk2 which nearly everyone apart from the VAG fan brigade now admits wasn't as good as the then older 205GTi and the Renault 5 GT turbo in terms of being a drivers car.

The Mk3 won car of the year (my first GTi and one of the least interesting cars i ever owned) in several magazines, as did the Mk4 (so many GTi, V6 and V5 variants of this model, all of which were flawed. The GTi's were especially rubbish). I remember the same publications that had said they were brilliant then using them as examples of how the GTi had lost it's way only a few years later when the Mk5 came out.

The Mk5 did make a massive leap forward (so much so that VW couldn't better it and the Mk6 was the same car with a bit of glitter sprinkled over it). However, at this time the price of a GTi was pretty high and we had 6 cylinder BMW hatchbacks kicking about so it starts to become a questionable choice.

I rarely pay much attention to the opinions of the majority of the motoring press in the same way as I reserve basing judgement on a car based on facts and figures. I've driven cars with impressive stats that have been crap and vice versa. I'm a bit of a believer in the more they add to cars the more they take away from the driver. Yeah they get faster but do they get better? I'll reserve judgement until I drive it and maybe this time it will finally be the Golf I can love....... However, spec'd up it's M135i money for a car that has 125i performance. Keep the spec low and it makes more sense.