Re: How is a diesel car more expensive to run?
Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:35 am
Very interesting and quite heated in places. I'm not a diesel fan and never have been, but as I've never owned a diesel car what do I know.
One thing I can say is that all through this thread people are comparing one model against another and making comparisons about their value. But in most of these cases it is like comparing apples with bananas. You are not genuinely comparing like for like.
There is no point in comparing residual values, running costs, insurance etc. between a car that does 0-60 in 8 seconds and one that does it in less than 7 seconds. Clearly all of these are going to be different.
Likewise in comparing the 140TDI against the 1.4 (160) there is a significant performance difference. And in motoring terms extra performance always costs more. Fact.
A comparison between the 170TDI and the 1.4 (160) would be a better match on performance levels. Only 1.7% difference on residual here by the looks of it. But even here there are differences. You are comparing a GT spec car with various extras including leather seats against a car with a more basic spec. Leather seats and full air con will always help sell a car so its residuals will consequently be more anyway.
At today's prices the 1.4 (160) costs £21,670 and the 170TDI costs £25,950. A price difference of £4,280.
If you took VW finance @ 7% the extra £4,280 would cost you £300 per year, £900 over 3 years. So you are paying £5,180 more for the 170TDI over 3 years.
Balanced against that the 1.7% extra residual value of the 170TDI is a petty £441 at the end of 3 years.
So how many tank fulls of fuel would you need to make up that kind of difference? And on top of that the insurance for the 1.4 (160) is usually less than for the 170TDI.
One thing I can say is that all through this thread people are comparing one model against another and making comparisons about their value. But in most of these cases it is like comparing apples with bananas. You are not genuinely comparing like for like.
There is no point in comparing residual values, running costs, insurance etc. between a car that does 0-60 in 8 seconds and one that does it in less than 7 seconds. Clearly all of these are going to be different.
Likewise in comparing the 140TDI against the 1.4 (160) there is a significant performance difference. And in motoring terms extra performance always costs more. Fact.
A comparison between the 170TDI and the 1.4 (160) would be a better match on performance levels. Only 1.7% difference on residual here by the looks of it. But even here there are differences. You are comparing a GT spec car with various extras including leather seats against a car with a more basic spec. Leather seats and full air con will always help sell a car so its residuals will consequently be more anyway.
At today's prices the 1.4 (160) costs £21,670 and the 170TDI costs £25,950. A price difference of £4,280.
If you took VW finance @ 7% the extra £4,280 would cost you £300 per year, £900 over 3 years. So you are paying £5,180 more for the 170TDI over 3 years.
Balanced against that the 1.7% extra residual value of the 170TDI is a petty £441 at the end of 3 years.
So how many tank fulls of fuel would you need to make up that kind of difference? And on top of that the insurance for the 1.4 (160) is usually less than for the 170TDI.