turbos and fuel octane.

[y_p_w]

My cummins does not have glow plugs, their usually found in smaller 4 cylinder
and low output v8's (like the oldsmobile diesel and gm 6.2 "slug"). Mine does
however have a "grid" that glows like a toaster in the intake manifold, i'm
guessing to heat the incoming air. I never use it, besides I like the way it
pours out the white smoke when its 10 degrees. My neighbors like it too

Uh - several members of my extended family have driven vehicles with the
engines you describe. One was a 1980 VW Rabbit Diesel. Loudest car I've
ever had the displeasure of riding in. The ridiculous lack of sound
insulation didn't help. I guess VW did everything in their power to
get 55 MPG, but forgot that actual human beings would ride in these
things. My uncles bought a pair of Oldmobile diesels - a Delta 88 and
a Cutlass Supreme. Eventually they passed one on to my folks after our
car died. They smelled, were loud, and didn't go fast. The only saving
grace was getting almost 40 MPG in a full-sized sedan.

My father leased a 1984 Mercedes-Benz 300D-Turbo. That was a nice ride,
save the awful MB-Tex vinyl seats. It had a distinctive rattle at
idle, but at highway speeds is was nice an smooth. I'm not sure why
MB went with a 3.0L 5 cylinder turbodiesel though.

 

[Juhan Leemet]

My father leased a 1984 Mercedes-Benz 300D-Turbo. That was a nice ride,
save the awful MB-Tex vinyl seats. It had a distinctive rattle at
idle, but at highway speeds is was nice an smooth. I'm not sure why
MB went with a 3.0L 5 cylinder turbodiesel though.

I had an '85 Audi 5000 STD (turbo diesel) FWD which only gave up the ghost
a couple of years ago. It also had a 5 cylinder, but I think it was only
2.3L not 3L? Not a bad car. Great for highway cruising. The turbo made it
bearable, unlike a buddy's Mercedes 240D (non-turbo) I drove a long time
ago: it took several seconds to start moving from a standing start. With a
turbo, a diesel feels more or less like a regular car. The 5 cylinder
sounds odd, but it's a very smooth engine, with lots of torque: more than
a 4, almost as much as a 6, er, I guess that's pretty obvious? However,
the Audi diesel was really expensive to maintain.

These days I'm driving a '98 Subaru Legacy Brighton and I LOVE IT!

p.s. Every now and then I read the Alfa newsgroup about their turbo
diesels and they sound pretty exciting, but I can't afford that now.

 

[Ignignokt]

I had an '85 Audi 5000 STD (turbo diesel) FWD which only gave up the
ghost a couple of years ago. It also had a 5 cylinder, but I think it
was only
2.3L not 3L? Not a bad car. Great for highway cruising. The turbo
made it bearable, unlike a buddy's Mercedes 240D (non-turbo) I drove
a long time ago: it took several seconds to start moving from a
standing start. With a turbo, a diesel feels more or less like a
regular car. The 5 cylinder sounds odd, but it's a very smooth
engine, with lots of torque: more than a 4, almost as much as a 6,
er, I guess that's pretty obvious? However, the Audi diesel was
really expensive to maintain.

I'm guessing that your noted increase in maintenance expense was due to the
fact of its being an Audi rather than its being a diesel. The most
expensive-to-maintain car I've ever owned -- and by a very large margin --
was a 1990 Audi V8 Quattro (not a diesel).

- Greg Reed

 

[Juhan Leemet]

I'm guessing that your noted increase in maintenance expense was due to
the fact of its being an Audi rather than its being a diesel. The most
expensive-to-maintain car I've ever owned -- and by a very large margin
-- was a 1990 Audi V8 Quattro (not a diesel).

Actually, I think it was probably both Audi+diesel that made it more
expensive. Turned out that most of the parts for that car were NOT common
with other models of the same year. I don't know why a diesel model needs
different parts (with a much smaller production), but many of them were
unique, and expensive. For example, the radiator was "special" (well, I
can sort of understand that might have to be heavier?) and cost me
Cdn$1000 to replace. My mechanic said that even VW diesel rads were
more expensive than gas versions. Hard to determine if that's simply the
result of "market economics" or "price gouging". Why should a diesel
radiator cost x2+ more? I could understand 20% but 200+%?!?

p.s. Another "weird thing" with that Audi. The top radiator hose was a
"3-way" hose. You'd think a standard "generic" rad hose would do? Nope!
Gotta buy that special Audi hose (for big $$$) with the little "bleeder
hose" coming off the middle. Ah, but that reminds me...

Gotta love duct tape (go! Red Green!). I actually made a temporary repair
of that top radiator hose on the Audi diesel using duct tape. The hose
split lengthwise (for about 2" length) on the highway coming into
Montreal. It was a Saturday and the only thing open (no garages) was a
Canadian Tire (within walking distance). Since I had nothing to lose, I
bought a roll of duct tape and wrapped a "sausage" around the split part
of the top rad hose. It was about 3/8" thick and extended a couple of
inches either side of the split. Good enough to drive to my brother's
place in Montreal. Then I thought I'd do a little experiment: after the
weekend I drove from Montreal to Toronto (about 600Km), and drove it
around for about a week in Toronto, before taking it to my mechanic.
Unbelievable! The hose was intact and bone dry! Gotta love duct tape!