Diesel cars might be phased out.

Have a look on some of the car forums. The standard response when someone whines that their emissions are up is often that the EGR valve should be blocked, the DPF removed, a sensor hard wired to a resistor that will always give a 'healthy' reading etc.

I can totally understand why people do such things. You mentioned early that DPF's do work. Maybe, for a while, but there's plenty of people on the car forums who say otherwise and want to remove them because they're sick of them failing. Perhaps they work reliably for a while then give constant grief? There's so much going on in a modern engine, which means so many things that have to work perfectly in unison, and so many opportunities for failure. By comparison, an electric motor and its associated systems entails some coils of wire, some magnets, some capacitors, a battery, some cabling, and some fairly basic electronics. Modern internal combustion = practically rocket science. Electric motor = GCSE physics.

 

They Stink.!

 

EGR; no longer possible sadly, but yes on older systems I totally agree! DPF; too many short journeys. Basically, the wallies bought the wrong car for the job! Modern diesels are great for users who do more than regular short journeys, petrol for the rest.

DPF filters are generally reliable if everything is ok elsewhere and it gets regular decent runs. It is a filter and as such needs replacement from time to time, but on the whole (with a few notable exceptions) will be good for 100 000 to 150 000 miles.

And they should be left as they left the factory. So many of the most vocal wallies on car forums have had this chipped and that remapped. How some pratt with a laptop can do a better job than tens of millions of euros backing a skilled team defies logic. It also defies reliability as countless clutch failures, premature head gasket failures and in extreme cases piston failures are proving. I just bought a 2010 Passat diesel with a broken piston. Sent the ECU away for analysis and it has a non standard map! So at 53000 miles a piston broke and the flailing conrod punched a hole in the block!

Covered by FC.

Thanks - you saved me typing for hours!!

 

This bit amused me, because I totally agree 100%. Its like the yoofs that buy a corsa or clio for £300 then lower it and but 'Neverbeen' stickers all over it. My first ever car was a 1.3 litre, 8 valve Ford Escort Mk5 (the overly heavy one). It was the slowest car in the universe. Yet one day at some lights some chavs in a lowered Nova clearly indicated they intended to 'mock me'. I thought to myself. 'yeah, you've got the quicker car, but I'll make you work for it' (silly I know, I've grown out of that sort of thing). The lights changed, we both floored it. They lunged half a car length ahead instantly, but their rear wheel arches, lowered so much, dropped under acceleration to the extent that a plume of blue smoke come off and they had to slow down. My 3 legged donkey pulled ahead with ease. I've always said in conversions, the engineers put a lot of effort into choosing just the right suspension and engine settings and gear rations and valve clearances etc etc etc, just for some chav to 'do a better job' himself.

Doesn't seem to change the fact that lots of people, both on the forums and people I know personally suffer endless woe with modern engines, particularly diesel ones. Its why I only like older cars. Newer ones seem to spend half their lives bust.

 

TVP causes worse emissions

 

I've got an in depth knowledge of how to set race cars up to corner. Despite not having attended a race meeting in 17 years I still have my corner weight scales and set the odd car up at the workshop. My weekends are frequently interrupted by a couple of old race mates phoning up to toss ideas over. Despite this, I refuse to mess with road car set up. You're spot on - hundreds of thousands of miles go into sorting road car suspension out. Most barry boy Saxos end their days going backwards through a hedge or backwards into a wall because some gimp knew better!

Too many of these problems are the result of wrong car for the wrong job or through the use of the wrong oil!

 

But this isn't the fault of the owner. Most people can't afford to change their car on a whim, so they must choose whatever they think is going to be right for them, and stick with it. The car manufacturers and dealers don't help. They tell you that ALL their cars are perfect for you, and people can't be expected to study in depth engineering principles to help them to make an informed decision. So given that a combination of cost and lack of info makes it virtually impossible for someone to be sure they're making the right choice, I still maintain, that newer cars seem to suffer a lot more woe than older ones.

 

I totally agree Clueless. As is so often the case in life the most instructive experience is usually bitter experience.
I stand by the fact that many premature problems come about as the result of using the wrong oil though. This may not be the owners fault but the fault of the garage that they use.

 

Not really. Most engines nowadays are bombproof thanks to the advances in mass production techniques. Service intervals based on use patterns used to seem gimmicky, but they have proven to be effective.
What is nuts/exploitative is the minimal wear tolerances allowed on brake discs nowadays! They're almost on the limit when fitted new.

 

Seems Heathrow has some fully autonomous, fully electric cars.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/ar...rt-passengers-around-londons-heathrow-airport

And it was on the news today that there's been an all electric F1 Grande Prix.
http://news.sky.com/story/1334803/its-electric-first-formula-e-season-begins

Maybe things are changing after all.