:ylsuper: Don't care what the wackos say you want power and fuel economy diesel the only way to go and even the old diesel was cleaner than gas. so bring it on. :nono: :2cents:

Yeah, too many of the ricers think a vehicle with 230 HP and 20 ft-lbs torque is faster than a vehicle with 190 HP and 250 ft-lbs torque. If I can find a good used '86 or older 3/4 or 1 ton 4x4 chevy with a diesel engine, I'm buying it reguardless of price.

I've got a weird one, an 86 Mercury Topaz Diesel (ford tempo) and it's by far the best car that I've ever owned. It has a little 2.0L Mazda motor and gets 50mpg wherever I drive. This is a mid sized car with all the options

I just took a trip from close to Vancouver BC (Canada) almost 1/2 way across Canada to Winnipeg Manatobia, and back on around $300.00 Canadian. 1 diesel fill per province per direction

I wish that they made a new version.

isn't it true that there are tractor pulling engines that can reach 7000+ rpms, if so, what kind bore/strokes would the be running, and i only assume that they are turbo, but what would happen if you kept it naturally aspirated, what would be the result

2.0L mazda diesel in tempo/topaz are they relilable cars and motors? What is the longevity on the cars and motors? how are they in cold weather? can any body help us on this subjeck please send us a message regarding this please. i am looking at an 1984 tempo diesel (2.0L mazda diesel) with a 122,000 miles

Well, we could get a little more out of our gas engines by using TDI. But I don't want a diesel for the mileage - I want one for the torque. But yeah, that's why a stock diesel pickup from ford, dodge, gm is quite the sleeper.

Diesels are pretty much always reliable, the engines have no need to be stressed. There's a multitude of Peugeot diesel engines out there with 500,000 Km's on them looking like they've only just been run in.

The resistance towards diesel does seem to be declining.

My 2.3ton diesel 4wd was faster to 100km/h than my 700kg corolla was. Despite having a power/weight ratio of less than half the corolla.

Shame so many ignorant politicians don't like it.

All I can say is Loremo: http://www.loremo.com/ That thing gets like 150mpg. Turbo V-twin diesel engine.

Yeah, too many of the ricers think a vehicle with 230 HP and 20 ft-lbs torque is faster than a vehicle with 190 HP and 250 ft-lbs torque. If I can find a good used '86 or older 3/4 or 1 ton 4x4 chevy with a diesel engine, I'm buying it reguardless of price.

Jees, when will people learn?

I hate to dig up old threads, and im sorry to burst anyones bubble, but assuming that both cars weight the same, the car will 230hp and 20 torques WILL be faster than the one with 190hp and 250 torques. Physics people.

but assuming that both cars weight the same, the car will 230hp and 20 torques WILL be faster than the one with 190hp and 250 torques. Physics people.

I heartily disagree.

With a power difference of less than 20%, the torque curve will make all the difference to who wins.

If we look at the consumption, diesel is today the best solution.
For example the last Bmw 118d : 5liters/100km, that means more than 600miles with a fill up.
You can find more or less the same thing on other diesel compact car : Citroën C4 Hdi, Renault Mégane Dci, VW, Golf Tdi, Alfa 147 jtd, Fiat Brvo Jtd, Mercedes A Class Cdi, etc. etc. All with about 120 to 150hp.
On the superior range (C5, 407, Passat, Croma, 159, Avenger, Mazda 6, 3 Series, etC.) the consumptions are a little bit higher, but not much. Power btw 120 and 180hp.
Even on the "big" sedans (607, C6, E Class, 5 Series, Thesis, etc.) with engines of 200hp to 250hp, the consumption is about 7liters/100km.

With the same gas engines, the consumption is often two times the gasoil consuption on the cars I mentioned. And if we compare with american cars (Taurus, Fusion, Stratus, 300C, etc.) the diesel engines bacome very interesting from the point of view of the consumption.