Why Diesel Is Not A Dirty Word When Buying A Motorhome (1 Viewer)

[Harry Price]

With the recent news that Hamburg will be the first German city to ban older diesel engines, coupled with a flood of 'dirty diesel' media coverage over recent years, it's understandable that customers have been prompted to think cautiously about diesel when considering a new motorhome.

But, there is an important distinction to be made between 'dirty' diesel engines and cleaner diesel engines in new motorhomes; a difference that prospective buyers can benefit from knowing.

Older diesel engines, i.e. those that were built before the Euro 4 standard in 2005 are those considered to be the most harmful to the environment and are commonly referred to as 'dirty'.

Conversely, new motorhomes are fitted with diesel engines that comply with the new European Commission standards of Euro 5 and Euro 6, introduced in 2009 and 2014, respectively, with the aim of reducing harmful levels of exhaust emissions from both petrol and diesel engines.

Both Euro 5 and Euro 6 are fitted with particulate filters and Euro 6 engines have emissions control technology that converts up to 99% of combustion engine exhaust pollutants and particulates.

 

[Kevinthecat]

I don't think euro 5/6 will meet the ultra low admission zone coming into force next year in London . So anyone visiting , say, Abbey Wood will have to pay £12.50 a day to come into the low admission zone (if they move their vehicle after arriving ) . It will be at its cheapest £25 if you visit .

Thanks for the info @HP I learnt something from your post.

 

[Jands]

Easy target.
I do feel the biggest cause of vehicle pollution is down to road design.
The governent should, instead of building an expensive railway to save 20 min, build new roads and improve our current ones.
Improve the major A roads up to dual carriageway level and bypassing towns.
Create alternatives to the motorways we have so drivers have a choice of roads.
No hold ups, queues and congestion would allow vehicles to operate as designed at their most enviromently clean operation.
This would cost big money so it won't happen, easier to blame vehicle drivers.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Bailey58]

At least older diesels didn't go into limp mode and and be off the road for two months when a relay packs up and four garages and an auto electrician later we finally get to go away in the van.

 

[LesW]

And yet our 2004 Inca appears to be exempt from the newly proposed London Emissions Zone...

 

[ambulancekidd]

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[EuroTrotters]

We own several diesel vehicles.

Euro III, IV, V and VI.

Oddly, the latter have a horrible diesel exhaust stench. Yet the well cared for Euro III, you know its a diesel, but no foul stench. I guess you cannot smell the bad stuff.

 

[Pausim]

I

I don't think euro 5/6 will meet the ultra low admission zone coming into force next year in London . So anyone visiting , say, Abbey Wood will have to pay £12.50 a day to come into the low admission zone (if they move their vehicle after arriving ) . It will be at its cheapest £25 if you visit .

Thanks for the info @HP I learnt something from your post.

I think the Abbey Wood site is outside the ULEZ.

 

[Kevinthecat]

I

I think the Abbey Wood site is outside the ULEZ.

Your right , it is , I've just checked. I assumed it copied the current low admission zone. I live in central London so my 2015 van doesn't meet the ULZ but because I'm local we have until 2021 to change the van if we don't move first.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[PP Bear]

Easy target.
I do feel the biggest cause of vehicle pollution is down to road design.
The governent should, instead of building an expensive railway to save 20 min, build new roads and improve our current ones.
Improve the major A roads up to dual carriageway level and bypassing towns.
Create alternatives to the motorways we have so drivers have a choice of roads.
No hold ups, queues and congestion would allow vehicles to operate as designed at their most enviromently clean operation.
This would cost big money so it won't happen, easier to blame vehicle drivers.

You’re absolutely right.

If we take Newbury as an example. The main A34 ran through the middle of the town. Loads of pollution, both noise and emissions.

So they plan and build the underpass, much to the discuss of the tree huggers and many protesters.

Where as before, it took 30 mins to navigate your way through the town, around all the roundabouts, vehicles pumping out fumes etc, the new bypass means that you pass Newbury in less than 3 mins, the vehicles running at an optimum speed and emissions reduced.

The results? Cleaner air, quieter, safer town, house price increase etc.

I’m all for the A303 Stonehenge bypass and would vote a huge yes to more roads, motorways and bypasses as they’re the only thing that makes any sense and will keep our busy, overcrowded roadways moving into the future.

 

[138go]

It will be in 2040 when all Diesel and Petrol vehicles are banned. I wonder what the tuggers are going to do. Modern battery powered cars are not designed to tow things as it upsets their aerodynamics. As for MH’s cannot imagine what it will be like with 2-300 mile journey and then trying to find a charging post for 12 hours.

 

[jezport]

I don't think euro 5/6 will meet the ultra low admission zone coming into force next year in London . So anyone visiting , say, Abbey Wood will have to pay £12.50 a day to come into the low admission zone (if they move their vehicle after arriving ) . It will be at its cheapest £25 if you visit .

Euro 6 seems OK plus some Euro5 vehicles registered from late 2016

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[tacr2man]

There are loads of German cities that dont allow older diesels in
and have done for several years @Harry Price

 

[tonyidle]

It will be in 2040 when all Diesel and Petrol vehicles are banned. I wonder what the tuggers are going to do. Modern battery powered cars are not designed to tow things as it upsets their aerodynamics. As for MH’s cannot imagine what it will be like with 2-300 mile journey and then trying to find a charging post for 12 hours.

Tuggers and motorhome users will be in the same boat. There are no aerodynamic motorhomes other than those based on panel vans. Nothing will be banned come 2040 - it won't exist so there'll be no need. The face of transport will change in the same way as it did when the ICE arrived and how it turns out is very difficult to imagine 20 years in advance.

 

[Pausim]

Euro 6 seems OK plus some Euro5 vehicles registered from late 2016

My Euro 6 4200kg motorhome passes the LEZ compliance check but fails the ULEZ check. Strange. Are the rules more complex than they appear on first reading them?

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jezport]

My Euro 6 4200kg motorhome passes the LEZ compliance check but fails the ULEZ check. Strange. Are the rules more complex than they appear on first reading them?

What was the date of registration?

 

[Cheshirecat57]

So my van wont go into London......evry cloud etc

 

[Pausim]

What was the date of registration?

October 2015.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jezport]

October 2015.

Isn't yours euro5 then? Not euro6

 

[Speve]

Isn't yours euro5 then? Not euro6

I think that’s about the time Euro 6 came in isn’t it.
We had a 2015 in June I had was 5

 

[Pausim]

Isn't yours euro5 then? Not euro6

I thought it was Euro 6, Mercedes with AdBlue system. I will have to check my documents when I get home. Meanwhile I will have to avoid the Ludlow ULEZ.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jdk62]

There is also a Euro 5+ engine. We have one in our 2016 registered Motorhome.

I think this meets LEZ requirements. Not sure about ULEZ although I suspect it doesn’t

 

[buttons]

Easy target.
I do feel the biggest cause of vehicle pollution is down to road design.
The governent should, instead of building an expensive railway to save 20 min, build new roads and improve our current ones.
Improve the major A roads up to dual carriageway level and bypassing towns.
Create alternatives toused when the motorways we have so drivers have a choice of roads.
No hold ups, queues and congestion would allow vehicles to operate as designed at their most enviromently clean operation.
This would cost big money so it won't happen, easier to blame vehicle drivers.

Sounds like the theory of the planners who added more lanes to the M25, However, Less congestion leads to more vehicles which leads to more congestion which leads to more pollution which has lead to a requirement for yet more lanes on the M25. Improved rail is the only way to go.....

 

[tacr2man]

Sounds like the theory of the planners who added more lanes to the M25, However, Less congestion leads to more vehicles which leads to more congestion which leads to more pollution which has lead to a requirement for yet more lanes on the M25. Improved rail is the only way to go.....

If thats the answer then we might as well shoot ourselves now

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jezport]

I thought it was Euro 6, Mercedes with AdBlue system. I will have to check my documents when I get home. Meanwhile I will have to avoid the Ludlow ULEZ.

If it has adblu it is. You need to check its on your V5 as Euro 6, And if you want to go into the ULEZ you need to contact TFL and see what you have to do to get your vehicle correctly registered with them.

 

[Kingham]

I don't think euro 5/6 will meet the ultra low admission zone coming into force next year in London . So anyone visiting , say, Abbey Wood will have to pay £12.50 a day to come into the low admission zone (if they move their vehicle after arriving ) . It will be at its cheapest £25 if you visit .

Thanks for the info @HP I learnt something from your post.

You had me worried for a moment there, as I regularly take my van in to London to visit my son.

I've just entered my 2017 Euro 6 van's registration number in to TfL's online site and it's not subject to ULEZ

 

[Jands]

Sounds like the theory of the planners who added more lanes to the M25, However, Less congestion leads to more vehicles which leads to more congestion which leads to more pollution which has lead to a requirement for yet more lanes on the M25. Improved rail is the only way to go.....

You misunderstood me.
I don't want larger current motorways just improve, dual lane, bypassing towns, A class roads to increase road options.
At the moment everyone uses the same few roads. M1,M6,M25,M3,M4,A1.
A5 good through MK but rubbish after, could provide an alternative to M1 if improved, along with A6.
Increase the M6 down to Dover, thus avoiding the M1 and M25.
Nobody wants the accidents and hold ups resulting from our congested, limited road network, creating more options of routes will reduce the problems.
Concentrating the traffic onto a few increasing sized roads won't.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[buttons]

You misunderstood me.
I don't want larger current motorways just improve, dual lane, bypassing towns, A class roads to increase road options.
At the moment everyone uses the same few roads. M1,M6,M25,M3,M4,A1.
A5 good through MK but rubbish after, could provide an alternative to M1 if improved, along with A6.
Increase the M6 down to Dover, thus avoiding the M1 and M25.
Nobody wants the accidents and hold ups resulting from our congested, limited road network, creating more options of routes will reduce the problems.
Concentrating the traffic onto a few increasing sized roads won't.

I think you will find the A5 link to the M1 is now open and the A505 comes around the other side of Leighton Buzzard again through to the M1. Cutting straight through Dubstable or St Alban is not really an option.

 

[Jands]

Nice new dual carragway between A5 and M1 again pushing traffic onto the M1.
To use it you have to go on the single carriage A5 through hockcliff or Dunstable.
J11a has created big congestion in North Luton as the road between M1 j11a and A6 is not up to standard, it's a plan for the future.
Also the M1 between J10 and J14 is at 110% capacity so why force more lorries onto it.
It's a cheap option to stop lorries going through dunstable, rather than upgrading the A5 from MK to avoid hockciff and dunstable and join the M1 at J9.
Around J11a they are going to build a large warehouse estate so even more lorries onto the M1.
As I said build dual carragways to increase the traffic options not concentrating all the traffic to a few increasing laned motorways.

 

[1881TB]

Sounds like the theory of the planners who added more lanes to the M25, However, Less congestion leads to more vehicles which leads to more congestion which leads to more pollution which has lead to a requirement for yet more lanes on the M25. Improved rail is the only way to go.....

I think it's the very rapid population growth we have in the UK which leads to the extra lanes being full as soon as they are built. The difference in quality of life in less densely populated countries made a big impression on me.