I still don't understand the desire to buy a diesel unless you are doing more than 20k miles per year. The petrols are more characterful, not having to resort to artificially generated noise, and fit the marque better. Anyone who has one want to explain the reasoning?
I don't doubt that the various shenanigans that are done to reduce diesel omissions do bring the measured pollutants down to reasonable levels but the particulates seem to get through the testing. Yes a DPF helps with that but how many vehicles have we seen on the roads dumping clouds of black s**t out of the exhaust when they put the power on. This includes cars that were fitted with a DPF from new, but have perhaps had it bypassed as a cheaper fix than replacing it. People are cheap and if there is a way around something that is cheaper than the right fix they will do it and undo the good work done to keep the omissions down.
I still think that diesel has limited shelf life and will be replaced by full electric in the next 10 years. Petrol, and petrol hybrid, will continue for a while longer to cope with those situations where charging may be an issue.
Well to turn your argument on its head for a moment.
Why not choose the Diesel over the Petrol. Setting aside the 'S' and comparing the standard petrol. In terms of refinement there is little to choose once the Diesel is warmed up, in fact it may in general driving be a little quieter. Although as you point out the albeit artificial exhaust sound, in Sport mode sounds deeper as it's been electronically tuned to sound like a V8, and I don't notice any criticism being levelled at BMW for doing the same with their i8.
In terms of performance, whilst the standard petrol post quicker acceleration times, in real driving it's not noticeable, in fact the Diesels generous torque could even be more relevant.
As for running costs, they speak for themselves.
Are my comments painting a biased position for the Diesel... maybe so, but at the same time it's not the terrible alternative some suggest.
