I have been reading these forums with interest recently. Seems the general concensus among you guys is that the best engine is the 1.9 TDi 130 lump yes? I remember when I bought my car the choice for 1.9 TDi was limited to 100 and 130 BHP units. But on looking at some used car adverts recently I've seen 1.9 TDi 105 and 115 bhp engines. When did these come in? And more importantly what are they like?

Of course I read up on the 2.0 TDi 140 bhp with great interest. I never knew about that particle filter ****** on the Superbs. So glad I came here for the advice.

I am currently on my second Superb 2.0 TDi 140 - no real problems to report with the first one in 30k, and so far (touches wood) none with this one in 10k.

But from my view the 1.9 TDi 130 5spd is the best one, no particle filter rubbish to deal with.

That's my two pence worth.

Here we go again

1.9 130bhp if you're in the UK, V6 if you use the Autobahn.

on fence>

Haha, this argument has been debated once a day with some pretty derogatory statements about each engine.

If you stick to uk speed limits the TDi130 is probably the better choice, having a similar 0-60 as the V6 - if you like an engine that'll just keep pulling past 70 the V6 will come into its own. Having driven both I much prefer the torque curve on the v6 - you almost never have to come out of 6th gear on the motorway.

Whether it's worth the fuel economy and/or maintennance costs - you'll have to make that decision.

Here we go again

1.9 130bhp if you're in the UK, V6 if you use the Autobahn.

on fence>

I find the PD130 is fine at motorway speeds (and up to 90 or so leptons). I've not had experience of the V6 so can't compare, though for the extra power I wish I had the V6 TDi Auto.

No experience of the PD105 or PD115 either. I have test driven a TDi100 Superb, and it wasn't that bad - certainly had enough pick up, so I'd expect the 105 and 115's to be a wee bit better.

I've recently bought a V6 TDI and I must say that I much prefer the V6 to the 130 bhp TDI passat I had before. Endless torque, little lag, fast delivery of power etc. I suppose you get bored with the power you have after a while and want more..... That's why I went for the V6 and I'm not sorry.

I've recently bought a V6 TDI and I must say that I much prefer the V6 to the 130 bhp TDI passat I had before. Endless torque, little lag, fast delivery of power etc. I suppose you get bored with the power you have after a while and want more..... That's why I went for the V6 and I'm not sorry.

I couldn't agree more

Apart from using old rotary pump technology on the V6 which gives it poor efficiency relative to the PD (check the output figures in relation to the CO2 it produces), the V6 is very expensive to maintain - a belt change is expensive, even if you can find someone to do it properly. The electronic VE fuel pumps are not very reliable either.

When I test drove the V6 when choosing a towcar, two things became very evident. The extra weight of the V6 over the 4 makes a nose-heavy car worse. As the car handles like a drunk with a hangover, this was one step too far for me.

The worst aspect though was that VAG have used the same final drive ratio for the V6 as for the 4. The 4 is just about correctly geared, but the 6 could pull a higher top gear and would be better for it. The 6 speed manual box is a bit of a joke as the top gear ratio is very little different from the 5 - 120 rpm difference at 70 mph in top. It's also a lot less reliable than the 5.

The diesels, especially the V6 have such a massive spread of torque that a 6 speed box is a joke (or more likely, a marketing exercise originally conceived for Audi). These engines could manage perfectly well with 4 ratios if they were widely spread. The 5 speed unit is a fair compromise.

The V6 has mercifully been killed off by VAG as a power unit but its fitment in the B5.5 was clearly a bodge for a runout model - otherwise it would have been properly geared with its own transmission. It would then have been a really good high speed cruiser for use outside the UK - although I could never live with the handling.

BMW do it far better with their 6 cyl diesels and use the right gear ratios.

rotodiesel.

The diesels, especially the V6 have such a massive spread of torque that a 6 speed box is a joke (or more likely, a marketing exercise originally conceived for Audi). These engines could manage perfectly well with 4 ratios if they were widely spread. The 5 speed unit is a fair compromise.

I dont think this is really true - once you get used to this it's easy to see the point of this box - couple a 6 speed box with a rediculously low torque peak and the car drives effortlessly. You can easily make swift progress without ever going above 2k rpm, which I think was the point of the box - if you drive it at low rpm its efficiency jumps considerably. Yes okay, it could have pulled at lower RPMs on the motorway, but that's just skoda cost cutting on its production I think.

BMW do it far better with their 6 cyl diesels and use the right gear ratios.

Again I dont necessarily think this is true, having owned a pre common rail 2.5 6 cylender BMW 5 series (M51 Eng.)

Bmw 2.5 6 cylender: 114/141HP - 280Nm @ 2200RPM

VAG 2.5 6 cylender: 150/160HP - 310NM @ 1400RPM

I got considerably worse MPG in the Bmw, only being able to pull about 25-27 combined - whereas the Skoda combines about 32-34. The bimmer was also considerably slower off the mark due to it's rediculous gearing, it was like driving a slug sometimes and quite often caught you out trying to pull out of a junction. On a motorway, sure, it was awe inspiringly quick pulling from 70 upwards all the way to the limiter... but around town it was pretty useless.

You cant compare the VAG 2.5 V6 TDi with their new bmw 2.5/3.0/3.5 6 cylender TDi engines - they're in a completely different class of common rails. (Though still relatively crap on fuel economy)

Also - I thought VAG hadnt killed the V6 TDi - it lives on bored out to a 3.0 - with a 335Hp/600Nm+ version fitted to the Porsche Cayenne? They've just canned the 2.5 version much like BMW is reportedly about to...?

Edited 5 March, 200917 yr by Ferret101
Correcting a figure

But BMW at least had the sense to change the gearing between 4 and 6 cyl in the same bodyshell. It makes a huge difference if you want a high speed cruiser.

The VAG V6 engine was sold during the same time period the BMW CR engines were sold - hence the comparison. Having used one of these machines quite a bit in Germany, I can't agree with you concerning their fuel economy - it's not "crap" - I was very impressed with it.

The Skoda beats it on price though.

rotodiesel.

Not terribly relevant, but I see All Electric in Brum have a 2.5V6 TDi Auto Edition 100 for sale. Wished I've had hung on for a 2.5...

But BMW at least had the sense to change the gearing between 4 and 6 cyl in the same bodyshell. It makes a huge difference if you want a high speed cruiser.

The VAG V6 engine was sold during the same time period the BMW CR engines were sold - hence the comparison. Having used one of these machines quite a bit in Germany, I can't agree with you concerning their fuel economy - it's not "crap" - I was very impressed with it.

The Skoda beats it on price though.

Admittedly yes, bmw changes the gearing ratio for pretty much every car - a la:

www.e34.de

However I imagine it's considerably cheaper to do so when the final drive isnt part of the gearbox. (By which I mean you dont have to set your final ratio at the time the gearbox is built - only when the car is being built many months later.) I'm not disputing that it was a daft decision, however I think the low down ratios on the v6 Tdi are near perfect. The 6th gear *does* need to be a bit longer, my old 5 series used to be on idle at around 55 mph, sitting at 1500 rpm at 70 - wheras the VAG unit is higher than that.

The bmw cr diesels only really come into their own when you're on motorway duty... around town they're almost as bad as the M51 power unit (and on an auto they can be shockin' like.) My real point however was that you're trying to compare two different technologies - To compare BMW vs VAG you have to compare the same techs aka the M51 engine - which weighs in under the VAG unit. Out of date Tech vs New tech? Yes okay they were on sale at the same time but it's like trying to compare a lump of gritty chalk you picked up for free on the beach and an overpriced piece of fine french cheese :P

What really needs to happen is VAG to get their finger out and produce a decent CR V6 TDi lump - (I'm assuming that the 3.0 V6 TDi isnt, I'll check this in a minute) - however... I think they can be forgiven for being slow on the big diesel uptake while they bring their FSi/TSi technology up to speed - which may well make diesel engines redundant if they advance the technology any further.

They produce the finest V8 TDi in the world now I remember - the 4.2 in the A8 - maybe they've just not got around to updating the midrange V6 because of the rest of the really rather good improvements they're making?

As far as I know, the 3.0 litre version of the V6 is common rail. This at least overcomes the VE pump problems and the difficulty in setting the dynamic timing.

I've not seen the actual 3.0 engine yet, but a sectioned drawing appears to show the water pump driven by the cambelt at the bottom of the "V" - just like the 2.5. Bad idea.

rotodiesel.

I've got the V6 2.5 TDi. No its not a sharp handling car then again, if I wanted a sports car I'd have bought........well, a sports car -not a long wheel base family saloon!

I love the sound it makes, the endless torque and yes - even the fuel economy. I've had 50 on amotorway run dialed in at 80 on the cruise control - average speed for the journey was 63 mph over 143 miles. I also consistantly get about 39-41 to the gallon on my daily commute to the centre of Bath - an 18 mile trip.

I drove a 130 1.9. i liked it but in comparison the engine was predictably less refined & a little less smooth - particularly at higher revs where to be frank I think it looses the plot as it does in my wifes Fabia VRs & my Father's SEAT Alhambra.

Its not the smoothest V6, really it should have been better, but I can't help liking it- it's always fairly muted.

46K on the clock now, no reliability issues yet & uses no oil. Not cheap to maintain I suppose but hey ho! Lifes short & I don't like hair shirts too much! Its cheap to buy so that's you compenstion I guess.

Go for the V6 - indulge yourself.

I also consistantly get about 39-41 to the gallon on my daily commute to the centre of Bath - an 18 mile trip.

I see you're in the same neck of the woods as me .... can you recommend a good place for services locally?

Regarding the economy and the CO2 rating on the cars, in the past, we would often take my wife's Yaris on long trips, and the best mpg we ever got was about 53, which is almost identical to the 2.5 V6 when driven sensibly.

When you burn a hydrocarbon fuel, it mainly produces C02 and H20, so if you're getting the same mpg from two cars then you must get the same C02 for the same distance travelled (given that there's probably a slight difference between diesel and petrol in terms of chemical make up).

Quite why the 2.5 V6 tax is about twice the tax on the Yaris is beyond me in normal motoring. Have no idea what the V6 would be like in city traffic, but in town it seems to be around 35 mpg, which I still consider pretty good. I'm told that a mate's 1.9tdi Golf estate is taxed at £135, and he regularly gets worse fuel consumption than I do.

Have driven both the V6 and 1.9 TDi 130 .... own a 130bhp in fact, with a Dragon tuning box added and I can see the arguments for both.

However my own experience of them is that for one motorway journey I may go for the V6 - but to live with everyday I'd go for the 1.9 TDi. Thought it was better around town. It was punchier and more chuckable probably due to the reduction in engine weight? On the motorway mine glides past 100mph effortlessly, and although I have pushed it quite a bit further and it will do in excess of 130 mph ... in reality how many times do you really push it past 100mph, honestly?

Guess the best thing to do is test drive each and see which you like. Personal preference I suppose.

Have to admit though, when people say "the V6 just sounds so much better" makes me smile. What are you buying an engine or a stereo? Buy a 1.9 and a two stage exhaust in that case.

Edited 5 March, 200917 yr by allclownsareevi

Have to admit though, when people say "the V6 just sounds so much better" makes me smile. What are you buying an engine or a stereo? Buy a 1.9 and a two stage exhaust in that case.

Agreed... I've a drilled airbox in mine and it's changed the sound dramatically, espesically with the standard dump valve. It looks like my exhaust is on its way out as well so it might be a trip to Powerflow soon...

Anyway, as for sound - if you're after a nice sounding engine, why are you buying a derv in the first place?

Anyway, as for sound - if you're after a nice sounding engine, why are you buying a derv in the first place?

I guess a similar reason as to why audi are lining this up for the R8?

Amusing when a baby supercar ends up with a TDi

I guess the point of the TDi is to have V6 torque/noise/performance/whatever and be able to see realistically over 22-25mpg? Sometimes it's not completely about penny pinching - it's a compromise between a petrol V6 and a diesel I4 I guess? It's a sensible choice for someone that's not worried about the fuel economy - but doesnt want to go overboard. You get tired of 17-22 to the gallon very, very quickly

Amusing when a baby supercar ends up with a TDi

I guess the point of the TDi is to have V6 torque/noise/performance/whatever and be able to see realistically over 22-25mpg? Sometimes it's not completely about penny pinching - it's a compromise between a petrol V6 and a diesel I4 I guess? It's a sensible choice for someone that's not worried about the fuel economy - but doesnt want to go overboard. You get tired of 17-22 to the gallon very, very quickly

There's always one...

Although, ignoring the possibility that it's just PR, that V12 TDI will have a wall of torque capable of stopping the world turning. I pity the fool who has to design a drivetrain to cope with that...

. It looks like my exhaust is on its way out as well so it might be a trip to Powerflow soon...

let us know how you get in with that think i'll be in the same postion by then end if the year :(

I bought my 2.5 diesel two and a half years ago when it had done 90k miles and had just had a cambelt change. Since then I've done another 55k miles and I just love the fact that this is the best lazy boy's car around. It has so much low down torque that I can almost choose which gear to put the car in. My partner has an Octavia Mk1 estate with the 130bhp engine and 6-speed box. It is SO different. I have to drive that one, choosing my gears carefully and always being at least one gear lower in that than I would be in my 2.5 V6 Superb. I am not a boy racer. I am an idle driver who wants the car to help me get around. My bigger engine just encourages me to use low revs, save more dosh on my fuel bills and enjoy driving. I'd have my car over my partner's any day. As for the cost of managing the cambelt, I'll tell you more about which is better when I've had my cambelt et al replaced at the end of the month. I'm hoping to still have change from £400 for the cambelt and the other bits, plus water pump with metal impeller. I'll give you an update in early November.

tbh i would say the 1.9tdi 130 bhp with the 6 speed box and then get a remap to about 170bhp and about 300lbft

tbh i would say the 1.9tdi 130 bhp with the 6 speed box and then get a remap to about 170bhp and about 300lbft

IIRC You could not get the 1.9TDi in the Superb with a 6 speed manual, only a 5.

1.9TDi 130 - remapped as vrsadz says - had mine done for £200 and it's fantastic. Still can't believe how I've now got 297lb/ft of torque yet the fuel economy is way better. I see 53-55mpg average across the whole tank now (according to the trip computer)

...in reality how many times do you really push it past 100mph, honestly?

16-20 times a year, 10+hours at a time, usually past 130mph for at least 3hrs each time

2.5V6 TDI 6-spd is the one for me, 65k miles trouble free except for rear-end impact back in April. Will do the timing belts myself, as I have yet to see a knowledgeable VW technician in the area I live in.

I agree about fuel consumption, it is substantially higher on 2.5V6, though the 1.9 is really unique in terms of power / fuel economy balance.