I know there are loads of threads about which engine has the better MPG but I thought I'd add my real world experience of both engines.

I bought a 1.4TDi Estate in Nov 2008 and drove it for about 4 months putting on about 8K in the process. For the last 2 1/2 months I've been driving the wifes' 1.9TDi hatch due to the arrival of a new sprog and the estate being nabbed by her as it's "nicer" (i.e. it has heated seats!).

I've done pretty much the same routes in both (30 mile daily commute, a few 200 mile motorway trips) and my conclusion is that the 1.9TDi is more economical to drive in real world conditions.

I can average 60mpg in the 1.9 without really trying whereas the 1.4 needs to be driven much more slowly and carefully to achieve the same mpg. I've achieved 70mpg in the 1.9 with careful driving but couldn't get that in the 1.4.

Saying that the 1.9 has done 80K and the 1.4 only 10K so is still running in to a degree.

Anyway that's my view but I will say that the MK2 Estate is still a superb car - I got the 1.4tDi on cost grounds (both intial and running costs) and don't reget it at all.

My experiences with the 1.4 and 1.9 were with a Polo Mk4 facelift (2001), and my Mk2 Ibiza TDI 90 and an A3 TDI 110.

The Polo was SWMBO's company car, but I used it for my mixed commute for a while. The best car economy wise was the Audi- which was also the fastest. The Ibiza & Polo were about the same for economy.

I think to some degree the 1.4 is potentially better on fuel, if you drive it gently, which I didn't. It's a cracking engine though.

Hi

I previously owned a Fabia Mk1 1.4TDi Classic Estate (75bhp) which I loved to bits,was a lovely motor all around. I was getting day to day 55mpg after it achived 75K onthe clock before that I was getting 53.5 mpg this was 'Brim 2 Brim' method as no trip computer on this car. On long journeys anywhere between 62mpg to 75mpg again via 'Brim 2 Brim' the type of driving I was doing was simply keepingwith traffic and driving progressively when no one in front of me.

I now have a 1.9TDi Mk2 Fabia and after 2,350miles of driving average of 53.1mpg and long journeys 58mpg mind you I only have 9,262miles on the car. Most journeys have been outta town and can not give a day to day figure yet. (Have had time off work due to to much holiday days left... lmao)

In conclusion I will have to say what I have seen personally so far the 1.4TDi is more efficent. However like yourself I have considerably less miles on the new car and the hopeful thought of mpg figures improving as it get older is a great thought indeed. But in true feeling I will have to say at present there is little drop in economy from the 1.4 to the 1.9... so your thoughts may prove correct. None the less I am open to the possibility of the larger engine being better economy but time will only tell for true info to emerge on this.

TL

Forgot to mention the 1.4TDi is better around town then the 1.9TDi logic dicates that if people do large amounts around town,then the 1.4TDi will make the logical choice As a 1.4TDi is more of a all rounder in this respects

All figures stated are from Brim to Brim method, I have observed the Maxidot Computer is 2.5% optimistic showing 54.5mpg as average.

Edited 26 May, 200917 yr by Timelord1.9Tdi

Very interesting results chaps. The estate version of the Fabia Mk2 is heavier than the hatch so the 1.4TDI in the estate is not likely to be much more economical. In fact, every road test I have read suggests the 1.9TDI for everday use is almost as economical as the 1.4TDI. I would add that I don't hang about in my 1.4TDI estate, but I can easily achieve 66mpg on the motorways without really trying. However, even if I try hard I cannot get over 71mpg on a run...and that's according to the trip computer. Brim to brim...it's not much different! Around town with no out of town driving I get 50mpg all the time, mostly short runs. I'm happy.

Very interesting results chaps. The estate version of the Fabia Mk2 is heavier than the hatch so the 1.4TDI in the estate is not likely to be much more economical. In fact, every road test I have read suggests the 1.9TDI for everday use is almost as economical as the 1.4TDI. I would add that I don't hang about in my 1.4TDI estate, but I can easily achieve 66mpg on the motorways without really trying. However, even if I try hard I cannot get over 71mpg on a run...and that's according to the trip computer. Brim to brim...it's not much different! Around town with no out of town driving I get 50mpg all the time, mostly short runs. I'm happy.

Hi

You'll be suprised, but the weight differance isquite irrelevant, the other consideration that will adjust for weight differential is the gear box ratio's here are the ratio's for a1.4TDi (80):-

Hatch

1 - 3.778

2 - 2.063

3 - 1.348

4 - 0.967

5 - 0.769

FD - 3.389

Estate

1 - 3.300

2 - 1.944

3 - 1.308

4 - 0.971

5 - 0.756

FD - 3.389

as you see majority of the gears are smaller in the estate then in the Hatchback which means it rev's lower and therefore slower accelerating but better economy in relation to the hatch gearbox

It is also down to fuel quality as well, I was getting 62mpg in the South West and in Scotland (Inverness) I was getting 75mpg driving the same just Scotish fuel rocks

Any way I digress but you get better around town then my 1.9TDi I get around 45mpg based off Maxidot Comp

Also woth noting I only see a 2.5% drop between Comp andBrim to Brim

TL

Added 1.9Tdi Hatch Gear Ratio's

1 - 3.778

2 - 2.063

3 - 1.308

4 - 0.917

5 - 0.700

FD - 3.158

Edited 26 May, 200917 yr by Timelord1.9Tdi

I am very happy with the mpg for the 1.4TDi 80 estate. I don't think the difference between the 1.4 and the 1.9 would be great but the main selling point must be the £35 road tax.

I got my highest ever mpg on a journey yesterday of 72.6. I put it down to the hot weather and quieter road for a bank holiday.

Nice one mate

Thanks for the comments guys.

Estateman - couldn't agree more that on cost grounds the 1.4TDi makes more sense - mine's a company car and it's way cheaper as a benefit in kind due to the 120g CO rating.

Timelord - must admit your analysis is way deeper than mine - I just look at the trip computer MPG and compared them with the same driving style over the same route.

Biggest difference is there are a couple of long hills on my daily commute and the extra torque of the 1.9 makes the difference as I don't have to drop a gear or increase the revs.

Anyway that's enough from me - I'm happy with my 1.4 Estate (well I would be if the wife let me drive it!). It's still the best small estate on the market IMHO.

Hi

You'll be suprised, but the weight differance isquite irrelevant, the other consideration that will adjust for weight differential is the gear box ratio's here are the ratio's for a1.4TDi (80):-

Hatch

1 - 3.778

2 - 2.063

3 - 1.348

4 - 0.967

5 - 0.769

FD - 3.389

Estate

1 - 3.300

2 - 1.944

3 - 1.308

4 - 0.971

5 - 0.756

FD - 3.389

as you see majority of the gears are smaller in the estate then in the Hatchback which means it rev's lower and therefore slower accelerating but better economy in relation to the hatch gearbox

TL, Good post...and I agree with what you say except for the bit about the gear ratios. With the same final drive ratio for both models, hatch and estate, if the numbers are smaller for the estate gearbox the gear ratios are lower, and the engine revs higher for any given gear selected. The estate is marginally heavier and it is anticipated it will carry more load during it's life, and so needs slightly lower gearing to maintain good driveability and good get up and go from a standing start. It is only slightly lower gearing, and it bearly affects fuel economy, but I get your drift.:thumbup:

Edited 27 May, 200917 yr by Estate Man
I still can't speel

Hi

A Useful resource I found... have entered the ratio's of the Hatch and Estate already.

Could not upload excel document so here is linky from my site

http://www.timelordq.co.uk/GEARS.xls

enjoy

TL

According to spritmonitor.de these are the real world figures, I found:

1.4 TDI 70 Bhp: 53.70 MPG

1.4 TDI 80 Bhp: 53.91 MPG

1.9 TDI 105 Bhp: 50.90 MPG

80bhp That seems very near to what I always get and however I drive it stays around this figure. As a number of threaders state this reflects accurate returne as the Maxidot is a little generous?

80bhp That seems very near to what I always get and however I drive it stays around this figure. As a number of threaders state this reflects accurate returne as the Maxidot is a little generous?

Hi

My Maxidot currently is 2.5% 'generous' based over 2,500 miles since I had it. However some of this variation my also be accounted for by the natural varriation of fuels and the method applied in the calculation of the 'Brim 2 Brim' method, and wether it come from the very same pump as well, and even that varries based on the natural varriation of fuel and wether trading standards have done a 6 monthly test of the pumps and had to alter the settings on the pump to ensure we are getting the correct amount of fuel etc. I am inclined to think the maxidot is reasonably accurate based on my studies.

Hope this is helpful

Timelord

Forgive me for getting off topic but what does final drive mean??? and what difference doea a higher or lower one make???

Timelord, I apologise...I was thinking abit squiffey regarding the gear ratios (faulty brain circuit!). You are right of course in what you say.

Timelord, I apologise...I was thinking abit squiffey regarding the gear ratios (faulty brain circuit!). You are right of course in what you say.

No Worries mate, I get confused on this as well, so easy to, so I cheat and use that excell document to remind me

Not clever, just a blagger of cleverness

Nice doc though init

Timelord

Forgive me for getting off topic but what does final drive mean??? and what difference doea a higher or lower one make???

Final drive means the drive wheel (Ok here comes the blagging of cleverness)

FD = Drive Wheel, basically as in a push bike the gear wheel that the pedals are attached

The smaller FD the more force it needs to drive the wheel, just like on a push bike. Also assuming the (Gears) are smallish as well means higher speeds achievable in gearing at lower RPM's. However this is useless unless you have sufficent force (Torque) to propel the gears to speed.

Diesels have smaller gears then petrols as diesels produce more torque the petrols. Hence why diesels have good low rev acceleration over petrol cars, also as known diels are peaking torque between 1700rpm - 2800rpm, and max power(BHP) output is limited to 4000rpm / 4500rpm where petrols vary more on power limits between 5000rpm to 8000rpm.... and torque peaks at 3000rpm to much higher like 6000rpm depending on engines in all cases. This is why petrols need lots of revs compared to diesels.

I am not sure if I explained this correctly, I hope I have

This is why I always say that gearing and torque is the most important factors when it comes to acceleration. It is a complicated thing to explain, but unless invited to explain my reasoning I will cut this short here (Ok not so short but hey ho)

Timelord

I Can never see my 1.4 getting over 55mpg, and am not really a fast driver at all, cars covered just over 11k and ive heard that you get better mpg as more miles clock in, at the moment am getting around 51mpg which is ok, intrestingly my mpg goes down if i fill the tank up by around 1 - 2 mpg which is odd, and my car runs on nothing but BP Ultimate, which really is some awesome jungle juice!