New article appeared on the auto.cz,

It appears that there may be a 1.4TSI in a few months time, front wheel drive only with 6 spd manual or 7spd DSG. No exact date on introduction given, trim levels or prices.

My link

Also on the 'front page' of automix.cz

My link

Regards,

TP

Edit - additional info

Edited 29 January, 201016 yr by The Plumber

Any news on the 200+ bhp CR Diesel?

Any news on the 200+ bhp CR Diesel?

170 not enough then

TP

Never enough!

New article appeared on the auto.cz,

It appears that there may be a 1.4TSI in a few months time, front wheel drive only with 6 spd manual or 7spd DSG. No exact date on introduction given, trim levels or prices.

That peace of new may upset a few readers :'(

170 not enough then

TP

It would be a pain if I ordere the 170 and then the 200+ bhp 420Nm 2.0 CR came out immediately after.

On one of the articles it says it indicates that the CO2 emissions= 179g (Band I) and fuel consumption 7.4 l (38.2mpg). Those don't sound too good. Do you think they're right? In the Octavia, the 1.4tsi = 148g CO2 emissions and fuel consumption 42.8mpg.

Edited 29 January, 201016 yr by CharlieB72

On one of the articles it says it indicates that the CO2 emissions= 179g (Band I) and fuel consumption 7.4 l (38.2mpg). Though don't sound too good. Do you think they're right?

Hi Charlie,

just had a look at the Superb II figures as that's probably the closest model with this engine (kerb weight 1482kg), combined fuel = 6.8ltrs/100km and CO2 =157g/km. The figures quoted in the 'mag' sound not far of the Tiguan 1.4TSI 4x4.

Regards,

TP

Well if those articles are correct it looks like my hope there would be a 1.4 TSi are correct. the only disappointing thing is that it appears to be 2wd only.

The other disappointment being I've just ordered a 1.2 TSi! Still I'd delayed ordering long enough so if i hadn't ordered that it would have been a different car entirely.

On one of the articles it says it indicates that the CO2 emissions= 179g (Band I) and fuel consumption 7.4 l (38.2mpg). Those don't sound too good. Do you think they're right? In the Octavia, the 1.4tsi = 148g CO2 emissions and fuel consumption 42.8mpg.

If those figures are anywhere like correct I think I'd rather stick with the more efficient 1.2 or get the extra power and traction of the 1.8.

Probably the Golf Plus 1.4 TSi is the nearest comparison at the moment to a potential 2WD 1.4 TSi Yeti.

The Golf Plus 1.4TSi has a top speed of 121mph, 10.2 secs to 62 mph, CO2 emissions of 152 (146 in DSG) and 43.5 mpg combined cycle.

In manual form the Golf Plus 1.4 TSi has a gross weight of 1970kg compared to the 1.2 TSi Yeti's 1890kg - so in 1.4 guise they will be pretty close me thinks.

The manual Yeti 1.2 figures are top speed 109mph, 11.8 secs to 62mph, CO2 emissions of 149 and 44.1 mpg combined cycle.

Going on those figures the 1.4 TSi makes it the better choice.

If those figures are anywhere like correct I think I'd rather stick with the more efficient 1.2 or get the extra power and traction of the 1.8.

+1 Exactly my thoughts!

The Golf Plus 1.4TSi has a top speed of 121mph, 10.2 secs to 62 mph, CO2 emissions of 152 (146 in DSG) and 43.5 mpg combined cycle.

If these figures turn out to be correct and the 1.4TSI is available from around April.May it will be just what I want

Probably the Golf Plus 1.4 TSi is the nearest comparison at the moment to a potential 2WD 1.4 TSi Yeti.

The Golf Plus 1.4TSi has a top speed of 121mph, 10.2 secs to 62 mph, CO2 emissions of 152 (146 in DSG) and 43.5 mpg combined cycle.

In manual form the Golf Plus 1.4 TSi has a gross weight of 1970kg compared to the 1.2 TSi Yeti's 1890kg - so in 1.4 guise they will be pretty close me thinks.

The manual Yeti 1.2 figures are top speed 109mph, 11.8 secs to 62mph, CO2 emissions of 149 and 44.1 mpg combined cycle.

Going on those figures the 1.4 TSi makes it the better choice.

I really can't see the 1.4 TSI getting that close to the 1.2 on fuel economy. If you look at the Golf the difference between the two engines is about 4mpg. From the top of my head, I believe that the same is true for the Octavia. I think that in the case of the Yeti, this difference may be widened by its square, tall shape. I would say that a combined figure of 40 mpg is the most that we can hope for.....

I really can't see the 1.4 TSI getting that close to the 1.2 on fuel economy. If you look at the Golf the difference between the two engines is about 4mpg. From the top of my head, I believe that the same is true for the Octavia. I think that in the case of the Yeti, this difference may be widened by its square, tall shape. I would say that a combined figure of 40 mpg is the most that we can hope for.....

Spoken like a person with a 1.2 TSi on order.

If you can believe those figures, the 1.2 TSi Yeti would cover 0.6 mpg over a 1.4 TSi Golf plus - a negligible amount given the latter's extra performance.

The Golf Plus is 1611mm and the Yeti 1691mm high both to the tips of their roof rails so the extra 80mm would not help it for sure. Wonder how their drag coefficients compare?

Spoken like a person with a 1.2 TSi on order.

If you can believe those figures, the 1.2 TSi Yeti would cover 0.6 mpg over a 1.4 TSi Golf plus - a negligible amount given the latter's extra performance.

The Golf Plus is 1611mm and the Yeti 1691mm high both to the tips of their roof rails so the extra 80mm would not help it for sure. Wonder how their drag coefficients compare?

Mmm interesting..... I simply compared how the 1.2 TSI fares against the 1.4 TSI in those VW group models for which both engines are available. That was the basis for my reasoning anyway and why I have noticed a c. 4mpg difference.

To be honest, I haven't ordered a 1.2 TSI because I think that it is superior to a 1.4 or any other Yeti engine; I have bought it because it is the cheapest engine option and my budget will not stretch to anything more exotic.

Mmm interesting..... I simply compared how the 1.2 TSI fares against the 1.4 TSI in those VW group models for which both engines are available. That was the basis for my reasoning anyway and why I have noticed a c. 4mpg difference.

To be honest, I haven't ordered a 1.2 TSI because I think that it is superior to a 1.4 or any other Yeti engine; I have bought it because it is the cheapest engine option and my budget will not stretch to anything more exotic.

don't let the doubts get you. I have my 1.2 since Friday and I am AMAZED from this marvel engine. I made 600 kms already and i got a 6.9 lt /100 km average consumption, that equals 41mpg. Not bad for a completely new engine.. But the most amazing thing is the power of the motor, its quietness and refinement. Just an example. I was doubling other cars on the mountain with 6th gear, and carrying 3 other passengers.. What do you need more? The 1.2 is here and is perfect! Why wait for the 1.4?

Edited 31 January, 201016 yr by ikons

The 1.2 is here and is perfect! Why wait for the 1.4?

Both these engines have similar traits with refinement, low emissions, good mpg, excellent low & mid range torque. The 1.4TSi just gives that bit extra, try the Octy or Golf to really appreciate it - it would suit the Yeti 100%. If availability had been OK it would have been available at launch.

I would not be surprised if the 1.4 was BETTER than the 1.2 for mpg during an average driving year; you see the same thing in many car ranges, the lowest spec engine gets pushed harder and so uses more fuel than the slightly larger engine, even though the original spec sheet says it should have a better mpg.

There is no doubt that the 1.4 TSI would suit the Yeti just like the other engines in the range.

The question here is not which engine is better than the other, each engine has it's offerings which suits ultimately each customer. Our Yeti will do the school run, shopping and fulfill town car duties with the odd trip. All up maybe 8000km/year, so the 1.2TSI is perfect for this (and my wife!). Not that it won't fulfill more demanding tasks either in my opinion, albeit perhaps with a little more effort.

Although I was infromed (by a Skoda dealer) that the 1.4 TSI would become available in the course of 2010 (as I mentioned in some of my previous posts btw) we were happy the 1.2 TSI was on offer as the 1.4 TSI would cost about 1500euro extra, higher insurance costs, inevitably slightly higher fuel consumption, and one step higher road tax bracket (here in The Netherlands) - for a return of an extra 17hp and + torque - so for us there was no need to go for the extra cost of a 1.4 TSI.

Besides, the gear ratio's would be the same as the 1.2 TSI so it just gives an extra ummph in each gear over the 1.2 TSI (which is nice for someone seeking it). So, no wonder the 1.2 TSI is being offered across the range of VAG automobiles: to fulfill specific needs !

Lastly, (if one feels the need later on) a tidy power upgrade can be had with chiptuning the 1.2 TSI to 126hp and 224Nm as offered HERE

Andy

Edited 1 February, 201016 yr by YETII

I would not be surprised if the 1.4 was BETTER than the 1.2 for mpg during an average driving year; you see the same thing in many car ranges, the lowest spec engine gets pushed harder and so uses more fuel than the slightly larger engine, even though the original spec sheet says it should have a better mpg.

Quite agree, the 1.2TSi although adequate in the Yeti, which happens to be no lightweight, really is best suited to the Fabia, Polo or Ibiza. The 1.4 TSi in the Yeti would be the near perfect match.

Lastly, (if one feels the need later on) a tidy power upgrade can be had with chiptuning the 1.2 TSI to 126hp and 224Nm as offered HERE

Andy

But then HERE you will find the 1.4TSI at 146bhp and 247Nm

I really can't see the 1.4 TSI getting that close to the 1.2 on fuel economy. If you look at the Golf the difference between the two engines is about 4mpg. From the top of my head, I believe that the same is true for the Octavia. I think that in the case of the Yeti, this difference may be widened by its square, tall shape. I would say that a combined figure of 40 mpg is the most that we can hope for.....

The excellent 1.2 and 1.4tsi engines share several characteristics, both being refined, flexible, nippy and frugal; with plenty of torque across a wide band and from low down being a major contributor.

Which you choose depends on whether you value a little more performance over economy or vice versa, but neither priority requires huge sacrifices of the other .

Using the Octavia and Golf as examples, your estimate of c.4mpg difference between the Yeti 1.2tsi and 1.4tsi strikes me as pretty reasonable. Over say 12k annual mileage that's very roughly 30 gallons or £150 per year / £450 if you change your car every 3 years.

Add to this I should think at least £500 price differential between the two engines, as well as insurance savings, then the 1.2 makes a very good case for itself.

Although the 1.2 TSi in the Yeti is adequate, it seems to me to be on par with putting the 1.4 TSi in the Superb, where once again it is adequate. With the Superb though, the 1.4TSl is only available in base trim but in the Yeti, the 1.2 is available in all trim levels. With the Superb, the jump up from a 1.4 TSi to 1.8 TSi is no great leap but currently with the Yeti, 1.2 TSI to 1.8 TSi is.

The Yeti needs and deserves the 1.4 TSi.