How does the new 1.8 TSI engine compare with the old 2.0 FSI engine? On paper, power, torque, acceleration and fuel economy all seem better. But what's it like in practice?

I'd be particuarly interested in what its like in a 4x4/Scout, and with 4 people in the car. Its notable that the 4x4 system hit the performance and economy of the old 2.0 much worse than the desiels when comparing with the front-wheel drive cars. I'm guessing that this is becasue the desiels have more torque, and as the new 1.8TSI has significantly more torque it may be OK.

Whilst the 0-60 figure is significantly better, does anyone have 30-50 or 50-70 figures for both engines?

Do any dealers out there have a 1.8TSI demonstrator (or a FL Scout demonstrator with any engine)? I'm based in the East Midlands, but travel a lot.

Edited 2 February, 201016 yr by Tom_vRS
Join Freedom to advertise please.

It is another world.

I think you struggle to find a demo car as most people seem to buy diesels for economy or the VRs for performance. Its a good engine though, kind of like a very smooth and quiet diesel - it is tuned for low and midrange power so doesn't have the high rpm power rush that many petrol engines have. Its not that the engine has no high end power (power doesn't disappear at 4000rpm like a diesel), just that it seems at its best in the midrange.

I have the 1.8 FSI in my 58 plate L&K. When I was looking to replace my old Octy I (I took over a year to pick its replacement) I drove several 2.0 FSI a nd 1.8 FSI ex demo cars but I eventually decided that the general smoothness of the 1.8, and the sheer grunt was compelling enough to join the waiting list for a car with the 1.8 engine, trying to get a 1.8 ex demo was just impossible in a manual L&K, they all had DSG which I don't like (OK so I'm a luddite, but I intend to keep my car 10 years or so, like I did last time, so the DSG replacement cost figured in my reasoning). I am slightly dissapointed with the economy but that's probably because I am doing a lot more short runs in it than I used to (job change) and it enjoys being used "enthusiastically". Performace is in many ways better than my 3.0 litre Alfa GTV, it is genrally quicker, and so much more refined (but then the arnese V6 is known for its sound). I would not have the 2.0, it offers no real advantage other than ease of availability over the 1.8's.

The 1.8TSI is far superior to the 2.0FSI. It just feels so much more muscular.

No comparison - I went from 2005 2.0FSi Elegance hatch to 58 1.8TSi Elegance hatch (better car in other ways too.) Had both from new.

Much more low down torque on TSi so less down changing on hills etc.

Gives a satisfyingly big punch when you floor it in mid gears.

A little less economic - I'd say about 5 mpg on average, but worth every ha'penny!

I can't comment on the 2.0, but I went out the other day in my tfsi with 4 large adults on board. I can't believe that anyone would be dissatsfied with the performance, very smooth, flexible etc even fully loaded, with similar engine characteristics to a diesel ( my last car was a 3.0 diesel Jaguar XF by the way)

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/110133-1-8-petrol-engine-opinions

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/112705-1-8t-vs-2-0fsi-again

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/143063-change-from-2-00-fsi-to-1-8-tsi

In practice it 's even better than on paper.