I have been trying to understand a comment in another thread about the low rev power surge of our former Superb PD (180 bhp) in comparison with the somewhat smaller and lighter new Yeti (170 bhp)

Here's a link to some helpful guidance:- Common Rail and PD

Are my impressions right here in that the Octavia, Fabia vRS and Superb with the PD was able to chug up hills happily and surge away in a higher gear than is possible with the CR engine.

On the whole I think the PD engines (manual Octavia and Fabia) may be more economical on fuel unless the fuel performance difference is purely associated with 4WD. However the Superb was auto and the Yeti is manual.

I believe the CR is intended to be more environmentally friendly than the PD but some guidance on what to expect in actual use would be appreciated.

I have been trying to understand a comment in another thread about the low rev power surge of our former Superb PD (180 bhp) in comparison with the somewhat smaller and lighter new Yeti (170 bhp)

Here's a link to some helpful guidance:- Common Rail and PD

Are my impressions right here in that the Octavia, Fabia vRS and Superb with the PD was able to chug up hills happily and surge away in a higher gear than is possible with the CR engine.

On the whole I think the PD engines (manual Octavia and Fabia) may be more economical on fuel unless the fuel performance difference is purely associated with 4WD. However the Superb was auto and the Yeti is manual.

I believe the CR is intended to be more environmentally friendly than the PD but some guidance on what to expect in actual use would be appreciated.

Which Superb was it that was 180bhp out of interest?

One of the key changes in character between PD and CR has always been the lack of low down spool up and shove... CR's are more linear in their power delivery and more refined and able to put the power down in a smoother fashion as a result (in my opinion at least).

Which Superb was it that was 180bhp out of interest?

One of the key changes in character between PD and CR has always been the lack of low down spool up and shove... CR's are more linear in their power delivery and more refined and able to put the power down in a smoother fashion as a result (in my opinion at least).

Yes it was the 2.5 V6 180 bhp. I loved the kick in the pants as soon as you hit the throttle and thought the 170 bhp in the Yeti would be similar because it was more efficient... It should of course be more economical.

Wonder if the low revs and power of the 180 bhp contributed to getting better fuel economy than the Yeti 170 bhp one?

If CR diesels lack this sparkle is it time to go back to petrol?

Maybe I would be disappointed with the new Superb in comparison with my old one!

Yes it was the 2.5 V6 180 bhp. I loved the kick in the pants as soon as you hit the throttle and thought the 170 bhp in the Yeti would be similar because it was more efficient... It should of course be more economical.

Wonder if the low revs and power of the 180 bhp contributed to getting better fuel economy than the Yeti 170 bhp one?

If CR diesels lack this sparkle is it time to go back to petrol?

Maybe I would be disappointed with the new Superb in comparison with my old one!

Comparing a six cylinder PD engine to a four cylinder CR is a different discussion. You have the instant 'performance' advantage of two extra cylinders with the Superb. I was comparing four cylinder PD's to four cylinder CR's in my above post tbh

Comparing a six cylinder PD engine to a four cylinder CR is a different discussion. You have the instant 'performance' advantage of two extra cylinders with the Superb. I was comparing four cylinder PD's to four cylinder CR's in my above post tbh

Comparing a six cylinder engine that is NOT PD to a CR is even funnier! PD engines came in 105 130 140,4 cylinder only and the V6 engine is a VAG design older than gods dog.

Hope you did not pay for VW 507 when you had the car, as its not needed in this engine and a complete waste of money.

Edited 31 March, 201016 yr by berr0010

CR, PD - six cylinders, four cylinders, diesel or petrol.

Heck one common denominator is the bhp! It seems you cannot rely on simple science

So it seems all will be downhill after the Superb with its ancient engine?

The Superb was after the Fabia vRS TD and Octavia Estate (circa 2005) both of which had more kick in the pants fun than the 170 bhp Yeti

To be fair, the shape of the Yeti would not really lend itself to VRS status. I am not sure that any of the different brands that make this style of car, Volvo, BMW, VW, Honda etc. make a kick in the pants version. I am sure there are good reasons for this, engineering types please confirm. The 170bhp will give you more overtaking power than many cars but I suspect the Yeti was never set up or marketed to be a "sports" car. Strong, gradual power yes, fly back in the drivers seat, no.

Weve just orderd a new Scout which thankfully is the old PD. I did think of waiting for the CR but having read many threads saying theres more gear changing due to lack of grunt as you would in a Petrol & heard of a 2K bill to sort the Injector problems on a high mileage Audi CR I went for the PD, Better the devil you know I guess

Edited 31 March, 201016 yr by Stuart_J

I've run 4 cars with the VWs PD engines (5 incuding the better halfs Roomster) and the 'kick in the rear' was a great feature. However, although that is less present with the CR engine (only point of reference being my 140 BHP Yeti, currently covered just under 9000 miles) I would not go back to a PD engine. This (CR) engine feels like a major step forward, quiet, smooth and a linear push through the rev range, makes the Yeti feel like a real luxury motor.

You pays your money, you takes your choice!!

Complete anoraks can read this thread about the merits/demerits of PD engines (with some comments about CR).

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=66473

I warn you it is a long thread (but the contributions from poster "659" are illuminating), but remember you did ask!!!!!

I've driven both types of diesel...

You want a kick in the pants???

May I suggest that thumb is pulled out of bum or wherever it is so essentially employed that a gear change is an impossible activity, drop it to third and let rip to 4500rpm changing right the way thru to 6th. Chances are a standard PD engine of equivalent HP will be way behind in the rear view mirror

I'm sure all are aware this is just an informed opinion!

P.S. Nearing 7k miles on my monster and it's loosening up a treat...especially on low-end pull

Edited 31 March, 201016 yr by scunjee

PD engines came in 105 130 140,4 cylinder only

My Passat 2.0 TDI is a 170 PD.

It does give a bigger kick than my 140 bhp Yeti (but 30 bhp is a big difference) but the Yeti is way smoother. I also note that the Yeti's redline is a bit higher.

I think the Yeti is to Euro 5 spec rather than the Passat's Euro 4 so environmentally, the Yeti's better.

John

<snip>

May I suggest that thumb is pulled out of bum or wherever it is so essentially employed that a gear change is an impossible activity, drop it to third and let rip to 4500rpm changing right the way thru to 6th. Chances are a standard PD engine of equivalent HP will be way behind in the rear view mirror

<snip>

Agree with you that this would give a kick in the pants but would it be such an economical kick in the pants as the standard PD engine working at lower revs?

The issue came up in the choice of Yeti for the school run in winter and it was suggested an automatic would be best to obtain performance without so many gear changes. Cannot imagine the Mum's hitting the revs

Complete anoraks can read this thread about the merits/demerits of PD engines (with some comments about CR).

http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=66473

I warn you it is a long thread (but the contributions from poster "659" are illuminating), but remember you did ask!!!!!

Thats an excelent find, Im not an Anorak ( I Hope) but the points by 659 are logical & well put, Glad I bought a PD.

Thats an excelent find, Im not an Anorak ( I Hope) but the points by 659 are logical & well put, Glad I bought a PD.

Yes, a good find and the explanation that in a PD engine the fuel pump is lubricated by engine oil rather than the fuel probably explains why, when some months ago I stupidly filled my Passat with petrol and did not wreck the pump!

John

I've run 4 cars with the VWs PD engines (5 incuding the better halfs Roomster) and the 'kick in the rear' was a great feature. However, although that is less present with the CR engine (only point of reference being my 140 BHP Yeti, currently covered just under 9000 miles) I would not go back to a PD engine. This (CR) engine feels like a major step forward, quiet, smooth and a linear push through the rev range, makes the Yeti feel like a real luxury motor.

You pays your money, you takes your choice!!

I agree. I had a seat Leon Cupra with the 150 bhp 1.9PD engine, lovely kick as the power comes in and over 50mpg. Clever design with direct fuel injection pumped in at over 2000psi. Downside was noise, the PD system was inherently noisy even the exhaust note never let you forget you were driving an oil burner. No problem on the motorway but engine noise on acceleration always felt conspicuous. To compete with BMW and other quieter diesel engines I think VW had no choice but to go down the CR route.

I have only test driven the new CR engine but it feels smooth and quieter than the PD even the exhaust note sounds better. Looking forward to getting my SM and its new CR engine.

Had a test drive in a Yeti 110 bhp. No real kick as revs climbed, just a steady surge. It was also the quietest diesel I've ever been in, sounded more like a petrol.

Andy