On the verge of buying a new 4x4 Estate. Have discounted the Scout and don't need/want 2.0 TDI PD. However, now stuck on whether to opt for 1.6TDI CR or 1.9TDI PD. Price, emissions, MPG, VED I've already checked out but would like a few more pros/cons to help decide as don't want to go on salesman's blurb alone. (May yet go to drivethedeal anyway so 'blurb' may not be a factor). Any pointers as to which one and why would be appreciated.

Thanks

Rab

The new 1.6CR engine has had some less than stellar reviews - many say it lacks torque low down and drives a bit gutless. Conversely the 1.9TDI PD is a proven engine so don't be put off that it's now being phased out - it's still a great engine.

Do read around on here, and on other forums (the 1.6CR is ubiquitous in many VAG cars), but ultimately I'd suggest a good extended test drive to make your own mind up.

The new 1.6CR engine has had some less than stellar reviews - many say it lacks torque low down and drives a bit gutless. Conversely the 1.9TDI PD is a proven engine so don't be put off that it's now being phased out - it's still a great engine.

Do read around on here, and on other forums (the 1.6CR is ubiquitous in many VAG cars), but ultimately I'd suggest a good extended test drive to make your own mind up.

I agree with the above. My wife has the 1.6 TDI CR albeit in a Golf. Quiet, smooth and gutless-but cheaper to tax. It isnt that economical-well not as good as claimed.I previous to my current 2.0TDI 4x4 Estate. had a 1.9 Octavia Elegance Estate and I found it pulled like a train. Much better option and more suited I think for the 4x4 model. As Phil_P says dont be put off by fact its old technology -its still good technology . Dont know where you will get to drive a 1.6 4x4 -there's not many about.. Certainly the 4x4 is a different drive and better drive in my opinion than the 2WD

Edited 16 May, 201016 yr by morganic

Have you checked that you can actually buy a 1.9TDI PD?

The latest brochure says the 1.9 is available for "stock vehicles only" - I think they've stopped making the 1.9 so you have to find one that's already been made and is sitting in the system somewhere.

I test drove a 1.9 2WD hatchback and found it ok, but nothing spectacular. If the 1.6 CR really is more 'gutless' then I'd be disappointed with it. But then I decided that for pulling a caravan I needed more power than the 1.9 anyway so ordered the 2.0TDI PD engine when I ordered my Scout. It should arrive in about 3 weeks.

On the verge of buying a new 4x4 Estate. Have discounted the Scout and don't need/want 2.0 TDI PD. However, now stuck on whether to opt for 1.6TDI CR or 1.9TDI PD. Price, emissions, MPG, VED I've already checked out but would like a few more pros/cons to help decide as don't want to go on salesman's blurb alone. (May yet go to drivethedeal anyway so 'blurb' may not be a factor). Any pointers as to which one and why would be appreciated.

Thanks

Rab

I was once told there's no such thing as a silly question. However, asking which is the best between the old, noisy and thirsty 1.9 and the modern, quiet and economical 1.6 probably comes into the catagory of a stupid question. I'm sure if you look hard enough, you could point to a small difference in the low down grunt for about a tenth of a second after pulling away from rest, but you do have to look hard. A small change in driving style will soon iron that one out though. From then on, there's nothing about the 1.9 that beats the 1.6. The DPF is also a non-issue for normal driving and probably a non-issue in the real world for abnormal driving.

The new 1.6CR engine has had some less than stellar reviews - many say it lacks torque low down and drives a bit gutless. Conversely the 1.9TDI PD is a proven engine so don't be put off that it's now being phased out - it's still a great engine.

Do read around on here, and on other forums (the 1.6CR is ubiquitous in many VAG cars), but ultimately I'd suggest a good extended test drive to make your own mind up.

The thing is, once the 1.6 is up and running, it pull strong right up to the red line. I put a lot of the "bad press" about the 1.6 down to nothing more than mis-informed rumour. I've just gone past 22,000 miles in mine and it's easily the best diesel car I've ever owned and has been a 100% reliable. It's also fun to drive - not bad for a car with "green" credentials and 35 quid a year tax. I'd go so far as to say it's also a better engine than the 2.0 PD I had before, although I'm probably being a bit too controversial here - it's certainly a lot more refined.

This lack of torque issue only appears to come from people who are used to the PD engines... I've driven common rail diesels since 2003 and I find the new CR VAG engines much more to my liking than the PD ones. Sure, they don't have the rush of torque that the PD engines have, but they have a flatter torque curve over the rev range, meaning that in real life they're no worse (as well as being smoother, quieter and generally more refined)

If you've not had a diesel before then the CR will possibly be a pleasant surprise, if you've had another manufacturer's fairly recent diesel (i.e. non-PD) then they will be pretty much what you are used to. If you've spent the last 10 years driving a VAG PD diesel, you'll have to get used to the fact that they are no more and deal with it.

It's possibly a slight change in driving style due to the changed torque curve, but I doubt if it's a massive change. The 1.6 has the same max torque as the 1.9 but because it comes in a bit later than on the 1.9 people are up in arms screaming blue murder. It is being marketed as the "greener" option, not the boy racer option. It's a 105 horsepower engine in a family car... Are you really expecting acceleration that's going to snap your neck? Not from that engine I'm not...

Driven sedately, the 1.6 diesel is bloody economical, one of my colleagues has one of these engines in his Octavia estate and is averaging well over 50mpg and is happy as a pig in **** with his choice of car (he also prefers the engine to the 1.9PD he had in his previous car)

As to the comments about engines not being as economical as claimed, I always take the claims with a pinch of salt in the first place. If I average more than about 80% of the stated figures I'm happy... How many people actually average 57mpg on their 1.9 105 PD? Bet it's not many

The change from what is effectively an old school style diesel (PD) to a modern CR type one if you're used to the former and most other old diesels can be difficult as your driving style is geared (forgive the pun) towards driving around where the torque is. With the PD in my (now my wifes) Fabia VRS I tended not to hang onto the revs much beyond 3500rpm and tended to use low down power a lot, although soon stopped that after the map as I feared for the life of my clutch and flywheel.

The transition to the CR in the VRS has meant I've had to get used to revving it more - quite a lot more as it happens and sitting in a slightly lower gear so the revs are already a bit higher in case I need power on tap as it feels more laggy with the torque coming in more gently and later on. I imagine the same is true for the 1.6 - I read about the PSA 1.6 HDi and that apparently needs revving a lot to make it go but it's good fun when it is revved.

For me the biggest thing here is noise and refinement as you can just change your driving style a little to cater for the CR over the PD. The 1.9 TDI in my wifes (and in an 07 Golf I heard start up this morning) is a pretty clattery thing and I could not go back to it after the CR. The CR is so smooth as you build the revs, you occasionally have to remind yourself you're driving a dirty diesel - that is until you hit the red line sooner than you'd like - it's that smooth and revvy.

Not all CR's are build equal though and my wifes old 306 HDi 90 did put me off a bit as that was as flat as a fart, not revvy at all and again all the power came in suddenly (what little there was). It was a bit noisy too and you could hear the injectors clattering when you floored it. :( The PD in my (at the time) Fabia was so much more flexible. Then I got the Octavia CR and realised how it should be done. Much much better.

The 1.9 also will have EGR stutter issues too as thet had to ramp up the EGR so much towards the end of its life to keep it within emissions regs....you'd need to sort that. A Fabia BLT I drove had that issue and it would have sent me potty if Id have owned it. The CR is cheap on tax for a reason - low emissions.

Does the 1.6 have a DPF? That is one annoying thing if it does - sure it means no smoke but it's forever going on regen and that is annoying for various reasons, plus something else to go wrong.

Thanks for your insights folks.

Sadly it looks as though the PD is indeed no longer available, except on stock cars, which will not apply in my case.

Fingers crossed, I may be pleasantly surprised.

Best...

Rab

Thank goodness the choice has been made for you or some posters will have seizures .Driving cars is a personal experience Its a matter of which car suits you.My advice is test drive a 1.6 4x4 before you buy one.As one contributor says above may not be many around and they are not as economical by far as a 2 wheel drive.

Edited 18 May, 201016 yr by mortalbayonet

Thank goodness the choice has been made for you or some posters will have seizures .Driving cars is a personal experience Its a matter of which car suits you.My advice is test drive a 1.6 4x4 before you buy one.As one contributor says above may not be many around and they are not as economical by far as a 2 wheel drive.

Can't agree more with the above - you've got to test drive if at all possible. I have a 2.0TDi PD 4x4 and think it is great but i have driven a CR TDi in a Golf and it was much, much more refined but less punchy... I liked both engines for different reasons but I made the decision when I bought the car and don't regret it - You take your pick and make your choice based on the information you have at the time... so get a test drive!

I have found the power and torque curves for the CR and PD 2.0 litre units, and they are virtually identical. I wonder if the comments on the forum reflect a comparison of PD at 20k+ miles with a new CR. I also imagine the PD feels quicker because of the noise!

Does anyone have curves for the 1.9 and 1.6 for comparison?

Les.

I have found the power and torque curves for the CR and PD 2.0 litre units, and they are virtually identical. I wonder if the comments on the forum reflect a comparison of PD at 20k+ miles with a new CR. I also imagine the PD feels quicker because of the noise!

Does anyone have curves for the 1.9 and 1.6 for comparison?

Les.

A good point, but I've now just taken delivery of my 2nd 2.0 PD (in a 4x4 estate) which currently has only 600 miles on the clock and its definetly more punchy than the the CR Yeti I test drove. The CR was more free reving than either this PD or my previous 2wd with 50k on the clock, but seemed to have no low rev urge (well for somebody used to the PD it didnt). probably the CR was smother and quieter at high revs than the PD's but I felt you needed to use those revs. At lower revs (say below 2500) dont think there's that much difference. The new Octy 4x4 makes a fair bit less noise than my old 2wd hatch and is if anything quiter than the Yeti CR at lower revs. Just my observations.

Lee

Can't agree more with the above - you've got to test drive if at all possible. I have a 2.0TDi PD 4x4 and think it is great but i have driven a CR TDi in a Golf and it was much, much more refined but less punchy... I liked both engines for different reasons but I made the decision when I bought the car and don't regret it - You take your pick and make your choice based on the information you have at the time... so get a test drive!

Given that the 1.9PD is being pensioned off, I acknowledge the position you feel in being steered towards the 1.6CR, but as skomaz says, you really do need to test drive it to make sure you can live with it. After years of enjoying diesel grunt I sought extensive opinion on the web then test drove the 1.6 CR myself which corroborated a significant proportion of the web opinion, ie. smooth, economical but disappointingly flat and spiritless.

So disappointed was I that I bought petrol (my 9k miles per annum made the diesel -v- petrol equation pretty equal).

Can't help but feel more than a tad patronised when folk talk about adverse opinion on the 1.6CR being 'misinformed rumour' - while the web has a lot of test drives by mags which may or may not have an agenda, the vast majority of what you will find is by ordinary folk, like me, who researched it, tested it and ultimately couldn't compromise on the enjoyment factor. Perhaps you can. Other folk think that it's fine. Who knows? That's why you need to test drive it.

Edited 18 May, 201016 yr by Cauliflower

This is a really interesting thread. There is certainly an issue with the 1.6CR engine/gearbox combination. I think it would be better with a 6 speed box. The gearing is too high in my opinion and the engine is prone to stall no matter how careful you are. For this reason alone I am reluctant to opt for it. Over on the VWAUDI forum a significant majority of posters seem to be against the engine.

In the 4x4 application the extra weight will blunt the power available as well. Maybe best to think of the 140 PS 2 litre version. But I agree that you should try it - if you can find one!

This is a really interesting thread. There is certainly an issue with the 1.6CR engine/gearbox combination. I think it would be better with a 6 speed box. The gearing is too high in my opinion and the engine is prone to stall no matter how careful you are. For this reason alone I am reluctant to opt for it. Over on the VWAUDI forum a significant majority of posters seem to be against the engine.

In the 4x4 application the extra weight will blunt the power available as well. Maybe best to think of the 140 PS 2 litre version. But I agree that you should try it - if you can find one!

Hi, I was a (late 1980s) diesel convert but I am relieved to see I am not a lone person on this forum suggesting that the new VW 1.6CR engine needs significant adjustment to provide an enjoyable driving experience. I'm convinced it's gearing. To all you folk who defend it, it's smooth, it's economical, but can you say it's an enjoyable drive without caveats????

If I'm honest, I can't see me enjoying a 105hp engine in a car that weighs the best part of 1400kg ever being fun (by my definition of fun)... I had 120 in the last car and hated it as there wasn't enough oomph to overtake on a country lane without booking an appointment in the diary for a week next Tuesday to make sure it was clear the other way, even though it handled ok and cruised all day at 80...

It was getting that car instead of the previous 150 version that eventually persuaded me to drop out of the company car scheme (well, that and the fact that it would have been replaced with a Insignia which I dislike with a passion even though I can't put my finger on why)

The only thing you can do is take it for a test drive and see if it suits you. If you are a relaxed driver you may well love it (as my colleague does) but I agree that you may not enjoy it at all and the only ay to find out is to test drive for an extended period on a range of roads.

If I'm honest, I can't see me enjoying a 105hp engine in a car that weighs the best part of 1400kg ever being fun (by my definition of fun)... I had 120 in the last car and hated it as there wasn't enough oomph to overtake on a country lane without booking an appointment in the diary for a week next Tuesday to make sure it was clear the other way, even though it handled ok and cruised all day at 80...

The only thing you can do is take it for a test drive and see if it suits you. If you are a relaxed driver you may well love it (as my colleague does) but I agree that you may not enjoy it at all and the only ay to find out is to test drive for an extended period on a range of roads.

good post, totally agree rags.

If I'm honest, I can't see me enjoying a 105hp engine in a car that weighs the best part of 1400kg ever being fun (by my definition of fun)... I had 120 in the last car and hated it as there wasn't enough oomph to overtake on a country lane without booking an appointment in the diary for a week next Tuesday to make sure it was clear the other way, even though it handled ok and cruised all day at 80...

It was getting that car instead of the previous 150 version that eventually persuaded me to drop out of the company car scheme (well, that and the fact that it would have been replaced with a Insignia which I dislike with a passion even though I can't put my finger on why)

The only thing you can do is take it for a test drive and see if it suits you. If you are a relaxed driver you may well love it (as my colleague does) but I agree that you may not enjoy it at all and the only ay to find out is to test drive for an extended period on a range of roads.

Agreed, especially on the Jellymould, sorry Insignia, comment.

Of course, it's more than just naked hp / weight factors that makes a car enjoyable. I recently drove a Fiat Panda which was an absolute blast, and it was only when I checked afterwards that I discovered it was a 1.2 engine with 69 hp hauling 900kg around. And just look at the Yeti forum to see what fun those folk are getting from a 1.2tsi engine. Back in the 1980s I owned a 1.5 Hyundai Pony for a while (yes really ) which on paper had decent performance yet when you pressed the accelerator the engine reacted as if on the end of two tin cans and a piece of string.

So what makes a car enjoyable? It's an amalgam of aesthetics, performance / gearing, steering reaction, ride/suspension set-up, progressive pedal action and various other things. An Octavia will tick many of those boxes for lots of people. I suspect the performance / gearing of the 1.6 CR TDi will split the jury. A test drive will decide your verdict.

If I'm honest, I can't see me enjoying a 105hp engine in a car that weighs the best part of 1400kg ever being fun (by my definition of fun)... I had 120 in the last car and hated it as there wasn't enough oomph to overtake on a country lane without booking an appointment in the diary for a week next Tuesday to make sure it was clear the other way, even though it handled ok and cruised all day at 80...

No offence, but it sounds like you need to learn how to drive. Or at least how to drive properly.

Given that the 1.9PD is being pensioned off, I acknowledge the position you feel in being steered towards the 1.6CR, but as skomaz says, you really do need to test drive it to make sure you can live with it. After years of enjoying diesel grunt I sought extensive opinion on the web then test drove the 1.6 CR myself which corroborated a significant proportion of the web opinion, ie. smooth, economical but disappointingly flat and spiritless.

So disappointed was I that I bought petrol (my 9k miles per annum made the diesel -v- petrol equation pretty equal).

Can't help but feel more than a tad patronised when folk talk about adverse opinion on the 1.6CR being 'misinformed rumour' - while the web has a lot of test drives by mags which may or may not have an agenda, the vast majority of what you will find is by ordinary folk, like me, who researched it, tested it and ultimately couldn't compromise on the enjoyment factor. Perhaps you can. Other folk think that it's fine. Who knows? That's why you need to test drive it.

I find too many motoring journalists and hobbyists are to far towards the motorsport and petrolhead end of the spectrum, than those from a Roadcraft background - although these groups don't have to be mutually exclusive, they do start from a different point of view. I take the opinion that the power required by a driver is inversely proportional to their skill. In other words, it makes up for their inability to read the road and plan ahead adequately. Harsh, but fair.

No offence, but it sounds like you need to learn how to drive. Or at least how to drive properly.

None taken, but if people actually allowed you to over take instead of speeding up when you pull out to go past them I wouldn't have to book that appointment. I've even had people pull to the right when I've attempted to overtake them... It's not just me that needs to learn how to drive...

I average somewhere between 25-30K a year depending on where the work is and use my mirrors, am aware of where other traffic is, move to the left when I've overtaken on a motorway or dual carraigeway and assist when someone is trying to overtake me on a narrow road by keeping as far left as is safe and coming off the throttle when they've pulled out.

If more people actually did things like that then people would not get frustrated. What is the point, when someone is obviously going faster than you, in being a complete **** and trying to hold them up?

Edited 19 May, 201016 yr by Raglits

Well, I guess I should break it to you all that the deed is done; 1.6CR 4x4 duly ordered for Sept. delivery.

I hear what a lot of you are saying re. the PD engine; our Passat is a 1.9 TDi PD 100bhp, and going from it to the 1.4 TDi 80 bhp in our Polo involves making a few adjustments to driving style.

These days I find I'm more concerned with mpg, given I do >100 mile round trip to work; squeezing 70+mpg from the Polo by not booting it above 2000rpm reflects my current driving style.

For the avoidance of being stuck during the winter (we live in the sticks these days) we wanted a 4x4 to strap some all-season rubber to come November, therefore I discounted the 2wd option.

Even though the 1.6CR has its detractors, on paper I recon what we've got is still the most economical, cheapest to tax, cheapest to insure and cheapest new 4x4 out there.

(If you're interested: Black with mats, maxi-dot, curtain bags, tow-bar prep, variable boot, f/s spare, set of 4 15" steels for the winter, less p/x on '02 Passat=<£15.6k OTR, from same dealer we purchased our VWs)

Cheers

R

I find too many motoring journalists and hobbyists are to far towards the motorsport and petrolhead end of the spectrum, than those from a Roadcraft background - although these groups don't have to be mutually exclusive, they do start from a different point of view. I take the opinion that the power required by a driver is inversely proportional to their skill. In other words, it makes up for their inability to read the road and plan ahead adequately. Harsh, but fair.

"I take the opinion that the power required by a driver is inversely proportional to their skill. In other words, it makes up for their inability to read the road and plan ahead adequately. Harsh, but fair."

Harsh, fair and honest! Never have truer words been spoken. Invariably some with more power than road sense feel it and all the other modern auto gismos will get them out of a sticky situation and so just don't read the road or plan correctly . You can have all the power in the world but if you have no road sense then you are headed for disaster.Driving is about being safe and considerate to other road users. The public highway is not a race track (although some might think so)and is not intended to be.Anyone can drive fast but can they drive safely?

Edited 19 May, 201016 yr by morganic

Well, I guess I should break it to you all that the deed is done; 1.6CR 4x4 duly ordered for Sept. delivery.

I hear what a lot of you are saying re. the PD engine; our Passat is a 1.9 TDi PD 100bhp, and going from it to the 1.4 TDi 80 bhp in our Polo involves making a few adjustments to driving style.

These days I find I'm more concerned with mpg, given I do >100 mile round trip to work; squeezing 70+mpg from the Polo by not booting it above 2000rpm reflects my current driving style.

For the avoidance of being stuck during the winter (we live in the sticks these days) we wanted a 4x4 to strap some all-season rubber to come November, therefore I discounted the 2wd option.

Even though the 1.6CR has its detractors, on paper I recon what we've got is still the most economical, cheapest to tax, cheapest to insure and cheapest new 4x4 out there.

(If you're interested: Black with mats, maxi-dot, curtain bags, tow-bar prep, variable boot, f/s spare, set of 4 15" steels for the winter, less p/x on '02 Passat=<£15.6k OTR, from same dealer we purchased our VWs)

Cheers

R

Sounds nice. Hope you enjoy it when it arrives