What is the real life performance and economy of the new, small TSIs and TDIs

[rjd]

I'm looking at getting a new Octavia with swappage to replace my '98 Golf 1.6.

I'm hoping that some people have had some real life experience with the new engines, as the reviews are mixed.

I'm really looking for something just as snappy as my current car, preferably beating the 38mpg I get doing mostly motorway / A road miles.

I'm young and looking for something cost effective, so the big expensive diesels aren't really on the cards.

According to the stats:

Compared to my old car, the Octavia 1.2 TSI (105) has more torque, power and better economy, and only 0.2s slower to 60mph, probably due to being 10% heavier.

The 1.4 TSI (122) is only slightly more expensive, a little less economic, but faster.

And the 1.6 TDI CR (105) is a lot more expensive, but far more economic, just as torquey and powerful, but slower to 60.

Some people are saying that the economy isn't far off the combined figure, and the performance is adequate, others are saying that it's too tempting to rag the little engines, and that the performance and economy is sub par.

Would I be better of getting the 1.4 vs 1.2, as it would be less tempting to use lots of gas, and at lower revs it would be more likely to hit it's official combined economy?

Does the 1.6TDI pull away well and need less gas, giving great economy, or is it sluggish and needs gas also? Would the slightly cheaper 1.9TDI be a better proposition?

Would the 1.8 TSI actually be the best proposition (similarly priced to the diesels), as it would cruise with very little gas and be more likely to achieve it's combined mpg figure?

[Aspman]

If you're looking at the paper figures for these cars remember to lose at least 10% off the stated mpg. You'll be very unlikely to reach the manufacturers figures.

You really need to drive them to get an idea if the engine characteristics are to your liking.

[Sammycarp]

How many miles do you do each year? This would probably give a good indication of whether to choose petrol or deisel. I seem to remember that people on here seem to think that 15,000 miles a year is the break-even point for the two fuels - ie: over 15k and deisel is cheaper.

Given what you've said, I'd probably discount the 1.8TSI on cost and insurance grounds. Depending on your milage and petrol/deisel argument, you're down to two engines (1.2 & 1.4TSI, or 1.6 & 1.9TDI) - so drive them both...

[silkysteve]

I'm looking at getting a new Octavia with swappage to replace my '98 Golf 1.6.

I'm hoping that some people have had some real life experience with the new engines, as the reviews are mixed.

I'm really looking for something just as snappy as my current car, preferably beating the 38mpg I get doing mostly motorway / A road miles.

I'm young and looking for something cost effective, so the big expensive diesels aren't really on the cards.

According to the stats:

Compared to my old car, the Octavia 1.2 TSI (105) has more torque, power and better economy, and only 0.2s slower to 60mph, probably due to being 10% heavier.

The 1.4 TSI (122) is only slightly more expensive, a little less economic, but faster.

And the 1.6 TDI CR (105) is a lot more expensive, but far more economic, just as torquey and powerful, but slower to 60.

Some people are saying that the economy isn't far off the combined figure, and the performance is adequate, others are saying that it's too tempting to rag the little engines, and that the performance and economy is sub par.

Would I be better of getting the 1.4 vs 1.2, as it would be less tempting to use lots of gas, and at lower revs it would be more likely to hit it's official combined economy?

Does the 1.6TDI pull away well and need less gas, giving great economy, or is it sluggish and needs gas also? Would the slightly cheaper 1.9TDI be a better proposition?

Would the 1.8 TSI actually be the best proposition (similarly priced to the diesels), as it would cruise with very little gas and be more likely to achieve it's combined mpg figure?

My 1.6D is now 0n 22,000 and has been averaging around 55mpg for the last three months. This is measured, not using the maxi-dot which is around 2-3mpg optimistic. This is mainly motorways, but does include some start-stop city driving.

[SBirch]

Hi,

I think this has been covered before, although possibly not covering all engines at once… Basically it boils down to :-

1. Personal preference on Petrol vs Diesel.

2. How many miles you do and how you do them. Motorway / short trips etc.

3. Budget / how long keeping the car (Diesels can have better residuals).

4. What load you carry around / towing etc. Diesel is less effected by extra weight due to higher torque.

We can only give general advice as really you would need to drive the car to find out if it’s right for you. The diesels tend to cost more to buy, but are cheaper to tax and fuel. If they have a DPF though you might want to avoid them if you do lots of town driving. The other cost concideration is the weather the engine has a timing belt that needs changing. This is costs about 300’ish. I think the new TSI engines, don’t need this as they have chains.

So generally if you are only going to do 9-10K miles a year, with quite a few short trips. Then the TSI would probably make more sense. Which one though? I drove the 1.4 TSI and found it fine I would expect it to be quicker in gear than you Golf.

I have a 1.8 TSI on order, but that’s only due to the fact that my current car is a six cylinder BMW. So not ready for a 4 cylinder diesel or slower car.

I hope the above helps. So do you sums, get a few test drives and then buy what you like anyway.

Simon

[goosander]

Would the 1.8 TSI actually be the best proposition (similarly priced to the diesels), as it would cruise with very little gas and be more likely to achieve it's combined mpg figure?

The 1.8 TSi is lovely but speaking from experience I'd say you are very unlikely to acheive the combined mpg figure in normal use. IIRC the combined figure is about 40 mpg, I can acheive (and sometimes exceed) this on long drives at moderate speed where there is little traffic around (e.g. cruising round highland roads). Motorway journeys will probably be high 30's and normal mixed driving about 34 - 35 mpg and if you do short journeys this could easily fall to 30 mpg.

I have been able to achieve average fuel consumption in line with the combined figure with no effort for the majority of petrol cars I've owned in the past, the 1.8 TSi is the first one that misses by so much.

If you want performance and most of your driving is on open roads, I'd consider the 1.8 TSi but otherwise the 1.4 TSi is probably a better balance. I've no experience of one but forum posts here and elsewhere suggest owners like the engines performance but also don't acheive the quoted economy - I'd hazard a guess that you can add about 5mpg to the above figures.

[Evening Star]

If you were doing loads of miles (10k+) & looking for something with punch, then I'd say get a 2,0 TDi (The CR version is out from next month), the torque on the diesel is brilliant, as is the economy.

If you're doing lower miles then the the 1,8 or even the 1,4 is probably more suited.

I've got the 1,8 TSi & it has got some punch to it, but you need to give it more "welly" to get it to do it, I expect the same can be said of the 1,4. I've more or less decided that when it comes to changeover time, I'll be going back to diesel, even though I'm on lower mileage.

That may sound hypercritical, but I miss the economy of the diesel & the punch of the diesel, so I'll be returning to the oil burner camp.

[Raglits]

One of my friends has the 1.4 in her A3 and I think it's a cracking engine, she's found it to be bother quicker and more economical than the 1.6 she had previously... I can't remember the exact figures but I'm pretty sure she's averaging low 40s and she's not a slow driver by any stretch of the imagination.

[james26]

Hi,

Have a look at the WhatCar site:

http://www.whatcar.com/car-news/petrol-versus-diesel-which-is-cheaper-/248139

And there calculator, most of the Octavia's you need to do about 50k miles for dev to make sense vs petrol ones. And that's not hoping the DPF or dual mass fly wheel does not go in dev's!James.

Edited 21 May, 2010 by james26

[rjd]

Thanks for all the replies! And sorry for the following formatting - I had to write this on a PC and import it to my phone (internet troubles)

Aspman:

Ideally I'd love to try them all, but they're all so new very few dealers have any in stock, or their Audi / VW equivalents.

I can't find any within an hour and a half of where I am (Chippenham), and that's for each model - to try them all it would be a few 3 hr round trips.

Sammycarp:

I did a little less than 15k miles last year, although it'll vary year to year.

I did some maths on my current fuel spending.

Per year the 1.6TDI (should) save me:

~�576 on the 1.2TSI, at an extra cost of ~�2320 (4 years driving)

~�907 on the 1.4TSI, at an extra cost of ~�1795 (2 years)

~�238 on the 1.9TDI, at an extra cost of ~�460 (15 months)

even if the official figures are overestimates, the ratios should hold roughly true.

So if the 1.2 drives fine, and gets as near to it's predicted economy as the others, it's a winner.

If the drive is sluggish, or if the economy is proportionally worse, then competition is a bit tighter.

If the 1.6TDI drives worse than the 1.4TSI, and they both get equally close to the predicted economy, I'd go with the 1.4, and visa versa.

silkysteve:

Is that the 105PS? That's impressive. How would you rate the drive?

Most my driving is motorway, but I do need to get to and from, and there's usually a lot of queueing on the M25.

SBirch:

1. The only diesels I've driven have been town driving, so I've never tackled roundabouts, motorways, sliproads etc. They seem to be love em/hate em

2. I tend to drive a round trip of XXXmiles each weekend, plus shorter journeys during the week. Sometimes the round trip will be significantly longer, sometimes shorter.

3. My budget is the smallest possible basically. I'll pay slightly more for good value / lower running costs, but nothing extravagant. I'm looking to get the SE + ~�400 of extras. I'll be buying the car with a loan either from family or Tesco etc. The Fabia isn't cheaper enough to switch on money terms alone.

4. A lot of the time it's just me, sometimes one other. On rare occasions I'll have to fill the car to the brim, every year or so maybe.

Evening Star:

I do do well over 10k. I've heard that the 2.0 diesels are excellent, but even the 140PS are significantly more expensive than the 1.9/1.6TDI / 1.8TSI

Raglits:

That's encouraging. Being satisfied with the economy and performance of the cheap 1.4 would probably be my ideal situation.

Briskodian:

Yeah, from my earlier figures I'd need to do 60k (1.2TSI) to 30K (1.4TSI) with the 1.6TDI before it made economic sense.

I was under the impression that most diesel engines were more reliable in the long run - are these DPF / DMF issues expensive / serious?

[g_tee]

For my car the What Car calculator says I break even in one year (I do 25,000 miles)

So Diesel is worth it considering I want it for 3-4 years

[Raglits]

As you do mostly motorway driving the DPF is unlikely to be an issue and it is my belief that the DMF issue has been hyped out of proportion and it's actually quite rare on standard non re-mapped cars.

However, they can both be expensive once you're out of warranty...

[Raglits]

For my car the What Car calculator says I break even in one year (I do 25,000 miles)

So Diesel is worth it considering I want it for 3-4 years

Sounds about right. When I was doing the sums on 25K a year I reckoned the break even point was about 16months... Don't think I have the spreadsheet I used anymore though

[Dr Zoidberg]

My 1.6D is now 0n 22,000 and has been averaging around 55mpg for the last three months. This is measured, not using the maxi-dot which is around 2-3mpg optimistic. This is mainly motorways, but does include some start-stop city driving.

My 1.6 bravo has done almost exactly the same MPG over exactly the same distance.

That's 10% down on the quoted figure, but not bad overall.

Oddly my PD140 and 1.9TDI octavias before that *did* get the quoted figures.

I think it's fair to say that a lot of manufacturers have their cars designed to achive as high a headline figure as possible but a side effect is that it's only achievable under a narrower range of conditions.

[SBirch]

RJD,

I would say that you driving habbits suggest that a TDI is viable. The choice between a 1.9 and 1.6 CR might be made for you though as I think they are stopping making the 1.9 and would just have some prebuilt cars left.

Simon

[Mute]

Hopefully this might be useful i have one of the engines you're asking about and these are the figures i get and you can compare against what you get.

I have a '98 1.6 Golf and it does an average 36-38 mpg with fairly normal driving. When driving for economy it'll go past the 40mpg mark but only just.

I also have a new 2.0 Tsi Octavia and it does 2mpg less but driven much harder than the golf. If driven the same way as the golf (i did on my 2nd tank of fuel) it is slightly better than the golf.

EDIT: only talking about fuel economy here, as an engine, the Tsi is far superior, the turbocharger makes the engine extremely drivable, not even comparable to the 1.6 NA unit

Edited 21 May, 2010 by Mute

[Cauliflower]

Hi there, I've driven the 1.4 TSI for several thousand miles. Quiet, silky smooth and similar power to a typical normally aspirated 1.8 petrol engine. 'Normal conditions' economy for me is around 41mpg mixed motorway / ordinary road use with a small amount of daily town driving, using the pedal modestly (but with the odd foot to boards when occasionally needed). Drive a bit more spiritedly everywhere and I can see that reducing to 36-37mpg, gun it absolutely everywhere and you'll drop to low 30s.

All in all I'm impressed. The cherry on the cake would have been 'normal conditions' economy of over 45mpg, but that won't happen.

Would love to hear from someone who has the 1.2TSI, for the 1.4TSI has more than enough performance to spare and if the 1.2TSI can past muster performance-wise but offer better economy, I would say consider it carefully.

Depends what your priority is, fuel economy or driving enjoyment. It might be useful to test drive the 1.2TSI back to back against the 1.6TDi CR. Then make your choice.

[RangerMD]

Would love to hear from someone who has the 1.2TSI, for the 1.4TSI has more than enough performance to spare and if the 1.2TSI can past muster performance-wise but offer better economy, I would say consider it carefully.

Well, I own a 1.2 TSI for 5 weeks in Greece! The engine is fine, moves the car definitely better than a normal aspirated 1.6 liter. In hills, high torque helps you maintain speed without stepping on the pedal and increasing consumption. The engine is quieter than the 1.4 TSI. A local magazine compared the two octys and concluded 1.2 is the wiser choice. Of course, due to local tax issues, 1.2 has significantly lower tax and insurance compared to 1.4 (which is similar to the 1.8 here in Greece). The 1.4 has some extra power you will only need if you need to road race sometimes....

Also, do have a look at the enviromental commendation in the VAG site. The 1.2 TSI is much more energy - efficient, lighter materials, 8-valve design to minimize friction. Finally, my consumption, mixed city driving, (35%) and light country road (work at hospital, situated in a panoramic area, thus lots of climbing on the morning and lots of downhills in the evening) is 6.8 litres / 100 Km (you'll need to make conversion, sorry).

I hope I helped you:thumbup:!

Edited 21 May, 2010 by RangerMD

[Cauliflower]

If Google conversion is to be believed, 6.8 litres per 100km is 41.5 mpg which on initial view is slightly disappointing, BUT you seem to have quite heavy city driving which throws that into a different perspective. I get the feeling that a true 45+ mpg for the normal UK driver is achievable...

In relation to performance, can you give us a sense of any shortfalls? Slip roads onto motorways, tight turns on uphill roads, entering and exiting small roundabouts??? This seems to be an issue for the 1.6 TDi CR engine...

[Yetiflute]

The 1.8 TSi is lovely but speaking from experience I'd say you are very unlikely to acheive the combined mpg figure in normal use. IIRC the combined figure is about 40 mpg, I can acheive (and sometimes exceed) this on long drives at moderate speed where there is little traffic around (e.g. cruising round highland roads). Motorway journeys will probably be high 30's and normal mixed driving about 34 - 35 mpg and if you do short journeys this could easily fall to 30 mpg.

My 1.8TSI DSG - now with 2200 miles - yes I would concur with the above analysis from my experience.

[james26]

As you do mostly motorway driving the DPF is unlikely to be an issue and it is my belief that the DMF issue has been hyped out of proportion and it's actually quite rare on standard non re-mapped cars.

However, they can both be expensive once you're out of warranty...

My friend who has a 2008 Fiat diesel has had the DPF fail, and Fiat won't pay up say it's his fault. So not hyped!

James.

[silkysteve]

My friend who has a 2008 Fiat diesel has had the DPF fail, and Fiat won't pay up say it's his fault. So not hyped!

James.

One example that may or may not be true - you only have hearsay "evidence" and it doesn't even relate to a Skoda - isn't enough to prove that something fitted to another make of car is inherently faulty.

If you could come up with some actual evidence that would stand up to scrutiny as being more than a once off, then it may be worth taking into account. Anything else is just gossip.

[Raglits]

My friend who has a 2008 Fiat diesel has had the DPF fail, and Fiat won't pay up say it's his fault. So not hyped!

James.

I said the DMF was hyped up and that the original posters driving style meant that a DPF failure was unlikely... I think DPFs are the spawn of the devil, but if your driving pattern means the regen will happen fairly easily they are unlikely to cause an issue (note, I say unlikely, not impossible)

DMF - Dual Mass Fly Wheel

DPF Diesel Particulate Filter

They're quite different...

[silkysteve]

I think DPFs are the spawn of the devil

Regardless of origin, I think the total absence of black smoke can only be a good thing.

[RangerMD]

If Google conversion is to be believed, 6.8 litres per 100km is 41.5 mpg which on initial view is slightly disappointing, BUT you seem to have quite heavy city driving which throws that into a different perspective. I get the feeling that a true 45+ mpg for the normal UK driver is achievable...

In relation to performance, can you give us a sense of any shortfalls? Slip roads onto motorways, tight turns on uphill roads, entering and exiting small roundabouts??? This seems to be an issue for the 1.6 TDi CR engine...

The car only has 1100 kms on it, I have read that consumption can be expected to decline further. Also, these are true numbers and I avoid always keeping low revs for better running in. So Yes, believe 45 mpg are realistic.

My only concern would be tight turns on uphill roads: you need to keep revs above 1500 to avoid switching down to second or 1st gear. That is you need to have one of those gears in already! However, I am not aware of many 1600 normal aspirated engines (especially 16 valve ones) that could move an octavia with 1300 revs in this situation.

The car was measured with the Bosch horsepower system here in Greece. They reported 124 PS and 206 kg of torque!