I am thinking about takin the plunge and ordering a Yeti 4x4. looking for advice on the merits of the 110 rather than the 140 and is there really that much of a difference in normal day to day driving.

The car would be used for comuting and and trips from central scotland to skye on the west coast. It will not be used for towing and would only have two people and luggage and I am of the age where I no longer rush about.

Currently driving a DSG Octavia estate with the 140 PD engine

Therefore I would be interested on any feedback on the performance etc. of the 110 in real life or should I just bite the bullet and go for the 140

All advice and comments are welcome

I am thinking about takin the plunge and ordering a Yeti 4x4. looking for advice on the merits of the 110 rather than the 140 and is there really that much of a difference in normal day to day driving.

The car would be used for comuting and and trips from central scotland to skye on the west coast. It will not be used for towing and would only have two people and luggage and I am of the age where I no longer rush about.

Currently driving a DSG Octavia estate with the 140 PD engine

Therefore I would be interested on any feedback on the performance etc. of the 110 in real life or should I just bite the bullet and go for the 140

All advice and comments are welcome

Hi

I find my 110 4X4 perfectly adequate, plenty of zip in the lower gears. I prefer travelling on cross country routes, so don't use motorways that much, where the extra power might be useful. There does not seem to be much of a fuel consumption benefit though for choosing the 110 4X4 over the 140 4X4 in real use.

Cheers,

JP

Edited 8 December, 201015 yr by jeep

Hi and welcome,

have the 110 4x4 on order myself although I've not driven one either. Did have a 140 SE Yeti until very recently; took advantage of the current strong residuals to get a newer version. This time though decided to go for an Elegance spec 110 4x4 for retained value, as the cost to change was very similar to an SE 140 4x4 with a number of options as I had before.

Have canvassed opinion from owners with this engine and almost all appear happy with it. Also been in touch with a forum member who test drove a Yeti believing it to be a 140. Only later discovering it was actually a 110 4x4 and they were more than happy with it.

Hope that's of help,

TP

Ive also wondered about the real life driving difference between the 110 and the 140 tdi.

The two differences id be interesting in knowing is:

What are the torque figures for each of the engines. Im guessing they will be very similar? Therefore Id guess performance differences would be minimal.

How many revs per 1000 does the five gear (in the 110) and the sixth gear (in the 140) manage? I cant imagine that fifth in the 110 would be the same as fifth in the 140 six speed box so just how far away is the length of the 110's fifth from the sixth in the 140?

Well I have just picked up my 140 DSG today and I am really, really impressed with it.

Can't remember what the 110 was like.

Ive also wondered about the real life driving difference between the 110 and the 140 tdi.

The two differences id be interesting in knowing is:

What are the torque figures for each of the engines. Im guessing they will be very similar? Therefore Id guess performance differences would be minimal.

How many revs per 1000 does the five gear (in the 110) and the sixth gear (in the 140) manage? I cant imagine that fifth in the 110 would be the same as fifth in the 140 six speed box so just how far away is the length of the 110's fifth from the sixth in the 140?

The 110TDI 4x4 has unlike the 2wd version a 6 speed box, it also produces 30Nm more torque The two 110 engines and the 140 are the same basic engine family, however the 170 is not.

CFHA - 2.0TDI 110bhp; 250Nm torque (1750-2500rpm)

CFHC - 2.0TDI 140bhp; 320Nm torque (1750-2500rpm) 4x4

CFHF - 2.0TDI 110bhp; 280Nm torque (1750-2750rpm) 4x4

In gear RPM unsure on that one I'm afraid; from recollection Pat was around 2000 in sixth at 70.

Regards,

TP

Edited 8 December, 201015 yr by The Plumber

having moved from a 110 Octavia to a 138hp V50 i would say go for the 140bhp. If you are driving to Skye then the extra oomph you will get will ease safer overtaking on the type of roads you will be on. I imagime a much more torquey engine and so more relaxed for the varying road conditions.

Make up your own mind take lengthy test drives in both cars, be a nuisance to the salesman(person sorry!) and make them work for thier money. Take as much time as you can in deciding as if you don't think you've chosen right you will regret it for a long time.

Personally I think the Octavia Scout offers far more value.

The two 110 engines and the 140 are the same basic engine family, however the 170 is not.

Hi Tim,

Are you indicating that you have found more details of the differences between the 170CR and the other 2.0 litre TDI engines than just the letter codes??

Details would be interesting.

Hi Tim,

Are you indicating that you have found more details of the differences between the 170CR and the other 2.0 litre TDI engines than just the letter codes??

Details would be interesting.

Hi Agerbundsen,

no just the letter codes and obviously the change from Generation 1 CR 140 to Generation 2 occurred at the same time the 110 was introduced back in November 09, whereas the updated 170 did not appear until June this year. Plus the different code of course; CFJA although there some family link as it starts with CF :wonder:

Might be worth sending JonA a PM; working with Skoda he may know more.

Regards,

TP

The 110TDI 4x4 has unlike the 2wd version a 6 speed box, it also produces 30Nm more torque The two 110 engines and the 140 are the same basic engine family, however the 170 is not.

CFHA - 2.0TDI 110bhp; 250Nm torque (1750-2500rpm)

CFHC - 2.0TDI 140bhp; 320Nm torque (1750-2500rpm) 4x4

CFHF - 2.0TDI 110bhp; 280Nm torque (1750-2750rpm) 4x4

In gear RPM unsure on that one I'm afraid; from recollection Pat was around 2000 in sixth at 70.

Regards,

TP

Great post - thanks

So the 110 4x4 gets a six speed box - so very little compromise!

So can anyone confirm that the 110 has the same turbo? I'd guess it does and is just 'limited' in the engine management side of things.

don't use motorways that much, where the extra power might be useful.

Wrong way round. You don't need huge amounts of power for motorways - witness the fact that the knackered white van is often the fastest thing you see on them.

I'd agree with loskie: it's the run to Skye you want oomph for - to get past the dozy camper vans on the fun windey bits!

I have the 2wd 110bhp

It is a good motorway vehicle and perfect for what I do as I can't afford the company car tax penalty of the 4wd. However it is does not inspire confidence in overtaking on back roads, A roads etc.

I would recommend that you go for the 140bhp if you can.

The 110BHP is absolutely fine in day to day driving I don't think you'll see a difference between the 110 4x4 and 140 4x4.

I'd rather have a 110 Elegance than a 140 SE I think, mostly because I really like the awesome Bi-Xenon headlamps, oh and the leather, and the bluetooth.

I test drove the 110 and found it quite adequate..........However,I bought the 170 Elegance . I too have reached the age were I don't need to rush about, but there's no law yet to say you can't accelerate there quickly. You can't beat that mid range torque. :yes:

My 59bhp Polo is adequate for cruising on the motorway, but as soon as you want to overtake on an A road. Forget it unless there is a 2 mile straight clear stretch in front of you

That's why I have a 140, which will be remapped, to give me better economy - the 170 is more economical than the 140, so a remapped 140 should be similar if not better.

Oh, and somebody (Bilun777) mentioned quicker = safer, acceleration

Mike

The 110BHP is absolutely fine in day to day driving I don't think you'll see a difference between the 110 4x4 and 140 4x4.

I'd rather have a 110 Elegance than a 140 SE I think, mostly because I really like the awesome Bi-Xenon headlamps, oh and the leather, and the bluetooth.

But James you are based in the rather congested Surrey area are you not? 2 Years ago I spent 6 months working around the Guildford area travelling round various farms. the driving is far different from up here.

Do you hear the engine working harder in the 110bhp version?

But James you are based in the rather congested Surrey area are you not? 2 Years ago I spent 6 months working around the Guildford area travelling round various farms. the driving is far different from up here.

Yes that is true and I only did drive the 110bhp version around the town and a few small a-roads and it seemed fine. I have driven the 140 quite a lot and I think it's quite fast, okay so it isn't 3.6 Superb fast but it certain is plenty of power for the average user. I found the 110bhp to be fine, although I would like to live with on for a bit and see how I feel then but I still maintain that the Elegance spec offers so much I think I'd rather have less power and more spec especially as you say around here where we sit in traffic all day long and can't actually move at any rate of speed anyway...