1.2 TSI vs. 1.4 TSI

[PekoSI]

Hey!

 

I was checking out this videos of 1.2 TSI and 1.4 TSI engines acceleration on youtube and I find the comparison hard to believe since the performance of both engines is practically the same.

Bellow are youtube links to both videos but please notice that 0-150 km/h timing in 1.4 TSI video is not measured (you can figure it out roughly though from running timer - 17,9 secs)

 

1.4 TSI acceleration

1.2 TSI acceleration

 

Results:

                                    -> 1.4 TSI    vs.   -> 1.2 TSI

0-100 km/h (0-60 mph)      = 8.1 s             = 8.9 s

0-150 km/h (0-93 mph)      = 17.9 s           = 19.9 s

 

Performance of the 1.2 TSI in this video is a lot better than what factory specs are saying (0-60 in 10.5s).

 

I would like to know your opinion about it.

 

Since I'm ordering my new Octy in a few months time I'd like to know if 1.4 TSI is worth that extra few bucks (I'm going for petrol engine either way) =)

[Has]

It also depends on which trim level you're interested in, 1.2 TSI is only available in S and SE trim, Elegance in 1.4 TSI only.  So if you want Elegance then you have no choice.

[PekoSI]

It also depends on which trim level you're interested in, 1.2 TSI is only available in S and SE trim, Elegance in 1.4 TSI only.  So if you want Elegance then you have no choice.

 

Yup I want Elegance so you are absolutely right about that one! 

 

But even so I would still like to know what do you think about the difference... Is there anyone that has already driven both of these? If so - is there some noticeable difference or hardly any?

[Harkonnen]

Elegance 1.4 TSI... I have it and it's fantastic. 1.4 feels like a 2.5L on the old engines without turbines. 

Edited 11 July, 2013 by Harkonnen

[Rog Dodge]

Never driven a 1.2, but as Harkonnen said a 1.4 is fantastic, mine has DSG, stick it in Sport Mode and it goes like s** off a shovel. Waiting for my new one, Hurry up Skoda!

[littleade]

Personally I'd go for the 1.4. The new 1.2 105ps is roughly the equivelent of the old 1.4 122ps in the heavier mkII taking the lighter weight of the mkIII into consideration. I had the 1.4 mkII and always found it lacked mid range torgue, so the new 1.4 with more power and torque than the old 1.4 in a lighter car makes it more or less the equivelent of the old 1.8TSI performance wise.

 

Don't forget it's not all about 0-62 times as unless your a traffic light jockey they're meaningless. In the real world the extra torque the 1.4 has will make it a much nicer car to drive as you won't have to wring it's neck to get it to go.

 

official consumption figures are almost identical so in the real world i wouldn't mind bettin you'll get better mpg/LPkm from the 1.4

 

Try both out on a test drive and see which you prefer

[EwenS]

No experience of the Octavias but have driven both 1.2 & 1.4 Yetis.  Have to say I was a bit surprised at how little difference there seemed to be going from the 1.2 to the 1.4.  SWMBO has a 1.2 & I had been considering an upgrade to the 1.4 for her but after having one for a day as a courtesy car I'm really not sure that it ofered much in the way of real world benefit. 

[Yeti_Man]

No experience of the Octavias but have driven both 1.2 & 1.4 Yetis.  Have to say I was a bit surprised at how little difference there seemed to be going from the 1.2 to the 1.4.  SWMBO has a 1.2 & I had been considering an upgrade to the 1.4 for her but after having one for a day as a courtesy car I'm really not sure that it ofered much in the way of real world benefit. 

It does at higher speeds and for incline work imo.

[Capo79]

No experience of the Octavias but have driven both 1.2 & 1.4 Yetis.  Have to say I was a bit surprised at how little difference there seemed to be going from the 1.2 to the 1.4.  SWMBO has a 1.2 & I had been considering an upgrade to the 1.4 for her but after having one for a day as a courtesy car I'm really not sure that it ofered much in the way of real world benefit. 

 

Ehm.... The Yeti comes with the "old" 1.4 TSI engine with 122 PS. I wouldn't compare that with the new 1.4 TSI 140 PS.

 

To TS: The Octy 3 with 140 PS has the same (or even better) performance than my old 2005 Astra 2.0 Turbo 170 PS. It goes quite well, to put it mildly.

[PekoSI]

After reading all this I'm pretty excited about 1.4 TSI. I would like to test it out for sure but the problem is all the cars for test drive are either with diesel or 1.2 TSI at the moment... Last week I took 1.6 TDI Octy for a test drive but I wasn't very happy with it - a bit too sluggish at higher speeds but still good performance overall though considering the horse power and torque.

[WallaceSteve]

I have the 1.4 TSI engine and it is fantastic, it flies up hills doing 60 in 6th gear with no issues what so ever, it drives as if it's on a flat road. It goes very very fast and yeah, if you get the 1.4 you will not be disappointed! 

[stokey]

1.4 is great, quiet smooth and pulls like a dream.

[Perra79]

In Sweden, you can buy the 1.2 petrol in the Elegance version.

[Harkonnen]

In Romania too. But I would still recommend 1.4 for the HP

[Perra79]

Agree, 1.4 engine is a better choice.

[TudorM]

There's no way the 1.2 engine would accelerate to 100km/h in 8,9s. Just no way. I have the old 1.6 NA engine (102hp) and it would do 11.5s in the best conditions and mine has really short gear ratios for 1-2-3. Even with a slightly more potent engine, more torque than mine and slightly lighter car, there's no way it would get to 8,9s. I bet you they'd advertise it as such if it were true. If you have an engine that can do that, why would you advertise as being far slower?

[philhoward]

I was looking at the Golf 1.4 140PS (with ACT) specs earlier today and it has the same torque figure as my 180PS Fabia vRS (250Nm) which funnily enough is the supposed limit for the DSG7 box...given the amount of times I take mine to the red line, I'm expecting the new 140PS 1.4 to be a good mid range puller.

 

0-60 times are only one way of telling how a car performs - what happened to the old 50-70 in top gear figures?  They were much more "real world"..

[PekoSI]

0-60 times are only one way of telling how a car performs - what happened to the old 50-70 in top gear figures?  They were much more "real world"..

 

I was searching for those as well but couldn't find them. It would probably be a lot more interesting to compare those like you say. Pretty sure the times of both engines would not be as close as 0-60...

[No.733]

I'm very familiar with both engines. I've driven numerous cars with both engines in, from Fabias to Leons and Golfs to Ibizas. As completely remarkable as the 1.2 is, the 1.4 just has a chunk more of everything right across the rev range. It's worth a few hundred squid more IMHO.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2

[hawkster]

I have the 1.4tsi and am amazed at it's performance - especially on the motorway, the pickup from around 60 -70mph even in 6th gear is fantastic - smooth and effortless it is very easy to find yourself exceeding the 70MPH limit without really being aware of doing it as it is so smooth   :think: . It definitely feels like a much bigger engine and I run in ECO mode a lot of the time.

 

I suspect the difference between the 1.4 and 1.2 will be much more obvious when running at speed rather than just the bald 0-60 time, the extra grunt in the 1.4 will be more beneficial through the gears.

[PekoSI]

Well from what I read in this topic there is no doubt in my mind that 1.4 TSI is the engine for me. So ty all for sharing your thoughts about it!

[v0n]

Do I remember correctly that the 1.4TSI in O3 is the "budgeted down" version with cam belt instead of chain like in the previous generation?

[Zillio]

Opps...

Edited 24 July, 2013 by Zillio

[Zillio]

I thought all the new VAG TSI engines had moved away from chain cams they now use long life belts

[Harkonnen]

Yes all of the moved from chain