Hi Yeti owners,

I have been considering a second hand Yeti or a Qashqai. I think I'm settling on a yeti for the better reliability and drivability. But I'm moving from a golf GTI and although I don't expect a similar driving experience I don't want a car that will feel sluggish particularly pulling away or overtaking on the motorway.

I don't really want a 4x4. But I have heard that the 2.0l 110bhp can be sluggish. I've even heard the 1.2 petrol is better although I find that hard to understand.

Any advice appreciated,

The quickest Yetis are 4x4, which leaves the 1.4 TSI (122PS, 10.5sec 0-60) as the nippiest 2WD, if you can find one. The 110PS diesel is slightly quicker (book figures 11.6 vs 11.8 0-60) than the 1.2 TSI, and the extra torque helps for overtaking.

 

If you want quick then the 1.8 TSI has the most scope for tweaking.

Really depends on whether the engines are on or off note so to speak.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps?  

You are going to have to get a 4x4 in my opinion, because they come with the bigger engines.

The 1.8tsi is quite brisk.  As is the 170bhp diesel.

Both hit 62mph in 8.4 seconds, have enough oooph for motorway overtaking and also have the benefit of 4x4 which makes them brisk on a typical B road too.

 

My 170 with just a remap makes a little over 200bhp and I'd expect it's as least quick as a previous model Golf GTI.

^^ what he said, get a big diesel they go well

I'd equate the driving experience of a 170 4*4 Yeti with a Golf GTi any day.  It handles just like a tall go-kart, and has terrific squirt and go capabilities, especially round corners.

Hi Yeti owners,

I have been considering a second hand Yeti or a Qashqai. I think I'm settling on a yeti for the better reliability and drivability. But I'm moving from a golf GTI and although I don't expect a similar driving experience I don't want a car that will feel sluggish particularly pulling away or overtaking on the motorway.

I don't really want a 4x4. But I have heard that the 2.0l 110bhp can be sluggish. I've even heard the 1.2 petrol is better although I find that hard to understand.

Any advice appreciated,

 

The 1.2 is remarkably good and better to drive than you think. I wanted the DSG box and not a diesel so had to go with this. If the 1.8T had the DSG box I would have gone for that. I have a 1.8T Octavia and believe me it goes like **** of a shovel.I would imagine the Yeti although not tried with this engine, must be a beast.

I'm perplexed by this question I have to say.

 

I think even a five year will tell you that the more you pay, the more power you get. And said five year old will also tell you that a car with 170 horses will be quicker than one with 140 which in turn will be quicker than one with 110...  Had you ask which is more like a GTI: the 1,8 petrol or the 170 diesel I'd have understood.  

 

That a 110 diesel can be slower than the anemic breathless 1,2?! Not sure where you heard that but I've never ever heard that one before - be it in a car test on this forum or via word of mouth. In the real world most people will struggle to tell the difference between a 110 and a 140 diesel Yeti truth be told (as many people that have owned both stated on this very forum).  But a 1,2 is something you notice the moment you put your right foot down. Yes fast for a 1,2 brick shaped car, but glacial in how it "accelerates" compared to anything else! Let alone a Golf GTI.

 

If budget is an issue and you really, really don't want a 4x4, get a 2wd 110 diesel and chip it. Job done.

Go for a 140/170 diesel which have plenty of midrange oomph which is what you need in the real world driving environment....

Amazingly useful comments so thanks. I've spent hours spread over several days trawling the net trying to get a view which you guys gave in a day.

 

To qualify some of your queries:

 

Comments I've seen about the 1.2 were in reviews, and I guess they were intended as 'relative'. i.e. zippy for a 1.2 vs sluggish for a 2.0 diesel.

 

Not sure about fiddling with the config as surely insurance becomes a problem?

It sounds like we do need the 140 at least. I'm happy to spend a grand more (second hand) and, say, £200 extra a year on petrol to get me that extra reassurance on the motorway. I was most concerned about the unnecessary added complexity / things to go wrong on a 4x4.

 

Hopefully I'll be updating my profile to a 'Yeti owner' shortly. Any additional / final thoughts really welcome...

Edited 27 January, 201412 yr by josephaedrus

I have a 2.0L 4x4 diesel DSG, and believe me it goes quick, and has plenty of power for me. Mine's only 17 months old, so haven't come across any 4x4 type problems as yet. I have driven Skoda automatics for most of the last 10 years, Fabia, Octavia, without any problems at all.

I would recommend a 2.0L to you with no problems at all. Hope you choose one.

To be honest the 140 CR is a cracking engine, my wife had one in a Seat Leon and it was over powered from new I think they are about 160 IIRC we did a 2 week driving Holiday round the south France with others in 300bhp cars. I have to say I was more than impressed with it being able to keep up on the backroads and we didn't see the petrol stations nearly as often as they did  

There is not much more complexity in the 4x4 Yeti because it's a haldex based system with a bit of hardware that sends drive to the back end.

It's rare to hear of any faults, just allow for an oil change every 30k or so miles.

To be honest the 140 CR is a cracking engine, my wife had one in a Seat Leon and it was over powered from new I think they are about 160 IIRC we did a 2 week driving Holiday round the south France with others in 300bhp cars. I have to say I was more than impressed with it being able to keep up on the backroads and we didn't see the petrol stations nearly as often as they did

Given the weight difference and the additional transmission losses of the AWD system, personally I'd skip the 140 if you want something quick. The aerodynamics of the yeti also don't do it any favours above 60mph either and the brakes are on the small side IMO. As bossfox says, the haldex is pretty bombproof. I've been running over 104% more power through mine compared to the factory figure for over 20,000 miles now (with 20k haldex fluid changes) and its spot on. Personally I'd go for a 1.8tsi running Shark stage 1 software and a bolt on 312mm brake upgrade.

I have a 2.0L 4x4 diesel DSG, and believe me it goes quick, and has plenty of power for me. Mine's only 17 months old, so haven't come across any 4x4 type problems as yet. I have driven Skoda automatics for most of the last 10 years, Fabia, Octavia, without any problems at all.

I would recommend a 2.0L to you with no problems at all. Hope you choose one.

Agree with this!

Amazingly useful comments so thanks. I've spent hours spread over several days trawling the net trying to get a view which you guys gave in a day.

 

To qualify some of your queries:

 

Comments I've seen about the 1.2 were in reviews, and I guess they were intended as 'relative'. i.e. zippy for a 1.2 vs sluggish for a 2.0 diesel.

 

Not sure about fiddling with the config as surely insurance becomes a problem?

It sounds like we do need the 140 at least. I'm happy to spend a grand more (second hand) and, say, £200 extra a year on petrol to get me that extra reassurance on the motorway. I was most concerned about the unnecessary added complexity / things to go wrong on a 4x4.

 

Hopefully I'll be updating my profile to a 'Yeti owner' shortly. Any additional / final thoughts really welcome...

One thing the 4x4 gives is the ability to put the power down in a very predicable manner. I had a 140PD L&K Octavia before the Yeti and it had the tendency of most front wheel drive cars to wheelspin and scrabble for grip if I tried to put the power down coming out of an opening for example. None of that on the Yeti (which with 20HP more and better acceleration could be harder to control of the line) - it just seems to sit down a bit and go without even the slightest chirp from the wheels.

I noticed a massive difference between the 110 2wd I had before and the 4x4 140 I now own.

Sorry 90000 I would have to disagree on that one. But totally agree with everything else.

Given the weight difference and the additional transmission losses of the AWD system, personally I'd skip the 140 if you want something quick. The aerodynamics of the yeti also don't do it any favours above 60mph either and the brakes are on the small side IMO. As bossfox says, the haldex is pretty bombproof. I've been running over 104% more power through mine compared to the factory figure for over 20,000 miles now (with 20k haldex fluid changes) and its spot on. Personally I'd go for a 1.8tsi running Shark stage 1 software and a bolt on 312mm brake upgrade.

 

If you owned a GTI and want a yeti this is the best option by far, ticks all the boxes. 

The 1.2 feels quicker than the stats suggest, but only if you stay within the power band.  Either side of that and it's very obviously a 1.2, but you soon learn how to stay within it, and thus get the most out of the car.

 

I entered Yeti ownership from a Polo GTi, and found the Yeti's nimble go-kart like handling and "zippy" engine a hoot   The 1.8TSi was very quickly ruled out for me because of the £275/year Road Tax (or whatever the exact figure is).

I noticed a massive difference between the 110 2wd I had before and the 4x4 140 I now own.

Sorry 90000 I would have to disagree on that one. But totally agree with everything else.

As I said above, from what some people on here have said and TP springs to mind. I've never driven a 2,0 110 so won't know. But have driven a 1,2 DSG.

I've had an octy vrs , fabia vrs , both very similar to the golf td gti ,,,, if I had the choice of the three of them or my current 170 4x4 yeti ,,,, I would choose the yeti without hesitation. It's a fantastic motor ,,,, the 170 engine seems made for the yeti , coupled with the haldex 4x4 system it's a step ahead of the others , giving traction where the others spin.

Best way to make your decision my friend is try one with an open mind

....with an open mind

...and an open cheque book

Go for a 140/170 diesel which have plenty of midrange oomph which is what you need in the real world driving environment....

for oomph, the 140 isn't that good IMO.

moving from a Seat leon Tfsi-200bhp/Mk V golf platform- I found my Journey times weren't badly affected in a 140-the much better forward view allows the extra time for a less brisk powerplant to make quick progress.The 1.8Tsi is real world quick and -on paper- the 170 is as quick with more flexibility. If you drive in a way which avoids instant bans you would be fine  with either and would cope with a 140

The 140 I test drove certainly wasn't slow, but the 170 is (to me, at least) noticeably more rapid.

 

As for the 4x4 system, I also test drove an Octy CR170 VRS that day and I'm pretty sure the 140 Yeti was quicker point to point because it didn't spend so much time scrabbling for grip. It was damp but not raining.