Exploring a hopefully slightly bigger alternative to the Yeti and viewed an Audi Q3 1.4Tsi S-Tronic

which from what I can gather  is similar to 1.4Tsi with DSG (I know you can't buy that spec in UK).

 

Seems to have a few tweeks...it "rolls freely dis-engaging the clutch when it senses you are not

accelerating or braking if Audi drive and efficiency drive is selected to save fuel" Sounds like marketing speak!! Also has stop/start system and an electric/electonic parking brake that I would do without if possible.

 

In the light of the 1.2 chain cam issues and DSG oil change issue would be interested if any one

can offer an opinion on the above Audi config. Dealer could not offer any detail on what the likely difference would be inspite of having Skoda and Audi franchises within the group..

I'm assuming the Audi 1.4 is belt not chain cam but again Dealer "not sure, but would be to the latest spec available"

.

The point that I am coming to is with the extra complications by going with an Audi 1.4Tsi S-Tronic (DSG by another name) from a 1.2Tsi DSG Yeti do you think it may be adding to potential problems? (more to go wrong)? 

The DSG oil change feels like a kludge to me, and the 1.2 Tsi Chain cam to modified Chain cam to finally Belt drive also smacks of poor design along the way taking too long to cure.

 

I appreciate the Audi is a fair bit pricier spec for spec (+£5k ish, £28k S-Line,vs Elegance), but quite taken with the total package.

 

The boot is slightly bigger 200mm deeper front to back and 25mm shorter height wise with spare fitted and same 1000 mm usable width. Headroom about 50mm less but I have plenty of headroom which I don't in a new model Cashcow.

 

Any thoughts appreciated especially engine/DSG (S-Tronic)?

Edited 21 May, 201412 yr by kibby

Have you looked at the Ford Kuga, or the Kia Sportage, or Nissan cashcow as alternatives, the prices are close.

The new ford engine appears to be a peach ( 1ltr ecotech). & the revamped cashcow looks more modern.

 

I did take a very brief look at the Kuga & cashcow, & i mean very brief, & bought a Yeti.

I always thought the Yeti was between the Q3 and Q5 in size?

The 1.4 is the 148 bhp engine with  chain cam.(according to Wiki.)

Hopefully it will be available when we get the new Yeti in 2016......?

I always thought the Yeti was between the Q3 and Q5 in size?

The 1.4 is the latest 148 bhp engine with  cambelt.

Hopefully it will be available when we get the new Yeti in 2016......?

Q3 is 15cm longer than a Yeti apparently.

Kuga was my other near alternative but a little to much chrome flash (especially in the cabin), reminded me of a Sportage interior, not discounted it though. Sportage no Petrol Auto so a deal breaker for us (short runs/DPF issues). Cashcow my head attached to roof in admittedly larger car so again a deal breaker. Mazda CX-5 no petrol auto if I remember right.

Kuga 1.6 auto avail?, 1.0 eco engine seems a step too far the wrong way and no auto!! (lol).

 

If we go for a Yeti or Q3 probably take the extra 1/2 year warranty for peace of mind, although normally wouldn't.

Edited 21 May, 201412 yr by kibby

Q3 is the only other alternative to a new Yeti I'm considering (Yeti FL being essentially unimproved from pre-FL, refinement suboptimal, relatively old-tech satnav and no powerful petrol DSG being the downsides of the Yeti option for me personally). 

 

But I'm not totally sold on the Q3 either because:

 

** styling is rather dumpy and anonymous;

** the van-like rear of the Yeti certainly does make best use of space in a relatively short body whereas the curved rear of the Q3 doesn't help efficient space use;

** rear seats in the Yeti much more flexible - Q3 just folds (and not even fully flat);

** I have come to like the generous headroom in the Yeti - the screen in the Q3 feels like it's more restricted in height in comparison, a bit claustrophobic even;

** Yeti actually scores better on some options, eg AFAICS  Q3 has no memory on the electric chairs and no heated windscreen option;

 

Other reasons against the Q3 are the cost (of course!) and the fact that a facelift Q3 is apparently due out in 6-9 months.

 

(And the Q3 forum doesn't seem to be a patch on this one!)

 

But obviously some things the Q3 does well, like a 211PS petrol engine and the dry 7-speed DSG (which presumably will come to the Yeti II in due course but only the less efficient wet 6-speeder at present), the better refinement, the substantially better sports seats and the wheel/knob-operated satnav which seems much easier to operate precisely.

Edited 21 May, 201412 yr by prodata

My sister-in-law has a Q3 (170 S-Line Quattro) and the Yeti was parked next to it on the drive last weekend. As said, the Q3 is slightly larger, but to me the boot isn't as usable.

 

I'm also not a fan of the looks - the design looks out of proportion to me. Nice to be inside though

I always thought the Yeti was between the Q3 and Q5 in size?

The 1.4 is the latest 148 bhp engine with  cambelt.

Hopefully it will be available when we get the new Yeti in 2016......?

Are you sure that this is the engine (148 bhp cambelt ) in the Q3?

I am also interested in a compact automatic petrol SUV with 2-wheel drive, and was considering the Yeti when the Q3 was announced. I would prefer the 1.4 engine that Skoda UK decides not to allow us, so the Q3 seems ideal. However, Audi do not say which engine it is. My concern is that it is the same twin-charged 1.4 that is offered in the Tiguan, which by all accounts is to be avoided. I was under the impression that the "new" cambelt engines were only fitted in MQB platform vehicles as in the Octavia.

I would be very pleased if the VW Group as a whole got its act together and provided proper information and offered more choice of specs in the UK, like it seems to in the rest of Europe!   

Are you sure that this is the engine (148 bhp cambelt ) in the Q3?

 

I'm pretty sure that this isn't the twin-charged engine. But you might get an answer in the technical section of the Q3 forum at:

 

http://www.q3ownersclub.co.uk/forum/technical-faults_forum10.html

I'm pretty sure that this isn't the twin-charged engine. But you might get an answer in the technical section of the Q3 forum at:

 

http://www.q3ownersclub.co.uk/forum/technical-faults_forum10.html

Oh dear, plenty of problems there!

Mazda CX5 ?

No petrol auto when last checked.

Are you sure that this is the engine (148 bhp cambelt ) in the Q3?

I am also interested in a compact automatic petrol SUV with 2-wheel drive, and was considering the Yeti when the Q3 was announced. I would prefer the 1.4 engine that Skoda UK decides not to allow us, so the Q3 seems ideal. However, Audi do not say which engine it is. My concern is that it is the same twin-charged 1.4 that is offered in the Tiguan, which by all accounts is to be avoided. I was under the impression that the "new" cambelt engines were only fitted in MQB platform vehicles as in the Octavia.

I would be very pleased if the VW Group as a whole got its act together and provided proper information and offered more choice of specs in the UK, like it seems to in the rest of Europe!   

According to Wikipedia you're right.

The 1.4 is the ea211 turbo engine with chain cam drive.

Technical info on Audi websites appears to be virtually non-existant.

No petrol auto when last checked.

Surely just a matter of time.

Have you also checked out 

 

Mitsubishi ASX Or  Outlander

Subaru ~XV

Vauxhall - Mokka  Or Antara

Hyundai - Santa Fe Or iX35 ( currently being advertised & seen as a Yeti competitor)

 

Havent seen any of these mentioned.

 

I did also consider the new Citroen C4 Picasso having seen one at goodwood last year, looks really nice, loads of storage space, & the tech toys are futuristic, which also was one of the items i thought might be a drawback if ( or as most people will say when) they go wrong what will the impact be to the rest of the car, & also being very new tech then what will reliability be like.

I have the new model Subaru Forester and am very happy with it. The non-turbo ones are actually pretty frugal in petrol automatic form and its the only auto I've seen where the MPG is higher than the manual version. It has a real handbrake, on the drivers side, too and will fit a full size spare in the wheel well (though it comes with a space saver). Plus good safety and reliability reputation and a 5 year warranty.

 

You don't really need to wait for one either as they keep them in stock as you don't get options on Japanese cars.

Another one I'd add, but only if you're happy with 2WD would be the Golf SV, due to be orderable in a month or two I believe. eg

 

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/volkswagen/golf-sv

 

They seem to classify it as an MPV, but what's in a name? 2WD/4WD aside, I'm not really sure that there's really much difference in concept between an SV and a Yeti, other than the extra rear seat flexibility in a Yeti.

And the ride height - that was an important factor for me as my company Avensis sustained a number of injuries crossing building sites and forest tracks. Also the extra ride height makes a big difference when trying to move on snow.

I would say the Yeti seat height (not ground clearance) is more comparable with MPV's. It feels the same as the Cmax I had but no where near CRV's, Discos etc. which are higher. I narrowed my choice between a new Cmax or Yeti. Nothing in it at all. Ride, comfort, build quality were identical IMO. Yeti rear seat combo has been in Cmaxes since 2004 so nothing new there. Only reason I bought a Yeti was because I'd never had one. Happy with the Yeti but the Cmax has more rear carrying capacity. My 1.8 petrol Cmax was as economical as my 1.2 Yeti doing same journeys.

Thanks for the input all.

Noticed small engined petrol auto's are not that common.

The cars mentioned so far give a good choice of alternatives Have found some possibles..Kuga, Audi Q3, CRV, BUT the price ends up to near to £30k for my liking for a well (Elegance like) specced model.

Edited 22 May, 201412 yr by kibby

Countryman? Good petrol auto in the range, no?

Needs to be at least Yeti or slightly bigger and has to have ability to slide into seats without 'a drop' as have back/hip problems. (Would need a block and tackle to get out of a BMW if you get the drift.!!).

Edited 22 May, 201412 yr by kibby

Golf SV looks tasty...lots of engine/transmission options if they don't limit the choice for UK.

Golf Plus didn't like and Dealer didn't like too as he tried to put us off it for some reason.!! Very odd!

Funny world, isn't it?

Whatever I look at in the equivalent market there is only one model that comes anywhere within striking distance of the Yeti, and that is the Freelander.

Isnt the VAG 1.4 in the Q3 built by Skoda anyway?