140 or 170

[yetifinn]

Hello all,

 

I recently ordered from my local dealer a Yeti Outdoor Elegance 2.0 TDI 140PS 4x4 manual DPF to replace my Golf Mk 7 GT 150PS. My reasons for switching to a Yeti having had 6 Golfs are that I have always liked the Yeti since it's inception and that I would like a bit more room and comfort for the dog who will now be able to reside in the back. The 4x4 option also appeals due to my country pursuits.  

 

Having read some of the articles within the forum I am now thinking that I should have ordered the 170 version. I test drove a 140 and was well impressed with the driveability, overall feel of the vehicle and indeed the performance which was great for the driving that I did. But, for the sake of only less than another £700 I could have ordered a more powerful, more economic and more green version in the 170. It may be too late to change my spec but perhaps not? I am not a "petrolhead" and tend to drive conservatively but will I miss the out and out power delivered by a 140 when needed compared to my 150 golf? I also do the occasional longer journey where a more powerful engine might make it easier.

 

I can see some downsides to a 170. Namely increased insurance premiums and possibly a more restrictive resale audience when the time comes to move the vehicle on.

 

I would be very interested in the forum's opinions on this matter...

 

P.S. Apart from the Amundsen Sat Nav, I ordered no additional options with my Elegance but seriously considered the variable boot floor. If I decide and am able to change my order spec I may go down the variable boot floor road - any thoughts on this would also be gratefully received. 

[clv101]

If you're happy to spend the extra for Elegance spec, then the 170 is a no brainer.  I didn't really value any of the extras that came with the Elegance, so was limited to the 140 in the SE. In a perfect world I'd have the 170 in S trim!

[mikep]

Or remap the 140.

[john999boy]

I think even the 170 will feel slow compared to your Golf - at least in the beginning.

[Smokeyjoe]

A Yeti is not a 'GT' car and has features that appeal to a different audience. Personally I find the 140bhp plenty quick enough for what the Yeti is intended to be.

 

I had an Audi A3 with 140bhp and drove a 170bhp version as well and could not really appreciate the difference. It was not as big a jump in performance as I was expecting.

 

Dave

[crazyj]

Hi,

Depends on what you want and your driving needs.

I drive my 140 4x4 elegance daily to work through twisty B roads with a bit of three lane A-road at the end and it's more fun and feels more 'appropriate' than my wife's 170 passat cc GT DSG. It will hunker down nicely as you power out of bends, stick to road like glue and generally make a dull journey an event.....But on long journeys the cc has the edge.... Gearing, power curve shape and less transmission drag and perhaps lighter than the 4x4 yeti (not checked).

But saying that if conditions are poor and we have a long journey then the yeti gets the gig. .. It will get you there... Pretty much always .. I like that. Actually on those long journeys where we use the yeti (and that's four-up plus luggage) I am not overly aware of the yetis comparative lack of legs to be honest...perhaps it doesn't go from a standing start to 95+'up the slip road of the M6 but then I wouldnt know about that sort of thing m'lud.

I was buying a used reliable motor to get me to work...and a gem of a 140 presented itself.. And I am not disappointed..surprised:yes...disappointed:no..... I wouldn't swap it for a 170 unless I was doing loads of daily motorway or mountain roads...which We are not.

Either way for most purposes I think that there is little difference...they are both fun and capable cars.

If I was having second thoughts with a new order I would chat to my dealer...perhaps have another test drive ..get some motorway miles in...put my doubts at rest and await my new 140 eagerly .....or if doubts still linger negotiate a change asap. It's never too late till the whole balance has been transferred

Cheers

John

[bilun777]

Lot's of 140 owners will tell you how good it is,but you'll soon miss the extra Oomph of the 170 after a 150bhp Golf.

[GeoffH]

I am now retired but I spent some years in the motor trade. When ordering my Yeti I too had the dilemma.... 140 or 170.

I wasn't sure so I called to see one or the "traders" I used to deal with on many occasions. The first thing he asked me was which engine was in the Tig I was driving.. Answer 140 DSG. The next question was what was I doing with it... He bought it on the spot and gave me what I was offered last August with 8000 miles less on the clock.

He said he found the 140 much easier to sell on to a dealer. He had a F-Type Jag and his wife a VW (with the 140 engine) and said so far as he was concerned the 140 was the way to go, so I did and saved money not only on the purchase price but the dreaded insurance as well.

[john999boy]

What's the typical difference in price between insurance quotes as I wouldn't have thought it was that much to waver a purchasing consideration?

[CicaYeti]

go on a 170 and you'll discover the same good sensation of the previous golf! go on a 140 and you'll cry like a rabid dog.....

[GeoffH]

Perhaps that's why I've started to foam at the mouth... Must go to see the vet... Rabies... Arghh!

[muddyboots]

The extra weight of the Yeti, plus the additional drivetrain losses of 4x4, will blunt its performance compared to a Golf with a similar engine power.

To get the same level of performance of the Golf, I'd say you definitely need the 170.

I always reckon my 170, in straight out acceleration terms, is on a par with smaller 2wd cars with roughly 20bhp less.

 

Higher spec brakes too on the 170.

 

The 170 does make an awesome B-road machine

Took me ages to find a used 170, I don't think it'll be an issue come resale time, and I doubt insurance will vary by much at all.

 

Do it

Do it

Do it

[137699]

I test drove a 140. I thought it felt pretty decent.

I bought a 170 - I never regretted it.

 

Yes you can remap a 140 to around 170 hp but the 170 engine has internal differences, bigger turbo & bigger brakes. Therefore if you wanted to remap you can take it to 210hp comfortably.

 

I am very glad I chose the 170 - the only thing is, it is somewhat thirstier than the 140.

[Brijo]

Has there been a forum poll recently on who's got what?  I wonder, in this case, what the proportion is between 140 and 170 users here. 

[muddyboots]

Has there been a forum poll recently on who's got what?  I wonder, in this case, what the proportion is between 140 and 170 users here. 

I would imagine that of those two, the 140 is more common.

Edited 14 February, 2015 by muddyboots

[Frenchtone]

vcds changes to the braking force might work as opposed to the bigger brake route

[stokie_nav]

The wife had the se 110 bhp 4x4 yeti in 2012 - swapped it for an l&k 170 manual 4x4 last year and can definitely recommend this engine / drivetrain. I've just Part exd my 13 plate Octavia fwd for a new superb 170 4x4 dash so have the same engine in both cars and I wouldn't choose any other engine

Edited 14 February, 2015 by stokie_nav

[john999boy]

<<< It might be time to update your car details then stokie.  

[CicaYeti]

I would guess the 15

 

I would imagine that of those two, the 140 is more common.

 of course....... only because the 140 owners supposed the horses would have been enough....till they (how many of them compared both????) test 170 

moreover the consumption is not very different, maybe the insurance....I have an online insurance and this solved every economic matters

 I suggest going on 170 and never regret it! 

[muddyboots]

vcds changes to the braking force might work as opposed to the bigger brake route

Doubt it to be honest, you aren't improving the physical capability of the brakes themselves, if anything all it could possibly do is marginally reduce the effort required at the pedal.

 

Larger discs and/or uprated pads are the way to go if you want improved braking performance.

Larger discs mean the pads are clamping further from the wheel centre, therefore providing more braking torque for the same pedal effort, even with standard pads. Larger discs also provide more heat capacity, so are likely to take longer to fade.

[Frenchtone]

^ ok, point taken, however I did say MIGHT!!

[danbarnes]

I swapped a 170 in for a 140 as I wanted DSG which wasn't available with the 170 at the time. I love the DSG gearbox but really miss the extra power of the 170. It might be just mine but the 140 engine is no where near as smooth as the 170 was, there is a lot more engine noise from the 140. If I get another Yeti it would be a 170 with DSG.

[ED51]

I bought a 170, I've never been sat in it thinking I wish it had less power. If I'd bought a 140 MAYBE I'd be sat in it thinking, I wish it had more power - I don't know

[CicaYeti]

I hope in a future model with a diesel engine performing more than 200hp, it will be mine! Power, torque and good handling in every situation.. and.... some MB and BMW owner with their tongue outside mouth!

[aerofurb]

TIBET I was one of the first (if not 'the' first!) customer order/delivery CR170 Yetis. My rationale was that if I went for the most powerful version, I would never be thinking 'what if'!

 

No regrets after three CR170 Yetis....