Surprised at performance 1.4 TSi

[lukey@cz]

Sweeping statement coming up here - are those coming from smaller engines not going to think the 1.4 is great, while those coming from bigger engines are going to think m'eh?

 

I am not sure one can generalise like this. I still drive 1.6L 16V petrol 5M Renault engine and it needs working to get the car going, it is in no way as responsive off the mark as the skoda 1.4tsi engine. I love the 1.4tsi because it responds really well in 'normal' mode when you are cruising or when pulling out from a roundabout, I feel like I can take the cars on - in the 1.6 petrol I would have go down a gear and work on it, in the skoda engine I just press the pedal a bit more to get beyond 2.5-3K revs. The other day, whilst on the motorway, the 1.4tsi had no trouble acceleration in 6th gear from a cruising 65-70mph to about 80-85mph in order to overtake cars whilst a guy behind me seemed to be in a hurry?!

 

for technical comparison, the Renault engine has these specs:

1.6 16V, 0 to 60mph in 10.8 secs

 

max speed: 115 mph

engine power: 110 bhp (83kW/111.5PS)

 

the skoda 1.4tsi is listed with these official figures 8.5sec; 134mph; 138.8bhp (103kW/140PS)

 

Overall, I am impressed with the engine and whilst occasionally I think that the 1.8tsi would be cool to have, for my needs the 1.4tsi is enough - the 1.2tsi would be too weak though when the car is full, IMHO!

 

 

       

[BA Baracus]

I personally drove the 1.4 122bhp a number of years ago and I thought m'eh - was totally fine but that was it, therefore didn't buy.

 

It is just a bit disappointing that the jump between petrol 1.4 and 2.0 VRS is significant with nothing in between - so are those choosing the 1.4 having to make more/too much of a compromise?

 

I could survive with the 1.4 for my family needs but I prefer an extra bhp or two to make the journey even more relaxed.

[ednmra]

I personally drove the 1.4 122bhp a number of years ago and I thought m'eh - was totally fine but that was it, therefore didn't buy.

 

It is just a bit disappointing that the jump between petrol 1.4 and 2.0 VRS is significant with nothing in between - so are those choosing the 1.4 having to make more/too much of a compromise?

 

I could survive with the 1.4 for my family needs but I prefer an extra bhp or two to make the journey even more relaxed.

The  present 1.4 TSi though is no longer 122,  it is 140 (knowing VW probably a bit more in truth). 

[philwoodphoto]

I personally drove the 1.4 122bhp a number of years ago and I thought m'eh - was totally fine but that was it

The 1.4 in the O3 is a different beast.

I've come from a 1.9tdi A6 and the TSI is far more relaxed to drive. I had a V6 A4 before that which was very relaxed and easy, but heavy and not particularly efficient. I find the 1.4TSI (with DSG) very comfortable and not lacking in grunt when I need it.

Cheap tax and insurance, reasonable refuelling cost and the fact my wife now enjoys driving again are all big pluses to me. The fact that it still shifts when I want it to puts a smile on my face too

[Redboy]

Even better, if Skoda fit it, is the 1.4 150Bhp in the Seat FR. It is excellent and quick enough with great economy.

[Dempsek]

Well I am     .

 

I don't drive or (currently plan to) on autobahns and or over the speed limit and the 1.4 is really quick around UK national speed limits. I have a long journey up and coming with four up and have no concerns at all with using the car - with DSG and ACC it will munch the miles and return around 46-50 MPG.

 

95% of my driving is around town with a max speed of 30 MPH, I am hoping by the time I come to change the car Skoda will be fitting the 1.4 ACT engine or possibly a 1.4 TSI hybrid.

[Gromle]

Well I am .

95% of my driving is around town with a max speed of 30 MPH, I am hoping by the time I come to change the car Skoda will be fitting the 1.4 ACT engine or possibly a 1.4 TSI hybrid.

Rumour has it that that the 1.4 ACT will make an appearance in the MY2106 Octavias.

[Gerrycan]

Rumour has it that that the 1.4 ACT will make an appearance in the MY2106 Octavias.

So never? Or was the year a mistype?

Personally I cannot see the added complication/cost of ACT to be worth the minimal fuel usage improvement in the limited number of circumstances it would kick in.

Stop/start technology is not currently available on the Skoda 1.4tsi units in Australia, probably because we do not have a car tax regime that emphasises fuel economy. From what I have read it often turned off by UK drivers so it may not be the best of its type around.

As it is the 1.4tsi uses less than 0.5 l/hour when ticking over stationery with no A/C on. I can and do turn the engine off when it is worthwhile, ie when I get caught at a traffic lights with a long cycle or a train crossing.

I would say I use the full power of my car about 0.5% of the time (maybe less) and I am not a slow driver. I often read in this forum complaints from VRS owners about traction issues, now rain is rare in Adelaide but I have not experienced any such problems and I find it very nimble in traffic due to relatively light weight, good traction and a very responsive engine.

I spend about 90% of my time and 80% of my mileage in daytime urban traffic, lots of very short journeys with full A/C in high temperatures, often ferrying elderly relatives and so my Fuelly average of 6.7l/100 is pretty good.

Most of the major highways out of Adelaide soon degenerate to what would be classified as single lane "B" roads in the UK so car with good mid-range torque is essential for safe overtaking and I find the 1.4tsi has ample reserves even when fully loaded.

I learnt good overtaking technique in the UK driving a 1 litre Ford Escort estate. Most Australians tailgate the car or B-double they intend to overtake and make a hash of it even when they have a high power vehicle because restricted vision meant they could not make good decisions.

The 1.4tsi is just about ideal for me and anything more like a VRS would probably be a waste, but frustration would be then avoided with occasional track days

Edited 1 April, 2015 by Gerrycan

[Sak]

The 1.4tsi is just about ideal for me and anything more like a VRS would probably be a waste, but frustration would be then avoided with occasional track days

True. I came from a nissan V6. I find 1.4 has ample power and torque for daily driving and safe overtaking. In addition to that, my fuel bill has cut in to half

[ednmra]

True. I came from a nissan V6. I find 1.4 has ample power and torque for daily driving and safe overtaking. In addition to that, my fuel bill has cut in to half

And my road tax too! And no service costs for 3 years, and no AA charges for 3 years...and no worry about things going wrong (as under warranty)

Shouldn't complain really....I do, but I shouldn't !!

[themanwithnoaim]

Ed, not that the DSG will pay for itself in savings but, its road tax is £75 less than yours.

[ednmra]

Ed, not that the DSG will pay for itself in savings but, its road tax is £75 less than yours.

Really? Something to do with eco green stuff I guess?

I thought autos were less eco friendly, but things change..............

I live near Green- run Brighton so perhaps I ought to get a horse instead........

Come to think of it, the horse would produce much the same as our Green council does...........good for the garden as well.....................

[kallekilponen]

Personally I cannot see the added complication/cost of ACT to be worth the minimal fuel usage improvement in the limited number of circumstances it would kick in.

Stop/start technology is not currently available on the Skoda 1.4tsi units in Australia, probably because we do not have a car tax regime that emphasises fuel economy. From what I have read it often turned off by UK drivers so it may not be the best of its type around.

As it is the 1.4tsi uses less than 0.5 l/hour when ticking over stationery with no A/C on. I can and do turn the engine off when it is worthwhile, ie when I get caught at a traffic lights with a long cycle or a train crossing.

Limited circumstances? From the tests I've read it's in use about 75% of driving (on VWs). The only situations when an ACT engine uses all four cylinders are when accelerating or in autobahn speeds.

[themanwithnoaim]

Limited circumstances? From the tests I've read it's in use about 75% of driving (on VWs). The only situations when an ACT engine uses all four cylinders are when accelerating or in autobahn speeds.

Arha so, just when the ignition is on then !

[ednmra]

Arha so, just when the ignition is on then !

The rest of the time you just have to pedal harder.......................

[scottyboy235]

I've had my 1.4TSI hatchback for about 3 weeks now and its averaging a rock steady 45/46mpg on a daily 22 round trip commute. The roads are a mixture of country lanes and dual carriageway (Milton Keynes), so plenty of scope for motorway type speeds.

 

So far I've driven it according to the computer recommendations - curious to see what type of mpg I'd get out of it. The official mpg figures for this car are 43.5mpg (urban), 61.4mpg (extra urban) & 53.5mpg (combined)

 

For comparison my previous car (Fiesta 1.4 Zetec) averaged 39mpg on the same route

[MorrisOx]

I've had my 1.4TSi DSG since...well, this afternoon. It was handed over with 8 miles ln the clock and an a average economy reading of 14mpg! By the time I'd got it home, I'd got it up to 42.3.

Ridiculously early days, of course, but it's quiet and if it is trying the DSG disguises its efforts really well.

[Gerrycan]

I've had my 1.4TSI hatchback for about 3 weeks now and its averaging a rock steady 45/46mpg on a daily 22 round trip commute. The roads are a mixture of country lanes and dual carriageway (Milton Keynes), so plenty of scope for motorway type speeds.

 

So far I've driven it according to the computer recommendations - curious to see what type of mpg I'd get out of it. The official mpg figures for this car are 43.5mpg (urban), 61.4mpg (extra urban) & 53.5mpg (combined)

 

For comparison my previous car (Fiesta 1.4 Zetec) averaged 39mpg on the same route

That is pretty good when you consider the relative vehicle sizes and performance difference.

The best I have managed for an individual journey was a cross-town urban trip of about 20 kilometres with 60kph speed limits.

It was night so very light traffic where I could drive economically without affecting other drivers and I was able to achieve 4.2 l/100 (67 mpg) averaging 45kph. Lots of traffic lights and junctions but I got slightly higher than average number of green lights.

The best average I can attain for short periods of steady speed (flat open roads) in gear driving is about 3.7 l/100 (76 mpg). If I could resort to hyper-mileing accelerate and coast techniques then I could probably achieve even better (maybe 3 l/100), but even I cannot be bothered.

There was a great thread raised by 'Iriches' http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/344930-for-those-of-you-wondering-about-official-fuel-economy/?view=findpost&p=4145866&hl=%2Btruth

He found a fuel consumption guide for the Golf 1.4tsi (90kw) with lots of facts, graphs and figures about that car which are relevant to the manual Octavia 1.4tsi 103kw). The Octavia is bigger, heavier, less slippery, but the higher output engine supposed to be more economical so they are pretty comparable and the graphs matched what I achieve.

The main point he made was the funereal acceleration rates dictated in the official tests that make the 'optimistic' manufacturers figures possible.

[jthyssen]

Well I am     .

 

I don't drive or (currently plan to) on autobahns and or over the speed limit and the 1.4 is really quick around UK national speed limits. I have a long journey up and coming with four up and have no concerns at all with using the car - with DSG and ACC it will munch the miles and return around 46-50 MPG.

I also have ACC, and I don't think it is particularly good for fuel consumption, but it is very good for comfort.

FWIW, at full throttle on the autobahn (~215kph indicated) the fuel consumption was about 5km/L or 14mpg uk

[MorrisOx]

A good test to see how economical your driving can be is to switch the info display to instant fuel consumption. Try lift off & coast where there's evnough momentum/downward gradient (and it's safe to do so) and it can make a surprising difference.

[ednmra]

I tried the instant m.p.g. read out once or twice but it keeps flicking through changes so often it is hard to know what it is saying.

It often even showed 0.00 m.p.g (and, no, i wasn't standing still at the time!)

 

In a way I guess the lifetime average m.p.g figure is more relevant anyway.

[pipsyp]

The 2.0 TDI 150 is similar also.....its as fast as a Mk2 vRS CR 170 despite the loss of 20ps and a fair smidge of torque....I guess the circa. 140kg weight saving goes some way there.

[Gerrycan]

I also have ACC, and I don't think it is particularly good for fuel consumption, but it is very good for comfort.

FWIW, at full throttle on the autobahn (~215kph indicated) the fuel consumption was about 5km/L or 14mpg uk

If you do that sort of thing often you will be better off with a diesel. You should be able to go twice as far on a tank at those speeds

[Genoa1893]

 

It often even showed 0.00 m.p.g (and, no, i wasn't standing still at the time!)

 

This is the effect of fuel "cut off" when you lift your feet from the throttle, while in gear.

 

I must say I typically watch to instant consumption either when driving for economy or when in a hurry.

 

A couple of days ago I was amused at reading 4.4l/100km while traveling at a good pace on the highway with a colleague of mine, and AC on!

[jthyssen]

If you do that sort of thing often you will be better off with a diesel. You should be able to go twice as far on a tank at those speeds

 

Possibly, but I "hate" agricultural vehicles Besides I only go to Germany one or twice a year, and I can only drive flat out when SWMBO is not in the car