I was on here awhile ago as I was considering a Yeti along with other options e.g. A3 5-door, Octavia estate etc.

 

Well having gone cold on the idea of changing my old Fiat Stilo runabout or part ex-ing my wife's Mini Cooper S for a Yeti etc. the idea resurfaced today and we went along to our local dealer. Didn't know about the 0% finance until we got there and that's good news as am now considering getting a new car rather than used.

 

Even though we only do low mileage nowadays I still prefer a diesel for its characteristics and still do a 20 mile commute 3 days a week so it will get a regular good blast. If they did a bigger petrol still i.e. 1.6/1.8, I'd go for that, but personally think a 1.2 (don't want an L&K) is too small for a car like the Yeti.

 

So 2.0 diesel it is. I've had a few VWs and Audis with that engine.

 

When discussing with the salesman (I now realise from coming on here) that the brochure he gave us isn't the latest as the Elegance has now been replaced with the SE L. The Skoda configurator isn't of much use as I'd prefer the 150ps engine but the 4x4 option isn't showing unless you go for the Monte Carlo, which I don't want! Came across the latest brochure on here (thanks for that) and things are a little clearer i.e. it does look as though there is a SE L 150ps 4x4.

 

That will probably be my choice but what are the current views on the 110ps as I don't really need 4x4? I read previously that some thought the 110ps was borderline OK powerwise, but that the brakes were only just adequate? Is this still considered to be the case?

 

Am booked in to see another dealer on Monday so will see what transpires.

 

Chris

I went from a 100bhp VW diesel Touran to a 110bhp diesel Yeti. I find the brakes and performance are fine, but then again I do not give it a lot of right foot. I drive safely within the limits of the car. If I got into a 140bhp with bigger brakes, I would obviously find them better, but are they needed? Give or take a few kg the weight of the vehicles is similar, and as such the kinetic energy of both vehicles doing the same speed will be similar and the brakes needed should be the same. If the bigger brakes were needed they would be fitted as standard.

 

Colin

I'm on my second 110 4x4 and find it has enough power (my first a 1.2 never felt underpowered),  on the brake front I don't have a problem with them, if you apply them gently they seam to work gently, but hit them hard and you stop, have made one or two following me go a bit white and need a change of underwear , the best way is to get a test drive even if it's a older modal to get the feel.  

Edited 10 July, 201511 yr by wakev

If you are not towing a caravan, a budding F1 driver or a boy racer the 1.2 is adequate for most uses. It is a surprisingly good engine.

We ran an original Yeti TDI 110 4x4 for nearly 3 years, 40,000 miles and found it had enough go for me, even taking 4 adults plus a roof box into the Austrian Alps and it had no problems on those long 'hill climbs'.

 

Brakes wise I felt they were adequate but had ongoing issues with the rear callipers seizing; these were the same design as used on the 140.

 

 

As a side note, we now have a V40 with similar power (1.6 TDI 115) and the brake discs are far bigger and noticeably more effective than even those on our short lived ownership of an Octy III TDI 150; brakes from my experience is not a VAG strong point.

 

 

TP

Thanks for the replies. I'm not a fast driver (though not slow either!) and am gentle on brakes so it sounds like the 110ps would be fine. And when I do fancy a bit of a go I've got the TT and motorbikes!

 

I'm an old git (well I am an old git! ) when it comes to the new breed of petrol engines. I've not driven one but am surprised that how well a colleagues Focus 1.0 goes but still I can't get my head round/accept how a 1.2 is enough in something like a Yeti.

 

I'm swayed in that one of the reasons for the Yeti is taking friends and family out and I have a trailer I tow now and again and I like the easy going nature and torque of a diesel. Having said that, I test drove a 140ps today and was a little surprised that I had to rev it more than expected to get it to go. But that is something I have noticed over the years having owned a number of 2.0 litres diesels in VW's and Audis. Diesels are getting more like petrols in their characteristics and vice versa. Diesels I owned years ago went like stink and could surprise you in the lower gears when pulling onto islands etc. with their almost vicious power delivery when the turbo kicked in. That characteristic seems to have been increasingly ironed out over the years.

 

I suppose I should pull my head out the sand and give the 1.2 a try. But cost wise there isn't much in it, so even if I like it I shall probably stick with a diesel as I think it goes with vehicles like the Yeti.

Thanks for the replies. I'm not a fast driver (though not slow either!) and am gentle on brakes so it sounds like the 110ps would be fine. And when I do fancy a bit of a go I've got the TT and motorbikes!

 

I'm an old git (well I am an old git! ) when it comes to the new breed of petrol engines. I've not driven one but am surprised that how well a colleagues Focus 1.0 goes but still I can't get my head round/accept how a 1.2 is enough in something like a Yeti.

 

I'm swayed in that one of the reasons for the Yeti is taking friends and family out and I have a trailer I tow now and again and I like the easy going nature and torque of a diesel. Having said that, I test drove a 140ps today and was a little surprised that I had to rev it more than expected to get it to go. But that is something I have noticed over the years having owned a number of 2.0 litres diesels in VW's and Audis. Diesels are getting more like petrols in their characteristics and vice versa. Diesels I owned years ago went like stink and could surprise you in the lower gears when pulling onto islands etc. with their almost vicious power delivery when the turbo kicked in. That characteristic seems to have been increasingly ironed out over the years.

 

I suppose I should pull my head out the sand and give the 1.2 a try. But cost wise there isn't much in it, so even if I like it I shall probably stick with a diesel as I think it goes with vehicles like the Yeti.

Yes, you should at least try the 1.2 Tsi. I went from a 2.0 litre Octy diesel to a 1.2 Yeti and have never regretted the change. The engines do have different characteristics but you very quickly get used to the petrol over the diesel - and, of course, they are so much quieter in everyday use. I delayed testing the 1.2 Yeti for ages as I thought it MUST be slow and stodgy but not a bit of it! The 1.2 is sprightly and has never felt underpowered in my use. If you were 4 up and towing a van then the extra torque of a diesel may be required but I don't tow a van so why go for the extra complications of modern diesels? I also chose the DSG gearbox and that coupled with the 1.2 engine is one of those combinations that seems perfectly suited - as many motoring correspondents have said. Try one you have nothing to lose!

I went from a 2.0 diesel in my previous car to a 1.2 TSI in the Yeti and in more than two years have never regretted it and I regular drive four up plus a couple of dogs so pretty well laden down. I've also got the sunroof and spare wheel option, adding a bit if weight. As others have said, before you make your final decision it's worth giving the 1.2 a try. And if it doesn't suit you, no harm done, at least you will know diesel was the right way to go for you. Whichever you choose I'm sure you will be happy.

Thanks Guys, I think!

 

I was trying to make it easy for myself (well easier, 110 or 150ps diesel) but I'm going to have to try the 1.2 aren't I! Doh!

 

I don't really need a diesel for the mileage I do and my wife would prefer a petrol for when she uses it. And who knows what the government will do in the future as it seems that diesels are losing favour? Only downside it that it seems that the 1.2 is a better bet with the DSG and my wife isn't keen, though I love them. Apart from the odd go in my DSG Passat and Multitronic Audi A6 she's only ever driven manuals and given that the TT is a manual, I think that sticking with them is the best bet. 

 

I'll try out the various options on Monday and see what deal I can do. Maybe something from stock.

Thanks Guys, I think!

 

I was trying to make it easy for myself (well easier, 110 or 150ps diesel) but I'm going to have to try the 1.2 aren't I! Doh!

 

I don't really need a diesel for the mileage I do and my wife would prefer a petrol for when she uses it. And who knows what the government will do in the future as it seems that diesels are losing favour? Only downside it that it seems that the 1.2 is a better bet with the DSG and my wife isn't keen, though I love them. Apart from the odd go in my DSG Passat and Multitronic Audi A6 she's only ever driven manuals and given that the TT is a manual, I think that sticking with them is the best bet. 

 

I'll try out the various options on Monday and see what deal I can do. Maybe something from stock.

I do not agree with the statement about the 1.2 being better with the DSG box. I have the 6 speed manual and it is a superbly smooth gearbox and £900 cheaper. Let's also not forget the current 1.2 IS 110ps.

Having perused the latest brochure and read a few more threads I think my probable spec. will be:

 

2.0 TDI 110PS SE L

Metallic silver

Black interior

Sat nav

Parking sensors

Textile mats

Tow-bar

Spare wheel

 

Can't wait to go to the dealers tomorrow!

Sounds very nice. But looking at my foot-wells you might want to think rubber mats either instead of or as well as the textile mats. They aren't very expensive and in winter you might appreciate the lip round the edge catching mud, git and water. Or perhaps you are more careful than me getting in and out.

Yeah, I've got the rubber mats and they're great!

I'm pretty careful but at work we've got that yellowish stone in the car-park which does transfer the dust/mud, so good idea on the rubber mats. Thanks.

 

I did think about the heated front screen as well but I've managed for 40 years so have left that out. But on that reasoning why am I including parking sensors!

Heated screens are great-I managed without for 40 years too! I'm a great fan of xenon lights too but they are a pricey extra if you are buying a lower spec model.

Gatecrashing a bit, but thread is an interesting read. Can anyone tell me if the 1.2 TSI brakes are the same as those for the 2.0 diesel SCR and does the latter have a 5 or 6 speed 'box? The brochure is confusing on that bit. The PCP residuals and co2 figures for these two turn the list prices on their heads. I was very impressed by the 110ps TSI in a Fabia on a test drive, but the monthlies and running costs on the diesel look like they'll be lower. I'm usually a died-in-the-wool deiselhead, but our Citigo (and now that Fabia) have turned my head.

 

VAGCF - I think I am unknowingly married to a clone of your wife!

Edited 12 July, 201510 yr by Citigopher

Heated screens are great-I managed without for 40 years too! I'm a great fan of xenon lights too but they are a pricey extra if you are buying a lower spec model.

 

I wanted Xenon, hence going for a model with them as standard. Had Passats in the past with normal lights and they were poor. Having them on the TT, my previous A6 and my wife's Mini make them a must have now. As you will see I've had to pass on the heated front screen.

 

 

Gatecrashing a bit, but thread is an interesting read. Can anyone tell me if the 1.2 TSI brakes are the same as those for the 2.0 diesel SCR and does the latter have a 5 or 6 speed 'box? The brochure is confusing on that bit. The PCP residuals and co2 figures for these two turn the list prices on their heads. I was very impressed by the 110ps TSI in a Fabia on a test drive, but the monthlies and running costs on the diesel look like they'll be lower. I'm usually a died-in-the-wool deiselhead, but our Citigo (and now that Fabia) have turned my head.

 

VAGCF - I think I am unknowingly married to a clone of your wife!

 

  Other thing she wouldn't have any truck with was the push-button hand brake on some of my cars. She is a good driver but doesn't drive my cars enough to get used to them (though not the TT for some reason!) and isn't interested in tech. so it has to be manual and normal hand brakes if she is to drive them.

 

As regards the manual gearboxes on the 2.0 TDI 110PS's the brochure is confusing but I think the FWD cars are 5 speed and the 4x4 are 6 speed. Bit daft really as most cars are 6 speed nowadays.

 

Anyway I've done the deed. Bit of a heart and head decision as I've stuck with the diesel and gone for the SE L 2.0 TDI 110PS. And as I'm replacing my old Stilo for work/running around was keen to get into one asap. so have gone for one already built. Couldn't wait for months!

 

Spec. basically as wanted i.e. sat nav and parking sensors, but no tow-bar, which obviously isn't a problem. Colour is Petrol Blue and additionally it has the double sided boot floor and stainless steel tail pipe finishers. I'll add a spare wheel later and just carry it in the boot.

 

Should be about 2 weeks, can't wait!

Edited 13 July, 201510 yr by VAGCF

I have the 1.8 L&K petrol with 4x4, what i will say it is NOT a 4x4 as everyone thinks of it i.e offroader.  think soft roader, slightly muddy roads/ snow.

 

Where I live, to get out onto the main road, or one particular route i use is on a bend & difficulty to see traffic coming from the right so you sometimes have to give it a bit of stick, just to make sure you are clear quickly & compared to the RWD MX5 traction is not what you expect, as Yeti fronts can spin not getting you moving a quickly as you would like.

 

So despite the badge saying 4x4, its is closer to FWD.

Some of us would disagree with those comments!

You beat me to it Graham. In fact I was amazed to read that, as my Yeti performs in almost the same manner as my Impreza.

I have the 1.8 L&K petrol with 4x4, what i will say it is NOT a 4x4 as everyone thinks of it i.e offroader.  think soft roader, slightly muddy roads/ snow.

 

Where I live, to get out onto the main road, or one particular route i use is on a bend & difficulty to see traffic coming from the right so you sometimes have to give it a bit of stick, just to make sure you are clear quickly & compared to the RWD MX5 traction is not what you expect, as Yeti fronts can spin not getting you moving a quickly as you would like.

 

So despite the badge saying 4x4, its is closer to FWD.

 

Sorry, it may just be me, but who/what is your comment aimed at? Read back through the thread and can't link it to anything.