Time to seriously move on from my MK1 octavia , served me very well all these years , and ultra reliable . Would i be disapointed with the 1.6 diesel , thinking elegance and maybe DSG ( again any thoughts )  . Heart says get the 2 litre , any recomendations and what about reliability . Thanks 

Mine is a 2.0 but had a loan of a 1.6 when mine was in the garage last week. 1.6 drives fine but doesn't have the same satisfaction for me

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Disappointed in what way?

Having owned a 1.9PD lump and driven the mk1 octavia 1.9TDi. I can say the new engines are very nice.

You don't get the big lump of torque and it's more petrol like in its power delivery in some ways.

Reliability, never had an issue with my 2.0CR Octavia....only thing that was going to cause an issue was the DPF. But that's due to my travelling pattern changing to around town work.

If you want a diesel then it's a good way to go. But also look at the 1.4TSi as another option, depends on you mileage and driving pattern.

Now own a vRS 2.0CR DSG. My next car may not be a diesel as my annual mileage has recently dropped dramatically but it will definitely have DSG.

Do you like the torque you get from the 1.9TDI and the diesel way of early changes up and riding a torque curve?

 

If you do, you will hate the 1.6 CR TDI (IMHO) as it requires revs like a petrol car.

 

Having just moved from a 2.0 PD 140 to a 2.0 CR TDI 150, I have to say it's more petrol like than the PD, but it's nowhere near as bad as the 1.6.

I'd say the 2.0 just doesn't have that really low down grunt/turbo surge that you're used to in the PD.

 

You're going a lot faster in the same time (IMHO) and the car is much quieter, so that probably contributes.

 

Try them both and if you do low mileage, do consider a petrol car.

I love my 1.6 TDi Elegance.

 

My previous vehicle was a tuned 2.5Tdi Transporter. Fast as f**k, but could barely manage 30mpg, cost over £500 p/a to insure and a whopping £270 in VED. The criteria for the new vehicle (with a baby on the way) was based more on the economy, insurance and potential VED cost factors and trying to drive down the cost of motoring.

 

Having said that, the 1.6 has never let us down and although it isn't going to win a race from the lights, or blow the the power boys of my bumper on the motorway, it has coped with everything we have thrown at it and I wouldn't describe it as sluggish by any means, even fully loaded with a roofbox and bikes on the back.

 

The simplest thing would be to take a test drive of both ensuring it has a bit of motorway in it. I tested the 1.6TDi first and didn't bother testing the 2.0 as it met my requirements.

 

Only you will know if it meets yours and whether you might be disappointed or not.

 

:-)

Edited 21 October, 201510 yr by airscool

When I was looking for a replacement for my Mk1 1.9 TDI 110 I tried both the Mk3 1.6 TDI and 1.4 TSI.

 

The 1.6 TDI was much quieter than the old 1.9, and ultimately quicker (the Mk3 is a much lighter car) - but felt like you had to row-it-along a bit with the gears.  As others have noted, the low down surge of the 1.9 was not there - but it did reward revving it much more.

 

The 1.4 TSI was much quieter again - basically silent at idle and low-revs.  Although it still didn't have the low-down thump of the old 1.9 TDI 110, it seemed better than the 1.6 TDI, and when you revved it out was a LOT faster.  After that test drive, I knew I'd found the engine for me and didn't try the (more expensive!) 2.0 TDI.

 

In terms of economy, on the same route that my old 1.9 TDI got 50-52mpg on I'm getting around 48 mpg out of the 1.4 TSI, so the fuel economy penalty over the 12,000 odd miles a year that I do is pretty small.

For me. Mainly town driving a 1.6 if it's mainly fast roads and motorway work 2.0 everyday.

Experience 90k in a 1.6 golf and 40k and counting in the Octavia 2.0. Virtually nothing in economy with real world fast road driving in my experience. Probably because I had to rag the 1.6 everywhere to keep up

1.6 will be comparable to a 1.9 100/110ps...offer up their power v differently with the PDs being laggy...but then v strong low end once on boost but getting flat towards the top of the mid range...the 2nd gen CR again being a bit laggy off boost but then with a nice linear power delivery...effectively going harder the more you push it until you go through the usual 4 cyl diesels 4k rpm power drop (rather like hitting a soft limiter!).

The Mk3 is a v light car and so with just a 110ps motor will still go quite well. The 2nd gen EA288 knocks the previous EA189 out of the park in terms of performance anyway.

If the car happens to be a 130 PD (sure the higher end Mk1's could be had with the 130ps motor) then a 150ps would be the better bet. The 2.0 is noticable faster than the 1.6...as it ought to be with another 40ps and more torque.

If I werent covering that many miles though I think the 1.4 TSI 150 is worth a look. Overall performance with a moderate load is on par with the 150 TDI (though I suspect it suffers if really loaded up) and is probably a nicer powerplant to drive around with, being that bit quieter and more refined and frugal if driven sensibly.

Edited 21 October, 201510 yr by pipsypreturns

I wouldn't touch another VAG 1.6 Diesel engine!

I had a 2006 Fiesta 1.6 Tdi and used to get almost 70 mpg, until a truck pushed me into a motorway barrier. The company replaced this with a 2006 VW Passat 2.0 TDi, I used to get 50 mpg out of the Passat. Came to the end of the lease, I was close to retiring so decided to buy my own car. Tried to buy a Fabia 1.6 TDI but delivery dates were a problem so got a new SEAT Ibiza Sport 1.6 TDi, taking note of the quoted 65 mpg. As I was usually able to achieve the combined figure.

Wrong, the Ibiza only managed 53 mpg!! Complained to SEAT, they checked and said no fault with the car but I would be allowed to reject the car and chose another SEAT as long as it was not another 1.6. I also had problems with DPF regens, it did one every 6-700 miles and was a pig to drive whilst it did this.

The Ibiza was traded after 16 months for a near new (7000 mile) SEAT Leon FR170 DSG. Fuel consumption dropped from 53 with the 1.6 to 50 for the 2.0!

Don't believe any of the crap stated about excellent economy on 1.6.

Go for the 2.0 you will be happier with that.

I'd always go for the bigger engine as it has more grunt to get you out of unexpected situations that you may unwittingly find yourself in courtesy of other drivers and you may need to accelerate out of it/do a swift overtake.

 

There maybe a slight economy hit, but it won't be much. The only time I'd touch a smaller diesel was if I were doing taxi work or low(er) mileages.

The 1.6 is perfectly fine and does what it says on the tin.....the 2.0 is actually v respectably quick for a 150hp diesel car.

My estate is as quick as my previous mk2 170 TDI and really is not alot slower than the Mk7 GTD I also have real world which is quite something for what is a fairly ordinary looking white estate car.

I moved into a mk3 rs tdi from a tuned mk2 petrol rs and I was seriously disappointed with the tdi as standard, couldn't believe how lacking the standard diseasal is in torque. The software hesitation flat spot doesn't help either, but I am happy with the mpg figures I now achieve....

The tdi imho needs tuning to bring a smile to your face, but it is only imho...

Edited 21 October, 201510 yr by billybskoda

In fairness a stock 184 TDI will be a disappointment when used to a tuned 200 TSI.

A mapped 2.0 TFSI/TSI is quite a different animal to a stock one.

I find the 1.6 more than adequate. It's very smooth through the (manual) gears. The lack of sixth means it is at its economic best 50-60mph. I had a test drive in a 2.0. It was quick but it wasn't as smooth in delivering the power which it definitely had more. My experience was that you didn't seem to get much at first but then got loads when you change to second. I often wish I had a 2.0 but that's more because I resent the sensible decision I made in going with the cheaper car (insurance, tax & original price). I nearly asked the dealer what it would cost to switch to a 2.0 but I knew it wouldn't be worth it.

I think I ultimately wanted the greenline engine but I want elegance spec more.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Any time I've had to drive a 1.6 VAG TDI I've always found it lacking. There isn't any real overtaking ability off motorways whereas the 2 litre is more willing. To me at least the slight extra capacity makes a huge difference.

Yeah the 2.0 150 is a really flexible, punchy engine, especially when coupled with DSG. Never driven the 1.6, but a 40ps drop and 80nm (I think) will be noticeably different!