Has anybody seen a comparison of the original 2009 170 HP TDI and the current 150 HP TDI? 

 

The specs call for slightly lower torque in the 150 (340 vs. 350 Nm), but over a wider range in the 150 - from 1750 rpm to 3000 in the 150, where the 350 Nm stopped at 2500 in the old 170.

There's some measured stats, annoyingly the site squishes them down a bit and they aren't quite the same scale so not a direct visual comparison (I tried overlaying them in Photoshop and adjusting but couldn't get it right...)

 

I've not seen any reviews of the 150 but I think it feels a touch more restrained than the 170 I test-drove. Feels plenty quick enough in normal driving but when you're trying to overtake a lorry on an A-road you feel it takes a little longer than expected (at least compared to previous cars I've owned, including a 170tdi SEAT Exeo). Also, I think the brakes are from the 140 rather than the 170 - OK but not amazing.

Edited 8 January, 201610 yr by Jimrod

I have a Golf 7 GTTdi 150. Having come from a 140 in a mk5 and mk6 it's completely different experience. The torque does stay in later and when it does it has a much longer shove so when overtaking you can stay in the gear without having to change up. I like it but it can feel a bit flat at first in the higher gears partly because I think they are taller. 

 The downside is that the fuel consumption is considerably worse, high 40's compared to high 50's in the 140bhp. This may be partly due to the EA288 engine being EURO 6 so it uses more fuel to reach the very low emissions and that it has only done 11,000 miles. I hope this helps... :|

 

Here is a vid of the EA288 engine..

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLAb1wpzz9g

Interesting you mention the fuel use, we recently bought a new Superb 4x4 with the 150 engine, and so far according to Maxidot we're only getting around 42mpg, so assuming a bit of computer optimism, that's probably less than 40mpg - quite disappointing.

On the Superb 3 forum, seems some are getting decent (50+) mpg from the 150, but others are barely getting over 40.

Even my 4x4 170 Yeti (similar weight) gets better than that, and that's with the aerodynamics of a housebrick!

Hmm, I'd take that second Cr170 power figure with a pinch of salt.

Hmm, I'd take that second Cr170 power figure with a pinch of salt.

 

It's from a remap site so the second run figures are for the remap, the first one should be the stock dyno run.

Hmm, I'd take that second Cr170 power figure with a pinch of salt.

Does seems optimistic for a remapped 170, although I guess we don't know if it was on a std engine, or if it had other mods too.

Even with the DPF removed and a Stage 2 map, I think Shark only suggest around 215bhp on an otherwise standard engine.

I know it's a remapped figure - courtesy of Celtic tuning.

 

I have had a remap from them on a previous car, which actually did stack up to their quoted figures, when tested on another tuner's dyno.

 

As said though, 227 horses from any Stage 1 or 2 mapped CR170, seems a little optimistic, to say the least.

I know it's a remapped figure - courtesy of Celtic tuning.

 

I have had a remap from them on a previous car, which actually did stack up to their quoted figures, when tested on another tuner's dyno.

 

As said though, 227 horses from any Stage 1 or 2 mapped CR170, seems a little optimistic, to say the least.

 

Yeah, I don't think the newer CR diesels are as responsive to remaps as the older PD ones, I had a 130bhp Fiat Grande Punto which was easily remapped to 184bhp, from what I've seen the VW 140tdi struggles to get to that with a basic map.

Edited 11 January, 201610 yr by Jimrod

I suspect that re-mapping is getting more and more dificult. I have just read through the VW Selfstudy programm fopr the EA288 Diesels, which are current for 2015 and 2016 models.

 

There are an awful lot of control points and sensors and interacting re-circulating flows in the design.