"more expensive to buy" - Indeed I got one hell of a deal on a 14 month old Superb petrol - the nearest diesel was many £1000's more

"Fuel is messy to fill up" - Agreed but gloves are usually provided at garages - nothing worse than getting diesel on you hands just before embarking on a long journey, it stinks for ages

"Sounds like a tractor" - Most of the later CR diesels don't but the earlier 1.4 pd did!

"DPFs block up " - That's one of the reasons I bought a petrol, depends on you journey types, later DPF installations better designed and not an afterthought add on

"everyone thinks your a tight arse" - I live in Yorkshire, badge of honour around here

"smoke gives us cancer and asthma" - Actually if you compare a typical Euro 6 diesel with a Euro 6 direct injection petrol it's the petrol that emits more particulates. This will change in 2017 with Euro 6 c where some petrol cars will require a GPF (Gasoline Particulate Filter)

Gasoline Particulate Filters oh no!

Edited 31 January, 201610 yr by glosrich

Maybe a SEL with the sports package will be satisfying, Sir?

With that youll have the best seats and without the horrible interieur color scheme.

 

That is a good compromise if you can cope with the seats and probably with 17" wheels. In my case I went for a 110PS SE L but with ordinary seats and 16" wheels. I felt the sold seat backs are a big barrier to those in the rear of the car.

Gasoline Particulate Filters oh no!

 

Fear not , GPF not as bad as DPF because petrol runs hotter - passive regen always possible. GPF's can be smaller as well. 

 

Some engine designs will negate the need for a GPF by mixing direct and port injection - eg the latest VAG EA888

Edited 31 January, 201610 yr by bigjohn

Fear not , GPF not as bad as DPF because petrol runs hotter - passive regen always possible. GPF's can be smaller as well.

Some engine designs will negate the need for a GPF by mixing direct and port injection - eg the latest VAG EA888

Phew..

The Monte interior is a bit "Marmite"; works well with a few exterior colours but IMHO not most of them. I think a colour concept SE-L with sports seats is a nice option.

 

Regards Bob

Gasoline Particulate Filters oh no!

 

Best buy a 110 TSi now before the GPFs come in.

But, but, but - I thought that the particulate emissions from direct injection turbo charged petrol engines were good for us - no???  (another petrolhead myth blown away)

Edited 1 February, 201610 yr by rum4mo

 Tsi 110 for me. It's a Jekyll and Hyde motor. Keep the revs under 2000 and it's Dr Jekyll, keep the revs between 2000 and red line and you turn into Mr Hyde. Before you decide, you should really try the DSG version. The auto box might become the norm before long because it is no loss on MPG. It's a bit clunky at first but you get used to using it to its best. The DSG is involving to drive in a good way and I keep on finding out more about how it can behave.

I would not be too sure that these new auto boxes give same economy as a properly driven manual gearbox, what happened, as far as I could work was, the motor car manufacturers that made premium cars, which were invariably heavy and had auto transmissions, got together and attacked the authorities that designed the methods of testing for fuel usage/emissions - they won so test method were changed to suit auto transmissions and figures are now slightly slewed towards auto transmissions, where as in real world use, even although all figures are highly optimismic, I think you might find auto transmission still carries a fuel penalty, although, where it seems to count with new cars, the emissions for auto transmissions are now being quoted as lower than manual transmissions - all another big con really to suit the big players!

"I would not be too sure that these new auto boxes give same economy as a properly driven manual gearbox"

How do you judge that "manual gearbox is properly driven"? This really is not an argument, but rather a counterargument - if you know and want to "properly drive a manual gearbox", you will most likely select a manual and won't listen to automatic gearbox advocates, but if you don't know or don't really want to "drive properly", i.e., not always think just about economy or switching gears, it would more likely put you off from buying a manual box. Pros and cons of manual box should accordingly be worded differently

Having said that I must admit, I have DSG with TSI, and I really enjoy it. But it's the autobox, just because I don't like switching gears on a regular basis

My choice between TSI and TDI was a simple calculation. If petrol is 44mpg and the diesel 63mpg, it equals (being in metric system) to 6,4l/100km and 4,5l/100km. It's a 2 litre difference per 100 km. If I drive annually around 15k km (almost 10k miles), the fuel economy will be 15000 (driven distance) / 100 (calculation segment) * 2 (litre difference) = 300 litres (equals roughly 300 EUR, add 10% difference of diesel/fuel price differences here), so it equals 330 EUR annual fuel difference. In five years the fuel economy will be roughly 1650 EUR. If I plan to use the car for five years with possibility to switch to something else after. My economy (in Latvia, with price difference of fabia TSI 110manual/TDI105manual being 3299 EUR) is 1649 EUR. So basically, I can drive 10 years or a minimum of 150000 and only then the economy of diesel will start to kick in. Accordingly, with the topic author's 10/12k annual mileage, the fuel economy will kick in after 7,5 to 10 years...

I think that I was using that phrase to describe the way the car would be driven to achieve best fuel economy and emissions figures, while still making moderate progress along the road. That would include not changing gear too early and so causing the car to labour, or change gear too late. One issue I feel with the "encouragement" of fitting auto boxes, is that the car manufacturers are designing engines that work well with auto boxes in as much as some or most petrol engines feel a bit like TDI engines, but maybe that is progress. If you have not driven cars with petrol engines that have a wide almost linear increase in power/drivability, ie older engines, then yes, why not go for auto transmission - that is all. Remember not all changes to engines are for the benefit of the user/environment, "green" politics pull some very questionable demands out of the bag sometimes.

 

Edit:- just read your last post, I've not got any plans to go down the TDI route, I've always stuck with petrol.

Edited 2 February, 201610 yr by rum4mo

I think that I was using that phrase to describe the way the car would be driven to achieve best fuel economy and emissions figures, while still making moderate progress along the road. That would include not changing gear too early and so causing the car to labour, or change gear too late. 

I was not being judgemental or anything. Was just saying that there is actually more to it than fuel economy I have driven my share of manual boxes and I enjoy every single moment of not worrying about wether, when and how I should change the gear Just sit and drive... especially, when there is a 4 year old boss sitting next to you and blabbering non-stop... I think the only drawback of automatic box is that you have more time to play with the navigation/sound system

 

Ohh. And the post about calculations was in reference to the initial post of author Not related to automatic/manual things

Edited 2 February, 201610 yr by Gauss

To be honest, I had completely forgotten what the original title/subject of this thread was when I posted my last big posting - I had allowed myself to be blinkered into thinking only of 6MT or DSG with the 110PS petrol engine!

 

Maybe I'm frightened to try using a DSG box in case I like it!   I'm not sure if VAG have designed and built them to last the life of the car though.

My choice between TSI and TDI was a simple calculation. If petrol is 44mpg and the diesel 63mpg, it equals (being in metric system) to 6,4l/100km and 4,5l/100km. It's a 2 litre difference per 100 km. If I drive annually around 15k km (almost 10k miles), the fuel economy will be 15000 (driven distance) / 100 (calculation segment) * 2 (litre difference) = 300 litres (equals roughly 300 EUR, add 10% difference of diesel/fuel price differences here), so it equals 330 EUR annual fuel difference. In five years the fuel economy will be roughly 1650 EUR. If I plan to use the car for five years with possibility to switch to something else after. My economy (in Latvia, with price difference of fabia TSI 110manual/TDI105manual being 3299 EUR) is 1649 EUR. So basically, I can drive 10 years or a minimum of 150000 and only then the economy of diesel will start to kick in. Accordingly, with the topic author's 10/12k annual mileage, the fuel economy will kick in after 7,5 to 10 years...

be wary of basing costings on manufacturer figures, have a look on somewhere like fuelly to get real world figures for some reason small diesel seem to have larger discrepancy between manufacturer and real word figures

 

last time I changed my car about a year ago there was virtually no way to recover the £2k premium for a diesel at which point the reason for choosing a diesel is about drivability / power delivery rather than cost

 

I went the petrol route and not diesel for the first time in over 20 years

be wary of basing costings on manufacturer figures, have a look on somewhere like fuelly to get real world figures for some reason small diesel seem to have larger discrepancy between manufacturer and real word figures

 

last time I changed my car about a year ago there was virtually no way to recover the £2k premium for a diesel at which point the reason for choosing a diesel is about drivability / power delivery rather than cost

 

I went the petrol route and not diesel for the first time in over 20 years

Actually, the figures were from the author's post with reference "Honest Johns real mpg states 43 vs 63." If I was to use manufacturer's figures, the difference is just one liter, so 15-20 years

'More expensive to buy'  - yes if buying new, but no discernible difference on used 6 month old cars.

 

'Fuel messy to fill up' - had diesels over 10 yrs so used to it

 

'Gives us cancer and asthma' - hmm, food for thought, however since I've been inhaling diesel fumes for so long I'm probably toasted already 

 

'DPFs block up' - am I the only diesel owner that's never had a single problem ? 

 

'Everyone thinks you're a tight arse' -  well they do already, and I am ! 

 

On 10,000 miles a year using Honest John's current figures of 43 and 63 mpg, the tight arse in me makes that around £27pm cheaper to run the diesel on fuel costs only (based on both being £1 per litre (managed to pay just 97p for diesel yesterday).

 

Think I'm going to have to drive them back to back to see just how much nicer that petrol 1.2 Tsi is as all you kind folks are definitely pointing me in that direction. 

 

 

Obviously a one sided argument - forgot to mention inhaling benzene when filling up on petrol , probably as bad for your health as the lead it replaced. 

DPF's block up - never had a problem but then I drive more than 50 miles a week. 

Fuel messy to fill up - err stick the nozzle in the car and don't spill any then , not difficult is it ? 

To answer the O.P.  I've had my Mk3 1.4TDi 105 SEL about 11 months and racked up around 14K on it so far..

 

Yes, it's engine is noisier than the petrol.. what diesel isn't really? It's noisier than the old Mk1 1.9TDI PD engine.. but when you are up to 70.. it doesn't matter so much..

 

The DPF is a complete pain.. I will stress this point. so much so, it actually kills the fuel economy and performance when it starts to get cleaned out every so often, and the 1.4 does seem to be a lot less effecient than the advertised 80+mpg extra urban, which is quite sad, because I got better fuel economy from the Mk1 1.9TDi than I currently get from the 1.4TDi..

 

I usually get into the 60mpg on my route to work.. I have had low 70mpg over summer last year and one day I got an amazing 80mpg, but not seen that figure for a while.. too much traffic at the moment to get anything decent and too cold - diesels are sluggish below 10degC but they do come alive when you get milder weather..

 

If it wasn't for the DPF, it would be a great little car.  It does spoil it just a bit - the up and coming oil change may settle the car down a bit.. in the Mk1 I would always change it every 10K, but this time, I'm not being sucked into the "you must do what the dealer says.." ballcocks.. yearly will do.  I don't drive harsh enough to cause the car too much stress.

 

It's your choice at the end of the day, I'd say there's not a lot in it.. I would imagine by the time we get around to Mk4 and Mk5 Fabias, this DPF rubbish will be consigned to the scrap heap and we'll be driving Hydrogen, or eFabia Petrol/Diesel Hybrids at the rate VW are backpedalling to make things greener after their scandalous 2015.

 

Good luck..

Having had a Polo SEL 1.0 TSI with a 7 speed DSG courtesy car for 5 days whilst my Polo TDi I had some warranty work done, I struggled to get more than 49 mpg on a run from Kent to Gloucestershire. I drove it exactly the same as my diesel Polo and would have expected 60+ mpg from that on a similar journey. Admittedly the DSG didn't help. The refinement wasn't much better due to the low profile tyres. But the 1.0TSI 115ps is a great engine, but the 1.4TDi is good also. A 3 cylinder diesel is never going to be a paragon of refinement!

I would go for petrol now. For the last 8 years I was driving a turbo diesel 1400 Yaris of 90hp. I changed last April for a new Skoda 1200 TSI 110 estate. The Yaris always returned more than 60 mpg and up to 70 on a run but, it was noisy and slow. It might have had 90 horses under the bonnet, but they were not willing race horses, more like cart horses, and they always needed foot to the floor and time to wake up. And when they performed they guffed out such a cloud of black soot that I rarely used the full power, unless I thought the car behind was following too close. I am not sure but I think most diesel drivers cannot be aware of the thick smoke trail they leave behind when they reach for full throttle. I never had any problems with the EGR system but my son had to replace the EGR valve twice under warranty (Golf 2,000) and when the warranty ran out, the valve immediately failed for a third time.The other things I did not like about the diesel engine was that it took ages to warm up and the performance and economy dropped off in cold or wet conditions. Sure. it saved on the cost of fuel but I think Gauss has made the definitive calculations. Thanks for your work there Gauss, it's a very clear explanation.

    About the DSG gear box, if driving 'properly' includes being in the correct gear at the right time, whether you want to go fast or save fuel, then the more gear ratios available means that you have a more suitable gear ratio to select at any time. The DSG box for the TSi 110 has seven ratios. I have tried using the manual select option and I find that I can not keep up with the gear-change prompts when in 'D' mode and, around town, it's far easier to leave it in auto 'D' mode. I guess that this accounts for the better economy figure quoted for the DSG in 'Urban'.

The overall quoted economy is the same for the DSG and manual vehicles: 58.9mpg or 4.8 l/k. I get nowhere near that figure, I usually get about 48 mpg when I make a journey and about 43 around town. However, when I fill the tank, I do the first 300 miles very carefully, hoping to do a personal best on economy. It's usually the last quarter tank that I think 'let's see if it still wants to rip' and I let it. I see that the DSG is 25kg heavier than the manual box. That is a substantial weight penalty and it's over the front axle. I love the sharp steering and flat cornering of my DSG estate, I guess the behaviour of the manual hatch is even better.

Edited 13 February, 201610 yr by SoupDragon

My choice between TSI and TDI was a simple calculation. If petrol is 44mpg and the diesel 63mpg, it equals (being in metric system) to 6,4l/100km and 4,5l/100km. It's a 2 litre difference per 100 km. If I drive annually around 15k km (almost 10k miles), the fuel economy will be 15000 (driven distance) / 100 (calculation segment) * 2 (litre difference) = 300 litres (equals roughly 300 EUR, add 10% difference of diesel/fuel price differences here), so it equals 330 EUR annual fuel difference. In five years the fuel economy will be roughly 1650 EUR. If I plan to use the car for five years with possibility to switch to something else after. My economy (in Latvia, with price difference of fabia TSI 110manual/TDI105manual being 3299 EUR) is 1649 EUR. So basically, I can drive 10 years or a minimum of 150000 and only then the economy of diesel will start to kick in. Accordingly, with the topic author's 10/12k annual mileage, the fuel economy will kick in after 7,5 to 10 years...

OK, but I'm looking to buy used and have narrowed it down to 2 cars (I want the panoramic roof) and for same age / mileage the diesel is £1k cheaper of the 2. Going to take a look at the diesel tomorrow and will probably drive a petrol again too before making mind up. 

I have the 1.2 tsi DSG, great combination. Have also had a diesel manual hire car last 2 times I was on holiday, and it convinces me the diesel is dreadful, no pulling power below about 1500 revs so always having to change gear on winding hilly roads, it's either gutless or noisy. Maybe it was just the cars I had hired, but the gear spacing was odd, 2nd and 3rd seemed close, 5th and 6th were massively wide

For me, the DSG is always in correct gear, and I don't wake up half the street with a rattling diesel on cold mornings, or have a car that smells like a cross between a bitumen plant and burnt toast every few days as it has a DPF. so it's petrol for me

I got 1. 2 110bhp and im getting 62mpg atm. Lovely car and so easy to drive

Really, if you bought 10 gallons of petrol you could travel 620 miles?

I got 1. 2 110bhp and im getting 62mpg atm. Lovely car and so easy to drive

If that's true then you're a very good hypermiller, best I've had was 53mpg on a run down to Sheffield just after I got mine.