1.4 TSI 150 BHP reliability questioned

[ednmra]

A lot of engine preference is hard to assign to figures - it is more the "feel" to the individual driver.

I remember being very pleased and surprised when I got my Mk. 2 1.8TSi after the non turbo 2.0 litre petrol Mk. 2

 

But the 1.4TSi surprised me even more. I thought it would feel really dull after the 1.8, but now I think I could hardly tell the difference.

[philhoward]

I think the 1.4 and 1.8 have the same peak torque - the 1.8 having a slightly wider torque curve and going higher in the revs so makes the extra bhp right at the top end?

[JPH0091]

I think Ednmra was talking about  the former 1.8 generation.

 

The new one has indeed the same peak torque than the 1.4. This is due to the DSG7, that is limited to 250Nm as input torque. The same 1.8 engine delivers 320Nm in the Polo GTI.

Both 1.4 and 1.8 current TSI will behave the same between 1500 and 3500rpm, because they also share the exact same gearbox.

The 1.8 makes the difference between 3500 and 5000 rpm.

Practically, if you overtake in 3rd gear, the 1.4 will require to shift up to 4th around 95-100kph. The 1.8 will go on further behind 120kph, still in 3rd, without screaming.

 

This does not make much difference for people under the habit of driving diesel cars. (never thought overtaking in 3rd gear )

But for a petrol regular driver, I think this makes a huge difference.

 

.

Edited 9 February, 2016 by JPH0091

[ednmra]

I think Ednmra was talking about  the former 1.8 generation.

 

 

Yes, I got my 1.8 TSi manual hatch in 2008 and traded it for my present 1.4 in Oct. 2014

[Gerrycan]

The DSG7 was a real problem in Australia for the VAG group and their customers and it was not sourced from China as far as I know.

As usual there was a lot of denial of any problem locally and it was only after the huge recall in China and the Australian press picking up on the local issues that VW acknowledged it existed.

There is still a lot of bad feeling about that here.

The 'fix' is reported to just be a change of lubricant type and incidents are now rarely reported. I assume it was an issue here and not in the UK due to the extreme summer temperatures.

All Skoda in Australia are sourced from the Czech Republic so we had the same boxes as you.

VW sold here have come from various places over the years, some Golf from South Africa although I believe the current range is from Europe, current non-MQB Jetta sold here with 1.4 twin charger is sourced from Mexico

Edited 9 February, 2016 by Gerrycan

[rajnaks]

Hello Guys, I have an 1.4 TSI 140HP Octavia with 110k km with the CHPA engine and I noticed some unevenness when the engine is running at idle or when keeping the revolution between idle and 1500rpm during no load running. I can see the rpm indicator drops slightly and it feels like a resonance like when you have a misfiring cylinder. However, there is no error code in the ECU and everything is normal when driving the car. The dealer says it is normal, but I do not totally trust them. I do not know if the car used to have this "issue" before because I just bought it recently. (it used to be a company car with full service history)

 

Do you also have this little unevenness when the engine is running at idle? I could imagine that my car has some carbon deposits and that causes the symptom?

Also there is some very slight rattling noise that I can usually hear when driving slowly and the windows are open and passing close by an object. I am not sure if this is normal or not either. It cannot be the timing chain as this model came with the belt already. So maybe it is just a normal operation noise of this engine.

 

Any clue would be appreciated! Thanks!

 

Edited 11 June, 2017 by rajnaks

[Gerrycan]

What distance has it covered?

My tick over is absolutely steady (after 38,000 km). 'Rattling' may just be the injectors, they are relatively noisy if you lift the bonnet, but not obvious from inside the car. You would have to compare with another 1.4tsi to know if yours is more noisy than normal. It does not have to be an Octavia as the same units are fitted in VW and SEAT vehicles.

Could be the air-mass flow detector needs cleaning or even the EGR valve?

[Ootohere]

Welcome / koszontlek,

 @ 110,000km / 68,000 miles have the spark plugs been changed or even checked?

Is servicing all up to date not just showing as,  ie airfilter checked / changed etc?

[rajnaks]

Spark plugs were changed @50.000 km and 95.000 km. All maintenance was made by an official Skoda dealer so I suppose it was properly done. They say it is normal that the engine is running unevenly while it is cold, but I disagree. I will try to compare it with another 1.4 TSI if I find one. I will also try to check the EGR valve.

[Ootohere]

Best open the Air Filter box and look see just what the Air Filter looks like, 

and maybe just get those spark plugs out and look if supposedly they were changed 15,000 km ago. 

Relying on the fact that because a car was at a Main Dealers that all is well can be fatal to engines.

Check if the gap is still as should have been.

Edited 11 June, 2017 by Awayoffski

[Sec8200]

On 9.02.2016 г. at 12:37, JPH0091 said:

I think Ednmra was talking about  the former 1.8 generation.

 

The new one has indeed the same peak torque than the 1.4. This is due to the DSG7, that is limited to 250Nm as input torque. The same 1.8 engine delivers 320Nm in the Polo GTI.

Both 1.4 and 1.8 current TSI will behave the same between 1500 and 3500rpm, because they also share the exact same gearbox.

The 1.8 makes the difference between 3500 and 5000 rpm.

Practically, if you overtake in 3rd gear, the 1.4 will require to shift up to 4th around 95-100kph. The 1.8 will go on further behind 120kph, still in 3rd, without screaming.

 

This does not make much difference for people under the habit of driving diesel cars. (never thought overtaking in 3rd gear )

But for a petrol regular driver, I think this makes a huge difference.

 

.

 

It's strange stuff for 1.8 180hp limited to 250nm. As you said Polo GTI is 320nm, also Superb 3 is 320nm on manual.

 

However all the data points Octavia 3 is 250 nm even on manual. Is there anything else as info?Very bad if so, otherwise this engine will be pure gem in terms of hp,nm,sport and reliability...

[Ootohere]

Polo GTI 1.8TSI 192ps & 320Nm Manual & 250Nm DSG and yet the DSG is quicker than a Manual just not in VW Group kidology official figures.

Go figure.

[JPH0091]

2 hours ago, TTodorov said:

 

It's strange stuff for 1.8 180hp limited to 250nm. As you said Polo GTI is 320nm, also Superb 3 is 320nm on manual.

 

However all the data points Octavia 3 is 250 nm even on manual. Is there anything else as info?Very bad if so, otherwise this engine will be pure gem in terms of hp,nm,sport and reliability...

 

No, it's not bad. All the contrary.

 

The torque is limited to 250Nm, yes. But It is availaible quite sooner (1250 rpm) and much longer (5500 rpm) than on the 320Nm version.

On the other hand, the development of the gears are shorter.

This compensates for the lower engine torque, so that the torque transmitted to the wheels (the actual torque moving the car) is globally the same.

 

At the end, you get the same performances as the 320Nm version, whatever the speed you are.

And you have a larger range of use for your engine. We tell more "souplesse", in french. I don't know how it translates properly, maybe flexibility here, as a contributor to the driving pleasure.

 

I've explained this here, if you read french:

http://www.forum-auto.com/forum2.php?config=marques.inc&cat=97&post=3086&page=3&sondage=0&owntopic=1&trash=&trash_post=&print=&numreponse=0&quote_only=&new=&nojs=0#t280686

 

Never try to assess a car on the basis of its max engine torque; you need much more information like the power and torque curves, and mainly, the transmission ratios of the gearbox.

If engineers have worked properly, however, the max power remains a good indicator.

 

Some explainations below, where you can see the 2.0 TDI 150 is always less performant in the Octavia than the 1.4 TSI, even 140hp:

http://www.forum-auto.com/forum2.php?config=automobile-pratique.inc&cat=12&post=386231&page=1&sondage=0&owntopic=1&trash=&trash_post=&print=&numreponse=0&quote_only=&new=&nojs=0

 

Edited 11 June, 2017 by JPH0091

[Sec8200]

@JPH0091 - merci, will try to understand as much as I can. French is weak part of me, however I can see the technical stuff clearly.

[norsko]

1 hour ago, JPH0091 said:

 

No, it's not bad. All the contrary.

 

The torque is limited to 250Nm, yes. But It is availaible quite sooner (1250 rpm) and much longer (5500 rpm) than on the 320Nm version.

 

 

Hmmm. Are you sure about this?

I assume that the 320Nm version also has 250 Nm between 1250-5500, it just has even more in a slightly narrower rpm band

[JPH0091]

Your are right.

But the important point is the range at max engine torque and when it starts.

Even if it has always higher torque values, the 320Nm as a narrower range at its max torque, starting at higher RPM.

it's max torque value will induce longer gears.

 

At 1250rpm, even if it delivers the same torque than 250Nm version, it will have to cope with smaller transmission ratio, and will deliver less torque and power to the wheels than the 250Nm version.

 

In terms of performances, you don't really care the value of max engine torque as long as you can design the right associated gearbox.

The main advantage of a higher torque for the same power is mostly regarding consumption reduction.