Hi guys.

I've currently a 1.9 auto which I loved albeit the ingress issue which took time to sort but love the car.

Sadly had someone pull out on me last week and its now a write off.

Keen however to get another.

Looking at the 2.5 diesel auto. I know the faults of the car itself but don't know about the 2.5 engine.....is anyone able to offer some advice on reliability and quirks etc please?

Thanks in advance guys ;-)

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

A lot of owners on here like them, but the fuel pump system can be an expensive failure that the the 1.9's don't suffer from.

Oh right, which obviously isn't a serviceable part so not ideal. Do like the 1.9, was just tempted for a bit more grunt.

Maybe the 1.9 is the one to stick with then.....

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

My last 1.9 (Edition 100) was remapped and I dare say went a lot better than the 2.5 as they are quite an old engine therefore not much quicker than a std 1.9 PD130.

More I think about it I think a 1.9 auto as I had would be the safer bet. ;-)

Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk

Do not listen this comments.

They never had 2.5 TDI and they dont know what to say against this motor.

I have one and I can say I woudnt buy 1.9 never..and it is pretty much stupid comment to say they have pump which can be broken.

Like wtf?!

Also, 2.5 can be chipped and than what!? Will it 1.9 be quicker than 2.5?! Bull****.

My advice is to test 2.5 v6 and than tell is it or it isnt diffrence, and listen your heart!

I've had both engines with manual boxes.

The 130hp 1.9 is a 'better' engine than the 2.5, newer technology, more punchier in its power delivery and better economy. The 2.5 feels lazy in comparison, very linear power delivery.

Chipping a 130 makes a nice difference, you lose some of the smoothness when the power kicks in, it feels more raw but really shifts. A 2.5 is harder to tune, mechanical fuel injection vs electronic.

I had intermittant problems with the 2.5, got to the point where i couldnt trust it anymore. No problems at all with any of my 1.9s

Try both and decide for yourself.

Chipping a 130 makes a nice difference, you lose some of the smoothness when the power kicks in, it feels more raw but really shifts. A 2.5 is harder to tune, mechanical fuel injection vs electronic.

 

I removed the Quantum Tuning remap from my car because of this... it spoilt the car, the faboka remap that replaced it however was as smooth as std but equally as quick as the Quantum map.

and it is pretty much stupid comment to say they have pump which can be broken.Like wtf?

I don't think it is a stupid comment. It is a well known and expensive failure. Lots of these cars are being written off as not cost effective to repair due to this VP44 pump.

Of course driving enjoyment is important to some people - not to me. I drive a road with lots of roundabouts to work so like having autobox to avoid clutching all the time, but the engine, so long as it is fast enough to be safe and quiet enough on the road, is much of a muchness.

Cheap and easy servicing and lack of bits to go wrong is far more important to me.

That isnt reason I woudnt buy Sup. Anything can brake, 1.9 isnt damage proof like how you people trying to represent.