220 or 280?

[wooyay]

Hello Briskodians.

 

I'm looking at replacing my Octavia VRS with a the Superb in order to get more space both in the cabin and boot and to have a more comfortable ride as the Octavia's suspension isn't very forgiving over our wonderfully maintained roads.

 

Whilst the outgoing VRS is diesel it will be replaced with a petrol Superb which has got me agonising between the 220 and 280PS engines.  Unfortunately my local dealer has neither available in a Superb for testing although I have been offered the 220 engine in a Octavia VRS which I'm planning to try later this month.

 

I was able to test drive a Superb with the 190 diesel engine coupled with the DSG box and whilst it seemed a nice car wafting on main roads I was disappointed with it on more twisty roads.  I realise it'll never compete against the VRS but it seemed very hesitant and reluctant to make progress unless it was pushed reasonably hard.  I wouldn't say the 190 engine felt under powered but I wouldn't want to have any less power.  Having the DSG box in sport mode helped but it always seemed to be playing catch up.

 

So for those with the 220 and 280 engines how do your cars compare in normal everyday driving - is the extra 60PS and extra weight of the 4x4 drive really a cut above the 220?  Do they pair with the DSG box better than the 190 diesel?  I'm coming from an entire history of manual gearboxes so I realise there may be a learning curve to reach the full potential.

 

Cheers! 

[philpix]

Just search YouTube for Superb 280. I think you'll be convinced that this is the engine the DSG box and 4x4 is the right choice.

[Rainmaker]

I have the 220ps and would honestly say if you can afford it get the 280. All forum banter aside, more power is always better and you get the benefit of 4WD to get it onto the tarmac. Yes its heavier, yes it would be a bit worse on fuel, but you're a long time dead. The 220 is still a cracking engine (and I'm not just saying that because I have one). It's fantastic on fuel as well as fun and fast when you want, but I still wouldn't have said no to the 280 if I'd had the chance. To be fair I'd rather have had the 3.6 V6 over and above either, but that's another story.

 

If you go 220 you'd not be disappointed. It only really loses out to the 280 at the top end of the rev range (they're pretty similar at first), and you'd save a bit on fuel (it's easy to get MPG into the late 30s around town and into the 40s on the motorway if you're careful)... But the odd time when you're pressing on and the wheels spin, you'd instantly wish it was rear wheel drive or AWD. If the 220 was RWD it'd be perfect (as pressing the loud pedal would just press more weight onto the driven wheels), but alas no. You'd not be disappointed either way really, but as I said being honest the 280 is the one to pick if you have the choice imho.

[Alf01]

You really don't need the 280.

The 220 (162TSI) has more then ample power. 0 to 100km/h in 7 seconds is more then you ever need. This was Porsche Carrera territory not that long ago.

The 162TSI gives progressive power right from low down. My son's Holden Thunder Ute V8 would not run away from our car, that's for sure.

Both my wife and myself aren't exactly known to drive in a conservative way and the 220 more then fulfills our needs for a decent pickup.

[Nick_H]

Don't listen to Rainmaker go for the 280 !!!

 

Oh hang on a min !! Err... Sorry RM !!

 

280 Is great fun. First gear is pretty brutal if you floor it and the 4x4 puts the power down with no drama.

[dodsi]

If you can afford a 280, get one - if I could have afforded it... I would have gotten one.

[Norian]

I have the 220ps and would honestly say if you can afford it get the 280. All forum banter aside, more power is always better and you get the benefit of 4WD to get it onto the tarmac. Yes its heavier, yes it would be a bit worse on fuel, but you're a long time dead. The 220 is still a cracking engine (and I'm not just saying that because I have one). It's fantastic on fuel as well as fun and fast when you want, but I still wouldn't have said no to the 280 if I'd had the chance. To be fair I'd rather have had the 3.6 V6 over and above either, but that's another story.

 

If you go 220 you'd not be disappointed. It only really loses out to the 280 at the top end of the rev range (they're pretty similar at first), and you'd save a bit on fuel (it's easy to get MPG into the late 30s around town and into the 40s on the motorway if you're careful)... But the odd time when you're pressing on and the wheels spin, you'd instantly wish it was rear wheel drive or AWD. If the 220 was RWD it'd be perfect (as pressing the loud pedal would just press more weight onto the driven wheels), but alas no. You'd not be disappointed either way really, but as I said being honest the 280 is the one to pick if you have the choice imho.

 

Again, a great post, good reading material, crossing the t's and dotting the i's  

Really approve your comment on the 3.6 V6. My dealer has one Superb2 with 10k miles on it and really got me thinking of choosing it instead of the 220TSI Superb. The naturally aspirated engine is a great machine. 

 

 

Somehow I was stuck in the same dilemma some time ago, just like the OP 

 

Here's my 2 cents: 

The 220TSI seems to be the better choice due to it's great Torque curve and the power delivery. It's lighter, so beside the better fuel economy is ligther to throw around the corners, the inertia is smaller. Agree, it loses to the 280TSI on hard and long accelerations started at aprox 90-100mph. Another week point is traction on wet from a standstill. The 350NM are a lot of torque when attempting to "slingshot" away. 

 

The 280TSI's 4wd really comes into life at standstill getaways, but the torque figure is not impressively much above the 350NM of the 220TSI.

Besides this, the 4wd is not a "quattro" system which uses a Torsen differential to split evenly the power between axels, but no less then 50-50ratio, which varies to 80-20 or 20-80 depending conditions.

The 4Motion system used in the 280TSI uses a Haldex system which is "4x4 on demand". Basically you have some sensors that green light the rear to kick in. They really work on standstill getaways on wet, but no chance of making over steer action through corners. 

Putting it simple: with a Quattro, if you enter to fast into a corner, just floor it and the rear will over steer, so the front will be back on the right track - very simple explanation of the phenomenon. With a 4Motion, when entering to fast into a corner, if you floor it - you will be in the ditch, the front just keeps under steering wide, until you get of the road. Again, simple explanation.

 

The 220TSI's tendency to loose grip on hard accelerations from standstill on wet can be easily cured by changing tires. The OEM equipped Pirelli P7 are no good when driving hard. Continentals Sports or GoodYear Assymetrical 3 or Michelin PilotSport will cure this problem.

To back up this argument - I've driven recently a 290TSI CUPRA, which had fitted some new edition Pilot Sports. The car really stuck to the tarmac, on hard acceleration out of hairpins was perfectly stable and no drama from wheel spin, while the braking was delicious, it literally pulled you out of your seat with the amount of grip delivered.

 

Money wise, the 3.5K Euros difference between the 220TSI and the 280TSI is too much for just 60hp and an "on demand 4x4" system. You can fully spec the 220TSI for the 3.5K difference and enjoy your car, as in real life driving conditions is very difficult to "drive those 60hp" and really make use of 100% of the 280TSI

 

Just my thoughts on this.

Edited 2 September, 2016 by Norian

[Brenticles]

I was in the exact same quandry.

 

 

The 220 was the sensible choice, better MPG for my commute.

Plenty of power (with space to chip tune if required) price wise, it was a fair lump cheaper.

Convinced myseldf this was the correct option.

 

 

Then I ended up buying a 280 (ex Demo) as it was pretty cheap, with loads of extra's.

 

Not regretting it at all!

[Norian]

I was in the exact same quandry.

 

 

The 220 was the sensible choice, better MPG for my commute.

Plenty of power (with space to chip tune if required) price wise, it was a fair lump cheaper.

Convinced myseldf this was the correct option.

 

 

Then I ended up buying a 280 (ex Demo) as it was pretty cheap, with loads of extra's.

 

Not regretting it at all!

That's an interesting turn of events

 

Would have done the same in this case  

[wooyay]

Thanks to everyone who replied.    Many useful points and comments made, and now many hours lost to YouTube 280 clips. 

 

Money wise, the 3.5K Euros difference between the 220TSI and the 280TSI is too much for just 60hp and an "on demand 4x4" system. You can fully spec the 220TSI for the 3.5K difference and enjoy your car, as in real life driving conditions is very difficult to "drive those 60hp" and really make use of 100% of the 280TSI

 

That's pretty much the same as I was thinking, but even though the 4x4 might not be as good as the Quattro system it'll still be an improvement over FWD.  Losing traction is an easy thing to do in the VRS especially in cold damp conditions before the tyres get to up working temperature (I found the factory fit Dunlops awful for this) but I've managed perfectly well with it for the last 8 years!

 

I think the next step will be to test drive the 220 DSG Octavia VRS that the dealer has available because unless the engine/gearbox combination is better than the diesel 190 DSG I might be stuck.

[MartiniB]

by chose 2.0 TSI 4x4 you will get bonus -

exhausts which must come on every gasoline car!

all other gasoline models come with turned down(diesel) exhausts :(

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/392652-exhausts/

[Hawtin]

Norian, you should do some googling since BorgWarner gen 5 (bought Haldex More than 5 years ago) is a permanent 4WD since atleast 5 % of power is always on rear axle (the same feature was already in gen 4). The system also anticipates loss of traction from multiple factors and supplies more power to the back before loss of traction.

Quattro also isn't the same as torsen. There's a quattro badge in my current A3 which has the above mentioned gen 5 and it is very good system for normal driving. That is why Audi is also moving towards electronic 4WD's in new A4's due to also fuel savings. Of course if you spend the hole day at ice track, then the electronic system is not as good as more mechanical system (for example torsen) due to overheating. But gen 5 is also surprisingly easy to get overstear, quite enjoyable in fact, so no reason to mock that. Of course torsen which usually stears even more power to the rear axle is even better, but again, in normal driving not a big difference. And I would like see normal tyre (or what ever tyres for that matter) that can take 220 ps and 350 nm of torque without spinning if you floor it...no way Jose...

All in all, the original question is a definate no brainer; if you can afford 280, thats your choice. Permanent 4WD brings added stability in summertime, wet or dry, and in winter the fun begins at about the same time when 220 drivers start looking at their calenders thinking how long is it untill spring...

[Norian]

Norian, you should do some googling since BorgWarner gen 5 (bought Haldex More than 5 years ago) is a permanent 4WD since atleast 5 % of power is always on rear axle (the same feature was already in gen 4). The system also anticipates loss of traction from multiple factors and supplies more power to the back before loss of traction.

Quattro also isn't the same as torsen. There's a quattro badge in my current A3 which has the above mentioned gen 5 and it is very good system for normal driving. That is why Audi is also moving towards electronic 4WD's in new A4's due to also fuel savings. Of course if you spend the hole day at ice track, then the electronic system is not as good as more mechanical system (for example torsen) due to overheating. But gen 5 is also surprisingly easy to get overstear, quite enjoyable in fact, so no reason to mock that. Of course torsen which usually stears even more power to the rear axle is even better, but again, in normal driving not a big difference. And I would like see normal tyre (or what ever tyres for that matter) that can take 220 ps and 350 nm of torque without spinning if you floor it...no way Jose...

All in all, the original question is a definate no brainer; if you can afford 280, thats your choice. Permanent 4WD brings added stability in summertime, wet or dry, and in winter the fun begins at about the same time when 220 drivers start looking at their calenders thinking how long is it untill spring...

 

Fact is that I'd rather we'd discuss from "real life situations" and not car manufacturers marketing brochures.

 

If you prefer to call "permanent" a system which send only 5% of power to the back axle with no option of locking the torque for each of the wheels in the back axle, then be it, you can call it that.

I call "permanent" only the likes of Torsen and Subaru's Symmetrical All Wheel Drive, with emphasize on "Symmetrical" 

 

There are loads of youtube films with Superb's 4x4 who, in real life snow driving conditions can get the Haldex all confused, mixed up and not responding.

 

Here's one example, with a Superb TSI 280:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1B_V5cZVIiE

 

I suggest paying close attention to what’s going on from 6'45''. 

 

At 6'55'' you can clearly see that the front and back wheels do no spin at the same time, there are delays in moving power from front to back, situations where only front or only back is spinning.

 

At 7'30'' again, the back is not spinning, the car loses momentum and gets stuck.  

 

The system works well when flooring it at high revs. 

 

You were mentioning the " The system also anticipates loss of traction from multiple factors and supplies more power to the back before loss of traction."  My question is: where is that anticipation happening exactly ?  

 

Regarding the A3, no offence, but Quattro in A3 is just for marketing purposes. A3 is build on MQB platform which uses Haldex (of course, you pay the price of Torsen, being an Audi)

Starting with the A4, we're talking about MLB platform, which uses Torsen, the "real Quattro"

 

If you Google my location, you will see the kinds of winters we get here. Even that, with a good set of winter tires and some common sense, you can pass the winters with no fuss even with FWD, as long as you understand what a car can and cannot do. Even with 4x4 you will not be "the king of the slope covered in snow", you are limited by your ground clearance, otherwise you just get the car suspended on snow with wheels spinning in this air. It's no drama when winter comes, rest assured.  

After all, one's driving skills are not observed in straight line speed, rather more in "how fast and smooth" you get around corners on a winding road. And Haldex has nothing to do with "power slides" out of the corners, it's mainly just plain-old under steer.

[Kungfugerbil]

280 all the way. I have the 190 diesel 4x4 DSG and love it, but would love the 280 quite a lot more The 220 I had a go in was very good, but not sparkling. The 280 I would have in a flash.

As the popular sports shoes say, "Just do it"

Edited 15 September, 2016 by Kungfugerbil

[IsoE]

Hi guys, new to the forum!

 

I'd like to give my opinion on 4x4 system of the Superb. Last winter I decided to take the 280 for a test drive for a day. It was -15C and the roads were in a typical Finnish winter condition: http://www.vastavalo.fi/albums/userpics/21160/normal_20120204-24.jpg. Some bare, but frozen, tarmac and snow between the bare grooves. Smaller, quieter, roads completely covered in snow.

 

I was really curious to know how the Haldex-based system works in those conditions and how easy it is to drift through corners. My previous car was a 249 hp RWD and I was used to drive more sideways than straight during the winters. I had read about the differences between various 4wd systems and was a little sceptical how well Skoda's system would work.

 

The car I drove had proper winter tires installed, but they were the non-studded versions, so not so great on icy surfaces. To my great surprise the car was really easy to get sideways. I was able to drift through tight corners and throw the car around on a straight road. Just apply some extra throttle and the rear-end will start moving around. But mind you, it was super easy to control and as soon as I eased on the throttle, the car would continue in a straight line.

 

I made a hill test also. I stopped the car in the middle of the steepest hill I could find near my house. The road was covered in hard and icy snow and it's so slippery that it's really hard to walk up. There was a split second slip in the tires, but the car started to climb almost instantly and as soon as the car started moving there was no problem with the lack of friction.

 

Overall I was really satisfied with the car and decided to order one. So 280 L&K was my choice. I'll get the car in a couple of weeks - can't wait!

Edited 16 September, 2016 by IsoE

[Hawtin]

Fact is that I'd rather we'd discuss from "real life situations" and not car manufacturers marketing brochures.[/size]

 [/size]

If you prefer to call "permanent" a system which send only 5% of power to the back axle with no option of locking the torque for each of the wheels in the back axle, then be it, you can call it that.[/size]

I call "permanent" only the likes of Torsen and Subaru's Symmetrical All Wheel Drive, with emphasize on "Symmetrical" [/size]

 [/size]

There are loads of youtube films with Superb's 4x4 who, in real life snow driving conditions can get the Haldex all confused, mixed up and not responding.[/size]

 [/size]

Here's one example, with a Superb TSI 280:[/size]

 [/size]

[/size]

 [/size]

I suggest paying close attention to what’s going on from 6'45''. [/size]

 [/size]

At 6'55'' you can clearly see that the front and back wheels do no spin at the same time, there are delays in moving power from front to back, situations where only front or only back is spinning.[/size]

 [/size]

At 7'30'' again, the back is not spinning, the car loses momentum and gets stuck.  [/size]

 [/size]

The system works well when flooring it at high revs. [/size]

 [/size]

You were mentioning the "[/size] The system also anticipates loss of traction from multiple factors and supplies more power to the back before loss of traction."  My question is: where is that anticipation happening exactly ?  [/size][/size]

 [/size]

Regarding the A3, no offence, but Quattro in A3 is just for marketing purposes. A3 is build on MQB platform which uses Haldex (of course, you pay the price of Torsen, being an Audi)[/size]

Starting with the A4, we're talking about MLB platform, which uses Torsen, the "real Quattro"[/size]

 [/size]

If you Google my location, you will see the kinds of winters we get here. Even that, with a good set of winter tires and some common sense, you can pass the winters with no fuss even with FWD, as long as you understand what a car can and cannot do. Even with 4x4 you will not be "the king of the slope covered in snow", you are limited by your ground clearance, otherwise you just get the car suspended on snow with wheels spinning in this air. It's no drama when winter comes, rest assured.  [/size]

After all, one's driving skills are not observed in straight line speed, rather more in "how fast and smooth" you get around corners on a winding road. And Haldex has nothing to do with "power slides" out of the corners, it's mainly just plain-old under steer.[/size]

Yes, Norian, I was also talking about real life situations, not one or two split second in a random youtube flick. As I mentioned, I have lots of hands on experience on Haldex5 (and Torsen) - have you? And it was 5 % MINIMUM. And I never said that serious offroad systems would not be more capable 4WD's but we were not talking about that here. And yes, I do know that Quattro is just a marketing title, I thought that I made that quite clear, It just seemed that you were not aware of that when talking as Quattro would be just one system (it's not two or even three different systems, there are more currently in production). And all A4 Quattros are not Torsen (as I already mentioned) because, unlike you, Audi seems for some strange reason to believe that electronic 4WD's are quite capable in real life situations.

And yes, I've been to Romania and I am aware that occasionally you may experience a flake or two of snow. Getting decent winter tyres might be a bit more difficult over there though. But neither of the last mentioned points bare relevans compared with real life experience. I mean the ones that for example IsoE just mentioned (believe me, it wasn't me using different name;-). And if you google "Finland" or "Arctic circle" or "Santa Claus" you might notice that we do have some experience on winter conditions too.

Although this is quite entertaining, I do have to call quits with this "my 4WD is bigger and better than yours" on my part. Do enjoy Torsen (if you have one, that is) because they are most likely history quite soon...

[Nick_H]

Back on topic then..... Marvelous ...

[Rainmaker]

Back on topic then..... Marvelous ...

 

[philpix]

Two big exhaust pipes on show. That is all.

[Gizmo]

It’s not very often you hear people say “I wish I had a bit less power”

you don’t have to use it all, but you can’t use what you don’t have.... enough said. 

 

IF I could justify petrol (I do 20K PA and pay for the fuel myself) then there would have been no choice... 280 all the way.

[wooyay]

Thank you to everyone who's replied.  I've now test driven a 220 DSG (in a Octy VRS) and it was a much more pleasurable experience than the 190 DSG diesel Superb I'd originally tried.

 

Given the comments, and my gut feeling, I'm leaning towards ordering the 280 despite my head telling me the 220 would be perfectly adequate.

 

I know I've read somewhere on here but can't find it, could those who have either the 220 or 280 tell me roughly what RPM the engine is doing at 70MPH in top gear?  Whilst I don't spend all day every day on the motoway, whenever I do it's usually for fairly long trips and the shorter gearing of the 280 is niggling at me...

 

Thanks! 

[Rainmaker]

Thank you to everyone who's replied.  I've now test driven a 220 DSG (in a Octy VRS) and it was a much more pleasurable experience than the 190 DSG diesel Superb I'd originally tried.

 

Given the comments, and my gut feeling, I'm leaning towards ordering the 280 despite my head telling me the 220 would be perfectly adequate.

 

I know I've read somewhere on here but can't find it, could those who have either the 220 or 280 tell me roughly what RPM the engine is doing at 70MPH in top gear?  Whilst I don't spend all day every day on the motoway, whenever I do it's usually for fairly long trips and the shorter gearing of the 280 is niggling at me...

 

Thanks! 

It's not just about RPM/gearing, but about efficiency at the revs. My 220 sits around - roughly - 1,800rpm at 70mph and a hair over 2,000rpm at 80mph. The 280 will be higher, but in the real world there's not a huge amount in their economy if you try. In the 220 though, you don't really have to try. Really though, get the 280 (says the 220 owner). 

[wooyay]

I guess the question I should've asked is whether the noise caused by the extra RPMs is noticeable between the two but that's a very subjective question.

 

I know that the 280 will be the right choice but it'll be the first time I've ever bought without having driven (or even seen) the engine so I'm trying to rid those last minute niggles before I settle on a car I intend to keep for many years.

[philpix]

I guess the question I should've asked is whether the noise caused by the extra RPMs is noticeable between the two but that's a very subjective question.

 

I know that the 280 will be the right choice but it'll be the first time I've ever bought without having driven (or even seen) the engine so I'm trying to rid those last minute niggles before I settle on a car I intend to keep for many years.

I bought the 280 without a test drive. I went with a gut feeling relying on the great feedback from the 280 owners on here. I could have the car next week but I'm away in Spain. Murphy's Law.

[Brenticles]

I do lots of motorway miles in the 280. I can honestly say I have never actually noticed the engine noise at any speed.