Hi, I'd be grateful for advice. I'm wondering how big the performance deficit is for the Greenline II Yeti compared to the 2.0 TDI? I'm also a bit confused about bhp/ps outputs as had thought the 2.0 litre had 140bhp, though it appears to be less at 110bhp. (Perhaps the 140bhp figure is for the 4x4 only?)

 

We're not looking at hauling huge loads. The Greenline II appears to come out okay in reviews but I've got a nagging doubt still. The 1.6 unit just seems a bit weedy to haul all that weight. Any feedback would be great (including mpg figures!). 

 

Thank you very much.

 

MM, London

 

 

Welcome.

 

I've requested this be moved, as the Yeti II has not yet been released, so I presume you are asking about the facelift model.

 

The 2 litre diesel was available as:

2x4 110bhp

4x4 140bhp

4x4 170bhp

and now 

4x4 150bhp

Edited 10 April, 20179 yr by Llanigraham

I have the greenline 1.6tdi

Perfectly ok for day to day use, but can struggle to maintain speed in top gear on some hills full of people and luggage, however no issues with climbing even the steepest in the lower gears.

 

On the motorway it will cruise all day at a true 70 without having to use lower gears.

 

I would think twice before overtaking on a single c'way road, but not really been an issue in the 40000 miles I have now done in it.

I had the 110ps 2lt 2wd previously and the performance is very similar, except the greenline does a lot more mpg.

 

If not in a hurry I often see 60+mpg, sometimes I have had a journey average of 70+ but that is exceptional, and is from the maxidot so probably not accurate.

 

Drive fast and into a headwind and it will be around 45-50mpg.

 

This is a company car and it was the only Yeti that was within the company's maximum CO2 limit, so I had no real choice about getting the greenline version this time. However it does the job and I enjoy driving it.

 

However next car will be mine and I can order the spec I want so it is a Yeti SEL Drive 150 dsg 4x4. The extra power vastly improves the driving experience. (The discontinued 170ps must have been a near GTi! beater)

1 hour ago, Llanigraham said:

 

I've requested this be moved, as the Yeti II has not yet been released, so I presume you are asking about the facelift model.

 

 

To clear up any confusion, I don't think the OP is getting confused with a Mark II Yeti:     the Greenline Yetis have been called Greenline II from the outset....I've no idea why...there doesn't ever seem to have been a Greenline I. As a result,  most people don't bother with the "II".  I don't know what engine is going into the current Greenlines,  but before Euro 6 came in it was a 1.6 diesel plus Stop/Start,  low rolling resistance tyres,  lower suspension etc., none of which were on other models.  Now all the cars have stop/start, so I don't know what other advantages the current Greenlines have as regards emissions and frugality.  The one I used to have was very economical,  but not, to my mind, particularly underpowered...it coped with everything I ever threw at it,  but I'm no boy racer!  I only changed it because I needed an automatic,  and was a bit worried about how powerful the 1.2 petrol engine could be....it turns out its a little stunner,  apart from the fuel consumption,  which was a bit of a shock after the Greenline.

^^^ But the post was in the Yeti MK2 'Spotted' Section for Yeti Replacements which there are none of yeti,

and then the post was moved to here after members including me pointed it out to the mods.

I also can't believe how long the tyres are lasting on mine. The fronts will still have some tread left at about 42k when the car goes back to the lease company in 12 weeks time.

 

I suspect the combination on 16" wheels and low rolling resistance tyres contributes to the longevity.

 

Previous Yeti 110ps 2.0lt tdi 2wd had gone through the front tyres at around 30k

 

This is still much better than some cars I have had before, including a Ford Mondeo estate which ate front tyres regularly in 11k despite tracking etc being spot on.

My Greenline II gives great fuel consumption and is perfectly powered for most of the time.
You could always have it re-mapped to give more power, below is Practical Caravan's review of it towing.
 

 

3 hours ago, kenfowler3966 said:

I also can't believe how long the tyres are lasting on mine. The fronts will still have some tread left at about 42k when the car goes back to the lease company in 12 weeks time.

 

I suspect the combination on 16" wheels and low rolling resistance tyres contributes to the longevity.

 

Previous Yeti 110ps 2.0lt tdi 2wd had gone through the front tyres at around 30k

 

This is still much better than some cars I have had before, including a Ford Mondeo estate which ate front tyres regularly in 11k despite tracking etc being spot on.

 

Edited 10 April, 20179 yr by skoda1982
woops

Company car lease scheme, so only has to be undamaged and with recent mot. Company does allow change of tyres at 2.5mm, but mine still have nearly 4mm left.

Even if some slight damage it just gets assessed before it goes to auction. Last one had a small dint in the rear quarter from a door opening in to it and a scrape on the front bumper. Both happened in our tight and overwhelmed car park whilst parked. £900 damage cost though back to my employers even though it would have been auctioned without any repairs and not that bad to put off most buyers of a four year old car. 

All very helpful. Thanks so much for your replies. My feeling is that the Greenline is okay 85-90% of the time. Overtaking will need caution. Overall, broadly tolerable.

 

Thank you again for your help.

1 hour ago, MasterMunchkin said:

My feeling is that the Greenline is okay 85-90% of the time. Overtaking will need caution. Overall, broadly tolerable.

 

My count would be very good for 99.9% of the time, if overtaking is done with thought 100% of the time and you use speed already gained not popping out and expecting it to leap forward. Tolerable is not something I would describe the Yeti as, it's a fantastic drivers car that will put many "sporty" cars to shame and leave them as a shrinking dot in the rear view mirror on twisty roads yet still giving a very comfortable ride.

Have a test drive in one and like us you'll probably put the order in on the spot, and that was after test driving the competition.

My Greenline had a Racechip fitted and went like a rocket - so 100% for me - even the traffic lights GP.

Fuel consumption improved a well!

The latest model may not have such a simple connection/disconnection so check before copying me.

I tested a Greenline and 110 BHP 2.0 at a dealers last year back to back on the same 10 mile test route.  Both cars from cold and similar ages and milages.  Mix of A road, B road and dual carriageway.  Absolutely no discernible difference in power.  Set the mpg on startup and surprisingly the 2.0 bettered the greenline by 1 MPG.  Moral of the story, apart from the higher road tax, you are going to see little difference between the two.

27 minutes ago, Falmouthboy said:

I tested a Greenline and 110 BHP 2.0 at a dealers last year back to back on the same 10 mile test route.  Both cars from cold and similar ages and milages.  Mix of A road, B road and dual carriageway.  Absolutely no discernible difference in power.  Set the mpg on startup and surprisingly the 2.0 bettered the greenline by 1 MPG.  Moral of the story, apart from the higher road tax, you are going to see little difference between the two.

Perhaps the engines have changed but my 2014 Greeline is consistently about 10mpg better than i used to get from my 2010 110bhp diesel.

The earlier car did not have stop start and the low rolling resistance 16" wheels though.

Looking at the latest figures the greenline seems to have become redundant when the 110 current car gained stop start and the Greenline was discontinued.

Fair point on economy, none of my test route was urban benefiting 'stop/start' and both cars were pre facelift.  I suspect under those conditions the greenline would have had the edge on economy.  Also, in the test I did 'press on'; coming from a more powerful car, sufficient power was more a priority for me which may have given the 2.0 the edge as it wasn't working so hard as the 1.6.