Karoq - torsion beam rear end

[Sootchucker]

HI all. I was surprised to hear recently that the non 4x4 versions of the Karoq have a torsion beam rear suspension setup, rather than the multi link system that the 4x4's use (and all my VW Golf's and Scirocco's have used).

 

Quick question for those with the 2wd models, is there difference in the ride quality and handling going to this simpler set up, or is it to all intents and purposes invisible to the average driver ?

 

I'm guess that a 4x4 version of the 1.5TSI 150ps is not on the books for later this year ?

[bone_tone]

Given that none of the magazine reviews have mentioned a difference, I would guess that the average driver couldn't detect it. I certainly have no complaints about the ride or handling of my 1.5TSI, but I've not driven a 4x4 version to compare.

[Ootohere]

As to the 1.5 TSI DSG AWD's, 

there are plenty waiting to see that available with VW Group vehicles, 

so time will tell just when they get that combination in the Q2, T-Roc, Ateca and on and on. 

[terrapin]

I don't think I've seen either the 1.4 or 1.5 TSI engines as 4x4 anywhere in the VW group but I may be mistaken. The 2.0 TSI however is available as a 4x4 for both the Ateca and the Tiguan. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't be surprised if the 1.5 TSI were kept solely for FWD duty.

[bigjohn]

13 hours ago, Sootchucker said:

 

Quick question for those with the 2wd models, is there difference in the ride quality and handling going to this simpler set up, or is it to all intents and purposes invisible to the average driver ?

 

 

I test drove a 2dw 1.5tsi SE L and found the ride very good indeed - even over a very rough road that is part of my commute. Infact I found the ride a little better than my 1.4tsi Superb II

 

Personally I think I want the torsion beam rear axle/suspension as I feel rear tyre wear would be substantially better.

With independent rear if you have a very heavy load and passengers in the rear, back tyres can be prone to wearing on the inside as the camber angle changes - this doesn't happen with torsion beam.

Edited 1 February, 2018 by bigjohn

[AllanDJ]

20 hours ago, terrapin said:

I don't think I've seen either the 1.4 or 1.5 TSI engines as 4x4 anywhere in the VW group but I may be mistaken. The 2.0 TSI however is available as a 4x4 for both the Ateca and the Tiguan. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't be surprised if the 1.5 TSI were kept solely for FWD duty.

 

In that case I think you are well and truly mistaken, as outside my house I have a Yeti 4x4 with a 1.4 TSi engine inside of it! Only issue with this combination is poor fuel consumption, with the more aerodynamic body of the Karoq and front wheel drive only I think fuel economy will be much better.

 

[terrapin]

Ah, good point - must admit I hadn't considered the Yeti in my search.

 

Would be interested to know how the 1.4 TSI performs a fuel economy point of view in its 4x4 guise. Would you mind sharing the type driving that you do and the sort of mileage that you are getting?

 

Still unsure whether to hold out to see if the Karoq line up is updated to remove the folding tables and add a 1.5 TSI 4x4 option. 

[KaroqKent]

21 hours ago, terrapin said:

I don't think I've seen either the 1.4 or 1.5 TSI engines as 4x4 anywhere in the VW group but I may be mistaken. The 2.0 TSI however is available as a 4x4 for both the Ateca and the Tiguan. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't be surprised if the 1.5 TSI were kept solely for FWD duty.

I was in a dealers yesterday chatting about the Karoq and mentioned that my preference would be a petrol 4x4. They said that if there was enough demand it might become a reality and that the Kodiaq is available with a 1.4 TSI  engine with 4x4.

 

Maybe another line of enquiry.

[terrapin]

Well damn, thank you for the info. That shows both how incomplete my research has been and the value of these forums!

 

Kodiaq is too big for us unfortunately. Interesting none the less as it looks like the mpg loss would be in the 10 to 15% range going from FWD to 4x4.

[pinkpanther]

48 minutes ago, terrapin said:

Ah, good point - must admit I hadn't considered the Yeti in my search.

 

Would be interested to know how the 1.4 TSI performs a fuel economy point of view in its 4x4 guise. Would you mind sharing the type driving that you do and the sort of mileage that you are getting?

 

Still unsure whether to hold out to see if the Karoq line up is updated to remove the folding tables and add a 1.5 TSI 4x4 option. 

Different engine / car, but I ran both a 2WD and 4WD Yeti and typically saw ~10% less MPG from the 4WD variant. This seemed a small price to pay for the improvements in traction offered by the 4WD system.  

[pinkpanther]

1 hour ago, AllanDJ said:

 

In that case I think you are well and truly mistaken, as outside my house I have a Yeti 4x4 with a 1.4 TSi engine inside of it! Only issue with this combination is poor fuel consumption, with the more aerodynamic body of the Karoq and front wheel drive only I think fuel economy will be much better.

Hi Allan, curious how bad the fuel economy is with the 1.4 TSi 4WD Yeti?

 

I considered one of these as a replacement for my 2014 140 BHP 4WD Yeti. It drove well and benefited from a much lighter front end than my current car.

 

I couldn't find one at the right price though (and my wife objected to the brown interior colour scheme!).

 

A lot is made of fuel economy, but in reality a few MPG here or there make very little difference to the actual running costs of the car.

 

Frustration arises when claimed figures fall short of actual returns - I recall being especially disappointed when I traded in my 1.9 PD TDi Roomster for a new 1.6 CR model.  This was all pre emissions scandal and in hindsight I fell for the marketing claims.  The old-tech / pre-DPF car had averaged mid 40's (50 max) and I was led to believe the newer CR engine would return high 50's / low 60's. In reality it averaged mid 40's MPG  (max 57) and lost all of the driveability inherent in the older PD unit.

 

Since then I've generally ignored manufacturers figures and have checked actual returns on Fuelly / Spritmonitor / Honest John etc.

 

[VAGCF]

On ‎01‎/‎02‎/‎2018 at 13:02, terrapin said:

I don't think I've seen either the 1.4 or 1.5 TSI engines as 4x4 anywhere in the VW group but I may be mistaken. The 2.0 TSI however is available as a 4x4 for both the Ateca and the Tiguan. I hope I'm wrong but I wouldn't be surprised if the 1.5 TSI were kept solely for FWD duty.

If I was looking for a 4x4 petrol then I'd prefer the 2.0 TSI to offset the extra weight.

 

I've been looking at the Tiguan, and as it's a bigger vehicle, I'd want the 2.0 TSI over the 1.4 TSI (which will be replaced with the 1.5 at some point I guess) but it's only available with 4x4 and DSG which I don't want. It's all very frustrating!

[terrapin]

I agree that it's pretty frustrating, but it's nice to have a choice of imperfect options for cars 

 

I do sometimes wish I could order a RHD vehicle from a Czech Skoda dealer or a German VW dealer though. The range of options available are (unsurprisingly) much better compared with the UK vehicles in both cases.

[AllanDJ]

The Yeti 4x4 with the 1.4 engine runs very quietly indeed and is surprisingly powerful with it, it is a very comfortable car to drive too just slightly smaller sized seats than my previous car an Octavia 3. The car usually averages in the low 30's mpg although you sometimes see the average mpg on the display approaching 38mpg and this is with mixed town driving and some country roads maybe around 50mph or a wee bit faster. I think on longer runs if you weren't going too fast that you would get maybe up to 40mpg at times. It seems very sensitive to cold weather and the fuel economy dives every time the temperature gets down close to zero or under, then it can be reading mpg in the 20's at times. It's fuel economy is almost irrelevant given the PCH deal that I got it on last year, incredibly inexpensive for a car this well equipped really!