Any thoughts on 2.0TSI?

[Si1978]

Just joined the forum having ordered my 2.0TSI DSG Edition last week. I was just wondering if anyone on here has the same model and what they think of the more powerful petrol version? I’ve read plenty of stuff on the 1.4 but the 2.0 doesn’t seem to get much coverage in the media or on other forums.

 

On another note my dealer has quoted me 18 weeks until delivery as, in his words, I’ve ordered a Christmas Tree. This still seems a hell of a long time to wait? Does anyone have any recent experience of wait times?

[silver1011]

Welcome to Briskoda 

 

I can't comment on the 2.0 TSI, its one of the rarer engines. I have noticed that it seems to get mixed results from the media though.

 

18 weeks is actually pretty good. A few of us who have ordered (February / March) recently were told 12-14 weeks, although they have been coming through quicker. You'll see a recent thread on a Kodiaq arriving in a total of 9 weeks a few threads down the page from this one.

 

I assume you've added lots of factory fitted options, although again the number of options hasn't seemed to have an adverse affect on lead-times.

[abaday789]

I'd be interested as to that as well. As that's the engine size I would be looking at getting as well. 

[Si1978]

Options I’ve gone for are ACC, LED light pack, children’s pack, Area View pack, space saver, heated washers and screen and traffic sign recognition. Not sure if these will delay things significantly?

I managed to get a test drive of the 2.0TSI but only for 30 mins. It seemed really smooth and quiet but with plenty of poke when I did put my foot down but obviously it’s a short test drive. Coming from an A6 Tdi I’m interested to see what the actual mpg is because I know it’ll be nowhere near the 38 it’s quoted as. But I suppose if you want fuel economy you shouldn’t buy a 2 litre Petrol SUV!!!!

Edited 9 April, 2018 by Si1978

[silver1011]

I did quite a bit of research before plumping for the 1.4 TSI, although I should make clear I wasn't able to test drive the 2.0 TSI so all I can is say that the 1.4 TSI (150PS) copes very well in a car as big and heavy as the Kodiaq.

 

Here was one of the articles I read...

 

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/skoda/kodiaq/first-drives/skoda-kodiaq-20-tsi-180-4x4-dsg-se-l-2017-review

 

They like the engine, but end up suggesting the 1.4 TSI is the better all-rounder...

 

Autocar...

 

"...but given this petrol's stats, it's likely to be rare sight on UK roads. Both its relatively high CO2 emissions and poor official fuel economy will keep the majority of buyers turning to the diesel while it remains a viable fuel - and it most certainly does here and now.

But those who brave said figures will be rewarded with a very well-rounded engine. Firstly, it's smooth at any revs and only starts to shout deep into its rev range, and then there's its stout low-down enthusiasm and decent turn of pace when provoked. Unfortunately, the DSG 'box doesn't show the same sort of urgency in its Normal driving mode, needing Sport selected before it starts to keep pace with proceedings.

 

I bet you've heard the one about the high-mileage driver going for a diesel and everyone else being better off with the petrol. Well, that remains the case, except that in the case of the Kodiaq, there's a cleaner, more frugal 1.4 TSI petrol unit with clever cylinder deactivation technology on offer for less money. That its 148bhp doesn't feel out of depth in this 1800kg car rather seals the 2.0 TSI's fate."

 

WhatCar...

 

"It’ll be a rare sight on UK roads due to high CO2 emissions and big thirst for fuel. Performance is suitably brisk, but we’d recommend the cheaper 1.4 TSI 150 if you’re looking for a petrol."

 

https://www.whatcar.com/skoda/kodiaq/estate/2-0-tsi-se-l-4x4-5dr-dsg/80333/

 

[Yogi-Bear]

I test-drove both the 1.4TSi and the 2.0TSi, both for about an hour. I really don't think the 2.0TSi is necessary, nor is it worth the extra money in terms of up-front cost and running costs (especially considering the 2.0TSi is only available as a 4x4, which kills the fuel efficiency even further).

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again - the Kodiaq is not a sports car. It is a large, practical 7-seat family car, and if you're buying one then you're almost certainly buying it because of that. The 1.4TSi can cope perfectly well with the demands placed upon it. If you want a fast, sporty car with a powerful engine, then the Kodiaq shouldn't really be on your list.

[Si1978]

I hear what you’re saying Wiggo. I get the practicality bit and yes that is he main reason for me purchasing the Kodiaq. With a young family and regular camping trips my current car just doesn’t do it space wise.

I’m not looking for a sports SUV but I do want the extra power the larger unit will provide. I have no doubt that the 1.4 copes well (it gets excellent reviews) and will obviously be a lot more frugal than the 2.0 but are there any owners out there who can share their longer term experiences with the 2.0TSI?

[raygun57]

4 minutes ago, Si1978 said:

I hear what you’re saying Wiggo. I get the practicality bit and yes that is he main reason for me purchasing the Kodiaq. With a young family and regular camping trips my current car just doesn’t do it space wise.

I’m not looking for a sports SUV but I do want the extra power the larger unit will provide. I have no doubt that the 1.4 copes well (it gets excellent reviews) and will obviously be a lot more frugal than the 2.0 but are there any owners out there who can share their longer term experiences with the 2.0TSI?

 

Hopefully pick up mine on Saturday.  Will let you know.

[Yogi-Bear]

9 hours ago, Si1978 said:

but I do want the extra power the larger unit will provide

 

Why?

[Si1978]

10 hours ago, raygun57 said:

 

Hopefully pick up mine on Saturday.  Will let you know.

Thanks Raygun. Looking forward to it.

[Si1978]

56 minutes ago, WiggosSideburns said:

 

Why?

For the fully laden camping trips, and travelling to sports matches with 4 other blokes and all their kit, and to have the confidence to put my foot down and overtake when I want to. I’m not always on motorways and getting stuck behind tractors on the roads I do drive on is pretty frustrating. The extra power is something I feel that I need.

[Yogi-Bear]

22 minutes ago, Si1978 said:

and to have the confidence to put my foot down and overtake when I want to

 

The 1.4TSi is perfectly capable of overtaking tractors and other vehicles when required, even with 7 people on board.

 

26 minutes ago, Si1978 said:

The extra power is something I feel that I need.

 

Nowt wrong with that... we're all different and want/need different things.

[Krooked]

Hi Si1978 - i am in exactly the same situation..ordered mine a couple of weeks ago and have a BW22 allocated. What colour did you go for?

 

I too have gone for  2.0 TSI  Edition model loaded with too many options to list! although i didn't go for ACC - as i don't trust computers driving the car for me.

 

I haven't even test drove one either! I went for the 2.0 TSI because most of our runs are short one's and we do around 6,000 miles PA. Also my brother is a petrol head and kept banging on that i should go for the well proven and regarded 2.0 TSI engine that is used on many cars in the VAG group ( 2.0 petrol engine is the Audi developed EA888 Gen3B which has made use of the valve timing to further improve fuel efficiency). I hear good things about the 1.4 TSI, but I did have doubts on a turbo charged small engine in such a big car. There is no "replacement for displacement' is a phrase by brother uses.

 

Now also with economy figures which is the real reason ppl go for the 1.4 TSI (plus of course the list price saving). There is always a huge difference between reported and the actual achievable figures in everyday driving.  So if not driving it with a heavy right foot, the actual difference between the 2.0 TSI and 1.4 TSI 4WDs i don't think would not be that great. Even between the non 4WD version is only 5 mpg more.. which is £ and pence is nothing really.

1.4 2WD DSG Co2 is 143 Combined consumption 44.8 mpg
2.0 4WS DSG Co2 is 170 Combined consumption 39.8 mpg

 

I also did ask the salesman, and while i do take it with a pinch of salt. He did comment that 2.0 TSI is the most refined engine in the range, but journo's are obessesed with diesels still. Hence why i read most of my reviews on this engine on the Australian reports. "These scores make the Kodiaq one of the more frugal cars in its class – the CX-9 officially drinks 8.8L/100km, and the Santa Fe 2.4-litre petrol, 9.4L.100km.

When it does arrive the diesel will likely cost a couple of thousand dollars more and will use about 20% less fuel – meaning it’ll pay for itself only if you do fairly substantial distances with the car."

 

http://chasingcars.com.au/review/2017-skoda-kodiaq-review-132tsi-petrol/

 

 

[Yogi-Bear]

27 minutes ago, Krooked said:

Now also with economy figures which is the real reason ppl go for the 1.4 TSI (plus of course the list price saving). There is always a huge difference between reported and the actual achievable figures in everyday driving.  So if not driving it with a heavy right foot, the actual difference between the 2.0 TSI and 1.4 TSI 4WDs i don't think would not be that great. Even between the non 4WD version is only 5 mpg more.. which is £ and pence is nothing really.

You seem to be trying to justify the 2.0TSi based on "because that's what my brother said I should get" and some skewed comparison based on driving styles. First of all, what's right for your bother isn't necessarily what's right for you. Second, doing only 6,000 miles per year would mean the difference in running costs is low because you won't use all that much fuel. But higher mileage users will see a vast difference.

 

I'm getting just under 40mpg from my 1.4TSi (2wd) on short, non-motorway hops, and approaching 50mpg on longer motorway journeys - and it's only just over 5 weeks (about 1,250 miles) old so I'm hoping it will get even better. I drive with a very light right foot (most of the time) and take my time. Rushing around is futile these days, there's just too much traffic and you just end up stressed out.

 

36 minutes ago, Krooked said:

i didn't go for ACC - as i don't trust computers driving the car for me

 

You're missing out - combined with traffic jam assist, it's the best thing since sliced bread when you do inevitably come across traffic jams.

 

I'm not saying nobody should get the 2.0TSi - I'm simply saying that I do not think it is needed. The 1.4TSi is perfectly able to cope with the size of the vehicle, and smaller turbo-charged engines are the way forward. If they weren't, why would everyone be using them now, even on performance cars like Audi RSs and BMW Ms?

[Krooked]

Maybe justifying it to myself - he's in the motor trade and i don't pretend to know anything about engines.

 

I might well look into adding ACC as from memory it wasn't that expensive!

 

I'm still wrangling with colour choice - i went for Quartz Grey with Beige leather.. But now thinking i should change it white with Black leather!!!

[Si1978]

15 minutes ago, Krooked said:

I'm still wrangling with colour choice - i went for Quartz Grey with Beige leather.. But now thinking i should change it white with Black leather!!!

Yeah I originally specced Quartz Grey with black leather but changed in the end to moon white with black leather. I just think the white ones I’ve seen stand out that bit more.

[Yogi-Bear]

2 hours ago, Krooked said:

I might well look into adding ACC as from memory it wasn't that expensive!

 

If you're getting an Edition, then don't just add ACC, spend the extra £45 and get the Assistance Pack - that's what adds TJA and it's worth every penny.

[silver1011]

Be sure you ask which 2.0 TSI engine you'll get.

 

As with the 1.4 TSI being replaced with the 1.5 TSI, the 2.0 TSI engine is also due to be replaced too...

 

 

[MikeHig]

This is an interesting debate as I will be probably looking at one of these for my next car.

Personally I would go for the bigger engine every time. It has about 30% more torque across a slightly wider rev range. That will have obvious advantages for overtaking, lugging heavy loads, etc..

Also, the big engine may well have longer ratios which will give more relaxed cruising ( I haven't seen the respective mph/1000 rpm figures). Similarly the brakes may well be uprated over the smaller engine. These are points I will be checking when I get closer to a purchase.

For relatively low mileages, like the earlier post, the difference in fuel economy will not cost much and, in my view, would be worth paying. As more people buy these and get some mileage on them it will be interesting to see how the real-world figures compare.

[Yogi-Bear]

49 minutes ago, MikeHig said:

That will have obvious advantages for overtaking

 

What is everyone's obsession with overtaking? There is too much traffic on the roads to get anywhere quickly these days anyway. And you can overtake the stuff you really need to (tractors etc) in just about anything. Be patient, people, relax and enjoy the time in your car... don't be in such a hurry to get where you're going and get out of it!

 

50 minutes ago, MikeHig said:

the big engine may well have longer ratios

 

It has a 7 speed DSG 'box, compared to 6 speed DSG or manual on the 1.4TSi.

 

51 minutes ago, MikeHig said:

Similarly the brakes may well be uprated over the smaller engine

 

Pretty sure the brakes are all the same. The certainly work well enough, I can vouch for that...

[Ootohere]

^^^ You need to maybe get away in your car more often, maybe some wonderful driving routes in Scotland with those towing their holiday home, HGV's adhering to the NSL's for them, and doing Elephant racing on Crawler Lanes.

 

Getting passed those VW group SUV's loaded and under powered is often part of getting someplace at a decent pace.

Then a but of oomph is good when somehow they think sitting on your jacksy is a good idea.

Then when you let them go they become a road captain.

Edited 10 April, 2018 by AwaoffSki

[Falkster]

16 minutes ago, WiggosSideburns said:

What is everyone's obsession with overtaking? There is too much traffic on the roads to get anywhere quickly these days anyway. 

 

Ah Wiggo! Is it you who arranged all those overhead smart motorway gantry's?

[Yogi-Bear]

7 minutes ago, AwaoffSki said:

You need to maybe get away in your car more often

 

I'd love to spend more time in my shiny new toy, driving it around. But unfortunately, life and work and kids and all that other rubbish seem to get in the way.

 

But that's why I always make sure I have plenty of time to get where I'm going, take my time, and enjoy being in my car. If I end up going slightly slower than than the speed limit (it's a maximum limit, not a minimum limit), then so what. A few more minutes spent enjoying the drive.

 

9 minutes ago, AwaoffSki said:

Getting passed those VW group SUV's loaded and under powered is often part of getting someplace at a decent pace.

 

You really do seem to have a problem with VAG. I'd ask why, only I really don't care... but constant bashing on a forum that is for one of their marques just strikes me as a little, well, childish and pointless.

 

And a decent pace is one where you get there in plenty of time, without putting yourself or anyone else in jeopardy.

[Ootohere]

Chill man. You are very serious.

Some people drive for hours.  I have driven over 1,100 ,miles in the last 3 days and drive VW group motors.

[MrTrilby]

46 minutes ago, WiggosSideburns said:

 

What is everyone's obsession with overtaking? There is too much traffic on the roads to get anywhere quickly these days anyway. And you can overtake the stuff you really need to (tractors etc) in just about anything. 

 

You seem to assume everyone experiences the same conditions as you, and has the same expectations. Where we live, it’s an hour drive to the nearest dual carriageway. There’s not a huge amount of traffic, especially early in the morning when most of my journeys are, but if you do get stuck behind something and don’t overtake, that’s up to an hour sat behind a lorry or caravan doing 45...

 

My current 140bhp car can overtake things ok, but 190bhp makes overtaking much more pleasant and straightforward.