Has anyone driven both these cars.

would like your opinion between 1.9tdi elegance and 2.0tdi ambiente as i can not make up my mind. I like the kit and also the performance and have to choose between the two of them as i am using 30 day exchange.

Both cars are the same price, elegance 05 and ambiente 06.Have driven 1.9tdi over 800 miles and am quite pleased. I have only driven 2.0tdi on test drive which i enjoyed but would like someones opinion who has owned and driven both cars.

also would you know the differences in running costs.

thanks

I own an 05 1.9 TDI Elegance. I like the toys, but am kicking myself for not buying the 2.0 TDI. I had a 2.0 TDI as a courtesy car and it was awesome. That engine is a gem. If I could chooise again between a 1.9 elegance or a 2.0 ambience I might just go for the 2.0 ambience and get it remapped. I find the limited gains you can get from reampping the 1.9 105 annoying.

Depends on what you like.

The ambiente will swap climate for air con, but other than that it's not exactly earth shattering, you loose the jumbo box and cruise control and rear parking senesors.

Personally if you can live without the climate control, I'd get the 2.0TDi due to it being a better engine by a mile (IMHO), the 6 speed box and the car being a year newer. You can always have the cruise and parking sensors retrofitted.

I find the limited gains you can get from reampping the 1.9 105 annoying.

That's what I gathered too but check out This thread. Hellfire reckons the PD 105 can be remaped to 150-155bhp by Jabba!

Yeah, you need to weigh up whether you want the toys and less power or are happy to sacrifice the toys for a much better engine. Both can be rectified later on with retro-fitting of toys or remapping the engine, but will depend if you want to keep it stock or not.

As far as remapping goes, while you may be able to achieve higher peak figures than on the 2.0l engine, I'd be surprised if it can match the 2.0's smoother power delivery.

Chris

I have experienced driving both 1.9 TDI and 1.9 DTI with chipped engine. I owe Octavia with 2.0 TDI engine and I must say it runs much alike as 1.9 with chipped engine. The difference in horse power (140 vs 136) and momentum Nm (320 vs 280) you will not notice at all. The only problem is that chipped engines don

My mum owns the 1.9 with the Dsg and, I've got the 2.0. The 2.0 is by far the better engine, it is a lot more powerful over more of the rev range, especially in gear and is a lot smoother with it too.

I totally disagree that a 1.9 drives like a 2.0, chipped or otherwise.

The 2.0 is a far smoother engine to drive than the 130PD, and this PD is the 105 only not the 130. Definately agree that 6th is a boon though.

Why not get the 2.0 Elegance? I did

After testing the 2.0 earlier this week, I can confirm the engine is far superior even to the PD130 1.9. I'd go for that if it was my money.

Agreed, the 2.0 is superior to the 1.9 PD130, its very smooth and there is more power around the rev range (IMO).

Regardless of that, the PD130 is still a great engine in its own right.

I vote for the 2.0

1.9 seem's slow and rough, as for elegance v ambiente, some of the extra kit can, as other's have said be retrofitted.

I had the same decsion to make when I bought my car and opted for the1.9 and all the elegange kit.

While I acknowledge that the 2.0 is a quicker and smoother engine the 1.9 is prefectly quick enough for every my every day need and there is rarely an oppertunity or real reason to regret the extra power on todays congested roads.

1.9 is more economical = mine shows 54.5 on the computer but this is probably a bit optemistic

While I acknowledge 2.0 is smoother the 1.9 is still a pretty refined car and is certainly a nicer drive than my previous Mk1 - oh and I'm pretty sure this 105 is quicker that the 110bhp mk1!

So it's all down to hat you value most - the extra kit or extra oomph

If you can afford it go for the 2.0 TDI coupled to the DSG box it is a very good combination and my sons also tell me they like it and try to take over the vehicle at every opportunity.

It has a good power delivery even if you just let the engine management just do its own thing, but if you want to play the heavy foot then it will push you well back into your seat.

With our congested roads I suppose it does not actually mean a lot between the 1.9 and 2.0, but the two will get round things very rapidly, which can be useful when required. Where the two comes into its own is on those long, uncluttered continental roads, where it will cruise effortlessly for hours at the permitted speeds. The 1.9 would be more frugal, if that is important to you.

oh and I'm pretty sure this 105 is quicker that the 110bhp mk1!

It would be. The 105 is a totally different engine to the 110 in the mk1, The PD engine you now have burns more efficiently at a much higher pressure and gives out a lot more torque for the same power.

I have the 1.9 and can tell you it's not as fast as a Fabia vRS or a Mini Cooper (not even an S, and it was a girl!) but is slightly faster than a Citroen Berlingo. At least that's what I found out today.

But for everyday ownership I think you would miss climate, rear sensors, arm rest and cruise more than you would miss 35bhp.

I have the 1.9 and can tell you it's not as fast as a Fabia vRS or a Mini Cooper (not even an S' date=' and it was a girl!) but is slightly faster than a Citroen Berlingo. At least that's what I found out today.

But for everyday ownership I think you would miss climate, rear sensors, arm rest and cruise more than you would miss 35bhp.[/quote']

I agree.

I don't use the extra power all that often (though it is very nice to have) , but I would miss the climate and and cruise especially.

Fortunately I was lucky enough to be able to afford a 2.0tdi elegance

Has to be the 2.0TDi over the 1.9 whilst there is nothing wrong with the 1.9 the 2.0 is the newer engine lot more refined. I had a similar debate but opted for the 2.0 and glad I did.