New Passat 1.4Tsi, opinions?

L-M

Volkswagen has launched, to hit Irish forecourts in early '08, a 1.4Tsi engine for the Passat... Lower tax, lower fuel enconomy, higher bhp than the 1.6fsi (+7)... Will it sell???

Volvoboy

Jaysus, never thought they'd put a 1.4 in midsize! I'd say it will sell for the company cars.



-VB-

Zonda999

I think that was a good move by volkswagen.less tax, less insurance and probably light on petrol. Is it a 6 speed or 5??

L-M

That was the only question i have the ask... The father was comtemplating trading in his passat, and as this would work out cheaper, for obvious reasons, he said he'd have a look at this... Won't be here till Jan though... But he hates the current six speed in the Passat, very close together gears... If it is five speed, i say bring it on...

CrowdedHouse

It will still be an ugly,boring style-free car.

Owen

I know on paper, the engine is supposed to be powerful, but I had this engine on track in a Golf on Ablington RAF Airfield last month, and it just didn't feel quick at all at low revs. Combine that with the bulk of the pa-sat, and maybe it's not such a good idea?

colm_mcm

I'd have it over the 1.6 FSI though. it's not meant to be a performance car as such. for VW drivers used to 1.4 Golfs and 1.6 Passats, this will be more than enough.

L-M

I'm sure for the market it;s aimed for, except for the one part(the red highline, with monte carlo's and tint from the b post back and 4 motion badges all over them {any1 from limerick will know}), i don't think speed will be big concern. I tried checkin the Golf Gt sport to see what speed but no spec's as of yet. What speed was the one u drove Ned78

Mailman

In the UK BIK will be charged at 5% less for the 1.4 litre version than the 1.6 litre version if I have read the tables right.

L-M

Some1 tell me what BIK is please:o

CrowdedHouse

BIK - Benefit in kind:Income tax on a company car

L-M

Thanks, CrowdedHouse... All in all i think it will take off, and incomparsion to some other saloons of the same size which are limited to 1.8 petrol, it'll be a real decision maker to have a 1.4...

colm_mcm

I think they've been offering this engine on the Touran in Ireland for about a year now

L-M

They have, i believe, apparently on the jetta aswell...

E92

We discussed the merits of the 1.4 TSI Passat over the 1.6 FSI in this thread about a month ago.

And the TSI people are talking about thats been in the Jetta, Touran and Golf is not the TSI engine in the Passat.(the new TSI engine in the Passat is being launched in the rest of the VAG range progressively, the VW cars being first, and VW's sister company Audi calls this engine a TFSI)

Moanin

I think it is 120bhp also?

Zonda999

vw are also replacing the 2.0fsi inthe passat with an all new 1.8tsi with 160bhp.I d say that would be a better bet for not a lot more.

bbability

They need to do something with the 1.9tdi next. Its way underpowered compared to the 2.0tdi. If they had the 1.9tdi set at around 130bhp and the 2.0tdi at 170bhp they'd probably shift alot more.

E92

bbability wrote: »

They need to do something with the 1.9tdi next. Its way underpowered compared to the 2.0tdi. If they had the 1.9tdi set at around 130bhp and the 2.0tdi at 170bhp they'd probably shift alot more.

The 1.9 is a stong age design. Based on the engine that came out back in the Audi 80 1.9 TDI. It is being replaced by a 2.0 TDI with common rail technology(and is said to be a massive improvement in terms of how much less noise compared to the current PD engines).

The 2.0 TDI is available in 140 and 170 bhp guises. This too is being replaced by the new common rail diesels(which have juist made their debut in the all new Audi A4).

So the Passat should have a whole new range of diesel options in the not too distant future. Though the first VW to benefit from the new Euro 5 common rails will be the Tiguan.

And the 1.8 TSI(which is really a TFSI by the way as it too like the 1.4 TSI in the Passat has no supercharger) is coming at the same time as the 1.4 TSI. Currently found in the just launched Audi A4 too(and in German market Passat's).

unkel

E92 wrote: »

the new common rail diesels(which have juist made their debut in the all new Audi A4)

Indeed they have! VAG had been talking about it for ages but I never knew the changeover had already happened

Thanks for bringing me up to date on that one, E92

JHMEG

Haven't any 1st hand experience of the 2.0, but the 1.9 is rough. I actually thought (wrongly) that they had started to kill it off in 2003..

R.O.R

I already have 3 orders for the Passat 1.4Tsi for next year so it's already taking off for the fleet market.

The new A4 is being launched with a 2.0Tdi engine with 140ps (along with the 1.8Tsi) but will come out later in the year with a 2.0Tdi engine with 120ps to replace the 1.9Tdi. I would expect to see this engine line up in the Passat mid to end of next year.

Dermo123

The Passat 1.4TSI is already in Tunners Cross Cork since last weekend. Took it for a quick spin and it seemed more than adequte power wise. It is no sports car and I would say it was a better bet than the 1.6FSI.

Ice_Box

The 1.4 in the Tiguan gets 33mpg
the 1.8 in the new A4 does 40mpg

Mailman

it's more fuel efficient than the old 1.6 anyhow.
http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/GREENNEWS/volkswagen-new-tsi-engine.htm

unkel

colm_mcm wrote: »

for VW drivers used to 1.4 Golfs and 1.6 Passats, this will be more than enough.

Indeed! Should be a big seller in the private market. Might even eat some market share back from the diesels in the lease market

Compared to the sligthly more expensive 1.6FSI, it uses 6.6l combined (7.6l) and it coughs up 157g of CO2 (179g). It is slightly more powerful with a lot more torque. Should be a winner!

Golferx

The only reason we still have that tractor engine, the 1.9 litre VAG unit, is because of our idiotic cc based taxation system.

As for the 1.4 litre? I dread to think of how long it will take to overtake someone in a Passat with five people on board. It has to be very limited in terms of torque. (Forget about bhp, that's only for glanza-boys)

Mailman

Golferx wrote: »

T
As for the 1.4 litre? I dread to think of how long it will take to overtake someone in a Passat with five people on board. It has to be very limited in terms of torque.

http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/GREENN...tsi-engine.htm
200nM seems fine to me.

Golferx

unkel wrote: »

Indeed! Should be a big seller in the private market. Might even eat some market share back from the diesels in the lease market

Compared to the sligthly more expensive 1.6FSI, it uses 6.6l combined (7.6l) and it coughs up 157g of CO2 (179g). It is slightly more powerful with a lot more torque. Should be a winner!

It is a clever move, and will be a big sales success.

6.6l corresponds to 42.7 mpg, so it's a decent figure. (Though only similar to Toyota Avensis 1.6l figures)

Golferx

Mailman wrote: »

http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/GREENN...tsi-engine.htm
200nM seems fine to me.

The proof will be in the pudding, as the saying goes. Time will tell.

History, though, will show that extraction of high amounts of BHP or Torque, from small engines seriously reduces the longevity of such motors. Again, time will tell on how durable they will be.

E92

Golferx wrote: »

(Though only similar to Toyota Avensis 1.6l figures)

It is not. 1.6 Avensis averages 39.1 mpg.

The 1.4 TSI has 122 bhp(more than a Mazda 6 1.8) 153 lb ft of torquefrom only 1500 rpm all the way up to 3500 rpm(more than the non turbo 2.0 FSI Passat) and has the VRT, running costs and tax of a 1.4. It will be the best selling Passat by a mile when it arrives and easily will replace the 1.6 as the nation's favoured variant of Passat.

As for whether it will be reliable, it just any old 1.4 with direct injection, only VW stuck a turbo on it. The turbo is providing the power and torque increases, not the engine itself. It should be no more nor no less reliable than the standard VAG 1.4. If what you were saying about turbo engines were true, how come diesels with a turbo are infinately more powerful than non turbo diesels, yet reliability so far as I can tell hasn't suffered one little bit?

See below as to why the 'tractor engine' was kept.

JHMEG wrote:

Haven't any 1st hand experience of the 2.0, but the 1.9 is rough. I actually thought (wrongly) that they had started to kill it off in 2003..

You weren't wrong at all. The existing 2.0 TDI replaced the higher output 1.9 versions(the 130 and 150 bhp versions). It was only the 100 bhp version that stuck with the 1.9(and got a 5 bhp boost while it was at it).

Golferx

E92 wrote: »

It is not. 1.6 Avensis averages 39.1 mpg.

.....................

One of my cars is an Avensis 1.6. It averages closer to 45mpg. Either way, the figure quoted for the Passat is still very close to that of the Avensis.

E92 wrote: »

...........................

As for whether it will be reliable, it just any old 1.4 with direct injection, only VW stuck a turbo on it. The turbo is providing the power and torque increases, not the engine itself. It should be no more nor no less reliable than the standard VAG 1.4. If what you were saying about turbo engines were true, how come diesels with a turbo are infinately more powerful than non turbo diesels, yet reliability so far as I can tell hasn't suffered one little bit?
....................................

You seem lacking in awareness of how engines work. Turbos add boost by allowing more air and fuel to be injected/burned at any time. This places higher stresses on the engine components. Of course it will reduce the reliability of the engine, if it is just the same as a normally aspirated engine with a turbo bolted on.
As for the reliability of turbo versus non-turbo engines? I haven''t conducted a survey, have you? Sheer physics will tell you that more mechanical stress = shortened lifetime, and VAG turbo engines, especially, are far from a virtue of reliability. I hope (I haven't looked) the engine is far removed from the 1.4 as fitted to the Mk4 Golf and Bora. It was a disaster and a very poor, unreliable, design.

E92 wrote: »

.......................
See below as to why the 'tractor engine' was kept.



You weren't wrong at all. The existing 2.0 TDI replaced the higher output 1.9 versions(the 130 and 150 bhp versions). It was only the 100 bhp version that stuck with the 1.9(and got a 5 bhp boost while it was at it).

And one only has to look at the differences in price betwen the 1.9l and 2.0l versions to see how ridiculous the taxation is. The 1.9l engine should have been scrapped years ago, it's far too rough an unrefined for today's market.


As I said previously, time will tell how good these engines are and how suited to Passat they are. VAG reliability is as poor as any (with the possible exception of the Fiat group) these days and they need something good to get back up where they once thought they were, alongside Toyota.

Mailman

Golferx wrote: »

You seem lacking in awareness of how engines work. Turbos add boost by allowing more air and fuel to be injected/burned at any time. This places higher stresses on the engine components. Of course it will reduce the reliability of the engine, if it is just the same as a normally aspirated engine with a turbo bolted on.

This is a relatively low pressure turbo designed to provide power at low RPM not a high pressure turbo for high rpm.
they also probably messed around with the compression ratio to reduce stresses on the engine.

As long as the oil is topped up/changed regularly with good quality oil it should last a long time. The people who drive family cars don't red line them often.

Boggins127

Mailman wrote: »

http://www.greencarsite.co.uk/GREENN...tsi-engine.htm
200nM seems fine to me.

EMm well as a driver of a 1.6 passat i don't think so as the 1.6 is very sluggish and don't say the 1.4 will have more power...It won't make a difference!!! the models under 1.8 are really too sluggish...Lovely car though i think very imposing..Looking forward to my new 08 1.9 tdi More power..WHIPPY!!! 1 more thing good fuel economy fair enough But is it worth it cars these days will get too boring without power....We need POWER!!
Regards
Dave:cool:

cyborg

Boggins127 wrote: »

EMm well as a driver of a 1.6 passat i don't think so as the 1.6 is very sluggish and don't say the 1.4 will have more power...It won't make a difference!!! the models under 1.8 are really too sluggish...Lovely car though i think very imposing..Looking forward to my new 08 1.9 tdi More power..WHIPPY!!! 1 more thing good fuel economy fair enough But is it worth it cars these days will get too boring without power....We need POWER!!
Regards
Dave:cool:

I have driven this 1.4 and it does have lots of low down torque and is a very relaxing drive, very quiet too. It does not need high revs live the 1.6,it drives just like a 2.0 petrol.
Judging by your post many people will be of the prejudiced mindset that it's only a 1.4 so it will be slow.
Unfortunately for VW this car is being introduced at a time when engine cc no longer matters for vrt and tax. This car emits 157g co2 and therefore will be in the 25% vrt and tax brackets so effectively will have its VRT increased +2.5% and its tax increased form 320 to 430.
So if you want 1 buy now!

_Kaiser_

For comparison... What would be the new "modern" equivalent (from a power/torque/performance standpoint) then of my 2002 1.9 TDI (130) Passat?

In other words, if I was changing it in the morning, what should I be looking for?

Semi-related: I'm half thinking of a current shape A6 (05-present) in the spring/summer anyway (probably a UK import) - something like the 2006 2.0 TDI (140) version.

Given the new VRT/Tax implications is this a good move (I searched for the CO2 rating on some of the links posted in the other thread but just got "no information available"). Is 2.0L/140 Bhp enough for a car of that size?

Boggins127

Ok fair enough i'd say it is a good car and i have to admit i am going to test drive one...But i don't think she'l be any use as 1.4 seems a little small for such a heavy car..And the 1.6 fsi was vw's worst creation when i get into 6th and go about 110-120km/h she rev's too loud..Still im inclinde to go for a diesel next year but have heard the 1.9tdi is not a good car?????i thought it was ok once u stick with the 5 speed box
Thanks,
Dave :cool:

bazz26

Boggins127 wrote: »

Still im inclinde to go for a diesel next year but have heard the 1.9tdi is not a good car?????i thought it was ok once u stick with the 5 speed box
Thanks,
Dave :cool:

The VAG 1.9 TDi is an old unit and was good in it's day but it is outclassed these days. It is unrefined, noisy, course and not very powerful compared to the vast majority of other diesel engines being made today. VW should drop it from their range imo. The 2.0 TDi is light years ahead of it but costs more. Also VAG have just launched the new common rail 2.0 TDi and this will be available in the Passat soon too but expect it to cost a small fortune.

cyborg

Boggins127 wrote: »

Ok fair enough i'd say it is a good car and i have to admit i am going to test drive one...But i don't think she'l be any use as 1.4 seems a little small for such a heavy car..And the 1.6 fsi was vw's worst creation when i get into 6th and go about 110-120km/h she rev's too loud..Still im inclinde to go for a diesel next year but have heard the 1.9tdi is not a good car?????i thought it was ok once u stick with the 5 speed box
Thanks,
Dave :cool:

Again with the 'its only a 1.4' ......200nm is 200nm. Let us know how u think it compares after the testdrive.
The gearing is quite high in 6th as the low down torque can cope so @ 110kmph the engine is only turning @2500rpm and is very quiet.

E92

Boggins127 wrote: »

Ok fair enough i'd say it is a good car and i have to admit i am going to test drive one...But i don't think she'l be any use as 1.4 seems a little small for such a heavy car..And the 1.6 fsi was vw's worst creation when i get into 6th and go about 110-120km/h she rev's too loud..Still im inclinde to go for a diesel next year but have heard the 1.9tdi is not a good car?????i thought it was ok once u stick with the 5 speed box
Thanks,
Dave :cool:

The 1.4 TSI has 122 bhp(7 bhp more) and 153 lb ft(which is 39 more than the 1.6 FSI) at only 1500 rpm(compared to the 1.6's 114 at 4,000 rpm) and that is even more torque than the 2.0 FSI! So it should be a big improvement over the 1.6.

Boggins127

E92 wrote: »

The 1.4 TSI has 122 bhp(7 bhp more) and 153 lb ft(which is 39 more than the 1.6 FSI) at only 1500 rpm(compared to the 1.6's 114 at 4,000 rpm) and that is even more torque than the 2.0 FSI! So it should be a big improvement over the 1.6.

Yep u have all prsuaded me im going to really consider buying this car if its as good as a 2.0fsi then y not...ill test drive her in da new year.
thanks,
Dave :cool:

E92

Boggins127 wrote: »

Yep u have all prsuaded me im going to really consider buying this car if its as good as a 2.0fsi then y not...ill test drive her in da new year.
thanks,
Dave :cool:

Well the 2.0 FSI has 150 bhp and 147 lb ft, so it would still be faster, however it should be discontinued soon as under the new VRT scheme, the 1.8 TSI is meant to be in the 24% category and the 2.0 is supposed to be in the 28% category(though its in the 30% one now).Perhaps someone could confirm this, its hard to remeber every last change! The 2.0 TDI will be in the 20% category, down from the 30% category, and is meant to be a much nicer engine than the 1.9 TDI, so if you're interested in an oil burner, that would be worth a look as the price differential between it and the 1.9 should be much smaller after July 08.

cyborg

E92 wrote: »

Well the 2.0 FSI has 150 bhp and 147 lb ft, so it would still be faster, however it should be discontinued soon as under the new VRT scheme, the 1.8 TSI is meant to be in the 24% category and the 2.0 is supposed to be in the 28% category(though its in the 30% one now).Perhaps someone could confirm this, its hard to remeber every last change! The 2.0 TDI will be in the 20% category, down from the 30% category, and is meant to be a much nicer engine than the 1.9 TDI, so if you're interested in an oil burner, that would be worth a look as the price differential between it and the 1.9 should be much smaller after July 08.

The 1.8 TSI will unfortunately be in the 28% cat so diesel wins out again!

E92

cyborg wrote: »

The 1.8 TSI will unfortunately be in the 28% cat so diesel wins out again!

Thats strange, the Audi A4 with the same engine is in the 24% band(but I haven't checked the Passat so I'm asduming you're right).

il gatto

High torque at high revs is all but useless. You need it lower down. Much lower down, as in tickover to 3,000 revs. It would defy physics for such a small engine to produce enough. Big bangs make big torque.

craichoe

I just saw 1.4 and Passat in the title and thought "Wanderly Wagon"

cyborg

il gatto wrote: »

High torque at high revs is all but useless. You need it lower down. Much lower down, as in tickover to 3,000 revs. It would defy physics for such a small engine to produce enough. Big bangs make big torque.

Well defy physics it does!
This little 1.4 engine produces 200nm of torque form 1500 rpm to 3500rpm,
80% of max torque (160nm) is available from only 1250 rpm.
Thats the beauty of a well engineered turbo engine ,no need for high revs.

E92

cyborg wrote: »

This little 1.4 engine produces 200nm of torque form 1500 rpm to 3500rpm

Could we stick to lb ft please:D! But if you insist on using Newton metres then I shall be pedantic and insist that we do Issac Newton some service and capitalise the 'n' in 'Nm' and leave a space between the figure and the SI unit!

il gatto

cyborg wrote: »

Well defy physics it does!
This little 1.4 engine produces 200nm of torque form 1500 rpm to 3500rpm,
80% of max torque (160nm) is available from only 1250 rpm.
Thats the beauty of a well engineered turbo engine ,no need for high revs.

That's amazing. If it's as good as it sounds, respect to VW. I wonder how reliable it will be. The tolerances must be tight.

Boggins127

il gatto wrote: »

That's amazing. If it's as good as it sounds, respect to VW. I wonder how reliable it will be. The tolerances must be tight.

Yeah i reckon she'l b a bitch on the services n all dat????
Thanks,
Dave
:cool:

E92

Well BMW's 335i manages 295 lb ft from only 1,300 rpm all the way up to 4,900 rpm and I haven't heard people questioning that or how reliable it will be.