| Motoring Discussion > VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? | Buying / Selling |
| Thread Author: legacylad | Replies: 19 |
|
New Wed 16 Jul 14 16:42
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - legacylad
|
|
Pal of mine is changing his '04 307 which has become a money pit. His daughter has a 2.0 Tdi (140) Golf which will shortly be three yo and he is thinking of buying it from her. He tells me that a local indie, who service his 307, have warned him off that particular engine as it is prone to problems! My take on it is that there are so many of them there are bound to be a few with problems, although my gf was left stranded twice when her Passat Tdi suffered injector failures at less than 3yo. He is not bothered about 2.0 power just long term reliability, so would he be better with the 1.6 Tdi as fitted in a newish A3? I might have a vested interest because I bought a 59 plate A3 1.6 Tdi SE for my gf's daughter to use as a runaround for a few months whilst she was in the UK to give birth and she returns overseas next month. It will probably be sent to the auctions unless my pal wants it. |
|
New Wed 16 Jul 14 16:54
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - DP
|
|
I thought the VW 2.0 CR TDI was a good-un, unlike the 2.0 PD TDI, which was a dog of an engine. Loads of the guys at work run VWs and Audis with the CR engine, and they all rave about it. Biggest gripe I've heard with the 1.6 is that, like most small capacity diesels, it doesn't get near the claimed MPG figure. |
|
New Wed 16 Jul 14 17:11
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - legacylad
|
|
I thought the opposite. A few friends with the old 1.9 PD Tdi , as fitted in their A3 & A4 ran faultlessly for many years and many miles. Agricultural to say the least, although I was not aware there was a 2.0 PD engine. Shows how little I know. Think you are correct about the 1.6 not achieving it's claimed mpg figures. Doubtless I shall find out when I get it back next month, although the lassie is impressed with it....she likes the heated seats in this cold climate and the Parrot hands free kit, the low tax & insurance , build quality and stop/start! Her normal wheels are an i10 in her Indian Ocean island home. Last edited by: legacylad on Wed 16 Jul 14 at 17:12
|
|
New Wed 16 Jul 14 17:22
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Manatee
|
|
I've no hard facts or experience of them but the received wisdom seems to be 1.9 PD - OK 2.0 PD - bad 2.0 CR - OK A bit of googling should give you some anecdotal info. |
|
New Wed 16 Jul 14 17:55
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - mikeyb
|
|
Weve got the 1.9 PD 130 in the Sharan. Just passed the 100K mark in it last week (ours from new). Although a bit rough it does the job well, and the only thing done to the engine in the time we've had it was new cam belt / tensioners. Was on long life servicing, but switched to 10K when our annual mileage dropped. Averaging around 47mpg at the moment - not bad for 7 seats and the aerodynamics of a wardrobe. Driven a few golfs with the 1.6 tdi and quite liked it, although don't recall getting much over low 50's from them. Colleague at work today requested a 7 seater from Europcar - expecting a Sharan / Galaxy was surprised to be issued with a VW transporter Shuttle.......I guess it has the 2.0 CR engine as I was surprised at how refined it was, although I'm comparing it to my 1.9 PD |
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 12:18
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - RichardW
|
|
The 2.0 CR engines have (or had at the start at least) a problem with the oil pump dive fretting on the crank and wearing. Not heard much about it recently, suggsting it might have been fixed in later engines? eg www.ring-engineering.co.uk/vag-vw-audi-20-tdi-oil-pump-repair.html |
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 15:33
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Mark
|
|
OK, OK! I know this is from the "other place" but old 659 did know his stuff on VW engines See here: www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=93946 As always Mark Last edited by: Mark on Thu 17 Jul 14 at 15:38
|
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 16:39
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - DP
|
|
>> The 2.0 CR engines have (or had at the start at least) a problem with >> the oil pump dive fretting on the crank and wearing. Not heard much about it >> recently, suggsting it might have been fixed in later engines? >> >> eg www.ring-engineering.co.uk/vag-vw-audi-20-tdi-oil-pump-repair.html >> This is the 2.0 PD. A total dog of an engine. |
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 19:31
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - mikeyb
|
|
Mmmm - 659's comments cause me a dilemma. I would happily part with the sharan. We've had it approaching 9 years, and its always been very competent, but it has the 1.9 PD 130 unit which appears to be the best of the bunch. I guess given its faultless record, decent MPG (for a proper 7 seater), usefulness and lack of remaining value (2.5 - 3K) then its looking like I should stick with it. Cambelt is due on age (4 yrs) but not mileage - 42K since last change, so I'm thinking I should just bite the bullet and spend £500 on the belt + service then run it till it drops |
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 22:29
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Avant
|
|
Mikey - it does seem to make sense to keep the Sharan for now. But if the heart ever rules the head and you do look for something new or newer, go for a petrol engine, a it doesn't look as if your mileage is high enough to justify the extra cost of a diesel. If anyone is choosing between the VAG 1.6 and 2.0 TDI engines, I'd go for the 2.0 every time, provided it's the common-rail post-2008 engine. The 2.0 has more power of course, and is very little less economical, as you don't need such a heavy right foot to make reasonable progress. |
|
New Thu 17 Jul 14 22:41
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Woodster
|
| I'm struggling to understand why the 2.0 PD is considered to be a dog of an engine. I've been running it for 4 years in an Octavia, now at 90k miles and faultless. It'll cruise all day at 90, fully loaded with passengers and kit, aircon on and still return 45mpg. I certainly don't mollycoddle it, just drive the damn thing as I please and service it every year ish.. I haven't driven the CR version so perhaps I speak from a position of ignorance. Still got an 03 Golf with a 130 1.9. Still a nice drive, pulls beautifully and regularly cruised at 85 very happily. I dunno why I'm typing really. They're just cars! |
|
New Tue 22 Jul 14 11:41
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - DP
|
|
>> I'm struggling to understand why the 2.0 PD is considered to be a dog of >> an engine. I've been running it for 4 years in an Octavia, now at 90k >> miles and faultless. It'll cruise all day at 90, fully loaded with passengers and kit, >> aircon on and still return 45mpg. I certainly don't mollycoddle it, just drive the damn >> thing as I please and service it every year ish.. I haven't driven the CR >> version so perhaps I speak from a position of ignorance. Still got an 03 Golf >> with a 130 1.9. Still a nice drive, pulls beautifully and regularly cruised at 85 >> very happily. I dunno why I'm typing really. They're just cars! >> Sorry, perhaps my dog statement was a bit sweeping. I meant it purely from a design / reliability point of view. There were versions of the engine with and without twin Lanchester balance shafts. The versions without are apparently OK. The versions with are for the brave only. There are three fundamental issues with this engine, two of which (and the most serious) only affect the balance shaft versions. The first of these is the chain drive to the balance shafts on the early engines which tends to lunch its (plastic) tensioner and destroy itself. As the oil pump is driven off the balance shaft, this wrecks the engine. Later engines were modified with gear driven balance shafts, which fixes this issue. The second is to do with the aforementioned oil pump drive which is hexagonal shaft that links the balance shaft and the oil pump. The bar is too short and doesn't sit deep enough inside the hex drive. Combine this with the torsional vibration of the balancer shaft itself, and eventually the hex drive rounds off to the point where the hex shaft simply stops turning. Followed almost immediately by the oil pump. Later engines were modified with longer shafts which engage more fully with the drive, but another issue exists with some engines where the drive is off centre, exacerbating wear and stress on the hex. All the above was covered in some depth in Car Mechanics magazine a year or so ago, where they cited poor quality parts (the balance shaft drive chain sprocket looks no more substantial than something you'd find on a child's pushbike), poor tolerances (offset drives), and generally poor design. VAG, and independents have released various modified parts over the years, but VAG have stopped short of admitting any liability for this issue. The cost of the replacement parts, with fitting is also likely to exceed the value of the earlier cars fitted with this engine, meaning preventative measures are simply unrealistic. For example you can buy a balance shaft delete kit which converts the whole set up to be the same as the old 1.9, but it is four figures worth of parts alone. On a £2k car, you simply couldn't justify it. Not to mention markedly increased NVH levels afterwards due to the loss of the balance shafts. The bottom line is avoid balance shaft versions of this engine (most of them) as they are fundamentally flawed. The third issue my VW tech friend dislikes this engine for in all its guises is a propensity for blowing head gaskets. He tells me this engine is a modified 1.9PD with the extra capacity found by a 1.5mm bore increase. This reduces the gasket area between cylinders and waterways as well as adjacent cylinders. These engines are far more prone to head gasket failure than the older 1.9. And I think that's the point. All this needs to be taken in the context of the 1.9 PD engine which is widely regarded as one of the most reliable of the modern (ish) diesels. With the exception of the 150PS version, all the 1.9s are known for their reliability and longevity. The 2.0 was a very different kettle of fish. The version of the 2.0PD with no balance shafts is OK (head gasket aside), and these are apparently the ones to go for if you want a 2.0PD. The common rail 2.0 was an all-new design and doesn't suffer from these issues. Last edited by: DP on Tue 22 Jul 14 at 11:46
|
|
New Fri 18 Jul 14 02:26
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - idle_chatterer
|
|
I've driven the 1.9PD 130, 2.0PD 170 then 1.6CR and 2.0 CR 140 and 170. I concur that the 2.0 CR engines are a world apart for refinement and drivability from the PD engines and decently economical too. The 2.0PD 170 was horrible to drive, agricultural and very thirsty (as I've often commented). I found the 1.6CR in a Golf VI to be a reasonably good engine although a bit gutless low down, definitely very economical though. IMHO the 2.0CR in 140 (now 150) and 170 guise would be the pick although I have read that the detuned 110 version is reasonable too. The 1.9PD although much loved is a bit long in the tooth now perhaps ? |
|
New Fri 18 Jul 14 08:55
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - IJWS14
|
|
I had a 1.9pd in an Octavia, the 105. It was fine and covered a little over 100k in the four years I had it, economical. Have driven Passats with the 130 and it was a good engine. Have a Passat with the 2.0 (Common rail?) and it has done 50k in 2 years - faultless and economical last two fills have been at over 900 miles and it is currently telling me it will do 1000 on this tank. Its not about how fast you go but how gentle you are with the loud pedal and the brakes (a la Fangio). Drove a 1.6 diesel Passat and it struggled to make 50mpg. Sister has a Golf with that engine (and company pays for fuel) which is doing around 60 - about the same as my Passat with the 2.0. |
|
New Sat 19 Jul 14 10:50
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - mikeyb
|
|
>> Mikey - it does seem to make sense to keep the Sharan for now. But >> if the heart ever rules the head and you do look for something new or >> newer, go for a petrol engine, a it doesn't look as if your mileage is >> high enough to justify the extra cost of a diesel. Petrol would be a strong contender for any replacement, especially haven driven a few of the VAG TSi units and Fords Ecoboost's When we bought the Sharan we were doing about 18K a year in it, but a few changes in circumstances caused this to drop, however, as the Viano is a bit thirsty then the Sharan is now being used as the first choice car. Combined with Mrs B going back to work in September I could see its annual mileage creeping up past 15K |
|
New Sat 19 Jul 14 14:36
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Roger.
|
|
We had an Alhambra with the 1.9 pd lump and it was so nice to drive. I truly prefer the driving characteristics (manual gear change) of a diesel to a petrol, particularly in a biggish MPV and would not consider a Sharan, Alhambra, or Galaxy with a petrol engine. We also had, while in Spain ,a Skoda Fabia with the 1.9 pd tdi, 101 BHP engine and it was a super engine - economical and propelled the car quickly, too. |
|
New Sun 20 Jul 14 18:43
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - Rudedog
|
| The 2.0 PD (140) has had mixed reviews, mine has been strong since new (2006) with good power and MPG, on the VW forums the 140 seems to be a favourite with the tuners. |
|
New Sun 20 Jul 14 19:57
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - ....
|
|
What are Audi fitting their A6 these days? I followed one on a 14 plate onto the A1 today wearing TDi and Quattro badges but it was quite arthritic in acceleration. Certainly slower than my D3 when he eventually pulled over and wanted to see if I could out drag him. |
|
New Mon 21 Jul 14 10:03
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - rtj70
|
| The 2.0 diesel in the Audi A6 has 190PS these days. But you mention Quattro so that means it had to have the 3.0 diesel which comes with either 204PS, 245PS or 313PS. |
|
New Fri 25 Jul 14 08:10
VAG 1.6 or 2.0 Tdi? - IJWS14
|
|
Just because there is a badge doesn't mean it is a quattro - there is a parts dept at most dealers. Son's last A6 had about 170hp in FWD and was quick, might appear lethargic because the driver wasn't pushing the loud pedal very hard! |
Forum Version 3.0 - By Khoosys
Car4play Forum
