A shiny (almost) new SE with the 1.4 TSI engine. She has griped mildly about the lack of oomph from her Jazz for 5 years now so that should sort that!
I shan't get to play with it until the weekend so I can't give any practical report but two questions;
how do I change the second speed display from KPH to MPH? I've read the manual but where it says "the main menu will be displayed" - it isn't. Do I need to have the engine running maybe?
and...
what MP3 player - I'll open a new thread on that one.
Thanks,
John
|
>> how do I change the second speed display from KPH to MPH?
Ye cannae (ye can) it's an EU requirement or some thing, if the speedo's in MPH, the digital readout's in KPH and vice versa.
If you know someone with VCDS / VAGCOM (CAN interface lead for your car, NOT the £10 fleabay job unfortunately) you can change it. If you go on any of the numerous VAG message boards, most of them carry a list of their member's & locations -- normally beer stamps are preferred currency.
>> what MP3 player
Have you got the MDI unit fitted? If so your choices pretty much are --
USB HDD (or flash disk / USB mass storage)
Or iPod... it works best of all the options IMO, an old 5th gen 30Gig iPod in the glovebox == perfecto. 2 min job to plug it into the PC every week to transfer the latest podcasts over.
|
Handbook says you can choose...
Yes, it has the MDI unit. So one vote for iPod then.
thanks,
John
|
Well if its ipod compatible, then go for it.
Nicole has the new 6th generation ipod nano, the little square jobby. Gorgeous it is. Sounds good too.
Yes you will need Itunes, tho thats no bad thing.
|
>>A shiny (almost) new SE with the 1.4 TSI engine>>
Which TSi unit is it out of curiosity?
|
1.4, 122bhp, 200 Nm, 0-60 in 9.5 seconds, chain cam and sips fuel. Apparently. Probably the fastest car I've ever had, including XR3is :-)
John
|
|
A bit underpowered for such a heavy car IMO but a nice car. I will probably get a VW next year to replace the Mazda6.
|
The 122bhp version is only turbocharged.
A pal bought the Skoda Octavia with this engine about two months ago and is absolutely delighted with it - it certainly looks good in Apple Green and has all the toys included.
Price. Just £13,500...:-)
I have the 168bhp version of this engine (170PS) with 177lb ft of torque, but the more recent 160PS unit delivers exactly the same performance and torque figures.
>>A bit underpowered for such a heavy car IMO but a nice car>>
I wouldn't agree in the case of the TSi unit, but definitely with the earlier 1.4.
See:
www.volkswagen.co.uk/#/new/jetta/which-model/engines/acceleration
for performance figures (Jetta in this case, but very similar).
Last edited by: Stuartli on Wed 3 Nov 10 at 22:31
|
Well, I have had mine since July last year but have only covered 7,000 miles. It is economical but not as economical as I'd expected, averaging only 42.2mpg over that period using mainly 'super' fuels but now bog standard petrol. In this respect it is no more economical than the previous Golf MK5 with its 1.6 FSI engine, however the MK6 with its turbocharger has impressive ooomph and really shifts when required and is much quieter than its predecessor.
The small Kph readout does not worry me in the least and is required by the EU and I would not waste your money on an MP3 player unless you really want one. I did waste my money in a way and bought a Creative Zen 8GB player/Radio but ended up transferring all my 100+ Classical Cds to an 8GB USB flash drive which remains permanently plugged into the MDI connector under the central armrest, where it functions admirably, when required.
The car is good but is plagued by the odd rattles and squeaks a lot of which seem to emanage from the doors and fascia. The doors squeak or 'tick' between Spring and Autumn when the sun seems to cause expansion/contraction of those shiny plastic external, vertical door trims. There also seems to be a problem with some cars of door movement which may require door adjustment.
There are others but visit several of the VW forums where you'll hear all about these and many other issues of poor (ish) quality despite what VW claim about "All the car, you'll ever want/need" or whatever their claim is!!!
|
>>a lot of which seem to emanage from the doors and fascia. >>
Try checking the bolts on the extreme edges of the fascia - if you expose the fuses panel you will see one of them on the top section.
I know about this because my son (who has a Golf GTi) asked me if the Jetta suffered from any rattles; he'd been reading about the problem on one of the VW forums.
|
>> >>a lot of which seem to emanage from the doors and fascia. >>
>>
>> Try checking the bolts on the extreme edges of the fascia - if you expose
>> the fuses panel you will see one of them on the top section.
>>
Thanks but been there- done that. I have had Golfs since 2004 now and am very familiar with sources of their rattles but unlike my MK5 there were no loose nuts and bolts at the fascia ends under those covers - surprisingly!!
The most annoying one in my latest Golf had me flummuxed for some time until Idiscovered it was sourced in the driver's sun visor but I cured that.My VW dealer would not replace under warranty as they could not reproduce it on a run abround the block and I would have had to fork out £67 + labour to have a new one fitted. Nice one VW!
|
Underpowered? Well it's subjective, its down to what you are used to. Compared to her Jazz it's a rocket ship and it feels (from the passenger seat so far) comparable to my PD130 Passat.
The USB stick, pulled out of a drawer, is doing admirably plugged into the MDI USB socket.
John
|
I'm sure you and your wife will also appreciate the fact that the smaller engine provides a much less nose heavy and sharper steering feel compared to being behind a diesel engine...:-)
Incidentally VW twice won the European Engine of the Year award for the TSi in the mid-2000s.
|
>> Incidentally VW twice won the European Engine of the Year award for the TSi in the mid-2000s.
Rightly so! They're not BMW inline-6 smooth but they're very fiery whilst unexpectedly economical.
So far, they seem pretty reliable... which is kind of surprising, because at the heart of them is all the technology (except DPF) that makes diesels a minefield.
I'd be surprised if the 200nm/122bhp 1.4 lump in a golf mk6 feels anything other than rapid. Not adequate, rapid.
|
SWMBO had exactly this car, it never (ever) felt underpowered, in fact they drive like a reasonably torquey 2.0L petrol from a few years back (if you look at the output figures you'll see why) - but the fuel economy is much better. We got low 40s mpg from ours but it rarely did more than 3 or 4 miles in a journey and this was mostly urban use. In fact we decided against the 2.0L 140 CR for this very reason - we didn't want a DPF.
And before someone comments that my perception of the power was relative, I was driving a 330d with 245PS and 289lbft of torque at the time, the 1.4TSi 122PS Golf was clearly nowhere near as fast but it never felt sluggish. The TSi engine is also very refined / quiet but with a nice exhaust rasp when revved.
The rest of the car was excellent too, very refined and well put together with a high quality interior and good standard spec (better still on the Match). I often commented that it's all the car you really need, might even get one myself when we return to Blighty if I'm truly cured of my liking of powerful cars.
I understand the non-turbo 1.4 base model to be woefully underpowered, what I've read of the 1.2 TSi 105PS (which replaced the previous 1.6FSi really) is that this drives well to, haven't tried one (yet) though, maybe a hire car sometime....
Pity they don't offer the 1.8TSi in the Golf in the UK like they do in other markets and they do in the Skoda Octavia.
|
>>I'd be surprised if the 200nm/122bhp 1.4 lump in a golf mk6 feels anything other than rapid. Not adequate, rapid.>>
You can imagine then how the 240Nm 170PS version feels in a Jetta Sports...:-)
See, for instance:
preview.tinyurl.com/2c74uux
tinyurl.com/2cerduj
tinyurl.com/2vscslr
>>They're not BMW inline-6 smooth but they're very fiery whilst unexpectedly economical.>>
In fact my engine is very smooth, so much so that I occasionally think it's not switched on at tickover (bit like the early Lexus LS400).
|
>> You can imagine then how the 240Nm 170PS version feels in a Jetta Sports...:-)
Haha :-) you're preaching to the converted! (daily driver's a 2010 Octavia Vrs / 2.0TSi) Did you go for the manual or the DSG auto?
The Octy's often compared to the VW Golf, same platform etc. just a bit longer floor pan but probably it's more of a cheaper version of the Jetta (which is kind of an extended Golf + some luxury like the fancy lighting behind the air vents, v nice!).
>> In fact my engine is very smooth
I wouldn't dream of calling my TSi rough, it's not, like you say often whisper silent, but it's not in the same league as the inline-6 in my BMW (M52TU engine).
|
>>Did you go for the manual or the DSG auto?>>
I hate automatics (!) although it seems the DSG's performance is actually slightly superior to the manual both on acceleration and economy.
There are two 2.0 TSi units; presume you have the 200PS version, which is more than enough for most people...:-)
The Octavia has always been a superb buy and, as I've often pointed out in the forums, at least 80 per cent of the many taxi drivers in my town have them. They love 'em.
In fact, although I've always been a VW saloon fan (two previous Jettas and a Bora in 18 years), I did spend a lot of time checking out Octavias until I eventually spotted the Jetta Sports on the VW website. It was the only one out of the 100 or so Jettas listed and had just 17k on the speedometer after three years' use.
The Octavia, Audi A3/4, Seat Leon and Bora are all basically the same underneath as you will be aware; it's the body styling and different price bands that VW uses to appeal to a wide range of buyers.
|
>> There are two 2.0 TSi units
There's 4 now! They introduced 2 more revised versions
CCZA - 200ps / 2.0TSi / k03 turbocharger
CCZB - 208ps / 2.0TSi / k03 turbocharger (no physical difference to CCZA, just different engine software / map)
Both of those remap to the same power, 250bhp-260bhp / 380nm-420nm -- which is sensational. For ~£500 at any Revo Technik UK dealer + no difference in insurance premium if insured via Skoda or the RAC.
The daddies though, the dogs cahoonas, aren't available in a Skoda :-(
240ps / 2.0TSi / k04 turbocharger, larger injectors -- as in the Seat Leon Cupra
265ps / 2.0TSi / k04 turbo, larger injectors, (and in the Audi S3, larger intercooler) -- Leon Cupra R, Audi S3
They remap to ~310bhp. Capable of harrassing some exotic marques on the race track.
I like the fact these cars are well understood from a tweaking point of view.
£500 on a handling pack from Whiteline.
£500 on a Stage 1 remap (+£500 stage 2, +£1000 stage 3)
etc. etc.
The most attractive TSi must be the 5-cyl version in the Audi TT-RS. The new v6 TSi weighs an awful lot more than the 5-cyl which weighs near enough the same as the 4-cyl. I reckon the v6 would impact handling, for not any more oomph than the 5-cyl.
|
>>There's 4 now! They introduced 2 more revised versions>>
You are making my mouth water...:-)
|
Disappointment is setting in :-(
SWMBO was reading the handbook last night. Bear in mind please that it describes EVERY possible feature, even those not offered in the UK. She does not approve of the "hill hold" function which apparently holds the brakes for 2 seconds on a hill start and gently releases them as you pull away. Whether this car has this feature we will have to see but she declared "But I'm good at hill starts!".
She has decided that this takes all of the fun out of it and there should be an "idiot" switch which switches all such features on / off. She'll be posting on here next! :-)
John
|
Hill hold is a low priced optional extra on all Golf VIs IIRC, I'd be surprised it it's fitted though ? I had this feature on my 330d and whilst initially sceptical it proved to be particularly good when towing, I probably wouldn't pay extra for it but wouldn't avoid it either....
Since it costs so little as a factory fittment, I wonder whether it's configurable via VAG-Com ? Similarly they offer a flat tyre indication system (standard on BMWs), this just uses the ABS sensors to detect variations in wheel rotation when the effective circumference changes (with a deflated tyre for instance). I'll bet that's configurable without additional hardware......
|
Reading the manual I suspect that a few of the optional extras are merely a matter of enabling the feature in the software. A bit cheeky really.
John
|
>> Reading the manual I suspect that a few of the optional extras are merely a matter of enabling the feature in the software. A bit cheeky really.
Aye :-)
It goes even further in some cases - there's 1 part number for each rear light cluster, i.e. no RHD part # / LHD part # for each side. There's only 1 high intensity light visible at the back (opposite sides obviously) on RHD vs. LHD cars. They all ship with both bulbs in place, just turn one side off in the BCM unit :-) That can be changed via VCDS.
The hill hold one's a different ABS unit or something like that -- Skoda sent out some Superb's without it when they should have had it, but deemed it a non-economical retrofit and just refunded the cost of the hill hold feature.
The blinky fog lights for cornering -- you know when you turn left below 26mph it turns on the left fog light, like merc's do, that can be enabled in software. I was sceptical about it but i've left it enabled, i find it worthwhile in dark multi storey car parks and maneuvering on isolated streets.
|
>>
>> 240ps / 2.0TSi / k04 turbocharger, larger injectors -- as in the Seat Leon Cupra
>> 265ps / 2.0TSi / k04 turbo, larger injectors, (and in the Audi S3, larger intercooler)
>> -- Leon Cupra R, Audi S3
And in the Golf R or whatever it is called.
|
>>
>> I'd be surprised if the 200nm/122bhp 1.4 lump in a golf mk6 feels anything other
>> than rapid. Not adequate, rapid.
>>
Compared to a push-bike maybe. A big fat 1300KG car with 122BHP is never going to be anywhere near rapid. Thats 93BHP per ton, not exactly going to set the world on fire.
|
In the early 80s it would have qualified as a hot hatch. It would have been hot on the heels of a GTI. The torque figure is hugely important in assessing how a car is going to feel (without actually driving it). 200Nm is a helluva lot.
John
|
|
Is it? The modern turbodiesels that do feel effortlessly rapid have torque of 350 Nm and upwards. The Toyota T180 in the Golf-sized Auris has 400 Nm. A lot depends on where the torque is delivered of course, but 200 Nm doesn't sound like much for a heavyish car.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Fri 5 Nov 10 at 15:48
|
Agreed, my Passat is somewhere on the high side of 300Nm but 200Nm is pretty good going. Peak torque from 1500 upwards iirc. But this isn't a TD and I wouldn't expect it to match a TD. That's comparing apples & oranges. If 0 - 60 in 9.5 seconds isn't fast enough for you, buy a bigger engine.
John
|
200 Nm is 148lbft, that's more than a 2.0l normally aspirated petrol Mondeo puts out and comparable to the output of the old VAG 1.8T, having driven the 122 TSi Golf VI it's just fine and my comparator was a 330d with 500NM of torque. In fact one of the factors SWMBO really liked in choosing this car was that it had good torque delivery like a turbo-diesel.
One of the main differences to the 4 cylinder diesels which I've experienced is that the torque curve of the 1.4 TSi is pretty flat and sustained from low revs right through the rev range, 4 cylinder diesels (however good) are more peaky.
VAG put this engine in Skoda Superb Estates and VW Passat Estates, I've no idea how well these will drive bur remember that the output from this engine is comparable to a normally aspirated 2.0l petrol. IIRC there is also a slightly more powerful version deployed in the new Sharan, a wee bit heavier than a Golf perhaps ?
The future is likely to be small capacity turbo engines, look at the 1.6T that Vauxhall now use. I even read of the S-Class Merc getting the 2.2 250D (200PS) engine, the E200 certainly 'only' has a 1.8T (or is it supercharged) engine in it too.
|
>>
One of the main differences to the 4 cylinder diesels which I've experienced is that the torque curve of the 1.4 TSi is pretty flat and sustained from low revs right through the rev range, 4 cylinder diesels (however good) are more peaky.>>
As I mentioned earlier, my 170PS unit (and I suspect the 140 and 160) delivers 100 per cent torque from 1750 to 4,500rpm and at least 80 per cent from that point to 6,000rpm.
In fact the VW is only approximately one and a half seconds slower from 0-100kph, if you take the figures as being accurate, than the new three-litre diesel Jaguar XJ I've driven belonging to a friend.
In turn he's been out in mine and couldn't believe the sustained acceleration delivered by "only" a 1.4-litre unit compared to the Jag; I gently pointed out he had a very much heavier, fully equipped vehicle, so it even things up a bit....
|
To my knowledge there is NO hill hold function on the OPs car unless of course, it has a DSG box. It may be fitted to the latest Golf Match, I don't know as I haven't gone into its specification.
However, I realise that the Match has pretty much all those things I had to spec. as extras on my 1.4 122PS TSI SE. Of course my sunrood would be extra no matter which model although the original MK6 GT had it as standard I believe.
The sunroof, together with the 1.4TSI engine was the reason for my car taking over 5 months for delivery, a situaltion I hope never to be in again when ordering a new car.
|
>> Thats 93BHP per ton
Remember it's the area under the graph, rather than the peak figure that matters.
It's the torque you're interested in, but power wise, 93bhp's enough to put ~2 tons of metal over 100mph so no issues there.
The headline is 200nm of torque comes in at ~2k rpm (like a diesel) but continues on through the rev range (like a petrol). Best of both worlds really.
There's no perceptible turbo lag on these, which really sets them apart from older style turbo petrols.
Last edited by: Skoda on Fri 5 Nov 10 at 16:20
|
"One of the main differences to the 4 cylinder diesels which I've experienced is that the torque curve of the 1.4 TSi is pretty flat and sustained from low revs right through the rev range, 4 cylinder diesels (however good) are more peaky."
This is the crucial point, isn't it - torque rather than absolute power is what make a car feel lively in normal driving on UK roads. I've had five diesels in a row because of this, but seriously thinking of a petrol next time - likely to be a VAG TSI.
|
I had three VAG turbo cars (using the 1.8T) and chose the first way back in 1999 because of how the emissions were low for the torque/power available. Then I swapped to diesels because of the benefits to BIK on company cars.
I had thought I would switch back now turbo engines are back in fashion. But a Passat 1.8T SE will cost more per month than a Passat 2.0d 140PS.
I'd like an Audi A5 but I could have at least £80 per month extra in take home pay if I got say a Passat. And I might like next years new Jetta too.
|
>> I'd like an Audi A5 but I could have at least £80 per month extra in take home pay if I got say a Passat
I can totally see the logic there.
Oh no, wait... :-)
|
|
I can read your response either way there Skoda. It is only an incremental cost to have the A5. With offset pedals mind.
|
Interesting comments generally about the Golf Mk VI, I reckon a GTi will be on the shortlist for me when I replace the FocuST early next year.
|
>> I can read your response either way there Skoda
Ahh don't read into it too much.
You lost me back on the thread on the new BMW 520d -- when you moved on from it. My simplistic, binary thought processes can't compute past choosing an A5 over a 5er. I've no chance of understanding a Passat (excellent car though it is) over a 5er! :-)
Last edited by: Skoda on Sat 6 Nov 10 at 14:17
|
|
I can't see the point of a Passat over an Octavia: although the Octavia is built on the Golf platform, it's almost as spacious and it's a lot cheaper.
|
>> I can't see the point of a Passat over an Octavia
The Octavia is an ugly car for a start. Both share the same platform essentially as the Golf although they are different lengths.
The logic of Passat vs. A5 is easy. Head says one and the heart the other. I really like the look of the A5 but the difference per year would pay for a nice holiday.
Sorry to hijack the thread.
It's a shame the more powerful 1.4T is not available in the Passat. But then it'd be more powerful than the 1.8T. Emissions would be lower on the 1.4T with both super and turbo chargers.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Sat 6 Nov 10 at 16:06
|
>> The Octavia is an ugly car for a start.
Ah! but Beauty is in the eye of the beholder! I like the Octavia. I also think that the Passat saloon and coupe are very handsome. (Though the Passat Estate is very ugly IMHO.) The A5 is just gorgeous!
When comparing the Passat vs A5, don't forget that the Passat only has a boot, whereas the A5 gives you the practicality of a hatch. For me this is crucially important, though I accept that others can live quite happily with the limitation of just a boot.
I have to say that (if I could afford one) the car that I would buy right now is the A5 Sportback. (The fact that a certain car magazine doesn't like it only makes it more desirable!)
|
I think our resident A5 owner is very pleased with his.
He might be along shortly if he's written out enough speeding tickets to justify his existence. :)
|
Well, I've had a bit of a drive of it today. Out to the Peak District, a short walk (AC - you really need to get some duckboards down in Lud's Church. I was calf deep in squidge. Thank goodness for gaiters. Saved my trousers. Again.).
Couldn't really stretch it due to repeated instances of criminal levels of mimsing on pleasant A roads plus a line of traffic unwilling to overtake the perpetrator :-( That and respect for a new engine, so I'm not going to rev the nuts off it.
The impression so far is that it is decently brisk. It pulls nicely, always able to hold at least one gear higher than I would expect, even up hills. The "change up for economy" indicator seems a bit premature to my mind. I'd rather have a few more revs on the engine before changing up. 5th gear at 30 just doesn't seem right!
And it is really quiet.
She's happy. What more can I ask for?
John
|
...She's happy. What more can I ask for?...
So are you going to do the job properly and treat her/the car/yourself to an iPod?
|
Iffy, I'm from Yorkshire! I have bought her a £16 / 16GB USB stick.
I on the other hand have just been bought - A NEW PAIR OF BOOTLACES!!!! Of course she spotted some walking trousers she had to have while we were in the shop.
I wear the trousers in this house. And I wash them and I iron them - Dennis Thatcher. :-)
John
|
>>
>> The impression so far is that it is decently brisk. It pulls nicely, always able
>> to hold at least one gear higher than I would expect, even up hills. The
>> "change up for economy" indicator seems a bit premature to my mind. I'd rather have
>> a few more revs on the engine before changing up. 5th gear at 30 just
>> doesn't seem right!
>>
I can't remember the exact 'change points' but I recall SWMBO's offering seemingly ludicrous ones, 5th at 30mph, 6th at 40mph maybe. Also (unlike my BMW) the VAG gear-change indicator doesn't advise when to change down (if you're labouring the engine), of course it's irrelevant if you're an even averagely competent driver....
|
>> The Octavia is an ugly car for a start.
Doesn't worry me..... I'm sat inside it :-)
|
Nice bike rack'd go with that Golf John.....Free delivery within the county...
:-)
Edit - Walking trousers would double up as cycling trousers I should think...
Last edited by: Humph D'bout on Sat 6 Nov 10 at 19:11
|
|
And a Blackberry Bold with GPS - you actually need a towbar mounted rack, ideal on a Golf..
|
|
Towbar mounted rack is a good suggestion but Mrs Slow isn't going to find one those for £30 is she ? Not locally anyway. Then there's the cost and inconvenience of the fitting of the towbar...Got to be a clip on rack really in all conscience.
|
"The Octavia is an ugly car for a start."
With both the Octavia and Superb the estate looks a lot better than the hatch (or saloon/hatch in the case of the Superb). Agreed - that's just the view of one beholder.
|
|
If I got either the Octavia or Superb then yes it would be an estate. An Superb estate (top spec) is still on my short list so to speak. I won't order a new car until next summer! Planning ahead.
|
Volkswagen Golf VI - Wife's gotta Golf - Skoda
