1.4 TSI GT question...

[OldBoy22]

Mighty forum, i request thine help!

Was dead set on a GTD as the new motor but have recently changed my mind after hearing horror stories about wait times and the wife's chronic back issues have dictated we go for something a little less firm on the road.

Will be a GT mk7 by the look of it. I have test driven the TDI GT and liked it, but we only do around 10k a year so not sure diesel is the most economically sound judgement.

Owners of the petrol GT, whats it like to drive? Does it pull well?

Obliged...

[JRL 2W]

I have a 3 week old GT auto, with the 1.4TSI + ACT . Running in eco mode at present, for first 1000 miles, but have had to swop to sport mode a couple of times, to accelerate around slower vehicles, and the car just surges forward. I think it will be more than enough pull, once I can utilise the full power range. Hope that helps.

[jk88]

Owners of the petrol GT, whats it like to drive? Does it pull well?



Indeed it does !

[andyCYM]

4,000 miles in my manual 1.4 ACT, to give perspective it replaced a mark 6 GTD which I ran for three years.

Yes, it pulls well, very well in fact. Obviously can't quite match the 170 diesel but it never feels underpowered and on the plus side of course, you have the revs you don't have in a diesel.

Also petrol works very well with stop-start and you can barely hear the engine at idle.

Ride / handling is pretty much spot on. More comfortable than mk6 GTD, but I might have spoilt that car with 18" wheels.

[OldBoy22]

Excellent news, much obliged. Am arranging a test drive to be sure before placing an order. Have got used to diesel and the abundance of torque it brings, but must say I'm looking forward to saving a few quid at the pumps! Costs me an arm and a leg to fill up the CC at the mo.

I know I'll never get near the official MPG figures but 40+ for my style of driving would be good. I'm guessing the economy takes a bit of a pounding if you give the car a decent stretch of the legs eh?!

[Allmac]

Excellent news, much obliged. Am arranging a test drive to be sure before placing an order. Have got used to diesel and the abundance of torque it brings, but must say I'm looking forward to saving a few quid at the pumps! Costs me an arm and a leg to fill up the CC at the mo.

I know I'll never get near the official MPG figures but 40+ for my style of driving would be good. I'm guessing the economy takes a bit of a pounding if you give the car a decent stretch of the legs eh?! You are not alone in considering a switch from diesel.....my past five cars have all been diesel automatics and I have always enjoyed the relaxed & unstrained characteristics of these engines but after test driving both the diesel and petrol (DSG) versions of the Golf GT, I decided that the petrol best suited my current requirements as I now drive <10k miles/yr. and a lot of short journeys. Both cars are quite and smooth but I felt that the petrol had the edge on refinement, which was particularly noticeable on the test drive when the automatic stop/start operated....the diesel re-starting was quite noticeable to the extent that I would turn this feature off as I would find it very irritating but the petrol re-start was seamless and was a noticeably quieter car. If I still did higher mileages I would definitely go for a diesel Golf but I don't think that this would give any economic advantages for me now and there are other issues to consider such as the worry about particulate filter clogging , regeneration fuel use and the cost differential of fuel. I was also told many years ago that diesels take longer to get to their efficient working temperature, although I suspect that modern engines aren't affected. I won't know if I've made the right decision until I pick up my car in Sept. and get some miles under my belt but happy at the moment with my choice.

[mcmaddy]

Mighty forum, i request thine help!

Was dead set on a GTD as the new motor but have recently changed my mind after hearing horror stories about wait times and the wife's chronic back issues have dictated we go for something a little less firm on the road.

Will be a GT mk7 by the look of it. I have test driven the TDI GT and liked it, but we only do around 10k a year so not sure diesel is the most economically sound judgement.

Owners of the petrol GT, whats it like to drive? Does it pull well?

Obliged...
I only do about 10k miles and short journeys during the week but I've still ordered a gtd. engine set up on the gtd should negate the dpf and mpg issues others appear to be having. if you order the gtd with adaptive chassis control then you'll be able to set the suspension up to your comfort needs. I've just had an extended test drive today of a dsg gtd and had no problems at all with stop/start. instant and unobtrusive.

[pango1in]

mcdaddy - I'd be interested to know how you set up the engine as you mentioned.

[dcdick]

mcdaddy - I'd be interested to know how you set up the engine as you mentioned.

Me too !

D

[C5Clive]

I suspect an awful lot of people would like to know....including everyone at VW :D

[mcmaddy]

would be really good if people actually read posts properly! I said the engine set up should help with dpf and mpg issues not I will set the engine up ffs!! engine is different to other VW diesels before it ie gets warmer faster and relocation of dpf filter. Jesus fellas read posts please.

[pango1in]

engine set up on the gtd should negate the dpf and mpg issues others appear to be having.


would be really good if people actually read posts properly! I said the engine set up should help with dpf and mpg issues not I will set the engine up ffs!! engine is different to other VW diesels before it ie gets warmer faster and relocation of dpf filter. Jesus fellas read posts please.

Without being too much of a pedant, it's pretty easy to misread your original post (enough for at least three people to get it wrong...).

For starters, the way VW have designed the engine on the Mk7 obviously doesn't help with the dpf and mpg, otherwise why would we be complaining so much? Not only has there been disappointment with the regular 2.0 diesel (which is practically the same engine block as the GTD???), but there are starting to be noises made about the fuel economy of the GTD itself. MPG is actually WORSE than earlier diesel engines that don't include all this Bluemotion tech.

So, when you say "engine setup", it sounds like it's the way that you plan to setup the engine, not the way VW has designed the engine (as mentioned above). Easy mistake to make.

Sorry for going off topic with this post.

[mcmaddy]

I could have understood if I'd actually said I will be setting my engine up....... but as I didn't and said the engine set up I don't see what could be misenterpretated by my statement. the problem is people are buying these cars expecting to see the claimed mpg figures straight out of the box when in reality you'll never see them, ever. the way the tests for mpg are set up means Joe public will never replicate the published figures. I don't think the engine in the 2.0 is a problem it's people taking the hump when they can't get 60 odd mpg from a car. I'm not saying it's right and to be honest I think something should be done about manufacturers publishing mpg figures that a paying customer will never get.

[C5Clive]

There are two aspects to this.

You are quite right in saying that customers who expect to achieve published MPG rates under real world conditions are being optimistic. These rates have always been unrealistic and with new cars appear to be even more so.

The second is that customers shouldn't need to cover significant numbers of motorway miles with the engine in a specific rev range in order to initiate passive regeneration. Active regens should be a rare occurrence for the vast majority of drivers, anything else is just poor design and the customer paying the price for the manufacturers poor attempts to comply with the legislation.

I hope you don't have the same DPF/MPG issues that others are reporting, but I strongly suspect that the different engine set up of the GTD will have little to no effect on the way the DPF regenerates. It seems fairly clear that if you don't drive in a certain way then you are stuck with active regens, and that will hit your MPG.

[pango1in]

I could have understood if I'd actually said I will be setting my engine up....... but as I didn't and said the engine set up I don't see what could be misenterpretated by my statement. the problem is people are buying these cars expecting to see the claimed mpg figures straight out of the box when in reality you'll never see them, ever. the way the tests for mpg are set up means Joe public will never replicate the published figures. I don't think the engine in the 2.0 is a problem it's people taking the hump when they can't get 60 odd mpg from a car. I'm not saying it's right and to be honest I think something should be done about manufacturers publishing mpg figures that a paying customer will never get.

Actually, there were no articles or pronouns in front of "engine setup" in your original quote (no the and no my). So how were we meant to interpret you assertion that "engine setup" was going to negate the dpf or mileage issues?

If the engine blocks for 2.0l diesels are all the same (with the same exhaust manifold, dpf placement, cylinder numbers, etc.) "the engine setup" on the GTD will likely have no impact on the number of dpf regens or mpg. Granted cylider heads or valves may be different, along with the ECU setup, but on average these should make the mpg worse, if anything. Hey, if i'm wrong about the engine design differences between the 2.0 TDI 150PS and the 2.0 GTD, please point it out.

So if there's no real differences in the way VW designs or sets up the 2.0 TDI engines, the only interpretation left was that somehow you were going to set it up differently. Again, several people interpreted it this way.

[dcdick]

I could have understood if I'd actually said I will be setting my engine up....... but as I didn't and said the engine set up I don't see what could be misenterpretated by my statement. the problem is people are buying these cars expecting to see the claimed mpg figures straight out of the box when in reality you'll never see them, ever. the way the tests for mpg are set up means Joe public will never replicate the published figures. I don't think the engine in the 2.0 is a problem it's people taking the hump when they can't get 60 odd mpg from a car. I'm not saying it's right and to be honest I think something should be done about manufacturers publishing mpg figures that a paying customer will never get.

Obviously some confusion here. My question is.... why do you think that the GTD will not be affected by DPF/economy issues to the same extent the other engines are ?

People are "taking the hump" as you put it because the "new" engine is worse than the previous model in spite of being trumpeted as super efficient/greener/lighter etc.... by VAG. In my experience it clearly is not so.

D

[maisbitt]

Perhaps GTD drivers are more likely to drive their cars a little harder which will make passive rather than active regens more likely? I drive my car moderately hard to get quickly up to a cruising speed and stay there but anticipate the traffic well and let the car slow itself down a lot of the time approaching roundabouts or if traffic ahead of me slows etc and on a good day (like yesterday and today) I can get 55mpg on my 12 mile commute.If driving in a way that would have traditionally been thought of as ultra economical causes active regens which hammer your economy then driving harder may well be more economical if you don't suffer active regens as a result.

The new engines don't seem much more economical than the old ones (if they are better at all) that have no eco tech on them. The GTD I test drove seemed to cruise more economically but to accelerate to a cruising speed seems to hammer economy more than my current Scirocco 170TDI.

Main engine differences are: Bigger Turbo on the GTD, different injectors, it'll have a different ECU map - and that's about it. Saying that though - a map difference can be night and day, especially if the GTD one performs well and the 150TDI one doesn't. My MK5 Golf 170TDI (the first Golf with a DPF) needed a service remap to stop the DPF filling up and it was like a different car afterwards. I wonder whether the 150TDI is in need of one and whether they'll just slyly apply it the first time your car visits the dealership either for your first service or fist bit of warranty work.

[pango1in]

Maisbitt - I expect you are right about driving a bit harder in a GTD. I find the best fuel economies happen straight after a regen.

So could "engine setup" mean the way the car is driven?

[maisbitt]

Maisbitt - I expect you are right about driving a bit harder in a GTD. I find the best fuel economies happen straight after a regen.

So could "engine setup" mean the way the car is driven?


I think the biggest factor in "engine setup" is the ECU mapping. A tuning company can get GTD performance from a 150TDI and they can improve mpg on pretty much any engine, VW put bigger injectors and turbos on the bigger output cars for longevity. Supposedly VW use a "one size fits all" worldwide mapping for each engine/gearbox combination and the remappers have the edge of using a map (or a series of maps) that are suited to your geographical location, taking expected temp and humidity ranges into account). This is all according to the remappers patter on many of the websites. Makes sense I suppose - a car being driven in South Africa should be mapped differently than a UK/Northern Europe model as it will have a hotter and drier supply of air. My car seems to perform best when the humidity is high and the ambient temp is around 20C.

You would expect that as 1.6TDIs and 2.0TDI 150s will vastly outnumber the GTDs, VW will have put more effort into the mapping of those cars. On the other hand, VW have had 8 months to perfect the GTD map in the time they launched the general MK7 range - did they rush the other TDIs out? Or have the scewed the well balanced performance across the usage range on the previous engines to maximise economy at one extreme usage scenario, to the detriment of the all other usage scenarios just to get the official CO2 rating below 110g/km? DSG does seem to have quite a fuel penalty in a TDI now by the accounts seen on this forum - I will be very interested to know how well my manual GTD performs in 5 or so weeks. I am expecting it to be a minimum of 10% better than the test drive I took in a GTD/DSG on Saturday.

If I can get an indicated 60mpg (55mpg actual) around the doors in my GTD, in the summer without changing my driving style then I'll consider it an improvement over what I have - but I won't hold my breath! At the very least I expect to be in the same position as I am with the current car (which some people here aren't unfortunately).

[C5Clive]

I'd be happy if I were to get 55 MPG from my 2.0 150 to be honest, sadly from the reports on this forum, it doesn't really look to be achievable.

I think you are right in saying car manufacturers are setting up cars specifically for the EU emissions test, but it's more with the aim of keeping the BIK figure as low as possible. More new cars are sold to company car drivers than to private users in the UK and this is a hugely competitive market, failing to keep BIK the same, or better than direct competitors, would de detrimental to sales.

I just don't really buy the argument that harder driving by GTD owners will result in less active regens, sorry. If you look at the DFP sticky on this forum, then it states passive regen occurs during 'long motorway journeys', someone driving a GTD hard in circumstances other than this would still result in a lack of passive regen. Someone doing 10k miles per year as 1000 x 10 mile journeys as opposed to 100 x 100 mile journeys would still be relying on active regens, however hard they drove it.

[OldBoy22]

Well I ordered the GT today and plumped for the TDI rather than the TSI. I tried them both and to be honest just preferred the diesel. TSI was a sweet engine but it couldn't 'torque' me outta the TDI (see what i did there).

I've had a diesel CC for a little while now and tend to do longer runs than the missus. Never really had too many issues with the DPF as i give it a good run a couple of times every week, here's hoping this continues. Gave the GT TDI a good test drive today, 10 miles or so in Sport with a some boot and it read 34mpg, with only 20 miles on the clock.

Anything around 50mpg after i've done a few miles is good enough for me, just looking forward to enjoying the car!

Out of interest what tires am i likely to have fitted to it? It's on the standard, and rather nice 17" dijon's.

[pango1in]

Well I ordered the GT today and plumped for the TDI rather than the TSI. I tried them both and to be honest just preferred the diesel. TSI was a sweet engine but it couldn't 'torque' me outta the TDI (see what i did there).

I've had a diesel CC for a little while now and tend to do longer runs than the missus. Never really had too many issues with the DPF as i give it a good run a couple of times every week, here's hoping this continues. Gave the GT TDI a good test drive today, 10 miles or so in Sport with a some boot and it read 34mpg, with only 20 miles on the clock.

Anything around 50mpg after i've done a few miles is good enough for me, just looking forward to enjoying the car!

Out of interest what tires am i likely to have fitted to it? It's on the standard, and rather nice 17" dijon's.


I had these:

http://www.blackcircles.com/catalogue/bridgestone/er300/225/45/R17/W/91/f?returnurl=%2forder%2ftyres%3f%26width%3d225%26pr ofile%3d45%26rim%3d17%26speed%3dW%26minpricerange% 3d0%26maxpricerange%3d0%26manufacturer%3dbridgesto ne%26displayall%3d999&tyre=27375769

They aren't bad. Good grip. But they aren't the most fuel efficient - perhaps that's the problem I'm having! Would much rather have these:

http://www.blackcircles.com/catalogue/dunlop/sp-sportmaxx-rt/225/45/R17/Y/94/f?returnurl=%2forder%2ftyres%3f%26width%3d225%26pr ofile%3d45%26rim%3d17%26speed%3dW%26minpricerange% 3d0%26maxpricerange%3d0%26manufacturer%3ddunlop%26 customerrating%3d0%26displayall%3d6&tyre=32109086

Brand new out, replacing the old version that had much worse specs.

[Dmo238]

Well I ordered the GT today and plumped for the TDI rather than the TSI. I tried them both and to be honest just preferred the diesel. TSI was a sweet engine but it couldn't 'torque' me outta the TDI (see what i did there).

I've had a diesel CC for a little while now and tend to do longer runs than the missus. Never really had too many issues with the DPF as i give it a good run a couple of times every week, here's hoping this continues. Gave the GT TDI a good test drive today, 10 miles or so in Sport with a some boot and it read 34mpg, with only 20 miles on the clock.

Anything around 50mpg after i've done a few miles is good enough for me, just looking forward to enjoying the car!

Out of interest what tires am i likely to have fitted to it? It's on the standard, and rather nice 17" dijon's.

My GT came with the Pirelli Cinturato P7 tyres. Agree that the Dijon alloys are very nice. Considered the optional alloys but thought that the dijons look sporty without being too flash.