V6 v 2.0T FSI

[rwpgriffiths]

Morning folks.
This is my first post and I am considering changing my Honda CRV back to a real car! I am not going to change yet but am trying to find out as much as I can about the EOS before putting an order in.

I currently have the 2.2ltr turbo diesel in the Honda which is a wonderful engine but confess I miss petrol.

I am trying to make up my mind between the V6 and the 2.0ltr Turbo and would be grateful for any feedback especially in respect to mid range torque for overtaking and which engine suits the car better. I am concerned that the V6 may be a bit heavy for the front end.

And does the V6 really return 30mpg on a run?
And finally the petrol head bit - which sounds best!
Thanks

[Gavster]

Hi ya,

I have PM'ed you

Gavin.

[GurnyGub]

A couple of early reviews said the car's balance was a bit off, roof down, as the roof was stored in the top of the boot. That was just one of the reasons I plumped for the V6, the balance is great, and the car feels very solid on the road. After trying the Eos 2.0T, and then the R32 (same V6engine, but AWD) I knew I wanted that power too. With all the extras I wanted, the V6 was coming in only about £1,100 more than the same spec 2.0T. So, I'm glad I did, and the sound....great. Mpg? sorry, don't look, my wife said she was getting 30, but I switched the display to distance!

John

[Gavster]

Hi ya,

We are about to order the 2.0t for several different reasons but most of all because we prefer a manual gearbox.

Gavin

[neh321]

Morning folks.
This is my first post and I am considering changing my Honda CRV back to a real car! I am not going to change yet but am trying to find out as much as I can about the EOS before putting an order in.

I currently have the 2.2ltr turbo diesel in the Honda which is a wonderful engine but confess I miss petrol.

I am trying to make up my mind between the V6 and the 2.0ltr Turbo and would be grateful for any feedback especially in respect to mid range torque for overtaking and which engine suits the car better. I am concerned that the V6 may be a bit heavy for the front end.

And does the V6 really return 30mpg on a run?
And finally the petrol head bit - which sounds best!
Thanks


The difference in performance between the 2 litre Turbo and the V6 is minimal (V6 0.2 sec quicker to 60 mph and 10 mph higher top speed - 154 against 144!) so not much in it there. The 4 cyl is quite a bit more economical and produces less CO2.

But according to reviews I've read the V6 in the Eos is not quite what it is in the Golf R32. It's a lot heavier than the 4 cyl motor so causes the nose to understeer a bit. The 2.0 litre Turbo is one of the world's best engines according to several car mags - it's flexible, quick and economical. Do you really need another 1200 cc for very little gain in performance but quite a bit less economy?

Depends on your driving style I think. The V6 is very much a relaxed cruiser whilst the 2 litre Turbo is the enthusiast's choice.

[rwpgriffiths]

Thanks for your help so far folks - I am now thinking that the 2.0t is a better bet as I do like a good drive and it seems to have been included as the best match for the car by VW. Many thanks.

[GurnyGub]

Well, it's like writing about music you haven't heard, isn't it? My dealer gave me cars for extended testing, and I think that's the only way to make your mind up. I did 340 miles yesterday, all sorts of conditions, and the car ate the road. I find the extra weight makes the car feel more 'planted' on the road, and less skittish and twitchy on minor roads, with little understeer. The DSG is perfect, and it brings out the best in the bigger engine, no turbo up and down, and in S mode thrilling, frankly. Good luck, and be pointless.
John