New Golf engine size and HP

[J400uk]

The 1.2 TSI is an all new engine IIRC, only available with a turbo. Its unrelated to the 3-cylinder n/a 1.2s you'd get in a Polo

[vc-10]

Yeah it is all new. It's a 4-cyl not a 3-cyl like the Polo engines.

[normclarke]

As SCO3OTT says time will tell. Without the design details available it is difficult to be entirely accurate. With a smaller bore the crank webs will be thinner and to sustain the power and torque will not last as long. Simlpes.

Best,

normclarke

[ross980]

Hmmm, my advice to anyone considering buying a 1.2 TSI and reading this forum is to take any armchair Engineer's opinion regarding the longevity/suitability of the engine with a massive pinch of salt. I think my faith would be placed with the Designers and Engineers who designed/built/tested it.
I’d have no concerns buying a 1.2 just because “it sounds a bit weedy” and “it might not last quite as long as a 1.4...”. What really?! Give me a 1.2TSI over a normally aspirated 1.4 any day.

Test drive it and see if you like it.

[david25]

I've driven the 105PS 1.2 in the Golf. It's fine for the un-demanding driver and definately better compared to the old 1.4.

If you are just after a shopping hatch / kids taxi it's an option, however best of the range is still the 122ps 1.4.

[maningrey]

I will add my 2 pennies worth as I am driving a 1.2 TSI 105 as a rental car at the moment. Surprisingly good for what it is and feels quicker than the 1.6 astra I had as a rental car before! Not quite as much pull as my old 1.6TDI but worth having if you dont do the miles and like a bit of turbo burble as well

The turbo certainly gives it a bit of poke mid range and the economy is looking good. 600 miles at varying speeds and testing it out (hire cars always go faster!) and showing 48 mpg which isn't bad.

As David 25 said, fine for a runaround with a bit of poke but waiting til I can order the 160 TSI as my next company car.

[percymon]

On paper such small capacity engines hauling around a heavy Golf don;t make for good sense, but compared to the archaic and asthmatic engines they replace they are a marvel.

They're never going to eb a hot hatch, but the TDI engines are a revelation, in performance, engine note and economy.

The old 1.4 and 2.6 NA engines were always disappointing when it came to economy, and road tax bands.

[normclarke]

Well my current 1.4 bog standard is getting me about 50mpg. Its definately better than my previous 1.4 FSI which gave about 45mpg. I note that the CGGA engine has an iron block which improves the oil consumption (more rigid). The alloy block engines were noted oil burners, my son had a Skoda Fabia with the 105PS engine that was worse than the mini's I used to run in the fifties and sixties.

Best,

normclarke.