sweeney

I have a Fabia Vrs (great) amd my father has an Octavia Elegance TDI 140 (also great but in a different sort of way!). I was wondering what were the essential advances and differences between the two engines, apart from the obvious. I know one is 2L and the other 1.9L and the power outputs are slightly different. It's just that car mags often refer to the "ageing 1.9 TDI" etc.

I know my car is much lighter but I don't find the 1.9L to be in any way inferior. It's not noisier, it's not thirstier, it's not less responsive.

What are the great developments with the 2.0 TDI.

Thanks

Neo_Vrs

My mate has an Audi A3 2.0 TDi 140PD Sport and having been a passenger in it many times have not noticed any difference in performance. If anything it may be a tad slower and i'm not biased....honest!

I think the peak torque is 320Nm whilst the vRS is 310Nm, but I suppose the weight difference evens it out.

devonutopia

i Was gonna say the only "advance" is about 100cc.

Dad's got the MkV 2.0 TDI Golf with this engine in, and yeah, it feels like a quick diesel, but I didn't notice anything about it which made me go, "oh yeah!", over a 1.9 TDI.

I'm biased too of course.

__________________
Jason - Only a Skoda.
Custom Fabia Bonnet Lifter Kits - £45! Click Me.

BRISKODA CLUBSTAND @ Castle Combe! 25/04/09! Track session too! Click me!

See the mongrel's 260bhp Dyno Video!

neilwilliams

The 2L engine has a 16 valve head and is Euro4 emmissions compliant while the 1.9 is an 8 valve head and is not compliant.

Don't forget that if you are comparig the installations of the 2L to the Furby vRS there will be added weight in the A3 and the Octavia compared to the Furby. This will reduce the performance so you won't notice the change all that much even if you are not biased

__________________
Neil Williams
History: Fabia 1.4 8v, Fabia 1.4 16v, Fabia vRS
Now driving a Golf Mk5 tdi

Teachers click HERE for free resources.

sweeney

Thanks

Yes I've been in my Dad's Octavia 140 many times and it doesn't seem anymore responsive or more advanced. There must be something new as you don't develop a new engine for no cost. Don't know what it is though.

sweeney

Thanks for the replies. Some which have crossed with my responses. I wasn't ignoring the info about 16V etc. I think it probably a case of steady evolution from the 1.9 to the 2.0 rather than a great leap forward.

Thanks

logiclee

But your dads Octy is a lot heavier.

VAG needed a diesel that was Euro 4 compliant for the company car drivers. The PD140 is the first rung on the new 16V 2.0, there will be further models with more power.

Cheers
Lee

__________________
Another Ex-Scooby owner.
Mondeo TDCi 130 6 Speed Ghia, Octavia 1.9TDi Elegance (Now Sold), Fabia 1.9TDi Comfort and Felicia 1.9D GLi

Fabpreza

I suppose if you take the original 90 and 110bhp 1.9 and look how it evolved with PD to 150 bhp in standard trim, then in 3 or 4 years, 140bhp will become 180bhp before you start remapping it yourself.

I remember trying to convince petrolheads on Evo's site when I had my 2.5 Audi TDi(150bhp but running at 185bhp) that within the same timescale, 210-220bhp would be fairly normal for medium execs. Oh how they laughed and took the doo-doo when I said that in the mid-range my car wasn't that far behind the Impreza, but give it a couple of years. 535d, E320 (Euro IV), A6 3.0 anyone !

Ibizauk

Judging by a run in I had the other day with a new A3 2.0 Tdi, if anything the performance of these cant match a 1.9 130, the guy was giving it a good thrashing, as I could hear his engine at revving out! Although the A3 undoubtedly has its advantages. It will be interesting to see some of the more powerful developed versions of the new VAG 2.0 tdi as they arrive onto the market.

jtstatic

One thing I've heard about current 2.0 tdi engines is that they have less tuning potential than 1.9 PD130/PD150 for example. The main drawback being that the stock injectors run out of juice when going over 170bhp.. Anyway there is a more powerful version of the engine coming later that will have 170bhp in stock condition which will change things a bit.. only for the top end models though (new passat for example)..

Mil

16V cars usually have much more tuning potential than 8V cars.

__________________
Milton Kyvernitis
Private Government

Tom_vRS

I must say that I thought the 2.0 was slightly more refined - but certainly not a massive difference. I followed my friend who has the new A3 sportback 2.0 TDi, and I just had the edge on him - but of course the Fabia is lighter etc. The only thing that suprised me was how smokey his was! Its done 6k and was smoking like a biatch! Certainly smoked lots more than my 1.9, even before I had the Green and PD160 intake treatment.

I've also heard that the ECU has many more anti-remap features too - but I only heard that from a friend who runs his 12" sub off his head unit

__________________
97/R BMW 328i in Boston Green.

Goodas

I have heard that the PD130 can 'feel' faster because the torque/power arrives in more of a lump, giving the stomach squeeze feeling The 2.0 has power over a slightly greater range.

I see a golf V 140 most mornings on the work run up the dual carriageway and the acceleration is eerily similar, its like having a shadow

__________________
Corrida Red Fabia Vrs...now sold...new car...Blue Fiesta ST150

jtstatic

To correct myself what I meant to say was that there is potential but possibilities for tuning in its current state are limited as tuning parts are not yet available.. the situation will likely change though when better injectors will be available for this engine.

Prasg

I have both - a newish Octavia 140 and a 21 month old Fabia vrs.
The gearing is slightly different and these are some figure I’ve got for both. In magazines they say the 140 engine is more refined that the 1.9 in the Octavia.

30 to 50 mph in 3rd
vrs = 3.5, Oct= 4.0

40 to 60 in 3rd
vrs = 4.4, Oct= 3.9

50 to 70 in 3rd
vrs = 4.7, Oct=4.9
Mine is the estate which I think is slightly lighter than the Octavia hatch. I also ran the Octavisa in very carefully whereas the vrs was a demo car.

I realise others will have got different figures but this is how it is for my cars. Also, when I say 40 to 60 I mean 43 to 63 to allow for the 3mph it reads over the actaul value

briwy

I agree with Prasg
I too have both, my Octy is also and estate which is about 50Kg heavier than the hatch.
Personally I think that the 130 is the better engine
I do a lot of miles in the Octy (company car) and for me the advantage of a turbi diesel is the relaxing drive.
My Octy certainly will not accelerate anything like the Fabia Vrs in 5th and 6th which means a lot of changing down and harder work on the motorway.
I agree that the Octy is considerably heavier than the Fabia but I previously had a Passat 130 TDi Sport. This had the same engine as the Vrs and a six speed box and would pull in 5th and 6th a hell of a lot better than the 140 TDi. I guess the Passat and the new Octy are about the same weight so unless I've got a duff engine I consider the 140 a step back in regards of drivability.
Seems to me that newer diesels are getting petrol characteristic, ie you have to thrash them to get any power out. Guy at work has a a new BM 3 series and has found the same, now has to change down all the time wheras his old had lots of torque low down.
If I wanted to rev a car to get moving I'd have bought a petrol engine.

Brian

WW_VRS

I must say I was surprised about how smokey a lot of relatively new diesels are. I bet they get trashed from cold most days which would cause that I suppose, over time.

Must agree with Brian there tho - a lot of diesels require more revving now, strangely

Remap time me thinks

__________________
WW --->> Project Journal (pic links in first post there)
Lummox'/Ross thread on Unit18 Automotive progress on my car: here