Will be very interested in your regular reviews of this in terms of overall performance, mpg and likes/dislikes, as it looks an ideal size for future use. I followed a 1.0 tsi the other day and it had plenty of performance. If VAG's belt drive TSi proves a long term reliable engine, I coud be tempted, so far I haven't heard any undue engine-related issues apart from the odd oil burner.

If VAG's belt drive TSi proves a long term reliable engine, I coud be tempted, so far I haven't heard any undue engine-related issues apart from the odd oil burner.

The troublesome TSi was the chain cam one and the twin charged version was the one that had a huge appetite for oil in some cars. The current TSi's share no ancestry with that engine series other than the name. Yet to read about a troublesome one and its been on sale now for over 5 years. The 3 pot is a bit newer but I understand it shares many features.

It's funny how we take 100bhp/litre power outputs for granted these days. 30 years ago, getting an engine with that sort of specific output in an everyday car would have been a major achievement.

50 bhp/litre was more the norm until the early 80's. My original Golf GTi pushed that to a heady 62 bhp/litre. Honda achieved 100 bhp/litre in the Civic type R with no turbo as did BMW with the E30 M3. Most cars that have reached 100 bhp/litre have had turbos. Even the Sierra Cosworth for all its legendary status only managed 100 bhp/litre.