Many thanks Skidpan. I'm not normally a fan of smaller engine / big car (and still wouldn't fancy a one-litre Mondeo), but clearly the 1.4 TFSI is man enough to give the Superb respectable perfromance, as you correctly forecast that it would.

Engines like this have got to be the answer for people who want to move away from diesels and from experience I know that its big brother the VAG 2.0 TSI is also excellent. My diesel V60 would have done no better than your Superb in terms of economy on the Scotland trip: SWMBO's 1.4 Audi A1 would have done even better and matched your previous Leon.

There are a lot of our members who don't like VAG cars, and have given good reasons why: but for those of us lucky enough to buy new - or live near enough to SLO for him to find you a good used one - there are equally convincing reasons to buy them.

These are such great engines, so I do hope that in time we'll get some evidence that they can still be reliable at high mileages. Just at the moment they haven't been around in large numbers for long enough, and there is the usual scepticism about small, hard-worked turbos.

Edited by Avant on 29/05/2017 at 15:42

I did not hang about on the trips and overtook when the oportunity arose but I feel confident enough to say I never went above 5000 rpm and can only remeber one ocation where I had to press hard enough to get full throttle. How can such easy performance be called "hard worked".

My old GTi 1800 did 113,000 in my ownership and was still on the road last year with just over 200,000 miles on the clock and no engine work needed. On A roads I had to work it far harder than the 1.4 TSi to get good performance and on the motorway at 70 mph instead of doing the 2500 rpm approx it was doing 3500 rpm approx. On both counts it was worked harder and I for one have no worries about the TSi 150 PS.

A bit of a tangent here, but I recently chanced on some dyno charts that had been done by an owner of the same model of bike as my own (2006 Suzuki SV650, a 650cc V-twin rated by Suzuki at a claimed 72bhp).

The plots included dyno runs done at 25% throttle, 50% throttle and 100% throttle (easy to do from the injection system's throttle position sensor). At 50% throttle, the bike produced 52bhp @ 9,200rpm. At 100% throttle it gave 73bhp @ 9,600rpm.

The point I'm getting at is, even half-throttle (which most drivers rarely use in everyday driving) isn't really working the engine hard.

"How can such easy performance be called "hard worked"?"

Agreed - I'm with you on this. But there has been scepticism about the longevity of small turbo engines expressed here and elsewhere, which I don't myself share unless I'm proved wrong in time.

Glad you are getting on so well with your Superb skidpad, its a very nice car, quite classy looking. I agree about the VAG hand break arrangement, its great it just works away in the background and very quickly goes out of your thinking altogether.

Ive never agreed with the idea that idea that the TSi engine is hard worked or over stressed, unless these comments are qualified with an explanation they don’t mean anything. Well maintained and driven properly there is no reason they won’t last as long as any other.

Had a !.8 GTi as well, Mars red big bumper version, loved it to bits but your 1.4TSi would knock it into the long grass in just about every respect.

Go on try the V-Power fuel. You know you want to.

but nothing surprises me in this trade. I know Mitsubishi would've came down on us like a tonne of bricks for that.

Back in about 1991 when I was competing in the Caterham I decided a 4x4 would be a good idea not because the Golf GTi struggled to tow but because of the state of some of the paddocks. Early starts so I could get a good spot normally worked well for me but if you arrived late you could end up in a spot where getting out required the help of a fellow competitor with a suitable vehicle. The smallish 4x4 market was much smaller back then and basiaclly mean't the SWB Shogun or Trouper were the only decent options. The Daihatsu looked plain silly and the Frontera was just plain rubbish in SWB form with the 2 litre engine.

So off to the Mitsubishi dealer and had a look at the Shogun. and to the Izusu dealer for a look at the Trooper. Preferred the Shogun and the dealer seemed nice enough and was local (passed them on the way into work). He explained all the important stuff and I went away to think. A few days later I had to visit a local back street garage to do a property survey for the landlords agent. Right grotty place (floor was not even concreted) but in there were 3 brand new Mitsubishi's. Got talking to the "owner" who told me that they did all the PDI and most of the service work for the local Mitsubishi dealer because they did not have a decent mechanic. Wonder if Mitsubishi knew about this?

I thought a bit more and decided a slightly earlier start would be better than buying a car I only really needed 20 days a year from a dealer who could not afford a decent mechanic.

The back street garage visit saved me a fortune.

Had the car for almost 5 months now and yesterday managed to go out for a decent run without the usual annoying squeaks and rattles i.e. the wife. Would have normally gone in the Caterham but the weather forecast was grim for the afternoon (turned out correct) and as I get older I don't like getting wet (got a hood but hate it).

About 70 miles each way mostly on decent A roads with 50 and 60 mph limits but plenty of 30 mph villages, a toll bridge and a 2 mile stretch of 70 mph dual carriageway.

Trip there took 1 hour 20 minutes starting at 8.30am which was a decent drive with no hold ups other than 2 temporary sets of traffic lights at roadworks, in truth they added no more than a couple of minutes. No idiots on the road, cannot remember overtaking more than a handfull of cars. The dash mpg (which is actually spot on form calculations) read 55 mpg on arrival.

Trip home took 1 hour 40 minutes starting out at 4.20pm and was again a decent drive. probably overtook fewer cars because of the extra traffic and only one slight idiot (Seat Leon who went like a bullet in a strait line but virtually stopped in corners) and a VW Transporter whose driver thought all other cars should simply get out of his way. I had to do 80 mph to get past the Leon and then left him in the far distance driving at a legal speed and I almost fell off my seat when the Transporter driver nearly turned the thing over on a wet roundabout in his attempt to pass me and a couple of other cars. We all turned right and he went strait on so what did he gain for his stupidity. Temp roadworks held me up for a short time again and the average for the trip 53mpg.

So overall I did 140 miles in 3 hours which is an average speed of 47 mph and achieved 54 mpg without driving like a parson. I never went anywhere near full throttle and I don't think I went over 3500 rpm all day. Despite being the size of a small dwelling the Superb feels normal on the road and you always get out feeling relaxed.

Still highly recomended.

Back in the 1980's I did the trip early one morning in the Golf GTi in 55 minutes. Roads were exactly the same but there was little traffic, no speed cameras, I was more stupid and I cared not a jot about mpg. Speed limit through the villages was 40 mph if there was one. Might of got 30 mpg if I was lucky, will never know.

Was I as relaxed when I arrived, probably not.

Was I as happy as I was yesterday, probably happier.

How times change.

the likelyhood of my next car being petrol (or hybrid of some sort)

Looked in a mag over the weekend. Had a roundup of hybrids available. Toyota came near the bottom because basically they have not moved on since they first brought them out. Same faults that I have noted in my limited experience of the Auris Hybrid (as a passenger), all revs and no action when you boot it and mpg no better on the motorway than a good modern turbo petrol.

Have a good test drive. But other brands may be better.

Edited by skidpan on 24/07/2017 at 16:06

They make more sense as a company car -

Which is exactly why my colleage had one as his company car. They also have benefits for the company which is why they are happy to provide a car whose cost is over the normal budget for that particular user.

But for a private buyer like myself paying at least £5000 on top of the price of a Leon for something that is slower, less comfortable, poorly finished and no more economical overall makes no sense whatsoever.

The weakness here is turbocharged engines lower capacity to take the neglect which some owners show their cars particularly as they age. Missed oil changes and poor quality wrong grade oil will kill them far more rapidly than a normally asperated engine but the upside of greater economy, drivability and lower emissions will see them become the mainstream for the foreseeable future. Just don't buy one used unless it has a full main dealer history. The days of back street garages bunging in any old oil in and making do and mending are numbered sadly.

To be honest, its a weakness with the vast majority of modern cars - unlike many designed in the mid 1990s to early 2000s (before the common rail diesel and three-lettered acronymn era), most modern cars are less hardy in terms of their engines and electronics (though may be for body corrosion resistance), which, as you say, must have very specific TLC, which is forcing more owners to keep servicing their cars at main dealerships, which obviously costs a lot more, even if an independent uses the correct grade of oil etc.

I remember my old barber (now sadly passed on over 10 years ago) saying that he couldn't keep his beloved (but aging) Audi because it was too expensive to service at the local main dealer, but no independents in the area had all the make-specific diagnostics equipment (and weren't going to pay a fortune to aquire them) that were required for the service. I wonder if most modern cars can even be serviced other than to a very basic level at home any more either, which won't be going down well with Haynes.

The weakness here is turbocharged engines lower capacity to take the neglect which some owners show their cars particularly as they age. Missed oil changes and poor quality wrong grade oil will kill them far more rapidly than a normally asperated engine but the upside of greater economy, drivability and lower emissions will see them become the mainstream for the foreseeable future. Just don't buy one used unless it has a full main dealer history.

Missed services will evetually affect the reliabilty of any modern car and the the correct spec oil (ACEA and viscocity) is essential on all modern cars. One size fits all Castrol GTX or Duckhams is long dead.

We had a bad experience with one Nissan dealer back in about 2009. The car went in for its service and when I collected it the service desk told me they had saved me £10 because they had used 10w40 mineral instead of 3w30 semi synthetic. I told them I would not pay until they had changed it back to the correct oil which they refused to do saying it would be fine. A heated discussion followed during which they threatened to lock the car away in their compound unless I paid, I threatened to call the Police and report that the garage was stealing my car (no idea if they would have attended) and report the garages actions to Nissan (it was a well documented fact that the wrong oil could cause the timing chain and tensioner on these engines to fail prematurely). By this time the showroom (where the service desk was) was filling nicely and they obviously did not want the Police turning up or me continuing to block 1/2 the available places so they agreed to change the oil and filter and after some further words agreed to allow me to see it taking place. Had a call a few days later from the service director who apologised for his staffs actions and promised that if we did decide to use them again we would get the excellent service all owners should get.

On early Ford Zetec Mondeo engines anything but 5w30 would lead to noisy hydraulic lifters and on later Zetecs (after they started fitting solid lifters) it was still essential to use 5w30 of A1 spec (later A5) to avoid issues with the emmision control system.

When we had the Kia Ceed CRDi the oil spec was 5w30 Fully Synthetic C3 low SAPS since the engine was fitted with a DPF but one local dealer (mainly sold Ford and we had used for years) used Ford spec 5w30 semi synthetic A1/B1 in them.

Using a main dealer is no garantee of getting the job done correctly.

As afr as small turbo engines are concerned, sump sizes tend to be c 3-3.5 liters.. You don't need much lost oil and total owner indifference to run oil below safe levels...

The oil and filter change on a 1.4 TSi is 4 litres. As a comparison the capacity for a 2 litre Ford Zetec is 4.3 litres. The much loved Mazda 2.0 petrol in the 6 holds 4.2 litres. Sod all difference. But the highly regarded Honda 1.8 petrol in the Civic only holds 3.8 litres.

As usual some posters will not check the facts before posting what can only be considered to be critisism of certain product types. But why should truith get in the way of a good story.

If the owner does not check his fluid levels (and tyre pressures regularly) then they deserve all they get.

Edited by skidpan on 25/07/2017 at 16:47