Will be getting a fuel card with my new job and will change my (personal) car to something with a MUCH lower CO2 number to minimise the BIK hit. I want to stay with petrol and have found that several companies now do a 1.4 turbo petrol with 120-140 ish horses in an Astra/Focus/Golf sized car.
Anyone got such a car? If so what's it like in the real world?
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 12/02/2010 at 13:55
|
Have you read HJ's roadtest of the 1.4 turbo Astra?
www.honestjohn.co.uk/road_tests/index.htm?id=408
"We drove the 140PS 1.4 turbo, that also pumps out 200Nm torque from 1,850rpm.
It doesn?t feel quite as torquey from low revs as Renault?s or VWs 1.4 petrol turbos, or Peugeot 1.6THP. But it?s a very smooth and willing engine and pulls a very high 6th gear giving around 34-35mph per 1,000rpm. Fuel economy on the combined cycle is an excellent 47.9mpg, and CO2 of just 139g/km puts it into the £110 VED Band E. "
|
|
|
We got a 122PS TSi Golf VI for SWMBO in December, we considered the 160PS version and also the 2.0CR TDi (she was replacing a 2.2 CTDi Civic) and I can honestly say that the 122 drives very well indeed. Slower than the 160 but not slow by any means - it has as much torque as a 2.0L Mondeo and 122PS is ample. Low speed torque and tractability are both good.
I drive a 245PS 330d and whilst the Golf isn't in the same performance league I still find it an enjoyable, refined and economical car and don't feel 'short changed' on performance. I long since abandoned 'free fuel' though, can't see how the BIK can ever be worth it myself - do you have the choice to 'opt out' ?
|
DD - yes of course I saw HJ's review of the new Astra! It's at the top of my list right now. I was after some other opions like those of I_C's (thanks for that I_C) and would like to get some more if anyone would be kind enough to add their comments.
I_C - I will save between one and two grand a year by taking the fuel card, as long as I have a very efficient car to tag it to. Hence the search currently heading towards a 1.4T petrol with sub-140 CO2 thingies.
|
As I said in my review of the VAG 1.4TSI 122 in the Octavia, very good indeed, though I'm not comparing it with a 330d....
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?f=2&t=82...8
|
The Octavia 1.4 tsi is a bargain at around 14k for the hatch and a more practical car than a Golf. It's a cracking little engine and is also used in the big Supurb estate. Autocar are running one as a longtermer and they like it a lot.
|
|
Bear in mind there are a few variations on engine that are all badged 1.4TSi. But it sounds a good engine. It was originally both turbo and supercharged and was about 170PS but now available as just a turbo in various levels of tune which include the 122PS version.
|
I have a Golf 1.4 tsi / 122.
I would say that the engine feels & responds much like the average 1.8, whilst retaining 1.4 running costs.
I get around 40 - 42 for local running with 50 mpg possible on long trips if you keep to 70 ish on motorways.
This engine is refined too. It does not get over harsh whe nreved a bit.
|
I would say that the engine feels & responds much like the average 1.8
I've driven a few 1.8s but never one as good as that, much more torquey and relaxed IMHO. Amazingly responsive on a light throttle
I get around 40 - 42 for local running with 50 mpg possible on long trips if you keep to 70 ish on motorways.
I look forward to that... still running in and typically get around 40 at the moment
|
There is a Fiat Bravo1.4TJet with 150BHP.
In a slightly smaller car the Alfa MiTo is now available with 1.4 135BHP Multiair. Every review I have read it has left drivers in awe of the torque delivery.
|
|
|
|
The Octavia 1.4 tsi is a bargain at around 14k for the hatch
...or £12.5k from drivethedeal. That's for the Elegance; £10.9k for the S.
|
|
|
|
|
You don't say MUCH lower than what...
Personally, if I were looking for a petrol I'd go for the Alfa 1750 TBi.
Same power, more torque than a 2.0 T FSi Golf GTi or Skoda vRS.
|
|
My first turbo petrol was my Golf GTi 1.8T in 1999 followed by a Passat 1.8T Sport in 2000. Before I had a Vectra B 2.0 which seemed "underpowered" in comparison (well it was but thinking more torque than power). And in between the Golf I had an Audi A4 1.8, Audi A4 1.8T and another VW Passat 1.8T Sport. The non-turbo 125PS A4 was gutless. The best was the A4 1.8T Sport but it was costly as a company car (above my allowance per months and expensive list price for the meagre spec too) so I had it a few weeks as a temp car.
Edited by rtj70 on 12/02/2010 at 21:21
|
A 1.8 is capable of delivering 40mpg quite comfortably though isn't it? My extremely leggy old Primera manages it.
To make these smaller units worthwhile I'd be looking for more than 10-20% extra efficiency, what with all the extra complexity.
Is this part of the grand conspiracy to ruin petrol engines like they have with diesels, so we all buy electric cars?
|
|
Turbo petrols are about making them more efficient and less polluting. Getter more mpg will depend on the type of driving of course. But they are aiming to reduce emissions etc for the existing tests.
|
|
|
The 1.4 TSi 122 Golf is on 'back order' of at least 5 months at the moment for a reason - everyone wants this engine. So there is either a consensus or a herd mentality.....
I agree it drives like a 1.8 or even a 2.0 in a low state of tune, however the fuel economy is markedly better than the 1.8 Focus we ran a few years ago and similarly better than the 2.0 MK4 Golf we ran before that (which it also beats on performance).
HJ commented that in Germany they are offering the 1.8 TSi in the Golf as an alternative to the 1.4 TSi for people who don't want to wait, it would (perhaps) be a nice combination (available in the Octavia anyhow), however it doesn't detract from the fact that the 122 TSi / Golf combination is a good one.
Personally I don't care about the complexity, if it breaks it may cost money, it was a lot cheaper in both real and numeric terms than the similarly specced 2.0 Golf MK4 was 10 years ago.
We didn't get (the undoubtedly good) Octavia because it was too big (for a second car), lacked safety equipment and quite simply wasn't a Golf.
|
|
|
|
|
