|
I believe VW can, and do, design and manufacture excellent diesels.
Sorry, I don't.
I drive dozens of different cars each year as a result of my travels and the VAG 1.6 and 2.0 diesels are, in my experience, noisy, rough and not that economical. Someone will now come on to say they get 59.235907 mpg out of their 1.6 noise box I'm sure.
Having also actually owned a car with a VAG 2.0 CR diesel my view is that it is hopeless.
I've also run Subaru and Honda diesels to crzy mileages with no problems whatsoever.
Sister has a recent (61 plate) BMW 2.0 diesel and it's been nothing but trouble.
|
|
Make a note of broken down cars on the motorway, old bangers aside, anything under 10 years old is invariably a VAG diesel. For instance my journey down the M6/M1 this Friday - two broken down cars, one 55 Reg Golf TDi, one 56 reg Passat TDi. Since I started making a point of noticing the make of broken down cars on the motorway, the bias towards VAG diesels is staggering.
|
Make a note of broken down cars on the motorway, old bangers aside, anything under 10 years old is invariably a VAG diesel. For instance my journey down the M6/M1 this Friday - two broken down cars, one 55 Reg Golf TDi, one 56 reg Passat TDi. Since I started making a point of noticing the make of broken down cars on the motorway, the bias towards VAG diesels is staggering.
However, you do need to divide the number broken down by the number sold to get a realistic picture.
|
However, you do need to divide the number broken down by the number sold to get a realistic picture.
Yeah, coz Ford and Vauxhall - only sell a handful of cars every year - that why I don't see them stranded on the hard shoulder - or BMW 3 serieses - despite being the best seller in their class.
|
|
|
|
|
Having also actually owned a car with a VAG 2.0 CR diesel my view is that it is hopeless.....
Interesting comment BC, , as I've been trying to find owners views of this engine as opposed to the older PD unit, which is known as a bit of a dog. Would you like to share some detail which brought you to this conclusion, thx.
|
Bazza,
I run a a4 2.0 tdi cr 60 plate. In my view it is a genuinely nice engine to drive. Economical, refined - anyone who refers to it as a noise box can't have driven to many modern diesels (fiat 1.3 multijet springs to mind). And flexible through the gears.
I'm not going to comment on long term reliability as I've only done 28k but I thought these engines were proving to be reliable provided they were driven in the right way I.e. not lots of short runs.
We recently came from the south of France to Calais in outs at a good speed on oe tank of diesel. I'm happy with that!
|
|
As I said I fancied a Subaru diesel, but did not require 4WD, nor fancy the associated fuel penalty.
Because of the wifes knee problems and it being a shared vehicle we also required an automatic.
Which also eliminated a Saburu, or indeed a Honda.
So it boiled down to a VAG DSG or a Ford Powershift.
Since I am poor at makng decisions I opted to elimnate the Ford permutations, allowing that VW had had more experience building these double clutch transmissions.
That said I knew that the dry 7 speed DSG was a new development.
I hope the 1.6TDI proves to be as good as the old 1998 TDI was.( I would be the first to acknowledge the 1.9TDI was a racous noise lump btw)
PS
I reckon some find them noisy because they insist in driving them like a PETROL, revving needlessly, therefore creating noise at the expense of fuel consumption.
I say this having witnessed this behavouir by recent petrol to diesel converts (as in sitting in with)
I do note that the DSG changes up at (to all intents and purposes) exactly the same low rpm's I would do manually (and did in der Galaxy, which can only assume was a factor in the very reasonable mpg's I got)
Cheers
Marcus
Edited by dieseldogg on 16/12/2012 at 11:56
|
I reckon some find them noisy because they insist in driving them like a diesel, revving needlessly, therefore creating noise at the expense of fuel consumption.
They're probably trying to 'blow' the soot out of the DPF!
I do note that the DSG changes up at (to all intents and purposes) exactly the same low rpm's I would do manually (and did in der Galaxy)
Yet people complain about this and think that the gearbox has been programmed incorrectly. Driving in a low gear gives the illusion of going faster than you are.
|
|
|
|
DieselDogg, you're brave to go for a new DSG design, it has taken VAG a number of years to shake down the issues with every new generation DSG.
|
|
|
|
Bazza, I run a a4 2.0 tdi cr 60 plate. In my view it is a genuinely nice engine to drive. Economical, refined - anyone who refers to it as a noise box can't have driven to many modern diesels (fiat 1.3 multijet springs to mind). And flexible through the gears. I'm not going to comment on long term reliability as I've only done 28k but I thought these engines were proving to be reliable provided they were driven in the right way I.e. not lots of short runs. We recently came from the south of France to Calais in outs at a good speed on oe tank of diesel. I'm happy with that!
I ran a 2.0 CR 110 bhp on a 10 plate in a Skoda for 13,000 appalling miles.
It was noisy, rough and intractible right from new. It burned about 1/2 a litre of oil every 400 miles, and before we get the usual 'diesels burn oil when new' nonsense:
- never burned oil in a Honda or Subaru diesel, even at almost 100,000 miles
- getting steadily worse as the Skoda limped to the point where I binned it
Constant gear changing due to power band stretching from 1900 rpm to 1950.
Had two sets of injectors and a diesel pump in vain attempts to fix it.
Never got more than 37mpg.
Skoda jokers once tried to blame it on driving it too gently and the DPF being sooted up (at about 5000 miles) so with the service manager I drove it for about 10 miles at a steady 4000 rpm in second. His response was that it was bound to be bad if that's the way I treated it!
Can't say any of the various other Skoda loan cars were in any way better.
I'm struggling to think which of the modern CRD engines I haven't driven in the last year or so. I choose to run petrol engines in both of my own cars.
Edited by Buster Cambelt on 16/12/2012 at 14:50
|
|
"I appreciate BMW make excellent diesels."
My god they are responsible for producing some of the biggest disasters in the history of engines,Vanos and swirl flaps in diesels destroyed the engine and disolving pistons rings in the petrol engines to name a few problems plus extremely poor quality of electrical items, VAG do not have prize of the worst diesels alone.
I to have done 120k in an Accord diesel with no problem and a two 407 1.6hdis with over 150k on one with no problems.
|
|
An ex-colleague of mine had an E46 3-series diesel that decided to deposit the contents of its engine all over his driveway, even though it had been regularly serviced.
I think it was a mistake for Mazda to use the Ford/PSA diesel engines, which were the cause of many "reliability issues" where they'd never existed before. Most of the other ones were due to parts sourced from European sub-contractors (shared with many other models and makes across the world).
When Japanese cars were (amost) solely built using Japanese-made parts, or at least to their normal standards, then reliability was very good. It is noticeable that my Mazda3 is very reliable, as it is a 1.6 petrol and doesn't have the TC/SC which gave all the problems. Both this car and my previous Nissan Micra (K11) never use oil at all.
I think its only when the Japanese makes lower their engineering standards to price mtach the opposition that they come acropper, as Toyota did a few years ago. Unlike with some German marques, where you pay for the fit & finish and the badge, for Japanese makes you always (and hopefully still) pay for the quality of the engineering.
|
I think it was a mistake for Mazda to use the Ford/PSA diesel engines, which were the cause of many "reliability issues" where they'd never existed before. Most of the other ones were due to parts sourced from European sub-contractors (shared with many other models and makes across the world).
The issues suffered by Mazda were not experienced by that engine in any other car, the problem was caused by Mazda's DPF regen programming. Had they not tinkered and stuck with Ford's system lock, stock and barrel they would not have suffered oil contamination issues from failed DPF regens. This was a Mazda cock up - they managed to make a very reliable engine a liability.
|
|
|
|
I drove it for about 10 miles at a steady 4000 rpm in second
His response was that it was bound to be bad if that's the way I treated it!
His response was quite right. Driving at 4000 RPM in second is the most efficient way to turn fuel into noise. Driving like this yields bad fuel consumption and a clogged DPF.
|
|
Actually its more likely to clear a DPF driving at low revs causes more problems.
Edited by Collos25 on 16/12/2012 at 19:02
|
|
I thought it was load, therefore exhaust heat that cleared DPFs, not rpm.
1,500rpm in top at 50mph is no different to 4,000 in 2nd at 50mph - surely?
|
|
For a petrol, little difference since air/fuel ratio stays constant.
For a diesel, air/fuel ratio is not constant. Roughly speaking, if you double the revs you double the airflow. But you don't double fuel flow. Hence engine runs leaner and EGTs are cooler.
Obviously high load, high RPM gives the highest temperatures but this isn't a scenario that will corrospond to any legal cruising speed. So, you just use the highest gear the engine is comfortable with. This also gives the best economy. Simples. No shenanigans required.
|
|
|
|
Higher revs = more heat which reduces soot build up.
|
|
An another thing!
Wor 1.6TDI skoda uses NO oil, well it is perhaps nearing the min on the dipstick when due the 18,600 mile servce.
But then I ran the engine in correctly.
As in straight out of the showroom, about 10/15 mile of ordinary roads with 30 and 40 mile limits, nicely up to temp when we reached the Motorway, then 80mph odd the 60 miles home.
Slowing up when going through Belfast.
She also got a few periodic decent high speed work outs once warmed up, and allowed to cool down, with lower speed driving before pulling the strangler.
btw I religously checked the ol until I was sure she did not be using any abnormal amount.
I intend to run her to 200,000 or 250,000 miles, this was the basis the car was bought on.
Then one more new car should near-enough see my driving days past.
|
|
My Skoda Superb 19.pd100 VAG diesel with 140k miles still does about 50mpg and has had little go wrong with it (except usual service items). Alternator failed at about 100k and had a damaged vacuum pipe at about 115k (showed up as EGR). Today it does about 15k / year and usually only needs topping with oil after about 6k. It obviously doesn't have the later Seimmens PD injectors or CR or DPF or balancer modules etc.. It's even on it's original clutch/DMF, battery and exhaust!
I must admit I'll select my next purchase very carefully. Was wondering about the VAG tsi engines but they seem to be having issues - although I do have a friend with a 1.4tsi Octavia that has been great and suprisingly economical (exceeded 50mpg on a long trip to Germany). What is the reliability like of the Hyundai 1.7 diesel (IX35, I40 etc...) or Kia ?
|
|
You are ahead of me - I have a Superb with the AWX 130 engine. This generation of 1.9 PDs was the absolute pick of the bunch - Bosch solenoid injectors, no self-destruct balance/oil pump drive and no DPF. Mine runs well too.
I will also have to consider its eventual replacement but I would look into any VAG engine you may consider with the utmost care. Avoid any of their engines with a chain camshaft drive (they just can't do it) and scour the Internet on an international basis to see what problems are arising. The high output/small displacement petrols seem to be a minefield. Likewise, approach Japanese/Far Eastern diesels with care as they produce European fuel systems under licence and don't always get it right. Makers in this global region have had no interest in producing economical prime movers until comparatively recently and consequently lack experience - the Mazda 6 diesel is perhaps an extreme example.
If you address the design weaknesses of your Superb and maintain it carefully with the correctly specified components (there's a lot of junk out there) you should get 300k miles out of it. They don't rust much and everything is fixable by an Independent. You're only half way there - keep it.
659.
Edited by 659FBE on 17/12/2012 at 12:48
|
Likewise, approach Japanese/Far Eastern diesels with care as they produce European fuel systems under licence and don't always get it right. Makers in this global region have had no interest in producing economical prime movers until comparatively recently and consequently lack experience - the Mazda 6 diesel is perhaps an extreme example.
Hyundai-Kia are moving away from licence-built engines having introduced their own designs for 2.0, 2.2 and 3.0 in 2009 and steadily working their way down the range.
|
|
Thanks 659,
It was the VAG chain cam I was worried about on the small petrols as well as reports of piston and injector failures.
Maybe I should have considered the recent very cheap 1.6mpi run-out model of the Octavia that used the good old 8v engine and fit it with lpg. This engine has been available in Europe with lpg factory fitted on the Octavia.
I'll keep the Superb for now but can't imagine driving to Italy with 300k on the clock in the future.
Edited by Big John on 17/12/2012 at 23:27
|
|
More info
Edited by BorisTheSpider on 18/12/2012 at 11:20
|
|
Do NOT open the above link as it more than likely to contain a virus - as I experienced recently!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
