Scirocco Central

Both of those diesels are the old PD not the new common rail.

Yes I have driven the TSI.

I didn't call you an idiot, I said that if you compare 2 things and have only got knowledge of one of them, it leaves you LOOKING like an idiot or a stirrer.

Okay. I submit. Enjoy your car. It's what ownership is all about. I wonder how the torque curves compare? That's another thread though. :-) Just found a Dyno chart which shows peak torque of 280Nm from 1500rpm to 5000rpm and no dips on the Tsi. That's exactly how it feels. Hugely grunty! All the power at the top end I had a 192ps RX-8 and even though it went like the clappers when revved, I always wished I got the 231ps. If you want the diesel buy the 170!

170 all the way, i test drove both tsi and tdi, deisel holds its money much better, your vw dealer will tell you that, mid range power its much better than the tsi, No brainer for me.

I've recently put in an order for a 140 GT.

I'm having some regrets but changing the order to the 170 would mean possible delay to my order. Still not got my build date as well.

Plus would mean I'd need to drop the Luganos and go for the interlagos instead with the 170 due to budget restrictions.

However, if the 140 suffices I would be happy. I mean if its quick enough, fun enough to drive I can't complain.

But from posts I've read, impression I'm getting it would be a big mistake going for 140 instead of 170.

In a huge dilemma here! Any sort of help/advice would be grateful!

I find the 140 very good. It is a great improvement on the old PD 140 diesel, and is much quieter and is already more lively and more economical with 1k on the clock than our Audi 140 PD with 30k. If the 140 isn't enough for you when you get it, have it chipped for £300/£400 and you've got more than 170 and saved £600/£700 aswell.

Thanks for you reply.

I am considering chipping it as well. Just implicatons of it being a leased car, also as far as I knew it could only be done for 70 quid or so.

Plus while I have the car, I do need to service it once as well which for then need to get mod removed.

Hi Suli_din

2 things, if you do not have a buikld date yet, you can still change the order and it should not affect you in terms of delay, do not accept a dealer who says it will...

Second one is that the 170 is around 20% more powerful, so you get what you expect, more power, more torque and more fun

and if the 170 is not enough, you can get it chipped for £300/£400 quid and get over 200BHP

suli_din wrote:Thanks for you reply.

I am considering chipping it as well. Just implicatons of it being a leased car, also as far as I knew it could only be done for 70 quid or so.

Plus while I have the car, I do need to service it once as well which for then need to get mod removed.

I would be suprised if you can find anything for £70

no need to get the map removed, they will not look for it on your car unless you have blown the engine or done serious mechanical damage. which in the end is not likely to be down to the mapping unless you go for a very extreme ( pushing the limits) map.

Cheers jammyd,

I have emailed the leasing company to find out if I can change the order without delays!

Going for the 170 would mean need to sacrifice the Luganos and stick to Interlagos.

What a dilemma!!

If you believe what the chip companies tell you, a chipped 140 should be better than a std 170 as it will have more power and is supposed to be more economical too.

should is the word though, my old 170TDI CR engine in my TT was actually putting out 179BHP on the rollers but post remapping I was edging 210bhp.

I am biased though, I have a 140TDI and I am now moving to a 170TDI as I feel the 140 is under powered with not enough pull in 5th and 6th gears

jammyd wrote:should is the word though, my old 170TDI CR engine in my TT was actually putting out 179BHP on the rollers but post remapping I was edging 210bhp.

I am biased though, I have a 140TDI and I am now moving to a 170TDI as I feel the 140 is under powered with not enough pull in 5th and 6th gears

Not sure I understand your point. I think most VAG engines put out more power than quoted, but that doesn't mean that chipping doesn't improve them as your case proved.

Surely if you have a 140, it would be much, much easier and cheaper to chip it than swap cars to a 170? There must be other reasons behind the swap?

Just spoke to leasing company who said that the VW campaigns have ended on Friday last week so will not be able to get same price for 170 I was quoted before.

Also, they have said that lead times will be delayed as my build week is very near so any changes will cause delays.

I guess have to stick with 140 just now and hopefully as GeoffT suggested go for a remap.

Any reasons why you not going for a remap instead jammyd?

Keep hearing about re chipping a 140 to make it a 170 and save money. A 170 is not a just a re- chipped 140 engine there is more besides. Ask yourself this if you can re-chip a 140 to 170 why not just chip it to 200? Think your find you cant

peter.vw wrote:Keep hearing about re chipping a 140 to make it a 170 and save money. A 170 is not a just a re- chipped 140 engine there is more besides. Ask yourself this if you can re-chip a 140 to 170 why not just chip it to 200? Think your find you cant

Of course you can't, no-one is suggesting that you can, but as the 170 is best part of £1000 more than a 140, and chipping a 140 costs £300/400 and gets you more power and possibly better economy than a std 170, it seems to make sense.

No one has mentioned wanting 200bhp in this thread as far as I can see.

GeoffT wrote:No one has mentioned wanting 200bhp in this thread as far as I can see.

No I was making this comparison from 140 to 200 to show that for your £1000 your getting more than a re-chipped engine, I understand that the turbo is bigger and the injectors are different on the 170 maybe some one on here can enlighten us,
For me having driven both the 140 and the 170 the 170 is the best option more power right through the rev range .
If cost is a factor the 1.4 petrol is a good alternative but what ever Scirocco you chose you will not be disappointed.

I've just had a look at the superchips power curves for both the 140 and 170, chipped and std.

The curves are a very similar shape and the figures are:

...................Max Power.........Max Torque
Std 140............152 BHP............332 Nm
Chipped 140......184 BHP............386 Nm
Std 170............180 BHP............370 Nm
Chipped 170.......202 BHP............417 Nm

So on these figures a chipped 140 is better than a std 170, but if you want more than 180 BHP you need to start with the 170.

Finding this thread a revelation...I had a MkIV Golf TDI90 back in 1999, my brother a few years later had a Golf GTTDI 110 and later a Bora TDI 130 (?) these were all the PD engines and were seen as really powerful diesels, and preferred over their petrol equivs...I've lost track of diesels a little (although the other 1/2 has a 2.5 TDI XC90 but this 'only' has 170bhp and certainly is no slouch despite it's bulk), whats happened for everyone to be talking about the 140 being a bit of a lightweight...yep the 170 is more powerful but given the old PD 110 & 130's were rapid (if I remember more for in gear rather than off the line) whats making the 140 such appear such a slug? Is it just more weight creeping on to the Scirocco negating the extra BHP or has everyone turned into a Max power road racer?

I've just ordered a 140 GT as I am doing mainly a 250 mile round trip 2-3 times a month now am home based. Tthe deal was 50% of what I'm paying for my BMW 320i Coupe..I thought the extra torque of the diesel and the slightly lighter weight would give me similar performance add into the mix the fuel savings hopefully I'll be quids in ....order placed now but am I going to regret it?

Hi Gronk. Like you I have had cars with both 115 & 130 PD engines. In fact I just sold a Mk IV Golf GT TDI 130 when I got the Scirroco. By comparison, the new 140CR is anything but a slug! I find it noticeably more lively than both the Golf 130PD and my wifes Audi 140PD. Maybe part of the problem is that it is much smoother and quieter than the earlier engines and the power is much more evenly spread across the rev range so you don't get the huge surge at around 2000 rpm that the 130PD especially gave. It is much better to drive however, with no holes in the torque curve, and although a lot of the talk in this thread has been about chipping, at the moment I am more than happy with it as it is. Also looking at the above test figures, it's likely that it is nearer 150 bhp than 140 anyway. I don't think you will be disappointed.

Phew!