Page 1 of 1

170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 8:57 am
by scirocco
Today when leaving my 2 year old 2.0 GT in for its second service my dealer asked if he could chat to me later about a potential change.

He pointed out a GT 170, Sumatra, Pano Roof and 19 inch alloys which in his words he would sell at a very keen price.

My first reaction was im not sure if id want to take a step back in performace. Has anyone driven a GT 210 BHP and GT 170 BHP back to back, any feedback welcome....

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:38 am
by wildvb99
If your Scirocco is 2 years old, won't it be the 200BHP model?

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 11:46 am
by Wappingwooly
I test drove the 170 TDI and the 210 Petrol for a full day each, before deciding on the diesel.

I didn't notice much difference in either model apart from at the top end (over 70mph), where it felt like the petrol could accelerate a bit faster than the diesel, apart from that though, couldn't tell too much between them.

Nice tax (£120) and mileage (45mpg is my average) so I went for the tractor :hyper:

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 1:51 pm
by scirocco
Yeah mines is but if I was changing I would be more interested in the comparison between the latest engines. Thanks for the info I will see about a test drive later...

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2010 5:02 pm
by mickscirocco
Remap it to 210 bhp , mine get done Tomos,

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Sun Oct 31, 2010 6:08 pm
by Ibanez33
Wappingwooly wrote:I test drove the 170 TDI and the 210 Petrol for a full day each, before deciding on the diesel.

I didn't notice much difference in either model apart from at the top end (over 70mph), where it felt like the petrol could accelerate a bit faster than the diesel, apart from that though, couldn't tell too much between them.

Nice tax (£120) and mileage (45mpg is my average) so I went for the tractor :hyper:

Added bonus the tax dropped in april to £110...

I think the biggest difference between them is the sound of the engine... :)

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 11:19 am
by pishpashposh
In terms of official facts and figures the 170 bhp diesel seems closer to the 1.4 TSI 160 BHP as the 0-60 of the 1.4 is quicker than the diesel 170 but i imagine the diesel is quicker when already moving. Top speed is marginal between the 1.4 and 170 diesel too. if you want outright performance then stick with the 2 litre petrol but if you want a blend of performance and economy get the diesel.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 12:25 pm
by maisbitt
The 170TDI is far quicker than the 160TSI when moving through the gears, especially in the overtaking range. It's so close on the 0-60 between the 2 due to lack of initial grip from a static start on the TDI.

If you look at the Audi TT 170TDI, you'll see that it's 0-60 time is just 7.5s, that's due to the TT having Quattro as standard for the TDI. Just a little more grip from the quattro and the 0-60 time is significantly reduced. That should show you how quick the 170TDI roc is once it's moving.

Unless you cane it all the time, you should get 45mpg around the doors and 52mpg minimum on motorway journeys at 75/80mph.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 12:42 pm
by scirocco
Had an interesting chat with the dealer and it looks as if I will be changing to a new 2.0L TSI. I currently only cover 10k a year so would much prefer the petrol engine, plus id miss the black headlining...

Dealer has stated he will have it for me in January with no problem, plus VW are freezing the VAT for all november purchases which is nice.

We also discussed the R and he stated dont bother ordering one as delivery times are likely to be 7 months +.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:50 pm
by pishpashposh
maisbitt wrote:The 170TDI is far quicker than the 160TSI when moving through the gears, especially in the overtaking range. It's so close on the 0-60 between the 2 due to lack of initial grip from a static start on the TDI.

If you look at the Audi TT 170TDI, you'll see that it's 0-60 time is just 7.5s, that's due to the TT having Quattro as standard for the TDI. Just a little more grip from the quattro and the 0-60 time is significantly reduced. That should show you how quick the 170TDI roc is once it's moving.

Unless you cane it all the time, you should get 45mpg around the doors and 52mpg minimum on motorway journeys at 75/80mph.

hmmm, the petrol engine TT is also 0.5 seconds quicker with quattro so in theory the 1.4 would have the same benefit. i certainly agree that the diesel will be quicker through the gears, no doubt about it, but i stick to my point that the 170 is closer to the 1.4 than 2.0 petrol in terms of raw pace. it would be interesting to see how all 3 fared round a track.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Tue Nov 02, 2010 9:34 am
by maisbitt
Pishpashposh: The 170 TDI has a massive initial torque surge when it accelerates from a standstill that won't let it put all that power down, never experienced that torque surge in my mate's 160TSI. The TTs Quattro helps in that respect, it'll help any car that couldn't put all that power down from a standstill, but I doubt it'd benefit the 160TSI to the same degree (0.5s off the 0-60 times).

The 160 TSI's 0-60 time being comparable to the 170TDI has more to do with it having initial grip though less power and a more linear power delivery.

The 170TDI's 30-70mph 3rd/4th/5th "overtaking" times are a lot closer to the 200PS TSI's than the 160TSI's. Once the TDI overcomes the initial lack of grip (if you're after a fast static-start), it's got some real kick if you keep it in the 2000-3500rpm sweet spot. The 210TSI will no doubt widen the gap though.

Sometimes that 170TDI torque surge is a real hazard though - you can get caught out on a busy roundabout, spinning on the spot if you give it too much, or if it's wet.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 10:07 pm
by Lovepug13
scirocco wrote:plus id miss the black headlining...
A guy at work has the 170 GT and he has the black headlining, I thought the top spec in diesel and petrol got it?

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:29 am
by scirocco
Strange the one I was looking at last week in the show room didn't!

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:08 am
by RW1
Lovepug13 wrote:A guy at work has the 170 GT and he has the black headlining, I thought the top spec in diesel and petrol got it?
If the Scirocco is spec'd with a leather option it is usually a black roof lining in the UK.

C.

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:50 pm
by skindemon
i came from an S3 - whilst the top end power clearly isn't there in the 170tdi compared to the s3, for at least 90% of the time, the diesel is better in my opinion. It's economical & very torquey (great for overtaking easily), which for me are the key factors. Add the fact tax is low, insurance is also low.

This is my first diesel car and I'm very happy with it :)

Re: 170BHP VS 210BHP

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:31 pm
by Lovepug13
RW1 wrote:
Lovepug13 wrote:A guy at work has the 170 GT and he has the black headlining, I thought the top spec in diesel and petrol got it?
If the Scirocco is spec'd with a leather option it is usually a black roof lining in the UK.

C.
That seems accurate, his has leather.