Test driving a different model to the one I'm buying... 140 FWD vs 170 FWD vs 170 4WD

audigex

audigex

Registered User
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
600
Reaction score
47
Points
28
Location
NULL
Hey guys

I'm going for a test drive next week with a view to buying the car, but the nearest dealer to me can only offer me a drive in a 2.0 TDI 140. I've got in touch with the next closest and they might be able to get a 170, but it'll only be FWD when I want quattro.

Other than the obvious difference in power between the 140 and 170, and less traction in extreme circumstances, is there anything I should bear in mind regarding the differences? I'm mostly wanting to check approximate performance, feel, driving position, interior etc - whether my car is a bit quicker than these isn't as much of an issue as I'm not intending to completely rag a car I don't own. I assume it's just going to be a bit slower and less grippy, so if I'm happy with the one I test drive I'll be delighted with my own.

Cheers
 
The 2 wheel drive will feel more pokey thats about it .the 170 are not that much more powerful
imo you should be test driving the exact model you want .And any decent dealer should be more accomodating to a brand new car buyer?
 
Lingy. said:
And any decent dealer should be more accomodating to a brand new car buyer?
Click to expand...
+1. If they really want your business they should go out of their way to provide you with the car you intend on buying.
 
Talk to Audi CC. Audi used to have a policy that meant Audi central would lend dealers specific models not on their fleet.

Quattro 170 Tdi is rare but in my view the best A3 all round. Power, economy , excellent handling and stability.
 
Ive test driven Two 140 Sports now and loved them, Drove one yesterday and it had half leather suede interior lovely condition but on checking the VOSA site re the MOT's the car had been Clocked :( so walked away, was so close to buying it as well!!
 
Lingy. said:
The 2 wheel drive will feel more pokey thats about it .the 170 are not that much more powerful
imo you should be test driving the exact model you want .And any decent dealer should be more accomodating to a brand new car buyer?
Click to expand...

Ibis Edition said:
+1. If they really want your business they should go out of their way to provide you with the car you intend on buying.
Click to expand...

I thought it was a bit weak, if I'm honest - that's why I tried the second dealer who said he was going to see if he could get hold of a service demonstrator and would get back to me in half an hour. I've heard nothing back as of yet, 12 hours later. I'm thinking of ringing a couple of others further afield (closest is 30 mins away, second/third an hour and 15, after that it's 2 hours to the 4th and 5th closest dealers) to see if they can do any better. If someone's wanting to take £25,000+ off me, they should be putting a bit more effort in to make sure I at least know what I'm buying.

If I can't find a better one, though, the general consensus is that I won't miss the quattro on a test drive, and that 140bhp is not so significantly faster that I'd really notice the difference? As long as I can test the driving position and interior, with the same engine tuned differently, at least I'm getting the basic idea. I know I want the car, I just want to check if it causes me any problems.

Is the sportback any better/worse for visibility than the 3door? They're pretty much the same size, and I've heard the sportback is a bit better on tight junctions due to the third window where the 3dr's C pillar is?
 
worth every penny the 170 over the 140-especially in quattro form-night and day difference,
 
Alternatively you could do what I did. I owned two 2.0TDIs before my current one. A 140 and a 170. Before I bought my current one I test drove both current models in common-rail form. I actually preferred the 140. The engine was a little better on pick-up and seemed to be able to take corners and roundabouts in a higher gear. This may be due to the fact that the only different between the two in the common-rail version is the size of the turbo. After I took delivery of my 140 I had it re-mapped and it now produces around 175. The re-map cost me £300 compared with the £900 difference between buying a 170 and a 140. So I ended up with a 170 and saved £600.
 
Buying a 170 adds £50 to my insurance, re-mapping a 140 adds £500 (per year) - the saving wouldn't last long.

I'm not asking which is better, the 140 or 170 - I'm already sold on the 170 because you can't get quattro on the 140 BE: I'm just trying to find the differences between them when test driving: ie are there any differences apart from the 170 accelerating a little faster and the quattro's extra traction?
 
Last edited:
I think the 170 accelerates more than "a little faster" than the 140, it's more than a second quicker to 60. That'd put it a fair distance in front.
 
audigex said:
Buying a 170 adds £50 to my insurance, re-mapping a 140 adds £500 (per year) - the saving wouldn't last long.

I'm not asking which is better, the 140 or 170 - I'm already sold on the 170 because you can't get quattro on the 140 BE: I'm just trying to find the differences between them when test driving: ie are there any differences apart from the 170 accelerating a little faster and the quattro's extra traction?
Click to expand...

When I told my insurance company they did not increase my premium at all so I'm £600 better off.

If you're allready 'sold' on the 170 quattro then apart from the extra acceleration and four-wheel drive the only real difference will be the 170 quattro will have a smaller luggage area because of the space taken up by the quattro drive to the rear wheels. Unless it's snowing or pouring with rain you will probably not notice much difference between two and four wheel drive.
 
Last edited:
jerseypaul said:
Small detail but the boot is significantly smaller on quattro models than the 2wd.
The boot floor is higher.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say significantly smaller having had both. In everyday use they both are more than adequate. You do get a larger fuel tank in the Quattro and IMHO it is a far (possibly significantly!!) better car than the FWD.
 
Stink said:
Ive test driven Two 140 Sports now and loved them, Drove one yesterday and it had half leather suede interior lovely condition but on checking the VOSA site re the MOT's the car had been Clocked :( so walked away, was so close to buying it as well!!
Click to expand...

Was not by any chance this one was it?

2006 Audi A3 2.0TDI 140 Sportback Quattro Sport DIESEL | eBay

I was thinking of taking a peek at that one if it is pukka.

Cheers,
 
audi upgrades
Don't forget that you will get poor fuel consumption in 170 quattro.
Poor for a diesel obviously.
 
And am I right in saying that you can only get a 170 quattro in manual? Not s-tronic?
 
This is why I ended up with a petrol... Next time round I reckon s'gonna be a diesel though.... Gotta have stronic, so it'll be the quattro I'll have to love without I guess.. Seems a strange choice by Audi!?
 
slepy said:
Don't forget that you will get poor fuel consumption in 170 quattro.
Poor for a diesel obviously.
Click to expand...

Disagree completely. We rarely get less than 40mpg and over 50 typically on ours. And it's our third 8P Quattro... The economy just gets better... 2005----2008---2011.

DO YOU ACTUALLY HAVE AN A3 170TDI QUATTRO SLEPY??

What do you base your comments on slepy?


We have Stronic on another Audi with 3.0Tdi and Quattro -- great fun but not quite the same economy as the A3!!
 
slepy said:
Don't forget that you will get poor fuel consumption in 170 quattro.
Poor for a diesel obviously.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't notice the difference in fuel economy with Quattro on a diesel like a petrol car due to the torque... We have a MY2010 170TDi S-Tronic and get the same figures as Pilot does...
 
Yeah it doesn't seem to be insane, there's only 3 mpg in it: or 6% more efficient - which shouldn't be too problematic on my moderate mileage. About £80 a year over 10,000 miles by my reckoning?
 
Oh please...
I have currently 2 A4's 170 quattro in my garage. On 6th gear driving 70mph I get 38mpg.
Today I did over 250 miles in a fwd A6 140bhp. Most of the time over 80mph plus 2 hours stuck on the m1 in a barely moving traffic and average 45.8mpg.
In a A3 2.0 tdi 140 it isn't hard to get 55mpg on motorway.

Edit:
It might not make a huge difference in A3 if you have quattro or not because it is haldex.
It does make a difference between 140 and 170 bhp.
 
Last edited:
I have the MY11 170 quattro also.

I get 33mpg average, mostly short runs and driven hard. It's only on longer runs with a warm engine, constant speeds you can see over 50mpg. I never seem to get an inbetween figure, either exceptionally good even at 80 mph or terrible around town / short journeys.
Most important factor is probably driving style rather than model though, I would say around 5mpg worse than a 140.
 
I think it all depends on yearly mileage that you do.
If I did 10k miles a year I would get a 2.0T petrol.
Unfortunately because of my avereage 45k miles a year even 5mpg does make a difference.
 
The diesel is cheaper to insure, which at 21 is a bigger impact than the fuel or tax. It does sound quite bad for a diesel getting 33mpg round town - but if I can get an overall average to match my old car (40mpg approx) and longer motorway journeys are better, that's where I notice the cost.

Thanks guys. Just trying to decide if the lead times are too much for me now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
140 vs 170
Replies
33
Views
6K
jessie123
jessie123
piers90
170 Vs 140 TDI
Replies
22
Views
3K
Dandle
D
C
TDI 140 vs TDI 170
Replies
12
Views
12K
Bugsy_27
Bugsy_27
D
TDI 170 vs TDI 140
Replies
24
Views
3K
h5djr
h5djr
D
TDi 170 vs TDi 140 remapped
Replies
38
Views
11K
Staz
Staz
Top
Back