170 Vs 140 TDI

piers90

piers90

Registered User
Joined
Jun 26, 2008
Messages
99
Reaction score
8
Points
18
Location
birmingham
this evening (on a private road) me in my 2.0tdi 170 quattro, and my mate in his new shape golf 2.0tdi 140 did a drag to see what the difference would be like. to my surprise he was basically in my boot and i wasn't able to pull away AT ALL up to the speed of around 69mph (then we slowed down)... is this normal? i was thinking of going to audi and asking them whats wrong. i feel coned into buying the 170 now... ha.
have any of you had this 'problem' as such?

Piers

:(
 
Your A3 + Quattro will weigh a lot more than the Golf...
 
I reckon he had the new engine as I had a drive as passenger in new 140 & it was ****** torquey, very nippy indeed, so dont feel down, lol
 
With all things equal and as standard with all the relevant weights, your A3 should be about a second to a second and a half quicker to 60'ish than his Golf, which should have you noticably pulling away from your mate.

BUT.....
Maybe for that "drag" he drove better... e.g. gear changes....
AND maybe his is slightly quicker than a standard Golf 140 out of the box, and your's is spot on the standard A3 170.
AND maybe your traction control interfered a bit during this drag, and his didn't.
AND maybe you're heavier than him.
AND maybe his tyres are better than yours.

The list could go on and on, so there are loads of possible reasons where that second (or so) you should've had over him could've been lost.

I wouldn't worry about it.... (even though I probably would!!! :) )
 
Last edited:
Same power and torque as the old engine, so can't imagine why it would feel "more" torquey? But agree with the weight thing, four wheel drive does sap power.
Dave
 
mine is a 2007 engine and his is the new engine..i did have my traction control turned off... the only reason i was infront of him was because of the quattro launching me forward off the line!! :haha:
but am very dissapointed with the apparent 170 engine.. i was hoping to be pulling away a bit easier than how it turned out :sob: .. owel.. thanks for the help guys..
:beerchug:

Piers
 
LOL...dont worry about it dude, your car looks better than his ;)
 
aythreee said:
With all things equal and as standard with all the relevant weights, your A3 should be about a second to a second and a half quicker to 60'ish than his Golf, which should have you noticably pulling away from your mate.

BUT.....
Maybe for that "drag" he drove better... e.g. gear changes....
AND maybe his is slightly quicker than a standard Golf 140 out of the box, and your's is spot on the standard A3 170.
AND maybe your traction control interfered a bit during this drag, and his didn't.
AND maybe you're heavier than him.
AND maybe his tyres are better than yours.

The list could go on and on, so there are loads of possible reasons where that second (or so) you should've had over him could've been lost.

I wouldn't worry about it.... (even though I probably would!!! :) )
Click to expand...

All good points.

Try adding some rain, or bends, into the next private road dash next time, and see what happens.

OP- Just remap it.

Or buy a 20TFSI:undwech:

Cheers
Paul
 
Little advice andy, edit the swearing before u get told of.

Continuing on with thread, look the new engines are literally more pokey than old, its a fact, so cant see why its an issue, they are very nippy simple as that & doesnt mean his car is crap, afterall its 170 not a 250 3.2 v6, so cant see problem, given the added variables like weight etc, seems fine to me.
 
Well I think it's a bit frustrating even if it is not e 3.2 engine but I think that it wasn't the Golf who was fast but the Audi was slow.
The Audi may be heavier than the Golf, due to quattro, maybe the Golf had DSG that really makes a difference also maybe the Audi's clutch is slipping...
 
I see can see why your bit pi**ed off tho mate.
 
Last edited:
audi upgrades
Assuming that the driver and amount of fuel in each car is the same theres about a 125kg difference between the two cars, maybe he got some better gear changes or his tires have better grip, I wouldnt be too miffed about it to be honest...

Is swearing banned now?
 
There are two reasons the lower powered Golf kept up the the Audi.
1 ) The Audi was a quattro so will have about double the transmission losses ( 28% ) compared to the FWD Golf ( 14% ).
2 ) The Golf was a lot lighter therefore had a higher BHP/tonne then the Audi.
Simple.
 
devonmikeyboy said:
There are two reasons the lower powered Golf kept up the the Audi.
1 ) The Audi was a quattro so will have about double the transmission losses ( 28% ) compared to the FWD Golf ( 14% ).
2 ) The Golf was a lot lighter therefore had a higher BHP/tonne then the Audi.
Simple.
Click to expand...

This is the reason. My old 2.0-TFSI Quattro was exactly the same speed as a 140bhp tdci focus from 40-90mph. We did the test loads of times and no matter who was in front they were dead level. The diesel has shorter gearing so looses out massively from the start but once rolling it was a different matter, add that to the AWD losses and the extra weight of the A3 and what on paper should have been quicker was no quicker at all.
 
My previous 250bhp MK5 Gti (TFSI) would easily sit behind EVOs/Stis once on the move on a dry piece of private road.

Sounds like ******** pub bragging but its the truth, and those ricer saloon owners probably felt like you did. So it shows that FWD does hold back outright starightline performance.
Which isnt everything of course......it wouldnt put me off.. Now go and get that remap and make proper use of 4wd and all that extra weight!:)

cheers
Paul
 
unkle said:
Is swearing banned now?
Click to expand...

Do you want the long or short answer, choose from yeah or yes, lol

Always was a rule tbh, but we all get carried away from time to time with bit of fun, not anymore.
 
Dandle said:
This is the reason. My old 2.0-TFSI Quattro was exactly the same speed as a 140bhp tdci focus from 40-90mph. We did the test loads of times and no matter who was in front they were dead level. The diesel has shorter gearing so looses out massively from the start but once rolling it was a different matter, add that to the AWD losses and the extra weight of the A3 and what on paper should have been quicker was no quicker at all.
Click to expand...

But quicker 0-60, and 90+, Right?

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

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
B
140 vs 170
Replies
33
Views
6K
jessie123
jessie123
L
Help! Age old question? 2.0 tdi 140 Vs 170
Replies
18
Views
2K
rOb_A
rOb_A
Top
Back