New to Audi and looking to buy a3 quattro - but petrol or diesel?
- Thread starter ds7_uk
- Start date
Most are like prostitutes too....pay as you en...oh forget it
Unless you've got an Oyster Card... ;-) my this thread is being hijacked!
Back on Topic Diesel 170 Quattro
mpg should get better the more you drive it they are allways not that good when new a guy in work used to have a a4 1.9tdi avant on a p plate it had done 270.000 miles and it was still cracking out well over 65 mpg so they are like a fine wine they get better with age lol
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Most are like prostitutes too....pay as you en...oh forget it
I always enter via the back door when they're not looking.
Works with buses too.
pi quattro
Registered User
What a laugh!
In my humble opinion tdi 170 quattro wins hands down
One important fact is that guy asking the question is moving to Scotland! The roads here are slippy for at least 50% of the time, never mind the snow. (rain+cow/sheep **** = slide factor 9/10, quattro required)
I could also assume that the roads will be twistier in Scotland and as said previously, quattro makes for better progress.
Also I think that torquey nature of a diesel is better for towing.
Aythreee - this guys "real world driving" might well be in the twisties if he moves up here. Trust me I LOVE burning 2.0t on wet cobbled roads in Edinburgh in my 170 tdi quattro. It happens...
In my humble opinion tdi 170 quattro wins hands down
One important fact is that guy asking the question is moving to Scotland! The roads here are slippy for at least 50% of the time, never mind the snow. (rain+cow/sheep **** = slide factor 9/10, quattro required)
I could also assume that the roads will be twistier in Scotland and as said previously, quattro makes for better progress.
Also I think that torquey nature of a diesel is better for towing.
Aythreee - this guys "real world driving" might well be in the twisties if he moves up here. Trust me I LOVE burning 2.0t on wet cobbled roads in Edinburgh in my 170 tdi quattro. It happens...
pi quattro
Registered User
Like your new order pilot, my dream car! Driven lots of cars and can't really say I will stray from a quattro tdi for anything.
Don't know why you can't get a 170 tdi quattro with DSG? that would be a winner for me!
Don't know why you can't get a 170 tdi quattro with DSG? that would be a winner for me!
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Ok ok, maybe the slimy streets of Scotland will prove too much for a FWD 2.0T (a Quattro 2.0T will burn you though)... but on normal un cow/sheep sh*tted, uncobbled (etc etc) streets... i.e. pretty much the rest of the UK........ all you'll be seeing through your TDI windscreen are undriven rear wheels disappearing into the distance.
Which is kind of what this thread (as usual) moved on to.
pi quattro
Registered User
A 2.0T and 2.0TDi will both generate a good amount of torque at low revs - possibly even the same sort of power at 3-4,000rpm. But take it past that and the petrol will continue pumping out more power, while the TDi will need another gear to access a lower amount of peak power again.
That's why a TDi will be just fine keeping up with most petrols for 20mph sprint increments, but also why they're not first choice for drag strip or longer on-the-move accelerative bursts.
That's why a TDi will be just fine keeping up with most petrols for 20mph sprint increments, but also why they're not first choice for drag strip or longer on-the-move accelerative bursts.
Yea but a petrol needs to chang gears more than a diesel. It might have more revs but it needs 6k revs to do what a Deisal does in 4k revs. If what you are saying is true then a derv would need 8 gears to reach the same top speed as a 6 speed petrol. They simply give it taller gears because its pumping more torque and can go further in each gear for less revs
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
I'm not saying they aren't great, I'm just saying that 2.0TFSI > 170TDI.
We can debate this until the cows come home, but the bottom line is... in the VAST majority of "everyday driving" scenarios the 2.0T, even in FWD, is a higher performing car.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Surely its the other way around?
A petrol could get to say 50mph with one gear change (1st/2nd), but a diesel would need three changes (1st/2nd/3rd).
I've been wondering about that. I wonder if the DSG has problems handling the Torque. Though suspect someone will tell me that they use the DSG on engines with more torque.
I agree DSG would be a nice option.
Coming back to Petrol vs Deisel. Both arguments are right. They are right for what the person wanted from the car. If outright performance is what you want then suspect petrol is better. If you want economy a 1.6 deisel (if they still make them) will do. To me it is a compromise, but the idea of a car that does 0 -60 in under 8 seconds with a double speed limit top speed , that has 4 WD and still gives 55 MPG and low emmissions really became a no brainer - For Me-
I have done a fair amount of driving over the years including 4 years club circuit racing(Bikes) and done performance driving courses ( I used to be an advanced driving instructor/examinor -Bikes) , skid control courses and a number of off road courses. So both performance and slippery driving are no stranger to me, and for slippery driving I found my Deisel Discovery Auto was the very best control you can have , but the best fun was on a bike ---ahh can smell the Castrol R right now ---
We have had 8P 2.0FSi, 8P 2.0TFsi Quattro, then 2.0Tdi 170 Quattro which was so great in comparison to the TFSi we are buying another one...I don't think the 2.0T FSi with FWD is that great with torque steer, spinning wheels and crap fuel economy. Sorry
Well looking at your figures if 1st to 2nd is one change then 1st to 2nd to 3rd is 2 changes......
The way i see it is if the derv needs more gear changes to reach a speed then it must have more gears to reach the top speed of the petrol....but it dosnt does it
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
We have had 8P 2.0FSi, 8P 2.0TFsi Quattro, then 2.0Tdi 170 Quattro which was so great in comparison to the TFSi we are buying another one...I don't think the 2.0T FSi with FWD is that great with torque steer, spinning wheels and crap fuel economy. Sorry
Forget economy, i'm talking about performance. And you saying the TDI Q is so great in comparison to the TFSI Q is laughable.
As for the FWD... torque steer is slight, wheels really only light up in 1st if hammered from stand still, but this is pretty easy to prevent without take off suffering by anything noticable.
I can easily reach 60 in under 7 seconds, everytime, with all the "torque steer" and "spinning wheels" you speak of. Yeah its going to be a bit slower in the wet, but still quicker than a 170.
Handling at full pelt around bends and roundabouts won't be as good as the TDI Q, granted. But that's a rare occurence. Handling is EASILY good enough for "sensible" fast speeds through the two.
Sooo.... taken to the limits of handling (do any of us really do this??), of course a quattro is going to come out tops, but realistically speaking for even fast driving on the roads of today........
....and with the added benefit of DSG..... see ya.
The original post was about QUATTRO so not quite sure all this FWD/DSG stuff is actually helping the debate.
For those of us with experience of both 'in the VAST majority of "everyday driving" scenarios the 2.0TDi QUATTRO 170 is a better overall performing car.
QED
For those of us with experience of both 'in the VAST majority of "everyday driving" scenarios the 2.0TDi QUATTRO 170 is a better overall performing car.
QED
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Aww come on Pad, you know what I meant. Two changes then! Either way, it's more than it takes in a petrol... which (as you know) is the point I'm making.
The way i see it is if the derv needs more gear changes to reach a speed then it must have more gears to reach the top speed of the petrol....but it dosnt does it
I'm afraid you see it wrong then.
It doesn't quite work in that way.Although the TDI does have a lower top speed than the TFSI, so maybe the diesel would need a 7th gear to achieve the petrol's top speed.
You can get the top speed out of most (all??) 5/6 geared cars using their second from highest gear. The highest gear is a fuel saver etc.
Example.... on the DSG when in 'S' it won't select 6th gear. The highest gear it will select is 5th, no matter how fast you go. You will however still be able to achieve the cars top speed.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
The TFSI does have a slightly higher top speed but who wants to do 140mph in any A3?????
Our TFSi Quattro (2005) always felt like it needed a 7th gear when cruising on the Motorway the Tdi Quattro 170 is very relaxed in 6th.
Clearly the gearing does the Petrol A3 no favours and hence possibly the poor economy. A similarly powered A4 Q (yes we had one in the family in 2006) was far more economical and relaxing that the A3TFSiQ.:busted_cop:
Our TFSi Quattro (2005) always felt like it needed a 7th gear when cruising on the Motorway the Tdi Quattro 170 is very relaxed in 6th.
Clearly the gearing does the Petrol A3 no favours and hence possibly the poor economy. A similarly powered A4 Q (yes we had one in the family in 2006) was far more economical and relaxing that the A3TFSiQ.:busted_cop:
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Not me. Paddy did ask though.
For me, cruising on motorways is where mine (2006) feels most relaxed. It's also where I get the best economy.
To wrap this up, it's obvious that for you a diesel is suited to your driving style/preference.
For me, I like a revvy engine that I can really stretch and unleash a bit more oomph if I choose to.
We need to remember that you have a DSG and not a Quattro so may not be offering the best opinion to the OP.
...
58 2.0 TDI 170 bhp Quattro Sportback S/Line at 45k and, albeit with "fast" cruising mainly up and down motorways, I am getting about 35 mpg. Company car with my tax already paid on the fuel card, so don't really care about economy, but bit surprised about the drop in fuel economy when compared to 140 FWD A3 2dr which ALWAYS gave me 44 whatever I drove it like.
58 2.0 TDI 170 bhp Quattro Sportback S/Line at 45k and, albeit with "fast" cruising mainly up and down motorways, I am getting about 35 mpg. Company car with my tax already paid on the fuel card, so don't really care about economy, but bit surprised about the drop in fuel economy when compared to 140 FWD A3 2dr which ALWAYS gave me 44 whatever I drove it like.
AuldReekie
Registered User
Interesting. By that rationale: there is little merit to your (many) opinions on the matter of S3 ownership then. Can't have it both ways.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Ahhh mate, with respect, you don't half talk some fraff.
Before you make throw away statements at least know what you are talking about. The TDI 170 has about 15-20% more torque than the TFSI.... not 1000% as per your comment above.
And as mentioned earlier in this thread, the TDI's torque is spread across a much narrower range. So whilst you're running out of puff and mucking about changing gears, I'll be motoring on and on and on and on......
I think its safe to say that for me AND YOU this thread moved miles away from the OP's topic ages ago.
Last edited:
the 2.0 tfsi quattro is a clear second quicker to 60 than the 2.0tdi the tfsi is 6.9 the tdi is 7.9 so its close match i think lol
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Even the crappy FWD tfsi
is a second quicker than the TDI Q as well. But PilotAudi will still tell you that the TDI is 1000 times quicker! 
Thing is, I genuinely don't think the TDI is slow/poor/crap/a tractor/etc etc. In fact, I know they are surprisingly good performers, especially in Quattro form.
But his idea that it is a better performer than a TFSI Quattro and TOTALLY outperforms a FWD TFSI is just plain weird IMO, and to be honest the first time I've ever heard someone take such a stance on here.
they both have good points and bad points like any engine but i prefer the petrol engine you have to change gear alot earlyer in a tdi were in a petrol you still have 3000 odd revs to go, the tdi is prob a little quicker off the mark in the first place because of the turbo lag of the petrol but then the petrol will go past the tdi when it changes gear because of the more revs available and the higher bhp at the top of the rev range easy really
PaulAr
S3 (8P)
Even the crappy FWD tfsi
Thing is, I genuinely don't think the TDI is slow/poor/crap/a tractor/etc etc. In fact, I know they are surprisingly good performers, especially in Quattro form.
But his idea that it is a better performer than a TFSI Quattro and TOTALLY outperforms a FWD TFSI is just plain weird IMO, and to be honest the first time I've ever heard someone take such a stance on here.
The figures show the TFSi QUATTRO as quicker. No dispute. Having owned both the Petrol and Diesel 170 (both Quattros) for 3 and 2.5 years respectively I honestly believe the Diesel to be the better overall performer in real life motoring... not 0-60 drive it like you've stolen it situations. Normal everyday spirited driving.
The original Question posted was 'which Quattro to buy'?
Irrespective of MPG, residual values etc I would and am going for a secong Tdi 170Q because I think it performance mix is better... Factor in Economy, servicing, residuals, towing capability, tyres (TFSi not so good on them either but not comparing same make!) and it is an absolute no-brainer Tdi 170 Q no contest!
And ay3.. 'ten times; was a figure of speech
... Are you Cleggyroons spin doctor eh....
Sorry, think I'll just go and have a beer as this is just the opinion of one person who has actually owned both!!
Last edited:
Was quite exicted to see the number of replies to my original post, which was about
1) diesel or petrol quattro, and
2) DPF purported problems
What a disapointed to trial through all this crap about whether a fwd is quicker than a quattro or its top speed or how revvy it is
I noted at the start, as was picked up by an earlier contributor, I drive a caterham too. Rear wheel drive for proper driving fun, and a 0-60 of about 4 sec and revs to 8500
I also drive a Porsche 911 (997), 0 - 60 in about 4.8 and a top speed just shy of 190mph - I kinda think I should have noted this before to make it clear my reasons for asking the question had nothing to do speed etc, but trying to focus upon a different aspect of performance. But then maybe my question would have been 'Petrol or Diesel' 'Quattro or FWD' - which is the quickest.
For those of you who joined the thread to find out about about the questions 1 and 2 above, my apologies for going off topic.
For those who who like there 2wd revvy engines - enjoy - but it would be nice to see the end of the debate here.
Still no bad reports on the DPF - the links through Honest John I posted above appear to be off the mark, within this forum at least. Maybe written by someone who likes petrol engines more.
cheers
Darren
1) diesel or petrol quattro, and
2) DPF purported problems
What a disapointed to trial through all this crap about whether a fwd is quicker than a quattro or its top speed or how revvy it is
I noted at the start, as was picked up by an earlier contributor, I drive a caterham too. Rear wheel drive for proper driving fun, and a 0-60 of about 4 sec and revs to 8500
I also drive a Porsche 911 (997), 0 - 60 in about 4.8 and a top speed just shy of 190mph - I kinda think I should have noted this before to make it clear my reasons for asking the question had nothing to do speed etc, but trying to focus upon a different aspect of performance. But then maybe my question would have been 'Petrol or Diesel' 'Quattro or FWD' - which is the quickest.
For those of you who joined the thread to find out about about the questions 1 and 2 above, my apologies for going off topic.
For those who who like there 2wd revvy engines - enjoy - but it would be nice to see the end of the debate here.
Still no bad reports on the DPF - the links through Honest John I posted above appear to be off the mark, within this forum at least. Maybe written by someone who likes petrol engines more.
cheers
Darren
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
Take a chill pill mate. When there is talk of petrol and diesel in a single thread this is always how it ends up on here.
In fact you'll find that most threads with more than 15-20 posts go off topic.
You're new, you'll learn.
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 8,263
- Reaction score
- 688
- Points
- 113
- Location
- London
- Website
- www.aythreee.com
That's your catchphrase. You write it in every thread you post in! WE KNOW.... WE GET IT!
I reckon it just feels that way, due to the shove in the back you get from the TDI.
The reality is that is just isn't quicker/faster/etc etc. I'm sorry.
Put the two on the road or a course or a drag strip or wherever.... the TFSI Q will come out on top.
Anyway, I really can't have this conversation anymore. We are boring me now.
