New A3 122 BHP Vs 140 BHP...Which to go for?
- Thread starter ahfh1
- Start date
The 122bhp is cheaper but the Cod 140bhp is more expensive but more economical and has the extra grunt. If I was given a choice. The 140bhp without a doubt.
140 bhp. Loose a few toys if you have to, the engine is the most important aspect IMO
Last edited:
You should go and try the 140bhp because yes it has more grunt and properly just as economical if not better than the 122bhp. (properly extremely dependent on your driving style) However it does that by using the CoD technology and you need to experience that and make you own conclusion if this cylinder cut off is okay with you. Because you can feel it when it enables/Disables the cylinders
I drive both and after the 140bhp ride it was an easy choice for me, 140hbp.
From what I've read on here I wouldn't say there's a vast difference in economy between the two engines. People seem to be reporting similar MPG across both (from my experience on here anyway). But then I guess you could look at it as getting an extra ~18bhp out of the engine without taking a hit on economy. I've got the 122bhp, and if I was ordering again I would seriously consider the 140bhp, but probably only from a BHP point of view as opposed to economy.
I have the 140bhp and I test drove the 122bhp there is definitely more power with the 140bhp but I was still impressed with the 122bhp. IMO the 140bhp is the best choice, on paper there is no reason other than cost to choose the 122bhp.
I have never noticed mine dropping to 2 cylinders, maybe that's just me not being very observant. It would be nice for the DIS to inform you when running on 2.
On average, depending on whether u go for SE, sport or S line, it seems the average price difference between the 122 and 140 bhp is £1k.
Considering I'm on a tight budget, I think £1k for an extra 18bhp is quite pricey in my eyes, although it would be nice to have that extra bit of power!
Also I'm sure that eventually there will be a re-map available for it which would generate more bhp for less than £1k. I'm aware that the warranty will be void but something to consider.
Considering I'm on a tight budget, I think £1k for an extra 18bhp is quite pricey in my eyes, although it would be nice to have that extra bit of power!
Also I'm sure that eventually there will be a re-map available for it which would generate more bhp for less than £1k. I'm aware that the warranty will be void but something to consider.
Having looked in the brochure it is some 50 Nm, yup that certainly would make a difference to the acceleration of the car...
But how much extra will the 140 be worth come resale time? You may get most of that £1K back.
Wow that would make some difference. For those who have driven the 140bhp, where do u notice most of the torque?
Is it more torquey at the low end (from stand still) or say on the motorway for overtaking?
Fragup
Registered User
I've gone for C.O.D. 140 bhp. You get extra 18 bhp, 50nm extra torque, quicker to 60 by 1 second and slightly (only just though so don't buy it for this) better economy. A no brainier except for initial out lay. If you can afford it then do it, as the step up of a grand is good value for what you get, but like most things comes down to money.
If you compare it to the next step up 1.8 180bhp is another £1700 ish for 1.2 second faster to 60 than C.O.D. Same torque ! (Surprised me!) and far worst fuel economy.I Would still have 1.8 for fun though, but C.O.D. Is pick of bunch for me.
But I am biased
If you compare it to the next step up 1.8 180bhp is another £1700 ish for 1.2 second faster to 60 than C.O.D. Same torque ! (Surprised me!) and far worst fuel economy.I Would still have 1.8 for fun though, but C.O.D. Is pick of bunch for me.
But I am biased
I currently dive a mk6 golf tsi 160.
I test set drove a golf mk7 act 140, same as a3 act I assume. Came away very very impressed with engine performace and economy compared to my 160. If anything felt stronger!
When I get the chance to test a3 122 I felt the difference between the two felt far more than just 18 ps and a little disappointed. I think the extra torque makes a missive difference and hope to drive a 140 cod in 2014.
I test set drove a golf mk7 act 140, same as a3 act I assume. Came away very very impressed with engine performace and economy compared to my 160. If anything felt stronger!
When I get the chance to test a3 122 I felt the difference between the two felt far more than just 18 ps and a little disappointed. I think the extra torque makes a missive difference and hope to drive a 140 cod in 2014.
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2013
- Messages
- 501
- Reaction score
- 123
- Points
- 43
It's in the mid range that the torque shows. The bottom end is a bit weak, so will feel flat if you're in too high a gear for your speed. However, it is more forgiving of gear choice than other petrols I've driven. I can leave it in 6th on the motorway with traffic speed varying down to 40mph.
If you can afford it go for the 140 as 122 is not alot of power these days (not that i have drove the 122 model) buti always like something with a bit of grunt for those overtakes. I also think that the value on resale will justify the price difference between the 2 engines.
As you have said it is more powerful and effecient so although it is £1k more expensive you would save some money in the long run on fuel, you may not get the £1k back but that coupled with the resale vaule being higher i would go for the 140.
My 2p's worth.
As you have said it is more powerful and effecient so although it is £1k more expensive you would save some money in the long run on fuel, you may not get the £1k back but that coupled with the resale vaule being higher i would go for the 140.
My 2p's worth.
I have not driven a 122 but have ordered a 140 and can wholeheartedly recommend it. We were originally planning on going with the 2.0 TDI. After a test drive where we were, not exactly disappointed...it was extremely capable but not much fun, I started looking at the other engine options. On paper the 1.4 CoD looked good, so we tracked down one for a test drive. Glad we did...it was an awful lot of fun! I used to have a MKV VW GTI with a 200 HP 2.0T. Granted, I haven't driven that car in over three years, but the 1.4 CoD felt every bit as fun as lively as that car disk if not even more so. I would say the difference between the two engines more than justifies the initial outlay, and as others have mentioned, once you factor in the improved economy and better resale the CoD will likely pay for itself. It's a no-brainier, IMHO. I would also echo the sentiment above to compromise a bit on other toys if you have to to get the better engine.
GS
GS
I have the 122 with s-tronic and it makes for a very relaxing, pleasant cruising driving style but it doesn't encourage you to drive it hard (although I don't want to). Having said that, it goes pretty well when pushed, although a bit flat around 30 - 50 ish. The 140 wasn't available to order when I placed my order or I would have gone for it.
Ordering now, I would definitely go for the 140. I wonder if Audi will cease the 122 in the 8V's lifespan - it seems a bit redundant to have 2 x 1.4 engines in the range, one of which is considerably better with only a modest price differential (£850ish?)?
Ordering now, I would definitely go for the 140. I wonder if Audi will cease the 122 in the 8V's lifespan - it seems a bit redundant to have 2 x 1.4 engines in the range, one of which is considerably better with only a modest price differential (£850ish?)?
Sorry for a dirty diesel boy butting in here but it was for the above reason I opted for the 2.0TDI (150BHP), cant't comment on the COD as not driven it, and was not available at time of order, but the diesel still has an additional 40Nm of torque over the COD engine so should have a little more grunt in the mid range......would be really interested in seeing some in gear acceleration figures if they were available for all 3 engines.
Overall I think there is little to choose between the 1.4TFSI & 1.4TFSI COD and between 1.4TFSI COD & 2.0TDI but felt felt there was a bigger enough difference between 1.4TFSI and 2.0TDI to warrant the extra cost for me
Last edited:
If you tow trailers occasionally, or do a lot of miles like I do, the TDI is a no brainer for me 
I prefer the way diesels drive as well anyway.
I prefer the way diesels drive as well anyway.
It's fine if you do longer distances and the mileage that pays back the extra cost of a diesel. However if you are like me it would be very questionable to purchase one because of the dpf issues it would have and the extra cost of the fuel. But I don't know why Audi do not post in gear acceleration figures as they are far more important than 0-62mhp ones..
Sounds like cost was/is an important factor for you, which for me it was not, so seems to be pushing you down the petrol route. I test drove the 1.4TFSI and my previous 8P was the 1.4TFSI and both were prefectly good and would not have baulked at either if I had similar constraints but just wanted a bit more mid range power
I use premium unleaded in petrols anyway - made a big difference in my old car in terms of economy - which is more expensive that diesel anyway.
I've just come from a 170HP Passat with 350Nm torque which was great for overtaking, but to be honest I tended to use the power just because it was there. My commute is 20 miles each way of single lane country roads and it was too tempting to overtake because you could. For me, it's safer and more relaxing to bimble along at traffic speed in relative silence compared to the Passat and arrive 1 minute later! Fuel economy is almost identical too.
Horses for courses, but I don't miss the diesel at all.
It would do, however I need an engine that produces nearly 200ps and about 290 Nm but will return the economy near that of a diesel. The 1.8 comes closer to my needs...
Agree from a standing start the 1.8TFSI will be much quicker than the 2.0TDI but after looking at the configurator I was surprised to see that the 1.8TFSI only has 150nm of torque, the same as the 1.4COD but does deliver it over a wider rpm range, but mpg figures are considerably lower for the 1.8tfsi (49mpg combined) compared to the 2.0TDI (63mpg combined).
Fragup
Registered User
Fragup
Registered User
Needs it to compensate for all that extra weight (85kgs than C.O.D.) is why it's slower to 60,
heavy noisy diesel can't use the extra power !
Only joking have driven Diesel 2.0ltr and is a great engine. Am just jealous as I have another 5 - 6 week wait !
Needs it to compensate for all that extra weight (85kgs than C.O.D.) is why it's slower to 60,
heavy noisy diesel can't use the extra power !
Only joking have driven Diesel 2.0ltr and is a great engine. Am just jealous as I have another 5 - 6 week wait !
Think this thread shows that there ain't a bad engine amongst them all
Fragup
Registered User
i have said it before Audi has nailed it on the cross section of engines. The 1.4 TFSI 122 bhp seams the win the awards,
but I must admit, I do read the S3 thread with a degree of envy ! Seriously quick for a hatch back, would beat my mates Lotus elise in a straight line (not in corners i suspect) May be next time !
Yea, my heart says S3 as well but head says I am perfectly happy with the TDI.
My 8P 1.4TFSI was a great engine and have said elsewhere that a French colleague of mine thought I had mine deliberately under badged after I took him out for spin. Taking my new car over to France again in a couple of weeks and will take him for another spin and ram the back of his head into the head rest!!!!!
Last edited:
I used to want a really fast car (S3 etc), but I'm just not that bothered any more. You get to use the power of a car like that so little on a commute or even otherwise that I'd just rather refinement, assistance systems to make journeys comfortable, and enough speed for overtaking when needed. Economy and running costs are a win for the TDI to me, £20 a year tax, great economy and great in-gear pull for overtaking I don't envy the S3s economy!
I don't envy the S3s economy!
Fragup
Registered User
I used to want a really fast car (S3 etc), but I'm just not that bothered any more. You get to use the power of a car like that so little on a commute or even otherwise that I'd just rather refinement, assistance systems to make journeys comfortable, and enough speed for overtaking when needed. Economy and running costs are a win for the TDI to me, £20 a year tax, great economy and great in-gear pull for overtaking
Your best off avoiding the S3 for towing ! You wouldn't want your glider taking off before you got to the airfield !
Compared to my remapped 1.6 ecoboost the diesel isn't in the same league as the ecoboost, in the form I have it in, it is just about the sweetest engine I've ever had in a car, it also sounds very very nice. When I drove the A3 saloon with the diesel engine I could certainly feel the extra weight of the diesel lump in the front. I know that 1.8 has the same torque as the 1.4, but to satisfy my needs I'd probably have that remapped as well..
You do seem to like your current ecoboost engine as have mentioned it on a few occasions in posts in this forum, pity Ford can't build premium cars around a pretty decent engine as you would be happy as a Sand boy but not sure the OP was asking for a view of Ford engines.
Last edited:
We've got the 122 and its nippy enough for me. I'm 42 now been there done that with really fast cars when I was younger. Saying that though the 122 is still fast and were still running ours in, so not floored it yet .
