Is this where this thread turns into the usual petrol vs diesel b1tch fight, only this time it's diesel vs diesel!! 
2.0 TDI TORQUE - is this car faster than a BMW330Ci ?
- Thread starter bingobongo123
- Start date
- Status
HotboxDeluxe
automatic
Oh look, another diesel versus petrol and my metro is better than your lamborghini because thread...
Exciting
Exciting
Firstly, yes I am the sandal wearing moderator and if you carry on with any more of than kind of talk you will find yourself receiving a warning. I could say the same a trainer wearing younger generation but I don't.
I'm not saying the 140 is better or faster than the 170 but if speed on a track is you only concern then the 170 will probably be the better of the two.
That is not what I'm looking for. I want a car that is good and enjoyable to drive, is reasonably economical, will be comfortable for long drives in Europe and equally good for day to day local driving. I been driving A3s since 1988, both petrol and diesel, both manual and s-tronic and I know what I want from a car. To me the 140 is the car that best suits my needs with enough performance to be good in the lanes, good on the motorway and enjoyable on de-restricted German autobahns. The 140 Sportback is that car. If you personally prefer the 170 that's your choice. I preferred the PD170 to the PD140 which is why I bought one. But I prefer the CR140 to the CR170. Audi offer us the choice and we make our decision. Neither is better or worse than the other. It just depends on what you want.
Oh look, another diesel versus petrol and my metro is better than your lamborghini because thread...
Exciting
If it does turn into another diesel versus petrol thread I will lock the thread and that will be the end of it.
At the moment it seems to be discussing the merits of two different versions of the 2.0TDI.
You are aware you are insulting alot of the forum with this post dont you?
There is nothing wrong with the 140 or the 170 and the 1.4sec difference you mentioned i believe is the difference between the 140 manual and the 170 DSG version which would be faster for obvious reasons.
Come the end of the day if you need to say "I could put my 170 against your 140 on a track, drag anywhere and still come out on top and probably enjoy the ride much more too." then you need to do a bit of growing up me thinks.
FL1X
devonmikeyboy
As far from JBS as possible !
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2007
- Messages
- 1,227
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
Yeah i will challenge pretty much everything you have said and wasted forum space with.
ragsterx since you seem to show a lack of respect for other forum users and low intelligence for insulting a forum moderator you also might want to learn to read as well. I stated the PD170 engine wasn`t a good engine and that the new common rail 170TDI was much better. You claim the common rail 170TDI engine is much better then the 140 engine. Can you explain why other then one has 30bhp more since the engine block etc is all the same the only difference is the fact that the 140TDI has a GT1646V turbo but the 170TDI has a GTB1749VM turbo which is only very slightly larger then the 140TDI turbo and the same size wheels as used by the PD130/140/150/160 GT1749V turbo. The 140TDI is not better then the 170TDI the same as a diesel engine isn`t better then a petrol engine.
HotboxDeluxe
automatic
I think the original question was will an A3 TDi beat a 330i...to which the answer is very ****** not.
As for "is a 140 better than a 170" well it's like asking whether long grass is better than slightly shorter grass. It's still grass, that doesn't rev over 4500 rpm
As for "is a 140 better than a 170" well it's like asking whether long grass is better than slightly shorter grass. It's still grass, that doesn't rev over 4500 rpm
I think the original question was will an A3 TDi beat a 330i...to which the answer is very ****** not.
As for "is a 140 better than a 170" well it's like asking whether long grass is better than slightly shorter grass. It's still grass, that doesn't rev over 4500 rpm
Agreed. Just out of interest with the new common-rail engines Audi have increased the red-line on both engines to 5,000 rpm, but max power is still reached at 4200 and max torque at 1750-3200.
As my username suggests, I have owned a 330ci sport coupe and have test drove an S3 whilst owning one and then jumped back into my old 330ci and yes the S3 is alot more torquey but the 330ci does still pull alot...
I also had a 2.0T A3 convertible as a loan car and this in comparision to my 330ci was not quite along the same level at all...
In saying the above...I do not think the 2.0TDI will have a chance from stand still....but rolling start it will keep up for like a couple of seconds but the 330 will be pulling away more and more
I also had a 2.0T A3 convertible as a loan car and this in comparision to my 330ci was not quite along the same level at all...
In saying the above...I do not think the 2.0TDI will have a chance from stand still....but rolling start it will keep up for like a couple of seconds but the 330 will be pulling away more and more
HotboxDeluxe
automatic
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2003
- Messages
- 29,115
- Reaction score
- 3,862
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Solihull, Midlands
- Website
- www.audi-sport.net
For anyone driving a 330CI and losing to an Audi 2.0TDI(standard, not modified) at any speed, go and find a place to hide, as it's not likely to happen unless your inline 6 is running on 4 cylinders and misfiring at the same time lol.
That is all I have to say on the subject!
That is all I have to say on the subject!
I reckon my 535d would blow the 330 out of the water, i'm close to 330bhp and 700nm torque.
Still only a 3 litre and gets 40mpg
Still only a 3 litre and gets 40mpg
Anybody know if a 140ps sportback should be able push a 530D sport hard? Or was this guy just messing with on my way up the M1?Didn't seem to be and couldn't shake me if his life dependend on it. Couldn't push me either when I got in front
Depends on the model but I doubt a current 530d would have any trouble dispatching the 140ps sportback. The current one does 0-60 in 6.8s(with the torque limited in 1st and 2nd gear) with a top speed of 155mph, 235bhp and 500nm of torque. If its an older one it may be closer as the old e39 in 2000 was 184bhp and the power has had about three bumps to get to the current levels(218bhp in 2003, 231 in 2005 and 235 in 2007), still doubt the 140ps engine would be much of a match though.
My 2.0 FSi would beat all cars mentioned here. It's standard, no mods or anything. BUT........ it's a Sport.
That means it's well fast, right???
The other day I timed it's 0-60 at 4.2 seconds!
Although, to be fair it could've been closer to 4.5 seconds..... it was kinda hard knowing EXACTLY how far 60 foot was.
That means it's well fast, right???
The other day I timed it's 0-60 at 4.2 seconds!
Although, to be fair it could've been closer to 4.5 seconds..... it was kinda hard knowing EXACTLY how far 60 foot was.
Cheers, the whole car is a love it or hate it design with lots of people in both camps. Doesnt look as radical as when it first came out anymore though.
Yeah a few people dont like the exterior of that shape wernt it an american designer they brought in or something ??? But my old boss had the saloon of that im not sure of the engine but it was rapid i loved it and the look.... Its was like a grey colour m sport i like it alot....
HotboxDeluxe
automatic
I didn't like it either at first (had the previous E39 model which I thought was much nicer) but most Chris Bangle designs from that era have really grown on me. The current 5 series in Sport trim is a fannytastic looking car, even the 3 series 4-door looks good now in the right spec 
HotboxDeluxe
automatic
- Status
