170 verses 140

A

Audi buyer

Registered User
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Hi everyone,

What are the differences between the latest 170 and 140 horse diesels?

Aside from the obvious price, performance and name!
 
my friend has an 07 plate 170, and it wasn't far behind another mates 02 civic type r. with a remap they must be **** hot
 
are you talking about the new common rail engines or the TDI ?
 
Audi buyer said:
Hi everyone,

What are the differences between the latest 170 and 140 horse diesels?

Aside from the obvious price, performance and name!
Click to expand...

The 170 uses a DPF which gets clogged if you're driving around town all the time or doing short journeys. It can regenerate, but it needs a good blast to clear it. If it wont clear, its a replacement DPF.

If most of your driving is town or city, or you don't like to thrash the engine, I'd get a 140 and map it.
 
madvw said:
The 170 uses a DPF which gets clogged if you're driving around town all the time or doing short journeys. It can regenerate, but it needs a good blast to clear it. If it wont clear, its a replacement DPF.

If most of your driving is town or city, or you don't like to thrash the engine, I'd get a 140 and map it.
Click to expand...


Unless you are talking about the new common rail, both have DPF on the common rail engine.
 
Ive got the new 140 CR type and compared to the old 140 PD type its a million miles more refined. Its very quiet, almost petrol quiet at low speeds, very very very economical did 100 miles lastweekend at 67.7mpg at a very careful 60mph...slow yes but still running it in, its very refined and you can hardly tell its a diesel.

So deffo go for diesel yes. Id never go back to petrol now unless the lottery comes up and S3 will be on the list...As for the two engines it depends on how you drive. I have a hire car for work so 5 days a week mines sat on the drive. Only moves at weekends and on long journeys. So i dont need an even fast(er) car ie the 170bhp. The 140 bhp is quick surprisngly how quick, my old one (07 reg) beat my mates Golf GTi at certain torque levels.

I havent test drove the new 170bhp CR but all i can say is ive got the new 140 CR and its cheaper to run than the old 140bhp.If you want very fast go for 170 if like me you dont need that fast (but still quick) and prefer cheaper insurance, tax and fill ups then go for the 140bhp. Either one you cant fail theyre GGGGGREAT:thumbsup:
 
I agree entirely. I also have a new 140 common-rail at the moment. My previous A3 was a 170 PD and I had a 140PD before that. The new engine is so much better, much quieter and more refined. Before I decided on the 140 I test drove both the 140 and the 170. The 140 is more economical and I wanted to see if I noticed any real difference between the two. The answer is Yes I did, but not in the way you might think. Both cars and my previous 170 and my 140 before that had s-tronic gearboxes and the new 170 cr was slightly noisier than the 140 and I also found I needed to change down to a lower gear for some corners and roundabouts. I was told by an Audi Master Technician that this was probably because the 170 has a slightly bigger turbo than the 140. Performance wise I never noticed any difference in normal day-to-day driving. I decided to go for the 140 and have never regretted my decision.

I recently took my A3 to Germany and Austria for a holiday covering some 3000 miles with all sorts of driving. The car was quite happy cruising at 120mph for quite long periods on the German Autobahns but was equally happy at much slower speeds in Austria and on mountain passes. My overall mpg for the whole holiday was around 47-48mpg. This is some 5mpg better than a similar holiday a couple of years ago with my 170PD.

If you do not the extra kudos of owning a 170, certainly with the new common-rail versions, I would say go for the 140.
 
h5djr said:
I agree entirely. I also have a new 140 common-rail at the moment. My previous A3 was a 170 PD and I had a 140PD before that. The new engine is so much better, much quieter and more refined. Before I decided on the 140 I test drove both the 140 and the 170. The 140 is more economical and I wanted to see if I noticed any real difference between the two. The answer is Yes I did, but not in the way you might think. Both cars and my previous 170 and my 140 before that had s-tronic gearboxes and the new 170 cr was slightly noisier than the 140 and I also found I needed to change down to a lower gear for some corners and roundabouts. I was told by an Audi Master Technician that this was probably because the 170 has a slightly bigger turbo than the 140. Performance wise I never noticed any difference in normal day-to-day driving. I decided to go for the 140 and have never regretted my decision.

I recently took my A3 to Germany and Austria for a holiday covering some 3000 miles with all sorts of driving. The car was quite happy cruising at 120mph for quite long periods on the German Autobahns but was equally happy at much slower speeds in Austria and on mountain passes. My overall mpg for the whole holiday was around 47-48mpg. This is some 5mpg better than a similar holiday a couple of years ago with my 170PD.

If you do not the extra kudos of owning a 170, certainly with the new common-rail versions, I would say go for the 140.
Click to expand...

I guess a lot comes down to your driving style. Having driven cars with both 140 and 170 CR engines, I think the 170 feels significantly quicker, but has to be driven harder to feel the benefit.
 
sam80quattro said:
my friend has an 07 plate 170, and it wasn't far behind another mates 02 civic type r. with a remap they must be **** hot
Click to expand...

Presumably you are saying the 170 was remapped? I doubt it would've been hanging onto the rear bumper of the CTR as stock. Having owned a Civic Type-R, of which I don't have a lot of good things to say about it, it was a very quick car with the power really only kicking it at ~ 6000 RPM through to 9300....
 
kkp0897 said:
Presumably you are saying the 170 was remapped? I doubt it would've been hanging onto the rear bumper of the CTR as stock. Having owned a Civic Type-R, of which I don't have a lot of good things to say about it, it was a very quick car with the power really only kicking it at ~ 6000 RPM through to 9300....
Click to expand...

I think the advantage the diesels often have is the power delivery is smooth across the rev range. A lot of diesel drivers think they're quicker than they are.
 
I agree, no way will a 170hp diesel keep up with a ctr. I know for a fact my remapped 140 wont, so i wouldn't even try.

My remapped 140 keeps with a mates mk3 golf gti 16v (his has fuel regulator, full system) and they are 150hp stock and a little lighter than my a3.

If your after performance and driver enjoyment, get a petrol.
 
Thanks for all the replies. I've had several diesels and I'm might be ordering an A3 soon - 140 or 170 still undecided.

I was wondering if anyone knew whats actually different - eg under the bonnet. h5jdr mentioned a bigger turbo but I doubt its just that.
 
To be honest, I'm not really sure but I was VERY close to buying one. The only thing (rather unavailable option) was being unable to order a Quattro S-tronic in a diesel but I was definately going for the 170.

THe only thing I would say is the 170 derivative is a newer engine to I would expect it to be a better unit. From the point of view of figures, I don't think there's much in it (mpg, emmissions...) between the two hence would go for the 170.

Cheers

KKP
 
The difference between the two im not sure of under the engine, it would never keep up with a CTR...bit difficult to prove lots of reasons, weights, fuel, road type, surface type etc will have advantages/dis for both cars. All i can say is try a 170 with quattro......it absolutely flies...ok ive not got an S3....(KKP :sob:!) but in my opinion they are still v fast. I love my car for the fact i can put it in 6th at 40mph and carry on to 130mph without changing or going up a hill changing down to a low gear to get some power....not with a diesel.....

Driving diesels is totally different to petrol in lots of ways they have different characteristics so to compare the two is very hard. It depends what you want...cheaper motoring, insurance, fuel costs (well in some areas/garages).

I agree totally with the mod 140 everytime for me unless money was no object then an S3..which kind of blows my arguement out of the water for the diesel flag!:keule:. 170 is a v nice engine but when ive drove it i find theres too much torque not that i cant handle it just too much power and you kind of think why i dont need more power a 140 would be more than sufficient. Probably not making my point clear so my advice test drive the two and make your own mind up
 
kkp0897 said:
To be honest, I'm not really sure but I was VERY close to buying one. The only thing (rather unavailable option) was being unable to order a Quattro S-tronic in a diesel but I was definately going for the 170.

THe only thing I would say is the 170 derivative is a newer engine to I would expect it to be a better unit. From the point of view of figures, I don't think there's much in it (mpg, emmissions...) between the two hence would go for the 170.

Cheers

KKP
Click to expand...

The new common-rail 140 and 170 engines were both developed at the same time. The AMT I spoke to about the differences implied that the only real difference between them was the turbo.

With the previous 140 and 170 PD engines the 170 was a later development and had other internal changes but I understand Audi wanted to keep the two new CR engines as close to each other as possible during manufacture.
 
I have been driving a chipped 140 TDI for two years and i have to say its been fantastic, very noisy but super strong on torque and did everything i wanted it to, not to mention averaged near on 50mpg most days. However i pick up my new 170 common rail next friday, and i cannot wait. The reason i went for the 170 was that i figured if its fast enough standard then won't chip, if i want even more then 200+bhp here i come. When i bought the current 140 i nearly went for the 170 but heard about the DPF issues, and as the 140 did not have one it was a easy choice. Now they have fixed the DPF and both engines have one anyway it was always going to be a 170 ;)

This time however i went for S-Tronic, had it some time ago on a Golf GTI and it is just so good i could not resist, roll on next friday. It is really nice to hear from your guys with the new 140's about how good the engine is, certainly the mpg and reduced noise, the current 140 sounds like a tractor on startup ! lol.

I think i read somewhere about Audi winning a award for the new 2ltr common rail desiel engine ?
 
ctr vs a3.... both cars standard and both had 3 people in each and it wasnt untill 125+ were the type r actually started pulling away, and both experienced drivers and both giving it the beans lol
 
sam80quattro said:
ctr vs a3.... both cars standard and both had 3 people in each and it wasnt untill 125+ were the type r actually started pulling away, and both experienced drivers and both giving it the beans lol
Click to expand...

Not in a million f*cking years.
 
kkp0897 said:
LOL - I agree, no chance mate...
Click to expand...

I just read this, and first I thought, yeah, no chance at all. But then I re-read it, thought about it, and you know what, I actually could believe this.

The Civic and A3 with 1 man each, the Civic would be quicker no doubt about that at all. However, with 3 people in each car, and knowing how very little torque the Civic has, and that the A3 has the same as the S3, 350nm, it could actually be possible.

Just a thought i'd throw a little curve ball in there....
 
I agree with beanoir having driven both 140 (and own it) and 170 and a CTR....so in my opinion theres only one way to find out....:box:
 
DING DING.. round 1.. lol

I would've love to had a go if I still had my CTR.... Here's a pic of it..

psn00021.jpg
 
I own a 170PD and have chanced a few CTR I tell you!
My best stretch of road on the way home is an up hill stretch in Kent on the M2, not vertical job but steady.

Quite a few times CTR's have dived in the middle after a blast to 110mph+ and I agree, the torque wins every time!

I love the TDI and will never go back to petrol unless I get my Boss's GTR! Now thats a different story altogether!!!!!
 
*i'm really, really bored of my 170 TDi. it's not fast....*

I barely beat a Lexus IS200 in my 170 :3sadwalk:

Loads of fast-ish stuff just walks away from me :3sadwalk:

Any sort of headwind and it really struggles to go over 120 mph :3sadwalk:
 
I had 130mph out of my 140 (07 reg and the PD type) new one not tried yet still running it in so i would guess about the same...I could get 120 out of my 1.6 focus i had many moons ago you sure your car is running correctly?
 
Ding ding round 3 goes to KKP :))) :box:....

Just looked at the figures for the CTR and "maximum torque of 202N/m"....A3 Sportback 140CR Tdi is "320N/m" and 170 Tdi "350N/m"...:o.k:
 
170

1.4 seconds 0-60 faster
30nm more torque
1.1mpg less (combined)
10mph fastr top end

And those that say that the 0-60 is nothing, the S3 does 0-60 1.3 seconds faster than the 2.0TFSi standard

They are more powerful and if thats what you like then go for the 170.. if your not bothered about that then get the 140 if you want the diesel, even better get the hairdryer 1.9TdIE and cruise
 
ragsterx said:
170

1.4 seconds 0-60 faster
30nm more torque
1.1mpg less (combined)
10mph fastr top end

And those that say that the 0-60 is nothing, the S3 does 0-60 1.3 seconds faster than the 2.0TFSi standard

They are more powerful and if thats what you like then go for the 170.. if your not bothered about that then get the 140 if you want the diesel, even better get the hairdryer 1.9TdIE and cruise
Click to expand...

I'm sure some people will buy the 170 rather than the 140 just so that they can say "I've got the more powerfull 170"

The performance differences are very small and personally I found the 140 better to drive a slightly quieter. That's why I purchased the 140. To me it was the better car of the two.
 
h5djr said:
I'm sure some people will buy the 170 rather than the 140 just so that they can say "I've got the more powerfull 170"

The performance differences are very small and personally I found the 140 better to drive a slightly quieter. That's why I purchased the 140. To me it was the better car of the two.
Click to expand...

Suppose you went for the SE trim as it looks nicer and feels better too hey?
 
ragsterx said:
Suppose you went for the SE trim as it looks nicer and feels better too hey?
Click to expand...

I owned four Sport version of the 8L 1.8T A3 before I changed to the SE. I'm now on my third SE. I also had three Golf GTi's and a Golf VR6 before that so I had my fair share of Sport models. Now I'm quite a bit older I prefer the comfort of the SE, all be it fitted with 17" wheels and 225/45 tyres. I no longer like Sports seats or the Sports suspension so the SE is the obvious choice. The SE used to be the same price as the Sport but with more of the 'luxury' items as standard. Now it's cheaper but I added back all the previous SE options and a few more as well to get exactly what I wanted.
 
ragsterx said:
Suppose you went for the SE trim as it looks nicer and feels better too hey?
Click to expand...

Not everybody wants to be 'sport'. I wouldn't want another S-line, I value my spine and teeth. In a parallell universe where I buy another A3 I'd spec it to be more 'luxury'. I'm finding diesel shoppers dressed up with S's and rock-hard suspension and sporting pretensions a bit :lazy: at my age, and I'm 31 :yes:

And waving willies about '0.00001 seconds faster to 60' is a bit gay as well :happy:

Fast tractors, what's the world coming to eh :eyebrows:
 
I was at miltek a few weeks ago they hate dpf filters they have a mod that replaces the dpf with a bypass pipe and then a remap that also stops the regen kicking in.
They also said that there were complaints at Audi and VW about mpg on the 170's so some dealers turned off the regen in the ecu giving better mpg but black smoke like a non dpf car this was found when the cars turned up for the dpf mod and the tuner found that no warning lights came on due to the regen turned off already.
Regen is when the ecu puts excess fuel in which sticks to the blades in the dpf heating up and burning away the soot deposits its like a fire in the exhaust thats how they put it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
140 vs 170
Replies
33
Views
6K
jessie123
jessie123
SteveTDCi
140 v 170
Replies
13
Views
2K
stevehsv868
stevehsv868
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
Top
Back