Another 170 or 140 thread

C

confusionhunter

Registered User
Joined
Nov 19, 2005
Messages
191
Reaction score
4
Points
18
Location
lothian
Ah what a quandry!
Time for a new car, well a newer car and bigger more to the point, new addition to family means the 3 door A3 doesn't cut it anymore.

So Ive had the A4 B7 and B8 debate with myself and read the threads on here and I think I'll plump for a B7 Tdi avant S-line 2.0. I would like a top spec one and there is a few around but I have a concern.

140 or 170? I've read the threads and my conclusion was I'll go for a later 140 (to avoid head issues).
Id even plump for the black special editions and I wouldnt need to do anything to it (except maybe xenons). But the 170 puts me off.

Ive read about the 170s which in theory sound great but poor MPG puts me right off. It seems the hybrid Piezo injectors and PD tecnology didnt work out too well..... Anyway MPG is more important than raw pace to me at the mo.

So My question is.... are the 170s really that bad? Has anyone removed the DPF and blocked the EGR both of which are known to improve MPG (with appropriate remap of course). I havent really seen a conclusion on this?

I'd rather get a 140 and upgrade the interior, RNS-E and black bits out than get a top spec 170 and be left with a poor performing engine (mpg wise).

What are peoples thoughts?
I wouldn't want to get a 170 and then spend £££ making it get better mpg when Id be happy with a 140 etc....
Debate! :)
 
My mother has a 140 auto. Isn't quite as good on economy as her old B6 1.9tdi but thats to be expected I guess with the auto box.

I've asked a car dealer friend to look for a 170 for me. I mentioned the DPF as I do quite alot of short journies but then will have at least one long journey a week. He said he could have it removed and the ECU mapped to suit (ECU told everything is fine when in fact its not even there anymore) for £250.

The injectors I've noticed VAG is offering to check and replace if required FOC. So some sort of psuedo recall of sorts.

Only thing I can see that is still of concern is the oil pump issue. But from what I gather thats across the range and only made a bit better by subsequent models.

Least thats how I see it anyway. I'm a bit nervous going for a 170 but hey. I want the BHP :)
 
Well my S-line quattro Special Edition, which is a 170 Avant has seen 44mpg although its normally about 38-40. Maybe its all the goodies on it, but it improved after the injectors were replaced. As for DPF issues, I've yet to see the light come on in nearly 5 years and nearly 50,000 miles. I've had the cambelt done and its just about to have another service and MOT in a week. So backed up with a comprehensive warranty that would cost twice as much if I were to take it out now, I feel supremely condfident in mine. Although I put my registration on retention with the intention of selling the car, I've still got to convince myself that it's the right decision - it just does everything really well.
 
Last edited:
We have had our 170 Touran from new since 2007, it has had a few problems and has just had to have the injectors replaced, its quick, not brilliant on fuel and the DSG box has a lot to be desired.
 
Had my 170 s-line 18 months, love it, had injectors done, cleaned out egr, drives great, returns 46 on a good run, returns 36-40 under a heavy foot enjoying the car.


My mate also has a 170, he has had a DPF delete & remap done (I think it was done by AMD)............ it's on my to do list........... what a different car, 205bhp, can't remember the torque. So I guess I'd say the 170 is the one.

Mac
 
I have a 2010 170 Quattro A3 with a DPF delete and remap ( 200bhp) ish. I get 36mpg round town and 55-60 on a run. Not bad for a 4x4 with 200 horses.
 
audi upgrades
thanks for the replies! Mac... what MPg does your mate see on his dpf delete car? I know how diesels work its basically a case of MPG directly proportional to power.

I just hear of all the 140s regularly returning over 50 ( can anyone confirm?!) with ease and I really am puzzled why 30 bhp makes so much difference.... Ive got the 3 cyl pd engine in the polo we have in the family and its got 60% more power than normal and hasnt dropped too much in mpg.
Any one with tuned 140s care to comment? I think Im still swaying to a 140 for some reason.
 
confusionhunter said:
thanks for the replies! Mac... what MPg does your mate see on his dpf delete car? I know how diesels work its basically a case of MPG directly proportional to power.

I just hear of all the 140s regularly returning over 50 ( can anyone confirm?!) with ease and I really am puzzled why 30 bhp makes so much difference.... Ive got the 3 cyl pd engine in the polo we have in the family and its got 60% more power than normal and hasnt dropped too much in mpg.
Any one with tuned 140s care to comment? I think Im still swaying to a 140 for some reason.
Click to expand...

Just asked, he says he's getting about 48-52+ general mixed driving, that obviously drops when putting the foot down.
To be honest tho' if it's purely down to MPG then you will be better off with the 140 for a saving of a few pounds a month, but aesthetically the 170 twin pipes look better IMO

Mac
 
confusionhunter said:
thanks for the replies! Mac... what MPg does your mate see on his dpf delete car? I know how diesels work its basically a case of MPG directly proportional to power.

I just hear of all the 140s regularly returning over 50 ( can anyone confirm?!) with ease and I really am puzzled why 30 bhp makes so much difference.... Ive got the 3 cyl pd engine in the polo we have in the family and its got 60% more power than normal and hasnt dropped too much in mpg.
Any one with tuned 140s care to comment? I think Im still swaying to a 140 for some reason.
Click to expand...

Well, as a comparison, we've also got a 140PD Octavia estate with Haldex which had an experimental remap and returned about 45. OK its not exactly quattro, but close enough to the comparison you're looking for. Don't know what the "overhead" for having quattro is, but I wouldn't spec an Audi without it.
 
thanks for all the replies. This car will be a keeper and the a3 we've done 60 odd k in.

I hear what you are saying about quattro it is awesome, but given I have a 'weekend car', I'm not fussed about traction or power too much. Since I've discovered winter tyres I'm not convinced i would need quattro in a 140 for the sake of awsome snow traction for a month or so of the year....

And I guess this is a key point, the 170 has a few nicer bits like the exhaust, bigger clutch, turbo so on and so forth.

Oddly I'm also not that worried about the DPF in terms of failure or reliability. Its the fact the engine burns excess fuel on purpose to get heat into it!

hearing of decent mpg from a 170 with a dpf is pretty inspiring though! any other mpg reports from a dpf delete 170?

Over the life span of the car a difference between 40 and 50 is about £2k....hmm....
 
Hi bud,

I test drove a 170 and mpg is around 41 - i changed my B6 1.8t for a 57 plate 140 tdi B7, its been mapped stage 2 giving 210 bhp and it will still return 55 - 58 on good run... plus lots of grunt.
 
Yea, I really want to like the 170 but for bang for buck the 140 seems better, even when mapped to over 170 it seems to perform better....
 
the only thing going for the 170 is the look of the back and exhaust exit either side of the car, try and drive a mapped 140 you will be surprised.............. i love mine, but 19" and a low drop is fun with family .............. not
 
Wouldn't a 170, mapped with the DPF removed have a higher MPG than with the DPF? Don't they start ticking over higher if they think the DPF is clogging up? Is what I've heard.

Still fairly sure I want a 170. My mothers 140 does mid 40s on a run but it is an auto. Her old b6 130 did just on 50 according the the display thingy anyway.
 
My old B6 1.9tdi PD130 did 50mpg no problem.
With B7 170Q on motorway I average 40-42mpg which is shocking. Funny thing is that driving 70 on 6th, I will never go better than 38mpg. Only when I do 80-85 I see 42-44mpg. I regret not getting 3.0Tdi because it gets the same on motorway.
BTW. My sister has a 140bhp Jetta and absolutely destroys me when it comes to acceleration.
Probably because of extra weight and more power loss when it's a quattro.
 
thanks for that. Would be good to have some more feedback on the 170 less dpf MPgs are like but Im thinking a remapped 140 is the way to go and best for me!
 
I would imagine that the Quattro will use a few more MPGs.

If a mapped/DPF removed 170 can do high 40s on a run I'll be happy. I would be interested to hear what folk get from the 170s in town driving. My Jeep averages 16 atm.
 
eddscott said:
I would imagine that the Quattro will use a few more MPGs.

If a mapped/DPF removed 170 can do high 40s on a run I'll be happy. I would be interested to hear what folk get from the 170s in town driving. My Jeep averages 16 atm.
Click to expand...

My 170 FWD does 30 average on town driving (in london). Easily drops to 25 on a very bad day.

I got 43 yesterday taking it easy with no traffic. Very rare though.
 
I've had some experience of the two engines, first i had the 170 quattro avant for 5 years from new. i had it mapped after three years and TBH it was never good, MPG was always low 30's and perhaps neared 40 on a good run, the DPF is a nightmare and when its doing a regen the car drives like crap and guzzles the diesel. The main reason i gave up on it after trying everything (cleaning egr, mapping etc) was that the 140 2.0tdi in my wifes SEAT just drove like a dream compared to my (twice the price) Audi. Its only my experience but the PD engine just doesnt work with the electronig EGR and DPF, if you removed the DPF and mapped out the EGR (blocked it off) im sure it would be sweet however what you'd have created is a 140 with a bigger turbo and injectors so whats the point?

If its any indication of how sick i got of the 170 i traded it in for a 2.0tfsi b7 of the same age. I commute 60miles a day to work and pay my own fuel, i've noticed hardly any difference in fuel costs as the TFSI engine is VERY economical once mapped and if you take it easy. I can easily achieve 35mpg in it and its much nicer to drive and easier to work on and modify.

Just my opinion though, many people are totally happy with the 170.
 
I love my b7 for everything except for the engine to be honest.
I had 1.9 130PD before was happier with it. Although I am an Audi freak I think it's time to try 325d or 330d soon.
 
this is exactly where I was coming from. Its such a shame the 170 should be amazing on paper and seems 'lesser' manufacturers are producing better engines by the timw VW/Audi were moving on from PD. The 170 is a bit of hybrid as it uses the piezo injectors not the traditional PDs. Ive got a 3cyl PD blocked of the EGR etc and it runs great. 140 for me then, I do like the b7!
Thanks for this guys. I dare say DPF delete and some messing about the 170 would be a great performance engine, but that costs yet more £££
 
spider74 said:
If its any indication of how sick i got of the 170 i traded it in for a 2.0tfsi b7 of the same age. I commute 60miles a day to work and pay my own fuel, i've noticed hardly any difference in fuel costs as the TFSI engine is VERY economical once mapped and if you take it easy. I can easily achieve 35mpg in it and its much nicer to drive and easier to work on and modify.
Click to expand...
Don't mean to hijack the thread but been thinking of alternatives and fancy a Golf Gti or TT any you you say my mpg will be about the same?
 
Had a crash a couple of weeks ago... had me thinking.... turns out the b7 is 4 star euro Ncap but the B8 is 5 star..... Im now thinking B8 despit my previous preference. Soooooo Ive not heard great things aboutthe 143 CR diesles MPG, but can you legally ditch the DPF on the B8s? Was it 09 they were made legal?
 
im not sure where you lads are getting these mpg figures from for your 170 b7 but mine returns 50mpg all day long!!!

thats a standard engine 170 no dpf delete on it. i rev it hard and and defo dont hang around on the motor way, its loves a good blast.

i think mines brilliant, there arnt many motors out there that i would change mine for that return 50mpg on a run. my brothers 330d does around 42mpg on the same journey.
 
My 170 has got as high as 45 on a run driven gently. Its doing mid to high 30s in normal driving. Its had all injectors changed which cant see any difference. Its having the egr and dpf removed and mapped soon. My mothers 140 is a good 5mpg better and its an auto. The engine is much nicer to use than the old b6 tdi.

Dont regret buying the 170 at all.
 
I got 61.6mpg in our VW Jetta 2.0 TDi 140 on a 50 mile motorway run last weekend. I can't believe the 170s are so bad.
 
scotty76 said:
I got 61.6mpg in our VW Jetta 2.0 TDi 140 on a 50 mile motorway run last weekend. I can't believe the 170s are so bad.
Click to expand...

The 2wd 170pd should be capable of mid 40s, easily. My quattro averages 40mpg with mixed driving, but I've seen a (genuine) 47mpg on a 400 mile motorway run and I get low 40s on most of my motorway trips. Considering it's pushing 200bhp and has 4wd I think that's reasonable.

TBH I don't understand all the moaning about the 170. It's a performance engine (well, as close as a small capacity diesel is ever going to get to 'performance'). It was never designed for economy and it's at its best when being driven hard (unlike the 1.9s it actually seems to like being revved to the red line). That's bound to cost at the pumps.

You pays your money, you takes your choice :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I
140 Or 170?
Replies
6
Views
939
Whopper
Whopper
P
140 or 170 TDi
Replies
4
Views
2K
NHN
NHN
A
Economy - 2.0 140 chipped to 170 or Factory 170?
Replies
4
Views
1K
sclamb
S
K
TDI Difference 170//140????
Replies
6
Views
2K
Addie
A
NM07
TDI 170 exhaust on 140
Replies
4
Views
844
NM07
NM07
Top
Back