1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

1.6 FSI Engine...is it that bad?

Discussion in 'A3/S3/Sportback (8P Chassis)' started by AK, Aug 7, 2008.

  1. AK
    Offline

    AK New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Aug 7, 2008]
    Hi all,

    Been looking for a Diesel 2.0 TDI to find either ones with high mileage or early models (according to my budget)

    Having read a few posts on here, it appears that these engines do like to drink a lot of oil.

    I have also been looking at 1.6 FSI's but not sure what they are like - performance and reliability wise.

    There has been a few comments on here about the 1.6 engine being sluggish and not worth it but what about the 1.6 FSI?

    Thanks
    #1
  2. Ads

    Ads

    [Sep 23, 2014]

  3. golf
    Offline

    golf ***** rent boy VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,556
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Aug 7, 2008]
    It's perfectly adequate in town driving and short trips, but if it's thrills you're after or easy overtaking the diesel will be miles better. Will still be dull, but the torque will make driving on the motorway less of an ordeal.

    They're still very unrefined compared to the 1.6. The FSI variant has 13bhp more and is more economical, but will cost more obviously. I think the Road Tax will be cheaper as well, but if it were me I'd avoid the base models of any car as they will be poverty spec.
    #2
  4. MarcQuinlivan
    Offline

    MarcQuinlivan Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,539
    Likes Received:
    2
    [Aug 7, 2008]
    Apparently you need to use the 98 ron stuff to utilise that additional horsepower - otherwise you just end up with the same 102hp as the non-FSI 1.6 engine.

    That's what I was told by my dealer when the 8P A3 came out at first and i was enquiring about what the difference was between the fsi and non-fsi. I couldn't understand why they would make two different versions of the same engine. Don't think the 1.6fsi model ever sold in great numbers.

    just to pick you up on your "poverty spec on the base model" comment - presumably by base model you mean non-sport, non-se as opposed to the 1.6. Aren't the different trim levels all the same spec except for the engine?
    #3
  5. kaz219
    Offline

    kaz219 Active Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    1,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    [Aug 7, 2008]
    How about a 1.9 TDI ?

    They're a bit dearer than the 1.6 but better IMO
    #4
  6. biggiep
    Offline

    biggiep Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Aug 8, 2008]
    Even in standard guise I don't think you could say the 2.0TDi is boring? Its not lightning quick buy any stretch but its entertaining and punchy and a hell of a lot better than most stuff on the road.

    Not expensive to re-map and get a genuinly entertaining car for the economy/price.

    Maybe were confusing it with the 105 1.9TDi ?
    #5
  7. Amchlolor
    Offline

    Amchlolor Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2005
    Messages:
    5,604
    Likes Received:
    3
    [Aug 8, 2008]
    Yes, the 1.6Fsi is that bad.
    As others have said, even the 1.9tdi is better.
    We have one of each in the fleet, I drive both semi-regularly.
    #6

Share This Page