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

2.0 tdi - definately want one, but is the 170 THAT much better than a 140??

ajda3 Mar 1, 2010

  1. ajda3

    ajda3 A3 Newbie... Haa

    25
    0
    1
    Basically as said in title

    Any help much appreciated
     
  2. smudge_don

    smudge_don Active Member

    2,944
    11
    38
    In a word, yes

    I've had both, and the 170 is so much more responsive

    Specially in DSG format :wub:
     
  3. N8

    N8 Kowalski Details VCDS Map User

    17,163
    718
    113
    I've driven a 170 DSG with a bluefin, and it felt slower than my 140 DSG, map the 140 and you'll be fine! Lower insurance too!
     
  4. deano670

    deano670 Too Much Hype

    270
    0
    16
    Go for the 140 and get it mapped if you want the extra power. Save your ££££ and get what you want.

    The 170 is less than 1 second quicker than the 140 to 60mph.
     
  5. ajda3

    ajda3 A3 Newbie... Haa

    25
    0
    1
    is that one second slower after the remap then? or before?
    if i were to get the 140 and remap it would it then be on par or faster than the stock 170?
     
  6. NHN

    NHN Retrofitter - Audi - VW - Skoda - Seat Site Sponsor VCDS Map User

    29,268
    1,685
    113
    That would depend on age of car, if its the new 140's then they fly in stock form.

    & without sounding condescending Jord, as your 1st was 140 & this is 170 it would seem more responsive with the extra 30 horses fella as your 140 was stock.

    Lower insurance would depende if you declared the map etc as that would auto add higher insurance costs.
     
  7. ajda3

    ajda3 A3 Newbie... Haa

    25
    0
    1
    well AMD offer extra 35-45 break with a stage one remap, leaving it at 175/185 - but i'm guessing that wouldnt necessarily means its faster due to suspension etc?
    or is the suspension the same?
    sorry for the amount of questions but am i complete noobie
     
  8. deano670

    deano670 Too Much Hype

    270
    0
    16
    the 140 is 1 second slower than the 170 before remapping.

    A remap would take the 140 between 170-190 - so yes it would be quicker than a 170.

    If I was you I would go for the 140 and see how you get on with it. Remap if needed.

    Black Edition?
     
  9. NHN

    NHN Retrofitter - Audi - VW - Skoda - Seat Site Sponsor VCDS Map User

    29,268
    1,685
    113
    Oh yes it will be quicker for sure, suspension type depends on version designation as in Sport, Sline, SE as to what parts are fitted.
     
  10. smudge_don

    smudge_don Active Member

    2,944
    11
    38
    My 170 was cheaper than my 140 to insure

    The new 140's are pretty quick

    I love my 170, the 140 was ok but was lagging a little bit, the 170 is muvh better in my opinion

    If you really want to decide, go to a dealer and try out both, see what you like
     
  11. piers90

    piers90 Member

    99
    8
    18
    ive got a 170 quattro. did a drag race with a mate in a 140. nuthin in it at all!!!! felt ripped off for buyin the 170! :sadlike:
     
  12. h5djr

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User Gold Supporter quattro Audi A3

    9,011
    1,409
    113
    It depends if you are talking about the 140/170 PD or the new 140/170 CR (common-rail) version. The 170PD/DSG I owned before my current Sportback was definitely better than my previous 140PD/DSG. A little more powerful and quite a bit smoother.

    But I test drove both the 140CR and the 170CR before I decided on my present 140CR Sportback. I preferred the 140 and performance wise there seem very little in it. The 140 seemed smoother and quieter than the 170 and I did not think the extra £900 was worth it. So I purchased a 140CR again with a DSG. I have subsequently had it remapped and it is probably producing something in the region of 170-175hp and the remap cost me £295. To me this is a lot better value that a 170CR at £900 more than a 140CR.
     

Share This Page