Mar 3, 2008
Again, not according to my lease company, my buckfast guzzling friend.:icon_thumright:
Indeed. In response to a similar question in last weeks auto express mail page, a VW spokesman said exactly the same to somone who was frustrated in not being able to order a VW Golf with that engine - in this instance they were originally told 20 weeks then couldnt order it as all. Hence VW reintroduced the 1.6FSI for the Golf 'for customers for who waiting isn't an option.'
6 months, albeit is not ideal, I can accept as being likely to be accurate for this engine in the A3.
When I ordered mine (2.0 tdi 170) back in September I was told 6 months by two dealers as they had used up all of their allocation. Lease company however got it in 3 months as they searched around various dealers and found one with allocation. Probably works the same with all models?
Congrats on the car, looks great and i've heard great things about the 1.4 engine. My 2.0T Quattro has been very economical so far, so i can only imagine what the 1400 is like.
Anyway i think a few people are getting touchy and offended over nothing. Yes we all know salesmen tell lies to sweeten a deal. No **** sherlock. But so what? Whether the 6 months waiting list is true or not...The guy didn't wait 6 months so who cares? If the buyer is totally happy with the deal at the end of the day it's all good.
The was a time when an A3 fitted with a DSG gearbox was taking 6 months for a while, because the gearbox plant at Kessal could not make them fast enough to meet demand.
Providing you are quoted that as a delivery time then fair enough. I personally don't mind waiting to get what I want. Whenever I consider changing my car the first thing I do is to check on the current delivery period and plan accordingly.
But there does seem a section of society that works on the basis - I want it and I want it know! and gets upset when it cannot have it.
That little A3 looks fantastic - will be interesting to see how people get on with the 1.4T engine. Although it's small, its power output is higher than the previous model with the 1.6 which produced 102(?)bhp or there abouts.
125bhp from this 1.4T is the same output as the 1998 model A4 1.8. Bet it'll be really ecenomical too.
Me too, I'd be really interested in the daily mpg around Town, plus what its like on the Motorways
A 6 month wait would bring it into the facelift option surely?
Gentlemen can we stop with the childish personal remarks.
I don’t normally post but today I feel compelled to do so.
Firstly, nice car TFSI I think the 1.4 TFSI is a great engine & I hope you get lots of enjoyment out of it!
When I have time I might spend 5 mins in between appointments looking around various posts which may be of interest to me. One thing I have started to notice is that there is a certain member who seems to like nothing better than to jump down peoples necks and try and cause a stir. (This is a common theme throughout this forum for this member)
I don’t understand why this person even bothers to post on this forum, he obviously is not an Audi fan (which is fine, freedom of speech etc) but when somebody is clearly pleased about their new purchase (and why not), why doesn’t this person just pipe down.
I think we all know why this is the case, I feel very sorry for the wife! We all have inadequacies so why don’t you just buy a BMW, oh sorry you did.
Ah, he's alright. But give it a rest bowfer. The guy's bought a new motor and he's chuffed. Let's just do one of those 'Ooo! That looks nice! What's it like?' threads.
I thought about the 1.4 TFSI for Mrs. rich1068, perfect as far as I was concerned. But she needed the Sportback and doesn't like them. So we got another Polo and she hates that too. Wrong colour apparently. Well maybe if she actually visited a showroom it would help... grumble...grumble...bloody women...
Glad to see you're liking the engine, I got a A3 1.4 S-Line in phantom black on order and I am counting down the days till it arrives!
Now thats one long countdown clock!
Do you not get Buckie in the land of the sheep Bowfer?? Nae luck!!
Is wales not the sheep friendly country...
Just to add some fuel.
Broadspeed are quoting 20 weeks for the 1.4 and 12 weeks for everything else.
Interesting how they can get their hands on everything else in 12 weeks.
Popular engine is this 1.4 and for good reason too.
The dealer quoted me a 12 week delivery time when I ordered my 1.4T 2 weeks ago, I questioned it and he told me 'lets just say 12 weeks would be the worse case scenario' so I am hoping I can get the car sooner!
Our A3 tdi was very economical until the last week of ownership when my Mrs decided to fill the tank to the brim 3 days before we sold it , even with my best efforts at uneconomical driving it still went away with nearly half a tank full! I nearly went on a long tour just to make sure I didn't give any fuel away
But it's not just the bhp; it produces almost as much torque (200Nm) as the old 150bhp 1.8T engine, as fitted to the 8L A3, and at only 1500rpm too.
I've got a test drive booked in a couple of weeks time.
Does VW put this engine in any of it's current range? I noticed last night that the new rocco will be offered with it and the 170BHP version
Think VW only offer the 1.4 TSI which is the Supercharged and Turbocharged version.
Yes, that's my understanding too, although possibly the lowest power version might be the same as in the A3 (ie. turbo only).
I seem to recall that the 170bhp 1.4TSI is no more fuel efficient than an equivalent power 1.8 or 2.0 engine, so it becomes a bit pointless.
I don't understand why VW are sticking with the TSI (turbo + supercharger) concept, as it will always be less efficient than a turbo engine. I would be concerned about its reliability too, given that it declutches the supercharger everytime you press the throttle and the revs build up.
Not quite, there's a 120bhp Golf 1.4 Tsi - and although it has the same name as the twincharger thingy, it's just the same engine as the A3 - turbo only.
The lower powered TSi unit produces 140hp as opposed to the 170 unit and has the exact same concept in mind ie supercharged and turbo charged but it's a rough drive. Not at all refined like the similar Audi unit. All or nothing I'm afraid in the VW unit. The Audi unit is a much smoother drive imo.
Now done 5 days and 320 miles with my 1.4 TFSI the little motor is amazing me more and more. Not been above 4000 rpm yet but shift 1st and 2nd quickly and floor it in 3rd and it just pulls smoothly and quickly from very low revs all the way up to 4k and then does the same in 4th. Its quiet lively in 5th and 6th as well.
Long, Flat Torque Curves are the business.
ME AND THIS LITTLE AUDI ARE GONNA GET ON JUST FINE
Gonna keep the 1.4T badge on the back as well which is gonna upset a few people when they try to get the better of this little engine.
Or I might pass on a few opinions of my own...
Am I missing something?
Is this the 1.4 TFSI @ 125 PS we are speaking about?
With 147 lb-ft of torque?
How on earth is that going to be as fast as some suggest...against - for example - a Diesel with 140 PS and nearly 100 lb-ft or torque more?
I'm in no doubt that the 1.4 TFSI is a fine engine...if its anything like it's bigger brother it'll be a cracker...
But also remember that economy is fine if driven like a 1.4...if driven like a more performance orientated car, and all the power and the full spread of it's flat torque curve are used...it will go through petrol at a decent rate as you have to burn it to make the power/torque.
BTW, that's a lovely car GlasgowRangers..one hell of a shine!
Yea we're talking about the 1.4TFSI, the diesel sounds good with its +100lb of torque but its only over a very small rev band (1750-2500rpm), so you will be riding a surge of low down torque and will have to shift up whereas the petrol has a peak torque over 1500-4200rpm meaning it reaches peak pulling power lower down the rev's and continuing all the way to >4000rpm.
And what mpg are we expecting from this 'Brilliant Little Engine'?
Ive just fueled my little engine at 350 miles and its roughly around 35-36 mpg that includes a 200 mile jaunt to North Wales and the rest pottering about a and b roads.
A 2.0T i had for a spell used to really fly but only averaged 19 mpg plus it sounded like a bag of nails when it was idling.
Little engines today are a totally different engine than yesterdays.
I am not that easily impressed by normal car performance after having a spell driving a BENTLEY CONTI with a 640 hp Audi W12.
Now thats performance like a GR1 Tornado on wheels
In fact the 140 diesel I had produced hardly any torque until 2000rpm, so you were forever swapping cogs to make any progress. Precisely what a diesel is supposed to avoid !
Got to agree...
The 140 PD isn't a great engine in my view...the 8v 130 is a 'better' engine...more usable torque....in fact I prefer the 130 over the 150 for the reason that it picks up earlier.
Out on the open road, once rolling, I'm struggling tosee how a 1.4 TFSI will keep a 140 PD at bay.
Now, the 170 PD...that IS a cracking engine...
Yes, probably true.
(Until the PD driver gets tired of the tractor noise, obviously )
Had one as a loaner once, and was very impressed. Quite similar in character to the 2.0T, I thought.
funny I was not impressed at all with the 170... but maybe it was the DSG..
I happened to be on my way home from work one evening when my friend in his 1.4T Sportback pulled alongside me on the dual carriageway so we both accelerated and mine was obviously significantly faster. I would of thought a 140 would be able to hold its own against it, it doesn't have that much less than torque than mine.
The 2.0Tdi 140 may produce it's peak torque in a very narrow band, but the fact is it continues to make good torque long after that.
For example, it is still making 300nm at 3500rpm and 250nm at 4000rpm.
The fact that the 1.4Tfsi hold onto it's peak torque longer is irrelevant, when it's still less.
The most it can ever muster is 240nm.
Less is less is less mate, no matter how much you try and dress it up.
It's like a bloke with a 3 inch wang saying "ah, but I go on longer"
So what mate, you've still got a small wang..
Separate names with a comma.