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

A3 2.0 FSI v A3 2.0 TDI - which is which ?

Discussion in 'A3/S3/Sportback (8P Chassis)' started by h5djr, Apr 14, 2004.

  1. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    With all the 'discussions' that have taken place on this forum about the relative performance of the new A3 2.0 FSI and the A3 2.0 TDI, I have collected some performance figures about these 2 cars and the old A3 1.8T Sport. They all come from road tests from a reputable magazine and all from the same magazine so they should be a fair comparison

    To add a bit of interest I have included the figures against car A, car B and Car C but have not said which is which

    top speed car A=128 car B=129 car C=131
    0-60mph car A=7.7 car B=8.6 car C=7.9

    30-50mph(3rd) car A=4.4 car B=3.5 car C=4.8
    30-50mph(4th) car A=6.1 car B=5.5 car C=7.0
    50-70mph(3rd) car A=4.7 car B=4.4 car C=5.1
    50-70mph(4th) car A=6.0 car B=5.3 car C=6.8
    50-70mph(5th) car A=7.7 car B=6.5 car C=8.9

    I won't give the relative fuel consumption as that would give the game away.

    Post replies - what is car A, car B and car C

    A3 2.0 FSI,A3 2.0 TDI and A3 1.8T Sport

    I will give the details in a few days time.

    Dave R
    #1
  2. Ads

    Ads

    [Sep 23, 2014]

  3. garethj
    Offline

    garethj Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    I own a 2.0TDI and can certainly say that it can't do 0-60 in under nine seconds so what kind of cliff did they drive the car off to get that kind of performance ?
    #2
  4. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    Perhaps their better practiced at doing 0-60 tests or have more accurate timing kit. Anyway it's the same people doing the testing on all 3 models so it should be a fair comparison. I personally think the in gear 30-50 and 50-70 times give a better measure for ordinary day to day driving.

    Dave R
    #3
  5. garethj
    Offline

    garethj Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    I agree but if the car could do 0-60 in 8.6 seconds why the hell would Audi claim 9.5. VAG have been known to provide 'tuned up' versions of their cars for the press. 8.6 0-60 is what you would expect from a port tuned 2.0 TDI.
    #4
  6. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    The time given by Audi is 9.5 for 0-62mph. Only a minor point but it does make a difference. Also are you using the cars speedometer to register the 60mph. Road testers use much more accurate systems - 3rd wheel etc.

    Maybe it's just a better than average version. There was a article in a magazine recently where a standard A3 2.0 TDI was put on a rolling road and found to have 156 PS before any work had been done to it.

    By the way how do you do your timing ?

    Dave R
    #5
  7. yak
    Offline

    yak Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    These 0-60mph results don't seem to be right. Given that there's other magazines also, respectable and they've got results a bit over 9s for both models (and as Audi gives 9,1s & 9,5s, they seem right).

    So maybe these guys could fix their timing-machine, now these results are made with a random generator.

    Anyway, here's my guess: A = 1,8T ; B = 2,0 TDI ; C = 2,0 FSI

    Why? B has the best ingear acceleration, so it should be a TDI. A has shorter gear-ratios, so it should be a 1,8T. That leaves the C to be FSI.

    Anyway, the numbers are a bit weird for 0-60mph. Otherwise at least C seems to be quite well in line with other FSI results. Why isn't there a result with 30-50mph with 2nd btw? Yes, the diesel can't do it, but both petrol engines can and that would show their strength.

    Anyway, videos would be nice, too bad there's no such things /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif

    - Yak
    #6
  8. JamS3
    Offline

    JamS3 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2003
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    12
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    Don't forget though when most manufacturers do the performance times it's mostly with a half load in the car (ie 2 people) and a full tank of fuel.

    It's sometimes stated in the small print at the bottom. Plus car magazines tend to do the 0-60 times properly, I never go on what a manufacturer says as it always seems quicker
    #7
  9. garethj
    Offline

    garethj Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 14, 2004]
    David, the magazine article was actually the review of the Superchips offering that I posted recently. The 156BHP was probably overstated as most rolling roads are a little optimistic to say the least. If I were using the speedo to time 0-60 it would be faster as the speedo reads 60mph when the car is doing 56mph (GPS calibration). I know some magazines will rev the **** out of cars and drop the clutch viciously to try and squeeze the last ounce of performance out of them but 0.9 of a second is a lot.
    #8
  10. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 15, 2004]
    It's not uncommon for a PD TDI to put out more than the quoted figures.

    I reckon car A is the 2.0TDI...
    #9
  11. tennisguy
    Offline

    tennisguy Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2003
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 15, 2004]
    I think Car A =1.8T, B = 2.0 TDI, C = 2.0 FSI. Same as Yak.


    #10
  12. JezyG
    Offline

    JezyG New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 15, 2004]
    Any car is fast all depends on the driver and the way they drive. Driver A may be faster than Driver B then you also have the differences in temp, wet dry ect.

    Unless all the cars were tested at the same time with the same driver and the same miles on the clock there are too many variances to be able to make a definitive answer.
    #11
  13. jojo
    Offline

    jojo S3 Drift King! Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2003
    Messages:
    26,249
    Likes Received:
    1,677
  14. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 17, 2004]
    so come on, fill us in!!
    #13
  15. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 17, 2004]
    OK everyone, firstly thanks for joining in the fun.

    The cars are Car A=1.8T, car B=2,0 TDI and car 3=2.0 FSI.

    All the figures were taken from road tests by Audi Driver Magazine in the September 2000, April 2004 and February 2004 issues respectively.

    Enjoy your A3s which ever version you drive and thanks for keeping this a lively forum.

    Regards

    Dave R
    #14
  16. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 17, 2004]
    So apart from 0-60 the diesel is the quickest in gear car?

    Apart from top speed of course..

    Mind you, I'm a bit miffed at how much the diesel is quicker in the gears but so much slower in 0-60 in those figures.

    Thanks David!
    #15
  17. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 19, 2004]
    It is also the case that a TDI with a DSG gearbox is a fraction quicker 0-60(62) mph that a manual TDI because there is no loss of power in a gear change, especially if you select Sport mode and let the gearbox decide when to change.

    Also, in an overtaking situation, you can floor the accelerator and if the engine reaches maximum revs in that gear it will just change up to the next with no loss of power or acceleration.

    Dave R
    #16
  18. steve184
    Offline

    steve184 Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2004
    Messages:
    1,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 19, 2004]
    I think the most valid simple reason that generally diesels have slower 0-60 times is that they generally will not stretch to 60 in second gear ie, require 2 gear changes instead of one in a performance petrol car.... but ive kinda been wondering... my mum and dads car is a megane diesel 120bhp and i have on more than one occasion pulled off without realising i was in second (ie felt just as quick as first) ie the low rev high torque is helping here. makes you wonder what would happen if you pulled off in second then you would only need one gear change to 60 (or even 80-90!!)

    Obviously this aint something you would wnat to do all the time as heavier on clutch but now and again to embarass the odd boyracer wouldnt do much harm!!

    just a thought!

    steve
    #17
  19. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 20, 2004]
    @ Yak - You reckon you can pull off in 2nd in a petrol car any easier than a diesel one?

    Yeh maybe in a Ferrari!
    #18
  20. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 20, 2004]
    [ QUOTE ]
    Yak said:
    Might feel good, but it's actually a lot slower, also starting with 2nd would make your TDI to drop below that good torque range, giving you hard time to accelerate anywhere, since there's no low-low-torque, whereas petrol engines can handle this situation easily.
    - Yak

    [/ QUOTE ]

    FSI max torque 148 lb ft @ 3500 rpm
    TDI max torgue 237 lb ft @ 1750 rpm
    1.8T max torque 155 lb ft @ 1750 rpm

    TDI = more torque at lower revs.

    This is why the TDI felt so much like my 1.8T and the FSI felt so dead until the revs were up to 3000-3500 rpm. May be good for 0-60 testing but not very good for actual driving.

    Dave R
    #19
  21. DavidR
    Offline

    DavidR Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 20, 2004]
    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    Post replies - what is car A, car B and car C


    [/ QUOTE ]

    To be honest they could all be the same car tested by different measures, on a different day, with different fuel loads, tyres, pressures and so on. Also the drive on times are flawed as some of the cars have 6gears and others only 5. The A3 1.8T has ridiculously long gears, making any meaningful interpretation of those figures even more challenging.
    Surely the only "accurate" measure of performance is same car, same day, same driver or an average of say 5 or more independant road tests for each car.

    Anyhow, I cannot figure out why you guys are STILL bickering about such a small difference...
    #20
  22. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 20, 2004]
    David R

    So what you are saying is that all car magazines road tests are useless because, although the cars are tested by the same experienced team of testers who match fuel loads, use the same methods etc etc, they are not all done on the same day they mean nothing.

    Also we keep "bickering about such a small difference" as you put it because we enjoy it. We don't all own a chipped S3 or similar or particularly want to. Each to his own. I prefer my Audi's as made by Audi. But I quite understand how others get a lot of enjoyment out of customising and chipping there cars. Surely there is room on this forum for all points of view from all Audi drivers. If you don't think a post will interest you don't have to read it.

    Enjoy your Audi - whatever model, chipped or not, that you drive.

    Regards

    Dave R
    #21
  23. garethj
    Offline

    garethj Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2003
    Messages:
    396
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Yak you are now talking out of your arse, the 2.0TDI will pull from 900rpm (way below turbo spooling speed), hence the reason that you can drive in fourth gear around town without any need to change.
    #22
  24. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Yak I agree with you on the "without a turbo" bit, hence the old VW Jetta for example, a slow smelly diesel but we're not talking about that type of diesel engine.

    PLEASE give us a break though will you, a 1.6??? Which has BOTH less torque and less BHP than the 2.0 TDI!!??

    I think if we got an engineer in from Audi to speak to you you'd still tell him he was wrong.

    All I know is I've got nearly 400 miles out of a tank this week in pure city driving and it cost Euro 40 to fill it while you're wasting petrol revving your car to 4K to get some power out of it.
    #23
  25. JezyG
    Offline

    JezyG New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Your consumption seems a bit high Irish as I am currently getting 350 miles out of a tank in quite a hungry 1.6 doing city driving like yourself. I would expected going on for 500 miles out of your TDi. Must just be newness.
    #24
  26. peteA3tdi
    Offline

    peteA3tdi Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    408
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    [ QUOTE ]
    JezyG said:
    Your consumption seems a bit high Irish as I am currently getting 350 miles out of a tank in quite a hungry 1.6 doing city driving like yourself. I would expected going on for 500 miles out of your TDi. Must just be newness.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    it needs to run in my old one started at 350/400miles per tank and ended on 550/600
    #25
  27. DavidR
    Offline

    DavidR Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    1
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    So what you are saying is that all car magazines road tests are useless because, although the cars are tested by the same experienced team of testers who match fuel loads, use the same methods etc etc, they are not all done on the same day they mean nothing.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    No, what I mean is that figures should be taken in context, and a single set of figures are not usually wholly representative of an individual car. If we are to beleive, for example, that certain stock cars produce more / less power than others, then even the most strictly conducted test may be flawed by inter vehicle variation. Additionally, if we are to beleive the stories that certain press cars are producing more power than the normal road cars, then again variations are certain to exist. These considerations bourne in mind mean that the figures posted cannot necessarily be reliably attributed to any of the 3 cars, and in the real world cannot represent the differences between an FSI and TDI engine.

    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    Also we keep "bickering about such a small difference" as you put it because we enjoy it.

    [/ QUOTE ]
    Well, good for you! How about saying something slightly more objective that the old "my car's better than yours argument"

    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    We don'tall own a chipped S3 or similar or particularly want to. Each to his own.


    [/ QUOTE ]
    Here, here!

    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    I prefer my Audi's as made by Audi. But I quite understand how others get a lot of enjoyment out of customising and chipping there cars. Surely there is room on this forum for all points of view from all Audi drivers.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Of course, but what makes the board stale and tiresome is repetitive arguments that cover no new ground, resort to personal attacks based on potential misinformation. The TDi vs FSi argument is akin to trying to determine whether blue is better than black - there cannot be an answer. What people want to see is an objective discussion, with good information that MAY make a new reader make an informed desicion on which car to buy, rather than look at pages of circular arguments and choose a different web board.

    [ QUOTE ]
    David Robinson said:
    If you don't think a post will interest you don't have to read it.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Moderator = reading all posts...

    [ QUOTE ]
    Yak said:

    Yes, but did you look below that max torque at all? TDI engines' funny symptom is, that there's no torque below that turbospooling.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Depends on you definition of "no" really. I found that you can drive the 2.0TDI pretty much from tickover without problems

    [ QUOTE ]
    Yak said:
    David, actually 1,8T's gears are quite short compared to this new 6-gear-box. At least A4 1,8T's 1st and 2nd are a lot shorter than new A3's.


    [/ QUOTE ]

    Yak, please stop posting RUBBISH. How, exactly, the 1.8T gears can be considered "short" when you can do 39MPH in 1st, 68MPH in second, 107MPH in third and over 120 in 4th beggars beleif. I await your explaination with anticipation.
    #26
  28. yak
    Offline

    yak Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    David, then there's differences in 1,8Ts. There are others with shorter gears also, a lot shorter (with 2nd topping at 78km/h), these are from A4's, as I pointed out, read.

    And as to torque with 2,0TDI when starting still, yes. Funny how every other board seems to complain this is a problem with 2,0TDI engine, not felt in the 1,9TDI engine. In this forum it's illegal to talk about any cons that these 'superiour' engine has. This is also a known problem with short rev-range, yet.. here it doesn't exists.

    - Yak
    #27
  29. yak
    Offline

    yak Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    And yes Irish, even a 1,6 engine will go faster with 1st gear, or 2nd gear, because of limited rev-range of the TDI engine. And yes, that affects the engine's torque responsiveness also.

    And yes, 1,6 will give you more constant feeling than turboed TDI, and yes and so on. And yes, it's slower, but it's got bigger, more constant rev-range. You're forgetting that maximum torque/maximum bhp doesn't always mean it's better in every case.

    - Yak
    #28
  30. yak
    Offline

    yak Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Ouh and this one is for Irish: YES, the 1,6 petrol engine has MORE torque than 2,0 TDI when it's out of turbo-spooling. Whippiaijee.

    If you want to see the 'performance' diesel engines give you, check 2,0 SDI. No turbo here.

    - Yak
    #29
  31. james_suckling
    Offline

    james_suckling Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2003
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Jesus Yak, give it a rest!!

    Constantly arguing the subject does nothing. You're obviously a devout petrol head, and nothing will make you choose the TDI over an FSI. That's fine, it's your choice.

    You have to appreciate that other people have other opinions. Personally, give me £20000 and I'd take the diesel everyday, no matter what the figures are for 0-60, top speed, torque, gearing or the amount of smoke. I don't care, I just prefer the way it drives.

    That's the bottom line, personal preference. Discussion over.

    /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile_smoking.gif
    #30
  32. h5djr
    Offline

    h5djr Well-Known Member VCDS Map User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2003
    Messages:
    7,519
    Likes Received:
    573
    [Apr 21, 2004]
    Hello David R

    I did not realise that, as a Moderator, you had to read every post. You have my sympathy.

    Most of our 'bickering' as you call it does help a person who is trying to decide between an FSI and a TDI version of the new A3. When the new A3 came out I was sure that I would go for a new FSI because I thought it would be the natural successor to the 1.8T which a currently drive. How wrong I was. Having driven both cars for a day each it totally changed my views. I have never owned a diesel before but the TDI was so much like my existing 1.8T in all situations.

    To me the 'bickering' that goes on will hopefully at least make others try BOTH cars before making a choice.

    I don't think you will find any of my posts 'getting personal' and I think discussion on the subject of any new Audi is heathy. Most people are prepared to accept some of the points put forward in favour of either cars - some will not. But at the last count 377 people have been interested enough to look into this thread and from the title is obvious what we are discussing.

    Anyway, thanks for you efforts as Moderator and I'm sorry if you find our discussions boring. Enjoy driving your Audi.

    Dave R
    #31
  33. Irish
    Offline

    Irish Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2004
    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    [Apr 22, 2004]
    Yak I think I'll just ignore the verbal runny poo that exits your mouth from now on.

    JezyG - yes I am a little concerned about the fuel consumption, I don't think around 400 is too little for city driving though - although I could be wrong.

    I can still see the MPG at 29mpg on the rare occasion.

    I have noticed though that second last time I filled up the range was 400 miles and yesterday when I filled it up again the range was 450.

    I have a little over 500 miles on her now and I do hope it gets better fuel wise.
    #32

Share This Page