218Q vs 272Q: can't decide!!!

NickGun

Registered User
I wouldn't be overly concerned, I'm not sure if anyone other than Audi and their suppliers know what the true limits of of their gearboxes are. They will have design criteria which provides adequate safety margins for reliability as they don't want too many warranty claims for gearboxes either.

That would be exactly my thoughts too, it makes zero sense to run the risk of excessive warranty claims - I'd wager that it is not the gearbox thats the torque limiting factor in the 3L 218, but that Audi have pegged the torque figure back to be sufficiently lower than the 3L 272 and to match the 2L 190 - and that it's the higher torque figure of the 272 that dictates the 8speed ZF.
 

cuke2u

Registered User
In that case I would expect the gearbox to be the same as fitted to the 190ps diesel, not the 2.0l petrol..
 

S.line

Registered User
So a remap/dtuk box is a no go then. Dtuk claim 270ps with 470nm I think


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

/dev/null

Registered User
I went for the 218 because when I added up the difference in insurance per year, tax, insurance and the initial cost it was getting a bit pricey. The 218 does everything I need - never feel I need to put it in sport mode at roundabouts as some people on here have put. You have to drive it a bit differently from a manual but you soon learn how the car responds to certain things.
 

S.line

Registered User
Kind of agree with dev. The more I drive mine the more I'm getting used to my first auto. About the s tronic being maxed out at 400nm, does anyone have any solid evidence of this? It's been playing on me today that I've bought a £43k car that's on its limits. Or is it just speculation


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Ricksta8

Registered User
A read of a post on the a5 forum revealed to me that the gearbox code is inside the front cover of the service book with all the other build codes.
Mine appears to be RZW SKF - now i just need to find out what that means OR compare with the codes of other B9 models 219 / 190 /150 and petrol to see what we all have?
 

cuke2u

Registered User
I thought that usually the code is a three digit number, such as 0B5 for the DL501..
 

NickGun

Registered User
I know for the gearbox fitted to my car has a maximum rating of 400Nm, see here https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&s...4z0IN_-HfnePe9zVw&sig2=YrJ2ZgBCVu8hMsz-_jLaTA page 9


Guess that would make sense safety margin wise for both the 2L petrols, as 2.0TSFI 190 is 320NM, even the 2.0TFSIQ 252 is 370NM, so safely below the 400NM rating of that particular gearbox.

It must be a different specification of gearbox in the 2.0TDI 190 and the 3.0TDI 218, also even though the peak torque rating is the same on the 190 & 218 TDI's (400NM) the peak torque spread is wider, the 2L 190TDI is 400NM / 1750-3000RPM and the 3L 218TDI is 400NM / 1250-3750RPM.
 
Last edited:

Jimbbobw1977

Registered User
It's not uncommon for manufacturers to limit the torque to the maximum amount the transmission can operate SAFELY at... and I say safely because anything over could but may not run the risk of causing damage.

The Ford Powershift dual clutch box is made by getrag and is a maximum of 450nm - and this is the exact torque figure for the Mondeo 2.0tdci bi-turbo 207bhp.

Would be interesting to know what gearbox the Passat 2.0 bi turbo 240bhp has though...
 

cuke2u

Registered User
Yes torque limiting in the lower gears has been around for some time now. I believe APR sell TCU upgrades that can actually remove these torque limiters...
 

S.line

Registered User
Cuke I read for a torque of 400nm and up to 200kw. So the 400 don't seem to be the maximum (hopefully!)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Ricksta8

Registered User


this is the list of codes inside the front cover of my service book - since LZ7S is Daytona paint code, I had assumed RZW SKF to be gearbox code? obviously not the DL501 or DL382-7Q type code - but clearly some sort of code used by Audi and which must in some way identify the gearbox??
 

cuke2u

Registered User
I thought I had established your engine has the same gearbox as mine?
 

Ricksta8

Registered User
Oh, sorry, i did not spot that clarification in the preceeding posts.
I was reading Nickgun 's bit where he suggested it must be a different spec on the 2.0 and 3.0tdi.
I seem to have missed the definitive confirmation that the a4 b9 stronic is the same on all 2.0 and 3.0 petrol or diesel .
 

NickGun

Registered User


this is the list of codes inside the front cover of my service book - since LZ7S is Daytona paint code, I had assumed RZW SKF to be gearbox code? obviously not the DL501 or DL382-7Q type code - but clearly some sort of code used by Audi and which must in some way identify the gearbox??


Here's an interesting one, we both have B9 Avant 218 Quattro's, below are my codes from service book and indeed the engine code is the same as yours (CSWB) but the gearbox on yours is RZW SKF but mine is RZW QFK.

I'd assume RZW is Audi speak for S-Tronic and the following 3 letters might be a particular production run of the gearbox. Ours manufactured April 2016 and yours November 2016.

IMG_3093.JPG
 
Last edited:

Ricksta8

Registered User
.... Takes coat off for a moment....

Thanks Nick, I was kind of hoping that if a few people checked their codes (nice and easy to find in the front of the service book, no lying on the drive trying to check under the car with a torch) by comparing a few with the known model of car 2.0 / 3.0 petrol / diesel we could possibly see some link?

Clutching at straws perhaps.... I don't really know, it was just an idea, maybe RZW is the s tronic for the 218 like you say? and the second 3 digits are production run... we need to see a few more - sorry if this is too far Off topic from the original question - personally I only went 218 to keep a lid on mpg - should have gone for 190 2 litre with sensible head, but could not resist 3.0 if I did less miles I would have definitely gone 272!

....prepares to put coat back on again....... lol
 

dts439

Registered User
Our August built car gearbox code is also like Nick's "RZW QKF". I'd wrongly assumed the "Q" was to show it was a quattro version of the gearbox... but version code of the "RZW" makes sense. Anyone with a FWD 218 and a 190 TDIQ able to share their gearbox code?

On a different subject I also spotted that Nick's car has the l/km/CO2 figures - 5.0/4.4/4.7/123 (and having checked pics) is on 17" wheels, whereas our car is 5.1/4.6/4.8/126 (we have 18"), so perhaps the rolling resistance of the 17" tyres really do help the impressive economy figures that Nick has got.
 

NickGun

Registered User
Our August built car gearbox code is also like Nick's "RZW QKF". I'd wrongly assumed the "Q" was to show it was a quattro version of the gearbox... but version code of the "RZW" makes sense. Anyone with a FWD 218 and a 190 TDIQ able to share their gearbox code?

On a different subject I also spotted that Nick's car has the l/km/CO2 figures - 5.0/4.4/4.7/123 (and having checked pics) is on 17" wheels, whereas our car is 5.1/4.6/4.8/126 (we have 18"), so perhaps the rolling resistance of the 17" tyres really do help the impressive economy figures that Nick has got.

Thanks for checking and its interesting that your August build 218Q has the same gearbox code as our April one - and good spot on the Sports 17's, according to Audi literature it does indeed contribute to being slightly more fuel efficient and I'd forgotten about that having any bearing.

Over to any other S-Tronic owners, irrespective of engine and fuel to check and post their gearbox codes - maybe we should start a new thread as we've somewhat hijacked this one, so apologies to @lsc05 for that.
 

BigAardvaark

Registered User
My code, 190 2.0TDi quattro is RZV QFJ. So, slightly different to the V6s. June '16 build.
 

NickGun

Registered User
My code, 190 2.0TDi quattro is RZV QFJ. So, slightly different to the V6s. June '16 build.

Thanks and interestingly yours is month after our build but different code - is yours definitely RZV not RZW? as if thats the case that might indicate a different S-Tronic for your 190 2L TDI Q compared to the 3 codes we have for 218 3L TDI Q...?
 

cuke2u

Registered User
My code is, trumpet fanfare, is --- SJH. Yes nothing aside from dashes in the first three characters. So are these codes actually telling us anything?
 

NickGun

Registered User
My code is, trumpet fanfare, is --- SJH. Yes nothing aside from dashes in the first three characters. So are these codes actually telling us anything?

:laughing: Yep guess without actually knowing what the individual codes we have mean, its not confirming anything as such.
 

cuke2u

Registered User
Yes but we need the gearbox code Audi use, and I think its different to the ones on the sticker, for example the DL501 gearbox as fitted to the b8 was 0B5 which seem to cover these sticker codes as far as I can tell:
NUJ,NHL,NRW,
NUS,NHS,NSC,
NHQ,NSA,NUR,
NHN,NRY,NYP,
PJW,PWZ,PWW,
PWY,PWU,PJU
 

BigAardvaark

Registered User

lsc05

Registered User
@NickGun it's not a problem, I like the way the discussion goes because I really want to know these details about the gearboxes before I take my decision.
Why?

If the S-tronic fitted on the 218Q has a maximum safety torque of 400 NM I would think again before buy it, beacuse my way of thinking is that a 3.0 tdi should definetely have a bigger torque in 2017. BMW makes 313 hp and 630 NM from their 3.0 tdi in-line 6. Also if the S-tronic is limited, I think I can take into consideration the 2.0 tdi 190Q also. The differences between these 2 are 28 hp and the maximum torque range in RPM's. But the 2.0 would be way cheaper at initial price, taxes, insurance, fuel, and maintenance.

If the S-tronic is not limited and can support bigger torque with tuning I would take the 218Q because the 272Q is 4k euros more for the same 3.0 tdi engine(Yes, I am 80% sure that the 218Q is a detuned version of 272. Same engine, different software settings and different gearboxes).
So, please, keep the discussion here or post a link with the new thread because I want to find the answers.
Cheers, guys!
 

Ricksta8

Registered User
I am not going to be particularly impressed if it does turn out that my superbly engineered and powerful v6 diesel has been restricted in power and performance - not as I had imagined to improve economy, But rather so it could be mated to a transmission which could not comfortably absorb more power if it were not restricted - I think 500nm should have been a consideration really if the 272 is making 600?
 

cuke2u

Registered User

S.line

Registered User
Question is, where do we find out true fact? Send an email to audi U.K?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

cuke2u

Registered User
Well quite, within one of my links there was a quote from a Audi engineer. I guess either to contact Audi and hope you get an honest answer or you confer with APR tuning uk who might know the gearboxes.
 

S.line

Registered User
I just can't understand why a manufacturer like audi would put a box in that's on its limits. I mean surely the risk of failure/unhappy customers/courtesy cars and the press would be too great. Nothing gets missed by the press these days. Always out to pull someone down...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Jimbbobw1977

Registered User
I just can't understand why a manufacturer like audi would put a box in that's on its limits. I mean surely the risk of failure/unhappy customers/courtesy cars and the press would be too great. Nothing gets missed by the press these days. Always out to pull someone down...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because 400 is the safe operating limit that least likely to result in failures. The box may well be able to handle 450 for example but it can not be guaranteed that it won't fail at this level.

My daily driver is a Mondeo MK5 Powershift 180tdci - this has 400 torque, Ford rate the Powershift at 450 therefore I probably wouldn't remap it taking it over 450 as I wouldn't want to run the risk.
 

S.line

Registered User
Yeah but I thought vw were so reliable because they always underpowered drive trains? Surely if something is driven close to its limits it ain't gonna last long?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Jimbbobw1977

Registered User
That's the point though, if it has been extensively tested on the limit at 400 450 and 500 and it was found that the fewest amount of failures occur at 400 then that is the best option. It doesn't mean it handle more, it's a safety net and would exist across the board with most manufacturers.
 

RonS3

DERV convert
The "limit" quoted is almost certainly the maximum recommended to achieve the required reliability over the life of the vehicle i.e. it has been designed to be used upto this figure. In theory manufactures could design gearboxes for every engine in the range and save some weight but this would not be economical, hence lower power vehicles which share gearboxes with their higher powered stablemates have "over designed" gearboxes for manufacturing cost reasons, not because they need margin for reliability reasons.
The limit is also not that precise and unlikely to be a figure which leads to immediate failure if exceeded. I would expect a gearbox rated to 400Nm could safely be used at 500Nm if treated sensibly and looked after. Lots of full power launches from standstill especially when cold are more likely to result in problems.
 

lsc05

Registered User
I can't understand why they didn't put the same S-tronic from the A7, for example. A7 3.0 tdi 218Q has 500 NM with the S-tronic! That sounds a lot better, for me at least!
 
Top