3.0TDI 201bhp vs 233bhp difference

Axk95

Registered User
Hi,

I've just bought a 2005 3.0tdi quattro with the semi auto gearbox and I'm wondering what difference there is between this and the newer more powerful TDV engine? They have 233bhp according to autotrader as opposed to the 201 of mine.
 

Malfuss

Registered User
I think the 233 has the DPF filter, kind of like the Mk5 Golf GTTDi, the 140 doesn't have one, the 170 does. I'm guessing a slightly different map as well. However, I will qualify my statement by saying I am as mechanically minded as a hedgehog, so am probably totally wrong. Would be interesting to find out as I'm currently undecided on the 3.0TDi A4 or the A6 equivalent.
 
Last edited:

Mr-C

Registered User
My 2007 3.0 doesn't have a DPF The later engine also have the upgraded cam chain tensioners. More torque and more BHP is always good thing

Shameless plug.. My 3.0 TDI is for sale, have lookie in the classifieds
 

ScottD3

I want your faulty electronics
Supporter
My A8 has the 233bhp 3.0TDI engine.

I got no idea if it has a DPF or what the differences are.

I just know I pay the higher tax and it goes well.


I'm wondering what the differences are as well.
 

jdp1962

Grumpy Old Man
2007 (57-reg) TDV here (it's 229BHP by the way, the 233 refers to PS). Like ScottD3, it doesn't have a DPF. It's also been mapped to 257BHP, so it really does go like stink, even if it does smoke a bit on full throttle.
 

V6 Quatt

Registered User
I had 2006 non DPF 3.0 TDI Quattro 233ps deffo...more torque and power went well... compared to the 3.0 B8 newer version is 245 so even more power
 
My 2007 233 3.0tdi did have a DPF

Not sure if it was a customer option but there seem to be versions of each engine of varying years both with and without DPFs. Only way to be sure is to check your VIN code or get under the car...
 

andy1acars

Registered User
My A4 cab 56 plate has dpf, now with delete and remap. jdp 1962 is correct about the ps so 229bhp. I also recently sold an a6 3.0 tdi 05 plate also mapped, so originally 201bhp. Check the 0 to 60 5.9 on the a5 3.0 with more power, that's a quick car, so the 229 bhp feels a bit quicker than the 201bhp, and with a dpf, egr delete and map its silky smooth and very deceptive. I have had a lot of quick cars but I love this engine!
 

Jimbo.King

Registered User
Here's some info I found, which is another interweb load of bo!!ox as mines a TDV and hasn't got a DPF !!
Makes the definition of TDV sound good tho :-

Direct from Audi UK, "TDV" stands for Technology Development Vehicle.

It basically denotes that a diesel particulate filter is present on the Audi in question but the vehicle was produced just prior to (or during) the legislation process regarding DPF's. The abbreviation 'DPF' was not yet officially in existence so Audi used the 'TDV' letters to identify the diesel particulate filter.

Explained by a very helpful chap at Audi UK on the 'phone - 22/03/2012.
 

A19quattro

Registered User
Apologies to the OP, didn't mean to hijack the thread and still interested in the difference between the 2 engines.
 

Golfedd

Registered User
2007 (57-reg) TDV here (it's 229BHP by the way, the 233 refers to PS). Like ScottD3, it doesn't have a DPF. It's also been mapped to 257BHP, so it really does go like stink, even if it does smoke a bit on full throttle.

Not sure who or what company map you have on your car but that's a tiny increase in relation to the turbo on that engine. you should be looking close to the 300bhp mark with NO smoke. lucky on the no DPF. My 2.7 had one, for a while soon got cut out but still all OK on emissions. mine up near the 260bhp mark, no smoke at all with a complete custom map and EGR/DPF delete. Running strong and fine for over a year in case anyone is curious.

In regards to the 3.0 TDV I had this chat with Audi, and they said it was a limited edition offering more power but that they all came with DPF (the devils curse). I've driven both of the 3.0 and the TDV is a noticeable difference but I think it's all down to the map mainly
 

jdp1962

Grumpy Old Man
Not sure who or what company map you have on your car but that's a tiny increase in relation to the turbo on that engine. you should be looking close to the 300bhp mark with NO smoke. lucky on the no DPF. My 2.7 had one, for a while soon got cut out but still all OK on emissions. mine up near the 260bhp mark, no smoke at all with a complete custom map and EGR/DPF delete. Running strong and fine for over a year in case anyone is curious.

In regards to the 3.0 TDV I had this chat with Audi, and they said it was a limited edition offering more power but that they all came with DPF (the devils curse). I've driven both of the 3.0 and the TDV is a noticeable difference but I think it's all down to the map mainly
I could have had around 275BHP if I wanted it. I chose the "economy" map rather than the full monty.
 

desertstorm

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
VCDS Map User
The BKN 204hp and ASB 232HP engines have the same BV50 turbocharger and I believe are tuneable to pretty much the same numbers they seem to use the same injection pump and injectors so there are probably detail differences between them. I think 300bhp on this turbo would be right at the top of what could be done and would be pushing reliabilty but is probably achieveable, 280bhp is a more sensible number, clutch issues could causes problems though.
The 2.7 uses a gtb1756vk and 265 bhp must be right at the top of what that is capable of, I would have thought more like 240-245 bhp but it's what the car drives like at the end of the day and the performance it has. Dyno numbers are only part of the story.

Karl.
 

Golfedd

Registered User
The BKN 204hp and ASB 232HP engines have the same BV50 turbocharger and I believe are tuneable to pretty much the same numbers they seem to use the same injection pump and injectors so there are probably detail differences between them. I think 300bhp on this turbo would be right at the top of what could be done and would be pushing reliabilty but is probably achieveable, 280bhp is a more sensible number, clutch issues could causes problems though.
The 2.7 uses a gtb1756vk and 265 bhp must be right at the top of what that is capable of, I would have thought more like 240-245 bhp but it's what the car drives like at the end of the day and the performance it has. Dyno numbers are only part of the story.

Karl.
Yup agreed around the figures and output numbers, thought about getting the BV50 turbo, but with FWD it's a waste... and I can just pull away from a stock 330d (241bhp) but can't catch a 335d (281bhp) and rolling road numbers should always be taken with a slight pinch of salt. it drives very smooth so numbers aside it's pretty nippy haha.
 

desertstorm

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
VCDS Map User
I had issues with traction with my previous car a Passat 1.9 TDI and that was only running around 210bhp so thats one of the reasons I went for the quattro 3.0 . Even as the weather is today really wet and horrible you can just floor it , and it launches off with the ESP light flashing a bit. I was following a 13 plate 520D tonight back home and twice going across roundabouts he had the back end sliding about, And that only has 180bhp I think. So much for the ultimate driving machine.

Karl.
 

Gazwould

Registered User
My friend purposely takes the BMW out when it's raining haha, do find it strange that BMW doesn't really have any AWD/4WD/FWD cars unless you count the big 4x4 types but even they're RWD biased from what I remember, wouldn't personally want a RWD car as a daily diver.


They have xDrive and it can vary the torque by 1-99% to each axle.
 

desertstorm

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
VCDS Map User
Well if you watch this video you might think it was.

Also this
http://www.awdwiki.com/en/videoquattroxdrive/

In the real world though where are you going to need to send 100% power to either end of the car. The Audi Quattro solution is proven and it's a fairly simple mechanical system unlike the BMW option which has a lot more complexity with electronics and clutches.

Karl.
 
Last edited:

DieselJake

Well-Known Member
VCDS Map User
That's pretty clever, maybe I'm a bit behind the times with what BMW's doing but as for this being better than others that's just propoganda, can't see having 99% of power at one end being of any use in most situations and other manufacturers have similar setups which they brag about in completely different aspects.
 

andy1acars

Registered User
Don't worry after the warranty runs out and each complicated sensor costs £300 a pop you will be glad you've got a Quattro.
 
Top