First yes...I know this is really sad, but I am a sad git so just ignore if you hate numbers....
Did a quick calculation in another thread comparing the cost of the 2.0TDI with the 1.5TFSI to see whether at 10k miles, the diesel actually gives you better economy despite the higher starting price and more expensive fuel.
Got me thinking about the depreciation and fuel costs of the other engines, so I did a quick calculation.
I've looked at the 1.5TFSI (S-Tronic, S-Line), 2.0TDI (S-Tronic, S-Line), 2.0TFSI (S-Tronic, S-Line, quattro) and S3 (standard).
Was interested in whether the 2.0TDI or 2.0TFSI quattro are actually economically better than the 1.5TFSI and S3 over 48months.
I got the price from the Audi finance calculator and assuming 10k miles per year, looked at the GFV at 18-48months.
I assumed 30MPG for the S3, 35MPG for the 2.0TFSI, 40MPG for the 1.5TFSI and 50MPG for the 2.0TDI. The actual MPG is irrelevant, its the difference between the engines I am looking at in terms of increased fuel use. I think these average differences are fair? The NEDC values indicates a 6.3MPG difference between the 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI, and just 4.4MPG between the 2.0TFSI and S3, so overestimation for the diesel potentially, but we'll go with these numbers anyway....I assumed £1.18 for petrol and £1.20 for diesel, so about a 2p difference per litre.
First graph shows that the depreciation costs is lowest for the 1.5 and highest for the 2.0TFSI. Expressed as a proportion of the RRP, the S3 fairs the best retaining 47% of its value by 48m, and the 2.0TFSI fairs the worst at 41% of its value at 48m.
However, once you factor in the fuel costs (second graph), there is very little difference between the 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the heavy depreciation of the 2.0TFSI means that the relatively small gains in fuel costs do not make it a much more cost effective option compared to the S3, and it isn't until 48m until you start seeing any meaningful cost savings. Given the massive difference in performance, it would seem the S3 provides better value.
Basically, I conclude that if you do 10k miles per year, the 1.5TFSI is the best option for economy over a 2.0TDI, and if you want more performance, the S3 is the better option over the 2.0TFSI quattro. The 2.0TDI likely sees better economy at mileage over 20k.
Of course there are other costs like insurance and servicing. Given the large variation in insurance premiums, this wouldn't be possible to factor in, so you will have to calculate that individually (or rather, the average difference if I could get that statistic would likely be quite meaningless due to the large variation). Servicing is a relatively small cost difference, so didn't seem worth adding in either...? Happy to be corrected on that.
I doubt there are any differences between a 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI, so its more relevant for the 2.0TFSI quattro vs. S3. I know for me, insurance is very similar and I doubt service cost differ that much. Even at 48months, the cost difference between the 2.0TFSI and S3 is only £900 over 4yrs, so unless insurance premiums are much higher, the 2.0TFSI quattro makes little sense economically speaking.
Of course this is purely an economical argument. There may be other reasons to go for your particular model, which is purely personal preference, but I have heard on a few occasions about the 2.0TDI being chosen over a 1.5TFSI and a 2.0TFSI quattro being chosen over a S3 for reduced running costs, and hopefully this helps highlight the true costs ownership.
Did a quick calculation in another thread comparing the cost of the 2.0TDI with the 1.5TFSI to see whether at 10k miles, the diesel actually gives you better economy despite the higher starting price and more expensive fuel.
Got me thinking about the depreciation and fuel costs of the other engines, so I did a quick calculation.
I've looked at the 1.5TFSI (S-Tronic, S-Line), 2.0TDI (S-Tronic, S-Line), 2.0TFSI (S-Tronic, S-Line, quattro) and S3 (standard).
Was interested in whether the 2.0TDI or 2.0TFSI quattro are actually economically better than the 1.5TFSI and S3 over 48months.
I got the price from the Audi finance calculator and assuming 10k miles per year, looked at the GFV at 18-48months.
I assumed 30MPG for the S3, 35MPG for the 2.0TFSI, 40MPG for the 1.5TFSI and 50MPG for the 2.0TDI. The actual MPG is irrelevant, its the difference between the engines I am looking at in terms of increased fuel use. I think these average differences are fair? The NEDC values indicates a 6.3MPG difference between the 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI, and just 4.4MPG between the 2.0TFSI and S3, so overestimation for the diesel potentially, but we'll go with these numbers anyway....I assumed £1.18 for petrol and £1.20 for diesel, so about a 2p difference per litre.
First graph shows that the depreciation costs is lowest for the 1.5 and highest for the 2.0TFSI. Expressed as a proportion of the RRP, the S3 fairs the best retaining 47% of its value by 48m, and the 2.0TFSI fairs the worst at 41% of its value at 48m.
However, once you factor in the fuel costs (second graph), there is very little difference between the 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the heavy depreciation of the 2.0TFSI means that the relatively small gains in fuel costs do not make it a much more cost effective option compared to the S3, and it isn't until 48m until you start seeing any meaningful cost savings. Given the massive difference in performance, it would seem the S3 provides better value.
Basically, I conclude that if you do 10k miles per year, the 1.5TFSI is the best option for economy over a 2.0TDI, and if you want more performance, the S3 is the better option over the 2.0TFSI quattro. The 2.0TDI likely sees better economy at mileage over 20k.
Of course there are other costs like insurance and servicing. Given the large variation in insurance premiums, this wouldn't be possible to factor in, so you will have to calculate that individually (or rather, the average difference if I could get that statistic would likely be quite meaningless due to the large variation). Servicing is a relatively small cost difference, so didn't seem worth adding in either...? Happy to be corrected on that.
I doubt there are any differences between a 1.5TFSI and 2.0TDI, so its more relevant for the 2.0TFSI quattro vs. S3. I know for me, insurance is very similar and I doubt service cost differ that much. Even at 48months, the cost difference between the 2.0TFSI and S3 is only £900 over 4yrs, so unless insurance premiums are much higher, the 2.0TFSI quattro makes little sense economically speaking.
Of course this is purely an economical argument. There may be other reasons to go for your particular model, which is purely personal preference, but I have heard on a few occasions about the 2.0TDI being chosen over a 1.5TFSI and a 2.0TFSI quattro being chosen over a S3 for reduced running costs, and hopefully this helps highlight the true costs ownership.
Of course the disclaimer should also read "based on PCP with GFV". Quite a few of us haven't used this so will have to sell in the second hand market or trade in where there is no GFV which will always be way lower I would have thought. Plus any diesel driver 4yrs from now will completely done for. The choice for me would be the 1.5 for mpg or S3 for higher residuals (but then you would be paying more so it would depend!). I wonder how the intro of a new model impacts depretiation? are there any stats on this? great graphs though mate. good info to know.
(roughly...)
