Whoohoo, hot interior blower output.

I'm guessing they weren't the ones who screwed you over then?

BTW does the lack of news for the past few months mean the current job is actually working out ok?

cheers, clive

Comfort 2.0 TDI =09PD=09140bhp=09169 =09 E =09 =A317195 =09 =A317410 Comfort 2.5 V6 TDI=09Tip=09160bhp=09206 =09F =09=A318785 =09=A319040

So the 2.0 is the better engine even though it is in the poor person=20 priced car? It even has less Buhpsss

--=20 Carl Robson Audio stream:

I guess it takes a lot of corossion for a car to actually break. But to your credit you did take it to someone who had a lot of pride in there quality of work.

Yes, the 2.0TDI is a better engine. More revs, less emissions, and ultimately a quicker car.

Interesting comparison - despite the Superb being bigger on the outside, it's smaller on the inside.

They look a bit overpriced for an old generation car these days - especially when you consider that the Octavia vRS is cheaper, significantly quicker, better to drive and has more interior space.

The Octavia is on my 'possibles' list for when the Passat goes back - if only to get a hatch and DSG.

I don't beleive that (the quicker bit)? The 2.5 has more power and surely more torque?

Just pulled up the 'What Car' figures.

It's all down to the gearing and tip-tronic box, I reckon.

But tip-tronic is now old hat, given that VAG have largely swapped over to DSG now. I assume they can't hook up the DSG to the old engine. Or something.

More to the point, the 2.0 TDI was obsolete when introduced.

It's a multivalve four cylinder TDI. Now if SteveH knew anything, just

*anything*, about TDIs and had tried a few without the blinkers, he'd understand that the 2.0 TDI is a fine engine in isolation but not when compared with the 1.9. And yet.

Oh, hold on, yes that's right, I don't think SteveH understands V6s compared to I4s. That 2.5 V6 is a nicer engine to live with day in, day out - if ultimate economy isn't your bag. That's because the 2.0 TDI is jerky as chuff in comparison.

Compared back to back with the 1.9, the 2.0 doesn't have the same relative low down poke. It needs over 2,000 rpm to perform, the 1.9 pulls stronger below this. VAG stuff has tall gearing partially because TDI technology is noisy, partially to get CO2 output down, partially because that's the way TDI is supposed to work.

Sure, try the current generation (I refuse to sound all anal and quote the model numbers for this car) Passat 1.9 and 2.0 TDI models and providing you can stay awake, most people would opt for the 2.0 because the 1.9 makes my Ka feel quick.

Then try the 2.0 TDI with any other similar capacity, current generation, four cylinder turbodiesel. PSA's HDI, Ford's TDCi, Toyota's DI-D.

Shoot, the Isuzu derived donk in the Saab has the same low down weakness but is keener to rev, despite being less powerful and 10% larger.

VAG have needed to admit defeat with their TDI PD technology for a long time. Good thing then, it's about to change.

It's 258 lbsft for that particular 2.5 V6, versus 236 lbsft for the 2.0 TDI.

The 2.0 TDI *needs* more revs to perform *less* well.

If you've sold your soul to the company car then the emissions will bother. You'll overlook the jerky four cylinder, loud, rough 2.0 donk and claim it's a better engine than the 2.5 V6. It may be a more advanced engine, but in many respects, it's backwards. I'd take the 2.5 V6. Oh and live with 40 mpg rather than 47 mpg and VED band F rather than band D.

However, in the alternative universe that SteveH lives, the 2.0 is clearly quicker. This has nothing to do with the fact that he has one of course.

I do know that while DSG was used on Octavia vRSs, they had a plague of them broken.

I wonder if it is to do with the kick in when the turbo spools up. Was DSG available on the turbo TTs or only on the v6?

And if it is torque increase from a turbo that do it, what would a turbo diesel do?

Accompanied by the sound of a chisel on slate DervMan, managed to produce the following words of wisdom

We've been through the V6 vs I-4 thing.

The V6 is almost tolerable as diesels go, the I-4 is agricultural.

1.9s are OK, I've driven several, but they're not as good as the 2.0.

If you check the figures, the 2.0-140 is quicker than the 2.5 in the Superb. But, as I've said, that could be down to the tiptronic box as much as anything else.

It's so good that VW have dropped it from the range. The only reason the Superb still has it is that the Superb is an older generation car and was engineered for it from the start - because the 1.9TDIs weren't producing the power at the time.

But yet, when I'm sat at the lights with the radio at moderate volume, I have to double-check the rev. counter to make sure the engine is still running. Pretty agricultural, then.

Which station has Sir taken to hanging around outside the toilets?

I now use Charing Cross... no problems either way, and I use the line that passes by your gaff.

Up until a month ago I was travelling into Victoria via the Medway line - again, never any problems getting a seat either way, and I'm a second class pikey.

-- JackH

Have you driven a V6 one?

The 2.5 V6 TDi is one of the few that doesn't vibrate like a jackhammer at tickover.

I'm no fan of diesels, but the VW I-4 ones whilst being economical aren't the nicest. They can be quite pokey and reasonably torquey, but they're nowhere near as smooth as the V6 TDi.

They use the 4 pot in the cheap Audi A4s and A6s, but not in the more expensive ones, where they use the 2.7 and 3.0 V6 TDi

I suspect it's a lot more to do with reps not being able to get the V6 without being taxed to death than the I-4 being better.

It's the old "Little Chef" car park Kudos thing again.

Driven a B5.5 V6, yes.

The 2lt doesn't vibrate - see my comments above.

Which won't fit in the B6 Passat, anyway.

No, 'cos the 2.0 can be had with 170bhp, which is more than the old 2.5 V6 anyway.

It's more to do with packaging, with the B6 not being designed to take the V6 TDI - not much point when you can have 170bhp from an I-4 anyway.

And yes, tax does come into it - why pay £HFM for tax, when mine costs me about the same as a banger per yer?

Hmm.

The A6 I took to Devon last week was a 2.5 V6 TDi with 180 bhp.

Yet another reason to drive a proper car instead of a repmobile.

The B6 is definitely better to drive than the B5/5.5, although that frankly isn't saying an awful lot. The new 2.0 tdi isn't significantly better than the last gen 1.9 pd tdi - the 140bhp version is obviously more powerful than the outgoing 130 of the 1.9, but it feels less gutsy to drive, and although it revs a little better, it feels slightly coarser. Also, the 2.0 is nowhere near as nice to drive as the 2.5 v6 tdi. That has been phased out because it was comparatively expensive, but it is vastly smoother and more refined than the 2.0, albeit less economical. If I could choose between two otherwise identical cars, I'd take the one with the 2.5v6 in a heartbeat.

I remember that - paying income tax for having somebody else's a car at the door.

I'm better now.

Yeah, but the South London Nigerian pimp pub landlord scammers love LPG.

Doesn't the pikey factor count for anything where you live?

I'm significantly better off with a company car than I was paying for my own bangers.