Golf 1.4 TSI 150 GT DSG
Discussion
Good to hear that the 1.4 ACT/COD engine is proving to be good in the real world.
I am due to order my new company car in the spring and want to go down the route of one of the new small petrol engines rather than a diesel (my Ford company car at the moment isn't very economical and is very noisey).
I am not 100% sure how far my monthly budegt will stretch at the mo because lease prices seem quite fluid when others have checked on the website we use. I don't think an A3 in Sport or S Line trim is available to me with this engine or a Golf in GT trim so I may look at at Polo Blue GT or an A1. I should be able to spec them up too. The DSG / S Tronic appeal for the daily hack too.
Size isn't too important because I spend most of my time in my car on my own, I just want something that will be comfy for 20k+ per year. If I can get high 40's it shouldn't cost much more than my Ford that struggles to get more than 51 due to petrol being a bit cheaper.
I am due to order my new company car in the spring and want to go down the route of one of the new small petrol engines rather than a diesel (my Ford company car at the moment isn't very economical and is very noisey).
I am not 100% sure how far my monthly budegt will stretch at the mo because lease prices seem quite fluid when others have checked on the website we use. I don't think an A3 in Sport or S Line trim is available to me with this engine or a Golf in GT trim so I may look at at Polo Blue GT or an A1. I should be able to spec them up too. The DSG / S Tronic appeal for the daily hack too.
Size isn't too important because I spend most of my time in my car on my own, I just want something that will be comfy for 20k+ per year. If I can get high 40's it shouldn't cost much more than my Ford that struggles to get more than 51 due to petrol being a bit cheaper.
JackReacher said:
I don't know if lower numbers will be good longer term for residuals, probably depends on how reliable the engine turns out to be and if people realise how good these engines are from a performance/economy point of view.
I think the problem is a lot of people don't know they exist and the diesel is simply the default option. I wouldn't even get the choice on my company car scheme. Residuals are likely to be similar to that of earlier 1.4 TSI models which also sold in low numbers, good but not quite 2.0 TDI strong. 
va1o said:
I think the problem is a lot of people don't know they exist and the diesel is simply the default option. I wouldn't even get the choice on my company car scheme. Residuals are likely to be similar to that of earlier 1.4 TSI models which also sold in low numbers, good but not quite 2.0 TDI strong.
I'd agree diesel will be the default choice......we've recently got a new scheme after a year or so of not being able to order new cars, the only non-diesels in the works car park which are new are hybrids. Various people have got Golf's, all going for the 2.0TDI. As I've mentioned I test drove the two back to back, there was simply no comparison, not only was the petrol a LOT quieter but the front end felt so much lighter - the petrols 85kg lighter, and that's got to be all over the nose.....Edited by acme on Thursday 20th November 22:00
toml555 said:
I tried the 2.0TDI (150) engine in a GT and thought I might as well buy something from Massey Ferguson. The 1.4 TSI ACT is like driving a cloud in comparison. With a real world 46-48mpg from the TSI, you'd have to do a hell of a lot of miles to justify putting up with the TDI.
Currently in a blagged 2.0 GT TDi Golf and I agree totally. it is a bit of a tractor, quite laggy as well. It will do 62mpg on my 20 mile commute though, where my previous car did 30 at best. If the 1.4Tsi that I have on order can get close to 50 on the same run, I'll be happy - its all quiet A-Roads so should be possible.Hello, long time lurker, first post, please be gentle on me!
I've been reading this thread with interest. I have a Polo Blue GT, 63 plate, I've done 4k in it. I bought it 3 months agin with just 2700 on the clock
Last three tanks have averaged 53.2 mpg (real world, not trip computer).
Using shell vpower 100% of the time (I started on supermarket stuff, but it ran like a dog).
I do drive like a grandad, sticking to between 60 and 65 on motorway most of the time, also using CC on motorway most of the time. I do like to thrash it a bit every now and then, not too much though.
Can't fault much with it. Heated mirrors do my head in, in so far as I forget to turn them off, and the voice activation on the phone is frustrating, but not really a long list of complaints.
Hope this helps
SEM
I've been reading this thread with interest. I have a Polo Blue GT, 63 plate, I've done 4k in it. I bought it 3 months agin with just 2700 on the clock
Last three tanks have averaged 53.2 mpg (real world, not trip computer).
Using shell vpower 100% of the time (I started on supermarket stuff, but it ran like a dog).
I do drive like a grandad, sticking to between 60 and 65 on motorway most of the time, also using CC on motorway most of the time. I do like to thrash it a bit every now and then, not too much though.
Can't fault much with it. Heated mirrors do my head in, in so far as I forget to turn them off, and the voice activation on the phone is frustrating, but not really a long list of complaints.
Hope this helps
SEM
Superexcelman said:
Last three tanks have averaged 53.2 mpg (real world, not trip computer).
Using shell vpower 100% of the time (I started on supermarket stuff, but it ran like a dog).
Good work! Our's has just been through it's first full tank, did 455 miles with an indicted 15 miles left on the computer. Average mpg was 46.3 and best commute was 52.1, so very happy with that on a new engine.Using shell vpower 100% of the time (I started on supermarket stuff, but it ran like a dog).
Interesting comment about the fuel, mine is being run on vpower as girlfriend is collecting lego for me, but will revert to normal. In what way does it run like a dog?
Hi, don't know how to quote you (still new!), but it felt sluggish to the point I was half tempted to check it into the garage if I was passing. The main problem was that the ACT would not kick in for what seemed like ages (10 or 20 miles at a time), and then only if the accelerator was completely disengaged (i.e.coasting).
Brother in law recommended flipping every other tank, 95 ron then 97 ron, and so on. The first tank of super didnt seemed to change it much, but by the second, I was starting to get 2 cyl more than 80% of the time. Now, when I want, I can get over 90% easily. So, i'm just sticking to Shell 100% now (which i believe is quite high ron, maybe 99?)
Hope this helps, SEM
PS I'm also acquiring a useful collection of lego for stocking fillers!
Brother in law recommended flipping every other tank, 95 ron then 97 ron, and so on. The first tank of super didnt seemed to change it much, but by the second, I was starting to get 2 cyl more than 80% of the time. Now, when I want, I can get over 90% easily. So, i'm just sticking to Shell 100% now (which i believe is quite high ron, maybe 99?)
Hope this helps, SEM
PS I'm also acquiring a useful collection of lego for stocking fillers!
toml555 said:
Just found a new mk7 golf pet hate. Have to open the bonnet to retrieve leaves from under the driver's side wiper 
Same on the Leon.Drove the car quite a bit at the weekend, few observations:-
Both me and the girlfriend prefer sports mode for the firmer steering, better throttle response and seems to have no impact on fuel economy.
Even in sport mode throttle response isn't great, but seems to be getting better as it does more miles.
The air con seems to take longer to demist the windscreen in the morning than previous car.
Can't get the mirrors to fold when locking the car. How does this work on the golf?
Funnily enough I found that too recently, but only after I'd shoved my hand down below the bonnet and just about managed to scoop them out!
Interesting you should note that about the fuel economy, I use eco when doing long work journeys and individual (ACC eco, engine & steering normal) the rest of the time, and I agree it doesn't seemingly make a jot of difference! I'd possibly use sport but on the DSG it hangs on to the gears for far too long in normal driving.
I'm now not sure if the poor throttle response isn't due to the gearbox, would need to drive a manual again.
As for AC, mine seems more damp inside than other cars, perhaps either common to the car/car type, or possibly whatever that new car smell is derived from ie a sealing stuff?
On the Golf you programme the mirror settings via the settings manual via the CAR button on the centre console.
The car is so configurable!
Interesting you should note that about the fuel economy, I use eco when doing long work journeys and individual (ACC eco, engine & steering normal) the rest of the time, and I agree it doesn't seemingly make a jot of difference! I'd possibly use sport but on the DSG it hangs on to the gears for far too long in normal driving.
I'm now not sure if the poor throttle response isn't due to the gearbox, would need to drive a manual again.
As for AC, mine seems more damp inside than other cars, perhaps either common to the car/car type, or possibly whatever that new car smell is derived from ie a sealing stuff?
On the Golf you programme the mirror settings via the settings manual via the CAR button on the centre console.
The car is so configurable!
BraveSirRobin said:
On the Leon you need to keep the lock button on the key fob pressed for a few seconds.
Thanks, as Acme said I had to select the option in the setup first, now they fold when I hold the lock button.They are so many options in there, found a new one, "motorway lights". Apparently now that I've selected it, the LED headlights should raise slightly above 60mph so that's it's lighting up the road a bit further ahead, haven't tried it yet to see if it makes any difference.
This engine continues to me impress me! Had my first proper motorway drive yesterday, 40 miles down the M3, speed between 70 and 80 and average mpg as indicated by the computer was 48.1 mpg. The way back was 44.8 mpg but at a slightly higher speed. The previous 1.6TDI would not have done any better at those speeds.
It's not just the economy that impressed, I was also very happy with how well it pulled in 6th gear, I did wonder whether this would be a weakness given the small capacity but it was great, very flexible and diesel like, but without the noise!
I was also surprised at how often it goes into 2 cylinder mode at higher speeds, even when cruising at 80 it kicks in, incredible.
This did get me thinking though, does anyone know whether it is the same 2 cylinders that shut off? or does the engine management vary it so that they wear at equivalent rates?
It's not just the economy that impressed, I was also very happy with how well it pulled in 6th gear, I did wonder whether this would be a weakness given the small capacity but it was great, very flexible and diesel like, but without the noise!
I was also surprised at how often it goes into 2 cylinder mode at higher speeds, even when cruising at 80 it kicks in, incredible.
This did get me thinking though, does anyone know whether it is the same 2 cylinders that shut off? or does the engine management vary it so that they wear at equivalent rates?
I have been driving a 1.4TSI GT Golf since April '13, also thought the 2.0 diesel felt heavy and sluggish and the 1.6TDI isn't available in the GT trim (mercifully). This is a really nice engine in the Golf, good economy if you drive carefully and even if you don't (like me) you can average 40mpg long term. But it does like the higher octane petrol. Especially Aral 102, if you happen to take a trip to Germany.
It is always the centre two cylinders that deactivate, you can seen the solenoids on top of the rocker cover that extend the pins into grooves on the cam lobes to move them and disengage the valves from the camshaft on those two cylinders. And I have tried to catch the system out for nearly two years, without success. All I can get is a slight shudder occasionally, but passengers never know.
Its a great engine and I would urge anyone interested in a VW Group product to try it before buying the default 1.6TDI.
It is always the centre two cylinders that deactivate, you can seen the solenoids on top of the rocker cover that extend the pins into grooves on the cam lobes to move them and disengage the valves from the camshaft on those two cylinders. And I have tried to catch the system out for nearly two years, without success. All I can get is a slight shudder occasionally, but passengers never know.
Its a great engine and I would urge anyone interested in a VW Group product to try it before buying the default 1.6TDI.
I don't think the system will cause any noticeable change in normal engine wear. With the valves staying shut and no fuel being injected, the pressures in the cylinders will be far lower than under normal operation. So the forces being transmitted through the components will be lower, which could mean that the inboard components have less wear than the outer ones. And VW seem to have the vibrations sorted out, there is only a very slight vibration at certain engine revs when running on two cylinders.
But I could be wrong of course...
I think the engine management software is set up to deactivate the cylinders only when the revs are above 1400r/min and when the torque demand is less than 75N.m. It is possible to accelerate when the system is engaged, but as soon as you give it a bit more throttle it instantly goes back to 4 cylinders.
The shift indicator is clever too, it will often suggest changing from 3rd to 5th or 4th to 6th, not just an up or down arrow like the first gen systems.
I must be honest though, I don't know if it makes such a big difference to the fuel consumption. I know it makes a difference to the official consumption and to the official emissions, but the engine loves to rev and just sounds happy doing it so it is difficult for me to drive economically.
But I could be wrong of course...
I think the engine management software is set up to deactivate the cylinders only when the revs are above 1400r/min and when the torque demand is less than 75N.m. It is possible to accelerate when the system is engaged, but as soon as you give it a bit more throttle it instantly goes back to 4 cylinders.
The shift indicator is clever too, it will often suggest changing from 3rd to 5th or 4th to 6th, not just an up or down arrow like the first gen systems.
I must be honest though, I don't know if it makes such a big difference to the fuel consumption. I know it makes a difference to the official consumption and to the official emissions, but the engine loves to rev and just sounds happy doing it so it is difficult for me to drive economically.
Springbok235 said:
I think the engine management software is set up to deactivate the cylinders only when the revs are above 1400r/min and when the torque demand is less than 75N.m. It is possible to accelerate when the system is engaged, but as soon as you give it a bit more throttle it instantly goes back to 4 cylinders.
Thanks, I shouldn't be worried about additional cylinder wear then. Interesting you say only kicks in above 1400rpm. I was wondering why it doesn't kick in when you come to a halt, like at traffic lights. Would make sense for it to go into 2 cylinder with the clutch down and then engage the others as you start to lift it. Must be a reason why not.Gassing Station | Audi, Seat, Skoda & VW | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff