Golf 2.0 140 vs 170
Discussion
170 also has bigger front discs - from a GTI
The DPF can be a pain if you don't use it for motorway journeys as it becomes clogged.
With the turbo being larger it is more laggy but I would go for the more powerful lump.
Don't forget the visible pipes on the 170 too, vs the down-turned hidden ones from the non DPF 140.
The DPF can be a pain if you don't use it for motorway journeys as it becomes clogged.
With the turbo being larger it is more laggy but I would go for the more powerful lump.
Don't forget the visible pipes on the 170 too, vs the down-turned hidden ones from the non DPF 140.
RicksAlfas said:
Not sure what age car you are looking at but if you can get a 140 without a DPF that would be much less troublesome than a 170 with...
Not so concerned about age, more the number of miles. Just looking for the best value for money or initial cost + running costs. Need something with some poke though, the 170 looks about ok on performance for a family transport.There's a fair old difference in looks too.
The 170 is only available as the GTD, so you get much more GTi-like styling.
The 140 is the GT at best. The above poster is incorrect though - the 140 gets visible exhausts, it's the 110 that doesn't.
140 GT:
The 170 is only available as the GTD, so you get much more GTi-like styling.
The 140 is the GT at best. The above poster is incorrect though - the 140 gets visible exhausts, it's the 110 that doesn't.
140 GT:
Edited by Beefmeister on Monday 21st March 16:11
Don't, however, get the 18s on a GT - the ride is really poor/hard as a result of it.
You could, however, consider a Match spec car (if they're still doing them) - it's an SE with a lot of extras for not a lot more.
Economy and emissions are better with the 140 too.
For more in depth questions, I can recommend this forum - http://www.vwaudiforum.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.ph...
You could, however, consider a Match spec car (if they're still doing them) - it's an SE with a lot of extras for not a lot more.
Economy and emissions are better with the 140 too.
For more in depth questions, I can recommend this forum - http://www.vwaudiforum.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.ph...
Mafioso said:
Beefmeister said:
There's a fair old difference in looks too.
The 140 is the GT at best. The above poster is incorrect though - the 140 gets visible exhausts, it's the 110 that doesn't.
This isn't true on the mk5 though is it?The 140 is the GT at best. The above poster is incorrect though - the 140 gets visible exhausts, it's the 110 that doesn't.
OP - are you looking at the Mk6 or 5?
Which model are we talking?
MK5 had the 2.0 TDI PD, 140 was the best, 170 rough and plagued by DPF problems. Both available in GT/ GT Sport trims.
MK6 has the 2.0 TDI CR, very smooth and refined, all variants have a DPF. Initially there was just the 110 and 140 variants. 110 dropped and replaced by 1.6 TDI 105. 2.0 TDI 170 offered at the top of the range in GTD trim only. 2.0 TDI 140 offered in SE then Match and GT.
Does it have to be diesel though? The 1.4 TSI engines are quicker, cheaper to buy and no DPF to worry about.
MK5 had the 2.0 TDI PD, 140 was the best, 170 rough and plagued by DPF problems. Both available in GT/ GT Sport trims.
MK6 has the 2.0 TDI CR, very smooth and refined, all variants have a DPF. Initially there was just the 110 and 140 variants. 110 dropped and replaced by 1.6 TDI 105. 2.0 TDI 170 offered at the top of the range in GTD trim only. 2.0 TDI 140 offered in SE then Match and GT.
Does it have to be diesel though? The 1.4 TSI engines are quicker, cheaper to buy and no DPF to worry about.
va1o said:
Which model are we talking?
MK5 had the 2.0 TDI PD, 140 was the best, 170 rough and plagued by DPF problems. Both available in GT/ GT Sport trims.
MK6 has the 2.0 TDI CR, very smooth and refined, all variants have a DPF. Initially there was just the 110 and 140 variants. 110 dropped and replaced by 1.6 TDI 105. 2.0 TDI 170 offered at the top of the range in GTD trim only. 2.0 TDI 140 offered in SE then Match and GT.
Does it have to be diesel though? The 1.4 TSI engines are quicker, cheaper to buy and no DPF to worry about.
I had the 1.4 TSi 160 engined Golf Plus for a week a while back, and it felt awfully gutless next to the 140 TDi, unless you really revved the crap out of it. Which I did, and that resulted in an average of 31mpg over the week, compared to 49 out of the diesel. MK5 had the 2.0 TDI PD, 140 was the best, 170 rough and plagued by DPF problems. Both available in GT/ GT Sport trims.
MK6 has the 2.0 TDI CR, very smooth and refined, all variants have a DPF. Initially there was just the 110 and 140 variants. 110 dropped and replaced by 1.6 TDI 105. 2.0 TDI 170 offered at the top of the range in GTD trim only. 2.0 TDI 140 offered in SE then Match and GT.
Does it have to be diesel though? The 1.4 TSI engines are quicker, cheaper to buy and no DPF to worry about.
BlueEyedBoy said:
Looking at MK5, around 11K. I know that the 1.4 may not have the issues but I am trying to get the best running costs + purchase price. If the 1.4 is the same initial price as the TDI, which does around 10mpg more, over 5 years I am likely to save far more.
1.4 is substantially cheaper than the dieselProbably the better choice unless your doing mega miles IMO.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff