2.0 B48 or 1.8 EA888 TFSI
Discussion
Owners of BMWs which have the b48, how are you finding the car?
Owners of Audis that have the 1.8 tfsi, how are you finding the car?
I’m looking for a new car and I’m in a predicament. I’ve ALWAYS wanted a BMW because of that sweet rear wheel drive but recently my mrs got a new car , a 1.2 Audi a1 and to be honest I’m loving the way it drives (not hard to beat the fiesta I have now mind) so I’m now considering Audi.
I’m either thinking of a 1 or 2 series with the b48 engine or an Audi A3 with the 1.8 tfsi, both automatic.
How is the reliability of these engines? Any expensive jobs at certain mileages?
I don’t want to turn this into an Audi vs bmw thing, as I will test drive both before I buy, but rather get an idea of how they are to own, drive and maintain from an owners point of view.
Owners of Audis that have the 1.8 tfsi, how are you finding the car?
I’m looking for a new car and I’m in a predicament. I’ve ALWAYS wanted a BMW because of that sweet rear wheel drive but recently my mrs got a new car , a 1.2 Audi a1 and to be honest I’m loving the way it drives (not hard to beat the fiesta I have now mind) so I’m now considering Audi.
I’m either thinking of a 1 or 2 series with the b48 engine or an Audi A3 with the 1.8 tfsi, both automatic.
How is the reliability of these engines? Any expensive jobs at certain mileages?
I don’t want to turn this into an Audi vs bmw thing, as I will test drive both before I buy, but rather get an idea of how they are to own, drive and maintain from an owners point of view.
You don't say how old a car you are thinking of buying. My vague recollection of the VAG 1.8TFSI engine is that there have been various versions, with the older ones subject to typical early VAG direct injection problems like heavy oil consumption and perhaps coking up. Also, the automatic in the Audi will be a DSG and I'm not sure whether it will be a dry or wet clutch one as the 1.8TFSI sits near the dividing line. A wet-clutch one would probably be more reliable and robust, but would need its fluid changed to schedule (and if it isn't, expensive things like the mechatronics can go bang).
This thread would probably sit better in "Car Buying" - perhaps you can report yourself to the mods and get it moved?
This thread would probably sit better in "Car Buying" - perhaps you can report yourself to the mods and get it moved?
The B48 is a good engine. Be careful if you decide to remap, etc - make sure you take it to someone who knows what they are doing as there are several versions of this motor that can take differing levels of power. Someone on here ruined his pistons this way.
The EA888 is also good, providing you get one that was made post-2012. By then they had sorted the problems the early versions had.
The EA888 is also good, providing you get one that was made post-2012. By then they had sorted the problems the early versions had.
trevalvole said:
You don't say how old a car you are thinking of buying. My vague recollection of the VAG 1.8TFSI engine is that there have been various versions, with the older ones subject to typical early VAG direct injection problems like heavy oil consumption and perhaps coking up. Also, the automatic in the Audi will be a DSG and I'm not sure whether it will be a dry or wet clutch one as the 1.8TFSI sits near the dividing line. A wet-clutch one would probably be more reliable and robust, but would need its fluid changed to schedule (and if it isn't, expensive things like the mechatronics can go bang).
This thread would probably sit better in "Car Buying" - perhaps you can report yourself to the mods and get it moved?
The EA888s are paired with one of the wet clutch DSGs, which are more reliable. This thread would probably sit better in "Car Buying" - perhaps you can report yourself to the mods and get it moved?
I've only driven the B48 in a Morgan Plus 4 and a Mini JCW, and it really impressed me in both those applications with plenty of smooth power. I appreciate that they may not be as representative of other versions, but they were good units.
Not sure about the E888 engine. Last VW engine I owned was in my 2006 SEAT LEON with the older EA113 and that was lovely in its power delivery.
Not sure about the E888 engine. Last VW engine I owned was in my 2006 SEAT LEON with the older EA113 and that was lovely in its power delivery.
ahenners said:
georgeyboy12345 said:
The EA888s are paired with one of the wet clutch DSGs, which are more reliable.
Are you sure? I thought the Leon 1.8 TSI 180ps and Audi A3 8v 1.8 tfsi had the DQ200 dry clutch 7 speed. ahenners said:
Are you sure? I thought the Leon 1.8 TSI 180ps and Audi A3 8v 1.8 tfsi had the DQ200 dry clutch 7 speed.
I think they did - I assume to peg it back from the S3/Cupra. The Polo GTI with that engine also had the dry clutch box, but this is probably because the PQ25 platform of that Polo couldn't take the DQ250 Wet clutch systemIts odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
SteBrown91 said:
I think they did - I assume to peg it back from the S3/Cupra. The Polo GTI with that engine also had the dry clutch box, but this is probably because the PQ25 platform of that Polo couldn't take the DQ250 Wet clutch system
Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
Yeah I think the 1.8 just about managed to get under the DQ200 torque limit whereas the 2.0 are over and got the DQ250. Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
I've run a Gen 3 2.0 EA888 for nearly 70k and no qualms about reliability, but mine has a DQ250. Expect the 1.8 is just as reliable, as a friend with the Leon has had no issues either, but his is manual and I'd be more wary about the DQ200 box.
ahenners said:
SteBrown91 said:
I think they did - I assume to peg it back from the S3/Cupra. The Polo GTI with that engine also had the dry clutch box, but this is probably because the PQ25 platform of that Polo couldn't take the DQ250 Wet clutch system
Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
Yeah I think the 1.8 just about managed to get under the DQ200 torque limit whereas the 2.0 are over and got the DQ250. Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
I've run a Gen 3 2.0 EA888 for nearly 70k and no qualms about reliability, but mine has a DQ250. Expect the 1.8 is just as reliable, as a friend with the Leon has had no issues either, but his is manual and I'd be more wary about the DQ200 box.
If the A3 does have the dry-clutch DSG, then presumably the OP would be ill-advised to chip it, as the torque would likely exceed what the gearbox could take?
trevalvole said:
ahenners said:
SteBrown91 said:
I think they did - I assume to peg it back from the S3/Cupra. The Polo GTI with that engine also had the dry clutch box, but this is probably because the PQ25 platform of that Polo couldn't take the DQ250 Wet clutch system
Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
Yeah I think the 1.8 just about managed to get under the DQ200 torque limit whereas the 2.0 are over and got the DQ250. Its odd as it is basically the same as the 2.0 EA888 which always was linked to a wet clutch DSG. The 1.8 I think has a shorter stroke and a few other changes but is fundamentally the same engine.
I've run a Gen 3 2.0 EA888 for nearly 70k and no qualms about reliability, but mine has a DQ250. Expect the 1.8 is just as reliable, as a friend with the Leon has had no issues either, but his is manual and I'd be more wary about the DQ200 box.
If the A3 does have the dry-clutch DSG, then presumably the OP would be ill-advised to chip it, as the torque would likely exceed what the gearbox could take?
The front wheel drive only supposedly comes with a 7 speed which is the dry clutch one.
A friend has a 520i with the B48 and the ZF 8 speed auto, I’m very impressed. Smooth and pulls well, can only assume it’s even better in the smaller 1 or 2 series.
Few things about the EA888 Gen 3 1.8, pretty much the same engine as the Golf R and S3 but smaller turbo. But also has the same water pump fault. Also read of people having issues with the turbo actuator and the dry clutch DSG.
Few things about the EA888 Gen 3 1.8, pretty much the same engine as the Golf R and S3 but smaller turbo. But also has the same water pump fault. Also read of people having issues with the turbo actuator and the dry clutch DSG.
trevalvole said:
I recall that the Polo GTI DSG had its torque reduced compared to the manual to protect the gearbox.
If the A3 does have the dry-clutch DSG, then presumably the OP would be ill-advised to chip it, as the torque would likely exceed what the gearbox could take?
The Superb 3 DSG with the 1.8 TSI EA888 also has limited torque to 250Nm instead of 320Nm to allow the use of the 7-speed dry-clutch DQ200 transmission, making low and mid-performance similar to the 1.4 TSI with also 250Nm. Peak HP at 180hp is slightly better in the 1.8TSI compared to 150hp with the 1.4TSI.If the A3 does have the dry-clutch DSG, then presumably the OP would be ill-advised to chip it, as the torque would likely exceed what the gearbox could take?
Personally I'd avoid the DQ250 box like the plague. I know someone that fried his box in 30.000 miles (luckily exchanged under warrantee).
The wet clutch gearboxes have a much better trackrecord, but even those have a big chance to need a rebuild at high mileages.
Went with a ZF8 myself as it's very serviceable, but I see the appeal of the DSG and the cars that come with them.
Edited by HelldogBE on Tuesday 29th March 14:23
HelldogBE said:
Personally I'd avoid the DQ250 box like the plague. I know someone that fried his box in 30.000 miles (luckily exchanged under warrantee).
The wet clutch gearboxes have a much better trackrecord, but even those have a big chance to need a rebuild at high mileages.
Went with a ZF8 myself as it's very serviceable, but I see the appeal of the DSG and the cars that come with them.
Do you mean DQ200, as the DQ250 appears to be a wet-clutch gearbox?The wet clutch gearboxes have a much better trackrecord, but even those have a big chance to need a rebuild at high mileages.
Went with a ZF8 myself as it's very serviceable, but I see the appeal of the DSG and the cars that come with them.
Edited by HelldogBE on Tuesday 29th March 14:23
trevalvole said:
HelldogBE said:
Personally I'd avoid the DQ250 box like the plague. I know someone that fried his box in 30.000 miles (luckily exchanged under warrantee).
The wet clutch gearboxes have a much better trackrecord, but even those have a big chance to need a rebuild at high mileages.
Went with a ZF8 myself as it's very serviceable, but I see the appeal of the DSG and the cars that come with them.
Do you mean DQ200, as the DQ250 appears to be a wet-clutch gearbox?The wet clutch gearboxes have a much better trackrecord, but even those have a big chance to need a rebuild at high mileages.
Went with a ZF8 myself as it's very serviceable, but I see the appeal of the DSG and the cars that come with them.
Edited by HelldogBE on Tuesday 29th March 14:23
Gassing Station | Car Buying | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff