VAG 1.9 TDI & 2.0 TDI Chipping

[Welshbeef]

Ok so what are the gains?

Lets say the
1.9 TDI 130bhp
1.9 TDI 150bhp
2.0 TDI 140bhp
2.0 TDI 170bhp

Which is the best unit of the lot std and which is the most efficient std and when chipped?

Am I correct in saying the 1.9 TDi's are all 8v and the 2.0ltr are 16v - hence the far less peaky power delivery in the 2.0ltr over the 1.9ltr?

Given Golf 2.0 GT tdi 140's can be bought for sub £6k (yes with a few miles) is it worth going for a Mk4 150bhp?

[istoo]

at the moment i would go for the 1.9tdi the 150's often read more than 150 on a RR, adn the 130 does take a huge leap with remaps. plus they are at the end of theat engine cycle and have a really well documented list of tuning options. the 2.0 lump is newer as such. i know less about the 2.0 lump but i have heard the 170 can be problematic to remap, not sure why. but for driving sakes the 2.0 lump has a nicer delivery, i find the 1.9 quite booooost/no boost. ]

plus the 1.9tdi is still a pretty efficient lump, i would put the choice down to budget and what your reasons for a TDi are...

[Dift]

Welshbeef said:

Ok so what are the gains?

Lets say the
1.9 TDI 130bhp
1.9 TDI 150bhp
2.0 TDI 140bhp
2.0 TDI 170bhp

Which is the best unit of the lot std and which is the most efficient std and when chipped?

Am I correct in saying the 1.9 TDi's are all 8v and the 2.0ltr are 16v - hence the far less peaky power delivery in the 2.0ltr over the 1.9ltr?

Given Golf 2.0 GT tdi 140's can be bought for sub £6k (yes with a few miles) is it worth going for a Mk4 150bhp?

1.9 TDI 130bhp to 165 ish
1.9 TDI 150bhp to 185 ish
2.0 TDI 140bhp to 180 ish
2.0 TDI 170bhp to 195 ish (DPF issues)

2 litres are smoother and more refined, the old 1.9s are slightly more powerful with better fuel consumption, and dont have the DPF.

Depends what you want.

[MikeA3]

My old A3 TDI 130 went to 162bhp quite easily, a 130 TDI quattro went to 175bhp.

I believe the only difference between the 130 & 150 is a map anyway so if you intend to get it chipped save the cash and get a 130.

[steebo888]

MikeA3 said:

My old A3 TDI 130 went to 162bhp quite easily, a 130 TDI quattro went to 175bhp.

I believe the only difference between the 130 & 150 is a map anyway so if you intend to get it chipped save the cash and get a 130.

more than just the map

The hike from the previous model's 130bhp to 150bhp, and from 228 to 235lb ft is down to three main factors, a bigger boost from the variable-vane turbo, a more efficient intercooler and a better design of injector nozzle which results in a more efficient mixture burn. So despite the unit's increased output, the official economy figures are little different to the less potent TDI's. To cope with the increased loads there are stronger con-rods and the pistons have been redesigned, too.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/1569...

Edited by steebo888 on Friday 8th August 14:04

[Welshbeef]

istoo said:

at the moment i would go for the 1.9tdi the 150's often read more than 150 on a RR, adn the 130 does take a huge leap with remaps. plus they are at the end of theat engine cycle and have a really well documented list of tuning options. the 2.0 lump is newer as such. i know less about the 2.0 lump but i have heard the 170 can be problematic to remap, not sure why. but for driving sakes the 2.0 lump has a nicer delivery, i find the 1.9 quite booooost/no boost. ]

plus the 1.9tdi is still a pretty efficient lump, i would put the choice down to budget and what your reasons for a TDi are...

I guess thats what I was thinking and these days GT TDI 150's can be had for £4k - whereas GT TDI 140's are nearer £6k.

ONe other thing though is handling - clearly the Mk5 is a big step over the Mk4 BUT does the extra £ to buy it worth it? Plus Ive heard that interior qualty is not as good in the Mk5 as the Mk4.

[steebo888]

ive driven the mkv which is better handling but yes the interior is alot better in the mk4.
The money saved though from buying the mk4 you could use some to upgrade the suspension