advertisement


VW Golf GTE?

170 bhp from a 1.4 4 pot with a turbo unreliable, no surprise Sherlock!

A natasp 1.4 car engine is going to generate 100bhp with a nice tractable tune and 130ish with a lumpy cam and raised rev limit. More than this is going to need bike engine technology or extensive tuning, both costly and/or less driveable. A turbo to add 50-60 bhp to such an engine is going to have to run about 0.5bar, I'd imagine, and the thing is unlikely to last 100k miles.

I'd say it was just VW cutting corners, cost and thorough development that caused the problems, not the BHP/Litre. I'm not aware of, for example, Mercedes having such trouble with their A45 AMG which chucks out 360bhp (?) from a 2.0 four pot. And by focal does that thing go. I just couldn't help the expletive when I first put my foot down, The sales guy said that almost everyone said roughly the same :)

VW probably rate alongside BMW. BMW's N47 2.0 diesel engine suffers from failing timing chains, and the chain is at the back of the engine! Deep joy. And good luck getting them to admit it is ALL their fault.
 
170 bhp from a 1.4 4 pot with a turbo unreliable, no surprise Sherlock!

A natasp 1.4 car engine is going to generate 100bhp with a nice tractable tune and 130ish with a lumpy cam and raised rev limit. More than this is going to need bike engine technology or extensive tuning, both costly and/or less driveable. A turbo to add 50-60 bhp to such an engine is going to have to run about 0.5bar, I'd imagine, and the thing is unlikely to last 100k miles.
Not necessarily if the components have been designed to cope with the output (a reason for not tuning engines for higher output if you don't know they will cope with it, at least one component on an engine will be marginal at rated output). Turbo pressures are higher now, control of boost is far more advanced now than the first generation so a high max boost (my Alfa 159 goes up to 1.2bar max) does not mean stupid lag or lack of driveability.
 
BMW managed to squeak 1000BHP+ out of a 1.5 M12 engine.

Not sure about reliability in the long term though.
 
BMW managed to squeak 1000BHP+ out of a 1.5 M12 engine.

Not sure about reliability in the long term though.

The pit crew pulled the pin out, sent it on its way, and put their fingers in their ears.
I loved those days. Huge sums of money on countless engines, but I do wonder how the costs compare with the ropey dogs we have had since 2014.
 
... a reason for not tuning engines for higher output if you don't know they will cope with it, at least one component on an engine will be marginal at rated output.
It's a small comfort that I'm getting *only* 306bhp from my 3L turbo. I was tempted to strap on a piggy-back tune, but thought better of it. I want it to last the distance or at least 250,000km.
 
Having read the above, it's no wonder people buy Toyota in the real world :)
 
Has anyone had a hybrid? I nearly went for a Lexus CT200h - an ugly b@stard of a car But a diesel golf looked cheaper and simpler.
 
170 bhp from a 1.4 4 pot with a turbo unreliable, no surprise Sherlock!

A natasp 1.4 car engine is going to generate 100bhp with a nice tractable tune and 130ish with a lumpy cam and raised rev limit. More than this is going to need bike engine technology or extensive tuning, both costly and/or less driveable. A turbo to add 50-60 bhp to such an engine is going to have to run about 0.5bar, I'd imagine, and the thing is unlikely to last 100k miles.

120bhp per litre isn't that unusual these days - my daughters little Fiesta has more than that (125 bhp per litre).

I do recall being amazed by the 160bhp from 1.6L of my old Honda Civic VTi 20+ years ago though - but it was normally aspirated.
 
Has anyone had a hybrid? I nearly went for a Lexus CT200h - an ugly b@stard of a car But a diesel golf looked cheaper and simpler.
Not much help really, but my brother had the Lexus when they first came out. Indeed not the most elegant tank. He seemed to enjoy the vehicle and kept it for 3 years.

Bloss
 
Toyota reliability used to be second to none before they started being built in the UK...
Toyota had fine QA and build quality until they realised they needed to make more money. They reduced the quality, increased tolerances, dulled the QA.
 
Having read the above, it's no wonder people buy Toyota in the real world :)

Of the five turbo diesel cars we’ve owned four were VAG and one Toyota. The latter was the only one to eat its turbo, twice. The other four were/are bombproof.
 
Of the five turbo diesel cars we’ve owned four were VAG and one Toyota. The latter was the only one to eat its turbo, twice. The other four were/are bombproof.

I drove a few Toyota diesels a few years ago while car hunting. Gutless, and hopeless aircon. I went to VW, 100k miles with no engine problems. And the car is still going strong at over 200k miles.
 
For balance, I have a VAG car (Audi A2) which has cost me the equivalent of 10mpg over its (120,000 mile) lifetime in unscheduled maintenance, or around 60% of what I paid for the (nearly new) car. Failed turbo (40,000 miles); Crankshaft thrust bearing fell out (80,000 miles); failed dual mass flywheel (110,000 miles); plus numerous 'small' jobs (aircon compressor, anti roll bar, door check strap, and others) mostly within the first 60,000 miles or so.

This despite careful and meticulous maintenance above and beyond the service schedule. For me, the much-vaunted VAG reliability and bulletproof design is a myth.

I do still like the car, though.
 
Reliability figures per manufacturer are available, and show that the Japanese do better, on average, than the Germans nowadays.

Perhaps the difference is exaggerated a little though because reliability partly depends on the way you drive a car. 'Spirited' drivers will generally experience worse reliability than those who have a calmer driving style, and certain marques appeal more to each kind of driver. (Although really mollycoddling a car is not good for it either - they need a good run fairly often.)
 
Reliability figures per manufacturer are available, and show that the Japanese do better, on average, than the Germans nowadays.

Perhaps the difference is exaggerated a little though because reliability partly depends on the way you drive a car. 'Spirited' drivers will generally experience worse reliability than those who have a calmer driving style, and certain marques appeal more to each kind of driver. (Although really mollycoddling a car is not good for it either - they need a good run fairly often.)

Nearly all my cars in recent years have been either German (BMW & Mercedes) or Japanese (Honda and Mazda) and I can confirm that I've had fewer reliability issues with the Japanese cars than with the German ones. Much as I like Mercedes (and my wife loves hers) they really can't compare with Honda for reliability - in our experience anyway.
 
I live in rural Essex, and I walked with my daughter through the woods this morning. Just for the oddness of it we went onto a footbridge over the M11 before coming back. The stench of fumes was very evident a good 200 yards before we reached the motorway. In urban and suburban areas millions of people live a lot closer to these fast roads than 200 yards. The noise and the fumes are awful. I walked home pretty convinced of the case for electric/hybrid cars.

I spend a fair chunk of my life out and about in the West End and City Of London, I wouldn't be surprised if I die of lung cancer. Whilst painful for my company (running 2 cars and 2 vans within the congestion charge zone) I personally look forward to the London air being cleaned up. I get my new company car today, after five 2.0 TDi cars I'm getting a Skoda Superb 1.4TSi, will be an interesting comparison.

Cheers BB
 
(Although really mollycoddling a car is not good for it either - they need a good run fairly often.)
Sometimes it takes a long time to correct this. I bought my Mondeo cheap at 97k miles (ish), it had become a vehicle for ferrying kids around town and was generally rather neglected. I trucked around in it for a while and it improved a bit but after a year and a bit it was pretty shonky and handed me a chunky bill for the MoT. I nearly binned it but decided to keep the faith, used it through the winter on reasonably lengthy trips, typically a 2x 30 mile commute involving the motorway. It still felt flat. The work situation changed, I was using a hire car and the workhorse had no work to do. I ignored it, I was hardly going to spend money on a car that sat on the driveway all week. It staggered to and from the shops at the weekend. Work changed again, May '16, I was responsible for 2 sites, both miles away. I resolved to use it until it died. 600 miles per week. Leeds to Birmingham, onto Colchester, back to Leeds. Sometimes I'd go the other way for variety, other times I'd go wild and crazy and visit the West Midlands twice in a week. It refused to die. MoT came around in September, it needed a brake caliper, a spring and a bit of suspension that had been groaning since I bought it was diagnosed as a strut top bearing and fixed. By November the thing was running like a watch and up to somewhere over 120k without a hitch. More work changes, South East London. The poor abused thing was detailed to a 450 mile round trip every week. 200 miles on Sunday night, trucking around suburban London (yuk) all week, back on the Dartford/M11/A1/M62 every Friday. Never missed a beat, pulled like a train and soaked up all the crap driving and white van doors of SE London. More changes come Spring, next news is a local (!) run of 2x 50 miles a day, cue MoT in September. 18k miles on from the previous year, it needed a bulb and a replacement windscreen. The engine still returns 40mpg from a 1.8 petrol, burns no oil and performs better than it ever did when I bought it. I reckon it was sluggish for a year and a half. Now either I've adjusted to its flat performance or it really has improved. There have been no changes to account for this, not even a replacement exhaust which amazes me over the course of 3 years/45k miles.
 


advertisement


Back
Top