FSI, TSI, and TDI

Hello, I just happened to be reading the FSI vs. TDI thread in the 'Blaumann' section, and I feel I need to share my opinion on it. Since I'm not familiar with that area, I'll just open a new thread here that's similar and also relevant to the topic.

So, apparently VW has developed a new engine with a displacement of only 1.4 liters that produces 170 horsepower and a top speed of 220 km/h. In addition, the engine has already reached between 1750 and 4500 revolutions per minute.
'It produces 240 Nm of torque thanks to the combination of a supercharger and a turbocharger. I think that's quite impressive for a gasoline engine with such a small displacement, especially considering it revs up to 7000 RPM.' Can a diesel engine still compete?
'So, regarding fuel consumption, the Golf GT is supposed to consume around 7 liters under normal driving conditions. However, it's difficult to make a direct comparison because there are no other diesel engines with such a small displacement that also produce 170 horsepower.' In addition, you pay less tax on the GT due to its engine displacement, etc., and its emissions. Well, it's a balancing act, I guess?

What do you think about this... and what will the future look like?
2.0-liter TSI engine.
255 horsepower.
360 Nm, with a smooth torque curve.
And 0-100 km/h in under 6 seconds?

Okay, not exactly like that, but maybe something similar. We can do without the consumption.

Whoever is interested:

PS: To go back to your comparison, specifically the 2.0 TDI and the 2.0 FSI, I had the pleasure of driving an A3 2.0 TDI for three days, and I can tell you that if a 320i with 150 horsepower couldn't keep up with me, how is a 150 horsepower FSI supposed to?
They're not that different at all. Both models go from 0 to 100 km/h in about 9.9 seconds. The TDI does it in 9.5 seconds. According to 'auto-motor-und-sport,' which measured it directly (I haven't measured it myself, but that figure seems plausible). It's clear that the TDI will eventually be overtaken, because more horsepower equals a higher top speed.http://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/d/92723{MARKER}

my opinion:
The TSI is a nice invention and has performed very well (if not better) compared to the Opel 1.x CDI (150 hp) (see autoXXXX), BUT: it lacks displacement. Above approximately 170 km/h, reaching top speed becomes endlessly agonizing... and 170 km/h is something that even the smallest cars can achieve these days. Nevertheless, I think the engine is good. Unfortunately, I haven't had the chance to drive it yet. It's a step in the right direction... if only the reliability is also good.

I don't think the idea is bad, but it's somehow BRUTAL to get so much power out of such a small space . I'm curious to see how it will be with reliability.

Okay, I drive an A6 C4 2.5 TDI with 140 horsepower. I always thought it was pretty fast, but I recently had the chance to test drive an A3 2.0 TDI with 140 horsepower, and I was really surprised at how well it accelerates – ideal for diesel drivers!!!
Alternatively, I also drove the 2.0 T-FSI with 200 hp, which is significantly sportier, but in my opinion, it delivers too little torque – so the feeling of power was much less pronounced!!!
Both cars were definitely well-driven, but I'm sticking with my old A6 – the difference in space was just too significant for me. *fg*
Best regards,
Martin

I would still tend to favor the TDI - why?

FSI: Simply lacks torque, and the 115 hp version with a 1.6-liter engine has no bite...

TSI: As I said, this variant is supposed to be quite slow at the top end, and it also has twin turbocharging -> If something breaks, it's going to be expensive to fix! More displacement is always better...

TDI: In my opinion, it's a classic – especially the PD engines, which offer excellent torque. And in the near future, the VAG group will also be using common-rail engines! They are leading the way in 4-valve technology, and they also run very smoothly!

The 1.8T engines were also criticized back then. The engines, both then and now, were simply inexpensive for their performance and had low fuel consumption.
I think the TSI engine is similar in that regard. It seems that downsizing is the key word for reducing fuel consumption. Hybrid technology is certainly more prone to failure and more expensive to repair. And the fuel consumption of the small TSI engine is probably more than acceptable for 170 horsepower. I think the trend will increasingly move towards turbocharged mini-gasoline engines.

Well, it's true that a 2.0 TDI with 140 horsepower might feel more powerful, but the 200 horsepower T-FSI engine simply outperforms it. And the torque of the 200 horsepower T-FSI isn't bad at all; it has 280 Nm! As I mentioned before, with diesel engines, there's this "feeling" that there might be more to it than meets the eye, but whether there's actually more substance behind that feeling is always the question.

The TSI will not become as popular as the PD TDI did...

It's no coincidence that BMW and Mercedes have been relying on common-rail technology for quite some time, which, for me, represents the gold standard .

Because it's relevant to the topic: Autobild

Quote:

Mercedes has been using common-rail technology for quite some time

.

Well, after Mercedes initially allowed other companies to dominate the market for turbocharged direct-injection diesel engines, and after they initially used 4-valve naturally aspirated diesel engines, they have since caught up.

In my opinion, it's really good, but "back then" it was cutting it close, as they were just releasing a "290 Turbodiesel" to also have a "direct injection" option.

m;

Even with TSI, the diesel remains... it would be nice to have just a few more cylinders .

What I forgot to include in my list:

TFSI

The 200 hp TFSI engine really delivers - torque and RPM are excellent! I would choose that one over all other engines (if I had the necessary funds).

Okay, I just don't think you can replace a strong diesel engine. Like a Seat Ibiza Cupra with a 160 horsepower diesel engine, or a Seat Leon with 150 horsepower. The acceleration is just amazing, I think, and with a chip tuning module, the car really performs well. Fuel consumption remains below 10 liters, what more could you ask for than winning the lottery ?

Of course, it always depends on the specific situation: For a diesel, you'll already pay at least €2,000 more when buying, which means I could be filling up with gasoline for 3 years longer. And if the problem of particulate matter pollution continues to increase significantly, more and more regulations will be imposed on diesel vehicles... (e.g., additional taxes, particulate filters -> leading to higher fuel consumption, etc.).

And the amount of torque or pulling power that a diesel engine has doesn't really tell you much, because:
Subjectively, it feels like the car has 30 horsepower more, but it loses power after 3,500 RPM, whereas the gasoline engine can rev up to 6,000 RPM! The comparison of the acceleration time at 60 km/h from 5th gear. "Gang" is also non-informative -> which gasoline car driver would be in 5th gear at 60 km/h?

It's no coincidence that the peak of the diesel craze is already over...

I'm currently leaning more towards a turbocharged gasoline engine.
The 1.4 TSI engine has its own appeal.
Maybe I'll have the opportunity to drive one on Saturday.
If she does anything inappropriate, I will issue a statement about it.
Speaking of the Golf GT, we should also mention the 170hp TDI PD engine.
I'm really excited to see what this thing can do.
It has to be a huge success.

IMHO, the smoothness of the engine operation speaks in favor of the turbocharged gasoline engine.
But what about those engines with low displacement?
Can you still drive those comfortably?
The 1.4 FSI engine in the Lupo is quite unusual and sluggish in terms of its performance.
If you don't rev it up, there's just no power.

LG
Maxx.

Maxx1278 wrote:

Speaking of the Golf GT, we should also mention the 170hp TDI PD engine. I'm really excited to see what this thing can do. It has to be a huge success.

I've driven the 140hp 2.0 TDI in various cars, and I was disappointed by its very poor low-end torque. I also don't find the power delivery to be very exciting. A 130hp ASZ engine, for example, in an A3, is actually more fun to drive. And even though it has less power, an x20d will be faster thanks to its rear-wheel drive. In short, I wouldn't expect too much from the 170 horsepower.

I'm not sure what changes will be implemented in the new 2.0 TDI engine. It was supposedly supposed to be available at dealerships a long time ago, but I'm reading in various forums that there seem to be some problems with it. Apparently, the cylinder head is not very stable, and cracks have been found.

Some customers who had already ordered the 170 hp TDI have even been asked if they would prefer the less powerful 2.0 TDI, as it's still uncertain when the new model will actually be available for sale. Apparently, it won't be released until the 3rd quarter. Here's the translation:

"Coming this quarter of the year."

So, I wouldn't buy the 170 hp TDI (not yet/if ever) because I don't want to be the guinea pig for the VAG group. Eventually, even the 4-cylinder models from Volkswagen/Audi will also be equipped with common-rail technology, so that's something to keep in mind.

I personally haven't had the pleasure of driving a 2.0 TDI with 140 horsepower yet.
My experiences are actually based only on hearsay.
If there really is this problem with getting started, that's truly a shame!

You actually hear very little about these difficulties with the 170hp TDI engines.
I haven't heard of anything like that before.
But if that's the case, I wouldn't want to be a guinea pig either.
How specific is the common-rail technology used by the VAG group?
Are there any more specific details available yet?

LG
Maxx.

Maxx1278 wrote:

How specific is the common-rail technology used by the VAG group? Are there any more specific details available yet? LG Maxx

Regarding ease of installation and maintenance, especially with 4-valve engines, the common-rail system has an advantage - I think this is also a reason why people are moving towards common-rail systems... (of course, I have no objections to the smoothness of operation either http://www.autobild.de/aktuell/meldungen/artikel.php?artikel_id=9994).