VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Dsy

I’m going to buy a new car and want advice on the long term additional costs of a diesel (e.g. DPF mileage related fouling or longer term renewal) that I would need to factor into the equation in the choice of a diesel or petrol car based on 8 to 10k miles a year, a mix of long (100 miles+) and shorter runs, and keeping the car for 8 to 9 years. I’d like to stay with Audi VW cars. I have driven a ’54 VW Passat Estate 1.9TDI from new. It has 120k miles on the clock, no DPF and runs well.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - skidpan

Suggest you look at either a Skoda Octavia Estate or a Seat Leon Estate, same car as the Golf/A4 but without the premium prices.

I bought a Seat Leon in June last year and had the petrol vs diesel equation to decide after almost 17 years driving mostly diesels without issues (even DPF's and DMF's). The new 1.4 TSi was getting excellent reviews and tried one, I was staggered and bought one, still absolutely delighted.

Getting just over 45 mpg which when you consider the petrol vs diesel price difference equates to almost 48 mpg in diesel terms. My last diesel (A BMW 118d) did 48 mpg thus my fuel costs have not changed.

The car drives better than any diesel I have owned in the past, the performance is simply staggering for a 1.4. There is not turbo lag and the engine is way more refined than any diesel I have driven.

Buying the petrol saved me £2000 in comparrison to the nearest Leon diesel and I have no worries about DPF's etc.

Try one and prepare to be amazed.

PS Ignore any doom mongers posts about the TSi being unreliable. This is a brand new engine that is totally unrelated to the previous TSi models some veresions of which were a money pit. In truth when you scout the forums it was the twin charged versions (now discountinued) which gave the model all the bad press but as always some people cannot look beyond the name.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - craig-pd130

That's excellent economy, what sort of driving mix is that?

Also interesting that according to the specs, the 1.4 has the same max torque output over pretty much the same rev range as the 1.8TSI. 180-odd lb-ft is very healthy.

Edited by craig-pd130 on 24/02/2014 at 13:25

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - skidpan

That's excellent economy, what sort of driving mix is that?

Also interesting that according to the specs, the 1.4 has the same max torque output over pretty much the same rev range as the 1.8TSI. 180-odd lb-ft is very healthy.

My commute is 15 miles each way, 3 days a week, takes 30 minutes. The remainder of my mileage is shops, relatives, woods with the dog etc. Occational coast trips during the summer.

When i bought it I very briefly considered the 1.8 TSi but the RFL and fuel costs were going to be much higher and after driving the 1.4 TSi I could see no point in even trying the 1.8 TSi. With regards to the torque both the 1.4 TSi and 1.8 TSi have 184 lbs ft from 1500 rpm, the only difference is the 1.8 range extends to 4000 rpm wheras the 1.4 ends at 3500 rpm. I asked the dealer why this was so, previous experience says the 1.8 TSi should have much more torque. The answer was simple, blame the 7 speed dry plate DSG gearbox they fit as an option to the 1.8 TSi. This is limited by VAG to 184 lbs ft of torque for safety thus the engine has to be mapped to not destroy the gearbox. Manuals could be mapped to produce considerably more torque but for marketing reasons selling the car with an expensive gearbox and less torque is not viable.

Loads of muppets already re-mapping the 1.8 TSi DSG to produce ludicrous amounts of power but their solution is simple. Sell the car just before the warranty runs out and its not their problems, expect loads of posts on here in about 3 years time.

So why not fit the car with the 6 speed wet clutch DSG box?

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - craig-pd130

Thanks for that. I'm currently looking at replacements for my company car (currently a Volvo V60 D3 diesel, lease is up in the summer), and I see the 1.4TSI is available in the new-ish Octavia estate, so I'll have to have a look at one of those ... especially as there's a Skoda dealer 5 miles from where I live.

The BIK tax on the Skoda is actually lower than the V60 D4 (with the new modular engine) that I've been considering, which is unusual for a petrol-engined car.

I had a V40 2.0T (the light-pressure petrol turbo variant of the T4) a long while ago, and that was a lovely engine with buckets of torque ... but the economy was terrible, I would get 33mpg on a long trip and just under 30mpg on average.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Peter.N.

If you are buying a new car its debatable whether a diesel will be cheaper overall especially if you are only doing short runs and a relatively low mileage.

Buying secondhand is a completely different kettle of fish especially if you don't mind something older. I bought a Peugeot 406 estate about four years ago for £950, its never broken down on me in 30.000 + miles and will do 60 mpg driven gently. It now has 220,000 miles on the clock and still has the original clutch, DMF and head gasket.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - thunderbird

Buying secondhand is a completely different kettle of fish especially if you don't mind something older

But the OP already has something older and is looking to buy a new car that will last many years.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Peter.N.

Pity, the older one will probably last longer and be cheaper tp maintain.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Avant

But it's still a gamble, which the OP wants to avoid as he's been doing wth his Passat - buying new and looking after it well. With your Peugeot either you were lucky or you chose carefully knowing its history.

After five diesels in a row, my current and previous Octavias have been petrol-powered, as my annual mileage is more like 12,000 than 20,000 as before. No regrets: not much in it financially if you take all aspects into consideration, but the things that swayed me were the comparative silence of the petrol and (mainly) the excellent torque that these new VAG petrol engines have.

Mine is a 2.0 TSI but as Skidpan and others have found, the 1.4 TSI is equally good. And as he says the economy gap between these engines and their diesel equivalents is narrower than it used to be.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Ed V

I think there's a better quality in the Golf than the Seat - you can personalise it with better colours / seat combos and extras better than you can with the Seat. Obviously, to do that costs money, but if you keep a Golf for a decade you might think that worthwhile simply to have something less than 'one of the crowd.'

Doing that with an almost equally popular Audi will cost much more.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - craig-pd130

@ Avant - what are you getting economy-wise out of your 2.0TSI?

I'm looking at an Octy estate next week, I was very surprised to find that the 1.4TSI is better on benefit-in-kind car tax than the Volvo I was planning to get. That, combined with reasonable economy and the price difference between petrol & diesel may well sway me if I like the car.

Out of curiosity, does the owners manual recommend premium fuel for best performance / economy, or does it just recommend bog-standard 95 octane?

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Avant

A good time to ask the question, Craig, as the Octavia is now nicely run in and gave its best figure yet on Thursday. I was driving up the M4 from Berks to park at Barons Court tube (free in the street after 5.00 pm and useful if going to London for the evening) - and the trip computer showed 44.4 mpg, not far off the normally unrealistic Government combined figure of 45.6. The M4 had fairly heavy traffic but we kept going, mostly at about 60 mph. Co-incidentally the odometer at that point read 4444.

Coming back late at night I was cruising at my usual 75 mph and it was 40.5 mpg. (I've checked the trip computer against brim-to-brim and found it accurate.)

In town it's low 30s, on the open road using the acceleration (or I wouldn't have got the vRS in the first place!) it's 36-38 mpg. I'm no scientist but I'd put this excellent economy down at least partly to the torque of this engine: you need comparatively little accelerator pedal travel to get plenty of oomph.

The legend inside the fuel filler flap says ambiguously 'super unleaded min. 95 RON', but the handbook says that for engines requiring minimum 95 RON 'the use of petrol with a higher octane number than 95 can increase the power and reduce fuel consumption'. I've found that to be true: on this and the previous Octavia super unleaded (97-99) pays for itself in better mpg.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - Avant

I should add - thank you, Skidpan, for that explanation of why the 1,8 TSI isn't worth it over the 1.4. I've seen several reviews of the Audi A3 where they say that the 1.8 isn't the best engine choice - now I know why. I normally favour the bigger engine where there's a choice - clearly not in this case.

The wet-clutch DSG is by all accounts more reliable than the dry-clutch, and isn't jerky either - so indeed, VAG could have solved a problem by fitting it to the A3.

VW Golf Estate/Audi A4 Avant - Additional long term costs of new diesel v petrol - artill

There is a vicious circle going on here. The car makers want to sell more cars, so dont want them to last too long. the governing bodies want us to buy more cars, vat, depreciation etc, not to mention improving fuel consumption. The public like buying more cars. So everyone it seems want cars made cheaper with a shorter life, except those of us who actually want a long term quality purchace to last and last, that is reliable, and easy to fix when it isnt.

Trying to single out one manufacturer or another who make cars that will outlast the others, while being easy to maintain isnt easy. I am not sure any qualify any more. In 50 years there will probably be more cars from the 1960 still working than cars from the first decade of the 21st century