Quick question - which TDi engine will last longer, the 130 TDi 4-cyl, or the 2.5 V6 ? I plan on running my forthcoming (used) Passat for a few years, and still can't make up my mind which to buy - at 3 years old the difference in price isn't that much.
I am wondering if the less-stressed V6 diesel will last longer ... anyone out there run either a 130 or the V6 to some high mileages ?
I wouldn't say one will last longer than the other. The V6 TDI is more of a pain to do a cambelt change on and so the service bill will be higher for that job. I also find the 2.5TDI has something of a flat spot under 2000rpm, while the 1.9 doesn't. The v6 will drink substantially more fuel while not being that much faster. I'd be going with the 1.9. We get Audi A4 1.9 and 2.5 TDIs in with 120k+ on the clock (same drivetrain) and they all go just fine with no problems. Regularly serviced you can't kill either engine. I should point out that these cars have done their 120k relatively fast like at 30k per annum rather than over 6 years.
Good info, as ever ! I am planning on running it to about 200K miles from 60k, probably in 3-4 years, so I need something bullet-proof. The extra cost of the V6 servicing is what I was thinking about, especially as I will be having them more often than most !
200K on a properly serviced 1.9 TDI would be of no concern to me whatsoever. Chances are its the things attached to the engine (water pump, alternator etc) that will fail and I don't think the displacement of the engine will have any bearing on those bits.
I've had both and neither engine is stressed, at least not if you get one with either a 6-speed manual or an automatic. Both my previous Golf TDI estate (6-speed) and the current Avant 2.5 TDI (multitronic) are geared at about 35 mph per 1,000 rpm, so at 2,000 rpm at 70 mph either engine ahould last a very long time.
It's a matter of preference: the head says 1.9 or 2.0 TDI - better economy and slightly cheaper servicing and repairs, the heart says 2.5 or 3.0 TDI - lovely 6-cylinder noise (much less of it than the 4-cylinder engines), slightly better performance, and a general feeling of well-being that you get from a six.
I should think that Passat 2.5s are rarer than the 1.9s so the latter should give youy a wider choice.
If you want total reliability you might find more luck looking outside the VAG group.
What about something like a BMW 320d?
theres always somebody that ignores your question!
both are very good engines but for me if you want to keep it long term for big mileage then the 2.5 would be my choice more bullit proof.as somebody stated things go wrong around the engine(on the majority of cars) before the engine itself gives up life!!!
less of it than the 4-cylinder engines), slightly better performance, and
a general feeling of well-being that you get from a six.
I should think that Passat 2.5s are rarer than the 1.9s
so the latter should give youy a wider choice.
Interesting - I have heard of problems with the 5-speed box at high mileages on the 1.9 130, so I had already decided to get the Sport with the 6-speed box (the non-sport is a bit flobbady for me, anyway). In fact, as it turns out the V6 looses the sport suspension, because of the 17" wheels !
I had a v6 to 145K, FSH.
The fuel pump failed starving the injector system which subsequently broke. Reconditioning the Bosche injector unit plus new fuel pump was a £2K expense.
IIRC Mechanic informed me the v6 engine is liable to do this at 140-160K whilst the 1.9 engine at 110k ish.
If you are worried about a car being 'a bit flobbady' then I suggest you don't get a Passat, otherwise, yes the Sport is slightly better in this respect though not a patch on some of it's competitors in the driver satisfaction stakes. Yes, I could say Mondeo though, due to the risk of being shot down in flames, I won't.
As I said before what about the TDi 4-Motion? Rare though the best Passat.
I agree that the Passat isn't the sharpest handler - the A4 is clearly better - but I like the sports ride/comfort compromise - yes, the Mondeo is handles better, but the driving position is bad, and the interior ... well ... not very nice, looks like a Fiesta to me ...
Arnold2, I know you only asked for opinions of the two Passat variants you mentioned, but as an owner of a Passat Sport 1.9 TDi, I still feel it worth repeating the suggestion that you look at other alternatives unless you want to spend more money improving the handling of a Passat (aside from any potential reliability issues). That's unless you can get a Passat for a considerably better price than equivalent alternatives that should be at least as reliable, if not more so. I would consider a 320d, a 156, an A4/A6/Superb, a Mazda6, a higher-spec Mondeo, possibly an Accord or an Avensis, even a Rover 75!
I find the Passat adequate, no more - adequately swift, quite comfortable, less than satisfying to drive enthusiastically, etc.
Of course, if you really feel that a Passat is the only car for you, by all means ignore the above! And go for the 1.9, for reasons listed above, and spend £300 on a remap instead of on fuelling and servicing the thirstier engine.
Vroom, vroom - mmm, doughnuts ...
SAAB 9-5. Zero to 60 in 6.5 seconds. Top speed 155mph. Combined fuel consumption 32.1mpg. CO2 emissions 209g/km. BIK tax 2002-2003: £2,658.72 at 40%. Doesn't read like a Vectra, but it's amazing what you can do with one.