Afternoon all.
I am considering changing my car from a small renault Clio Diesel to an Audi A4 Avant. No I have not got Kids yet but just need a bigger car.
I am looking for the new style but want to know forum members views on semi high mileage diesels, either the 1.9 or 2.5. Are there any major problems with mileage over 85,000 that members know of. Anything to stay well away from either.
Your views are sought.
Many thanks.
|
Shoud not be any problem if vehicle srviced regulary and properly.
1.9 engine would be the better choice if things did go wrong
|
|
1.9 TDI engine must be in tens of millions of vehicles worldwide and has a great reputation.
|
I agree. In PD 130 guise, this is one of my favourite diesel engines. Responsive, almost unbelievably frugal, and based on the two highish mileage thus-equipped VW's in our family, pretty reliable too.
On paper, the 2.5 isn't actually much quicker and nowhere near as economical.
Cheers
DP
|
Not disagreeing with DP - I have the 110 non PD version and it's very peppy, much better than the HDi it replaced.
It doesn't have the possible expense related with the PD system. The only niggle is that it is timing belt rather than chain.
|
|
|
|
Agreed (I've just bought a car with one fitted) but this engine is a well known cambelt breaker. Change every 4 years regardless ( hydraulic tensioner and probably water pump at the same time) and within 80k miles if you're a high mileage driver. I would personally be happier with 4 years/40k knowing the stresses caused by the PD injectors.
The costs of this slightly negate the outstanding efficiency of these engines, but I've got 2 years to learn how to do it (NS installation, so front has to be pulled out).
659.
|
|
|
|
|
For all the reasons mentioned, the 1.9 is the logical choice, but I had a 2.5 and loved it. In my experience it was quite a bit faster and much more refined.amd effortless. It did 36 mpg in town, 45 on a long run, about 8-10 mpg less than the 1.9 Golf TDI estate which came before it.
Both will give you good service subject to the cambelt point already made - try both if you can and go wth your own priorities.
|
659FBE is right, this engine is a cambelt breaker. You may get a problematic car and won't know until the cam belt goes for the first time.
I personally wouldn't buy a high mileage diesel these days. Reconditioned fuel pump will be £500 for this model, plenty of bills of £1000 and more for diesels these days. Timing belt is a £400 job at Audi. Does the front still have to come off to get at the timing belt?
Get a petrol, you will get a better, newer car and save yourself in the long run. Soooooooooo many diesel engines meet there maker earlier than the rest of the car.
No-one factors in the likely cost of repairs to diesel engines in there financial plans, saving money is not all about MPG.
|
Given fair treatment, the PD engine is capable of huge mileages without trouble. As with any machine, get to know its weaknesses and address them to get the best out of it.
There is no fuel pump as such on the PD engine other than the tandem pump which is effectively a lift pump. The unit injectors are mostly reliable. In my case, I'll do my own cambelt change as I have time to learn the tricks. The front doesn't "come off"; you move it outwards on extended bolts to make room to do the work. Air con hoses and the like are long enough to do this - VW at least considered the problem.
If you go to a dealer, have a look at a Skoda agent - the Superb is an old Passat in drag.
659.
|
We've had two non-PD 110's to 130K. Timing belt/tensioner/water pump as already mentioned.
MAF is problematic.
Front suspension arms - dont bother with the cheapy replacements - they dont last.
economy varied between 47 for a full time quattro doing 7 mile commute and 55+ for 2wd doing 50 mile trips.
|
|
|
|
