If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
JB³ wrote:
> > I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in a > manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around > 10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This would > be adequate, although faster yet would be better. > > Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the > horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to > compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think > about. Any info is greatly appreciated. > > jb I can't answer your question about "chipping" the TDI, but if you buy the car, you may well find that the Passat TDI will have adequate merging acceleration in stock form. I have a Jetta TDI wagon. Even with its manual transmission, it is probably little if any quicker 0-60 than the Passat with the autobox. When I bought the car, I thought I might feel the need to make it faster, but I have found that it does just fine stock. I won't win many drag races, but I have plenty of power to merge with traffic, and plenty of power to cruise comfortably at 80mph. Maybe you have more of a "need for speed" than I do, but you might be surprised at how well a "stock" TDI will do. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
2005 Passat TDI
I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in a
manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around 10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think about. Any info is greatly appreciated. jb |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
0-60 is misleading... The diesels aren't bad at all for merging - I've never
had trouble getting on the highway with my 4 speed automatic 90hp Golf - even with 5 people and baggage... Look up the 30-50mph passing times they shouldn't be too bad. I have the powerbox in my Golf TDI now, and it improves things nicely... chipping is even better. I can keep up with a Pumpe Duese 5 speed Jetta in flat out acceleration (we went up to around 80-90kph - as it was an 80kph zone... and ~90-95ish is the normal traffic speed for the neighborhood we were in... I was slightly ahead due to his ESP/ASR kicking in initially... but I can't rev up my engine so I'd say takeoff is fairly equal) It sounds like you haven't taken the car on a test drive, I would suggest one... numerical performance of the diesels is fairly misleading Maybe a V6 is the better option for you too - or the 1.8T gasoline engine... Not as good fuel economy though, but you have to sacrifice performance for fuel savings. And merging with traffic should be something you think about - I'm sick of getting stuck behind the 90% of drivers who don't merge at more then 70kph by the end of the very long onramps around here... They aren't thinking about the people behind them, or the trucks that have to put the brakes on for them... (BTW I know what you really meant by not having to think about it, you meant not have to worry about not having adequate speed) "JB³" > wrote in message news:8lgdd.3519$7d7.3402@trnddc04... >I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in >a manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around >10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This >would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. > > Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the > horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to > compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think > about. Any info is greatly appreciated. > > jb > |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"JB³" > wrote in message
news:8lgdd.3519$7d7.3402@trnddc04... >I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in >a manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around >10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This >would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. > >Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the >horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to >compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think >about. Any info is greatly appreciated. 0-60 in 10.x seconds isn't all that slow. I think most of us would classify, say, an '85 Golf 1.8 8V 85hp 1.8 as reasonably peppy (though hardly a sports car) and that car did 0-60 in about that time when it came out. Yes the Passat TDI is slower than a gas-powered Passat and compared to midsize sedans in general it's slower, but I don't think 0-60 in just over 10 seconds puts one in the "gotta think about it first" category. I also wonder if that 0-60 figure you mentioned is with the transmission shifting itself or if you might be able to do better with the Tiptronic and shifting the gears yourself. Also, I'm not sure what the passing power is like on a Passat TDI but often times the 60-80 time for a diesel might be far quicker than the 0-60 time would lead one to expect. For example, Car and Driver about a year ago I think it was tested a Euro-spec Chrysler PT Cruiser with a diesel engine and it was far quicker at passing speeds than the 2.0 gas counterpart even though the 2.0 gasser was quicker 0-60. I rented a PT Cruiser back in '01 and found that it was indeed rather weak in 60-80mph passing times so the diesel doing so much better was impressive. I don't remember the numbers but it was something impressive (making this up for example's sake) like 60-80mph was 6.5 seconds for the gas engine and 4 seconds for the diesel. Something like that...it was quite a big difference. FWIW I looked on the UK site and the 130hp Passat TDI there with a 5-speed is listed as 0-62mph as 9.9 seconds...not that much quicker than the auto version...so you aren't losing that much to the automatic. I do wish we could get the 5-speed here though only because I like to stir my own gears anyway. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Yes I do need to take it for a test drive. I wanted a 4Motion 1.8 man. but
with 160 mile commute each day, I'll do without the unavail. manual, and 4Motion for a TDI. I know the gas mileage difference is slight on highway, but I sure like the exclusitivity of a TDI with possible outcomes of 38-45 mpg. Noise of a diesel?? I LOVE it. Speed freak?, yes but not for racing, only on the Interstate with light traffic to make good time. jb |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Matt B." > wrote in message news:Hajdd.72075$cJ3.18128@fed1read06... > "JB³" > wrote in message > news:8lgdd.3519$7d7.3402@trnddc04... >>I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in >>a manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around >>10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This >>would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. >> >>Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the >>horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to >>compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think >>about. Any info is greatly appreciated. > > 0-60 in 10.x seconds isn't all that slow. I think most of us would > classify, say, an '85 Golf 1.8 8V 85hp 1.8 as reasonably peppy (though > hardly a sports car) and that car did 0-60 in about that time when it came > out. > > Yes the Passat TDI is slower than a gas-powered Passat and compared to > midsize sedans in general it's slower, but I don't think 0-60 in just over > 10 seconds puts one in the "gotta think about it first" category. I also > wonder if that 0-60 figure you mentioned is with the transmission shifting > itself or if you might be able to do better with the Tiptronic and > shifting the gears yourself. > > Also, I'm not sure what the passing power is like on a Passat TDI but > often times the 60-80 time for a diesel might be far quicker than the 0-60 > time would lead one to expect. For example, Car and Driver about a year > ago I think it was tested a Euro-spec Chrysler PT Cruiser with a diesel > engine and it was far quicker at passing speeds than the 2.0 gas > counterpart even though the 2.0 gasser was quicker 0-60. I rented a PT > Cruiser back in '01 and found that it was indeed rather weak in 60-80mph > passing times so the diesel doing so much better was impressive. I don't > remember the numbers but it was something impressive (making this up for > example's sake) like 60-80mph was 6.5 seconds for the gas engine and 4 > seconds for the diesel. Something like that...it was quite a big > difference. > > FWIW I looked on the UK site and the 130hp Passat TDI there with a 5-speed > is listed as 0-62mph as 9.9 seconds...not that much quicker than the auto > version...so you aren't losing that much to the automatic. I do wish we > could get the 5-speed here though only because I like to stir my own gears > anyway. OK, now that is what I wanted to hear !!! I figured with all that torque it should feel just like what you described about 60-80mph "passing times". I am going from a 17 mpg SUV to probably a Passat TDI. Needless to say, I'm excited. What is it going to take to have VW offer it with 4Motion and a six speed manual ??? jb |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
It was Car and Driver... I have that article... The Mercedes diesel was
faster at pretty much everything then the 3.2L V6 gasoline. My Uncle's new BMW (I think it's a 7 series as that is what he typically used to buy- btw he's in Germany) has the diesel engine in it and it's faster then the base gas version - and a hell of a lot cheaper to run... he says it's great on the autobahn, only a little slower at top speed. "Matt B." > wrote in message news:Hajdd.72075$cJ3.18128@fed1read06... > "JB³" > wrote in message > news:8lgdd.3519$7d7.3402@trnddc04... >>I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in >>a manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around >>10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This >>would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. >> >>Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the >>horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to >>compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think >>about. Any info is greatly appreciated. > > 0-60 in 10.x seconds isn't all that slow. I think most of us would > classify, say, an '85 Golf 1.8 8V 85hp 1.8 as reasonably peppy (though > hardly a sports car) and that car did 0-60 in about that time when it came > out. > > Yes the Passat TDI is slower than a gas-powered Passat and compared to > midsize sedans in general it's slower, but I don't think 0-60 in just over > 10 seconds puts one in the "gotta think about it first" category. I also > wonder if that 0-60 figure you mentioned is with the transmission shifting > itself or if you might be able to do better with the Tiptronic and > shifting the gears yourself. > > Also, I'm not sure what the passing power is like on a Passat TDI but > often times the 60-80 time for a diesel might be far quicker than the 0-60 > time would lead one to expect. For example, Car and Driver about a year > ago I think it was tested a Euro-spec Chrysler PT Cruiser with a diesel > engine and it was far quicker at passing speeds than the 2.0 gas > counterpart even though the 2.0 gasser was quicker 0-60. I rented a PT > Cruiser back in '01 and found that it was indeed rather weak in 60-80mph > passing times so the diesel doing so much better was impressive. I don't > remember the numbers but it was something impressive (making this up for > example's sake) like 60-80mph was 6.5 seconds for the gas engine and 4 > seconds for the diesel. Something like that...it was quite a big > difference. > > FWIW I looked on the UK site and the 130hp Passat TDI there with a 5-speed > is listed as 0-62mph as 9.9 seconds...not that much quicker than the auto > version...so you aren't losing that much to the automatic. I do wish we > could get the 5-speed here though only because I like to stir my own gears > anyway. > |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Rob Guenther" > wrote in message
. .. > It was Car and Driver... I have that article... The Mercedes diesel was > faster at pretty much everything then the 3.2L V6 gasoline. Ah yes I remember that. The cars in the test were the E320 diesel, PT Cruiser Diesel, and some VW (either the T-reg V10 TDI or a Jetta TDI). The E320 was the one that was the most impressive in terms of out-doing its gas counterpart in the number of areas that it outperformed it. The E320 diesel was for sure an impressive car. IIRC didn't it still return something like 40-45 mpg in testing while still outperforming the gas version? Well, all diesels in the article were impressive but the E was the most impressive overall. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I found the article: numbers listed are diesel/gasoline
For the Mercedes HP: 201/221 Torque: 369/232 0-60: 6.4/7.4 0-100: 18.1/19.7 0-120: 38.5/33.0 1/4 mile: 14.9@93 / 15.8@90 5-60: 7.3/7.8 30-50 (top gear): 3.3/3.8 50-70 (top gear): 4.5/5.4 top speed: 149aero-gearing/131governed Idle dB: 44/42 Full Throttle: 72/76 70mph cruising 69/69 Fuel Economy: 25 city, 44 hwy, 34 combined cycle... C/D observed 28mpg... only one less then the I-4 PT cruiser Fuel Economy for the gas... 16(ouch) city, 31hwy, 24 combined, C/D observed 22mpg And the big Audi A8 is even more impressive... less so on fuel economy but 156mph top speed, and very fast times for all the clocked runs... and I've seen a video from Britain of that very Audi getting 800 Miles to one tank of fuel... tho the engine was sputtering by the end of it... The driver was trying to get fuel economy so all electrical was off, not going above 1200rpm or so... and so on. "Matt B." > wrote in message news:Cfndd.72137$cJ3.64313@fed1read06... > "Rob Guenther" > wrote in message > . .. >> It was Car and Driver... I have that article... The Mercedes diesel was >> faster at pretty much everything then the 3.2L V6 gasoline. > > Ah yes I remember that. The cars in the test were the E320 diesel, PT > Cruiser Diesel, and some VW (either the T-reg V10 TDI or a Jetta TDI). > The E320 was the one that was the most impressive in terms of out-doing > its gas counterpart in the number of areas that it outperformed it. The > E320 diesel was for sure an impressive car. IIRC didn't it still return > something like 40-45 mpg in testing while still outperforming the gas > version? Well, all diesels in the article were impressive but the E was > the most impressive overall. > |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
JB³ wrote:
> I am planning to get a new Passat TDI. I hate the fact I can not get it in > a manual trans. The performance with an auto is poor. 0-60 stock is around > 10.2 sec. If I chip it, can the 0-60 times drop to around 8 sec.? This > would be adequate, although faster yet would be better. > > Just curious how much improvement just a chip can do. I know the > horsepower/torque gains, but I want some 0-60 times or 1/4 mile times to > compare to. Merging with traffic shouldn't be something you have to think > about. Any info is greatly appreciated. > > jb Our '04 Passat TDI sedan will spin the tires easily from a stop, and has that great diesel "pull" at highway speeds. It frequently doesn't have to downshift at 45-55 going to 65+, it just goes. Never a problem merging. My wife always drives it and she loves it because she's a leadfoot. Even so, she still gets about 30mpg, mostly in-town. Highway we get 45+. Very nice car to drive. -- Wake |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2005 545i vs 2005 A6 4.2 | Seth Brundle | BMW | 34 | February 22nd 05 02:32 PM |
2005 S4 Cab | Flyboy | Audi | 0 | November 23rd 04 07:35 PM |
Passat or New Passat? | Jeff Bailey | VW water cooled | 11 | October 16th 04 06:33 PM |
buying bmw 325 (2005 vs 2006) | Ruwan | BMW | 2 | September 19th 04 11:27 PM |
2005 S4 Cabriolet Newbie | Ramzi Nassar | Audi | 4 | August 7th 04 10:35 PM |