Volkswagen Scirocco Forum banner
1 - 20 of 65 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I know there are a few threads on this but I have the added consideration of it being a company car and the two cars attract quite different costs due to emmisions/car tax etc...

The long and short of it is that I would need to spend an extra £1000 PER YEAR to have the 2.0 over the 1.4 - and so it would be useful to hear from those that have tried both engines as to whether they think the 2.0 is worth an extra £3000 over 3 years.

I have tried the 2.0 DSG and it was obviously very nice, I am just off now to try the 1.4 to get a comparison. I have read all the reviews and I get the impression that the 1.4 is a great engine and only 0.8 slower to 60. Though I know there will be the people that say the 2.0 is the only choice. Given the £1000 per year extra, is this still true ?

I have a 1.8T cupra (180) at the moment and this gives me the power I need, the 1.4 would be very slightly slower than this, the 2.0 about 0.5s quicker.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
The 1.4TSI is a remarkable engine... I dont think it is available in GT spec though?

The DSG really impressed me - I wonder if I had the choice between a 2.0TSI manual or the 1.4TSI with DSG, would I have opted for the latter? I do not do enough miles to warrant the diesel. So as a company vehicle the 1.4GT DSG would have been a good choice - if GT was possible.

You do have a dilemma!

G.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
315 Posts
You are doing the best thing, which is to try the 1.4 TSI. Many people would be put off by the thought of a small capacity engine but when you try it I think you will be impressed. In my opinion the 1.4 TSI has more than adequate performance for most motorists' needs (and that is in no way a criticism of the 2.0 TSI which is a really quick car). In terms of extras, the 1.4 TSI has a good standard spec and I would not bother with much other than rear parking sensors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Please can you give a review of the test drive and your thoughts after it as I am in exactley the same situation.

Is the 2.0 worth the extra annual cost?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Ive not driven the 1.4 and to be honest don't really have much intention of doing so. The 2.0 is fantastic, especially since being remapped :D I would pay the 3k over 3 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Thanks for the comments so far, any other thoughts would be much appreciated.

Just got back from trying out the 1.4, they let me go out on my own for half an hour with the car which gave me a chance to get an idea how the engine performs compared to the 2.0 and my current car (1.8T cupra).

It is a great engine, with the twin charger I reckon it performs equivalent to a 1.8T. Yes, it is noticeable that its not quite got the umph of the 2.0T but not massively so and it gives me as much as I would need and still makes the scirocco great fun to drive. There was a tiny bit of lag but once thats out the way it pulls smoothly through the revs and you can just about feel that second kick as the supercharger kicks in.

With the situation I am in, doing it as a company car, I don't think I could justify paying an extra £1000 a year just for that little extra performance of the 2.0T.

What is a real shame is that they don't do it in in GT trim, can't understand why they don't. I have got used to having electronic climate control so would prob try and get that and maybe parking sensors and cruise control. And then theres the decision on what colour!

On a different not, tho its not for me, they has a viper green 2.0 in the showroom and they had painted the 18" interlagos wheels black and I reckon it looked great, maybe if I was 10 years younger!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
goodfella only you can choose, i never had that dilema as i could only order the 2.0 FSI last July :D

no regrets either
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
Somebody needs to get back down the dealers with a camera.... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
Goodfella said:
What is a real shame is that they don't do it in in GT trim, can't understand why they don't!
Probably to keep the costs down.
Adding a GT spec to the 1.4 would bring it even closer to the 2.0 price I guess, which would be pointless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
I have the same dilemma but I do a lot of motorway driving so I am going for the 2.0's better grunt in the 50mph to 80mph range. The 1.4's fuel consumption is very attractive though!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Just to let you know after a lot of unhelpful advice from my local dealers. The 1.4dsg will be released in the next 2 weeks.

Im going to be opting for this for my company car due to the great box and great co2, especially for a 40% tax payer!!!

Good luck in deciding!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Reassuring that someone else came to the same decision on fleet - 2.0GT all in post-tax was £1104 a year more than 1.4 for me. Can't justify it.

Has anyone else noticed how much the 1.4 blows apart the middle of the fleet market? The low tax band and high residual value is a real double whammy, especially if VW offer further support. Currently our fleet provider is pricing it the same as the 2.0L Volvo C30 in base trim and only a little more than the 2.2 diesel Civic in mid-range trim, despite it being £2k higher on list, a second faster to 60, cheaper to run (and much, much cooler) than both. Volvo have got to be gutted!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,088 Posts
For my tuppence worth VW could have easily not had any other variants other than the 2.0 Tsi and I would not have even noticed as I was 100% blinkered and knew from the outset that only the 2.0 Tsi would cut the mustard... although I fully intend to early terminate on the HP when the R20T or the (in my mind) inevitable Storm special edition hits the streets and that one will be for keeps.
 
1 - 20 of 65 Posts
Top