150 ps or 240ps

[blakeley]

Hi All,
I’ve just had my weekly email on the most popular topics and this one was at the top of the list...
My first thought’s.. with a smile, This is going to open up that can of worms with a perfectly innocent question.
As always tho, some interesting views. Some very personal views and some very defensive views.
From me; well I think both units are up to the job. I say I think as I originally had a 150 in my head (but never driven), the test drive was a 204. I liked and that became my new choice.
If you can stretch to it go for the larger lump for the benefits the extra cost and larger lump brings, if you are unable, then stick with the 150. From all of the research I did before my test drive I decided that it is more than capable.
I don’t think you will be disappointed either way.

Enjoy....

Very condescending comment, I would choose the 150 for value for money, cheaper to buy and cheaper running costs, the same reason that I would not buy a TSI. It has nothing to do with my bank balance.

 

[B J G]

Very condescending comment, I would choose the 150 for value for money, cheaper to buy and cheaper running costs, the same reason that I would not buy a TSI. It has nothing to do with my bank balance.

Has the lower running costs been verified as yet?
Just wondering as the TSI has a £400 higher first road tax payment and I saw a quoted 24mpg figure mentioned.

I had to have a 204 as 4Motion and DSG were on must have list. 150 isn't an option on that configuration although if it had been I'd would have gone for the 150 due to mid range power is less stress on the mechanics.

 

[Shadrack]

My apologies,
I never intended to cause upset and rereading my post I can see a better choice of words could have been used.

I think I used those words as the extra cost was a consideration for me.

It was my intention to get across that both units are more than capeable.

Once again my apologies....

 

[Joker 1299]

Hi, my name is Steve and I’m a bhp addict. When ordering my van I couldn’t possibly have one with less bhp than my bike. Oh, wait; I guess that didn’t work. Oh well, never mind.

More bhp vicar?

 

[Digger]

Shadrack We all can make errors when posting on the forum and no harm done or intended by you. Your response is welcome and appreciated. Thank you

 

[B J G]

My apologies,
I never intended to cause upset and rereading my post I can see a better choice of words could have been used.

I think I used those words as the extra cost was a consideration for me.

It was my intention to get across that both units are more than capeable.

Once again my apologies....

personally see no reason to apologise, you ask a question and where it goes after that isn't your responsibility.

 

[blakeley]

Has the lower running costs been verified as yet?
Just wondering as the TSI has a £400 higher first road tax payment and I saw a quoted 24mpg figure mentioned.

Yes, averaging 48mpg so more than happy, not sure what your comments are re TSI as I said I would not touch a petrol

 

[B J G]

Yes, averaging 48mpg so more than happy, not sure what your comments are re TSI as I said I would not touch a petrol

I misread you comment, thought that you meant 150 & TSi both more cost effective than 204.
wrist slapping done,

 

[RodCouncil]

40mpg + combined from our once 140, it's running at about 170 from on the bluefin, overtakes are much easier in 3rd and 4th gear now.

 

[Ocean Spirit]

Very condescending comment, I would choose the 150 for value for money, cheaper to buy and cheaper running costs, the same reason that I would not buy a TSI. It has nothing to do with my bank balance.

I never read it that way. I thought it was a good post.

 

[Cheery Charlie]

I had a test drive in a 150 today and it felt more than adequate for the job. I currently drive a 184 Golf and a 252 Disco 4 and (given the dimensions) the Cali felt plenty powerful for use in the real world. The DSG box was maybe even a tad smoother than in the Golf - just miss the auto hold button !!!!

 

[Ocean Spirit]

just miss the auto hold button !!!!

Whats that?

 

[sidepod]

Yes, averaging 48mpg so more than happy, not sure what your comments are re TSI as I said I would not touch a petrol

48mpg? In a petrol Cali?

 

[blakeley]

48mpg? In a petrol Cali?

I think you would be lucky to get 28 MPG in a petrol

 

[Cheery Charlie]

Whats that?

It means you don't have to keep your foot on the brake pedal when your stopped in traffic. Car automatically held with no creep forward until accelerator is pressed.

 

[Ocean Spirit]

It means you don't have to keep your foot on the brake pedal when your stopped in traffic. Car automatically held with no creep forward until accelerator is pressed.

Ah like hill start assist but not for a second or 2 on a hill. Instead, similar effect non moving traffic?
So the alternative is to stick a DSG in park or handbrake on on a manual?
Alternatively, if you have't turned off the ECO stop start mode you wouldn't be looking to take your foot off the brake anyway I guess.
That sound right?

 

[Alain]

When flooring the pedal from standstill, I already get a lot of wheel spin and traction loss with the 150HP DSG. So I can’t imagine the 204HP being a lot ‘quicker’ from 0-50 in real life situations. With the DSG and adaptive cruise control you don’t need plenty of HP anyway

The only moments I felt I could use more power was when overtaking trucks on steep alpine passes. But is this worth 4000 euros? Also, the engine is more complex (2 turbo’s) so maybe less reliable like the previous 180HP version.

 

[Cheery Charlie]

[QUOTE="2020 freedom, post: 246418, member: 14816"
Alternatively, if you have't turned off the ECO stop start mode you wouldn't be looking to take your foot off the brake anyway I guess.
That sound right?[/QUOTE]

The Auto Hold works whether the STOP/START has kicked or not but I guess in a Cali if it has kicked in then you would still need to 'hold' it somehow or gravity would take over.

 

[WelshGas]

When flooring the pedal from standstill, I already get a lot of wheel spin and traction loss with the 150HP DSG. So I can’t imagine the 204HP being a lot ‘quicker’ from 0-50 in real life situations. With the DSG and adaptive cruise control you don’t need plenty of HP anyway

The only moments I felt I could use more power was when overtaking trucks on steep alpine passes. But is this worth 4000 euros? Also, the engine is more complex (2 turbo’s) so maybe less reliable like the previous 180HP version.

Hearsay as regards reliability. More than enough 140/150 have been mentioned with problems on this forum and elsewhere. That's all I'll say on the matter of reliability.

 

[soulstyledevon]

I have a 140bhp, would like a bit more mid range power, but otherwise it’s a very capable engine.
Definitely order another.

Over 50k in 5 years and it hasn’t used a drop of oil and I drive it very hard.
Not a single engine issue, so for me would order the same again.

 

[B J G]

It means you don't have to keep your foot on the brake pedal when your stopped in traffic. Car automatically held with no creep forward until accelerator is pressed.

Did it have an electrically operated handbrake?

 

[frenchie]

cruise control will do nothing to help pulling away. more torque is always useful, 320NM to 420NM is a big leap. you don't need to use it, but if its not there you cant. F

 

[RodCouncil]

I have a 140bhp, would like a bit more mid range power, but otherwise it’s a very capable engine.
Definitely order another.

Over 50k in 5 years and it hasn’t used a drop of oil and I drive it very hard.
Not a single engine issue, so for me would order the same again.

We went for a superchip bluefin, very nice mid range added

 

[sidepod]

With the DSG and adaptive cruise control you don’t need plenty of HP anyway

What?

 

[sidepod]

cruise control will do nothing to help pulling away. more torque is always useful, 320NM to 420NM is a big leap. you don't need to use it, but if its not there you cant. F

Cruise doesn’t activate below a pre determined min speed.