VW T5 California Engine Power difference

[bmassaer]

Hello all,

I am new to this forum - right now we are considering to buy a VW t5 California, build in 2007. I was wondering about the engine power: it "only" has 78 kw which is 106 pk. We are slow drivers, but would this power be enough to pull this camper through our holidays?
Is there a huge difference with a California, build in 2010 with 103 kw (= 140 pk)?

Thank you for this information,

Bart

 

[yanathem]

I have a 2007 california se with the 130bhp engine it has more than enough power than i will ever need for a camper van. And if required there is always the option to get it retuned.
Is it not the idea of owning a camper van a bit of looking good going slow.

 

[ChrisandPenney52]

Agree. The 130 is more than adequate. Good for 90mph cruising on the Autobahns, never any problem climbing, including alpine and Pyrenean journeys, good acceleration for joining motorways. You'll be fine.

 

[Mark Thomas]

I currently have a 114 HP on order here in Denmark (delivery January) after some time researching, especially in this most helpful Forum and a similar French one (thanks, all); also with eyes open about the fact that 114 in UK is, I believe, for the lighter Beach (not available in DK).

There was a price difference of c. £5K c.f. the 140 which was perhaps the biggest influencer, but I'm exepcting to nudge the speed limit - at least in UK. I hear the Cali gearchange is reputedly good, which will be important at times on hills. Obviously I am conditioning expectations accordingly since 140> 114. But in essence, I can't wait to get my hands on it.

You see quite a lot of Calis for sale in UK with as little as 82ps commanding good prices and that tells us something about 106 being just fine. So, I'll see you on the road - but maybe not so often in the fast lane.

 

[bmassaer]

All right... thank you for those answers. In fact, we bought this camper this afternoon. So right now I am really excited to be the proud owner of a California!!!

 

[ChrisandPenney52]

Is the 2007 a UK spec model? I didn't know they did anything less than a 130 at that time

 

[zeratul]

Hi, I'm looking at the same engine.

Here in Belgium the 114HP is labeled BMT "BlueMotion". The other engine versions are not, but you can order the option "Bluemotion Technology" on all models.
I'm confused. CO2 and consumption of the 84/102hp and 114hp BMT are all equal.

Dealer told me there is a difference between Bluemotion Technology and Bluemotion model (which may have aerdynamic changes, lower suspension, ...). But I'm confused why it doesn't reflect in the consumption figures. What do you get extra on this engine version besides the extra hp? It's the same engine, so I'm considering to order an 84 or 102 hp and tune it to 114 or a bit higher.

 

[bigeric]

We have a 140 BMT auto. The main difference with the BMT is the Autostop feature that stops the engine when the van is stationary. The engine starts as soon as you release the foot brake. We get 37.9 MPG.

 

[zeratul]

Yesterday I test drove the 114bhp and the 140bhp.
I currently drive a BMW X3 184bhp so I am used to some power and acceleration.

I must say I can live with the 114's power. Okay, the van wasn't fully loaded and I didn't test it in the mountains. But I was test driving to see if I would find it acceptable for daily driving to and from work, with the kids etc. When i go on holiday, I try not to be too stressed.

The 140 on the other hand felt more powerfull in 2nd and 3rd gear.
If I buy a California (to be decided, heaviliy taxed and expensive..) my plan is to buy a 114 or even a 84bhp and chip to 178bhp for just €350.
I'm told that the all cars up to 140bhp are completely equal (except gearbox) but electronically limited. So it makes sense to chiptune them (and void warranty).

But the test drive also reminded me how much safer a 4x4 feels compared to FWD. I am so used to BMW's x-drive and with a van you'll clearly have to be carefull on rainy or snowy days.

 

[KernowLad]

You can get a 4WD California though!