Skoda Octavia advice please

hartcjhart

which is the better engine,1.9 or 2.0 diesel

marmitedog

Better for what? Engines have a number of performance criteria which each person will rank differently.

Generally, the PD (1.9) unit is simpler then the common rail unit. The PD is also less refined. MPG is similar, but depends on the tune of each engine. Octavia has 90, 105, 130,140 and 170 variants I recall.

harveybobbles

The 2.0 has the DPF...

hartcjhart

marmitedog wrote: »

Better for what? Engines have a number of performance criteria which each person will rank differently.

Generally, the PD (1.9) unit is simpler then the common rail unit. The PD is also less refined. MPG is similar, but depends on the tune of each engine. Octavia has 90, 105, 130,140 and 170 variants I recall.

yep,agreed,I am enquiring for a friend. all I can compare is the difference between the old pug 1.4 annd 1.5 engines both vitually the same mpg,but the extra 100cc made a fair difference on power

ukjoel

The 1.9 is an older slightly more industrial engine often used in taxis and more taxis.

Its runs well, has good fuel consumption and is cheap to buy and run. Its a good engine and does the job nicely. Its the biggest selling engine in the Octavia in the UK at the moment.


The 2 litre comes in different variants but the 140 is older and more industrial (similar to 1.9 but with more poke)

The 170 is a newer engine found inside the vRS octavia and also the superb. It may now be available on other octavia but wasnt last time I looked. Its a thing of beauty that purrs at you and if combined with the DSG auto box can knock out performances that a sub 20k car shouldnt be thought possible of doing.

People often say the police drive those but they tend to go for the 200 bhp petrol engine instead.

Also worth a look at the petrol engines as they are very new to Skoda (and rest of vw group) I tried the 1.4 in the Superb expecting it to be laughably underpowered and was convinced they had given me the wrong car to the point of 3 of us pulling over and opening up the boot to check.

My vote would be the 170 but all are good solid engines from the VW group stable.

nick74

harveybobbles wrote: »

The 2.0 has the DPF...

Only those in the 4x4/Scout and the VRS models had a DPF.
The rest of the range used a 2.0 PD engine without a DPF.

bigjl

From what I have heard and experienced, though only for a few months on a new shape Passat. Is the the older 1.9PD is a little noisier, but has better throttle response when pulling away from standstill than the 2.0, this can be solved with a remap, though strangely several of my mates have had vehicles with the 2.0 engine and found the fuel economy worse than the 1.9, at least in the 110 and 115 pd specs. Resulting in one bloke having his remapped, he bought it on finance, and the other sold his and bought an old shape Vectra (52) with the 2.0 DTi engine in it, result 10mpg better.

I personally prefer the 1.9 pd engine, they are also proven, but need a specific oil to prevent top end wear.

alleycat`

Assuming they are the same engine (as vw stable).

the 1.9 130bhp (2003-2007) i had in a passat was execllent both for power, delivery and fuel consumption.
the 2.0 litre (2007/2008) 140bhp i had in a leon felt more slugish and produced slightly worse fuel consumption than the 1.9 did in the passat.

Both of the above were PD units.

The 1.9 is noisier on start up and used more oil initially (stopped doing it after about 12K miles).

Personally i think VW's build quality has tanked over the last few years for internal fit & finish but the engines seem to be pretty decent.

BillScarab

I had a 1.9 PD Octavia estate with 105 HP for three years. It was an excellent car and had very good fuel economy. I could get it upt to about 65mpg if I was careful but generally it was more like 47-50 ish. At the same time a colleague has a 140 2.0 PD and to be honest in everyday driving there wasn't a lot in it. The 2.0 was probably a bit smoother but it tended to return slightly worse MPG. There wasn't alot in it really unless you like dumping the clutch and doing full throttle starts or driving above 100 MPH.

EDIT: Just to say that in the three years I ran it I did about 45,000 miles and it only ever went to the garage for servicing, tyres and a replacement windscreen due to a stone chip.