Trading in your VW TDI? What will be your next car

bizzle said:

This has been my experience with all gassers, in general, and why I now take claims like DieselMann99's of 40mpg trips with a grain of salt.
In my diesels I've just never really seen a huge dip in mpg when I'm traveling over 60mph whereas with all my gas cars the mileage efficiency drops significantly (and quickly) as speed and/or weight are increased.

Click to expand...

I have a 2016 GSW 1.8 TSI - my AVERAGE mpg has been 38.48 over 44k miles. Not 'computer' estimated. Refilled # of gallons and miles tracked every tank.

Our road trips consist of a loaded down wagon with camping and climbing gear (heavy enough that I added coil helper air bags) and we start from sea level, ending up at 4k to 10k feet depending on the destination. I set the cruise control for 74 mph on HWY 395 for much of those trips. Local short trips from the campsite to climbing also should hurt mpg. We usually average 40+ mpg roundtrip on those.

Key factors:
5spd manual GSW (outdoes the ATX from all reports I've read)
I've added underbody aero panels from hybrid/euro VWs
potential mpg helper: I run LC20 in the oil and RLI Bio-Syn in the fuel (used to keep the oil/gas systems in top shape, who knows if it actually does anything)
I drive smartly, but am not afraid to do a full-throttle pull to keep the engine exercised when available.

I'd love to see how a 1.4T GSW would do with the same conditions. Possibly a 10% increase?

Anyways, these 5spd TSIs are underrated for EPA mileage. Very easy to exceed.

Just another data point

Well then the poor mileage I experienced seems to have clearly been my driving style. That's probably because the 1.4s I drove felt anemic, but a stick might have ameliorated that. I wasn't willing to downgrade all the way to an S for a stick so I didn't test drive any.

bizzle said:

Well then the poor mileage I experienced seems to have clearly been my driving style. That's probably because the 1.4s I drove felt anemic,

Click to expand...

IIRC, the 0-60 time on the TSI is significantly better than the TDI. Something like 7.6 secs vs 9.0 secs.

DieselMann99 said:

IIRC, the 0-60 time on the TSI is significantly better than the TDI. Something like 7.6 secs vs 9.0 secs.

Click to expand...

0-60 numbers don't really describe how the car feels in daily driving. My '97 Passat has got to be one of the slowest cars on the road, but it doesn't feel it because of the low end torque.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

0-60 numbers don't really describe how the car feels in daily driving. My '97 Passat has got to be one of the slowest cars on the road, but it doesn't feel it because of the low end torque.

Click to expand...

I totally understand. I own a Passat TSI, formerly had a 2013 Jetta TDI, and just bought a 2013 Jetta TDI for my son. I've driven both TDI and TSI plenty of miles. The difference is clear to me . . . crystal.

DieselMann99 said:

IIRC, the 0-60 time on the TSI is significantly better than the TDI. Something like 7.6 secs vs 9.0 secs.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the 2016 jetta 1.4 tsi has a 0-60 of 8.4 seconds vs the 9 seconds for the 2015 jetta tdi. Feeling quick and being quick are different things. Neither of these cars are quick(by today's standards). Here's an interesting article where the jetta 1.4 tsi returned 41.5 mpg highway during testing:

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/jetta/2016/2016-volkswagen-jetta-14t-first-test-review/

DieselMann99 said:

IIRC, the 0-60 time on the TSI is significantly better than the TDI. Something like 7.6 secs vs 9.0 secs.

Click to expand...

It's 8.4 seconds for a 2015 GSW TDI, but regardless as IndigoBlueWagon pointed out the feel of a car's quickness shouldn't be boiled down to that number. C&D had a similar experience to mine when testing the 1.4 Golf TSI:

"It is as exhilarating as it is deceptive, producing the sort of endorphin release that consistently makes us forget what happened immediately prior, which was, well, nothing. If you want to know why the Golf finishes second, blame its throttle response, which has all the urgency of Wolfsburg answering its mail from the EPA.

From a standing stop, the VW is at its worst. The transmission is as dimwitted as the throttle is recalcitrant. After depressing the accelerator, the driver (and the turbo) is left waiting far too long for either one to respond."

Incidentally the 1.4 Golf tested out at 29mpg combined whereas the TDI was 34mpg.
https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-volkswagen-golf-tsi-page-2

bizzle said:

As you hopefully remember from your diesel days, you got ~38 mpg regardless of how many people were the car, how much luggage you were hauling around, and regardless of how (reasonably) fast you drove--even if it was over the speed limit.

That is, driving around 65mph in your gasser is reported to be netting you ~38 mpg but as soon as you go up a hill, load up the weight, or just press that throttle aggressively (even simply passing someone) and the mileage plummets.

Click to expand...

My experience and almost 350k of fuel logs across five different diesels (a 3.0, two ALHs, a turbo Mercedes, and an old non-turbo Golf) do not match this. They show seasonal effects, speed effects, and hauling effects. The only one that seemed to mostly shrug them off was the Golf, but that was because you were using full power nearly all the time anyway.

Well hopefully it's obvious to everyone else we're talking about the cars relevant to this thread: the common rail diesels involved in dieselgate that people are thinking about keeping or turning in.

If you try and apply that mileage estimate to 20 year old cars, other manufacturers, or semis, then you will probably be confused why I made that statement. I'll take the hit for not making that clear to readers, but I did think it obvious that I wasn't saying every single diesel that has ever been on the road only gets 38 mpg regardless of circumstances :/

What I'm saying is that my 3.0 absolutely got different mileage based on speed and load, and it was consistent with other diesel cars I have owned. So I'm not sure where your claim that diesels don't change MPG based on those things is coming from.

If I misunderstood your claim, my apologies.

All cars get different mileage based on speed and load. Some vary more than others. In my experience ALH TDIs vary less than most cars. Having said that, I have managed to get 18 MPG in my ALH during track days.

flargabarg said:

What I'm saying is that my 3.0 absolutely got different mileage based on speed and load, and it was consistent with other diesel cars I have owned. So I'm not sure where your claim that diesels don't change MPG based on those things is coming from.

If I misunderstood your claim, my apologies.

Click to expand...

The point wasn't that the vehicles have a static MPG, it's that our vehicles get at least that and you have to really beat on them to get less than that. The older ones, at least mine, have even better mileage numbers.

I was comparing that to the gas Jetta's 38mpg that seems to be at peak operating efficiency.

In the example we were discussing I get 38 and he gets 38. I was pointing out that the TDIs get 38 and up, whereas the gassers are up to 38.

I don't know about that. My tdi can get worse than 38 mpg under the right conditions (high speed, high load, cold weather). And I've done better than 38 mpg in a tsi.

I know it's the economics of fuel consumption that is of most interest to most of us here, but it's worth noting that a gallon of diesel is 12-15% more carbon/energy dense than a gallon of gasoline.

I have beat 40 mpg is a gasser without really thinking about it. Hybrids have actually changed the game quite a bit as they get rid of some of the worse operating characteristics of gasoline engineers. I think the diesel advantage for passenger cars is much smaller than it used to be.

Diesels are still fun though. My Touareg brought me many more grins than the gas version. Nothing compared to electric! That torque is absurd.

Thanks for clarifying. It makes more sense now.

flargabarg said:

Nothing compared to electric! That torque is absurd.

Click to expand...

Not familiar with electric at all, but I've spoken to several Tesla owners who all say that the acceleration is phenomenal.

So, do electric motors develop more torque just by their very nature? And if so, why?

Electric motors develope max torque from zero rpm is my understanding.

truman said:

Electric motors develop max torque from zero rpm is my understanding.

Click to expand...

Just did a little Googling -- you're exactly right. Electric motors are always at 100% max torque irrespective of rpm. No wonder they deliver such great acceleration. I'm gonna do a little more reading up on it.

Thank you for that.

DieselMann99 said:

Just did a little Googling -- you're exactly right. Electric motors are always at 100% max torque irrespective of rpm. No wonder they deliver such great acceleration. I'm gonna do a little more reading up on it.

Thank you for that.

Click to expand...

They usually start to taper the torque off once max power is reached. On a performance model S that happens at about 25 mph.

turbobrick240 said:

I love my tdi too. Which is why I'm holding onto it until the very last days before the Dec. 30 buyback deadline. What makes Fuelly such a useful tool is that it draws from a MUCH larger data set than a single (or couple) driver could ever achieve. Well, with the possible exception of Irv Gordon, RIP. More data gives better accuracy. I posted this link up today in another thread, but it also fits well here :

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/01/volkswagens-1-4-tsi-best-small-car-base

Click to expand...

I'm turning in my JSW TDI on Thursday - I had planned to turn it in on 12/27, but I got a free apartment in NYC over the holidays just for some light dog sitting, and couldn't turn it down.

So....after Thursday, I'll be sharing a car with my 2 kids until I replace it. If I don't get one on Saturday of this coming week, I'm out until 12/30 - so I really have until 1/13 to when I won't have ANY car available to me.

I've been looking at some larger vehicles or compact crossovers - everything from the Ford Edge ST (330HP!) to the Mazda CX-5 Signature, Honda CR-V, Subaru Forester, and even the Cadillac XT4 - but the Subaru and Honda both have CVTs, which I hate driving. The Cadillac is pricey....and will likely depreciate like a rock.

The Ford Edge ST is attractive, but fully loaded it's close to 50K. Dealers are getting full sticker for the Mazda (and even gouging)....so I decided to see what an '18 Alltrack is going for - and with some of the incentives, I may be able to go from my '14 JSW TDI to an '18 Alltrack SEL.....for only the tax/tags/title cost.

At the end of the day, I LIKE how my JSW drives and handles, and the new features (Apple Carplay, active safety features and Park Assist), plus AWD may keep me in the VW family.

Now, I wonder if a performance chip might be fun......

turbobrick240 said:

They usually start to taper the torque off once max power is reached. On a performance model S that happens at about 25 mph.

Click to expand...

They usually have three phases. At low speeds they are basically full torque, with power rising as speed rises. Then they are power limited for a range of speed, usually by the power electronics or battery. Then at the highest speeds they are limited by the magnetics in the motor, or by total ability to remove heat from the electronics, battery, or inverter. On a well designed vehicle they tend to hit all the limits at once.

It's neat stuff, and totally different than what we are used to with combustion engines. The really neat part is how quickly you can change power output, which makes some very cool stuff available for traction control.

Yeah, a lot of the torque delivery is determined by the power electronics. As a recent model S owner you must be loving the mountains of torque. Congrats!

I'm kind of an electro nerd, because I also have a Zero SR, and am building an electric dirt bike from scratch. One of the things I have learned is that the motors have enough torque to break other things. It's like turbocharging a gasoline car, you start breaking stuff that you don't even expect to break.

Finally handed over our 2014 Passat SEL - sad to see it go. Would have liked to have kept it, but the economics were too compelling. Buying out car back at fair market value was not possible at any of the local dealers, so we found a 2015 Passat SEL with fewer miles. It was a CPO, so extensively inspected and has a 2 year warranty. The 2015 engine seems a little “smoother,” but otherwise the car is the same. I will miss topside oil changes.

We chose to continue enjoying the low end torque and great fuel economy for awhile longer and hopefully many relatively trouble free miles like our 2014.

I got the fix and 12K for my '10 TDI Touareg. I could not bring myself to get rid of it since no one has anything else I want. I could have got 33K for buy back, but I already owned my Treg. Plus it was the last year for low range and air suspension. Fix didn't seem to even change much on it to be honest. Still runs like it did before the fix as far as I can tell.

Took the buy back on my 2010 Golf TDI with 175k miles in the summer.

Picked-up a 2015 manual Golf Sportwagen TDI with 15k miles in December.

Electric motors are like steam engines....full torque at zero RPM. So great acceleration.

I went from a 2010 Golf TDI to a 2017 eGolf. It’s been an adjustment but the eGolf is a great car.

I loved my TDI and making the decision to sell it back to VW was difficult. Worries about the long term effects of modifications on an already complicated and somewhat fragile emissions system combined with doubts about VW’s commitment to the extended warranty ultimately tipped me towards the buy-back.

slk23 said:

I went from a 2010 Golf TDI to a 2017 eGolf. It’s been an adjustment but the eGolf is a great car.

I loved my TDI and making the decision to sell it back to VW was difficult. Worries about the long term effects of modifications on an already complicated and somewhat fragile emissions system combined with doubts about VW’s commitment to the extended warranty ultimately tipped me towards the buy-back.

Click to expand...

Not a bad reason at all.

How’s the “e” driving experience?

Converted my 94 hybrid bicycle to battery assist this weekend. Battery torque is amazing. I can see my next car being a hybrid of some sort. An Alltrack 1.4 hybrid would be an interesting platform.

elcid86 said:

Not a bad reason at all.
How’s the “e” driving experience?

Click to expand...

Compared to the 2010 Golf TDI the e-Golf is quieter and feels quicker and more refined. Some of that is Mk7 vs. Mk6 and some due to the electric powertrain. The e-Golf also has a slightly softer suspension which is nice for city driving.
Things I miss the TDI: it was lighter and nimbler, had a 600+ mile range, and had more character/quirkiness.
Things I like better about the e-Golf: more relaxing to drive in freeway traffic and on city streets, no complicated emissions system to worry about, effortless acceleration.