![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:27 • Filed to: VW | ![]() | ![]() |
![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:31 |
|
YES!! Victory for the manual in published fuel economy, most cars nowadays are the other way around. Even though most drivers can thoroughly beat the EPA estimates with a manual transmission.
![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:33 |
|
Wow that 2.0 TSI is likely rated for mpg's when burning premium, making it much more expensive to ran than the 1.8...
Also, keeping the inline 5 in the line-up is an interesting choice, I am glad they did, but in all reality it is fairly redundant compared to the 1.8.
![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:35 |
|
They aren't keeping the 5 cylinder. The 1.8T replaces it.
The chart just is just to compare the incoming motor with the outgoing motor.
![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:44 |
|
ah gotcha. It could be interesting with a turbocharger. I imagine it is somewhat smoother than the I4? (I am not sure, never driven an I5).
![]() 08/07/2013 at 19:55 |
|
It's smoother than a 4 cylinder of the same size. However, because it has an odd number of cylinders, a 5 cylinder has end to end vibrations. So, it's a bit of a wash.
The 2.5TFSI in the RS3 and TT-RS are based on the 2.5L block (though everything else is different).
There's a Golf RS running around...Golf R with a custom built 2.5L from a Golf with a custom turbo system.
![]() 08/08/2013 at 01:48 |
|
I am sad to see the 2.5 20V go. My mom has a jetta with that engine, and it's a smooth and powerful plant. but, 1.3 seconds off the 0-60 time is damn impressive!
![]() 08/08/2013 at 02:41 |
|
My friend's wife has a 2.5 beetle. He likes the sounds it makes but finds it terribly slow.