Mini review.
in [Tuning]
|
From: JackH on 25 Feb 2010 16:34 On Feb 25, 9:25 pm, Chris Bartram <n...(a)delete-me.piglet-net.net> wrote: > JackH wrote: > > Not so with the current one, which is a 90bhp. > > > When the MAF played up on that, it felt like it kept cutting the turbo > > in and out fairly violently, and you'd end up going up a hill and just > > maintaining your speed rather than making any progress. > > Well, my MAF wasn't utterly fucked- no fault codes or CEL, it just gave > a low output on VCDS logging. Car felt *much* faster with a new one though. FWIW, they rarely throw up any fault codes when they go, and I've seen them where the car has been more like you described, as in it just seems to lose its edge power wise rather than act like above. -- JackH
From: Steve Firth on 25 Feb 2010 16:42 JackH <jackhackettuk(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > On Feb 25, 9:15 pm, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: > > JackH <jackhacket...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > On Feb 25, 7:04 pm, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: > > > > JackH <jackhacket...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > It's smooth, comfortable, quiet, costs 125 a year to tax, and as I've > > > > > already said, pulls from sod all cleanly right through the rev range > > > > > with none of the 'narrow power band' issues some diesels seem to be > > > > > saddled with. > > > > > > I had one of those Mk4 Golf TDis and ran it for two years from new. > > > > Experience tells me that you're deluding yourself. > > > > > Experience tells me you're either exaggerating about how bad the one > > > you had was, or you actually had one with issues. > > > > > What model / BHP was it? > > > > It was a red one. Other than that who GAF? It was a Golf, and an estate, > > and a diesel. The three most boring things on the face of the planet. > > Bored again, I see... Bored of VAG shite, yes. Ford actually make more interesting cars. I mena look at you in other parts of this thread getting worked up about 130bhp. That's umm 90bhp less than the slowest of my vehicles.
From: Adrian on 25 Feb 2010 16:55 %steve%@malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > I mena look at you in other parts of this thread getting worked up about > 130bhp. That's umm 90bhp less than the slowest of my vehicles. Pfft. It's about the same as four of mine.
From: AstraVanMann on 25 Feb 2010 18:18 "Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote: > they were saying: > >> I mena look at you in other parts of this thread getting worked up about >> 130bhp. That's umm 90bhp less than the slowest of my vehicles. > > Pfft. It's about the same as four of mine. Can I mention that my van surely wins the prize for lowest bhp/tonne? -- "For want of the price of tea and a slice, the old man died."
From: JackH on 25 Feb 2010 18:26
On Feb 25, 9:42 pm, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: > JackH <jackhacket...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > On Feb 25, 9:15 pm, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: > > > JackH <jackhacket...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > On Feb 25, 7:04 pm, %ste...(a)malloc.co.uk (Steve Firth) wrote: > > > > > JackH <jackhacket...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > > It's smooth, comfortable, quiet, costs 125 a year to tax, and as I've > > > > > > already said, pulls from sod all cleanly right through the rev range > > > > > > with none of the 'narrow power band' issues some diesels seem to be > > > > > > saddled with. > > > > > > I had one of those Mk4 Golf TDis and ran it for two years from new. > > > > > Experience tells me that you're deluding yourself. > > > > > Experience tells me you're either exaggerating about how bad the one > > > > you had was, or you actually had one with issues. > > > > > What model / BHP was it? > > > > It was a red one. Other than that who GAF? It was a Golf, and an estate, > > > and a diesel. The three most boring things on the face of the planet. > > > Bored again, I see... > > Bored of VAG shite, yes. So do as you are, and don't try / buy / drive any of it then. Meanwhile those of us who are happy with it for the reasons stated elsewhere will continue to do as we please in this respect. > Ford actually make more interesting cars. Maybe, maybe not - I'm not in the market for a new car for the foreseeable - when I am, maybe I'll take a look at what they've got to offer. A mate of mine funnily enough, has a 2006 Mondeo 2.2 TDCI ST thingy... low mileage, bought from the local main dealers within the last 18 months. The PAS has just started to play up on it... and he's now facing an £1100 bill to get it put right The parts to sort it are on back order for the foreseeable, which kind of indicates it might be something affecting quite a few of these right now. It's that kind of thing, together with the way the 130bhp ones of those should almost have the DMF listed as a 80k mile service item, that puts me off certain brands, no matter how good or bad they look in the flesh. > I mena look at you in other parts of this thread getting worked up about > 130bhp. We weren't getting worked up? Go on, point out the bit where you reckon I was getting 'worked up'... :-P If anyone is familiar with a TV series called 'TV Offal', they'll remember the regular feature whereby Victor Lewis-Smith did a feature 'This is how they sound to me'... something which poor old Mr Firth appears to be suffering with in older age. > That's umm 90bhp less than the slowest of my vehicles. Yes, and? Your Exploder weighs about 4 tons (1) - that's a lot of weight for A: the engine to move, and B: it to get round corners - tis no wonder Firestones were blowing out on these. <thinks> Would you like a new set of tyres for that... I'm sure there'd be no shortage of people willing to chip in and buy you a set of those for it. (1) That's 2 tons for the car itself, and 2 tons for the combined weight of the chip on your shoulder and that of your swollen head. -- JackH |