New Octavia ....when? How Much?

It's called 'sweating the asset' they are getting the most use out of the dq250 that they can. Understandable, any business would do the same. Otherwise autos would be 9-11 speed zfs already.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GTR27

The tiguan is the same engine, in a similarly priced car, but with the higher capacity gearbox. Same engine, with this gearbox means that packaging is a moot point (it already is packaged with this engine!). More gears = better acceleration and economy. That would be the reason for putting it in (and I suspect that gearbox will start to filter through VAG cars with the 2L TSI). Cost difference should be minimal. Rated peak torque of the DQ250 is 350nm which is what the engine is currently putting out. So any life cycle upgrades wont carry any extra power/torque as the gearbox is not rated to take more (despite tuners finding it is capable of more). The DQ500 makes sense for an upgrade down the track to the model, as it improves acceleration/economy and is capable of taking more power/torque which the TSI engine has been shown as easily being able to make.

Not saying that it should come out now now now, but rather saying that this is a logical choice of gearbox for either a facelift, or the next model to come. Would be nice to have in this model, but we know that wont happen as skoda is the budget brand.

EDIT: Volkswagen Group DSG: the New DQ500 says dq500 is more efficient than dq250 also.....

---

As your original post said you wanted manual in preference to the DQ200 but would accept the DQ250 as an alternative you seem to have contradicted yourself.

Packaging goes beyond an existing ability to mate an engine with a gearbox - you still have to fit it in the engine bay, get the accessories to fit around it, get the suspension to suit the extra weight, get the handling to work with the change in COG, roll centre & front/rear bias.

Economy won't necessarily be better. At least one of the tuners has stated that there's a 10% power loss penalty with the DQ500 compared to DQ250. So if your losing 10% to the pavement then it's likely you'll be using more fuel to achieve similar perfomance parameters.

I still don't think you have an understanding of what an engineering rating is. Sydney Harbour Bridge was being used significantly above (130% IIRC) the rated capacity for years until Baulderstone / Aurecon did the upgrade works. It's quite likely that if VW decide that they want to market torque >350nm (which is already artificially limited) from their engines they'll just get the engineers to re-rate the DQ250.

If I specifiied a gearbox with more than 20% torque headroom (eg:<420nm on a 350nm motor) my boss would have my nuts. Fit for purpose is all that's needed because if you overengineer everything you end up with a big fat tub-o-lard & excess material costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brad

I think I'd regard her as an average buyer with average expectations.

---

And sounds like she went for the average car!!!:rolleyes:

I'm currently studying (in my 3rd year) as an engineer, I understand what an engineering rating is. FoS is something you put in to make sure it doesnt go pop when the "max load" is applied. I dont want my vehicle to be on the edge of reliability. The further away from that "max" you go, generally the more reliability gained. Shock loads are far worse for anything (gearboxes included) than an progressive load.

EDIT: this is mechanical forces, not structural so there are more forces to consider. Structural is comparitively easy compared to mechanical.

I said I wanted manual and would possibly accept the DQ250 as an alternative. the DQ500 would have meant I would have seriously considered it against the manual (due to the benefits). Its a more modern gearbox, and smoother than the 250. I dont think the gearbox is the 10% less that you keep quoting (despite vw's official documentation stating otherwise), and the additional gear would negate a lot of that anyway. The haldex AWD system would account for that. You cant get a 2wd DQ500 yet can you?

All of this is speculation, and a wish list of course. I understand why the current gearbox is in the current platform (cost). Its the low cost brand, so it stands to reason that we cant get the higher cost options as it would canniblise sales from the more premium brands.

The DQ250 lives happily in the VW GTI & R and Audi S3, so its not about cost or a brand conspiracy against Skoda. Seeing as VW are making a new 10-speed DSG they probably decided to keep things simple and just have the Dry DSG7 and Wet DSG6 as options for MQB platformed cars until its out.

Don't forget the manual gearbox will have a similar official torque limit, probably 350nm as well!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by readerr0r

The DQ250 lives happily in the VW GTI & R and Audi S3, so its not about cost or a brand conspiracy against Skoda. Seeing as VW are making a new 10-speed DSG they probably decided to keep things simple and just have the Dry DSG7 and Wet DSG6 as options for MQB platformed cars until its out.

Don't forget the manual gearbox will have a similar official torque limit, probably 350nm as well!

---

Sorry it may come across differently but I agree. I know why they do it, but no harm in wishing for a better gearbox :)

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by donweather

And sounds like she went for the average car!!!:rolleyes:

---

Sure, but she's pretty excited moving up from a 20 year old mazda wagon.

Interestingly she thought the holden cruse wagon a better car than the Golf wagon but didn't have the confidence to negotiate the readiliy available 15%-20% discount that you can get off Holden products.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GTR27

I said I wanted manual and would possibly accept the DQ250 as an alternative. the DQ500 would have meant I would have seriously considered it against the manual (due to the benefits). Its a more modern gearbox, and smoother than the 250. I dont think the gearbox is the 10% less that you keep quoting (despite vw's official documentation stating otherwise), and the additional gear would negate a lot of that anyway. The haldex AWD system would account for that. You cant get a 2wd DQ500 yet can you?

---

It's 10% on top of the AWD losses. eg: golf R DQ250 AWD & Tiguan DQ500 AWD with same mods (inc KO40 turbo) and the Tiguan will be about 10% less power on the dyno.

GL with the Engineering degree. There's always something (possibly interesting) happening. I'm having a research afternoon & about to hunt down copies of the NSW Statewide Asbestos plan & AS1891 (work at heights) & review what implications the latest AS1657 (ladders, platforms walkways) will have on our existing assets. (i'm not an engineer though). It should keep me out of mischief for a few hours.

Back to build talk, my dealer has been chatting to Skoda AU about my order and worse case the car won't be built until August, but July is more likely. Dealer is working with Skoda to get it into an earlier slot from cancelled orders, here's hoping!

I've got mine pushed to July build too....

Might hit my dealer up and ask...

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk