Passat 105 BHP

[BurtonRob]

Following my previous posting, has anyone experience of towing with the 105 BHP Passat(Saloon or Estate). My Pageant van is 1350Kg MTPLW though its never fully loaded.

I'm just a bit concerned that the 105 won't have enough power. It's just that there are lots of them around at better prices than the 130BHP.

Thanks

Rob

 

[Icemaker]

Never had a 105 bhp engine but can say that the 115 bhp did feel a little underpowered to me although i was towing a bigger van than you and the engine was in my alhambra which is a larger car albeit not much heavier than the passat.

My latest towcar is another alhambra again similar weight to the passat estate but it has the 130 tdi fitted and this engine is an absolute gem and i can whole heartedly recomend the engine as a cracker for towing whatever vehicle it is installed in.

I have allso found loads of 105s going very cheap on the web, it does make you wonder why?.

 

[Angus1]

Hi Rob,

just a bit confused as the 105 is only in the Passat 6 (new one) whilst the 130 was in the Passat 5 (old shape). Which one are you looking at?

 

[BurtonRob]

Quite fancy the new one at 105 BHP. (Just in my price range) If it is underpowered then I will look at the older 130BHP. Hope that makes sense.

Incidentally I think there are more second hand 105BHP's around for sale because of the fleet market not because its a poor car.

Thanks for your help

Rob

 

[Angus1]

If you want a tow-car out of the two it has to be the 130. No contest.

The real question is how much towing will you be doing? If you`re only using it for holidays but need a car for daily use then the 105 should be adequate. It wont be quick but should suffice.

If you`re away most weekends and going long distances with the van go for the 130. Not only is it not burdened with a stupid excuse for a handbrake, but the build quality is better.

 

[Forbes1]

A friend of mine has the Passatt 6 estate with the 105bhp engine. Towing his Swift Charisma 570 he says it has a redundant 6th gear and it plods. But gets hime there and, yes, his is a company car. I'd suggest you go for a higher output engine if possible but the attraction of a newer car can be irresistible. I know, I bought a new Touran 105 S when I could've had a 2 - 3 year old Sharan 130. Mind you, the Touran does alright with my Coachman Amara 530/4 (MTPLM 1462kgs).

 

[BurtonRob]

Thanks everyone, Forbes' post sums up my problem. I guess it will have to be a 130BHP. Just have to decide what vehicle it's in now. Time to drive the wife scatty by talking cars again!!!

Rob

 

[Steve_5090070]

Hi Rob,

I had a Passat but changed it quickly. It struugled when pulling my Avondale Dart, 1300kg. I found that it failed in all areas. It took a life time to get up to 50mph. Hills were a no go area. When it came to reversing on to a pitch it failed miserably.

cheers Steve

 

[Angus1]

Hi Steve

Which Passat did you have and what did you change to?

 

[Steve_5090070]

Hi Angus,

I had I beleive a 115bhp. S reg saloon.It had a max tow weight of 1300kg. Max nose weight of 75kg. I changed it to a Nissan X-Trail. The X-trail weights 1760Kg with me in it. This gives a safer towing ratio of around 75%. It also allows me a 100kg nose weight, and to top it of it runs at 40mpg solo and 28/30 mpg while towing. The car is not as nippy as the Passat but other than that a great car.

Steve

 

[Angus1]

If it was on an "S" plate it would have either been a 90 (an utter slug) or a 110 (which was a damn fine tow-car - I ran one for three years).

Unless bought new many 90`s `acquired` `red-eye` badges which signified the 110`s.

 

[Steve_5090070]

If it was on an "S" plate it would have either been a 90 (an utter slug) or a 110 (which was a damn fine tow-car - I ran one for three years).

Unless bought new many 90`s `acquired` `red-eye` badges which signified the 110`s.

hi

it must of been a 90 as it was as you say an utter slug

Steve

 

[BurtonRob]

Have to agree with Angus, I ran a 110 Passat and it pulled our pageant all over France, that's why I'm looking at them again. The 90 was poor even Solo (I test drove one once). The Kerb weigt was a bit light on that range and there is evidence that the clutches weren't great reversing a van, but I found it a great vehicle.

Rob

 

[Angus1]

Having had a Passat 110, 130 Sport and now a 140 Sport, TBH if it was MY money and not a company car, I`d go for the 110 as the best compromise.

The 130 has oodles more stomp, but unless you pull a heavy van a lot the better MPG of the 110 (a good 5 solo, 3 towing)makes it a decent all-rounder.

The 140? Will find out what it tows like at Easter, but its not as strong low down as the 130, has higher intermediate gearing and is a lot thirstier solo.

 

[Angus1]

If anyones interested, just got back from Northumberland and TBH my old 130 is MUCH stronger than the 140 which needs to come down a gear or two on inclines that the 130 took in 6th.

It`s also a good 4 to 5 mpg worse than the old model.

Yes, it`s quiet, comfy, roomy (estate) but also eats tyres (fronts down to wear bars in 11000 miles!) Good job I don`t have to pay for tyres and fuel!

 

[Garfield]

Hi

We used to tow with a 99T Sharan 110 which had 175Nm @2000 and struggled to tow in 5th on anything other than flat, the new car is an S-max 2.0 tdci 140 hp and 236Nm which is virtually identical output to the VW 2.0 140hp engine and it leaves the 110 hp Shaz standing with fuel consumption being virtually identical.

Interestingly, although the Ford will tow in 5th + 6th it is more economical left in 4th, I expect if you dont use the superior torque of the 130/ 140 for anything but acceleration and short hills, using a lower gear and a lighter right foot sould give you better mpg.

 

[Angus1]

The car tows fine in 6th, just not as good as the 130.

This can be down to the torque peaking later than in the old model and taller overall and intermediate gearing. It may also benefit from more miles as the old one needed 20000+ to be properly loose.

The trip computer confirms that it is more economical in sixth than fourth or fifth, but even solo the 130(which we still have) will murder it unless you thrash it, and even that doesn`t account for the disappointing fuel consumption solo or towing.

 

[Robert_374242026]

Hi Rob ,have been going through the replies to your question ,thought i would add my pennyworth, we have a Skoda Octavia Elegance with the 140 bhp engine and DSG gearbox, our Coachman weighs 1350klg .Just come back from Germany and the motor just shrugs off anything we come up against.As you might know the chassis is the same as the Passet, gearbox is used i'm told in the audi, engine is VW.I know what i would do .Cheers

 

[Angus1]

Chassis is from a Golf actually, but none the worse for that.

The Octavia is really a `parts bin special` with an amalgamation of various VW group bits, as are all the Audi, VW ,Skoda and Seat ranges so you shouldn`t really choose which bits come from where as they are all used elsewhere.

If you can manage with the weight the Skoda is spectacular value, and if the VRs 170 diesel estate would have been available at the time I would certainly have given it due consideration.

 

[Robert_374242026]

Chassis is from a Golf actually, but none the worse for that.

The Octavia is really a `parts bin special` with an amalgamation of various VW group bits, as are all the Audi, VW ,Skoda and Seat ranges so you shouldn`t really choose which bits come from where as they are all used elsewhere.

If you can manage with the weight the Skoda is spectacular value, and if the VRs 170 diesel estate would have been available at the time I would certainly have given it due consideration.

Thanks Angus for comments,last year we had a x-trail 04reg sport auto 2.5 ,lovely car but the Skoda we have pulls much better and the mpg is double to what we use to get with the x-trail.

 

[MikeClifton]

Hi Rob, My last car was a 100 Tdi saloon and while no ball of fire while towing was certainly ok with 1250kg on the balland 3 people in the car plus dog.If the figures add up,it may be worth investigating buying a 105 then if it really isn't up to the job, get it chipped. My old car, a 2002 could be taken out to 130bhp for about

 

[garyyorkshire]

hi

i have a passat and have just bought a abbey 1300kg. the dealer said it came within the 85% bracket (just).

when we picked it up it didnt feel too bad puling up gentle hills in 4th. and steeper hill in 3rd.

fortunately we live near the motorway so not too many hills to deal with when off on hols.

 

[Robert_374242026]

Whilst on the subject of VW ,we have the parts bin Skoda Elegance with DSG box.I have been driving since 1950 so have been around the proverbal block.Now this DSG box,to me its fantastic and with the 140 bhp i can set the cruise control to 60mph and it just goes on and on and with about 30+mpg towing 45+solo.Now not much is mentioned about this gearbox, is it because lots of drivers prefer to waggle the stick around as i just sit back and let the car do the talking.Any comments regarding this?.

 

[Darren_5130889]

Hello Rob,

Have you purchased a car yet, if so i'd be interested to know if you went for the 105PS Passat. I, too, am in the same dilema. The new passat 1.9TDi 105 is within my price range, but the 2.0TDi 140 is not. On paper it will tow my van no problem 85% kerbweight is an impressive 1374kg for the new shape 1.9TDi salon and 1405 for the estate, but will the 105hp struggle?

I currently tow with a TD4 freelander - thats only got 115hp and does the job no problem. I'd be interested to know what you went for.

Darren.

 

[BurtonRob]

Thanks for all the replies. I've just changed the car and after considering everything and scouring this forum, I've opted for a Ford Galaxy 130 BHP. The extra kerb weight makes it a dream to tow with. Only the very new Passats had enough weight on them. I'm also getting amazing mpg solo out of the Galaxy. I would reccomend the Galaxy to anyone. I'm also suprised by how much I benefit from it's versatility.

Thanks again everyone.