23 replies to this topic

[AnastieVRs]

For some an easy choice. I now drive a Mazda 3 2.0 sport but only get 33 mpg and I do about 15000 a year.
I like the look of both cars but not driven either. Given my mileage is the tdi 105 that much more economical than vrs given the fuel cost differences?
I would hope that the diesel engines torque makes for a fun drive?

[the mad monk]

driven sensibly i can often manage over 40 mpg in the vrs, give it real beans though and its down to late 20's early 30's like youve been used to

[tlx]

Try a Fabia with a well run in 1.6 CR (more than 10 000 miles) before you decide.  This is a great engine with plenty of power and torque, and better economy than the VRS (though economy is variable and they seem to give their best economy when well warmed up and in flat, warm environments below 60mph).  With the diesel you should save on road tax, fuel costs, insurance and probably on depreciation.

[Estate Man]

Personally I think it's a no brainer. Go for the Monte. I'll be berated for this but the Vrs is...errrrrr....less than reliable for many people. The only two chaps I know that have them have both had engine rebuilds under warranty and now one of them needs another rebuild after just 7,000 miles. On top of that they have had positively loads of issues with the twin chargers...and the oil consumption issue. But all taken care of under warranty. Not good though for an engine that's been about for years and doesn't bode well for ownership outside warranty. Depreciation is likely to be massive. But then that may not matter to many who buy them. On a positive note, they go like hell!

[logiclee]

What type of 15000 miles do you do?

Are you crunching motorway miles or blasting around b roads?

Cheers
Lee

[AnastieVRs]

Thanks for all the replies.

My trip to work is along country B roads 12 miles. The rest of my work day can be a 70 mile round trip on busy duel carriage ways and a little town driving. Im car mad and enjoy driving. However, the cost of fuel is annoying and I worry that the economy of the VRS will prove equally irritating especially when I hear it requires high octane fuel!

Until my Mazda I had many diesels including Fabia VRS, Jag 2.2 and BMW 320. The problem with the jags and BMW's is that they were unreliable and I must have reliability.

[sharkrider]

I dont put a drop of oil in my vRS ever, have done 33,000 faultless miles, and got 49 mpg on the way to work this morning

(much less on the way back, as I was "enjoying" it )

Its a jakle and hyde... can be driven economically, or like the Rally car

I love it. But then I haven't had the problems others have had. Its still the best car I've ever owned apart from the lancia thema turbo

[sharkrider]

and as for high octane fuel: think on this, costs virtually the same as diesel, and my vRS gives me more miles per gallon than two collegues... one with a nissan duke diesel, and another with a citroen people carrier diesel....

[sk4gw]

Can anyone say 'What does a diesel Monte get when being driven for fun & not to get the best MPG?'

I agree with whats said above by sharkrider.
I found that 44 mpg plus is no problems after the vRS is up to running temp & @ Motorway speeds, and over 50 mpg at lower speeds.
Obviously you can ruin that with spirited driving, but then thats the choice you have.
35-37 mpg is easily achieved around town as long as the journey is more than for 10 minutes.

98 or 99 Ron petrol is costing me less than Diesel just now

as to the oil usage, that can only be on a few models, should have been fixed on any currently or recently having issues
& surely by now is sorted on the Newst cars being sold.

The similarity of a Monte to a vRS is only in the looks department IMO,
Totally Different vehicles to drive i would imagine, but then i have never driven a Monte.

george

[Stormchaser]

Estate Man, on 15 July 2012 - 16:52, said:

Personally I think it's a no brainer. Go for the Monte. I'll be berated for this but the Vrs is...errrrrr....less than reliable for many people.

Agree on that.I would go for the Monte diesel personally.

[sk4gw]

'DPF',
whats the worst that can happen?
'You decide!'
(& will any expense be after the warranty is out?)

george

[Terry Collins]

Vrs or 1.6 tdi 105bhp... I have owned both...
VRS: approx 40 mpg
16 tdi 105 bhp approx 55 mpg
VRS: many smiles per gallon
1.6 tdi : not many smiles per gallon

If you can live with 40mpg get the VRS, if you can't don't!

Terry

[bluecar1]

as to DPF on any of the CR VAG diesels

how many "actual" issues are there on here, there is a lot of speculation / scare mongering, a few annoyance when the car is doing a regen but so long as you don't ignore the DPF warning light on the dash then not many issues

from a milage perspective you are in the "diesel makes sense" area from a personal perspective, it depends on what you want from the car, sporty drive, looks, economy etc

i just find it a shame there is no sporty diesel variant like the MK1 VRS, the wifes had hers for 9 years and will not change it

Edited by bluecar1, 16 July 2012 - 12:37.

[sk4gw]

Its true that you never know about 'actual issue' untill there are any.

You can never know how a vehicle will be at 3 or 4 year old and out of warranty untill they are 3 years old.
So we are waiting to see how many issues if any there will be on Euro 5 engines diesel and Petrol
& if there are actually any as they get more miles and years on them..

I know how Fiat, Peugeot, Citroen, Renault and some others have got on with their Euro 4 then Euro 5 diesels with DPF's.
Time will indeed tell if VAG/Skoda have got things right or better than them..

5 & 7 year warranties will help give some piece of mind to buyers, once VAG get around to feeling that financially they can offer these on all their vehicles

george

Edited by sk4gw, 16 July 2012 - 12:57.

[Furbytom]

The Monte TDI is obviously going to be more economical and is a great car I'm sure. The vRS however is in a completely different league when it comes to both fun and performance.
I know if I was driving around in a monte I know I'd always feel a twinge of regret that I didn't buy a vRS each time I saw one.
Go on -buy 'the real McCoy', you know you want to

[P1TT8ULL]

In terms of sporty diesel a remap on the 1.6 will take it to 130bhp making it the same as the old Vrs.

[Latte]

They serve different purposes these models.

One is for saving pennies and looking pretty.

The other is for going like Joe at reasonable cost.

Why not have a TSi Monte. Cheaper, quieter, better handling and you won't stink like diesel dude.

[arnold]

I had my first service on the VRS recently and they loaned me the 1.6 diesel Monte. It felt a diffrent car to the VRS.They are certainly not built for speed. They will attract different types of people and what you want out of a small car. Even my wife commented on the lack of power . Its a bit tortoise and hare
For a performane vehicle you will be hard pressed to get the same returns for your money.

[logiclee]

For regular high speed work I wouldn't have a Fabia as an only car, we've had three diesel, petrol and tsi. For me at 70+ they get too unrefined and the economy suffers due to the boxy shape.

For that type of driving I'd go with anything from the Passat/Superb/Mondeo sector.

Saying that if your dual carraigeway work is 60-70mph then the diesel monty would be my choice.

If driving pleasure and economy is key wait until the facelifted Fiesta is out in November, it's going to get an uprated verion of the 125bhp 1.0 ecoboost and will get a 60+mpg combined figure.

[AnastieVRs]

Thanks for all the replies.. better go test them...

[Wilko251088]

Tdi vrs :-D beauts car!

[exiledwelshman]

I picked up my new Monte TDi CR 105 on Sunday and have been averaging around 55 MPG and that is on mainly A & B roads to work in Hereford and I drive briskly. My average mileage is 15k per year so our commutes are similar I thinks

The VRS is a fantastic machine ( I did look at buying one) but if you do 15k a year on A roads and Dual Carriageways then I would say that the Monte is the one as it is cheap to tax (£30 per Year - I think), Cheaper to insure, and the economy is better.

Also I diagree with a few of the comments that the TDI is sluggish and tortise like, the 105 HP has plenty of torque and is fun to drive and gives some of these so called hot hatches a real run for their money!!

Buy the Monte, make sure it is the 105 HP as there are a couple of variants of the TDI and spec it correctly and carefully and you will be close to VRS spec with the added bonus of saving on the VRS price tag, reliability problems, having better economy and still having the looks of a sporty car.

In short Save yourself some cash and buy the Fabia MONTE CARLO 1.6 TDi CR 105, wins everytime for me!

[PDIBK]

Whoa! This thread has elements of car magazine entries from the last 10 years. To paraphrase:

"Diesel makes your hands stink.  Buy a petrol." - 4 of my last 7 cars have been diesel.  The fuel goes IN THE TANK, not all over your hands.  You're doing it wrong!

Which leads me to the..."it's a diesel, it's underpowered and sluggish".  Again, 105 BHP in a car the size of a Fabia is plenty and the torque is the same.  Car mags recently (in fact for ages) that jump in  adiesel and procede to try and thrash the rear off it like a petrol car will always be disappointed - you don't drive a diesel like that.  You have to use the stonking torque to et you to the power, or just ride the in gear torque.  If you get in and expect a diesel to fling you down the road like a petrol, it just won't happen (unless you have my mate's 535d, remapped to silly figures "The Train".  Quicker than his M3 was...).

Returning to the original posters' dilemma, with that mileage a year diesel would win hands down for economy.  You know how to "drive" diesels, so you should be able to make the Monte TDI work for you - mine is plenty quick enough (for now...) and rides really well on the lowered suspension and 17" alloys.  The VRS (I've never driven one) would, I imagine, be more responsive, encourage "raggings" and then give you 35-40mpg.  I has DSG only (you might not want that either) and will be completely different.

I had to think did I want this current car to be a bit bonkers, or a fair bit more sensible?  I went for sensible and got the Monte.  I won't ever feel guilty for ragging it, as it will still say 50+mpg.  It sticks, goes and stops well enough (maybe a bit more poke later in life - it's only 6 weeks old), so I'm happy!

[dazz600]

4 weeks ago I swapped my Monte for a vrs.With the mileage you do then The Monte will be good enough.I had a lot of bad luck with mine and as I only do short journeys/low mileage I had bother with the Dpf amongst other things (the Dpf I was unaware of when I bought it).For anyone on low mileage then a vrs wins hands down as the driving experience is something else with dsg
Basically if dpf`s appear on all cars then Ive done with diesel for good.Its all on your milage at the end of the day and if you take the tdi badge off the rear (like I did) they are hard to tell apart!