delta925

Camelspyyder, That is interesting. Given it is fundamentally the same engine logically the ECU programming while at some point giving 15% more power / torque overall has a narrower band. I've found the 1.0 95 fine other than as posted being totally confident about a quick exit into traffic. Locally there is no opportunity to exploit it. As things are by the time I go anywhere more demanding I'll have totally forgotten the diesel Fabia make any comparison.

Camelspyyder, Thanks for your comments. The drivers seat is height adjustable, or at least as it seems hinged at the front as rear rises more. I have just not found a comfortable balance. A well shaped thin back cushion might work. One I tried was too thick so left the front edge of the seat too far up my thighs. A thin base cushion might be better still. The issue with either is keeping in place. When you say you found the 1.0 a better drive than 110 is/was that 1.2 ? When I test drove the 1.2 110 I only had a couple of chances to judge the performance but it seemed rather gutless. Even though the 1.6CR needs to be driven more like a petrol than an old school diesel I put it down to changing up too early. After I wondered if something was not right with it. Had I been seriously interested I would have wanted another drive. I recall reading somewhere here that the 5 speed gearbox is both better to use and more reliable. There is still plenty of tread on the Dunlop 215/45/16 tyres. By swapping front to rear in a few months without getting close to 1.6mm at least 25,000 miles looks easily achievable. They do seem noisy and not great grip in the wet. 215/40/17 must be an even harder ride plus greater risk of catching the rim on a kerb. The best I can say about the Bridgestones the Fabia came on was they lasted well. I fitted Barum after as roughly 2/3 price of Continental. They gripped better but wore faster. As you say the Rapid is good value although perhaps balanced by a relatively low resale value. By the time I sell the mileage should be below average. Already at least 1000 miles less over the last 10 weeks plus no leisure trips. The obvious alternative was a Focus 1.0 which would have been at least £2k more but logically a higher return when sold. The Scala looks to be priced rather higher than the Rapid. While the next two services need to be with the dealer so no arguments if a warranty claim after that it will go to the local VAG independent like the Fabia did. Having them was a factor in choosing Skoda over Ford.

Back last October I posted about a 66 plate Rapid Speceback SE Tech 1.2 110PS I test drove but even though the price dropped more I didn't purchase. While looking then I saw a glut of 68 plate Rapid Spaceback SE Tech 1.0 mostly 95PS available with mostly 11000 - 14000 miles covered initially priced around £11000. I did see one drop to £9900 then sell while towards Christmas gradually prices dropped as low as £9250. None were particularly local to me but one within 40 miles and another perhaps 60 miles but easier to get to by public transport were at £9500. Both were blue as I didn't really want grey not least as not so visible. Just before work closed for Christmas I contacted both dealers who send videos of their car and a provisional p-x price for mine. I also contacted the local dealer who offered a price for my car back in October. I went to view and test drive the nearer car then agreed to purchase. The local dealer increased his offer for my Fabia. The car was registered to Skoda so either used by them or on a contract. The actual registration was January 2019 and the tax returned September 2019. The milage on the one I bought was just under 11000, the other I enquired about was almost 12000. While paying £145 RFL rather than the £30 of a 66 plate instead I have the factory warranty and breakdown cover. I collected the Rapid after Christmas. While given the choice I would probably have bought the 6-speed 115PS in reality I would rarely exploit it. Normally by now I would have been out on a few longer runs but have only commuted to work plus essential local trips. I am recording an average of around 48mpg. However by usage this seems optimistic by around 5%. Without the current situation from mid-March and so would have filled up another two or three times that would have been enough to average out differences and make a reasonable calculation. If so the mpg will be over 10% less than the 1.6CR Fabia but with petrol costing less financially the cost increase will be under 10%. Overall I'm happy. Perhaps because having come from a diesel I still haven't really worked out making a quick exit from a junction. Only slighly pressing the throttle gets the engine revs up over 3000 yet once releasing the clutch the engine revs very quickly drop so can need dip it to be sure not to stall. Somehow I can not find an idea position for the seat. The rear of the squab really needs either to be lower or slightly further back. I have rolled up some material and pushed in between the squab and the backrest. This may become a bigger issue once places to go open up again so a longer driving time. Like the Fabia I would have preferred smaller wheels and 55 profile tyres both for a softer ride and lower cost. Dunlop SP Sport Maxx are fitted but anything except ditch-finder budget seems close to £100 a corner. While all four would have to be fitted together and the potential issue if one damaged Vredestein Quatrac 5 are tempting when the time comes.

When I ordered my Fabia Estate Elegance 1.6CR TDI 105PS back in November 2010 for delivery March / April 2011 my plan was was for 10 years. However after the MOT & service last year I decided to change before the MOT this year. Two factors were the mileage between DPF regens decreasing and several reports of rusting through of the exhaust system. I should have posted this a while ago but between Christmas and New Year I handed this car over to a local dealer and collected a Rapid SE Tech 1.0 95PS. I don't currently need the space of the Fabia estate like 10 years ago but the boot of the Fabia MK3 hatch really is a bit too small. I would have bought a Rapid Spaceback rather than the Fabia estate if available back in 2010. Overall I can not fault the Skoda specific elements of Fabia. While of course the material and trim finish were not the same quality as my previous Audi nothing rattled, wore significantly or fell apart. The only issue here was the common one of wires breaking in the door harness. The VAG group 1.6CR engine though was both a dissappointment and costly. While certainly smoother and quieter than the 1.9 PD for me in a smaller lighter car less economical plus the EGR failure. Initially the long term average mpg was close to my calculations but for the last years around 10% lower. My commute would never give great mpg but overall day-to-day the average was around 52mpg. On a long clear run keeping to 70mph 60mpg was just achievable. Time will tell if eventually VAG do payout over the misleading mpg and emissions levels published. Given what I found out 5 years later about EGR, DPF etc despite replacing a diesel choosing diesel again was the wrong choice but equally the 1.2 TSI of the same era had issues too. I did read the DPF level with VAG DPF just before selling at 62000 miles :- Ash 26.13g, 37%

Sadly while on paper the VAG 1.6CR TDi looks a low cost option in reality any car fitted with one inevitably will not be. For the car you are looking at cleaning the DPF may work for a while but there are other expensive parts. Unless already replaced in the last couple of years the EGR is a big risk and £700 or so at an independant as 5 - 6 hours labour because so much has to be removed and refitted. Again unless done recently, and was it even done 5 years ago, cambelt replacement is due. The water pump should be changed too as if it fails all the dismantling has to be done again. That is £400. The remainder of the exhaust could fail somewhere. The official solution is a complete system including DPF. Depending where the failure is an independant might be able to patch it up but a risk and even if successful how long before the next weakest point fails ? The early 1.2 petrol engines from the same era have issues too plus are £145 RFL. The later 1.2 petrol engines were much better and their introduction may coincide with the reduction in RFL to £20 / £30. However very unlikely you will find a car with this engine and no significant faults for even £1500. While £145 RFL a pre-facelift car with the 1.9TDi could easily actually cost less to run based on much lower repair costs. EGR for example is accessible and much simpler hence replacement perhaps £150. The cambelt & water pump still need doing but if done to schedule you may find one with a couple of years before due and if your daughters mileage is not high perhaps risk for another year when realistically the car will be worth very little anyway.

Back when I had the Audi A4 if I recall correctly there were four keys - two full function remote - one metal but no remote, I can't remember what happened if that was put in the steering lock and an attempt to start the car made - one plastic that would fit lock to open doors, again I can't remember what happened if that was put in the steering lock and an attempt to start the car made If the OP has a Fabia 1 it may be based on this.

If the third lost / found key operates the locks remotely rather than physically turning the lock then the battery is OK. Regardless I may be wrong but I thought the immobiliser part was passive to avoid any key battery issues not least because no button on key the has to be pressed while starting. Did the third key once allow the car to start and run rather than just operate the doors? Since normally only two keys are supplied could it have been coded for the doors but not the immobiliser?

I have an ELM327 rather than Carista but I had to go through several versions of VAG DPF to find one that worked. The one that did for me is 2.17.6P.apk. Similarly Torque if it works with the Carista module. To save you searching I've dropped both here ( I hope this is allowed on the Briskoda Forum ) https://www.sendspace.com/filegroup/hvnRh41dBqE%2FKRXHNumtKQ

Don't presume P0101 means the sensor itself is faulty, although if it is that could explain the shortage of power, as there are other reasons for the ECU recording ' implausible reading '. From my experience with the 1.6CR the air filter could be the issue. I found the fitted filter had all VAG logos moulded in so as it should have been presumably genuine part from dealer or TPS and it didn't look dirty. However swapping it to a new Bosch part stopped P0101 errors and car ran much better. Another member traced P0101 errors to an o-ring seal not properly fitted. Once replaced no more errors. If fitted to the 1.2 like the 1.6 the combined pressure and temperature sensor can throw up P0101 errors too. If you don't find anything get another MAF from a breakers to try. Most posts about cleaning find it is at best a temporary fix but in your case could help diagnosis.

Dogtanian1234, For me the intervals between DPF regens has gradually decreased. My car has 62K on the clock now and down to around 250 mile intervals plus take three commute trips to complete. When new only two trips and as I recall around 400 mile intervals. If you do mostly motorway driving this ought to be better for running efficiency and hence the DPF than me. 50% of my commute on town / city roads. The other 50% is national limit dual carriageway but the traffic flow speed is often under 60mph not to mention a crawl for miles at the slightest incident or obstruction. I've never had the DPF light come on. To be honest I've expected it if a regen starts or is part though over a weekend of several short trips. A sensor fault would be a relatively low cost fix while diagnostics should show if any anomaly of readings. I had a sensor fail at around 15 months but swapped in the work car park by Skoda Assistance back when operated by RAC. Worst case find an independent who will remove DPF and clean it. How it will behave after is debatable so logical next step is to sell while all the dash lights stay off. Back to mpg my longer trips with lower average and maximum speeds are cross country hence through villages and towns plus slowing for junctions and roundabouts. Hence at best 55 - 60 mpg.

Dogtanian1234, I've never seen close to an average of 70mpg and I don't drive hard. My daily commute will never give great mpg but in summer on a long clear 100+ mile run sticking to 70mph I just scrape 60mpg. Maybe doing this at 50mph I would see 70mpg. Overall I was expecting a 10% mpg gain from the 1.6CR over the 1.9PD. When I bought I did wonder about the durability of Skoda given an Audi A3 Spaceback with the same engine and paper specification was another £8k. The reality nearly 9 years on is no issues with the Skoda specific parts as all have been with the VAG group wide parts. The 1.2TSi of the same era wasn't great either. From all I've read both the final version of the 1.2TSi and the 1.0 have no underlying issues equivalent to EGR failure to bring an unexpected big bill. The cambelt and water pump at 5 years is £400 ish. A key factor in considering a Rapid is I have a local VAG independent specialist to look after it. I guess most reputable independents including the one I used for my relatively simple 1.9PD Audi ( the local VAG specialist hadn't opened then and for the first 3 years the Fabia went to the dealer ) could look after a 1.0 Focus but I prefer the interior and luggage space of the Rapid. Initially the Rapid will cost less but in several years time the Focus will be worth more so overall similar cost. For you at 80k miles with the EGR done the DPF is perhaps the next weak link plus depending on age and where you live so how much salt on the road over a winter the exhaust system overall. Having forked out over £700 hopefully you can get at least another 3 years or 30k miles out of your Rapid with just scheduled servicing.

Dogtanian1234, Like many 1.6CR owners been there, done that & got the t-shirt with my Fabia :( Back in 2011 1.6CR diesel was £20 RFL & 1.2TSI £90 ( from memory so maybe slightly out ) so on paper over 10 years £70 difference would nominally pay additional purchase cost and the mpg gain money in my pocket ..... how wrong I was. Mpg is worse than the 1.9PD and I often wonder how different from 1.2TSI, if I end up with one I'll find out. My only hope to recover is if eventually VAG have to pay out over the ' manipulated ' published emissions levels. Now at 9 years rather than 10 I'm looking to change soon before any more bills. I'll be buying petrol. A 1.0 or 1.2 Rapid is one on the short list. After a bad experience back in the mid 1990's when cats first were fitted to petrol engines I swapped to diesel for simplicity and reliability first a Rover 200 with the Peugeot derived engine then an Audi A4 1.9PD. Neither had any engine issues. Now as Camelspyyder says petrol is the better option. If only back in 2010 I knew what I know now about EGR, DPF etc and the costs. How many basically sound cars will go for scrap because the cost of replacing these parts can not be justified ?

A corroded connection or terminal at one end of the earth strap or main ground cable will cause issue too.

OT but been there, done that. Much as I like to help I'll never give a jump start again. If really desperate situation I would disconnect my battery from my car but then got to set windows etc up again. Fortunately 1990's design car when far less electronics and everything was more accessible. Luckily picked up a recently recon'd alternator on eBay for about £20 and swapped out myself. In the interim had to put on trickle charge every night. Likewise I only ever buy decent batteries with the view if any issue it could be the difference between enough power to still start the car and failure.

The RAC report shows your car is a 13 plate. Unless the battery has already been changed and the replacement was a good quality part e.g. Bosch / Varta with 4 or 5 year warranty rather than cheapest available from local factor, ECP etc even if not the direct problem realistically it is end of life so needs changing. You may not have noticed if gradually the starter motor has been turning slower but if the voltage drops too far it will turning too slow to start and the fluctuating voltage can cause ECU errors. For now disconnect the existing battery while you charge it and hold the car terminals together for a few minutes. When the battery is fully charged after reconnecting it turn the key to the run position for a few seconds then to off a couple of times before you try to start. Particularly with the temperature dropping another fuel issue could be the filter. When was it last changed? After changing clearing the air can be a problem, there was a thread on this here a while ago.