Now that the new overdraft is on its way, I took a look at the Sept. 2008 brochure (I always do things backwards!)

Interesting figures, though you can't just go by numbers I agree.

1.8TSi 0-62 is 2 seconds quicker than the 2.0FSi. (8.1 vs. 10.1) That sounds quite a lot for 10 bhp more, though the current brochure only quotes the 2.0 in L&K tiptronic version.

The max bhp (160 as against 150) is reached at 1000 rpm lower, at 5000 for 1.8.

Max torque is not only 25% higher (250 against 200) but is quoted as being at 1500 to 4200 revs ! The 2.0 is 200 Nm at 3500rpm.

NB The brochure also only quotes the 1.8TSi as an L&K even though it is now standard on Elegance.

Finally, one oddity. My 2005 2.0FSi Elegance has ESP as standard. According to the current brochure, on a hatch it is only standard at L&K level. Is this a mistake or has it been dropped from the Elegance level's standard spec?

Edited 18 October, 200817 yr by ednmra

I think the extra torque at less than max revs is what makes the big difference in acceleration between the two engines, and the 1.8T will feel even more powerful at lower revs ((ie in normal driving).

Yup... it's an infinitely better engine

It's got low insurance too for the available performance : 8.1(0-62) & 139mph is quite serious for a group 11 car! I havent actually checked but I suspect there are very few cars this quick in group 11.

I wonder if the new VAG 2.0TFSI will end up in the VRS any time soon. Its even more impressive, 211 ps(4500-6000) & 350NM (258Lb/ft) 1500-4200rpm AND its got a 153g/km CO rating - amazing - but only available on Audis so far I think.

I only renewed my insurance on the FSi at end of September so this year I'm just coughing up another few quid to the same outfit (HSBC - very good quote on the 2.0FSi.)

However I did a "Confused - Got Bomb" type of search for the new car anyway and, yes, it can be had very reasonably, if your driving record is pretty good. If I keep it on the island, next year should be very acceptable.

Going back to performance, (according to the brochure again) the 1.8 compares quite well with the vRS. The diesel vRS is 0.3 sec slower to 62, and the petrol vRS is 0.8 secs quicker. No doubt the overall performance of the vRS's is well up but the 1.8 sounds quite respectable!!

Not to mention that your figures for the 1.8 Tsi refer to the current engine. The facelift Octy gets a revised 1.8 Tsi with the 0-62 sprint now in 7.9 seconds (both manual and DSG I think) and economy up to (combined) 40.58mpg on the manual and 43.1mpg with the DSG. CO2 emissions have also dropped from 176g/km to 163g/km for the manual and 155g/km for the DSG so dropping a tax band whilst being more efficient. All in all a superb (pun intended) engine.

Oh well, I guess for that one I will have to wait for my NEXT next Octy - in three years or whatever. By which time I expect it will be a 1.3TSi with 600 bhp, 0-62 in minus 3 seconds, and champagne in club class.

Skoda are saving all that for the Yeti!

The 1.8TSi '160bhp' engine seems to be developing a fairly typical 180bhp ...

Wot!!? Don't tell my insurers please!

Actually that would make it much like the 1.8 in my Mk. 1 vRS.

1.8TSi 0-62 is 2 seconds quicker than the 2.0FSi. (8.1 vs. 10.1) That sounds quite a lot for 10 bhp more, though the current brochure only quotes the 2.0 in L&K tiptronic version.

The max bhp (160 as against 150) is reached at 1000 rpm lower, at 5000 for 1.8.

Max torque is not only 25% higher (250 against 200) but is quoted as being at 1500 to 4200 revs ! The 2.0 is 200 Nm at 3500rpm.

It's all about the torque & the gearing.

I don't think it's a particularly powerful engine - it's only 10kw more than the 2.5DOHC Subaru Liberty/Legacy I had. The difference is the torque and how it seems to be "allways there".

It's not a ball-tearer of an engine but very driveable & chews up the kilometres without much effort. Most days I drive most of the way home in 6th without having to change down. Infact, 5th is a bit useless & I wish 5th was about 200rpm taller & 6th 200-400rpm on top of that.

It isn't really comparable to the 2.0TFSI in the vRS - the power delivery is a bit different & the 2.0TFSI makes you giggle more than the 1.8T:).

Not to mention that your figures for the 1.8 Tsi refer to the current engine. The facelift Octy gets a revised 1.8 Tsi with the 0-62 sprint now in 7.9 seconds (both manual and DSG I think) and economy up to (combined) 40.58mpg on the manual and 43.1mpg with the DSG. CO2 emissions have also dropped from 176g/km to 163g/km for the manual and 155g/km for the DSG so dropping a tax band whilst being more efficient. All in all a superb (pun intended) engine.

What have they done to achieve this? Is it all in the OEM tune? If so, any idea if it's possible to get the new model maps flashed onto the old model ECU?

ESP was an option on my 2007 Elegance.

What have they done to achieve this? Is it all in the OEM tune? If so, any idea if it's possible to get the new model maps flashed onto the old model ECU?

I guess the ECU might be the same (assuming no hardware has been changed) but is it worth the bother.... 0.2 sec isn't very noticeable ,the cost would probably outweigh the fuel savings & you can't claim a lower tax band unfortunately :confused:

A Revo remap on the other hand would certainly be noticeable. I see they're claiming 220 PS & 275 lb/ft from 1.8TSI (don't know cost but suspect £400 +)

ESP was an option on my 2007 Elegance.

Standard fitment on my 2007 build Elegance.

I think thats an indication of how varied the build sheets are from country to country. The AUSspec vRS appears to have more bells & whistles than the UKspec (18" rims, CC air, etc all from 1st month of sale in Oct '07)

I guess the ECU might be the same (assuming no hardware has been changed) but is it worth the bother.... 0.2 sec isn't very noticeable ,the cost would probably outweigh the fuel savings & you can't claim a lower tax band unfortunately :confused:

A Revo remap on the other hand would certainly be noticeable. I see they're claiming 220 PS & 275 lb/ft from 1.8TSI (don't know cost but suspect £400 +)

Tax band means nothing down here in Aussieland. If they started doing registration costs based on CO2 output it would send the local car industry bankrupt.

The reason I asked is that the Subaru Australia Head Office dealership does ECU upgrades with factory maps & the cost is fairly reasonable - $300 (120GBP?) will get you about 10kw & a lot more torque with less fuel consumption on a Legacy 3.0L. They are also putting the new '09 maps onto the '08 WRX - but that's to stop engine failure (still better power, etc though).

I agree, 0.2seconds is nothing - I'm thinking more torque & slight fuel consumption improvements would be nice.

I noticed the Revo remap the other week. I'm waiting on GIAC & APR/Oettinger to release their maps, then I'll take advantage of the "try before you buy" offer and compare the three. In AUS these aftermarket remaps cost $1000-$1500.

I guess Aus specs are similar to NZ specs - we get the vRS with every option except sunroof and one other - I forget what - as standard.

And it's cheaper than the UK price by a few grand.

They also offer remaps covered by warranty - REVO I think.

Not to mention that your figures for the 1.8 Tsi refer to the current engine. The facelift Octy gets a revised 1.8 Tsi with the 0-62 sprint now in 7.9 seconds (both manual and DSG I think)

I wonder if there is actually an increase in performance or not ? If the current 1.8 motors are all actually producing 180bhp rather than 160bhp then Skoda may have decided to update their performance figure to reflect what they actually do, rather than what they were previously rated at. VAG are typically pretty conservative with their performance claims (presumably to stop disappointed owners from complaining).

Standard fitment on my 2007 build Elegance.

I'm intrigued at this. When I bought my 2005 elegance new, I didn't specify anything in particular, and it came with ESP.

The brochure for the current UK range indicates you don't get this as standard on an ordinary Elegance level hatch, only on L&K etc. So I'm wondering if my old car just happened to be dealer-built to a particular spec.

I wonder if there is actually an increase in performance or not ? If the current 1.8 motors are all actually producing 180bhp rather than 160bhp then Skoda may have decided to update their performance figure to reflect what they actually do, rather than what they were previously rated at. VAG are typically pretty conservative with their performance claims (presumably to stop disappointed owners from complaining).

It's possible although I doubt it. Skoda quote the reduction in CO2 emmissions too along with the improved fuel consumption and I'm sure they're independently verified. So they must have tweaked the engine slightly to improve the efficiency and a result is a slightly improved 0-62. To be honest I think the 0-62 sprint is pretty meaningless anyway. A compare of in gear acceleration times would be far more relevant but that level of detail on the revised engine doesn't seem to be in the public domain yet. I doubt there'll be much difference in that measure either though. Still, nice to know you'll be getting a 'better' powerplant if you go for a facelift Octy!

It's possible although I doubt it. Skoda quote the reduction in CO2 emmissions too along with the improved fuel consumption and I'm sure they're independently verified. So they must have tweaked the engine slightly to improve the efficiency and a result is a slightly improved 0-62. To be honest I think the 0-62 sprint is pretty meaningless anyway. A compare of in gear acceleration times would be far more relevant but that level of detail on the revised engine doesn't seem to be in the public domain yet. I doubt there'll be much difference in that measure either though. Still, nice to know you'll be getting a 'better' powerplant if you go for a facelift Octy!

"nice to know you'll be getting a 'better' powerplant if you go for a facelift Octy" .....Yes you have to advertise some improvement over the old model!

To be honest I think the 0-62 sprint is pretty meaningless anyway.

I agree - and, in any case, how often does an "ordinary" driver do a tyre burning blast off the line? It is flexibility in traffic and quick responses when on the move that I prefer. If this motor truly has nearer 180 bhp, and apparently very good torque, it sounds as if it will feel more like my old Mk 1 vRS than my present car.

The 2.0FSi is pretty good on power but I notice, especially when 4 up, a lot more gearbox stirring is necessary, especially on some of the grades around here. If the 1.8 is good on torque from 1500 rpm, it sounds like I'll enjoy it.

A week to go!