So, as delivered, there's no point in revving higher than a TDi, and you've got shorter gearing?

he's talking about a Fabia vRS...you know, the one with the PD130 diesel engine...

You don't buy a hot hatch for economical driving now do you? You don't have to be light footed all the time either, just plan ahead and carry as much momentum as possible for as long as possible.

Well, no, but *whatever* car i buy has to be economical enough to stand my commute without breaking the bank, fast enough so it's not tiresome, small enough to park on my drive, and big enough to fit 4 passengers in. I don't have the space or money to run another car, so whatever I buy has to be a compromise.

While your point about driving economically is a good one, road conditions in my use really limit how far you can take that: urban roads and busy motorways are not the easiest place to achieve light, steady cruising.

Performance cost ££ always has always will.

Indeed. But the Octy I'm talking about was just 'quick', rather than blistering. Probably about as quick as a standard Fabia vRS, which I had at the time- but if I'd had that car my fuel bills would climb dramatically, and I don't mind the narrow power band and PD clatter.

Like previous threads on this, this is all a bit pointless. We can argue about costs, performance, torque, power bands and NVH all day, but it's what suits the individual. What we all want is loads of torque, free revving, good MPG and a nice sound, but you have to accept a compromise on one or more...

Edited 1 April, 200917 yr by cjb

Drive into a wall at 40 in the saxo, the wall will still be standing and the saxo will be demolished. They are a very old design and weigh nothing.

The Fabia is a big heavy car (The handling proves this), but some of that is down to extra safety features such as the airbags, crash bars, stronger body and a shell that isn't made from cooking foil

I would not want to crash in a Saxo, having seen one after it hit my A3...

I've driven some nasty dervs and nasty petrols, as well as some good ones, turbo and non-turbo for each flavour.

The more modern petrols sound a lot like dervs in some ways, and they deliver a wide torque band, much wider than before. Fuel economy of petrols has got significantly better too.

The cost of petrol vs diesel in the UK is gone so far towards petrol is cheaper, even when using super, that you really have to do tons of miles to make it financially worth it now to drive a derv.

So have I, with Vauxhalls figuring mostly in the "nasty" category, and PSA and VAG cars in "good" (Aside from German cast concrete seats).

My current car is in the 'A-B vehicle' range - it's a VAG car (Seat Marbella) but power, handling, comfort (and noise) are in a different league as compared to the Fabia vRS Estate Unit 18 Edition

The difference between the PD100 5 speed with stock suspension and so on and the current state with 200ish bhp, 6 speed, properly sorted suspension & brakes is just staggering

Isn't a Seat Marbella really a Fiat Panda rebadged?

So have I, with Vauxhalls figuring mostly in the "nasty" category, and PSA and VAG cars in "good" (Aside from German cast concrete seats).

I've driven a CDTi Zafira(?) and my brother's driven an Astra with the same engine and both were gutless (I was, at times, scared by the lack of anything below about 2000rpm in the Zafira). Bengie had a 1.8 Sapphire a while ago and when I took it to work above about 45-50mph the throttle wasn't good for much more than adjusting the engine's volume

Isn't a Seat Marbella really a Fiat Panda rebadged?

I believe so, and how old is it? was SEAT part of VAG when it was "built"

Gutless CDTi engine made worse by Vauxhall's fond belief that a 4 speed + overdrive box is a substitute for a 5-speed too. I see where you're coming from, but I think that's Vauxhall's poor engineering, rather than anything to do with diesels as a concept.

for sure, there's no doubt in my mind that the 1.9 CDTi and the 1.9 PD are worlds apart in terms of driveability

IIRC the Seat Marbella was made under a licensing agreement with Fiat. There are several improvements that were made to the Fiat Panda that did not make it to the Marbella as by that time the license had run out.

It's basic motoring, that's for sure

Sure is basic.

The Marbella comes with a hammock rear seat which doubles as a double bed!

So have I, with Vauxhalls figuring mostly in the "nasty" category, and PSA and VAG cars in "good" (Aside from German cast concrete seats).

Personally, I love firm seats. Soft ones aggravate my backache.

Personally, I love firm seats. Soft ones aggravate my backache.

Firm and supportive yes; hard to the point where it reshapes you to the shape of the seat no.I can drive an Octy all day, but get numb bum after an hour or so in an Audi, Vw or Opel (aka Vauxhall).

It's about as fare as comparing a n/a petrol to a turbo diesel...

Which seems to class as a fare comparison...

In terms of the price you usually pay and performance , they are similar.

IIRC the Seat Marbella was made under a licensing agreement with Fiat. There are several improvements that were made to the Fiat Panda that did not make it to the Marbella as by that time the license had run out.

It's basic motoring, that's for sure

Yep , the Marbella was based on the Mk1 panda.

The Mk2 panda got better engines (1 litre FIRE vs 900cc crap) , an improved interior and rear suspension that didn't use cart springs.

I don't think the small turbo petrols would be any more complicated than a turbo diesel. Common Rail is more complex than Direct Petrol injection due to higher pressures and then you have the hassle of DPFs. I love my Fabia VRS but during its recent hassles with the turbo I have been driving my dad's 1995 C280 Merc and dicovered "top end" again. I also had a Megane 1.6 111 BHP on 24 test and, although it needed birching, it was a sweet and smooth engine. I would be interested to try the new !.4 122 BHP TSI in the Octavia: seems like a great little engine. I would go for this in my next car (would be great in the Fabia) or maybe the 1.8 TSI if I wanted a bit more shove. The Fabia can easily do 55 mpg on a run and Ifind it cheap to run but I can't see myself paying a grand premium for derv on something like an Octavia in the future. As I said the only time where a Diesel is really better than the petrol in every respect is the BMW 2.0d and 2.0 Petrol. I would have a 320d every time.

just to add to this i can achieve nearly the same mpg as a vw passet tdi doing the same journey as me in my petrol fsi.

just to add to this i can achieve nearly the same mpg as a vw passet tdi doing the same journey as me in my petrol fsi.

Then the passat is either broken or being driven in an uneconomical fashion.

Then the passat is either broken or being driven in an uneconomical fashion.

I agree, my 2.0TDi PD140 Octy which now has in excess of 70K miles on the clock now achieves mid to high 50mpg (real world not computer) on my daily commute.

just to add to this i can achieve nearly the same mpg as a vw passet tdi doing the same journey as me in my petrol fsi.

The mpg indicator in your sig indicates 36.something mpg... please can you define 'nearly' ?

The mpg indicator in your sig indicates 36.something mpg... please can you define 'nearly' ?

30 or 40% less

Originally Posted by Blade404

Not always.. my turbo'd petrol had 300lb/ft (236lb/ft standard) between 2000-3000 rpm...

Either way it's lots more than a PD110 and much smoother to drive around town or out on the open road.

that's not a fair comparison though; the PD110 doesn't really make much in the way of torque

in which case compared to the pd130 its about the same around 230ftlb standard and over 300ftlb remapped

i've gone from a mk1 oct vrs 1.8t to a mk1 octi pd130 and doing the same journeys/same driving style etc and I see about 20mpg more out of the tdi and for everyday driving I now see very little difference in performance and fun factor.

I would have to be doing 10k less per year to be able to justify going back to the Octi vrs. Both have loads of torque and driven the right way they can both be economical.

I loved the 1.8t for the reviness and the sound but also like the pd130 for its relaxed lazyness but still able to make progress when needed. In the ideal world I would have a Petrol Turbo to have as a play car and the Diesel Turbo for the day to day work/running the kids around etc.

Buy a car for your needs run it & enjoy it, its your car.

just to add to this i can achieve nearly the same mpg as a vw passet tdi doing the same journey as me in my petrol fsi.

But you are comparing a N/A Petrol to a Turbo Tdi and the TDI should get better mpg than a N/A Petrol and a Turbo'd Petrol