I decided to pay the extra £40 and have a spare wheel. Actually got round to having a look at it yesterday and it appears to be a full-sized tyre albeit mounted mounted on a steel wheel whereas standard wheels on SE's are alloy. I was a bit surprised about this because when I ordered the car, the dealer told me it would be a "temporary" and "small" wheel.

I haven't looked at mine properly yet, but my wife's Mazda has a narrower tyre then those on the car but nowhere near as narrow as what I'd call a spacesaver like I had on my old car. But it still has an 80kph speed limit like the traditional spacesavers.

mines full size spare on steel rim, rest are alloys 50mph/80kph sticker on it and a standard tyre the same as the rest, so why the speed limit? as when on does not affect handling or stopping distances

Quite surprised with this arm rest topic; my brand new SE doesn't have one and I can't even see where one might be secured.

Still an option according to the Skoda website... part number DAO700001 at £126.99!

http://www.accessories.skoda.co.uk/productdetail.aspx?p_no=DAO700001

Changing subject;- I decided to pay the extra £40 and have a spare wheel. Actually got round to having a look at it yesterday and it appears to be a full-sized tyre albeit mounted mounted on a steel wheel whereas standard wheels on SE's are alloy. I was a bit surprised about this because when I ordered the car, the dealer told me it would be a "temporary" and "small" wheel.

My spare tyre (steel wheel + 50mph sticker) looks full-sized, but it is in fact slightly narrower than the vehicle tyres (alloy wheels): -

Spare tyre - 195/55.............Vehicle tyres - 205/45

It seems Skoda standardised the spare option when it introduced the goo can.

Rob

Edited 10 March, 201016 yr by Robjon

Thank you for your replies. All very useful and interesting but now I am feeling in a quandary as this new petrol engine (1.2 TSI 105bhp) seems to be as economical and cleaner than the diesels and without the concerns of the DPF.

My current 2001 Fabia Classic is a 1.4 (MPI I think?). In Devon last year we had 5 in the car, a full load and a roof box. It has always struggled a little on hills but with this particular hill the car actually stopped. I had to reverse and then pick up speed to make it up the hill.

Will this 1.2 engine have more power than my Fabia? Is it the 'bhp' that one should look at rather than the engine size in terms of litres?

Thanks again,

Matthew.

I used to have a Fabia with the 1.4 MPI like yours. That was an ancient but characterful engine, dating back to the pre Volkswagen Skodas, and if I remember correctly put out 68bhp and was very slow indeed. So to answer your question, you'd probably find even the less powerful 1.2 TSi engine would feel powerful by comparison to your existing car. The 105bhp TSI would feel positively quick. Both these TSI engines are turbocharged, which means they have a lot more low down pulling power than your old Fabia as well as the outright power.

For what it's worth, my opinion would be if you're not a speed demon, or do lots and lots of miles, I'd save your cash and go for the second-cheapest 85bhp 1.2 TSI. I suspect you wont be disappointed.

The VAG group have moved to common rail and dropped the PD engine to control dpf regeneration more effectively. The ability to control precisely injection time and number of injections per cycle is vastly improved with common rail as the fuel pressure is available all the time and injection is started and stopped electronically. Unlike the PD engine where the time available to inject is limited mechanically to the time each injector is operated by the cam. The ability to have 2 pre injection, 1 main injection and 2 post injection phases in 1 cycle vastly improves combustion and gives the ecu the ability to raise exhaust gas temperatures to allow dpf regeneration without having to adopt a certain driving style. The dpf problems on PD engines are common and unfortunately due to the lack of injection control on these engines sometimes a sympathetic driving style is needed to aid dpf regeneration. Unfortunately dpf systems are fitted to vehicles because of neccesity. ie EU emissions standards and as each new standard is produced technology will have to follow. Adblue is the next emission control system which will appear on VAG passenger cars to bring down the NOx emissions.

Adblue is the next emission control system which will appear on VAG passenger cars to bring down the NOx emissions.

http://alternativefuels.about.com/od/researchdevelopment/a/adblue.htm

looks nasty stuff

says not a DIY job to refill the adblue tank, yet another way to try and tie you to a stealer for service

peter

The new TSI engine is a brand new turbocharged single cam 8v direct injected four cylinder and a gem from what I have read. The 1.2 HTP is a three cylinder engine that is revvy but can be described as "characterful" or raucous depending on your state of mind. Only driven it in a Fabia where it's growl under accerleration is nice but you really do have to birch it to get it to go. The Diesels will be nice and relaxed with plenty of low down torque but the litte 1.2 TSI developes it's torque at under 2000 rpm too and will be quieter and more civilised. Add the fact that you may have particulate filter issues if you do a lot of town drivinand I'd steer clear if the 1.6 TDI and get a 1.2 TSI

The new TSI engine is a brand new turbocharged single cam 8v direct injected four cylinder and a gem from what I have read. The 1.2 HTP is a three cylinder engine that is revvy but can be described as "characterful" or raucous depending on your state of mind. Only driven it in a Fabia where it's growl under accerleration is nice but you really do have to birch it to get it to go. The Diesels will be nice and relaxed with plenty of low down torque but the litte 1.2 TSI developes it's torque at under 2000 rpm too and will be quieter and more civilised. Add the fact that you may have particulate filter issues if you do a lot of town drivinand I'd steer clear if the 1.6 TDI and get a 1.2 TSI

Is there a reason why the TSI is an 8V SOHC? I assumed it would be at least a 16V , if not a DOHC.

Is there a reason why the TSI is an 8V SOHC? I assumed it would be at least a 16V , if not a DOHC.

8v engines are usually better for low down torque, and have less moving parts so are cheaper and there is less friction.

Yes torque and less friction together with compactness. I posted a VW promotional video off Youtubeon the Yeti forum somewhere. Yes the drive train may appear old but they didn't need twin cam etc so binned it. The engine has got great reviews though.

Edit: Here is the video agan:

This wll give you an idea of the sound of the 1.2 three cylinder in a Polo:

Not to everyone's taste but as I say I like it!

Edited 10 April, 201016 yr by Matt Bodycombe

I used to have a Fabia with the 1.4 MPI like yours. That was an ancient but characterful engine, dating back to the pre Volkswagen Skodas, and if I remember correctly put out 68bhp and was very slow indeed. So to answer your question, you'd probably find even the less powerful 1.2 TSi engine would feel powerful by comparison to your existing car. The 105bhp TSI would feel positively quick. Both these TSI engines are turbocharged, which means they have a lot more low down pulling power than your old Fabia as well as the outright power.

For what it's worth, my opinion would be if you're not a speed demon, or do lots and lots of miles, I'd save your cash and go for the second-cheapest 85bhp 1.2 TSI. I suspect you wont be disappointed.

Sounds good advice to me. Even the 85bhp version of the 1.2tsi has more torque (c.118lbs or 160nm) than the previous petrol 1.6 range topper. This pulling power is available low down and sustained throgh the rev range so in real world driving will seem pretty flexible. The 105 will be even more so of course. Incidentaly, given the torque figures, I'd be surprsied if the latter wasn't quicker than the times Skoda has posted, which are currently the same for the 105 tsi as for its 1.6 predecesor. I'm sure both 1.2 tsis will be quicker in gear and 30-70 than the normally aspirated engines they replace.

Edited 10 April, 201016 yr by helix

I'd be surprsied if the latter wasn't quicker than the times Skoda has posted, which are currently the same for the 105 tsi as for its 1.6 predecesor. I'm sure both 1.2 tsis will be quicker in gear and 30-70 than the normally aspirated engines they replace.

I agree, I expect they quoted the same times for the new vs. old for marketing reasons - in some countries they will still sell the old 1.6 so didn't want to make it appear slow as well as less economical. That's my guess anyway!

This wll give you an idea of the sound of the 1.2 three cylinder in a Polo:

Not to everyone's taste but as I say I like it!

I really like them too! The best bit is you can rev them all the way to the red line and they still sound like they want more rather than screaming for mercy. Here's a couple of vids of them in a Fabia:

For what its worth I have only nothing but praise for the 1.2TSI unit. I have it in my yeti and find it to be extremely refined very flexible and very economical. (Just returned from a fully laden family holiday and averaged 44.1 mpg over 900 mixed miles including a lot of stop start and hilly country b road driving - very impressed) My decision to choose the 1.2TSI was down to the fact that I wanted economy but having owned BMW and Merc diesels in the past which were very good and very very refined I simply couldn't live with the noise levels of the VAG derv units. While the new CR units are more refined than the older PD units - they are not a patch on some of their competitors. I also wasn't impressed with VAG's statements regarding DPF and regeneration. I want to know that I can drive my car how and when I like and not have to ensure I drive at 50mph for 40 miles to regenerate the DPF. I do mixed driving around town and motorway/A roads. While I was waiting on my Yeti to be delivered my local dealer had given me a new 1.6TDI Octavia as a loan vehicle after 4 days of general driving around the car decided to do a regeneration cycle during a drive to Perth - unbeknown to me! Honestly I thought the thing was going to go on fire! I actually stopped the car and got out to try and identify where the smell (like burning tyres) was coming from. Phoned the dealer and they advised this was the regeneration cycle taking place and all would be fine after a longish drive. So between the incident with the octavia CR diesel and a mountain of problems I had with an early A3 170TDI PD DPF which used to just cut out all the time and in the end had ££££'s of warranty work done to it and never really got any better, I reckon I made the right choice with the 1.2 TSI and it would take a LOT of convincing to get me behind the wheel of another VAG diesel.

Just my 2p worth!

But go try a 1.2TSI it's a sweet little engine and punches well above its weight. Although I suspect nobody will have a demo roomster or fab yet but even blag a shot in a yeti or polo just to see what you thing. Comparing it to the old 8v 1.4 which routes right back to polos and golfs from the 70's and 80's there is absolutely no comparison!

http://alternativefuels.about.com/od/researchdevelopment/a/adblue.htm

looks nasty stuff

says not a DIY job to refill the adblue tank, yet another way to try and tie you to a stealer for service

peter

Lol I have a friend who has a citroen C5 that uses this stuff - it costs an absolute fortune to replenish ( a refill of the small tank under the back seat costs over £200 and is supposed to last 40k miles IIRC however his car needs replenished at every service and if it's not done the car responds with a whole plethora of bells whistles and warning lights - not to mention a limp mode! ) he says if it wasn't a company car he'd have binned it ages ago. In essence all it is is a refined urine solution I jokingly tell him just to pull over and take a **** in the tank

Lol I have a friend who has a citroen C5 that uses this stuff - it costs an absolute fortune to replenish ( a refill of the small tank under the back seat costs over £200 and is supposed to last 40k miles IIRC however his car needs replenished at every service and if it's not done the car responds with a whole plethora of bells whistles and warning lights - not to mention a limp mode! ) he says if it wasn't a company car he'd have binned it ages ago. In essence all it is is a refined urine solution I jokingly tell him just to pull over and take a **** in the tank

35% pure urea solution in distilled water apparently, several service stations i use in kent and london have 40 ltr containers of it for sale, (for lorries i assume) so seems to be easilly available

question is do you need to reset anything on the engine management (similar to the service indicator)

peter

35% pure urea solution in distilled water apparently, several service stations i use in kent and london have 40 ltr containers of it for sale, (for lorries i assume) so seems to be easilly available

question is do you need to reset anything on the engine management (similar to the service indicator)

peter

Well I don't know how it will affect vag group cars but on my mates citroen when it runs out it brings on the check engine light.

Conclusion: They still haven't got it right, unless top notch fuel economy is a real issue for you (it isn't for me because I only do 10k per annum) get a petrol engine and avoid all the hassle!

I have recently ordered the Fabia and I had initially planned on getting the diesel however after a bit of reading (DPF etc) I went for the 105 hp 1.2TSI. I currently drive a 2L octavia and here's how the performance figures compare:

2.0 115BHP @ ~5750rpm 125lb/ft @ ~2750rpm best mpg 35, typically <30mpg

1.2 105BHP @ ~5500rpm 129lb/ft @ 1500-4100rpm expecting to average >40mpg

The other reason I was not so keen on the diesel is the narrowness of the power band. if you are accelerating or getting past something you need to change up at 4000rpm whereas you can let the petrol spin up. You get the low the down torque (almost) afforded by a diesel with the top end of a petrol. Win win!

The other reason I was not so keen on the diesel is the narrowness of the power band. if you are accelerating or getting past something you need to change up at 4000rpm whereas you can let the petrol spin up. You get the low the down torque (almost) afforded by a diesel with the top end of a petrol. Win win!

I've run PD diesels for 9 years now, and many other diesels before that and can say with all honesty that I've never had any problems when overtaking, and I don't hang around... the power band is so wide that its actually more likely that you would have to change if you were in a petrol rather than the diesel... I agree re mileage however that is also dependant on what you pay to run the car (company/motability where costs can be paid for you for instance mpg is more important regardless of the mileage)... I know you are talking about the 1.6 CRD, but the torque curve seems similar to the PD, just curves off after 3500, but I can't remember the last time I went over that figure... That "overtaking" change down is a myth spread by certain anti-diesel journos and spread around every time someone wants to justify petrol to diesel... in real life driving its just that, a myth!

Having said that I will be looking at the TSi because its the only Roomie with an auto option!

Edited 17 May, 201016 yr by The PM

... That "overtaking" change down is a myth spread by certain anti-diesel journos and spread around every time someone wants to justify petrol to diesel... in real life driving its just that, a myth!

I was speaking from experience of driving the wife's Mondeo with a six speed box, very short ratios seem to keep you stirring the box constantly. I had concluded that matching a diesel with an auto box would be ideal, but the Fabia didn't offer the diesel/DSG combo and I was put off by the DPF issue also.

If you put more ratios in any car then it will mean more gear changes! I can only speak for 5 spds, and I've never had any problems over a number of diesel cars of different makes... after all overtaking is about planning it correctly... and knowing how to get the best out of your car... something most car jouros in diesels don't have a clue!

Would agree re the DSG box, I'm another thats a bit annoyed that they have only mated it to the TSi and not the diesel!