hi, ive been looking through the forum for a good few days now and could do with some help with a few bits and bobs regarding the octavia vrs 2.0t. I currently own an mg zt cdti and am getting annoyed with the cost of parts like the dual mass flywheel which keeps giving me problems and seems to be problematic on almost every diesel car ive researched.

What i would like to know though is how suitable or unsuitable would an octavia vrs be over an annual mileage of around 15-20k miles a year and what sort of real world economy could i expect if driven sort of normally with general use of backroads to work and main roads driving about. Also i would like to know if anyone has any info on any common faults or problems that affect these cars and as people run these cars on a daily basis i wanna know how reliable the really are or arent.

also i know the vrs wont be as economical as a diesel but when compared to the expensive problems of dual mass flywheel failures and injectors and egr vales and all the other stuff that seems to go wrong on diesels is the really much difference anymore...that and the fact petrol is cheaper than diesel,

i know this sort of thing get posted regularly and i have done my research but cant quite find the exact answers im looking for

many thanks in advance

Octavia vRS Diesel would be my recommendation and not just because i have 1.

Economical, good to drive, and quick enough to shock you.

im a petrol man, but it seems to me like the diesel vRS is the one your after. petrol will avaerage 32-34 diesel prob 42-44 driven like for like.

The main problem is the Teeves abs pressure sensor that can fail<mine did!> cost £1500 to fix Edit is that a figure of speech < new car buying? because if you are buying new the fl have the teeves 70 abs and are ok

Edited 4 June, 201016 yr by bluvrs2

thanks to everyone whos replied.

i did originally look at the vrs diesel but the problem is i want a very low mileage car and you pay alot more for the car in the first place, that and there seems to be so many problems with diesels in general which are really expensive to fix (going by my experiences anyway)

so an mpg figure of 30 - 34 is achievable realistically then ? thats not that bad really for the power and the engine size type.

this problem with the abs sensor dont sound good though, does it affect many cars and is there any other common problems or faults to look out for. ?

id be looking at buying a car registered around 2006 with around 30k on the clock if that helps

Edited 5 June, 201016 yr by spanner28

so an mpg figure of 30 - 34 is achievable realistically then ? thats not that bad really for the power and the engine size type.

In the first 2500 miles in mine I've averaged 33.7. That's with a mix of driving (spirited at times to enjoy the car but not hooning it round, pedal to the floor constantly). Driven will economy in mind, I can get ~31MPG on the 4 mile journey to work (more uphill) and up to ~42MPG on my way home (more downhill). If you hoon it about all the time, it will become thirsty but I usually find I get 28-32 when not in economy mode.

thats really not bad at all then considering i get around 35 - 40 from the mg and given thats a hell of a lot down on power to a vrs

thats the first ABS sensor ive heard going wrong. problem wise there dont seem to be any. on thepetrol there was an issue with the standard diverter valve splitting, but they have released an uprated version now which is only £50.

not really any issues to worry about afaik. the petroll in my experience is the better one to drive(queue the diesel drivers abuse ) and i have driven the PD/CR diesels and the TFSI. id love more MPG, it would be great, but it doesnt bother me enough to want to change to a diesel.

getting back to your original question...i had the same dilema...petrol or diesel......i have driven my mates diesel which was great...but although i like the torque on diesels, i still prefer how a petrol drives.

the VRS petrol is a great drive and has plenty of low down torque. ok it won't return the same mpg as a diesel but i believe you will enjoy the drive better. at the end of the day both versions are quality cars!

i was lucky as i found a mint 56 plate with only 5k miles..one owner...that's what swayed my decision!

thanks for the information everyone is giving, by the looks of this forum there seems to be very few problems... everything ive read about the diesel cars i was tempted to buy are nothing but problem after problem, from dual mass flywheels to generaly poor quality parts. It really does seem the octavia is a serious contender i just need to have a work out and see if i can take the step down in mpg from a diesel

Go for a petrol. I have a vRS diesel and love it, but was lucky enough to buy it new. I'm a moderator on the Honest John forum, and I see lots of horror stories about modern diesels (far less about older ones) with DMF and DPF failures.

It may be that the newest engines have got round the problem by improved design, but as you're looking for something 3-4 years old I think a petrol vRS would be a safer bet. The engine is lovely and torquey, and if I did a lower annual mileage I'd probably have had one.

high annual mileage is my biggest concern tho as its quite high at around 20k

I've got a 10 plate FL petrol. I get 34mpg average that's with motorway at a steady 80mph 40%, town 40% and hooning it around 20% (you don't buy a warm hatch to not use the loud pedal ). Trying for economy i can break 40mpg about town, and ~56mph on the motorway (not moving the throttle so slower on uphills faster on downhills) gives 46mpg. Well into conventional diseasal territory if you want it to be but if you call it 34mpg that leaves plenty of scope for having fun.

The only thing i'd raise is the Tsi & older Tfsi engines are effectively diesel engines that drink petrol. The are common rail (like the diesel), direct injection (like the diesel), variable geometry turbocharged (like the diesel), lean burn (like the diesel), etc. etc. they share more in common with the diesel than they differ. The main difference will be in petrol not gunging up like diesel does so hopefully the injectors will last past 100k miles which the diesels commonly dont. All that being said, the new generations of engines are much more reliable than the old. DMF issues are much rarer on the modern DMFs, that goes for all makes really.

very informative thanks, i hadnt thought about the engines like that its really becoming very tempting to just go find one and buy one... got to do some research into insurance i think as im only 25 and dont wanna be paying the earth for the privilege

new car buying? because if you are buying new the fl have the teeves 70 abs and are ok

Do they? I thought the Teves MK70 was only fitted to models that only have ABS and not the full ESP?

im only 25 and dont wanna be paying the earth for the privilege

snap! :-p I've gone with admiral for mine. Had a few concerns about going with them, like they don't cover extras, even factory fit extras, so if my fairly spec'd up octy got written off they'd only match the price of a base model. I spoke to them on the phone and got that sorted, they agreed to cover my options too. Have taken a multicar policy which skews things a bit but they quoted £400 for the octy with 4 years ncb and parked on the driveway at night.

Hope it helps

The only thing i'd raise is the Tsi & older Tfsi engines are effectively diesel engines that drink petrol. The are common rail (like the diesel), direct injection (like the diesel), variable geometry turbocharged (like the diesel), lean burn (like the diesel), etc. etc. they share more in common with the diesel than they differ. The main difference will be in petrol not gunging up like diesel does so hopefully the injectors will last past 100k miles which the diesels commonly dont. All that being said, the new generations of engines are much more reliable than the old. DMF issues are much rarer on the modern DMFs, that goes for all makes really.

Do u mean that the TSI and TFSI engines have DMF's like diesels that go wrong too?

Do u mean that the TSI and TFSI engines have DMF's like diesels that go wrong too?

I don't think they go wrong as much anymore. Sure it's an extra thing on the car so it's an extra thing that can go wrong, but I don't think failure rates are excessive anymore like they were back in 2006 or so for ford.

For what it's worth, VAG have been fitting DMFs commonly since the late 90's and to certain cars since long before. The wee 1.6 Petrol in my 12 year old golf came out the factory with a DMF, I'd love to say it's still going strong but I changed it to an SMF because of clutch pedal feel issues (learner driver, very poor feel and operation in that clutch from the factory.

everything pretty much has dmf's fitted these days, perhaps the amounts of torque from diesel engines are there biggest killer as ive not really heard much about petrol engined cars having issues,

insurance so far for me being 25 and having 4 years ncb seems to be around 800 quid through admiral and around 550 for my mg, gonna have to look and see if i find it cheaper tho i think...

i assume that generally speaking things like clutch lifespans and gearboxes are generally pretty good on these cars ? appreciating the fact it depends how there driven

oh also fair play to everyone on this forum whos commented, this is one of the most helpful forums ive come across. Posted up some genuine questions on a ford forum about a mondeo i was previously debating and not many people made the effort to be helpful so thank you

Edited 6 June, 201016 yr by spanner28