Alternative to new vRS

[Black]

There is a good chance ex Demo Octavia VRS are probably ex hire cars. Have seen a fair number at hire depots recently.

[helix]

You wouldn't have to settle for ex demo Octy vRS's, TorqueX. DTD are listing the 2 litre petrol at £15.6k brand new, making it cheaper than the Fabia II vRS, and that's before you've added niceties such as climatic air conditioning, cruise control, front armrest and electric rear windows to the Fabia which the Octy already comes as standard with. Who are Skoda trying to kid with the pricing of the Fabia?!?

No doubt the Octy vRS is a well equipped bargain at the moment: the total discount includes the VAT free offer i think dsicount is about £3600 on DtD.

However, on-line brokers are offering the Fabia vRS for around 14k, so while discounts are not in the Octy league,it is still cheaper.

i don't think the Fabia pricing is at fault: new models won't usually attract the same discount as established ones so for the time being there's no doubt that you could get a lot more metal for not much more money.

The Fabia vRS is still cheaper than most comparable hot minis, and unlike most of the competition is a five door with genuine small family capacity. In that sense it retains some of the Mk1's USP as a practical as well as fast car.

Edited 21 July, 2010 by helix

[giandougl]

Would have guessed the new MK2 1.4Fabia VRS petrol would run rings around my old unmapped MK1 1.9Fabia VRS.

Reduced 0-60 by two seconds, an extra gear (7th) a higher top speed, turbo+super-charger.

Would swap my Fabia VRS MK1 for MK2 VRS in a second, fuel consumption not relevant.

[Statto]

Around 14k would be a more sensible starting point for the Fabia II vRS, and good on the online brokers for doing that. At that price, it doesn't represent too much a price jump from the old Fabia vRS, for what is admittedly a superior car technology wise (ie engine and gearbox). I'd almost be tempted to trade in my Fabia vRS SE for one, but I think i'll wait until leather becomes an option on it and "diffuser delete" becomes a no-cost option!

[GREZA]

The new Fabia should by rights be at least 25% more expensive than the last of the Fabia vRSs were in 2007 as Sterling has depreciated by 25% in that time i.e. it should be close on £14,500 just to stay where the old car was in Euro terms.

This does not even allow for the car being perhaps intrinsically more expensive than its predecessor given its more sophisticated mechanicals.

[Stuart_J]

The new Fabia should by rights be at least 25% more expensive than the last of the Fabia vRSs were in 2007 as Sterling has depreciated by 25% in that time i.e. it should be close on £14,500 just to stay where the old car was in Euro terms.

This does not even allow for the car being perhaps intrinsically more expensive than its predecessor given its more sophisticated mechanicals.

You have ignored the recession forces that have pushed prices down but we can always find reasons to justify the price increase but most people just look at what the same money will buy

This is the same money, IMO a far better looking pocket rocket http://www.abarthforum.co.uk/grande-punto-abarth/abarth-punto-evo-press-pack-and-tech-specs/

Edited 22 July, 2010 by Stuart_J

[helix]

There are quite a few "hot" minis which seem to deliberately retain some of the practicality and day to day useability of the superminis on which they are based eg Polo GTI, Ibiza Cupra/FR, Alfa Mito and even the Abarth Punto Evo. The Fabia vRS mk2 is obviously in this category (and the mk 1 was an excellent example of this which also had the diesel economy USP). Most of these have also had varying degrees of comment about how they lack outright sporty driving qualities eg lack of steering feel. i think that's the price we probably have to pay. If you want something more uncompromisingly sporty, there's the excellent Clio. if you wants something smallerand cheaper there's the Suzuki swift or Abarth 500 (neither of which are particualrly quick).

In this company, the vRS seems to hold its own well: 5 doors, on the spacious side, generally good reviews for ride and handling, genuinely quick and responsive, well built, and comfortable and economical enough for everyday use. It's not perhaps the best looking, but for some, it's understatedness is part of its appeal. And it's cheaper than most. What's not to like?

Edited 22 July, 2010 by helix

[Hannibal]

If the Ibiza FR gets the 2.0 tdi 140, will it not be available in the Fabia II in the future?

[helix]

If the Ibiza FR gets the 2.0 tdi 140, will it not be available in the Fabia II in the future?

It's a nice thought.

However it's often reported that the 2.0 TDI won't fit the Fabia platform*, so maybe not. The Ibiza and Polo use a new platform.

*I've also read that this is a myth so who knows!

[Hannibal]

It's a nice thought.

However it's often reported that the 2.0 TDI won't fit the Fabia platform*, so maybe not. The Ibiza and Polo use a new platform.

*I've also read that this is a myth so who knows!

Fnarrrr

[helix]

My own feeling is that if Skoda want to produce a Fabia vRS diesel they will find a way. It would fit the history of the Fabia vRS, and the petrol/diesel choice in the Octavia vRS. (I'm no techy though so I can't pretend to understand the practical limitations of engines and platforms)

IIRC I think Skoda had first use of the 1.9 PD 100 (indeed may even have developed it). Its availability in the Fabia was slightly delayed and a dealer told me back in about 2000 that Skoda were having trouble getting it to fit. I think the 1.9 started life as a 90 bhp but ended up delivering 150 in PD form. I'm getting speculative here, but if the 2.0 really doesn't fit, I wonder if the 1.6 TDI has the potential to deliver more than 105?

[Stuart_J]

Suzuki swift or Abarth 500 (neither of which are particualrly quick).

I beg to differ on the Abarth, on our little 3500 mile rally last year many were quicker is a straight line but on the twisties a Z4M being well driven was the only thing to stay with us, & thats without any mods to the Abarth.

The Abarth weighs in at 1030 kg, The Fabia is probably nearer to 13-1400. Ok the Abarth is only 130 bhp (ours dynoed at 139) but theres the option of the SS kit which gives another 30 Italian horsies & with it added its still cheaper than the fabia.

Edited 22 July, 2010 by Stuart_J

[GREZA]

My own feeling is that if Skoda want to produce a Fabia vRS diesel they will find a way. It would fit the history of the Fabia vRS, and the petrol/diesel choice in the Octavia vRS. (I'm no techy though so I can't pretend to understand the practical limitations of engines and platforms)

IIRC I think Skoda had first use of the 1.9 PD 100 (indeed may even have developed it). Its availability in the Fabia was slightly delayed and a dealer told me back in about 2000 that Skoda were having trouble getting it to fit. I think the 1.9 started life as a 90 bhp but ended up delivering 150 in PD form. I'm getting speculative here, but if the 2.0 really doesn't fit, I wonder if the 1.6 TDI has the potential to deliver more than 105?

It is not only space but airflow that is the issue with the 2.0 CR unit in the Fabia MkII. The other big obstacle is emissions and simply pumping more fuel into the 1.6 TDI to up the power output would likely fall down on this aspect.

Skoda will not IMHO produce a diesel sport Fabia in the near term and willcertainly have to wait for Fabia MkIII and the use of the platform in the Seat Ibiza/VW Polo before they can even comtemplate doing so. There were a lot of dealers in the UK that tried hard to get them to make the latest vRS Fabia a diesel but they could not and would not.

The original MkI vRS was only diesel because the big cheese at VW told them it had to be. Skodas management didn't want to make a sport diesel and would not if they had been given the option. Sadly, given its success, instead of realising how fortunate they were to have been 'guided' to make the MkI car, they have reverted to their 'preferred' solution in the MkII and I doubt they will want to introduce another diesel sport Fabia if they are not forced to.

Edited 22 July, 2010 by GREZA

[MartynVRS]

I don't know about alternative but for hard core driving thrills I would be very tempted by a Renault Clio Cup for a few grand more.

I agree. The cup one though is hardcore and is stripped out so doesn't come with aircon, etc. I drove a Clio 200 Renault Sport with cup suspension and a proper recaro seat and Brembo brakes a few days ago so it's the best of both worlds. Really doesn't need at turbo and goes really well. Far better than I thought it would. Easily one of the best handling cars I've ever driven. Far better quality that I expected from a Renault too.

[Fabia00]

I think at some point the 2.0 140 tdi will go in the Fabia. The facelift actually has a completely new front end to accommodate the new engines. The wheel base between pre and post facelift Fabias is also slightly altered and the Fabia now uses the same front bumper as the Polo. I have a feeling that there is very little difference between the new and old platforms underpinning the polo/ seat and the Fabia. At one point the 1.4 tsi wasn't supposed to fit the Fabia yet we have the Vrs now.

[Juego]

With the CR140 engine being in the new Ibiza FR it'd definately be my choice for a replacement to the Fabia

I do like the Mk2 Fabia VRS but i'm not into this whole DSG gearbox at all!

[GREZA]

I do like the Mk2 Fabia VRS but i'm not into this whole DSG gearbox at all!

And how much has the DSG gearbox added to the final price of the Fabia vRS?

Surely a manual box would have been cheaper and DSG could have been offered as an option.

Edited 22 July, 2010 by GREZA

[Juego]

Dunno lol, but i'm not a fan of it at all!

Drove my dads BMW 535i auto for 3 weeks and it was boring, my left leg kept going numb so since then it's put me off autos. I know the DSG isn't an auto in the same sense but it's still no clutch therefor not for me

[GREZA]

Oh

Edited 22 July, 2010 by GREZA

[GREZA]

The complexity of the DSG will inevitably mean that the car will be an early retiree to the scap yard when the cost of fixing the box is not justified by the residual value of the car IMHO.

This is a trend happening widely in the automotive industry and it needs highlighting. it seems the game is to make cars complex and mostly not repairable. The replacement parts are the major income stream for manufacturers over the car's lifetime, NOT the original sale. But when the big parts give out in an aging car then it goes to the scrap yard, probably in many cases prematurely. Look at the cost of changing the clutch on a MkI Mercedes A Class and this is not isolated, faults in ECUs, broken complex sunroofs, ABS pumps, turbos, aircon compressors I could go on.

Time was when cars rusted away and were scrapped accordingly. Now the manufacturers have to be more devious in the ways they make cars defunct.

[Juego]

My dads current BMW is a 730D, it's a fortune to repair anything in it cos it's mostly a dash out job! I whole heartedly agree manufacturers are just making cars more complex to make more money on people buying new ones

But the other reason is to go with our gadget society

[GREZA]

We need the 'independent' commentators i.e. magazines to highlight the true cost of ownership of vehicles by perhaps publishing 5 year or even better first 5 and second 5 year running costs for each model.

In this way it would become very apparent which manufacturers' cars are timebombs of expense waiting to blow up on those who own them later on in their lives.

Edited 22 July, 2010 by GREZA

[Juego]

BMW is definately one of them! My dads put another years warranty on his 730D cos it's only a 56 plate, but he plans to get rid before that warranty is up as it wasn't cheap

[GREZA]

Car warranty premiums are a very good indicator of the likely future running costs, as your Dad has discovered Juego

These insurance companies gather large amounts of data on breakdowns to arrive at an acturarial calculation of what premium to charge based on age, mileage etc.

Perhaps their premiums should be published regularly in magazines so that it then becomes obvious to all which cars will burn a hole in your wallet in respect of repairs and which won't.

Edited 22 July, 2010 by GREZA

[helix]

I beg to differ on the Abarth, on our little 3500 mile rally last year many were quicker is a straight line but on the twisties a Z4M being well driven was the only thing to stay with us, & thats without any mods to the Abarth.

The Abarth weighs in at 1030 kg, The Fabia is probably nearer to 13-1400. Ok the Abarth is only 130 bhp (ours dynoed at 139) but theres the option of the SS kit which gives another 30 Italian horsies & with it added its still cheaper than the fabia.

Fair point Stuart. I've heard the Abarth is a cracking little car ranking high in the fun factor! And as you say, its agility compensates for a slightly lower speed. My intended underlying point was that because of its size, it's not quite a direct competitor for the Fabia.