My contention is that the Fabia vrS represents the spiritual successor to the original Golf GTi Mk1 in what it seeks to give the driver by way of performance and Q car status.

Ah, now that's where I'm coming from. My last three cars have been Golf GTIs. In 1981, I imported a 1.6 Mk.1. In 1983, I imported a 1.8 Mik.1 (my all-time favourite). In 1990, I bought a 1.8 Mk.2 (comfortable, but lost the zest). So I got the Elegance 2.0 to a) fit in my small garage, give me a bit of oomph, c) provide 5 doors and the comfort to carry 4 people.

Mike the Fabia vrS really is a great little car. I can't think of another car on offer in the UK that offers a better all round package.

Golfs have become heavier and heavier with each successive generation, the latest MkV GTi needs 200Bhp to offer any performance, utterly mad through the front wheels - regardless of the clever electronics needed to cope with it !

Long live the Fabia vrS !

Yup. In particular, 'the man' would like to know the relative merits of petrol and diesel as regards pollution. I have several acquaintances who have breathing problems and are susceptible to the particulates that diesel produces. So what would help me here is a) point me to some references for diesel/petrol, point me to some figures that show how the VRS measures up compared to other diesels.

The price difference to me, over three years, is negligible. The equipment is not much different. What appeals about the VRS is the extra punch. What detracts is the fumes.

The vrS meets pollution regulation EUIII whereas the 2.0 petrol meets the higher EUIV standard, however the vrS diesel emits 138g/Km CO2 whilst the 2.0 petrol emits 180g/Km. There seems no hard and fast yardstick for pollution as whilst diesel emit significantly less CO2, they do produce particulates. To be fair my vrS seems a little smokey on initial startup and on hard acceleration. I have been told by an acquaintance who made his pile in soughting out ship diesel engine emissions, that smoke from a diesel is a result of temporary over fueling a slow spinning turbo equiped engine which can be relieved by shifting down a gear to raise the revs. However you should expect some smoking with a standard vrS. This could be a good reason to consider having the 'loading' remapped by a reputable tuning house which will also result in more power. Remember all diesels have to conform to a standard for particulates as set down in the MOT test.

I certainly didn't choose my Fabia on price. I would choose a Fabia over the equivelent Polo every time and the same goes for the Octavia vs Golf. Skodas are special, the company has a real heritage. (Love VWs but Skodas are even better)

ESP = VRS only

Xenon = VRS only

Similarly, parking sensors are unavailable on the VRS, and you only get a single seat cover option.

The 6 speed box is not hard to get used to, it's like from 4 to 5 speed. Benefit is that you are able to stay in the power a lot easier if you want to. 5 speed is probably sufficient for normal driving though, admittedly.

I got used to the 6 speeder within a very very short time, it wasn't something radically different, and for the rest it seemed similar enough

As for getting test drives, that's demand for you. No guarantees it will stay like that though - but whilst a waiting list exists the demand is sufficient to keep the prices up.

The Fabia Sport may make a little dent, hard to say

But, as I asked - would you have bought it if it was, say

OK back on topic and without the warm bull that has been sprouted since my last post. GREZA, I can tell you like the car, but it really is nothing special. All that is different is the running gear, ride hight, bumpers, wheels and seats. I feel it does drive better, but at the end of the day it is just another trim level, it's not like comparing a 318 BMW and a M3 as these really are different cars. And I'm talking as an owner. The steering weight has been changed, but that can be done at a dealer and has no special components. The only thing truly special is the price when compared to the Ibiza FR and Polo GT.

Yup. In particular' date=' 'the man' would like to know the relative merits of petrol and diesel as regards pollution. I have several acquaintances who have breathing problems and are susceptible to the particulates that diesel produces. So what would help me here is

a) point me to some references for diesel/petrol,

point me to some figures that show how the VRS measures up compared to other diesels.

The price difference to me, over three years, is negligible. The equipment is not much different. What appeals about the VRS is the extra punch. What detracts is the fumes.[/quote']

I have asthma myself (as does my dad) and have not had much problem with modern diesels. They are a bit sooty but even though the particulate filter sorts most of it out, you will never get rid of it all.

What sort of references do you need? The easiest way to find out more or less what you want to know is to look at the technical specs of cars off of the Skoda website. For other branded diesel/petrol look at their websites.

The car tax band is A for the vRS and C or D for the 2.0l , so in diesel terms it is a lot lower in fumes when compared to the petrol, and will save you money in that respect too.

With the diesel fumes, unless you are going to stick a tuning box on the car, you will not really notice it. Again what I say is test drive a vRS and make your own mind up ride and punch wise.

Mike/Greza

I still stand by the fact that the 2.0 petrol suits the Fabia far better than is made out in the press.

It is NOT a performance model or marketed in that way, but I enjoyed driving if for a few days after I swapped a 220bhp 4x4 Octavia in for one (prior to delivery to the parents!). It was just so relaxed, easy going and quicker than the stats would have you believe - as mentioned above, the comfy ride and whole non-pretentiousness of it all really impressed. As you said Mike, it drives like a big car - a comment which my dad echoed and he used to have an Audi.

The vRS is a cracking car but if running costs and resale genuinely don't matter as much to you, then the 2.0 still makes a strong case for itself. In the same way that a 4x4 Octavia makes as good a case as a vRS one !!!!

Yes the Fabia vrS is based on the Polo' date=' I was suggesting that it was the 'spiritual' successor to the Golf GTi Mk1. In other words it offers similar driving properties.

Funny when I was at school (back in the dark ages when schools actually taught things), 'force' and 'power' were one and the same thing. To be pedantic, torque is force applied through a moment, sometimes called 'twisting force' but I'm sure you knew that.

[/quote']

I would contest that it is nothing like the Golf GTi, in fact the Fabia vRS is heavier and less agile than the Mk1 golf as the entire range was gearer towards comfort. In driving ability, the Golf GTi outclasses the Fabia vRS, as does the new MINI and the last 2 generations of the Fiesta. You have mentioned 5th gear and Top gear, but you obviously did not bother paying too much attention as the only reason the Fabia won, was the raw punch it had over the Mini Cooper. Through the corners, the mini wins hands down.

To put force and power in perspective, they are totally different:

Force/Torque is the turning power (why the vRS loses grip so easily)

Power, is the amount of pull.

In make it simpler and use electrical terms, Power would be watts (hence the vRS lump is a 130bhp/96Kw engine) and Torque=Volts(the pressure used to get it movind). They combine to do the same job, but go about it in different ways.

If you had a 130bhp engine, but the torque was 0Nm (not really possible, but an example) the engine would turn, but as soon as a load was put on it (in the form of wheels/gearbox) it would not move as the resistance of the air/ gearbox parts will be more than the potential pulling power and will stall.

I still stand by the fact that the 2.0 petrol suits the Fabia far better than is made out in the press.

I cannot comment on this as I have not driven it (let alone seen one), but has I drove it in the Octavia I can see how you mean as it is effortless, and makes for a comfortable cruiser.

Of course he woulndt' date=' because he clearly says's and you even quoted it yourself:

[/quote']

EXACTLY! If the Fabia vRS wasn't cheap, most people wouldn't bother with it. If dealer's want to sell it cheap, they won't pay a lot for it come trade-in. It's the story with all the Skoda range, and I've yet to see anyone come up with a convincing reason as to why it will be different from the Fabia vRS...other than "it's special", which again, there don't seem to be many reasons forthcoming to explain.

Rob.

I'd say anything over a 1.6 petrol in the Fabia would make it very smooth to drive. A 2.0 petrol will make it very relaxing for sure, and it may even be easier in some ways as you have a far greater usable rev range.

The vRS is special as it's faster than the rest of the Furby range. It is not special beyond that. The lowering helps stability a bit, and that's good for me.

I'm sure I would have enjoyed the 2.0 petrol engine drive very much, and it should make the Furby fly

Again, test driving the potential candidates seems like the best way, it's your hard-earned cash after all

Rooboy, I do diagree slightly with your comments re the Mini Cooper, and although I understand your point exactly I personally view it differently.

I understand wholeheartadly that most wont view it like this but it's freedom of speech so here goes...

I bought my vRS with an intention to remap it. I liked the reliability and the MPG, I also liked it's uniqueness, 5000 in the country? the same as Aston Martin make per year (not comparing the two cars). Also for me being young it was quite a humbling moment to step into a car with a Skoda badge and i'm the first to report that it is a Volkswagen in drag to people of my age group - a case in point. But going to the real reasoning is modification. I like the fact that unlike most normally aspirated petrols you can spend

OK, some good points have been made. Comparing the vrS to the 2.0 petrol Elegance it is true that there is a

especially if we are going to be able fule up with biodiesel at 60p a litre form this month onwards as seems to be likely.

What? How? Where? Why?

HM Treasury (that nice Mr Brown you know: I don't think so) have decreed a 20p discount on biodiesel starting Jan 2005 so start demanding it at your local filling station.

Great! will it affect performance, or is it just Green?

Best of both worlds my friend. Better for the environment, more power and longer engine life due to greater lubricity. Blending will dictate the true price deduction, some stations will be using 5% blends (e.g. Tescos Harlow area) but others up to 100% so should pass on the full discount.

1. I think the Fabia handles better than some people give it credit for. Although some of this may be down to tyres, I am running some Pirelli's up front instead of the Michelins and its a lot better. I'd be interested to see what difference a strut brace will make and hopefully in a few months I'll be able to find out. Even without it, I feel I can push this car to the limits, and its great fun to drive - and all of my passengers have always been impressed when I've pushed on through the twisties - a combination of having quite a lot of grip and lots of torque makes this car seem like it was built for twisties. Maybe not as good as some other cars, but I have no problems driving this car bloomin fast round corners - the brakes are the main problem - fading.

2. Again just my opinion, but the vRS seems clearly a nice step up from the more "mundane" models - no offence meant to anyone else here, but I've sat in both the vRS and in other models in the showroom, and to me the vRS looks the part from outside compared to the others and the cockpit seems sufficiently lifted compared to other models - ok its still dark but I personally feel theres something about it.

3. I've never driven the 2.0 Fabia but my dad once owned a Mk4 Golf 2.0 GTI and the Fabia vRS IS WAY quicker and WAY better handling than that was. Unless the 2.0 model is significantly cheaper, theres no way would I consider it over the vRS.

OK, some good points have been made. Comparing the vrS to the 2.0 petrol Elegance it is true that there is a

Correction here. Price drops this month put the Elegance 2.0 hatchback at

Best of both worlds my friend. Better for the environment, more power and longer engine life due to greater lubricity. Blending will dictate the true price deduction, some stations will be using 5% blends (e.g. Tescos Harlow area) but others up to 100% so should pass on the full discount.

This has been discussed at length on here before and the general feeling seemed to be that the more biodiesel in the mix, the rougher the engine ran and the poorer fuel economy and performance .... that's compared to regular diesel....

Chris

Great! will it affect performance, or is it just Green?

I am looking into this - www.biodiesel.org.

Re discounts and the price difference between the 2.0 Elegance and the vrS, I take your point Mike but if you play hard ball and play a few stocked up dealers off against oneanother as I did last summer, then you too might be lucky and get