If you're still harping on about 0-60 times, are you suggesting that people using a GPS timing system are lying? Or that the GPS system was incorrect?

I'm not sure that standard GPS would be accurate enough to give a reliable figure given the built in wobble ot the satellites. I think you would need DGPS (corrected by a local base station as per modern marine systems) and I somehow doubt anyone has gone to these lengths. But please prove me wrong,its open season, everyone seems to have it in for me round here anyway so why should you be different...

Boys and Girls.

Having placed the original thread, I could hardly believe what I have been reading over the last few pages.

Sense of humour failure, mucho big time.

Lets all calm down. You're all lovely people and so is the VRS.

Nuff said.

Maybe Skoda have a good reason for understating their cars performance. If so then its a rare case of a company underselling their product.

Well, if the power output is somewhere between 130bhp and 145bhp, it makes sense to pick the lowest value - that way, if you sold it to someone as 140bhp and they found it was 138bhp via dyno, they could probably sue you for false advertising or similar...

Rob.

Well, if the power output is somewhere between 130bhp and 145bhp, it makes sense to pick the lowest value ...

Makes good sense, given how touchy SOME FOLKS get at the drop of just about anything

You threw down the challenge re my assertion that the AutoExpress article had factual errors in it. I proved that there were errors and you had to admit you had overlooked them.

No, I said I could find 4, you then gave me the errors and I readily accepted the ones that you had a point with, namly the optional extras, and the CO2, although even Auto Express has said in their email to you that they used their results as opposed to Skodas quoted fiqures, which wouud be explained by a higher output of BHP and torque along with the 0-60 timings.

I have no problem admitting when I am wrong, and have readilly done so on more than one occasion.

Makes good sense, given how touchy SOME FOLKS get at the drop of just about anything

No' date=' I said I could find 4, you then gave me the errors and I readily accepted the ones that you had a point with.....

I have no problem admitting when I am wrong, and have readilly done so on more than one occasion.[/quote']

Look its not about face, its about having a good debat, thats all I was trying to do and to get the magazine to give a fair and accurate representation of the car. I've no fight with you and the power/performance of the car - you're probably totally right over this and to be quite frank I've got a great big smile over the fact that I've just got an extra 15hp without spending any money ! Cheers, have a great weekend.

So do you think it should have come first?

(In the spirit of debate, not having a go )

So do you think it should have come first?

(In the spirit of debate' date=' not having a go )[/quote']

Stimps, I can see where the article is coming from and most importantly their target audience. Speaking personally I would NEVER swop my vRS for either of the other two cars, the Fabia has a certain class about it that the others lack IMHO. So for me it would win by a country mile.

Boys and Girls.

Having placed the original thread' date=' I could hardly believe what I have been reading over the last few pages.

Sense of humour failure, mucho big time.

Lets all calm down. You're all lovely people and so is the VRS.

Nuff said.

[/quote']

Here here!

And anyway, who gives a fudge if it's 0-60 in 7.2 secs, 9.6 secs or never at all as you bust your clutch trying too hard. Its just a great car that everyone on this forum appreciates (cue William :boat: ) by virtue of the fact they are on this forum.

Hail Skoda!! :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:

Speaking personally I would NEVER swop y vRS for either of the other two cars, the Fabia has a certain class about it that the others lack IMHO. So for me it would win by a country mile.

I agree! Have a good weekend all :cheers:

Autocar : Why Are The Headline Figures So Often Wrong? (0-60 times)

http://www.autocar.co.uk/diarycategorylist.asp?DT=14

Stimps, I can see where the article is coming from and most importantly their target audience. Speaking personally I would NEVER swop my vRS for either of the other two cars, the Fabia has a certain class about it that the others lack IMHO. So for me it would win by a country mile.

I wouldn't swap my fabia either, and it's not even a vRS...

The only point I've really tried to make is that the vRS isn't necessarily a traditional hot-hatch, and therefore wouldn't beat cars that are considered as such... I don't think I ever said the other cars were better...

:cheers:

Hiya!

New on here today. I too read the AutoExpress article, and was rather surprised. OK, the 0-62 time for the Fiesta was a lot quicker than the Fabia, but the in-gear time for 50-70, wiped the floor with the lot of'em! I think that is a more realistic example of why I think the Fabia should have at least come better than 3rd, as I would mainly want all that power at about 50mph for overtaking or spanking a car down a windy country road (Mid-Wales for example!).

I currently drive a Ford KA (yes, I know, very emabarassing!), and when finances allow, I will flog it and get a V Sexy VRS. Will not buy another Ford, as the KA badly designed (and that came from a mate of mine who is an ex-Ford mechanic), badly screwed together, and too flimsy even for town driving. I really think they are overrated and overpriced!

20ishmpg for the Fiesta ST aswell? Pants! You don't want to be filling over every couple of yours if you take your car out for a spin- another area where the Fabia won hands down!

Only downside I have found is that Skoda won't let you take a Fabia for a 24hr test drive, like they will for the Octavia and Superb. Real shame! :confused:

p.s. anyone know somewhere in the MAnchester area doing a Fabia VRs for a cracking price, as all garages i have tried won't budge from the RRP :thumbdwn:

GPS systems don't need DGPS any more really since the US government turned off the randomised error 2 years ago or so. You can get figures down to 10 m or so with a cheap handheld GPS now. I'm not sure how GPS comes into speed timing though, since for that you need an accellerometer (as built into a performance meter, like the one we used in the thread mentioned by Jeff earlier). GPS gives a good accurate speed reading (although it usually lags by a second or two), but you need to couple it with accurate time measurement, which handheld stopwatches just don't do.

this thread is nothing more than a childish arguement now. are mods gonna do the business? some say good some say bad. who actually cares, but whatever the outcome this thread is now pointless

What annoys me which no one has mentioned is that they are 3 very different cars.

Clio 182 Cup, it's designed to be a fast road/track car for 1k less than a 182, if you want to tick the options list as standard then get a 182 with xenons, cruise, leather interior, auto wipers, cd, central locking, cat1 alarm, trip computer - basically everything a more prestige brand would have. The 182 cup isnt for the road and of course it's sparse, why else would you be able to specify recaro seats and a roll cage as options?

The fiesta ST is a basically a fiesta with a big engine, no doubt it'll be well built, durable and practical however it will also be an enthuisiast who buys it, because for the money there are cars that out perform it, much in the same way the Focus ST used to get out performed yet seemed to come top in each comparison, i'd take the Leon Cupra R for the same money thank you, if for it being more exclusive alone.

Then you have the Fabia vRS, a "warm" hatch, it's group 9 insurance and does 55 mpg and had 5 doors and a large boot for it's size. It's not a tyre shredding track car like the Clio 182 Cup and it will NEVER be as fast, but it's not supposed to be. It's a nice car that is a great all rounder, but has been compared with the wrong cars.

I wouldn't say it was a bad review. I'm a mk5 zetec-s owner and I'm looking for a new car. The ST and Fabia vRS are on my list. And if anything that group test has swung me towards the Fabia for economy, in-gear performance and interior plastics quality!

I had a look at the Fiesta at my local showroom and it seems really solid. Only really let down by the interior plastics. They are shocking and even make my mk5 Fiesta's look good!

The best thing about it, without driving it, was the seats. They are sooooo nice and comfy and I personally thought the driving position was great. But I'm yet to sit in a vRS and I'm told they have fantastic seats too.

The handling in my zetec-s is amazing. For example there is a corner near me that my brother struggles at 50mph in his 172 and I can easily take at 90mph in my z-s. I've been told that the ST has better handling than my zetec-s so it must be brilliant.

I'm going to look at the ST tomorrow in Milton Keynes (Xscape) as they have the Fiesta Sports Series down there. Hopefully they'll give me a test drive.

My Uncle, brother and me are all interested in the Fabia vRS and it's one of the top cars on my list to replace my beloved zetec-s. I can't wait to have a look and drive of one.

The handling in my zetec-s is amazing. For example there is a corner near me that my brother struggles at 50mph in his 172 and I can easily take at 90mph in my z-s. I've been told that the ST has better handling than my zetec-s so it must be brilliant.

I think either your exagerrating or your brother is a crap driver...

The z-s does handle. It beat the vts on top gear (many moons ago).

I wanna look at the vRS because it's great perfomance wise and also is pretty amazing value for money.

It's also a low ins grp which means a lot to me being 22 and poor

Regarding the official skoda 0-62 time of 9.6 seconds....i was recently having a chat with a guy in the motor industry who i won't name and he said 'do you really think VW want to advertise the fact that a vrs at

Regarding the official skoda 0-62 time of 9.6 seconds....i was recently having a chat with a guy in the motor industry who i won't name and he said 'do you really think VW want to advertise the fact that a vrs at

Interesting that last year the vRS was Auto Express's 15 best 'drivers car' of 2004, yet this year it's beaten by the petrol FR Ibiza and the Fiesta, it'll be interesting to see how many polls either of those even get into - the Seat wasn't even in the top 25 last year. How fickle these reporters are.

The Seat was not launched until the middle of this year and the fiesta ST is brand new. What is intriguing is the FR is above the Fabia in the driver car survey, yet was below the vRS in the Auto express article because they thought the Fabia was better.

I give up........

Where did you get these performance figures from ?? :confused:

2 seconds faster to 60mph than a standard vRS ?? THE official best time for the STANDARD Fabia vRS is 7.2 seconds for Autocar magazine (Oct 04). These are TESTED figures and NOT the silly claimed 9.6 second claimed figure from Skoda. You drive one and you'll find out how fast it really is. Granted, around a racing track (as demonstrated by 5th Gear) the Fiesta ST is a little quicker due to it's superior handling, but there is NO racing tracks near where I live. We all live in the real world and in that world the Fabia vRS leaves the Fiesta in most categories. (I've also driven the ST Fiesta).