As I'm waiting for my petrol vRS to arrive at the dealers any day now, I was wondering.....................we all know that the petrol is faster 0-60, but does anyone know what the in - gear times are? (given the extra torque that he diesel has)

Depends which gear you are in I suspect with the diesel winning out in higher gears. The petrol one does it fast enough for it to not really matter.

I believe the petrol is faster in all the different ranges. The petrol has a lot of torque from low down in the rev range meaning the usual benefits of diesels are not there in this case. So if you want the fastest VRS in all areas then the petrol is the one to go for. The diesel is not slow just not as quick as the petrol.

plain and simple the petrol will win that hands down,

whilst it might only have 207Ibft of torque, it has that pretty much from 2000rpm all the way to the redline without dropping off. it makes for very easy acceleration in all gear increments

Edited 28 November, 201015 yr by janner_Sy

Thanks guys-I thought the petrol would be faster all the way-I just thought you might need to change down a cog ot two to ensure the fastest acceleration possible. Does anyone have an figures for both (30-50, 50-70 whilst through the gears and in 5th/6th etc)?

Thanks guys-I thought the petrol would be faster all the way-I just thought you might need to change down a cog ot two to ensure the fastest acceleration possible. Does anyone have an figures for both (30-50, 50-70 whilst through the gears and in 5th/6th etc)?

Even the 1.8 TSI is much quicker than the VRS Wiesel, like over 3 seconds quicker to 100 mph. It is not the toque or even the power (=2*PI"N*T) it is a lot to do with inertia of moving parts. Yes diesel has more torque but it is out of puff at 4.5K revs. As the table below shows there are one or two points where the 170 hp, 350 Nm diesel does OK ie just before a gear change point but the lower inertia weight of the engine internals have a huge effect on acceleration and that zip in the petrol engines just helps the TSIs walk away from the diesels. If Skoda used the 140 hp 1.4 TSI that would be about as quick as the 170 wiesel ie about 8 and half seconds to 60 mph.

Easiest thing to do is have the DSG and then just press and go. Spread of torque and power is wider on the TSIs ie 1500 rpm to 6200, engine more flexible. Diesel are OK for static engine ie generators or marine engines where weight or rapidly accelerating the revs does not matter so much. Always an exception and that is Audi's R10 and R15 Le Mans Cars which do well due to the type of race ie fewer pitstops is good and the rules slightly favour wiesels too.

Vehicles Skoda Octavia II 1.8 TSi V S Skoda Octavia II RS 2.0 TDI

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gearbox : manual 6 gear manual 6 gear

Power : 160 PS 170 PS

Torque : 250 Nm 350 Nm

Weight/Power ratio : 9.13 Kg/PS 1 9.24 Kg/PS 1

1 Weight (EU) heaviest verified in running order

Performances

*

Max Real Speed : 223 Km/h 224 Km/h

Km : 28.4 s . 30.2 s.

0 to 40 : 2.2 s. 2.3 s.

0 to 60 : 4 s. 3.8 s.

0 to 80 : 5.8 s. 6.1 s.

0 to 100 : 7.7 s. 8.6 s.

0 to 120 : 11.3 s. 12.5 s.

0 to 140 : 15.2 s. 16.6 s.

0 to 160 : 19.9 s. 23.3 s.

80 to 120 min : 5.5 s. 6.1 s.

80 to 120 in 4 : 6.6 s. 6.3 s.

80 to 120 in 5 : 8.7 s. 8.2 s.

80 to 120 in 6 : 10.5 s. 11.1 s

Close-ish but 1.8 TSI petrol clearly quicker than the Wiesel VRS. Do not have the 7 speed DSG figures. Figures are on an old thread on this website.

I would hardly call the 1.8 much quicker than the diesel VRS over normal (legal) driving speeds. In fact there are a few timings in that list where the so called 'slow' diesel is in fact quicker. Now I appreciated the 1.8 may have the slight edge but in the real world there is not going to be much between these two and it will be more down to how they are driven i.e. a good driver will be quicker in the diesel than an average driver in the 1.8.

no no no no

I'll be back in a few.

But for now i need to just put this:

30 to 70 through the gears the petrol is only quicker by 1.2 seconds.

That 1.2 is negated or increased depending on the driver,.

30-50 in 3rd - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

30-50 in 4th - petrol is 0.9 seconds quicker

50-70 in 5th - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

50-70 in 6th - petrol is 1.2 seconds quicker

Now, i know that petrol drivers probably would not need to do 30-50 in 3rd and that they'd probably use 2nd which might be quicker.

Out in the real old world we live in the petrol would be quicker - but not by as much as some believe. This is first hand experience chasing a MK5 GTi and separately a PreFL vRS. Neither of which "Walked away" far from it in fact.

Without going into another diesel v petrol debate, they are what they are. Yes petrols sound great and have a more linear power delivery. On the downside, drive them like that all the time and you'll struggle to hit 25mpg, compare the same thrashing to a diesel vRS and you'll see an easy 40mpg

There's not much difference to be shouting about.

Anyway - back in a mo with some 1.8 figures.

Edited 28 November, 201015 yr by prolfe

mine was running 270+hp and i never struggled to get 25mpg.

#

I will add though, my mate went to the ring with me in his PD170 vRS estate with a P torque map on numerous occasions, whilst he might not have been able to keep up with me, which was expected considering the 60Hp+ deficit it had, he still had just as much fun, if not more, because i was refueling every 10 laps. he was easily doing 20-30 laps per tank.

no no no no

I'll be back in a few.

But for now i need to just put this:

30 to 70 through the gears the petrol is only quicker by 1.2 seconds.

That 1.2 is negated or increased depending on the driver,.

30-50 in 3rd - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

30-50 in 4th - petrol is 0.9 seconds quicker

50-70 in 5th - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

50-70 in 6th - petrol is 1.2 seconds quicker

Now, i know that petrol drivers probably would not need to do 30-50 in 3rd and that they'd probably use 2nd which might be quicker.

Out in the real old world we live in the petrol would be quicker - but not by as much as some believe. This is first hand experience chasing a MK5 GTi and separately a PreFL vRS. Neither of which "Walked away" far from it in fact.

Without going into another diesel v petrol debate, they are what they are. Yes petrols sound great and have a more linear power delivery. On the downside, drive them like that all the time and you'll struggle to hit 25mpg, compare the same thrashing to a diesel vRS and you'll see an easy 40mpg

There's not much difference to be shouting about.

Anyway - back in a mo with some 1.8 figures.

Thrash a CR170 and you'll not see 40MPG, you'll be lucky to see 30, yes it will recover quickly on the post thrash part of the run but boot it and they are still heavy on juice! as far as the 1.8TSI / GTI 'Walking away.....not from mine they won't

Even the 1.8 TSI is much quicker than the VRS Wiesel, like over 3 seconds quicker to 100 mph. It is not the toque or even the power (=2*PI"N*T) it is a lot to do with inertia of moving parts. Yes diesel has more torque but it is out of puff at 4.5K revs. As the table below shows there are one or two points where the 170 hp, 350 Nm diesel does OK ie just before a gear change point but the lower inertia weight of the engine internals have a huge effect on acceleration and that zip in the petrol engines just helps the TSIs walk away from the diesels. If Skoda used the 140 hp 1.4 TSI that would be about as quick as the 170 wiesel ie about 8 and half seconds to 60 mph.

Easiest thing to do is have the DSG and then just press and go. Spread of torque and power is wider on the TSIs ie 1500 rpm to 6200, engine more flexible. Diesel are OK for static engine ie generators or marine engines where weight or rapidly accelerating the revs does not matter so much. Always an exception and that is Audi's R10 and R15 Le Mans Cars which do well due to the type of race ie fewer pitstops is good and the rules slightly favour wiesels too.

Vehicles Skoda Octavia II 1.8 TSi V S Skoda Octavia II RS 2.0 TDI

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gearbox : manual 6 gear manual 6 gear

Power : 160 PS 170 PS

Torque : 250 Nm 350 Nm

Weight/Power ratio : 9.13 Kg/PS 1 9.24 Kg/PS 1

1 Weight (EU) heaviest verified in running order

Performances

*

Max Real Speed : 223 Km/h 224 Km/h

Km : 28.4 s . 30.2 s.

0 to 40 : 2.2 s. 2.3 s.

0 to 60 : 4 s. 3.8 s.

0 to 80 : 5.8 s. 6.1 s.

0 to 100 : 7.7 s. 8.6 s.

0 to 120 : 11.3 s. 12.5 s.

0 to 140 : 15.2 s. 16.6 s.

0 to 160 : 19.9 s. 23.3 s.

80 to 120 min : 5.5 s. 6.1 s.

80 to 120 in 4 : 6.6 s. 6.3 s.

80 to 120 in 5 : 8.7 s. 8.2 s.

80 to 120 in 6 : 10.5 s. 11.1 s

Close-ish but 1.8 TSI petrol clearly quicker than the Wiesel VRS. Do not have the 7 speed DSG figures. Figures are on an old thread on this website.

YAWN! A 1.8 TSI will not walk away from a PD170, in fact the PD170 may have the edge.

oops......I think I might have started something here......

Thrash a CR170 and you'll not see 40MPG, you'll be lucky to see 30, yes it will recover quickly on the post thrash part of the run but boot it and they are still heavy on juice! as far as the 1.8TSI / GTI 'Walking away.....not from mine they won't

My PD A3 was driven very enthusiastically everywhere. I saw 36mpg. The CR is far more efficient.

no no no no I'll be back in a few.

But for now i need to just put this:

30 to 70 through the gears the petrol is only quicker by 1.2 seconds.

That 1.2 is negated or increased depending on the driver,.

30-50 in 3rd - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

30-50 in 4th - petrol is 0.9 seconds quicker

50-70 in 5th - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

50-70 in 6th - petrol is 1.2 seconds quicker

Now, i know that petrol drivers probably would not need to do 30-50 in 3rd and that they'd probably use 2nd which might be quicker.

Out in the real old world we live in the petrol would be quicker - but not by as much as some believe. This is first hand experience chasing a MK5 GTi and separately a PreFL vRS. Neither of which "Walked away" far from it in fact.

Without going into another diesel v petrol debate, they are what they are. Yes petrols sound great and have a more linear power delivery. On the downside, drive them like that all the time and you'll struggle to hit 25mpg, compare the same thrashing to a diesel vRS and you'll see an easy 40mpg

There's not much difference to be shouting about. Anyway - back in a mo with some 1.8 figures.

================================================================================

Figures show 1.8 TSI virtually 2 seconds quicker over the standing kilometer ie about 7% quicker as it is to 60 mph also.

Top speeds are the same, diesel would only be a metre or two a head at the 2nd to 3rd change points for the manual, maybe not my DSG as right foot stays planted and then from third gear onwards the 1.8 TSI maintains the 7% gap which as the UK legal limit approaches the gap clearly become many car lengths ie a second at 70 mph is a car length and it then grows in proportion to the increasing speed.

Edited 29 November, 201015 yr by lol

we need to end this, my vRS was faster than all your vRS's so there

no no no no

I'll be back in a few.

But for now i need to just put this:

30 to 70 through the gears the petrol is only quicker by 1.2 seconds.

That 1.2 is negated or increased depending on the driver,.

30-50 in 3rd - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

30-50 in 4th - petrol is 0.9 seconds quicker

50-70 in 5th - petrol is 0.1 seconds SLOWER

50-70 in 6th - petrol is 1.2 seconds quicker

Now, i know that petrol drivers probably would not need to do 30-50 in 3rd and that they'd probably use 2nd which might be quicker.

Out in the real old world we live in the petrol would be quicker - but not by as much as some believe. This is first hand experience chasing a MK5 GTi and separately a PreFL vRS. Neither of which "Walked away" far from it in fact.

Without going into another diesel v petrol debate, they are what they are. Yes petrols sound great and have a more linear power delivery. On the downside, drive them like that all the time and you'll struggle to hit 25mpg, compare the same thrashing to a diesel vRS and you'll see an easy 40mpg

There's not much difference to be shouting about.

Anyway - back in a mo with some 1.8 figures.

With regards to the sound, I've been wondering does the petrol vRS actually sound any different to a non vRS petrol Octavia?

i had a Miltek resonated exhaust on my previous vRS which I miss and am thinking of a NON resonated exhaust now..

With regards to the sound, I've been wondering does the petrol vRS actually sound any different to a non vRS petrol Octavia?

i had a Miltek resonated exhaust on my previous vRS which I miss and am thinking of a NON resonated exhaust now..

As I said the 1.8 TSI and petrol VRS use the same EA888 engine, they are almost identical except for cylinder block etc due to stroke difference.

It is odd thought that the redline on the 1.8 TSI is at 6K yet the VRS is 6.5K and even odder when the the 1.8 TSI power is between 4500 and 6200 rpm humm.

Will be interested to see when the DSG box changes gear, bet it is about 6400 or so.

Sound, well they are both zingy but fairly subdued but not tractor like the diesels which IMO just sound aweful. If it is diesel it needs to be 5 cylinders or more to sound half decent IMO.

As I said the 1.8 TSI and petrol VRS use the same EA888 engine, they are almost identical except for cylinder block etc due to stroke difference.

It is odd thought that the redline on the 1.8 TSI is at 6K yet the VRS is 6.5K and even odder when the the 1.8 TSI power is between 4500 and 6200 rpm humm.

Will be interested to see when the DSG box changes gear, bet it is about 6400 or so.

Sound, well they are both zingy but fairly subdued but not tractor like the diesels which IMO just sound aweful. If it is diesel it needs to be 5 cylinders or more to sound half decent IMO.

30-50? In the real world the petrol VRS holds on to 2nd and if required 3rd gear to clear the traffic. The decision is clear. Economy torque and high mileage invest in a diesel. Lower mileage and cheaper initial purchase. No DPF or DMF issues and acceleration when it counts- petrol. Less cash and a good

compromise. 1.8TSI. Having had petrol BMW 6 cylinder and Ford 2.0 TDCI, the petrol 2.0 TFSI and I

presume TSI are IMO great engines which shove you past traffic in real situations.