My previous cars have all had the PD engines - the last being a PD140 Octy estate. The one thing I really loved about the PD engine was the way the power kicked in at 1750 - 1800 rpm. This was quite a kick; you had to watch out if the surface was slippery, but this, IMHO, made it a real "driver's" engine.

The CR engine delivers its power much more smoothly. There is no noticable kick as the turbo comes into play. If you are used to driving the PD (or similar set up), this can give the impression that the power is not there! But it is, and it carries on pulling beautifully into the middle 4000's.

Because of the different characteristics of the power delivery, you have to think a bit more petrol engine style when accelerating. For quick action, change down to 2300 - 2500 rpm, floor it, and see what happens! Brilliant!

It will still pull away from 1600 ish with confidence, but there will be a slow start to the acceleration.

I'm very happy with the performance (but I'm curious to know what a Shark remap would do, but Mansfield is such a long way away.......).

Just to add my 2p here :-

I had a 180 BHP Fabia vRS Mk1 ( yes it was remapped ) & was a real hoot & a pleasure to drive, so any car I bought after this was going to be a bit 'slow'. Specially going to a Fiat 500 which was 105 bhp less than the Furby

I think what needs to be thought about here is that ANYTHING less than you currently have will be & feel slow, you cannot expect a 170 Yeti to perform that same as a 210bhp Golf - You have to reset your expectations of what your new car will do.

The only REAL way to put any new car into context is to compare with other makes of the similar size.

My 2p:

The CR170's power is plenty enough to hustle you along quite smartly, to be able still to accelerate comfortably at 70-80mph and to keep up with all traffic other than the GTi-type brigade. You won't be able to match a current Golf GTi or similar, let alone an 'R', but you knew that already.

But if you're coming from a more powerful petrol car then it may be a slight disappointment. Personally I think that you need a sub-8 second 0-60 time to really start delivering visceral acceleration (yes I know 0-60 times aren't everything but if you have to sum up acceleration in a single widely-available figure then it's as good as anything else - actually I'd really prefer 30-70 in-gear times but only a few reviews here and there offer reliable 30-70 data). And if you can get sub 7-second then a car starts to feel properly quick.

But the Yeti's 0-60 figure is lowish 8 seconds and that's what the Yeti feels like, ie very acceptable but unremarkable. The other thing that you'll miss is the wide rev band that good petrols deliver. My Accord 2.4 would rev to 7000 and so when accelerating you could go all the way from 1500-7000 without a gear change and accelerating smartly all the while. The CR170 engine isn't a bad compromise as diesels go, revving to 5000, though the last 500 doesn't deliver too much and the commotion from under the bonnet is increasing noticeably then.

OTOH the 4wd does allow you to put down the power on - for instance - wet roundabout exits without worry and so you can achieve good point-to-point timings, better than its outright accelration figures might suggest.

I think the Yeti as an overall package is excellent - it ticks so many boxes for me and the CR170 is a reasonably quick car - but don't let anyone try to convince you that it's the equal of a modern petrol GTi in performance terms - that would be stretching the truth just a bit too far.

Don't expect too much from a CR170's performance (and then you might be pleasantly surprised).

My 2p:

The CR170's power is plenty enough to hustle you along quite smartly, to be able still to accelerate comfortably at 70-80mph and to keep up with all traffic other than the GTi-type brigade. You won't be able to match a current Golf GTi or similar, let alone an 'R', but you knew that already.

But if you're coming from a more powerful petrol car then it may be a slight disappointment. Personally I think that you need a sub-8 second 0-60 time to really start delivering visceral acceleration (yes I know 0-60 times aren't everything but if you have to sum up acceleration in a single widely-available figure then it's as good as anything else - actually I'd really prefer 30-70 in-gear times but only a few reviews here and there offer reliable 30-70 data). And if you can get sub 7-second then a car starts to feel properly quick.

But the Yeti's 0-60 figure is lowish 8 seconds and that's what the Yeti feels like, ie very acceptable but unremarkable. The other thing that you'll miss is the wide rev band that good petrols deliver. My Accord 2.4 would rev to 7000 and so when accelerating you could go all the way from 1500-7000 without a gear change and accelerating smartly all the while. The CR170 engine isn't a bad compromise as diesels go, revving to 5000, though the last 500 doesn't deliver too much and the commotion from under the bonnet is increasing noticeably then.

OTOH the 4wd does allow you to put down the power on - for instance - wet roundabout exits without worry and so you can achieve good point-to-point timings, better than its outright accelration figures might suggest.

I think the Yeti as an overall package is excellent - it ticks so many boxes for me and the CR170 is a reasonably quick car - but don't let anyone try to convince you that it's the equal of a modern petrol GTi in performance terms - that would be stretching the truth just a bit too far.

Don't expect too much from a CR170's performance (and then you might be pleasantly surprised).

Good post and say's it far better than i ever could.

You and I are getting our CR140s mapped because, as we have the DSG gearbox, there is no other way to having c. 170-175bhp.

The OP has a free choice as, it would seem, he is happy (as several others are) with a manual gearbox.

On the other hand I am looking forward to being able to do instant gear changes and playing with the tiptronic function; so maybe this would be of interest to the OP.

This appeals to me too - excuse if covered elsewhere, but do we know that the new engine characteristics will match with the DSG box - both in terms of mechanical integrity (I thought was a reason the DSG not offered in 170) and in terms of how/when the box changes gear etc? I imagine the characterisitics an any auto box need to be tailored pretty precisely to engine performance?

This appeals to me too - excuse if covered elsewhere, but do we know that the new engine characteristics will match with the DSG box - both in terms of mechanical integrity (I thought was a reason the DSG not offered in 170) and in terms of how/when the box changes gear etc? I imagine the characterisitics an any auto box need to be tailored pretty precisely to engine performance?

Mechanical integrity is not an issue as the DSG 'box is used on the CR170 engine in the Octavia vSR TDI and other VW, SEAT & Audis.

Once a CR140 is mapped and producing c. 170-175 bhp the DSG will automatically (pardon the pun) respond to the extra power/torque. This will then make for a more relax drive with the 'box changing down less and utilising the available torque.

Mechanical integrity is not an issue as the DSG 'box is used on the CR170 engine in the Octavia vSR TDI and other VW, SEAT & Audis.

Once a CR140 is mapped and producing c. 170-175 bhp the DSG will automatically (pardon the pun) respond to the extra power/torque. This will then make for a more relax drive with the 'box changing down less and utilising the available torque.

Mike

Good post and say's it far better than i ever could.

I too agree good post, I came from a type r, I was concerned about having less power but it has not been an issue. What I do miss though is just being able to leave the 'r' in third and just driving with the throttle.

Many thanks for all your honest and objective comments so far, guys. I have definitely decided in favour of the 170 now

I have a CR140 DSG. I have a remap and insurance all paid for, just need to arrange a date....... should give me around 185bhp & 390Nm. ( and improved fuel economy), so in theory, it should be at least as quick, if not quicker than a standard CR170.

I can't wait.

Mike

As a matter of interest, do you mind me asking how much extra your insurance was with the remap?

Many thanks

John

As a matter of interest, do you mind me asking how much extra your insurance was with the remap?

Many thanks

John

Skoda charged me an extra 10% as I'm doing it for economy reasons (they asked why I was having it done)

Mike

Ha!

Slow? Not likely. The Skoda Yeti 170 is as rapid as what would at one time have been referred to as a "hot hatch"!!

Not only that, it handles infinitely better than many so-called GTIs. And compared with two VW Toerags it certainly is much more satisfying - as in two separate toerags!!

A tall go-cart, that's what a 170 is! **** off a shovel fast. Corners on rails. Stops on a pfennig...

Anything else? Yep, pretty economical, spacious, versatile, warm, cool, comfy, idiosyncratic, rare, and so on and on and on and on....

Just go order one, yeah? And stop wasting our time here with dumb quessies!!!!!

Having had a few 'hot hatches' I can honestly say that my SM is as good an adrenaline rush as when I first got into my first Mk2 1275 GT mini. XR2's were quite quick in their day, had 2 first one had carbs and the second fuel injected, never as much fun always seemed to be holding back.

After a few of what my Wife would call sensible cars I went the Skoda route, 1.8T 4X4 Octavia estate. Driven energetically - quite interesting. Another Octavia, 140CR 4X4 very good car with performance to match. The Yeti, what can one say, I think go-cart on rails sums it up. Wish I had the bottle to really push it just to see what it will do. Now as a fully paid up member of the BOFs club need to be a little conservative.

Lets hear it for the 170 Yeti!