Fabia II VRS MPG

[vRSy]

look at page 5 BLG engine code

and thats based on the golf 1.4 TSI 170ps engine. So if that runs at a lower output on 95 ron with higher fuel consumption id imagine its even more noticeable on the TSI 180ps engine

this is a quote from theFabia owner/user manual,"]Fabia user manual[/url]

Use unleaded petrol 98 RON. You can also use unleaded RON 95, however some loss of power is expected when doing so.

In unleaded RON 98 or 95 is not available, you can refuel with unleaded RON 91 in an emergency. After refueling continue driving at medium engine speeds and minimum load. Driving at high engine speeds or heavy engine loads can lead to serious damage.

so 95 ron will not cause damage as has been eluded to already and you will lose some power

[meangreen]

I find the seats really comfy and more supportive than the great seats in my previous Type R Civic. I did try an Octavia VRS which was ok but I noticed the large sales guy had already damaged the seat edge on the demo after 500 miles.

Standard 95 fuel for me, 30minute commute 40ish mpg, but can't resist chance to lower it!

Always a bit disappointed when range after fuel up predicts 380 but asks for fuel around 300.

Really enjoying the drive though.

[tonyfvrs]

As I had absolute confirmation from Customer Services that 98+ octane should be used for the vRS 1.4 and 95 only if 98+ temporarily not available, I would not contemplate ignoring this advice.

Anyone had any thoughts on warranty claims if the incorrect fuel is used?

Regards

Tony :think:

[Furbytom]

As I had absolute confirmation from Customer Services that 98+ octane should be used for the vRS 1.4 and 95 only if 98+ temporarily not available, I would not contemplate ignoring this advice.

Anyone had any thoughts on warranty claims if the incorrect fuel is used?

Regards

Tony :think:

If by 'incorrect' you mean standard 95Octane fuel I can't see this causing any problems with a warranty claim. Are dealers themselves filling their demonstrators up with 98?.... Doubt it very much!!!!

I would say that nationwide the number of people driving a 1.4TSI on standard fuel would exceed those on 98 by a country mile. The view on this and other forums tends to be skewed towards filling up with the good stuff but thats because it's enthusiasts discussing it who are more likely to put 98 in by their very nature. The 99.9% of 'normal' people ( joke) who don't spend their time on the internet discussing their skoda's MPG will probably chuck in 95 and be asolutely fine.

There have been many many tests of standard vs 'super' fuels with all sorts of results, most conclude that they are a waste of money.

At the end of the day you pays yer money and makes your choice....

Haven't yet decided myself which fuel to go for when I get mine in a coulle of weeks. Will prob end up using 95 but will try it on 98 to see if it runs any better.

[Can]

One thing I have noticed is that the MPG climbs as the engine finaly warms up which also takes a while. Though even with 50 miles on mine once it got warm it was posting 38mpg + indicated crusing on a dual carridgeway.

[Doubleglazing]

I'm averaging about 31mpg, compared to 48mpg on my old diesel vRS.

It doesn't help that the DSG has it labouring down the road in 7th at 30mph, or screaming it's nuts off when you press on.

And there is no manual control, they lied about that, it's auto only. If you could actually control the gears, fuel consumption might be a bit better, as you could keep it in the right band so it's effortless, and neither labouring nor screaming.

I like the car, but hate the DSG with a passion.

[SJFISHER67]

I'm averaging about 31mpg, compared to 48mpg on my old diesel vRS.

It doesn't help that the DSG has it labouring down the road in 7th at 30mph, or screaming it's nuts off when you press on.

And there is no manual control, they lied about that, it's auto only. If you could actually control the gears, fuel consumption might be a bit better, as you could keep it in the right band so it's effortless, and neither labouring nor screaming.

I like the car, but hate the DSG with a passion.

Have you not put the car into manual mode by pushing the gear lever to the left, or using the paddles whilst in manual mode? That always gives me better control, and (in my opinion) I think it works well the DSG.

[Furbytom]

And there is no manual control, they lied about that, it's auto only.

You can overide the gear selection by using the paddles or flick the stick over to the left to lock it into manual mode..... :yes:

[jrw]

+1 - use manual and the paddles if you don't like D or S.

I wouldn't worry about your MPG. You have bought a hot hatch! Look at the alternatives!! You would struggle to get 30mpg in the Clio RS200 and would have to thrash it to get the power out of it....and it costs £3k more.

Be happy that you have picked the right mix of performance and handling with a good MPG for a car of its class and is far cheaper than its nearest rival.

[tonyfvrs]

I'm averaging about 31mpg, compared to 48mpg on my old diesel vRS.

It doesn't help that the DSG has it labouring down the road in 7th at 30mph, or screaming it's nuts off when you press on.

And there is no manual control, they lied about that, it's auto only. If you could actually control the gears, fuel consumption might be a bit better, as you could keep it in the right band so it's effortless, and neither labouring nor screaming.

I like the car, but hate the DSG with a passion.

Practice makes perfect.

DSG is marvelous, so many ways to drive it, a new fun element into sometimes boring journeys otherwise.

1)Leave it alone in auto and trickle along in town. Kick down and hang on tight on the open road.

2)Leave it in auto and play around with the paddles, for example manual down shifts via paddles approaching a bend and braking, listen for the throttle blip. This is just like left foot braking (toe and heel) with a manual box.

3)Pop the lever left into manual and control all the changes yourself.

4)Select Sport and let it get on with progress.

5)Select sport and play around with the paddles.

I am still learning after 2000 miles and enjoying every minute.

Regards

Tony

Edited 13 February, 2011 by tonyfvrs

[seboni121]

If by 'incorrect' you mean standard 95Octane fuel I can't see this causing any problems with a warranty claim. Are dealers themselves filling their demonstrators up with 98?.... Doubt it very much!!!!

I would say that nationwide the number of people driving a 1.4TSI on standard fuel would exceed those on 98 by a country mile. The view on this and other forums tends to be skewed towards filling up with the good stuff but thats because it's enthusiasts discussing it who are more likely to put 98 in by their very nature. The 99.9% of 'normal' people ( joke) who don't spend their time on the internet discussing their skoda's MPG will probably chuck in 95 and be asolutely fine.

There have been many many tests of standard vs 'super' fuels with all sorts of results, most conclude that they are a waste of money.

At the end of the day you pays yer money and makes your choice....

Haven't yet decided myself which fuel to go for when I get mine in a coulle of weeks. Will prob end up using 95 but will try it on 98 to see if it runs any better.

Hi furbytom sorry to disagree with you but the stealer near myself stated they only put the v-power 98 in the VRS'S demonstrators plus will tell the buyers of new VRS'S only to use 98 ron petrol and only to use 95 ron only in emergency and to top up ASAP with the 98,however did not say anything about warranties

[pipsyp]

If by 'incorrect' you mean standard 95Octane fuel I can't see this causing any problems with a warranty claim. Are dealers themselves filling their demonstrators up with 98?.... Doubt it very much!!!!

I would say that nationwide the number of people driving a 1.4TSI on standard fuel would exceed those on 98 by a country mile. The view on this and other forums tends to be skewed towards filling up with the good stuff but thats because it's enthusiasts discussing it who are more likely to put 98 in by their very nature. The 99.9% of 'normal' people ( joke) who don't spend their time on the internet discussing their skoda's MPG will probably chuck in 95 and be asolutely fine.

There have been many many tests of standard vs 'super' fuels with all sorts of results, most conclude that they are a waste of money.

At the end of the day you pays yer money and makes your choice....

Haven't yet decided myself which fuel to go for when I get mine in a coulle of weeks. Will prob end up using 95 but will try it on 98 to see if it runs any better.

Here Here! Couldnt agree more!!

[Can]

Quick update

First 300 miles gave me 32.73 MPG

Next 130 miles has given me 33.86 MPG so far.

[jamjar]

I have heard over on the seat forums that the airfilter has an unnecessary white sock over it required for very cold climates.

Some people over there have removed this sock and gained around 20% increase in economy, i have removed mine today and will let you know what effect it has

[Can]

Suppose it depends upon the definition of cold some temprature ranges would be good but let us know how you get on deffinatly interesting

[jcm]

I have heard over on the seat forums that the airfilter has an unnecessary white sock over it required for very cold climates.

Some people over there have removed this sock and gained around 20% increase in economy, i have removed mine today and will let you know what effect it has

Yep , please keep us informed how it goes.

John

[Stu vRS]

My updated list since first fill over 5 tanks (calculated using brimmed tank on FuelCalc iPhone app):

MPG / Distance covered in each tank

1. 34.54 297mi

2. 30.27 263mi

3. 29.54 254mi

4. 31.52 271mi

5. 30.24 260mi

This is based on filling about 39.09L every time, the tank can probably hold more than this.

Edited 21 February, 2011 by Stu vRS

[tonyfvrs]

Sorry Stu wasnt having a pop m8. I just think there's too much "98 RON only" talk when it comes to the vRS on the forums. People are being misled I think if they are being told they cant use 95 RON in their cars without problems. I totally agree that to get the most out of the car you should put the best grade fuel in it but 95 RON isnt going to cause any damage or poor drivability. I'd stick by my guns in saying that anyone experiencing engine problems either would have done anyway or have been extremely unlucky and filled up with poor quality fuel.

Page 158 of the manual 'Fuel' " If you use petrol with a lower octane number than the one prescribed, the engine

can be severely damaged!"

Tony

[pipsyp]

Page 158 of the manual 'Fuel' " If you use petrol with a lower octane number than the one prescribed, the engine

can be severely damaged!"

Tony

Sorry tonyfvrs, 95 RON can be used on this car without damage, anything lower then maybe. I've not seen anything less than 95 RON available in the UK.

There is a useful VW tech document about the 1.4 TSi engine which I have seen somewhere on this forum that advises the use of 95 RON on the higher powered variants will reduce low end torque delivery, it makes no mention of physical power loss. Admitedly it references the 170 version found in the MK5 Golf but the 180 engine will be no different other than a slightly different map. Power loss would be alot more noticable on a naturally aspirated engine than a car with both a supercharger and turbo.

I ran a MK5 Golf GTi ever so briefly (rental for 2 weeks), according to the rental guy the car was also remapped to 240hp. It was very quick (not sure I believe the remap story) but I ran it on both 98 and 95 RON throughout the time I had it and it had no apparent effect on performance or MPG (averaged 22mpg all the time I had it, was appaling!)

I think the consensus here is that its fine to use decent quality 95 RON, probably at the loss of a small amount of performance. 98 RON is optimal.

Be interested to here anyone who can confirm that the car runs LOADS better on 98 rather than 95.

[jcm]

When I went to the dealers about a warning light - different thread - we had a chat about the 95/98 octane debate.

He said one of the salesmen went to fill up the Fabia vRS demonstrator it was nearly empty.

He took several customers out on a test drives and the car seemed a bit different and when he checked the mpg

he found it was a little worse than usual.

The car had been filled up with 95 rather than 98. All their Fabia vRS demos are filled with 98 and

he suggested I always fill mine with 98 and only use 95 if the 98 was not available.

He did not think there would be engine damage using the 95 but the car runs better and according to him you get better mpg with the 98.

John

PS - dropped into the dealers today and talked to the guy who was dealing with my exhaust warning light fault ( to tell him seems to be fixed). He said there could be damage if 95 octane was used all the time !! So as far as I am concerned it will always be 98 octane which was my decision from taking delivery.

Edited 22 February, 2011 by jcm

[tonyfvrs]

Sorry tonyfvrs, 95 RON can be used on this car without damage, anything lower then maybe. I've not seen anything less than 95 RON available in the UK.

So if the manual is wrong, where do you get definitive information?

Customer Services are wrong also, then?

Are you the official expert employed by Skoda?

Confusing isn't it?

Tony

[dickyd]

So if the manual is wrong, where do you get definitive information?

Customer Services are wrong also, then?

Are you the official expert employed by Skoda?

Confusing isn't it?

Tony

Just thought I'd throw a spanner in the works, I emailed Skoda customer services who called me back and said that the car runs fine on 95 with no damage or loss of power.

[pipsyp]

So if the manual is wrong, where do you get definitive information?

Customer Services are wrong also, then?

Are you the official expert employed by Skoda?

Confusing isn't it?

Tony

Strangely enough if you look at the latest Fabia brochure it only states that 95 RON is required with 91 being OK but with reduced performance for all petrol engines.

I know this is incorrect, the vRS is designed to run on 98 RON but will run happily on 95 RON with a slight performance reduction.

There is absolutely no way a decent tank of 95 RON would damage an engine like this. I've said it time and time again, people that experience problems with their engines will either be unlucky to have been delivered a car that was always going to go wrong or they've used poor quality fuel and have suffered the consequences. In any case I would put money on the fact that Skoda would fix it under warranty anyway, particularly if its down to a build defect.

I have first hand experience of this. We currently have an 08 VW Polo 1.4 FSi Match (due to be replaced with a vRS estate in a few months time). With about 800 miles on the clock it completely died. Initially it would have trouble starting if it hadnt been used for a couple of days, then it just completely gave up the ghost.

It got towed to our local dealer, transpired that the injector, spark plug and coil pack on the 3rd cylinder required replacing, was confirmed as a build defect and was fixed under warranty with no questions asked. Also a number of years ago my Dad had a 2001 MK4 Golf GT TDi 110 as a company car, after approx 1500 miles the oil pump went and it near enough seized. Didnt need a new engine fortunately but still pretty bad for a brand new car.

Sadly things like this do happen with new cars, even those as supposedly well put together as a VW but that is what warranty is for.

I'm fortunate enough to live less than 2 miles from a BP garage and fill up there all the time as its so convenient. I personally wouldnt chose to fill up at a supermarket filling station just to save a couple of pennies, most of the time their barely any cheaper than a branded filling station anyway.

Edited 23 February, 2011 by pipsyp

[pipsyp]

Just thought I'd throw a spanner in the works, I emailed Skoda customer services who called me back and said that the car runs fine on 95 with no damage or loss of power.

Well there we go, says it all!

[tonyfvrs]

Just thought I'd throw a spanner in the works, I emailed Skoda customer services who called me back and said that the car runs fine on 95 with no damage or loss of power.

Now that is really strange, because when I phoned CS with the same question the answer was 98+, 95 if 98+ not available.

Don't run long term on 95.

I will try to get a final written statement from them when I have finished decorating the back bedroom!!!

Tony