Hello,

I'm currently driving a 2008 plate TFSI VRS with 26000 miles on the clock, I've had it for 11 months now. Like lots of people, I'm finding feeding it with fuel a little draining (previous car 1.9 Fabia VRS 55MPG+)! I'll be averaging about 11000 miles per year and I'm considering swapping it for a newer CR diesel VRS in March time.

I'm averaging 37 MPG on a motorway run using super unleaded, (mainly tesco momentum 99) which is the same price a diesel now. Which makes me think id be better of with the CR diesel in the long term as it has usable performance and I'll see 50mpg? (please correct me) on a steady 70mph motorway run but still have some fun on A and B roads especially with a re map.

I know the TFSI is the better engine and I'm concerned I'm about to make a big regrettable mistake!!!

Any useful opinions/advice appreciated?

Cheers, Dan.

Edited 29 January, 201115 yr by Dan 534

You will always save money with a diesel but what you need to weigh up with the fact that you already have a VRS is how much it will cost you to swap and how much you will loose on yours. i.e if its going to cost you £5k or something, how long will it take to make up that £5k in fuel savings.

If you hadn't already got a VRS then it makes it an easier decision but the fact you already have one makes it more difficult!

You can have mine for £20k!!

Why are you running it on super unleaded? What's wrong with the normal stuff.

I've got a FL cr diesel and I'm lucky if I get mid forties mpg most of the time. You have to drive like a granny to 50 or more. But then I like using my right foot

Definitely stick with the TFSI - its a sweet engine and the car is a lot more fun than the CR.

The only reason to go to a CR would be marginally improved fuel consumption, but you'd have to cover a huge mileage to offset the cost to change - certainly a lot more than 11,000 miles PA.

Forgot to say that i usually get 50-52MPG in mine.

I would stick with the TFSi - lovely flexible engine just a pleasure to use.... If you bought a VRs presumably that is something you wanted from your car and if you found yourself disappointed with the change you would have wasted the cost of changing.... My own TFSI is about the same age as yours and I am becoming conscious of the things that seem likely to crop up towards the end of the 4th year.... like cambelt and water pump, and the almost inevitable (so I understand) ABS fault. I suppose my "philosphy" is that running a car that is remotely interesting is not going to be cheap these days and if I am spending money then I want a car that is a pleasure to drive, the fuel cost is part of that.

You will find the CR slow in comparison and also a bit boring. I made the same change two years ago and have been disappointed. I got mine remapped last year and that made a difference putting it on a par with the TFSi although still not as much fun to drive. I get about 35mpg generally and that goes up to 39-40 on a run.

Unless your company pays for your car then stick with the TFSI. As an owner you'll already know that If you regularly drive within the speed limits you'll get reasonable MPG. As other posters have said, you will lose money trading in and your mileage doesn't warrant a diesel. Ie the saving on fuel will be negated by the price you pay for a CR. They are obviously good cars. However the amount of DMF / DPF and other issues you read about lead me to think that as a private motorist I'd stick with the petrol. I've had a decent diesel and liked its torque but traded it in for the petrol. I'd been a fan of the VRS and was finally convinced after seeing one overtake a line of traffic on the A52. As for engine sweetness, on Friday a colleague who owns a S6 drove mine and thought the engine was smooth and willing and put a smile on both our faces hanging on to 3rd up to the red line and continuing to accelerate just as rapidly in 4th. It doesn't run out of puff like a diesel. Lastly buy a warranty or extend the one you've got.

Unless your company pays for your car then stick with the TFSI. As an owner you'll already know that If you regularly drive within the speed limits you'll get reasonable MPG. As other posters have said, you will lose money trading in and your mileage doesn't warrant a diesel. Ie the saving on fuel will be negated by the price you pay for a CR. They are obviously good cars. However the amount of DMF / DPF and other issues you read about lead me to think that as a private motorist I'd stick with the petrol. I've had a decent diesel and liked its torque but traded it in for the petrol. I'd been a fan of the VRS and was finally convinced after seeing one overtake a line of traffic on the A52. As for engine sweetness, on Friday a colleague who owns a S6 drove mine and thought the engine was smooth and willing and put a smile on both our faces hanging on to 3rd up to the red line and continuing to accelerate just as rapidly in 4th. It doesn't run out of puff like a diesel. Lastly buy a warranty or extend the one you've got.

Don't seem to get DPF issues on the CR - I think it was only on the PD's tbh....

Don't seem to get DPF issues on the CR - I think it was only on the PD's tbh....

I stand corrected. Whether or not there are DPF issues I'm also suggesting that there are other reasons for choosing between petrol and diesel. Both have their faults. Each owner will choose for a variety of reasons be they mileage, economy or performance. Diesel is a great choice for some and petrol for others. Having had both I prefer petrol and don't think the OP will gain much by switching. Either way both versions are great value for money.

I also have a TFSI and get about 37.5mpg on a motorway run (super unleaded) doing 75-80ish, when I had my previous 2.0CR diesel Audi, 50mpg was achievable on the motorway.

The killer is short, hilly, journeys under 10 miles, these see my TFSI average 20-25mpg. The diesel was about a third better easily into low 30's.

Overall I get 29mpg average to 38mpg on the A4 diesel so my fuel costs have gone up 25%.

I think swapping to save money on fuel (£50 quid a month?) is a bit of a flase economy as depreciation is likely to be the biggest hit.

The best thing you can do is take a test drive in one, personally I'm making the most of driving a fast petrol again even if it does cost 25 percent more to run over a diesel, we will probably all be driving electric cars in 10 years time!

I think swapping to save money on fuel (£50 quid a month?) is a bit of a flase economy as depreciation is likely to be the biggest hit.

+1

Much sense spoken I think!

In an ideal world, I would keep the petrol any day, but obvious costs have got me thinking. By the sounds of it most people say stick with what I have, as I'll probably be more out of pocket with a newer diesel (and it is a brilliant high spec car). Might save my money and have a slight remap instead.

I was concerned about the 3- 4 year niggles, mainly the expensive ESP fault, but from the research I've done, my car is right on the build date Feb/March where Skoda fealised there error and modified the sensor. Think I'll take out an extended warranty anyway.

Thanks for the advice!

Edited 30 January, 201115 yr by Dan 534

Although owners get very excited about fuel economy, the fact is that with the sort of mileage you are doing (11 000 PA) and even with the current high fuel prices, the slightly worse consumption of a petrol model is actually one of your smallest motoring expenses. People notice fuel costs because they tend to pay frequently and so become more aware. Even taking 'worst case' fuel consumption and fuel prices, at 11 000 miles a year the petrol model will cost you less than £400 extra over the Diesel. Your current car is starting to depreciate a lot less, and the depreciation on a newer model will cost you much more than £400 extra.

There is now a repair kit for the ABS/ESP and hopefully it will be freely available in the UK soon. This should remove a potential worry because it massively reduces the repair cost. There are other things to worry about (e.g. air con compressor), however my experience with CR Diesel cars (not just VAG ones) is that engine faults are much more expensive to repair than on petrol cars. The later VAG cars with piezo injector technology run at £800-900 per injector and they don't seem especially reliable. My friend who works in a VW garage is replacing quite a few of these at the moment.

Have had the same thoughts. My long term average is 32.5, but that'll probably rise a bit with the temperatures.

If you sell your car you'll take a hit on depreciation and if you buy from a dealer you lose 20% to the VAT-man. On a £10k car that's £2k.

That's going to take a lot of miles to claw back in savings. Maybe more miles than you do in the time you have the car.

Even if Skoda says "we'll pay the VAT", you're still paying VAT at 20% just on the cheaper price of the car.

IMHO if you have 'quality' fuel close to hand like Shell the TFSI will run fine on standard 95RON. If like me you're stuck with the supermarket then super is a must or the car loses about 3mpg and feels like you've a family of Lithuanians stowed away in the boot.

You will find the CR slow in comparison and also a bit boring. I made the same change two years ago and have been disappointed. I got mine remapped last year and that made a difference putting it on a par with the TFSi although still not as much fun to drive. I get about 35mpg generally and that goes up to 39-40 on a run.

After 11 months in my Tsi I've averaged about 31-32 overall, and like you I can get high thirties on a run, although usually not as high as forty mpg.

Based on that i think the Tsi is only a few mpg behind the CR overall. My "fag packet" maths tells me that for 11k miles you'd using these "real world" mpg examples you'd only save 250 a year in fuel costs swapping from a tsi to cr.

Not worth it IMO.

Don't seem to get DPF issues on the CR - I think it was only on the PD's tbh....

My 2008,58 CR vRS needed a new DPF at 40k miles.

Edited 31 January, 201115 yr by Lou_O

I awapped from TFSi to CRi in July my mpg in the TFSi was 36 now in the CRi its approx 52-53 on the same routes. On top of that depreciation is less on the CRi, (but only if you need to swap). The TFSi is the nicer ot the two engines and that's from someone who has a previous history of driving diesels. Initially I thought i'd made a big mistake changing for financial reasons but 6 months down the line i wouldn't swap back!

As mentioned in previous posts, my experience is that the margins expected by greedy dealers will mean a substantial cost to change. You may never get back what you save. If a dpf or dmof goes outside the warranty, you will regret it even more (or have these problems been resolved?) If you are doing that mileage, refinement is a factor also? I would probably keep the petrol.

I'm just trying to think of the long term (eg3+) years. I really like the octavia and can see myself keeping it for a while.

I would probably sell the current one privately and try and get a bit more for it and bargain the price down, even then for a high spec CR FL I would still be looking at £5000 on top of the money from selling my current TFSI. Most people are seeing 45-51mpg on a long steady run in the CR then? Obviously less when you floor it! I'm running it on super unleaded as the MPG goes up and it worked out cheaper than using 95. Interestingly I have never tried 'premium' 95 from Shell or BP to see if it has better MPG than tescos 95. I just presumed it all came from the the same refineries!?

Edited 2 February, 201115 yr by Dan 534

Interestingly I have never tried 'premium' 95 from Shell or BP to see if it has better MPG than tescos 95. I just presumed it all came from the the same refineries!?

It does, generally. Just the additive blend that changes really. Run Shell-95 for a few tanks, see what happens. I always found my old TFSI liked V-Power the best though, from a smoothness, MPG and performance point of view.

Hello,

I'm currently driving a 2008 plate TFSI VRS with 26000 miles on the clock, I've had it for 11 months now. Like lots of people, I'm finding feeding it with fuel a little draining (previous car 1.9 Fabia VRS 55MPG+)! I'll be averaging about 11000 miles per year and I'm considering swapping it for a newer CR diesel VRS in March time.

I'm averaging 37 MPG on a motorway run using super unleaded, (mainly tesco momentum 99) which is the same price a diesel now. Which makes me think id be better of with the CR diesel in the long term as it has usable performance and I'll see 50mpg? (please correct me) on a steady 70mph motorway run but still have some fun on A and B roads especially with a re map.

I know the TFSI is the better engine and I'm concerned I'm about to make a big regrettable mistake!!!

Any useful opinions/advice appreciated?

Cheers, Dan.

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

Put simply your head would love the savings in fuel costs of a few hundred pounds per year but your "heart" would hate driving it as it is no where near as exciting to drive.

Fortunately there is a solution.

The simple answer is to go for the 1.8 TSI. It sits in the middle between the VRS diesels and petrol in both economy and performance.

Acceleration is only half a second slower to 60 mph than the petrol VRS but half a second quicker than the wiesel VRS.

Fuel economy is about 5 mpg better than the petrol TSI VRS and only about 5 mpg worse than the wiesel VRS.

Mine is 1.8 TSI DSG L&K looks like a VRS at first glance as it has the VRS spoiler on it and is debadged of L&K badges and has all the L& K extras over the VRSs ie adaptive xenon, alcantara, electric and heated seats and icing on the cake costs way less than the diesel VRS because you get the 17.5% reduction for the no VAT offer. No brainer with these current offers. If you want a plodding good fuel consumption diesel then I would go for the 1.6 CR DSG but, and having just given up a 2 litre 140 hp VAG diesel, they are not fun places to be compared to TSI heaven.

Edited 3 February, 201115 yr by lol

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

Put simply your head would love the savings in fuel costs of a few hundred pounds per year but your "heart" would hate driving it as it is no where near as exciting to drive.

Fortunately there is a solution.

The simple answer is to go for the 1.8 TSI. It sits in the middle between the VRS diesels and petrol in both economy and performance.

Acceleration is only half a second slower to 60 mph than the petrol VRS but half a second quicker than the wiesel VRS.

Fuel economy is about 5 mpg better than the petrol TSI VRS and only about 5 mpg worse than the wiesel VRS.

Mine is 1.8 TSI DSG L&K looks like a VRS at first glance as it has the VRS spoiler on it and is debadged of L&K badges and has all the L& K extras over the VRSs ie adaptive xenon, alcantara, electric and heated seats and icing on the cake costs way less than the diesel VRS because you get the 17.5% reduction for the no VAT offer. No brainer with these current offers. If you want a plodding good fuel consumption diesel then I would go for the 1.6 CR DSG but, and having just given up a 2 litre 140 hp VAG diesel, they are not fun places to be compared to TSI heaven.

Everywhere you go you are spouting rubbish about MPG!

FUEL CONSUMPTION IS NOT ONLY 5MPG WORSE. It is much worse than that. You will get 35MPG in normal driving in a 1.8TSI if you are lucky. There are plenty of threads on this and on google. A 1.8TSI and trying to get 40+ MPG is not a fun place to be.

It also looks nothing like a VRS - front bumper is a massive giveaway.

Also why would the OP sell his VRS TSI for a 1.8TSI L&K??

Edited 3 February, 201115 yr by jrw

Everywhere you go you are spouting rubbish about MPG!

FUEL CONSUMPTION IS NOT ONLY 5MPG WORSE. It is much worse than that. You will get 35MPG in normal driving in a 1.8TSI if you are lucky. There are plenty of threads on this and on google. A 1.8TSI and trying to get 40+ MPG is not a fun place to be.

It also looks nothing like a VRS - front bumper is a massive giveaway.

Also why would the OP sell his VRS TSI for a 1.8TSI L&K??

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

Sorry you are right the difference is actually 4.3 mpg difference between the 1.8 TSI DSG and the VRS DSG diesel according to Skoda (combined), I will try and be more precise.

CO2 is 5 grams difference but then the petrol does not get the 3 level loading by HMRC so the 1.8 TSI is actually 2 groups lower for tax.

I think the DLRs are more of a give away than the bumper and the ride height but I do 30K miles a year so comfort came before sporty ride. We have a TSI VRS and a the 1.8 TSI VRS, both black, both with with VRS tail, have to look twice in the mornings, usualy figure it when press the key and the other car beeps.

OP wants better fuel consumption but appears to not want to loose the petrol performance. Quickest std Octys are the petrol VRS, then Mk1 Octy VRS, then 1.8 TSI, then diesel VRS. According to Skoda and http://www.zeperfs.com acceleration is as quoted aboveand hopefully the standing quarter run at Bruntingthorpe will prove this too. Will being doing some quarter mile practice against SWMBOs TSI VRS as soon as I get some decent front boots and the weather is warm enough to get full traction.

Edited 3 February, 201115 yr by lol

Surely unless you're keeping the car for 10+ years it is crazy to change to diesel over economy concerns?? As OP says it will cost £5k to make change all for a few hundred quid a year saving.