Or, if they hadn't ruined the vrs by it being petrol only. Mk1 diesel vrs was awesome. I have to buy a monte but would buy a diesel vrs if they saw sense and built one

the mk1 vRS was crap. wasnt quick plain and simple (just because you have this surge of torque for 1000rpm that makes you feel like its rapid it doesnt make it quick) and had more body roll than a yacht in the middle of a force 9 tack, the only reason it was a hit, is it allowed younger guys an entrance into the warm hatch market as the fuel, insurance and running costs were all very good value.

YOu kow it was a warm hatch when the car it was compared to in many TV and magazine reviews was the 115hp Mini Cooper and not the Cooper S or any of the other hot hatches.

This new fabia is still not as dynamic as the top hot hatches, but its as near as dammit just as quick, better value, and leagues ahead of the mk1 in every sense other than fuel economy. I personally dont rate this new fabia that highly either in all honesty, despite owning one but it is a good all rounder and a steal with the tax free deal. Much prefer my mk2 Octy vRS

Tend to agree upto a point EXCEPT that some people like the look of the VRS and really want the 180 horses on tap but the DSG gearbox maybe a step too far. In my instance I've chosen the monte over the VRS purely due to that gearbox. I'm very fortunate that the price / insurance costs are of no consequence in my case.

In reply to the Monte Versus VRS, which to buy discussion, my only thoughts are:- If the VRS was available as a manual or DSG, which gearbox would account for the highest sales? If there is a large chunk of buyers who would go for a manual, then there lies one of the reasons why the monte finds a good few fans.

As well as those well cooler black lights and grill combo

I agree, I like the DSG but it probably would be a better car and perhaps sell better if it had a manual gearbox. That said we were after an auto this time round so it was a no brainer. As you know point I was really making is that the Monte is really a standard Fabia with a body kit, the vRS is a bona-fide hot hatch; the reason the two cars cant really be compared.

Or, if they hadn't ruined the vrs by it being petrol only. Mk1 diesel vrs was awesome. I have to buy a monte but would buy a diesel vrs if they saw sense and built one

I dont agree. We had an Ibiza 130PD Sport a few years ago which was near as damn it the same car. It was really punchy but it handled like poo and didnt stop very well either. Great for tooling around in a straight line but not for throwing around. I gather the MK1 vRS was a bit sloppy in the same way though I havent actually driven one.

I recently drove a new shape 2.0 TDI CR Ibiza FR and really wasnt overly impressed, quite punchy (given its really rather light) but really not that quick and certainly didnt feel it. I have a MK6 Golf GT with the same engine and whilst its not slow its not exactly fun to drive at 10/10ths, power delivery with the CR engines is very very boring. If Skoda did the same thing with the Fabia the vRS would still blow it out of the water. There really is no substitute for a turbocharged petrol!

I would agree the Monte is a bit OTT, they could have made some of the bodykit a bit less stand-out but I suppose thats the point of the Monte. Its meant to be an early car for new drivers that has some poke that they can afford to isnure before they move on to more powerful versions.

Not keen on the awful DS3R style "flag" stickers you can get though, think thats a bit too far!

And I think the TSi has a nicer engine note than the vRS - I`ve been a few of them and a couple of Ibiza Cupra`s and I found their engine noises to be a bit too quiet compared to the TSi - it has a nice little noise to it when you give it some beans.

the vRS has a TSI??

These arguments of the merits of the DSG are going to be moot pretty soon. As was pointed out in EVO recently, in the need to meet ever tighter emissions regs, the manual gearbox is very soon going to be a thing of the past.

So they don't simply mean a set of lowering springs when they say sports suspension? Surely it cant be the VRS setup... Uprated dampers, springs, thicker anti roll bars and different bushes?! :no:

No, they don't, and yes it can.

Tech1e would be the one to confirm this, but as far as I know, Sport suspension is the vRS suspension with everything that goes along with it.

It won't have XDS, or ESP as standard. But then, as Janner points out, even the vRS is not as focussed as a Renaultsport Clio, so even without ESP, you'd have to be a serious idiot to crash one.

it says suspension so id imagine its the springs and dampers, but not the anti roll bars. could be wrong though

To me, the roll bars are as much a part of suspension as the dampers. Why would they not put them on? Without them it won't all be matched up.

The vRS standard spec list reads simply "Sports suspension". It's just different bits to bolt on in the same places at the end of the day.

No, they don't, and yes it can.

Tech1e would be the one to confirm this, but as far as I know, Sport suspension is the vRS suspension with everything that goes along with it.

It won't have XDS, or ESP as standard. But then, as Janner points out, even the vRS is not as focussed as a Renaultsport Clio, so even without ESP, you'd have to be a serious idiot to crash one.

XDS has proved on some cars counter productive on track use as it can overheat the brakes trying to balance grip, it ain't all that if going flat out but for general use and fast road it works well but it can't beat a proper LSD or ATB.

Well, took the dealer's invitation to drive a 1.6cr diesel in 105 guise today. The car in question was a fabia se with 10,000 miles on it. Was happy with this as it would give real world figures for mpg and performance. My own personal notes/thoughts are;

1) On start up, the car was quite loud and 'tapperty' (car wasn't cold) the engine certainly seemed noisier than my 1.9pd sport

2) Initial thoughts were that the cr does pull better than the 1.2tsi however, in day to day motoring, I would say that the extra pull seems so small as to make no significant difference.

3)mpg is better than the tsi.... but not much! I used the same route as the monte tsi I had on saturday:

Spirited driving in lanes: tsi = 40 cr = 44 (11 miles recorded)

'A' roads cruising at 50-60 mph with stops at juncs etc: tsi = 52 cr = 58 (15 miles recorded)

70+ mph on motorway with real world acceleration and overtaking etc tsi = 48 cr = 48 (again 17 miles) (mpg numbers not a typo)

4) Power delivery is very similar between the tsi and the cr. The old PD had a thump in the back about it (still circa 105bhp if I remember correctly?) but the cr is much more linear like the tsi. Don't get me wrong, these two still have a surge but not like the old PD

5) If I was dead set on diesel, I wouldn't be dissapointed in the cr BUT I would have to be realistic in that I would have to drive around on tickover to achieve anywhere near the quoted 78.5 mpg (or I need to get more than 10k miles under it's belt). Be under no illusion, the same applies to get 62.8 mpg from the tsi !!!

In summing up, this is still only my humble thoughts and observations!! there is still the fact that I have pitched a 7miles old tsi against a 10k miler cr !! but I felt that based on comments from other posters, a cr really needs plenty of miles on it to get a true feel for its true performance.

Still undecided? I would stress that you should drive both engines. Also, my ramblings are based on a manual 'box. DSG experiences could be completely different!!

I'm in the very fortunate position of having the offer of a tsi this week or a preferred spec cr in 5-6 weeks, so the wait isn't really a deciding factor for me.

I've based my final decision on the fact that I enjoy the driving of a car and wouldn't be able to crawl round, constantly looking at the mpg readout for the best economy. My drive to/from work is 15miles each way consisting of 6 mls of 60mph 'A' rd, 6 mls of 50mph country lane and 3 mls of m/way. Its a great route and I guesstimate that both cr and tsi will be doing the same circa 46-48mpg on the trip.

If the cr blew the tsi away on mpg, I would be swayed towards diesel, but it doesn't, and so I'm not !!

I have arranged to take delivery of the tsi on thursday morning.

For what it's worth, I am man enough to admit when I make mistakes and so if I find myself feeling that I made the wrong decision, I will freely admit it

I know, I know, I can hear you all chanting now that I should have got a VRS (there's a blue one in the showroom) but, and it is a but to me... IF IT HAD A MANUAL BOX, I'D HAVE ONE!!!

Sorry for all my waffling :S

they could have made some of the bodykit a bit less stand-out

MC = Mini Cooper = Monte Carlo ??

XDS has proved on some cars counter productive on track use as it can overheat the brakes trying to balance grip, it ain't all that if going flat out but for general use and fast road it works well but it can't beat a proper LSD or ATB.

100% agree

The seats are identical to the vRS with different covers. The suspension will be the same as the vRS too, except you won't have the XDS differential, which is what helps the vRS tame 180bhp.

Sorry Mike but I disagree. The vRS would need alot more than just XDS to tame the extra power; the chassis on the vRS I am certain is a fair bit more heavily breathed on than the standard car with sports suspension. It's like me saying the suspension on my MK6 Golf GT (which is "sports suspension") is the same as that on a Golf GTi. I know it isnt and I know which of the two cars handles better.

Also the vRS will have considerably more powerful brakes. Appreciate the seats are very much the same though.

Also the vRS will have considerably more powerful brakes. Appreciate the seats are very much the same though.

Probably a bit more anti-corrosion protection on the VRS passenger seats.

To me, the roll bars are as much a part of suspension as the dampers. Why would they not put them on? Without them it won't all be matched up.

The vRS standard spec list reads simply "Sports suspension". It's just different bits to bolt on in the same places at the end of the day.

They wouldn't put them on as it's not the flagship sports model that the vrs is. I would be stunned if they updated the arbs on the Monty Carlo to the same spec as the vrs. Infact how could they if the weight of the cr and 1.2tsi units are so different to the vrs lump?

Edited 24 March, 201115 yr by FocusZtec

They wouldn't put them on as it's not the flagship sports model that the vrs is. I would be stunned if they updated the arbs on the month to the same spec as the vrs. Infact how could they if the weight of the cr and 1.2tsi units are so different to the vrs lump?

thats a valid point. I cant share the same exact same suspension setup as the front axle weights will differ so spring rates and damper compression/rebound etc would need to take that into account

Picked the Monte up 9am this morning. Well chuffed with it and it's great being back in a Skud after 18mnths. Having trouble posting pics for those who want to see. Here are some link addresses though.

I thought the same as you, but I was going on what I have been told.

The struggle will be from the dealer's side as I am in no hurry to change my car unless I get what I want! Some dealers may be interested - others not. I spoke to an established local dealer on Saturday and he was a bit snotty and didn't want to sell me anything that was not in the standard 'bubble pack'. But another one will get back to me with something.

It is available on all models except Greenline and Scout. The Elegance could become a bit sporty with a remap

Elegance 105 crtdi 1.6 is quite sporty 110 mph ish at 3.500rpm pretty sporty to me

Picked the Monte up 9am this morning. Well chuffed with it and it's great being back in a Skud after 18mnths. Having trouble posting pics for those who want to see. Here are some link addresses though.

http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.co...in/photostream/

This is the one in our stealers here is lovely and dare I say nicer looking than the vrs and manual box

This is the one in our stealers here is lovely and dare I say nicer looking than the vrs and manual box

Is that at Abergele?

Picked the Monte up 9am this morning. Well chuffed with it and it's great being back in a Skud after 18mnths.

Looking good mate Are you transferring the plate from the black'un?

Looking really good mate

It does. I'd be more tempted by a 1.6cr or 1.2tsi manual Monte more than a vRS.

If only they did the 2.0cr monte :(

Picked the Monte up 9am this morning. Well chuffed with it and it's great being back in a Skud after 18mnths. Having trouble posting pics for those who want to see. Here are some link addresses though.

Looks so nice and the red combo seats really suit the car

Could you please let us know if the fender flares could be placed on an MkII Sport like the one you have in your photo stream? I got almost the same and I wonder in case I manage to buy the fender kit if I will run into any fitting issues. (most probably with the front)

Any pics of the flares where they join the front and rear spoiler would be very much appreciated - if it is too much trouble no worries.

Enjoy the Furby ahhh the smell of a new car is so nice :yes: