hi im in the market for a fabia looking at 10 plates at the moment im changeing my petrol 1.4 08 plate ...im thinking of diesal i have 2 cars to look at within the next week one is a 90bhp the other is the 105bhp..i have test driven them both and to be honest i can tell no difference, can anybody else give me any info on the 2 different engines,one car im going to look at has 1k on the clock the other has 8k.

cheers mark

Hello Mark, like you I've driven both versions and again, like you failed to notice any real difference between the two...until that is...I floored them, and then it was clear the 105ps version had the extra omph! But this really was only at the upper end of the rev scale. where most people don't drive. The torque difference at 1800rpm is not much, 230nm for the 90ps and 250nm for the 105ps version. For most, this torque figure is more important than the bhp or ps. Most of us won't notice any differernce unless the vehicle is heavily loaded, going uphill with the need the accelerate very quickly halfway up the hill. And even then it won't be a huge difference. Fuel economy,..don't know what differences there will be, but the book shows them to be the same. If you are travelling loaded much of the time the 105ps version may prove more economical. I'm sure if you hang about the blokes with both versions will be along to advise you in more detail. I would guess it will be a decision based upon which motor just feels best and how much you have to pay. The 1k version may be a good option if the price is right. When you drive it be aware the engine will be very tight still and won't perform as well or as smoothly as it will once it is properly run in. Insurance my be slightly cheaper too on the 90ps version. Let us know what you eventually decide, we're all interested! Good luck and enjoy the test drives.

Edited 26 April, 201115 yr by Estate Man

Hello Mark, like you I've driven both versions and again, like you failed to notice any real difference between the two...until that it...I floored them, and then it was clear the 105ps version had the extra omph! But this really was only at the upper end of the rev scale. where most people don't drive. The torque difference at 1800rpm is not much, 230nm for the 90ps and 250nm for the 105ps version. For most, this torque figure is more important than the bhp or ps. Most of us won't notice any differernce unless the vehicle is heavily loaded, going uphill with the need the accelerate very quickly halfway up the hill. And even then it won't be a huge difference. Fuel economy,..don't know what differences there will be, but the book shows them to be the same. If you are travelling loaded much of the time the 105ps version may prove more economical. I'm sure if you hang about the blokes with both versions will be along to advise you in more detail. I would guess it will be a decision based upon which motor just feels best and how much you have to pay. The 1k version may be a good option if the price is right. When you drive it be aware the engine will be very tight still and won't perform as well or as smoothly as it will once it is properly run in. Insurance my be slightly cheaper too on the 90ps version. Let us know what you eventually decide, we're all interested! Good luck and enjoy the test drives.

thanks ..they are both the same price both the same colour the only difference is the mileage and the bhp difference ..i have seen the debate on fuel economy on the forum which does concern me a little ..but round town my 1.4 engine is poor on fuel return so the diesel has to be better no matter what...or am i hoping for something that wont happen !!!!

Edited 26 April, 201115 yr by markbsac

Round town any car isn't much cop.

I have a diesel Seat Ibiza FR 1.9 TDI at the moment, and while I used to return 50+ easily when I commuted 90 miles a day to work and back... Now I'm lucky to get 40mpg.

However, my driving habits have changed enormously - I live only 5 miles from work, barely enough time for the engine to get warm!

I've ordered a vRS Fabia Estate, and while the "maximum theoretical" MPG figure will only be 45 on the motorway, considering how little I use the motorway, the drop in mpg will be something that I won't notice.

Some quick calculations reveal that I will be £5 a month worse off for petrol (purely for work commuting), however, I'll be £75 a year better off insurance wise, as the new Fabia vRS will only be £375 to insure, whereas my Ibiza's renewal will be £450.

So, that works itself out nicely. Nutshell - town driving != good economy. Unless you buy a Prius.

I'd go for the 105, the 90 is the same engine just strangulated by a more eco focused map. If you're going for a 1.6 CR its the one to choose.

Personally however if you're not doing much mileage I would look at the equivalent 1.2 TSi; whilst not quite so fuel efficient is more punchy and refined and low CO2

I bought the 105PS given my previous car was an Audi A4 with the 1.9TDi PD engine in 115PS setup.

I assumed there were changes in the engine like larger bearings, larger turbo and piping etc for the extra dosh, not just different electronic setup with no real cost to Skoda.

I don't think if I had the 90PS I would notice so if this is so I might as well have bought the 90 and saved a few £££ on the car and insurance.

Which engine has only done 1K miles as that still has to loosen up?

If you have driven both back to back and not just round the block but on journeys reasonably typical to you and can't tell the difference I'd go for the better deal or which car you prefer considering things like colour, specification and options plus how you are treated by the dealer.

Yes either diesel should be better on fuel than your petrol but if that is your main reason for changing are the savings worthwhile?

As to consumption my journey to work is just over 11 miles made up of about 1.5 miles from house to 7 miles of dual carriage way then 2.5 miles of town roads.

Depending on how the traffic is flowing including how many changes of traffic lights I have to wait for at the end of dual carriageway, a good day 2 or 3, a bad day best part of mile at 20mph then stop start for 3 or more changes using the one journey MPG display I normally have 55mpg up at end of dual carriageway but this can drop to as little as 50 MPG by when I arrive at work.

I normally have a smoother run home so arrive with over 55 MPG displayed.

On my local runs of 2.5 - 3 miles of town roads, junctions, traffic lights the single journey consumption from cold so far is just over 40MPG.

My current overall displayed MPG is 52, the same as the A4 and I am still being more gentle with the Fabia.

Really too early to be how accurate the display is, not least with the variation of fuel pumps cutting out but so far, again just like the Audi, my calculated the overall figure is a couple of MPG lower.

I have only covered 650 miles so expect these figures to increase.

So far nobody has mentioned the DPF.

Will you do a 20 mile run on open roads at least every 300 miles, may be with mainly town running this will need to be less?

If not you will not get the DPF to do a regen without specially going for an otherwise pointless drive wasting fuel and your time and adding general wear and tear.

Generally the 1.6CR is a very different beast from the 1.9TDi plus higher geared - 2000rpm at 70mph compared to 2250rpm.

Maybe it will be better in a few thousand miles but it really is not happy much below 1500 rpm despite prompts getting at 1600rpm to change up, which I ignore. May be not the punch of the 1.9 but, as a 105, in 5th it pulls from 55 - 70mph pretty smartly with no where near full throttle.

If not in a rush once over about 35mph the 1.9 PD could be left in 5th.

Generally the 1.6CR is a very different beast from the 1.9TDi plus higher geared - 2000rpm at 70mph compared to 2250rpm.

Maybe it will be better in a few thousand miles but it really is not happy much below 1500 rpm despite prompts getting at 1600rpm to change up, which I ignore. May be not the punch of the 1.9 but, as a 105, in 5th it pulls from 55 - 70mph pretty smartly with no where near full throttle.

If not in a rush once over about 35mph the 1.9 PD could be left in 5th.

Delta, if it's any help, I've driven several of the 1.6cr engined cars including the 75ps, 90ps, and the 105ps. My sister has the 105ps and two ex-colleagues now have the 90ps versions. The 90 & 105's all seem to go pretty much the same. However, regarding the comparison you make with the 1.9PD, you will notice a huge difference in your new car when it has covered a few thousand more miles. It will have loads of extra power lower down and at the top end too. As you say it isn't designed to be quite like the PD engine but you won't find the engine lacking in flexibility or power once bedded in. My sisters car was completely different to drive under 1500 miles, but now with over 5,500 on the clock it's even quieter, more flexible, very economical, and boy is it fast. I would say just as fast as the 1.9pd without any problem. My sister is getting on average about 9mpg more now from her 1.6cr over the 1.9PD Octavia Estate she previously had. She averages regularly 58-62mpg in rural Suffolk. Her best has been 68mpg on a run in 5th gear mostly. Although, normally she hardly ever uses 5th gear as the roads don't allow it (most of the time she is at 50-55 in 4th). Hope that helps. Just don't go too easy with the throttle or revs now your miles are building up. Keep posting your information as she does more miles...it's of tremendous interest. Cheer bud!

Delta, if it's any help, I've driven several of the 1.6cr engined cars including the 75ps, 90ps, and the 105ps. My sister has the 105ps and two ex-colleagues now have the 90ps versions. The 90 & 105's all seem to go pretty much the same. However, regarding the comparison you make with the 1.9PD, you will notice a huge difference in your new car when it has covered a few thousand more miles. It will have loads of extra power lower down and at the top end too. As you say it isn't designed to be quite like the PD engine but you won't find the engine lacking in flexibility or power once bedded in. My sisters car was completely different to drive under 1500 miles, but now with over 5,500 on the clock it's even quieter, more flexible, very economical, and boy is it fast. I would say just as fast as the 1.9pd without any problem. My sister is getting on average about 9mpg more now from her 1.6cr over the 1.9PD Octavia Estate she previously had. She averages regularly 58-62mpg in rural Suffolk. Her best has been 68mpg on a run in 5th gear mostly. Although, normally she hardly ever uses 5th gear as the roads don't allow it (most of the time she is at 50-55 in 4th). Hope that helps. Just don't go too easy with the throttle or revs now your miles are building up. Keep posting your information as she does more miles...it's of tremendous interest. Cheer bud!

thankyou so far...im going for a test drive in the 90 bhp on friday..the one with 1k on the clock,it looks mint been owned by the same garage from new its the colour and spec im after they have offered me the px i expect...we prob only do 50 miles a week mainly round town but people i know who own diesel cars still say i will be getting better mpg than what i am now with my 1.4 petrol engine...i also fancy a new car

thankyou so far...im going for a test drive in the 90 bhp on friday..the one with 1k on the clock,it looks mint been owned by the same garage from new its the colour and spec im after they have offered me the px i expect...we prob only do 50 miles a week mainly round town but people i know who own diesel cars still say i will be getting better mpg than what i am now with my 1.4 petrol engine...i also fancy a new car

Fair enough if you fancy a change rather than the only motive being saving on fuel.

For your journeys I'm sure the 90PS will be ample and you will never benefit from the 105PS so given it is the spec and colour you want and a fair deal sounds like the one to go for.

My concern is if you only do 50 miles a week around town you could have DPF issues as it will never do a regen under those conditions.

To quote the January 2011 brochure

DPF: diesel particulate filter is part of the exhaust system responsible for cleaning the engine exhaust gases before they enter the atmosphere. The DPF catches soot particles emitted in the exhaust gas and it works in conjunction with the catalytic converter which reduces the amount of harmful gases entering the atmosphere. The DPF must periodically be emptied of the soot particles, a process known as regeneration. This involves elevated exhaust system temperatures.

A driving style is required during regeneration, where a constant vehicle speed above 37 mph must be maintained.

This does not always suit customers who make frequent short journeys or experience stop/start driving or drive within inner-city or urban areas.

From the manual -

If the warning light comes on, this means that soot has accumulated in the diesel particle filter because of the frequent short distances.

In order to clean the diesel particle filter, the vehicle should be driven at an even speed of at least 60 km/h at engine speeds of 1800 - 2500 rpm for at least 15 minutes or until the warning light goes out with the 4th or 5th gear engaged (automatic gearbox: position S) when the traffic situation permits it. This increases the exhaust temperature and the soot deposited in the diesel particle filter is burnt.

I got home one day with about 300 miles on the clock and when I got out was struck by a hot / burning type smell. After a few minutes the penny dropped it had done, or a least tried to do a regen so the first time this hot. I didn't have the smell when I arrived at work the next day so assume the regen completed.

I went a 40 mile trip cross country (not literally !!) and back at the weekend so if 300ish mile intervals ample time for a regen, although I didn't notice either from the driving or a smell.

Delta, if it's any help, I've driven several of the 1.6cr engined cars including the 75ps, 90ps, and the 105ps. My sister has the 105ps and two ex-colleagues now have the 90ps versions. The 90 & 105's all seem to go pretty much the same. However, regarding the comparison you make with the 1.9PD, you will notice a huge difference in your new car when it has covered a few thousand more miles. It will have loads of extra power lower down and at the top end too. As you say it isn't designed to be quite like the PD engine but you won't find the engine lacking in flexibility or power once bedded in. My sisters car was completely different to drive under 1500 miles, but now with over 5,500 on the clock it's even quieter, more flexible, very economical, and boy is it fast. I would say just as fast as the 1.9pd without any problem. My sister is getting on average about 9mpg more now from her 1.6cr over the 1.9PD Octavia Estate she previously had. She averages regularly 58-62mpg in rural Suffolk. Her best has been 68mpg on a run in 5th gear mostly. Although, normally she hardly ever uses 5th gear as the roads don't allow it (most of the time she is at 50-55 in 4th). Hope that helps. Just don't go too easy with the throttle or revs now your miles are building up. Keep posting your information as she does more miles...it's of tremendous interest. Cheer bud!

Thanks for your comments.

It will be interesting to see how mine drives once 5000 miles covered.

So far I keep 3rd until near 40mph and only use 5th when over 50mph can be sustained.

I am keeping under 3000 rpm but when the opportunity accelerating fairly quickly in 3rd from roundabouts etc. When out at the weekend and roads quiet I was purposely building up to 60 - 70 mph, dropping back around 10mph then building speed again so not holding a steady speed.

Going out on my 40 mile run the average indicated consumption was just over 55mpg.

Coming back traffic was lighter and with no pressure on time I drove a bit slower but still averaging indicated speeds around 55mph on single carriageway and 65mph on dual. The recorded average mpg was 61 and remember this was trying not to hold a constant speed which is not the most economical way to drive.

Based on the GPS app in my phone, I don't have a sat nav, the speedo over reads by about 6% so actually averaging more like 52 and 62mph.

Thanks for your comments.

It will be interesting to see how mine drives once 5000 miles covered.

So far I keep 3rd until near 40mph and only use 5th when over 50mph can be sustained.

I am keeping under 3000 rpm but when the opportunity accelerating fairly quickly in 3rd from roundabouts etc. When out at the weekend and roads quiet I was purposely building up to 60 - 70 mph, dropping back around 10mph then building speed again so not holding a steady speed.

Going out on my 40 mile run the average indicated consumption was just over 55mpg.

Coming back traffic was lighter and with no pressure on time I drove a bit slower but still averaging indicated speeds around 55mph on single carriageway and 65mph on dual. The recorded average mpg was 61 and remember this was trying not to hold a constant speed which is not the most economical way to drive.

Based on the GPS app in my phone, I don't have a sat nav, the speedo over reads by about 6% so actually averaging more like 52 and 62mph.

so now im asking should i have really ever looked at the diesel...or just gone for the 1.2 petrol engine..according to figures even round town the diesel gives better fuel economy, but its more expensive, my insurance goes up slightly on the diesel...but my road tax comes down to £20.00 instead of about £160.00 on my present petrol car, on the petrol engine i have no worries about a partical filter, but is the 1.2 engine less responsive with it only being a 3 cylinder....decisions decisions decisions...HELP !!!!!!

so now im asking should i have really ever looked at the diesel...or just gone for the 1.2 petrol engine..according to figures even round town the diesel gives better fuel economy, but its more expensive, my insurance goes up slightly on the diesel...but my road tax comes down to £20.00 instead of about £160.00 on my present petrol car, on the petrol engine i have no worries about a partical filter, but is the 1.2 engine less responsive with it only being a 3 cylinder....decisions decisions decisions...HELP !!!!!!

The 1.2 diesel 3cylinder engine is fabulous. You won't regret buying one...everyone I know that has one is very pleased. There is a lot more power there than you think. The economy you will get is disproportionately greater than the extra amount of money you will pay for your diesel. You can't lose.

The 1.2 diesel 3cylinder engine is fabulous. You won't regret buying one...everyone I know that has one is very pleased. There is a lot more power there than you think. The economy you will get is disproportionately greater than the extra amount of money you will pay for your diesel. You can't lose.

hi estate man did you mean petrol ?

hi estate man did you mean petrol ?

Diesel 1.2tdi greenline

Yes...what Seb says! Greenline 1.2TDI 3 cylinder diesel. It's brill. Thought that was what you were referring to regarding the diesel engined car you are buying! Sorry if I am mistaken.

Yes...what Seb says! Greenline 1.2TDI 3 cylinder diesel. It's brill. Thought that was what you were referring to regarding the diesel engined car you are buying! Sorry if I am mistaken.

no the 1.6 im being put off by diesel now as my mrs only does about 50 miles a week....somebody said go for the 1.2 petrol engine...the partical filter is putting me off ..if she dont do the miles it wont regenerate......so i dont know what to do now