Big Jag diesels maybe. God there are some dinosaurs on the forum. Next people will be saying they were disappointed it didn't come with a starting handle . I drove the Clio 200 after the vRS and it's great fun to drive but reliability is an issue, plenty of reports of trim falling off and other faults plus unlike the 172/182 they are terrible on fuel. Also more expensive too. The Corsa 1.6 turbo engine. The problem with Piston 4 put me off those.

I won't be going diesel again unless I'll be doing big mileage. Main thing that puts me off is DPF's and other filters they keep putting on them so they meet emissions.

There shouldn't even be a comparison. Fabia offers 5doors, space and practicality which you'd forget on the Corsa and Clio so not a direct competitor. Not to mention the noise inside a Clio... But even with all these comforts, a vRS can surely give you tons of fun on the highway with its unexpected acceleration, at least I have had some marvellous moments so far againts so-called "fast" cars... The biggest point of the car for me is being somewhat "undercover" but not fun? I would really not say that. I always choose the longest way home in order to drive it a little more.

Now the comments about flaws on engine (WTF?) and box are just hilarious I don't understand why people seem to be afraid of it so much without even trying it first, I guess it's the fact it runs like hell... :yes:

There shouldn't even be a comparison. Fabia offers 5doors, space and practicality which you'd forget on the Corsa and Clio so not a direct competitor. Not to mention the noise inside a Clio... But even with all these comforts, a vRS can surely give you tons of fun on the highway with its unexpected acceleration, at least I have had some marvellous moments so far againts so-called "fast" cars... The biggest point of the car for me is being somewhat "undercover" but not fun? I would really not say that. I always choose the longest way home in order to drive it a little more.

Now the comments about flaws on engine (WTF?) and box are just hilarious I don't understand why people seem to be afraid of it so much without even trying it first, I guess it's the fact it runs like hell... :yes:

until it breaks down

until it breaks down

Oh, you could come up with something a lot better than just being mean! :p

I think this has more chances of happening If you pay me a visit and drain out all the oil while I'm sleeping, rather than a failure of the engine itself, so maybe you're right after all!

Edited 7 September, 201114 yr by newbie69

Would a 2.0 CR170 fit in that engine bay?

No, it doesn't.

I am glad that Skoda have taken a proper crack at the hot hatch with a petrol engine. As much as a choice of engines would be nice, VW isn't offering the Polo GTi as a diesel either.

Since it is petrol, I would have one since a diesel is no longer suitable for low mileage due to DPFs. I do still have concerns about DSG, but then I would be getting one on PCP and would not be keeping it beyond warranty.

Once they go to the new 1.6TSI, I am hoping for a choice of manual or DSG gearboxes, since the 1.6 would have to have a manual box made for it since it will be put into a lot of different models.

The new vRS ticks all the boxes for me. Quick, handles well, comfortable, economical when needed, practical.

the fact its a petrol doesnt bother me too much, but i wouldnt buy one because its got a DSG box in it, i could get away with it if it was a manual but wouldnt buy one for the DSG

the fact its a petrol doesnt bother me too much, but i wouldnt buy one because its got a DSG box in it, i could get away with it if it was a manual but wouldnt buy one for the DSG

+1

Oh, you could come up with something a lot better than just being mean! :p

I think this has more chances of happening If you pay me a visit and drain out all the oil while I'm sleeping, rather than a failure of the engine itself, so maybe you're right after all!

Mean me, REALISTIC MAYBE!!! just jokin it will last years( dog years)

I don't own a Fabia vRS but did have the diesel vRS a few years ago and when I first seen the new vRS I was like it's a petrol and I'm not going to get one!

However thats all changed managed to get a wee drive in Sharkriders and it went like stink that I am possibly looking to get one in the next year, once my house extension has been complete, I've been a diesel driver for 4 years and my mileage has dropped like a stone, in a year of driving my diesel Fabia I have done about 6000 miles!

I reckon I could live with the DSG as well.

One thing I will say is the dsg gearbox is fantastic. I wish I could have had it on my diesel

Petrol for me any day.

I only do 10,000 miles/year and can't justify the extra cost of a diesel.

I don't like having to put gloves on at the pumps.

Anyway I don't like running out of revs when I drive a diesel, it's like short shifting all the time.

However modern diesels are terrific and if I did 40,000 miles/year I would probably have one, but would miss having 7,000 rpm on tap.

Regards

Tony :beer:

I came to the MK II vRS because its different. I am glad its a petrol as for me i have always driven petrol cars (nothing against diesel though).

However my big thing to come over was bang for buck and to be slightly different (1.4 twin charged and 7 speed dsg with paddles) from the regular GTI/Hot Hatch crowd.

The appeal was it was fast yet different from the pack.

I cant comment on the MKI vRS, but I can see its another niche model that was different in its time and has a great following and if you look at the used prices I think its fair to say from what i have seen it holds its price very well.

My 2 pence worth over.

The folks had a Furby VRS about 4 years or so ago. They're 2nd car's a diesel fiesta (bucket of **** - no power/no comfort/no anything really. not to mention I may have hit a few things in my first year of driving and messed it up a little... :think: ) and they're looking at getting a Mk1 Fabia Vrs again as a 2nd car. I think the 2 cars are very very different. Same family but there not particularly comparable. Will be cool if they get one, have my Vrs and their one sitting side by side. Make a good photo haha!

The mk2 vRS isn't a hot hatch either... i was very unimpressed with it on the testdrive, having driven it just after driving a Clio 200 it felt numb, high and boring with a mid range punch that died before the redline was hit.

Got to disagree there. General consensus in the press is really 8/9 seconds to sixty is a warm hatch. Anything around 7ish is pretty much hot. Aside from the fact that it's pretty academic anyway. You could certainly argue from looks/trim and ride compromise that the vRS is a warm hatch rather than an overt hot one.

Jumping into the vRS directly from what is considered the benchmark hatch of its generation, the RS 200 Clio, is probably NEVER going to make the vRS look good. Speaking as someone who is coming to the vRS from Renaultsport cars (the Megane) the vRS is definitely the slightly softer but still fast compromise that I am looking for.

I am really not understanding all the DSG bashing on here. I have done 10k Miles in my MKII now and it has not missed a beat changes are instant with tiptronic and paddles. I understand the immersion of a manual this is my first Auto based car but the DSG to me is the best of both worlds auto when you cant be bothered, tiptronic / paddles when you can.

Back to the subject Petrol as people have said is better if you are not doing the large milages as the new diesels dont lend themselves to short runs / commutes. Seems a shame that there is not a diesel version of the car but hey it is what it is.

So for me with short commute Petrol made more sense.

people who havent lived with DGS dont like it, I was exactly the same, even when I got my vRS, for the first few thousandmiles (as I was learnin to use it properly) I was dubious as to where I'd ever accept it as a replacement for manual.....

Now... hell, (15,000 miles in the vRS) I would never , ever go back to a manual. ever. end of. there is nothing a manual can do that the DSG cant, its a simple myth that you cannot select and use the gears you want with the DSG (I was on that band wagon before, complaining about no proper control in manual) but you can simply learn methods to make it do what you want, its just a case of learning the tech. now I have mastered it, I will have DSG with every car I buy from now on,...

the only manual I drive now, is our old backup ambulance at work, and its SUCH a grind after driving the tiptronic fiat (the new ambo we have) that its almost painfull, I know its not a comparison to a good hot hatch like the clio 200.... but I wont be using a clutch by choice again

D.

there is nothing a manual can do that the DSG cant

/quote]

Not quite true in my experience - a manual box/clutch gives you much more fine control when it comes to very low speed maneuvres -for example the DSG is a right pain when it comes to reverse parking/driving out of tight spaces. The clutch enables you to creep forward much more slowly.

Also I don't think the DSG will allow you to hold high revs whilst stationary then dump the clutch for a traffic light grandprix -if you were so inclined lol

Don't get me wrong I love the DSG and think its a technical masterpierce and very glad I have chosen it for my current car. I just don't have that 'never go back to manual' feeling after 6000 miles. Its down to personal taste and not necessarily down to 'not being able to master the tech'.

It'll be interesting to see if I change my mind but currently thinking my next motor will have -engine at the front, 6-speed manual 'box in the middle and RWD....

/quote]

Not quite true in my experience - a manual box/clutch gives you much more fine control when it comes to very low speed maneuvres -for example the DSG is a right pain when it comes to reverse parking/driving out of tight spaces. The clutch enables you to creep forward much more slowly.

Also I don't think the DSG will allow you to hold high revs whilst stationary then dump the clutch for a traffic light grandprix -if you were so inclined lol

Don't get me wrong I love the DSG and think its a technical masterpierce and very glad I have chosen it for my current car. I just don't have that 'never go back to manual' feeling after 6000 miles. Its down to personal taste and not necessarily down to 'not being able to master the tech'.

It'll be interesting to see if I change my mind but currently thinking my next motor will have -engine at the front, 6-speed manual 'box in the middle and RWD....

again (no argument, just a difference of opinion) I disagree. the control in tight spaces reaslly isn't a problem at all! remember I teach people to drive in this car (and have taught thousand in a manual) and all find it really easy to park (carpark space) and reverse park, uphill, downhill whatever. all are taught from scratch how to use the tech properly, for example if the hill holder is operating not to give it gas, just to wait a second for it to disengage and then let it creep as normal, ect ect... smooth low speed manouvers are just as easy with the DSG, you just have to be as gentle with the throttle as you would be with clutch during clutch control.... works a dream in my car, but then others have had less good experiances, driven my car and said "this drives differently to mine.." so I still can't explain the differences between similar DSG equipped cars, unless it is the variances in the softwares learning capability to set peramiters...

and the traffic light GP? mine taking off in sport is the quickest I have ever managed to get a FWD hatch off the line! again RWD could be different, but may be fitted with launch control...

as for the front engine rear drive ecg... yes you are setting up to have a better handling "sports car" in your mind than a fwd hot hatch,(when I say never go back, I'm thinking I will stay with FWD hatch) and there I may be inclined to agree that a manual box could be better suited, BUT I havent driven a paddle shift rear drive car like an XF or BMW ect to have the experiance to comment whether it would be better!! the last front engine rear drive I drove was an MX5, and that rocked as a nicely set up , good handling sports car !

/quote]

again (no argument, just a difference of opinion) I disagree. the control in tight spaces reaslly isn't a problem at all! remember I teach people to drive in this car (and have taught thousand in a manual) and all find it really easy to park (carpark space) and reverse park, uphill, downhill whatever. all are taught from scratch how to use the tech properly, for example if the hill holder is operating not to give it gas, just to wait a second for it to disengage and then let it creep as normal, ect ect... smooth low speed manouvers are just as easy with the DSG, you just have to be as gentle with the throttle as you would be with clutch during clutch control.... works a dream in my car, but then others have had less good experiances, driven my car and said "this drives differently to mine.." so I still can't explain the differences between similar DSG equipped cars, unless it is the variances in the softwares learning capability to set peramiters...

and the traffic light GP? mine taking off in sport is the quickest I have ever managed to get a FWD hatch off the line! again RWD could be different, but may be fitted with launch control...

as for the front engine rear drive ecg... yes you are setting up to have a better handling "sports car" in your mind than a fwd hot hatch,(when I say never go back, I'm thinking I will stay with FWD hatch) and there I may be inclined to agree that a manual box could be better suited, BUT I havent driven a paddle shift rear drive car like an XF or BMW ect to have the experiance to comment whether it would be better!! the last front engine rear drive I drove was an MX5, and that rocked as a nicely set up , good handling sports car !

All good points but I reckon you must have been lucky with yours regarding low speed maneuvres. Mines a bit of a pig -its almost impossible to inch forward -as soon as the brake peddle is gently released (no throttle at all) it shoots forward like a stabbed rat -quite worrying when there is a wall or parked car in front of you . I just feel the clutch/manual setup gives a finer degree of control than the DSG in my car. These are only very minor gripes tho and don't spoil my overall enjoyment of the car in any way.

SWMBO drives the vRS way more than I do anyway and loves the DSG -she definitely is in the 'never go back to manual' camp! I'm tempted next year to let her keep it full-time and bag myself and early 335i or something as they seem to be getting quite good value now...

well if you want "proper" handling, you will always need to go front engine rear wheel drive alot of people don;t like having to rely on things like the EDL to put down the power out of corners ect!

I did my skid pan training in a BMW 325 on a gravel surface, with slick tyres! lol.... was a hoot! I wouldnt have been able to have that much fun in a FWD hatch with electronics

This has been rather interesting, glad I made this post! Was expecting to see the Petrol vs Diesel debates as well as some of the negative comments regarding DSG and the twinchargers reliability.

I guess ultimately the old vRS is nothing like the new one; no disrespect to those that own one but as most people have agreed on here it wasnt really a hot hatch whereas the new one is likely as hot as a Fabia will ever get! Real shame is that VAG didnt further develop the PD technology to improve refinement and emissions; instead they took the easy and cheap option to move to common rail like everyone else. As a result their diesel engines whilst refined now lack soul; I dont think the MK1 vRS could be repeated even if they tried. the 2.0 CR Ibiza FR I test drove some months ago whilst leagues ahead on refinement and general build quality was nothing like as lairy or fun as our previous generation 130 PD Sport. Really wasnt any more efficient either returning fuel economy which was little or no better than the older car.

I guess DSG works for some people and not others; personally I wasnt sure about it at first and thought the car would be better as a manual but I love it now and wouldnt want a manual transmission in the car. Its actually really nice to be able to be lazy and tool around in Auto when the mood takes, then take control and wring its neck as and when. There is no doubting either the quality of the gear changes on the move either. It's not perfect but once you're used to it and have lived with it for a while I think its rather apparent why VAG matched the gearbox to the engine.

I think the twincharger lump is now pretty well proven so not really sure why people are still giving it a hard time for reliability issues. VAG are putting this engine in loads of cars now from the Golf, Eos, Golf Convertible, Tiguan, Touran etc so if it wasnt any good I should think they would have dropped it by now (like they did with the 1.6 FSi - awful!). I did get the emmisions warning on our one very early on but 2K later it doesnt do it any more. Also our cars only used about 300ml of oil in 2K; think its more to do with how their run in.

Ultimately people have a preference and thats fine but I think it has to be said that a proper performance car (from a hot hatch to a sports car) should be petrol powered. For me thats why Skoda got it so right this time around.

Edited 9 September, 201114 yr by pipsyp

Spot on really. Times move on and things improve. Talking with my friend who does all my car work (works at Audi) last night and he's hearing more and more talk about shutting cylinders down while at slow speeds. There's been whispers too of diesel being dead soon. Not sure of how much truth to this there is but VAG switched from PD to CR, added DPF's and complicated emissions systems. It's more than possible

At the rate they are tightning up emissions regs having a hot anything is starting to look less and less feasable.

To get similar performance you'd be looking at a 2.0 CR 170 and DSG which would never be allowed as thats the engine for the Golf GTD.

It is all about efficiency and that is where the game is at. "Smaller" engines with a lot of power and more environmentally friendly operation.

They will be further changes to the TSI engine in 2012 making it even more efficient.

http://star-motoring.com/News/2011/VW-to-introduce-cylinder-shut-off-in-4-cylinder-TS.aspx

Given I can barely drive the VRS off boost as it takes away so much of the fun they can go for it but I'll never see any benifits just completely *******s economy figures compaired to just overly optomistic that they are now.

Its been quite a good friendly debate here, i guess the thing is that a car has to be different things to different people and everyone has their own desires from what they want from a car. no one manufacturer has yet managed to make the perfect car that appeals to everyone, after all if they had, we would all be driving it and nothing else. i suppose the other thing is that it is good to have a choice in your model line up, had they offered the new vRS with a manual box option, then the people who arent keen on automatics would be happy, had they offered a diesel, then the high mileage drivers and the ones that just like diesels would be happy to. by only making one engine and gearbox combination with the new vRS, as they did with the Mk1, then you are always going to alienate some people. I suppose if you look at the Octavia vRS then you can get a petrol or a diesel, a manual or an auto. that way it will keep everyone happy. thats why cars come in different colours, everyone is different and wants different things. Im in no way bashing the new vRS or the DSG box, they are both great if thats what you want, just not everyone wants a petrol engine or a DSG box.