Hi, I'm considering buying a diesel Octavia, having had great service from my Mk IV 1.9pd Golf (which still runs really well, and is being passed on to my wife). Any tips on which one to go for? (New or S/H). I like the torquey character of my golf engine, and also am a major fan of reliable motors! Thanks.

Hi, I'm considering buying a diesel Octavia, having had great service from my Mk IV 1.9pd Golf (which still runs really well, and is being passed on to my wife). Any tips on which one to go for? (New or S/H). I like the torquey character of my golf engine, and also am a major fan of reliable motors! Thanks.

VRS CR , not as problematical as pd engined VRS

try the 2.0 tsi, pulls like a diesel but doesnt run out of puff!!!!!

1.9PD most reliable /good fuel economy if your not too bothered about performance

Hi, I'm considering buying a diesel Octavia, having had great service from my Mk IV 1.9pd Golf (which still runs really well, and is being passed on to my wife). Any tips on which one to go for? (New or S/H). I like the torquey character of my golf engine, and also am a major fan of reliable motors! Thanks.

The 1.9D, especially the 130, 150 and 160 hp variants were the pinacle of 4 cylinder VAG diesel engine design IMO.

The Common Rail CR variants are quieter, smoother but the performance has virtually stagnated with the 170hp variant not producing substantially more torque, a mere 350 NM where as the 160hp 1.9D produced 330 NM. The power is only at the single RPM point quite close to the red line in all these engines.VW-Audi have been directing most of their Research and Development on the Direct Injection and Turbocharged TSI range for the last view years for which they have won multiple awards. Where the gap between diesel and petrol performance was about 33% it is now less than 20%.

VW-Audi have been offering all sorts of incentives for people to choose the petrol option over diesel for the smaller engine variants. The TSI engines not only have fuel consumption getting every closer to that off the diesels but their spread off power and torque is far wider than the diesel. Take the TSI engine in my Octy 2, torque plateau starts at 1500 of 7000 ie about the 20% point of the rev range, max power occurs at 4500/7000 rpm ie at 65% up the rev range and goes on to 6200/7000 rpm ie nearly 90% of the rev range. Compare that to any of the diesels power/torque curve ie in petrol it is not a curve it is a plateau!

Performance is much more zippy in the petrol variants, servicing similar gaps at around 20K miles on variable. In certain countries where taxes and the cost of diesel makes the diesel variants the logical choice but here in the UK I do not see it. After being forced to drive a diesel for years as a company car I am now liberated to be able to choice a petrol, joy. Cost £5K less to buy than the diesel. All the TSI's are brilliant, 1.2, 1.4, 1.8 and 2.0. Matched with DSG, particualrly the 7 speed, the results are awesome for both acceleration and economy.

Edited 17 September, 201114 yr by lol

The 1.9D, especially the 130, 150 and 160 hp variants were the pinacle of 4 cylinder VAG diesel engine design IMO.

The Common Rail CR variants are quieter, smoother but the performance has virtually stagnated with the 170hp variant not producing substantially more torque, a mere 350 NM where as the 160hp 1.9D produced 330 NM. The power is only at the single RPM point quite close to the red line in all these engines.VW-Audi have been directing most of their Research and Development on the Direct Injection and Turbocharged TSI range for the last view years for which they have won multiple awards. Where the gap between diesel and petrol performance was about 33% it is now less than 20%.

VW-Audi have been offering all sorts of incentives for people to choose the petrol option over diesel for the smaller engine variants. The TSI engines not only have fuel consumption getting every closer to that off the diesels but their spread off power and torque is far wider than the diesel. Take the TSI engine in my Octy 2, torque plateau starts at 1500 of 7000 ie about the 20% point of the rev range, max power occurs at 4500/7000 rpm ie at 65% up the rev range and goes on to 6200/7000 rpm ie nearly 90% of the rev range. Compare that to any of the diesels power/torque curve ie in petrol it is not a curve it is a plateau!

Performance is much more zippy in the petrol variants, servicing similar gaps at around 20K miles on variable. In certain countries where taxes and the cost of diesel makes the diesel variants the logical choice but here in the UK I do not see it. After being forced to drive a diesel for years as a company car I am now liberated to be able to choice a petrol, joy. Cost £5K less to buy than the diesel. All the TSI's are brilliant, 1.2, 1.4, 1.8 and 2.0. Matched with DSG, particualrly the 7 speed, the results are awesome for both acceleration and economy.

I have owned both the pd and cr in skodas now both stock an both remaped CR tech has come a long way and now surpassed the PD which is more complex and expensive at the end of the day. The spread of power etc all depends on how the car is set up the engine in the CR and PD as they are supplied both mine were VRS's are made to meet certain emission/eco standards etc and not at their peak performance by any means and I find when both remaped to a smooth power curve the CR is a lot more refined and less of a tractor and wont wake your neighbours early in the morning simply by starting it and letting it idle lol

Id go for a nice new CR if you can afford it the 1.6 has mega MPG to offer!

I like the torquey character of my golf engine...

Then PD is the only way to go...

...and also am a major fan of reliable motors!

The 1.9 PD ticks that box too!

I have owned both the pd and cr in skodas now both stock an both remaped CR tech has come a long way and now surpassed the PD which is more complex and expensive at the end of the day. The spread of power etc all depends on how the car is set up the engine in the CR and PD as they are supplied both mine were VRS's are made to meet certain emission/eco standards etc and not at their peak performance by any means and I find when both remaped to a smooth power curve the CR is a lot more refined and less of a tractor and wont wake your neighbours early in the morning simply by starting it and letting it idle lol

Id go for a nice new CR if you can afford it the 1.6 has mega MPG to offer!

Is your 2011 CR remapped already? I ask because i've clocked up 3500miles & i'm getting used to the power but i'm noticing where it could do with a bit more, i assume a re-map will give me a smother & longer pull. If you have mapped your 2011 Cr is now a good time for me (mileage wise) or should I wait a while?

I have owned both the pd and cr in skodas now both stock an both remaped CR tech has come a long way and now surpassed the PD which is more complex and expensive at the end of the day. The spread of power etc all depends on how the car is set up the engine in the CR and PD as they are supplied both mine were VRS's are made to meet certain emission/eco standards etc and not at their peak performance by any means and I find when both remaped to a smooth power curve the CR is a lot more refined and less of a tractor and wont wake your neighbours early in the morning simply by starting it and letting it idle lol

Id go for a nice new CR if you can afford it the 1.6 has mega MPG to offer!

I don't think lol has ever driven a CR tbh, he is quick to slate them having only read internet bumpf.....and where on earth is a diesel £5k more than the petrol?

You don't state what bhp your current PD engine is. If it is the 100bhp then seriously go for a test drive the 1.6. I drove one the other week in a Fabia (105bhp) and i was seriously impressed with it. I got 62MPG around town whereas i managed 42mpg on the same journey in mine.

If the PD is any quicker then you will be looking at the 140 or the 170. If you are looking at the 140 or 170 i would try and avoid the PD's as these have been plagued with DPF issues as the engines weren't originally designed for use with them.

The 170 CR, granted doesn't seem as torquey as the PD but my god it shifts. I think the rev band/bhp is more evenly paired with the torque so you get power throughout the rev range rather than in one big lump (i went from a 130PD to this CR).

Test them all and make your decision (trouble is testing them all, you will pick the 170!!).

Let us know how you get on!

Is your 2011 CR remapped already? I ask because i've clocked up 3500miles & i'm getting used to the power but i'm noticing where it could do with a bit more, i assume a re-map will give me a smother & longer pull. If you have mapped your 2011 Cr is now a good time for me (mileage wise) or should I wait a while?

What did you have before? how have you run it in? You should have really pushed it through all the gears through the entire rev range when the engine was fully warm. That is what i did with mine and i think the 0-60 figures speak for themselves - Mine is DSG though so that helps

Hi, I'm considering buying a diesel Octavia, having had great service from my Mk IV 1.9pd Golf (which still runs really well, and is being passed on to my wife). Any tips on which one to go for? (New or S/H). I like the torquey character of my golf engine, and also am a major fan of reliable motors! Thanks.

Thanks to all the BRISKODA members who have kindly replied to my question so far - it will be good to have informed opinion behind me when I buy!

Need to check again but I was quite suprised at the difference in insurance between a 1.9 pd and 2.0 pd. it was something like from £250 upto £450.

I've owned two 1.9pd 105ps Octavia estates and they have both covered around 70k and were trouble free. I now have the 1.6cr Octavia estate, which overall is a better drive. I was concerned that the engine was too small for the Octavia until I test drove it.

The CR is smoother through the range, OK it doesn't have to low down punch that the pd has, but it does seem to pull well. The gearing is taller, so you use fourth more than the pd. I do a lot of motorway miles and the mpg is averaging around 58 (actual) which is over 700 miles on a tank of fuel. £30 road fund is also a bonus.

The 1.9pd was good, but I'll have another 1.6cr next time.

I can't comment on the 2.0 cr, but a collegue has the Superb 170ps and he reckons it's really good and he's just moved to Skoda from owning a BMW 5 series diesel.

Need to check again but I was quite suprised at the difference in insurance between a 1.9 pd and 2.0 pd. it was something like from £250 upto £450.

Really? I went from a Bora 130PD to a VRS CR and paid £50 more for 6 months (thats going from group 9 to 15 in old money). Interestingly the 170PD is cheaper to insure than the 170CR for some reason...

If the PD is any quicker then you will be looking at the 140 or the 170. If you are looking at the 140 or 170 i would try and avoid the PD's as these have been plagued with DPF issues as the engines weren't originally designed for use with them.

Bear in mind though that the only Octavia PD140 to have a DPF was the Scout. The front wheel drive Octavia PD140s didn't have a DPF - part of my reason for choosing an Octavia originally.

Bear in mind though that the only Octavia PD140 to have a DPF was the Scout. The front wheel drive Octavia PD140s didn't have a DPF - part of my reason for choosing an Octavia originally.

Didn't know that!

The 170 CR, granted doesn't seem as torquey as the PD but my god it shifts. Test them all and make your decision (trouble is testing them all, you will pick the 170!!).

+1 :thumbup:

Really? I went from a Bora 130PD to a VRS CR and paid £50 more for 6 months (thats going from group 9 to 15 in old money). Interestingly the 170PD is cheaper to insure than the 170CR for some reason...

I find this strange as when i got my new cr vrs it was cheaper to insure than my 3yr old pd vrs with the same company

I find this strange as when i got my new cr vrs it was cheaper to insure than my 3yr old pd vrs with the same company

Just proves insurance premiums are made up then

Just proves insurance premiums are made up then

It was last year at renewal time I checked a few options for L&Ks against my old 306

I ended up keeping the old car so I deleted the emails so numbers from memory.

Need to renew in 10 weeks so will be checking again soon.

I find the 1.6 TDI quite adequate, especially with the DSG, mind I am mostly running on my own.

She did however feel a trifle sluggish when coming back offen hols with a full load of Cezch beer on board/in belly, especially on long Autobann inclines.

However however over 5160 miles we averaged 60.4795 mpg, absolutly brimmed at the start & finish, Autobann and 2nd mountain roads included, so I will perhaps forgive her.

Cheers

Marcus

Had the 1.6 CR Estate Greenline for just over a week and can't fault the CR engine, it feels very similar to the 2.0 CR (110ps) engine in my previous car a VW Passat and a lot smoother and quieter than the 1.9Tdi engines I've had in either of my VW Tourans.

As I haven't had it very long yet and am half way through it's first tankful I can't comment on the mpg other than what the OBC says at about 66mpg over 500miles with a best of 85mpg! on one slow trip on the motorway.

What did you have before? how have you run it in? You should have really pushed it through all the gears through the entire rev range when the engine was fully warm. That is what i did with mine and i think the 0-60 figures speak for themselves - Mine is DSG though so that helps

I had a 1.6 diesel Citroen & it had half the BHP of this beast. I do appreciate the poke & your probably right. I need to let each gear run for longer & stop short shifting. I think the DSG might give a slight edge but there is something very satisfying about changing gear in a manual at high speed, feels like you are earning the speed but doing something meaningful to create more power instead of flicking a paddle (like I would on my PS3). It's probably more of a case you dont know what your missing if you've never had it.

I'll put this into practice tomorrow, when in the rev range to you flick up a gear? 4000?