Hi all,

Anyone have any idea if this will ever be done with the mark 2. Just reading about the new 2.0 TDi Audi A1 (costing 22 grand!!!! and looking like one of my other halfs handbags). Quite fancy a new VRS - have driven the petrol version and though i like the way it drove, and i'm sure i'd get used to the DSG box - i'm just hankering after a diesel with a manual transmission, and the mcuh adord VRS badge on the grille

you could always buy the deisel montecarlo, and remap it

don't seat do something similar in the ibiza?

They do a 2.0 Turbo diesel Ibiza fr. Remapped they can get 185bhp and something around the 450nm of torque aswell. It comes as a manual aswell.

I really don't understand where skoda have their heads regarding this. Really really strange

Apparently tha fabia is unable to fit the crtdi 2.0 litre engine in the front which is required, for the VRS performance

Edited 17 November, 201114 yr by seboni121

The Fabia is an old platform, compared with the A1/Polo/Beeeeeeeza.

A diesel isn't really needed as the Twincharger is quicker, and gives very good economy!

and gives very good economy!

not in mine it doesn't :p

i knew exactly what i was in for so it doesn't bother me but you just cant compare the mpg's, there not even close. maybe against other hot hatches you could say the mk2 is pretty good but thats all.

booting the old mk1 vrs id get 40's over my 20 mile commute, booting the mk2 im lucky to get 20

had the choice been available id take the diesel any day even if it had less power but it isn't so i didn't and i do still love this mk2

Simples - don't boot it

Simples - don't boot it

ive tried that, didn't like it its just so tempting

lol your fuelly says 37.9 i would love that figure

On my MDI it readys 30.1 lol

As previous post get monte with the diesel and reap it will out run the Mk2 VRS easy peasy and cheaper to run , also you won't have the gearbox made out of balsa wood

Edited 17 November, 201114 yr by seboni121

lol your fuelly says 37.9 i would love that figure

On my MDI it readys 30.1 lol

thats coz i drive like a fanny but put my daft head on and its costly. if i drove this like i drove the mk1 then the fuelly would be very much lower. lasts nights 20 mile trip home = 25 :'(

right now im on a mission to see what i can get but its spoiling the fun a little, not sure how long i can last it out though

as for the gearbox seb, thats why i bought it, its brill

I'm not sure what's going on cause I caned the one I test drove, and it averaged 40mpg over about 10 miles!

The Fabia is an old platform, compared with the A1/Polo/Beeeeeeeza.

Wasn't the only difference the front subframe which has since been changed to the new style on the face lift?

Nope, it's the previous generation of the platform.

Wasn't the only difference the front subframe which has since been changed to the new style on the face lift?

Bigger differences I think, the newer platform the A1 uses had modifications to the bulkhead to accomodate the 2.0TDi and haldex AWD transfer box. The floorpan was also modified to accept AWD.

Some say the facelift Fabia has it all, some say not. I have pre and post Facelift on the drive and can't see any difference underneath.

Cheers

Lee

I have both per and facelift Fabiias and there is a decimate difference to the road holding and cornering, they must have tweeked the frame and suspension, there is a definite difference in the cars, I remember also the dealer saying there is a small difference in the chassis on the facelift version but not sure of what I particular has been changed but the cars are like chalk n cheese the pre is much more whallowy in fast corners were the facelift is much flatter, I don't have the sport suspension set up either

I have both per and facelift Fabiias and there is a decimate difference to the road holding and cornering, they must have tweeked the frame and suspension, there is a definite difference in the cars, I remember also the dealer saying there is a small difference in the chassis on the facelift version but not sure of what I particular has been changed but the cars are like chalk n cheese the pre is much more whallowy in fast corners were the facelift is much flatter, I don't have the sport suspension set up either

Spring and damper rates also differ greatly depending on engine type as well though. I remember my wife saying "I can't believe I'm driving the same car" when switching between a 1.2 12V and 1.4Tdi. Wheel sizes also have a major impact on ride and handling.

Cheers

Lee

I have the 1.4tdi and the new facelift crtdi and I generally chuck both around the corners quickly, and the facelift much happier doing as its told

I have had mine a few weeks now and is happily sitting at 38-40mpg obviously not booting it everywhere just driving normally so a good mpg is achievable.

the facelift much happier doing as its told

I have found the same as you. Mk2 and particularly the facelift, drives much better than the Mk1.

Back on topic. I've always read that the 2.0TDI won't fit in the Fabia, so a diesel vRS won't happen until Skoda also get the fully up to date platform in 2013. Even then it might not happen, depends what the decision-makers want to do.

You could get the 1.6TDI Monte Carlo and remap it, should get you 130ish bhp and Mk1 vRS performance I would have thought. Won't be as quick as the petrol vRS, but that's as close as you'll get if you want diesel.

I have to admit I am still a bit put off by the DSG. It's all very clever I know.... but a 6 speed manual would be brilliant The "too much torque from the twincharger" line is BS as the PD130 produces more and they had no problem making a manual box for it. There isn't a manual because VAG don't want to make one.

I have to admit I am still a bit put off by the DSG. It's all very clever I know.... but a 6 speed manual would be brilliant The "too much torque from the twincharger" line is BS as the PD130 produces more and they had no problem making a manual box for it. There isn't a manual because VAG don't want to make one.

I love DSG but quote that's voiced elsewhere about too much torque is laughable. The twincharge unit is a low torque engine and uses the weakest DSG box VAG produce. The problem with the 6 speed manual is it wouldn't fit.

The twincharge 1.4 is available in other VAG models with 6 speed manual.

Cheers

Lee

Maybe that's why the 1.4 twin powered VRS will soon be in the elephants graveyard, in favour of the 1.6 single turbo engine, I initially ridiculed the VRS but since I have driven one albeit for a few hours, I enjoyed it very much dsg was crisp enough allthough far from perfect, slight hesitation on exiting and entrance to roundabout, plus reversing it seemed clunky and clumsy ( that might have been my lack of use ), would I buy one NO, simply because I have grown up with a manual and not sure of the quality of the dsg box, but all in all a great little pocket rocket for the £ you pay for it, enjoy all you who drive one, as long as you can any way 20-35 mpg at today's fuel prices :(

Edited 17 November, 201114 yr by seboni121

Maybe that's why the 1.4 twin powered VRS will soon be in the elephants graveyard, in favour of the 1.6 single turbo engine,

Technology moves on, the new petrol turbo technology is advancing quickly. Peugeot/Citroen, Ford , Vauxhall, BMW, VAG all gave units out or coming out with 125bhp/litre+ and with astounding torque "curves". The new BMW 4 cylinder turbo produces maximum torque from 1250rpm to 5000rpm, that's maximum torque at just above tickover, amazing. And the new VAG 1.6TSi? 200bhp and maximum torque from 1500rpm, no supercharger needed.

I think the twin charge engine has been an inovation though and it has advanced forced induction technology, it's just it's a technology that's been superceeded.

As for the DSG, more gears, more performance, lower CO2. Love it or loath it I think automatics will move into the mainstream more and more as the technology evolves and becomes cheaper.

Cheers

Lee

Edited 17 November, 201114 yr by logiclee