As above, probably the hatch in Elegance spec, or indeed perhaps the Scout(better value estate?)= Senior Managments choice(for the putitive grandweans)

Wanting/needing? to keep the insurance group low but timerous of the 75bhp.

PS

I suppose what I really want to know is the differences between the various engine specs,i.e. a different turbo?, intercooler? pump, injectors???.............or is it simply all to do with the engine managment software?

Cheers

Marcus

I think they are mechanically identical the 90 just mapped to a higher power output....

Ok

I do know that the 90 has the variable vane turbo( from a Polo spec sheet,& identical engine I can only presume) but where do Skoda list this information.

The anal rentitive obsessive complusive prefectionist in me likes to know this probably useless information :p

As dieseldogg & Furby indicates, there are mechanical differences with the intercooler, turbo etc. There are I think differences with the injection pressure too. It's all listed on the Skoda website under performance in the engine spec.

Edited 1 December, 201114 yr by Estate Man

The 75PS does feel a little underpowered and restricted, I'd certainly suggest going for a 90PS if you're buying new. If you're buying used and are happy with 75PS try and hunt down a Greenline!

Thanks James?

A car for the daughter, the Son is currently recievieng beer tokens in lieu of a car

PS

Why the Greenline spec if settling for the 75BHP, I would have thought this would perhaps have been the worst of all worlds, or does the extra milage from the Greenline better compensate for the lethargic performance of the 75BHP.

I will keep looking

PPs

Are most Car Dealers still open on Christmas Eve? :p

For a last-minute year-end bargain

The extra MPG on the Greenline easily makes up for any lack of performance that you might find compared to the 1.6CR 90PS. I don't find the Greenline especially slow or anything, I think the gearing is different from the 1.6TDi which makes it feel fairly nippy around town, I just sometimes think the 1.2CR could have done with a 6 speed gearbox.

We are normally open on Christmas Eve, but not this year..!

As James says, if you only want 75bhp then the Greenline II is a better bet.

Comes with decent standard spec too and a comedy spoiler on the hatchback variant.

I like my GL2, it's fine unless you are in a rush.

Regards the gearing, the GL2 will pull 95mph at about 3000rpm. It just takes time to get there once you get over 60mph as the acceleration tails off a bit.

If you are going for a 1.6 CR, get the 90 version or 105.

Regards the first post...

The scout is good, estate is practical and you don't see many. Plus body trim is more practical and protects from minor bumps that mark standard cars.

I like the scout a lot in the right colours.

Unless this will be doing intergalactic miles, way better to buy a TSi.

Go for the 105bho much better performance and makes more economic sense as its better fuel economy today 60 mile run 63.5 mpg

Interestingly... did you know that the Skoda site lists the 1.6 75bhp diesel engine as having a lower top speed and slower 0-62mph time than a Greenline II. :wonder:

Go Greenline II !

Thanks all, useful stuff to mull over, I had kinda decided NOT to buy the wee three pot, having heard it described as harsh/noisy etc, but will certainly reconsider.

And i suppose also liking the 1.6 CR in the Octavia.

Ps

Wor tiddles, for whom the car is mostly intended, positively squwaked when I mooted buying a TSI, (& I done reared dat girl good )

But regardless over 100,000 or 150,000 miles ( & optimistically 200,000) the diesel will win out, her could/will be doing a 100 mile round trip each weekend plus probably another 100 at the weekend (& abs min 50)in addition to her daily commute.

While Tiddles was driving the Galaxy she "never cooled", neither her nor the car.

Thanks again

Marcus

Then drive the three dervs back-to-back, then try a TSi, and see which one you order

Thanks all, useful stuff to mull over, I had kinda decided NOT to buy the wee three pot, having heard it described as harsh/noisy etc, but will certainly reconsider.

To be honest the 3 pot Greenline II is noiser than the others. But it's not excessive.

The 1.6 CR is very smooth and quiet, but the 1.2 in the GL2 is more like a standard car diesel engine from about 5 or 6 years ago. On the move it's fine, but you can hear it.

It rattles when started until the oil has circulated.

It's lovely and quiet at a standstill as it's got stop-start!

If I wasn't doing a lot of miles I'd have a TSI.

We have the 1.2 in our Yeti DSG and it's amazing for a small petrol engine. Even in the bigger and heavier Yeti we average over 40mpg. And it's really quiet, refined and responsive.

Factor in the lower purchase price and I'd not touch the 1.6 for this reason in all honesty.

For me it's GL2 for economy TSI for lovely smooth and quiet driving. But I'm biased as we have both engines.

(and my Mum has a 1.6 CR Greenline Yeti, but I won't go into that! )

Indeed the reason i even considered the petrol was simply because that when I had the TSI Yeti on an albeit brief test drive I was truly astounded at its capabilities.

It to my mind drove like a diesel, in that I had just stepped out of a TDI and did not notice any difference ( well except the lack of noise)I never even stalled her!, which I had half expected to.

But but but

over 100 or 150 thou miles even when calculated with petrol at £1.30 and diesel at £1.40 & knocking 20% off the EU combined fuel consumption figs.

It stacks up

Plus the TSI is as expensive to buy?? Is it not?, virtually.

Really must test drive the options, but when the Skoda Dealer I was dickering with did not even know, nor know how to find out, the actual BHP of the 2nd hand diesels in stock..............it did not exactly fill me with confidence.

Well hey its a diesel innit

Edited 1 December, 201114 yr by dieseldogg

If you're seriously budgeting out ownership costs over 150k, IMO turbo and DPF replacement should be included in the overall cost of the diesel. I know of a Mk.I vRS on it's third turbo at that milage.

pearce what about budgeting for the cost of a new turbo AND supercharger for the TSI.

look it's obvious this guy isn't thinking about owning this car for 3yrs 5yrs 7yrs 10yrs, he wants to buy it and drive it until it dies.

if the basic laws of physics remain unchanged i would expect the equivelent Diesel model fabia engine to outlast the petrol model.

DPF will probs fail in 150,000 or 15yrs of use, the turbo... well who can say.

i recommend the Grennline personally, the lowered sports suspension on it means it handles better than the 1,6tdi as well as being quicker, but will it be tougher who can say.

I think spending 2k and buying a rare as rocking horse poo 190D NON turbo 2.5 is the best choice. comfortable, 75bhp so your kids won't hurt themselves, only 40mpg but almost everyone i know that has owned them say they are simplky amazing, my old neighbour in particuluar currently still driving his for the last 11yrs has over half a million miles on his and he bought his used in 2000yr for £1300 with 212,000 on it. bargain

what about budgeting for the cost of a new turbo AND supercharger for the TSI.

The turbo is far less likely to fail in the petrol engine since it's water cooled (no mad oil temperatures), the petrol engine (should) produce no soot (and so can't block up the variable-vane mechanism, if indeed is has VVT) and because it has no DPF there is far less possibility of oil pollution (leading to blocking of oil supply pipes and hence bearing failure). Obviously I may live to eat my words :wonder:

BTW, the 1.2 doesn't have a supercharger.

DPF will probs fail in 150,000 or 15yrs of use

I can't comment on VAG units but Citroen include in the service place inspection and replacement of DPF at c.75k and c.120k respectively, so I'd agree with that. Who would give a stuff about it in 15 years though, that would be like spending £1,500 on a P-reg Saxo. The point is that once it goes the car is likely to be a total loss, economically.

75bhp so your kids won't hurt themselves

It's a great point. Ford have the option to program different keys to provide different power outputs on their Fiesta I think I read somewhere. Something IMO it would be useful to see become standard.

To be honest there are no mad hot oil temps in diesel turbos either. Diesel turbo's run cool and on average last around 40-50% longer than petrol engine turbos in my experience. It remains to be seen if the TSI turbos will have a similar life to diesel units. I suspect they may not even if they are water cooled (some cars have had this feature for years and it is much needed on modern engines just to allow them to cover a reasonable mileage) as the more power you extract from a small petrol engined turbo the harder the turbo works and the hotter it will ultimately get. You are right about the Citroen DPF. They use a different system to VAG and it appears to have a shorter life span. All being well, the Skoda DPF's should last most of, or all the life of the car. Don't actually know what VAG says about that though.

If you are looking at 75Ps then with lots of miles you will probably be better off with the GL2.

As for petrol/diesel, the life span of a catalyst on a petrol car from the AA "Catalysts often last 10 years, but actual life depends on mileage and engine tune. 50,000 miles is a more reasonable benchmark, and you can generally expect to replace the catalytic converter once during the life of a vehicle." at 10,000 miles just 5 years

The life span of a DPF from VW "The latest generation of diesel particulate filters at Volkswagen operates without additives and is therefore completely maintenance-free for a long time. An initial inspection is usually carried out after 150,000 km. The filter’s lifespan is dependent on factors such as fuel quality, driving style, use and oil consumption." - about 93000 miles at 10,000 miles 9 years before initial inspection.

Sonner,

Thank you, our intentions exactly ( & cue another reference to the bought new 1998 TDI Galaxy wit 0ver 240,000 of hard earned miles thereon, still with the origional turbo & head gasket,& pump & injectors untouched..............yawn )

And Yes, I reckon the modern petrol=TSI is likely to be as liable to some high cost maint as a diesel, over an extended period of ownership.

But I dont know.Does anyone............yet?

But also I prefer to write a larger cheque in the first instance for diesel, then the furthur we drive the more we save on an ongoing basis.

Like women at the sales, "the more I spend the more I save"

Wheras the Petrol would have me squeaking every time I stopped to refuel,as I reflectd on how much furthur each litre of diesel would have taken me.

I know absolute hard economic facts can tell a different pertol/diesel story, but hey its ignoring such unwelcome facts (but only somtimes) that makes us human.

cheers all

Marcus

Ere,

I should blush, after a distinctly cool unhelpful reception at the Belfast Skoda dealers on Friday afternoon, we popped into C. Hursts at about 16:30, simply to kill the rest of the day.

Wor Tiddles sat her backside in a new Yaris and was smitten,her face said it all, no words were needed, (& so was I to be honest).

So Senior Managment is off to Coleraine in the morning to dicker & hopefully clinch the deal.

Me,I gotta go to work.

Sorry Skoda.

Cheers

Marcus