Fabia Estate - 86 or 105 TSI?

[Tidza]

I am looking to buy a Fabia estate for my wife, to replace her old 2005 Fabia estate.

She does a relatively short commute - country lanes, a bit of open road, and a bit of town queueing - about 11 miles each way. So she certainly isn't a high mileage driver.

I am a confirmed diesel fan (Octavia TDi), but she had a petrol before, and thinks a petrol would be best again, so that is what we are looking at.

The garage has told her that the 86PS TSI is probably equivalent in power to her old car, but - given that the fuel economy is virtually the same - I would be more inclined to go for the 105PS, just so you have a bit more grunt for overtaking, or when you occasionally need it.

Can people advise on the pros and cons of these 2 engines? I know insurance will be a bit more expensive on the 105, and obviously it costs more in the first place, but what else should we consider?

Also, are both engines the same vintage, or is one effectively an 'older' model?

Thanks in anticipation.

Neil

[Allams Skoda]

Personally given the extra performance and the relatively small increase in price, I would go for the 105TSi. There are so real downsides to it as it doesn't use more fuel or cost more to tax, plus it certainly feels like more than 105PS when you're on the road.

It's a great engine!

[Vrs2]

The 105 engine would be a great engine if it wasn't for the poor fuel economy, don't not believe the figures that skoda quote as they are a long way off the real world. I averge 39 mpg over a week of gental driving on A and B roads so if you are going to be sat in traffic this might make it a lot worse.

So my advice is if you are set on one of these engines take a long test drive in you normal driving style and route and see what mpg you achieve, you may be supprised at it's performance as I was but if economy is your priority I can assure you there are many better performing cars out there with better fuel economy to, so buyer beware.

Edited 9 December, 2011 by Vrs2

[pearce_jj]

I've had book from the TSi, it does take some effort though.

If you look at the power curves for the two states of tune, actually the 85bhp version is only about 10% down up to about 4,000 rpm, where the torque holds up on the 105bhp version resulting obviously in a widening power difference. Probably because of the physically small turbo, the torque from both engines drops away sharply over about 5,000 rpm (however the plus side is torque low-down, 100nm at 1,000 rpm and 170 nm at 1,500rpm, in the 105).

Hence if you don't drive over 4,000 rpm there would be surprisingly little real-world difference.

[Tidza]

Thanks for the replies so far.

A couple of questions:-

Vrs2 - economy is certainly a high priority, and the shortfall in manufacturer's stats is pretty stark. Does anyone know if the 86PS version is similarly afflicted?

What about considering a diesel, or does her typical usage mean this is a daft notion.

Also, any ideas on other marques/models worth considering (of a similar overall size). Your comment re. the "many better performing cars out there with better fuel economy too" comment has intrigued me!

Pearce_jj - interesting research there. Given that she isn't prone to "flooring it", it may well be that the 86PS version is more than enough for her needs and driving style.

Mr Allam (sorry, Rothwell!) - any practical reasons to go for the 105, beyond just the fact that "it's a great engine"!

Once again, thanks in anticipation.

Neil

Edited 9 December, 2011 by Tidza

[Allams Skoda]

As I mentioned before, it's not much more money and you do get a fair bump in power which is always nice.

I disagree with vrs2' comments about the MPG, on our standard test drive route which is littered with roundabouts and a few sets of traffic lights a TSi 1.2 will get between 45 and 50mpg if you use the engines torque and make use of the higher gears.

[JGMVRS]

I have just taken ownership on the 1.2TSI 105 engine.

250 miles done so far averaging 43mpg

Thats on a 13 mile round trip to and from work, on mainly 60mph duel carriageways. Although i do have to crawl for 10 mins on the approaches to the Runcorn bridge each time which without could maybe see me pushing 45-50?

Im sure as soon as the engine loosens up it will improve a notch further

Edited 9 December, 2011 by JGMVRS

[Kablam]

When I was running a 1.2 TSI I was averaging around 45mpg. 39 sounds like you've got a heavy right foot.

[just music]

The 105 is a few insurance groups higher.

[Vrs2]

When I was running a 1.2 TSI I was averaging around 45mpg. 39 sounds like you've got a heavy right foot.

No heavy right foot, totally the opposite in fact as many have driven it and can't achieve much better than 45mpg on a single run with no town driving and never going over 3000 rpm. My dealer agrees there may be some problem with this engine but I have also been told by several Skoda/Seat dealers that complaints from both TSI owners and 1.6 cr diesel owners about poor fuel consumption are not uncommon, they seem to ether achieve very good or very poor returns and it's a bit of a lottery.

Also if you reads many car review magazines and online reviews you will notice a recurring trend of reports on TSI engined cars not returning no way near the official claimed figures. After owning many larger and more powerful cars the last 2 both VRS octavia's I would never buy a small engined car again as it's been the worst for fuel economy by far except for the petrol Vrs that was worse, but not by much if driven in a similar fashion, and that had 200 bhp so not really fair to compare.

Edited 9 December, 2011 by Vrs2

[Ross Chapman]

Simples - get the 86. If she wants more speed, get a tuning box to give it a bit more grunt.

I found my 105 (before it went) was almost as bad on fuel as my 1.6 Polo is now (Fabia averaging around 34mpg, Polo is 32 and I dont hoon it around) which is MASSIVELY off the claimed 50 or so. My SDi Polo will quite happily do 47mpg+ on exactly the same route, driven exactly the same way as the other two.

I think it would be helped more if it had six gears like the Polo / A1 as 5th is, frankly, stupidly long (30mph to 130mph).

[Black]

My wife has a 1.2 tsi 86 Estate, which she loves. She had a 140 TDI Passat before and I have never heard her complain about loss of Power or Torque.

Has covered 15k miles in it now, economy is around 43 mpg.

It is one of the best cars we have owned. Dont let the 1.2 tag confuse you, power delivery is excellent, even for overtaking. It is a lot faster than you expect. Didnt go for the.105 engine because I am always wary of over tuned engines after experience owning a 150 bhp TDI Golf. Really liked it unitl I drove the 130 version and realised the tuning of the 150 had compromised the power delivery. Dont know if this is the case with the tsi though.

Best answer is to test drive.

[Tidza]

All of those replies have been extremely useful - thanks everyone!

Particularly interested in the sentiments in that last post from Black.

Still keen to hear any suggestions of alternatives to look at, and also thoughts on the petrol vs diesel question.

Thanks in anticipation once again!

Neil

[pearce_jj]

Simple, just drive them both back-to-back (petrol and diesel). Do post back which you sign up for!

It is a bit odd the way it's continually said in the manner of "figures Skoda claim" re mpg. The fact is these are standard tests conducted in a controlled environment; any particular manufacturer is not making any claim over real-world economy per-se, simply stating the result as measured in the standard test. Also note Audi 'claim' 1mpg more in the A1 SE (also 86ps TSi).

Edited 9 December, 2011 by pearce_jj

[Kablam]

No heavy right foot, totally the opposite in fact as many have driven it and can't achieve much better than 45mpg on a single run with no town driving and never going over 3000 rpm. My dealer agrees there may be some problem with this engine but I have also been told by several Skoda/Seat dealers that complaints from both TSI owners and 1.6 cr diesel owners about poor fuel consumption are not uncommon, they seem to ether achieve very good or very poor returns and it's a bit of a lottery.

Also if you reads many car review magazines and online reviews you will notice a recurring trend of reports on TSI engined cars not returning no way near the official claimed figures. After owning many larger and more powerful cars the last 2 both VRS octavia's I would never buy a small engined car again as it's been the worst for fuel economy by far except for the petrol Vrs that was worse, but not by much if driven in a similar fashion, and that had 200 bhp so not really fair to compare.

I can only go by my own experience which tbh I trust over the 2nd hand experiences of others. 45-50mpg was perfectly attainable for me. Maybe I had a magic car?

[Black]

Tidza - interestingly our TSI was the first car we ever bought without a test drive! Had a Fabia ii before though so I knew they were great cars.

As mentioned before we had a Passat B6 Estate which I took over when my wife got the Fabia. Always planned to trade the Passat in for another large Estate but after a year of dual ownership decided to dump the Passat for a smaller economical car, got a diesel mini, and keep the Fabia as the main family car.

Six months on and I don't regret it at all. Fabia estate is actually a pretty big car, lots of leg room and a good load bay. Family of four and a camping weekend are no probelm. The engine is very good, first petrol we have had in about 300k miles of driving and really impressed how the game has moved on. My last petrol was a VAG 1.8 Turbo.

Low down torque is almost diesel like but it is very refined. Can cruise on the motorway at the same speed as more powerful cars I have had.

[fabked]

My 105 TSI Hatchback is giving really good figures from new. Work is 7 miles away and I have been getting approximately 44mpg on the way and 51mpg back home when driving normally.

I originally ordered the 86ps, but modified my order 2 weeks later as I did not want to regret my choice later down the line. I really am loving the perfomance of this engine and the acceleration is much improved over my old car.

Personally my insurance did not alter in cost going from a group 5 (70HTP fabia) to a group 13 (105TSI fabia)

[logiclee]

We got the 105 as it's the only one available with DSG. If you are looking to get a TSI with ESP then a DSG version will only cost an extra £200. Let your wife have a test drive in the DSG versions, my wife and my mother were both very negative about having an "Automatic" but now they both love the DSG.

Economy? Tending to get 40mpg knocking about and 50mpg on a run which is very similar to our 1.2 12V 70bhp HTP.

Cheers

Lee

Edited 10 December, 2011 by logiclee

[GeneralPurpose]

Tidza, the 1.2TSI is a fabulous engine and for a petrol car, very economical. I've got to say that the reported complaints of poor fuel economy is usually traceable to the way the car has been treated during the running in period (yes, cars still need to be run in even today). Babying the engine and not going over 3k rpm is not good for a modern engine. And, driver technique during everyday running around is a main contributor to good or bad economy. Of course the route and traffic conditions also make a huge difference too. That's usually all it is. Car themselves don't actually vary very much at all. Fits and limits at the engineering level are these days very good indeed and engines largely come out of the factory virtually identical in build quality. If you follow the book running in method and don't baby it, you'll be fine. Modern turbo'ed petrols are very very tight when new, just like diesels, and need proper bedding in before they give good fuel economy. I'm a diesel fanatic and would always buy diesel, but if I had to buy a petrol car it would be one of the TSI engines, the 105ps version.

Edited 10 December, 2011 by Estate Man

[Allams Skoda]

I found my 105 (before it went) was almost as bad on fuel as my 1.6 Polo is now (Fabia averaging around 34mpg, Polo is 32 and I dont hoon it around) which is MASSIVELY off the claimed 50 or so. My SDi Polo will quite happily do 47mpg+ on exactly the same route, driven exactly the same way as the other two.

How are you getting such low MPG out of an SDi? I used to have a Fabia SDi back in the day and I was getting 60-75mpg out of that all the time.

[Tidza]

Well, thanks to everyone for your replies. They were extremely useful.

Today, I went into my local dealer and ordered....

.... a 1.6 CR TDI 90bhp!

I test drove both engines, and the 86 TSI was excellent. But given that my wife will probably keep the car for 6-8 years, plus I can save a bit of money over diesel pump prices, I decided that was the more sensible choice. I will also take it on my own commute every 2-3 weeks, which will certainly burn off the debris in the filter!

Also, the new CR diesel engine felt really smooth and quiet. Significant improvement over the 140 PD TDi in my Octavia.

Any congratulations on my decision welcome. If you think I've comletely blown it, please keep schtum

Neil

[Ross Chapman]

How are you getting such low MPG out of an SDi? I used to have a Fabia SDi back in the day and I was getting 60-75mpg out of that all the time.

Its only a 3 mile run to work so the diesel hasnt warmed up fully by the time I get to work, plus I think the engine needs its valve seals done (blows out blue smoke a little bit when started).

Having said that - the few times I`ve taken out remapped Superb to work that gives an indicated 56mpg!

I`ve driven the CR Fabia and that is an awesome little car. Feels a lot nipper than youd think it would. The 105 can be a bit of a speed-demon, feels like it pulls a LOT harder than the 1.2 TSi (probably down to the 100Nm more torque than the petrol)

Edited 11 December, 2011 by Ross Chapman

[Yeti_Man]

100lb/ft more torque in the diesel?! :wonder:

[fabia55]

We got the 105 as it's the only one available with DSG. If you are looking to get a TSI with ESP then a DSG version will only cost an extra £200. Let your wife have a test drive in the DSG versions, my wife and my mother were both very negative about having an "Automatic" but now they both love the DSG.

Economy? Tending to get 40mpg knocking about and 50mpg on a run which is very similar to our 1.2 12V 70bhp HTP.

Cheers

Lee

I can only assume you either labout your engines or live iun an area with very smooth roads. I never get about 40mpg on average. Even cruising steadily at 60-65mph 50mpg on average is impossible.

[pearce_jj]

I can only assume you either labout your engine

Labour did you mean? But the comments were with reference to a DSG equiped model.