The topic says it really, is there a noticeable difference between the 86 and 105 PS engines in terms of real performance? On paper there is an obvious difference but when driven, can you really tell which you are driving?

Long term (when youngest old enough to drive) the lower powered engine will be better on insurance, but in the present, until i get my vRS back of SWMBO, i need a replacement car and her 1.2 Corsa is not going to cut it.

Thoughts please Briskodians.......

I found some graphs comparing them on a tuning site (which I now can't find).

Starting with the 105, it's torque curve drops of sharply at about 5,000 rpm, I guess because of the physically small turbo. However the flip-side is the low-end, 100nm at 1,000rpm quickly rising to 170nm at 1,550rpm or there abouts.

VAG have used a similar method to differential the two versions as they did with the old 1.8t, which is to back off the boost to give about 10% less torque, and back it off more at higher revs, about 4,000 in this case.

Hence the 'general' drivability should be little different, but it will lack the top-end.

Of course the best bet is to drive them back-to-back.

Thanks for that. Am driving both back to back tomorrow to find out first hand. Am tempted with a used 86PS but possible deal with a brand new 105PS. Will make up my mind then and see which i get. Either way its not going to be the same as the 180PS from the vRS but at present being practical otherwise it would have to be an Octy.

Let us know what you think between the two, thanks

you get all that extra power, loads more torque on both 1.2 TSI engines and it is more economical than the 1.2 HTP, which is still a very good car/engine, especially for insurance for youngens.

The only down side is the buy price but then you can get the VAT-off deal.

Skoda really need to do a 1.4 TSI version of the Fabia with the 122 hp engine I reckon. Do not think it would harm the VRS sales but it would fill the gap between the 105 hp 1.2 TSI/wiesel and the VRS nicely. In Monte spec would be very nice!

Edited 4 February, 201214 yr by lol

Skoda really need to do a 1.4 TSI version of the Fabia with the 122 hp engine I reckon. Do not think it would harm the VRS sales but it would fill the gap between the 105 hp 1.2 TSI/wiesel and the VRS nicely. In Monte spec would be very nice!

I think the point of the Monte especially in 105 and 86 form is to keep BHP low enough for insurance but to give appearance of something much hotter. Insurance for youngsters is so ridiculous now that any further increase in BHP would prohibit them from getting one. As you say a 122BHP Monte might also infringe on VRS sales and therefore, from Skodas point of view, not a good idea.

In answer to the original post. We have the Monte in 105 trim and it's a cracker. It gives more than adequate performance for everyday use IMO with no discernable turbo lag and returns around 42mpg. We also test drove an 86BHP SE+ and found that very smooth and free revving also. Check out insurance quotes for your youngster before buying. If you havn't already done so it may come as a big shock.

Thanks all.

Unfortunately was not able to drive a 105 monte, only a standard Fabia so my view was slanted a little. However, the 86 was pretty good. Very impressive on the test drive and handled pretty much like the vRS but i guess it should. Engine was a dream and did not feel under powered and certainly spun up well (unlike the 1.2 (80HP) lump in the Corsa). Didn't get a chance to pull any overtaking moves but guessing that will be hampered compared to what i am used to.

It was difficult to compare the 105 as it was not the same model. The engine still felt good but overall not as sure footed. i suspect though that was down to a combination of suspension setting/tyres.

However, i really enjoyed my drive in the Monte so we now have an 86PS car on order which may even be with us by the end of the week.

Insurance? Had a quick look on a comparison site to get an idea of what it may cost and was quite surprised at the results. All quotes based on myself, SWMBO, and my 19 year with a full licence 1 yr.

Corsa 1.2 (Current car) £ 920

Monte 86PS £ 1090

Monte 105PS £990

All with the same insurer and details. So why is the 105PS Monte cheaper to insure? And if we drop my son off we can get the insurance quote to below £200.

Thanks all.

Unfortunately was not able to drive a 105 monte, only a standard Fabia so my view was slanted a little. However, the 86 was pretty good. Very impressive on the test drive and handled pretty much like the vRS but i guess it should. Engine was a dream and did not feel under powered and certainly spun up well (unlike the 1.2 (80HP) lump in the Corsa). Didn't get a chance to pull any overtaking moves but guessing that will be hampered compared to what i am used to.

It was difficult to compare the 105 as it was not the same model. The engine still felt good but overall not as sure footed. i suspect though that was down to a combination of suspension setting/tyres.

However, i really enjoyed my drive in the Monte so we now have an 86PS car on order which may even be with us by the end of the week.

Insurance? Had a quick look on a comparison site to get an idea of what it may cost and was quite surprised at the results. All quotes based on myself, SWMBO, and my 19 year with a full licence 1 yr.

Corsa 1.2 (Current car) £ 920

Monte 86PS £ 1090

Monte 105PS £990

All with the same insurer and details. So why is the 105PS Monte cheaper to insure? And if we drop my son off we can get the insurance quote to below £200.

Im 18 and my vrs is cheaper to insure than my 60(pathetic) bhp polo.....they just make the prices up as they go along with youngsters as i was 4grand cheaper to be the main driver rather than a named driver on my car

hi,

i have the Monte with the 105 ps 1.2 tsi.

We did some tests a few months ago on this, and u cant really sence the difference if you dont have any passengers.

But if you have passengers, u will feel that the 105 ps has ''the extra power''...

Just because of that (and the fact that its faster on paper), i went for the 105 ps and i know i will never ever regret it.

Edited 4 February, 201214 yr by joten

Just because of that (and the fact that its faster on paper), i went for the 105 ps and i know i will never ever regret it.

Thanks joten, totally agree re the extra power, but hopefully i will get my vRS back from the wife once her achilles heals, but that is going to be a minimum of three months. Fortunately for her, unfortunately for me, it (the vRS) has the DSG gbox and it is her left leg that has torn, hence driving an auto is not a problem. The 86 PS was good on the test drive this afternoon three up, and i did not use one M way or dual carriage way. I was honestly really impressed. Car felt well planted, and whilst not having the grunt of the vRS performed admirably around some good country lanes . Why do salesmen always think you wnt to see how fast a car goes?

Thanks joten, totally agree re the extra power, but hopefully i will get my vRS back from the wife once her achilles heals, but that is going to be a minimum of three months. Fortunately for her, unfortunately for me, it (the vRS) has the DSG gbox and it is her left leg that has torn, hence driving an auto is not a problem. The 86 PS was good on the test drive this afternoon three up, and i did not use one M way or dual carriage way. I was honestly really impressed. Car felt well planted, and whilst not having the grunt of the vRS performed admirably around some good country lanes . Why do salesmen always think you wnt to see how fast a car goes?

''Why do salesmen always think you wnt to see how fast a car goes?''

Because YOU want to :p

Edited 5 February, 201214 yr by joten

For some reason Skoda dont seem to want to put the turbo-only 1.4 TSi into the Fabia but you can only get it in the Audi A1 (but oddly, not the 105 1.2!)AFAIK.

However, from what I have seen of rolling road figures for the 105 (and judging by my own 105`s performance compared to my current 105bhp N/A Polo) they all seem to be putting out about 115-125 anyway untuned.

At the end of the day, the only thing you are paying extra for on the Monte over a standard Fabia is the seats (vRS style sports ones) and the bodykit, so if you have been out in a stock 105 then it will give you extactly the same performance as the Monte would have.

I would say if there is only a minor difference in price (if any!) between what you have been offered for the 86 and 105 versions, go for the 105. Its quick enough to give a good impression of the performance of the vRS but still be slow enough to get cheap insurance. I pay £200 more(!!!) on my current older 1.6 Polo Estate than i did on a brand new 1.2 TSi estate.

Edited 5 February, 201214 yr by Ross Chapman