I currently have a MK1 octavia VRS and love it however, The tax on it is £245 for 12months. Some places say the tax on

a 2.0T FSI vRS 5d is only £190 is this true? So i could have a more powerfull mk2 vRS which returns almost the same if not better MPG and Cheaper to insure and tax? Is this correct?

Cheers

Are you trying to convince yourself you will save money upgrading?

Are you trying to convince yourself you will save money upgrading?

lol yes I am, I never used to like the look of the MK2 but they've really caught my eye of late

I currently have a MK1 octavia VRS and love it however, The tax on it is £245 for 12months. Some places say the tax on

a 2.0T FSI vRS 5d is only £190 is this true? So i could have a more powerfull mk2 vRS which returns almost the same if not better MPG and Cheaper to insure and tax? Is this correct?

Cheers

Hello.

No that's not correct, I paid £236 for last year, and so it'll probably be around the £245 that you're currently paying for this year.

However, I believe the newer (mid-09 onwards) TSI is around £190 (hopefully someone with a TSI can confirm that).

The FL Octavia vRS are £190 per year (manual) or £210 (DSG).

So if you are trying to convince yourself then it would be a quicker car for less road tax

If you get a 1.8TSi, you'll have at least as much go as the Mk. 1 vRS - I've had both. Probably insurance etc. lower than on Mk. 2 vRS

If you get a 1.8TSi, you'll have at least as much go as the Mk. 1 vRS - I've had both. Probably insurance etc. lower than on Mk. 2 vRS

But most of those handle like a boat.

For the sake of a small extra outlay on running costs I'd definitely go for the vrs.

Pre FL TFSi vRS is £245. I've just got my reminder through.

But most of those handle like a boat.

For the sake of a small extra outlay on running costs I'd definitely go for the vrs.

Really? Can't say mine handles like a boat - more like a small rocket.

But interestingly it is the handling (and gear change) that was a big improvement on the Mk. 1.

I had a 2.0FSi between them and even in that the difference in handling was remarkable. But the 1.8TSi engine is miles ahead of the FSi.

Really? Can't say mine handles like a boat - more like a small rocket.

But interestingly it is the handling (and gear change) that was a big improvement on the Mk. 1.

I had a 2.0FSi between them and even in that the difference in handling was remarkable. But the 1.8TSi engine is miles ahead of the FSi.

Non vrs models, IMO, are a little too soft. Body roll is much more pronounced and they feel too floaty for my liking. I haven't tried one with a sports pack which may be better but for minimal extra annual outlay (not taking initial outlay into account as I'm not too familiar with UK prices these days) you can have a far superior car.

Non vrs models, IMO, are a little too soft. Body roll is much more pronounced and they feel too floaty for my liking. I haven't tried one with a sports pack which may be better but for minimal extra annual outlay (not taking initial outlay into account as I'm not too familiar with UK prices these days) you can have a far superior car.

The ride and handling on the vrs is questionable so I can't imagine that it's particularly good on the 1.8 tsi. If you're getting a vrs and want decent ride and handling then budget for some upgrades.

The ride and handling on the vrs is questionable so I can't imagine that it's particularly good on the 1.8 tsi. If you're getting a vrs and want decent ride and handling then budget for some upgrades.

I agree. It seems in some areas it was meant to ge a 90% job. It seems strange but I switched to a bigger and less powerful car with no real sporting intent and it is better than the vrs I terms of both ride and handling.

TFSI is £245 (going up to £250 shortly)

TSI is cheaper £215 I think.

The ride and handling on the vrs is questionable so I can't imagine that it's particularly good on the 1.8 tsi. If you're getting a vrs and want decent ride and handling then budget for some upgrades.

Huh?!

It's nothing of the sort!

The ride and handling is is pretty good for a standard production vehicle and thats not just my humble opinion either! For day to day driving its a good compromise but of course if you are a pretend racing driver who thinks anything without coilovers and uprated ARB's is a waste of space then yeah, the handling might appear a bit suspect. Then again I've driven loads of "uprated" cars which handled WORSE than standard

Ride quality is actually exceptionally good in my opinion given the overall suspension stiffness, tyre size and profile and I suggest anybody who questions this should try a modern BMW with run-flats!

I was in a brand new Audi A4 the other day and it was worse than the FL VRS. Speaking of which Skoda did something on the FL which changed (improved) the ride quality over the MKII but I have no idea what. Perhaps it was just slightly softer spring rates. Any ideas?