VRS Diesel Buying Advice

[JasonBroad@blue]

After 4+ years and 70000 hard driven miles across the Welsh countryside I think the time has come to say fair-well to my Mk1 LPG VRS. Its been almost faultless in that time save for an N75 valve and a couple of coil packs. So good in fact I am in the market for a MkII.

What I am thinking is. Low mileage VRS CR Diesel circa 2008-2009. Undecided on DSG or Manual, Would go for pre or post facelift, hatch or estate if the price is right.

My question to those in the know is what issues should I be looking out for. I have trawled the forum but without knowing what I am looking for it is like looking for a needle in a haystack. All I have determined so far is that:

DSGs seem to go through fly wheels but not there would me much to look out for below 40k miles which is what I am looking for.

Air con problems seem common so check that out carefully.

2008/9 is the crossover from PD to CR so need to make sure that CRs really are CRs not mis-described PD's, but not sure how to tell for certain which it which Wikipedia suggests engine codes of BMN on the PD and CEGA on the CR

Any help or advice much appreciated

[Guest]

My advice is, unless you're getting the diesel purely for the fuel saving, get the petrol otherwise you will probably be disappointed with the performance. The CR is a good engine but it's just not as quick or as good to drive as the petrol IMO.

[andyvee]

The V5 will give the engine code - just make sure it isn't BMN (PD170) if you want a CR (edited)

The CR doesn't seem to suffer the DPF issues of the PD, and isn't subject to the injector recalls. Not heard of turbo failures on PD or CR.

Treat it like any used car purchase but pay attention to clutch/flywheel and Aircon.

[silver1011]

The V5 will give the engine code - just make sure it isn't BMN (PD170)

A little harsh, the PD170 is a very good engine used widely across the VAG range and with great success in the Octavia vRS.

Very few people actually suffered injector problems, not that it matters because they are being replaced for free.

Most manufacturers have issues with DPF's, the PD170 has been around a lot longer than the CR so by the very fact that there are more PD engines out there means it is likely that there are more people suffering from DPF related issues on PD engines, or simply that there are more PD owners posting on Briskoda.

I wouldn't hesitate recommending a PD170 engined vRS.

[andyvee]

A little harsh, the PD170 is a very good engine used widely across the VAG range and with great success in the Octavia vRS.

Very few people actually suffered injector problems, not that it matters because they are being replaced for free.

Most manufacturers have issues with DPF's, the PD170 has been around a lot longer than the CR so by the very fact that there are more PD engines out there means it is likely that there are more people suffering from DPF related issues on PD engines, or simply that there are more PD owners posting on Briskoda.

I wouldn't hesitate recommending a PD170 engined vRS.

Not harsh - the OP asked how he made sure it was a CR???????? - it wasn't me slagging off a PD170!

I can hardly do that when I have a porous head, flakey turbo, dodgy flywheel PD140 can I!

Also, the PD was never designed from scratch to run with a DPF, hence the issues some people have with them. If you buy a used PD170 at the moment I would want to know if the injectors have already been replaced or not, and if so if the engine oil level is rising................ Not bothered about the supposed problems before the replacement, it is the potential problems caused by the replacement that would worry me.

[Captain Scarlet]

I think partly the reason why there are more DPF issues with the PD is because it wasn't designed for it really...it was more bodged on if you like. The CR was designed more with it in mind IIRC.

[andyvee]

I think partly the reason why there are more DPF issues with the PD is because it wasn't designed for it really...it was more bodged on if you like. The CR was designed more with it in mind IIRC.

It had to be to meet EURO 5 IIRC which came in to effect Sept 2009.

[silver1011]

A lot of threads are quick to put down the PD engines with most (including this one) referring to occasional DPF and injector issues as being common issues.

Agreed, the DPF on the PD doesn't have the catalyst that the CR does which means the DPF has a harder time reaching the required temperature to perform passive regens but the DPF on the PD is hardly flawed when compared to those from other manufacturers.

I have both a PD140 and PD170 and suffered the issues associated with the injector change, which was a result of poor workmanship rather than the fault of the car itself.

Just defending the PD that's all.

[andyvee]

A lot of threads are quick to put down the PD engines with most (including this one) referring to occasional DPF and injector issues as being common issues.

Agreed, the DPF on the PD doesn't have the catalyst that the CR does which means the DPF has a harder time reaching the required temperature to perform passive regens but the DPF on the PD is hardly flawed when compared to those from other manufacturers.

I have both a PD140 and PD170 and suffered the issues associated with the injector change, which was a result of poor workmanship rather than the fault of the car itself.

Just defending the PD that's all.

Which is exactly the points I was making. If I had a choice between a PD170 or a CR170 for similar money, I would go for the CR (and a remap) as it is a more refined engine.

Don't get me wrong, I like the PD, the weak point on the 140 is the turbo (on BKD non-Scout) models, and the DPF IMHO on 140 Scouts and 170. First thing I would do is get rid of the DPF on these models. I agree, other manufacturers are worse, but just the regens would annoy me enough to get rid of it. IMHO DPFs and EGR systems are weak points that if they can be removed, should be, as long as you still meet the emissions for the MoT.

[JasonBroad@blue]

Thanks Guys. I didn't mean to start an argument ;o) I am sure that the PD is fine but I don't think anyone would argue that the CR is better so since I can run to a CR I figured why not.?

My advice is, unless you're getting the diesel purely for the fuel saving, get the petrol otherwise you will probably be disappointed with the performance. The CR is a good engine but it's just not as quick or as good to drive as the petrol IMO.

I'm sure you are right that the Petrol is faster but whether i will be disappointed is another matter. I have never had a MKII petrol VRS so I won't know what I am missing! I confess though that if the CR does not match up to my Mk1 petrol VRS in the midrange (30-70 is what I care about). Haven't seen any figures. Anyone had a MK1 VRS and MKII diesel VRS able to give me an inside opinion? I will obviously be doing some test drives before I buy anything

[Aspman]

On Pre-FL check the sills. They didn't put the stone chip paint up high enough and most are suffering with bubbling. Sorted on the FLs I believe.

I'd also get down on the ground and check the state of the rear wheels on the inner edge. Not easy to see unless you get your knees mucky.

[thejames]

30-70 on the CR170s is immense. I came from a 330ci. The BMW had it beat off the line and top end, but at usable overtaking speeds, my VRS is outstanding. And then the scope for remapping it is huge... It's something that's definitely on my mind.

I'm not sure it belongs in the VRS category... I've driven quicker cars and there are hotter vehicles out there. However, it's a very nice looking, comfortable and practical car with enough toys to keep a confirmed gadgeteer like me happy. It flies when you need it to and returns (in my experience) 45mpg, give or take 10 or so, depending on the situation.

My wife and I love ours.

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

I`v just help a mate buy a 2011 vRS CR 170 estate. Of the two VAG techies I spoke to, both said to steer clear of PD170s, DPFs being the main reason. As has already been said, the PD engine is of an old design so slapping a DPF on didnt work very well where as the CR engines have been designed much more with the DPF in mind. Thats as I understand it anyway.

As for performance, I got my hands on it at the weekend. Coming from a circa 200bhp Fabia I was expecting it to feel a little lethargic, 170bhp, big heavy car and that but it really surprised me. Felt much more nimble than I expected, the suspension setup is much better than his 2011 Fabia vRS, manages to be firmer in the corners but less crashy. Speed wise, felt good to me, obviously not as eager as my fabia but its not slouch. I kinda understand people saying the CR engine is smoother, it is which I found made it easier to drive smoother with less of a lump of power in one go. However, that said, it still felt like it had a good old diesel kick up the arse when I put my foot down, best of both worlds. He is well chuffed with it, double the MPG of his previous Fabia but with the poke when he needs it. I fit in the boot too which is also a bonus.

I think it should be a "vRS", the Fabia wasnt the quickest car and that still had the vRS badge. The VW version has the GTD badge, while essentially looking like the GTI. I guess skoda have only just managed to get the vRS name out there and established, without trying to start another so I guess thats why they just stick to the "quickish" sporty models being vRS.

I`m not sure how much of this post is OT tbh lol.

[blueR36]

The M1 vRS felt fast the vRS diesel certainly doesnt, owned the first , driven the 2nd at some length , mate has one and he agrees. I have a petrol M2 VRS now. The diesls a good car, but not a great one IMO

I think the Fabia M1 vRS was more deserving of the name ( Than the Octy

[silver1011]

I think it is fair to say that the diesel vRS Octavia is a bit of a compromise, that compromise being performance for economy.

It's not as fast as the petrol but the diesel engine enables me to afford to run a vRS over my 25K/annum mileage.

[silver1011]

Of the two VAG techies I spoke to, both said to steer clear of PD170s, DPFs being the main reason.

The saving grace is that the DPF can be removed from the PD170 for less than £500 and it'll still pass an MOT.

[silver1011]

The PD engine is of an old design so slapping a DPF on didnt work very well where as the CR engines have been designed much more with the DPF in mind. Thats as I understand it anyway.

That's right, the DPF on the CR has a huge catalyst on the top. The purpose of this is to keep the DPF hotter for longer.

This then allows the DPF to regen passively much easier (the soot is burnt off without the DPF actively regenerating) and at temperatures that wouldn't allow for a successful regen on a PD engine.

This therefore ensures that DPF issues on the CR should be much less likely although not impossible!

Edited 22 August, 2012 by silver1011

[JasonBroad@blue]

Well I went out and drove a CR170 today. Evans Halshaw in Cardiff let me have good ole test drive in a 58 plate hatch including some dual carriage way and a bit of twisty stuff. Have to say pretty impressed. It felt quick enough for me in the midrange and handling was good. Ride felt firmer than I was expecting but its probably just by comparison to my Mk1 that has probably softened up after 70000 miles spent on Welsh A and B roads and is probably in need of a new set of shocks.

The only disappointment in that particular car was that they have fitted whole new set of Event WL905's to it. I am sorry if I am being unfair to event but they cost £48 a coner and score a whole 35% for wet grip on tyrereviews.co.uk. (you would think a garage based in wales would know better) but generally my philosophy is "life is too short to fit cheap tyres and if you do it may be shorter" But at least one of the salesman put it into perspective when I suggested it was an unfortunate choice for such a sporty model. he said "Yea its not really though is it. Its only a Skoda with a bigger engine"

I might try an auto as well before buying and take a look at a facelift model. I've seen the outside of course. Is there much different inside? any additional toys?

[Kenich]

The M1 vRS felt fast the vRS diesel certainly doesnt, owned the first , driven the 2nd at some length , mate has one and he agrees. I have a petrol M2 VRS now.

Quite funny as I only said the exact opposite about 2 hours to a work mate. Found the 1.8t in standard form slow, where as the derv didn't to me. Opinions will always difer, I would rather a petrol to lol

[blueR36]

Same interior, better stereo and revised climatic dials, Horrid one model fits all steering wheel , different illuminated dials in the clocks