Well this morning it was scraping time... very cold...nearly freezing according to the temp gauge

No sooner had I pulled away, the heater is turned up and after literally seconds it starts blowing warmish air... after a minute tis lovely and warm... all thanks to the water cooled turbo!

I have done just under 10,000 miles in 7 months with 42.2 mpg average, seems more £25 gets 170 miles

2 blown bulbs, 1 litre of oil used

September 58 reg Elegance paid £5199 in Feb

Best car I have ever owned by a light year!

Just had to share the joy

Nice one. I share your joy. Good to read about happy Skoda owners

That's deeply impressive mpg for a petrol engine.

What is the power output and torque?

Have to fully agree, the 1.8tsi is a gem and often overlooked. The warm up time you mention is the reason I prefer taking it in the colder months compared to our other car; a diesel. 41.8 mpg average for me over the last 6,000 miles and that's in a boxy, heavier yeti! :-)

That's deeply impressive mpg for a petrol engine.

What is the power output and torque?

1.8 is supposed to be 160bhp but dunno what the torque is.

1.8 is supposed to be 160bhp but dunno what the torque is.

250Nm or 184 Ib ft

Mine's same age (nearly) and model - lovely car, pity it's no longer available new. 26K now in nearly 4 years - well over 40 m.p.g on a run, no rust, no more rattles....I'll wake up soon.

Same here. Love the 1.8 TSI. Loads of go yet frugal for it's size/power.

As you say, shame it's not available on the current Octavia or the Rapid. Hopefully it will reappear for the Octavia 3.

Edited 23 September, 201213 yr by darrenw

Hmm I'm a bit sceptical about mpg claims for high output petrol engines. There is a limiting efficiency based on compression ratio and volumetric efficiency, losses etc for any internal combustion engine.

Diesel engines have compression ratios of around 18:1 and petrol engines 10:1 - both with forced induction these days. So, crudely, diesels have almost double the efficiency of petrol (ie with a similar capacity and volumetric efficiency), for a given power output (due to the compression ratio). So how can a petrol engine with 160 bhp even approach a diesel with say 130 bhp ??

can someone explain.

I have enjoyed the last 28,000 miles

The good old 1.8.Another great unit killed off like the 1.9tdi.

Hmm I'm a bit sceptical about mpg claims for high output petrol engines. There is a limiting efficiency based on compression ratio and volumetric efficiency, losses etc for any internal combustion engine.

Diesel engines have compression ratios of around 18:1 and petrol engines 10:1 - both with forced induction these days. So, crudely, diesels have almost double the efficiency of petrol (ie with a similar capacity and volumetric efficiency), for a given power output (due to the compression ratio). So how can a petrol engine with 160 bhp even approach a diesel with say 130 bhp ??

can someone explain.

Dont have a clue about the technicalities but I monitored my full usage very carefully whilst I was away on holiday and worked out the figures with tank to tank filling so I know my figures are accurate.

No need to be Phill... its a fact

Im getting 170 miles on my weekly 4 day commute of 42 miles per day using 4 gallons costing £25

The computer has been suggesting 46 mpg but thats a bit off!

I got 51 mpg to Manchester the other day on the computer

I dont drive at 75, just 60 ish no need im never in a rush

No need to be Phill... its a fact

Im getting 170 miles on my weekly 4 day commute of 42 miles per day using 4 gallons costing £25

The computer has been suggesting 46 mpg but thats a bit off!

I got 51 mpg to Manchester the other day on the computer

I dont drive at 75, just 60 ish no need im never in a rush

Ive seen over 50mpg also and I do believe I even have photographic proof as it was a first Id cleared 50mpg on the maxidot. Had to sit at 60mph to achieve it however!!

I have an Octavia 1.8TSI 4X4 Estate. It had 12335miles on the clock when I bought it and has averaged 32.47mpg over 3273 miles since then. That figure is 2-3mpg less than Trip 2 readings.

The 1.8TSI is one of the smoothest, quietest and nicest engines I have ever driven.

Hmm I'm a bit sceptical about mpg claims for high output petrol engines. There is a limiting efficiency based on compression ratio and volumetric efficiency, losses etc for any internal combustion engine.

Diesel engines have compression ratios of around 18:1 and petrol engines 10:1 - both with forced induction these days. So, crudely, diesels have almost double the efficiency of petrol (ie with a similar capacity and volumetric efficiency), for a given power output (due to the compression ratio). So how can a petrol engine with 160 bhp even approach a diesel with say 130 bhp ??

can someone explain.

It depends on the driver. These drivers may well have achieved over 60mpg in a diesel car on the same journey. We will never know. You can only compare the 42mpg of the 1.8tsi if the same driver had a diesel previously and drove the same journey. Guaranteed back to back the diesel would achieve more mpg for the same journey but 42mpg average is very good none the less. My average in my last car a BMW 320d auto was 40mpg. It all depends on you journey and how you drive. When i see the missus drive it does my head in. She never reads the road ahead i.e accelerates up to cars then has to brake rather than coasting up without needing to brake, problem is every time i point this out an argument normally ensues. No-one like to have their driving critiscised.

Point is 42mpg in a petrol in isolation is pointless unless we have a diesel comaparison. I'll bet anyone could achieve 42mpg in a petrol car if they were careful and driving on the right roads.

A very good point

In my Bora 1.9 six speed average was 55 mpg i got her cheaply

Everything was going fine until the Dual Mass Flywheel went!

I started this thread to state that "possibly" the Octavia with the 1.8 TSI engine is the best version

Well for me its a car that scores in all areas

Easily sporty enough to make you smile and overtake effortlessly

Very respectable MPG can be obtained if driven with some care

In elegance spec, it has all the right toys

There does not seem to be any reliability issues either

I scanned this excellent forum , along several VW forums and could find no issues

Its time for some people to make the switch so ill start the ball rolling ...

Here you go no excuses either!

http://www2.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201233481909051/sort/default/usedcars/fuel-type/petrol/price-from/1000/price-to/20000/engine-size-cars/1-7l_to_1-9l/model/octavia/make/skoda/onesearchad/used/onesearchad/nearlynew/onesearchad/new/postcode/bb126nt/radius/1500/page/1/keywords/tsi?logcode=p

Hmm I'm a bit sceptical about mpg claims for high output petrol engines. There is a limiting efficiency based on compression ratio and volumetric efficiency, losses etc for any internal combustion engine.

The limiting efficency is influenced by so many things that the ones you mention become minor sidelines:

Car variables - weight (number of passengers, luggage, etc), tyre pressures, tyre rolling resistance, car properly maintained?, brakes binding?, engine tuning, drag increase by open windows, addition of racks etc., Use of aircon, HRW, heated seats etc.

Ambient condition variables - wind, temperature, air pressure

Road variables - surface, gradients

Driver variables - driving style, speed, anticipation

Fuel variables - different hydrocarbon mix, different additives

Journey variables - amount of stop/start, heavy/light traffic, type of road (city street, motorway, country lane, etc)

I'm sure I've missed some factors

I drive the same commute every morning fuel consumption (Maxidot) varies between 35 and 42mpg. (I drove it in a 2l diesel Avensis hire car last week and got 41mpg.)

I have driven gentle 40-50 mile cross country A road journeys and seen over 50mpg on the maxidot; I have had a 20 mile blast on B roads and seen under 20mpg.

There are so many variables that comparison is all but impossible. That is why the government figures are produced under (unachievable) standard conditions.

A very good point

In my Bora 1.9 six speed average was 55 mpg i got her cheaply

Everything was going fine until the Dual Mass Flywheel went!

I started this thread to state that "possibly" the Octavia with the 1.8 TSI engine is the best version

Well for me its a car that scores in all areas

Easily sporty enough to make you smile and overtake effortlessly

Very respectable MPG can be obtained if driven with some care

In elegance spec, it has all the right toys

There does not seem to be any reliability issues either

I scanned this excellent forum , along several VW forums and could find no issues

Its time for some people to make the switch so ill start the ball rolling ...

Here you go no excuses either!

http://www2.autotrad...s/tsi?logcode=p

No need to convince me! I also upgraded from a 1.9TDi.

I will add another plus for this magnificent engine - chain driven cam - no expensive belt replacement

Agree with all of the above praise with one caveat.

I have always filled up with Shell fuel by choice. Since I got the Octavia, 99 V power when I can and regular 95 when I can't.

I can give a practical example of why the 99 improves the (7 week old) TSI (DSG) to give much more satisfaction. I sense it is much more free and responsive on the road. A trip to Kelso from Newcastle proved that in my mind yesterday but that can't be proved physically.

What I can say is that I have a 1 1/2 inch lip where my drive enters the garage. With 95 octane the 1.8 tsi stops as the rear wheels hit the lip if only the idling torque is used. With 99 V power the idling revs push the car gently over the lip up to my stopping point ( I have only 15ft 6 inches for the 15 ft. Octavia. This is not particularly scientific but it's what happens and I can't think of any reason why it's different.

I must say it is the only car I've had recently where I would probably spend money on quite pricey maintenance (e.g if the cat was going, or air con) whereas before I'd have traded in.

yes of course Ecceshill I agree, but I was assuming, 'all things being equal' .

You see, with modern engines having high outputs, the cubic capacity is now rather irrelevant - its the power output that is important and you cant get something for nothing - power in - losses = power out. I remember not that many years ago an owner with an MR5 was it - the small Toyota sports car, being disappointed at only getting around 22 mpg from the 1.8 engine - until it was pointed out that it produced as much power as a 'cooking' 3 litre six.

Likewise, I used to have a Pontiac Firebird with a 5 litre V8 and manual gearbox. People used to disbelieve me, that on a run I could get 28 mpg, until I pointed out that it only produced 170 bhp.

So given (all other things being equal) a 1.9 Diesel of a 105 bhp, with CR of 18:1 and a 1.9 petrol engine of a 160 bhp and a CR of 9.5:1, its difficult to believe they can both give the same 50 mpg. ???

It's interesting that some report low 40's mpg with their diesels as I have averaged 50 over 5,000 miles

of mixed motoring with mine.

It may well be a capable engine but I'd find 160bhp/250nm a bit on the gutless side so would not be an option for me.

It's interesting that some report low 40's mpg with their diesels as I have averaged 50 over 5,000 miles

of mixed motoring with mine.

It may well be a capable engine but I'd find 160bhp/250nm a bit on the gutless side so would not be an option for me.

Gutless? obviously never drive one!

It may well be a capable engine but I'd find 160bhp/250nm a bit on the gutless side so would not be an option for me.

That's a typical comment from someone that hasn't considered anything but the headline power figures! Forget the fact that the torque sits at that 'gutless' level from 1500rpm to 4500rpm before peak power arrives at 6000+ rpm. Ive pretty much driven every 170 vag model and wouldn't swap my humble 1.8 for any of them. Oh and the basic fact that the 1.8tsi is a quicker car against a 170 means nothing I guess also? ;-)