Hi all

At 11am today I was 99% sure I was going to buy a VRs pd 2007 with 78k on it (subject to it being as described)

The PX deal has been agreed already, however I spoke with a friend who is involved in the tuning industry and he rattled off a dozen reasons not to buy one, all of these things I already new but probably didn't want to accept. As i count him amongst my best friends his advice sounds "more real"

Are the known faults as common as the forum threads make out

The car is 2 owner, FSH, will be serviced and have a new cam belt prior to collection

His suggestion was a top spec 1.9pd and suffer the lower power output but benefit from bulletproof mechanicals or stump up some more money and buy a common rail

Any thoughts greatly appreciated

Stephen

Edited 14 October, 201213 yr by j3w3ll3r

Get a proper petrol one

Injectors should have been replaced under warranty, DPF is likely to be a problem so get Shark to remove it.

1.9 diesels are not without faults - you still have EGR's and DMF's. But, they have a reputation for serious longevity.

If you want the performance, don't mind a smaller car and probable better reliability, maybe consider a Fabia VRS mk1 - love ours.

The 1.9 is not without some issues. I know that the ones we have at work have a very hard (and short) lifespan. The last 2 both died at 115k miles.

Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk

Yep get a proper one, not a smelly diesel

The three main issues with the PD170 are:

1) DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter). It can be removed for £400.

2) Injectors. All PD170 engines are having/have had these replaced FOC under a VOSA/Skoda UK recall.

3) DMF (Dual Mass Flywheel). Depends how the car has been driven. If the previous owners have relied on the torque and drven it under load in higher gears at low RPM/speed then it'll be getting worn at 78K. If however they have driven the car quite hard and only loaded the car in lower gears it'll be fine.

Agreed it isn't as tough as the 1.9 PD105 but then it's a lot more powerful.

Take the car for a good test drive, load the DMF, you'll soon know its worn if the car judders.

As long as you aren't crawling along in town all day the DPF should be OK.

If it hasn't had the injectors replaced get them done before collection. It doesn't matter about age, mileage, service history etc. they'll still be fone free of charge.

If you can afford it then I'd go for the CR as it is a more modern engine.

However I have the PD and love it.

Yep get a proper one, not a smelly diesel

Doing 15,000 miles per annum will cost you £675 more in fuel and road tax in a Tsi compared to a PD170.

And the Tsi isn't even that much quicker!

Thanks for your replies

My heads spinning now...

I know that I don't want to spend the extra for the CR as its just gonna be parked on the street at work all day, really it's just a means to work and back (55mile round trip)

Been looking at a few of the VRs fabia too, my wife has the new 1.6cr fabia Elegance which we really like, I have never been in the MK1 shape

you should also consider a 2.0 PD 140 - no DPF or injector recall issues

you should also consider a 2.0 PD 140 - no DPF or injector recall issues

Not without issues though, Turbo VNT vanes requiring Mr Muscle (though will effect the others too) but worse is the issue with porous head, which worse case is a new head at about £2K.

Paul

Matey I got VRS 170 PD a couple of months ago and it's a great car. The only problem I has was it had been town driven for a while and the SPF was quite full. But a run cured that. The only other thing was the fuel filter get blocked as factory spec says every 60,000 but it need doing every service but it only costs a few quid. Other than that they apparently suffer a bit on the lower sills so if there is a slight bit of surface rust clean it up sooner than later and enjoy

Not without issues though, Turbo VNT vanes requiring Mr Muscle (though will effect the others too) but worse is the issue with porous head, which worse case is a new head at about £2K.

Turbo vanes not an issue unless you buy a high miler....Porous head is not an issue on cars build after 2005......revised "c" cylinder head fitted from then which completely fixed the porous problem.

Edited 15 October, 201213 yr by booke23

I'm off to test drive a Fabia VRs later today 2006 model and the Octy on weds so will see how we go

Doing 15,000 miles per annum will cost you £675 more in fuel and road tax in a Tsi

............but it's £675 more fun

............but it's £675 more fun

Is it?.........1 second quicker to 60mph and 27 bhp more than the PD170 I'm not so sure.

A £300 remap on the PD170 makes it more fun than the Tsi! And it'll still be £675 a year cheaper

I test drove a fabia today and was really impressed, I think I'm swaying towards that

Is it?.........1 second quicker to 60mph and 27 bhp more than the PD170 I'm not so sure.

A £300 remap on the PD170 makes it more fun than the Tsi! And it'll still be £675 a year cheaper

Map the TSI and it again it wins in the fun/quick test.

No question the petrol VRS is more racy drive, and quicker in most situations. Have you taken into account the extra £5 per 450 miles increased fuel cost.

Each to their own at end of day. I had Fabia vrs, mapped, so know how good the PD is. However the 2.0 TSI lump is awesome, better in most respects to my TFSI. Very easily tune able, and they have less issues than modern and older diesels.

Map the TSI and it again it wins in the fun/quick test.

No question the petrol VRS is more racy drive, and quicker in most situations. Have you taken into account the extra £5 per 450 miles increased fuel cost.

Each to their own at end of day. I had Fabia vrs, mapped, so know how good the PD is. However the 2.0 TSI lump is awesome, better in most respects to my TFSI. Very easily tune able, and they have less issues than modern and older diesels.

Has a Chain, no cam belt to change.

Am I right in thinking the TSi has a bigger turbo than the TFSi for more low down power?

Have you taken into account the extra £5 per 450 miles increased fuel cost.

My calculation takes this into account.

Also don't forget that residuals on diesels will always be higher, naturally so is the purchase price.

I assume tax is lower on the diesels?

I think if it's your only car and your mileage is low, petrol is the better choice. For me, my mileage is higher (15-17000 miles) & I'm fortunate enough to have a much better drivers car in the garage. Also it does mean I don't flinch at the fuel cost on longer journeys if I'm going away for wkds etc.

You won't go wrong if you go for the Fabia, they are a lot of fun to drive, although very different to the Octavia.

Has a Chain, no cam belt to change.

Am I right in thinking the TSi has a bigger turbo than the TFSi for more low down power?

Not sure that it's any bigger, but it's definitely a different make. TFSI K03 vs TSI IHI.

Expect 29 to 31 mpg. That's all really.

That's 06 vrs tfsi stage 1 shark map

Can get 35 if stick at 70

So 50000 on the clock

rear socks replaced under warrantY

Aerial booster replaced under warranty

Replaced wiper motor on rear

Replaced rear pads and shoes

Switched to annual service schedule

Replaced one battery

Replaced an air mass filters

Tyres are lasting well but do run winters.

Not bad if you ask me

Only car I felt the need to Remap. With remap its fantastic