It is utterly pointless as the 2.0TSI is avaialble. Narrow band torque compared to constant pull of the petrol does make a great difference. When somebody says that 1 sec in acceleration makes no difference then... there's nothing to talk about anymore really.

Diesel apostels are completely blinded by massive torque figures, I know as I used to be one . Then I drove a car which delivers max torque throughout the whole power band, from tickover to red line, surprise surprise it was petrol.

BTW, what is the weight of Octy III vRS diesel and Petrol, anybody knows?

 

It is the overtaking 30-70mph in a diesel that makes a petrol look pointless...  NOT the 0-60.  That is why the 1 second difference there is not a bother.

1 second is a lot of difference IMO 0-60 when you are starting to talk about quick cars. A 5 second car is very different to a 6 second car and similarly to a 7 second car. They are all major jumps in performance. Once you get to the 8/9/10s then yes 1s does become less of an issue as you are going away from a really quick car.

You don't have to be always "at the lights all day ragging it off the line" to notice the sort of performance difference this results in. As you say it does depend where the power band is as to how you use it.

having owned a petrol octy vRS mk1 a diesel octy vRS mk2(facelift) an Audi a5 3.0tdi and now an A6tdi I do fancy going back to petrol.

the large V6 diesels are awesome and would both show up the new octy vRS pertol but its possibly time for me to downscale and i really fancy having a pertol again, diesels are just not as much fun or involving with low rpm etc :(

not sure i want a 4pot diesel again but guess needs must possibly

It is utterly pointless as the 2.0TSI is avaialble. Narrow band torque compared to constant pull of the petrol does make a great difference. When somebody says that 1 sec in acceleration makes no difference then... there's nothing to talk about anymore really.

Goodbye then

Im not a diesel 'Apostel' but I see the sense in it. And its not just about a narrow powerband. What about the fact most diesels give MORE torque in that band? Also, Id love to know which car you've driven that delivers max torque from idle to the red line! Im guessing it must be electric?! 1 sec 0-60 makes no difference unless you sit at the lights all day ragging it off the line with a total lack of mechanical sympathy. Mid range is far more important in the real world.... and something TDi's do very well.

I'd take a little bit less torque but have throughout rev range than a big wallop of it within at best 2k rpm - it turns the car into PacMan game one has to abuse the gear stick so much. VVT and VGT turbo motors are different of course. Is Diesel vRS Octy III equipped with one of those?

 

1.4 Twincharger develops max torque at 1200rpm and holds till circa 5krpm and it does feel like an electric car

EDIT: It actually gets a perceptible kick around 5.5k rpm due to fuelling change and blower coming on full song, AFR from stochio drops all the way to 9.5:1 and it doesn't stop until red line is reached.

 

Funnily enough the fastest Skoda on the Official Bedford Leaderboards is Jason's mongrel with circa 300bhp oil chugger under the bonnet - only fractionally slower than brand new TTRS

to be honest 0-60 is a measurement for most cars rightly or wrongly but just means they are all judged the same way. lets be honest everyone that says 0-60 is rubbish are usually the ones running the slower car from 0-60.

 

0-60 may suit petrol better and 30-70 may suit diesel better. doesnt really make one better than the other. out of interest what was the 0-60 and 30-70 of the mk2 vrs octy TSi and TDI?

It is the overtaking 30-70mph in a diesel that makes a petrol look pointless...  NOT the 0-60.  That is why the 1 second difference there is not a bother.

 

And this is where 1.4 twincharger or VVT / VGT petrol turbo pi55es all over any diesel - acceleration from 30-70mph and well beyond, where diesels simply die.

Goodbye then

A petrol would still win 30-70, just drop a cog or two and floor it.

And this is where 1.4 twincharger or VVT / VGT petrol turbo pi55es all over any diesel - acceleration from 30-70mph and well beyond, where diesels simply die.

i may try and see how mine fairs my diesel is 5.9 to 60 and sub 6 30-70 3.0tdi

That's the thing about Petrol v. Diesel comparison.

One hing is undisputable, driving characteristics. Howeer you might try diesels run out of puff very quickly compared to blown petrol motors which just keep going on and on and on...

 

 

i may try and see how mine fairs my diesel is 5.9 to 60 and sub 6 30-70 3.0tdi

 

To havea fair comparison you'd have to put another motor in that car to make up the dispalacement difference . My little Fabia MK2 vRS does 0-60 in 6.57 on dirty, uneven, concrete private road surface with cold stock tyres LOL.

mine will do sub 6 in wet the joy of quattro

 

only kjoking anyways just making it a bit more light hearted in here. the fabia vrs is a firecracker!

 lets be honest everyone that says 0-60 is rubbish are usually the ones running the slower car from 0-60.

 

 

Well I said it was rubbish and a sub five and half second to 60 time on my car doesn't make me think any differently. Theres a lot of peoples own opinion coming out on this thread - great, as that's the point of a forum but in terms of convincing people your argument is right...  nah, I've got to get dinner going.

Dinner, what dinner?!? I will be stuck in the office till late and then the gym. On the way back compulsory "cobwebs removal" 

 

If you watched the new TopGear this Sunday there was a test of new hot hatches and the drag race was the best illustration of how does it look to be 1 sec (or whatever) short in 0-60 drag race and any overtaking is a drag race of sorts, especially when the one you overtake is not willing to cooperate

mine will do sub 6 in wet the joy of quattro

 

only kjoking anyways just making it a bit more light hearted in here. the fabia vrs is a firecracker!

Bossfox in maped 200+bhp diesel Yeti 4x4, despite removing seats and all he could was still slowr than bog standard Fabia MK2 vRS despie having like 400Nm torque and 4x4 to use it

http://www.howfast.co.uk/leaderboard.aspx - use filter function and choose Skoda

..and again you are comparing two totally different vehicles!

Anything more than 200 bhp in a front wheel drive car is a complete waste of time and tyres. You just can't get enough traction and when you do it's understeer all the way. Yuk.

Anything more than 200 bhp in a front wheel drive car is a complete waste of time and tyres. You just can't get enough traction and when you do it's understeer all the way. Yuk.

 

The current batch of hottest hatches would disagree.

vRS makes sense as a performance saloon or estate, right? There's a massive gap between Diesel and Petrol versions in term of performance, however you look at it. Octy III vRS diesel is like a "pretend" version of the real, petrol guzzling vRS, you either buy a "performance" car or not.

We are talking the 2.0 litre petrol VRS here are we? Not something with a 500 bhp supercharged V8?

And regards the much trumpeting of 0- 60 times that is only relevant in a traffic light Grand Prix situation which any mature driver would avoid. Acceleration through the gears I.e. 30 - 50 mph or 50 - 70 mph is far more relevant. And like it or not the hefty torque of a good diesel closes the gap an awful lot more than the 0 - 60 mph times would suggest.

..and again you are comparing two totally different vehicles!

 

 

And what is wrong with that? .

 

There's no point comparing Octy III vRS Diesel with Petrol version - Petrol trumps diesel with everything bar fuel consumption and running costs, especially road tax.

The current batch of hottest hatches would disagree.

Don't see it. You can only get the front tyres to do so much - trying to transmit over 200 bhp and steer at the same time simply doesn't work. Other than being on first name terms with your local tyre shop.

We are talking the 2.0 litre petrol VRS here are we? Not something with a 500 bhp supercharged V8?

And regards the much trumpeting of 0- 60 times that is only relevant in a traffic light Grand Prix situation which any mature driver would avoid. Acceleration through the gears I.e. 30 - 50 mph or 50 - 70 mph is far more relevant. And like it or not the hefty torque of a good diesel closes the gap an awful lot more than the 0 - 60 mph times would suggest.

 

Depends how good a driver you are. If you want to measure acceleration from 30-70mph while in say 5th gear between diesel and petrol OctyIII vRS then perhaps diesel is not going to lose so massively. If you take away that limitation however and one can use the gearbox then diesel is left far, far behind.

I love traffic lights GP, especially when driver next to me sits in a seemingly much faster car and is left behind very quickly LOL. - all within previaling speed limits for the avoidance of any possible doubt!

Bottom line, vRS shouldn't have a diesel version. 

Don't see it. You can only get the front tyres to do so much - trying to transmit over 200 bhp and steer at the same time simply doesn't work. Other than being on first name terms with your local tyre shop.

Jason can transmit about 300bhp through front tyres (R888 rubber  or something) in his mongrel and he's quite good at it - just because you cannot do it doesn't mean it is not possible

Bottom line, vRS shouldn't have a diesel version. 

Why not? It is NOT exactly a thoroughbred sports car is it, like it or not. If there is a demand out there for a quick, good value diesel then a diesel VRS is exactly right. Our local motorway police have the VRS for motorway pursuit use - and they are all diesel.