Some prices in CZE

[ketys]

Hi, here are some prices of the new Octy

http://www.octaviafan.com/news/the-price-of-the-new-octavia-is/

[Kiwibacon]

Some good specs too.

The basic 2.0tdi manual gets to 100km/h in 8.5 seconds and uses 4.1 litres/100km. Those are stunning figures and not often seen together.

[Nick P]

So about £19,500 for a 1.8TSI elegance DSG.

[k.young]

Does anybody have a list of emissions for the different engines ???

[RapidRonnie]

Does anybody have a list of emissions for the different engines ???

1.2TSI 86BHP: 119g/km

1.2TSI 105BHP Greentec: 114g/km

1.4TSI 140BHP Greentec: 121g/km

1.8TSI 180BHP Greentec: 131g/km

1.6TDI 90BHP: 109g/km

1.6TDI 105BHP Greentec: 99g/km

1.6TDI 110BHP Greenline: 89g/km

2.0 TDI 150BHP Greentec: 119g/km

[Kiwibacon]

Those CO2 emissions don't match the fuel economy spread. The 2.0tdi manual is showing within 10% of the 1.6tdi. Yet those CO2 ratings are ~30% different.

I'd wait for a better list.

[RapidRonnie]

Those CO2 emissions don't match the fuel economy spread. The 2.0tdi manual is showing within 10% of the 1.6tdi. Yet those CO2 ratings are ~30% different.

I'd wait for a better list.

They are from the officil Skoda press release.

The 89g/km 1.6TDI is the Greenline version, whereas the others are just Greentec.

[ketys]

http://new.skoda-auto.com/en/news/Pages/2012-12-27-most-economical-octavia.aspx

[Kiwibacon]

I see.

The 3.9 litres/100km and 99g/km is the 5 speed manual 1.6tdi greentec. The greenline 1.6tdi gets the 6 speed and 89g/km. The 119g/km is for the DSG 2.0tdi.

[dieselV6]

...and all listed DPF equipped engine fuel consumption numbers are laboratory science fiction.

My wife's Roomster 1.6CR TDI 105bhp uses about 6.8l/100km in mixed use. My Mk1 Superb 2.5TDI V6 (non-DPF) manual 6-spd gearbox uses about 7.5l/100km in similar mixed use, only it is 500kg heavier and 30% quicker off the mark. Superb matches it's brochure consumption, but is non-DPF, Roomster is burning 40%+ more fuel than listed in brochure.

DPF burns insane amounts of fuel on warmup, on idling, and in light load driving. Complete rubbish and 1 DPF EGT sensor was already replaced under warranty after only 6k miles. The only time I get anything like advertised consumption is in a slow steady drive on a motorway or a country road. My bet is that during lab fuel economy tests no regeneration takes place, easy enough to disable it in software if you make the car.

Do not get me wrong, I would still buy a diesel because on trips abroad the cost difference to petrol is 30%+ and in the UK it's perhaps 10%, but if you are looking at brochure numbers you'd better slap on an extra 40% on top of VAG/Skoda con salesmen's figures.

Edited 8 January, 2013 by dieselV6

[k.young]

http://new.skoda-aut...al-octavia.aspx

Thats what I was looking for.

The 2.0Tdi looks like it can perform near miracles in emissions and economy considering it has the 6 speed DSG...................Brilliant news!!!!

[Herschel]

and the vRS diesel will do around 65mpg and get to 60mph in around 7.5s.

if the Seat Leon FR diesel stats (same engine) are anything to go by....................

[dieselV6]

k.young and Herschel, are you in Skoda marketing by any chance? I have just stated that you are extremely unlikely to get anything like the mileage figures posted from these DPF equipped diesels in real life driving. The 65mpg printed will look more like 45mpg in real life, unless it involves 50mile+ constant (low) speed runs at a time. Care to comment on this?

...and all listed DPF equipped engine fuel consumption numbers are laboratory science fiction.

My wife's Roomster 1.6CR TDI 105bhp uses about 6.8l/100km in mixed use. My Mk1 Superb 2.5TDI V6 (non-DPF) manual 6-spd gearbox uses about 7.5l/100km in similar mixed use, only it is 500kg heavier and 30% quicker off the mark. Superb matches it's brochure consumption, but is non-DPF, Roomster is burning 40%+ more fuel than listed in brochure.

DPF burns insane amounts of fuel on warmup, on idling, and in light load driving. Complete rubbish and 1 DPF EGT sensor was already replaced under warranty after only 6k miles. The only time I get anything like advertised consumption is in a slow steady drive on a motorway or a country road. My bet is that during lab fuel economy tests no regeneration takes place, easy enough to disable it in software if you make the car.

Do not get me wrong, I would still buy a diesel because on trips abroad the cost difference to petrol is 30%+ and in the UK it's perhaps 10%, but if you are looking at brochure numbers you'd better slap on an extra 40% on top of VAG/Skoda con salesmen's figures.

Edited 9 January, 2013 by dieselV6

[Chubbs]

The latest VW Golf model is already being discounted on Drivethedeal so I'm hoping the new Octavia will be too. DTD will do a new Golf GT for a tad over £20k so a saving of £2.5k - not bad!

[Herschel]

k.young and Herschel, are you in Skoda marketing by any chance? I have just stated that you are extremely unlikely to get anything like the mileage figures posted from these DPF equipped diesels in real life driving. The 65mpg printed will look more like 45mpg in real life, unless it involves 50mile+ constant (low) speed runs at a time. Care to comment on this?

No I'm not.

And I don't agree with you about a 40% drop due to the DPF.

As I've just said on another thread, my vRS does about 10% less than the quoted "combined" figure.

[k.young]

k.young and Herschel, are you in Skoda marketing by any chance? I have just stated that you are extremely unlikely to get anything like the mileage figures posted from these DPF equipped diesels in real life driving. The 65mpg printed will look more like 45mpg in real life, unless it involves 50mile+ constant (low) speed runs at a time. Care to comment on this?

My driving is not what you would call "normal" real life. I average about 450kms a day and most of it is spent in 6th gear on Motorways. I would say the new 150CR engine is going to be very frugal for me.

Don't work for Skoda by the way.

Credit where credit is due.

[dieselV6]

No I'm not.

And I don't agree with you about a 40% drop due to the DPF.

As I've just said on another thread, my vRS does about 10% less than the quoted "combined" figure.

When I had the Mk1 Octavia 1.9 110bhp, it was 15% off combined figure in same combination of driving routes, noticeable, but not a problem. Current Roomster 1.6CR DPF is 40% off. It actually rarely does the full regen, it just constantly adds fuel at return stroke to keep DPF at desired temperature. I'd rather live with a more frequent full regen than waste fuel like this.

Published mixed cycle consumption is 60.1mpg, what I get on almost every single fill-up is 42mpg +- 1mpg. It is very consistent for last 4k miles. That's 40% difference (60/42-1)

I agree in motorway driving you may get closer to published figures as DPF does not need extra heating, though you need 55mph in top gear for that extra urban figure.

It is not just me who noticed this, at some point EU action was (or still is) discussed to bring car manufacturers to publish real life as opposed to lab fuel economy figures.

It is actually interesting that Superb Mk1 chassis (since 97) had true fuel economy figures quoted, Octavia Mk1 was 15% off and Roomster is now 40% off. Can you see a trend here?

Edited 9 January, 2013 by dieselV6

[k.young]

The majority of my driving has me and my Octy sitting between 110kmh and 140kmh sometimes for 2 hours solid. I will eat my hat if the new car is worse on fuel than my current one. I really am not too bothered about the published figures because if you want to see those figures,they can be achieved but who would want to drive like that!!

Horses for coarses.

[Anddenton]

When I had the Mk1 Octavia 1.9 110bhp, it was 15% off combined figure in same combination of driving routes, noticeable, but not a problem. Current Roomster 1.6CR DPF is 40% off. It actually rarely does the full regen, it just constantly adds fuel at return stroke to keep DPF at desired temperature. I'd rather live with a more frequent full regen than waste fuel like this.

Published mixed cycle consumption is 60.1mpg, what I get on almost every single fill-up is 42mpg +- 1mpg. It is very consistent for last 4k miles. That's 40% difference (60/42-1)

I agree in motorway driving you may get closer to published figures as DPF does not need extra heating, though you need 55mph in top gear for that extra urban figure.

It is not just me who noticed this, at some point EU action was (or still is) discussed to bring car manufacturers to publish real life as opposed to lab fuel economy figures.

It is actually interesting that Superb Mk1 chassis (since 97) had true fuel economy figures quoted, Octavia Mk1 was 15% off and Roomster is now 40% off. Can you see a trend here?

Will you knock it off banging on about fuel consumption, just because you can't drive economically doesn't mean the rest of us don't get the quoted figures. I actually exceed the stated mpg figures for my DPF equipped Scout (See fuelly in my sig) and that's on the old pd engine which is renowned for DPF issues.

[Herschel]

When I had the Mk1 Octavia 1.9 110bhp, it was 15% off combined figure in same combination of driving routes, noticeable, but not a problem. Current Roomster 1.6CR DPF is 40% off. It actually rarely does the full regen, it just constantly adds fuel at return stroke to keep DPF at desired temperature. I'd rather live with a more frequent full regen than waste fuel like this.

Published mixed cycle consumption is 60.1mpg, what I get on almost every single fill-up is 42mpg +- 1mpg. It is very consistent for last 4k miles. That's 40% difference (60/42-1)

I agree in motorway driving you may get closer to published figures as DPF does not need extra heating, though you need 55mph in top gear for that extra urban figure.

It is not just me who noticed this, at some point EU action was (or still is) discussed to bring car manufacturers to publish real life as opposed to lab fuel economy figures.

It is actually interesting that Superb Mk1 chassis (since 97) had true fuel economy figures quoted, Octavia Mk1 was 15% off and Roomster is now 40% off. Can you see a trend here?

As I say, I don't disagree that the quoted test consumption is not based on "real-life" driving, but I'm yet to drive a DPF-equipped car that is more than 10% below the quoted combined figure with mixed driving, i.e. 50/50 town/motorway or A-roads.

My Octy is around 10% right now, and that's based on 38,000 miles in 2 and a half years.

I've driven a 320d BMW with a quoted average of 63mpg and got 60mpg.

I've driven a 318d BMW with a quoted average of 63mpg and got 61mpg.

I've driven a Mini 1.6D with a quoted average of 74mpg and got 68mpg.

All of that was mixed driving, not far off 50/50 motorway and then congested town centres.

IMO, a lot of the lower powered diesel engines will struggle to match their quote combined figures because you have to put your foot down to feel like you're moving..................

H

[dieselV6]

Will you knock it off banging on about fuel consumption, just because you can't drive economically doesn't mean the rest of us don't get the quoted figures. I actually exceed the stated mpg figures for my DPF equipped Scout (See fuelly in my sig) and that's on the old pd engine which is renowned for DPF issues.

Erm, nothing to do with economic driving, it's the time idiling and driving under low load, ie the town part of mixed driving that seem to affect consumption most.

Secondly, you have a 1.9PD engine, for these fuel consumption was stated realistically (well, within 15% actual use), and the DPF was causing problems precisely because it did not add enough fuel. So VAG went on the safe side and is now wasting fuel to make sure DPF is kept hot, on top of more mechanical loss from CR fuel system. I suggest reading up on this.

I am talking about the newer 1.4CR and 1.6CR engines here.

I'd be perfectly happy if the car was using 6l-6.2l/100km as the old Mk1 Octavia 1.9TDI did on the same driving circuit, I explained in another post that DPF is responsible for about 10% extra fuel being lost.

Frankly, I do not care about absolute amount of fuel used as long as it is lower than petrol engine under same conditions and the fuel tank is large enough. My Mk1 V6 Superb is using 12l/100km whenever I am driving it at 140mph-145mph across Germany, and I am still happy with that, because a petrol engine would have been using 15l+/100km and on top the petrol would have been 20%+ more expensive than diesel.

What I do care about are B$ fuel consumption figures printed all over recent VW Group literature. It is not just Skoda.

Edit: Herschel lists other manufacturer (BMW) and that is precisely the point, VAG seems to be departing from reality nowadays with their fuel consumption figures. 1.6CR and 1.4CR are the worst offenders and yes I agree the problem is that these are relatively underpowered suboptimal engines for the size of the car. Unfortunately, you cannot have the 2.0TDI in a Roomster, I'd have taken it immediately.

Edited 10 January, 2013 by dieselV6

[GaSelle]

I have a Superb Combi Greenline 1.6 TDI. It´s quoted 22,7 km/l (sorry, don´t get that MPG thingy), and I´m doing 22 km/l in the summertime, and 19-20-ish km/l on winther tires. And that is calculated, not what the trip computer is telling me. So maybe it is more about how you drive your car?

[dieselV6]

Would that Greenline be with a start/stop system? If yes, there's your answer, this engine does not idle in town anywhere near as much as a non start-stop, so increased DPF consumption is not really an issue. As soon as you add idleing, DPF software in the ECU will inject extra fuel at exhaust stroke to keep the DPF at high enough temperature. Same for cold startup, our commute involves 2 short trips in the morning on partly warmed up engine and DPF squirting fuel down the exhaust, then usually 2 longer trips that involve motorway and/or country road, in any case above 40mph.

Also, with these numbers you are likely not doing much town driving. As I mentioned earlier I do not dispute that as long as you are doing above around 50km/h-60km/h, you can get published economy figures.

My 3 Skodas always used more fuel than published figures, the point is that the published figures used to be very much in line with real figures 6-10 years ago, but they are not anymore, at least not for town part of driving and non start-stop equipped engines.

Edited 10 January, 2013 by dieselV6

[GaSelle]

Yes, it does have start/stop, but I turn it off, because in my case, I don´ t like the engine stopping just after driving for a long time under load (the turbo needs to cool down). So since I´m not using the start/stop system, and I still get nice figures, my car must be broken then I don´t think I drive that economical. I tried for one full tank to drive as "nice" as possible. That gave me 25 km/l.

I have tested the start/stop system, and it does not make that big a difference, even when driving in heavy trafic in citys with many stop and goes.

[dieselV6]

Do you drive significant distances and time in town traffic (10-40km/h) and still get the 20km/l (5l/100km) figures you published? I doubt that. As I said, as soon as you are out of town, I have no problem with VAG numbers.

Many people think they drive mixed use when they drive dual carriageways across town. E.g. here in the UK Milton Keynes is a town, but you can drive motorway speeds all across it, you only stop at (numerous) roundabouts.

Anyway, the whole fuel consumption thing is still a moot point as whatever you use, the new Octy fuel tank is only 50l, 5l smaller than the old one, one way or another the range has been crippled. If I wanted to save fuel by reducing weight, I would much rather fill up a70l tank to half-full, rather than have VW beancounter cripple the car's range.

Believe or not, I seriously considered buying a V6 petrol Superb a year ago as I can afford the fuel cost, but one of the main things that stopped me was 60l fuel tank (the other was the durability of DSG). I frequently travel abroad, at night autobahn speeds 60l translates to fuel stop every 1.5h (assuming 8l reserve, 52l/(15l/100km)/230km/h), ridiculous when I can drive my current Superb 2.5TDI V6 comfortably for 2h15min at the same speeds, and there are cars that will let you go for 3h, or across most/entire Germany at that speed before refuelling.

Edited 10 January, 2013 by dieselV6