Have a vRS estate and think its a v good car for the money.

It does really rather depend on what you preference though; sounds to me so long as its half quick and economical it'll be the one, given that i'd probably chose one of the 105ps cars, probably the TSi to be fair.

My single biggest personal criticism of the vRS has to be the fuel economy, it'll push 40ish mpg if driven with kid gloves but mine has only managed an average of approx 31 mpg over 11k miles which is quite poor given the 45mpg manufacturers claim.

Also whilst the drivechain and gearbox are probably the best to be seen in any current hot hatch as yet the driving dynamics of the car dont meet the same grade. Its floaty, rolls too much, struggles for traction when its damp (it'll try to light up in 4th if provoked enough in the wet) and the steering weight and braking feel for me dont inspire alot of confidence.

The 105ps Monte has more or less the same chassis configuration so will test it half as much as the 180ps car, the dynamic shortfalls can sometimes be entertaining but for me they frustrate more so.

You can improve then considerably by lowering them, installing a rear anti roll bar and fitting bigger MK4 Golf GTi front brakes but thats not my bag, should drive better out of the box.

Updated springs and a rear arb will only cost you £300 if you fit yourself,...if you are not happy with the handling just do this.I'm not into heavily modding cars,but the above is a simple thing that won't affect the warranty,get the Skoda approved eibach springs.

As for the brakes,the size of the front discs look big enough to me so I suspect a set of top quality fast road pads will be a major improvement.

I have come from a mk1 Vrs to Monte Carlo (86ps) and now on to a Vrs mk2.

Vrs mk2 is the best car if you want fun and the dsg box, though the Monte was fun as well but the fuel economy of the Monte could disappoint.

As George says, best thing to do is test drive them yourself, and see which pleases you the most. Everyone has different tastes.

Personally, I wouldn't touch another Skoda or anything VW-related, after getting so much crap from the dealers and SUK.

If it has to be a Fabia though, having had a TSI 85 and a TDI CR 90 as courtesy cars for a whole day each, I can tell you that the diesel car felt utterly dull to drive, dead steering, lacking precision, and a rather uncooperative gearbox. The petrol car was the complete opposite, with a slick gearbox and precise steering with plenty of feedback. I easily got over 60mpg in the diesel, compared to about 45 in the petrol. Both cars have considerable turbo lag. I was actually rather disappointed with the petrol version in that respect. The turbo lag in the TSI reminded me of turbocharged cars of the 80's. Anyway, they both pack quite a punch, considering their engine capacity.

Haven't driven a VRS, so can't comment on that. All this talk of oil consumption issues would be enough to put me off however. Not to mention, residual values of VRS models could only be affected in a negative way because of it.

I got my Monte 105 petrol on Tuesday and I've done about 300 miles so far. Mixture of motorways and country roads and so far it's been nothing short of fantastic. The VRS is obviously punchier than the Monte but test drive the Monte - it doesnt feel like it lacks power.

The monte will feel slooow compared to your accord, whereas the vRS will feel like a rocketship :-)

I appreciate there are loads of threads on the oil consumption issue with the Vrs ,,,, but how bad is it really ?? If you guys that have had a vrs for a while knew about the snag before,,,,, would it have put you off ???

I appreciate there are loads of threads on the oil consumption issue with the Vrs ,,,, but how bad is it really ?? If you guys that have had a vrs for a while knew about the snag before,,,,, would it have put you off ???

2.5 lts 2100 miles

Mine doesn't use a drop now but I don't reckon the oil consumption itself would have put me off. The thought of numerous trips to the stealer for oil consumption tests, breather mods and car ripped apart to install new engine might tho! I can never see myself going through what some people on here have tho. If a serious issue became apparent needing to go down this route I'd chop it in faster than you could say "part ex".

mine doesn't use a drop.

44k

New engine under warranty

However, the new one has supped just 400 mls in 2600 miles

You see now Im firmly in the 105cr monte ,,,,,, anyone who has one,, can you comment on the engine and running costs please, I could be doing a fair few miles,, can it be a motorway (500 mile) cruiser and also have the ability to put a smile on your face on some a roads ????

I have had a mk1 fabia vrs in the past and it does remind me of it , but i would like the 130hp and extra torque . Running cost are very low , £20 to tax and I do get 60mpg on my A road 50mph run, however on motorways it drops to 50-55 mpg . As for a smile on your face, its more of a smug grin knowing your costs are low .

I tested the Monti and it wasn't bad but the VRS is a totally diference beast, I knew of the oil problem before I got mine but I took the chance and up to now touch wood mine is OK.

I get 35 to the gallon and I'm not light on the gas, it is silly fast compared to the Monty.

The Monty is a good car but the VRS brings a bigger smile to your face as you leave other cars behind at the lights.

Ron.

Another vote for the vrs here. It's a good little car goes like a rocket and cheap to run

It depends what your looking for it you look past the oil consumption issues, afford to insure and fuel its gota be a VRS.

I drove one while my Monte had the wheels refurb i was constantly smiling it was eager etc.

BUT my budget (in terms fuel insurance and the fineance) the VRS wasnt viable.

So my other choice was the Monte, (i prefer its styling tho)

Now i was aimin for a 105 but came across the 86 with a kenwood upgrate climate control and cruise control.

To drive its obviosly not setting the world a light.

But give the area i drive (towns motorways the odd country lane and a-roads) it never feels undering whelming its quick/pokey enough to keep things intresting. The handling is superb, and will give most bigger cars a run for there money in corners

On the motorway it seems happy at 70 altho its not best speed for it MPG.

In terms of MPG the 86PS is said to get 54ish MPG, if im just driving (ie taking it easy) its generally mid 40s

If i push it late 30's(37 lowest i noticed but that wasnt a complete thrashin of it)

But on one commute home from work (most on the A2/M2 between Dartford and Sittingbourne with down drivig either end (about 26mile)

O thought id try and see what i could squeese out of the Monte MPG wise and I did hit 54.6 MPG

I have had a mk1 fabia vrs in the past and it does remind me of it , but i would like the 130hp and extra torque . Running cost are very low , £20 to tax and I do get 60mpg on my A road 50mph run, however on motorways it drops to 50-55 mpg . As for a smile on your face, its more of a smug grin knowing your costs are low .

Does the engine have good 'in gear' acceleration ?? How far can you get on a full tank, normal driving ? And,,,, strange question ,, how old are you arny ? You see I'm almost 40 now , swmbo is reminding me that I cant have a boy racer car anymore, but I dont think the monte (in black) is , its just a bit mean ....... :wonder:

Pfft - I'm 42 and pick up my VRS on Thursday. :-)

Rachel

My advise would be go and test drive them each and you will know whats best for you.

The 1.2 tsi engine is supprisingly powerful and does have a good range of power, but to compare it to a VRS is just daft of course the VRS is going to be much much faster, though also much more expensive to buy and insure.

If your budget allows it then go for the VRS if not then the 1.2 tsi is a great little engine.

Edited 14 January, 201313 yr by John Eva

Does the engine have good 'in gear' acceleration ?? How far can you get on a full tank, normal driving ? And,,,, strange question ,, how old are you arny ? You see I'm almost 40 now , swmbo is reminding me that I cant have a boy racer car anymore, but I dont think the monte (in black) is , its just a bit mean ....... :wonder:

I'm almost 40 too and my car gets to a ton in under 7 seconds. And my 70+ dad and 65+ mum with be driving the fab VRS!

Does the engine have good 'in gear' acceleration ?? How far can you get on a full tank, normal driving ? And,,,, strange question ,, how old are you arny ? You see I'm almost 40 now , swmbo is reminding me that I cant have a boy racer car anymore, but I dont think the monte (in black) is , its just a bit mean ....... :wonder:

I don't want to admit it but I'm 48 so don't let the age thing put you off :)

Does the engine have good 'in gear' acceleration ?? How far can you get on a full tank, normal driving ? And,,,, strange question ,, how old are you arny ? You see I'm almost 40 now , swmbo is reminding me that I cant have a boy racer car anymore, but I dont think the monte (in black) is , its just a bit mean ....... :wonder:

I'm past 50 and zip everywhere, VRS beats Monty every time. LOL

Does the engine have good 'in gear' acceleration ?? How far can you get on a full tank, normal driving ? And,,,, strange question ,, how old are you arny ? You see I'm almost 40 now , swmbo is reminding me that I cant have a boy racer car anymore, but I dont think the monte (in black) is , its just a bit mean ....... :wonder:

The engine is punchy and does have the typical diesel urge , mine seemed to loosen up around 15k and does feel quick(ish) when pushed, but its no VRS. Was 40 a few years back but running costs were my main reason ( last car was octi vrs mk1 ) . Black does look good.

The engine is punchy and does have the typical diesel urge , mine seemed to loosen up around 15k and does feel quick(ish) when pushed, but its no VRS. Was 40 a few years back but running costs were my main reason ( last car was octi vrs mk1 ) . Black does look good.

Thanks for this Arny ,,, the pics of your monte are fantastic,,, swayed me away from black !!!

Thanks all for your replies and comments,,, before I drive them all Ive kinda decided on the derv monte, the running costs just cant be ignored, living where I do , the potential to do big mileage is always there.

Now,,,, to drive them,,,, Vrs is first ! Last time I drove a vrs , i bought it on the spot.

Now,,,, to drive them,,,, Vrs is first ! Last time I drove a vrs , i bought it on the spot.

That's the problem. I was after a Fabia 1.2 TSI. I test drove one and thought it was OK. A vRS demonstrator was parked alongside. The salesman had already talked me out of having one and I had no previous interest in an auto box. I asked to take the vRS out for a run just out of curiosity. I was thrown the keys and told I could take it out for as long as I wanted. Two hours later I returned with a smile on my face. I was hooked. I did my calculations on running costs assuming 33 mpg worst case and decided I could just about afford it.

I have had no regrets buying the vRS (apart from high oil consumption) and can achieve 45 mpg on long runs.

Vrs is a great car for the money and DSG is excellent. MPG per others is really around 32 - 35. Had no undue oil useage with mine. Its had 1 litre put in it at just under 7,000 miles as top ups (It had its first service where obviously oil was changed).

Big think about the Vrs as because its slightly differnt than the norm it makes you smile.....