All i can say is my gains (from a 75bhp unit) is amazing. Its nice and relaxed until about 2k revs and then the pull is silky smooth but more then enough to push you into your seat.

my mpg gain has gone up about 5 mpg average as well, which im well chuffed about, and to be fair, ive not tried to drive sensible! Ive just waited for the engine to reach temp and had a little sprint (where its safe to do so)

i never drove the 105bhp engine, so they were a fair bit nippyer then mine in the first place, but now.....Well its just a different car altogether!

I know people rave about the vRS on here and slag off the monte, but in honesty i bought the monte over the vRS for a number of reasons, mainly due to it being manual and not DSG (kinda takes the fun out of driving imo). The sales guy at skoda also told me to get the monte over the vRS due to running costs etc, and said just get a remap it will go just as well....and i think he was right!

Fairplay the vRS has 47 more bhp.....but for the town driving i do, and country roads etc i would say there evenly matched on driving enjoyment and "zippyness" plus its nice to get a constant 50mpg instead of about 30mpg. Suspension is the same, styling is identical, insurance is cheaper on the monte, and its £20 a year to tax.........

Not a hard choice in my book, and now its been mapped......well........Its a little rocket. yeah it might not be as fast as the vRS's, or have its badge but it gives it a good run for its money now.....and all for £400......BARGAIN! :-D

Don't think I have seen one person slag off the Monte on here. I disagree that the styling is identical to a VRS though. Not sure why you are being so defensive. Glad you are pleased with your remap.

Edited 24 March, 201313 yr by grapo

Ben from shark?

Indeed

Well if the Monte does in fact have the same suspension setup (I'll believe it when i see the ETKA part numbers) then with a remap on the DSG105 its essentially the new version of the Mk1 Diesel Fabia vRS which is what loads of people wish had been released.

Id imagine there are different axle weights between the two cars though which could lead to different spring and damper rates etc. WHat brakes does the Monte Run?

Sales guy at skoda said it would go just as well as a vrs ? Highly unlikely IMO the vrs is an awesome bit of kit (some issues) but 47 bhp more and they twin charger with dsg would be chalk and cheese, however would be just as good as a mk1 vrs

Indeed

Thanx

WHat brakes does the Monte Run?

Discs front, drums rear

OK. Its a baragin if it is the same chassis setup as the vRS though. Whats the going rate for a Monte TDI these days?

Discs front, drums rear

That what I simply couldn't understand with the fabia tdi version , drums on the back ?

http://vin-online.ru/etka.php?vag=SK&rgn=CZ&mod=OCT&year=2003

Ekta, use chrome to translate

That what I simply couldn't understand with the fabia tdi version , drums on the back ?

seems really strange to me as well. But i guess with most FWD cars having a brake bias of 85-90% on the front axle its not a huge problem.

I actually find the handling quite good on the monte, certainly controlled, roll is a bit of an issue, but very complient around the twisties, there's enough torque as standard to get up big inclines with ease so I reckon having it mapped would make it even more fun.

and with the power it produces as standard I don't see any issues with the drums on the back, stops reasonably too

Will this map work on same engine in a vw ?

Our map is available for all the 1.6TDI engines, yes.

OK. Its a baragin if it is the same chassis setup as the vRS though. Whats the going rate for a Monte TDI these days?

I've also been looking. Approx 10-11k used, unsure of how much they are new. Did they make a DSG Monte Carlo?

They used to, but dropped the DSG option towards the end of last year, I think?

Sales guy at skoda said it would go just as well as a vrs ? Highly unlikely IMO the vrs is an awesome bit of kit (some issues) but 47 bhp more and they twin charger with dsg would be chalk and cheese, however would be just as good as a mk1 vrs

no he really did, the vrs does the 0-62 sprint in 7.3 seconds the monte 105bhp does it in 10.2, mines remapped to 133 on sharks dyno with masses of increased torque, so you can knock at least a second off it maybe 2 which means in a line to 60, its not far behind (on the clock) and imo with no clock, it would surely feel as fast?

So what the skoda guy was saying, imo is right?

either way, if im a second and a half behind a vrs, doing 55mpg, paying £205 a year fully comp and paying £20 a year road tax im happy :-) But i still have a dirty diesel with no race heritage when i think about it hard enough lol.

Is there a remap for the 1.2 TDI yet?

Running similar power to a mk1 vrs now you should manage 0-60 in 9 secs same as the mk1.

However some late mk1 vrs ran more power (later blt engine cars) and would do 8.5 Ish to 60.

Stock mk2 vrs runs 6.9 ish 0-60 not as slow as Skoda made it in the book

Monte has smaller brakes, 256 front and drums rear. Vrs is 288 front and 232 Rear iirc?

Edited 25 March, 201313 yr by Ad Lav

no he really did, the vrs does the 0-62 sprint in 7.3 seconds the monte 105bhp does it in 10.2, mines remapped to 133 on sharks dyno with masses of increased torque, so you can knock at least a second off it maybe 2 which means in a line to 60, its not far behind (on the clock) and imo with no clock, it would surely feel as fast?

So what the skoda guy was saying, imo is right?

either way, if im a second and a half behind a vrs, doing 55mpg, paying £205 a year fully comp and paying £20 a year road tax im happy :-) But i still have a dirty diesel with no race heritage when i think about it hard enough lol.

Are you going to upgrade the brakes ? Putting discs on rear ? Does it warrant upgrade ?

Need new hubs to change from drums to discs.

Are you going to upgrade the brakes ? Putting discs on rear ? Does it warrant upgrade ?

i looked into this, but as said, you need new hubs, then you have to start chopping brake pipes, working out PSI's as drums operate with a totally different pressure, retro fitting new handbrake mechanics etc etc....so its possible, but a hell of a lot of work and for the driving i do, rear drums are fine imo. They are quite tatty though, as i dont think they age very well, and as there silver, there quite visable behind the dark alloy wheel so as soon as the weather cheers its self up im going to paint them to match the car.

Running similar power to a mk1 vrs now you should manage 0-60 in 9 secs same as the mk1.

However some late mk1 vrs ran more power (later blt engine cars) and would do 8.5 Ish to 60.

Stock mk2 vrs runs 6.9 ish 0-60 not as slow as Skoda made it in the book

Monte has smaller brakes, 256 front and drums rear. Vrs is 288 front and 232 Rear iirc?

also worth thinking about is that the monte carlo is 1144kg and the old vRS was 1315kg...... Thats a difference of 2 grown adults and 1 child! So this must have an adverse effect on the 0-60 time?

Mmmmmm not sure about a map some reviewers not 100% apparently there are many more available now, I will wait for bullets too shoot me down,

Reviewers pf what map?

Google it

Google what?