Thinking of buying vRS/Downgrading from Mazda mk1 Mps 3

[Littlebull]

As the title suggests!

I'm thinking of buying a mk2 Fab vrs. I currently own a Mazda 3 mps mk1 (great car and love it) just very expensive to run. Average 275 miles between fill ups and road tax is soon to go up from £460 to £475 which ill have to pay in October.

I'd like a cheaper car to run but don't want to lose out on performance (too much) I've considered everything and from what I can see you get the most bang for your buck from the fab vrs.

I had the mk1 fab vrs before tuned and that was nippy as.

Question is though what can you do to tune the mk2 and what sorts of price figures am I looking at to get some decent bhp, 0-60, handling and mpg figures?

Oh another thing is like to enquire about is the electronic LSD the car comes with. Can it be taken off??? I'd like to put a REAL LSD in the transmission because the ESD's are crap!!!!

[pipsyp]

They are reasonably tunable; stage 1 remap usually sees 205/210hp with a reasonable increase in torque (in the region of 210/220lb/ft. Not big figures but it means more power than standard at any point through the rev range. Mapped cars can hit 60 in early 6 late 5 secs; standard cars have been timed 6.5 to 60.

To make more power you have to go fairly silly with them, new turbo, intercooler, cat delete exhaust etc and becomes expensive.

Worth noting that its already a highly strung engine as standard and the twincharger is not exactly renound for its long term reliability (a number of contributers on here have have had to have new engines) so id probably suggest tune at your own risk.

Standard suspension and brakes arent great, doesnt handle great in standard form and brakes are just about adequate for occasional keen use. Suggest OEM Eibach spring upgrade from Skoda dealer and VAG 312mm front brake retrofit.

There is a guy called Sy on the forum who has a maxxed out vRS (around 250ish HP I believe may b wrong) whos done loads to his car he should be able to make some suggestions.

Personally Id rather pay a bit extra and get a Polo GTi, dirty words on here I know but they do drive considerably better in standard form.

Edited 4 April, 2013 by pipsyp

[vRSy]

I agree thatthe ESD is pants. Its better than nothing but it hasnt got anything in comparison to a mechanical LSD. Currently SQS are the only company with a diff, the problem being its a plate diff and requires periodic servicing, its not a fit and forget mod. Nothing from Quaife, Wavetrac or Peloquin on the cards either from what i gather.

Tuning wise, my car is on low boost with a stage 3 setup whilst the misfire issue that's restricting the ultimate power of the stage 3 setup is fixed. But even on low boost it would destroy even a mapped 3MPS. Mine has the performance to keep up with A 340hp Porsche Carerra and 350Hp Mountune Focus RS. Mine in the dry conditions does a sub 5 second 0-60 and will do a sub 14 sec 1/4 mile when it actually works.

Stage 1 cars will do a sub 6 second 0-60 all day long, and low 14 second 1/4 mile all day long. Stage 2 cars get into the 13 second 1/4 miles with little to know issues in good conditions.

Handling wise, as stock, dont expect nothing too special. Lots of body roll, lots of wheel spin and lots of understeer and the brakes arent upto the job as standard IMO, let alone with the speed potential when mapped. Id say my chassis mods are pretty minimal (see my signature) compared to how far i could have gone, but handling wise my car is an absolute weapon now.

there are issues with the 1.4TSi and 5J chassis though. The engine is known to burn oil in many cars, this has led to the older CAVE engine being withdrawn after piston failures etc. There is also a misfire issue with some cars. When mapped they eat sparkplugs so its worth changing every 6k. My car is plagued by a misfire that only occurs if i run higher boost, which obviously i dont until we fix it. Everything from plasma coilpacks, map tweaks and about 6 types of spark plugs have been tried to no avail. Valve springs are now being changed to see if they are to weak as stock. My car has also lunched its steering rack which ive just found out has also put swarth into the steering pump, so my repair bill is well over a grand now.

With chassis and engine mods the setup is fantastic. You will be able to embarrass LOTS of much more powerful and expensive machinery and at trackdays and 1/4 tracks you will be approached by many people who just cant believe how quick they are, but ultimately, due to unreliability, im selling my car and buying something that i can drive without expecting something else fail.

[vRSy]

Personally Id rather pay a bit extra and get a Polo GTi, dirty words on here I know but they do drive considerably better in standard form.

But, ultimately its the same engine, same chassis, same brakes etc and suffers the exact same problems.

Stock v Stock though the Polo GTI is without doubt the better car, no one can argue that.

[grapo]

But, ultimately its the same engine, same chassis, same brakes etc and suffers the exact same problems.

Stock v Stock though the Polo GTI is without doubt the better car, no one can argue that.

Polo GTI is a completely different platform though right? It's a lot lighter than the lardy vrs platform

[vRSy]

Its practically identical. Same brakes gearbox, engine, steering.

The differences are mainly dampers/springs etc. The Polo/Ibiza are lighter mostly because of the lack of spare wheel and that the Fabia has 25kg of cast iron weights bolted to the rear crash beam.

[pipsyp]

I believe the new Polo and Ibiza share the same newer modular chassis architecture that also underpins the Audi A1. The Fabia is still largely based on the older generation Polo which was never dynamically that great.

Fairly sure there is quite a weight difference between the Polo and Fabia too.

[Confide]

There is some small mods that will transform the car.

Springs have been mentioned, but I would go as far as going for a set with both springs AND dampers!

Believe me, ride-quality is improved at the same time as bodyroll is reduced.

Software, a TBE and an intercooler is all that's needed for STABLE 210 bhp (230+ if you ask the tuners, but you know that already probably ).

Brakes is sufficient to go with the Octavia mk1 vRS brakes, it's a fair bit more bite and lasts way longer before they start fading.

It is quite a list for modding a new car... but then again, I came from a 315 bhp 250+ km/h SAAB 9000 Aero with even more mods on it .

So yeah, I like my cars tuned properly =D!

And yes, if you want to go MENTAL with it there is solutions for that too.

I've had alot off trouble personally, but hopefully it will settle down now and sort itself now.

So I can focus on the tuning instead .

EDIT : and no, the Polo / A1 / Ibiza doesn't have a modular chassi (thinking off the MQB here?), that comes with the next generation.

Edited 4 April, 2013 by Confide

[vRSy]

I believe the new Polo and Ibiza share the same newer modular chassis architecture that also underpins the Audi A1. The Fabia is still largely based on the older generation Polo which was never dynamically that great.

Fairly sure there is quite a weight difference between the Polo and Fabia too.

It is newer but dont think that it is drastically different. Its basically a concoction of the old Polo platform mixed with elements of the Mk4 golf etc.

Suspension, anti roll bars(front and rear), brakes, intercooler, radiator, steering system, engine mounts, rera beam etc are all interchangable between the two setups.

[Jabozuma]

As the title suggests!

I'm thinking of buying a mk2 Fab vrs. I currently own a Mazda 3 mps mk1 (great car and love it) just very expensive to run. Average 275 miles between fill ups and road tax is soon to go up from £460 to £475 which ill have to pay in October.

I'd like a cheaper car to run but don't want to lose out on performance (too much) I've considered everything and from what I can see you get the most bang for your buck from the fab vrs.

I had the mk1 fab vrs before tuned and that was nippy as.

Question is though what can you do to tune the mk2 and what sorts of price figures am I looking at to get some decent bhp, 0-60, handling and mpg figures?

Oh another thing is like to enquire about is the electronic LSD the car comes with. Can it be taken off??? I'd like to put a REAL LSD in the transmission because the ESD's are crap!!!!

I think you will be happy with Fab MK2 vRS as standard. It has much better power delivery than your current car having the benefit of supercharger and turbo working in together to give a very smooth power delivery all the way up to 7k rpm redline. It pulls all the way up . This mated with excellent 7-speed dry clutch DSG box makes for an excellent driving experience.

So it iwll have much less power but due to the above it will feel more piowerfull that it is in reality. I say DSG "adds" another "20 bhp feel" to the car .

Power is like any drug, the more you have the more you want. Whether you need it or not... The problem with this car is that the 7-speed DSG is only rated at 250Nm. I'd not be comfortable going anywhere more than 300Nm on it as all kit has safety margins designed into it. Yu will be told "Mine was mapped and is pulling close to 400Nm no probs" - then it goes quiet and learn bloke sold the car as it munched through mechatronics unit...

Handling wise (with all the electronics switched on) the car is very driver friendly, very stable and has neutral setup which is very good. It is already front breakingforce biased so unless much better tyres and upgrades to both front and rear brakes no point in touching braking at all. Putting big brakes front kit will increase your stopping distance in fact with nothing else done. It will make your car "feel better under braking" but perform worse.

As for body roll - I feel it but it is well controlled and I like well controlled body roll feedback from my road car. There has to be certain flex designed into the chassis and suspension to achieve the best handling and traction. Rock solid cars are not the best handling ones. Even in karting you buld chassis with different type of flex characteristics for different circuits.

It is much cheaper to insure ( I am paying £230 a year with absolutely everything and their dog thrown in), much cheaper to tax and can do 40mpg no sweat with only 5k miles from new and ext temps hovering above zero as we have now. If you hammer it on public roads you can excpect circa 20 mpg but you have to try hard to do that .

If you are not expecting a track day car handling characteristics, would like have a ride after which a visit to a chiropractor is not a must, very decent performance with good fuel consumption, cheap insurance and road tax, combined with massive boot, five doors (VERY family friendly wagon!) thi9s is your car! In my opinion this car is not excellent at anything with the exception of a marvelous DSG box but is very good at everything. That combined with amazing value for money...

MK2 Mazda3 MPS, Corsa VRX Ze Ring Edition were my first choices - I ended up with Fab MK2 vRS hatch and I so blooming glad I did!

Oil consumption problems are well documented. There are different theories on what is causing it. I believe in a strict running in regime. Some people adopted it and are very happy with their motors. I any case but extended 5 year warranty and you will have nothing to worry about as Skoda started to replace oil drinkers with very little fuss recently.

Hope it helps

[vRSy]

The problem with this car is that the 7-speed DSG is only rated at 250Nm.

How often do we see this.

Show me the exact quote from VAG Tech docs that states this!!

Do you know what the DSG torque limiters are set to on a standard box?.. I do, and its alot more than 250NM. If the box was rated at 250NM maximum, the factory torque limiters on the DSG would be set at 250NM and not 350NM!!

[Jabozuma]

How often do we see this.

Show me the exact quote from VAG Tech docs that states this!!

Do you know what the DSG torque limiters are set to on a standard box?.. I do, and its alot more than 250NM. If the box was rated at 250NM maximum, the factory torque limiters on the DSG would be set at 250NM and not 350NM!!

There you go, official VAG website

http://www.volkswagen.co.uk/technology/transmissions-and-drivetrains/dsg

Box rating and peak torque limiters values are two different things, don't you think? Sustained torque ratings are ALWAYS lower than PEAK ratings. At 350Nm car goes into limp mode to prevent catastrophic damage.

[Jabozuma]

How often do we see this.

Show me the exact quote from VAG Tech docs that states this!!

Is it the same VAG Tech docs which explained the reasons for the type of piston failures you and other UNMODIFIED cars experienced?

[vRSy]

Yu will be told "Mine was mapped and is pulling close to 400Nm no probs" - then it goes quiet and learn bloke sold the car as it munched through mechatronics unit...

So Jabo, who has this happened to then? Ive been on this forum and many others for a fair amount of time now and I have heard of one guy with an issue on his DSG.

The problem with this car is that the 7-speed DSG is only rated at 250Nm.

Please show me the quote and document that this has come from? If its the VAg docs im thinking of then you have misread it, as most people have. If the gearbox was indeed rated at 250NM: Firstly, would VAG have matched a gearbox to an engine that runs 250NM allowing no factor of safety or reliability. Secondly, why would VAG set the electronic torque limiters of the gear box 100NM higher than this alleged 250NM rating? The torque limiters on the stock DSG map are set to 350NM.

. It is already front breakingforce biased so unless much better tyres and upgrades to both front and rear brakes no point in touching braking at all. Putting big brakes front kit will increase your stopping distance in fact with nothing else done. It will make your car "feel better under braking" but perform worse.

i completely disagree. it WILL not increase your braking distance at all. Thats a ridiculous comment to make. Even on stock tyres uprated front brakes make a HUGE improvement to the braking performance of the car, obviously your always going to be limited by the grip of the tyre, but unless you are locking your tyres every time you brake, in which case learn to drive, a front brake upgrade is a massive improvement. Adding grippier tyres just allows you to be even harder on the brakes and witness an even bigger improvement. I of course know this from personal experience of actually doing it.

Rear brakes upgrades are not needed at all. The Ibiza Race cars, VW Cup Polos, all run stock rear brakes with MASSIVE front brakes. Big rear brakes are not required on a FWD car, especially one as light as the Fabia.

Also since when does a brake upgrade equate to a massive brake kit? 312mm disc/caliper upgrades give a massive increase in braking performance, as will better pads and fluid.

As for body roll - I feel it but it is well controlled and I like well controlled body roll feedback from my road car. There has to be certain flex designed into the chassis and suspension to achieve the best handling and traction. Rock solid cars are not the best handling ones. Even in karting you buld chassis with different type of flex characteristics for different circuits.

I agree rock solid cars are not good for the street, but with all the mods on my car, the ride quality is no harsher than stock at all. Mine is still much comfier and no where near as harsh to live when compared with a Clio RS200. There is masses of extra feel in my steering compared to stock, and the traction improvement is unbelievable and im not talking of cornering potential, which is of course way stronger than stock, but im now able to transfer my extra power and torque to the tarmac better than i could manage with stock power and stock suspension.

Until you have tried a modified setup, you really should consider what you say, because your way off with your theories.

[vRSy]

There you go, official VAG website

http://www.volkswage...drivetrains/dsg

This is what the quote in the link said:

Both DSG dual-clutch gearboxes are application-specific. The 6-speed is paired with high torque engines (up to 350 Nm) while the 7-speed variant is more effective in combination with smaller engines and torque outputs of up to 250 Nm.

I quote, the 7 Spd is more effective in combination with engine and torque outputs of upto 250NM!!

The other VAG docs say the same, the use the 7spd in applications where the torque is less than 250NM. They use the 6 spd in applications where the torque is between 250-350NM and above 250 Nm they use the 7spd wet. People read that and then say.........the box is rated to a maximum of 250NM, when it doesnt say that at all!!

Box rating and peak torque limiters values are two different things, don't you think? Sustained torque ratings are ALWAYS lower than PEAK ratings. At 350Nm car goes into limp mode to prevent catastrophic damage.

Does it.......err no, it doesnt, it doesnt go into limp mode at all. At 350NM the torque gets limited and no more. It will not allow the torque to get raised past that point irrelevant of what an ECU asks of it. Back along we thought the DSG was going into the limp mode with mine, however it was proven not to be the case and it was in fact an overboost that occurred during gear changes as the throttle body momentarily partially closed which created a spike in boost which the ECU registered and then applied limp mode as it thought it was all going wrong. Overboost removed, no alterations to the gearbox and its all fine and dandy.

[Confide]

What I think is needed here is some chillpills and a discussion over pm instead off the thread, boys.

And to op : if there is any questions or doubt feel free to pm me :-).

Skickat från min HTC One X via Tapatalk 2

[Jabozuma]

[/size]

So Jabo, who has this happened to then? Ive been on this forum and many others for a fair amount of time now and I have heard of one guy with an issue on his DSG.

Please show me the quote and document that this has come from? If its the VAg docs im thinking of then you have misread it, as most people have. If the gearbox was indeed rated at 250NM: Firstly, would VAG have matched a gearbox to an engine that runs 250NM allowing no factor of safety or reliability. Secondly, why would VAG set the electronic torque limiters of the gear box 100NM higher than this alleged 250NM rating? The torque limiters on the stock DSG map are set to 350NM.

Right, elements within gearbox experience higher peak torque values than 250Nm even on standard engine, hence to limiters set higher. It does not mean the transmission is able to take more, it is not. Increase the output of the engine and you will increase those peak values as well. As for who had problems – you did! Your box was going into limp mode at the strip, wasn’t it? Yesterday or so there was a thread here about a guy who wasted his mechatronics unit. Also not many people are too keen on publishing their cars going pop due to mods they did which were sworn by all the tuners and sundry to be perfectly safe…

i completely disagree. it WILL not increase your braking distance at all. Thats a ridiculous comment to make. Even on stock tyres uprated front brakes make a HUGE improvement to the braking performance of the car, obviously your always going to be limited by the grip of the tyre, but unless you are locking your tyres every time you brake, in which case learn to drive, a front brake upgrade is a massive improvement. Adding grippier tyres just allows you to be even harder on the brakes and witness an even bigger improvement. I of course know this from personal experience of actually doing it.

Rear brakes upgrades are not needed at all. The Ibiza Race cars, VW Cup Polos, all run stock rear brakes with MASSIVE front brakes. Big rear brakes are not required on a FWD car, especially one as light as the Fabia.

Also since when does a brake upgrade equate to a massive brake kit? 312mm disc/caliper upgrades give a massive increase in braking performance, as will better pads and fluid.

What you wrote above about front brakes upgrade being a “MASSIVE” improvement could only be true if the factory brakes were designed completely wrong and simply not working. i.e breaking torque offered by the OEM brakes is below that required to stop the car. I can lock OEM brakes at any speed hence the braking torque is sufficient and there is no need for more unless you upgrade tyres, lower the car , change weight distribution. It is all about brake bias setup and not how big the front discs are lol.

I cannot be bothered to explain the lot in my own words so I’d rather leave it to a chap who designs breaking systems for BOSCH and racing outfits of all sorts. You are right again, my comments are ridiculous without the basic knowledge to understand the forces at work.

http://stoptech.com/technical-support/technical-white-papers/white-paper---brake-bias-and-performance-why-brake-balance-matters

I agree rock solid cars are not good for the street, but with all the mods on my car, the ride quality is no harsher than stock at all. Mine is still much comfier and no where near as harsh to live when compared with a Clio RS200. There is masses of extra feel in my steering compared to stock, and the traction improvement is unbelievable and im not talking of cornering potential, which is of course way stronger than stock, but im now able to transfer my extra power and torque to the tarmac better than i could manage with stock power and stock suspension.

Until you have tried a modified setup, you really should consider what you say, because your way off with your theories.

In straight line suspension doesn’t matter at all – see drag racers, can you see any suspension there? . Transfer of power to the tarmac is through the tyres and chassis setup, the CORRECT setup and you are right here, trial and error is the best here as each setup is done for a particular driver. Road cars are designed to be neutral. You feel ARB & RARB, engine mounts and bushes did you no end of good? I am sure you are right. Are you quicker around the track with them compared to stock but the same power and tyres – who knows? What I am trying to say is that yes, those mods can help but can also work the other way round and screw things up. The chassis might actually need CofG lowered to be a peach and is stiff enough for most applications. Get a very twisty track and a cage is a must. Get one with fast flowing conrers and bog standard setup will be better J. For normal/fast road use it is perfect – you are simply not able to drive beyond its limit.

[Jabozuma]

This is what the quote in the link said:

[/size]

I quote, the 7 Spd is more effective in combination with engine and torque outputs of upto 250NM!!

The other VAG docs say the same, the use the 7spd in applications where the torque is less than 250NM. They use the 6 spd in applications where the torque is between 250-350NM and above 250 Nm they use the 7spd wet. People read that and then say.........the box is rated to a maximum of 250NM, when it doesnt say that at all!!

Does it.......err no, it doesnt, it doesnt go into limp mode at all. At 350NM the torque gets limited and no more. It will not allow the torque to get raised past that point irrelevant of what an ECU asks of it. Back along we thought the DSG was going into the limp mode with mine, however it was proven not to be the case and it was in fact an overboost that occurred during gear changes as the throttle body momentarily partially closed which created a spike in boost which the ECU registered and then applied limp mode as it thought it was all going wrong. Overboost removed, no alterations to the gearbox and its all fine and dandy.

OK, that was not divulged . ECU stopping any further torque increase and no limp mode, fine. Does the same thing i.e. protects the box.

And why do they use different gearboxes dpending on torque output? Just a whim, a hunch or the way the box is designed?

[apmaman]

[OzFabia]

[vRSy]

Right, elements within gearbox experience higher peak torque values than 250Nm even on standard engine, hence to limiters set higher. It does not mean the transmission is able to take more, it is not. Increase the output of the engine and you will increase those peak values as well. As for who had problems – you did! Your box was going into limp mode at the strip, wasn’t it? Yesterday or so there was a thread here about a guy who wasted his mechatronics unit. Also not many people are too keen on publishing their cars going pop due to mods they did which were sworn by all the tuners and sundry to be perfectly safe…

No my DSG wasnt going into limp, as said above, it was found to be an ECU/Overboost problem that they initially assumed must have been the DSG kicking off, but further investigation showed it wasnt the culprit.

What you wrote above about front brakes upgrade being a “MASSIVE” improvement could only be true if the factory brakes were designed completely wrong and simply not working. i.e breaking torque offered by the OEM brakes is below that required to stop the car. I can lock OEM brakes at any speed hence the braking torque is sufficient and there is no need for more unless you upgrade tyres, lower the car , change weight distribution. It is all about brake bias setup and not how big the front discs are lol.

I cannot be bothered to explain the lot in my own words so I’d rather leave it to a chap who designs breaking systems for BOSCH and racing outfits of all sorts. You are right again, my comments are ridiculous without the basic knowledge to understand the forces at work.

http://stoptech.com/...balance-matters

I wouldnt say the stock brakes simply dont work, what im saying is that they are ineffective at stopping from speed and ineffective at managing the heat. If you never track your car are not going to map it and have that extra performance on tap, and you will only drive it around town then a BBK is pointless.

Its easy to lock the brakes by stamping on the pedal, especially if that brake assist is on(I turned mine off and it was much better). Thats what people who have no idea how to drive and what weight transfer is. If your progressive on the brake pedal and have a progressive braking setup(ie multi piston where the small pistons deploy first to give feel and remove snatchy brakes) then you wont break traction and skid the car, your weight will have moved over hte front axle , loaded the front tyres and your car wil have superior braking braking performance. You should know this from your google searching.

Scenario 1: So your doing 80mph on the motorway, 2 cars on std tyres, one with my brakes, one with stock brakes. All of sudden traffic jam.... I guarantee my car would stop SUBSTANTIALLY earlier. Scenario 2. Your on an aggressive drive trough the EVO triangle or on a trackday working the car and brakes hard. Your using the same type of brake pads on both cars but which one will suffer fade first? The car with the stock brakes will as the larger discs of the upgraded brakes have a greater mass of metal to dissipate and manage the heat, however, you are of course limited in what size disc you can use as too large will result in the brake pads not getting upto their optimum braking temperatures in normal use. I've never had an issue with locking my brakes up even on stock tyres with either stock brakes or the Tarox BBK. I do agree you are only connected to the road by the tyres contact patch, so the biggest brake kit in the world wont mean a thing if your have no grip.

As to rear brakes, adding the larger rear brakes will of course improve you braking performance further, I was 99% ready to buy some for mine because even on stock brakes its not the most stable car when really stomping on the pedal, and typically adding some additional rear bias to the brakes(ie make the larger) will aid stability somewhat. I had a Le Mans racing Driver and a Rally driver take my car around silverstone and afterwards we discussed the Tarox fronts and potentially upgrading the rears to the 256mm Mk4 Golf setup, and they recommended against it. The temperatures of the rear brakes were miniscule compared to the fronts, so increasing the size and mass of the rears would cool them further making the pads less effective or harder to get upto temperature. This is why i still run stock pads on the rear as they work better from lower temps. Running the likes of DS2500 on the rear wouldnt give me an increase in performance. I spoke to Tarox about this as well as VAGBremtechnik, KPM racing and VWRacing, all of which have extensive experience in BAG braking systems. All recommended leaving thge stock rears in place.

In straight line suspension doesn’t matter at all – see drag racers, can you see any suspension there? . Transfer of power to the tarmac is through the tyres and chassis setup, the CORRECT setup and you are right here, trial and error is the best here as each setup is done for a particular driver. Road cars are designed to be neutral. You feel ARB & RARB, engine mounts and bushes did you no end of good? I am sure you are right. Are you quicker around the track with them compared to stock but the same power and tyres – who knows? What I am trying to say is that yes, those mods can help but can also work the other way round and screw things up. The chassis might actually need CofG lowered to be a peach and is stiff enough for most applications. Get a very twisty track and a cage is a must. Get one with fast flowing conrers and bog standard setup will be better J. For normal/fast road use it is perfect – you are simply not able to drive beyond its limit.

I was talking about straight line traction, I still have issues with mine going off the line, I was talking about the improvement in traction exiting corners as that was the biggest issue with the Stock platform.

Summarizing what you have been saying. Bigger and better brakes dont make braking better. Anti roll bars, suspension upgrades make the car slower, and you have no idea how to brake. lol

I for one am going to do what some others on here who have chosen to no longer reply to your posts.

@ the OP, apologies for this going off topic. Read into the above what you will. I base all my posts on my personal experiences modifying my car and doing lots of trackdays. This car when modified well, irrelevant of everything Jabo(who id like to add hasnt tried anything like this on his car) , is an absolute treat. Theres a big aftermarket scene for this platform.

[XK140]

Back to answering the original question.

In view of the issues with the twin charger engine I would say the last thing I would want to do would be to try and extract more power.

Apart from warranty invalidation it goes against common sense when it already has a very high output relative to it's size,which implies there is little safety margin left.

There are many other cars where you can get a 25% power increase with relative safety,e.g Focus St,Octy tfsi...and others.

But when you do this your mpg will drop accordingly,so you get back to the situation you,re in now with your existing car.

Sadly you may need to go Diesel...I'm assuming something like a BMW 330d or Merc 320cdi can be both fast and economical,but these will be quite old for Fabia vRS money.

There are never any easy answers to this question.

[vRSy]

@ the OP

A facelift Mk2 Octavia vRS with the later 2.0TSI engine will o 40mpg + on the motorway, with reasonable tax of abou just over half the price of the MPS and with the downpipe and remap our looking at 280Hp but with a really wide power band and shed loads of torque. Add a K04 turbo from the S3 and power wil fly upto 370-380hp. Add to that the better interior and more acomplished chassis id say its a better option than the Fabia vRS.

[Jabozuma]

Sy, that's OK mate. I'd be annoyed as well having spent ££££ on mods when somebody told me that they were pointless and would actually increase my braking distance . The only good thing your brake conversion did was to reduce unsprung mass and would work with better rubber. You know what's funny? I do not claim anything at all here, merely quoting authorities in the field instead of doing "baaa, baaa" and subscribing to a a philosophy like "millions of flies cannot be wrong so tuck in!". It is similar to when people install "performance intake systems" where the only effect on the performance is to lower it lol.

[Jabozuma]

I also do not think it needs any modifications unless you want this car to do 1/4 mile meets or track it on regular basis. Start modding it and you will increase your insurance markedly, void warranty and risk eating into safety margins to the point of destruction. Then bills mount up.

Also, have you had a chance to test drive it WITHOUT a dealer sitting next you yet?