If I swap my Fabia for an Octavia with a budget of £7000 which would be best for me? I am an old guy, do around 6k per year and I fancy another Auto as I had BMW's and Merc Autos previously. My research seems to point towards the 2.0 Tdi PD DSG as I assume the 1.6Fsi would be a little under powered? I have owned a Fabia 1.9 Tdi PD in the past and whilst a great engine it was a bit noisy hence my leaning towards the 2.0 Tdi. Any help with which model, pitfalls, what to look out for would be appreciated.

Drive both, see which you like best. Your car, your money etc.

Suggest you may be advised to avoid DPF with that sort of mileage.

I would buy one of the older 1.9 diesels.

Good luck

Suggest you may be advised to avoid DPF with that sort of mileage.

I would buy one of the older 1.9 diesels.

Good luck

Cheers mate, I take it then all the 2.0L TDI have the dreaded DPF. I do like the look of the performance of that engine. Being a mechanical numpty, what sort of mileage would I need to be doing and is there any sort of extra maintenance that would kind of look after the DPF if I only do low miles?.

You need to be doing around 15k at least I reckon. The newer CR definitely has the DPF but some on here will say that they've done a lot less per year and not had any trouble. The car needs a good blast regularly if you're going to get one but only do low miles. My business mileage has halved over the last 12 months so I factor in a good hard drive fairly regularly to get it up to temperature and clear out the soot.

You need to be doing around 15k at least I reckon. The newer CR definitely has the DPF but some on here will say that they've done a lot less per year and not had any trouble. The car needs a good blast regularly if you're going to get one but only do low miles. My business mileage has halved over the last 12 months so I factor in a good hard drive fairly regularly to get it up to temperature and clear out the soot.

Cheers Paul, as a result of being told about the DPF I have googled it so now I see what you mean. I wouldn't mind giving it a run once a week or indeed spending a few bob to have the thing cleaned but I sure as hell don't want the situation where it needs replacing or causes other damage. Further pondering required it appears.

My 2008 2.0TDI doesn't have a DPF as standard, They seem to be on later models.

A DPF just needs a good run to get it hot and a bit of whelly to clear it out. 30 to 70 mph in 3rd usually does the trick.

No DPF issues with the 1.9, and you also have the bonus of a far more reliable turbo. The 1.9 engine is known to be bomb proof, and would be a far better choice for lower mileage use.

Dual mass flywheels are a weak point on both 1.9 and 2.0 manuals, with plenty of failures reported on here for both engines, but the 1.9 is SMF convertable with fantastic results -- both mine have had SMF conversions and they are really great. The 2.0 is not accepted to like the SMF conversion, and a failure will cost you another DMF.

If you really want the extra power of the 2.0, how about a 1.9 and a remap? That would bring from its standard 105hp to be in line with a standard 2.0 (135-140hp), but the downside of this option is that on the 1.9 you only get a 5 speed manual gearbox, not a 6 speed as in the 2.0.

DSG automatics available in both 1.9 and 2.0 engines.

Mike

Thanks Mike, Yes a 1.9 would not be out of the question, I just wondered if it would feel a bit dated but I did have one in a Fabia and it was a fantastic engine but could sound a bit gruff. I plan to try one mated to a DSG and see how I get on. I'm not worried about a re-map as I am getting on a bit and drive rather more sedately these days. My reasons for wanting the 2.0l were solely that it was a more up to date version and I thought it might be a bit smoother. Certainly, as you say the 1.9 Tdi PD has less issues for me to worry about.

My 2008 2.0TDI doesn't have a DPF as standard, They seem to be on later models.

A DPF just needs a good run to get it hot and a bit of whelly to clear it out. 30 to 70 mph in 3rd usually does the trick.

A 2L without a DPF?? well that does put the cat among the pigeons, I'll investigate further.

My engine code is BKD. Silver or someone will be along to say if all the BKD 2.0TDI have no DPF.

The PD has a lot of low down shove.

5 years ago I had extended test drives in a 1.9 and 2.0.

As you know, I bought the 2.0 brand new. Now at 79k miles, my Indy says that there is another easy 100k in it.

MPG is tracked as below, less than a 1.9 but for the size of the octy and power, pretty good. I have 6 cog manual.

Edited 27 April, 201313 yr by Web Ferret

At 6k a year, I would be looking at a petrol. Cheaper to buy. Auto express did an article recently and 80% of cars tested worked out cheaper in the petrol variant over 3 years.

Drive some and buy with your heart. You have to live with it.

My engine code is BKD. Silver or someone will be along to say if all the BKD 2.0TDI have no DPF.

Yes you're correct, the 2.0 BKD engine was never fitted with a DPF and was available from 2004 to 2010 in the Octavia.

At 6k a year, I would be looking at a petrol. Cheaper to buy. Auto express did an article recently and 80% of cars tested worked out cheaper in the petrol variant over 3 years.

Buying new, I'd agree. But buying used, the sums are very different.

As for what engine to go for.......firstly the only PD engines with DPF's are vRS models and 2.0TDI scout models (and possibly 2.0 4x4 models). Standard PD140 2.0TDI or any 1.9 engine does not have a DPF.

The 2.0 is a bit more refined than the 1.9 and produces noticeably more power. Usually I'd also go on to say that the 1.9 is significantly more economical than the 2.0. However as you are considering DSG versions this does not really apply. The 2.0TDI DSG has a book combined figure of 47 mpg. The 1.9TDI DSG a book combined figure of 48 mpg.....hardly any difference at all.

If you are really not bothered about power, then I'd recommend a 1.9TDI. It's mechanically simpler than the 2.0TDI, and has a very good reputation. I test drove a 1.9TDI a while back with a DSG, and in normal driving it didn't feel any less powerful than the 2.0TDI.....only when you applied full power was there a (fairly noticeable) difference between the two.

The 1.9 is less refined than the 2.0, but in the Octavia the difference is not that noticeable as the Octavia platform has fairly good sound/vibration insulation......unlike the Fabia......which is frankly horrendous in this department. You'll be surprised how much more refined a 1.9 Octavia is compared to a 1.9 Fabia.

Be a 2.0 PD DSG for me all the way.

Evidence would suggest the 1.9's are a bit more reliable but having driven both the performance of the 2.0 140 engine is considerably better with little in the way of increased running costs.

Dont worry about DPFs as only the Scout, 4x4 and vRS PD versions were ever fitted with a DPF. Reason they arent the best idea in a PD is that the injection system was never designed to take account of proper operation of a DPF; VAG in essense retrofitted the technology to the PD engines in order ro reduce emissions and save them from having to go CR........in the end they admitted defeat.

You might be able to find an early CR facelift car in budget if you were willing to buy from an auction. Just an idea.

Edited 28 April, 201313 yr by pipsyp

No contest...

Octavia 1.8 TSI

160 horses, and 40 MPG

What he said above!

At 6k a year, +1 for the 1.8TSI, except from my experience I'd say 35 mpg rather than 40.

No contest...

Octavia 1.8 TSI

160 horses, and 40 MPG

He wants a DSG. I think a decent 1.8TSI DSG is going to be above his budget.

Besides......although the 1.8tsi is a great engine, the same cannot be said about the 7 speed dry clutch DSG fitted to the 1.8's. It seems prone to problems.......especially so when mated to the 1.8tsi. (The diesel engines all have more reliable 6 speed wet clutch DSG)

Edited 28 April, 201313 yr by booke23

Cheers guys, Hadn't really considered a Tsi as I thought they might be out of my budget but a quick scout on Auto Trader shows there are some out there that might suit. I'm in no rush and it may even be a few months before I take the plunge but I have looked at Audi and VW alternatives and the Skoda looks far and away the better buy. I am on my 2nd Fabia and far from the badge being a problem, I actually feel proud to drive such a quality brand. It's so helpful to get all the feedback and I now know I have the option of the two diesels or the 1.8Tsi. I will definitely come back with details of my purchase once completed.

Test driving each option would probably help you decide. For instance the 2.0 140 will no doubt be more expensive to buy and probably run too and if you don't need the extra power you could then end up with a newer/higher spec/lower milage 1.9 for the same money?

Just a thought.....

Well thats what I did... despite many think on here the 1.8 TSI is a remarkable performer and as it is a "Petrol" a veritable bargain

Car Giant get the odd one for sale the last one was a 57 Elegance with 80K for £4700!!!

they currently have a few 1.8 Tsi superbs in

IMHO I would not have a DSG car out of warranty, seems more trouble than its worth, although they are great to drive

test drive a TSI and I bet you end up buying one!

Its good to get the feedback and the inevitable "be wary" comments. After reading all the posts I'm not phased by any of the comments to be honest and am thinking that because I am in no hurry (for personal reasons August is about the time I'll buy) I will just keep looking for the best car that comes up and it could be any of the 3 models mentioned above.

I hear the comments about DSG but to be fair I don't see a string of DSG failures appearing and there are quite a lot approaching 200K and still going strong. Many years ago I had a Merc 190E 2.6 Auto and those gearboxes were delicate. I just changed the oil a couple of times and it was still sweet when I sold it at 126K. Then I had a BMW tiptronic and was warned by a few that if the box failed it would cost thousands. Again with proper service I managed 120K and still sweet.

I think the fear for many is the horrendous cost if the box does fail and they baulk at the prospect. At that I would say, if one really wants an automatic it is essential to buy a car with a sound history and like any other part, it's a risk from then on. Of course those who prefer a manual will never be converted.

If I have a concern about DSG it's more about the 'delay' that can occur at junctions. I once had a Nissan Primera CVT that was really bad at junctions and I couldn't get rid fast enough. So lengthy test driving will be required.

DSG is in a different league to CVT. I'm sure you won't be disappointed

You soon adapt to the delay, I used to leave enough room for a couple of creeps at roundabouts, so you could lift off the brake if it looked like there would be a gap and then go for it is it happened.

The BKD and DSG is a good combo, the thing to watch with a BKD is sticky vane syndrome with the turbo (see Mr Muscle thread for how this can be resolved) and porous head syndrome (if you search the net you can find out the various revisions there were, how to identify which head is fitted and the relative risks about it developing the issue).

Make sure that the DSG has had the required extra service carried out which is due every 4 years (may no longer be by time but by just mileage check with Skoda UK customer services) or 40K, this is an extra service beyond any normal 40K service on the engine, so check it has been carried out, personally I'd want to see the invoice to confirm it was carried out by whom and that the oil and filter were changed.

All the best with your search.

Paul

At 6k a year, +1 for the 1.8TSI, except from my experience I'd say 35 mpg rather than 40.

Id go for the 1.8TSI without hesitation.

When taking it easy they'll return exceptional mpg figures from experience.