the cr Octavia VRS or the pd version? also at what reg did they swap from one to the other?

Little difference between the two when remapped.

It was around the 58 reg but there were still some PDs coming through even after the CRs came out.

PD = punchier torque but rougher / noiser

CR = more linear power, smoother, quieter & more refined.

Both good fun when mapped, PD may 'feel' a little quicker due to power delivery but there the same really

Plus PD with DPF can be a little troublesome :-(

What about figures? Can you just get the same out of both even though the pd has more to start with?

I'd have to say Common Rail all the way. I love the PD engines but mixed with a DPF they are a recipe for disaster. I had an oportunity to buy a spec'd 08 Leon FR DSG with 15k miles on clock for a bargain price recently but after hearing all the horror stories of DPF problems and injector failures i steered well clear.....shame as it was a lovely car for the money.

The power delivery on the CR is completely different and what goes against the grain of a traditional diesel is that you have to 4k RPM it in every gear to see the benefit of the 170 horses, they arent so great at swift short-shift progress as the PDs.

In reality a PD engine in standard form produces the same output as a common rail version; the higher fuel rail pressures on the PD cars make them noisier but help provide the strong low end go they are renouned for and the CR counters its lower rail pressure by being way less noisy and having the ability to control the fuel injection cycles 100%. This is why CR engines work well generally with DPFs.

Both cars can remap to approx 210-215hp with 310+ lb/ft torque and id have thought with an extra 40hp and 50lb/ft there is quite a difference between standard and remapped. CR cars have little or no problems with DPFs so long as they are taken on the occasional longer run.

With a CR you could use a DTUK tuning box, gives the same sort of results as a remap but leaves no evidence when removed. A remapped car will probably want to smoke a bit more, in the case of a PD car this probably would end up killing the DPF but on a CR it will probably just regen a bit more frequently; maybe with the occasional warning light forced regen.

I'm sorry any mapping of the car will leave evidence. even a DTUK box despite what they say

I'm sorry any mapping of the car will leave evidence. even a DTUK box despite what they say

No physical evidence with a tuning box. Sure if a dealer went to the trouble of checking boost and fuel rail logs they may notice some difference but how would they prove it as if everything removed no hardware changes and software still standard; a remap way more obvious and certainly with the newer cars a mastic sealed ECU would be a massive tell tale sign

I'm sorry i disagree a tuning box will also be detectable, end of the day it doesnt matter to me aslong as the owner is happy.

210-215bhp is ambitious from either. 205bhp is roughly what you'll get from a decent map. You'd still struggle to stick with a standard tsi/tfsi through the gears though; that's based on personal experience.

what we takin from a remapped petrol vrs then?

240 should be doable from the tsi with a stage 1

what we talkin ecomomy then? low 30s?

mid to late 30s general use. over 40 on a fair run

mid to late 30s general use. over 40 on a fair run

The TFSi/TSi's are reasonably economical if you drive them like Miss Daisy, use your right foot plenty and you see as low as low 20's. I had a MK5 GTi Golf for a little while a few years ago and frankly as fun as it was its fuel economy/performance ratio was horrendous. Admittedly I drove it pretty hard whilst I had it but it was a struggle to get 30mpg out of it and almost always needed filling up before 300 miles were up.

The petrols are quicker and more fun than the diesels but i think its fair you know what youre getting into running cost wise. I had a Fabia vRS estate until recently and one of the key reasons I sold it was that it was getting nothing like the official fuel economy figures; in fact it wasnt much more frugal than the Golf.....though in fairness to it it was probably every bit as fast too.

A remapped CR diesel will be roughly as quick as a standard TSi in real world conditions (certainly at motorway speeds where its significant torque advantage would probably give it an edge) but will still easily average mid/late 30's when really tooled around, 40-50mpg range more likely. I managed 52.1mpg on a 40ish mile cross country run last weekend in my standard 170 CR estate and it doesnt even have 4k on the clock yet; thought that was damn impressive given its a 140mph car.

Edited 11 May, 201313 yr by pipsyp

mid to late 30s general use. over 40 on a fair run

I've never seen more than 33mpg out of mine in 38000 miles, typical average on a tank is 27 - 30 mpg. This is on a mix of roads with a fair bit of urban driving, I'd agree with pipsyp on what to expect.

I'd have thought that a remapped cr would be close to a standard petrol tfsi/tsi, although presented differently as the power outputs are roughly the same. A remapped TFSI is another step up in performance, and would be noticeably stronger than either. Fuel economy on my TFSI actually improved after its remap, and I didn't drive it like miss daisy.

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2

Should also add that I regularly see 35+ mpg from my std TSI, over 40 if cruise is set to 70 on a motorway run.

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2

I'd have to say Common Rail all the way. I love the PD engines but mixed with a DPF they are a recipe for disaster. I had an oportunity to buy a spec'd 08 Leon FR DSG with 15k miles on clock for a bargain price recently but after hearing all the horror stories of DPF problems and injector failures i steered well clear.....shame as it was a lovely car for the money.

The power delivery on the CR is completely different and what goes against the grain of a traditional diesel is that you have to 4k RPM it in every gear to see the benefit of the 170 horses, they arent so great at swift short-shift progress as the PDs.

In reality a PD engine in standard form produces the same output as a common rail version; the higher fuel rail pressures on the PD cars make them noisier but help provide the strong low end go they are renouned for and the CR counters its lower rail pressure by being way less noisy and having the ability to control the fuel injection cycles 100%. This is why CR engines work well generally with DPFs.

Both cars can remap to approx 210-215hp with 310+ lb/ft torque and id have thought with an extra 40hp and 50lb/ft there is quite a difference between standard and remapped. CR cars have little or no problems with DPFs so long as they are taken on the occasional longer run.

With a CR you could use a DTUK tuning box, gives the same sort of results as a remap but leaves no evidence when removed. A remapped car will probably want to smoke a bit more, in the case of a PD car this probably would end up killing the DPF but on a CR it will probably just regen a bit more frequently; maybe with the occasional warning light forced regen.

I had a pd version vrs remapped and the dpf clogged up constantly. Had to have it removed by shark and mapped again. I would never map a PD without removing the dpf at the same time. You might get away with it on a cr but the car runs so much better with dpf removed I would remove it anyway

I had a pd version vrs remapped and the dpf clogged up constantly. Had to have it removed by shark and mapped again. I would never map a PD without removing the dpf at the same time. You might get away with it on a cr but the car runs so much better with dpf removed I would remove it anyway

On the other hand, I ran a Tunit on my 170 PD for a number of years without any DPF issues whatsoever! DTUK don't do the equivalent, but if anyone wants a Tunit before I try ebay...

My combined figure for my TSi is below - the best tank so far I have got out of it was 37.7 on a long run. I don't think that a combined tracked MPG of 35 MPG is too bad as a combined figure on a 200+ BHP Petrol.

Not as good as my previous 8P 2.0 PD 140 (mapped) but more refined and nice to have a good rev range again.

Helps that I'm down to about 8.5K miles pa now.

My PD140 suffered with blocked vanes and had started to develop a thirst for coolant (so possibly was developing BKD porous head syndrome as there were no visible signs of coolant leaks), so I decided with my lower mileage to swap back to petrol.

My old ('07 TFSI manual, stage 1 remap from AMD) vRS averaged 35.1 over the 21 months I had it, SWMBO's '11 plate vRS TSi DSG has averaged 33.4so far, but she has a more enthusiastic approach to driving .......

We are both retired so heavy traffic commuting is a thing of the past for us, & we very rarely do v. short trips, but both cars are used for shopping, & vacations as & when we feel we need to be somewhere else!

As for running costs, we don't really care if diesels would be a bit cheaper to run, we don't do enough mileage to justify saving the extra few hundred pounds per year we spend, & both prefer the driving character of modern direct injection petrol engines to diesels. (Lot's of low-down torque, free-revving, useful grunt from app 1200 rpm to 6K+& freedom to choose when to shift up or down.)

I appreciate that for those of you who are commuting & have other family/financial commitments, running costs (& BIK, what ever that is....) are more important to you, but we are in the last few years of our lives & we'd rather enjoy what's left whilst we still can.

Driving is still a pleasure we can both enjoy so we are happy to scoot around in vehicles that might be judged in appropriate for senior citizens even though we know that our vehicle choices have not met with universal approval !

It's OT here, but I do enjoy both my big petrol-engine cars & since I'm likely to die before I run-out of spending cash I don't see a diesel in my life anytime soon.

To get back on topic, IOVHO re-mapped petrol-engine Octy vRS's are quite economical in daily use, have a surprising turn of speed when called for, but are extremely docile in heavy traffic &/or slow & crowded roads.

Much nicer than the Toyota GT86 auto that I drove over the weekend, nice handling but a gutless & torque-less wonder.... (200 PS @7000 RPM, 205 NM@6400-6600 RPM....... Got shut-down by an old Galaxy at traffic lights & couldn't catch it before hitting a camera controlled 50 mph speed limit!)

DC