Hi all .

I'm going to be buying a VRS 06-08 plate within the next two weeks.

At the moment I have a MK1 VRS, and it's been so reliable and has just passed its MOT with no advisories and the mileage is near on 150,000!

The question is , petrol or diesel?

I travel 40 miles each way to work on the motorway , and the 1.8t averages an amazing 40mpg.

How does the MK2 VRS compare? What about the diesel? What sort of mileage should I expect out of the petrol and diesel? I've seen some diesels being sold on near on 160,000!

How do they compare performance wise? As I know the diesel is fairly quick...

Anything to look out for?

Thanks everyone.

Only reason people buy a diesel is they cant afford to run the petrol they really want.

Only reason people buy a diesel is they cant afford to run the petrol they really want.

If the petrol matches the mk1 VRS it's more than affordable for me.

Do you know the average MPG on the petrol?

The petrol is the better car,Fun factor and no heavy iron block up front affecting  the handling  but if I was doing 40 miles a day on the motorway each day I would get the diesel, a few have had injector problems and as as you do high mileage your dpf will regenerate no problem

 

 

My vrs did 33 on a run and about 25 around town, so less than a m1, I had one of those also , but mine had 333 lb ft of torque and 245 bhp

Are petrol cars really that much more to run in the grand scheme of things?

Are petrol cars really that much more to run in the grand scheme of things?

 

Only on galactic mileage. 

How fast a car is depends on BHP, Carroll Shelby got it wrong.

The petrol version has 200BHP (or PS but close enough) and the diesel has 170BHP.

Because the petrol can rev higher it needs less torque to develop more power and is quicker.

The diesel is obviously more economical and for this reason costs more to buy.

I went for the petrol because I was fed up with having a super high torque diesel that felt very quick but actually wasn't any quicker than petrols with far less torque but the same bhp power output.

crazy pricing of fuel puts people off, but I would never have a tractor, I mean die--sel

Hi all .

I'm going to be buying a VRS 06-08 plate within the next two weeks.

At the moment I have a MK1 VRS, and it's been so reliable and has just passed its MOT with no advisories and the mileage is near on 150,000!

The question is , petrol or diesel?

I travel 40 miles each way to work on the motorway , and the 1.8t averages an amazing 40mpg.

How does the MK2 VRS compare? What about the diesel? What sort of mileage should I expect out of the petrol and diesel? I've seen some diesels being sold on near on 160,000!

How do they compare performance wise? As I know the diesel is fairly quick...

Anything to look out for?

Thanks everyone.

 

In your shoes, I would prob be wanting to keep the Mk1! 

In your shoes, I would prob be wanting to keep the Mk1! 

and thats from a diesel driver!    see you Sunday Fubar

My mk1 was a far better car than my mk2 tbh mate

In your shoes, I would prob be wanting to keep the Mk1!

Really?

Are the MK2's that bad?? I thought it'd be a nice upgrade

I have had both, the m1 is more owned by enthusiasts and the m2 more of a reps car,( diesels fault,) if you find a cared for one , like mine was , you wont go wrong

I was in the same situation when I bought mine whether to go for diesel as my previous few cars had been diesel. I do about 20k miles per annum (did 24k last year) but ended up buying a petrol - facelift tsi engine. Was cheaper to buy second hand than the same spec diesel ( I know diesel will hold its value slighlty better when I come to resell it) , road tax isn't that much more for the petrol, diesel fuel costs more than petrol, potential dpf and/or dmf issues with diesel if your planning on keeping it long term which I am. On motorway run mine will average 40mpg easily (its remapped as well). Petrol is far more fun to drive which was the biggest deciding factor.

I switched my MK1 vRS for the MK2 TFSI vRS, the MK2 gives better MPG on the motorway than the MK1. But has it's share of common faults, more than the MK1 id say.

Edited 21 July, 201312 yr by 07 vRS Taxi

Really?

Are the MK2's that bad?? I thought it'd be a nice upgrade

Seems to be from all I have seen on here over the years (not having owned a Mk1 Octy personally) that the Mk1 had better build quality. But I am terrible for wanting an upgrade. I still wish I had of kept my Mk1 Fabia VRS! But if what you have you like and its been bullet proof for you, would be a richer man to stick with it ultimately. 

 

With regards to the diesel option, if yout hitting a motorway fairly quickly in your commute in winter it does take A LOT longer for it to warm up and MPG will be a good bit lower for 25%-35% of your journey each way. No idea how the petrol is but I would think with the inferior highly flammable engine being so much less thermally efficent it heats up a lot quicker.  :sun:

and thats from a diesel driver!    see you Sunday Fubar

 

pfffft only the car is diesel smart hole! The bike makes any car seem crap! 

Even mine?. I had some exotic bikes including a bimota , but the R36 is as fast in a staight line with armchair luxury

If it helps, I have just come from a series of nice diesel cars all 170bhp or more (530D GT, Audi Q5 2.0d, 320d) and they all made more sense and were better on fuel, and were capable, sensible, nice cars.  I just bought a 10 plate VRS petrol DSG and haven't stopped grinning since I got it.  Go for the petrol!

It seems like every VAG you buy has common faults these days. They're quite a way off Japanese stuff for reliability now.

 

Saying about diesel / petrol again, a little anecdote:

 

My old Ibiza Cupra TDI had the old 1.9 8v TDI PD engine. 160 PS from the factory, highest output 1.9 PD in the whole VAG range in a 9N chassis.. it was a hoot

 

Anyway, I had it mapped to 200 BHP and 300 lb. ft. The shove was fantastic, and it hit max power at 4500 RPM.

 

The original Civic Type-R only had 150 lb. ft., so half of the 'shove' of my engine. But because it could rev to 9000 RPM it could still get 200 BHP.

 

The 2 cars were pretty much identical on a quarter drag.

"Original" Civic Type R only had 185ps.  

I have a stage 1 vRS TFSi with cat back and intake. Against a diesel 0-60 there won't be much in it- due to not being able to use full throttle in first until about 20 mph.

However, once rolling the petrol engine picks up speed very quickly.

If you bought a diesel and mapped it the difference in real day performance wouldn't be massively noticeable.

However, the petrol vRS does sound much nicer and is a bit more fun on the open backroads.

Mine averages around 30 mpg over 8 miles of mixed driving daily. On a recent run to Swansea it achieved 43.4 mpg which I was happy with.

You guys are really making me want to go for the petrol. It's cheaper too

I can cane a quarter of a tank of petrol in my TFSI in not much time at all.

If you plod they are okay,if you don't they are quite thirsty when provoked.

"Original" Civic Type R only had 185ps.

None of them have had 200hp. Ep3 was 197 fn2 was 198 earlier ones were less, the jdm ones had more but still not 200hp.

Having had a 1.8T for 4 years and recently swapped to a 2.0CR I can hand on heart say I do not miss the 1.8T one bit and I'm getting just under double the mpg and I haven't even had it remaped yet.

If your doing that many miles I'd be going for the diesel, but that's just my opinion there's plenty of opinions on here to weigh up.

Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2