Like I said, do the sums, drive them both, decide.

They're both fine choices, the petrol is lovely, so is the diesel, but they no doubt appeal for different reasons.

The DPF 'problem' is massively overplayed by (for some reason) fans of the petrol. Quite why they feel the need to be so evangelical about the petrol and try to 'convert' would be diesel drivers, I have no idea.

I've been a member of Briskoda for a wee while now and have not noticed loads of threads about DPF failures/problems.

 

Considering forums are where you find out real problems experienced day to day by owners/enthusiasts I would say that this is a good indication of a low level of DPF issues.

 

Will now go elsewhere incase someone points out hundreds of DPF threads I have not picked up on...

you really do need to try both to see which fits your needs. The diesel WILL be cheaper to run AND it'll be worth more at trade in. The petrol IS undeniably quicker and compared to the mkII running costs WILL be less. You've not said what type of journeys you'll be doing. If your doing loads of short stop start trips the petrol makes more sense as you'd avoid any possible DPF issues. If not you might find the oiler will surprise you and do most of the things you want most of the time in the real world, the decison is then do you want the more expensive to run petrol. Ultimately buy the one that ticks the most boxes for you.

One of the most useful things about VAG cars overall I guess is the fact that the shared engines appear in such huge volume sales that any problems relatively quickly spread across internet forums such as this.

 

From what I can tell, the 2.0 CR in both 140 and 170 seems to be pretty free of DPF issues regardless of how its driven, aside from the faulty exhaust sensor causing problems until swapped for the newer variant.

 

I guess the newer 180ps CR is untested but one would guess its a continuation on a theme.

Something else to consider (and I am not saying this to upset petrol VRS colleagues) - friend recently traded in a Mark II petrol VRS with loads of lovely factory extras and the message from dealers was loud and clear "large petrol engined cars are not desirable" - therefore priced accordingly.

When you are looking to buy a petrol VRS dealers tell you that there is a long waiting list and in great demand - come tradein time there will be a sharp intake of breath before an insulting offer!

Yep, picked up one such 2011 petrol VRS with lots of extras for mere peanuts. I love it! Expecting to keep it until it blows up.

I recently drove a Superb 1.6 manual oiler and once out of first gear I was surprised at just how nimble the engine was, even in car of such proportions.

Driving that Superb was what convinced me that in going for the diesel vRS DSG, I had nothing to be worried.

Plus I will also reap the benefits of better residuals, economy, VED and insurance.

For me, the switch to diesel was the right choice, but you have to make your own mind up.

WE went for a petrol. My wife will be doing 8-10k in it per year and using a web based calculator I estimated it would take 8 years to break even with a diesel

The general consensus of opinion is that around 20 k miles per year is when diesel power becomes viable!

 

Aaaaarrrgggghhhhhh!

 

This response is trotted out so often on forums that it would be laughable if it wasn't such obvious and blatant nonsense.

 

Compared to a petrol car, a diesel car will save you money in fuel every mile you drive.  That's every mile you drive, for as long as you own the car.

 

You pay the premium to buy the diesel car only once. (You usually get a large proportion of this premium back when you sell it too but for simplicity lets ignore that fact).

 

So in the case of the mkIII vRS, the diesel is £270 more expensive going on basic list prices.

 

If you do the sums based on manufacturers combined fuel economy figures and the petrol prices I can see at the shell garage across the road, it works out that the petrol will cost 13.3p per mile in fuel, the diesel 10.2p per mile.

 

So at a saving of about 3p per mile, you need to do just short of 9k miles to break even on the higher cost to purchase the diesel.

 

Even if you only do 3k a year, as long as you keep the car long enough to do 9k miles in total then the diesel is cheaper.

 

Not sure why this is a difficult concept for people to grasp

 

 

 

Like I said, do the sums, drive them both, decide.

They're both fine choices, the petrol is lovely, so is the diesel, but they no doubt appeal for different reasons.

The DPF 'problem' is massively overplayed by (for some reason) fans of the petrol. Quite why they feel the need to be so evangelical about the petrol and try to 'convert' would be diesel drivers, I have no idea.

 

This is the best post on this thread.

 

After years of diesel cars I've recently bought a Mini Cooper S and realised that petrol is more involving to drive, but it also comes with it's drawbacks (like 28mpg thirst in a tiny car!  ).

 

Only the individual can decide what is best for them, the diesel will undoubtedly be the better financial choice but how big a part this plays in the final decision is down to the individual.

If it all came down to finances none of us would be buying vRSs- a Dacia Sandero would do

It's a balancing act and the tipping point is set by the individual.

 

And DPFs- as has been said, does not seem to be a problem on new CR engined VAG cars.

WE went for a petrol. My wife will be doing 8-10k in it per year and using a web based calculator I estimated it would take 8 years to break even with a diesel

Hmmm, those figures sound a little off.

 

That would make the diesel about £2k more expensive?

 

It's the right way to go about things though, work out what suits your circumstances and go with it

WE went for a petrol. My wife will be doing 8-10k in it per year and using a web based calculator I estimated it would take 8 years to break even with a diesel

Would love to see your figures.

I'm in the same position as the OP, but I'll be financing my my VRS on the 0% PCP. The stronger residuals of the diesel mean they actually cost less per month, but with a bigger lump to buy outright at the end.

One point not consider on the thread so far is maintenance. Aren't diesels more expensive? I trust the new TSi unit has a cam chain like the mk2 fl? Therefore no £400 cambelt change every 4 years like the diesel. As I see it this offsets the difference paid in road tax each year.

I'm leaning towards a petrol estate at the moment, as the Gfv is better than the petrol hatch and close to the diesel models, so reasonable finance costs, more fun to drive, no potential dpf issues

Yeah. Those figures are well off. It's a few thousand to break even as the RRP difference is so small between the two engine types.

Here's a quick and dirty spreadsheet, it's on Google Docs right now and I haven't allowed editing, but feel free to download and use in your own spreadsheet app. Note, there may be errors, I've tried to guess likely MPG based on experience of owning 2 diesel vRS and I got the figures from the petrol from spirit.de.

But we don't know enough about the new cars for likely mpg yet, modify the spreadsheet for your own guestimate figures. Just change the figures in red (for annual mileage and whatever you pay for fuel).

 

Whatever, you might be surprised how low in mileage terms the break even point is. I haven't included GMFV in the equation, those figures are available on another thread, but nonetheless if I had included them it would make the pricing tip even more in favour of the diesel.

 

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AuDIXnRxWUbPdFhzMzhBVDhzb0t5VngzbDVrZmxfMHc&usp=sharing

This is only my opinion (hey everyone has one ) but having driven my brothers vRS Diesel DSG I have to say that I've come to the conclusion that it's all about how you drive it. If you are not careful it's very easy to get that thing down to about 35ish MPG (indicated) driving it like a loon, conversely if you drive carefully it'll do 60MPG (indicated) and easily outdo the petrol.

 

One thing you should bear in mind is your driving style, if you are only doing mainly town driving you will need to watch for DPF issues as it might not regenerate at slower speeds. That said the PDF from Skoda http://www.skoda.co.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Brochures/19246_Skoda_DPF_Leaflet_v7.pdf reckons that you only need to be doing 23mph for 10-15 minutes continuously for the DPF to regenerate. That's pretty easy for me for example because I use my car on the motorway at least once a week, but if you only do a few miles a day (shops and back etc) it might never get that kind of use, you could end up with a blocked DPF and then it's dealer dollar time.

 

Sorry if I'm repeating anything! 

Thank you everyone! The petrol vs diesel debate is obviously never going to end any time soon, but one thing that has been made overwhelmingly clear is that it is a pretty evenly weighted argument

 

The man I'm talking to at Skoda has told me that there are no diesel manual vRS(ses?) available as demo cars at the moment, but he can arrange a try out in the previous generation version. Obviously I'm going to test the petrol manual too, and I'll think my way from there.

 

Not normally a forum user anywhere, but this has been a great experience and has really helped further my knowledge - thanks again!

Thank you everyone! The petrol vs diesel debate is obviously never going to end any time soon, but one thing that has been made overwhelmingly clear is that it is a pretty evenly weighted argument

 

The man I'm talking to at Skoda has told me that there are no diesel manual vRS(ses?) available as demo cars at the moment, but he can arrange a try out in the previous generation version. Obviously I'm going to test the petrol manual too, and I'll think my way from there.

 

Not normally a forum user anywhere, but this has been a great experience and has really helped further my knowledge - thanks again!

I would personally say you should definatley try and drive the new manual. The chasis is (I believe) quite different (based on MBQ) and with XDS you will want to feel what that feels like in corners. Depending on where you are in the world I know that Aldershot have a manual estate version - don't panic though, the estate is exactly the same dimensions as the hatchback! It does "feel" a bit bigger though, but it turns out it must be in my head!

If it was me I'd go for the petrol.

I've currently got the CR and its a great engine but at 4 years old this December so far it's only got 27k on it.

If I replace it for the mk3 then it will be for a petrol. As I only do 3-4k a year in it now.

The citigo takes up all but long distance driving now.

The common theme seems to be the consideration of the importance of the finances. If like me you want a fast car at a relatively low price, then the petrol vrs is a cheaper alternative to bigger capacity 6 cyl engines from BMW, alfa et al. If your perspective of the cost of motoring is a little more prudent (and some may argue sensible!) then the whole diesel debate is valid. For most people who are prepared to pay more then petrol engines tend to be more fun than diesel. There is no right or wrong mileage, right or wrong mpg is purely down to your lifestyle choice, and if you want to minimise expenditure on motoring then a performance petrol engine makes little sense.

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2

if you want to minimise expenditure on motoring then a performance petrol engine makes little sense.

Sent from my GT-I9305 using Tapatalk 2

Amen. Save money and trips to the pump with the diesel. Have fun and burn cash with the petrol. If you're always keeping and eye on the mpg and tank range and will do all you can to improve these stats then you'll probably want the diesel.

Just thinking about trading the wifes Fabia VRS in for a Octy VRS.

 

I already own a CR VRS & it's a great car & the engine is fantastic...I get about 48mpg average & I don't hang about.

For me the main gripe I have with the CR VRS is that the handling is a bit 'bargey'..you have to drive ahead of yourself to get the 'turn in' timed right...I hope this makes sense.

For this reason...and the fact that the wife tends to do shorter trips & we've already got a CR for longer trips..I'm leaning towards a petrol VRS.

Just thinking about trading the wifes Fabia VRS in for a Octy VRS.

 

I already own a CR VRS & it's a great car & the engine is fantastic...I get about 48mpg average & I don't hang about.

For me the main gripe I have with the CR VRS is that the handling is a bit 'bargey'..you have to drive ahead of yourself to get the 'turn in' timed right...I hope this makes sense.

For this reason...and the fact that the wife tends to do shorter trips & we've already got a CR for longer trips..I'm leaning towards a petrol VRS.

 

The petrol rolls around like a trawler in a force 9, so why not uprate bits of the CR's suspension - would be a hell of a lot cheaper!

Both cars have their merits. Seems when these kind of threads are started they tend to become a petrols better than diesel argument.

Its no surprise to anyone that the TSI is quicker than the TDI, also its on the whole more fun to punt around. Doesnt really drive or handle any better of course but the revvy nature of its drivechain married up with turbocharged power delivery means that it does probably better meet the "warm hatch" agenda VAG set out to achieve with the vRS. It is however quite expensive to run for a 197hp 2.0 turbo car, its fuel economy is nothing to shout about and its not the cleanest thing on the road so road tax isnt what you'd call cheap. Also they depreciate v badly.

The TDI by comparison is a reasonably quick car but as with most diesels it has a strong mid range thats there one second and gone the next, doesnt much like being revved hard (just after 4k and the shows over, the torque plateau long gone) and whilst it doesnt sound bad for a diesel doesnt make the most inspiring noise. But its really not TSi quick at any given point and as much as I like mine I would term it effective rather than enjoyable to drive when driven with verve. The big but here though (and its a big thing for most people) is that its cheap to run with 50mpg capability, cheaper to tax being cleaner and despite being the more expensive car the cost of ownership is likely less than the TSI thats to its considerably better residuals.

Again both cars have their issues mechanically, people bang on about DPF issues on the CR TDI's but those issues are usually sensor related and not a DPF failure, they suffer nothing like the issues the PD engined cars did. The TSi's; again not exactly common but they are known to blow up.....risk with both id say.

Finances having been no object id have chosen the TSi on account of it being overall the more talented warm hatch but that said its nice to have a vRS on the driveway that bar the rev counter and cleaner exhaust tips (one thing to thank the DPF for) you wouldnt tell the two variants apart and its not really anymore expensive to run than any run of the mill diesel.

Point really here is that whilst I favour the TSi overall its probably more difficult to justify over the TDi for most....after all if the majority of us werent budget concious we wouldnt be driving Octavia vRS's petrol or diesel in the first place.

.....also care of being able to secure a Blackline managed to get the equivalent of a 25.5k factory order for 20k which could not be ignored. If Skoda had never released the Blackline id expect a few owners including myself would probably be driving a petrol instead.

Damn you pipsyp and your reasoned logic and common sense approach.

This is only my opinion (hey everyone has one ) but having driven my brothers vRS Diesel DSG I have to say that I've come to the conclusion that it's all about how you drive it. If you are not careful it's very easy to get that thing down to about 35ish MPG (indicated) driving it like a loon, conversely if you drive carefully it'll do 60MPG (indicated) and easily outdo the petrol.

 

One thing you should bear in mind is your driving style, if you are only doing mainly town driving you will need to watch for DPF issues as it might not regenerate at slower speeds. That said the PDF from Skoda http://www.skoda.co.uk/SiteCollectionDocuments/Brochures/19246_Skoda_DPF_Leaflet_v7.pdf reckons that you only need to be doing 23mph for 10-15 minutes continuously for the DPF to regenerate. That's pretty easy for me for example because I use my car on the motorway at least once a week, but if you only do a few miles a day (shops and back etc) it might never get that kind of use, you could end up with a blocked DPF and then it's dealer dollar time.

 

Sorry if I'm repeating anything! 

I have also read that leaflet.  Yet the owners manual supplied with my sister-in-laws Rapid 1.6 CR states '40mph for 20 minutes"!