http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2002-SKODA-FABIA-2-0-ELEGANCE-AC-16V-YELLOW-/121149668423?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item1c35153c47

 

Yellow and rear electric windows....how could you not want it

 

Tempting...

Fastest non vRS out of the factory maybe

 

Good point!

True but we're talking about a car which was released around the same time as the Mk4 Golf, surely Fuel injection systems and engine designs had improved from the Mk3 to the Mk4 era.

 

The 2.0l mk4 Golf GTI also only had 115bhp, despite the 1.8 having 125bhp

The 2.0l mk4 Golf GTI also only had 115bhp, despite the 1.8 having 125bhp

 

exactly, so why did they even bother with the engine? know what i mean?

 

IMO i dont see the point in putting in an engine which is a lemon, its probably no more economical, no more reliable no more powerful/torque-y and no cheaper than any other engine in the range. so why not make an engine as good at can be?

Probably because that's what VW told them they were allowed?

 

I doubt they'd allow them the GTI 125hp engine as it would then mean a Fabia that's far cheaper than the Golf is faster.

 

I'm surprised they allowed them the PD130 in the vRS 

They'd already put the PD130 lump in the Seat Ibiza Sport in 2002 so it's progression into the Fabia in 2003 made sense.

The only wierd one is why it took so long to bring out the Polo GT!

Behold the mighty two litre, all 115bhp of it, mine ate it's own piston rings, then drank it's own oil, but i did put biblical mileage on it driving to London 3 times a week. I would buy another one if one popped up again, it was actually quite a good car despite all that far nicer and more refined to drive than the 1.4 model... It's odd though mine also said 16v on the v5 document but it definitely was an 8v engine.

lovely jubbly..

Tempted by one. Just want a clean one to pop up lol

Day

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

There were lots of the 2.0 motors with dodgy rings from new I believe they were assembled wrong but I guess any still going now must be ok lol. The one in my octavia used to have a ltr per 1000 miles so within vw guidelines....

The tax will be the big killer now for them I guess.

Seriously torquey and reliable engine the 2.0 8v.

 

The 1.8 20v is an absolute DOG by comparison, I had a Passat estate with that damned engine way back, kept it for a month before I could stand it no longer, a gutless and thirsty abomination, managed to make £700 on it and bought a Sharan VR6.

 

BHP is bull**** and for the birds Taylor.

yeah that's right jim, iirc mine was £225 per year to tax that was a few years ago now, I got mine in 2006, mine went to well over 140k before the rings let go, only cost a couple hindered quid and a few evenings drinking beer and turning spanners to get her on the road again, it would do 45mpg on motorway runs... Lets face it, it's not a fast car, don't buy a fabia if you want a fast car, but it does do what it does quite well.. The only thing that let it down really badly was the long gearing in my opinion, which makes it quiet at motorway speed but a bit sluggish, like somebody has already said they aren't much slower than a vrs, myself and Will proved that over chew lakes near Bristol, (you know that private bit with the secret test track that has road markings) half a car length in it!! With shorter gearing and a slightly hotter cam from a mk3 golf gti engine it would tear a vrs a new poop hole.

115bhp from a 2.0? :think:  Why bother? I'd buy a bottom range fabia, rip out the interior and engine, slap on vRS body kit and wheels then put a 1.8T (or a VR6 if you want to be manly) in there for the same money as a 2.0 Fabia goes for.

With shorter gearing and a slightly hotter cam from a mk3 golf gti engine it would tear a vrs a new poop hole.

 

lol.......I was also thinking if you put vRS wheels on it along with a vRS suspension setup It'd be better in the corners than a vRS.......it'd be better balanced as the 2.0 petrol engine is presumably lighter than the 130PD.  

Tempting...

 

I thought you'd turned over a new leaf? :p

The 2 litre Fabia doesn't deserve the ribbing it gets really. It might have been way off the pace for a modern 2 litre engine, but it was torquey from low revs and not bad on fuel when not thrashed. I persuaded my mum to get one of these back in 2002 because she didn't want a diesel and the 16v 1.4 needed revving too much to get it to move, and she doesn't tend to use much of the powerband in every day driving but didn't want something too sluggish either.

 

And hey, putting this engine in a supermini was less comical than when VW UK used it for the base model Golf GTI!

I thought you could buy a 2.0l Fabia Saloon, but looking them up I must have been wrong. Saloons were only 1.4 petrol (8v and 16v) or a 1.9 SDI. I'm sure 5 or more years ago I saw one, but it must not have been a Saloon.

I thought you could buy a 2.0l Fabia Saloon, but looking them up I must have been wrong. Saloons were only 1.4 petrol (8v and 16v) or a 1.9 SDI. I'm sure 5 or more years ago I saw one, but it must not have been a Saloon.

Estate maybe....