It wasn't scientific, didn't have a stopwatch and GPS timing or anything.

Plus, it was literally within a mile of starting up at home then driving to work so engine not warmed up, maybe not the best conditions to try speed tests.

The 0-60 times are about 9.5 seconds anyway and it feels better than this when driving.

So if anyone with a Monte TSI has access to the an airfield runway and Top Gear style timing equipment please correct me if I'm wrong.

GazBull17,

 

Thats good enough mate! Many thanks!

 

Knew it would labour a bit in 4th as 30mph seems to be close to 1,500 rpm which is turbo spooling point. So basically if I think "hey its a petrol, drop it down a gear" then I'll get similar performance to the fabia 1 vrs - that was about 8 secs on same test but remember thats a 6 speed gearbox too.

 

It still thrashes a fiesta with the same power and torque!  Fiesta, according to Ford, takes 15 secs for the same test (12.2 secs for the 125hp version) and thats the car I found to be waaaaay over geared. I tell you, 4th gear in the Fiesta felt like a normal 5th, but do I wanna spend all day driving about in 2nd and 3rd in a Fiesta?!  Thank God the Fabia has normal gears!

 

sk4gw - remember this is a pull in 4th gear. Not through the gears or kickdown. You could perhaps simulate it IF the vRS DSG could be held in 4th or 5th gear (as its a 7 speed box). I think the DSG box might force a kick down though.....  This is why I didnt bother timing my dads 1.2 TSI yeti - same engine but totally different gearbox.

 

Thanks for all your help guys.... Looks like it will be fun, not stupid to fill up (petrol fell DOWN to 138.9 today in Shetland), and have enough power to be useful.  

 

Might not be able to take on the old Audi Quatro rally car in Shetland anymore (held him in my Fabia I vrs until I backed off at 85mph)... until I get the remap lol

 

I think there's going to be Monte in Shetland soon

Oh BTW, I can change my driving style. Previous to the Fabia I vrs I had an RX8 - NO torque until 5,500 rpm but shed loads of power (230hp at 9,000 rpm). As you can imagine, driving a diesel after the RX8 needed a change in style

 

I got the fabia because I was fed up with 18mpg - or 25mpg if I was careful on a motorway..... yeah, not suitable for Shetland!!  Also, 7000-9000 rpms attracts blue light attention

I came from years of diesels and yes, it looses out a bit to the torque figures but it doesn't feel that different to be honest.

Definitely quicker off the mark and if you have to drop a gear then so be it, it revs further anyway and sounds good when giving it some.

I know it's no vRS but I didn't want one so I'm more than happy with the Monte TSI.

Agree Gazbull17,  As you can see, fuel in Shetland is more expensive and its impossible to exploit our cars. A bit of revs never hurt anyone   And its fun too!!!    Thanks again to you and your Monte Tech. 

 

When I get the car I'll try and do some timings similar to Autocar. Wont be exact but for the numbers of people who ask "how does it go in x gear at x mph" it should help.

No worries bud, enjoy your Monte TSI when you get it.

Don't big the car up too much though as you might upset a few vRs owners out there.

They are like slighter less attractive women who get a bit jealous when a good looking woman comes along and starts getting all the attention.

Sorry vRs owners, only kidding.

I like this guys Vid Review.

If only the Fabia II vrs was a manual or Skoda did a Fabia II with the 1.4TSI (122 or 140hp)......

 

If money was no object, I'd get a petrol Octavia vrs 2.0T but I think shetland petrol prices would cripple me!

Here you go for the 86 hp, not fair really but the only one they had of the 12. TSis.....

 

http://www.zeperfs.com/en/match1152-3407.htm

 

Battle : Fabia RS vs Fabia II 1.2 TSI

 

 

Remind me why did the stop the Fabia 1 VRS ?

 

The 130 PD engine was fab though, best 4 cylinder diesel engine VAG produced in the last decade at least.

I have driven a Fabia 1.2 TSI 105 PS DSG and it was pretty good, and i think faster than a 105 PS Manual Monte,

but if you do not like Autos or the DSG then thats that.

A TMC Tuning box will do the job if you want.

 

A member from Sweden is selling his.

(EDIT, his Box is for a 1.2 TSI 86PS)

 

george

sk4gw

I watched that video, plus a couple of others when I was looking at buying mine.

He liked the car too, never really read or watched a bad review on the Monte, both TSI and TDI to be honest.

He said the 105bhp TSI engine was a great little motor in the Monte.

I'd assumed (wrongly) it would have a six-speed box! Strange one - I haven't owned a car with fewer than six gears since 2005.

Gazbull17, and nobody is arguing,

i dont know if you think people are down on the Monte, because i certainly am not.

(105PS,  not 105 bhp, 103.6 bhp, not much difference but there is, so as well to call it what it is. & that figure is always 'Minimum' 105PS,

so many are more once run in, and then 95 or 98/99 ron can make a difference.)

 

I posted one of the more interesting Vids, i think i have watched them all. and read all reviews.

Only pointed out that the 1.2 TSI is good with DSG, but only if you like that, it also rides quite well, but obviously does not come as standard on 17's.

 

george

Never tried a DSG box before, only had a short drive in an Audi A4 with a Tiptronic box, felt strange having never driven an auto before.

If I drove a bit more I'd probably look at a DSG but I think I would prefer it in a bigger car with a larger engine.

Still like driving my smaller manuals at the minute but a DSG with flappy paddles would be something I'd consider.

once you live with (not just test drive) a DSG I doubt you would go back to manual I wont!

Found the collated magazine comparison for the Fabia 1 VRS and a 1.2 TSI Polo (105hp). Surprisingly close in some areas.

 

http://www.zeperfs.com/en/match3318-1152.htm

 

Polo V 1.2 TSI vs Fabia RS

 

 

Had a Fabia 1 VRS (SE Edition) and am often given a 1.2 TSI for a loan car,  impressed with it as a do anything car, impressed with the 105 diesel's fuel consumption (65 mpg)  if driven very carefully but not so if driven spiritedly (45 mpg on short journey ie sub ten mile journeys.