Decision Time: Octy 1.6 FSI vs VW Pass 2.0 TDI CR

[sjdean]

Time to purchase the new car the weekend. I come from a Nissan Primera 1.8 (that's smoking - burning oil) with 110bhp, 0-60 11s and 29mpg around town. I do 8k miles of mixed driving, 10 mile a day each way to work (20 mile a day) with several trips over the course of the year to various places. Would like to start using my National Forest membership and visit more monasteries too.

Choices are, I see:

Skoda Octavia 1.6 FSI 56 plate, 60k miles - Elegance for £4000.

Or

VW Passat 2.0 TDI CR 10 plate, 80k miles - Highline for £8000.

On one hand, the Skoda is more car for the money, it's quite respectable. It shares similar characteristics to my Nissan for performance and economy, but should save me £45 on tax, a few pence on petrol if that, that's providing I can stick with 95 RON. The car I test drove today was a bit sluggish when cold, but when warmed up, 5th gear was a bit more responsive at 50mph. Drive well, no knocks or anything, held the road well. Has full history, but not Skoda dealer history.

But the Passat could save me £30+ per month on running costs with road tax and fuel savings, and it's got more BHP.

In either event, both will need to be serviced, the diesel may be more reliable, but if anything goes wrong, diesel might cost more to fix, plus it has a Cam Belt. But it is more tempting for the bigger savings.

However loan wise, I'd prefer £4k over £8k, unless I could see the Passat as some kind of investment, or you think I should completely disregard the 1.6 as being a can of worms?

Im more in favour of the Skoda at the moment, but the lure of Diesel savings is tempting.

What's your opinion? If Im happy with the Nissan, should I stick with the 1.6 Octy? Any reasons to avoid this engine? At 8k miles, should I favour diesel? Should the 1.6 be repsonsive in 5th gear at cold? Makes me wonder if there's a cat problem.

I realise I could probably add £2k budget to the £4k and get a greater Octavia 2.0 for ~ £6k, but at that point, I may as well just add a further £2k and go Passat.

Simon

[Eddie-NL]

is the passat an estate or saloon?

 

if it were me and the passat was an estate, that would be the better option

 

As you say each has its pros and cons, and tbh only you can decide which is the best option for your needs

[baggarell]

I do have an octy with 1,6 FSI, in my opinion the engine is great, reliable and it does not consume a lot. It is quick even in cold quiker on higher revs, after 4000 rpm, if  u put the pedal to the metal is rwally fast.

[goatboy]

To be honest it's a strange comparison.

at 8k a year I would be tempted to stay away from the diesel. You probably won't reap the benefits and diesel will only get more expensive compared to petrol and you have potential dpf issues at that sort of mileage.

It's going to take a lot of miles and years to make up the 4k price difference and the passat will continue to depreciate....

[rlp]

I love my i.6 fsi auto , it's got all I need and more ! chain drive timing no cam belt renewing or worries. a lot of people knock this engine but they usually drive a vrs .

[wiilydog]

the 1.6 will be cheaper to run as you don't do enough miles to justify a diesel, plus with diesel you will have to budget for £400 every 4 years for timing belt + water pump and potential costly items such as turbo and dpf going wrong

 

the 1.6FSI often gets slated,  as the 1.2TSI or 1.4TSI will feel more relaxed to drive due to the turbo so you don't always need to change gears and rev the guts out of it to make it go, but since you will be the one driving only you can decide if you are happy with the performance.

 

but if it was money no object then the passat will be nicer car to own in terms of comfort and refinement 

[PC1212]

Get a 1.8 TSI if you can find one

They are cheap, fun to drive, you can get 45 mpg on a run 

Car giant always have the odd one

[pipsyp]

Depends really whether you want to spend 4 or 8k on a car really.

The Octavia sounds decent for the money but its 3.5 years older and I am sure in terms of tech and refinement it will feel it too. The 1.6 FSi is frankly far from the engine sweetspot too, I had a 1.6 FSi Golf for a few days a good few years back and performance wise it was pretty weak and wasnt very frugal either. Be quieter and a bit smoother than a diesel perhaps though.

Without question the Passat is the better car, more refined, considerably better performance and will be more frugal, at 80k the diesel engine has bags of life left in it and DPF problems on the CR engines are not commonplace and shouldnt be of concern, particularly given that car has an average yearly mileage of of 18ish K a year so its seen enough use.

A facelift Octavia with a TSi or similar diesel engine would compare better and Im sure you'd find a FL Octavia for around 8k so would be worth a look.

Edited 12 December, 2013 by pipsyp

[littleade]

I just did a search on skodas website and found 11 octys between 4and 8k within 50 miles of brum both petrol and diesel. Have a look.....

[sjdean]

Thanks for the replies so far. £4k is the sensible choice. When I look at things like Mondeos and even I think 1.8 TSI's from VW, well, the economy isn't as good as my current car. I realise it's marginal, but that's what draws me to the 1.6.

 

Diesels do have the oomph and the economy with it too, but when you're going to £6k+ for a Mondeo or even Diesel Octy, I reckon may as well add the extra £2k to go £8k for the Passat.

 

I do worry about Turbo petrol engines - adding that sort of tech in, is it any different to a Diesel?

 

As for my mileage, although it is low at the moment, I do 20 miles a day for work, plus nearly 3000 miles in other journeys (a good motorway run  every month and other journeys). So Im not too concerned on the DPF. Im not too concerned on the costs of the timing belt either, as I'd be keeping the car around 5 years+ Given it's a 2010, a Cam Belt change rear end of 2014 and it should be good for another five years... 4 years if cautious. I also reckon I could save £40 a month on fuel and Road Tax saving £480 a year on current mileage.

 

But DMF's, Injector Failures and Fuel Pump failures scare the bejeebus out of me.

 

Also am I naive in believing the mpg figures of 39mpg around town? Then of course there's servicing costs and the fact the £8k loan would be over 4 years.

 

Undoubtedly, the sensible option is £4k on the Skoda and add a bit of money towards a new CAN Gateway, Bolero, MDI Interface and Bluetooth if I can find it (Im presuming that may require a maxi dot). And a few drinks for the guy at work who has VCDS. There wouldn't be any fuel savings as such, and it may cost more if I have to buy 98 RON. But it would be a good solid car with a timing chain :-) the loan would be over 2 years and I'd pay it back much quicker.

 

On the other hand, Diesel, power, economy, saving £40 a month.... Spending £180 on repaying a loan in both instances.... Should mean in theory the diesel would only cost £140 on loan repayments, unless there was some kind of major failure.

 

I am leaning towards the Skoda as its less worrying in terms of commitment.

 

Simon

[wiilydog]

if you set on a diesel there no reason why you cant get one with your £4k budget, don't be put off with the high miles as diesel can do 200k easily + the 1.9 has no DPF to worry about

 

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Skoda-Octavia-1-9TDI-PD-Elegance-Diesel-2005-55-/141137279680?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item20dc6ffac0

Edited 12 December, 2013 by wiilydog

[sjdean]

I'd get the 1.9 - if Skoda had those vintage with a 130 bhp engine. Want a little bit more get up and go :-) 

 

I'd get a VRS if it wasn't for the CO2 and the tax bracket :-)

Edited 12 December, 2013 by sjdean

[GroundHog]

Get a 1.4TSI Octy - better to drive than the 1.6FSI, no worries about DPF, or cambelt (its chain driven). Goes better than the 1.6, is cleaner, better fuel economy (you can run it quite happily on standard unleaded) and will be worth more or just easier when you come to sell it as it's newer technology. The 1.4TSI, I believe, was only available on the FL Octy, so you would probably get some of your spec included. And you can get a 1.4TSI for around £6k, so in the middle of your budget

[booke23]

I'd get the 1.9 - if Skoda had those vintage with a 130 bhp engine. Want a little bit more get up and go :-) 

 

Remember in real world conditions the 1.9 TDI would probably be faster than the 1.6 FSI......the 1.9 TDI has way more torque and only slightly less power than the 1.6 FSI. 

[Redboy]

Now the OP is really confused.

[sjdean]

I'd say Im not necessarily interested in raw speed - I can't see myself doing more than 100mph in exceptional circumstances (eg lunatic behind me) and no more than 70mph averagely. But a good pick up from stand still or a good mid range oomph would be nice. So the 1.9 TDI, faster but less power? Is that faster 0-60 or just faster top speed?

[wiilydog]

it will be faster in terms of real world driving 50-70mph eg joining a motorway or over taking a tractor on a single carriage way, as the diesel has loads of torque, and if you get bored and want more power they can easily mapped or with tuning box to 140bhp

 

you should really take a test drive before ruling it out.

[Stu08]

I'm confused.

The 2.0 CR or PD TDi has 140 bhp.

The 1.9 PD TDi the OP mentions is 130 bhp.

The 1.6 FSI is 110 bhp.

The diesel is faster and more powerful as standard against the 1.6.

Although power isn't massively important to OP the 130 and 140 TDi's do map to about 170 bhp.

I'd be looking at a 1.9 PD TDi 130 for reliability, low costs and enough power to keep me happy (with an option for more if needed).

I apologise if I have misread the thread. Long week!

[booke23]

But a good pick up from stand still or a good mid range oomph would be nice. So the 1.9 TDI, faster but less power? Is that faster 0-60 or just faster top speed?

 

On paper the 1.9 TDI PD105 is slightly slower on a 0-60mph dash than a 1.6 FSI. However as wiilydog mentions the 1.9 will be faster in practical situations......ie, floor the throttle at 60 mph in top gear in the 1.9 and you will accelerate well.....to achieve this in the 1.6 FSI you'd have drop down to 3rd and rev the nuts off it....even then it's probably not as fast as the 1.9 TDI in that situation. This is why driving diesels is often described as more relaxed.   

 

 

 

 

I'm confused.

The 2.0 CR or PD TDi has 140 bhp.

The 1.9 PD TDi the OP mentions is 130 bhp.

 

But the problem for the OP is that the 1.9 TDI PD130 was never fitted to the Mk2 Octavia.......only the PD105 version, hence his dilemma.

[sjdean]

Don't worry. Im confused too. Essentially, I class my current car as a benchmark - ie, ~110bhp, 0-60 in 11s, 177g CO/2, 29mpg Urban. 1.6 Petrol Octavia is probably best of bunch in matching my current setup which Im happy with, and has a little bit more bhp mpg and a tad better on the CO2. 

 

The ambition is to find something something <80,000 miles, would prefer CR over PD engine, and preferably at the 2.0L mark as the extra expense can somewhat be justified in the even better mpg CO/2 and 0-60.

 

Although the 1.9 PD 130 sounds probably best of both worlds, they do seem a bit thin on the ground on AutoTrader. The 1.9 PD 105 Skoda Octavia is appearing to be at least £1000 more compared to the petrol. I also can't find a more recent "Elegance" version of the 1.9 Octy than the 54 plate listed, unless I widen the circle, and see an 07 plate 70 miles away for £5500, which by the time I've tweaked the radio, added a Swing or Bolero, MDI Interface and changed the Can Gateway and remapped the engine for 130+ ummm.... may as well go for the Passat... Although dang, there's a lot of kit of the Octavia I really haven't appreciated. :-) I actually really like the parking sensors and the climate control of that era unlike what VW has replaced them with with the Climatronic stuff.

 

But yeah, I do start thinking, if Im going to start breaking the bank by going almost £2500 over my preferred budget, I may as well go all in and get the car I want.

 

However will take you up on what you say and see if I can find a reasonable priced PD 105 Octy before I part on for a petrol. I only ruled it out because it seemed even lower on the BHP and 0-60 which isn't what I was looking for.

 

Just to clarify, the 1.6 FSI matches my car and is priced perfectly. A 1.9 130 would be the ideal option, but Im not sure I'd like to part with £6500 to get this (same sort of philosophy behind not getting a middle of the road car like a Mondeo or something... yet bizarrely would be happier spending £8000 to get a 2.0 CR VW

 

Somewhere somehow that has to make sense. It seems reasonable in my head and in some respects cuts out the middle of the field. Which is probably completely and totally unfair.

 

Simon

[sjdean]

On paper the 1.9 TDI PD105 is slightly slower on a 0-60mph dash than a 1.6 FSI. However as wiilydog mentions the 1.9 will be faster in practical situations......ie, floor the throttle at 60 mph in top gear in the 1.9 and you will accelerate well.....to achieve this in the 1.6 FSI you'd have drop down to 3rd and rev the nuts off it....even then it's probably not as fast as the 1.9 TDI in that situation. This is why driving diesels is often described as more relaxed.   

 

Interesting to know that. That's what I love about my Nissan the most at the moment. It accelerates really well at 60mph in 5th or 4th gear. The engine is tweaked to provide most power and lower revs, and it really is such a lovely engine to drive - if I could get it to stop smoking.

[eccleshill]

I'd get the 1.9 - if Skoda had those vintage with a 130 bhp engine. Want a little bit more get up and go :-) 

 

I'd get a VRS if it wasn't for the CO2 and the tax bracket :-)

I came to the Octavia from a 1.8 Primera a few years ago.

I tested a 1.6FSi and a 1.9TDi.  After the Primera the 1.6FSI felt like a leaden slug!  The 1.9TDi had LOADS more get up and go than the 1.6FSi.  Even though it only had 105BHP the torque was more than enough to give it oomph where needed - in a 40-60mph overtake.  And it averaged  over 50mpg.  It is easily remappable to 135BHP and even more torque if you really want it.

 

There a loads of 1.9TDi and 1.4TSi Octavias around for under £8k.  Both have more get-up-and-go and both are more economical than the 1.6FSi

[booke23]

I see exactly what you mean.

 

The 1.6 FSI is perfectly fine for your needs and is very good value.......to get a diesel the same age and trim level will cost you quite a bit more and it will probably have significantly higher mileage.........if you're going to spend that much extra, why not spend a bit more and get a much newer CR diesel. 

 

A tricky decision, which will I suspect be influenced by what cars are available in your area at this time. 

[eccleshill]

The ambition is to find something something <80,000 miles, would prefer CR over PD engine, and preferably at the 2.0L mark as the extra expense can somewhat be justified in the even better mpg CO/2 and 0-60.

 

Here you go - top of the range L&K

http://www.skoda.net.r66.co.uk/carview.aspx?id=604155275

 

Oh just noticed - PD not CR - did they do a CR in the pre FL?

[ednw]

just swapped my 98 primera  1.6 for an 05 1.9 octavia the torque is noticeable but feels like it runs out of steam quickly test drove a 1.4 fsi which just run out of steam at 100kmh

no idea if this is of any use mind