Hi Guys,

 

I am new to the forum and looking for a little advice. I am thinking of buying a second car for the family this year. At the moment got a Fabia Bohemia Estate. While its very reliable and practical with a great boot and good mpg I would like something with a bigger engine for myself. I do a lot of motorway miles to and from work approx. 400 miles a week.

 

I would love to buy a mark II diesel VRS Octavia but because I do a lot of miles would it make more sense to get a standard Octavia as the maintenance and mpg wouldn't cost as much? Is there a big difference in maintaining a diesel VRS over a 2.0 TDI version? Is the VRS a lot less economical?

I don't know anyone with a VRS so thought I should ask the experts

 

Thanks in advance for the help,

Owen

I have an FL VRS Diesel - commute 250 per week - A road + Dual Carriageway - av. speed 50mph.  I was concerned about mpg - have been pleasantly suprised by the fact that it returns 50+ mpg.  No difference in service costs barring the cost of tyres - and careful research on prices mitigates that.

I managed to get 50+ mpg from my last 200bhp CR VRS so don't worry about running costs!

I do 500 miles per week Sussex to Portsmouth over mixed roads (everything from unclassified to motorway!), in a CR VRS. MPG always better in the evening as there's less traffic. 

 

Usual run driving at 70 returns about 50MPG. Keeping it to 60 max on the cruise control returns about 57MPG.

 

You should see 50+ on a motorway, and even more if you keep the speed down

Thanks for the replies guys. I thought the running costs would be worse to be honest! I was reluctant to seriously consider a VRS 

 

There a few 2008/9 versions on sale on autotrader at the moment. Seem to be around the £7000 range. Would you think this is a reasonable amount? This price would probably be my limit.

With your budget why don't you test drive a normal 1.9PD Octy to see if that would suit your needs as you'll probably get a newer/lower milage car and the 1.9PD is a well known mile muncher that will give excellent fuel economy and cost less in insurance too, unless that is you actually want the extra performance the vRS offers. The vRS would probably also have the 2.0PD engine, which has had an injector recall and they are liable to suffer from DPF issues while the 1.9PD doesn't have a DPF to worry about.

 

Was there a specific reason why you wanted a vRS (apart from the obvious!)

To be honest I have been thinking the VRS would be overkill for my needs but I just wanted something fun to drive :evil: . The normal Octavia seems a little boring even though it probably has 60 more bhp than my poor Fabia!

 

Are the standard 1.9 Octavias good drives? If I got the 1.9 remapped what sort of bhp and mpg do you think I would get?

 

Owen

 

 

Are the standard 1.9 Octavias good drives? If I got the 1.9 remapped what sort of bhp and mpg do you think I would get?

 

 

 

Most stage 1 remaps increase the power to about 140hp and 310Nm.

I'm not too sure about the mpg as I haven't had mine done yet but most people on here say it actually goes up by a few mpgs (unless you floor it).

Ah ok so the 1.9 models are about 105 bhp is that right?

 

The Fabia is about 80 I think so I was looking for something with more power as my car isn't too quick of the mark. Just something a bit quicker really.

Not going to hijack the thread but i can see your probably going to end up choosing the same engine as me 1.9 TDi PD and part of you username is my name

 

So that said, oh and hello!

 

Anyone know how much we are talking about for a stage 1 remap? and i take it the MPG would only increase by 2-5? How badly does it affect the insurance?

If you are considering a mapped 1.9 there really is no reason not to get a vrs, only you know what you can afford though

For me the cost of insuring a vRS is about double that of a 1.9. 

I previously had a 2.0 pd engine version and now have CR VRS. I typically get about 10 less mpg from the VRS, but it's so much more fun to drive. Brakes and handling are much better.

For me the cost of insuring a vRS is about double that of a 1.9.

Interesting, I found by the time remap mods were declared there was little difference

If you are considering a mapped 1.9 there really is no reason not to get a vrs, only you know what you can afford though

  

The OP has said his budget is 7k, hence my suggestion he tries a 1.9. SWMBO has one in her seat and TBH I don't drive it unless its raining, but to be fair its a good car and in isolation is quite fun to drive, so a 1.9 with a map would be a better option if the OP wants to keep running costs down.

Interesting, I found by the time remap mods were declared there was little difference

I'm doing the rounds at the mo as I'm considering fitting a DTUK tuning box and it varies loads between insurers. LV don't take the increase into consideration so are worth trying if your considering a big power gain. Admiral were cheap if the gain was small, though it does seem to vary between models too with getting the same increase on something like a vRS more expensive than doing similar on a Superb.

Personally, having driven a couple of VAG PD engined cars, I certainly wouldn't want to own one.

 

CR vRS for me, or nothing.

if you don't want a VRS then go for a 2.0PD 140 Tdi as it will have a bit more power and nicer to drive compared to a 1.9PD, it will not have DPF or PD injector issues compared to the PD VRS.

 

The runnning costs of the VRS will come from the insurance and tyres

I run a PD VRS, get high 50's on my commute down the M5 everyday. I wouldn't change it for anything else. In the 6 or so months I've had it, it's been service costs only & 2 tyres. It's big enough for the wife, 6 month old daughter plus push chair etc and the dog all in comfort.

Gets my vote everytime.

I would also advise on trying out a 1.6 tdi. same space and a bit more economical and less prone to DPF issues due to being a CR and not a PD engine (compared to the 1.9 tdi with the same horse power).

2.0 TDi CR 140 in SE Plus or Elegance spec is probably the sweet spot of the range IMO.

Usefully faster than a 1.9 or 1.6 TDi and not worlds slower than the 170 vRS. SE Plus spec is nice with standard BT, Nav, sunset glass and MFSw and Elegance is nicer in other respects but lacks some of the toys of the SE Plus in standard spec.

The one and only thing I dislike about my 2013 vRS other than is slightly overfirm ride (which not having sports suspension by and large resolves....just have to live with jacked up ride height and slightly more boat like handing.....not that the vRS is the most agile of cars being big and heavy) is that its not particularly quick for a 170hp car; power delivery is not exceptional and at over 1400kgs its quite a heavy motor.

Looks the part in white with black wheels and often having people trying it on or tailgating some perhaps thinking its the 2.0 TSi, but lots of more mundane looking metal is practically as fast (thinking 2.0 CDTi Insignias and Astras of the top of my head) and in all honesty whilst it looks good as a vRS from a go perspective I dont think the MK2 vRS TDi is wholly deserving of the vRS moniker; same goes for the MK3.

Still your money your choice but if you want an opinion theres mine right there.

Interesting, I found by the time remap mods were declared there was little difference

 

The quotes i've been getting are only for a standard 1.9 against a vRS, as i don't own one yet.

I would also advise on trying out a 1.6 tdi. same space and a bit more economical and less prone to DPF issues due to being a CR and not a PD engine (compared to the 1.9 tdi with the same horse power).

As far as I know the 1.9 tdi doesn't come with a DPF.

As far as I know the 1.9 tdi doesn't come with a DPF.

 

correct.    only the Vrs PD and IIRC the scout 140PD had dpfs before the CR engines were intoduced.

The vRS has independent rear suspension, the rest have a simpler torsion bar set up, hence less sportily handling.

Have been thinking about changing my petrol vrs (30mpg in town, 40mpg on the open road, 36-40mpg at 70mph) as my annual mileage may be about to triple and have spent some time looking at various options. The diesel vrs does command a reasonable premium over the other diesel Octavia's. My TFSI petrol was a bargain, and is probably the best all round car I have owned ( cost/performance/practicality). What I would like is vRS looks suspension and seats Lauren Klement toys and a sensibly chipped 1.6 tdi.

For info, I've got 17" wheels and the goodyears tyres I have are about £100 a corner.