2014 2.0 TDI 150PS Dyno Results

[pipsyp]

Perhaps its just because ive come from an 8yr old car, but i find the brakes on the Octy Elegance to be perfectly suitable, and could easily take more power. Afterall, you cant legally travel in excess of 70mph. 80 if abroad. Well unless you really take it too extremes in Germany. The brakes stop the car very rapidly, no matter what the speed, and with very little brake fade.

My old car in comparison sometimes feels like it has no brakes (and yes it does have legal brake pads). Thats how good the Octy is.

Its not that the brakes are bad, my old golf had 288mm brakes and have to say on balance that car stopped a little better (certainly more feel in the braking) than my current car with 312mm front rotors. The brakes in the standard O3's are v good....with standard power.

Ultimately VAG fit all their 150hp and below MQB based cars with 288mm front brakes as they are more than adequate but the more powerful cars get 312's or in the case of the vRS 340's (maybe 345's or 350's....unsure but big anyway). A car with 288mm rotors would cope with increased power but it would place added strain on the components causing them to wear quicker and probably fade quicker under heavy braking.

Edited 5 February, 2014 by pipsyp

[Orville]

Unless you take the cars on track days the brakes on any Octavia are more than sufficient to stop the car. From 70-0 the brakes on the VRS will not stop the car any faster than if it was fitted with good 280mm discs. Both will be more than sufficient to kick in ABS. The problem comes if you repeatedly brake hard without allowing the discs/shoes to cool, something that is very hard on most UK roads. I remember my old Subarus discs glowing and smoking away after a few hot laps at Cadwell. The stock discs on the Scoob were smaller than the CR150's, despite having VRS beating performance. I never had any problems with them driving spiritedly on the road.

..and the Scoobs wore 205 tyres just like the CR150's, although power was put through all 4 bits of rubber. With EBD and more advanced ABS I bet the Octy stops faster than my Scoobs (when they had stock brakes) did as well.

Edited 5 February, 2014 by Orville

[Genoa1893]

So, do you think that on private roads and spirited driving (no tracks) fading should not be a problem?

 

However, have you any hint on how to improve the standard 288mm brakes? Are there pads addressing the fading issues? Or slotted discs?

 

TIA

[themanwithnoaim]

Take a look at some of the EBC upgraded pads, I had drilled discs with Redstuff pads on my old Mk2, I never knew what heat fade was EVER.

Regards

T

Edited 5 February, 2014 by themanwithnoaim

[JungleJames]

Its not that the brakes are bad, my old golf had 288mm brakes and have to say on balance that car stopped a little better (certainly more feel in the braking) than my current car with 312mm front rotors. The brakes in the standard O3's are v good....with standard power.

Ultimately VAG fit all their 150hp and below MQB based cars with 288mm front brakes as they are more than adequate but the more powerful cars get 312's or in the case of the vRS 340's (maybe 345's or 350's....unsure but big anyway). A car with 288mm rotors would cope with increased power but it would place added strain on the components causing them to wear quicker and probably fade quicker under heavy braking.

Sorry, perhaps i miss read your original post, because i thought you said the normal Octy's brakes were only just suitable.

On normal road driving, id say the increase to 190hp wouldnt be a problem, the brakes being as good as they are. Its just if you took the car onto a track, that you may want the larger brakes to go with the increased power.

I wont be venturing anywhere near tracks though (let alone increase the power output), so no problem either way. The Isle of Skye provides me with all the fun I need! Now if only they'd take all the other cars off the Island when i was there

[Andrew@DTUK]

Its great to see that my threads always create a bit of a stir on here  

[Timoctav]

Its great to see that my threads always create a bit of a stir on here

 

..and mostly positive on this particular thread - even from my controversial self!

[Andrew@DTUK]

..and mostly positive on this particular thread - even from my controversial self!

Im not saying a word as even Brimma's been nice recently too lol

[Shermo]

Have you had anyone try this on the 4x4 version of the 150ps yet?

 

Currently looking at options for a new car, was tempted with an A3 184 quattro, but looking at the Octavia you get a lot more for your money and a much bigger boot. The 4x4 150ps Elegance looks a great choice given that the vRS doesn't have any 4x4 options (I guess so it doesn't encroach on VW and Audi sales?) but was just wondering how it would be with the power/torque being boosted as obviously it would be able to put the power down a lot better with the haldex 4x4 system.

[Dr Zoidberg]

Have you had anyone try this on the 4x4 version of the 150ps yet?

 

Currently looking at options for a new car, was tempted with an A3 184 quattro, but looking at the Octavia you get a lot more for your money and a much bigger boot. The 4x4 150ps Elegance looks a great choice given that the vRS doesn't have any 4x4 options (I guess so it doesn't encroach on VW and Audi sales?) but was just wondering how it would be with the power/torque being boosted as obviously it would be able to put the power down a lot better with the haldex 4x4 system.

The Laurin & Klement version is due to be revealed and day now and that will have a 184bhp 4x4 DSG option, though we don't know if it will be sold in the uk.

[Shermo]

The Laurin & Klement version is due to be revealed and day now and that will have a 184bhp 4x4 DSG option, though we don't know if it will be sold in the uk.

 

Is that likely to be much more expensive than similarly specced Elegance or vRS though? If it was almost as pricey as the Audi 184 quattro I'd be more tempted to go with the Audi to be honest.

 

I do find it funny how speccing up an A3 and an Octavia the price difference is huge even though under the bonnet they are basically the same, and so many options are standard on the Elegance that you have to pay extra for even on the S-line Audi. I can tick almost every box for an Elegance and its cheaper than the stock Audi.

[themanwithnoaim]

Yes the L&K is gonna be more money, as for the Audi pricing well thats just badge snobbery.

 

Regards

T

[Timoctav]

Tha Audi A3 Sportback is more the right size car for us as we don't need all the room of the Octavia most of the time. But a nicely specified A3 Sportback Quattro is £35k - that's a huge increase over an equivalent Octavia even allowing for the 4WD.

[Dr Zoidberg]

Is that likely to be much more expensive than similarly specced Elegance or vRS though? If it was almost as pricey as the Audi 184 quattro I'd be more tempted to go with the Audi to be honest.

 

I do find it funny how speccing up an A3 and an Octavia the price difference is huge even though under the bonnet they are basically the same, and so many options are standard on the Elegance that you have to pay extra for even on the S-line Audi. I can tick almost every box for an Elegance and its cheaper than the stock Audi.

Yes, it will undoubtedly be more. My guess was add £1800 to go from Elegance to L&K spec with the same engine, then at least £3k to go from 2wd 150 to 4wd 184 DSG engines.

[Shermo]

Tha Audi A3 Sportback is more the right size car for us as we don't need all the room of the Octavia most of the time. But a nicely specified A3 Sportback Quattro is £35k - that's a huge increase over an equivalent Octavia even allowing for the 4WD.

 

Yup about the same here, unfortunately for Skoda 4x4 you have to go with 150ps and manual, instead of 184ps and DSG. But it does work out about 8k cheaper.

[Andrew@DTUK]

Have you had anyone try this on the 4x4 version of the 150ps yet?

Currently looking at options for a new car, was tempted with an A3 184 quattro, but looking at the Octavia you get a lot more for your money and a much bigger boot. The 4x4 150ps Elegance looks a great choice given that the vRS doesn't have any 4x4 options (I guess so it doesn't encroach on VW and Audi sales?) but was just wondering how it would be with the power/torque being boosted as obviously it would be able to put the power down a lot better with the haldex 4x4 system.

We have an s3 sport back landing this week, in comparison to the octavia the a3 is tiny inside. Even our 8 year old commented on the lack of space in the sportback

[Timoctav]

We have an s3 sport back landing this week, in comparison to the octavia the a3 is tiny inside. Even our 8 year old commented on the lack of space in the sportback

a3 Sportback is a very good car no doubt about it albeit at a price. Don't start me on how awful the latest S3 is though....

[999pooch]

a3 Sportback is a very good car no doubt about it albeit at a price. Don't start me on how awful the latest S3 is though....

What's wrong with the new S3?

A member on here who has had a S4, S5 & a RS5 has just bought one & reckons it's now one of the best in the range.

Have you driven one yet?

[Timoctav]

What's wrong with the new S3?

A member on here who has had a S4, S5 & a RS5 has just bought one & reckons it's now one of the best in the range.

Have you driven one yet?

Yes borrowed one for a couple of hours, the latest version with double clutch 'box, as I was very seriously thinking of getting one to replace my sports car. Diabolical turbo lag, boomy unpleasant synthesised engine sound, lifeless steering......needless to say I stayed with the sports car in the end, the S3 taught me the lesson that you can't go from a very good sports car to a hot hatch and expect the same degree of handling, throttle response or driver enjoyment.

Maybe if I didn't have the sports car then it might have been more acceptable, but even then the all or nothing throttle response and tiring engine note would still have put me off. A BMW M135i is a vastly better car, and no doubt the new M235i coupe with that bit more power would be even better if you don't need the rear doors or a hatchback.

Edited 2 March, 2014 by Timoctav

[999pooch]

Yes borrowed one for a couple of hours, the latest version with double clutch 'box, as I was very seriously thinking of getting one to replace my sports car. Diabolical turbo lag, boomy unpleasant synthesised engine sound, lifeless steering......needless to say I stayed with the sports car in the end, the S3 taught me the lesson that you can't go from a very good sports car to a hot hatch and expect the same degree of handling, throttle response or driver enjoyment.

Maybe if I didn't have the sports car then it might have been more acceptable, but even then the all or nothing throttle response and tiring engine note would still have put me off. A BMW M135i is a vastly better car, and no doubt the new M235i coupe with that bit more power would be even better if you don't need the rear doors or a hatchback.

Haven't yet driven the new S3 myself, although I plan to in the near future. Just going off the positive reports from a fellow member

Agree the M135 is a great car to drive, but pig ugly! The M235 looks much better but with the obvious compromise.

But that's what most car buying is, a compromise. I would prefer to just have a small 2 seater as they usually drive much better but I had to compromise as I needed 5 seats , a decent boot space & a bit of usable poke. Owning 2 x cars was not practical so all my eggs are in the (proverbial) one basket.

[Yeti_Man]

Yes borrowed one for a couple of hours, the latest version with double clutch 'box, as I was very seriously thinking of getting one to replace my sports car. Diabolical turbo lag, boomy unpleasant synthesised engine sound, lifeless steering......needless to say I stayed with the sports car in the end, the S3 taught me the lesson that you can't go from a very good sports car to a hot hatch and expect the same degree of handling, throttle response or driver enjoyment.

Maybe if I didn't have the sports car then it might have been more acceptable, but even then the all or nothing throttle response and tiring engine note would still have put me off. A BMW M135i is a vastly better car, and no doubt the new M235i coupe with that bit more power would be even better if you don't need the rear doors or a hatchback.

this post confuses me somewhat. Probably because I rate the latest S3 very highly indeed - tbh I think it's probably the best real world quick hatch out there currently. You say you can't go from hot hatch from a sports car and expect the same - you you can't as they are a different class of car IMO. The hot hatch is more liveable day to day with a useable boot and room for four people in fair comfort. It's also serviceable round the corner and cheaper to run in most respects. I never felt a problem with turbo lag in it either so I'm wondering if the one you drove had an issue?

[Timoctav]

this post confuses me somewhat. Probably because I rate the latest S3 very highly indeed - tbh I think it's probably the best real world quick hatch out there currently. You say you can't go from hot hatch from a sports car and expect the same - you you can't as they are a different class of car IMO. The hot hatch is more liveable day to day with a useable boot and room for four people in fair comfort. It's also serviceable round the corner and cheaper to run in most respects. I never felt a problem with turbo lag in it either so I'm wondering if the one you drove had an issue?

You'll get no argument from me regarding the BMW 1 series styling, that's for sure. the A/S3 is also much nicer inside. But there it ends, at least for me. Yes of course a roomy hatch is less of a compromise versatility wise than a sports car, of course,and obviously a very different type of car, in the same way I don't criticise my Octavia for being a bit soft in comparison, but I was looking for a replacement that would give me at least some of the thrills of my sports car,but be cheaper to run even if not as quick, which the S3 isn't. We'll agree to differ about the S3 being the best hot hatch, but then it would be boring if we all liked the same thing - with the M135i rear wheel drive and the superb straight six engine would win the day for me. I've decided that I'll keep my sports car another couple of years but when I do change it will be for something completely different, so I won't be looking for anything near the sports car feel, precision or performance.

Edited 2 March, 2014 by Timoctav

[Chunkstar]

Might get shot down

But I drove s3 and pp golf gti for the money and in real world driving I choose the gti,the s3 is "just a tad safe boring almost " in my opinion and I have owned a s5 with v8 "still miss her" an s4 which I don't miss lol

I love the golf when you get it by the scruff of the neck it performs very well,but then is "normal golf" when it needs to be

The s3 was nice but only nice!!

couldn't justify the extra expense,yes the interior is nicer but not that much nicer

[Yeti_Man]

Might get shot down

But I drove s3 and pp golf gti for the money and in real world driving I choose the gti,the s3 is "just a tad safe boring almost " in my opinion and I have owned a s5 with v8 "still miss her" an s4 which I don't miss lol

I love the golf when you get it by the scruff of the neck it performs very well,but then is "normal golf" when it needs to be

The s3 was nice but only nice!!

couldn't justify the extra expense,yes the interior is nicer but not that much nicer

Hopefully no one will shoot down anyone else for their own opinion!

 

I do get what you mean but I think the difference then starts to be more in favour of the S3 if the weather is anything else but perfect. You can accelerate away hard or give it the full beans for safe mid range overtaking no matter what the weather. Admittedly the Golf certainly isnt bad in this respect but the S3 is in a different league in these conditions imo. Much bigger lungs and awd to make safe use of them. The Golf is a great do it all car though and wont try to kill you like an M135i will (according to Jeremy Clarkson last night on TG!)

 

[Timoctav]

Hopefully no one will shoot down anyone else for their own opinion!

 

I do get what you mean but I think the difference then starts to be more in favour of the S3 if the weather is anything else but perfect. You can accelerate away hard or give it the full beans for safe mid range overtaking no matter what the weather. Admittedly the Golf certainly isnt bad in this respect but the S3 is in a different league in these conditions imo. Much bigger lungs and awd to make safe use of them. The Golf is a great do it all car though and wont try to kill you like an M135i will (according to Jeremy Clarkson last night on TG!)

 

I'd totally agree that in bad weather the Quattro 4WD does give the S3 a big advantage. I like the understated styling outside (a real Q car - a bit like the Lancia Delta HF Integrale I used to own back inthe 1990's, which was also 4WD). The interior is beautifully put together, certainly better than anything else in the class, the double clutch transmission is also very fast in gear changing. But for me, as I said in my earlier post the boomy engine notye would be extremely tiring on a long drive and the turbo-lag, which is bad at low speeds acceptable because it is easier to moderate at higher speeds and the feel less electric steering ruined the car for me. Yes I know most cars these days have electric steering but some manage to give much better steering feel. The Golf Mk7 GTi with the optional performance pack is a much nicer drive even if it isn't as quick. Be interesting if the Golf R is any better with the same drive train as the S3.