Hi guys, I used to run a Mk 1 1.4tdi Fabia hatch, looked bog standard but re-mapped from 75 to 99bhp, cat de-cored, green cotton air filter, Millers oil and fuel additive, routinely averaged 76.5mpg in summer, as low as 69mpg in winter, managed 850 miles before bleeper and light, never tried running on till empty!!! But PD not CR, 3cyl and with just 6 valves, VERY vibratory if worked hard at low revs. Above 2,000rpm, balancer-shaft smoothed things and sounded bit Porsche-like (the flat 6's).

 

Since September, 105bhp 1.9tdiPD Roomster, averaging 57--59mpg tank-full to tank-full (govt combined is 53.3mpg), fitted green-cotton panel air filter, using Millers fuel additive, not yet changed to their oil. Currently running it to bleeper to test range, got a 5-litre canful on board just in case! Can see 70-72mpg on the readout on trips back along the M62 where the long downhill bits enable chunks of coasting.

Wow. Now you do take your economy seriously haha.

So amoungst the various mods, do you also have a feather as a right foot and the most patiance anybody has ever had in history?

I wish i was like that sometimes. Maybe i could get further for my money too haha

Yep I pass people every day sat with the Lorries in the inside lane doing 56mph. 

 

I tried it for about ten minutes and decided life's too short and reset the cruise to 75-80mph. lol.

 

Cheers

Lee

Really?! Doesn't the C43 pack 306bhp and accelerate 0-60 in 5.7s ? It would be great if the little vRS could keep up but i doubt it myself. :-)

Technically, yes, but the vrs' power is under-quoted by the factory and the c43 although excellently maintained is now 15 years old.

In a real drag race there was zero to separate them. At about 90 though the vrs ran out of puff and the merc can storm on relentlessly to 150...

Edited 5 March, 201412 yr by louisv6

Coming back from Cheltenham back to Kent via Swindon onto the M4, my Fabia was doing between 60-63mpg at 75-80 mph.

Fair enough keepin up with a 15 year old car, but the vrs is a new one.

And mercs more recent c63 AMG is a 6.2l v8 that does 0-62 in 4.5 seconds.

Below 5 seconds, thats getting fast then. Above that is just playin at it i think.

We need to get over this 0-100 km (62 mph) IMO.

Not just with Fabias, but many vehicles.

 

Who really goes full bore from a standing start and tries to get to 62 mph. Then no faster.

As much as accceleration, deceleration and brakes matter there.

If you are at 80 mph, maybe 100  before noticing you exceeded the 62 mph, that amuses many.

 

a Twincharger can get blown off by almost any vehicle on the road to 30 mph.

Getting traction and momentum is not its forte.

Rolling start times are interesting, or are to some.

 

30-70 times can be more real world.

 

0-62 times really has little to do with Motorway Miles & Economies or fuel use.

Now slip road entry at say 50 mph and get up to speed of flow is relevant possibly.

Its just a measurement used that everybody knows about. Gives you a good idea about how quick the car is all over the speedo i guess.

Nothin worse than realising your doing over a tonne by accident haha.

Just like the top speed will never be reached by many, but its still useful to look at on paper. It gives you an idea of what the car will be like at motorway speeds

Top speed double & more even than the UK NSL gives no idea what a vehicle might be like on a UK Motorway IMO

Or even how quickly you can get across country A-B in the UK.

 

Some cars these days have the wrong gearing for economy when built for performance

but sticking to NSL's.

& lower powered City Cars & Family Runabouts might have gearing and performance totally suitable

for 60 mph or 70 mph limits,

& much better 0-30 or 0-60 times for town and city driving.

 

You say a 1.4tsi 180 psTwincharger is not fast, but it has the same official times as the new VAG 1.8 Turbo 180 ps cars.

Which again are not fast, but then the Official figures are never accurate either from VAG.

Its just not fast though. It doesnt matter what else is getting the same times as it, as they also arent fast.

Im not saying its slow, but its certainly not 'fast' in my opinion. But then i guess it depends what your used to

The point was they get given officially the same times, not that they do the same times.

 

Your opinion is based on riding Motor Bikes is it not,?

Not Fast, but you really should go drive one before expressing opinions on how they go.

Been in alsorts mate. Bmw z4m, audi sq7, nissan gtr, porsche cayenne etc etc.

I do ride motorbikes yeah. Thats where i get my kicks, thats why iv got a 1.2htp.

Just sayin that they arent that quick in the scheme of things.

Those are not able to be bought new for £15,500 with a 5 year warranty, and have cheap insurance,

You can certainly get many nice used vehicles for less than the Skoda Asking Price for a new car.

 

But i see where you are coming from, but it is not Horses for Courses,

like a affordable 5 door Family car hatch or estate. that can be fun usable daily and return the same economy or better with anything else with the same performance.

Its just not fast though. It doesnt matter what else is getting the same times as it, as they also arent fast.

Im not saying its slow, but its certainly not 'fast' in my opinion. But then i guess it depends what your used to

 

Honestly, this is starting to come off as a bit of a campaign.

 

Why on earth would you come on here wanting to run down other peoples car choice? Volkswagen has GTI's and Skoda has vRS', this is a Skoda forum, I am really struggling to see your point.

 

Based on your logic - taking into account other cars that have similar performance to the vRS, you are saying most hot hatches aren't fast.  Sure you can argue against the Eurofighter they are snails but is that really the point?

Iv no arguments about the price, but no one mentioned money until now.

Iv not come on here to run them down at all. Somebody brought speed into this earlier on in the thread, and all i said was in the scheme of things they arent fast. Im not sure how you can accuse me of 'running down' as the thread is clearly titled 'motorway cruising mpg'

I never said im arguing against all hot hatches, im not. I never said i wouldnt have a hot hatch, cos i would, id have a golf gti any day and i never a said they cant be fun, because they can. But stating its 'fast' is abit too much of a statement to make for a little 180ps hatch.

If its fast you want, you look for a better power to weight ratio, iv no denying they are practical and good for the price etc, but thats not relevant to the speed, which is the issue that was previously brought up. Not by myself may i add.

'Gonephishing' just seems to have a tear in his eye since gazbull said the fabia handles like a boat and he went past (note, not racing) an ecoboost fiesta

Hard to bring a tear to my Glass Eye!

 

I know how they handle, i have one, Others know how they handle.
Like a boat (or barge) is a nonesense, but some just go along with that rubbish. I like the comfort of the supspension

& in some opinions that is how they handle, like a barge.

 

180 PS & a little Hot hatch and weight, Fiestas, Golf GTI's etc.

I run one at 1440 KG loaded not Kerb Weight, (1243kg or the likes, they give for EU testing)

check out Given Kerb weights and just see what they are on a car with a light driver, no passenger  and not a full tank of fuel,

ie not real world.

(The VAG on paper figures for the vRS & a mk 4 Golf V6 4Motion are near identical,

thats what VAG aimed for with the 180 PS Twinchargers, the vRS bettered them.)

The unladen weight of a V6 4Motion is over 1400 kg by the way.

Fuel consumption driven normally near 50% more than a Twincharger.

 

They are just cars, but they are the cars some of us drive, & i drive a 68 bhp car daily and love it dearly,

loads of fun.

But please if you are going to comment on vRS go drive one, then tell us if it is like a barge in handling and 

not fast enough to be called a Hot Hatch. (I prefer the term Warm Hatch myself)

I never said i agreed with the 'barge' comment. But then it depends what your used to. If he drives a caterham at the weekends for example, im sure the fabia does feel like a barge compared.

Just like if all youve ever driven is a 900cc suzuki swift, im sure the vrs would seem 'fast' and like a jetfighter.

All i said was cost, economy, practicality etc etc aside, all i was saying was, if you lined up every car in the world, from fastest to slowest, it wouldnt be anywhere near the fast end of the scale. It also wouldnt be anywhere near the slow end, i agree. But in my opinion 'fast' is a strong word and a 180ps hatch doesnt suit it, in my opinion.

Of course though,at the end of the day this is all opinions, it depends muchly on what your used to. No need to cry about it, its just an opinion.

I can see both sides of the coin here. I would say the Fabia is quite fast but have to agree with Otaylor38 that's it's also very relative to what you are used to and what has become 'normal'. Drive a car for long enough and no matter how fast it is it starts to feel run of the mill and a lot of us start to crave more power!

Fast is relative. I can count on one finger the number of cars you can buy, that fast, for less than £17k...

I needn't remind anyone what an AMG merc costs...

Edited 5 March, 201412 yr by louisv6

I can see both sides of the coin here. I would say the Fabia is quite fast but have to agree with Otaylor38 that's it's also very relative to what you are used to and what has become 'normal'. Drive a car for long enough and no matter how fast it is it starts to feel run of the mill and a lot of us start to crave more power!

 

Yep very true.

 

I hope everyone with a vRS enjoys it. But the examples I've driven have struggled off the line in anything other than bone dry, warm, smooth tarmac (Even our 1.2TSi DSG Does) and the mid range rolling acceleration is matched by most modern 2.0TDi's. Which I'm sure furbytom can confirm owning both.

 

Handing wise I wouldn't call the vRS a barge but the best can smooth out potholes and ridges without thumping, have minimum roll in the corners, have good steering feedback and be able to get power down early on the exit of a corner. I don't think anyone would think I've just described the vRS.

 

The Fabia is cheaper than many of the cars quoted but when today's roads seem to be full of 330d's and 535d's etc never mind the faster Audi's and Merc's most of which have RWD or AWD traction off the line then what is fast is pretty hard to quantify.

 

So yes I agree not fast when you look at the performance levels of what is about and especially if you look at bikes. Modern cars hide speed so well too, especially in the premium sector, an S5 I drove recently sounded awesome but didn't feel fast even though you were into triple figures with a prod of the peddle,

Now I have rallied 4WD Turbo cars, owned the road versions of some and driven the likes of a 400bhp Type RA Impreza at 1200kg and AWD with gearing that is designed for a 116mph top speed and no noise insulation. Now that felt a seriously fast car, overtaking ability like a superbike.

 

So yes it's all relative, what you are used to and what you see about on your local roads.

 

Cheers

Lee

Edited 5 March, 201412 yr by logiclee

Logiclee, i completely agree with everything youve just said. Couldnt have said it better myself (obviously, as i tried and just got marded at haha).

Please save us from all the BMW stuff again.  We know how wonderful they are.

Thats unless we can get back to how much is the Cheapest new BMW that matches the vRS's poor performance.

&

 please save me from the £17,000 for a vRS stuff, thats not what you need to pay.

 if Skoda are going to be Advertising crazy prices now for Monte Carlo Techs

they will be back selling few models like they were before doing the Tech offers last year.,

 

It was about Motorway Fuel use.  

So whats the cheapest new Economic BMW going for currently?

Buying with money not leasing!

 

EDIT,

Found it, about £16,200 for a 114i ES 3 door manual 102 bhp.

Quite good value and a bargain compared to the crazy prices being asked for some Skodas now.

I don't drive at 56mph all the time, just now and again when I have time and want to save a bit of cash

 

but even pushing it a bit you struggle to get less than 55mpg

You cant turn a thread into 'but for the money'. Money wasnt mentioned. The topic of conversation was 'fast'. Just because your seeing truth in what im saying, doesnt seem you can bring money into it as a back up.

Yes the bmw may be more expensive, but you also pay for a better quality car. Yes skoda's are well built for the money, but when you take a drive in the likes of an audi a3 or a bmw (yes i know they cost more), you realise that speed isnt the priority here (at this price point). Theyre built better, much smoother and much quieter, more kit as standard. Im not denying you pay more for the badge, because you do, but you also have to take other factors into account

And no. No leases found on my drive or garage either mate

Edited 5 March, 201412 yr by Otaylor38