skoda Fabia vrs mk2 1.4 TSI vs 1.9 TDI mk1

[thomasaspin]

Hi Briskoda I'm just in the process of buying A VRS which one i buy is down to you guys!!! Im 21 years old in a pretty underpaid job and I've been saving for a good year now for one of these bad boys I'm just really worried about the oil consumption issues , engine issues , running poorly on anything less than 98 ron and the DSG and spark plugs failure so what is your experience with your VRS mk2? really as bad as the forums make out or is that just one in a bad bunch spoiling the whole crop? a friend of mine has the VRS mk1 SE the rare blue version and has his currently running at 270bhp with an uprated turbo and an abundance of other cool things and tells me the mk2's are riddled with issues and to get the diesel version the only problem i have is all the diesels have a extremely high mileage! so guys any input would be superb can these 1.4 engines take a remap/ tuning box??  would a tuning box void my warranty if taken out before every service? what kind of things do they allow before a void of warranty I'm talking 

 

induction filter 

dump valve 

tmc tuning box

varex?

 

so all in all thanks guys heres a few pics of the exact skoda I'm looking at 

 

 

[Ootohere]

It is 2 out of 10 that spoiled the bunch and that is growing to 3 in 10.

& there were only 1,800 of them.

Then around 1,200 of the revised engine from late 2012.

 

So just find a good one, maybe even one that has had a Replacement Engine, 

& be sure to have a valid Warranty, because Engine Failure without might cost you £4,000 plus.

Edited 13 September, 2014 by goneoffSKi

[rickf]

I love my mk2 but will only be keeping it for 3 years. .. I would go for either the best mk1 I could get or a mk2 with some kind of warrantee or if possible one that has had a recent engine swap to a cthe engine

[Ootohere]

No CAVE engined cars were fitted with CTHE Engines as replacements.

 

Just some replacement engines had Upgraded Parts, but still the ECU / Map / Engine Management of a CAVE engine.

[pee81]

If I where you I'd go for which ever model you can afford without leaving yourself short. Both are good cars in their own right just get out there and enjoy your new ride

[Moist Von Lipwig]

I never had a Mk1 vRS but did have a Mk1 Elegance and would rate it over the Mk2 build quality. The Mk2 vRS is a nice car, pokey engine and cheap to run, as long as you can insure it cheaply. DSG v Manual is a personal choice, as is fuel choice.

Yes the mk2s have some issues but the an older mk1 is likely to have some issues as well for other reasons such as age and potential abuse or in either case you could get a good one.

As they are quite different i suggest you try them and see what you like and can really afford as the buying costs are going to be quite different i would have thought.

[tattyjay]

The standard VRS MK II is quick, I've not driven a MK 1, never mind one that has 270 but wouldn't think it would be that much faster. Plus you have the DSG in the MK II so becomes a kind of go -kart. Maybe 10 laps of a track yes, but on the road no since you don't have the freedom without going over those magic numbers that will likely see you banned. I'd say after 215 - 220 you're pushing the MK II that bit too far and that little engine isn't going to like it. Really depends on your budget I'd say.

[Ally_bassman]

I have owned both; the MK1 is good, really good. I traded it in, picked up my MK2 and never looked back. I liked the punchy torque of the 1.9 TDI engine, but at the end of the day it's just a derv lump out of a Golf/A3 and sounds like a taxi.

The MK2 has a much better engine/drivetrain IMO. The DSG box is fantastic. People will ramble on about 'proper gearboxes' but it's down to personal preferences.

If you want a 7 year old diesel, get the MK1. If you want a newer, faster petrol with a semi auto gearbox, get the MK2.

Neither handle brilliantly, both have rattles and are built to a budget. Both have their faults too.

You can't go wrong with either.

[MattGreen]

I'm fairly sure all parts mentioned would harm warranty. I understand the want for more power, and pub bragging rights, but really the mk2 vrs is adequately powered/geared for road use. With the loud pedal all the way down it only takes a few seconds to become very illegal!

I've not been in a mk1 vrs but I imagine with both cars in standard form the mk2 would feel (and actually be) a lot faster.

You don't get diesel economy but 40mpg is easy to achieve, very good for 180bhp. If you get the later cthe engined car you have a much better chance of not having issues and they are a bit more powerful too. Depending on budget they have some very good deals on at the mo.

Test drive one of each would be my advice. Then buy a mk2 so that you're not driving a tractor ;-)

I had an audi with the 1.9tdi lump...the engines are worlds apart.

[Ally_bassman]

I've not been in a mk1 vrs but I imagine with both cars in standard form the mk2 would feel (and actually be) a lot faster.

The way that the power is delivered in the MK1 makes it feel faster in 1st and 2nd gear. In reality it isn't. The big slab of torque gives you a nice shove into the back of the seat that the MK2 doesn't really give you with its linear power delivery.

[lordsummit]

If you want a mark 2, make sure you buy a Skoda Approved one. PM me and I'll tell you why!

[lordsummit]

Oh, and Goneoffski, I've been trying to PM you, seems you don't accept them?

[Ootohere]

PM on.

 

No need to Buy a Skoda Approved Used Car.

 You can not be sure that all checks are done,

that the ECU does not have a Remap on or Checked if there was previously, or Settings are back to Factory Stttings.

Not even a Guarantee all Service Campaign Items have been done.

 

But there will be a Skoda Approved Warranty.

(which they or the Dealer then possibly tries to say in Void, because the Previous Owner Remaped the car.

Yet they sold you it, and never Ensured by doing a check and ECU Update that it was Running on the Latest Skoda / VW Map / Software.)

 

You can Buy a well looked after car, check the Service and Warranty History, Buy a Skoda Approved Extended Warranty,

Have a Proper Service done including getting Spark Plugs changed,

& save money compared to a Skoda Approved Used Cars.

 

They have been know to resell Rejected Cars, (Rejected due to problems) they get put back out on the market without it being a given that they actually addressed high oil usage, replaced the engine etc,

and do not tell the Buyers or the Trade,

Edited 14 September, 2014 by goneoffSKi

[Ant FR]

standard the mk2 is a lot faster than a mk1 sandard.  It also drives better on track.  If you intend to take it on track the mk2 will allow this.  The mk1 will just feel like a diesel. I had an FR tdi remapped and 220bhp Ibiza Cupra Tdi so i can compare.

 

Also worth bearing in mind, one is a 15 yr old design chassis, the mk2 is a lot newer.  Like most new cars i would only buy with an approved warranty, as most new cars are not fixable on your drive.

 

If you want to mod then go the diesel route, however i would seriously say look at a cupra ibiza TDi before you do as out the box they are pretty awesome and still the only genuine out the box diesel hot hatch from that era. I would also say look at the polo gti 6n i think it is, and the cupra 1.8t,  if you want big power, ultimately these are the ones to go for.  But then in the same price bracket is the golf gti mk5 and leon FR and Leon Cupra.  Ultimately the world is your oyster with 7k in your pocket in vag world so go and test drive a few and see what you want.

[fabiamk2SE]

Also worth bearing in mind, one is a 15 yr old design chassis, the mk2 is a lot newer.

The chassis isnt much different though is it? Other than a few suspension tweaks?

[Toxicvrs]

The chassis isnt much different though is it? Other than a few suspension tweaks?

I think so

[Sparkly]

The chassis isnt much different though is it? Other than a few suspension tweaks?

 

Not much difference, still the same platform IIRC just with revisions. 

[sharkrider]

a fair few revisions though, and they are not announced, my 2013 vRS has different suspension than my 2010 vRS... I will be polybushing it in the future, and you actually need to order a different kit for the 2013 on.... so the mark II's have different suspension...

[Sparkly]

a fair few revisions though, and they are not announced, my 2013 vRS has different suspension than my 2010 vRS... I will be polybushing it in the future, and you actually need to order a different kit for the 2013 on.... so the mark II's have different suspension...

 

True enough, but still largely the same underpinnings.  Also I would imagine many of the revisions will be largely aimed at reliability, longevity and ease of servicing etc, as opposed to intentionally looking for better driving dynamics, although some will doubtlessly help.

[BossFox]

The way that the power is delivered in the MK1 makes it feel faster in 1st and 2nd gear. In reality it isn't. The big slab of torque gives you a nice shove into the back of the seat that the MK2 doesn't really give you with its linear power delivery.

 

This sums it up nicely.

 

The mk1 feels quicker than it is because it has punchy power delivery in the mid-range.

The mk2 feels slower than it is as there is no drama to the power delivery.

 

Which car is better completely depends on your own priorities.

I really like the mk1 and am not really a fan of the mk2 (I've owned both) where other people feel the other way.

[sharkrider]

yeah, I'm the other way..... I had a mark I for 80,000 miles, and have had 2 mark II's for a total of 77,000 miles now, and in my opinion, the mark II is ahead in every way except fuel economy, and looks, although my black stealth estate looks good I think ... however the 600 + miles I did last weekend averaged 41mpg on the motorway, which isn't bad, and used no oil either...

 

Also I had more warrenty done on my mark one, my mark II's have been more reliable. my mark I needed a gearbox, EGR and console bushes, my first mark II had a new track rod end. thats it, my second has had a new set of spark plugs. thats it.

 

the mark 2 is faster standard than a remapped mark I , (the M3 took the WHOLE of the straight at castle coomb to pass me! lol, I thought he must be broken, so I backed off before quarry to let him through ), better handling too without that big iron lump at the front...

 

I prefere the DGS too, i KNOW allot of people dont buy the car simply because of the DSG, but I have an MX5 , and while I enjoy changing gear, I would prefere to have DSG every day, including on the track!

 

I could go on... BUT I also accept, that other people may have completely different opinions, on the same areas!

 

just my opinion especially as some who have had problems with their car feel so different! but i will be keeping this one

[dandanfings]

just to put you at ease, mine has almost 12k on the clock and has not used a single drop of oil, also had a tuning box for the past 4k and again not a drop and never missed a beat.

It is a 2013 model with the revised engine.

 

I am sure some have been unlucky, just try to find a good one... funnily enough mine will be up for sale shortly as company car is incoming and i cant have a 3rd car due to parking restrictions where i live.