I suppose for the OP and the thread the advice is that performance is relative to your expectations.

Whatever you have something will be quicker. How often will you use the performance and how much extra will you pay for that in fuel. And is that cost worth it to you with your mileage.

Go on other forums and 300bhp+ is a starting point and we are getting to the stage where reps 2.0 Diesels are pushing 200bhp, in fact the next Passat (Due 2015) is to have a 236bhp 2.0D with 450nm of torque.

But saying all that the OP may find a 105bhp 1.6Tdi will be plenty and will be cheap to run while still looking sporty.

Only way is to test drive them at length yourself and see what you think. Both my wife and I are Fabia fans and have purchased several but we wouldn't purchase a VRS or Monte because of the ride. But that just shows you how different people are, we really wanted to like them but not for us. But you don't know unless you test drive them yourself.

Lee

Agreed. It depends what you're used to, what youve experienced and your driving style.

There is always faster stuff about. It just gets less and less often the faster you are haha.

Kerbweight is a defined term and doesn't include fuel , other liquids, spare wheel and tools etc

 

There's no continuity though some manufacturers quote individual models, some quote for the base model without aircon or any options. Some you think must be made up.

 

Look at the Passat, the brochure Kerbweight is 5kg more than the Mass in Service yet the M.i.S includes 90% fuel and driver. VW actually quote.  Figures are calculated in accordance with manufacturer’s criteria. The individual unladen weight depends on the specification of the vehicle, this then reduces the possible payload accordingly. 

 

BMW quote two figures for "unladen Weight" DIN and EU. Non are the same as the declared Mass in Service.

 

When you spend time on towing forums you quickly learn "Unladen Weight", "Kerbweight", " Mass in Service" vary widely between manufacturers and usually are quite a way out as to what the car weighs on the bridge.

Edited 29 September, 201411 yr by logiclee

Re Kerb Weight, it does confuse.

But does include quite a lot.

 

http://carleasingmadesimple.com/business-car-leasing/audi/a6/kerb-weight

 

In 2010 the Kerb Weight of a Fabia vRS Hatch was 1,243 kg & a Estate was 1,238

The Gross Laden Weight was 1,718 KG for the Hatch. the Estate is 1,713 kg

That is the 'Revenue Weight' on the V5 from 2010 - 2014.

 

Then in 2013 the Estate gets its Unladen 'Kerb Weight' changed officially to 1,313.

Its actual weight, heavier than a Hatch.

 

In 2014, the Hatch then has its Kerb Weight changed to 1,318 KG,  again heavier by 5 kg than the Estate.

Oddly the Gross Weight, & Revenue Weight stays at 1,718 kg.

 

It is pick a Number any Number with VWG and other Manufacturers.

When they announce a Reduction in Weight like the New Fabias,

You have to find a like for like Model before you can confirm 40 KG less or what ever.

Edited 29 September, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

Re Kerb Weight, it does confuse.

But does include quite a lot.

http://carleasingmadesimple.com/business-car-leasing/audi/a6/kerb-weight

That's not the legal definition

It gets complex when you refer to mass in service or mass in running order but kerbweight is the minimum weight the vehicle can be

That's not the legal definition

It gets complex when you refer to mass in service or mass in running order but kerbweight is the minimum weight the vehicle can be

 

Not always.

 

Some bruchures will quote "Kerbweight" but will include fluids and spare wheel etc. It's all down to each manufacturer, it's a nightmare if you are towing. especially if you have licence post 1997.

 

Ford actually quote in their brochures for "Kerbweight"  the car with 75kg Driver and 90% fuel which is the V5 Mass in Service definition.

 

Lee

Edited 29 September, 201411 yr by logiclee

They take a Model off the Line, a Base Model, and that represents, even though the Model Bought might have Options,

or Face Lifted, get a Spare Fitted as Standard, and be 75 kg by the time it is on sale.

They even provide their own figures, not necessarily checked.

 

http://skoda.co.uk/fuel-consumption-statement

 

My Fabia vRS 2010 as Driven by me,

Filled with Fuel, spare fuel, Tools, 2 Spares etc, is 1,440 kg.  so near 200 kg more than the Skoda 'Kerb Weigh',

& 278 kg less than the Revenue / Gross Weight.

That is driven on the Weigh Bridge,

Edited 29 September, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

 

My Fabia vRS 2010 as Driven by me,

Filled with Fuel, spare fuel, Tools, 2 Spares etc, is 1,440 kg.  so near 200 kg more than the Skoda 'Kerb Weigh',

& 278 kg less than the Revenue / Gross Weight.

That is driven on the Weigh Bridge,

 

That's 40kg more than my wife's 1 series 1.6 Turbo Petrol with 8 Speed auto.

No spare there's no room, no tools other than supplied, full tank and a couple of packets of sweets.

 

I've only taken the 1.2TSi Fabia to work a couple of times and never had it on the bridge. I will next time I use it.

 

Lee

My tools include a Trolley Jack,  Tool Box, 2 full size alloys. 10 litre can,  etc. no rear Ballast Weight fitted.

So it is easy to know how much weight can be lifted out in 10 minutes,

& passengers and Luggage in instead.

 

PS.

I stay in the car when weighing them, because i drive them.

and the actual on the Road Weight needs a Driver.

Mrs Lee is quite possibly 40 kg lighter than me, which is not hard to be.

Edited 29 September, 201411 yr by goneoffSKi

My tools include a Trolley Jack, Tool Box, 2 full size alloys. 10 litre can, etc. no rear Ballast Weight fitted.

So it is easy to know how much weight can be lifted out in 10 minutes,

& passengers and Luggage in instead.

Seats pull out in 30s too if hitting a track

Folding flat will do.

As a bit of Trivia our Mk1 Fabia 1.9Tdi weighed exactly the same as my Mk1 Subaru Impreza 2.0 Turbo AWD Series McRae special edition by Prodrive.

 

Both weighed 1260kg on the bridge. The bodywork on the Mk1 Impreza's felt like tin foil but it made the power to weight ratio outstanding.  The later models got a bit lardy but were better built and crashed better.

 

Lee

Son has just bought a Monte Carlo 1.6 tdi and its a great car 72mpg easy and a firm but comfy ride , it's not a rocket but neither a snail it really needed discs at the rear though , I simply don't understand as the Europeans get discs on the rear of the monte, any upgrades to the power output of the monte needs updated brakes to the rear I.e discs