I must admit that having owned my Octavia since March 2012, and with it having over 130K miles on the clock, I am still amazed at how eager the engine is, and how well it pulls uphill.

My previous cars have included BMW 528i and tuned Alfas, so I do appreciate a bit of power, but this has totally surprised me.

I once recommended someone that they buy a basic 1.9 Octavia as a family car, and someone else chimed in and said that they had one and it struggled to do 70MPH - you can guess what my response was.

Seriously, for a basic 105BHP engine, it does seem very willing, and this has been highlighted a couple of times on the continent, when we have been on a steady incline, and accelerated at 80MPH in top gear up to nearly 100MPH.

Which brings me to the last point, is this a 105BHP engine (are they all like this?) or has it been chipped/remapped?

Having owned a 105 MK5 Golf, i would say yours has probably been mapped.

 

Std they are nothing to write home about, but mapped they are nice to drive.

It does sound like its had a remap so will probably be putting out aroind 130ps. The PD engine creates a lot of its torque low down too which is probably what gave you the top gear roll on.

sounds like its mapped too, they are such much nicer to drive mapped 

It sounds like mine, as it's got a lot of grunt/pull all through the revs, I'd need to get a go in a standard one to compare (is a 51 passat 1.9tdi the same ie 105) if so, I know someone with one and could swap

Then when in the astra (1.7) it's gutless

Edited 27 December, 201411 yr by Cleo

If I plugged in my VCDS and ran group 11 logs while you hammered it, I could tell you if it was mapped.

I'm going to Wilson tomorrow with mine, I wonder if he could check

Thanks for the answers guys.

What made me think about this, was when we had a courtesy car a few years ago, a year old Audi A3 1.6 Sport six speed, and I found it totally gutless. At the time I was used to driving petrol cars so was capable of taking it up the revs and shifting quickly. That car was incapable of gathering speed in fifth gear (let alone sixth) at 65mph, up the same hill that my Octavia will manage easily in top at the same speed.

I have a 97 Alfa GTV in the garage, and may be interested to find out if anyone has done a diesel conversion on one - I would once have found this a heretical question, but I am sold on diesels now.

Edited 28 December, 201411 yr by andyoctavia

Hi. I don't want to put the "mokkers" on this, but a few weeks ago I posted on here about my 105bhp Octavia having loads of power but poor economy. I've had it on 2 rolling roads getting figures of 116bhp and122bhp. I was told that it hadn't been mapped but that the Variable Vanes on the turbo were stuck open and the ECU was compensating by  putting more fuel into the engine to compensate. Hence I was getting more power but poor fuel economy. I have since had a reconditioned Turbo fitted. This has considerably improved the fuel economy and the car feels a lot smoother to drive. It does still feel it has more than 105 bhp though when comparing it to my sons' 105 bhp Golf.

This thread is interesting, I have a PD105 wagon and my 300mile journey from Norwich to Llandudno a few days ago resulted in a 38mpg average (460 miles from a full tank!), but there didn't seem to be any lacking in power in any gear! When I first got it, it had similar performance to a 1.8 non turbo Mk4 golf gti (125bhp), which I kinda expected.

I do have some strange sounds coming from the engine that need investigating, so stuck vanes could be my issue....I have a "stalling"(?) noise (like a rally car) and what sounds like an open dump valve in second gear...

Mines an ex police car, so doubt it's had any form of engine modifications at all! Want it mapped though....

Yep, 38! Managed to get it to 46 at one point crawling along the M6 at 35, but that's the best it got! I think it has issues though, I know it needs at least an oil change! I blame the roof box too, but that wouldn't make a huge difference really.

It usually gets 550 to a tank, but I think that's mainly due to being only a few miles to work, so the engine never really gets hot until I go for a run to get it hot and clear anything out.

That is too low. My economy has dipped recently (over and above the normal winter dip) due to a sticky rear caliper. Might be worth checking for very hot brake discs. Don't touch them though!, the excess heat on mine can be felt by putting my hand close by without losing my skin!!

I recently had a week's holiday in Scotland, fully laden with SWMBO and 3 dogs in the car, and got 62mpg out if mine! (That's running the stage 1 map, and calculated brim to brim, which isn't that different from my re-calibrated maxidot reading). 700 miles + on a full tank is not out of the question.

 

Mike

That's some mpg fully laden, says a lot for octavia tdi's, especially when mapped....it makes you wonder why some people buy/prefer petrol

That's some mpg fully laden, says a lot for octavia tdi's, especially when mapped....it makes you wonder why some people buy/prefer petrol

Because there's more to life than worrying about fuel consumption.

I hate the way 4 cylinder diesels deliver their power, they can never be as smooth as a petrol and the performance trade off for thermal efficiency is just too great.

That and having to put gloves on to refill it with the devils fuel :-)

For me, diesels belong in vans and boats where economy over performance is a major consideration.

Different folks different strokes ;-)

^^^ 

 

You have certainly not driven a mapped CR then!!

 

I agree they are not for everyone and refuelling needs to be done with care though.

^^^

You have certainly not driven a mapped CR then!!

I agree they are not for everyone and refuelling needs to be done with care though.

Not a mapped CR but standard 170 Passat and a truly awful 318 estate with m sport pack. That was probably the biggest let down I have ever driven. Good knows why there are so many of them.

I raise your mapped CR with a mapped tsi :-)

Our millage rules out an oil burner,they have their place, especially where milage economy and bik are concerned.

Fortunately I don't have to worry about any of the above.

I just find it odd when people say why would you ever consider a petrol when there are manifold reasons why I would rule out a diesel.

The CR is a far cry from the earlier PD engines, they are in fact too linear and petrol like for my liking, I have also heard petrol vRS’s on tickover that rattle louder than their equivalent CR vRS (or even a non vRS 170CR).

 

Fully agree about the 318 though, I was not impressed with the 318 or 320 oil burners either (the 330 however....!!) 

 

We considered the 1.8 Yeti as a TDi is not needed for the mileage it does (although it has done more miles now than we thought we would be covering in it) but the 170CR won the battle, since it has been mapped it is even better and i was goo before.

(the 330 however....!!) 

Sure is!....I nearly got one before the octy but there was something put me off, seller for one

My brother had a 330d, smashing drive.

I will probably be going back to petrol on my next car now my mileage has dropped. But agree the cr170 sounds petrol like.

Mine literally does just over a mile to work and the same back now, apart from a couple of miles taking SWMBO into work I'm not doing a lot more miles than that, so it's not really getting warm as it should do. But the last fill up returned just over 40mpg even doing that.

Mike

41.32mpg calculated for the last tank full going to Llandudno (437 miles total from filler cap to touching the bottom of the redline). So far, the return trip to Norwich shows 44.7mpg on the mfd for 310 miles, most of which was on motorways at 80 but an average speed shows as 42mph,and just over half a tank used with an apparent 320 miles to empty...

Still shows extra performance and has the strange noises though....maybe it likes the colder weather...! Didn't notice any extra heat from any brake though, so I think I can rule that out...