Hi guys , on technical data of skoda it reads that scout 184 hp DSG accelerates up to 100 km/h in 7,8 seconds while VRS 184 hp DSG in 8,3 seconds ...is it correct ? Is it because 4x4 traction of scout ?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hi guys , on technical data of skoda it reads that scout 184 hp DSG accelerates up to 100 km/h in 7,8 seconds while VRS 184 hp DSG in 8,3 seconds ...is it correct ? Is it because 4x4 traction of scout ?

 

Yes.

So the Scout is the performance Octy?

 

  :giggle:        

There is some lucky guy waiting for an Elegance trim, 184, 4x4... so, not the off road stance of the scout and less drag... that would be even faster...

Id say that on the road there would be very little between the two...the vRS lacks the traction capability but then is a little lighter as is jot carrying the weight of the additional 4x4 hardware. The 0-62 on the vRS TDI is underestimated anyway.....there is little mechanical difference between one of these and a GTD that can do it in 7.5 secs so no doubt the vRS TDI is comfortably a sub 8 second to 62 car.

The scout is a good car for sure but its looks are nothing like as resolved as the vRS, it also probably doesnt drive quite so well doing without the vRS's specific chassis tuning, progressive steering rack and much better braking system. The scout is also v expensive.

I know what I would personally rather have....if I lived in the middle or nowhere, wanted 4wd and it had to be an Octavia I think id probably take the 150 Elegance with RRP anyway as to my eyes it looks better, better equipped overall, aint alot slower and best of all is cheaper.

 vRS's specific chassis tuning,

 

Like all mid range sporty VAG cars, isn't that just sport springs and dampers?

 

IMO the only sporty Octy is the TSI VRS version.

 

*Puts flame resistant suit on*

Interesting post, I tend to agree about the Vrs (tdi) being a ‘looker’ and the Vrs (tsi) being a ‘looker and goer’.

 

Would be embarrassed being out dragged by the scout at the traffic lights grand prix   

 

Ok at the first corner the Vrs would be well gone!!

FWD will always limit 0-60 sprints. My VRS TSI sucks at getaways compared to my less powerful and heavier 3-Series, and it is utterly destroyed by former 4WD Subaru's with similar power levels.

 

On new flat tarmac the gap closes but I am yet to find any surface where the VRS fronts will not spin in 1st under heavy acceleration. In the real world 4wd can easily knock a second or more off of 0-60 times.

 

*Subaru - Hold 4k rpm, dump the clutch, fly!

*VRS (manual) - Hold 3k rpm, gently release the clutch, hiccup a bit as TCS cuts in, then finally get going after you drop in to second.

 

The VRS TDI is probably as fast as the VRS TSI in 1st gear due to traction being the limiter. Even 2nd gear can be a real struggle for the TSI, and 3rd will spin in damp conditions. If only Skoda did a VRS with 4WD...

Edited 20 January, 201511 yr by Orville

I tend to agree with Orville. The tsi spins the wheels unless it's dry, clean, good tarmac and the driver is cautious feeding the power.  Once moving it's better, but I've spun a wheel in 3rd at 40+mph on... Mildly moist tarmac (m1, Watford gap service slip road).  For point and squirt driving a suspect the scout wins much of the time.  The tsi vrs would probably benefit from an LSD but since that wasn't an option despite being on the golf gti performance pack, and the Leon cupra as standard, the only option would be an aftermarket mod. Quaife wavetrac, peloquin....there are good, proven options.  I can only guess at the difference these would make though.

Yup - I've 'enjoyed' spinning wheels on my VRS in 3rd, especially if the boot is loaded, accelerating away from roundabouts on damp A roads - fun but surprising.

The VRS TDI is probably as fast as the VRS TSI in 1st gear due to traction being the limiter. Even 2nd gear can be a real struggle for the TSI, and 3rd will spin in damp conditions. If only Skoda did a VRS with 4WD...

Yes exactly that, it would be in 2nd too except the TDI's gearing means it needs changing due to it redlining at 5 while the TSI just about gets to 100kph in 2nd. The TDI is behind after that and can't catch up. Tuning box fixes that though but obviously not standard figures then.

So the Scout is the performance Octy?

 

  :giggle:        

1.8 TSI and 2.0 TSI are better

The Scout may well be quicker than the TDi vRS from a standing start but it might not when you take into account in gear acceleration and handling. Also the vRS is faster, just not as quick to 60 from a stand still. Maximum speed of the vRS is some 7 MPH faster not that it will make any difference to us law abiding UK vRS and Scout driver of course.

 

If 0 to 60 is that important go for the TSi that is nearly a second quicker than the still impressive and Scout..... and even faster allegedly... not that we'll notice too much on her Majesty's perfect tarmac. It's the driving experience that's important, not bothered about the numbers.... much 

There is some lucky guy waiting for an Elegance trim, 184, 4x4... so, not the off road stance of the scout and less drag... that would be even faster...

I'm one of those lucky few...if you can call someone lucky for having to wait...

 

I was just wondering today how the different power/torque curves on the Octy will affect my driving habits, since the TDI has more torque, but at a narrower rpm band and less power but at lower rpm...

 

Edited 20 January, 201511 yr by kallekilponen

I'm one of those lucky few...if you can call someone lucky for having to wait...

 

I was just wondering today how the different power/torque curves on the Octy will affect my driving habits, since the TDI has more torque, but at a narrower rpm band and less power but at lower rpm...

 

T5curves.pngTDIcurves.jpg

 

You just need to keep it in the right gear for the power band, that's all. I've been driving oil burners for the the last 12 years (just gone back to petrol), it took a little bit of getting used to but just stir the gear box when you need to. The diesels are higher geared to compensate for the narrower max rpm.

There is some lucky guy waiting for an Elegance trim, 184, 4x4... so, not the off road stance of the scout and less drag... that would be even faster...

This engine appeared on offer couple of months after I had ordered mine car.

 

I do feel slightly sorry because I didnt want vrs and some of its features, and I love a sleeper more.

 

Good things come to those who wait.

So a 4wd family car with the same engine as its 2wd sibling is faster?

 

How come Audi haven't managed that trick?

 

An Audi A3, or A4 2.0 TFSI quattro is slightly slower to 60 than the non quattro version.  Based on Skoda maths it should be faster.

 

Ford haven't managed it either - the 4wd Kuga is slower than the same engine in the 2wd.

 

Well done Skoda.

So the Scout wont be embarassed away from the lights vs a VRS. Cool.

It will also ride better on Australia's crap roads and wont scrape over all the stupid speed humps etc.

It'd be nice If Skoda would release it here soon. Supposedly due around March or April.

I spied my first ' in the flesh' Scouts on the back of a truck leaving Port Kembla (car arrival port) just last week so they can't be far away.

Edited 21 January, 201511 yr by AUSKOUT

So the Scout wont be embarassed away from the lights vs a VRS. Cool.

But the 4x4 184 Elegance might

The scout is a good car for sure but its looks are nothing like as resolved as the vRS.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'resolved' but if you meant understated then that's a positive for me.

Stealth!

So a 4wd family car with the same engine as its 2wd sibling is faster?

 

How come Audi haven't managed that trick?

 

An Audi A3, or A4 2.0 TFSI quattro is slightly slower to 60 than the non quattro version.  Based on Skoda maths it should be faster.

 

Ford haven't managed it either - the 4wd Kuga is slower than the same engine in the 2wd.

 

Well done Skoda.

Not sure where you got your figures*, but at least in the Finnish brochure the Quattro models are quicker from 0-100km/h than the FWD models..

 

A4 2.0 TFSI (125 kW) 8,1 s  -  A4 2.0 TFSI quattro (125 kW) 7,9 s

A4 2.0 TDI (130 kW) 8,2  s   -   A4 2.0 TDI quattro (130 kW) 7,8 s

 

And it would seem that the more power the model has, the bigger the difference. Which doesn't make the Skoda figures sound that outlandish.

 

*(Make sure to check the manual version, since Audi uses a different auto box in many of its quattro and non quattro models.)

Edited 21 January, 201511 yr by kallekilponen

Over certain levels of torque, the limits in traction of a FWD setup (but I never tried a LSD, a-la peloquin) are evident, or at least were pretty evident on the remapped VRS MkII PD of a dear friend of mine...

 

Max speed will be less fue to weight and some loss, but for what concerns starting from still...

The 1.8TSI FWD (180hp) with DSG is rated at 7.2 in Norway at least. Feels faster than the VRS diesel as well... Might be the  VRS is heaver for some reason?

Edited 21 January, 201511 yr by johnabrahamsen

The 1.8TSI FWD (180hp) with DSG is rated at 7.2 in Norway at least. Feels faster than the VRS diesel as well... Might be the  VRS is heaver for some reason?

The Finnish and German spec sheets say 7,5 s for both FWD and 4x4 (7,8 s for the Scout).

Then our magazines differ somewhat... Anyways its still faster than the VRS D.