my new skoda octavia scout 180 tsi 4x4 dsg

[Gromle]

amusing why?

As Kalle(sorry, I cant spell your entire name without looking, Im on my phone) has already stated, when somebody talks about a RS version, its supposed to be fast, not the slowest of the bunch.

Edited 5 April, 2015 by Gromle

[Yeti_Man]

I wish we could get the 1.8tsi Scout over here. I've had powerful fwd VRS Octavias and the awd equivalent. The fwd VRS was a big downgrade IMO. And agreed, the sporting flagship of the range should be the quickest.

[kiwiboy]

The 1.8TSI in the 4x4 is set up a little differently to the engine in the non 4x4 version.

 

Both are quoted as 132kw while the torque in the 4x4 is 280Nm compared to 250Nm in the non 4x4.  Apparently it is set up this way to make up for the 100kg or so extra weight of the 4x4 unit. The extra torque means the 0-100 km/hr times are exactly the same but the 4x4 uses more fuel.

[JPH0091]

The 1.8TSI in the 4x4 is set up a little differently to the engine in the non 4x4 version.

 

Both are quoted as 132kw while the torque in the 4x4 is 280Nm compared to 250Nm in the non 4x4.  Apparently it is set up this way to make up for the 100kg or so extra weight of the 4x4 unit. The extra torque means the 0-100 km/hr times are exactly the same but the 4x4 uses more fuel.

To make up for the extra weight, as primary factor, but also the additional losses in the transmission which are low but not negligible.

At the end, the 4 wheels beeing also more efficient to transmit power, especially during initial acceleration, it's ending up with same time on 0-100km/h.

Not sure this is still the same on the 80-120.

Edited 5 April, 2015 by JPH0091

[fatzy]

Yes, it's definitively a sleeper (hope the link works):

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CZu8G3XkFx8

In Norway the 1.8 TSI 4x4 is available as Elegance and L&K as well.

[kennethsorum]

You have this link as well

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JvKJq3t2c2c&itct=CBgQpDAYBCITCLPl98zx3sQCFQJ9HAodmlsAJTIHcmVsYXRlZEifrpCvt4PvzQk%3D

[JPH0091]

I've never tought it was (a sleeper). And I'd have selected the 4x4 version if it was sold in France.

Unfortunately we get only the diesel ones.

At least we were lucky enough to get the 1.8 TSI 2x4 version in Elegance from the start...

Edited 5 April, 2015 by JPH0091

[Gromle]

You have this link as well

Have you picked up the car yet?

[kennethsorum]

Nope. Wedensday i hope

[Gromle]

Waiting to hear your first imperessions

[Greg R]

I think it's amusing that you guys think the vrs diesel is slow. Whilst on paper, the 4x4 1.8 petrol is supposed to be a fraction quicker, i would wager that the over all package of the vrs would result in it being a quicker point to point car.

Snet with speeling mistkaes from my phoen

[JPH0091]

Surely the fake exhaust!

[Gromle]

I think it's amusing that you guys think the vrs diesel is slow. Whilst on paper, the 4x4 1.8 petrol is supposed to be a fraction quicker, i would wager that the over all package of the vrs would result in it being a quicker point to point car.

Snet with speeling mistkaes from my phoen

I dunno. The VRS is quite heavy.

It would be fun to see the vrs TDI vs the 1.8tsi vs the 184bhp diesel 4x4 on a track.

Lets hand them over to our tamed racedriver!

[fatzy]

The

I think it's amusing that you guys think the vrs diesel is slow. Whilst on paper, the 4x4 1.8 petrol is supposed to be a fraction quicker, i would wager that the over all package of the vrs would result in it being a quicker point to point car.

Well, "we guys" do not think the vRS diesel is slow (not me anyway), but I find it amusing that it is called vRS, since the 1.8 TSI in every version is quicker. Yes, we speak of at least one second.

Which pacakge should reverse this, just because it is called vRS? Do you seriously think that the official Skoda figures are wrong, in the disadvantage of the vRS?

[pipsyp]

I think it's amusing that you guys think the vrs diesel is slow. Whilst on paper, the 4x4 1.8 petrol is supposed to be a fraction quicker, i would wager that the over all package of the vrs would result in it being a quicker point to point car.

Snet with speeling mistkaes from my phoen

Agreed...the 4x4 whilst v competent wont be as capable or as enjoyable IMHO as a vRS with its specific chassis tuning, brakes and progressive steering....and in any case the vRS TDi is a sub 8 second 0-60 car comfortably (the book figures are rubbish) and in gear even in a relatively short rev range nearly 100lb/ft torque will count for something.

Not to say the TSI isnt a compelling combination but there is more to it than raw figures.

[Greg R]

The vrs diesel is the performance diesel variant. If you want a performance petrol, there is a petrol vrs version also. Much like the claimed mpg figures, i don't believe the brochure figures quoted by skoda represent real world performance.

As i said, i belive the overall vrs package, even the diesel, will be a quicker point to point car, even if it might lose out slightly in the traffic light drag race.

Snet with speeling mistkaes from my phoen

[JPH0091]

By the way, I'm not sure you did your maths, but for every speed, the torque available to wheels is exactely the same for the 1.8 TSI compared to the vRS TDI.

Of course it is available mostly on lower gear and higher revs for the TSI. This is what we like on petrol cars.

On the 6th gear, the TDI as around 20% more torque after 90km/h, but below the petrol is better (I mean more torque available: 566Nm for the TSI at 70km/h vs 452 for the vRS TDI...).

 

You should not only rely on the figures given for the engine torque.

You need to do you maths with the transmission ratios and axle ratio. Then you see.

 

Max torque available at wheels depending on car speed:

 

 

Then, the 1.8TSI weights 140kg!!! less than the vRS TDI...

Edited 6 April, 2015 by JPH0091

[Gromle]

The vrs diesel is the performance diesel variant. If you want a performance petrol, there is a petrol vrs version also. Much like the claimed mpg figures, i don't believe the brochure figures quoted by skoda represent real world performance.

As i said, i belive the overall vrs package, even the diesel, will be a quicker point to point car, even if it might lose out slightly in the traffic light drag race.

Snet with speeling mistkaes from my phoen

The part that I find amusing, is that vRS, on paper, is the slowest of the 184bhp diesel versions. The 4x4 with 0-100kmh in just 7.1 seconds must a fun, and thats the version that should be called vrs tdi :p

Are big there big differences on vrs suspension from the normal versions with the lowered sportsuspension?

[MidVRS]

It disappoints me that what was once a very good forum of people helping each other it has now descended into a my car is faster than your car slagging match with both the 1.8 TSi and the 1.4 TSi owners delightedly pointing out that their car is faster than a diesel RS...If I wanted a petrol I would have bought one but based on my mileage and the type of driving I do it makes no sense and I really don't see the pointing in people taking pleasure in the fact that (on paper) their car is faster...We are all supposed to be enjoying the marque, regardless of what variant we have chosen....

 

I'll get me coat

[JPH0091]

To Gromle

This is mainly due to the better grip with the 4x4, I think, more particularly on the 0-100km/h test.

Edited 6 April, 2015 by JPH0091

[fabdavrav]

Any car is only a fast as the muppet behind the wheel...........................

 

If the driver has the mental capacity of a goldfish they should not be given anything more complex than a sponge..............unfortunately a lot of drivers these days seem to be "goldfish"

 

In real life the 4x4 system will find better traction down a twisty back road & will beat a 2wd only car if the power outputs are similar. Anyway the quoted figures in the brochures can be "off", so don't take them literally! Remember that the figures are on the std fuel & half load, so empty car to just driver & use super premium (Shell Nitro) & you go faster...........then remove the rear seats, carpets, roof rails, wing mirrors, lower the car etc & go faster still.........................how far do you want to take it??

 

However NOTHING beats a works driven white van...................

[fatzy]

It disappoints me that what was once a very good forum of people helping each other it has now descended into a my car is faster than your car slagging match with both the 1.8 TSi and the 1.4 TSi owners delightedly pointing out that their car is faster than a diesel RS...If I wanted a petrol I would have bought one but based on my mileage and the type of driving I do it makes no sense and I really don't see the pointing in people taking pleasure in the fact that (on paper) their car is faster...We are all supposed to be enjoying the marque, regardless of what variant we have chosen....

 

I'll get me coat

Don't be disappointed, you contributed. And I think that everbody here enjoys our Skoda (or are looking forward to pick up their new one) and like to emphazise their good sides. A discussion about the marque differences isn't really a problem imo, it reflects peoples interests and highlights different priorities. It may be that someone can benefit from some of the information.

If you don't like a thread, feel free not to read or contribute. That's my philosophy.

[Redboy]

Those naughty Norwegians talking about performance...on paper, (that no-one believes unless it proves their particular model is quicker/more economic etc.) they're just taking their "revenge" for all the 50+mpg tales the diesel boys gloat about with their remapped point and shoot torque monsters.... As Fabdabrav says, white vans, lunatics and UK traffic volumes can quickly nullify any slight gains in the real world. The 1.8 TSI seems a sensible choice, the VRS diesel has the look, so both cars are a good balance of performance and economy. I still think that most of the contributors are helpful.

[Genoa1893]

Agreed...the 4x4 whilst v competent wont be as capable or as enjoyable IMHO as a vRS with its specific chassis tuning, brakes and progressive steering....and in any case the vRS TDi is a sub 8 second 0-60 car comfortably (the book figures are rubbish) and in gear even in a relatively short rev range nearly 100lb/ft torque will count for something.

Not to say the TSI isnt a compelling combination but there is more to it than raw figures.

My much slower 150 horses diesel verision has progressive steering. Infact I find this steering almost perfect (i.e. dead precise, meaty, and almost without reactions).

[JPH0091]

As we French never know where to stop a good joke, I just go one step further to show this is not only on paper.

Please see:

Match : Octavia III 1.8 TSi DSG vs Octavia III Combi RS 2.0 TDi DSG

 

Generally speking I enjoy browsing on this forum, read many topics, don't participate when I'm not particularly inrerested or knowledgeable, never miss to mention if I disagree, and am please to share any information useable to others. That's the way I see it.

Back to all the cars above mentioned in this topic, I do appreciate them, petrol or diesel, RS or not, and generally have a kind a priori on their drivers.

(of course one should never generalise )