The Nissan GTR obviously bogged here against a Standard £16,000 1390cc Estate. *DQ200 DSG*

Obviously the Nissan was faster.  But maybe too much traction was a bad thing.

Edited 29 June, 201510 yr by goneoffSKi

It's defo crazy how vag rate their cars, as previously said the 200bhp golf's where a match for most 230/240bhp cars and the newer 220 tsi must be pushing 240 I'd say!

The VRS TSI feels faster that "220PS" because it has very high low to mid-range torque (256lb/ft). Above 5K rpm the engine is pretty limp, and this is where big BHP/PS figures are normally made. From 1800-4000rpm my VRS feels more than a match for my old (~280PS) Impreza's, but beyhond that point the Jap cars would eat it for breakfast. DSG also adds to the feel-faster factor if you are used to manual.

 

With VAG turbo engines that DO NOT like to rev, torque is the most important factor. I personally think 220-230PS feels about right, but maybe I have a slow VRS.

That's a fair account orville I'd agree on that maybe it's just me, I was expecting it to be a little but slower as I just came from a 535d BMW and I would back the octavia to stay with the 535d (286bhp) all day long! Where as when I bought it I was thinking I'd have to get used to a big drop in performance! Same as I had a 280 Sti which was much quicker off the mark (4wd) but I reckon side by side at say 30mph the octy would stay with my old Scooby or thereabouts when in reality I assumed the octy would be miles off the pace! It's very surprising the amount of punch the 220ps tsi engine has certainly not disappointed having come from several good performance cars with lots more power! Fair play to the good old family car

Begs the question what the Superb 280 TSI will actually be pumping out then................  

It does that herchel!

Who says the GTIs performance is on par with the VXR?

On paper the VXR is 5.8 seconds 0-60 the GTI is 6.3 admittedly very close but not quite the same.

Once you get past 250Hp FWD finds it difficult to put the power down efficiently so increasing the power doesn't give much of a performance increase. That's where 4WD starts to make a difference.

Who says the GTIs performance is on par with the VXR?

On paper the VXR is 5.8 seconds 0-60 the GTI is 6.3 admittedly very close but not quite the same.

Once you get past 250Hp FWD finds it difficult to put the power down efficiently so increasing the power doesn't give much of a performance increase. That's where 4WD starts to make a difference.

Who says the GTIs performance is on par with the VXR?

On paper the VXR is 5.8 seconds 0-60 the GTI is 6.3 admittedly very close but not quite the same.

Once you get past 250Hp FWD finds it difficult to put the power down efficiently so increasing the power doesn't give much of a performance increase. That's where 4WD starts to make a difference.

The VRS TSI feels faster that "220PS" because it has very high low to mid-range torque (256lb/ft). Above 5K rpm the engine is pretty limp, and this is where big BHP/PS figures are normally made. From 1800-4000rpm my VRS feels more than a match for my old (~280PS) Impreza's, but beyhond that point the Jap cars would eat it for breakfast. DSG also adds to the feel-faster factor if you are used to manual.

 

With VAG turbo engines that DO NOT like to rev, torque is the most important factor. I personally think 220-230PS feels about right, but maybe I have a slow VRS.

 

I'm a bit surprised by your comment.

What really matters is the power that is transmitted to the wheels, in order to move the car.

Power is fully transmitted through a set of gearing, minus friction losses.

Torque on the other hand is multiplied by the overall gearing ratio.

As an exemple, two cars with the same power (~180 hp) will bring around the same max torque to the wheels for a given speed (say 1400 Nm at 90 km/h)

even though they have different values for max engine torque (e.g. 250 Nm for 1.8 TSI and 380 Nm for RS TDI).

Admittedly, it won't be on the same gear.

You can easily do the maths based on transmission and axle ratios.

Back to the RS TSI, during max acceleration, the gearbox is designed so that the most efficient is to remain as far as possible between 4500 and 6000 tr/min

(which is the max engine power), quite above the range of max torque (1500 to 4250 tr/min).

As far as I can agree a high engine torque on a broad range will bring smoothness and flexibility, what really matters for best performances is the engine max power, provided the transmission ratios are well designed.   

 

https://vimeo.com/60917841

0-60 times that manufacturer give dont mean a lot, look at the VXR take a beating from the St yet vauxhall claim it's faster of the mark! The astra vxr's aren't all they are made out to be!

Just noticed that Skoda UK, although removed most information about the vRS 230 ie from price guide, have left the claimed performance figures for it....

 

http://www.skoda.co.uk/models/new-octavia-vrs-hatch/performance

 

not a lot of difference.. wonder if it'll be the same for the true difference?

Just noticed that Skoda UK, although removed most information about the vRS 230 ie from price guide, have left the claimed performance figures for it....

http://www.skoda.co.uk/models/new-octavia-vrs-hatch/performance

not a lot of difference.. wonder if it'll be the same for the true difference?

It weighs 40kg more than golf and the golf's figures are much better yet in a drag there's less than half a car length between them. As I put above the manufacturer figures are rubbish the VXR is supposedly nearly a second faster than an St focus 0-60 yet on a drag race the focus beats it! There is so much to consider its unreal, if skoda claimed the vrs was 250bhp nobody would be any wiser as it is as good as most 250bhp cars around! Safe to say if you raced all the cars in a similar group down a straight and around a few bends the best driver would probably win as most of the cars 220 to 270 front wheel drive are very similar!

The UK NSL is 60 mph, and 70 on Dual Carriageways & Motorways, so does it really matter, ?

Do you Road Race?

 

You are driving a Family / Mini Cab Sized car that happens to have a hatch, and not really a Hot Hatch given its Power to Weight,

these days it hardly deserves being classed as a Warm Hatch.

Edited 29 June, 201510 yr by goneoffSKi

No it doesn't really matter to be honest haha just thought I'd say how impressive it was for a big lump that's all! As I said it was only a topic out of interest, I don't exactly drive fast never mind Road race I haven't got the balls and I also have a family. Was interesting to see what people thought!

I'm a bit surprised by your comment.

What really matters is the power that is transmitted to the wheels, in order to move the car.

Power is fully transmitted through a set of gearing, minus friction losses.

Torque on the other hand is multiplied by the overall gearing ratio.

As an exemple, two cars with the same power (~180 hp) will bring around the same max torque to the wheels for a given speed (say 1400 Nm at 90 km/h)

even though they have different values for max engine torque (e.g. 250 Nm for 1.8 TSI and 380 Nm for RS TDI).

Admittedly, it won't be on the same gear.

You can easily do the maths based on transmission and axle ratios.

Back to the RS TSI, during max acceleration, the gearbox is designed so that the most efficient is to remain as far as possible between 4500 and 6000 tr/min

(which is the max engine power), quite above the range of max torque (1500 to 4250 tr/min).

As far as I can agree a high engine torque on a broad range will bring smoothness and flexibility, what really matters for best performances is the engine max power, provided the transmission ratios are well designed.   

 

I will quantify my statement that my VRS feels faster than my old Impreza STI IV at low-medium revs, before the Impreza absolutely destroys it above 5,000rpm

 

Horsepower is calculated by multiplying the amount of torque by the RPM of the engine and dividing by 5,252. What this effectively means is that torque and BHP equalise at 5,252rpm.

 

*The TSI produces peak torque around 2000-4000, before begining to to dip and then diving after 5000rpm.

*My (1998) Impreza turbo did not begin to spin up until 3000rpm, started to bite at 4000rpm, and then hit peak boost between 5000-6500rpm, before trailing off and going limp at the 8,000rpm redline.

 

Note that the Octy VRS and STI IV both weigh about the same. At 5252rpm the Octy produces 217ft/lb torque vs 276ft/lb for the Impreza (manufacturers figures). This provides the Impreza a 27% torque advantage at 5252rpm. The 4WD system of the Subaru will incur higher loss, but this is countered by it's MUCH shorter (almost stupid) gearing. From memory, 5th gear in the Octy equals roughly 25mph per 1000rpm vs 19mph for the Subaru (5th was top gear within the Subaru).

 

For me it is clear that above 4500rpm the Subaru will murder the Octy, no-contest, easy win. Whilst the TSI begins to run out of breat the boxer is filling it's lungs and just getting started.

 

The downsides of the Impreza were high turbo lag and very little pull below 3700rpm. If you were caught in the wrong gear it would huff and puff, but from 4500 to 7200 it would blow the house in.

 

The TSI has vastly superior torque at sedate driving revs (2000-4000rpm), and it can certainly feel as fast or faster during normal driving conditions. However, push both hard and the result is not even close. One was a rally bred screamer and the other a sensible and slightly lardy Golf GTI.

Edited 29 June, 201510 yr by Orville

The UK NSL is 60 mph, and 70 on Dual Carriageways & Motorways, so does it really matter, ?

Do you Road Race?

 

You are driving a Family / Mini Cab Sized car that happens to have a hatch, and not really a Hot Hatch given its Power to Weight,

these days it hardly deserves being classed as a Warm Hatch.

Sorry mate, have to disagree with your warm hatch comment even in stock form.

But you remapped yours, and you are entitled to your opinion,

but 220 bhp and a medium sized family 5 door is in this day and age no Hot Hatch IMHO.

 

a Suzuki Swift with 134 bhp is considered a Junior Hot Hatch commonly.

I will quantify my statement that my VRS feels faster than my old Impreza STI IV at low-medium revs, before the Impreza absolutely destroys it above 5,000rpm

 

Horsepower is calculated by multiplying the amount of torque by the RPM of the engine and dividing by 5,252. What this effectively means is that torque and BHP equalise at 5,252rpm.

 

*The TSI produces peak torque around 2000-4000, before begining to to dip and then diving after 5000rpm.

*My (1998) Impreza turbo did not begin to spin up until 3000rpm, started to bite at 4000rpm, and then hit peak boost between 5000-6500rpm, before trailing off and going limp at the 8,000rpm redline.

 

Note that the Octy VRS and STI IV both weigh about the same. At 5252rpm the Octy produces 217ft/lb torque vs 276ft/lb for the Impreza (manufacturers figures). This provides the Impreza a 27% torque advantage at 5252rpm. The 4WD system of the Subaru will incur higher loss, but this is countered by it's MUCH shorter (almost stupid) gearing. From memory, 5th gear in the Octy equals roughly 25mph per 1000rpm vs 19mph for the Subaru (5th was top gear within the Subaru).

 

For me it is clear that above 4500rpm the Subaru will murder the Octy, no-contest, easy win. Whilst the TSI begins to run out of breat the boxer is filling it's lungs and just getting started.

 

The downsides of the Impreza were high turbo lag and very little pull below 3700rpm. If you were caught in the wrong gear it would huff and puff, but from 4500 to 7200 it would blow the house in.

 

The TSI has vastly superior torque at sedate driving revs (2000-4000rpm), and it can certainly feel as fast or faster during normal driving conditions. However, push both hard and the result is not even close. One was a rally bred screamer and the other a sensible and slightly lardy Golf GTI.

 

I am understanding and in general agreement with your statements.

I also concur with your assessment of the feeling given by the two different engines, both in normal driving conditions and at high revs.

My initial remark was related to the starting point of the discussion. Talking about a comparison between two cars at max acceleration, the dimensioning factor was

most probably not the engine specificities at low or mid-range revs, but more surely at high revs. You (nearly) never go below 4000 tr/min in this exercise.

Then, when talking about an engine at high revs, I personnaly feel more suitable to do it in terms of engine power rather than engine torque.

The reason is at high revs you have the max power available, while obviously you've already gone past the max torque.

If only dealing with limited data (max power, max torque) the max engine power remains a good way to get a view of the max performances of a car.

The max torque is more an indication of the low/mid-range behaviour, in normal driving conditions.

Due to the impact of the transmission, I'd say the range in which this max torque is available is even more important than the max value itself.

 

But you remapped yours, and you are entitled to your opinion,

but 220 bhp and a medium sized family 5 door is in this day and age no Hot Hatch IMHO.

 

a Suzuki Swift with 134 bhp is considered a Junior Hot Hatch commonly.

I'm not talking mapped here and yes, we're all entitled to our opinion as are you.

 

Although not sure where you're going with your statement that a Susuki Swift is considered a junior hot hatch commonly at 128bhp/tonne compared to 160 bhp/tonne for the VRS TSI (if stock 220bhp is to be believed). In fact the VRS has comparable power to weight to most other hot hatches out there.

 

Are you therefore saying that a hot hatch has to be small, light and have a good power to weight because if so I think the VRS ticks those boxes and then some.

 

It is light, has a hatch and has good power/torque per tonne - it's not exactly a huge car is it really, especially as it's based on the Golf MQB platform albeit extended.

 

Of course that is my opinion which I freely give, I'm sure you'll find something wrong with it though   

Nothing wrong with it in anyway. Summed up very well.

Based on a MQB Platform, no idea why that keeps being referred to as a Golf Platform,

it is as much a Seat Leon Cupra 265 / 280 platform, which is about where the VWG Hot Hatches & Estates are now.

It is just Skoda Customers that do not seem to get anymore unless they have them remapped at the expense of the Manufacturers Warranty being invalidated in the UK.

Edited 30 June, 201510 yr by goneoffSKi

Nothing wrong with it in anyway. Summed up very well.

Based on a MQB Platform, no idea why that keeps being referred to as a Golf Platform,

it is as much a Seat Leon Cupra 265 / 280 platform, which is about where the VWG Hot Hatches & Estates are now.

It is just Skoda Customers that do not seem to get anymore unless they have them remapped at the expense of the Manufacturers Warranty being invalidated in the UK.

I see where you're coming from and have to agree beloved Skoda customers seem to get the lower outputs/spec etc, however interestingly I'm sure there's someone in Skoda is having the last laugh as when they come to market, they're as quick as their more expensive brothers but with better reliability (in my cars case anyway) and truck loads more practicality   

Not the case here Rodge my friend has an average mpg of 27 and I'm at 31 mpg so I beat him there as well! In fact he's actually enquired about px already as he loves the octy haha! It's gotta be more than 220

I was referring to the official figures for comparison. As we all know fuel consumption depends on the driver as much as the car.

It's torque that throws you down the road and on paper the ST has 176 lb/ft per ton and the Octy has 192 so not so suprising the cars were equal.

It's torque at the wheels that throws you down the road, which depends on the power from the engine and the speed of the car.