Alternatively:

The 4x4 has added weight and complexity' date=' higher unsprung mass at the rear and costs more to buy. If you specifically need 4 wheel drive, then it is the obvious choice, otherwise why take the disadvantages?

Chris[/quote']

Good points plus the VRS has better brakes.............however you have to admit that it does seem to rain rather a lot in the UK. Cue wheelspin unless you have 4 wheel drive.

I note the comments about different gear ratios: I have just tried out a 4x4 and found it a bit noisy at higher speed and as if it needed a 6th gear to quieten it down. Have not tried a vRS, are they better in that respect? Thinking of 4hr drive I have to do most weeks, higher noise is tiring!

Drive both and make up your own mind! As for mpg, are there any vRS owners here who have kept a detailed fuel/mileage log and hence can quote accurate mpg figures? My (Jabba'd) 4X4 has averaged 31.73 mpg over 14656 miles - which I am entirely happy with. The manufacturer's combined mpg figure is 31.7 mpg for the 4X4 Estate and 35.3 mpg for the vRS Hatch and Estate.

Tavia4x4 regularly exceeds 40mpg in his 4x4 but has to drive like a wuss to do so... Equally i have exceeded 50 mpg in my vRS driving in a similar style.

But then my vRS was approx 400kg lighter than his 4x4.

Febus: I never considered a 4x4 at all when i bought my vRS. I felt it was pointless and offered me no advantage. However my usage was purely for going fast - at which the vRS is fundamentally better. The last thing i needed was more weight and more drivetrain to damage. If I had a family to lug and lived at a location where snow / ice was more than a 2 weeks a year problem I would have considered a 4x4. Having said that it would have cost me 20k as there is no way i would have ever considered it w/o susp+brakes+wrc bumpers/wing.

You pay your money and take your choice.

20K!!!!! would see me in a MY05 2.0 Turbo Impreza wagon with 5 k left over for remap, insurance and a years worth of fuel.

...........and as the advert for ruinous loans for idiots says "enough left for a nice little holiday"

I thought the idea of these cars was that they represent fantastic value for money for a great product.

but as you cant buy an 05 turbo 4x4 octy for £1m its an irrelivant arguement.

My £20k went on a vRS that could murder scoobs and Evos.

Baron I haven't ever mentioned an 05 turbo 4x4 Octavia on this thread.

I seriously doubt your 20K vRS would have been a match for my old EVO either.........

Ferbus, from this thread its painfully obvious you have merely posted to stir up a hornets nest. There are plenty of Scoobynet and MLR regulars who know exactly what a well set up vRS can do. I dont wish to bother arguing with you.

Good luck with whatever car you buy.

Thanks for acknowledging you didn't even bother reading what I'd written previously.

As for hornet's nest I'm not belittilng the VRS, merely doubting your 20K VRS would have been faster in anything other than an endurance test than my EVO or many others over on the MLR.

Often people who get defensive have reasons they'd rather not look at.

Thankyou for acknowledging you know nothing about my old vRS.

What point is there saying you would spend 20k on a scoob rather than an Octavia when the 4x4 turbo 20v doesnt exist anymore?

Back in 2003 thats what an elegance 4x4 would have cost with the options i required. A vRS + 6k of mods was a better route for me for trackdays..... Which was unfortunate for my business partners Evo 6 Mak with 10k of mods...

nowadays there are a number of vRS's and 4x4 on here with significantly higher bhp per ton than the 260-270 i ran with.... are they also in your doubt?

I dont wish to bother arguing with you.

Doesn't bother reading what people have put, thinks a 20K VRS is faster than a 350bhp+ EVO and doesn't even stick to what he's said.

Let's not turn this into some lame flame blame game.

Try commenting on topic if possible.

I think perhaps your posting style is more welcome on the MLR.

Quite right...faster perhaps, not nessecarily quicker though. The wonderfull thing about the internet and of course cars is you have no idea who or what is behind the post or wheel...

To be totally fair if I had a noble, I strongly suspect a Fabia would actually be quicker than me, in all but a long straight line. Then again if I had two nobles i would not give a dam about the track one and use it to within an inch of it's life, perhaps even braking it...

From what ex scooby owners have said a 600+ peak figure car is not that quick, it's such a narrow power band, it's of little real world use.

So you might think I'm being a ****, but faster is not always quicker.

I've seen 300+ scoobies get consumed, thats not the driver pulled over, thats two chaps who know each other have a tussel.

An article somewhere about Jon's TDi glued to mlr folk at castle coombe in the wet...I think anyone would agree diesel v evo is farsical...now where's that article, nm a member on here achieved a 8 min lap of the ring in his RS before selling it for an M5, wish I could afford to do similar. But alas I feel an old 3 series BM will be quicker for me than my more powerfull Octavia.

I'm not a fan boy; despite the site owner, of any one car. For me the Octavia is great value, you find me car for

So without further a doo I'd like to suggest that not all that burbles is the quickest, although they can be jolly fast.

Suffice to say that as per the topic and a question posed above, what do you actually want to achieve from the car, high altitude, so Europe or the Scandonavian block, 4x4 it is then...

What do you want to achieve with the car?

Update: Ended up borrowing a 4x4 for a day from a friendly dealer, followed by a VRs and decided that neither were for me. Neither was quick enough nor had the type of handling I was looking for.

My plan now is to buy a new Octavia 4x4 with the 1.9 TDI (which I drove and really rated apart from the low power engine), keep it in warranty for a yr or so then start modifying the 1.9 turbo lump. I'm told I can get 200bhp or so out of it with a new turbo and intercooler. Should be interesting as I'll have 3K or so for mods.

Oh and red baron, when I require any input from you about my posting style I'll ask, till then may I suggest if you don't like it then you don't bother replying.

Febus you are clearly a bit of a

however nobody is forced to like anybody on here so I will just keep hoping you heed the next piece of advice:-

Do not buy a new Octy Mk2 tdi 4x4. It will not make 200hp. You are dreaming. I strongly suggest you consider something else. The 105PD lump is not up to it.

I dont wish to bother arguing with you.

I'm a male chicken? This coming from a 'man' who doesn't even have the conviction to stick to what he says.

Anyway your comments show how much you know, having talked to Allard they say 200bhp is easily achievable, well within my budget.

Your other comments are largely beneath contempt but what I will say is that I neither like nor dislike some faceless entity who contributes to a BSS. The fact that you do suggests you have something lacking in your life and need to actualise your online existance because your real one is sadly lacking.

My dear Febus, i eagerly anticipate you posting a dyno showing that your 105pd has 200hp with just a turbo and an intercooler.

Where is the smiley for handbags at dawn ??

It will be a little more than that as I'm sure you can appreciate (assuming you actually know anything about the PD).

It will be a while before my plans are realised but Allard assure me that 3K will comfortably see me at 200bhp. When it's done I'm sure you'll be around to have your words rammed back down your throat. I'm looking forward to it.

It will be a while before my plans are realised but Allard assure me that 3K will comfortably see me at 200bhp. When it's done I'm sure you'll be around to have your words rammed back down your throat. I'm looking forward to it.

I'd be interested to know what they do to achieve that as it's an impressive power increase for 3k Do you know which turbo they use?

Chris

I have all the time in the world... crack on.

Im sure there are many more than just me that will marvel at your "emperors new clothes"

Following my brief conversation with them they suggest that I bring the car upto PD150 spec, although they said it might actually be better for me to source a PD150 engine and just swap them out.

At this stage it's all very embryonic, I'd hoped by posting here I'd get some ideas on solutions rather than 'it's doomed to failure' from some negative loser type.

What I have got is the will and funds to make the new Octavia 4x4 into the car it should have been in the first place and hopefully create something unique in the process.

For swapping the 105 to the PD150 - I recommend you speak to Jason (Devonutopia) who to my knowledge is the only person mental enough to even consider such a transplant. (He went from the 100 to the PD130 engine).

And I too think that £3k to bring the 1.9 105 engine to 200bhp is laughable.

Perhaps the 2.0TDI would be a better bet?

There are only a handful of people who have managed to take PD130/150 to over 200bhp - involving turbo, FMIC, exhaust, intake, clutch and custom map. Maybe 220 can be achieved with this set up - but then injectorw will be right on their limit. But this is from an engine far superior to the 105 lump.

I'm waffling. Don't know if this helps.

Is the new 1.9 Octavia a PD lump? Is it based on the PD100 engine or the non-PD variant?