Octy vRS mk1 vs mk2

[Qubit]

Ive just recently 'upgraded' to a mk2 vrs.  Am alone in preferring the mk1 though?    (before anyone says, test drives dont always show you very much and i needed a new car anyway, and it seemed hard to find a decent mk1).    I think i actually find it unpleasant to drive, whereas the mk1 was a nice balance between fast enough and comfort.    I dont think the 18" alloys help to be honest.   

 

[skinnyman]

It's interesting you say this Qubit.  I've owned the Mk1 & Mk2 and agree that they both have different characters.  I really like our Mk2 estate as it's a brilliant family car and so far has been a great balance between the mundane shopping car, the long haul with a boot full of stuff car and the hoon down a country lane car.  I'd say the Mk2 handles better in standard form and is obviously quicker too.  It's not as comfy, as I think the seats are rubbish and it's not as involving to drive but it does have more room in the back for the kids.  

I miss my Mk1 terribly and regret the day I traded it in.  However, I am quite happy for now with my Mk2 and when it's had an exhaust and remap it'll be even better.  I don't know if I'll ever feel as attached to this car as I did my Mk1 but it's early days yet.

Cheers,

Andrew.

Edited 12 August, 2016 by skinnyman

[petrolbloke]

it's not as involving to drive

 

While I wouldn't class either as an involving drive, I'd have thought the mk2 should be better than the mk1 in that respect (as per the mk4 vs mk5 Golf GTI).

 

I haven't "upgraded" to a mk2/3 because other than a small performance increase there's not really much other benefit.

 

I haven't driven a mk2 for long enough to comment on comfort but the lower profile tyres on the 18" wheels compared to 17" wheels will definitely not help.

[skinnyman]

While I wouldn't class either as an involving drive, I'd have thought the mk2 should be better than the mk1 

 

I agree with you on this. Neither has what could be classed as high levels of feedback, especially compared to your Clio for example.  The MK1 feels less refined than the MK2 so it's easier to know what's going on - maybe that's what I'm hinting at by saying involvement.

As for one being better than the other, it depends on what you want from a car.  I like to know what's going on around me when driving.  A car that wafts down the road, ironing out the bumps and has little in terms of steering and braking feedback isn't for me.  I've yet to drive a MK3 vRS and am hoping that I'm not disappointed as I'd like to move onto one at some point in the future.

Edited 12 August, 2016 by skinnyman

[petrolbloke]

Yes I get what you mean. I think the chassis/suspension is better on the mk2 - but maybe feels less involving to drive due to probably having lighter steering and more servo assistance on the brakes.

 

I really don't like the over-assisted brakes and electrically assisted steering that a lot of modern cars seem to have. Not looking forward to the time when my trusty old mk1 needs replacing!

[octyal]

It's will be a continuing trait I am afraid. As cars get ever more complex, and the physical link between driver and controls is altered from mechanical linkages to electronic ones the more the engineers need to add in the feed back by other means - look at the latest performance models with their piped in acoustic tracks for engine noise. I like my Mk1 (but then it would handle and perform better than my 2 tonne disco did ), it's a bit woolly suspension wise, after all it has 150k on the clock, but new shocks should help that, it handles really well, and accelerates beautifully (again compared to a 2 tonne disco) with more than enough power for my needs. Modern cars are all striving to provide comfort and refinement, which is fine in a "normal" model from the range, but when you get into the performance models, those systems can't usually handle it very well, leading to the usual reports in the reviews of "lack of feedback through the wheel", "crashing over bumps with it's 19" rims" etc. I remember my old '84 Audi 80 Sport, basic McPherson struts up front, twist beam rear axle (similar to the Mk1) and that handled like it was on rails, especially on the Pirelli P6's I had, and it's Golf GTi engine was more than enough to keep up with the Nova's etc that were around back then. I, like many others, like some feedback through the steering and the brakes, I like to know where I am pointing the wheel is where the front of the car is going to head, and if I hit a bump, I can feel it back through those mechanical links to the wheel. Performance models don't need 4 different modes for steering, dampers and power, they need to get back to basics - fit a single ratio rack, one level of engine tune, and give us some feedback.

[Qubit]

Interesting to read others opinions, dont get me wrong, i dont view the mk1 as being particularly involving, but definitely less detached than the mk2.    To be honest the only thing i slightly prefer about the car is the engine, which pulls smoothly, strongly and linearly for a turbo - even if it sounds like a sewing machine at lower revs.  

 

Driving it reminds me somewhat of playing a video game (which is weird because im quite good at them, but not what i want from real life motoring).    Don't think ill be keeping it sadly.     All the talk of refinement is quite interesting, because crashing over every road imperfection doesn't feel terribly refined, and neither does the high levels of road noise.    Oh well, and expensive lesson i guess.    Problem remains what to buy.   Another mk1, but when that dies in a few years?........ 

[mikey vrs]

Ive had my mk 2 petrol vrs for nearly 6 years now & i had my mk1 vrs for 2 years before i traded it in for the mk2,i always felt the mk1 was missing something,it just never felt as fast as it should to me & i hated the dated black & white interior,as soon as i drove the mk2 it felt like it was the car i expected the mk1 to be,i agree the ride with 18" wheels can be a bit choppy over rough roads but the TFSI engine is great,loads of pull from tickover all the way to the red line if required (both my cars were/are standard) i like the look of the mk1 & they offer a lot of car for little money nowadays & with some upgrades they can be a very good car,my vrs is 8 years old this year & i suspect it will need some suspension work soon so may upgrade the springs & shocks as id never call the vrs a hot hatch but there are a very good car. 

[KenONeill]

I have a mk1 TDi; my employer has mk2 TDis as pool cars, so I've literally been able to drive both on the same day and the same road.

 

Some of the mk2 versions have more powerful engines than the mk1 did as standard, so they're maybe a touch better on acceleration.

 

I'd say that my mk1 is a nicer drive though, to the extent that after 9 years I still find myself looking forward to almost every trip, even commuting to work.

[YellowCar]

Mk1 is just a nicer looking car imho, more character. Never driven a mk2 so can't really comment on that side of it though.

[kidology]

I prefered the Mk1 as well, a lovely yellow 03 plate near where i live. Owned the Mk1 for 4 years and the Mk2 for 18 months. Both were chipped, the mk2 was a rocket i must admit.

Bad points uninvolving drive and oil consuption was ridiculous. The mk 1 seats and carpet colour were the big let down, who thought of white? 

[YellowCar]

I prefered the Mk1 as well, a lovely yellow 03 plate near where i live. Owned the Mk1 for 4 years and the Mk2 for 18 months. Both were chipped, the mk2 was a rocket i must admit.

Bad points uninvolving drive and oil consuption was ridiculous. The mk 1 seats and carpet colour were the big let down, who thought of white?

The mk1 seats were a massive pain, tiniest drip got on them opening the door after rain would mean a stain. Drove me nuts. The mk1 handling definitely needed a few choice mods and a remap made it more like the car it should be. I miss my yellow one despite the trouble it gave me.

[lol-lol]

Another vote for the Mk 1 VRS (petrol of course not the sheep in wolf's clothing diesel).

Mark two was quicker, better suspension etc but just felt more bland, mark 3 is even worse I gather.

Both the Mark 1 and 2 were bargains, think I paid around £15K and then £17k, not bad for 7.5 and 7 second to 60 mph cars with top speeds well north of 140 mph.

if you want a proper quick hot hatch you have to look at the Cupras/ Cupra Rs if the VW stable or the similar Audis.

Fabia VRS 2 was fun too, Fabia 1 in a way too but felt quicker than it really was unless you got the 160-200 hp chipping to take it down to 7 second to 60 and then it would chew tyres and fight for traction most of the time.

Favourite was the 1.8 TSI Octy 2 with the 7 speed DSG, quick as the Mk 1 VRS and howled to 7k revs with the short stroke EA888 engine. In L&K trim ticked all the boxes and again tuneable to around 225 hp.

Looking out for a Clio or Megane RS now Skoda pulled out of the hot hatch market.

Edited 19 August, 2016 by lol-lol

[skinnyman]

I prefered the Mk1 as well, a lovely yellow 03 plate near where i live. Owned the Mk1 for 4 years and the Mk2 for 18 months. Both were chipped, the mk2 was a rocket i must admit.

Bad points uninvolving drive and oil consuption was ridiculous. The mk 1 seats and carpet colour were the big let down, who thought of white? 

 

I'm just discovering this on mine.  I'm currently monitoring how much oil I'm putting in as I'm quite surprised how quickly the dip stick gets down to the minimum mark.

[kidology]

Its strange Vw group think its exceptable, to put a litre of oil into there cars every 1000 milles or so. There was a case on the forum, where a guy left his Audi out side a dealer covered 

in writing about the amount of oil it drank.

Edited 22 August, 2016 by kidology

[mikey vrs]

I got my vrs when it was 2 years old with 11,000 miles on the clock & the oil usage was around 1.5 litres inbetween services,now as the miles have gone up (76,000 miles) it has decreased to a maximium of 1 litre inbetween services.

[skinnyman]

I got my vrs when it was 2 years old with 11,000 miles on the clock & the oil usage was around 1.5 litres inbetween services,now as the miles have gone up (76,000 miles) it has decreased to a maximium of 1 litre inbetween services.

 

Mine's on similar mileage.  What spec of oil are you using?

Some of the advice on here varies.  I have been directed to this particular oil by a forum member and wondered if it was the same spec as the stuff you're using.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=222215108645#ht_1208wt_1037

[YellowCar]

My mk1 vrs never lost a drop of oil, sorry I know that doesn't help, just saying there does appear to be a variety of experiences regarding oil consumption on these.

[skinnyman]

My mk1 vrs never lost a drop of oil, sorry I know that doesn't help, just saying there does appear to be a variety of experiences regarding oil consumption on these.

 

Yeah, mine never did either.  I checked it weekly for six and a half years and never had to top it up. I've not had a car that uses so much oil as this one does, it's bordering on the same usage as my mate's RX8!

[mikey vrs]

Mine's on similar mileage.  What spec of oil are you using?

Some of the advice on here varies.  I have been directed to this particular oil by a forum member and wondered if it was the same spec as the stuff you're using.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=222215108645#ht_1208wt_1037

Thats the same spec as i use,ive used different brands over the years,it depends on who i get my parts from,usually Andrew Pages or Eurocarparts. 

[kidology]

The oil consumption im refering to was the Mk2, not the Mk1 which never used a drop in 4 years.

[gadgetman]

Its strange Vw group think its exceptable, to put a litre of oil into there cars every 1000 milles or so. There was a case on the forum, where a guy left his Audi out side a dealer covered

in writing about the amount of oil it drank.

Renault are the same.

Had issues with a Clio RSI years ago that drank more oil than petrol. After believing it to be normal, I used an independent who diagnosed a split rocker cover gasket.

Once replaced the oil consumption went away.

Renault inspected it 4 times!

[kidology]

I believe in the new vw group owners book, it says to expect a slight oil usage. Dont know if that is just the Tfsi engines.

[tubbytommy]

as a performace car they are both poop in my opinion.

the vrs is just a family hatchback with a spoiler.

id say if you were looking for a perfomance car you have gone very very wrong.

[gadgetman]

I believe in the new vw group owners book, it says to expect a slight oil usage. Dont know if that is just the Tfsi engines.

That's just a get out to stop owners pressing the dealers to fix it. Seems owners either give up, or the warranty expires.... Hopefully without engine failure.

FSI & TFSI were (from reading owners issues here) seem to have some pretty bad issues. Apparently we were very lucky with our FSI that we didn't have any engine issues in 8 years of ownership.