Hi to all, I'm considering buying a 06 1.6 elegance but really need some advice on what they're like. It's well kitted out and seems a lot of car for very little cash. Currently own a Mk2 Leon FR but miss the comfort of my 2 previous Octavias. Don't need loads of power tbh these days but i am a bit concerned about a 115bhp engine pulling a chunk like the Octy. Are these engines chain or belt driven cams? Thanks.

I don't know the engine well but I'm with you, I'd be a wee bit concerned about the power and torque balance cw the size and mass of the car. If it was a Diesel 1.6 with similar horsepower (maybe a little lower) and a lot more torque sure, but in a petrol, with no forced induction.

 

I know you're saying you don't need to be racing anyone from traffic lights but I would be a bit concerned about driveability especially on inclines!

Exactly my concern. I am aware this old age thing is going on for me atm but going from 2.0 turbo Leon as well which goes very well is a big step down power wise. The Octavia elegance has quite a lot of equipment though and seems a lot of car.

Yes, sounds nice  it is just the engine I'd be concerned about. Maybe a good test drive will answer yes or no...

I think it will be plenty.

Never found my 1.9 TDI with 105bhp lacking in power. It did have more torque though (184 ft-lb vs 114 ft-lb).

But on paper it's faster to 60 and a higher top speed than the diesel.

Yes, wouldn't have a problem with a 1.9TDI. That's a lot of torque difference, without getting the calculator out it's nearly 70% more and will be a lot lower down the rev range.  It's not 0-60 flat out I'd be worried about.

 

Mixed views here on a previous threads. Here is one other - there are more.

 

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/297381-thinking-of-an-octavia-2006-16-fsi/

 

It is frugal but peak torque at 4000 rpm and not a lot of it. I hope you like working the gears and hearing that engine working.

 

But seriously some people seem to rate it so maybe drive it. I think the 1.9tdi would be a better balance of economy, torque and power.

Edited 13 October, 20169 yr by TheClient

Thanks for everyones help much appreciated. So, i suppose a test drive would say one way or the other if it's going to be powerful enough but what about reliability? Seems a lack of info on tinternet about this engine.

Yes, wouldn't have a problem with a 1.9TDI. That's a lot of torque difference, without getting the calculator out it's nearly 70% more and will be a lot lower down the rev range. It's not 0-60 flat out I'd be worried about.

Mixed views here on a previous threads. Here is one other - there are more.

http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/297381-thinking-of-an-octavia-2006-16-fsi/

It is frugal but peak torque at 4000 rpm and not a lot of it. I hope you like working the gears and hearing that engine working.

But seriously some people seem to rate it so maybe drive it. I think the 1.9tdi would be a better balance of economy, torque and power.

Thanks buddy yeah i read that thread. Again a bit inconclusive really some say good some say average at best.

I would look for a 1.8tsi

 

I currently have a choice of 3 cars in the driveway a 2007 1.8tsi manual Elegance that's been remapped to ~135kw/320Nm; a 2004 Honda Accord Euro with a 2.4L 140kw /220Nm with traditional torque converter 5sp auto and a 2016 Honda Odyssey people mover with a 2.4L 129kw / 250Nm and CVT.

 

The turbo is the easiest to drive and gets the best economy (not a fair comparison but that's how it is).  You seem to be constantly "driving" the two Hondas whereas the Octavia seems to move without effort.

I would look for a 1.8tsi

I currently have a choice of 3 cars in the driveway a 2007 1.8tsi manual Elegance that's been remapped to ~135kw/320Nm; a 2004 Honda Accord Euro with a 2.4L 140kw /220Nm with traditional torque converter 5sp auto and a 2016 Honda Odyssey people mover with a 2.4L 129kw / 250Nm and CVT.

The turbo is the easiest to drive and gets the best economy (not a fair comparison but that's how it is). You seem to be constantly "driving" the two Hondas whereas the Octavia seems to move without effort.

I havnt seen any 1.8 engined Elegances tbh must be scarce. I seen this particular car at a really good price hence the query. The owner says he's had the car 7 years and it seems he's looked after it really well. Also 12 months m.o.t.

1.6 FSI is going to be more reliable than a 1.8 TSI.

 

The 1.6 has a timing chain and not a belt. They don't have a change interval but will need replacing at some point when the tensioner loosens. But they last generally much longer than a belt.

 

It has no turbo and due to is relatively low power output is kind to the drivetrain. It's pretty simple in it's design. If serviced properly there should be no problems.

This is a good video. Similar sized vehicle to the Octavia with the 1.6 FSI. Good range of different driving. The 1.6 seems to pull itself along nicely. You're not going to win any drag races but it has no problem getting up to the speed limits.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65opBgHDfHs

I have a 1.6fsi unit and have no issues with it. Not the fastest car I've ever driven but with a full boot and 5 adults it will still get along the road. They do like to be revved so if you test drive one don't be scared of that as main power is above 3k revs. You do need a bit of space if overtaking on country lanes but will happily plod down the motorways. I've done 20k in mine now and have no reason to knock it. My FIL has a 1.6 focus which feels much slower than the octy

Edited 14 October, 20169 yr by Mikek3111

1.6 FSI is going to be more reliable than a 1.8 TSI.

 

The 1.6 has a timing chain and not a belt. They don't have a change interval but will need replacing at some point when the tensioner loosens. But they last generally much longer than a belt.

 

It has no turbo and due to is relatively low power output is kind to the drivetrain. It's pretty simple in it's design. If serviced properly there should be no problems.

 

1.8tsi has a timing chain.  The pre-fl gen 1 BZB block is really reliable.  The later 2nd gen EA888 with engine types starting with Cxxxx have issues with the timing chain tensioner which people should allow for when negotiating a purchase.

 

Timing chains, in general, should be good for the lifetime of the engine (~400,000km) if the oil is changed regularly, etc.  VW and their penny-pinching and fast-track development schedules are proving this isn't the case and many of their timing chain engines are proving to be shorter lived than the average timing belt engine.

 

Stress on the drive train is relative to the user and the right foot.  Seriously, you wouldn't find an easier driven Octavia than mine as I just use the torque all the time and rarely get up it.  The two Hondas regularly see redline - every outing.  Maybe I'm odd as I've also owned a few high performance V8s (4.2L, 5.0L and 5.9L) that I just cruised around in and my 4 cylinder cars got thrashed.

 

If you make lazy power then you can drive like a lazy p***k.

 

To the OP:  If you like the car, think it's a good buy and can live with the engine then go for it.

Thanks to everyone for advice and comments. The car i was looking at originally might not happen as it would involve travelling and due to my shifts we can't seem to organise a viewing. I've now seen a vrs tdi pd closer to me but thats another conversation all together!! Dpf anyone?

Dpf anyone?

 

Don't even think about it on a PD engine! 

 

Seriously though, in all probability at some point the dpf on a PD engine will need either replaced (£££) or deleted. It's just a fact of life. 

I have had my 1.6 fsi auto 08 for 4 years and I love it. can't fault anything. had no problems except 4 wheel tracking which has no bearing on the engine type or size. power is good and the kick down brilliant.

My 1.6 FSI is fun to drive accelerates well and is no slouch on a motorway.

I tow a Folding Camper grossing at 1000 Kg without Issue.

I regularly get better than 38 mpg of combined driving.

Have 3 Child seats in the rear to take my Grandchildren around.

Only thing better than it is my 2.o Liter FSI Estate.

Both coming up to 10 years old and no problems.

No hesitation in recommending it.

It is getting high praise. It seems it might be one of those underrated cars that slipped everyone by. The car i was looking at has sold i think. The search continues.

Don't even think about it on a PD engine!

Seriously though, in all probability at some point the dpf on a PD engine will need either replaced (£££) or deleted. It's just a fact of life.

It might be missing a dpf!!

It might be missing a dpf!!

 

The vrs was one of the first to get the DPF - The pd is the wrong design of diesel for a DPF active regeneration due to the fact the injectors/pump are camshaft operated only operating every camshaft revolution - during an active regeneration you need an extra injection of diesel. One of the main reasons had to quickly introduce Common Rail engines