1.2 Petrol or 1.6 Diesel ⛽️

[paulbadassbriant]

After my last post I think I'll end up choosing the Monte Carlo over the VRS as my first car

So am I better off getting the 1.2 petrol or the 1.6 Diesel? Or am I not doing enough mileage to warrant getting a Diesel??

Once again thanks for all the help on my previous posts..

[Brian69]

Forget tractor power - get the petrol - it doesn't sound like you'll be doing remotely enough miles to justify a diesel (the diesel will also take longer to warm up and then you have potential DPF issues...).

Edited 15 November, 2016 by Brian69

[2ndskoda]

Get the 1.2 petrol   -  ( NOTE - I am an ex 1.6 CR90 diesel owner !!)

[paulbadassbriant]

Cheers

Edited 15 November, 2016 by paulbadassbriant

[homesqueeze]

Petrol all the way!

[paulbadassbriant]

3-0 for Petrol

[Ootohere]

Skoda really are taking the pee about racing heritage and success when they produced Mk2 Fabia Monte Carlo with 105ps Petrol & Diesels with rear drum brakes 

and even went down to 69ps with them.

Then Mk3 Fabia Monte Carlo's get as much as a heady 110ps.

Any rally inspiration or DNA is purely in the Creative Directors imagination.

[Brian69]

I still can't get my head round the rear drums! Austin were offering five-doors, five-speed gearbox and drum brakes with the Maxi in 1969.

Edited 15 November, 2016 by Brian69

[paulbadassbriant]

So thanks to the forum members again with their input

It's a Monte Carlo not VRS

It's a 1.2 petrol...not a 1.6 Diesel

Now what colour??

[paulbadassbriant]

What colour?? Hmmm?

Edited 15 November, 2016 by paulbadassbriant

[Brian69]

Black or white for a Monte.

[Brian69]

Or grey (wasn't sure that was available - but it is and I like it).

[AMD87]

I still can't get my head round the rear drums! Austin were offering five-doors, five-speed gearbox and drum brakes with the Maxi in 1969.

I don't get the hate for the rear drums, i tracked mine at the weekend at knockhill and the brakes were fantastic and the only time i got fade was from duffis into scotmans as the brakes didnt have time to cool after braking for duffis, but into the hairpin and duffis no fade after 15 laps and that was on standard pads too.

[paulbadassbriant]

I don't get the hate for the rear drums, i tracked mine at the weekend at knockhill and the brakes were fantastic and the only time i got fade was from duffis into scotmans as the brakes didnt have time to cool after braking for duffis, but into the hairpin and duffis no fade after 15 laps and that was on standard pads too.

Wasn't overly enamoured with the white Monte, but seeing yours on the track has changed my mind somewhat

[Brian69]

Admittedly 99.99% of people (generally, not just those that know about cars) wouldn't notice or care but for me it's mainly because discs look umpteen times better (and it's 2016, not 1976). No doubt the work of a Skoda bean counter.

Edited 16 November, 2016 by Brian69

[dazz600]

After owning both diesel and petrol Monte Carlo you've made the right choice with petrol

Had a red one and a white one,preferred the red but hey ho

[big eck]

I'm just about to buy a red one this Saturday. I went for the diesel tho due to the 350 mile a week trip I make for work.

[homesqueeze]

I know im in the minority but I actually quite like the look of the drums on the monte (when painted black) because it creates space behind the wheels and you can see them without all the bulk behind. Almost like there aren't any brakes. I think it would look great with drums all round, were it not for the fact that the brakes would be useless!

[xman]

At least with drums, the rear alloys stay relatively clean.

First job though when you buy the car is to take the wheels off and clean/paint them.

[Ootohere]

The drum brakes are not such an issue, or the rubbish front discs or so so suspension, but the point is that adding some stickers and plastic trim do not a race or rally car make, all that Skoda did was try to cash in on the name of a once successful Motor Sport Event for a trim level.

[xman]

Iirc what made the monte carlo rally famous were some revolutionary if somewhat so so minis. Today would struggle to keep up with a mid range Fabia.

Monte carlo is more about bling than performance and tapping into the swing sixties.

Next a return to the black vinyl roof, remember those??

[Ootohere]

http://skodamontecarlo.com/en/mobile/heritage

There was the small capacity rear engine Skoda success's.

Then they did have success with  2.0 litre awd S2000's in IRC in 2010,11 & 12 and then for some reason put tribute stickers on Mk2 1.4 Fabia vRS and did a limited edition (not very limited) s2000 vrs that was nothing other than some options got fitted as standard and decals were put on metallic green cars.

Then 1.2 TSI and 1.6 TDI fabias some how get brought into the jumping on a bandwagon.

Edited 16 November, 2016 by Offski

[homesqueeze]

The drum brakes are not such an issue, or the rubbish front discs or so so suspension, but the point is that adding some stickers and plastic trim do not a race or rally car make, all that Skoda did was try to cash in on the name of a once successful Motor Sport Event for a trim level.

 

I don't think anyone seriously thinks the Monte is any kind of race car. Its just better looking/specced than an ordinary Fabia. Name doesn't bother me at all.

[Ootohere]

You are right nobody does, other than Skoda that like to try to with the likes of down the bottom of the OP's posts.

DISCOVER THE RACING HERITAGE 

at skodamontecarlo.com

http://skodamontecarlo.com

Edited 17 November, 2016 by Offski

[Brian69]

Mind you, if my vRS had had drums on the rear I would have had to have listened to 50% less bull**** from Henry's about how my car near needed new discs all round on an annual basis.

Edited 17 November, 2016 by Brian69