Hi Guys,

Just wanting a wider opinion on this!

I Am wanting to Upgrade my Fabia soon for another Fabia with a larger engine, and have been looking at the 2.08v. I Rang up my dealership who told me they were unpopular and were sort of being phased out, and recommended that If I wanted performance, I Should go for a PD100. I Don't do alot of miles and I do alot of town/traffic driving and would appreciate the quitness/smoothness of a petrol engine, therefore I Don't really want a diesel. I Don't like the 8v for the poor throttle response, to which I Was told a 1.4 16v could also be reccomended and I Notice that has 100BHP, only 15BHP Less than the 2.0, so my question is, which would you have?. I Have found 2.0 Elagances to be dirt cheap (But most have high mileage, is this engine good for high mileage?)

Personally, I don't rate any of the petrol Fabias except the 1.2 12v. The throttle response in the 1.4 is abysmall.

The 2.0 is a similar engine to the Golf MK3 GTi. Its a good, torquey engine, and not that bad tbh. Better throttle response than the 1.4 anyway.

I bet the engine is capable of very high mileages. I reckon a well maintained high mileage 2.0 Elegance would be a sound buy.

Okay, Ill have a poke around to see what I can find, anything to watch out for in particular on the 2.0?

2.0 is old and agricultural.. shocking fuel economy too!

maybe a 100bhp 1.4 if you insist on petrol?

Smoothness / quiet of the petrol. I'd say that todays diesels are pretty quiet and smooth. I've got both petrol and diesel, and although the diesel is 13 yers old and a noisy bu99er, its smooth.

have you driven a vRS ?

No Vrs is going to high in price range for me, I am not really concerned with economy either, given that my 1.48v has to be driven so hard to move I don't think there will be a shocking difference:rofl:

I Have had TDI Models as courtesy cars, awsome power but I really like lots of revs, My Relatives want me to get an octavia like theirs, but It's just too big!

I'd take a test drive in one of each and then make up your mind (after you have worked at insurance and running costs).

Diesels are very easy to drive around town, and to me honest you dont notice the noise of them that much.

I personally would steer clear of the 2.0, not Skoda's finest attempt at a petrol.

Yes, Test Drives are Definatley in Order, I Do love the look of this one!

http://www.skoda.net.r66.co.uk/printed_leafletframeset.aspx?id=500857087

Mainly for the colour (The Same as My current), but mileage is a bit high and It's very far away from me. I May see If I can get something similar in a 1.4 16v too, Lot's of hunting, rather than Impulse buying this time. I Knew in advance the 1.4 MPI was slow, but was just so eager to get a car. Definatley more careful this time.

I've driven the 1.4 16v in a polo (same as the fabia, near enough) and I hated it, sounds bad compaired to most 16v petrol engines, and you REALLY have to ring its neck if you want it to accelerate (at the time I was driving an 8v 1.6 saxo vtr, and the polo was the sportiest at the time, the 1.4 16v, both had the same power, but the citroen was way better, being easier to drive fast because you didn't have to wring its neck so much) [although the end result was very similar performance] I would also advise you try the deisels, far easier in town!

The 2.0 8v I had in my VW Bora was rough and crap on mpg. Wouldnt touch with a barge pole

1.9 100hp PD ; buy a high mileage model with service history; no worries and better prices. Just try and get a car fitted with A/C.

Forget the revs; feel the torque:thumbup:

Hi Guys' date='

Just wanting a wider opinion on this!

I Am wanting to Upgrade my Fabia soon for another Fabia with a larger engine, and have been looking at the 2.08v. I Rang up my dealership who told me they were unpopular and were sort of being phased out, and recommended that If I wanted performance, I Should go for a PD100. I Don't do alot of miles and I do alot of town/traffic driving and would appreciate the quitness/smoothness of a petrol engine, therefore I Don't really want a diesel. I Don't like the 8v for the poor throttle response, to which I Was told a 1.4 16v could also be reccomended and I Notice that has 100BHP, only 15BHP Less than the 2.0, so my question is, which would you have?. I Have found 2.0 Elagances to be dirt cheap (But most have high mileage, is this engine good for high mileage?)[/quote']

i bought my 1.4 16v in october ftrom a dealert with a years warranty for 4 grand

it had 30k on it its an elegance 100hp

Hmm I wouldnt even consider a diesel for short trips personally - which is why SWMBO isn't getting a diesel

The 1.4 was ok but not it felt pretty lifeless. The 1.2 (12V) is MUCH better IMHO, and cheaper etc.

Mil seems pretty happy with his 2.0 - sure the fuel economy will be a lot worse than the 1.4 PD but it will heat up a lot quicker so on short distances the difference may not be as big anyway?