Hi Guys

 

Currently a mk 2 VRS CR (manual gearbox) owner. I am considering getting rid of my other vehicle, an astravan and getting either another Skoda VRS Mk3 CR 184bhp with DSG and 4x4 or an Audi A3 quattro 150bhp with manual gearbox and constant 4 wheel drive.

 

I am not too keen on DSG so far but may get used to it as I have only had one short test drive with it. I am looking for advice and thoughts on the DSG VRS vs the Audi.

 

Any issues with the DSG, reliability etc?

What are the real mpg figures for the Octy DSG 4x4? The guy at the garage said the Octy is not constant 4 x 4 but it kicks in if needed. Is this the case?

 

Sorry for all the questions but having never owned a 4x4 before, I am just trying to weigh up the pros and cons before having a final test drive in them tomorrow and hopefully making a decision.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

 

Edited 21 July, 20178 yr by FatblokeVRS

2 litre diesels use 'wet' DSG box which are very tough and reliable.

4wd system is a Haldex which as the salesperson said is an on demand system but very fast reacting so no real complaints in this forum.

Consumption can reasonable but it depends largely on how you drive and environment.

It will depend on which vehicle option you enjoy most.

Have fun.

As far as I am aware the Audi A3 and the Octavia have the same Haldex AWD system, so the Audi is not constant 4x4.

Is the Octavia better on fuel consumption? The A3 is quoted as 58mpg combined. Not sure what the actual realistic figures are.

 

My mk 2 Octy VRS gets high 40's most of the time and low 50's on a run. That's calculated brim to brim.

 

Anyone got actual figures for a Octy 4x4??

 

The cars I am looking at are both the same price. Octy has 100 miles on it and the A3 has 9000 miles on it and is slightly older.

 

I just don't know what to go for.

54 minutes ago, Bogwoppit said:

As far as I am aware the Audi A3 and the Octavia have the same Haldex AWD system, so the Audi is not constant 4x4.

Correct.

 

All transverse engines Audi quattros have on-demand AWD using Haldex, only longitudinal engined Audi quattros have permanent AWD using a Torsen system.

55 minutes ago, Bogwoppit said:

As far as I am aware the Audi A3 and the Octavia have the same Haldex AWD system, so the Audi is not constant 4x4.

I thought the haldex was only available with the DSG. The Audi is a manual 6 speed box.

 

Anyone any more info on this?

Just now, FatblokeVRS said:

I thought the haldex was only available with the DSG. The Audi is a manual 6 speed box.

Anyone any more info on this?

The Audi S3 has been available as a manual with Haldex for all generations of the A3/S3 since the original 8L (I owned one of them from 1999 which had a 6 speed manual plus Haldex).

I will probably get shot down for this but the Audi will be better on fuel.

First reason is the manuals are better on fuel than the DSG's and also the 150ps engine is better on fuel than the 184ps engine.

 

Edited 22 July, 20178 yr by Bogwoppit

Get the newer car. Much roomier inside too!! 

 

The MkIII Octy has a really good interior too (if not quite up to Audi standards, it's a big improvement on the MkII) - you won't be disappointed!

 

 

Thanks guys. It's becoming clearer. The dealer's are generic and not an Audi or Skoda dealer so don't have much info on the cars.

 

Plus points on the A3 - nicer seats, manual gearbox, really nice to drive (more feedback and easy to chuck round corners), possible better residual value, dealer willing to look at some additional extras (mudflaps etc and give a bit more for trade in), 15 months old.

 

Plus points for the VRS - newer, 100 miles on it (A3 has 9000), winter pack, 9 months old.

Audi is a lot smaller inside than the Skoda. 

 

 

Strongly suggest you get a decent/long test drive in the vRS 4x4 DSG, before you buy.

 

I had a vRS 03 diesel manual non 4x4 for 2 years 40k and preferred this overall to the 4x4 I swapped it for.

I've had the 4x4 version for 14 months 20k now. It has all the good points of an O3 vRs such as space, reasonable price, good equipment, looks and the 181 engine has good power/torque - but if you like sporty driving, the 6-speed DSG/software isn't 'clever' enough. It' s alright the other 80% of the time though, so might do you.

 

My real world average mpg driving fairly briskly on country/B/A-roads/dual carriageway - manual 51mpg, DSG 4x4 41mpg. Though you have to appreciate the 4x4 definitely makes the car gripper in all weathers. On motorways/long trips, my mpg would generally be 6mpg+ higher on both.

 

Personally I wish Skoda would do the 181 4x4 with a manual gearbox, or a decent DSG such as BMW's 8-speed.

I had another test drive in both vehicles yesterday. The VRS had everything I was looking for apart from the manual gearbox. I just didn't like driving the DSG and it felt like I was driving a boat.

 

I eventually opted for the A3 as it just felt great to drive with the manual gearbox. A bit less grunt than the Octy but still ok performance. That dealer did give a bit more for my trade in, is putting mud flaps on it, covering the cost of switching my private plate and splitting the cost of a towbar. It doesn't have the heated windscreen but I can live with that.

 

Thanks for the input guys. We still have the Octy Mk2 VRS which is awesome so will continue to be on the Briskoda site quite often.

 

Cheers

 

Dave

 

Quite understand your preference for a manual box.

It is increasingly more difficult to get that option here in Aus as they only account for about 10% of sales here.

Personal preference is that DSG is far better than most other budget brand auto options though.

I'm just lucky the wife supports my whims.

On 7/22/2017 at 09:33, FatblokeVRS said:

Is the Octavia better on fuel consumption? The A3 is quoted as 58mpg combined. Not sure what the actual realistic figures are.

 

My mk 2 Octy VRS gets high 40's most of the time and low 50's on a run. That's calculated brim to brim.

 

Anyone got actual figures for a Octy 4x4??

 

The cars I am looking at are both the same price. Octy has 100 miles on it and the A3 has 9000 miles on it and is slightly older.

 

I just don't know what to go for.

 

A bit late maybe but here are some real world fuel figures using V-power Diesel on 4x4 DSG VRS Combi. Mostly Motorway and A Roads around 60-70mph on Cruise with short city journeys on school runs.

Around town, DSG encourages the lazy side of me but on a twisty country road, flappy paddles are hard to beat to keep the engine singing in mid range revs.

 

And another thing, There is very little understeer on the VRS 4x4. Having owned GM 4x4 cars in the past, as a comparison, they all understeered easily when pushed in the wet or dry. The VRS just turns in and goes. Its got me out of a 'situation' when i misjudged a sharp turn in the dark on the A5 in Wales.

 

Edited 25 July, 20178 yr by BigEjit
Brain slow to load

Thanks for the info mate. I went for the A3 eventually as it was just really nice to drive. I did have another test drive in the VRS but just didn't like driving it with the DSG. Our Mk II VRS is great to drive but the Mk III just didn't give the same confidence. We are keeping the Mk II VRS and sticking with VAG with the A3.

 

 Cheers

 

Dave

 

 

Edited 9 August, 20178 yr by FatblokeVRS