I'm reading a lot mixed reviews about the skoda fabia vrs mk2 2012. Is 178 bhp or 180bhp?

 

Many thanks

180PS (Pferdestärke) or 177.5 BHP in old-fashioned terms. 

So that is 180 ps Minimum.    Because they sell them and what is shown as max hp / Nm is actually the minimum they should achieve, 

the UK is not that extreme of weather, height above sea level, or with poor fuels even if using 95 ron unleaded.

 

So dyno a CAVE engine car in the UK no more than 4,000 ft above sea level running 99 Ron minimum and you should see about 185 bhp.

do a CTHE under the same circumstances and 192 bhp or so should be achieved.

http://briskoda.net/forums/topic/357839-fabia-vrs-estate-rolling-road-run 

 

See the 1.4 TSI / TSFI 132-136 kW cars Fuel filler flap.

Recommended fuel 98 octane, but cars are tested on 95 ron in the EU.

http://volkswagen.co.uk/need-help/owners/Fuel 

 

 

They did not want to show a Polo GTI as quicker than a Golf GTI, but then it was dead easy to put them head to head.

VW certainly did not want the cheaper Skoda quicker than the Polo. so the Fabia Hatch got ballast on the rear crash bar & a spare wheel as standard, 

making the front go light under acceleration, making it on paper 5 kg heavier than the estate, and yet it was still quicker then the VW, SEAT or the A1 185ps twincharger.   Easy to put them head to head.....

It would have been dead easy to weigh the 3 cars,then  mention the spare wheel or ballast on the Fabia and the 215/40 R 17 tyres on the SEAT & VW and the 205/40 R 17 on the Skoda.

 

Edited 9 May, 20188 yr by Offski

Cheers lads very helpful

I got mine dyno'd at shark performance a few weekends ago and my 2010 CAVE made 182.6bhp. For the sake of 2bhp I wouldn't bother, just throw a few racing stripes or stickers on to make it up

then Fold the rear seat flat and remove the rear wiper. 

Don't you always have the rear seats folded down in an estate anyway? 

It only improves the hatch performance, the echo has some slowing affect in the huge void in the estate.

The 9 3/4" longer car that was lighter unladen and nobody at Autocar / Auto Express etc asked how can that happen?

You need to turn the stereo up to 11 (unfortunately playing Enya) to hold the echo contained for maximum performance.

They forgot to put those weights hidden behind the back bumper on the estate models?

VW Group did not need them on the Estate as it was already a VED class higher than the heavier Polo 3 or 5 door.

They were never going to have the lighter, quicker more fuel efficient and cheaper Skoda's with Brochure / Media Pack figures better than the VW or the Audi A1 1.4TSFI 185ps Twincharger.

Then Skoda had the CTHE engine in 2012 and the Ibiza in 2013, yet the Ibiza Cupra had new Co2 g/km test results and went down a VED band while the Skoda's stayed as they were.  The 2013 Cupra Face Lift got no lighter.

 

Again Motoring Journalists never questioned VW Group on how the engine management differed, or actually never from the Skoda.

Both were improved over the CAVE, just not the first few months Software, it needed revised mid 2013....

http://autocar.co.uk/car-review/seat/ibiza-cupra/first-drives/seat-ibiza-cupra-first-drive-review 

Edited 9 May, 20188 yr by Offski

 

 

Here somehow the supposedly quicker 1.8TSI 192 ps / 320 Nm Manual Polo GTI performs not very well in the real world.

The journalist never even really thinks, the battery was in the boot of the 1.4 TSI Twincharger, but not in the sister cars from Skoda or SEAT.

Is it really there because they needed under bonnet space.

The Manual is seemingly a lighter box than the DSG, the manual car has 320 Nm, the DSG 250 Nm but VW give both the same performance figures.

(not that they are that impressive.)   Hence now a 2.0 TSI Polo GTI.)

 

Vorsprung Durch Technik,  make up the figures to suit yourself.

 

WTF, 0-60 MPH, 

 Manufacturers give 0-100km / 62 MPH.   Tell that time, no need to play the Media Pack game.

Could Auto Express really not have got a 5 door Polo GTI?  Supposedly only 25kg heavier than a 3 door.

(the ballasts on the rear crash bar of a Mk2 Fabia vRS was by coincidence 25kg but at the very rear of the car, and there was a spare wheel and jack as standard so another 19 kg.)

 

Edited 9 May, 20188 yr by Offski

21 hours ago, Offski said:

then Fold the rear seat flat and remove the rear wiper. 

I can see an extremely small gain by removing the rear wiper... Reduction in drag. The seats made me think though. Is it down to better weight distribution, perhaps? Drag can't be the issue as the rear window would do enough of that so it must be a balance issue. Motorcycle riders know that by removing the mirrors and indicators, you get a bit more speed but you are talking extremes here, not everyday riding. 

^^^ You maybe missed the posts from 'Toxic' when he had a Clio.

 

The post was totally non serious.

Remove the 25kg weights off the rear crash bar.

While every other manufacturer went for less paint, thinner glass and less sound deadening to achieve lower emissions / kidology,  VW had Skoda sand bag a car.

 

?

How much did these cost to get designed, manufactured and tested to then have a vehicle go light at the front under acceleration and cost the owners more in VED.

The VW Polo GTI just got the battery moved from the engine compartment to the spare tyre well and no spare wheel as standard but you could buy a battery cover and spare wheel.   

*Nice to have space under the bonnet with the battery not there!*

?

Who's cunning stunt was this rear ballasts on a Euro 5 emission 1,390cc petrol car, Dr Martin Winterkorn the engineers engineer?

 

Edited 10 May, 20188 yr by Offski