It has been said manufacturers water down 0-60's possibly for insurance (eg Fabia vRS 9.5 as opposed to probably 8 seconds...probably true)

How on earth does this fit in with claiming ridiculous top end speeds in the same brochures (eg 146 mph for my Octavia vRS...probably not true)

Apart from the fact there is no way my STANDARD vRS would get past about 135mph apart from down a steep hill does it not cancel out the argument about slower 0-60 claims helping insurance groupings.In fact quoting a high top end speed must be even worse!!!

You can't have it both ways Mr Manufacturer:rolleyes:

I totally agree. Also mpg figures are even more out !!

It has been said manufacturers water down 0-60's possibly for insurance (eg Fabia vRS 9.5 as opposed to probably 8 seconds...probably true)

How on earth does this fit in with claiming ridiculous top end speeds in the same brochures (eg 146 mph for my Octavia vRS...probably not true)

Apart from the fact there is no way my STANDARD vRS would get past about 135mph apart from down a steep hill does it not cancel out the argument about slower 0-60 claims helping insurance groupings.In fact quoting a high top end speed must be even worse!!!

You can't have it both ways Mr Manufacturer:rolleyes:

Trust me...Your Octy vRS WILL do 146, takes a while to get there but I have seen an indicated of nearly 150 on two different vrs's, on an autobhan of course!!!!!

Isn't it all fairly irrelevant anyway?

Noticed in Autocars test of the new vRS that they get a 0-60 of 6.6secs, a good bit quicker than the manufacturers figures. Perhaps Skoda have supplied a "well run in" example.

Aye but 0-60's are tested with luggage and a passenger

Aye but 0-60's are tested with luggage and a passenger

yep. So 9.6sec for a fabia is true if you add a boot full plus 3 passengers and a full tank.

yep. So 9.6sec for a fabia is true if you add a boot full plus 3 passengers and a full tank.

do other manufacturers do this?

Not every manufacturer measures in the same way, although IIRC there are guidelines for the MPG during certain conditions.

You can get excellent MPG out of most cars if you drive them in a careful manner, but that may not be the most enjoyable - alternatively you may trash it hard and get awful MPG, or be somewhere inbetween.

Specs are there as a guide, not a hard-and-fast rule. A 2nd gear launch will probably be quicker than 1st gear, but it won't be how you would drive generally. Ditto with 4x4 in the dry vs wet against a FWD/RWD, a 4x4 may be significantly slower in the dry but just drive off in the wet due to lack of grip.

My book figure of 56.5mpg for the urban / rural combined cycle holds fairly true if I drive carefully and keep below 70 on the motorway (which I do of course ). AS for performance . . . no idea.

Noticed in Autocars test of the new vRS that they get a 0-60 of 6.6secs, a good bit quicker than the manufacturers figures. Perhaps Skoda have supplied a "well run in" example.

they also said the old vrs did it in 6.7

This is interesting and I was about to ask this question myself. A friend of mine suggested that the Octavia vRS mark 1 had its figure of 0 - 60 mph given when four people were in the car.

Is it just Skoda that give their acceleration figures with a loaded car or do other manufacturers do the same, thereby making these sort of comparisons supposedly fair? Many figures are for 0 - 62mph to match the 0 - 100km/h figures in fully metrified Europe.

Regarding insurance, I would expect the acceleration figures to have more of an effect on premiums or apparent risk because it is more readily accessible. The ability or desire to drive at 150mph instead of 120mph is limited to most drivers due to the road conditions and traffic so there's less opportunity for someone to make use of the higher top speed. It may thus have less affect on insurance.

why does anyone want to travelat 150mph ?

what is the claimed figure for the mk1 0-60 ??? i dont believe 6.7

It seems stange that when Autocar tested the Mk5 Golf GTi, which has (essentially) the same 197bhp engine and weights approx 100kg less than the vRS it was actually 0.1 seconds slower to 60 and 0.7 slower to 100mph.

I know 0.1 seconds is an insignificant part of not a lot, but you would have expected the Golf to be a few tenths quicker than the vRS, not the other way around.

Edit: The Golf Autocar tested was itself, 2 to 3 tenths quicker to 60 than what VW claim in their brouchure.

The Fabia PD100 is a bit out. I believe the official figure is 0-60 at 11.5sec, well, I did it in 10.83sec. Also the mpg is meant to be mid 50's, I get over 65 even round town.

why does anyone want to travelat 150mph ?

what is the claimed figure for the mk1 0-60 ??? i dont believe 6.7

:eek: Where did you get my sig picture from!!!!!!

what is the claimed figure for the mk1 0-60 ??? i dont believe 6.7

The manufacturer's figure is 7.9 secs for 0-100 km/h. That and other official performance figures were measured without the vehicle being fitted with any equipment such as air conditioning, mud flaps, which affect performance.

It has been said manufacturers water down 0-60's possibly for insurance (eg Fabia vRS 9.5 as opposed to probably 8 seconds...probably true)

How on earth does this fit in with claiming ridiculous top end speeds in the same brochures (eg 146 mph for my Octavia vRS...probably not true)

Apart from the fact there is no way my STANDARD vRS would get past about 135mph apart from down a steep hill does it not cancel out the argument about slower 0-60 claims helping insurance groupings.In fact quoting a high top end speed must be even worse!!!

You can't have it both ways Mr Manufacturer:rolleyes:

I can report that an Octy vRS WILL do 146MPH I have driven two different cars one belonging to a technician friend, and one belonging to a customer (who was complaining of a high speed droan at 140mph. Me being the oldest experienced nutter in the garage was chosen to test it) each car was tested on long stretch of level motorway and both were running standard engines, no problem.

why does anyone want to travelat 150mph ?

what is the claimed figure for the mk1 0-60 ??? i dont believe 6.7

Why...? Because you can You know, man and machine in harmony and all that bull****, ok, its fun! :yipee: :auto: