2015 Octavia 1.8 tsi or Rs?

[DrKrink]

Hello everyone, 

I owned the same car for 15 years, a small alfa 145 jtd. Since it's time to change car I found that the Octavia seems to have all I'm looking for. 

 

Between the 1.8l tsi 180bhp and the 2.0l Rs 220bhp which one should I buy?  Pros and cons? 

Any of the two has big disadvantages? 

 

Some of the 1.8l I found are 4x4, is that a big plus over the Rs? 

 

Is the hatchback practical enough or the estate is always the way to go? (I don't have kids, but in the future I hope to and I plan to keep the car for some years.) 

 

The cars I've found online have very similar prices and they all are from 2015, less than 70k km, under €24k.

 

Thank you

[flybynite]

Well I jumped through a few hoops to get a 1.8 4x4 when I could have specc'd a vRS 220 on the doorstep and I do not regret it one bit, but I knew what I wanted and knew what I was getting.

 

A lot will depend on what you need it for, If you can see some 1.8 4x4s I guess you are not in the UK. (kms and € also give it away )

 

The vRS 220 has lower stiffer suspension but both have the multilink rear suspension. The 4x4 suspension is a good compromise over rough roads but you will need to tweak it if you want to do anything more than fast road driving.

 

The vRS is available in manual but the 1.8 4x4 only in DSG. A lot will depend on what model the non-vRS is and what spec/options it has.

 

There will be others along to sing the praises of the vRS but for me the 1.8tsi 4x4 is a very, understated but capable machine. Having the weight and drive at the rear combined with the lighter petrol engine means it is very well balanced on the road and you really feel it.

 

For me, if the 1.8 4x4 is on your list then I would just do it 

 

[paulsoava]

Hi. I went for the 1.8 TSI estate and so far I'm happy. It is slightly cheaper than the vRS, not as warm but quick enough, totally inconspicuous if that's your thing. For me the deal breaker was that I wanted the beige interior as I'm not a fan of black. So this was the only way to go. I like it a lot and don't regret my choice. Also, you get the famous independent rear suspension which is said to be better than the one on lesser powered models. Also, I rather like the classic elegant trim on the rev counters as opposed to the colour scheme they chose for the vRS. It doesn't have a stupid sound actuator. You can fit 16 inch wheels (cheaper) for your winter set.

 

That said:

- you get more support from vRS seats

- you get bigger brake disks so marginally better braking

- 40 bhp is something of a difference

- you get a sportier suspension setup on the vRS and also the electronic diff

- you can see the exhausts on the vRS

 

As for estate vs hatch it's really up to you, my previous car was a mk II hatch. Once you get used to the cavernous boot you will fill it no matter how large it is. Perhaps the estate is ever so slightly more practical but I think your choice should rather be driven by your aesthetic preference than the odd 10-15 liters of extre space.

[ahenners]

I'd go RS, unless the 4x4 option is a must. A colleague has the Leon 1.8TSI 180 and I have a VRS 220 TSI. Real world fuel economy isn't much different between them. If you are looking at DSG, I think the 1.8 got the DQ200 dry clutch 7 speed box as opposed to the more reliable DQ250 wet clutch 6 speed that's mated to the 220 TSI.

 

The hatch is definitely practical enough, I have 2 kids under 3 and we don't struggle. The estate is that tiny bit more practical, but sounds like you'd be fine with either.

[DrKrink]

8 hours ago, flybynite said:

 

 

The vRS 220 has lower stiffer suspension but both have the multilink rear suspension. The 4x4 suspension is a good compromise over rough roads but you will need to tweak it if you want to do anything more than fast road driving.

 

The vRS is available in manual but the 1.8 4x4 only in DSG.

 

Good to know! 

The rs I found is actually manual but I've tried a few automatic cars and it's growing on me. 

And yes, I'm Italian importing the car from Germany. 1.8l isn't available here and the vRS is very rare. 

Thank you flybynite. 

 

7 hours ago, paulsoava said:

totally inconspicuous if that's your thing.

. It doesn't have a stupid sound actuator.

You can fit 16 inch wheels (cheaper) for your winter set.

 

That said:

- you get more support from vRS seats

- you get bigger brake disks so marginally better braking

- 40 bhp is something of a difference

- you get a sportier suspension setup on the vRS and also the electronic diff

- you can see the exhausts on the vRS

 

As for estate vs hatch it's really up to you, my previous car was a mk II hatch. Once you get used to the cavernous boot you will fill it no matter how large it is. Perhaps the estate is ever so slightly more practical but I think your choice should rather be driven by your aesthetic preference than the odd 10-15 liters of extre space.

 

Wow, good choice, you have a gorgeous car! 

You made some very good points. 

Thanks paulsoeva. 

2 hours ago, ahenners said:

I'd go RS, unless the 4x4 option is a must. A colleague has the Leon 1.8TSI 180 and I have a VRS 220 TSI. Real world fuel economy isn't much different between them. If you are looking at DSG, I think the 1.8 got the DQ200 dry clutch 7 speed box as opposed to the more reliable DQ250 wet clutch 6 speed that's mated to the 220 TSI.

 

The hatch is definitely practical enough, I have 2 kids under 3 and we don't struggle. The estate is that tiny bit more practical, but sounds like you'd be fine with either.

 

Nice, someone with the vRS to balance the thread. 

Thank you for reminding me about the clutch. The vRS I've seen is manual but there are many with DSG and I'll keep it in mined.

Is it still  common for the 1.8 to have clutch problems? I thought it got resolved after 2013.

 

Some features and optionals I should definetly have in the used car I'll buy? 

[paulsoava]

I second that said about the DSG. They have fixed it I think but the wet 6 speed on the vRS remains a more solid performer and handles power better then the dry 7 speed on the 1.8 TSI.

 

Options I would advise:

- heated seats (unless you live in the south)

- heated windscreen (but check out a car that has it first; while it works great, I notice the threads in the glass and the vision is not so crisp)

- the Canton sound system (better than the standard system but don't expect to be blown away by it)

- adaptive cruise control (not standard on the 1.8)

 

One thing I would advise caution against is the panoramic roof; it's awesome but it eats quite a lot into head room. I opted not to have because of that.

 

Good luck finding the right car!

[flybynite]

9 hours ago, ahenners said:

I think the 1.8 got the DQ200 dry clutch 7 speed box as opposed to the more reliable DQ250 wet clutch 6 speed that's mated to the 220 TSI.

 

The 1.8 2wd was fitted with the DQ200 but the 1.8 4x4 definitely has the DQ250 6-speed wet clutch DSG. It is another reason the go for the 4x4 over the 2wd.

 

The brakes on the 1.8 are exactly the same as the later vRS diesel. But smaller (340mm vs 312mm) front than the petrol vRs. Rear brakes are identical at 272mm

 

The Haldex V 4x4 is the same as fitted to the vRS diesel, Golf 7R and Audi S3. It has standard-height multilink suspension (not as low as the vRS but not as high as the Scout) you may or may not see that as an advantage.

 

40 bhp may sound a lot but the difference is not that noticeable until you get to the 280-300bhp range of the Golf/Cupra/Superb. I regularly drive it back to back with both 220 and 290 machines. The 1.8 is well matched to its turbo in the range the DSG operates. The smaller turbo is quick to react initially but then will lose out to the extra 200cc and bigger turbos in the upper rev range, Either engine will more than keep up with traffic but neither will set the world on fire, if performance is what you need then you need to be looking at something like a 7R 

 

Keep in mind both the DSG and Haldex 4x4 come with additional servicing costs, not huge, but it may be important.

 

If you drive distance, adaptive cruise works very well. 

I like the pano roof and at 6'1" I have a good 2" above my head in a fairly upright driving position

Xenon lights are good to have too

 

In reality, any of them will be fine for a daily machine, a lot will come down to the spec you can get and what you like the look of

 

[Gaz]

I've always fancied a 4x4, but in 38 years of driving, I've not once actually needed 4wd, so it's a want, rather than a need (I still want one ).

 

As FBN says, 40bhp may not notice that much between 180 and 220.  My 220 vRS DSG was brisk enough out of the box, but since it's been mapped to circa 300bhp, it's a very noticeable difference.  Horses for courses really - buy 4x4 if you need or want it, but stick with 2wd if you don't.

 

Gaz