Living With A Sportline Plus 272 Hatch

[shyVRS245]

Owned 16 days now and 601 miles covered with an update on fuel purchased in another 12 days plus cost and mpg (actual) average.

[bigmeg]

I can tell you really love the car shy. It’s cracking in black as well. I’ll get my photo up in the next few days. I’ll have my cruise control set for tomorrow’s drive and hopefully mpg close to what you achieve.

[shyVRS245]

1 minute ago, bigmeg said:

I can tell you really love the car shy. It’s cracking in black as well. I’ll get my photo up in the next few days. I’ll have my cruise control set for tomorrow’s drive and hopefully mpg close to what you achieve.

Might be a good idea to check the oil level soon on your car if you haven't yet as I will need to put in about half a litre in the next few days proves dealer didn't do all the checks at the PDI before the handover.

[dunc69]

1 hour ago, shyVRS245 said:

Might be a good idea to check the oil level soon on your car if you haven't yet as I will need to put in about half a litre in the next few days proves dealer didn't do all the checks at the PDI before the handover.

Shy, these engines can use a little oil. Not sure if your 245 used much, but one to be aware of 👍

[shyVRS245]

Just now, dunc69 said:

Shy, these engines can use a little oil. Not sure if your 245 used much, but one to be aware of 👍

Thanks I know from experience on the 245 which used 1.25 litres before the first service at 18,500 miles and then none up until the second service at 29,000 miles.

[dunc69]

Yep, my first vRS petrol (‘10 ‘plate) used no oil.  
 

My 1.8 TSI Scout (‘10) drank oil for England (had to sell as it started getting worse). 
 

My ‘14 220 supped some, but was manageable.  
 

Fingers crossed your 272 is a gentle sipper! 
I’d hope Skoda (VAG) have finally got the piston rings sorted!! 

[Roscio]

12 hours ago, newbie69 said:

In any case, the 4.36" for 0-100 km/h is hugely impressive for what is essentially a stock car with raised boost levels. Did you achieve that time by full auto launch control or manual control?

Yes, I really didn't expect that time. Full auto launch control, almost empty fuel tank, no extra weight in the trunk, and no passenger.

For comparison, before remapping (full stock) i got 5.5 sec 0-100 with full tank, various stuff in the trunk and one 100+ kg passenger. Measured with Racelogic.

[shyVRS245]

6 minutes ago, Roscio said:

Yes, I really didn't expect that time. Full auto launch control, almost empty fuel tank, no extra weight in the trunk, and no passenger.

For comparison, before remapping (full stock) i got 5.5 sec 0-100 with full tank, various stuff in the trunk and one 100+ kg passenger. Measured with Racelogic.

Officially Skoda quote 5.5 seconds for the 272 and 5.8 seconds for the 280 suggesting the extra gear helps off the line.

[Roscio]

Yes, the extra gear definitely helps! And i'm sure it helps on fuel economy too...

overall, compared to the 280, i think the 272 gained a lot with DQ381 over DQ250 but lost MPI . And got two opf in the exhaust that for sure doesn't help dissipating turbo heat...

[newbie69]

2 hours ago, Roscio said:

Yes, the extra gear definitely helps! And i'm sure it helps on fuel economy too...

overall, compared to the 280, i think the 272 gained a lot with DQ381 over DQ250 but lost MPI . And got two opf in the exhaust that for sure doesn't help dissipating turbo heat...

Your stock turbo dissipates its heat just fine, it's the fact that you want to hit 450bhp+ that's an "issue" here 

[newbie69]

11 hours ago, dunc69 said:

Shy, these engines can use a little oil. Not sure if your 245 used much, but one to be aware of 👍

Not the case with the 280/272 engines though, despite some strong VAG mythology out there which tends to be applied on all models and variants regardless  "it's a VAG! it must have the check engine light ON and burn oil"  (which I am not implying you are claiming)

30K km in my previous 280 engine I never had to fill up a drop, the oil level barely moved down from max a couple of mm every 10-12K, still well inside the normal operation zone. Also never saw the color of the check engine light.

In fact the gen3 2.0 TSIs are one of the strongest and trouble free engines within the group.

Edited 14 January, 2020 by newbie69

[penguin17]

1 hour ago, newbie69 said:

Not the case with the 280/272 engines though, despite some strong VAG mythology out there which tends to be applied on all models and variants regardless  "it's a VAG! it must have the check engine light ON and burn oil"  (which I am not implying you are claiming)

30K km in my previous 280 engine I never had to fill up a drop, the oil level barely moved down from max a couple of mm every 10-12K, still well inside the normal operation zone. Also never saw the color of the check engine light.

In fact the gen3 2.0 TSIs are one of the strongest and trouble free engines within the group.

+1.  I'm 18 months into ownership and the car has covered 17K miles.  Apart from it's 1st service last May, the car has needed no oil.  I check it routinely and the level doesn't seem to drop.  In contrast my old EA113 2.0 TFSI was best friends with OPEC. 

Edited 14 January, 2020 by penguin17

[newbie69]

7 minutes ago, penguin17 said:

+1.  I'm 18 months into ownership and the car has covered 17K miles.  Apart from it's 1st service last May, the car has needed no oil.  I check it routinely and the level doesn't seem to drop.  In contrast my old EA113 2.0 TFSI was best friends with OPEC. 

Trust me, you don't know what "oil anxiety" means unless you've owned a 1.4 twincharged TSI     I've probably spent more time on the study of the why, how, when, by how much etc.  the oil level was changing than I did for my Bachelor's thesis...

The 280/272 engines though are solid.

[cmp1951]

8 minutes ago, newbie69 said:

Trust me, you don't know what "oil anxiety" means unless you've owned a 1.4 twincharged TSI     I've probably spent more time on the study of the why, how, when, by how much etc.  the oil level was changing than I did for my Bachelor's thesis...

The 280/272 engines though are solid.

Try living with a Lancia 2litre coupe or HPE, 1970-80s vintage, double over head cam! 1 pint per 1000 miles; but a dream to drive. Went like S--t of a shovel, but stuck to the road like s--t on a blanket. Why did I sell em! and no, they were not rust buckets like the saloons.

[newbie69]

11 minutes ago, cmp1951 said:

Try living with a Lancia 2litre coupe or HPE, 1970-80s vintage, double over head cam! 1 pint per 1000 miles; but a dream to drive. Went like S--t of a shovel, but stuck to the road like s--t on a blanket. Why did I sell em! and no, they were not rust buckets like the saloons.

 

Ha! Bring it on...

 

1 pint per 1000 miles you say? That, according to Google, calculates less than 400ml per 1000km which was my worst score (occasionally dropping to 200ml/1000km).

Edited 14 January, 2020 by newbie69

[penguin17]

😂😂

 

@cmp1951's driveway: 

 

 

Vs @newbie69's back garden:

 

Who will win?!

Edited 14 January, 2020 by penguin17

[caprixpack]

A pint for a 1000 miles isn't bad, my 924 owners manual says that 1 litre for a 1000 miles is normal. 

[cmp1951]

51 minutes ago, penguin17 said:

😂😂

 

@cmp1951's driveway: 

 

 

 

Vs @newbie69's back garden:

 

Who will win?!

back garden looks like Gainsborough!

Edited 14 January, 2020 by cmp1951
Still can't spell

[dunc69]

4 hours ago, newbie69 said:

Not the case with the 280/272 engines though, despite some strong VAG mythology out there which tends to be applied on all models and variants regardless  "it's a VAG! it must have the check engine light ON and burn oil"  (which I am not implying you are claiming)

30K km in my previous 280 engine I never had to fill up a drop, the oil level barely moved down from max a couple of mm every 10-12K, still well inside the normal operation zone. Also never saw the color of the check engine light.

In fact the gen3 2.0 TSIs are one of the strongest and trouble free engines within the group.

Very pleased to hear they have finally sorted it! 

[Roscio]

4 hours ago, newbie69 said:

Your stock turbo dissipates its heat just fine, it's the fact that you want to hit 450bhp+ that's an "issue" here 

No issue with opfs, those both will soon be stored in my garage shelving 

The real issue (to me) is the lack of mpi. But this is another story...

[shyVRS245]

Couple of heavy traffic (45 minutes rather than my usual 37 minutes) commuting days this week but managed to capture this moment 5,555 miles now completed.

[shyVRS245]

Reality check moment today as I enjoy 3 days off work. Wife needed to use her Karoq (she's only driven her car 187 miles in the last 2 weeks) for a home visit today so rather than swap the cars round in our tandem drive decided to drive to the local SPAR shop for milk (normally walk it in 10 minutes) and after the half mile drive computer tells me I've averaged 9.7mpg (same as a track day in my old 336bhp Octavia). The joys of cold engine and a large heavy car.

[shyVRS245]

Wife’s Karoq has been having some issues with the car not recognising both key fobs so I dropped it off at the Dealer 11 miles away for a couple of days investigation under warranty (doubt there will be any fault codes or a satisfactory solution). However it has given me the chance to do a quick review on the courtesy car a 69 plate 3,000 mile Fabia 1.0TSi with a handbrake (manual) and a 5 speed manual gearbox. Although the 3 cylinder engine sounded a bit diesel like when cold when warmed up it was quite refined and had good acceleration (for the engine size) in 3rd and 4th gears. Engine flexibility was impressive pulling 17mph in 3rd and 35mph in 5th. The gearbox was smooth if not as good as the Karoq’s 6 speed manual and driving position was fine for my 1.85m (probably better than the Karoq if I’m being honest). There was an annoying rattle when on poor road surfaces or going over a bump which after only 3,000 miles would wind me up if I was the owner.  It came with rear parking sensors, a small info screen with 6 buttons and manual air con. Surprisingly it had a front radar which went off with a warning bong when an Audi Q3 pulled away slowly approaching a roundabout. Handling was safe and overall I was impressed (apart from the rattle) with 49.4mpg for the drive home (it even had half a tank of fuel) compared to the Karoq’s 41.4mpg (however the rush hour traffic into the City was much worse, 40 minutes). Overall score 7 out of 10, and better than I was expecting.👍

[penguin17]

On 04/01/2020 at 20:36, silver1011 said:

Assuming 500+ miles to a tank, how much does it cost to fill it up? Is the 66 litre tank bigger than normal?

 

I'd love one of these, but my 20,000+ mile annual mileage forces me into a diesel.

 

Given the lower price of petrol vs. diesel at the pumps I'm wondering how far this goes to offsetting the 272's increased thirst...

Honestly, I wouldn't unless you can afford/justify spending a few hundred on fuel every month.  When I first started a job with a 90 mile return commute, we had a Mk2 vRS.  I'd start the week with a full tank of fuel and be refuelling on the Thursday.  Whilst I loved the car, it got a bit silly as fuel was costing more than I was paying for the car.  When it started to suffer the dreaded carbon deposits on the injectors I switched to Shell Optimax which was only available at my local services and IIRC, not much cheaper than what supermarket 95 is now, so quite expensive at the time.  Needless to say it took the enjoyment out of the car.  I only do about 8K miles PA at the mo and £90+ every 300-400 miles in the 280 is bad enough 😂 

[penguin17]

36 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

Wife’s Karoq has been having some issues with the car not recognising both key fobs so I dropped it off at the Dealer 11 miles away for a couple of days investigation under warranty (doubt there will be any fault codes or a satisfactory solution). However it has given me the chance to do a quick review on the courtesy car a 69 plate 3,000 mile Fabia 1.0TSi with a handbrake (manual) and a 5 speed manual gearbox. Although the 3 cylinder engine sounded a bit diesel like when cold when warmed up it was quite refined and had good acceleration (for the engine size) in 3rd and 4th gears. Engine flexibility was impressive pulling 17mph in 3rd and 35mph in 5th. The gearbox was smooth if not as good as the Karoq’s 6 speed manual and driving position was fine for my 1.85m (probably better than the Karoq if I’m being honest). There was an annoying rattle when on poor road surfaces or going over a bump which after only 3,000 miles would wind me up if I was the owner.  It came with rear parking sensors, a small info screen with 6 buttons and manual air con. Surprisingly it had a front radar which went off with a warning bong when an Audi Q3 pulled away slowly approaching a roundabout. Handling was safe and overall I was impressed (apart from the rattle) with 49.4mpg for the drive home (it even had half a tank of fuel) compared to the Karoq’s 41.4mpg (however the rush hour traffic into the City was much worse, 40 minutes). Overall score 7 out of 10, and better than I was expecting.👍

 

 

I bought my wife a 1.2 TSI SE L Fabia last Summer and am blown away by how refined, equipped and roomy it is for a supermini.  Whilst not as nice to drive as the Fiesta Zetec S Ecoboost she had before it, it's just a nicer, more 'grown up' feeling car.  I often borrow the keys if I need to go into town on market days and such as some parking spaces are a no-no when in the Superb.  No issues with the Fabia though, perfect for around town and not too shabby when on the motorway too.  Peppy little engine for a 90PS too, more so than the numbers would suggest.