Ok so it's a diesel. Let's face it, it's not going to keep up with an equally powered petrol car 'off the line'. For example, the 2.0FSI (non turbo) is 0.3 seconds quicker 0-60. Not a huge difference but enough to give the petrol car the edge.

The official 0-60 time for the 2.0 TDI is 9.6 seconds which although respectable, isn't vRS territory. However, during the few times i've had to 'take off briskly' ive noticed that the car feels quicker than the official figures suggest. In fact a friend of mine was in the car today and agreed with me on this.

Well pedictably we decided to time it. We found a quiet dual carriageway with a hard shoulder and suitable speed limit, then used a digital stopwatch to carry out the test.

We did 4 runs. I timed 2 of them and he timed 2 as well. We took alternate turns timing and I started.

Now I can be heavy enough with my right foot but it's not in my nature to really fleece a car as i'm always scared of damaging them. Consequently it took a few goes to get my confidence up.

Results:-

run 1 - 8.90 s

run 2 - 8.23 s

run 3 - 7.98 s

run 4 - 7.65 s

I was so shocked at the results of run 4 that i did it again and timed it myself - run 5 - 7.68 s.

Now i'm a reasonable guy and realise these times shouldn't really be acheivable for this car with this engine but I really can't see what (if anything) I could have done wrong in the timing. I mean I know this sort of thing has been debated on here before but please humour me here. Is there any chance that any of these times could be real? Has anyone else tried it?

I think the car is definitely quicker than the official figures. Although I haven't tested it, it feels much quicker than my previous car which was chipped to 172 bhp.

Seems a huge difference compared with the official timings :eek:

I did a similar exercise, in similar surroundings actually when I had the Fabia and got times around the 8.5 mark. I would have expected the TDi 140 in the Octy to produce similar times, seeing as you have a bit more power, but more weight.

You'd really need some professional timing gear (a la 5th Gear) to be absolutely sure. Can't think of a reason at the moment to discount your times though.

Steve

Take it or arrange for one like it to go to TRAX 2006 at Silverstone, they have got a pretty accurate 0-60 timing area

I'm sure they are all a bit quicker than stated - I don't think my best 0-60 is over 9 secs. But I doubt you can trust clicking a digital stopwatch when dealing with hundredths of a second, and equally I doubt if you can trust watching the speedo or rev counter, and saying "right, now it is on 60". By the time your eye and brain register that it has changed!

Though things have moved on, they used to reckon the only accurate timing for the car speed was a fifth wheel towed behind - for the elapsed time I'm sure you must need some kind of beam and external electronics.

Manufacturers keep the figures low to keep insurance costs down. They test them with a full tank and 2 passengers to 'simulate everyday motoring'.

remember 60 on the speedo will be around 65mph mark as speedos read over... so that could add an extra second??

remember 60 on the speedo will be around 65mph mark as speedos read over... so that could add an extra second??

erm, dont think that is correct. that would open all sorts of flak for the manufacturers......i dont think i would be too chuffed if i got a ticket for speeding if i had the national limit shown on the clock.......

i drove a seat leon FR TDi last year with road angel in it, and the car was doing a 'real' 70mph when 78/79mph was shown on the clock.........

but to get back on thread, i hear that skoda's 0-62 times are pessamistic. i think either auto express or autocar tested the Octy II vRS at 6.6s 0-62 (i think 7.3 is the official) and they also got a Fabia vRS below the 8s mark to 62mph.......

Rich means the other way around - 65 on speedo is 60 real.

Manufacturers keep the figures low to keep insurance costs down.

Do you have any info to back that up? :confused:

Chris

Don't forget that manufacturers now quote 0-100kmh times.

Thats 62 mph which is an indicated 66 mph on my octy 2.

Unless you were already taking this into account you need to go back and re-time yourself.

It is fair to say though that the manufacturers figures are a little on teh cautious side.

It's better for them to have cars that exceed expectations by a few tenths of a second than have magazine reviews criticising them for being too slow.

My TDi PD is winging it's way across Europe as we speak.

In previous cars I have tested the 0-60 with a handheld GPS and downloaded the data to a PC, the data can be transposed to a graph and a pretty accurate result obtained.

I will try it soon and let you know (will have to run in first though:D )

I am sure other forum members must have handheld GPS units that can produce track data, my Magellan 315 gives me acceleration data at 0.1 second intervals.

Taz

Rich means the other way around - 65 on speedo is 60 real.

yup! real 60mph will be around the 63-65mph mark on clock

yup! real 60mph will be around the 63-65mph mark on clock

I was always under this belief (and sometimes drove to take it into account ). Measured it on one of my drive-outs using a GPS device and discovered that the speedo was pretty much spot on!

Chris

Your comments are all very valid indeed and judging by my GPS, 60mph on the speedo is actually about 58mph. You'll think i'm having a laugh here but I think I can do even better anyway. ESP seems to take a second or so to kick in and although i've learned how to minimise wheel spin in 2nd gear, i'm still losing a little more momentum than I would like in 1st gear.

With regard to timing, the times I have disclosed are the ones I measured myself while driving as I considered the ones my mate took to be unreliable. Although he could pretty accurately start the timer when I took off it really wasnt good enough him relying on me shouting 'now' as a marker for him to stop the timer.

So I put the car in gear, left hand on steering wheel, right hand on timer and then took off. I was happily in 3rd gear with my left hand back on the steering wheel by the time the speedo hit 60 when I stopped the timer (still in my right hand). The only delay (if any) was thinking time and that was probably only a couple of 10ths of a second at each end of the run.

Just to throw something else into the mix - my company car is a 2.0 tdi 140 and the missus has a 2.0 FSi 150 Sport Audi A3. The Audi cannot keep up with the skoda in 'real world' driving.

That is 2nd gear rolling off roundabouts and overtaking through the gears etc.

In a standing start the Audi is a little bit quicker but only by about a car length upto about 70mph.

We tried it all one one day not long after I got the skoda, each driving each others car and vice versa. The missus really regrets not getting the diesel. She prefers mine to driving her own FSI

Octy II 2.0tdi dsg 1/4 time is 16,3 seconds

that will be down to the torque, much better at rolling starts etc.

so the PD140 is as quick(approx) to 60 as the new 200bhp octy and golf gti?

Just numbers....

Skoda Octavia, measured (Auto-Zeitung)

Engine 1.6 MPI 1.6 FSI 2.0 FSI 2.0 TFSI 1.9 TDI 2.0 TDI

Torque [Nm] 148 155 200 280 250 320

Power [kW] 75 85 110 200 77 103

0-100 km/h 12.0 11.4 9.0 7.8 11.4 9.5

0-120 km/h 17.0 16.0 12.3 10.3 16.7 13.6

60-100 km/h 7.1 6.6 4.8 4.0 6.6 5.2

Thru gears?

80-120 km/h 9.4 8.7 6.1 4.9 8.8 6.8

3rd gear?

that will be down to the torque' date=' much better at rolling starts etc.

so the PD140 is as quick(approx) to 60 as the new 200bhp octy and golf gti?[/quote']

Whoa cowboy I didn't say that. In reality the 0-60 times for the new Octy vRS and 2.0 TFSi Golf are closer to 7 seconds if not less. I wouldn't even think of embarrassing myself against one of those cars. However a remap to 180bhp and 400nM of torque might do something for my confidence (sorry just fantisizing).

But your gearbox can only take 350Nm of Torque so you are not going anywhere. :(

Why didn't they put a box that could take all that torque on it.