I am looking to buy nearly new RS @ around

Hi and welcome,

The RS is a great drive, I tried one a while back, very settling, however if you were in the mind set fora scuby, have you considered the 4x4?

At a showroom spec of 150 it does not set the world on fire, but change the ECU and you get a scuby beating performance in a subtle vehicle. The insurance is not to bad, about the same as a stock vRS in fact on average.

Where abouts are you in the UK?

Hi Colin,

My name is Pete & live in Preston, Lancs. I am still learning about the Octavia's, and no info on tuning, I always worry about doing too much , for example, those that Chip Scooby's generally blow them up, and how fast do we want to go.

I currently drive an MR" T bar its a 1996 in red, had it 3 years, great car, but ready for a change, and do like fast medium sized hatchbacks. The Scooby is tempting I know a guy selling one now its a 2000 (X) 4 door totally standard UK car, doen 17000, he wants 12500 for it, must be worth a look.

bye

Pete

Well I'm nr Bolton and my folks are up between preston and blackburn so I'm often up there.

If you fancy a blast out in a remapped 4x4 just drop me a PM or something.

(oh, and we have a "chip friendly" dealer in the area also, so don't worry about warranty etc)

With this sort of decision, you really need to compare the two cars back to back to get an idea of performance and handling, but make sure you're comparing the cars with the specs you want to end up with. With the Scooby, you've also got the minefield of buying a UK turbo, or a JDM car.

We went for the Scooby cos at the time the only real alternative was the bank-breaking Evo and we'd also lusted after one for so long , but now there appears to be plenty of high-performance car offerings from Honda, Ford, Seat, Skoda etc that may be worth a look.

When our car comes to be replaced in a couple of years time, I'll be test driving all of the above (and probably an R34-GTR for good measure! ) and I'll be very interested to know what I'll end up in! :D

Chris

I have just sold my STI 3 after 2.5 years & bought a 4x4, Ok not the performance of the Scoob but to replace it with a STI 7 or 8 would have cost a fortune & to be honest they just arent worth the money, also with a Scoob they are far too common, they are slipping into the grasps of the boy racers, all bad for the Image. If the police get used to scoobs being silly they will always be watching out for them & they are !!

The RS apears to be a bit of a tyre eater if some threads are to be believed & are also holding there price well which made me look at the 4x4. Having had a scoob I prefer the added traction & if it gets modded (it will) then the more wheels putting down the power the better.

as Tavia 4x4 said its easy to get the 4x4 up to UK Scoob spec & the ultimate potential on std internals is probably more than a scoob can be modded on std internals

Have a real good trawl around the Skoda dealers, you may be suprised how cheaply you can get a 4x4. I was lucky & got one 4 months old for 10500 with 1400 miles on but I have seen other low mileage ones for 11500-12000 & they will always haggle.

If you get a chance try a 4x4 or take Tavias offer of a spin in a modded one

as Tavia 4x4 said its easy to get the 4x4 up to UK Scoob spec & the ultimate potential on std internals is probably more than a scoob can be modded on std internals

And with the 4x4 you can get wood-effect panel trim, which

AFAIK isn't an option of the Scoob... :smile-l:

Rob.

Sadly wood-effect panel is an option on the Scooby, but I challenge you to find an owner with it installed

Chris

Thge only way I thought you could get wood effect paneling on a Scoob was to drive it into a tree, still you learn something everyday

Skoda also has climate control (only on jap spec Imprezas) + a sun roof as standard YES both

Stuart

Chris, You wouldnt happen to be from the house of the Silver Scoob ??

You guessed it Stuart And Rob's my brother which is why he keeps winding me up about the Scooby...

Glad you're enjoying your latest purchase and it'll be great to see it if you pop along to one of our meets some time.

Chris

Chris, wont make Mondays meet but maybe the next if Skuds are allowed in. I dont know what car Rob drives but if you fancy a go in a std 4x4 before it gets modded for future reference let me know, youve got about 6 weeks !!!!

My Octavia's a 1.6 Ambiente, so it's not going to win over any

Scooby owners unless they want some fuel economy and a

"real man's" boot

And we always seem to end up going out in Chris' car anyway!

:drive:

Rob.

LOL @ Rob! We've only seen your car the once!

Stuart - would love you to take me out in the 4x4 and I'm sure Jen would love a go too, so we can see what it's like. Will also be interesting to see the difference your mods make to it!

Chris

What's this a Scoobynet reunion?

Rollerskate, it all depends on why you are looking at the Scoob.

Now I'm biased on this one so take what I say with a pinch of salt:

I would take the Skoda for the following reasons:

* Running costs

* Lack of percieved yob image (please forgive me scoob owners)

* Running costs

* It will still have the bulk of its warranty and at that age they had a 3 yr unlimited mileage warrany

* Running costs

* They are fun to drive, just different to a scoob. Much wider spread of power. They are reasonably brisk

* Better interior (OK, you may not like the large Skoda badges, but it IS better inside than a scoob)

* Running costs

* People do not know what they are

* The inverted snobbery of having a Skoda

* Dealers, on the whole, are friendly, helpful and love it when you mod the car

Oh, did I mention that the running costs are better on the Skoda?

As to which Skoda, thats a thorny question. As you may have guessed there is friendly rivallry between the RS and the 4x4 camp, so I'll try to be impartial:

Enginewise, there is not a lot in it once you start modding. Power will be within 10 bhp whatever you choose.

Handling, well as standard I reckon a RS is better if pushing on. The 4x4 has a better (read softer) ride and is better over rougher roads. Ultimate grip would be the RS.

Interior, well it depends what you like. It all comes down to fixtures and fittings. It really is personal choice. The RS is more "sporty", but the seats and trim are a bugger to keep clean, so I don't bother The 4x4 is more "functional", which means it'll be easier to keep clean. It is also more comfort orientated with more options available, either as options or as standard.

Reliability will be the same whichever you pick. I've had mine 16 months and done 76,000 miles in it. Only problems to date are coil packs, but that can (and does) happen to any 1.8T VAG car. I'm averaging 31-32mpg overall. Doesn't sound that good really, but bear in mind mine has a full exhasut system with freeflow cats and downpipe replacement, plus that does include about 7,000 track miles I think the 4x4 will be less economical (I'm sure someone can post up the official figures, meanigless though they are). Tyre wear is going to be similar, if not the RS will be slightly better.

For Q car ability I'd have to say that a 4x4 wins hands down. It looks like any other Octavia but with a bit more ground clearance.

Sorry to ramble! Hope the above helps.

Jon

yup what he says... agree entirely...

(which is indeed a rare thing )

I agree almost totally with TaviaRS too, except for his statement that:

...there is friendly rivalry between the RS and the 4x4 camp...

He of course means friendly as in: 'Which part of your anatomy wants to be cuddled by my teeth?'

vRS or 4x4? You will have loads of fun in either as the majority on both sides of the vRS/4x4 divide would secretly admit. And if you chip the 4x4, you will have a real Q car to confound BMW drivers et al.

:wave:

PS For non-French speakers, 'et al' means 'and Al' - Didier's engineer. BTW, has Didier's membership lapsed?

Not exactly a scoob reunion, more those that have come over to the other side or are thinking about it having a chat so to speak.

I recognised the characters as I have been known to post over on the other side on the odd ocassion

Ian, we have been known to agree more than once (I think its 3 times now )

Not as a matter of principle, Jon, but contrary to Ian's benevolent statements, may I respectfully disagree with some of what you said?

Originally posted by TaviaRS

Handling, well as standard I reckon a RS is better if pushing on. The 4x4 has a better (read softer) ride and is better over rougher roads. Ultimate grip would be the RS.

I haven't found the FWD car yet that will out-grip a 4WD - with or without TC. Similarly, on the handling front I found the standard RS to be your typical understeerer. Lowering a 4x4 to RS height, thus getting rid of the excess wallow, should give it superior handling in corners.

Just to give you an example - just got back from a business trip to the other side of the country and had a blast taking on a pushy sales rep bloke in a smoke-bellowing, all-tuned up Passat TDI that happily flew past me on the straights but as I beat him away from the lights, on our way to a motorway entry road, I saw him in my mirrors sliding off front-first in a big, big way while attempting to make the corner as fast as I had. And I wasn't even trying.

Now that is neutral 4WD vs understeering FWD - oh, that's taking into account that both said sales rep and myself are terrible drivers.

Originally posted by TaviaRS

Interior, well it depends what you like. It all comes down to fixtures and fittings. It really is personal choice. The RS is more "sporty", but the seats and trim are a bugger to keep clean, so I don't bother The 4x4 is more "functional", which means it'll be easier to keep clean. It is also more comfort orientated with more options available, either as options or as standard.

The standard 4x4 seats are functional, yes, but totally lack side support if you're a lanky build. So I opted for the RS seats (still not perfect in that respect, I must say), but having heard some of your stories I already dread keeping them clean!

Originally posted by TaviaRS

Tyre wear is going to be similar, if not the RS will be slightly better.

Won't the RS be smoking up its fronts when driven like it should be - you know, with inherent understeer and all? I know the 4x4 doesn't have a 50:50 split like a Subaru and is FWD most of the time (and is slightly heavier), but nonetheless I'd say tyre wear should be better on a 4x4, with the power in "stress situations" more equally distributed across all four wheels.

All theoretically speaking of course! I can't be entirely sure, as I haven't had first-hand experience, so as I've asked in the Tyre life thread, could some 4x4 owners confirm my hunch? Or blow it to smithereens...

OK, I'll bite

Yes, the RS does understeer, but the limits are higher than those of the 4x4. This is due to the lower ride height, the lower profile/wider tyres and stiffer suspension.

Contrary to popular opinion you do not have more grip, you have more traction. There is a difference. Grip is down to contact patch on the road and tyre compound. By cornering flatter the RS maintains its contact area for longer.

So, we aren't talking standard? OK mine only understeers if severely provoked in the wet, it is more prone to oversteer which is how I want it. Most people on track think mine is either RWD or 4WD Oh and I'm a crap driver as well

The seat side support is not that good on the RS. I've had a passenger almost siting on my lap going round the Ring. Maybe it was because he had the build of a pipe cleaner and didn't fill the seat, unlike me! When I siad "comfort" orientated, I meant exactly that. It isn't made for hurling into corners as there is very little support from the "chairs"

Originally posted by TaviaRS

Tyre wear is going to be similar, if not the RS will be slightly better.

Yep, I'll stand by that. In normal driving it is true. Yes, the RS will spin its fronts and wear will be higher, but the raers do very little, wheras the 4x4 uses all 4. You wear 4 out at a slower rate than I wear out my fronts, but I rotate them to give them a rest and even out the wear. Your car is heavier which will put more load on the tyres, especially if used "enthusiastically".

Oh, and don't get me started on pad wear!

Ah, but then we do agree on a higher level

Pitch a standard RS against a standard 4x4 and I'll admit to your arguments immediately. But when you equip a 4x4 with the same tyres, the same rideheight and the same suspension layout - i.e. make it a 4x4 RS - I'll bet it's a different story. It will cost you, but then any 4WD car will be pricier than a similarly equipped FWD. (BTW, point taken on the grip vs traction issue, but that doesn't invalidate what I was saying when it comes to handling.)

I also agree that modding an RS with a trick suspension lay-out can give any sort of behaviour you wish - including oversteer! I know FWD Hondas that won't understeer unless you really, really want them to... But then Honda's suspension set-up, even in standard form, is second to none.

So in a sense, yes, I was comparing a standard RS with a modded 4x4 - but in a way that a performance and handling comparison would actually be on a more equal footing. If money is the constant instead of chassis characteristics, I agree that the RS will be cheaper to buy and run (also because of the mpg) and has a bigger boot space too.

It's probably a matter of taste as well - over the past years I've really grown fond of the way a 4WD car claws itself into the road. You can do pretty foolish things with them without running into trouble, like what happened to that sales rep this afternoon...

On the tyre issue - rotating them makes a big difference, I agree, but when you're the average driver not wanting to bother swapping them every once in a while, you will have tens and tens and tens of thousands miles of trouble-free motoring, coil packs notwithstanding, on the same set of tyres.

Just looking around on ebay and came across this vRS

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2406253552&category=18308

Buyer pays postage. Could be very expensive!