I disagree.....been in a TypeR of my mates and you do. Before you hit high RPM it's like any other 2.0.

What would I know. I don't own one or anything.

What would I know. I don't own one or anything.

Seem to have hit a raw nerve there! Calm down.....it's only a discussion where we air our opinions.

The Type R is a very quick car when driven properly. When my mate gave his some stick it went well and we were flying along. BUT....

You pootle along keeping the revs at a normal level and the N/A engine simply does not have enough torque to make decent progress without reaching into the higher power band.

Many manufacturers are now opting for forced induction now due to the torque benefits. The Focus ST, the Leon Cupra's, the Astra VXR etc etc.....even BMW have produced the 335i and they are normally dead set against turbocharging etc.

Around a track and flat out a CTR is a nightmare to keep up with. They're just mental with those engines. But sometimes I don't want to have to drop it 2x cogs to overtake the crawler doing 45mph. I might want to keep it in 4th and simply put my foot down thus achieving the same goal with less fuss.

It's all down to driving style and which type of engine suits you best.

And if only I could express... how I don't have to drop a couple of cogs... and how I leave it in 6th, increase the rev's and it goes some.......

Coming from a modifed Fabia, and from a modified Leon Cupra R.... I can safely say, I feel the Civic has ample torque. Obviously, and this goes for any car, it could always have more which wouldn't be missed.

Yeah, more torque is always good. An Audi A4 3.0 TDi left me standing this morning.......doing about 60mph he pulled out into my lane and just went surging forward. Drool.....

Why did you go from the LCR to the CTR? How did you find the transition?

I found that the particular Leon I had, was unrealiable. So swapped for a better Hot Hatch. They feel the same in speed, but the CTR's speedometer, goes up relatively quicker. Handles better, and doesn't hit silly MPG figures when out of V-tec.

I love my lil fabia, with the vvti engine your have to revv it to make it move or drop it into 3rd on the motorway. With the fabia just put your foot down in 6th and leave a cloud of smoke, plus silly mpg.

standard fabia vrs vs corolla t sport = no chance, the corolla is much quicker.

a remapped fabia vrs will keep up with one, but expect problems after 40-50,000 miles of having the remap - clutch will definately need upgrading, engine mountings tend to fail more often (i had to replace every one after 30,000 miles), and also i'm not sure if this is just a one off but apparently the the remap can cause oil to leak out of a pipe (don't know which one) of which there is no cure, other than to take off the remap. if you are prepared to live with the higher running costs (insurance) and no warranty & possible repairs then get it done as it does make a noticable difference, but you will also need to invest in better brakes and suspension to cope.

personally, in retrospect i wish i had just buy a car that was built to cope with that power in the 1st place, then you won't have any issues regarding the above.

I now have none of those issues, as i've bought a slower car, and not modified it

standard fabia vrs vs corolla t sport = no chance, the corolla is much quicker.

a remapped fabia vrs will keep up with one, but expect problems after 40-50,000 miles of having the remap - clutch will definately need upgrading, engine mountings tend to fail more often (i had to replace every one after 30,000 miles), and also i'm not sure if this is just a one off but apparently the the remap can cause oil to leak out of a pipe (don't know which one) of which there is no cure, other than to take off the remap. if you are prepared to live with the higher running costs (insurance) and no warranty & possible repairs then get it done as it does make a noticable difference, but you will also need to invest in better brakes and suspension to cope.

personally, in retrospect i wish i had just buy a car that was built to cope with that power in the 1st place, then you won't have any issues regarding the above.

I now have none of those issues, as i've bought a slower car, and not modified it

Spot on! For me, the power is never enough. And unfortunately... I'm too stuborn to change.

Hi,

Currently owing a corolla t sport (190bhp) and am very interested in the fab vrs, it looks like a gr8 car...

I think a chipped one would be as quick as mine?

has anyone had a run in with a t sport? i wonder what the performance diff is?

my guess is that they probably handle the same 2?

thanks

rob

only scanned through the posts, but I actually have driven against

a corrola t-sport (standard fabia vRS at the time) and for the first few seconds, i thought "ha!" then he just drove off.... so as others have said, much quicker than a standard vRs....

Having just had a play with a golf GTI in the 170 bhp GP tho, I matched him exactly between 40-70 mph..... (waits for the flaming of "he wasn't trying" ect)

so not sure what the story would be with a remapped vRS......

oh, and the corrola would handle better than the vRS... things can be bought to sort that out though ..

Having just had a play with a golf GTI in the 170 bhp GP tho, I matched him exactly between 40-70 mph..... (waits for the flaming of "he wasn't trying" ect)

He wasn't trying!

HTH

Chris

He wasn't trying!

HTH

Chris

lol... thanks

Thanks for all your input!

ive noticed a lot of people saying my t sport will handle better. i find this hard to believe, have you been in one lol (jelly on a plate)?

Performace wise, i noticed when Autocar (ithink) tested one with the superchips upgrade they were really impressed, 0-60 in 7.2 (same as t sport). 0-100 would be interesting because mine does it in about 18.5 secs. But just geneerally LOVED by the magazine for the year it ran it...

So the fab isnt so fab after a 50kmiles with the remap? which could provide costly i guess...

i just long for thoose mpg figures with some speed and fun at the same time...

(but 130bhp isnt enough lol)

good idea to wait for a couple of years for the more powerfull octavia diesel comes down in price.

untill then it will be low torque high revving entertainment...

A remapped Fabia should do in the region of 0-60 in 8 seconds and 20 seconds to 100 if your seriously interested in it. Fabia's are very bad handler's, I remember encounting my first... moment with it. Not pleasant, And to be fair.

Against the car I've got now, I was with a mate on some twisties into some roundabouts in his modified T-sport, and around bends he couldn't keep up.

Never driven one, but I presume they are poor handlers also.

Thanks for all your input!

The MPG is impressive i'll concede that, infact nearly 20 mpg better than my Astra.

I'm not certain whether mine was a one off in terms of reliablity as I often drove it like I stole it, but in a sense that proves my point. A standard Fabia vRS would be able to cope, as it is built to. And although the mechanical components would suffer over time, adding atleast another 40 bhp and 50 lb/ft more torque is only going to make things more susceptible to failure.

On the other hand, if you bought one, got it remapped and then drove it normally, things would probably wear out less often, but doesn't that kind of defeat the object of having all of this extra power under your right foot, especially when it's sooooo tempting to use it.

Regarding the handling, in retrospect I now understand what was wrong with it. Cornerning speed was never an issue, but the heavy front end is something that takes time to adjust to and you only fully appreciate the difference when you go back to a lighter engine. I fitted Eibach springs, Strut Brace and Ibiza Cupra bushes all of which helped the car corner quicker and with a less pronounced lean in the corners and under heavy braking, the downside to this was a poor ride in comparison to other cars, the outset in terms of cost and the fact I still never really had confidence on the corners.

And a final note about the brakes, whilst they may appear sharp once you have a remap you will need to slow the thing down a lot quicker and the standard setup will go through pads every 10-12k if you drive it hard (IMO), so a 312mm brake setup is a must.

All in all, although i've given it a slating on here, it was a very good car for me. I was young, didn't have many worries and cars were my only expenditure so repair bills, upgrades and making something unique were all part of the experience which I am pleased to of had. But in my honest opinion I would say the Corolla (T Sport especially) is a step up in terms of performance, ride comfort and practicality, why not spend some money making that unique, the VVT engine can see very good gains, and off cam it is still economic as far as petrol's go and you won't have that annoying diesel drone

HTH, Chris.

Hellfire interesting comment about problems after 40 to 50k when remmapped. You must have had a bad one., My Golf PD130 which is the same engine as the vrs and was remmaped since new. Then at 80,000 miles i fitted a hybrid turbo and is running 220bhp. It now has 160,000 miles and nothing has failed on it that is tuned related and is running like new. The only thing i upgraded was the clutch.

Interesting one this. My neighbour has the Corolla in question and his mate has an Mk1 Octavia Vrs which he says slays his in a straight line. He was really impressed with my Furby and especially the fuel economy which was reading 50mpg at 50mph when I took him out. Question is do you prefer low down torque or reving the balls of it driving styles?.

Exactly, a lot of it comes down to driving styles, although diesels do generate more torque due to the gearing, it is also aided by a turbo whereas in a lot of cases petrol's don't.

My brothers Megane 225 (turbo for those not in the know) and that revv's very nicely from 3k upwards, and goes manic at 5k, so whilst the arguement surrounding low down torque of a diesel and high revving petrol's will always rage on, a petrol with a turbo would bridge the gap, and will still return 30 ish mpg, which in the real world is only 15 less than an equivalent diesel but with the added smile.

Watch the 5th gear review of the Focus ST.....they mention a certain Honda and having to 'rev the nuts off it' whereas the Crocus has torque aplenty meaning you don't.

More torque allows for a more relaxed driving style really. Fewer gearchanges required to pick up speed. Hills are also a damn sight easier with more 'grunt'.

It's a personal thing.

Interestingly both are Petrols, one is N/A and one is turbo'd, hence proving that as soon as you add a turbo to a petrol it too had shed loads of torque making it a lot easier to drive low down in the revv's. The basic reason that TDi's exist is in modern day cars is because of the economy and supposid longetivity. If a petrol lasted as long and was equally economic when turbo'd then not many people would bother owning a TDi.

Reviews, Paragraphs, what Jeremy Clarkson said, My mate down the pub said etc. It can go on all day. There is no point in slating a car, if you've never driven it.

We can all do that...

Snoopie was that a generic answer or aimed at me, as I have previously owned a Fabia vRS as you will know by the number of posts i've made (most of which have been b@ll@cks , this will be the 3153 pointless post ).

Snoopie was that a generic answer or aimed at me, as I have previously owned a Fabia vRS as you will know by the number of posts i've made (most of which have been b@ll@cks , this will be the 3153 pointless post ).

Re-read through your post. You didn't slate either car did you? Nope... Guess it wasn't aimed at you then! :P

Cheers buddy

thanks for all the help with this....

i decided to stick withthe t sport (and the fuel bills) for now.

never say never though...

Nice one

Come to the next Skoda meet? And someone may kindly take you for a spin in a Remapped Fabia.