RE: The quickest Skoda yet?
Friday 29th July 2005
Škoda Octavia vRSŠkoda's about to make what it called its "fastest and most powerful production vehicle" ever.
The quickest Skoda yet?
VW offshoot to build its fastest ever car
Škoda Octavia vRS
While the unkind might comment that this isn't saying much, the new Octavia vRS has moved one step closer to our shores. The Škoda Octavia vRS hatch has a 0-62mph of 7.3 seconds and maximum speed of 149mph. Torque from the 2.0 TFSI 200bhp turbocharged, direct injection engine is a 207lb-ft at 1,800 to 5,000rpm -- not that impressive given that some normally aspirated cars can achieve 100bhp/litre. Available in hatch and estate versions, the estate can achieve 0-62mph in 7.5 seconds and a maximum speed of 148mph.
The new Škoda Octavia vRS will make its first world public appearance at this year’s Frankfurt motor show on 12 September and is due to arrive at the end of the year.
Of course, apart from not being the quickest car in its class, Škoda suffers from being at the bottom of the pile in the VW Group collection of brands -- so there's no way that the Octavia would be allowed to challenge Seat, let alone the core VW products. That said, if you're after a warm-ish, well-built hatch, you might do worse, presuming Škoda's price is right.
Discussion
100 bhp per liter from a factory turbo may not be impressive to some people - though I don't personally know any such people - but I haven't heard of any engine with a torque plateau that long since the last RS6. That is impressive to anyone who can appreciate practical, useful engineering, and I think anyone worth his or her seatbelts would take this engine for sporty driving every day on public roads over a more powerful but more high-strung engine, like in the S2000 for example, which has been criticized for being tuned solely for power and was compared to a motorcycle mill in it's character. Not that I'm not a big fan of the S2000.
Hmmm, the S2000 engine is a masterpiece.
So many journalists don't understand that low torque doesn't matter, @ the wheel torque is what matters, and the higher revving S2000 engine has 240bhp AND 9000rpm, so gearing *could* be 1.5 times shorter than say this Skoda engine for the same kinda speeds per gear.
Taking the S2000's 160lbft, probably a good deal of this is available across the 2000-9000rpm operating range.
This equates to lets say 130lbft at LEAST from 2000-8000rpm, X 1.5 because it can have shorter gearing, then we get 195lbft.
This engine will be bland and boring, and it's not actually even that fast! 7.3 seconds to 60mph ain't that hot. I guess a chipped version will offer mid-range urge and more wheelspin antics in higher gears at mid-rpm WOT.
I'd rather have a Civic Type R with it's much more superior engine
Not a de-tuned pansy turbo that was only made to have long service intervals and make good power and torque through turbo and not good design.
And VW is Skoda's main problem. Skoda will always be at the bottom of the pile, and never compete with the Seats or VW's etc because they are the pre-chosen "lowest" class. Least they could do is make some REALLY stonking sports cars just to give the brand some Kudos.
They could make a real mean machine here, but just won't because it would be counter-productive. Not sure if it's a good thing or a bad thing to even make this car, as it's clear pretty much anyone who buys it for "driving" will chip it anyway. Anyone who buys a car to look good in will just get the VW or Seat equivalent.
Dave
>> Edited by Mr Whippy on Friday 29th July 12:22
So many journalists don't understand that low torque doesn't matter, @ the wheel torque is what matters, and the higher revving S2000 engine has 240bhp AND 9000rpm, so gearing *could* be 1.5 times shorter than say this Skoda engine for the same kinda speeds per gear.
Taking the S2000's 160lbft, probably a good deal of this is available across the 2000-9000rpm operating range.
This equates to lets say 130lbft at LEAST from 2000-8000rpm, X 1.5 because it can have shorter gearing, then we get 195lbft.
This engine will be bland and boring, and it's not actually even that fast! 7.3 seconds to 60mph ain't that hot. I guess a chipped version will offer mid-range urge and more wheelspin antics in higher gears at mid-rpm WOT.
I'd rather have a Civic Type R with it's much more superior engine
Not a de-tuned pansy turbo that was only made to have long service intervals and make good power and torque through turbo and not good design. And VW is Skoda's main problem. Skoda will always be at the bottom of the pile, and never compete with the Seats or VW's etc because they are the pre-chosen "lowest" class. Least they could do is make some REALLY stonking sports cars just to give the brand some Kudos.
They could make a real mean machine here, but just won't because it would be counter-productive. Not sure if it's a good thing or a bad thing to even make this car, as it's clear pretty much anyone who buys it for "driving" will chip it anyway. Anyone who buys a car to look good in will just get the VW or Seat equivalent.
Dave
>> Edited by Mr Whippy on Friday 29th July 12:22
High time us well-informed PHers stopped with the Skoda jokes. We all know that, since VW took over, Skoda have made very competent cars (and the London Eye isn't bad either! They do heavy engineering too).
You can guess I am a Skoda driver (current Octavia as my company car), when I am not using my Boxster.
You can guess I am a Skoda driver (current Octavia as my company car), when I am not using my Boxster.
The article said:But banana trees can grow more than 100 bananas per acre.
Torque from the 2.0 TFSI 200bhp turbocharged, direct injection engine is a 207lb-ft at 1,800 to 5,000rpm -- not that impressive given that some normally aspirated cars can achieve 100bhp/litre.
Surely the subject of the sentence is torque (power being mentioned only in passing), so why compare this to 100bhp/litre from a NA engine?
The engineers at work keep chosing Octavias as their company cars. They are a great car for the company car driver as the tax is very low.
I drove the old vRS and it was a good balance for general use, and have been driven in a chipped and lowered Skoda UK car round Millbrook.... That was truly amazing.
The only thing people have against these is still the badge, and that really isn't warranted these days.
And the torque curve is only flat like that because that's how it's been programmed. VW are always doing it, and it makes the engines seem more boring to the likes of us. I really wish they wouldn't do it.
>> Edited by Westie Ian on Friday 29th July 13:49
I drove the old vRS and it was a good balance for general use, and have been driven in a chipped and lowered Skoda UK car round Millbrook.... That was truly amazing.
The only thing people have against these is still the badge, and that really isn't warranted these days.
And the torque curve is only flat like that because that's how it's been programmed. VW are always doing it, and it makes the engines seem more boring to the likes of us. I really wish they wouldn't do it.
>> Edited by Westie Ian on Friday 29th July 13:49
agent006 said:
Not a de-tuned pansy turbo that was only made to have long service intervals
Detuned from what exactly? It's the same engine as the golf GTi, and everyone loves that apparently. Badge snobbery alive and well.
006 -- hoorah - a great point, well made.. personally i'd rather take a seat leon cupra R over any of that range of VW range of cars (if that makes sense)..
s2000 -- who can be arsed to rev it all the way up to 9000? i drove one through birmingham a long time ago and got thoroughly bored of the wait - by the time you get 'all that power' out of both that car and the honda, my (old) 120d is over the next hill.
Gotta say PH, I'm dissapointed by your review. Yeah, we know, it's a Skoda - but basically it's also a Golf GTI in a more spacious body. That deserves more than just a 'warmish hatch' label...
May not be perfect for everyone, but it'll be a good value car - ideal for company car reasons and a good private buy once someone else has taken the initial depreciation hit. There's no point Skoda doing anything more sporting - they're not a sporting brand. The old rally cars weren't renowned for their performance, more their reliability (i.e. real world thrills).
May not be perfect for everyone, but it'll be a good value car - ideal for company car reasons and a good private buy once someone else has taken the initial depreciation hit. There's no point Skoda doing anything more sporting - they're not a sporting brand. The old rally cars weren't renowned for their performance, more their reliability (i.e. real world thrills).
The depreciation on Octavias is actually very good over three years and say 90,000 miles compared to other equivalent cars.
I was getting more money back from cars after that sort of mileage and even higher than all others cars on the fleet. And the running costs are very low as well.
They really are worth a very close look, it does just come down to the badge snobbery at the end of it. A Golf will often cost more, with less kit and less room than an Octavia.
I was getting more money back from cars after that sort of mileage and even higher than all others cars on the fleet. And the running costs are very low as well.
They really are worth a very close look, it does just come down to the badge snobbery at the end of it. A Golf will often cost more, with less kit and less room than an Octavia.
porky said:
High time us well-informed PHers stopped with the Skoda jokes. We all know that, since VW took over, Skoda have made very competent cars (and the London Eye isn't bad either! They do heavy engineering too).
You can guess I am a Skoda driver (current Octavia as my company car), when I am not using my Boxster.
How do you double the value of a Skoda?????
Fill it with Petrol.......
........Sorrycorcoran said:
s2000 -- who can be arsed to rev it all the way up to 9000? i drove one through birmingham a long time ago and got thoroughly bored of the wait - by the time you get 'all that power' out of both that car and the honda, my (old) 120d is over the next hill.
PMSL.
Thats got to be a joke.
SledgeMakeGood said:
I haven't heard of any engine with a torque plateau that long since the last RS6. That is impressive to anyone who can appreciate practical, useful engineering
Well said Sledge. This isn't meant to be a high-revving, bike engined track car, and personally I think it sounds like rather good.
When I saw the torque figures, I had to re-read to make sure they weren't talking about a diesel version. All that lovely torque practically from tickover...
And it's not like I can't appreciate a good high revving n/a engine, but horses for courses an' all that.
corcoran said:
s2000 -- who can be arsed to rev it all the way up to 9000? i drove one through birmingham a long time ago and got thoroughly bored of the wait - by the time you get 'all that power' out of both that car and the honda, my (old) 120d is over the next hill.
Yeah, right...the S2000 is one of the quickest cars, straight-line, under £30k. And anyone who reckons VTEC isn't driveable hasn't driven one, quite honestly...if you don't understand VTEC, you may as well drive a diesel for all the octane that ISN'T in your blood!!!
If you can't be bothered to rev a sports car then go and buy a season ticket for the trains...you're clearly far better suited to such mundane travel...the fact that you mention the 120d suggests that you are far more bothered by badge than ability or value-for-money anyway!!!
Speed Matters | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff