RE: Skoda Fabia vRS

Author
Discussion

Hub

6,413 posts

197 months

Wednesday 17th February 2010
quotequote all
You'd be surprised - I think the kerb weight is about 1300kg, which isn't very far off a Golf!

Podie

46,630 posts

274 months

Wednesday 17th February 2010
quotequote all
Hub said:
You'd be surprised - I think the kerb weight is about 1300kg, which isn't very far off a Golf!
I am... looks like there is about 70-75kg in it!

Gumpert

5 posts

169 months

Wednesday 17th February 2010
quotequote all
Mk5 Golf 2.0 TDI Sport - 1451kg
Skoda Fabia VRS - 1315kg

136kg difference or 21 stone.

Is it best to avoid parallel imports due to resale problems?

It is a UK spec import which was brought into UK from Cyprus by Motorpoint. The Golf's I've seen at dealers are at least £1500 more. Seen the same model Golf in private ads for £9.5k but that had 62k mileage, this one only has 29k.

Also, which is more likely to be stolen?

Edited by Gumpert on Wednesday 17th February 19:48

Shropshiremike

23,164 posts

202 months

Wednesday 17th February 2010
quotequote all
Pkh72 said:
Shropshiremike said:
Hub said:
It isn't anywhere near 7 seconds to 60 - mid 8's is more accurate. You need two gearchanges for starters, and first gear is useless. A 7 second car is modified!
I'm only reporting what Autocar timed their long-termer at with real timing gear. As I say, it surprised them but who knows whether it had a very good service on one drop-off at the dealer wink

I'll dig it out later - it was certainly 7.something
I can remember the autocar one being quite a bit quicker than the quoted time, i reckon it was as 'standard' as the Mkl Octavia Vrs that they had that was more rapid than it should have been.

Edited by Pkh72 on Wednesday 17th February 08:45
Looks like our memories haven't deserted us PKH. It was 7.2 to 60 recorded on the V-box, 0-100 in 23.8 and max of 126mph. 30-70 of 7.6.
Done at Millbrook on a cold, still February day with freezing air. Also shows the difference between an average driver and a proper road tester as the long term keeper Rory Lumsdon couldn't get below the 8s. Adam Towler the Autocar road tester did the 7.2. Doesn't Adam Towler post on here? Perhaps he can confirm if it was a glitch with the V-box or a genuine time?
Autocar 12/10/04 issue by the way

Pkh72

1,517 posts

185 months

Thursday 18th February 2010
quotequote all
Shropshiremike said:
Pkh72 said:
Shropshiremike said:
Hub said:
It isn't anywhere near 7 seconds to 60 - mid 8's is more accurate. You need two gearchanges for starters, and first gear is useless. A 7 second car is modified!
I'm only reporting what Autocar timed their long-termer at with real timing gear. As I say, it surprised them but who knows whether it had a very good service on one drop-off at the dealer wink

I'll dig it out later - it was certainly 7.something
I can remember the autocar one being quite a bit quicker than the quoted time, i reckon it was as 'standard' as the Mkl Octavia Vrs that they had that was more rapid than it should have been.

Edited by Pkh72 on Wednesday 17th February 08:45
Looks like our memories haven't deserted us PKH. It was 7.2 to 60 recorded on the V-box, 0-100 in 23.8 and max of 126mph. 30-70 of 7.6.
Done at Millbrook on a cold, still February day with freezing air. Also shows the difference between an average driver and a proper road tester as the long term keeper Rory Lumsdon couldn't get below the 8s. Adam Towler the Autocar road tester did the 7.2. Doesn't Adam Towler post on here? Perhaps he can confirm if it was a glitch with the V-box or a genuine time?
Autocar 12/10/04 issue by the way
It has to have been a tweaked Vrs to get a 7.2 i'm sure, cold air only does so much.
Even a clutch busting start wouldn't get ours to 60 in that time, not that i'd try it anyway.

Is Adam Towler the new EVO editor?

Shropshiremike

23,164 posts

202 months

Thursday 18th February 2010
quotequote all
Pkh72 said:
It has to have been a tweaked Vrs to get a 7.2 i'm sure, cold air only does so much.
Even a clutch busting start wouldn't get ours to 60 in that time, not that i'd try it anyway.

Is Adam Towler the new EVO editor?
Like I say, if you read the article, Lumsden ( the long term tester of the car ) only managed a 9second time at first and then got down to low 8s.
It was Adam Towler ( Autocar's chief road tester at the time ) that pulled the 7.2 out the car. He's on here so drop him a PM.


Also would you expect a tweaked car to be faster to 100 than 23.8 and 126 flat out or is that representative of a standard car?
I think there's a certain amount of 'pride' involved ( and a brutal technique ) in between road testers on different mags to extract the very best time from a car......at least that's what one told me hehe


Probably the reason why they sometimes break cars every so often - witness the 911 Turbo Performance Car had ( snapped driveshaft ), the E46 M3 manual Monkey broke at Autocar beating the SMG car times.
I dare say a good road tester could beat your best time in your own car if you gave it him wink

Edited by Shropshiremike on Thursday 18th February 08:49


Edited by Shropshiremike on Thursday 18th February 08:52

pbirkett

18,048 posts

271 months

Thursday 18th February 2010
quotequote all
The shorter ratios were introduced in 2004 and shortened the 0-60 time from 9.6 to 9.4 secs.

In reality they could all manage sub 9 secs stock.

Autocars 7.2 sec run was only achieved once. Quite probably by starting in 2nd and being very abusive.

Very much doubt it was mapped as 24 secs was par for the course 0-100. Given a 7.2 second 0-60, it then took a further 16.6 secs to reach 100, quite slow really. A remapped one could hit 100 in sub 20.

Straight line drags weren't where they impressed though, it was the hooligan like midrange.

They weren't really hot hatches in respect of they didn't have nimble handling or a revvy engine, and didn't really like being thrashed like a hot hatch - brake fade could be a problem even on the road and the puny smic struggled to cope with the heat standard let alone remapped.

Decent quickish cars for medium to long length commutes with the occasional hoon.

Shropshiremike

23,164 posts

202 months

Thursday 18th February 2010
quotequote all
pbirkett said:
Autocars 7.2 sec run was only achieved once. Quite probably by starting in 2nd and being very abusive.
Spot on chap - the majority of people won't drive their car like a road tester figuring it. Just seems like he got an optimum launch on that occasion.

IIRC they got the average consumption down to about 24mpg that day

GR33NIE

124 posts

172 months

Friday 19th February 2010
quotequote all
Shropshiremike said:
IIRC they got the average consumption down to about 24mpg that day
They must of been giving it some to get it down to that, I drive the Polo GT TDI which is the same engine as the VRS and even thrashing it I get way over 30mpg

pbirkett

18,048 posts

271 months

Friday 19th February 2010
quotequote all
Got mine down to 25 once, but then I suspect our definition of "thrashing it" are somewhat different wink

GR33NIE

124 posts

172 months

Friday 19th February 2010
quotequote all
pbirkett said:
Got mine down to 25 once, but then I suspect our definition of "thrashing it" are somewhat different wink
Are you still on your first clutch hehe

Podie

46,630 posts

274 months

Saturday 20th February 2010
quotequote all
The missus LE has just reached 60k and going strong.

New OE brakes (discs and pads, all round) cost £130.

Frugal daily motoring at it's best. smile

cheadle hulme

2,457 posts

181 months

Saturday 20th February 2010
quotequote all
2nd gear is the way to go for best traffic light grand prix.

Get it rolling slowly so the other guy doesn't think you're going for it then boot it. 2000 - 4000 results in 60 showing pretty quickly.
Mine is remapped to c170bhp and still on its original clutch and brakes at 55k.

pbirkett

18,048 posts

271 months

Saturday 20th February 2010
quotequote all
A.G. said:
Not for one moment saying they are a rocket ship but I've an 03 Civic Type R in the garage as well and there certainly isn't 2 or 3 seconds difference. Skoda was no more than 2 car lengths behind by 60.
To be fair I didn't say they were slow, indeed, they aren't. For a car with a power to weight ratio of under 100 bhp per tonne, they are a lot faster than they have any right to be.

Chris_w666

22,655 posts

198 months

Saturday 20th February 2010
quotequote all
pbirkett said:
A.G. said:
Not for one moment saying they are a rocket ship but I've an 03 Civic Type R in the garage as well and there certainly isn't 2 or 3 seconds difference. Skoda was no more than 2 car lengths behind by 60.
To be fair I didn't say they were slow, indeed, they aren't. For a car with a power to weight ratio of under 100 bhp per tonne, they are a lot faster than they have any right to be.
I actually regret not buying one, but at the time the ST170 had more going for it in terms of the drive than the VRS. The skoda felt much more exciting to belt through the gears though but the ST was IMO the quicker car. If I had driven the VRS in isolation I probably would have bought it and if there was a newer one produced at the same kind of price/performance ratio one would find its way here.