RE: Skoda Octavia vRS facelift: Review

RE: Skoda Octavia vRS facelift: Review

Monday 24th April 2017

Skoda Octavia vRS facelift: Review

Has the updated Octavia vRS taken two steps forward and one back?



We make no excuses for our fondness for the Skoda Octavia vRS here on PH. Not least for the fact it's a little difficult to pigeonhole. Is it a hot hatch? Sort of. It is after all based on the Golf GTI, arguably the benchmark all-rounder in the sector. But in actual size and practicality it's more like a car from the next sector up and a sensible family motor or repmobile.


Which makes it sound a bit dull. But in the vRS form enjoyed by many PHers over the years the proven mix of practicality, performance and value for money it's anything but. We should know having run the short-lived Octavia vRS230 for a very enjoyable six months and 15,000 miles. Boxes for a fast car to fit in with busy lives very much ticked.

Hang on though - short-lived? Well, yes. The 230 we ran wasn't in the range long but the whole Octavia line-up has been updated and with it the vRS versions. Which is what we're driving here. So what exactly has changed?

A face for radio
Let's get the elephant in the room out of the way first shall we? The updated vRS is, of course, based on the recently facelifted Octavia, complete with its 'overhauled' styling. Sorry to say but the new look does the car few favours; where the old car was actually very well proportioned, the new car is a little more challenging in appearance. In fairness, the vRS model, with it's more aggressive bodykit, does a good job of improving this, but still I don't think many people will be accusing the car of being better looking than its predecessor.


Also changed from the previous car is the interior, which remains familiar to anyone who's experienced a Golf, Leon or A3 recently. It was excellent before, but it now features an upgraded touchscreen interface which certainly looks a lot more modern that the outgoing system, and thankfully works just as well. Sadly, the VW group's excellent "virtual cockpit" hasn't yet been gifted to Skoda, perhaps to maintain the hierarchy and the brand's position as the discount option.

The only other point to note is that the rear track has been increased by 30mm, which was apparently for aesthetics but it brought about a slight increase in stability too.

Business as usual
So, aside from the changes the Octavia vRS remains largely the same. It is still available as either a hatch or an estate, with either a diesel or petrol engine, available with a six-speed DSG or a manual gearbox. For the purposes of comparison to our beloved long termer we will focus from here on in on the 2.0 TSI petrol manual. Happily this also happens to be the best-seller too.


The motor itself remains largely unchanged, although in theory it has gained 10hp over the old model, now boasting 230hp to propel the car from 0-62mph in 6.7 seconds and onto a limited top speed of 155mph. I say in theory because our long termer was a run-out 230 edition, which made use of this very engine variant. Nonetheless all-conquering EA888 motor remains a willing participant and, thanks to some exhaust upgrades (and some fakery), the vRS certainly sounds a bit more sporty too, with a raspy FUMMMPHH on upshifts. Yes it is engineered, yes they're childish and it will undoubtedly annoy some people ... but it made me smile.

For the most part the way that the car drives brings no surprises. It is still comfortable, well-judged and very pleasant indeed. However, being a vRS it is meant to have the nuts thrashed off it from time to time, so let's stop talking about niceties and get to that bit!


Out of the blocks it feels fast enough to be considered a genuine performance option, although somehow it feels slower than it sounds on paper, which may actually be down to the way it goes about its business with the minimum of fuss. Whilst the 30mm wider rear track seems to bring with it a slightly more stable feel, the downside is that it has made the rear end less responsive to throttle inputs. Admittedly this is only really noticeable on track and so will be of little impact to the vast majority of buyers, but it certainly makes the car feel less agile at lower speeds.

Diff of opinion
This isn't helped by the lack of the VAQ locking 'diff' on the front axle and much appreciated on our vRS long-termer. The more familiar brake-nibbling ESP-based simulation of its torque distribution is your lot and this robs the car of the dynamism and interaction we enjoyed so much. As experienced in other VAQ-equipped cars like the SEAT Leon Cupra and Golf GTI Performance, the system rewards a lead foot by pulling the car into the corner and distributing the traction to where it can work rather than just understeering out of it.

Moving on, as before there are numerous configurable options on the car, with both pre-set modes and an Individual mode that can be adjusted to your preferences. Best advice is to avoid the Sport steering mode as it serves only to add unnecessary weight and remove some feel.


Despite these downsides, the car remains a very appealing package. Sure, it isn't quite as fast, sharp or well equipped as its Golf GTI cousin, but it is much bigger, more practical, equally well screwed together, arguably more subtle and, with prices starting at £25,185, it is a few thousand pounds cheaper too. However, there is another car worth mentioning to anyone considering a vRS ... and that is the vRS we weren't able to drive on the launch. That car is the vRS245, clue in the title being this has a bit more power still and that VAQ front axle. Due later this year it also gets the latest seven-speed DSG, bringing it closer to the updated hot Golf range and offering a big step up from both the previous Octavia vRS models and this 'standard' version of the updated car.

If you like the vRS formula but were looking for a significant step-up in this updated version this would seem to be the one to go for. Something we hope to be able to confirm once we've driven it!


SKODA OCTAVIA VRS PETROL (HATCHBACK)
Engine:
1,984cc four-cyl turbo
Transmission: 6-speed manual/6-speed dual-clutch auto (DSG), front-wheel drive
Power (hp): 230@4,700-6,200rpm
Torque (lb ft): 258@1,500-4,600rpm
0-62mph: 6.7sec (DSG 6.8sec)
Top speed: 155mph
Weight: 1,420kg (DSG 1,440kg, both with driver)
MPG: 43.5mpg (DSG 42.8mpg, both NEDC combined)
CO2: 142g/km (DSG 149g/km)
Price: £25,185 (£26,575 DSG)


 

 

 

 

   
   
   
Author
Discussion

philmots

Original Poster:

4,631 posts

260 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
I was slightly alarmed when I first saw the pictures of this. It's now grown on me massively, looks modern and fresh.

Knowing how good the VAQ is on my Cupra 300 I would say it's quite necessary if you intend on really using it so the 245 is a good option, but as a family car the 230 would be more than adequate.

Ashtray83

571 posts

168 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
The front lighting arrangement looks all sorts of wrong

Jonno02

2,246 posts

109 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
I will never like the front end of this car.

FourRingedDonuts

109 posts

124 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Yeah nice rear end though, in a nice mix of anything German kind of way.

AndrewGP

1,988 posts

162 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Jonno02 said:
I will never like the front end of this car.
Me neither, it's awful. Shame as the rest of the car looks good and well proportioned.

I'd like to change our 2011 Mk2 VRS Estate for a new one but I think I'll wait for the Mk4 to come out! (Our car has only done 33k miles though so it's not exactly desperate).

kambites

67,547 posts

221 months

Sunday 23rd April 2017
quotequote all
Article said:
Which makes it sound a bit dull
If it's anything like the mk2, that's because it is a bit dull. Don't get me wrong, I like ours and it does exactly what we need a family car to do, but one think you could never call it is exciting.

Ekona

1,653 posts

202 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
How comes the DSG is slower to 60 than the manual? Can't quite figure that one out.

Also yes, it's ugly.

griffdude

1,823 posts

248 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
I've got the base version on hire at the moment, it's bloody ugly. I teased my wife that I was on an extended test drive & she said get something else!

FN2TypeR

7,091 posts

93 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
The front grille is too big whilst the lights are too small IMO. I liked the previous one but that's fugly.

GTEYE

2,094 posts

210 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
AndrewGP said:
Jonno02 said:
I will never like the front end of this car.
Me neither, it's awful. Shame as the rest of the car looks good and well proportioned.

I'd like to change our 2011 Mk2 VRS Estate for a new one but I think I'll wait for the Mk4 to come out! (Our car has only done 33k miles though so it's not exactly desperate).
It kind of reminds me of the pre facelift version of the last E Class. Mercedes knew it was wrong and put it right. This has gone the other way.

Vroom101

828 posts

133 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
GTEYE said:
It kind of reminds me of the pre facelift version of the last E Class. Mercedes knew it was wrong and put it right. This has gone the other way.
I was about to say the same thing, but unlike you I really liked the front of that E-Class, and thought the facelift looked as if they'd grafted on the front end of a different car.

Perhaps Mercedes had some of the pre-facelift lights left over and Skoda have bought them up and made them fit? laugh

TaylotS2K

1,964 posts

207 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
I don't think I could ever I could ever buy a Skoda. VAG designers must be told not to make it as good looking as it's Audi/VW rival. They're always worse looking imo.

Jonno02

2,246 posts

109 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
TaylotS2K said:
I don't think I could ever I could ever buy a Skoda. VAG designers must be told not to make it as good looking as it's Audi/VW rival. They're always worse looking imo.
I actually think Seat/Skoda have better designs than Audi. With the exception of the lights on this. New VW's are nice though.

ahenners

597 posts

126 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
Definitely agree it's steps forwards and steps back too. Still don't understand the basis for the new front end and the lights; nothing else in the Skoda range has the same split design and it is visually challenging in the wrong way.

The VRS 245 is definitely the one to have with the uprated 7 speed DSG, VAQ diff and the additional power.

Other nice bits are the alcantara seats (better than pre-facelift neoprene cloth) and the updated infotainment.

Good car this as a one car for all purposes. Had my pre-facelift 220 DSG for 6 months and can't really fault it on any front.

justa1972

303 posts

137 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
A real shame as I was interested in leasing a VRS but I just cannot get past those headlights - who signed that off thinking it was a good design ?

It certainly stands out I suppose but int he wrong way !

kambites

67,547 posts

221 months

Monday 24th April 2017
quotequote all
TaylotS2K said:
I don't think I could ever I could ever buy a Skoda. VAG designers must be told not to make it as good looking as it's Audi/VW rival. They're always worse looking imo.
I thought the pre-facelift mk3 Octavia was arguably the best looking hatchback in VAG's portfolio. The new one is just awful, though. Maybe VAG decided it was taking too many sales from the Golf and told them to uglify it. hehe

HannsG

3,045 posts

134 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
It's a real grower isn't it?

That estate looks fantastic......

RC1807

12,523 posts

168 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
We have a 2 month old RS230 wagon. I think it looks better than the facelift.

(I'm sure my wife will want the 245 in 3 years time though)

Bladedancer

1,265 posts

196 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
Too Passat looking but at 245 hp it's essentially a bigger Golf GTI.
Certainly an interesting car but the Superb 280 is always there as a tempting choice. And it would be even more so if it wasn't for the silly price tag.

liner33

10,690 posts

202 months

Tuesday 25th April 2017
quotequote all
TaylotS2K said:
I don't think I could ever I could ever buy a Skoda. VAG designers must be told not to make it as good looking as it's Audi/VW rival. They're always worse looking imo.
Same guy who designed the Bugatti Veyron designed the Octavia