matchmaker

In a standard Octy vRS you could probably keep up with an ITR if you caught him out of the VTEC zone. Once that VTEC came in it would be a different matter...................

A remapped Octy is different, though But only in a straight line. Factor in some twisties and the ITR would get ahead

Spankathon

Thats the funniest thing I have ever heard a standard Oct vRS keeping up with an ITR was the ITR on the back of a transporter at the time..??

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

My Saab 9-3 LPT kept pretty much with a Cooper S and a CTR and the Octavia is meant to be 30 BHP more than mine, reading stats in magazines is only part of the reality, ITR does 0-60 in what 6.7 and a the Octavia about 7.5, call it a second difference 0-60 and 30-70 is probably closer, a one second gap isnt that noticeable on the road, especially if you catch a high revving N/A off guard with a grunty turbo.

logiclee

The Octavia is aerodynamic as well with a top speed of 146mph with maximum torque from 1900rpm, rolling at high speeds I think things would be pretty even between a Octy vRS and an ITR.

Cheers
Lee

Fabioso

The thing you seem to fail to realise Rabid is that I am not deluded......look up the definition in a decent dictionary. Stop calling people names and try a little harder to get your point across in a way that is constructive and to the point instead of saying the same 2 words over and over again in a sentence which is boring and irrelevent

Riprock

As possibly someone who is uniquely qualified (Ive owned an ITR and A octy Vrs ),i would have to say standard the ITR is the quicker(Not vastly,but defo quicker).When chipped though the octy will in my opinion be Marginally quicker than the ITR.All this is of course on straight roads .....the moment it bends the octy can forget it

wide

Bit like this thread

Rabid

When you're hammering a nail into something as thick as two short planks repetition is the only way to get it fully home.

Fabioso

Ahhhh, but the difference between your comments and your analogy is that the nail had a point!

occyvrs

all i was saying was on what happends this was only up to 100 -110 i couldn't pass him but less than half a car lengh behind him and he was def in vtec as he had modded it a bit and u could hear it a mile away!! im not diluted on what the car can't and can do just want happend he might have been a **** drive as tryed it on with the new dc5 and that pulled 3 lenghs in frount so i know they are quick!

Rabid

hahaha! that's actually a good one.

pete1977

and its true!

Rabid

More seriously and at the risk of being accused of repetition the problem with that supposition is that the points I've made have been backed up by Fabia 'rocket ship owners' on this very thread.
I also gave a very fair assesment of the Furby which I don't think anyone can disagree with.
Face facts a Fabia with remap just isn't a quick car.

Diablo

99% of modded ITRs are SLOWER than standard.

My X plate ITR was more or less a match for my standard my99 scoob in a straight line at anything over 30mph and was quicker than any standard non STI bug eye.

60 to 100 times

MY99 Standard Scoob - 9.5 seconds
MY2000 Standard ITR DC2 - 9.5 seconds
MY01 bugeye - 10.5 seconds (at best, depending on which set of figures you use)

What's the Octavia VRS time?

brickboy

Latest performance figs on the Fabia vRS from a group test in this week's AutoExpress:

0-60: 8.5s
30-70 thru gears: 8.5s
50-70 in 5th / 6th: 6.2s / 8.0s

So considerably quicker than Skoda's own figures

matchmaker

Can't find that figure anywhere and as my own Octy is in hospital at the moment can't check it out on my private road. But it would be quite quick, I'd imagine, as the 1.8T is a torquey lump with a very flat torque curve.

Fabioso

ok Rabid you win for persistence....

But it isn't a slow one either

Duck_Pond

Sorry to drag this one back up again, but I managed to find some stats from Auto Express mag from their road tests which are interesting...

Car BMW 320D SE / Skoda Fabia vRS

Power (bhp) 163 / 130
Torque (Nm) 340 / 310

0-60 8.5 / 8.5
30-70 thr grs 8.0 / 8.5

30-50 (3rd) 3.8 / 3.5
30-50 (4th) 6.1 / 4.7

50-70 (5th) 7.6 / 6.2
50-70 (6th) 11.0 / 8.0

Top Speed 140 / 128

Both cars are standard. The beemer actually achieved a slightly better mpg from the test. It should be noted that the tests were from different days this year, so other factors could influence the data...

Maybe it wasn't such a tall story afterall

Spankathon

The only useful figure.... on the road, there will be no difference.

But then, they're both diesels...... eugh !!!! (cough cough)

mg driver

octavia vr's quoted at 13.6 from 60 -100 mph on letstorquebhp.

lozgti

Is that just under a fortnight?

martyrobertsdj

iTrader: (1)

This is silly!!!!

I'm looking at getting rid of my 1998 Scoob Wagon and have looked at a couple of alternatives:

2005 Leon Cupra R 225
2002 Impreza Sti Type UK

Went for the Leon, placed a deposit.....something came up with my home life, so had to cancel.

Now seriously looking for something cheaper to run and the Fabia vRS is probably top of the list. My Dad bought a brand new one a couple of months ago and it's a nice little car. It is NOT fast, but it pulls well at low revs.

I can get a 2005 one with 3K miles on the clock for 10K. This is £5K cheaper than the other two cars I was considering. Group 9 insurance halves my premium, 45mpg doubles my fuel economy.......the argument is strong.

I am under no illusion whatsoever that the Fabia is fast and I just KNOW I will miss the Scoob. However.....sometimes things happen in life where we have to chose something less than what we want, we just have to look at the big picture and use common sense once in a while!!

Spankathon

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, it may not be that fast but neither of your alternatives is twice as fast despite being twice as much to insure and fuel.

Depends which way you look at it, plus it isnt just the fast thing that guarantees enjoyable driving, plenty of other factors thankfully.

Plenty of people on here spending way more than they can afford to go faster than is sensible/legal and sane.

If money were no object I wouldnt look at diesel superminis, I could probably spend 30 grand on a car, in fact 100k plus would be possible but I have other commitments and priorities than cars, maybe when I am 50 I might go daft but for now its sensible and perhaps a project.

Saab is only doing 30 ish mpg so I will wear all the brakes and tyres out then px it !

martyrobertsdj

iTrader: (1)

Hear hear!!

However, I wasn't looking at the Fabia as being twice as slow as the alternatives. What is twice as fast anyway??? A Veyron???? Bit out of my price range.

The roads around my home ar mainly twisty B-roads, so you don't do 130mph very often anyway. Mid range is as important as anything and I'm sure that a trip to Star Performance with my Fabia (if I buy one) will see it plenty "QUICK" enough for what I need and can sensibly use.

Still think though.............real world, real roads, real British weather........a Scoob will beat most other cars on the road and a well sorted one certainly will!!!

I'll have another bike next year, so if I want to do 0-60 in 3 seconds and then go on to 170mph.....I can.

Duck_Pond

Real world... on a longer trip, in typical British weather (i.e. rain) I'd much, much rather be in my vRS Fabia than my Scooby. It's more comfortable, quieter, economical (up to 500 miles between fill ups compared to 250 (at a push!)) got a better ICE, more creature comforts, and tbh safer in terms of build quality than the Scooby.

It also provides enough fun factor to entertain, and can be parked pretty much anywhere when I arrive at the destination. I do, as usual, have a full disklok on it - what's £70 for peace of mind?

I'm still not convinced on the need to chip it. It's fast enough as it is, and struggles for traction in damp conditions. Plus making it more powerful can raise insurance costs, invalidate warranties and cause problems with the gearbox.

There are faults with it, but for a car that costs £12k new, what do you expect?

Fabioso

I'm still lovin my vRS after 1 year 2 months (this is something of a record for me as over the past 8 years I have owned more than 10 cars).

Fuels still on the way up and the amount of money I have been saving is great......do I miss the more powerful cars ? yeah u bet but not at the price I'd have to pay for them...

Echo

For a laugh and a treat I took my Scoob down to London today instead of the vRS and enjoyet it very mucho indeed Then I had to fill her up and that burst the bubble so back in to the vRS for tomorrow.

I am really enjoying having both the Scoob and vRS, I save a stack on the daily 180 mile trips but can then zoom off for some fun when the roads are less busy. The vRS is proving to be a surprisingly nice drive and TBH the Scoob wants to make me drive faster so I'm finding I'm a bit more chilled out in the week than when I was in the Scoob every day.

I don't know why people think the vRS is a rocket ship, it's not. It is very, very good value for money, it really is nippy and if I choose to put my foot down it does move plenty. In most situations the vRS is bang on, it has stacks of tourque but driving the Scoob is now a real treat.

If I couldn't afford them both I'd probably take the vRS, only in my case because of the silly miles I drive. Oh, finally, the vRS is bigger than you'd think. We get both baby seats in, buggies, all the other stuff and it's not cramped.

Well done Skoda.

Rabid

Yeah, the Furby is a good car and a nice compromise between speed and economy. From my own point of view having owned one I don't think saving a few quid really compensates for having a poor handling, relatively slow car but others on the thread feel a minor saving is worth the sacrifice.
It depends what your priorities are.

Fabioso

I don't call a few hundred pounds a month a minor saving.........but you pays your money and takes ur choice!