Octavia VRS vs Saab 9-3 Turbo
25 November 2005, 05:22 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Octavia VRS vs Saab 9-3 Turbo
Which is the better bet for 6K?
did all Octavias produce 180 bhp? Saabs come in several power outputs dependiong on the turbo (154 bhp, 185bhp, and 205 bhp I think)
Reckon the Octavia might handle better. Not sure about performance, probably not too much in it.
Any comments or advice welcome.
Thanks.
Martin.
did all Octavias produce 180 bhp? Saabs come in several power outputs dependiong on the turbo (154 bhp, 185bhp, and 205 bhp I think)
Reckon the Octavia might handle better. Not sure about performance, probably not too much in it.
Any comments or advice welcome.
Thanks.
Martin.
25 November 2005, 08:12 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Think the only issue with the Skoda will be build quality.Heard a few stories of interior and exterior fit and finish being below average.
As for the Saab's,if had a few and they have always been good for me,never been any issues or scares while i have owned them,mine have always cost me next to nothing on running costs.
Brett C knows plenty about the Saab's,so he may be able to help you better than me,also think GC8 has recently bought a 93 turbo LPT and is enjoyng ownership.
Personally i would go for the Saab,but im biased..
As for the Saab's,if had a few and they have always been good for me,never been any issues or scares while i have owned them,mine have always cost me next to nothing on running costs.
Brett C knows plenty about the Saab's,so he may be able to help you better than me,also think GC8 has recently bought a 93 turbo LPT and is enjoyng ownership.
Personally i would go for the Saab,but im biased..
25 November 2005, 09:06 AM
#3
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 2,965
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the vRS are 180bhp, the 4x4 1.8T was 150bhp. Octavia probably a bit cheaper to run 'cos of the big VAG parts bin.
My old man has had a 1.6 Octavia from new, 5 years old, absolutely nothing has fallen off / broken / needed fixing. Good solid car.
My old man has had a 1.6 Octavia from new, 5 years old, absolutely nothing has fallen off / broken / needed fixing. Good solid car.
25 November 2005, 10:13 AM
#5
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks FSF but my post GM saab knowledge isn't that great. So on this basis alone I am definately not the best person to advise.
However I am on pre GM saab number 7 and I have to say that you get an incredibly lot of car for your money.
I think it is J4CKO who has currently got a LPT 93. He may be better able to comment.
If I had to choose I think I would also have to get the Saab. They have been pretty good to me. Also, 'better the devil you know'!
However I am on pre GM saab number 7 and I have to say that you get an incredibly lot of car for your money.
I think it is J4CKO who has currently got a LPT 93. He may be better able to comment.
If I had to choose I think I would also have to get the Saab. They have been pretty good to me. Also, 'better the devil you know'!
25 November 2005, 10:55 AM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Bedfordshire
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 November 2005, 12:39 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Central Scotland
Posts: 875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fatscoobyfella
Think the only issue with the Skoda will be build quality.Heard a few stories of interior and exterior fit and finish being below average.
Not that I'm biased
Trending Topics
25 November 2005, 12:48 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 32 cylinders and many cats
Posts: 18,658
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Some of the earlier Octavias had the usual VAG problems of coil packs, and they are all at risk of MAF sensor problems, but they shouldn't blow up like a Scooby when this happens.
The interior trim is hard plastic and marks easily, and the rear doors and hatch let in water when opened after it rains. A lot of them make noises from the rear brakes in reverse.
Economy is excellent. Brakes are a bit grabby but you get used to them, handling is good for VAG, could do with rear anti-roll bar. Road noise is a little high compared with the best.
Overall, an excellent car for the money.
The interior trim is hard plastic and marks easily, and the rear doors and hatch let in water when opened after it rains. A lot of them make noises from the rear brakes in reverse.
Economy is excellent. Brakes are a bit grabby but you get used to them, handling is good for VAG, could do with rear anti-roll bar. Road noise is a little high compared with the best.
Overall, an excellent car for the money.
25 November 2005, 01:44 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the Saab:
I think relibility on thse is pretty good and parts are not silly price wise. Post 100k you need to think about cam chains etc. Can't see there being a hige difference between Skoda and Saab running costs but the Saab will cost you more.(IMHO)
The 9-3 2.0t (LPT) gives 150bhp but for £500 (Stage 1 tuning) it becomes a 215bhp car with more power than standard 2.0T, HOT AND Aero models so value for money is best on a cheeky upgrade of the LPT.
For the same £500 on other models:
2.0T - std 185bhp up to 235bhp
2.0T HOT Sport - std 200bhp up to 235bhp
2.0T HOT Aero - std 205bhp up to 250bhp
2.3T Viggen std 230bhp up to 275bhp
I know handling is a bit questionable on some of these cars and there is a raft of aftermarket stuff to sort it out. I imagine the Aero is OK but low specs might be pretty woolly. - No idea what they are like compared to Skoda though so might be similar.
have a rumage in here for parts prices and some of the tuning stuff ( I know you didnt mention tuning but it's always more interesting that way
)
www.elkparts.co.uk
www.maptun.com
www.partsforsaabs.co.uk
I think relibility on thse is pretty good and parts are not silly price wise. Post 100k you need to think about cam chains etc. Can't see there being a hige difference between Skoda and Saab running costs but the Saab will cost you more.(IMHO)
The 9-3 2.0t (LPT) gives 150bhp but for £500 (Stage 1 tuning) it becomes a 215bhp car with more power than standard 2.0T, HOT AND Aero models so value for money is best on a cheeky upgrade of the LPT.
For the same £500 on other models:
2.0T - std 185bhp up to 235bhp
2.0T HOT Sport - std 200bhp up to 235bhp
2.0T HOT Aero - std 205bhp up to 250bhp
2.3T Viggen std 230bhp up to 275bhp
I know handling is a bit questionable on some of these cars and there is a raft of aftermarket stuff to sort it out. I imagine the Aero is OK but low specs might be pretty woolly. - No idea what they are like compared to Skoda though so might be similar.
have a rumage in here for parts prices and some of the tuning stuff ( I know you didnt mention tuning but it's always more interesting that way
)www.elkparts.co.uk
www.maptun.com
www.partsforsaabs.co.uk
25 November 2005, 04:32 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 297
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, now I've had a look, I'd take the Saab. (I'm biased though) Just looks classy in the right spec.
Pics are a bit scrappy but you get the idea
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2001-SAAB-9-3-...QQcmdZViewItem
In the budget ball park, and was £22k new. Not sure if it's older than you are looking for though.
Pics are a bit scrappy but you get the idea
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2001-SAAB-9-3-...QQcmdZViewItem
In the budget ball park, and was £22k new. Not sure if it's older than you are looking for though.
25 November 2005, 05:18 PM
#12
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 November 2005, 12:31 PM
#13
As Brett said, I have a 9-3 LPT, bought it in March for 4 grand, 70k, full Saab history, mine is a basic one but its got what I need for a 23 mile round trip commute, came with new tyres and had been serviced recently (in MOT) so very good value for a car not even four years old. It pulls really well (0-60 in 8 dead, 30-70 in 7.5) for a sedate looking motor, 225 bhp for 500 quid with a chip, might do it but it drives so well I cant really justify the money, plus as it has fairly ancient underpinnings and comparatively narrow tyres it may overwhelm the chassis. They are built to last and it feels like it has years left in it, still seems like a newish car. I have gone up against all sorts from my favourite sets of lights and it will shock a Cooper S, close run thing against an early Boxster. I do suspect that they (when run in) produce a little more than 150 bhp !
I do also rate the Octavia, mate did 80 k in a 1.8 T model, loved it and bought an RS, loves it even more, I agree that Saab does sound a bit more upmarket than Skodas but who cares. I think the Octavia's chassis may be slightly better but its still no class leader.
I think you should drive both, keep and open mind and buy the best one you can get for the money, use the Autotrader search, there are plenty about, well the Saab anyway, mine was bought locally cos I had got sick of traispsing 30 miles to look at doggy Golf GTI's with mega mileages. I would go for the Saab as nobody assumes its a minicab !
I do also rate the Octavia, mate did 80 k in a 1.8 T model, loved it and bought an RS, loves it even more, I agree that Saab does sound a bit more upmarket than Skodas but who cares. I think the Octavia's chassis may be slightly better but its still no class leader.
I think you should drive both, keep and open mind and buy the best one you can get for the money, use the Autotrader search, there are plenty about, well the Saab anyway, mine was bought locally cos I had got sick of traispsing 30 miles to look at doggy Golf GTI's with mega mileages. I would go for the Saab as nobody assumes its a minicab !
02 December 2005, 12:30 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a vRS and love it to bits. Remapped to 216bhp from 45K (now on 102K) and apart from uprated pads, completely standard(-ish ). Anyway, not too long ago I came accross a Saab 93 (or is it 9-3?) who was up for a bit of driving at speed (on my private road ofcourse). Between the two cars there was nothing to it, and I was greatly surprised at the performance of the Saab, up to the point where I would check out the specs on the website the next day
I do would like to point out that the vRS has been designed for performance and as such has stiffer suspension, wider tyres, etc, so that will help if you have to throw it around a track. For every day driving it won't matter at all.
Q.
). Anyway, not too long ago I came accross a Saab 93 (or is it 9-3?) who was up for a bit of driving at speed (on my private road ofcourse). Between the two cars there was nothing to it, and I was greatly surprised at the performance of the Saab, up to the point where I would check out the specs on the website the next day I do would like to point out that the vRS has been designed for performance and as such has stiffer suspension, wider tyres, etc, so that will help if you have to throw it around a track. For every day driving it won't matter at all.
Q.
02 December 2005, 12:54 PM
#18
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've got a vRS and its been great for the last year i've had it, only thing was as already mentioned a dodgey coil pack which took 5 minutes to change and cost £12 (well free for me under warranty).
I do miss the power of my old scoob (approx 250bhp) something chronic as 180bhp just doesn't cut it for me so would like to get the remap done but the Mrs would kill me if she found out I spent £500 on increasing bhp!
Build quality is absolutely fine, had no issues with mine at all. Economy is great as it averages 35mpg quite easily on cross country runs with 27-30ish in town and 40 ish on the motorway if i'm not in a hurry. If driven in a sprited manner then its about 23/24 mpg across country but I rarely do this as 180bhp isn't worth the effort and will never feel anywhere near the fun of the scoob.
Space for passengers and luggage is amazing which is why I bought the vRS, the boot is HUGE, can fit a push chair, my 8 year olds mountain bike, all the babies bags and boxes for food and changing/clothes etc, his cot matress and still have room for other stuff
Oh and the police have been friendly when i've been stopped as they like their Octavias and always like to chat about how good they are.
Oh and then there is variable servicing which could be as long as 20k inbetween services depending on how you drive it.
I do miss the power of my old scoob (approx 250bhp) something chronic as 180bhp just doesn't cut it for me so would like to get the remap done but the Mrs would kill me if she found out I spent £500 on increasing bhp!
Build quality is absolutely fine, had no issues with mine at all. Economy is great as it averages 35mpg quite easily on cross country runs with 27-30ish in town and 40 ish on the motorway if i'm not in a hurry. If driven in a sprited manner then its about 23/24 mpg across country but I rarely do this as 180bhp isn't worth the effort and will never feel anywhere near the fun of the scoob.
Space for passengers and luggage is amazing which is why I bought the vRS, the boot is HUGE, can fit a push chair, my 8 year olds mountain bike, all the babies bags and boxes for food and changing/clothes etc, his cot matress and still have room for other stuff
Oh and the police have been friendly when i've been stopped as they like their Octavias and always like to chat about how good they are.
Oh and then there is variable servicing which could be as long as 20k inbetween services depending on how you drive it.
02 December 2005, 02:27 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by fatscoobyfella
Think the only issue with the Skoda will be build quality.Heard a few stories of interior and exterior fit and finish being below average.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
