Penguin

Can't commrnt on leather seats (not a fan of leather seats generally) but if the 1.6 FSI isn't quick enough for you ....yes check the 1.8Tsi ...I think you will be impressed with this engine & in the Octavia it's good value. The current VW's using the unit seem to have a premium over the (now deleted?) 2.0FSI etc. so I found the lower price in the Octavia quite strange (I assume this is still the same)

motr

Isn't the 1.8 160 bhp compared to the 115 in the 1.6?

I honestly thought you'd notice a difference compare to your 1.8. Its ok going up, but coming down?

Chris.G

I had a 1.6 FSI golf as a hire car & thought it was gutless. I couldn't wait to get my 2.0 TDI Octy back. That said it could have been the fact that I was used to the 140bhp in the Octavia that made the golf feel so under powered.

1.6 in a heavy Octavia body shell would never do it for me. We do a lot of motorway miles, most of the time with a full car. Everyone has different needs but if it were me i'd hold out until test driving one.

daiking

It's funny how its the diesel and turbo petrol owners who slate the 1.6 FSI. People buy the 1.6 petrols because they're cheaper to buy, cheaper to run for them and perfectly adequate for 95% of people's driving needs (not wants).

I regularly drive a 1.6 Golf 2-up on a mixed driving route and I don't imagine the golf is much lighter than the Octy although it does have the 6-sp gearbox. It won't win many traffic light grand prixs but the performance is fine, more than adequate if you're prepared to use the gears. Isn't that what they're there for?

I drive an even less powerful engine in a similarly heavy car and I can manage perfectly well. All I can say is drive the car yourself. If you can get on with it, great, if not look at something else but I think a lot of posters are doing Skoda a great dis-service by slating this engine choice with such biased opinions.

motr

I know its been covered, but yeah, you are right, its not a bad engine at all, especially if, like me, its the biggest engine you've ownded.

I have driven 2.0+ mercs, Saabs and Fords at work and all not bad at all, but thirsty as hell (petrol not diesel).

I can cruise well enough at 80mph+ with a full load in a 1.6FSI and yeah, it isn't the quickest at pulling away, but then, I am not a boy racer, if I was, i'd own an even heavier car weighed down by the subwoofer , but yeah, for a family of 4, I have no regrets whatsoever.

I did test drive the 1.4 Octavia before deciding on the 1.6 and that was rough.

onestar

You all are absolutely right.

What I noticed in the 1.6FSI was the salesperson and I had to put the foot down a bit on the accelerator when pulling out - enough to sound like I was revving the engine. Now I know I don't do that except maybe on hills in the Avensis, and pretty sure I didn't do in the last two cars, except the Citroen 1.4 once it had done 90K miles and had a problem or two

But is it driveable, yes.
Can it handle Motorway traffic, yes.
Did it have more pull to give, yes.
Did it sound like I was forcing the engine yes But that is my perception. Really based on Engine noise and pushing the pedal down for action.

But I went in hoping it was the right car. So I wasn't biased against it.

Would I imagine the 1.8T will be easy to drive. But if I go to the 1.8 Elegance then some other cars start to come into the running too based on total price/running costs -- all with a slightly lower spec'd car.

1.8T Ambiente (which isn't listed)
Vectra 1.8iEXCLusive with SatNav
Mazda 6
Citroen C4 VTR+
Ford Modeo 1.6 (though I wonder about that, since that is less power than the Skoda)

I guess its not back to the drawing board to think about
Do I need that 6CD autochanger
Do I need rear parking sensors
Do I need cruise control

workman

sorry to bang on about this folks (and, yes, people are entitled to their opinions of course), but totally agree with daiking and motr in that the 1.6fsi is fine for majority of the time. panning it by comparison with more powerful engines isn't, i believe, a fair analysis (power wise i could rank it to my previous car, mondeo st220, but it would pointless given the mondy had nearly twice the power).

bryan

hi, here is a comment I posted about the my 1.8T when I got it

"Had no idea of what to expect here, but WOW, lets say it is all I hoped for and more . As Gaff says - there is a strange (but nice) growl when starting to extend it, but it is also VERY quiet when not going for it. It has all the power I could want, feels like more than the stated 160bhp - it feels every bit as fast as I remember my old vRS and that has 180bhp. Power is instant, very little lag, stays smooth right up the revs, has almost turbo diesel like pull from low revs, again I say WOW, I just love this engine".

I stand over the comment still, you should for sure get a drive in 1. AFAIK there is not a huge price diff between the 1.6 an 1.8? And if your tax is CO2 based like here,, the 1.8 is as clean as the 1.6 also I think. Go get your drive in 1, think you will like it

Bryan

daiking

I would say it is quite a noisy engine for a petrol - not necessarily in a nice way either.

motr

I am sure its excellent Bryan. There is about an 1600.00 price difference between the two (elegance spec) and the 1.6 is in band D and 1.8 is in E.

I think the 1.6 is insurance group 6 or 7 and the 1.8 is 11.

Its all about pros and cons and what you really want.

motr

I would agree totally with you on that one.

workman

if you don't like revving the engine (and i don't mean redline it), perhaps a diesel might suit better?

if you didn't like the 1.6 octy, you'll hate 1.6 new model mondy (125bhp as well as 110bhp).

onestar

1.6 Ford Yeah I was thinking that too (based on paper spec).
On Diesel - I cannot explain, but I am biased against a diesel - I have no justification.

On revving I really only noticed it on take off. I mean the car naturally sounded harder pressed than I am used to for the rest of the drive, but seemed to drive okay. hmmmn maybe I am being a bit harsh What I think was needed was a 1.6T that probably would be the right position.

smstext

you could always get a 1.0 corsa for a week, anything will seem good after that

__________________

Oxon Meet Feeler 2009 please add your input, click here

onestar

Hmmmmn now there's a plan

Organist

I also had a 1.6 Golf (Hertz) for a week in Scotland on business fairly recently, and I found it as flat as a pancake. Absolutely no go (even if you really revved it) and fuel consumption in the high thirties. Rather pathetic.

__________________
2008 Skoda Octavia II Elegance 1.9 Tdi Estate in Storm Grey, factory fitted with High Intensity Discharge Lights, Light Assist, Maxidot, Multi-function Steering Wheel, MP3 with Aux in and Sunset Glass. 'Supertooth' phone unit. Also 2005 Black Skoda Fabia VRS. Best of both worlds!
60+MPG

motr

Was it knackered or something? Sounds it.

And when you say fuel consumption in the high thirties is pathetic, what do you expect? Can't remember what teh official figures are but I average 37-45 mpg on Ron 99 which seems pretty ok to me.

But it keeps being said, if you drive cars with bigger engines, its pretty pointless slagging off smaller engines isn't it?

Drove a BMW M3 today (one of the bosses wifes car) and I would say any Skoda would feel pretty flat compared to that, but you'd expect them to.

daiking

Last time I drove a 1.9tdi it was horribly unrefined, very noisy and the power came in one big lump, no finesse at all

sebulbus

While it may be a bit noisier, and not enough power for a fully loaded car, the 1.6 FSI is fuel efficient. I've drove one for 40k miles now, plus 5k more on a Golf with the same engine to know that.

__________________
Milk Inc's newest #1 fan

Organist

No, I don't think that it was knackered - it had about 1500 miles on it but seriously, I was comparing it to an old Honda Accord I had which did about 40ish to the gallon, but was a whole lot nippier than the Golf.

__________________
2008 Skoda Octavia II Elegance 1.9 Tdi Estate in Storm Grey, factory fitted with High Intensity Discharge Lights, Light Assist, Maxidot, Multi-function Steering Wheel, MP3 with Aux in and Sunset Glass. 'Supertooth' phone unit. Also 2005 Black Skoda Fabia VRS. Best of both worlds!
60+MPG

Organist

to quote a previous post "must have been knackered!"

__________________
2008 Skoda Octavia II Elegance 1.9 Tdi Estate in Storm Grey, factory fitted with High Intensity Discharge Lights, Light Assist, Maxidot, Multi-function Steering Wheel, MP3 with Aux in and Sunset Glass. 'Supertooth' phone unit. Also 2005 Black Skoda Fabia VRS. Best of both worlds!
60+MPG

onestar

Don't want to drag this up, but had to mention.

I just got to drive a 1.6 Toyota Auris Tspirit. Nice car (spec like the elegance except the 6cd autochanger ). But what really got me was how quiet, and effortless the engine was. I checked the spec, and its only a little lighter (200Kg) than the Octavia. So was very surprised.

Anyway not given up on the Skoda. Going to get a test for 1.8T and compare to a 1.8 Vectra and another (not sure who yet).

sebulbus

200 kg is not a little lighter, it's around 12-15%, and weight (or the absence of it) has a dramatic effect on acceleration.

It's not like getting 15% more horsepower (which is important in itself, think GTI vs ED30), it's even more dramatic.

__________________
Milk Inc's newest #1 fan

daiking

Thanks for bringing that up, I looked up a few weights on Parkers and I was amazed by the variation. I thought there would only be a few kilos in it for the golf/octy.

Mazda 3 - 1190kg
Toyota Auris - 1260kg
VW Golf - 1359kg
Skoda Octavia - 1455kg

No wonder mine doesn't quite feel like a slug with only 100hp.

Penguin

Tried one of them (Vectra 1.8 ) as they were available at silly money for what you get (new model imminent)......not impressed - car is too heavy for a 1.8 petrol. We found fuel consumption was poor when you used enough boot to wake it up ....... and you had to BOOT it to get much response. Road noise was less (better)on the Vectra on many rough surfaces. For £11.5k you got a lot of metal. 1.8tsi Octy trounces it on economy & performance but costs more to buy. In that old cliche...you pays your money.....