FEBUS

Took the new 4x4 for a test drive and was sorely disappointed. The diesel was first up and after the first application of the throttle we turned round and went straight back. Petrol was better but lacking torque.
I'm aware that it's probably a VAG restriction on Skoda but why on earth don't they sell this car with the 140 diesel engine?
Anyone know if they have any plans to introduce it? It's looking like an old model 4x4 for me now.

blades

had a new 4x4 diesel for a month now and found the engine a lot better than I expected. I reckon the 0 -60 time is a lot better then is quoted by skoda and it cruises at 80mph on the motorway with no problem. I have pushed it up to 100mph+ and it went ok

FEBUS

Yours remapped? I'm used to the same engine in front wheel drive only 150bhp remapped form in a MKIV Golf so it's not a surprise the low power unit wasn't for me. I'd ideally like high output diesel in the new Octavia 4x4 but VAG won't let that happen. No way am I going for a MKV Golf 4motion- too impractical and vastly overpriced. I prefer Skodas to VW for obvious reasons.
I guess politics means the 'tavia will remain without a top notch engine.

lozgti

I'm talking without checking but I thought only two engines were offered in the new 4x4.The 1.9 diesel which I presume is only 105 bhp and the 2.0 fsi petrol.

The new 4x4 looks a bit like its on stilts to me.

Dutch4x4

FEBUS, it's precisely the reason why so many 4x4 drivers are leaving for Subaru. Those appreciative of comfort will switch to the Legacy, those in need for speed will choose the WRX, and I can't blame any of them.

My dealer recognizes the fact - he has quite a lot of sporty 4x4 drivers, and they are all leaving - but there is nothing he can do. He has a simple explanation - the old 150hp engine just happened to be a turbo which could be easily tuned, but that was never Skoda's intention, looking at the off-road suspension. It was positioned to sell prominently in the Alpine countries as a cheap, practical and capable all-terrain car. Having people in other countries convert them to "RS-spec" was just a happy coincidence for the buyers involved. The new petrol 4x4 also has a 150hp, so Skoda are simply fulfilling their promise to the Alpine markets while apparently they can't seem to be bothered to do anything about the coincidental sporting niche market that they happened upon with the old 4x4.

I won't be switching to Subaru, however, but will be sticking with the old-style 4x4 for years to come while trading in our Micra runabout for a fun hot hatch - another way of solving the same problem...

__________________
Mrs D's Briskoda: Octavia 4x4 turbo (2003), Oettinger 210, Koni Sport, MAD Sportive, Dotz Le Mans 17", Bridgestone Potenza S-03, sports interior. And a Fiesta ST (2006) for myself...

Dutch4x4

As did the old one...

__________________
Mrs D's Briskoda: Octavia 4x4 turbo (2003), Oettinger 210, Koni Sport, MAD Sportive, Dotz Le Mans 17", Bridgestone Potenza S-03, sports interior. And a Fiesta ST (2006) for myself...

FEBUS

Good answer Dutchie! With any luck I'm moving to Assen soon, thus why I'm after 4WD for all the rain you get in Holland.

Bit dissapointed to hear it's the same situation over there. Wouldn't have a Subaru myself, they eat fuel and feel poorly built/are unrefined. Also the wagon WRX I tested actually felt a bit slow when rolling compared to my chipped PD150.

Maybe I should be looking on mobile.de for a 330Dix as well as an Octavia, ae they really worth double the money though????

Goochie

FEBUS - if you think a Scoobie wagon is slow, take a look at this video:

http://www.philgooch.com/octavia/race1.avi

Its a remapped petrol Octavia pushing 220bhp being totally battered by a standard WRX wagon with only 2000 miles on the clock.

Dutch4x4

He said it felt slow, Goochie... and I can sort of agree with that. I picked the 4x4 turbo over the WRX because the latter felt slow. I know it isn't but because of its bigger turbo only really kicking in at 4000rpm (and without the old-style GT Turbo bang) it doesn't give as much of a speed sensation as a remapped 1.8T does, hence to me it was less fun to drive.

I will agree with you, FEBUS, on the Impreza not being very refined but the Legacy is an extremely refined and well-built machine, even in poorly 2-litre 165hp spec. In several ways it's a better drive than the Octy 4x4 - if you appreciate delicate and less understeery in-corner handling above raw turbo power, the Legacy is the way to go.

And on the subject of rain - no more of it here than in the UK!

__________________
Mrs D's Briskoda: Octavia 4x4 turbo (2003), Oettinger 210, Koni Sport, MAD Sportive, Dotz Le Mans 17", Bridgestone Potenza S-03, sports interior. And a Fiesta ST (2006) for myself...

lozgti

Much prefer the Forester to the legacy although a bit expensive.

I don't think the 4x4 was built originally as any sort of rocket ship as you say.There is no reason why they would want to create that sort of car either.I don't believe skoda ever thought their 4x4 system would be 'sporty' as opposed to the quattro system of audi.People just struck it lucky with the first combination of 1.8T + 4x4.In fact I don't know really what the purpose ever was?(that is not a criticism of a great car)

I can't imagine many of the new octavia 4x4 buyers would be looking for that either.They will have a different model if they want sporty.

Wish Foresters were a bit cheaper though!

FEBUS

Looks like the Impreza driver isn't too hot either. Surely it should have hooked up with its AWD and rocketed past at the start? That said I'd settle for 3 or 4 car lengths slower than an Impreza upto the speeds seen on the video. New style Imprezas don't do it for me at all, the old one is pretty cool though.

I still find it hard to understand why the most suitable engine ie PD140 isn't being offered on the 4x4. Like you say maybe the average buyer doesn't want it? Then again look at the market for higher powered 4x4's and it seems to be taking off. Maybe Skoda are missing a trick?

Fabia 12v

Its probs not VAG restrictions.. its just the UK spec. After all europe got old 4x4 with the 1.9TDi and also the 2.0 petrol, where as we only got the 1.8T 4x4.

__________________
First Car: Skoda Fabia MK1 1.2 12v Comfort
Replaced with: Volkswagen Golf MK4 GT 1.9TDI
Replaced with: Seat Ibiza MK4 Sport 1.9TDI
Replaced with: Volkswagen Polo MK6 Ltd. Edition Sport 1.4 16v

FEBUS

Seems to be the same spec in Europe as well. Maybe VAG don't think Skoda buyers are worth the 2.0 140 BHP diesel unit or can't afford it. Whichever it's a crying shame that VAG's best marque seems to get the soiled end of the stick.

Dutch4x4

That was just with the old Octavia, there's no difference between Europe and the UK with regards to the new one.

Oh, and the old 1.9 TDI 4x4 was only a 100hp too, so the new 1.9 TDI 105hp is perfectly in line with the old scheme of things: 150hp petrol engine, weak diesel engine around the 100hp mark.

The fact that they ditched the 4x4 hatchback entirely, and specifically developed the Estate speaks volumes for their intention to market a cheap workhorse for the central European countries. And mind you, they are selling them by the dozen over there. Subaru used to have a virtual monopoly on regular saloon or estate-shaped 4x4 cars in Austria and Switzerland but Skoda has taken quite a chunk out of their market share now, and I assume it will be rising even further with the new car.

I expect the accidental lowered-and-remapped 1.8T 4x4 market to be completely insignificant compared to these Alpine markets. That's also because it will always be a small group of owners that will willfully modify their cars, regardless of warranty issues or leasing conditions. If there are more than a hunderd people across the whole of Europe who have tweaked their 1.8T 4x4 to über-RS-spec I'd be very surprised.

However, I do feel that VAG is very much mistaken in thinking that the people who would be interested in a standard 4x4 vRS are the same people who would fork out the additional cash to buy a similar VW 4motion or Audi quattro. I will never do that, and I suspect most of the current modified 1.8T 4x4 customers won't either. Or perhaps Skoda are thinking that the same small group of modified 4x4 owners are the only potential buyers of a 4x4 vRS whereas I believe that they would attract a huge number of Subaru customers that don't even give the vRS a thought because it's FWD.

Either way, not very clever, but there you have it...

__________________
Mrs D's Briskoda: Octavia 4x4 turbo (2003), Oettinger 210, Koni Sport, MAD Sportive, Dotz Le Mans 17", Bridgestone Potenza S-03, sports interior. And a Fiesta ST (2006) for myself...

bengie

if i had the money at the time i'd be driving an S4 instead of my 4x4. but money talks and i bought the little brother and happy with it. i will have a big quattro one day though

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

DaveH

Interesting vid that. I make it about 8 sec to 60 which a remapped 4x4 should be capable of going under by a fair margin. Do you know who remapped it?

bengie

jabba, its his car

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

bengie

i make it about 7

__________________
owner of a skoda octavia 4xvrs3

DaveH

Witchfinder

I doubt that Skoda never intended the 4X4 to be chipped. They needed a reasonably powerful engine, but nothing too extreme, and the 1.8 Turbo was available in the right level of tune. The fact that it can be easily and cheaply modified to 230 BHP and beyond is a happy coincidence for us, but I doubt it was ever in Skoda's plan.

__________________
Rob Illing
Play Interstellar War: "Fleet Battles" and "Conquest" for free!
The ST220 has landed! Die Micra, Die!

blades

We havn't had the 4x4 fettled with yet but do intend to with regards speed & power etc all I will say is 50mpg because that's what were getting at the moment.