This is a discussion on Sport 2.0 Fsi within the Octavia II forums, part of the Skoda Model Discussion Area category; Has anyone got one, and what are your thoughts? Is the FSI juicy and do you need to run it ...
| |||||||
Pronounced "bris-skoda", a brisk skoda. | Register | Gallery | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
| | #1 |
| Briskodian | Sport 2.0 Fsi Has anyone got one, and what are your thoughts? Is the FSI juicy and do you need to run it on Super unleaded? I saw one on Sunday and i'm in love!! ![]() |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Briskodian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: south east
Posts: 1,246
Members Car: 2005 2.0FSI hatch elegance Thanks: 9
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
| Re: Sport 2.0 Fsi I've got the 2.0 FSI but not the Sport [mine is the Elegance hatch - same engine etc] and it is lovely! Much better when run in a bit - yes I do use 97 octane now because I do low mileage so don't mind the extra. I like to think the "zip" comes from that, though it might be imagination. However, word is that it is better for the engine anyway to use Super, and also that you get better mpg so offsets cost. Having said that it ran perfectly well on 95. On a run I get well over 40 mpg, using cruising speeds of 'ahem' on motorways etc. Much higher than ahem and it probably goes down and around town on short trips it tends to be about 35 mpg. |
| | |
| | #3 |
| Briskodian | Re: Sport 2.0 Fsi Hi ednmra, we only do about 8000 miles a year, so i 'll go for the cheaper petrol over the diesel. Just need to find £4500 and sell my Ford C-max. You mentioned that the super fuel is better for the engine, could you explain why this is? |
| | |
| | #4 | |
| Briskodian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: south east
Posts: 1,246
Members Car: 2005 2.0FSI hatch elegance Thanks: 9
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
| Re: Sport 2.0 Fsi Quote:
You won't save much by using 95 instead of 97 if you do low mileage [I also do about 8500]. They reckon you get slightly better mpg from 97 anyway. I saw on this forum that if you use 95 [presumably over a long time] there can be a coking-up problem. I don't know how likely that is, and the books say you CAN run on 95 but SHOULD run on 97. Pays yer money and takes yer choice I guess. But I do rather like that little bit of extra buzz when you push it up the revs through the mid gears. I'm sure that is better on 97. But either way you'll like this engine. Better than my Primera GT 150 bhp and that was good. | |
| | |
| | #5 |
| BRISKODA Staff | Re: Sport 2.0 Fsi I thought FSI engine required low sulphur fuel to get economy benefits?
__________________ Adrian. |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Briskodian Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: south east
Posts: 1,246
Members Car: 2005 2.0FSI hatch elegance Thanks: 9
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
| Re: Sport 2.0 Fsi Dunno! Which brands are low sulphur - mine is usually Esso or Sainsburys. |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
| ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Introduction to the NEW Octavia | ColinD | Octavia II | 2 | 22-02-2007 20:09 |
| Octivia Sport 2.0 FSI | Keswick | Octavia II | 14 | 06-02-2006 19:13 |
| Octavia 2.0 TDI Sport | r1ch | Octavia II | 15 | 15-10-2005 13:18 |
| The Škoda Octavia 2.0 FSI Reaches Average Consumption of 4.9 litres in Testing | ColinD | Octavia II | 3 | 19-05-2005 16:59 |
| New Skoda Octavia 2.0 FSI, coil pack replaced twice | lost | Octavia II | 13 | 10-05-2005 18:19 |
BRISKODA.net is operated by Summit 360 Ltd
Site Design and vBulletin Theme by Alex Pinner (apinner)