Is the Mk1 vRS still the 'king'?

[Burnzee]

ive seen a mk1 on stage 2 vs a mk2 with a stage 1 map and the mk1 was faster, but then i guess it deppends on the driver

[Guest BigJase88]

The mk2's times down the 1/4 come from electronics not the driver

[sharkrider]

only read the last few comments, but thought it would be fun to post the video of my mark 2 beating the mongrel to 90 mph :p so a mark II against 260bhp mark I

 

 

and from the inside

 

 

*runs from jason! lol...

[XLBaconDoubleCheese]

Did you find it was the launch that gave you the head start? 

[Guest BigJase88]

only read the last few comments, but thought it would be fun to post the video of my mark 2 beating the mongrel to 90 mph :p so a mark II against 260bhp mark I

and from the inside

*runs from jason! lol...

Is your stock?

If so id be rather pi55ed if i had spent 20 odd k lol

Mapped to 210bhp i think it would dance all over it

[joe_vrs_tdi]

im telling you for a fact the mk1 is alot more reliable than the mk2, the mk2's are always coming in for turbo and gearbox changes

Yer turbos and dmfs are so reliable on mk1s dunno why I mentioned it. How are themk2 rear calipers, front bushes, door seals, standard intercooler connections....shal I go on?

[BossFox]

only read the last few comments, but thought it would be fun to post the video of my mark 2 beating the mongrel to 90 mph :p so a mark II against 260bhp mark I

 

Doesn't make sense to me.

My mk1 was around 255-260bhp and it ran a 13.6 quater mile, terminal speed 105mph.

mk2 figures I've seen from Santa Pod are around a second slower... that's quite a big difference and not all lost in the last 15mph.

 

So either Jason was not making that power on that day, not very good getting it off the line, or your car was modified in some way.

[korban]

Most probably get shot in the foot for this, but iirc Sharkrider was running a TMC tuning box so putting out about 200 BHP

 

From Jasons viewpoint

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0tKh9O47Ks&feature=player_embedded

 

 

Karl

[Burnzee]

Yer turbos and dmfs are so reliable on mk1s dunno why I mentioned it. How are themk2 rear calipers, front bushes, door seals, standard intercooler connections....shal I go on?

since when have door seals had anything to do with the reliability of a car? and the intercooler connections are fine until a remap when the cars running more boost than the factory intended.same as the turbo, and by the sounds of things you've been unlucky because ive never hurd of any of them things going wrong on a 'standard' mk1. yet i know 2 people that have had a gearbox change under warrenty on the mk2. snm

[Burnzee]

The mk2's times down the 1/4 come from electronics not the driver

exactly so the driver of the mk1 has to be good enough to keep up with a super computers shift time aswel as only reving to 5000rpm

[BossFox]

I like the way the thread has gone towards speed.

The mk1 was not about outright speed, it was about fun.

In this respect it's way ahead of the mk2 which delivers it's performance far too smoothly to be exciting.

[sko-with-go]

That's my experience, there's not an awful lot in it still it's a by a definite margin but it's 100 percent faster.

 

 

If that's the case, the MKII must do about 260 MPH ? 

[sharkrider]

Most probably get shot in the foot for this, but iirc Sharkrider was running a TMC tuning box so putting out about 200 BHP

 

From Jasons viewpoint

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0tKh9O47Ks&feature=player_embedded

 

 

Karl

what he said, I was 200 bhp......

[sharkrider]

Did you find it was the launch that gave you the head start? 

 

its just the DSG... a seemless power without gearchanges.... if you watch the revs, when it changes up at 7k , it then runs up from 5k (short ratios)

 

SOOOO if you also look at my RR graph

 

 

it produces almost 200bhp from 5-7k flat..... so its always running 200bhp, whareas if you watch jasons vid (that corban posted) you can hear hin "bulding" boost , and "building" power up a power curve, whareas the DSG allows you have max power all the time on full throttle...

 

and I didn't event try to "launch" just had it in "d" and hit the gas lol....

[sharkrider]

I like the way the thread has gone towards speed.

The mk1 was not about outright speed, it was about fun.

In this respect it's way ahead of the mk2 which delivers it's performance far too smoothly to be exciting.

 

I could agree, but the mark I (I had for 80k of "fun") used to scare me sometimes when pushing on, I know your idea of "fun" I saw you passin the start finish line at bedfor backwards in your yeti! pmsl.... guess I'm too old for that to be fair, now I have one with eibachs and a RARB, its much more fun than the one in the vid was!

[BossFox]

I could agree, but the mark I (I had for 80k of "fun") used to scare me sometimes when pushing on, I know your idea of "fun" I saw you passin the start finish line at bedfor backwards in your yeti! pmsl.... guess I'm too old for that to be fair, now I have one with eibachs and a RARB, its much more fun than the one in the vid was!

I know the standard handling is carp.

But I was refering to the entertaining thump of torque, rather than the very smooth linear power delivery that's rather boring. (IMO of course)

 

If you don't go sideways sometimes, how do you know you're trying hard enough?

 

I never got past about 30 degrees in the Yeti before the car put a halt to proceedings.

The mk1 was better, I got that just past 90 degrees and went past the pits actually facing it!

[Guest BigJase88]

Even near the top end though jasons does pull a few car lengths but then the mk2 seems to have it pretty much matched again!

It is rather impressive for a computer

[sharkrider]

lol.. it was fun watching! see you at castle coombe and oulten park I having an instructer at outlen!

[sharkrider]

Even near the top end though jasons does pull a few car lengths but then the mk2 seems to have it pretty much matched again!

It is rather impressive for a computer

I dont know how much jason may have backed off then I can only say he was going for it up to about 120..... sure he'll show up soon! lol.... I gave up as soon as pete came past me at about 127..... i actually lost that race after all my bragging! PMSL

 

edit, just watched jasons he backs off at 126.....

[joe_vrs_tdi]

since when have door seals had anything to do with the reliability of a car? and the intercooler connections are fine until a remap when the cars running more boost than the factory intended.same as the turbo, and by the sounds of things you've been unlucky because ive never hurd of any of them things going wrong on a 'standard' mk1. yet i know 2 people that have had a gearbox change under warrenty on the mk2. snm

Its not all about engine reliability when it comes to cars, if something fails no mater what part of the car that makes it unreliable. Just becausenthe place you work only gets certian jobs in doesnt match the amount of people posting on here with there trouble. Dmf fails with or with out a map same with hoses its just maps shorten the time of it happening. Turbos also go with put maps, spend enough time on here you will see. I do not rate the fabia at all on reliabilty i just rate it on how good it is when its finally all working good together how fun they are to drive. If i could afford the petrol and tax i would be driving an ibiza, leon cupra r or mk1 audi tt and have even more fun with plenty more tuning potential.

[sharkrider]

my mark I had a new gearbox, and suspension bushes in its 80k..... (and they wouldnt do the suspension on warrenty , said it was "wear and tear" ) EGR valve and other stuff.... I left skoda after the arguments that they should have done the bushes under warrenty (later the "revised" bushes came out, ******s) I then went to fiat, and did 110k inmy grande punto sporting WITHOUT ANY FAULTS AT ALL,.... says something about people's perception of fiats..... (and I remapped it at 6k) ...

 

however after driving the mark II vRS I couldnt resist....

 

I've had 2 now, and done 56,500 miles (50k in the old one) without any issues at all..... (never had any oil issues ect ect ) , so for me the mark II is more reliable...

[Dark_Hero]

I've not been in a mkII but out of the box they appear to be a much better machine than the mk1. It's just progress.

A standard mk1 is a wallowy old hector with a reasonable amount of oomph, but nothing to shout about and the cloth interior is a daft colour choice. The in gear torque is great though.

There are better handling and faster cars out there but as a whole package I love my car and couldn't find anything else that ticked all the same boxes

[sharkrider]

I've not been in a mkII but out of the box they appear to be a much better machine than the mk1. It's just progress.

A standard mk1 is a wallowy old hector with a reasonable amount of oomph, but nothing to shout about and the cloth interior is a daft colour choice. The in gear torque is great though.

There are better handling and faster cars out there but as a whole package I love my car and couldn't find anything else that ticked all the same boxes

 

 

thing is, I bought my mark I because it was incredible value at the time, nothing for the price could touch it, it never claimed to be a "hot hatch" but was fun , fast , and frugal, all for £13k!  you are paying £15k now for a mark II, (but thats still less than a deisel fiesta...)

[DanGum]

It's a 5 door turbo diesel lol. Not built for tearing up the roads. With the right mods it has a better chance. The mk2 fabia is ugly IMO.

[Dark_Hero]

thing is, I bought my mark I because it was incredible value at the time, nothing for the price could touch it, it never claimed to be a "hot hatch" but was fun , fast , and frugal, all for £13k!  you are paying £15k now for a mark II, (but thats still less than a deisel fiesta...)

That makes the mk2 superb value. It's much more advanced than the mk1.

I've never really been a fan of the mk2 hatchbacks looks though.