New Skoda VRS

[MJKooLio]

Wonder what the specs on a Fabia vRS would be?

[mrgolf]

Current looks heaps more aggressive. New one looks bland and korean.

[gregozedobe]

wait is this based on the MKVI Golf GTI or still the MKV?

Given that the Mk 6 is really only partial re-skin of the Mk 5 (plus some minor mechanical changes), I guess the answer is : Both !

[woofy]

I like the old look as well-but I like the slightly more powerful engine, the slightly better fuel economy and the slightly lower new model. I think I'll keep mine though-and we're waiting for the Fabia VRS for my wife. Assuming she can wait that long for a new car that is.

I'd be a tad worried about a bit lower, my guard thing in front of the drivers side front wheel scraped going around a corner recently.....most cars are really raked so the front is low these days and lots of carparks aren't setup for them. I haven't been able to park a car over 50% of gutters and any of those concrete bar things for about 8 yrs now with a stock Mazda 6 and an SP20 323 let alone the Skoda.

[mrgolf]

You must be doing it wrong. The Skoda is too high. Needs to be same height as GTI at least. And firmer. Also, the concrete things in car parks are not the to park against. They are to stop you going further. Park a few inches away and you wont have a prob.

As for the reskinned MkV: The MkVI has a new engine. It has new adaptive dampers and an electronic LSD. Every panel bar the roof is different. Hardly minor changes. By comparison, the Skoda has a new injection program and a few bits of new sheet metal and some different lights. The new RS will not be in the same ball park as the new GTI. Although better suspension will help it a lot. After driving the Blue Mountains for 3 days, I am convinced the car is set up too soft. Lacks composure and has too much weight transfer for an alleged sporty drive.

[gregozedobe]

Mrgolf, I originally said the Mk 6 was a "re-skin of the Mk 5 (plus some minor mechanical changes)", so therefore I'm not trying to say a re-skin is a minor change, you are.

As for the reskinned MkV: The MkVI has a new engine. It has new adaptive dampers and an electronic LSD. Every panel bar the roof is different. Hardly minor changes.

It seems wikipedia (and many others) agree with me about the Mk 6 being very similar (underneath the new clothes) to the Mk 5 :

Like its predecessor, the Mk6 is based on the Volkswagen Group's A5 platform. Because the car's architecture and suspension is identical to its predecessor, including the door frames, side glasshouse, roof and wheelbase, there have been questions as to whether the Mk6 is an all-new car or just a facelift of the Mk5. Indeed, some journalists proclaim that because the Mk6 is so close to the Mk5 in design, the car will look seriously outdated compared to rivals when it is due to be replaced.

IIRC the main driver for VW introducing the Mk 6 sooner than expected was because the Mk 5 was too expensive to build, hence there wasn't time (or money) to develop a truly new platform for the Mk 6.

The "new" motors (from the EA888 family) have been installed in Golf Mk 5s in other markets (eg US) for over a year, and some (1.8 TSI) were in the Octavia from day one in Oz. They aren't radically new anyway, there is much similarity between the old and new engines.

So considering the new dampers and electronic LSD (only on GTIs, note), by my standards for a "new" and "different" model I still say this GTI has only relatively minor mechanical changes compared with the old model. The gubbins (mechanical bits that give a car it's character and feel) are nearly all carried over to the new Mk 6. All the suspension components (except for the new dampers), the gear boxes, the floor pan etc etc remain essentially the same.

If you wish to believe the Mk 6 has major mechanical changes over the Mk 5 then please go right ahead (it's a free world).

The new RS will not be in the same ball park as the new GTI. Although better suspension will help it a lot. After driving the Blue Mountains for 3 days, I am convinced the car is set up too soft. Lacks composure and has too much weight transfer for an alleged sporty drive.

I don't believe the vRS is marketed as a direct competitor to the GTI, much the same as Audis are not directly marketed against the equivalent VW model. The vRS has a subtly different character (more laid back) compared with the GTI, which some people (like me) actually prefer to the more up-front nature of the GTI.

Seeing as driving in the Blue Mountains is so important to you, then by all means go out and buy a new Mk 6 GTI if that will make you happy (I'm sure there are many dealers out there only too willing to take your money).

On the other hand, I'm very satisfied with the slightly more easy-going nature of my vRS, plus the large amount of extra room it has (over a GTI) is a bonus

That is the good thing about the many different car models available in Australia, we can each choose the model that suits our preferences best. While it is fair to express our own opinions, it is best to remember that others may have quite different (and just as valid) opinions.

[MJKooLio]

I'm keen to get my hands on a new car. Drove the A4 today, 2006 spec and pretty bland to drive with a CVT transmission..... (As zz2 said but like he also said I never listen ) The MKV GTI is devine to drive with the DSG, A3 Diesel with DSG would be nice but didn't drive it.

Whilst in Europe from next weekend, I will get a hold of the new MKVI GTI and report back haha!

Probably wait around the end of year to next year to purchase something... the new Octavia would be nice in vRS form but then by then you would get an 08 model in the peanuts range 2nd hand and I won't be fussed! Petrol with DSG please....

Otherwise when I can later down the track get something.... leaning towards even a MKV GTI Golf

Jeesh I'm picking, might be another car next week I want!

[mrgolf]

Greg, I believe you missed the point. I was saying the difference between the MkVI and MkV is greater than the difference between the current and facelifted RS's. That is all. My comment about not just a reskin is a response to a commonly held belief that the MkVI is 'just a facelifted MkV'. Whether you hold this rumour to be truth or not is your deal. I believe, from reading a large number of articles, that it is more than just a facelift. As for your wikipedia quote, the source is not exactly known for its correctness. The stuff on there was added by Joe Public and their opinions. The basic 'architecture' is the same. But as VW say themselves, every panel bar the roof is different. Which is more than you can say for the Skoda.

As for the mechanicals, how different people choose to see them as is their own deal. It is a new engine, which is more than you get from a mere facelift. Yes, the engines are related, but it is different. The suspension is all new, especially the adaptive dampers. The electronic LSD is new. Not a completely new model, but certainly more than a facelift. As for the character, all the reviews I have read say that it feels different to the MkV. In fact they all say it is a better drive. It probably has held onto some of its character, but is still different. More than just a facelift.

As for the GTI vs RS comment, the difference between the current models is not too great. Dynamically they are very similar. The Skoda is softer, but that is about it. The difference between the next two models will be greater. The GTI will have moved ahead in leaps and bounds (by all accounts) whereas the Skoda will have only progressed a little. However, hopefully with the new suspension, it will be more composed over bumps and have less dramatic weight transfer.

Now, this doozy:

Seeing as driving in the Blue Mountains is so important to you, then by all means go out and buy a new Mk 6 GTI if that will make you happy

Do you, by chance, have a sticker on the back of your car with an outline of Australia and some words saying 'If you dont like it, leave'? Same mentality. I chose to trade in my MkV GTI for an RS because it was practical for my new family. That is all. I would have preferred to keep the GTI, but I love my son and it is more than a worthwhile sacrifice.

That said, it lacks the composure of the GTI. It is too high and too soft. It wallows a little over uneven surfaces and has more dramatic weight transfer on changes of direction. It squats more on acceleration and dives more under brakes. Yes it is more relaxed, but it is still meant to be a sports oriented car. Those wanting a more relaxed drive should look no further than a Toyota Aurion. The GTI is lithe and athletic. It just needs to be sold as a sedan/liftback or wagon... haha.

Ultimately, though, these are my only complaints about the RS. It is a very good car and is built better than the GTI was. It is only a minor complaint (although you wouldnt think it from reading these comments), but it is something I hope the facelift addresses.

As for opinions, that is what forums are for. Stupid thing is, we are essentially on the same page on this whole argument. We have said the same thing, but differently.

[gregozedobe]

Do you, by chance, have a sticker on the back of your car with an outline of Australia and some words saying 'If you dont like it, leave'?

Not me. Never have, never will - in fact I find that sort of sticker mildly offensive. I have however, been known to say things like : "Quit whinging ! If you don't like it, either do something about it or if you won't do something about it just shut up." Which is quite different in intent, and puts the responsibility back on the unhappy person. Of course, some people don't like being told that, do they ?

As for opinions, that is what forums are for.

Fair enough (but you do sound like you are still suffering some "buyer's remorse")

So in line with what I said above, can we expect to see Koni FSDs on your RS soon ? The Briskoda people seem to like them rather a lot (improved ride and better handling). Or are your handling needs a bit more hard core ?

Please let us know what you do and what you think of it after the change.

[brad]

That said, it lacks the composure of the GTI. It is too high and too soft. It wallows a little over uneven surfaces and has more dramatic weight transfer on changes of direction. It squats more on acceleration and dives more under brakes. Yes it is more relaxed, but it is still meant to be a sports oriented car. Those wanting a more relaxed drive should look no further than a Toyota Aurion. The GTI is lithe and athletic. It just needs to be sold as a sedan/liftback or wagon... haha.

And then you get the GTI owners who reckon the GTI is "too jiggly".

Dare i say:
GTI = HSV ClubSport/FPV
vRS = Commode SS / Ford XR6

(that should ruffle a few feathers)