From £24,095
It flexes 280lb ft and is returning a real-world 44mpg, but still has much to prove

Our Verdict

Amid a broader vRS refresh, Skoda has built its most powerful Octavia yet to take on the established order

15 April 2018

Why we’re running it: It’s the first in a two-parter: diesel vRS for three months, petrol vRS for three months. Which makes the better buy?

Month 1 - Specs

Life with the Skoda Octavia vRS: Month 1

Welcoming the Octavia vRS to our fleet – 4th April 2018

All things considered, this is a slightly strange time to be taking delivery of a new diesel car.

Certainly, far fewer people are doing so now than at any point in the past few years. The stats show that sales of new diesel models were down in December by 31% year on year, the result of a persistent and, we reckon, wholly unreasonable character assassination of the black stuff both in the mainstream press and at the hands of the government.

Just a few days ago, new tax rules were implemented that effectively make all new diesel cars more expensive to buy. For the highest CO2 emitters, the cost of the first year’s road tax will have leapt up by £500. For other diesels, the increase will be as little as £20, and the new regulations relate to that first year only, but the message from Whitehall is clear: diesel’s days are numbered.

The unintended consequence of the government’s efforts to discourage us from buying diesels is that overall CO2 emissions are creeping up. New car buyers are favouring petrol-engined cars in this post-Dieselgate era and, typically, a petrol car emits more CO2 than a comparable diesel one.

Several cities around the UK are pondering banning diesel cars, too, each of them citing diesel’s harmful NOx emissions, which have been closely linked to respiratory illnesses. That’s pretty tough to argue with.

The very newest diesels are just about as clean as a typical petrol engine, though, so forcing buyers away from such models achieves nothing at all. Apart, perhaps, from giving a vague impression that something is being done. For all these reasons, we at Autocar think diesel still has an important role to play in the medium term, which is why this Skoda Octavia vRS 2.0 TDI is joining the long-term fleet. Consider it a flag-waving exercise for compression-ignition.

This isn’t an entirely conventional long-term test, though, because after three months we’ll be chopping this car in for a petrol model. We absolutely do want to stand in diesel’s corner at a time when it’s being unfairly demonised, but if we come to the conclusion six months from now that a petrol Octavia vRS is the better overall proposition, that’s the one we’ll be recommending. Over a few thousand miles, we’ll get a good insight into the buying and running costs of each model, too, so we’ll know which one works out cheaper in the long run.

This particular car, resplendent in Race Blue metallic, is a fourwheel-drive model with the DSG dual-clutch automatic gearbox. Its standard list price is £28,700, but the 19in wheels (£655), Canton sound system (£505), Columbus sat-nav (£1060) and the essential Dynamic Chassis Control (£860), plus a couple of other extras, lift the overall price to £32,795. The engine is a 2.0-litre diesel with 182bhp and 280lb ft of torque. Skoda claims 55.4mpg and CO2 emissions of 134g/km (which, incidentally, means the first year of road tax costs £300 more today than it would have done a week ago).

When this car is replaced by the petrol version – the new vRS 245, the most powerful vRS yet – it won’t just be the fuel type that changes, but more or less the entire configuration. Rather than a four-wheel-drive hatch with a dual-clutch ’box, the petrol car will be a front-driven estate with a manual transmission. That way, we’ll know for certain exactly what it takes to get the best out of the Octavia vRS.

First impressions? Mostly very positive. It feels like an effortless, undemanding car, the sort that slots neatly into your life. There’s acres of space in the cabin. The diesel engine is strong and gutsy, with a usefully wide powerband. It’s hardly a thrilling four-pot, though, and it is quite noisy, particularly when cold.

The DSG ’box, meanwhile, is very good, although it does change down too often when you apply a little more throttle, perhaps to get past a cyclist on a busy urban street, when it could just lean on the engine’s big wedge of torque and spare you the sudden downchange, thrash of revs and jolty burst of acceleration.

For the most part, it’s very comfortable, too, thanks to the optional DCC adaptive dampers that our road testers have found to be so important. My only criticism of the ride quality is a slight but constant patter at motorway speeds. I suspect those very big – and presumably rather heavy – 19in wheels are the cause. It’s as though the hefty, oscillating mass on the end of each limb is just a little too much for the springs and dampers to keep control of. In the cabin, it doesn’t feel like a brittle or unyielding ride, but more like there’s one unbalanced wheel.

Everything else? I’ll report back in more detail next time but, a couple of hundred miles in, I would characterise the Octavia vRS – in this specification, at least – as a hot hatch reimagined as a grand tourer. It’s less tightly wound than the VW Golf GTI with which it shares a platform; more laid back. That should make for a pretty decent everyday car, I reckon.

Second Opinion

On paper, ‘vRS’ seems at odds with the Octavia’s remit. It surely needs to display the hallmarks of other great Skodas: huge range, comfy ride and unrivalled practicality. In reality, you can’t say no to the extra poke, and we’ll discover the rest shortly

Mitch McCabe

Back to the top

 

Skoda Octavia vRS 2.0 TDI 4X4 DSG specification

Specs: Price New £28,700; Price as tested: £32,795; Options: 19in wheels £655, Canton audio £505, Columbus sat-nav £1060, Dynamic Chassis Control £860, metallic paint £400, spacesaver £105, heated seats £255, wireless phone charging with Bluetooth and wi-fi £255

Test Data: Engine 4 cyls inline, 1968cc, turbocharged, diesel; Power 181bhp at 3500-4000rpm; Torque 280lb ft at 1750-3250; Top speed 142mph; 0-62mph 7.6sec; Claimed fuel economy 55.4mpg;Test fuel economy 44.2mpg; CO2 134g/km; Faults None; Expenses None

Back to the top

Join the debate

Comments
13

15 April 2018

Officially CO2 emissions are going up, based on a crude calculation of sales x posted NEDC figures. In reality, lots of diesel cars that claim an average 50mpg + are doing much worse than that bumping around suburban Britain.

Fewer people choosing diesel SUVs for short commuting duty is a good thing. Drivers who do big mileage will still choose diesel.

15 April 2018

Returns on average 30mpg. 

I love it!

Pace and practicality.

 

I will watch this road test with interest.

Steam cars are due a revival.

15 April 2018

The really big difference between this and the petrol you will have later is depreciation . A manual, front wheel drive petrol has much less value to lose. Add that to the lack of demand for a diesel at trade in, and the case for this version just won't stack up. 

People really only ever chose diesel to save money. It doesn't work any longer, unless you drive the car a massive distance before swapping it. 

Add in that the petrol version will be more fun, and to me it's case closed before you even start.

15 April 2018

... but you've chosen hens eggs and swans eggs.

Having owned hatchback and estate cars of the identical model even with the same engine and gearbox, I can categorically state that they are different. For the Ford Mondeo the estates were noisier and more wallowy.

If you add in changing the engine, transmission and fuel, you don't have a comparing, you have a contrast between two completely different vehicles that happen to have the same badge on the bonnet.

This feels more like top gear - boys playing with toys - than any serious comparison. I'm disappointed. I had thought I was going to read something useful; maybe a real comparison of similarly specified cars merely with differently fuelled engines. 

20 April 2018
fellwalker wrote:

... but you've chosen hens eggs and swans eggs.

Having owned hatchback and estate cars of the identical model even with the same engine and gearbox, I can categorically state that they are different. For the Ford Mondeo the estates were noisier and more wallowy.

If you add in changing the engine, transmission and fuel, you don't have a comparing, you have a contrast between two completely different vehicles that happen to have the same badge on the bonnet.

This feels more like top gear - boys playing with toys - than any serious comparison. I'm disappointed. I had thought I was going to read something useful; maybe a real comparison of similarly specified cars merely with differently fuelled engines. 

difference is mate , you can eat hen eggs cant eat swan eggs , against the law!!!  Get near them they break your arm mate!

15 April 2018

Save yourself about 9k by buying a year old Passat 190 GT estate.

15 April 2018

 For all it being powered by the Black stuff it’s only the torque that talks, it’s slower to sixty than my two litre Petrol BMW,and it’s real World mpg is only a mile or two better than my Car, I always thought Deisel was good for at least 20% better fuel consumption....?

Peter Cavellini.

TBC

15 April 2018

The reality between patrol and diesel is where the power and torque is in the rev range. For turbo diesels, it's pretty much from tick over, rarely would you need to rev it beyond 3000rpm to enjoy all of the available performance. For petrols, including small turbo petrols, you need to be above 3000rpm before you start to benefit from the power and torque. I wonder how many drivers take their petrol turbo beyond 3000rpm, and although they may be pleased with the economy that their car returns, the reality is that their car is underperforming - they may be able to boast to their friends how much power it produces, but is actually never used, (not that most people will notice). It will be interesting to see what average mpg is obtained from the petrol vRS, assuming that they use more than just the first 3000rpm........

15 April 2018

 That what you should deduct from the Car makers mpg figure Petrol or Deisel, yes every now and then you’ll do the quoted figure, their figure can only ever be an approximation, I have an elderly neighbor who has driven Deisel cars, they don’t go far, maybe 5000 miles a year, so it won’t cost them much as being pensioners their overheads are minimal compared to a Nuclear Family, If new Deisel Cars at the moment are just as clean as Petrol the real Beef is all the older Deisel Cars, Vans, Buses and the like, if a come and buy me scrappage scheme was available this would help clean up the pollution and through time and what with EV on the rise would rid the Roads of older dirtier Deisels and Petrol too?

Peter Cavellini.

15 April 2018

n/t

Steam cars are due a revival.

Pages

Add your comment

Log in or register to post comments

Find an Autocar car review

Driven this week

  • Alpina B5 BiTurbo saloon front
    First Drive
    24 April 2018
    The B5 BiTurbo is an immensely covetable machine that trades the smallest amount of handling precision for greater overall ride comfort
  • Volkswagen Golf GTI rear
    First Drive
    24 April 2018
    Could the Mk7, offered in its purest form, be the best Golf yet?
  • Hyundai i30 N
    Standard spec is good so paint colour is our car’s only option
    First Drive
    23 April 2018
    What’s Hyundai’s first hot hatch and N-brand debutant really like? Let’s find out
  • Jaguar E-Pace 2018 review hero front
    Car review
    20 April 2018
    Can Jaguar’s compact SUV bring flair and dynamic polish to a fast-growing class?
  • Audi TT RS Coupé
    First Drive
    20 April 2018
    The Audi TT RS has the looks, a vociferous engine and the supercar-baiting performance, but is it too uncompromising to use as a daily driver?