So you want a vRS with VW's XDS?

[Loobie]

How do we know that Australian spec cars are not being built with XDS?

How do you tell whether it's fitted or not?

Not exactly sure K1W1 - a dude has raised same question in a Briskoda thread (essentially asking whether there is any coding to specify a car having xDS). Unfortunately, its gone off topic so still wondering ...

I took a Mk VI GTI for a test while I was getting my car serviced, specifically to test out the xDS and xDL fancy diff work.

I couldn't feel any significant intervention but certainly was not understeering in places I have before (eg. sweeping off camber 60 deg bend). There wasn't any noticeable correction of my poor steering line or me overcooking it into the bend, it just steered round in a manner unexpected of any FWD car.

I've driven my brother-in-law's old Renault Meganesport 225 Cup that had a proper front diff, and recall it having quite a mechanical feel when hoofing it through corners, although the wheel wasn't giving much feel of the sensation.

[K1W1]

a dude has raised same question in a Briskoda thread (essentially asking whether there is any coding to specify a car having xDS).

If you knew what codes to look for I'm sure that the vehicle diagnostics would tell you.

[h100vw]

What about deciphering the options codes on the build info sticker?

I also wonder if Jmac has any Skoda info in ELSA?

Gavin

[Antiplastix]

Its like the same motor in the RS makes 147kw and 155kw in the GTI, Hmm maybe VW doesn t want their "hero" car upstaged. Any one got a dyno ?

[Jake02]

Its like the same motor in the RS makes 147kw and 155kw in the GTI, Hmm maybe VW doesn t want their "hero" car upstaged. Any one got a dyno ?

Agreed. I've always thought that because I still don't understand how a car that weighed roughly 100-150kg more than a GTI Mk V can only be 0.2 seconds slower to 100km/h (and I'm comparing previous GTI and pre-FL RS) Golf - 7.1/RS - 7.3 (but Wheels has done a 7.1 in a manual), with the DSG being 0.2 seconds quicker again. Maybe the RS has more power than that...

[K1W1]

The power output of any engine these days is largely governed by electronics and what you get depends on where the manufacturer wants to position the vehicle. Our S3 with a 2.0 litre TSFI engine puts out something like 188kW from memory so there is probably no reason why a vRS or GTI engine couldn't put the same sort of power out with some tweaking.

[Loobie]

Its like the same motor in the RS makes 147kw and 155kw in the GTI, Hmm maybe VW doesn t want their "hero" car upstaged. Any one got a dyno ?

Yeah, that's a definite statement about where VAG perceive the GTI against the vRS. And if we all put on the marketing hats, we'd probably do the same or even turn up the wick on the GTI a bit more to create a larger point of difference between the GTI & vRS.

I still believe the greater disappointment & point I was highlighting is Skoda providing more bang for buck in UK compared to Oz - volume aside, I would think both countries would be perceived as similar markets in terms of market/driver expectation of the vRS. It further reinforces the relatively poor deal we get in Oz for the vRS - to demonstrate:

UK GTI (5 door manual) 24,760 GBP (on road price)
UK vRs (L'back manual) 19,005 GBP (on road price)
- GTI is 30% more expensive than the vRS

OZ GTI (5 door manual) 40,490 AUD
OZ vRS (L'Back manual) 37,490 AUD
- GTI is 8% more expensive than the vRS

What the pricing shows is that the OZ GTI is a bargain when you look at the exchange rate. It also seems to show that VW Oz either negotiated a pretty ordinary deal for the vRS or they're making a nice big margin - the diplomat in me says that's an "odd" decision when you're trying to establish a brand and model in a new market.

[woofy]

It's been said to death, but Skoda priced everything too high here. When the Gti has such long wait times they aren't likely to be giving us such a bargain, but why the RS is so close in price I don't know. The have stated all along its being placed as a premium product, but really it's not meant to be.

[selurs]

The have stated all along its being placed as a premium product, but really it's not meant to be.

The Australian market is often treated a bit strangely like that. Ford did a similar thing with Volvo, tried to move it premium. Except that most people, strangely enough, baulked at paying premium prices for a dressed up Ford Focus/Mazda 3 (c.f. C30/S40). I suppose its a matter of perception - if you get people to think of Volvo/Audi as a premium brand then they'll pay what you ask for it, even if the C30 is a Ford Focus or the A3 is a Golf (or the A1, which will be built on the Polo platform).

I remember the statements when Škoda first re-entered the Australian market that they were positioning the brand to compete with the Japanese manufactures, and weren't even planning to mention is relationship to VW. Guess that went out the window with the slow uptake...however it does somewhat explain the prices. E.g. Mazda 3 MPS at around $47K drive away compares quite favourably to the RS at $45ish (depending on options). Also the Subaru WRX and Lancer RalliArt are both around the $42-43K mark drive away, which with its superior fit still leaves the RS ahead. I know from personal experience having tested all those cars before making my decision that while the MPS/WRX was definitely more powerful (and the MPS is a *stunner* in person from the outside), they didn't compare at all to the handling and quality interior of the RS, so it doesn't really need to be cheaper than them to compete.

So, in short, it's all about the perceived competition. They don't want us to think about Škoda as a "cheap Volkswagen" but as a "superior Japanese car". Anyway, just my 2c as to why the Škoda's are the price they are here...