Scirocco R sold :(

[ayc1985]

Hi guys,

As some of you will know I have had 2 Scirocco's in the space of a 2 years , (firstly the diesel and then upgrading to the R last october.) After 8000 miles and a lot of enjoyment I had to settle for something a bit cheaper with househunting in mind.

Yesterday I signed the deal to replace the Scirocco R with a Seat Ibiza Cupra (with the 1.4 TSI engine from the Scirocco). I have had a lot of fun in the Scirocco and it remains the best car I have ever had. I wish I could have kept it, but the costs of running it and the finance was too high.

It's got same features like DSG box, RNS 310, cruise control and bluetooth option as my current Roc! the seats are just as comfy although the actual interior is not as nice obviously!

I was looking at 09 plate TSI Roc's for around 17-18k but I managed to get a 2 month old 500 mile on the clock Cupra for £15k which ain't too bad!

It would have been my 3rd Roc!

I felt it was time for a change, although I am going to miss the envious looks and the ladies glances too haha.

Ibiza colour is White.


I will still stay on the forum and keep lurking at peoples deliveries etc lol.

[Actus Reus]

What a shame - though I reckon you'll be happy with the Seat, and even happier when you get a house - now's a great time to be buying a house, especially if you don't have anything to sell. We exchanged contracts last week and so I'm also thinking of getting rid of my 'Roc (210PS GT if anybody's interested!), because I'll have fulltime use of the other half's nice and practical diesel A3. What I'll get I'm not sure about - something older, but a bit more focused than a 'Roc I hope, though I'll revisit the idea of getting an 'R'...

[GeoffT]

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but you've swapped a Roc for that? Are paper bags available on the aftermarket for them?! I'd have got a used Roc TDI if running costs were the issue.

[ayc1985]

I already had a 140 TDI and I thought an engine like that on a car as good looking on the Roc was a travesty! It was a decent engine but a friend of mine paid 12k for the same engine in a 57 plate Golf! I was looking at the 200 Tsi but the best I could get at reasonable prices was 17k and 58 plate, which I dont think was good enough.

Obviously the Roc is better looking, but unfortunately the house is the bigger priority now.

[GeoffT]

Well so long as you are happy that is all that matters.

I don't understand the relevance of what your mate paid for a 57 plate Golf with a TDI motor though? I'm not even sure the the TDI in a 57 plate Golf will be the same engine. Certainly my wife's 57 plate Audi A3 has the older PD TDI not the CR TDI the Roc uses. Also you can't get a 57 plate Roc as they only launched in the summer of 2008 so there is no like for like comparison with the price of your mates Golf anyway.

I certainly don't feel the TDI in the Roc is a travesty. It is smooth, quiet, torquey, amazingly economical, in a car that looks great and holds it's value. With fuel prices as they are, it's win - win as far as I'm concerned. If it's good enough for Audi at Le Mans, it's good enough for me!

[maisbitt]

I'm not even sure the the TDI in a 57 plate Golf will be the same engine.

Geoff: You are right. 2.0TDI CR was on the Roc and then on the MK6 Golf. All MK5 Golf TDIs were PD units, either in 1.9TDI 105 without DPF, 2.0TDI 140 without DPF, or 2.0TDI 170 with DPF, and a 57 reg Golf is definitely a MK5.

The CR units are miles better than PD units for power delivery and refinement. My 140CR Roc was noticeably quicker in accelerating to a "landmark" sign (passed it at 78mph) on a sliproad I use than the 140PD MK5 Golf I had (passed it at 70mph), almost as quick as the 170TDI MK5 Golf I also had (passed it at 80mph), although through the gears, the 170 had noticeably more power than the 140CR Roc, as you'd expect.

[sciroccoR25]

srry to hear that mate but that car aint looking 2 bad !!

[ayc1985]

I'm not even sure the the TDI in a 57 plate Golf will be the same engine.

Geoff: You are right. 2.0TDI CR was on the Roc and then on the MK6 Golf. All MK5 Golf TDIs were PD units, either in 1.9TDI 105 without DPF, 2.0TDI 140 without DPF, or 2.0TDI 170 with DPF, and a 57 reg Golf is definitely a MK5.

The CR units are miles better than PD units for power delivery and refinement. My 140CR Roc was noticeably quicker in accelerating to a "landmark" sign (passed it at 78mph) on a sliproad I use than the 140PD MK5 Golf I had (passed it at 70mph), almost as quick as the 170TDI MK5 Golf I also had (passed it at 80mph), although through the gears, the 170 had noticeably more power than the 140CR Roc, as you'd expect.

Nothing against the engine, cause after all I did have one. I was comparing the specs between my friends 57 plate Golf GT and my 140 TDI Roc (59 plate).

Both TDI engines had 9.3 seconds to 60, average 53 mpg and emissions of 154. DPF or not, surely the image of the Roc was not worth spending an additional 8k on, considering the interiors between the mark 5 gold and Roc were very similar anyway.

I do realise the tdi engine has been tweaked to bluemotion recently though.

[GeoffT]

I don't understand your logic. Comparing a 57 plate Golf to a 59 plate Roc and saying the 8k difference is just for the "image" of the Roc is ignoring the fact that a huge chunk of the difference is because one car is 2 years newer than the other!! In fact, on a like for like comparison with the same engine/age/miles/condition, I think the Roc is very good value compared to the Golf. If memory serves, the new price, spec for spec, is virtually identical. This is all a wierd argument anyway because you bought an Ibiza not a Golf!!

[Actus Reus]

Indeed - a good Porsche 996 Carerra 2S can be had for about 22k these days - how does that compare to a 57 plate diesel golf?

[ayc1985]

You don't just pay for the image, you pay for the engine too. If pretty much the same engine is in a car 2 years older with no noticeable difference at all, you have to think is it really worth the 8k difference? I'm just saying , after buying the 140 tdi engine and realising the same engine was used in cars a few years older, it distorted my opinion on the car which persuaded me towards the R.

Thankfully the R's engine was very different from the r32's one, in terms of emissions, speed and maintenance. It made getting the R and paying a premium an easier choice.

[GeoffT]

Well you are the only person that has not noticed a HUGE difference between the old PD TDI and the new CR TDI. I currently drive cars with the 2 different TDI engines and the difference is like chalk and cheese. And you are still ignoring the point that the 8k difference is primarily because of the age difference pure and simple.

So because a different, but same capacity engine was used in a car a few years older it put you off having the current TDI?!!! That would stop you buying pretty much any car on the market!! Most engines evolve and improve over time but have parts in common with their predecessors. The engine in the current R is essentially the same motor that has been around for years in most VAG group models, but that didn't put you off buying an R?!

[ayc1985]

I have also driven cars with both TDI engines and am afraid I didn't notice any difference at all. I think it might be a hallucination to think otherwise. I do appreciate the image and age of the car would mean a 8k rise, but in my opinion it's not that radical of a change. Isn't the Roc ideally the Golf Chassis anyway? Also the mark 5 golf interior and Roc interior are pretty much the same. I personally didn't think it was worth the price difference hence I got the R. I know the engine in the R is basically a tuned up version of the GTI engine. But it is faster and more efficient than the old r32 engine and is noticeably different, in terms of emissions and speed in comparison to those.

[GeoffT]

Lol, I give up. Your arguments are getting silly now - so everyone else that has driven both engines (from the motoring press to owners like me who drive both versions) are hallucinating to notice a big difference, and you are the only one who is right because you can't tell any difference?

And of course the Roc is the based on the latest Golf platform, but what has that got to do with anything? The Roc and the Golf are the same price new, spec for spec, so you are not paying a premium for the Roc over the Golf anyway. Your Ibiza is the same platform as the Skoda Fabia, but what does that proof?

[Jane]

Mine finally went yesterday AYC, a very sad day indeed, but needs must and like you trying to be a bit more practical as there are more important things to think of right now, so I also took delivery of my Polo TDi
Mine came with a ready supply of brown paper bags in the glove box if you would like to borrow a few we could both keep Geoff happy ...

[Chungster]

Changing cars so soon after buying new is always a no win situ. Just had a px price on the folks zoom zoom sport purchased last year. Looking at 50% loss in 1 year! Well they can go p off!

[GeoffT]

Mine finally went yesterday AYC, a very sad day indeed, but needs must and like you trying to be a bit more practical as there are more important things to think of right now, so I also took delivery of my Polo TDi
Mine came with a ready supply of brown paper bags in the glove box if you would like to borrow a few we could both keep Geoff happy ...

Hehe. At least your Polo doesn't look like it has just caught a big black bin bag on the front

[ayc1985]

Good news, I sold the car to my brother!, that way it stays in the family and we at least have a Roc with an engine that does it justice .

The picture above is the bocanegra, i put the wrong one as I couldnt find the proper one.

Not quite a Roc, but still it shifts for a car its size.

[GeoffT]

Certainly looks better without the bin bag!

[ayc1985]

haha it certainly does to be fair. Not quite as good looking as the Roc, but a decent ride nonetheless. I gotta think about remaps and stuff now, apparently it can be remapped to 215 bhp!. Maybe lowered a tiny bit too.