Gerrycan

Lots of threads discussing headlight upgrades if you perform a search. In summary the general recommendation is that it is too expensive to upgrade from halogen to legal LED. Replacement with LED bulbs (available on the internet) usually have too much scatter and will fail MOT or vehicle inspection if stopped. Bi-Xenon upgrade is also not recommended as that requires a lot of additional legal installation of electronic and headlight washer controls. Cheaper to buy a vehicle with it fitted at factory. Usual recommendation is to fit Osram or Philips halogen bulb upgrades. Minimal cost, noticeable improvements but bulb life maybe short, especially on bad roads with lots of vibration. How old is your car? The facelift with the split headlights was generally considered to have better optics on the halogen than the original mk3, which I have.

It could be the fuel tank shape but I don't think so. I read an article at least a couple of years back where an unnamed Ford engineer confirmed it was standard practice across the industry to give drivers good vibes to think they had covered a good distance on half a tank. Same as the water temperature gauge does not move from its standard normal position when it has warmed up. It will only register higher temps if there is something really wrong and then you have got to act. The water temperature does vary (within acceptable operating temperatures) in daily driving but they chose not to show it, because some drivers panic at the slightest (within norms) rise and head off needlessly to the garage. On a run we can get about 500km off the first indicated half tank but usually about 380km off the second half tank before being urged to refill (usually about 48 litres).

A manual Citigo should be able to handle that terrain with few issues but as others have said you would have to select the right gear and rev the engine. Why not look at a Fabia 1.0tsi, or if you have a price ceiling, the older 1.2tsi. Both are available with a small turbo to boost low rev torque and make ascending hills so much easier especially if you have a load or other passengers in the car. The 1.0 non turbo engine in the Citigo provides 95Nm of torque at 3000 rpm which, by the way, is sensationally good for its engine type. The mk3 Fabia 1.0tsi (with turbo) produces 175Nm of torque from 2000 rpm and that extra torque at lower revs makes it much easier to drive in hilly country. The previous 1.2tsi engine available in the Fabia is probably even better for your purposes giving the same torque from as low as 1400 rpm. I believe there are other options available in the UK that provide up to 200Nm of torque, if you buy the DSG automatic or 6 speed manual. I have no experience of the Citigo, but I do drive a small and very old Echo offering similar performance, and I have driven a loan 1.0tsi Fabia which I thought was terrific and was also very impressed by its excellent consumption. You could look at any other similar engined vehicle in the VW and SEAT range if the selection of second hand cars is limited. Now that things are opening up don't forget that important test drive to see what YOU like.

I have not experienced any unusual sounds from my manual transmission. I cannot remember any mention of any 'whistling manual transmission' in any Briskoda thread for the 7 years I have been on here. Many other complaints of internal booming of course.

Over the years I've never known anyone mention rear transport blocks. The front ones are there to avoiding the risk of nose crunches driving on/off loading ramps during shipping. So unless there have been changes to shipping standards I don't think you will find anything at the back. I'd certainly get the dealer to do the work and give them the opportunity to offer a free service or something as some sort of compensation for your inconvenience, and patience. At least you complained here early and got good advice. At least one historical report was from the second owner of the vehicle

With the expected usage described by @MrDeeJay of 3 mile run to work, and some shopping trips, then based on my experience in my manual 1.4tsi with a typical 20 deg C starting temperature ,through a fairly free flowing urban environment, at an average of 31 kph, and no real attempt at economy driving, then the OP should get better than 40 mpg. Of course consumption could be better or worse for the OP depending on how many stops, traffic flow and the start temperature, his journey experiences. A good idea getting an older car without a PPF because the PPF will not get up to operating temperature with that short a run. Similarly the 1.0tsi is better for shorter trips because there is less engine mass to warm up and lets face it a 3 mile journey or shopping trips do not need anything with real performance. If you do give the 1.0tsi some welly then it is capable of getting to 100kph in under 11 seconds anyway. Heat will be coming out the vents far earlier in a trip (1 mile?) in winter with either petrol engine compared to a diesel. I suspect in winter the exhaust will fill up with water from condensation from a sequence of short trips. Last winter (ours are a bit more mild than the UK) my wife, who uses our Octavia for an 8 mile commute complained that the car was gurgling when she started it in the garage and she was right. I think the main problem is the low revs she generally uses.

As mentioned by @FrankNicklin the 1.5tsi in the Octavia has ACT whereas the 1.4tsi, in the Octavia, does not. However the 1.4tsi when fitted in the Superb did have ACT. The other major difference is that the 1.5tsi has a variable turbo and I think this was the first application of its type in a mass produced 'cheap' petrol engine. The 1.5tsi disappeared from production for quite a while during WLTP standards introduction which suggests they had some issues meeting emission standards (which would be a high priority following 'Dieselgate'). Similarly it took an inordinate amount of time to issue 'kangaroo' fixing software, again probably due to the difficulties meeting emission and consumption standards. I found it interesting that the simpler 1.0tsi engine was available throughout the WLTP introduction. It is interesting that here in Australia with our sub-standard Euro 5 standards that the VAG group has chosen to replace the 1.5tsi option with the old 1.4tsi engine attached to an Aisin 8 speed torque converter box on the new Octavia, Karoq and new Golf. Official consumption is notably poorer than the original 1.4tsi with dsg or manual, I don't regard it as an improvement on my current 7 year old Octavia. The 1.5tsi is available in Australia on the Scala in manual and DSG versions and I have been seriously looking at it as the base manual is competitively priced for that sized turbo engine but I have underlying reservations about the engine's complexities and reported driving issues, although I am not sure if the latter would apply to the PPF-less version sold here. Might even look at a 1.0tsi manual Polo as that would be up to A$5k cheaper and it will take forever for the new Fabia to introduced here. My work is making it difficult to arrange the time for test drives.

We've owned our 1.4tsi manual for 7 years and it still amazes me with its performance and economy. I had a loan Fabia 1.0tsi, the lower power 5 speed manual version, and @FlyingGecko 's comments are pretty spot on. The 1.0tsi is brilliant for its capacity, it produces 200Nm of torque which is the equivalent of a 2 litre NA engine so by all users accounts it goes really well, even on the highway. The 1.0 tsi would be marginally more economical but by every other measure the 1.4tsi is better being more powerful and smoother. Don't expect any petrol engine to be economical doing short runs from cold in an urban environment. It is just not possible but I'd put money on the fact that no other petrol engine could do much better for consumption than the 1.0tsi I drove.

Adelaide, 2014, mk3, 103kw, 1.4tsi Octavia wagon. I've been on this forum for about 7 years and the majority of contributors are really helpful. Now Australia is getting an increasing number of Skoda with different engines and transmissions it is slightly less relevant for us than it has been, but still a great forum to participate in. I reckon there are about a dozen inverted contributors. Sorry but my OCD has to tell you you have not got a 'Koroq'

The 'kangarooing' complaints came from manual owners, DSG users did not experience the same problems.

I think you will find the mk3 1.5tsi had the same issues. Lots of threads in all models that used it but most seemed reasonably happy with the update (although some did say they got worse consumption after).

Sorry you will have to measure how much fuel you put in and distance covered to confirm display accuracy. AND Test speedo accuracy against GPS (speedometers are usually optimistic) Test odometer accuracy against a know distance (odometers are usually much more accurate than a speedo but I have owned one new car that where the odo overread by 8%). If that all stacks up then you have a really good one.

Is your mk4 a manual and has it had the software updates?

Both my kids (now adults) learnt on manuals, which is very much the exception here. Most of their friends here would not have a clue how to drive one even though they are allowed to. I think our state of South Australia is the only one here that does not segregate auto and manual driving certification which is a bit weird. I'm sure your daughter will enjoy it. While it was fortunately not a problem for our daughter, we would have been happier getting her one with as many safety features as your Citigo has.

Looks great but the driver's rubber mat looks like it could do with a replacing Good on you for getting a manual.

Thanks for your comments. Based on my experience with the (older 103kw) 1.4tsi in my Octavia I'm not surprised at the competence of the 1.5tsi. As I was hoping, it sounds like it might be a bit more economical than my current vehicle although we are at the pointy end of ICE development so gains are likely to be incremental. The version sold here in Australia does not have the PPF fitted which will help a bit more. You do raise an interesting point though about all the new 'safety' tech in the car as I have reservations about some of the decisions it makes for the driver. Not everyone in this forum is a fan of it. I use my basic cruise control a lot, both in and out of town and appreciate its effective operation, but I have no experience of the ACC versions although many users here swear by it. Your wind noise at speed may be due to an ill-fitting door seal? I have had that problem myself but it was easily fixed as it had come loose at one point and the mount just needed to be be pushed back in its hole. Hope the visit back to the dealer addresses your rattles. Let us know how you get on with the now that the UK is opening up a bit more.

If the salesman said it's so, then it must be true! There's probably some truth to what he says but I think that would also be true of your extended warranty too, if you read the fine print. There will be all sorts of caveats on type of wear and tear the components are subject to. For normal drivers the warranties are reasonable and protect against most unusual catastrophic expenses. In Australia Skoda offer a standard 5 year, unlimited kilometre warranty, as long as you are not a professional driver covering huge annual distances. 5 years is standard here for most non-luxury manufacturers with Kia (possibly Suzuki?) and a couple of Chinese manufacturers 7 years and Mitsubishi 10 years with a distance ceilings. The Kamiq gets really good reviews here and has becomes the Skoda top seller, only restricted by supply issues.

My impressions of the two in the showroom was that while the Kamiq rear accomodation was good, the Karoq had the better legroom. Correct me if I am wrong but I thought the Karoq rear seat could slide forward and backward so maybe the rear seat was forward for more boot space?

Seeing as how your profile says you are located on Jersey the question posed by @cardo also crossed my mind. Is your profile location not accurate or do you normally ferry to France or UK?

Could you clarify how the Kia 7 year warranty ' wears off rapidly' ?

I'm a skinny 178cm so a car has to be pretty compromised for me to be cramped but I am aware that some of my larger (taller and/or bulkier) friends are impacted by vehicles I am comfortable in. I think the Australian version of the Corolla sedan operates on a longer wheelbase than the hatch providing better accommodation and bootspace. I read somewhere it may be larger than the European versions of the sedan/estate but I have not confirmed that. I got a few responses about actual Corolla consumption from a local car forum and the owners are getting between 50 and 75 mpg with the majority at the upper end. I guess if you buy a car for its economy then you are going enjoy the challenge of maximising its abilities.

It takes a while to come to terms with a new car's characteristics in different environments and things change anyway as it is run in. Look forward to hearing your opinions when you are ready to post.

Australians think they are rugged outdoor types so most new vehicles released here need to be identified as an 'SUV', even if they are little more than jacked up hatchbacks so there are relatively few estate options compared to Europe. The hybrid Corolla sedan/hatch here only has the 1.8L engine option but the lack of power doesn't worry me as our roads speed limits are very heavily policed and I am not prepared to donate to the government through speeding fines. We are both very busy at work currently so finding the time for proper test drives is difficult. My limited experience with Toyota hybrids pretty much confirm what you say about the box, and they are definitely economical around town. A manual 1.5tsi Scala is also very tempting.

West Wales to London is a long commute so I can understand a some disappointment at only getting around 40mpg, although I suspect you may have 'pressed on' a bit to shorten the journey time. The aerodynamics on the Karoq like many other SUV styled vehicles is not brilliant so higher speeds would exact a penalty. What sort of commute would you have with the new job? Open highway as before or more urban? Hybrid work well in urban, also hilly terrain but on open highway I would imagine there is little difference in consumption between the Scala and the Hybrid. Sure the 1.8NA Atkinson cycle engine is very efficient but so is the VW 1.5tsi. To be honest our old 1.4tsi Octavia can get similar figures to @MrMorm in the right conditions with overall lifetime average of 5.9L/100. Our current vehicles are ageing but still functional (a bit like us) and we are looking at possible replacements which includes a Scala and possibly the much more expensive hybrid Corolla. The Corolla hatch has far too small a boot so the sedan may be the one to look at. Unfortunately the estate version, which I would really like to look at, is not on offer in Australia. I have posted a request for comments from owners of a manual Scala 1.5tsi but unfortunately there have been no replies.

Seeing as how there are a couple of recent posts from different Octavia types about a sudden worsening of consumption I thought I might suggest something a bit different from the others (very plausible) suggestions. A lot of people just set and forget the climate control A/C so it is on all the time, and there is nothing wrong with that. However climate control A/C also controls humidity and I'm just thinking that if the weather has changed from just cold, to wet and cold, then the A/C might be operating both heating and cooling to reduce the humidity which would increase consumption.?? I've not experienced this in the UK myself (none of my UK cars had A/C 40 years ago) but relate it to an occasion when I got my worst open road consumption in unusual local (South Australia) conditions in my 1.4tsi Octavia. It was very overcast but hot (32 deg C) and very high humidity and very uncomfortable so naturally I had the manual A/C on (not climate control) but even on the lowest fan setting it made the inside of the car far too cold. So I had to put the heater on as well to offset the cold air and the combination meant my average consumption plummeted by over 10mpg for that specific 250km journey which I had done many times before in all sorts of weather conditions without the punitive results.