Robbydazzler

As already stated the Toledo is a better equipped Rapid. The differences between the two are cosmetic and minimal. I had 3 Toledos and a Rapid. In every case the Toledo was better value.

Good luck in the future. I have always found your wisdom very rewarding. I had one Rapid and two Toledos ( the last Toledo is now in my daughters possession and she loves it). I do not think that we shall see a bargain like the Rapid in the car world again.

If I remember correctly certain higher quality recordings in certain formats (eg WMA) are not accepted by the head unit. Try saving the albums in a lower rate MP3 format and see if that works.

As far as I understand it a swap from EFB to AGM will require recoding. Halfords provide a battery change service at a reasonable price as do many others.

This topic has been endlessly debated on these Skoda forums. An EFB battery in theory needs to be identified to the ECU to enable it to charge at the correct rate. However common opinion appears to be that you can get away with changing an EFB battery without recoding with no problems. If you know your head unit code (if it has been set) and don't mind reverting to factory paramaters in the ECU you can change the battery without maintaining a 12v supply while you do so. You would get a load of warning lights immediately after doing this which would quickly disappear on driving and might have to sup ply the head unit code. Also the ECU would quickly relearn your driving habits.

I had 3 Toledos and 1 Rapid. I do not recognise the symptoms you describe. The braking on all 4 was pretty solid and the 1.0 TSI engine had plenty of low down torque and get up and go. The 1.2 TSI engine was a little less powerful than the 1.0 TSI but smoother and more refined. Both engines were typical turbo with useful torque starting at less than 2K revs and , unless you were a boy racer, high revs to improve performance being pretty academic.

You describe the character of the car very well but I would add comfortable. spacious, frugal and safe. Depends what you want really. Before coming back to the Toledo I had a 276 BHP Superb L&K which had every luxury you could think of. However I found my self using the wife's Dacia when the destination had tricky parking and , worst of all, being irked by "challenges" from lesser models pulling up next to me at traffic lights which required me to crush them with the might of the Superb's horses. Pretty unedifying for a 70 year old and hence I went back to the souless and bland Toledo.

I had 3 Toledos and 1 Rapid with 1.2 engines (in various forms) and a 1.0 TSI as well. All the engines were economical and reliable. The 1.2s were marginally more refined than the 1.0 but the 1.0 was slightly more powerful and with more usable torque. If you buy any of the engine versions you will not be disappointed as they are all excellent. Have you considered a Toledo rather than a Rapid as you getmore goodies for your money? Also I think that the Toledo is the more handsome car.

I loved the Rapid/Toledo (I had 4) and only gave the Seat to my daughter because she needed a car with plenty of room. Having both retired my wife and I only really need one car and we dicussed what our motoring needs were and we bought a Suzuki S Cross. The Suzuki Baleno was bought really to just cater for the 3 occasions each year where we require two cars ! The Toledo and Baleno have a lot in common as they are both criticised for having " hard plastic", have plenty of room inside, are lively , comfortable and economical, but were not popular. The Toledo definately has the superior interior and more space and I would say that the Baleno has similar room to the Fabia. The Baleno , however, is more fun to drive and has a strange charm of its own. In some ways the Baleno reminds me of a car of yesteryear in the way it drives. It was amazing value for money and has a torque converter auto with paddles and can be driven like a formula 1 car if you want. It is very light and very perky. So far it has been totally reliable.

I agree with camelspyyder that the 1.2 is a superior engine to the 1.0 . Having stated that the 1.0 is a fine engine just a little rougher round the edges compared to the 1.2. I recently gave the 1.0 Toledo to my daughter (who loves it) and bought a Suzuki Baleno with a 1.0 boosterjet engine. Not much difference between the 1.0 TSI and boosterjet engines in my opinion. Perhaps the boosterjet is slightly more linear in performance.

The water you hear moving about may be unconnected with your heater problem. With early Rapids water was trapped in the doors due to the doorseal covering the drainage hole. Open each door and shake it to see if you can hear any water splashing about. If you do then ease the doorseals away at the underside of the door and the water will pour out .

The build quality has been good with all of them. They really are hidden gems. In early models there was a problem with water retention in the doors which was " cured" by butchering the door seals and later the fitted seals were modified. If you can get hold of a Toledo rather than a Rapid you will get more goodies for your money by the way.

I have had 4 of them over 6 years ( well 1 Rapid and 3 Toledos) and have never had one problem with any of them them.

If you drive 10K plus miles per annum diesel. Otherwise petrol. 1.2 TSI 110 bhp is possibly the best all rounder of all the petrols.

Fixed now ?

Hi Chris, Did you have any joy with the dealer?

This problem was an issue with early Rapids. The door seals were modified in later models to allow the water to escape. With the early problem models the dealers just "butchered" the seals to allow the water to get out.

If it is "stop start" then connect to a body earth point not the negative battery terminal. Trickle/smart charges are okay to charge the battery while it is still connectedbut if your charger gives a heavy charge disconnect the negative battery terminal and then connect charger to battery terminals.

Was the old battery that you changed an EFB or an AGM type? If it was did you change it for the same type? Did you have to change any data to record the change of battery?

The Toledo and the Rapid are the same car both built in the Skoda factory. I also had two Fabias and the Rapid/Toledo is a stretched version of the Fabia as you say. I think that you will be very pleasantly surprised by the amount of passenger room in the Rapid and even more impressed with the size of the boot. It is about the same size as the previous generation Octavia. In the UK you generally get more car for your money with the Toledo versus the Rapid. The notchback Rapid has more space overall than the spaceback Rapid. The Toledo only comes as a notchback.

Have you considered a Skoda Rapid or Seat Toledo? They are very similar and only slightly smaller than the Octavia. They will also probably be better value.

Similar to Silver1011 I have been looking round for something to do. Therefore , since my car gets little use at present, I decided that I would research all things car battery especially how to test its health. Tried a multimeter on my own 18 month old Seat Toledo today and got 11.92V. This confused me greatly as according to most things I have read (some articles are contradictary) this suggests the battery needs a recharge. I have noticed on my weekly 5 mile trip that the start/stop has ceased to function. I went out in the wife's Dacia the other day and the start stop was working and hence I decided to try the battery voltage expecting it to be far higher than the Seat. It read marginally higher at 11.98V. Both batteries are EFB and the Dacia is a year older. Both cars start immediately. To paraphrase Alice in Alice through the looking glass the more you look at things the curiouser they get !

Should be an EFB or AGM type battery. You can only replace an AGM battery with an AGM battery but an EFB battery can be replaced with either an EFB or AGM generally. In either case the ECU must be programmed with the relevant details (certainly for an EFB to AGM replacement). As far as I understand it if the battery is the same physical size and type you can replace the old battery with one with greater Amphours and CCA. THe AGM type is generally more powerful, longer lasting and more expensive than an EFB.

Probably heresy this suggestion but isn't road tar actually bitumin ? In which case wouldn't white spirits remove it?

When I was researching this subject I eventually bothered to read the Owner's Manual provided by SEAT with the car. It specifically stated that the data would only be lost for the two items I mentioned above if the battery was diconnected and then reconnected. It also said that normally no damage would be caused if a small amperage charger (5A) was used on a battery still connected to the car although the charger should be connected to an earth point (-Ve) other than the battery itself (start/stop).I understand that older models might run into the problems you describe. Personally I have a horror of charging batteries in situ as I blew an alternator doing this many years ago and, on the other hand, am always fearful that I will generate a load of faults which can only be dealer cleared if I disconnect it. Hence, unless I am forced to, I will not charge it using either method. Something I haven't quite twigged is that if I replace a battery with the same type (say EFB with EFB) do I need to "program" the ECU with details of the new battery?