skidpan

Simple solution, buy a 1.4 TSi 150 PS.

Just one small comment. Where did the OP suggest that they wanted a DSG/auto in their original post. "Private hire driver fed up of diesels would the superb 1.4 148bhp petrol 2016 be good enough to use doing a lot just just short journeys stop starting like the superb want one but don’t want dpf diesel problems okey with honest 38 -44 mpg looking for any owners covering 10 -20 ooo miles year petrol 1.4 superb 2016 honest opinion"

It would be perfect. More than enough performance and almost diesel economy. If used only in town for short trips ours drops to the high 30's but overall 18 months its averaged 45 mpg. Since your car would rarely be doing a cold start I would expect that your suggested 38 - 44 would be easily achievable with the truth being closer to 44.

When we were ordering the Fabia earlier this year it was unclear if we would get a 2018 spec car with no GPF or a 2019 spec car with a GPF. We did not want to end up in the same sort of circumstances were were in when we had diesels e.g. ensuring the trips we did were mostly long enough to keep the DPF healthy, the Fabia liek the Note it was replacing would be spending a good deal of time on shorter runs and in town. So I did some reading and all the sites I found were unanimous in the view that GPF's were very different in the way they regenerated to DPF's and because they were smaller and simpler were also much cheaper. Since petrol exhausts are much hotter than diesel exhausts the GPF would be passively regenerating pretty much all the time whereas a DPF needs long runs at a decent speed to do any amount of passive regeneration simply because of the low temp of diesel exhausts. The site also indicated that GPF would be placed close to the turbo to aid the temp needed but as with DPF's whilst that is desirable its not always possible due to underbonnet packaging. That is why many Peugeot/Citroens/Fords etc with the 1600 TDCi need the Eolys additive to increase the DPF temp. But since Skoda appeared to have ramped up production of the MY18 cars early in 2018 ours came about 6 weeks earlier than predicted and with no GPF so no worries. Not sure if any Fabias with GPF's have even been delivered yet, not seen any 68 plate ones in these parts.

GPF's do not need to regenerate like DPF's. The higher temperature a petrol engine runs at means that a GPF should burn off any particles as you drive. In theory there should be non of the problems DPF's have caused some diesel owners especially those doing short trips.

Had a 2017 1.4 TSi 150 PS (with ACT) for about 18 months now. On a 430 holiday drive to Scotland we have seen 55 mpg (not hanging about - average speed over 60 mph) but if its used in town for short trips it will drop into the high 30's. Overall so far its done just over 45 mpg (calculated). Like most cars the dash display lies but its not bad compared to some. Had the same engine in a Leon 1.4 TSi but that had 140 PS and no ACT. On a long run it would do about 52 mpg and about the same in town, in 3 1/2 years it averaged about 45 mpg. If you were expecting 56 mpg - 10% overall (about 50 mpg) you are going to be disappointed but remember its a big car with decent power and performance. The wife has a Fabia 1.0 TSi 110 PS and that is averaging just over 50 mpg but its not a quick or anywhere near as big. 20 years ago we struggled to get 45 mpg overall from a diesel, 25 years ago we had a 1.8 Blubird petrol and that would only average 30 mpg with no performance whatsoever. Think you need to be more realistic with your expectations.

You say in your profile that the car is a "Superb II Elegance". This is the Superb Mk 3 forum and there is no Elegance model. Ask a moderator to move the post, you will get more meaningful replies if its in the correct place.

We looked at one back in 2010 (I think) when we found out that the Octavia was way too noisy. Problem was simple, the hatch was so complicated and heavy the 5' 4" Mrs could not reach it to close it and even if she jumped and grabbed hold it was too heavy to move. The normal hatch on the Mk 3 is not an issue at all and for the record we have a rear wiper. Why not when its free.

Another piece of paper that is totally worthless. It will basically exclude every fault its possible for a car to have and it will also have a sizable excess on each claim The only extended warranties worth having are manufacturers ones and only then if they have the exact same exclusions as the original 3 year warranty. Take the extended warranty I had with the Seat Leon. Buy before the car was registered and as I said above it was the same T & C's as original for another 2 years. Buy after registration (only a day would affect your cover) and the list of exclusions was long and there was a £200 excess every time you went to the garage. In truth the Seat one I bought was a waste of money, the bloody thing never went wrong. Everybody told me TSi's were a money pit and Seats were crap, what a bunch of idiots.

Its only a badge. What really matters is does the car suit you. Since you seem to be happy with your existing car what advantage could buying one with a VRS badge have for you personally. A cheap alternative, visit a scrapyard and buy the badge off a VRS and stick it on. Won't make it go faster but if a badge really matters its a cheap way to get one. Me, well happy enough with an SE and an SE-L on the drive (and neither have a badge to show others this fact).

Its all on a spreadsheet, simply add another sheet when we swap cars. Simply swipe the cells and hey presto.

Looking at the figures I have at hand: Ford C-Max 1.6 TDCi April to November 2008 49.15 mpg November to March 2009 46.87 mpg, 4.86% difference BMW 118D April to November 2010 48.37 mpg November to March 2011 46.32, 4.24% difference Kia Ceed CRDi April to November 2012 52.23 mpg November to March 2013 50.80 mpg, 2.8% difference Average drop for those 3 cars in 3 random years was 3.966%, pretty much spot on my 4% rounded guess. For the record the C-Max did not have a DPF or stop/start wheras the BMW and Kia had both. The Stop/start in the BMW normally stopped working reliably mid November and woke up again mid February. The stop/start in the Kia did not work to normal rules, in truth it worked very little. In the real world stop/start save very little since even in the BMW with the better system it stopped working after 4 stops in one queue and thus saved very little diesel.

We drove diesels from 1996 to 2013 and for tax purposes I kept accurate records over that period. Winter diesel and cold temperatures did affect my mpg, on all the cars it was about a 4% drop. On a 12 gallon tank normally doing about 50 mpg that would drop the range from 600 miles to 576 miles. But my car use was pretty much identical all year round. Many car owners use their cars less in winter for longer trips and that will affect your range far more than the temperatures and winter diesel. Take our Kia Ceed as an example. Normally it would do about 52 mpg over a 12 gallon tank, range 624 miles. In late 2010 the weather was so bad for several weeks and due to an accident the wife was in hospital, this resulted in the car only being used locally. The mpg dropped to about 40 mpg lowering the range to 480 miles. This had noting to do with the temps and winter diesel.

Exactly that on the Superb and Fabia. Really easy.

I got a £200 voucher from Seat Customer Services because the selling garage were a bunch of useless liars. Short version, on delivery I spotted that the service book had the correct VIM but wrong reg and they claimed there was nothing that could be done other than cross the reg out and re write it, would not look great when you sold it. After complaining Seat Customer Services issued a new book. Then when the car was just over 7 months old with 6000 miles on the clock the service due warning came on. Contacted garage and they said it needed doing since it was due 12 months from manufacture not registration. Not an issue for me, I had a service plan so simply book it in. They then said the service plan did not cover a service before the car was 12 months old so I would have to pay. Contacted Seat Customer Services who confirmed that the service was due 12 months have after reg and to ignore the warning and get it done at 12 months/10,000 miles, they confirmed it in a letter (and email) and issued the £200 voucher. Serviced at a different dealer who supplied me with 4 winter tyres in exchange for the voucher. Never actually used them, sold them on e-bay for £260 the following winter. Result.

Not driven a 1.5 TSi, doubt anyone has in Superb. But we have had 2 1.4 TSi's and they are simply brilliant. First was a 140 PS in a 2013 Seat Leon. We had been driving diesels for 18 years and were very skeptical about returning to petrols, the Leon would be replacing a 2 litre BMW 1 Series diesel which was without a doubt the best diesel overall we had owned. We got a 40 mile test drive in the car and had made the decision to buy before getting back to the garage. Just a punchy as the BMW, quieter and if the dash was to be believed just as economical. Within 48 hours we had ordered one and collected it 4 days later. Never regretted the decision, simply brilliant. Averaged 45 mpg overall which was only 2 mpg less than the BMW diesel (these are calculated figures). When it was time to replace it we needed a bigger car but there was only one engine to have, another 1.4 TSi. The Octavia was initially the first choice but for several reasons the Superb was ordered. With it being a bigger car than the Leon we expected a performance loss and the mpg to be less. Performance is a bit reduced but the car is still more than fast enough (yet to wish I had a 2 litre) but probably because of the ACT it actually does better mpg (just) overall. On a motorway trip its much better on mpg, on a trip to Scotland the Leon would do just over 50 mpg, the Superb does between 53 and 55 mpg depending on traffic and weather (calculated mpg again). All I can suggest is you get a good long test drive in a TSI Superb and see if its the car for you. Would be very surprised if it falls short.

Its the replacement for the CD. Just look in any HiFi mag and there are regular tests of new to the market decks and reviews of new releases. I got in before it became popular, bought my first single in about 1963 and LP in probably 1973. Try it, you don't know what you are missing. But the buggers don't half skip when you try and play them in the car.

Interesting. If it were to be enforced the courts would be clogged up with cases for years, no time for murderers and rapists to appear in court. As the article suggest, the ruling was probably just symbolic. Off to Rip some more CD's after digitising some Vinyl.

As far as I am aware its perfectly legal to make a copy of a CD or rip it to another format providing you own the CD and its for your own use only. But it does become an illegal if you sell or give away the original CD.

I have used Specsavers since about 2001 following a poor experience with an optician I had been using since the 1960's. I have been very satisfied, two pairs of specs for less than I was paying for one at the old opticians (using the same Hoya Varifocal lenses) and when they found my inter ocular-pressures raised they referred me immediately. But 2 years ago things took a down turn. They no longer supplied Hoya Lenses thus I had to have their Pentax Varifocals. The prescription in my left eye was unchanged for distance but the reading part was slightly different. My right eye had a developing cataract thus it was difficult to get any improvement. When the spectacles arrived I stuggled to focus through my left eye, my vision was better in the old specs they had supplied 2 years before, due to the cataract it was difficult to say if the lens was OK, it like looking through fog at best. They kept saying keep trying them for another week and eventually agreed that if they were no better they would arrange a re-test and correct the lens if necessary. Went back in and they simply refunded my money, no choice so back to my old specs, at least i could see. Last year I was offered a sight test at the hospital and their prescription was exactly the same as the Specsavers one from the previous year. But they don't give you a copy thus you have to get tested on the High Street again. A bit of a waste of time but it prove the actual optician was correct. So off to Specsavers and the left eye prescription was the same again, the right was a tad different to the hospital from what I could remember. New specs ordered and when they arrived it was deja vu, could not focus with my left eye, the important one for me. They kept saying keep trying them but I was more insistent and eventually the branch manager became involved. They checked the left lens and believe it or not it did not match my prescription, put a lens over the spectacles to bring it to the correct strength and I could see. So both lenses were reordered and fitted an all has been fine for 12 months. Went to see the Consultant 2 weeks ago and despite my worsening sight in the right eye he would not consider me for an operation since I did not meet their criteria. I was not happy, poor sight is not pleasant at best and its getting worse every year. I can still easily pass the DVLA requirements with the left eye or both together but the right eye is a waste of space. I asked what option I had to get his decision reviewed and he suggested 2. 1st was at my next consultation on April I should either lie when I read the chart to make my sight appear much worse that it is or alternatively go back to my optician now and get re-referred. So I made an appointment at the optician that looked after my dad when he had cataracts about 12 years ago. Its a one man band thus you get to see the same person every time which with my problems is probably better than simply seeing whoever is available. Told him what had happened and which hospital it was and he was fuming. Told me that is the advice given to all patients and he has a huge battle to get treatment carried out. Said that asking patients to lie is very wrong and told me not to do it, he wanted me to take the matter further. He tested my eyes and the prescription for the left eye is the same as Specsavers have been giving me for several years and he too had difficulty finding a prescription that gave any improvement for the right eye, an operation is the only solution. He disagreed with re-referring me since his experience of that would mean me starting all over again with the hospital, he said I need an operation now. So I have made another appointment at the hospital in December and in the meantime will visit my GP to see if he will give me some tips or preferably back me up if I decide to take it further. Watch this space. I can only conclude that Specsavers Options are fine but their lens quality control in recent years can have issues. But at least its easy to spot, you cannot see. The Mrs has been using Specsavers since 2004 and has not had a single issue, but her eyes are healthy.

There is a chap on Honest John who claims cam belts never need changing, will last the life of any vehicle. Says is Focus is in its teens and his Audi is as well. But he also says antifreeze never needs changing, oil changes are a con, brake fluid lasts forever and tyres are fine to over 20 years old. Recently he claimed its fine to change one brake pad at a time if the others are OK.

Same experience with the Octavia. Since 2010 we have tested 4 Octavias and have really wanted to like them. Ideal size, spec and back in 2010 with the VAT free offer and broker prices the deals were stunning. In 2010 both cars we tested were 1.4 TSi estates, think they were 122 PS at the time. After a 110 PS Focus TDCi estate the performance was great and space in the car and boot was way better. But the road noise in both was ear shattering, the first one was so bad the wife wanted me to do a U turn and take it back, difficult on the M1. Cannot remember the exact specs, think one was an Ambience on 15" wheels and the other an Exclusive on 16's. The one on 16's was better but that may be down to better trim in the more expensive model. Back in the 5 year old Focus felt like getting into a new car, no Skoda for us. Before we did the deal on the Superb we decided to give the Octavia another go since we feared that the Superb might be too big in car parks like our Mondeo had been. With the new MQB chassis we hoped for better things, after all we had been driving a 1.4 TSI Leon with the MQB chassis for over 3 years and that was a very quiet car. First up was the estate and it was just like 2010, unbelievable noise. Next up was a hatch (much prefer the Octavia in Estate shape but with the deals on the table lets give it a go) and it was actually fine except for some wind noise near the mirror. Since this was the only Octavia out of the 4 with that issue I ignored it as a one off or a badly fitted screen. Back to the dealer to do the deal only to be told that the order books were closed until the facelift arrived in February and only stock cars were available, no 1.4 TSI SE-L hatches were available. So we bought the Superb hatch, no regrets especially when you consider that the Superb SE spec was actually better than the Octavia SE-L spec in many respects and the Superb was cheaper.

Over the years we have applied a simple rule. If its a large hatch it will be big enough for our needs, the Bluebird, Mondeo and now the Superb prove this. With the folding passenger seat the Superb hatch will accommodate 3m lenths of timber (just) and 2.5m lengths of sheet material with no issue. If its a medium hatch we get the estate. The Golf hatch we had after the Bluebird was too small (but we just coped for 7 years). After that the Mondeo hatch was fine. that was replaced by a Focus Estate and that in turn by a Kia Ceed Estate both of which were great (especially the Ceed). Because of retirement we sold the Ceed and decided to manage with the Leon Hatch, after 2 holidays in Scotland we ordered the Superb. But that's just us. if you carry large square boxes the estate would be invaluable especially with the lower loading lip. There is no simple answer in truth.

In addition to the PHEV's we also had a couple of engineers in the company with Toyota Hybrids. Why did they have them, obviously the huge saving in company car tax compared to their previous diesels, think it was a Honda and a Golf. Did they like them, most certainly not. Both found them sluggish and incredibly noisy with the engine running at high revs. I went on one business trip with one of the chaps in his Auris Hybrid, it was dreadful. He was driving at 55 mph surrounded by HGV's on the motorway and I felt very unsafe, it was the only way to get decent mpg. My 1.4 TSi 140 PS Leon would beat the Auris if he drove normally and the Superb is actually better than the Leon, probably the ACT bit. All you get on the motorway is a normally aspirated 1800cc petrol CVT car. The VAG TSi's are far better in this circumstance. Used solely in town the Toyotas might win but on our twice a year 1000 mile round trip to Scotland its not an experience I would enjoy. Hybrids will never save the planrt, they are simply a con trick.

It would appear you edited your post whilst I was typing mine so we now appear to be on the same page legally. As you say in your subsequent post "if I turn the DRLs off & I'm in my garage doing work to the car which require the ignition then what I am doing is NOT illegal... If I forget to turn them back on & drive down the public road then that is illegal." Totally agree.