EnterName

I would advise you to bide your time and look around. Drive a couple of Superbs to get a feel for them. The one you're looking at seems to be a decent enough car, but it's no crazy "can't afford to miss!" bargain. unless you're desperate, don't rush.

Is it a Skoda dealer you're buying from? If so, that's some peace of mind. First thing I'd do is do a vehicle check, you can use something like "Car Vertical" which will check loads of stuff. You've done the MOT check which is great. For a 5-6 year old car, it should be sailing through MOTs without so much as an advisory, IMO. Before you travel, have you had a car video of the vehicle? I mean has the salesman taken a video of them going round the vehicle, drawing attention to any issues that might prevent a sale. (I think the videos are useful at winkling out any issues the salesman wouldn't point out if you were looking at the car in the flesh, as if you can say "I want money off for this problem!", they can say "Well it was in the video!". Have you driven any very similar cars? Do you know what a "normal" 2017 Skoda Superb sounds and drives like? If in doubt, fork out the cash for a full online vehicle check. It's a good investment and can pay for itself many times over. (I once bought a car from a colleague at work which later turned out to be a rebuilt write-off. I wish I'd done a car check first. That said, it was a car for the Mrs, it was a punishment car after she'd just written off her car, then my car, and frankly I wasn't in a particularly "I must make sure I get her the best possible car I can." frame of mind at the time. ) Also, if it has a cambelt, that should have been changed at 50K miles.

Yeah, maybe. I guess a lot of the Big Brother content filters may have put a stop to it too. I still think it's a good word and I'm glad to hear it's still in use. 👍

I haven't heard this word used for quite a while and I don't think I've ever seen it written down before. It's a good word, I'm not sure why it stopped being used.

There was an event just the other weekend too. Events happen, but if the sort of event you want isn't happening, then it's up to you to make it happen.

Hello Richard! I can't say I have reliable advice, but I have opinions that I invite you to hear and discard or take acount of as you see fit. Firstly, it seems that the notably high MPG of the Greenline cars can't be relied upon in day to day driving, though it is a bit better than the standard 1.6TDI. You also get stability control as standard, which might be a very appealing thing, as it wasn't common on this generation of Octavia's, AFAIK. https://www.honestjohn.co.uk/realmpg/skoda/octavia-2004 Secondly, the tax is £0 right now, but that may change. It's pointless trying to second-guess what the government is going to do, but I don't think it's reasonable to assume they will increase tax on all ICE vehicles, one way or another, and I think it prudent not to place too much reliance on an annual £0 VED on a diesel car. That said, take a look at this vehicle, just within your budget. https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202305317967852?sort=relevance&advertising-location=at_cars&aggregatedTrim=&body-type=&colour=&fuel-type=&include-delivery-option=on&keywords=Greenline&make=SKODA&maximum-badge-engine-size=1.6&minimum-badge-engine-size=1.6&model=Octavia&postcode=b911ug&transmission=&year-to=2023&fromsra

I don't think we are in disagreement. But I think I already highlighted the key problem.

Hello and welcome!

I saw one of these on the road the other day, and I have to say it looked great. Wasn't in orange, mind.

That's good to hear. I've done my time in a council flat, and while I am happy to be out of it, I do remember there are people who still live in the area. Before that, I lived near Stockland Green, which at the time wasn't a particularly bad area. Now, it's not so nice.

Take a virtual stroll around this area. Perhaps some of the wealthy people on Brisky haven't got the life experience that has exposed them to people who live in areas like this, but they do exist and they are not a tiny minority. https://www.google.com/maps/@53.0810697,-0.8041879,3a,75y,359.21h,81.48t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s773_1R8-kpyg65RyzehbMw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

Well I'd love to, but firstly, this is not a thread on climate change, it's a thread on a tipping point for EVs. I don't think we've reached it. I broached climate change as not everyone regards climate change as a driver for EV adoption, whereas others see it as a strong driver of EV adoption. Secondly, while I'm willing to discuss climate change with you, I'm also very conscious that there is a very narrow Overton window of discussion on Briskoda, and I do not wish to be accused of being "conspiracy theorist", especially as I have four permanent warning points applied to my account because I ventured outside of the Briskoda Overton window. That would be a discussion for another platform, and certainly not for this thread.

I think you raise some very good points here @SteveTheElder. One thing I haven't seen mentioned in this thread is that the UK population is growing rapidly. In 2022, we had a net increase of about 600,000 people into the UK. Most of these were adults, many of whom will want personal transport. That's over half a million additional people in one year, a new high but it's been increasing in the 100,000s per year for some years now. With increased population density, the need for providing infrastructure for personal transport increases, and with multiple occupancy in houses becoming the norm, it will be difficult to meet the need for EV charging. I've seen the idea of "15 minute cities" being proposed, presumably as a way of reducing personal transport used. LTNs (low traffic neighbourhoods) have been trialled in the UK, and while there are some supporters, there are also people who object to them, sometimes violently. It's not just about logistics. Already there are reports of arguments over charge points. At the moment, EV ownership is largely comprised of middle-class early adopters. When EV ownership filters down to other demographics, I suspect we will see less genteel resolutions to who gets to charge their car first. I also suspect we will get charging ghettos, where leaving an EV to charge will be a risk akin to leaving a Golf R in an unlit road on a council estate in Birmingham. I also suspect we will encounter a lot more EV-related crime, of one sort or another. It's all well and good for affluent middle-class people in nice areas with off-road parking and charging, to have lofty ideas about how things would work if we simply had enough money and the will to make them work, but they seem to always forget the human factor. That, despite their belief that doing things their way would be "progress", some people don't like being told what to do by the great and the good, however well-intentioned.

I'll assume you're operating in good faith, but my gut reaction is "Are you kidding me!?" To fully answer your question will take this thread way off topic. But to address "Problems arise when data is distorted or withheld" I'll simply point you to the claims for vaccine efficacy, and happily that same issue covers the second point "a policed consensus, from which deviation is not permitted", to which I'll refer you to the screenshot I DM'd you some time ago.

Yes and no. When there are blanket bans on discussing particular topics, then we're not dealing with just individuals, but a policy intended to silence any dissent. Scientists are driven by data. They come up with a theory that fits the available data. Problems arise when data is distorted or withheld to support an politically motivated narrative. There are few absolutes in science, because when new information emerges, scientists have to be comfortable ditching a former theory that is now revealed to be incorrect because of the new data. So the fact that most scientists agree X at time Y is indeed a scientific consensus, but that don't make it so, especially when it is a policed consensus, from which deviation is not permitted. Example: The "scientific consensus" was that transgenderism was a mental illness until very recently. Now the "scientific consensus" says otherwise, and you won't find a scientist who would dare say something like that. Prof. Richard Dawkins, a well-known and well respected scientist got his backside roundly tanned by the "trans community" for daring to say "sex is pretty damn binary”, and humbly back-pedalled his statement. Human reproductive biology hasn't changed, but the approved narrative surrounding what defines men and women has changed beyond recognition, and almost all the "scientists" have meekly fallen in line with the new narrative, whatever their genuine opinion on the subject. In before "Oh that's COMPLETELY different!". Is it really? The sad fact is that some people lie about important stuff. Sometimes they lie because they are afraid of the consequences if they tell the truth, or lying gives them social credit amongst their peers. Sometimes they lie because they're onto a nice little earner, as Lee's post shows. Sometimes they lie because they have been lying for so long they can't escape the lies they've tied themselves up with. Scepticism is not evil. It's healthy. A blind refusal to accept the bleeding obvious because it conflicts with your view of how the world is or should be, is not scepticism, it's zealotry. The opinion of a sceptic can be changed, by convincing them with clear information they can understand. A reasonable sceptic will thank you for putting them right. The opinion of a zealot cannot be changed, and any attempt to change their mind will be treated as an attack. Sceptics listen to contrary opinions and challenge them. Zealots seek to silence contrary opinions. To win over EV sceptics, I think the case must be made for EVs. Climate change isn't gonna do it. Making it too expensive to run an ICE car isn't going to do it. Outlawing ICE cars isn't going to do it. You can impose your will upon people and force them to do what you want if you have enough power to do so, but you should never forget that what you gained by force, may in turn be taken from you by force. (The force here is political decision back by legal enforcement.) It might be we end up being forced to adopt EVs through an artificial tipping point, created by politically driven legal mandate. But then that's not really a tipping point, is it?

It's an old thread, but it seems like a good place to post this link. https://procarmanuals.com/self-study-program-558-close-coupled-petrol-particulate-filter/ Hope this helps someone!

Yes there is a correlation, and yes scientific consensus says one caused the other. I'd be more convinced by data showing one caused the other rather than consensus, especially when the "consensus" is policed through censorship of dissent. That pesky "consensus" without hard data, again. The onus isn't on you to prove or disprove anything, I'm just explaining why I'm sceptical about the push for net zero. I'm suspicious of "experts" telling me something that is obviously not true, and relying on their status as an "expert" to give their consensus weight. (This applies to a lot of issues.) I can't see the link between a reduction of X amount of CO2 preventing Y "damage to out currently habitable ecosystem", and therein lies my objection to the push for net zero. My suspicion is that CO2 DOES have an impact on climate change, but that there are other far more significant drivers of climate change that make any tweaking with CO2 futile. I'm sure it's a complex issue, it just seems to me focussing on CO2 seems to me to be a bit of a red herring, and EVs are an insignificant contribution to a relatively minor factor in controlling climate change. Which is why I don't think we're anywhere near a "tipping point" for people all rushing out to buy them. As I indicated earlier, I'm also incredibly suspicious of any issue that which has advocates who demonise dissenters from the agreed narrative.

I'll have to have a look at that later Dave, I struggle to get my head around the PPM data, as I can't convert that into impact on the climate, and that is the stated driver for the push to net zero.

Ah! Fair enough. Of course the big question is how will reducing man-made CO2 globally from 0.04% to what was it, 0.0396%, effect climate change? And if we don't know the answer to that, what's the rush, given the costs.

What percentage of the air do you think is CO2, @lol-lol?

What are the correct figures, if I am in error?

The movement of freight is going to be an EV challenge for a while. I think the cracks in the campaign to get us to "net zero" CO2 are starting to show. Awkward questions are being asked. For example: Q: How much of our air is CO2? A: 0.04%, I.E. 99.96% of out atmosphere is not CO2. (Multiple sources, here's one https://netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/faqs/carbon-dioxide-101) Q: What proportion of that CO2 is man-made? A: Under 4% of that 0.04%. I.E. 0.0016% of the air is man-made CO2. (Multiple sources available, but here's one https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-12/documents/02es.pdf) Q: How much will it cost to get the UK to "net zero"? A: Awkward shuffling and some mumbling about sustainable energy sources. (Unless anyone can source a cost?) Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what impact will that have on global CO2 levels? A: ̶I̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶U̶K̶ ̶g̶e̶t̶s̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶"̶N̶e̶t̶ ̶Z̶e̶r̶o̶"̶,̶ ̶w̶e̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶g̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶1̶%̶.̶ ̶i̶.̶e̶.̶ ̶G̶l̶o̶b̶a̶l̶ ̶C̶O̶2̶ ̶w̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶r̶e̶d̶u̶c̶e̶ ̶f̶r̶o̶m̶ ̶r̶o̶u̶g̶h̶l̶y̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶4̶%̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶a̶i̶r̶,̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶0̶.̶0̶3̶9̶6̶%̶.̶ EDIT: Woah there! My maths are way out here. If we get to "net zero" in the UK, we will reduce man-made CO2 by about 1%. So that's not a reduction in global CO2 of 0.0004%, that's a reduction in MAN-MADE global CO2. So that's 1% of 0.0016% percent., or a 0.000016% reduction in global CO2 from 0.04% to 0.039984% Sorry about that. (Source https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/uk-and-global-emissions-and-temperature-trends/) There's some dispute about the UK's contribution, with my source stating 1.1%. I used 1% to keep things easy to calculate, but then I also upped the global CO2 figure from 3.xxx% to 4%, so I'm not trying to rig the numbers. If anyone has any definitive numbers, by all means provide them and show the correct calculations and percentages. 👍 Q: If we get to "net zero" in the UK, what effect will that have on climate change? A: More awkward shuffling with mumbling. (I would welcome a more accurate answer to this question.) My point is, nobody is willing to state how much climate change will be reduced if we get to "net zero" in the UK and so managing to reduce the global CO2 levels by a heady 0.000016%, and the trade-off in terms of cost (not to mention the other issues that will undoubtably arise) are unpalatable to a lot of people given the uncertain benefits. As I said before, coming to an unstable balance-point is more likely than a approaching a tipping-point towards EVs, IMO.

Oh I agree, there's never been a better time to try and buy an EV.

I don't think we're nearing a "tipping point". Maybe a "balance-point", and by that I mean that "tipping-point" implies an acceleration towards the inevitable dominance of the electric vehicle, whereas "balance point implies the change in direction could accelerate in a different direction. It might be that the EV ends up becoming dominant, but I suspect that will have more to do with political intervention than market choice. Good luck if your vision of the future relies on political intervention, because that's a house built on sand. Talking of battery technology, did you know that a lot of EVs are run on 18650 batteries? I honestly did not know this until this week. https://electricvehiclesfaqs.com/how-many-18650-batteries-are-there-in-a-tesla-electric-vehicle/ Long live the vape-mobile!

I think this is the issue of direct injection EA888 engines getting carbon build-up on inlet valves, @toot. I think some of the Superbs have both direct and indirect fuel injection. If @Choripis really concerned, he could choose one with both injection types, but I dare say there's a trade-off to be had in that regard. There's a thread about it here.