Alex-W

Dealers are expensive. They have larger overheads and will always charge more. That 'free' clean they do is not free, if it was they wouldn't do it, it's not how a business works.... If you want ease and to walk into a shiny showroom and have your car cleaned, go doa dealer. If you want to just have what needs to be done, done, go to a independent (be it a specialist or a general garage with a decent rep). I just had mine serviced with filters, spark plugs and inspection for under £200 from a well known specialist. I even got a report, with photos, as well as the skoda digital record updated. That wasn't including oil/filter as I changed that myself about 3k ago so the normal price is £275 I think. Still, way better value than a dealer.

It looks a bit hideous, however I can see the point for long trips. If you drive around town most of the time and you have pretty decent paintwork, it makes sense to stick something on for the annual 1000 mile round motorway trip and protect the paint. They're used all the time in the US as people cover so many miles and largely on freeways etc. Less so in the UK. I wouldn't have one on permanently, but don't see the harm in protecting the paint if you think you're likely to damage it. I mean, a rain mac is hideous, but I'd rather wear one and stay dry than think I look cooler without one and ultimately end up drenched and looking worse....

I'm kinda of wishing I'd gone this route when I had to change my clutch earlier in the year. A DMF is expensive and wears so much that you have to change it with the clutch. I've read it causes issues going to SMF, but as one guy (who runs a tuning place that mainly does jap stuff) - it didn't seem to be a problem before somebody invented a DMF! Back in the 90s or early 00s most stuff was SMF and there's plenty of reliable highly powered cars from that era, so I don't fully buy into the idea it's just going to kill gearboxes unless they now make them from chocolate.

In comparison, my mate got his 1.4 Octavia for £20k brand new, with 0% interest. On the new Octavia 4, the 1.0tsi list price is 21.1k for an SE technology. 1.5tsi is 22.6k. It's not a big difference at all. To me it would be a no brainer.

This is what I don't get. If budget is THAT much of an issue, don't buy a nearly new car and spend a fortune on depreciation and if it's on finance, interest. It makes no sense to me when people say 'I've got 65mpg compared to 50mpg from the bigger engine' yet they're spending far more than they're saving on other factors, it pretty much makes that saving insignificant. An average person doing 12k miles a year will save £25 a month by doing 65mpg compared to 50mpg. When a car is losing £100 a month just in depreciation, is this significant? As for insurance, as I said previously I doubt it makes much difference at all. I pay ~£190 a year for my vRS. I'm betting if I switched to a 1.0TSi of the same age and value it'd save me less than £30 over the year. My friend with a clean license and the 1,4 version actually pays around 50% more than I do. I probably just made more effort shopping around. They're pretty comparible. I'm not arguing that it's not cheaper. I'm just saying the savings are not significant in comparison to the other costs involved and I just can't see it being significant enough to justify being that annoying if you're planning on using the car loaded up with family and camping gear etc. 1.4Tsi all the way IMO.

In reality, something pretty low. For popping to the shops etc, it's not needed at all. The reality is It's used for comfortable overtaking when required (of which the frequency is low) and needless acceleration when I'm on my own, just to make me smile. I also have a young family (a 1 and a 3yr old) and drive like a grandad with them in the car. My point was not to buy a vRS, I know that's over and above what is needed. My point is that even running a vRS is not particularly expensive and therefore for those times when the power is needed I think the cost is well worthwhile for me. However for many people it's not. But I don't get the advantage of the 1.0 over 1.4 even for the majority. Purchase prices and running costs are very similar but the day to day difference will be night and day. I had a 1.0 TSI as a hire car a few years back and on a ~350 mile round trip I only got low 40s as I just had to push it so hard to keep up with the flow of traffic. It wasn't as terrible to drive as I thought it would be tbh but there wasn't any real advantage to the loss of power/annoyance it did have.

I genuinely don't get the point of the really small engines. You're sacrificing day to day usability for the hope of a few pennies in fuel savings. The 1.4/1,5TSI has a very good combination of power and economy. Hell, somebody posted on here recently about getting 80+ mpg from a 1.5. A friend has a 1.4 TSI and averages above 50mpg. Another friend has a 1.4 Leon with the same engine. Again, very economical and pretty nippy. No issues with day to day power. The savings you'll get in fuel from a smaller engine are negligable in real world money terms. The difference between 50mpg an 60mpg isn't huge, nowhere near as significant as 25mpg to 35mpg. I don't understand why people chase the high numbers as they're saving such little amounts of money quite often, it's just a psychological desire to get a higher number rather than an actual cost saving benefit. You're also more likely to stamp on the pedal more often and drive it harder, negating any benefit. The 1.4/1.5 is the sensible choice for a person who wants economy from a petrol octavia. TBH though, I wouldn't consider lower than the vRS myself and didn't when I was looking. Considering I manage over 30mpg including all my short journeys and can top 45-50mpg on a motorway at a steady speed it's still pretty economical. Insurance is dirt cheap, tax is cheap. Not saying it's the sensible choice and you don't NEED over 200bhp. But the 1.4/1.5 gives the economy benefits without the frustration of having to think about power. The biggest cost of having a reasonably new car is depreciation and that'll outweigh the savings in fuel by miles.

If you look at the spec of them, heres the description from one in halfords - GB40 1000A NOCO Jump Starter The GB40 1000A NOCO Jump Starter is a portable lithium-ion battery jump starter pack that delivers 1,000-amps (7,000 J3S) for jump starting a flat battery in seconds. It features a patented safety technology that provides spark-proof connections and reverse polarity protection making safe and easy for anyone to use. It's a powerful battery booster that doubles as a portable power source for recharging USB devices, such as a smartphone. Designed for a car, boat, RV, truck and more with gas engines up to 6 liters, and diesel engines up to 3 litres. Plus there's a photo of it connected directly to the terminals. https://www.halfords.com/motoring/battery-maintenance/jump-starters/gb40-1000a-noco-jump-starter-721898.html?cm_mmc=Google+PLA-_-Motoring>Battery+Maintenance>Jump+Starters-_-Motoring>Battery+Maintenance>Jump+Starters-_-721898&istCompanyId=b8708c57-7a02-4cf6-b2c0-dc36b54a327e&istFeedId=62b447cf-331e-4fec-a47a-9985ff72d404&istItemId=wrpxpiawq&istBid=t&_$ja=tsid:94971|cid:1034356518|agid:51236243736|tid:aud-297219198449:pla-329023466368|crid:244691896474|nw:g|rnd:10182886846755435601|dvc:c|adp:|mt:|loc:1006715&src=3bpdp&gclid=Cj0KCQjws536BRDTARIsANeUZ5_RD7e3MGo9KhCcN_nTof2ble9H8vaYFClaB5EgxSIv7a-7oUe-fl8aAmc9EALw_wcB I think you've got nothing to worry about tbh.

Honestly? I think you hit the sweet spot with the Autecs and those aren't as nice. The Autecs are lovely. One of the only wheels that I'd consider changing to tbh. Those and OZ ultraleggeras.

Just to pick up a minor point here - I have read they are lighter although I'm unsure if that was a comparison of like for like tyres. The difference was small I believe. However, weight is not everything. Distribution of mass is also significant when it comes to rotating mass. You could have something that's lighter but if the mass is towards the outside of the wheel it'll still require more energy to spin and have more angular momentum when spinning. Generally, lighter is better but when you're talking small differences it's hard to tell. A smaller wheel with a larger tyre will have more mass towards the centre of the wheel and arguably be better. I'm not which is best here, I'd just be wary of assuming one way or the other.

I've done that in my Honda, loaded up a USB stick. TBH it ends up out of date after a while and I've found streaming from my phone the best option. Esp as I use Amazon music unlimited , so Alexa works on it...

As far as I know the reason you connect to the bulkhead or other earth point is due to the potential to spark when you connect the lead and the discharge gasses that are given off from a battery risking an explosion. That said, most batteries now are sealed and usually you're doing it outside, with some airflow. I've certainly jumped cars off the battery when it's been the most convenient place. However, often batteries these days have a significant amount of stuff bolted onto them and makes it difficult to get leads onto them.

I assume that most cars come without this now tbh and it's not linked to spec. My other car and my wife's car have CD players and I honestly can't remember the last time I used them. I think my wife does to be fair but rarely. I generally just either listen to the radio or stream via bluetooth. Most laptops don't have CD slots these days, nobody buys DVDs/BluRays any more, ultimately it's a dying media type and I doubt that car manufacturers want to support something they know is on the way out.

When I test drove my car, it was on the stock 19s. The ride was fine from what I could tell, although the roads weren't rough. However, as the OP has seen, the 19s were kerbed and it seems they are just kerb magnets. Also, the style of the Xtremes is not to everyone's tastes, certainly not mine. A friend described them as some kind of weird geometric experiment, which I thought was apt, lol. I got the garage to swap with another car and got some Geminis put on. I much prefer the style. I have to admit that 19s look better on a lowered car though. I kinda felt like mine looked a bit on stilts on the 19s mind. I wouldn't mind multispoke wheels in 19" myself, just not the Xtremes. Although I wouldn't trust the wife to drive the car with them.....

I saw the original announcement of that and thought that looked good, but the price sounds like it's much higher. The issue with most hybrids or electric cars is they're so expensive to start with it's outweighs any beneifts. There's only a limited amount of miles you can do in an electric/hybrid car where it's beneficial. Too few and you'll never get your money back. Too many and it'll devalue hugely as the second hand price dives because nobody wants to buy something with well worn batteries and foot the bill for changing them. I like the idea but certainly when I was looking at options for my parents a little while ago (pre lockdown as that's now on pause as they do no miles now) then none of the electric options were worthwhile as far as I could tell.

Manual. I don't find the gearbox anywhere near as quick to change or the action as nice. I'd probably go dsg if I were to go again tbh, or rather I'd not favour manual above dsg. That said, I do forget the difference and enjoy the drive of the vRS, I think I just like the feel of 90s cars. The Octavia beats it day to day though. Uses less fuel, is way more practical, has Aircon, is quieter, has folding seats and I can actually get my kids car seats in. I used the Honda daily for 12 years but last year got the vRS as the practical kid wagon as no modern seats for under 4s can go safely into the Honda believe it or not.

Sorry, this is going OT... Different cars. The Accord is way more fun I'd say. It makes me grin more than the others, the lack of torque is ok as it's got pretty low ratio gears. It's also the most nimble and better handing. The Mazda is probably the best value and best at doing everything of the three. Economical, looks prettier than the Octavia, is just as big, was half the price and like the Honda, just works. Bit heavy though. The Octavia is the fastest in a straight line and is more enjoyable to drive than the Mazda. But it's still not got that feel that the Honda has. I get back in the Honda and grin every time and think 'yep, that's why I'm keeping this, the skoda just doesn't do this'. 37 with 15 years NCB and about 6k miles a year on each.

This is the first year I've had all my cars under £200, I think between £185 and £196 it ranged. Honda Accord type R (209bhp) Mazda 6 Sport (179bhp) Skoda Octavia vRS (227bhp) To be fair, the Honda has been under £200 for about 4 years or so I think, the other two weren't though! The Skoda was £215 I think, then I declared the wheels and they knocked about £25 off.

I had mine swapped from 19" that came on the pfl230 to 18". It was largely around the fact that all the 19s on the car had obviously been kerb magnets and I don't like the design of the 19", the ride and cheaper tyres were just a bonus. Turns out it makes my insurance cheaper too! Managed to get it under the £200 mark this year.

I had a new clutch in my VRS TSi Manual as it started slipping at standard power. It was apparent the previous owner hadn't bedded it in properly. I'm told the OE clutch should be ok for stage 1 remap. The oem clutch is ~£400. The issue is that the DM flywheel also generally needs replacing and that's another £600. Then there's the labour.... I asked about upgraded clutches but apparently the difference in traffic is significant. They are much more on/off than the OEM one and if you do a lot of driving in town at low speeds can make it less pleasant and practical for a road car. I think the clutch itself is about £800 in that case, so an extra £400. I chose to go OEM as I want my car to be drivable without that compromise. I know how annoying a harder clutch is in traffic and I know the result is we'll just use the car less for those journeys which defeats the point of me having a practical car, I may as well go and buy a sports car in that case. Whether the clutch really is ok for a remap though is debatable. I've heard people preach both yes and no, so who knows.

1. Bit more power. 300bhp is probably more than is needed, maybe 275 would make a nice road car that feels that little bit quicker. 2. Needs more 'feel'. It's quicker than my Accord, certainly in a straight line. Maybe has more grip even, but it just doesn't 'feel' as fun. 3. Quicker gearbox. I like a manual, but again, compared to my Accord it takes me 2x longer to change gear. 4. Less roll on the suspension. 5. Fixing points for roof racks on the hatch. It just needs the little hidden ones so you can bolt on a rack without it looking ugly with massive clamps. 6. Better speakers. The fact you have to upgrade a vRS to get anything but the basic radio is stupid. Our Mazda 6 Sport came with a far superior Bose system and the car was £10k less new.

tbh if it doesn't fit, it's not really a concern anyway. You'd likely not get a space saver over them anyway. I know I can't get my spare on the front on my Honda, it's quite normal. If you get a flat at the front, just pop the spare on the back and swap that wheel to the front. It's an extra 5 mins IF it happens.

Yeah, I think it must be disabled or just not working then. I tried setting individual to the same as sport yesterday just without the sound on. I switched between that and sport several times and booted it each time. I couldn't tell the difference. Oh well, sounds like I'm not missing anything good then!

I'm pretty sure the differential settings are ONLY on the vaq equipped models. The more I read about people getting annoyed with the sound generator the now I think mine doesn't actually work or is turned off. I can hardly notice any difference I sound whatever the setting.

Personally I would say that the main difference in the cars you're looking at is the presence/absence of a electronic differential. I've not driven a 245 but the difference in power isn't going to be earth shattering. I could feel no difference between a 220 and 230, we're talking marginal power differences. I wouldn't even consider the electric seats as a factor myself. As said above, manual ones are quicker and less likely to go wrong. Heated is good though. Personally I wanted the panoramic roof, but I also wanted meteor grey on a pfl 230. You can't have everything when you're buying second hand unfortunately. Unless you're very lucky.