JayLibove

****. I'm driving my early 2020 Octavia (mkIII) Scout (2.0L diesel DSG-7) through France, and only after I filled up (31L of the 55L tank) from the "diesel" pump I noticed the marking "B10" which apparently really exists about only in France, I'd never heard of nor seen before, and is officially (per Skoda) not compatible with this engine. I don't find "B10" mentioned at all in the forums, and I find only few, vague mentions online in general about how B10 diesel (90% mineral diesel +10% bio diesel) can gum up diesel filters, degrade some engine parts, etc. Anyone have experience with whether just (slightly less than) one single tank of B10 would be so noxious that I Shouldn't Drive It At All until I can get service to pump out the bad tank of fuel, or whether it'll be okay? thank you, Jay

Yeah, there is the possibility that higher-end variants of the same manufacturer group provide also-poor customer service, but in general a key difference between made-on-(almost-)the-same-assembly line, but badged higher-or-lower is the service quality. Whenever I eventually go to buy my next vehicle, I will check to see who offers what. When I bought my current vehicle (an April 2020 Octavia combi Scout), it was a fairly unique offer (as, sadly, demonstrated by the fact that, as I understand it, Skoda have abandoned the Scout variant entirely :-( ). It's a supremely practical vehicle, a bit higher off the road, with more cargo space that much larger, more expensive vehicles; the all-wheel drive, a bit of armoring against bottoming out on not-too-rough but definitely-unpaved roads, the 2.0L diesel, etc. I didn't find anything else (except the VW Passat Alltrack and the Audi A6 Allroad, both of which are much more expensive) from any brand that was really a comparable vehicle. And the Scout is perfect for the way I use the car.

So, Skoda Spain called me back, and confirmed that my car has no recalls. They also said that the Skoda brand websites are not only not under their control, they don't even have a way to talk to that part of Skoda to provide feedback about the websites. I sent email to the contact address on the malfunctioning webpages, and got an initial non-answer which just also told me to call a Skoda service partner. Pushing back on them about the websites, they replied that the sites cannot be relied on! I sent back to them "Then take down the worse-than-useless sites".... And I commented that, although Skoda makes some good cars, my customer service journey with the brand, from the very beginning, has been disappointing. sigh I hope when it's time to replace my Scout in a bunch more years, I can afford an Audi or at least a VW...

Thanks @Evolution13 . I tried the UK gov't's site, but it doesn't like my Spanish VIN (which is 17 characters long).

I had sent a question about both my own car's VIN and about the two failing web portals, to Skoda Spain. I got a phone call the same day, confirming that there are no recalls that affect my car, and agreeing to forward the comments about the two web portals to the "digital" department. No idea how fiable (Spanish: reliable) either of the claims are.........

Skoda's website has a general recalls campaigns page (https://www.skoda-auto.com/services/recall-campaigns), a specific page to the Takata airbags fiascos, a specific page about diesel engines, and then a page for (apparently) any other type of recall campaign (https://recall.skoda-auto.com/004/en-com, or, seemingly specific to the Spanish market where I live, https://recall.skoda-auto.com/572/es-es). Entering my Spanish market vehicle's ID, the 004/en page says "Sorry, this service is temporarily unavailable. Please try again later." (this has been consistent for days), the the Spanish page (which I only found just now) says "Please contact your authorized service partner." So, what's the point of having these pages? Is there another recalls campaigns search page that actually does something? Or, as the Spanish page suggests (and I have not found super helpful here in Spain), I have to try to get a Skoda dealership to actually care about a car sold five years ago and really do a lookup? (My experience with Skoda workshops has been .. not great). thanks,

Thanks everyone. No, I don't have any light measuring equipment, and I don't want to ignorantly set my headlights to "cause a problem for others". (I still haven't reached that point in my life where others' constantly doing things that cause a problem for us has pushed me into "don't give a ****, start causing problems for them, too" mode. Yet). I'll raise the issue - pun intended - at my next scheduled service interval.

Thanks Cairus, so, I'm guessing that an OBD Eleven (the only diagnostic tool that I own) doesn't have the features I'd need, which leads me to "take it to a shop"? -Jay

Per my early 2020 Octavia (III facelift) wagon "Scout" (4x4, DSG-7, full-LED lights package) manual, the LED headlights version does not have any height/range adjustment for the low-beam headlights - it's automatic based on (I guess) some kind of weight sensors that detect front-heavy/ rear-heavy loading. However, I find that my low-beam headlights routinely don't illuminate quite as much of the road ahead of me as 1. I think they should, and 2. I think they used to. I don't see a reduction in brightness, and the high-beam lights are still miracles of me-seeing/you-blind ... Do I have an option for adjusting the low-beam headlights distance other than taking the car to a shop? thanks, -Jay

Ouch! I hope that the strength and flexibility of the glass is stronger than the amount of force that the closing motors will put on the glass trying to close onto a most inopportunely positioned obstruction before the force/current-overload sensors on the motors detect the obstruction!! Was it a slow-motion oooohhhh-**** moment, or a sudden surprise?

Thanks, everyone!

My early 2020 (last of the Octavia III) Scout's headlights switch, in addition to the two pull-out settings (front fog lamps, front and rear fog lamps), and the neutral/fog-lamps-off position, seems to have a sprung push-in position. That is, from fog-lamps-off it is possible to push the switch farther in, against spring tension that returns it to the fog-lamps-off position. Does this actually do anything? I don't find it in the manual nor searching here nor generally searching on the Internet. thanks,

There are plenty of threads in the forums about electronic liftgate problems (and one fascinating story about an electronic liftgate, a wild animal park, and a family with small animals - er, kids - loose inside the car, and an unexpected "Beep! Beep! Beep!" in the midst of the savannah... 😅) .. but what I'm curious about, as I failed to find it here in the forums or in a more general search online, is: Which, of electronic or manual liftgates, tends to be the more reliable over time? Every "we sell liftgate components" webpage, and every "review" page, that I found, had the same generic comments about electronic liftgates being more complex, and having more expensive-to-repair components. Sure, that's clear. But. Anything manual has to deal with the irregularity of humans, inconsistent force, etc. Whereas the electronic liftgates (assuming proper maintenance and nobody ever trying to use it while anything would be blocking it) should not suffer the same irregular stresses that a manual liftgate will experience every. single. time it is used by one of us mere, imperfect, irregular humans. So. Over a long period of time, which type of liftgate - mechanical, or electronic - tends to be more reliable, all other things about (good) use being equal? Thanks for your thoughts. (Love the electronic liftgift on my last-of-the-2019s/ mfr in April 2020 Octavia III facelift Scout! And the button on the console, and on the Kessy remote...)

The Autopista.es article pointed out that, while it will be up to the ministry to clarify whether 2G-being-dead-causing-failure-of-the-eCall-system should matter, it is presently a commonly checked thing in ITV inspections in Spain, and that until clarification is issued, someone somewhere will almost surely be told that they'd "failed". (This is Spain, after all. "The computer told me so"...). The article quoted a German car industry source as having specifically applied to the regulator to ensure that this won't cause a problem for these cars' TÜV tests. [ I repeat my own assertion/ assumption that, of course it won't, because that would just be stupid. But, of course, no government anywhere has tried to push back on Microsoft telling owners to junk approximately 250 million computers, also a type of general crime against the consumer, but cars seem to have a bigger owner lobby than computers 😅 - see https://therestartproject.org/right-to-repair/lets-stop-microsoft-creating-millions-of-tonnes-of-e-waste-this-october/ and yes I'll get off my soapbox now ] Back to the other question, was I correct in my understanding that "manufactured in 2020" was not the key to whether eCall was supposed to have been standardized into the car, but rather "homologated prior to entry to the market in 2017" (and eCall became required for cars homologated from 2018) ?

The Spanish automotive press "Autopista.es" (which has a bad habit of using lots of empty words and maybe/couldbe scare tactics to get people to read articles that in the end don't matter) posted this article warning that, depending on how national car safety equipment compliance regulations are interpreted, "millions of cars" may no longer be able to pass annual(-ish) technical inspections (e.g. "ITV" in Spain, "TÜV" in Germany) once the mobile carriers put the final nails in the coffin of 2G signals, because "Cars homologated from 2018" were required to include "eCall", and many cars' eCall function has 2G-only hardware: AutopistaMillones de coches pueden suspender pronto la ITV por un...El apagón y la interrupción de las redes 2G va a paralizar el sistema eCall de muchos vehículos, y recordamos que es obligatorio ya en coches nuevos por norm...My April 2020-manufactured last-of-the-2019 Octavia III facelift Scout does not have eCall. But, I suppose this car was "homologated" prior to its 2017 year introduction, so the eCall requirement never applied to Octavia III facelift vehicles? I consider it quite unlikely that any national car safety authority would make millions of vehicles unable to comply because this technology became obsolete. That would be like refusing to issue new road permits for cars older than three-point seatbelts or airbags, which as far as I know no country ever did. saludos desde España, -Jay

I thought about that, although I think I should be about as equally likely to notice the missing bicycle rack/ towbar/ etc as I would the flashing lights? (Well, if it's just a towbar, with nothing attached, I guess its lack could go unnoticed).

Well, that's a new one on me (and I had read the owner's guide and maintenance manuals cover to cover, though of course I may have forgotten)... I just unplugged the trailer wiring harness while my early-2020 (last of the Octavia MkIII facelift) Scout was turned off and locked. The emergency flashers (all four turn signal lights) started blinking, and continued blinking for several minutes until I hit the unlock button on the key fob. Any explanation as to why this feature exists?

Thank you @Aldfort , that's very practical information. So, for VAG cars at least, the attack surface is very limited (must be in pairing mode, requires interaction by the authorized user of the car to approve the new pairing request).

Be that as it may, as this did affect at least a Superb III, our not-entirely-so-modern vehicles may be vulnerable, and my original question stands, about whether anyone has/can get their Skoda/VW dealer to admit that an update is available and to offer to apply it. For example, as this is a security vulnerability, I would expect it to be offered without cost regardless of warranty status. (I've just called a Skoda workshop to ask; I'll report back here when I hear from them).

I explicitly stated that these things usually are not much real-world risk. But yes you are missing something - since this allows a complete takeover of the car computer systems, it's possible that it could be used for theft, and it's almost certain to be used for mischief. (People suck, basically). So since this is a "set up a device to carry out the attack, walk through a parking garage seeing how many cars I can muck up" vulnerability, yes, it would be better to get it patched the next time each of us happen to be taking our cars to a dealer/service shop.

BleepingComputerPerfektBlue Bluetooth flaws impact Mercedes, Volkswagen,...Four vulnerabilities dubbed PerfektBlue and affecting the BlueSDK Bluetooth stack from OpenSynergy can be exploited to achieve remote code execution and potentially allow access to critical element...Has anyone gotten (as this is recent, can anyone find/get) updates from VW/Skoda to patch this vulnerability? In short: "Four vulnerabilities dubbed PerfektBlue and affecting the BlueSDK Bluetooth stack from OpenSynergy can be exploited to achieve remote code execution and potentially allow access to critical elements in vehicles from multiple vendors, including Mercedes-Benz AG, Volkswagen, and Skoda." The vulnerability was found in late 2024 and then reported to VW Group and other carmakers which use the vulnerable software; public disclosure was only made recently as it took too f*cking long for manufacturers to bubble this up (down?) through their supply chains. It is unclear to me exactly which cars are affected, but at a minimum a Superb with a MIB3 head unit was included in the demonstration - a remote, unauthenticated attacker was able to get full administrative control of the car's computers. Physical proximity (say, within less than 10m) is required; human interaction is NOT required for some of the attacks; and sometimes the car doesn't even have to be on for the attack to be able to be carried out. Vulnerabilities like this are usually more proof-of-concept than real-world risk for typical drivers, but this is one (as a lifetime infosec person) that I'd prefer to patch...

Old topic, but, old problem. This has happened to me (early 2020-manufactured last-of-the-MkIII's Octavia wagon "Scout" model) three or four times over the years, always when the car has sat out in the sun for some hours and the car has gotten quite hot. (Which is problematic because here in southern Europe such hot days quite often end with rainy afternoons...) Sometimes the reset procedure worked right away, sometimes it took a couple of tries, sometimes it took letting the car cool down. I did take the car to a Skoda shop once and of course since they couldn't reproduce the problem they brushed me off. Anyone know whether this has ever been challenged to VW Group as a design defect requiring a recall to replace (I don't know what part) with an improved design? How would owners' forums even try to force a recall for such a thing? regards,

Oh, there's no question that I have the Scout - it's specifically what I bought new: higher suspension, less aggressive styling. The thing that I'm trying to figure out is exactly "as what" to insure the car, on my (please tell me if I'm wrong) assumption that an RS (especially if "RS" means "more powerful engine", which from your post above, maybe it doesn't [always] mean that?) should cost notably more to insure than a non-RS ? It's driving me a bit crazy that the Spanish insurance companies ask me for the model (and then DON'T come up wiht a Scout, but rather an Octavia wagon "RS") rather than getting the precise, correct model-to-insure from manufacturers' databases based on the Vehicle ID number...

I found an old discussion which described "CR" as "common rail", but I'm not sure whether that's 'the' "CR" I'm looking for ... I live in Spain and am switching car insurance companies, and I notice the same thing now that I did four years ago when I first bought my Octavia "Scout" (2.0TDI DSG-7, 184cv, manufactured April 2020, one of the last of the 2017-2020 MkIII) -- ALL of the insurance companies label ALL of the 2.0TDI Octavias a "RS" ... but I was pretty sure that "RS" meant the 245cv model (which I assume should be more expensive to insure). I dug around in an insurance company policy confiurator and I found one alternative - a 2.0TDI Scout "CR". So, for insurance purposes, am I right that it should be possible to insure my (NOT an RS!) Scout (possibly as a "CR") for less money than I've been quoted for things that the insurers call "RS"? (I live in Spain, for whatever that's worth relating to this question). How do your insurance companies classify your 2.0TDI 184cv Octavias -- "CR"? "RS"? something else? thanks,

That theory makes sense. I think I did try lowering the temperature by one degree and the system began to cool again. I was in traffic and couldn't focus on the experiment at the time. I'm away in (mostly!) cooler climes until October, but when I'm back I'll see if I can test it again on a nice sunny Mediterranean day!