dieselV6

I very vaguely remember my Mk1 Octavia timing belt change, ASV engine, also using VCDS, about 18 years ago. I also remember the graph not working for me, but that I could read injection timing in measuring blocks somewhere and set the value using the 3 bolts as per Skoda spec ( I think small amount ATDC), readout was changing when the gear was moved within the 3 bolt slots. Login 12233 might be needed. If after adjustment the timing is within spec and the engine still stutters / smokes etc, you're off by one tooth, loosen the belt and retime crankshaft, pump and camshaft again. HTH

The nice thing about using VCDS for this is that it often tells you likely login codes that usually work. Perhaps you could find someone with VCDS near you who could do the coding for you?

I did 5 to 6 speed gearbox swap for my 2002 Mk1 Octavia TDI after a couple years ownership from new. Aside from the gearbox including gear selector on top, reverse switch and speed sensor, you will need matching gearbox mount and its console, dogbone mount, driveshafts, flywheel and clutch including slave cylinder and related piping, and a whole lot of new bolts as a lot are stretch bolts. Ironically, the gear lever and linkage fitted both old 5-spd and new 6-spd, so I did not bother replacing the gearstick nor linkage and had a "secret" 6th gear for the life of the car, ie still 5 gears+ reverse printed on the gearstick yet the 6th could be selected. Aside from this, the airco piping is usually different between 5 and 6 speed gearboxes, but I was able to get round this by fabricating an additional mount (just a small piece of steel bar with a couple holes). Speed sensor needed adaptation somewhere using VCDS, but the difference was not massive. In summary, it was quite a bit of hassle getting all the parts and then a half day of work. For me, the reduced revs on motorway were worth it though, both for comfort and for fuel bill. At least at autobahn speeds of 100mph+ I estimated that the saved fuel has more than paid for the outlay on gearbox swap over the 80k or so autobahn miles. Note at UK motorway speeds the fuel saving would likely be minimal, and at current diesel prices at least it makes financial sense to go slow anyway. Also note that this was 22 years ago, and since then Adblue injection and engine cooling layout changes went in, so there may be other parts that interfere and may need replacement. HTH

Torque wrenches for undoing glow plugs (for example) are reversible and click both ways, respectable ones are also calibrated both ways. shear torque is under 35Nm, we're not talking subframe bolts here. There is nothing wrong with undoing glow plugs to a specified shear torque, which by the way is 2-3 times higher than the tightening torque but still relatively small, see earlier thread on this :https://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/511440-glow-plug-replacement/#findComment-5848987 For a low to medium torque such as glow plugs, it is perfectly possible to apply almost symmetric load by holding one hand on the handle of the wrench and the other hand on the top of the pivot. I agree than using just the handle of the wrench results in far more asymmetric load and may break the plug. The problem with T-bar is that although the load is symmetric, you may easily apply way more than is needed and shear the plug. It is far better to attempt using a reversible torque wrench set below shear torque and if the glow plug does not move, put some more penetrant oil around it and drive around a bit more. For a DIY mechanic, far better to wait a day or two than to snap the glow plug IMHO. Also, on a hot engine, you will find that the glow plug movement is far more gradual affair, most of the horror stories about glow plugs snapping during removal are from "mechanics" trying to undo them on a cold engine, without penetrant oil. Under these adverse conditions, even undoing a solid steel bolt that's been in place for many years is a hit and miss affair. In summary: warm up the engine, use penetrant oil and a double sided torque wrench set below max allowed torque and held with 2 hands, one on the axis of rotation. This is all that is needed to avoid your own snapped glow plug horror story. HTH.

For standard cruise control, you only need to replace left stalk with one with buttons and enable/code the functionality in VCDS. both can be done as a DIY job, I have done one on MK1 Octavia, since then only buttons have changed somewhat, job is very similar. The videos above are for adaptive cruise control which would be far more involved.

While I have no issue with your statement, you may find that a lot of cars show "accumulated ash" value at or near the limit coded in the ECU far earlier, around 100000mile mark, which again points to ECU signalling an imaginary problem using an imaginary ash value in order to either trade in the car or pay for a new DPF halfway through its life... just my opinion.

I do not know, in fact logic suggests opposite, i.e. higher tolerance to DPF pressure loss at end of regen when ash value is high as the base pressure loss due to ash would be higher. All I know is that the ash value has very little to do with actual pressure loss across the DPF / level of clogging. Perhaps, and I am only speculating, ECU could allow higher values of DPF pressure loss at end of regen when the ash value is high, as partly clogged DPF would have higher pressure loss than an empty one. Way to confirm this would be to take a car with low ash value that has trouble finishing regens, set its ash value to close to the limit and see if the regens improve. Never tried that. But most likely nothing / not much would happen until the DPF was actually clogged. A more sinister (but sadly likely) interpretation would be that the accumulated ash value counter as it is implemented was mainly put there into ECU to ensure profits of DPF manufacturers and exhaust workshops from replacement DPFs... who knows. In any case, if the ash value is over the limit yet your DPF is still fine, ash value can be adjusted down.

For best fit rather than rock bottom price, it's easy, I have been using skoda-parts.com for many years, parts by Skoda/VW number, checked against your car's VIN, either original part or a decent quality alternative (often a choice of both), and you can still ask them further by sending a message if you are not sure. Some things are worth getting from Autodoc though, as they can be a lot less expensive for premium quality, for example zinc coated brake discs. But you really have to triple check part numbers with Autodoc, both Skoda and specific part manufacturer's, and make sure you get sent what you ordered and not a cheap alternative. It can be a fuss with Autodoc, but can be worth £100+ on a brake disc order alone when compared to say ECP. As for UK suppliers, I occasionally use GSF or ECP as they are both local to me, but for any larger order than £50, like e.g. 2 quality rear suspension springs, I find GSF and ECP are often double the price of skoda-parts. I do not order many used parts, but I have used ebay on odd occassion for these. HTH

Yes, but you can adapt the value to a smaller number. I had to in the Roomster (CAYC engine), as it came from factory with regen causing issues (and fuel in oil) that were only fixed after quite a few regens over a period of a year or so, and resulted in 15g "accumulated ash" that simply wasn't there. It is just a number that can be edited.

This is exactly what I am trying to say, the "accumulated ash mass" is just VW's / ECU's theory. In practice, actual DPF condition is OK until clogged enough to cause backpressure and related loss of performance and problems with completing regen or frequent regens. Can be well before 80g, can also be way after 80g. I stress that this is certainly the case for EU5 engines, perhaps EU6 ones have better pressure monitoring, but I doubt it. The only way to be sure would be to swap the DPF without resetting ECU, drive for a while and look at the accumulated ash mass reading sometime afterwards. On EU5 TDI, for sure the ECU would not notice new DPF and just keep increasing accumulated ash value in line with mileage / number of regens. I suspect it is the same for EU6 TDIs, but not 100% sure.

Again, you might be chasing ghosts, at least on CAYC one will for sure end up with ash mass measurement exceeding limit after enough mileage and regens even if the DPF is empty of ash altogether, it is just a calculation in the ECU that does not take into account DPF pressure measurements at all. Or in other words, if you make a 300 regens and drive 100k km, the calc could be e.g. num regens x 0.1g + num kkm * 0.3g (I pulled numbers out of thin air, just like the calc in your car's ECU) resulting in 60g ash mass "measurement" even if in reality there would be only 15g-20g ash in the DPF at that point. Conversely, if you use poor quality, ash generating oil or if the engine burns a lot of oil, you may find clogged DPF while the ECU's "ash mass measurement" shows 20g or less, as in fact quite a few people have experienced. May I ask why you are chasing after this number? Are there any other issues with the engine to even be looking at ash mass?

Not sure what the exact calc for ash loading is, but it involves both number of regens and mileage. What's the mileage on each car/engine? In any case, if there are no signs of restriction in the exhaust (power loss, increased fuel consumption, regen completion issues etc.), the large amount of "accumulated ash mass" is just imaginary, there is far less ash in the DPF in reality. It is just a number / counter in the ECU which by the way can be adapted to a smaller value with VCDS, at least on earlier engines like CAYC. I honestly think that ash number was just put there to cover backside in case of clogged DPFs over the car's life, and also to force replacing DPFs latest at a certain mileage / after certain number of regens or both. The correct way to evaluate amount of ash would be to measure and average pressure loss after completion of each regen and indicate that DPF pressure loss post regen is getting on the high side, but my guess is that given varying temperatures and gas flow, the exhaust sensors used for it are either not accurate or not reliable enough, especially after many years of use / high mileage.

DPF ash load primarily depends on mileage and the number of regens. While it is possible that on EU6 engines it is measured / derived from DPF pressure loss after regen (doubt it), at least on our 2012 Roomster's EU5 1.6TDI CAYC 105bhp engine the ash load is simply calculated and increased based on mileage and number of regens, no measurements involved. If you experience frequent regens, you will find ash load going up quickly even though there is no change in pressure readings around DPF, i.e. no actual ash.

As long as the engine / mechanicals last or are replaceable / repairable, hard to predict, so I would just protect against corrosion, do all services and replace all fluids including PS, brake and gearbox oil change (plus Haldex oil on 4WD) and afterwards enjoy driving the car, replacing worn out parts on occasion. Once corrossion is taken care of / prevented, there's still mechanical wear and tear including interior, but you can replace worn bushes, fans etc. Bear in mind your satnav will run out of updates at some point, if it has not already. My Mk1 Superb has had a visible drop in parts availability about 10 years from end of manufacturing, but I guess Octavia was made in so high numbers that there will be spare parts made for a long time. Mk1 and Mk2 Skodas in general were of better quality than later ones, including better noise reduction and better interior durability. I can certainly see it comparing the wear of our 14 year old "cheap car" Roomster to a 10 year old "family car" Mk3 Octavia vRS. In a way, it is also a curse, as due to crazy Skoda model line-up policies (no manual diesels except in basic Octavia, no varioflex seats anymore in Karoq) now would be a time to replace the Roomster or even both cars with a 3-5 year old Karoq, but I just cannot bring myself to replace a car with superior quality interior, versatility, space and range with something that admittedly looks marginally better on the outside and is a little bit faster on autobahn, but otherwise nowhere near as good value for money nor as reliable / durable / maintainable. Not to mention Mk1/Mk2 headlamps, at least projector ones, being vastly better for travel abroad at night (true flat beam, not dipped z-beam).

Zinc primer is of dark grey colour (at least high purity zinc one), zinc-aluminium primer is light grey to silver. So choice of colours is rather limited unles you coat the zinc layer with paint. Personally, I'm happy with the underside of the car being 50 shades of grey ;)