Agerbundsen

Yer fergot the C-word, Tim. Was that not why you picked the 205'S? Come on now, fess up

Yetiman, it was my first reaction too when I moved from the Octy, but....... There is no visible line on the mirror, separation the the two zones, like you often see. I do believe that the outer area of the mirrors are more convecs - and give a wider view than the inner part. I have adjusted the mirrors, so that you can only barely see the side of your own car, and find that overtaking vehicles appear in the side mirrors just before they disappear in the rear view one - can't get any better than that. Now that I have gotten everything adjusted, I actually find the view in the mirrors is very good - both on the motorway and in backing up.

Winter tyres are a question of safety - being able to steer and brake when it is cold and wet - and yes also being able to go somewhere if and when it snows. My personal choice is focused on wet handling performance, as that is the most common problem - not lots of snow. That says that it is OK to put winter boots on your existing wheels. I personaly do not like to take tyres of and on twice a year, but it will save you the cost of a set of wheels, but add the cost of the changing the tyres. If you go for another set of wheels, then you have the choice of changing size to 16", which are probably a little cheaper. In real winter condition, taller and narrower is better than wide, so the 16 inchers seem to be the logical choice. I have a thing about stamped steel wheels - they are not always perfectly round - alloys are, as they are machined in manufacture. I do a bit of high speed travel in winter too, so prefer the smoother rolling alloys also for winter. I believe they offer lower rolling resistance and better economy, but I have no objective measurement to prove it. I had the choice the other way round, as Snehvide was delivered in December with 16" winter tyres. When it came to getting summer wheels, I stuck with the 16" - initially for economic reasons - but it has turned out very well. I have none of the pitching and rough ride that some with 17" wheels complain about. I am quite happy with the winter tyre choice - see below - both in wet, dry and snowy conditions. The Conti summer tyres are also OK, except that they have a tendency to grip longitudinal grooves and ridges in the road. They will eventually be replaced with something NOT with the pronuonced circumferential groove tread pattern.

Raz, geeky is good, I have learnt something. Interesting that the mileage values can be adjusted. It still does not alter the difference between the official mileage measured on the rolling road and real life. The rolling road values are only really useful as a guide for comparing different vehicles - not necessarily repeatable in real life.

With a little bit of rain or a smattering of snow, you can still beat the M3/5 at the traffic light - never mind getting round the roundabouts. Only drawback is that you cannot see their surpised face out of the back window - they are below the horizon.

I don't know about UK sales, but here in Denmark, there have been 116 Yetis registered in 2009 and up to the end of July 2010. Some of these are demo's registered by dealers, maybe 20 or so. With a population about 1/10th of Britain, this is a relatively low number, probably caused by our extremely high excise tax on cars and a stigma associated with 4WD vehicles. Another factor is that there is no real need for 4WD in general, as winters usually do not produce lots of snow and the roads are generally flat and reasonably well maintained.

Your argument is naturally correct, unless the remapping results in better engine efficiency - specific fuel consumption per HP. If you look at the TDI engines for the SM, the 170 hp is more efficient than the 140 hp and the 110 hp only slightly better in consumption than the 170. All three are the same size, so the same rotational losses. The 140 and 170 share identical drive trains.

Terfyn, No arguing with your math. However, if you fill in 60 liters each time, yu probabaly have to push the SM to the filling station . So on smaller fills, the math becomes more troublesome - if you look at one filing. If you add up both the gallons filled and the miles covered over longer periods, then the inaccuracies revert to the miles covered - again, assuming they are he same measurement, tires etc. the inaccuracies also are the same, but they are still not absolute, only relative, and do not correlate with the official figures. It's all academic in any case, and I am not at all dissatisfied with the numbers I read in my case.

I am sure the computer can add, subtract and multiply and divide, but the old adage of siso (**** in - **** out) data collection still applies. The distance input data are just inherently unreliable so that the data output can only be considered relative, not absolute. It's the same for on-board measurements as the vaunted brim-to-brim measurements. Bottom line: Don't kid yourself into thinking that one is more accurate than the other. 't aint! Anyway - by a little judicious attention to my driving habits, I can beat the economy of my old 140 hp PD Octy Combi. Not bad going - but then, i don't often do it, it's toooooo much fun not to.

It's a bloody good question - and I do not have the answer, but a few comments. One is prone to assume that brim to brim measuremets are accurate, but how do you know they are? I am not sure of the degree of calibration of the pump counter, but there is definitely a possible error in the cut-off point of differrent pumps and how much the pump is manipulated after the initial shut-off. Variations of a liter or more would not be unusual!!! Add to that the inaccuracy of the speedometer and the associated question of whether the odometer derives it's values from the same source as the speedometer? Tyre diameter is another variable, but effects both the maxidot and brim measurements the same. Finally, when the vehicle was tested on the rolling road for "official" consumption, how many of these variables were corre4cted, or was it jsut measured from an accurately calibrated rolling road and accurate fuel measurement - bypassing all the built in vehicle specific errors? My take on this is that the official measurements were probably accurate within the specifications - which were NOT driving under actual conditions, but optimized. The real life measurements are only relative - not absolute. Finally, the official values can be beat by driving optimally to beat them. I have demonstrated better than 54 mpg on a 100 km A-road run - but that's not how I normally drive. That one ought to is another question altogether.

Lap time?

My previous research on this subject has not come up with any safe method to remove the old mirror mount, glued to the windshield. It is most likely glued on with cyanoacrylate glue. heat will break the bond, but likely also crack the glass. Skoda will not touch the subject. The fishing line is worth a try, if it fails, then there is no damage done. There should be no problem gluing the mount back on the windshield after removing a little of the black spots with something like acetone.

How often depends on your driving. If it needs cleaning while you are on the motorway, you will not notice it, unless your eyes are glued to the instant fuel consumption display on the MFD - and you are not, are you? There is a measurement of differential pressure across the catalyst (DPF) somewhere, and when the pressure drop gets too high, it regenerates, basically by increasing the exhaust temperature. At the higher temperature, the catalyst causes the soot to burn into gaseous components, which them mostly oxidize to CO2 and water, but also a little NOx (NO2 and NO3) and maybe a little SO2 as well.

Welcome to the club. Mine is shod with the Conti's, and they are just fine on the rotad, but not really suitable for off-road work, as there are really no block pattern to the thread. I also expect to replace the rather soon - expected wear life of around 25000 km. I am not sure what to replace them with, but I am leaning toward something a little more off-road oriented. The Plumber is suggesting a Nokian e- something or other, which is an all season type.

Hello Tim, I did get it - traditionally BWritsh undersatement, like The repost was more intended not to mislead the uninitiated.

This is normal peration. The engine was in the middle of a DPF regeneration when you stopped. The regeneration of the DPF also generates a little NOx, so if you sniff the tailpipe, you will notice a distinktly different smeall, as the NOx has an acrid odour. If you had a stop with the engine running, you might also have noticed that the idle was 200 rpm higher at around 1000 rpm instead of the usual 800. Nothing t be worried about.

Some of the options were standard on the DK Ambition = UK SE.

Thanks, fixed.

Origin of the colour: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brunello_di_Montalcino Quite tasty too.

Slightly cooler?? In Northern Finland, -20°C is not at all unusual in January. Parking lots have electric outlets for block heaters to make it possible to start in the mornings.

My 2005 Octy 2 with the 140 PD engine also used some oil - not alarming at all, but maybe 3 -4 liters per 30,000 km. It was used, but not mistreated. It did not have DPF, so there is some thought that VAG did some optimizing to reduce oil consumption for the DPF engines - which I assume included the Superb PD engines? It could be something relatively minor, such as better oil control piston rings and better valve stem seals.

Interesting that the 170 hp TDI economy numbers is only bettered by the 110 hp 2WD TDI - and is better than the 140 hp TDI with the exact same gear ratios.

A mere child, but happy birthday anyway.

I ran mine in, using the factory guidelines. Basically, don't overrev to start, wait for the oil to be warm before using too much power and keept it running in the power band from 1750 to 2500+. It does not need to be babied, and as there is plenty of torque low down, you will end up doing the right thing, just driving. Cylinder and ring glazing was mostly related to high revs in petrol cars - not in the low rpm used by the diesel. In the first 30,000 km, I used 1.5 litres of oil, so I cannot have done anything terribly wrong. The engine has over that distance gradually loosened and is now much more rev willing tahn initially.

The Yeti is actually only 4.22 meters long, so you will have no problems parking at Mercadona either. Tight turning radius makes it easy to get in and out in the tight aisles too. We spemd a month in Benalmadena Pueblo, so i understand the conditions there. Scratches on the four corners of the bumper is really a badge of honor in your part of the world - that's why the bumpers are plastic