Agerbundsen

I’m not an audiolphile by any stretch of the imagination, but I do not understand the emphasis of the Sound systems: The basic noise in the car is around 69dB when drivning, so What is the point of fine tuned audio systems, when there is a 69dB base noise?

The TPMS On Skodas really only monitors if the tyre diameter is equal on all four wheels. So as you changed all four, there is no alarm.

Sounds like another pipe smoker to?

74 and have had Yeti's for 9 years. Needed to switch to automatic for health related issues. Thought the T-Roc would be just the ticket, as Karoqs were more than 6 month delivery. The T-Roc was fun to drive (190 hp petrol with 4M) but not as good as the Yeti - by a long shot. So we were lucky to find a 4x4 Karoq with all the do-dads for immediate delivery. Picking it up Tuesday.

I agree, but basically the T-Roc is a nice vehicle, just not quite finished yet. The hard plastic dash was a mistaken cost saving, as it has been highlighted by every journalist writing about it. For us, it was just too small after driving Yeti's for 9 years. Very handy and snappy with the 190 hp petrol and 4x4.

Thanks HWR1983, that helped a lot.

So, what does the ECO mode do differently? As far as i can see, it only switches displays to show consumption data and engages the freewheeling on deceleration. Seems unnecessary, as the engine shuts off fuel supply to the engine anyway in that situation, so only "benefit" is no engine braking?

I do not yet have my Karoc (next week) and it will be an automatic like the T-Roc it replaces. The T-Roc forum has a similar discussion with kangaroo starts with the 1.5 l petrol engine. My 2.0 petrol T-Roc requires a little finessing with the accelerator to avoid a jumpy start when acceleration gently. Seems to be a delay while the computer figures out what it should do, depending on the accelerator position and the gear selection? The diesel test cars have not had this problem, so the I believe it is important to realize that these cars are fly-by-wire, no mechanical connection between the accelerator and the engine, only position sensors. It seems to me that there is a software problem in this area, which they hopefully will get sorted.

Down loaded the manual from where??

Basically, it is the nearest to a Yeti possible. Had Yeti's for 9 years and loved them. Switched to T-Roc to get auto gear and petrol. That was a mistake. The T-Roc (190 HP and 4M) was a great car to drive, but just did not have the room and comfort we were used to. Only Karoq available for immediate delivery was a top-of-the line Style with all the options, except the hook for the enema bag.

After 9 Happy Yeti years, and a short sojourn to a VW T-Roc 4M, now back in the Skoda fold.

I have one, it will be for sale in february when it's replacement is delivered.

My first choice would have been a Yeti with DSG and 4x4, but alas, not available. After 8 years of Yeti ownership, no complaints, no squeaks or rattles or any other complaints.

Because the SEAT is perceived as a bit of a step-down from the Yeti - rightly or wrongly. Also the dealer I have used for the last ten years is both Skoda and VW - and have behaved very well from both service and sales pricing.

They are in showrooms i Germany - and selling well. The first few are in showrooms in Denmark for the official launch next weekend.

OK, multiple reasons for the change and the choice: 1. Need to switch to DSG for reasons of health. Don't like it, but have to accept fact. 2. When switching, petrol is clearly indicated rather than diesel. 3. Tested FWD with 150 HP - not happy with front wheel stomp under acceleration, as the Haldex just gets the job done - always. 4.Only Yeti available here was a wimpy FWD. 5. Don't want to wait many months for the Karoq - and do not need the bigger size. The T-Roc in 4M and petrol is only available with the 2 litre 190 HP. It's overkill, but ought to be fun too. Tyre choice will likely be the new Michelin all year, which will fit the winter weather here and allow occasional diversions to other Scandihovian countries and Germany in winter.

Decision made. I will be sorry to see the Yeti go, but it will be replaced with a VW T-Roc Sport, 190 Hp 4x4 TSI, 7-speed DSG, Navigation as only extra to Sport specification. Health, age and reduced driving requirements to about 5000 miles/year strongly dictated the spec's. The 190 HP were not really necessary, but that is the only petrol 4X4 offered here.

I will go and look at a T-Roc in Germany soon. The Karoq is not going to be available here for more than 2 months, so we will see how the Truck turns out.

A move to a flat in town and age related diminished physical prowess dictates a shift from Yeti to ???? Driving much less now, as everything is within walking distance, so from 20,000 miles/year in the past to now a bit over 5000 miles/year. The Diesel has not squawked as yet, but the indicated mileage on average has reduced from 17+ to around 11 km/liter - far too many far too short trips for the Diesel in the long run. Definitely need to move to DSG. Don't really need the extra size of the Karoq, but....... Do not need towing capacity, and I am in a tizzy over 4X4 or not? Test drove a FWD Tiguan as the closest to the Karoq, which does not come here till next year. Surprised at how easy the front wheel spin was provoked by a little swift acceleration on a damp road. (Just goes to show how well the Haldex works without you knowing it). The current thinking is that the VW T-Roc with 4WD and DSG might be a suitable alternative. This is still not introduced officially here, but will be in December. Same outside handy dimensions as the Yeti. Pricing for the T-Roc is known, but not the Karoq. My guess is that they will be equivalent. So what do you say? Leave Skoda after 12 years and go to the big VW brother or stick with the Karoq?

If you stall the engine at low speeds, just depress the clutch and it starts again. The addition of Halogen high beam lights to the xenons is a huge improvement over the pre-FL xenon headlights.

The measurement has a very short sampling cycle, maybe two seconds or so, so the values are very erratic (not erroneous!). This is the nature of the beast, and not a fault. It also makes the indication almost useless. It would be nice to have the ability to lengthen this cycle to maybe a minute or so, which would make it much more useful.

There are some details here: http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/399412-new-fl-yeti-observations-and-questions/ After having driven the new 150 about 1500 miles, the engine sweet spot is about 200 rpm higher than on the 170. The (presumably) smaller turbo kicks in powerfully rather like the old PD engine at around 2000 rpm. The car feels more agile than the old 170, but that may be the difference between a brand new car vs. a 6½ year old one with 100,000 miles on it. it is alarmingly quiet at motorway speeds, so creeps into the blue light special zone without you noticing it. The quiet engine means that you notice road noise and a little gear whine more than you are used to. The Amundsen is much better integrated than the Columbus was and the hands free telephone connection works like a charm. The factory foglights stink, but the addition of halogen long range lights to the xenon is an improvement. Needs high grade Philips or Osram replacement bulbs before winter. All-in-all, not so much different, but clearly more sophisticated in a lot of small details, particularly in the engine management software.

Pingo, SUK are telling you a story!. My new FL has both the towbar - non-removable - and the adblue with no changes to the tankage. I kept the spare wheel and associated kit for the boot from the old Yeti, and intend to drive without a spare locally, but take the spare along on extended trips on Holidays etc.

100,000 miles in the old 170 hp TDI yeti with nary a problem with the DPF. Mostly short trips into town with a weekly 20 mile on A-roads and a monthly 150 mile round trip on motorways to the city. The new 150 TDI should handle short trips even better: The new cooling management system and closer connection to the catalyst and DPF means much faster heat-up of the engine. The SCR catalyst also allows higher combustion temperatures and more efficient fuel useage, as the SCR means that less EGR is used, so fewer unburnt HC. All in all, the 150 TDI engine seems as capable as the old 170, except for the very top HP - but is much more complex.

I dunno? It seems to me that all of the "new" Suv's in the Yeti class fall into the lemming category as far as "design" goes: Lots of unnecessary wrinkles and bumps to look smart, raised rear window sill height, bad outlook behind and sacrifices volumetric capacity for goofy looks - a la Evoke. All in search of significance. The Cashcow actually went a bit the other way and is more sensible and practical now than before. The more I look at all the gee-gaws glued on the competition, the more I like the FL Yeti - No nonsense, clean purposeful lines, largest possible interior volume for the exterior size. The LED DRL's as an unbroken simple line under the Xenon lights is really classic - not like the plethora of weird shapes, purporting to be part of the "design language".