MarkyG82

The B6 with stock springs on my Octavia was really good. Yes a touch firmer but the body control was 8.5/10 compared to 6/10 on good stock shocks. Worn stock I'd knock 1-1.5 off. Lowered on B6 id give it 9.5 just because it was torsion beam and not as good as independent. It's such a personal thing though. The stock kit is tuned as a compromise of comfort, control, customer expectations, safety. And then you have bushes. Standard ones are generally too soft for anyone wanting a bit of control and precision. I've not ventured into that world yet other than dogbone inserts which I rate massively. Anything with a decent amount of torque will benefit.

I have special actives on stock springs on my Passat GTE. Slightly different car but same underpinning and also quite a specific model being the PHEV. Should be very similar to the superb IV. Quite disappointed with the shocks. Definitely more comfortable at speed and less body roll. However it feels crashy to the point that I may fit the originals back in. I will probably try lowering to see how that helps but the shock body ends higher on the konis which means much shorter bump stops would be needed. As it is they needed cutting on the front. Sorry I didn't compare to the B4. Had B6 on my Octavia with stock and lowering springs. Much preferred them to the konis.

Shirley that's the holy grail? Comfort with more control.

Could be a few things. My suggestion is they had seeped a bit (which is normal for lubrication) and the tester wiped them clean. Then they haven't had a chance to seep any more (likely based on the usage you describe). Or they have leaked so much that there is nothing left to leak, unlikely unless you are having trouble controlling the car.

At 50mm lift I'd be looking at changing the car if it's a regular requirement. You will massively compromise the normal handling to the point of making it unsafe. The scout ground clearance is a combination of higher suspension and tyres. To get the same from a stock height car you would also be looking at insurance notification. Again you have to think whether it's worth the work for the small occasional (?) benefits.

I'm sure someone will be along to translate. This is an English forum so you will get better results that way.

Likely to be having this discussion for many years to come especially with the reduction in use of ICE making 5he knowledge more diluted. Same here being an engineer I have my theories. One being the legal standpoint of Skoda UK (VAG as a whole or even all UK arms of vehicle manufacturers) instill shorter cambelt regimes to protect themselves against lawsuits. Given the catastrophic potential for a belt failure and the more ready appetite in the UK/US for legal help, I believe they are simply protecting themselves. We may also have greater appetite for paying for car maintenance. Our rules and regs for keeping cars road legal are definitely more strict than others around the world. As a result we are preconditioned to spending on cars.

My opinion: If it was genuinely a "life of engine" part, you wouldn't be able to get the parts to replace them. It's not like a body panel where a dented one can be repaired or replaced. A damaged cambelt is usually fatal (mechanically). So, it makes sense that as the parts are available you can treat it as a preventative maintenance item. The tricky part is the interval which is why we are here. The issue with car maintenance is the two variables of time and mileage which is an age old discussion. I'm sorry, I don't seem to have added anything useful. Just rambling on.

Check on the door speaker grilles. Should say "canton". Otherwise dig under the front seats for the amp and sub. Pretty sure that's where they put them.

What's the deal if you use it against another new car? At s/h prices I'm sure they will do you a good deal and then you can ride the storm till the prices reduce a bit.

Ah ok. Once you said that I did a quick Google and yes it looks like all damptronic shocks are twin tube. Even the coil overs. So are identical internally other than valving? Edit: so comparing b6 and b6 damptronic is not really apples and apples.

Source? Have spent the last half hour on various forums and sites and can't find anything confirming your statement. Not saying you are wrong but it makes a strange selection for bilstein. Especially given the technology difference between the passive shocks.

Just to add that the design is different between the two. B4 is a traditional twin tube setup where the outer tube is the structure of the shock with the damping unit inside. B6 is a mono tube where the outer tube is the structure and the damping unit. This has the benefit of having a larger area for the damper plunger to act on the damping medium making it more consistent and controllable. It also makes the damping medium a larger volume which aids cooling. The B6 is also a pressurised shock. This reduces the chance of the oil cavitation which again improves the reliability and consistency. This pressure contributes to the hardness that people describe and can also raise the ride height slightly. For example a 30mm drop spring might only drop 25mm with a B6. Tldr: the two shocks are different designs and intended for different uses. Quality control might be the same but component quality I would say are different. It's like comparing a fabia to a superb.

Probably 2k ish. I can look at my fuel logs and the dates I had the work done. I'll update. Worst case based on my mileage is 3k. Very likely to be closer to 2k. I've somehow deleted the calendar appointment so not sure the exact date so going on my fuelio data and the date I ordered the shocks.

Having fitted koni special actives to my Passat I wish I had gone with bilstein b6. They are good but not a massive change from the stock shocks. As I understand it, the superb IV shocks are softer than the Passat GTE so it may be a more dramatic upgrade. I still have the stock shocks so may be willing to sell the konis for the right price although I'd need to cover the labour cost and some of the purchase costs of the shocks. Edit: if the parts are right of course 👍

Definitely definitely don't just fit one! Make sure you do at least 2. You might get away with just one if going OEM but the valving will be different on the bilstein so the car will be unbalanced side to side with different brand shocks.

Looks like you have the Amundsen mib1 system. The mib platform has the headunit in the glovebox with a screen in the centre console. No you cannot just fit a bigger screen. You need mib2+ for that. You have 3 main options: 1) Fit an android system of which there is a very good thread in this section detailing everything you should need and is by far the cheapest @£200-300. No coding required and should have most of the in car stuff but needs a bit if tinkering and Android knowledge. 2) Pioneer (or Kenwood?) system for best part of £1k. No coding and looks like it should offer a good solution but reports are that it's far too slow so isn't really an option. 3) retro fit mib2 system that will give you smartlink for Android auto/carplay. It's the most OEM option but a little fiddly. You need a new screen which is plug and play. You then need a new glovebox unit which will first require component protection removal (dealer should be able to do this for £60-80) then it will need coding nto match the car. @pab567 is your best option for the coding. Proper legend. Total cost for mib2 system starts at £600 probably with recent prices. £1k+ for a big screen setup with more bells and whistles. Oh yeah, if you have a canton setup then you need a new bits of those too so add a few hundred for that.

It's a shame we can't try the same engine with a dq200 and a dq250.

As root suggests, I don't think we can compare the Saab and Skoda as the setup is too different. Also the general change in how cars are setup. Modern cars tend to have lower profile tyres with firmer suspension. All adds to how they hold traction. Edit: just to add, if anything I said has contributed to the bad taste left in this thread I can only apologise. I do have foot in mouth syndrome sometimes.

So my reasoning is far more applicable to a manual. Must engage brain before writing stuff on briskoda. Apologies all.

Pay careful attention to the gear selection. Planting it in a higher gear and using the torque will put additional strain on the clutch. There is no issue at all by dropping a gear and using the power instead. A gear change puts far less wear on a clutch than the additional torque with a map at low revs/high load. Please don't take what I'm saying as not to get a map. It's more of a bit of info to help keep clutches in good working order.

I'm using cross climates in that size and they are perfectly respectable in all conditions. Not a performance summer tyre nor a fully fledged winter. Safe in all conditions though and perfect for a daily. If after something more performance related, Goodyear eagle f1 get mentioned a fair bit on here or Michelin pilot sports.

For winter wheels I'd go for the CCs. Or the first ones you asked about with proper size tyres.

Etc is the offset and dictates how far the wheel sits into the arch. You need to know the wheel width too. Usually the wheel will have marking like "8j18et47" which states the rim is 8 inches wide, 18 inches diameter and 47mm inset from the face of the bolt surface. Then you need tyres to match. 235/45r18 is a standard size for superb.

What's so bad about et47? Standard is et44 I think so only 3mm change. Most important thing is that red ring (spigot ring) used to reduce the centre bore size. Take it out and it might be the right fitment. Find out what car they are from and what size that car needs and match up to what you need. As for the 16 wheels: they should fit fine. Just need the correct size tyres.