went to my dealer and asked if i could drive it before launch and he siad yes. come back tomorrow. went back and loaded in the family and went for a couple of hours. it was a 140 Tdi manual Elegance (poor choice of engine and box by the dealer i reckon) he are my thoughts in no particular order

1) engine was dire. old PD engines are hopelesslt noisy and unrefined. plenty of pull but not my choice at all

2) seats were really comfy. i have a bad back and find it difficult getting comfy. they were quiet hard but supportive and a nice shape. 4 way lumbar was good (we have this in our audi and its a godsend for bad back sufferers

3) columbus was good (apart form the stupid lack of 7 digit postcodes). it was very intuative to use. i didnt have the manual but managed to copy mp3 files from my SD card to the hard drive very easily

4) park assist is a great toy although it did go up the kerb a bit - kerb was low and parking was on a slight curve so i suspect this confused it. its a huge leap of faith to let the car do the sterring for you !

5) cabin was nicely screwed together. it felt slightly narrow for a such a big car.

6)all the buttons and conrols were in the right place

7)when on cruise i found it awkard to find somewhere for my right foot due to the accel pedal being floor mounted

8) twin door was very good. the engineering was clever and well executed

9) luggage and rear passagner space was ludicrously large - i needed some binoculars to see the kids from the front

10) BUT and its a big BUT ...this is supposed to be a premuim limo like car so i expected a wafty ride. however it was too firm - on good roads its was great and there was little if any body roll when throwing it round the lanes. it felt more like a golf in terms of agility. on poor surfaces we found it too hard. we are used ot the smooth ride of an Audi and to be honest the superb was a big let down. we had built up our expectations that it would be a step away from the sporty set up that other manufacturers are moving towards but to be honest i think skoda are following them. yes it was compliant on bumps and didnt jar but it was just unsettled on poor roads (exactly what they said in the what car review). i think the silly 18 inch wheel and 40 profile tyres didnt help - which muppet thought this would be a good idea on a exec style car. 17 inch with 55 profile would be the min i would go for. you simply need some rubber and air to give the car a chance on poor roads.

so we are left in a quandry. our 2002 A6 with 85k on the clock is a far better ride. do we want to spend 23k on a car that has a worse ride ? we will be test driving an Audi to compare and might end up deciding the extra is worth it !!

also - its misleading to say this is a big car. if you compare the dimensions of the wheelbase its actually shorter and narrower than an A4 even though it pitched more towards the A6 / passat. yes the over hangs are bigger and its cleverly designed to give a long cabin but the drive quality is affected by the wheelbase and i think thats why it felt different to what i expected

..im off to go a think what to do next !!

Interesting point about the dimensions, if I remember rightly the cabin is a fair bit narrower than the new Citroen C5.

See if you can find a 170bhp CR engine to have a go in as they drive a lot better than the 140PD engine.

I didn't realise it is narrower than the Audi A4, that's quite suprising.

1) engine was dire. old PD engines are hopelesslt noisy and unrefined. plenty of pull but not my choice at all.

I'm not questioning the poster's experience of this 2.0 140PD engine, but it made me think about how expectations change as technology improves, and Skoda's continuing use of PD engines.

Many commentators are quite critical of the refinement and spread of power in the 1.9 PD, but are usually less critical of the 2.0 140. It's agreed PDs are not as refined as modern CRs, but when not compared to something else (ie judged on its own terms) the consensus seems to be that the 2.0 140 is not so bad, and was certainly seen as a big improvement on what had gone before when first introduced about 5 years ago in the VW group. Many owners like them.

It's interesting that Skoda don't seem to be rushing to replace it with the 140 CR as they have done with the 170 version. Anyone know when that's likely to happen? I guess the 1.9 is due for replacement soon too: presumably by the 2.0 108bph which I think I've heard will be in the new Golf, rather than the rumoured VW 1.6 diesel which I think may still be under development. Any chance the former might be seen in the Octavia facelift I wonder?

See if you can find a 170bhp CR engine to have a go in as they drive a lot better than the 140PD engine.

I didn't realise it is narrower than the Audi A4, that's quite suprising.

I think jcblinc's comments about the wheelbase etc. could be a little misleading. Certainly, the wheelbase and track width are smaller on the Superb than the A4, but they are quite a bit wider than the current Passat Saloon.

Superb A4 A6 Passat

Wheel base 2761mm 2808mm 2843mm 2709mm

Track width 1545mm 1564mm 1612mm 1548mm

When it comes to inner dimensions though, the Superb has a much wider cabin.

Superb A4 A6 Passat

Front cabin width 1468mm 1410mm 1450mm N/A

Rear cabin width 1451mm 1380mm 1421mm N/A

Personally, I did wonder if 18's would be a step too far with regards to ride comfort. Sure, they look good, but I was always very happy with the 17's on my vRS, and appreciated the better ride quality that resulted.

Given that most of my driving will be motorway work, I don't suppose it will worry me that much. Of more concern is the unsettled nature on poor roads, as Cornwall has these aplenty.

Bagpuss.

bagpus

mmm -thats interesting. i didnt realise the passat was narrower and shorter. thats weird as i though the passat felt bigger. I have just looked a the dimensions of my old A6/passat and that is on a par withteh new superb. what is very odd about the superb is that the rear track is significantly less than the front track. you can see this if you look at the car from the rear (1554mm front and 1518 rear). this i find odd.

cabin - on paper the A4 is narrower and so is the A6. whilst i accept this is a true fact i do find it hard to get my head round. we also have a current shape A6 and it feels much wider inside than the superb did. i guess it depends on how the cabin is set out rather than just the absolute measurements. the superb cabin does feel long and narrow and high whereas the A6 feels finer and lower. maybe thats the point -the dash is higher in teh cuperb thus creating an optical illusion

all this discussion is somewhat acadmic i guess - its how it feels to the individual that matters. we prefer the A6 but the seats are killing me so we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

the 18" wheels are a step too far on a luxury saloon. we need to drive an SE with 17" to see if it makes a difference.

thanks for your comments !

helix - with regard to engines. i guess the problem is that i hate diesels with a passion. There is simply no need for them if you dirve 15k miles a year or less which must cover a vast majority of private buyers. I think there is simply a bandwagon effect making people buy diesel .I often wonder why people by small cars with diesel engines and as for the Audi TT diesel.....NO NO NO NO NO !!!! its just not right !!! LOL

If i had to have a diesel then i still think the PSA diesels are much better than the VAG ones. they are much more refined. the superb - i could feel the engine vibrating through the wheel and pedals at standstill..this is not right !!!

i suppose i am biased as i have driven 1.8T petrol + BMW 6pot 2.5 and now 3.2 V6 FSi...so if you put me a diesel i am bound to complain !!!

i am sure the CR engine will be much better.

i reckon my dealer ordered the 140PD manual as most of his customers are retired farmers and it reminds them of driving their tractor !!! (i live in lincolnshire !)

bagpus

mmm -thats interesting. i didnt realise the passat was narrower and shorter. thats weird as i though the passat felt bigger. I have just looked a the dimensions of my old A6/passat and that is on a par withteh new superb. what is very odd about the superb is that the rear track is significantly less than the front track. you can see this if you look at the car from the rear (1554mm front and 1518 rear). this i find odd.

Actually, the track on the A4, A6 and Passat is the same. Narrower on the rear than the front. Not sure why, but I guess there must be a reason.

cabin - on paper the A4 is narrower and so is the A6. whilst i accept this is a true fact i do find it hard to get my head round. we also have a current shape A6 and it feels much wider inside than the superb did. i guess it depends on how the cabin is set out rather than just the absolute measurements. the superb cabin does feel long and narrow and high whereas the A6 feels finer and lower. maybe thats the point -the dash is higher in teh cuperb thus creating an optical illusion

You are so right about this. The A6 and A4 actually have more head room than the Superb, and less width. I did test drive the A4 prior to ordering my Superb, but it simply felt more claustraphobic, especially in the back. Sadly, the A6 is out of my price range from a company car perspective.

all this discussion is somewhat acadmic i guess - its how it feels to the individual that matters. we prefer the A6 but the seats are killing me so we are stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The seats are exactly the reason I'm changing. My commute to work in about 250 miles each way, which I'm doing at least once a week. The seats in my vRS were killing my back. The seats in the Superb are just streets ahead in terms of comfort.

the 18" wheels are a step too far on a luxury saloon. we need to drive an SE with 17" to see if it makes a difference.

I'm stuck with the 18's now, so hopefully I won't find it too bad.

Bagpuss.

I agree with what you say about refined petrol engines jcb. I drove a 1.8T recently too. After my 1.9 TDI it was a reminder that it is possible for a modern petrol engine to be nearly silent at idle, and not much louder on the move.

well haven read the test reports, we have to consider that we are talking skoda here.....and in my opinion they are presenting a fantastic car, given the various options and engine specs......of course if we want the car to be dam near perfect then we wud have to pay something like 10-30k more for the audi say for example.....and even then the skoda has one up on the marque.....the twin door for example......and value for money....even a fairly reasonable mileaged merc costs more than a new skoda superb in lots of cases.....and i say.why buy used when new will do !!

well haven read the test reports, we have to consider that we are talking skoda here.....and in my opinion they are presenting a fantastic car, given the various options and engine specs......of course if we want the car to be dam near perfect then we wud have to pay something like 10-30k more for the audi say for example.....and even then the skoda has one up on the marque.....the twin door for example......and value for money....even a fairly reasonable mileaged merc costs more than a new skoda superb in lots of cases.....and i say.why buy used when new will do !!

Having read the test reports, we have to consider that we are talking Skoda here. In my opinion, given the various options and engine specs, they are presenting a fantastic car. Of course, if we wanted the car to be damn near perfect then we would have to pay something like 10-30k for an Audi (and sacrifice the unique twin door of the Skoda). Even a Mercedes with reasonable mileage costs more than a new Skoda Superb in a lot of cases. So why buy used when new will do?

1) It's agreed PD's are not as refined as modern CR's, but when not compared to something else (IE judged on its own terms) the consensus seems to be that the 2.0 140 is not so bad, and was certainly seen as a big improvement on what had gone before when first introduced about 5 years ago in the VW group. Many owners like them.

PD's are technically superior! Unfortunately they've gotten a bad rap these last few years... As computer technology has advanced so far, CR has proven the more profitable choice for todays small & medium sized cars!!!

I guess the 1.9 is due for replacement soon too: presumably by the 2.0 108bph which I think I've heard will be in the new Golf, rather than the rumored VW 1.6 diesel which I think may still be under development. Any chance the former might be seen in the Octavia facelift I wonder?

The 2.0CR-TDI 110PS is simply a detuned 2.0CR-TDI 140PS for slightly better emissions & possibly cheaper production costs... It's more likely a marketing stop gap measure! As the 1.6CR-TDI 110PS 250NM(same figures as the 2.0CR-TDI 110PS...)arrives in Paris next month in the MkVI Golf BlueMotion lowering it's emissions from 119g/km of Co2 to just 99g/km of Co2!!!

I'm off back to a VX in a yr or so, nearly px'd against an Octy Sport yesterday, until I read the thread about an engine mounting totalling another members car when it snapped and went through the timing belt, don't get me wrong the cars are fine, but Skoda and their dealers I wouldn't give you tuppence for, as usual Skoda wiggled on him blaming a twisted chassis even though a jig said otherwise, guy still has no idea who coughed for repairs and it took 5 mths to get a resolution, no good for me in my game.

Actually, the track on the A4, A6 and Passat is the same. Narrower on the rear than the front. Not sure why, but I guess there must be a reason.

but the differential in the skoda is greater. the others are only a few mm difference. not sure why and not sure if it makes any practical difference. interestingly the turning circle of the superb is small which is a bonus. maybe this has something to do with the dimensions ?

The seats are exactly the reason I'm changing. My commute to work in about 250 miles each way, which I'm doing at least once a week. The seats in my vRS were killing my back. The seats in the Superb are just streets ahead in terms of comfort.

Bagpuss.

glad its not just me with a dodgy back. sorry to hear this - nothing worse then being uncomfortable on a long journey. guess i should be thankful that whilst i have to drive to work every day its only 6 miles and 12 minutes !!

PD's are technically superior! Unfortunately they've gotten a bad rap these last few years... As computer technology has advanced so far, CR has proven the more profitable choice for todays small & medium sized cars!!!

The 2.0CR-TDI 110PS is simply a detuned 2.0CR-TDI 140PS for slightly better emissions & possibly cheaper production costs... It's more likely a marketing stop gap measure! As the 1.6CR-TDI 110PS 250NM(same figures as the 2.0CR-TDI 110PS...)arrives in Paris next month in the MkVI Golf BlueMotion lowering it's emissions from 119g/km of Co2 to just 99g/km of Co2!!!

Thanks for this information. The 2.0 TDI 108 does sound like a stop gap, and a 1.6 would make more sense. I'm wondering if the 2.0 TD might however be fitted to larger cars such as the Superb (as it is in the Audi A4 I think) because some prospective owners can't get their head around big car/small engine however powerful it might be (same concept discussed in another thread re the 1.4 TSI)!

we prefer the A6 but the seats are killing me so we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. !

Radical thought, if the rest of your a6 is in good nick - You could always get new seats and save yourself £20k. I'm sure you could get nice ones for a couple of grand.

Just another thought into the blender

That's a very good thought. Recaro have an excellent range of airbag equipped seats, which ought to drop straight in. It might be worth giving them a call.

I was tempted to do this with my vRS, but the company wouldn't allow it.

Bagpuss.

Radical thought, if the rest of your a6 is in good nick - You could always get new seats and save yourself £20k. I'm sure you could get nice ones for a couple of grand.

Just another thought into the blender

Or even look out for some seats out of an S6, i have these fitted to the front of my Superb, as i also suffer (mild understatement) with back problems, but the electrically adjustable S6 ones are really comfortable when you set them up to your preference.

If these prices are anything to go by it doesn't seem to badly priced if the only reason to change car was for the driver seat. Presumably you keep the originaly seat wrapped up in the loft with some anti mould sachets and replace when selling the vehicle

Capital Seating and Vision > Seating, Vision and Accessories for Hardworking Environments

Personally for a grand per seat (don't forget to add a subframe & VAT on to the Recaro's) i would go for a full s/h interior out of a S6

Site sponsers JKM do a range of seats by Cobra.

not sure if any off these will be any good.

http://briskoda.net/jkm-motor-services/cobra-seats-now-available-jkm/121356/

Thanks, very thoughtfull. Have had a look, but looks like they are nice sporty ones rather than supportive. I think I need them to be longer in the base, and also to still have airbag if possible

how do you go about fitting them. i was told that the car's ECU will have a wobbler if it cannot "see" the airbags from the original seat. there is a code or something in the seat and it needs to see this ? anyone know anything about this ?

Presumably the s6 interior would avoid this airbag problem, and a local garage could fit them. It's not something I'd take on myself with my skill level, it'd be like James May in that Merc he did up like a sitting room on top gear...