The February issue just out (i.e. January for normal human beings) has a group test of premium family cars including the Superb 140 diesel Elegance against Accord, Insignia, Mondeo, etc.

You'll like the conclusion!

It was a good result for the Superb, albeit a bit buried in the article.

Liked the row they had with Skoda UK re the test car - very funny!

have you got a link ?

i looked on the carmagazine website and cant find any reference to it ?

also i dont understand your comment about jan/feb ? is the jan edition or feb edition ?

Its the Feb edition, but it is the one that just came out, i think all magazines work in that strange way?

also i dont understand your comment about jan/feb ? is the jan edition or feb edition ?

I assume sandgrownun is talking about the warped sense of time used by publishers. A magazine which is labelled "February 2009" will typically be on sale in late December or early January - making the date on the cover almost meaningless.

I think it's because magazine publishers would typically publish their magazines one or two days earlier than their competitors, so that their "February 2009" edition would hit the newstands first, while their competitors still only had the "January 2009" (and less desirable) edition on sale. The trouble is that this has happened for ages, and these extra few days have added up to the point where it's got a bit out of hand...

Edited 2 January, 200917 yr by DavidY
Added extra bit

Althought I think the reason for this is becuase the magazine will be on sale for a month, late december to late january and if it is labelled February then people will still think it is current at the end of january just before the new one comes out.

The Car website doesn't have the article: they have to get people to buy the printed article somehow!

Here's the website: New February 2009 issue of CAR Magazine Car Magazine

still dont understand - no mention of the superb at all ?

will nip to WHsmith and have a nosey this afternoon !

It is in there, I can confirm, there is a family car group test, I have this magazine on subscription, it is tested against the new vectra etc. It is over four or five pages so I can say it is worth buying to see the review.

thanks. got to pop into town so will nip in the smiths and read .....erm ...i mean buy it ! LOL

I think it costs £4.20 to buy which is a bit ridiculous, but I get it with a tesco vouchers subscription which means it is free! or sort of anyway :P

not free, but effectively 75% off i think .

i have loads of tesco vouchers and dont know what to spend them on - you might have given me an idea !!

I also get Top Gear magazine and cbeebies magazine (for my boy) this way too!

Yet another test with the old generation 140 PD engine. Admittedly a bit cheaper than the 170 CR but most people are going for the 170 for the benefits it offers (smoother, quieter, a bit more performance with little fuel consumption increase).

Whilst I haven't read the test you refer to, and the inference being that the Skoda does well against the competition, wouldn't you think Skoda would push the 170 CR test cars rather than the 140 PD's (in price terms the Skoda leaves them all standing - a quick run through the VW comparator shows that to spec a Passat 170 TDI sport to Superb Elegance 170 CR spec would make the Passat £29000 on the road! No thanks)

I've yet to read a proper road test in English on the 170CR Superb.

Perhaps theres a hidden agenda, i.e. the magazines want something to say against the Superb so the default choice Mondeo can win again hence they deliberately test the 140PD (conclusion - nice car, noisy engine etc)

Even if they award the Mundano 6 stars out of 5 I wouldn't buy one (hmm, which grey repmobile is mine?) there's just so many of them on the road.

Anyway, I'll be doing my own long term road test on a 170CR Elegance starting next Tuesday so I can find out first hand what it's like!

2Slo

Edited 2 January, 200917 yr by 2slo

On the 170CR v 140PD question:

I choose the 170CR for exactly the reasons you gave, also - I thought the fuel consumption was actually slightly better for the 170CR (but I could be wrong).

And I am very happy with my choice. We've now had our 170CR Elegance for a month. And it is very smooth and very quiet - driven well I find the road/tyre noise and wind noise totally dominant - you can barely hear the engine.

(I keep meaning to check what make of tyres fitted, I have this hunch that when the current tyres wear out, careful choice of replacements might just make the car even quieter, given that tyre noise is dominant!)

I find it frustrating that Skoda make so little of the 170CR engine. There's almost no description or explanation of how or why it is better or anything.

I'm an engineer by Trade - and I'm genuinely interested in these things. But it isn't just Skoda - I've scoured the web trying to find a decent technical description of the 170CR engines from VW - and come up with almost nothing. I've found a reasonable list of "odds and ends" from all kinds of places. EG I think that:

a) It uses a variable geometry Turbo Charger

It uses a LOT of EGR (50%+)

c) The EGR is water cooled

d) The Intercooler is water cooled, with a seperate radiator and water circuit, but taking fluid from the same system.

e) It uses Piezo actuators on the Injectors

f) The Engine has two balance shafts

There's still quite a bit more I'd like to find out - in particular about the intake arrangements.

Were I more cynical, I might suggest that they're not singing the praises of this engine until they've spread it across the range and used up all the old stocks!

It still seems odd that OTOH VW Group have developed a brilliant Diesel Engine fit to challenge the likes of Honda - but then don't tell anyone anything about it!

Andrew

On the tyre front I found that Michelan Primacy tyres helped the ride and road noise on my MK1 Superb... However, I went back to the original Bridgestone Turanzas as they seemed to wear less than the Michelans, not sure that makes much sense either though?!

Yet another test with the old generation 140 PD engine. Admittedly a bit cheaper than the 170 CR but most people are going for the 170 for the benefits it offers (smoother, quieter, a bit more performance with little fuel consumption increase).

Whilst I haven't read the test you refer to, and the inference being that the Skoda does well against the competition, wouldn't you think Skoda would push the 170 CR test cars rather than the 140 PD's (in price terms the Skoda leaves them all standing - a quick run through the VW comparator shows that to spec a Passat 170 TDI sport to Superb Elegance 170 CR spec would make the Passat £29000 on the road! No thanks)

I've yet to read a proper road test in English on the 170CR Superb.

Perhaps theres a hidden agenda, i.e. the magazines want something to say against the Superb so the default choice Mondeo can win again hence they deliberately test the 140PD (conclusion - nice car, noisy engine etc)

2Slo

I wondered that too. It seems stupid given that the 170 is only £900 more and in some group tests I have seen the opposition are more expensive still! Some of the car magazines are either stupid or have an agenda. I wish Autocar would test the CR-TDI Octavia vRS too. They loved their long termer with the PD engine but the engine refinement was virtually their only criticsm.

You have to wonder what goes on behind the scenes with some of these road tests. For instance, could it be that certain manufacturers are more forthcoming with 'free' long term test cars than are SUK?

If the magazine were given a free car from one manufacturer and a closed door or put on a waiting list by another, would that magazine be completely impartial in it's road test verdict?

Are Fords really better than everything else?

Lots of road tests extol the virtues of Landrovers yet rarely or never mention that they tend to come last in reliability surveys. Impartial? I wonder.

2Slo.

Well according to this article in Car magazine, Skoda UK would not give them a long term Superb but it won the test anyway, so maybe "Car" at least are impartial!

They praised the Superb's handling, space, quality and spec.

Mondeo they said "one year ago we loved the interior, but now it looks cheap and dated" or something along those lines. Thought that would happen!

Here's the verdict from Car magazine:

"Or it (the Mondeo) would be (the winner) were it not for the Skoda. If you find the Mondeo too big, piloting the Superb will feel like commanding a supertanker, but this really is an extraordinary car in more than it's size. No, it doesn't quite entertain like the Ford but what you're buying is a premium long-wheelbase German exec for the price of a middling hot hatch. Cheap to buy and run, and positively overflowing with standard kit (how does nav, leather, Bluetooth and adaptive lighting for £21k sound?), it's also likely to return a class busting 46% of it's value in three years while most rivals will struggle to hang on to a third.

When we published a Skoda drive story last year in which we dressed a new Superb as a cab in Prague, Skoda UK failed to see the funny side and cancelled our planned long-termer. They'd been to incensed to see just how highly we rated this car. Message clear enough this time folks?"

Here's the verdict from Car magazine:

"

When we published a Skoda drive story last year in which we dressed a new Superb as a cab in Prague, Skoda UK failed to see the funny side and cancelled our planned long-termer. They'd been to incensed to see just how highly we rated this car. Message clear enough this time folks?"

Strange attitude, given how many Superb cabs there are in Prague. Most of them with 200k+km on the clock!

Phil

Strange attitude, given how many Superb cabs there are in Prague. Most of them with 200k+km on the clock!

Phil

I believe 'Car' actually did this in Vienna but they got it wrong in the article..

Should also mention although they say the car wasn't as entertaining as a Mondeo, they did rate the handling saying it "felt more like a Bentey barging down the road, but with the same results as the Mondeo"