I've just completed my first week or so in my Superb and have also had a chance to accurately measure the mpg, for those who like to count the pennies!

Coming from an Octy II, I am using that as the benchmark, equipped with the same 1.9Tdi 105 engine. I summarise below my 'likes' and dislikes' of the new Superb:-

LIKES

1) Quality of the interior plastics and especially the dash/instrumentation which looks more upmarket than the Octy

2) The semi-automatic air con automatically switches itself on whenever the control is set to the 'windscreen' position

3) Three 12v sockets strategically placed in the centre console, passenger console and boot

4) The 'Twindoor' works well and is a good talking point with folk who have not seen it in operation. The 'soft-closing' boot action is also a nice feature.

5) The boot passenger space is simply cavernous. Good when you have a six foot plus driver and rear passenger of a similiar height.

6) Three 'Isofix' positions, two in the rear and the front passenger seat (obviously!).

7) Gas strut fitted to bonnet, so no more fumbling to find the strut.

8) Door mirrors show much more than those fitted to the Octy and compensate for the slightly restricted view throught the rear window.

9) Plenty of cabin storage with a large glovebox and large storage box beneath drivers armrest.

10) Compentent handling and good ride quality. Drives like a larger Octy, however, engine better soundproofed, less wind noise and better filtering of sudden thumps and ridges.

11) Good sized rear central ashtray/rubbish container and easy to read LCD clock for rear occupants, plus their own air vents

12) The wide opening rear dooes make it very easy to lift a toddler into a car seat

DISLIKES

1) Handbrake on passengers side of central tunnel.

2) Lack of throttle footrest, while righthand side of central console slightly encroaches into clutch rest (ie. less foot space than Octy II)

3) Lack of rear wash/wipe

4) While the fuel tank is 5 litres larger than the Octy (60 vs 55 litres), a 70 litre tank would have been preferable and directly comparable with that of direct competitors (Mondeo, Insignia & Passat)

5) Bolero looks attractive, but less quick to operate than the Stream? radion/CD fitted to my old Octy II Ambiente. Time and outside temp not displayed, on/off button only switches unit off if button held for approx 2 seconds. On/off button on passenger side of car, unlike more conveniently located on/off button in the centre on the Octy. When a CD finishes, the unit does not more to the next CD in the changer, but starts to play the current CD from track 1.

6) Front seats whilst an improvement over the Octy are no match for those in the Insignia (at least from a tall persons point of view)

7) Shape of gearknob not very ergonomic, although, I supposed I'll get used to it.

8) Door pockets not as spacious as those in the Octy ie. no facility to carry 1-1.5 litre wine/water bottles

9) Pen holder in glovebox, however, lack of same on central tunnel (as per Octy)

10) Why no rear mudflaps as standard, as per Octy II. Incidentally, why are the rear mudflaps on the faclifted Octy now a less practical shape (ie. rounded rather than squared edge)?

11) Lack of protective film (stonechip protection) on the bottom of the rear wheel arch (again, as per Octy)

Now, those mpg figures I promised earlier:-

The car was delivered with 2/3 of a tank, to which I then added 10 litres of Tesco diesel. At 498 miles I then refilled with 57 litres of Shell diesel. 531.8 miles later the refuel light illuminated. Again, more Shell diesel, this time 48.52 litres (10.66 gallons) to brim the tank. This equates to 49.887mpg, slightly better than the advertised 49.6mpg on a Combined cycle.

My daily driving typically comprises a daily 4 mile urban crawel in the morning, followed by a 40-50 mile business journey on motorways and A roads, then a 45 mile commute home in the evening. I keep to speed limits and on the motorway cruise at between 70-75mpgh. Incidentally, an indicated 74mph equates to an actual speed of 70 mph (as per my Tom Tom). I use cruise where possible, but rarely use aircon, except for windscreen demisting.

By way of comparison, my Octy II with the same engine recorded an average 55mpg on the MFD, equating to an actual 51-52mpg based on fuel dispensed to brim the tank. I am thus confident with a few more miles the Superb economy will improve.

One last point to note is that my Octy was shod with four Michelin Primacy tyres (205/55/R16), while the Superb has lower rolling resistance Michelin Energy Saver tyres in the same size. Interestingly, The tyre pressures in the Octy are higher for the front tyres (front 2.1 bar, rear 2.0 bar) while the Superb has higher pressures for the rear tyres (front 2.4 bar, rear 2.5 bar).

Edited 8 February, 200917 yr by veloplus

In case anyone other than myself is interested, this morning I filled up for the second time and am able to comment on my car's economy.

To brim the tank required 52.22 litres, which given the fact I travelled 577.50 miles on the last full tank, equates to a commendable 50.31 mpg. This figure should improve as the car has only 1,765 miles on the clock.

Incidentally, I am using Shell Diesel (Extra not V-Power).

I found both my diesel Mercedes and my wifes Octy PD170 VRS took around 20,000 miles for the fuel economy to improve , i think modern diesels need a long time to settle in

This bodes very well for you !!

Excellent write up , thanks

As for the rear wash wipe , if you use "Rain X" or similar on the rear screen i'm sure you wont miss it as much

9) Pen holder in glovebox, however, lack of same on central tunnel

Absolute travesty!

Absolute travesty!

No, he's got a point. If you use your car for work and write a lot, a pen nearby is handy. Good write up. I had the use of a 170 CR Elegance for a week and found similar issues. Bit of a limo to drive when I'm used to a Octy VRS but absolutely effortless and could have set up camp in there and lived in it.

Good straight forward review:thumbup: How's the 1.9 engine is it under powered for the car?

Thanks to everyone who appreciated my writeup.

Yes, while I agree the lack of a pen holder on the central tunnel amounts to small beer when there is a pen holder inside the glovebox, it is far quicker to retrieve a pen from the central tunnel, rather than having to stretch across to the passenger side and open the glovebox.

I applied Rain-X (improved formula) to the side and rear windows of my Octy and found it worthwhile, especially in light of easier removal of ice on cold mornings. I aim to apply to the Superb when we get some decent weather.

The 1.9Tdi feels a little down on power compared with my Octy, however, I'm sure it'll loosen up with a few miles. On Saturday I made a A-road three car overtake (long straight road with good visibility) and the Superb slightly struggled to gain momentum, although not enough to have had to abort the manoevre.

TBH, were it no for our company's miserly company car policy I would have opted for a 2.0Tdi 140 with the same options specified for my 1.9Tdi 105. That said, the 105 is more fuel efficient and is not burdened with a DPF (excluding the Greenline).

Edited 5 June, 200917 yr by veloplus

I've noticed the Tom Tom differences in my Sup 1, again at 70mph it's about 4mph out in relation to the speedo, which is accurate the GPS or the pulse in the car? if the Tom Tom is correct then it means the car isn't as economical as it reads, and the odometer will also read incorrect.

Anyone know the answer, anyone tried the same test in another brand of car?

I've noticed the Tom Tom differences in my Sup 1, again at 70mph it's about 4mph out in relation to the speedo, which is accurate the GPS or the pulse in the car? if the Tom Tom is correct then it means the car isn't as economical as it reads, and the odometer will also read incorrect.

Anyone know the answer, anyone tried the same test in another brand of car?

Thats around the same if not better than most cars, speedo readings are never 100% most are only around 90%. GPS isnt 100% for that matter but its capable of being a lot more accurate than the speedo

Most people judge off what the computer says without ever checking it figures let alone checking the speedo but for the purpose of working out mpg the odometer is accurate enough imo

Absolute travesty!

I lol'ed... but he's right. I'm a taxi driver with an 03 plate Superb. I'm always filling out dockets and reciepts thoughout the day. Where do I keep the pen? It lays in the drinks holder part of the centre console. But then when I have a can of pop placed there the pen has to get poked into the heater airvent on the dashboard. It's made the vent slats go out of shape a little.

I know it's nitpicking but when you drive 8+ hours a day having to constantly pi55 about with a pen becomes an annoyance.

I lol'ed... but he's right. I'm a taxi driver with an 03 plate Superb. I'm always filling out dockets and reciepts thoughout the day. Where do I keep the pen? It lays in the drinks holder part of the centre console. But then when I have a can of pop placed there the pen has to get poked into the heater airvent on the dashboard. It's made the vent slats go out of shape a little.

I know it's nitpicking but when you drive 8+ hours a day having to constantly pi55 about with a pen becomes an annoyance.

put it behind your ear !!

can you not clip it to the sunvisor ?

Absolute travesty!

Good point here, I have a tom tom and go straight for the pen in the centre console to input the post code, If I was not a company car driver would probably think so what:rofl:! Just goes to prove each to there own and that is why we all go for different specs