Out with the old, in with the new?

[fattybacon]

After pondering the Nissan Note and Renault Modus, I went back to my original idea for a new family car and finally visited a local dealer to look at the Roomster.

At the dealership they had two just in, a 18 month old 1.9TDI '3' with slightly worn 'beige' (cappuccino?) interior but all the trimings and a 6 month old 1.4TDI '1' with basically seats, and that's about it. They were both just under £9000. So I asked about new because I knew there was the VAT free deal on at the moment and I was amazed that I could get a '2' for about a grand more.

So, I'm sold on the car but I'm unsure whether buying a new car is better or buying old, be interested in your opinions.

Now, to some general wibbling/pondering.

Diesel or Petrol? We don't drive much, no commuting, no school-run, no supermarket shopping - we just visit our families now and again (150-200 miles round trip, mostly motorway) and family holidays (Ireland annually, maybe France/Netherlands). I know we need to do a lot of miles to make a diesel worth while but would my driving requirements suit diesel better?

Numbers or Letters? The salesman said I could get the numbers, 1, 2, 3 without VAT but the letters S, SE, Scout would have VAT. This might be flannel because there is a pdf on the skoda site and all cars (made before week 5 2009) qualified for the zero-VAT deal.

1.4 or 1.9 Diesel If the answer to the above is diesel then which one. I've read 20 pages of the Roomster forum and some say 1.9 and some say 1.4. I'm no petrolhead, I've driven a 1.6 Focus for the last 9 1/2 years and had a 950cc Fiesta before that. I'm not sure I'd know that the 1.4 'lacks refinement' or that it has a 'blind' spot.

High or low spec Heh, to be honest, I'd be happy with a 1 or an S - I can even see the benefits of the open glove compartments! (I saw a really posh car yesterday parked with all it's glove compartments open to show any curious toerags that there was nothing to nick). Likewise, I'm no fan of alloy wheels, I've seen too many cars jacked up on bricks having had their alloys snaffled. I can't see me going as high as a Scout - I think the Yeti is a better solution for people who want a ruggedised car. The dealer said he might be able to get me a 2 with the glass roof, which reading the threads sounds like the 2 with the Family pack, which does sound it ticks all the boxes - if the price is right.

Anyway, I've got a test drive booked for Thursday afternoon so if you guys have some interesting questions or things for me to remember then I'd appreciate them.

[steffo]

I would say you would be better off getting a car that is about 6 months old,it will have depreciated a fair bit but still be basically a new car.I got an ex-Skoda UK car that was 7 months old had 3,000 miles on it and saved about £4000 on list price and there are some even better deals at the moment.The 2 was a good compromise the 1 being very basic and the 3 being too expensive for what you got extra.As for engines I can't fault the 1.9 TDI,very nippy when overtaking and does about 55mpg,i did consider the 1.4TDI but there wasn't a lot of price difference either to buy or insure and I'd read that it struggled a bit when shown a bit of a hill.The one mistake I did make was to go for a dark colour,the paint seems to mark and scratch much easier than previous cars i've had.

[fattybacon]

I would say you would be better off getting a car that is about 6 months old,it will have depreciated a fair bit but still be basically a new car.

Why would someone get rid of a car after 6 months? On a whim or because they had many, many problems with it? I'm new to dealership car buying, can you tell?

I won't make any rash decisions anyway, after reading this forum, the dealership I'm going to on Thursday has a pretty bad reputation so I'm not expecting any great deals.

As for engines I can't fault the 1.9 TDI,very nippy when overtaking and does about 55mpg,i did consider the 1.4TDI but there wasn't a lot of price difference either to buy or insure and I'd read that it struggled a bit when shown a bit of a hill.

I think I need to check the insurance difference, I live in a high risk area, so every little helps.

The one mistake I did make was to go for a dark colour,the paint seems to mark and scratch much easier than previous cars i've had.

Noted! My bro-in-law has bought a black car and paid extra for some plastic coating (can't remember what it's called)

[mannyo]

Why would someone get rid of a car after 6 months? On a whim or because they had many, many problems with it? I'm new to dealership car buying, can you tell?

Not neccesarily, if its a Skoda UK owned car then they change them frequently to keep their own fleet upto date. Other possibilites include, Ex. Demo or a owner who like to change cars a lot. We have a number of members on here who seem unable to keep a car for more than a few months before getting another.

I would proberbly go with the secondhand 3, its not that much older than the 1 but has a lot of extra gadgets. The new 2 would need to have quiet a lot of extras thrown at it to bring it up to the spec of the 3, and would therefore cost a lot more.

[fattybacon]

I would proberbly go with the secondhand 3, its not that much older than the 1 but has a lot of extra gadgets. The new 2 would need to have quiet a lot of extras thrown at it to bring it up to the spec of the 3, and would therefore cost a lot more.

I think that's why I was intrigued by the crumb offered by the salesman.. I think he was offering a 2 with the Family pack, a deal they did last year which gets you "panoramic sunroof, acoustic rear parking sensors, metallic paint, sunset glass and electric rear windows" added to a 2 for nowt.

I need to see what the difference between that is a 3 I think.

[The PM]

Ex Demo is the most common 6 month old car for sale, I'd have thought... personally I'd go for one about 18m/2yrs old... the one problem with the Roomie over, say the Fabia Estate, is that the depreciation is horrendous... personally I wouldn't go anywhere near anything newer... We have a Motability car and they've raised the "downpayment" twice on them since we got it and I suspect the main reason for that is the resale value after 3 years which is not as good as similar type cars such as the Fabia and Berlingo, etc.

An 18m/2 year one still has some warranty on it and makes much more sense unless you've got a few grand to waste.

Re engines, the 1.9 is only in 2 and 3 spec, I think... you've not given an annual mileage, but if its as low as it looks then i suspect a 1.4 petrol would be enough, or a 1.4 80 TDi if you can get one for the same price... don't touch the 1.2 or 1.4 70 TDi, they aren't powerful enough for it as its quite heavy for its size...

[steffo]

Sorry I should have been clearer.An ex-demo or a Skoda UK car is what I really meant when I said get one about 6 months old.:)Probably get a good deal on a 58 plate at the moment now that 09 plate has just started

[PSbridge]

The deal conditions are virtually the same as mine, 1,2 or 3 with the VAT off and I was offered a Scout as well. While we discussed the deal, another dealer bagged the Scout, so we went for the 3.

I test drove the 1.4 TDI engine and found it underpowered as other members have said as well, so chose the 1.9TDI.

As you will see from another thread, the Roomster 1.4TDI I tried did not have a glass roof. I tried it in my garage and with a front mounted aerial, it got under the Henderson door with a little to spare. I didn't twig that the 3 with the glass roof has a rear mounted aerial which rides a little higher up due to the shape of the roof. It is unlikely as supplied to get under my door without shortening or changing the element. In fact we will not know for sure for another couple of weeks, but a point worth remembering if clearance is tight.

[fattybacon]

I test drove the 1.4 TDI engine and found it underpowered as other members have said as well, so chose the 1.9TDI.

I better look at the differences in insurance. Ta.

As you will see from another thread, the Roomster 1.4TDI I tried did not have a glass roof. I tried it in my garage and with a front mounted aerial, it got under the Henderson door with a little to spare. I didn't twig that the 3 with the glass roof has a rear mounted aerial which rides a little higher up due to the shape of the roof. It is unlikely as supplied to get under my door without shortening or changing the element. In fact we will not know for sure for another couple of weeks, but a point worth remembering if clearance is tight.

I had been read your thread with interest, my garage was built in the 1940s so is quite snug. I was amazed to find the Roomy is thinner than my current Ford Focus and only a little bit longer, but with a shed load more boot space. However, as with you, height is an issue, we've got a rollup door and it means clearance is low. I can't get in with the Focus with a roofbox on so the aerial might be an issue on a glass topped Roomy.

I hanker after the glass roof, what with a 1 year old child, but I fear the cracking of the glass if I go over the very high curbs to escape idiot parking (blocking garage entrance).

Looks like it's a 2 or a Scout! Oh decisions, decisions.

[Decron]

Here is what you get for the money:

Skoda Roomster 1.9TDI PD 2 5-Dr MPV

Skoda Roomster 1.9TDI PD Scout 5-Dr MPV

You driven one yet?

[cheezemonkhai]

For £1k more I'd get the new car in level 2 and add the options, possibly even see about getting a new 3.

You get a huge discount, an extra 6 months of warranty, won't be forever cleaning that stupid beige interior and get to pick the engine you want. No nagging worries about how it has been driven or why it was traded in at 6 months old.

All IMHO

[The PM]

FB, you are getting worked up about the glass roof uneccessarily, I feel... just because its happened to one other owner doesn't mean there's an inherreent fault... I live on a road with speed bumps and have been driving over them for the past 6 months without any issues, so the odd kerbing isn't going to break it... in fact its more likely to damage the alloys than the glass roof!

If you were to take that argument to its logical outcome you'd avoid any car with a turbo, or electronic steering or lots of other new fangled gadgets because they are far more likely to fail! That other thread has highlighted a one-off and having noticed that Skoda have agreed to pay for the new roof it seems more likely that it was a faulty instalation rather than anything else. It does make quite a difference to the inside, brightening it up a lot and the kids love it!

There are differences between the Scout and the 3, many on here favour and plug the Scout a lot, but personally I didn't like it and instead got the 3 which I'm much happier with... the only thing I would have liked is the ESP which is an extra with the 3 but standard with the Scout... but pseudo 4x4 looks of the Scout don't appeal!

[fattybacon]

FB, you are getting worked up about the glass roof uneccessarily, I feel... just because its happened to one other owner doesn't mean there's an inherreent fault...

Noted.

There are differences between the Scout and the 3, many on here favour and plug the Scout a lot, but personally I didn't like it and instead got the 3 which I'm much happier with... the only thing I would have liked is the ESP which is an extra with the 3 but standard with the Scout... but pseudo 4x4 looks of the Scout don't appeal!

Yeah me too, why pretend it's a 4x4? The lack of ESP is my bugbear with the whole thing. ESP should be standard on every car, not just an option, but for the top end 3 it's criminal it's not there.

Shame they don't still make the 2 - I'd have that with the Family Pack they offered last year and paid for ESP as an option. Fussy b*gger eh?

[The PM]

Sounds quite a sensible option actually!

This "options" thing in this country drives me up the wall sometimes... I just wish they'd price a basic car and then list all the options and let you choose which ones you wanted...

[Decron]

I don't think the Scout is supposed to "look" like a 4x4 or even emulate it, I don't think I know anyone who has bought one wanting a "4x4" look. It's more a sort of urban style and I bought mine over the 3 because it had the kit I wanted and I genuinely think that the trim suits the vehicle as well as providing a certain amount of protection (Think Shopping trollys, car park muppets etc....).

Each to their own with it.

[fattybacon]

genuinely think that the trim suits the vehicle as well as providing a certain amount of protection (Think Shopping trollys, car park muppets etc....).

I think I preferred it when you said Nimrods

My current car's right front bumper area is covered in green paint and scratches due to me having an old chest of drawers in the top corner of the 1940s garage I mentioned before. Me thinks removing that and plastic bumpers is what I need, never mind other people!

I'm warming to the Scout now, makes the others seem a little bare - now I'm wishing for a 2nd hand one with a panoramic roof!

[fluffmeister]

My Scout actually looks pretty good now, it even got a compliment from a geezer in South Wales. It's black though so seems to blend some of the more awkward angles, and as mine is lowered 40mm, running uprated front ARB and a Neuspeed rear ARB with the 17" upgrade alloys, it actually looks really good with the lower plastic scout trim. It has a muscular look and stance to it (or about as much as that kind of stance you can get in a Roomster )

I actually find the looks of the non scout model's really odd, they look to tall and gangely, Tall sides with nothing to break the lines up, the scout's additional plastic does a good job of breaking the lines up and making the car look more proportionate (hard to describe really)

I certainly did not buy it for pseudo 4x4 looks, in fact the first thing that happened was it was dropped 40 MM The scout has a certain rugged charm to it, and with some subtle mod's can really look the part. (all in my unbiased humble opinion of course LOL)

And just because I am in Inverness and missing the wee beastie whilst it's home in Cheshire

[Decron]

My Scout actually looks pretty good now, it even got a compliment from a geezer in South Wales.

No way!

They usually save compliments fro the day after match day!

[The PM]

"Rugged" and "Urban" looks and covered in bits of plastic.... exactly the reason I don't like them... but as you say, everyone to their own...

[Broomster]

I have a 1.9TDI 3. I dont really do enough miles to justify a diesel from new, but I got a 15 month ex Skoda car for an excellent price 6 months ago, and it was no more than the petrol version with the same trim. Also, bear in mind that if you travel a lot on the continent, diesel costs a bit less over there.

The engine is VWs old but robust PD engine. Its a bit of a growler at high revs but it pulls like a train and at 75-80 its pretty smooth and quiet. Max comfortable (quiet) cruise is about 85 (on a German autobahn of course with impressively low wind noise) and with the cruise set at 70mph it can manage up to 60mpg! 50-55 is more normal though in everyday driving. Thats about 550miles before the tank goes on reserve.

I love the 3 trim - dont worry about the sunroof - it makes the car really light and pleasant - and you will love having cruise and parking sensors. Avoid the smaller engines though if you plan to carry a decent load.

[g6zru]

I've got the Scout 1.9Tdi, had it a year, I also liked the rugged look. I had the glass roof and Maxidot and Climatronic as extras and if I was buying it today I'd add cruise control and reversing sensors.

As well as day to day transport it has also towed a 1200Kg caravan without any problems. Performance is good enough fro me and the fuel consumption is a vast improvement over previous cars (petrol).

BTW. I measured to the tip of the rear mounted aerial; 10096mm.

Fred