Hi

Personally I tink ya'll need to drive more cars in the same class as the skoda fabia and then form oppinions. Seriously I work for a rental company and cars like Ford, Vauxhall, Fiat and many others (Including Prestige vehicles) and the overall build quality is superb against rivals. The interior of the fabia blows holes in 'Most' other cars and engines are much better in overall respect.

I owned a MK1 and now have a Mk2 and the build quality is simply better. y'all need to stop bitching about minor things, if your un appy then buy something else, I dare you to find better in te same price range... I am sure you will fail.

For gods sake just enjoy the car they're better then anything else in the Class and price range.... this is from experience as well.

TL

We've got a Mk2 Estate (Nov 2008) and MK1 Hatch (June 2004) and both have excellent build quality - not a rattle from either.

Mk1 hatch has done 80K and still feels great.

Would have to agree with other comments though - MK2 interior feels much better quality than MK1 and other makes (I test drove loads of cars before buying and this was the best quality).

Still feels brand new after 10K.

We've got a Mk2 Estate (Nov 2008) and MK1 Hatch (June 2004) and both have excellent build quality - not a rattle from either.

Mk1 hatch has done 80K and still feels great.

Would have to agree with other comments though - MK2 interior feels much better quality than MK1 and other makes (I test drove loads of cars before buying and this was the best quality).

Still feels brand new after 10K.

Indeed it does sir I loved my Mk1 but my new mistress is lovely The car is good too.... lmao

i had a fabia mark 1 estate and am very disappointed to find the more expensive mark 2 to be less well built. It seems that Skoda have cut down on costs and use cheaper quality materials, the dashboard, steering wheel, gear knob and every bit of trim feels a bit cheap and plasticky. I prefer my old mark one. But too late now, i've already bought a mark 2 - i'll lose depreciation if i go back to a mark 1. Also, sound insulation not as good and handling similar. I think the marketing people at Skoda have relied on the reputation of the build quality of the mark one. The mark one had vw/audi like build quality but the new mark 2 a bit citreon-like - cheaper feel.

The difference that struck me between the Mk1 and Mk 2 is that the painted steel of the door frames is exposed in the Mk 2, but not in the Mk1. So you can see a strip of the external colour on the inside. Not a bad thing necessarily, but a difference which might look "cheaper" in a bright colour such as yellow.

i think a significant factor in the design of the Mk 1 is that Skoda/VW must have known the first Fabia had to be a breakthrough, reputation-establishing car. This meant the old Skoda myths had to be addressed head on. Nearly all the reviews back in about 2000 commented on build quality, the reassuring heavy clunk of the doors, durable plastics, ride quality etc. In it's context the Mk1 really was a great car: much better and bigger than the contemporary Polo of the time, and also equipped with what at the time were seen as powerful and innovative engines for a supermini such as the PD 100. I bought one more as an alternative to small familiy hatches such as the contemporary Golf Mk4. I loved it!

one other thing: i suspect Czech wages have risen relative to the EU mean and compared to what they were in the early 2000s which was then a significant factor in supporting Skoda's value for money

I agree with the less favourable comments on the MK2 build quality.

I have owned a Mk1 estate in elegance trim and now have the Mk 2 estate in 3 trim.

The Mk 1 did feel better built all the doors clunk ressurngly and I have to agree with the comment above the boot on the MK2 flexs appalingly.

I hate the plastic chrome effect handles on the MK2 the handles on the MK1 felt so better quality.

But the MK1 had an awful dash the great swaith of bulky dash were the MK2 is broken up quite nicely more interesting to be in!.

Why did they drop the heated seats in the MK2? used to like that in the MK1.

What does bug me thou is the Oynk seat cloth ,picks up clothes fibres like nothing else.Looks like a perminent grey cobweb. its a bu**er to hoover of as well.

Overall I would say go for a late plate MK1.

But the MK1 had an awful dash the great swaith of bulky dash were the MK2 is broken up quite nicely more interesting to be in!.

I prefer the dash of the mark 1, less cluttered and smarter. The mark 2's dash is a bit plasticky and no longer got that durable quality feel, but some of the worst things in the mark 2 is the steering wheel, gear knob, door handles and pretty much most other things feels cheap. Also, the gear stick has to travel more to change gears, seems only slightly more sloppy gear change, but still ok.

My Mk2 is still on the way, and I sold my Mk1 3 years ago... but from the test drive on the Mk2 and what I remember of the Mk1, I think the Mk2 has a softer clutch (less tiring when driving in traffic).

My Mk2 is still on the way, and I sold my Mk1 3 years ago... but from the test drive on the Mk2 and what I remember of the Mk1, I think the Mk2 has a softer clutch (less tiring when driving in traffic).

no, feels very similar to me (on the same 12valve engine)c i think its because ur feet have aged by 3 years if u test drove recently

no, feels very similar to me (on the same 12valve engine)c i think its because ur feet have aged by 3 years if u test drove recently

LOL @ "ur feet have aged by 3 years"

mine was the 1.4 8v, maybe that's why.