"Which brings me on to the Skoda Roomster Scout. What were they thinking of? I like the normal Roomster. I think that if you avoid the three-cylinder diesel version, which doesn’t move unless you blow it up, it is a brilliant little car. But now Skoda has launched a version that has more ground clearance and various Streetwise styling cues ... but no four-wheel-drive system. This means that if you take it into a field, it will remain there until June."

Part of a very +ve review of the Octavia Scout Estate:

Jeremy Clarkson Skoda Octavia Scout 1.8 TSI review | Driving - Times Online

Stuart

Really winds me up when people criticise the Scout because it's not 4wd!

I bought it because I reckon it looks nicer than the standard Roomster inside & out and comes with things that I'd want as standard (nice alloys, esp)..

The scout is better value. It's styling not substance and a lot of people don't like but hey, wait till flares come back in....

Does the Scout have more ground clearance than the standard Roomster? Also it hasnt just been introduced as the article implied.

I considered the Scout but preferred the spec of the '3' and just needed to add roof rails.

Does the Scout have more ground clearance than the standard Roomster? Also it hasnt just been introduced as the article implied.

I considered the Scout but preferred the spec of the '3' and just needed to add roof rails.

On paper it is supposed to but I have found any in practice

BTW the Scout comes with ESP as standard which is far more useful than a glass roof.

BTW the Scout comes with ESP as standard which is far more useful than a glass roof.

My 3 came with both and roof rails.

Hmm , well I suppose you could say that rear parking sensors are more useful than sunset glass.

It's subjective. Each person will find their own requirements will push them in either direction.

When I bought mine and worked out what I thought was important, I saved about £700 on the Scout. It will be different for everyone.

Oh and the rear parking sensors are only worth it if they are free. I paid for mine and they are pretty cack compared a lot of others I have used despite the software upgrade. I wouldn't rate them for inclusion again

Oh and the rear parking sensors are only worth it if they are free. I paid for mine and they are pretty cack compared a lot of others I have used despite the software upgrade. I wouldn't rate them for inclusion again

What do you find is the problem? I think mine are superb although the comparison I have is with a DIY fitting on my old car.

I don't know if they're standard on the 3 but they were on the car when I bought it. I wouldn't want to be without them.

I've never had parking sensors before so can't make a comparison but I have no complaints about the ones that are fitted to the Roomster.

I know that a lot of standard equipment and options are down to marketing - charging £350/ £400 extra for metallic paint is in my view a rip off. In recent years when black became a popular choice what do the manufacturers do? They formulate a metallic black and charge extra for it. Hang on a minute I'm turning into Victor Meldrew :eek:

I know that a lot of standard equipment and options are down to marketing - charging £350/ £400 extra for metallic paint is in my view a rip off.

It's a well known fact that manufacturers and dealers make more margin on higher specced cars. Can't blame them though, they've gotta make a profit somewhere. AFAIK it's not uncommon for a dealer to make a £50 profit on a base spec car!

It's a well known fact that manufacturers and dealers make more margin on higher specced cars. Can't blame them though, they've gotta make a profit somewhere. AFAIK it's not uncommon for a dealer to make a £50 profit on a base spec car!

Just don't buy an MX-5, then - AIUI, the pitch to the Mazda board went along the lines of 'How would you like to produce a car for one-third less than the 323 that retails at one-third more?!'