Playing around with the Specs now of both cars.

I know the VRS is more sporty, is there anything else.

my main thing is economay, and I will be looking for a DSG box

I am not too bothered about leather, and so by playing with the spec, the cars seem to come out at the same price.

Any thoughts for one or the other (which only having been on this forum since sunday, I am sure there will be)

L&K then... diesel has no place in a sporty car!

vRS doesn't have as much standard equipment and uses more fuel... Handles better and goes quicker than the L&K though and is comfortable enough on a long journey if you suit the seats...

Like you I got the car as a business tool but I wanted something a bit more fun than a "standard" car.

If economy really is important then you want the manual box and not the DSG as on the diesels the economy is worse with the DSG

At the end of the day, only you can make the decision as to which one suits you best

L&K then... diesel has no place in a sporty car!

Oh really?

DSG for me is a must, I spend so much time with my foot on the clutch!!!!

The stats show even with the DSG that I can get 47 to the gallon. my 407 SW only gets 42-43 so I am still better off.

I have seen a few VRs estates on teh road, and they just look 'nicer'

I need to be comfortable, and maybe the VRs has a harder suspension whcih might not be as good for me.

DSG for me is a must, I spend so much time with my foot on the clutch!!!!

The stats show even with the DSG that I can get 47 to the gallon. my 407 SW only gets 42-43 so I am still better off.

I have seen a few VRs estates on teh road, and they just look 'nicer'

I need to be comfortable, and maybe the VRs has a harder suspension whcih might not be as good for me.

Take the figures with a pinch of salt, what does Peugeot claim for your current car (bet it's not 42-43)... I average about 42 mpg on my DSG vRS and I'm happy with that although it has to be said on a sedate run on the motorway (75ish) it does do well over 50mpg - I'm just not restrained enough for a sedate run

407 is supposed to be about 47-48, but only ever get near that London to Cornwall (for some reason)

I will be doing London to Liverpool tomorrow with a slightly heavy foot, but not much over what is permitted, and I woudl be getting about 45-46 tops.

I would be very happy with 45mg with a DSG box if it saves all that changing up and down.

I am far from a boy racer, so I may just stick with the L&K, although looking at some of the photos of the Vrs..........

Oh the joys of choosing a new car.

For L & K read P & S........

.........Pipe and Slippers

Go vRS

Get a vRS

L& K is nice BUT its not sporty enough for me

I had to make the same decision last year too. I chose the L+K as the shape of my drive means the VRS would have grounded every single time I went on and off as it is lower. I also decided that as I travel 60K per year I would rather have a comfortable set of springs. What I am going to do is get it remapped so I should have the luxury of the L+K and the power of the VRS! Also the L+K was cheaper second hand than the VRS and it has more toys on!

Tom

Vrs no comparison

Maybe the Vrs would be good if I werent doing 35k a year.

I also think ti would be good to keep licence.

Dont have a pipe, and never wear slippers.

Still trying to persuade the wife that a Skoda is not juse the cheap option.

Oh really?

Made the point for me quite succinctly. As for DSG's having a drinking problem that's also ***p too. Mine does high 40's regularly. I'd have the vRS anyday.

For me,as you can tell from the sidebar, it has to be the L&K, vRS nice, I had a test drive in one when I was deciding what to buy, but I just prefered the smoother ride with the much better equipment level as standard in the L&K, besides if you decide you want to have vRS levels of get up and go you can have it for about £3-400. The seats some complain as too narrow but as I don't need a wide load board for my arse they fit just fine, plus my friend who doesn't have the most pert bum in the world didn't complain about them last weekend, having said that they don't have the extra side support that the vRS seats have during enthusiastic driving, make up for that in the winter months with the standard heating, alcantara option in mine that helps.

Ian.

Seems an odd topic in a way as the two different specs are fairly clearcut, if you prefer a comfier ride then the L&K is the way to go whereas if you prefer a sportier drive then it's the VRS. I went with a VRS as I prefer the harder ride and better feel from its sportier setup but if I was looking for a gentler cruiser I would have gone with an L&K.

John

Vrs no comparison

You can't possibly argue with that???

what are the residuals of both models. Id have thought the vRS was the more desired car as well. IMO you cant compare the two cars as they are totally different.

Oh really?

And? My point still stands :p

And? My point still stands :p

That car, powered by the fuel of satan keeps whipping the petrol ones into submission...

Have to admit, if I did less miles I'd be driving a petrol too. I just can't afford to do 25-30K a year on Super Unleaded...

I do 28k miles a year and it's vrs for me, had a leon fr before and that's firm the vrs is quite soft in comparison!!

I can't be doing with soft suspension or seats, attention drops as it's all very boring. Well that's my thoughts

what are the residuals of both models. Id have thought the vRS was the more desired car as well. IMO you cant compare the two cars as they are totally different.

Along the same lines - I don't know if it makes a difference to you too, but what are the differences in insurance costs?

Edited 27 April, 201016 yr by Ed-Preston

Go for vrs it"s the best car skoda make

rob

I do 28k miles a year and it's vrs for me, had a leon fr before and that's firm the vrs is quite soft in comparison!!

I can't be doing with soft suspension or seats, attention drops as it's all very boring. Well that's my thoughts

I'm much the same, had a Seat Toledo but due to the lack of dog suitable Seats I went for the VRS which is a bit soft for my liking but probably better for the dog admittedly. When I bought the Toledo Sport I was actually after an Octavia L&K after a Superb Elegance TDI 130 falling through, the Seat's 150bhp engine made it an impulse buy which I thought I'd be getting rid of within the year but I found I enjoyed driving it much more than a comfortable car. To be fair though I can see why some people prefer a softer ride though.

John

besides if you decide you want to have vRS levels of get up and go you can have it for about £3-400

You can't if the vRS has had £300-£400 spent on it

There's not much point either having vRS levels of get up and go with Renault 4 handling

I for one would prefer the L&K - like the looks of the RS but miss the comfort. I think that the Octavias suspension is pretty stiff at the best of times in all the models but the RS in my view is a bit too much. I am not really a fan of lowered cars.

But this, as ever, is down to personal taste. And for the looks there's nothing better than the RS....

And in the end, who am I to discuss the plush versions when driving the Classic spec myself...