Why does the diesel Octavia vRS have a F tax band, when the VW Golf and Seat Leon with the same engine have an E band? The Golf's economy figures are also better than the Octavia's.

Are the Octavia figures still based on the PD170 engine? Just like the Skoda brochure still says the petrol vRS has a T-FSI engine, whereas VW and Seat show TSI for the equivalent models.

The octavia is bigger and heavier than the golf and leon, so therefore has more emissions and higher tax as a result. I believe the golf only just scrapes into band E.

its not the weight - its the more effiecient CR 170 as found in the FR, GTD and A5 SLine.

The golf and A5 are 134 and 137 CO2 ratings.

The A5 is 1530kg in weight, the golf 1329 and the octy 1485.

Skoda just have the older less effiecient CR.

its not the weight - its the more effiecient CR 170 as found in the FR, GTD and A5 SLine.

The golf and A5 are 134 and 137 CO2 ratings.

The A5 is 1530kg in weight, the golf 1329 and the octy 1485.

Skoda just have the older less effiecient CR.

If that was true then why is the CR 170 band F in an Octavia and band G in a Superb? :think:

The a3 sportback is 40kg heavier than the 3 door and yet it stays in band D.

The vRS hatch is rated at 149, as is the estate which weighs 15kg more than the hatch. The superb is also rated at 149 according to skoda's website and brochure despite weighing 1555kg which is 110kg more than the octy.

maybe the older Euro 4 against the newer Euro 5 would put it in a different band. Both the new octy and new superb are Euro 5 now though.

The superb is also rated at 149 according to skoda's website and brochure despite weighing 1555kg which is 110kg more than the octy.

maybe the older Euro 4 against the newer Euro 5 would put it in a different band. Both the new octy and new superb are Euro 5 now though.

According to the 25th May 2010 brochure the CR 170 Superb is 151, with DSG it rises to 159 and the 4x4 is 165. - They are listed as C02 (g/km) figures.

151, 159 and 165 are for the estate. 149 and 157 are for the hatch. 163 for the 4x4.

Easily misread.

Edited 22 July, 201015 yr by prolfe

Sorry yes i forgot to add 'estate' to the above, the point i was trying to make is that the weight of the car obviously does have a bearing on the tax band (which is IMO partly why the greenline - which is band D, is not available with the spare wheel option) as apart from the extra 20kg's that the estate weighs over the saloon there is no difference between the engine spec's yet the tax band differs.

I may have got it all completely wrong? but this is the way it looks to me, i am happy to be corrected as to why there is a difference between two otherwise identical cars.

in the intance of the superb, yes they are in different bands, weight does have some bearing on this obivously. I thought you were comparing the octy and superb hatches.

Which makes the banding ridiculous when you take in to account weight difference between the superb hatch and estate which is far far less than the weight difference between the octy and superb hatches.

I've no idea how they got to 151 for the estate.

Why skoda can't give us the super efficient 170 CR as found in the Audi's, the start stop would also help.

The Audi is 13 miles per gallon better than the vRS around town. In fact the Audi's around town figure (49.6) is the same as the vRS's average figure !!

Imagine a CR vRS with these figures:

Town - 49.6mpg

Average - 60.1mpg

Out of Town - 67.3mpg

As for the latest TSI, this too is much much better in our more expensive cousin:

Imagine a TSI vRS with these figures:

Town: 34mpg

Average: 44.1mpg

Out of Town: 53.3mpg

that's not far off the CR vRS now ! 36.7, 49.6 and 61.4mpg

I think we have to accept that with Skoda we get value and tried and tested technology. If one wants the very latest technology from the VAG group then it is a question of Audi and VW and the 25 to 50% price hike that goes with it. Personally I would rather save the capital cost and enjoy what is still an excellent product.

What the figures say, and what you achieve are two completely different things. Just look at the figures actually achieved in magazine's road tests.

Unless you drove an Audi with Start/Stop almost exclusively in Urban conditions (and assuming you actually got the engine warm enough so that the start/stop was actually activated), I would be surprised if the long term figures were much different between the VAG models.

the golf GTD doesn't have start stop and is much much much better:

43.5 urban

average 55.4

out of town 65.7