Looking for a Superb

[nickboazracing]

Hello all.

I am looking for a Superb, having finally decided that will be the car to replace my current steed.

I'm set on a diesel Elegance with Sat Nav, and an auto box.

Having looked through the Parkers guide, I would like a 1.9PD 130, pre October 05 for cheaper tax. However, would the 2.5 V6 diesel be a better car, being vastly more refined and a bit quicker, but not significantly. However, running costs including fuel and tax would be higher, despite being able to carry out all and any maintenance myself.

What are peoples thoughts on 1.9 vs 2.5?

I understand the PD engine to be very good, however sensitive to using a very specific oil? Would I be right to have no major concerns buying a car with 100,000+ miles? I do need room for 20k a year for at least 3 years.

Doing some browsing on here, problems I will be looking for when buying include:

CV boots

water ingress vis pollen filter causing consumer unit under passenger seat to fail.

coolant temp sensor (cheap but awkward)

Parking sensors

leaking radiators

Is there anything else of significance I should be wary off? Any issues with the auto box? I have noticed people like to change the oil more frequently than the 40k interval.

Anything on the toys and gadgets? (I have to confess to loving the toys! A big selling point of the car for me!)

Is there a service schedule on this forum I would be able to read through in preparation for looking at potential purchases?

Any info is greatly valued, thank you.

Nick.

[rotodiesel]

The 1.9 PD manual box Superb is the only model worth buying - and then only if you fix all the other stupid design faults such as rainwater ingress. PD engines must have the right oil.

You appear to have done some of your homework, but if you really want a V6 diesel, look at the survival rate of the Bosch VP44 pump, cost of belt changes, road tax, fuel consumption and added performance relative to the PD. Then buy a 1.9 PD.

No slush pump auto box works well or lasts very long on a high torque diesel engine - hence VAG's development of the DSG. The B5.5 auto box is poor at the best of times and the V6 breaks it even more quickly. Buy a 5 speed manual or choose an auto from another maker.

rotodiesel.

[nickboazracing]

1.9 PD it is. Are the autos really that bad? Even with only 130 bhp?!

[rotodiesel]

It's torque which kills gearboxes - power is just the product of torque and speed. The 1.9 PD can manage 285 Nm of torque - enough to pull trees out. That's why it accelerates so well in the "really useful" rev range.

Power is not a very good indicator of useful performance on the road - very few engines indeed spend any significant time at or near max rpm and sensible drivers don't go there.

Given the boat-like handling of the Superb, the performance with a 1.9 PD engine is quite enough.

rotodiesel.

[johannapam1]

I have the 2.5 V6 and I would not have bought any other model (not even the so called best buy 1.9) - it is great and def worth any additional cost of maintenance. I do not do high miles the car is Nov 05 and has 36k on the clock.

[Paulius55]

You are never going to get an objective reply on here! So - subjectively - the 2.5 V6 auto is the only one worth buying. It is smooth, quiet, reasonable economy. It will always appear from forums like these that all examples will all suffer from all the problems. This is clearly not the case and I bet that statistically most people will have few problems. Unfortunately, those untroubled people are unlikely to keep reporting about their latest non-problem. I have a 2.5 V6 Auto, a BMW F800ST motorcycle and did have a Ford Focus 1.8TDCi. If I were to believe the respective forum chatter for these 3 vehicles then all would fall apart as soon as move, with all sorts of problems that "all" seem to suffer from. However, that is not the case. I suggest you choose whichever car you want and make your own mind up.

[Gizmo]

I suggest you choose whichever car you want and make your own mind up.

I couldn't disagree more, on that basis the 2.0 140PD must be the best of both worlds, more power and cc's than the 1.9 130PD and newer and closer to the power and cc's of the 2.5 c/w it's old technology??

Read about all the issues that all the engines suffer from, work out how much each will cost to run (including tax and insurance etc) test drive the ones that are still left in the running and then make an educated decision on which one you buy - most people would choose the 1.9 130PD.

Don't do this blindly - I didn't care which engine I had, I did the research and IMO the best all rounder was the 1.9 130PD, so I bought one of them.

[nickboazracing]

You are never going to get an objective reply on here! So - subjectively - the 2.5 V6 auto is the only one worth buying. It is smooth, quiet, reasonable economy. It will always appear from forums like these that all examples will all suffer from all the problems. This is clearly not the case and I bet that statistically most people will have few problems. Unfortunately, those untroubled people are unlikely to keep reporting about their latest non-problem. I have a 2.5 V6 Auto, a BMW F800ST motorcycle and did have a Ford Focus 1.8TDCi. If I were to believe the respective forum chatter for these 3 vehicles then all would fall apart as soon as move, with all sorts of problems that "all" seem to suffer from. However, that is not the case. I suggest you choose whichever car you want and make your own mind up.

That's a very sensible and concise response, thank you!

You are of course dead right in what you say, and this is something I do bare in mind when browsing forums. An interesting example of your point would be my dad's TVR, in 5 years of regular use it has let him down just once, and that was a generic part not made by TVR..

But it is still nice to know what to look out for and what potential weak points there are in future ownership.

I think I will have to try both the 1.9 and 2.5 and go from there.

Is the auto box good to drive? That was probably actually more what I want to know from the original post, rather than reliability.

[nickboazracing]

I couldn't disagree more, on that basis the 2.0 140PD must be the best of both worlds, more power and cc's than the 1.9 130PD and newer and closer to the power and cc's of the 2.5 c/w it's old technology??

Read about all the issues that all the engines suffer from, work out how much each will cost to run (including tax and insurance etc) test drive the ones that are still left in the running and then make an educated decision on which one you buy - most people would choose the 1.9 130PD.

Don't do this blindly - I didn't care which engine I had, I did the research and IMO the best all rounder was the 1.9 130PD, so I bought one of them.

I have made an educated decision that the 1.9PD 130 is the most appealing and attractive to my requirements; this was in my first post..

Not sure I understand what you're saying here, sorry...

[Gizmo]

Nick the reply was at Paulius's comment of just "choose whichever car you want".

To do this blindly would be very foolish, just like those who thought the water ingress would not happen to their Superb, inevitably it would (without preventative measures being taken) because it's down to a design fault rather than luck, many people knock rotodiesel for his harsh comments about the Superb, but ignore his knowledge at your peril.

You do seem to be doing the research on the cars pretty thoroughly, this will no doubt pay dividends in the long run, especially as you intend to put a fair amount of miles on one.

My MKI Superb (that I have just sold) was one of the best cars I have owned, yes there are stupid problems that should have been sorted out on the Passat but once you know about them and keep on top of them they are IMO very hard to beat.

[ericsuperbee]

I have had my 06/06 2.5 V6 TDI auto for 4 years now - 92k on the clock, of which I have done 82k. There have been 2 'breakages' in that time - a cracked fuel run-back valve replaced under warranty, and had to have a new gear lever - the top of the original fell apart. That was 'ouch' at £135 + fitting.

Oil is changed every 10k and g/box oil/filter done with the cambelt change at 80k. I have yet to put any oil in between changes.

Gearchange is not the best - I use 1>2 auto, then Tip for 3>4>5

Cruising at m/way speed in affordable leather seated, climate and cruise controlled comfort in almost silence, listening to a very adequate sound system do I bother about the slightly higher maintenance and fuel costs? Am I a happy bunny?

[skodanut]

Seems to me what ever car one decides to purchase, regardless whether its a 1.9 tdi or 2.5 tdi or even a 2.0 tdi.....all these cars have problems, in my opinion, the 2.5 tdi would be more expensive to maintain mechanically if things went wrong with the engine, where as the 2.0 tdi has a pump problem, and the 1.9 can suffer from any problem of the two previous vehicles mentioned , depending on servicing plus all 3 models suffer the same problems with water and electronic issues....guess its a case of going with what vehicle offers the best over all rating.......ok my car has oil pump issues....if a belt snaps on a 2.5 tdi then that effectively writes the car off regarding cost to replace the engine....personally a good warranty purchased yearly would make more sense, and then one can choose from any 3 models of superb and the various trims they come in.

As for torque from all 3 models, they are all very impressive, every model has its own specification....but the same old problems.

[Cown]

Just stay away from the 2.0 140hp engine, then it wont go totally havoc... :-)

[oh_superb]

I have a 2.5 tdi auto. A brilliant car for motorway work. Much better mid range response than the 1.9 tdi. It rally comes into its own at 85mph+++, and in my opinion is actually more economical at 100+ than the smaller engine (worst I ever got was 38 mpg and that was VERY fast driving on Italian motorways around the alps).

Round town the V6 is thirsty, expect 23-27 mpg and if most of your miles are town then consider this fuel expense.

Dont forget that the 1.9 tdi requires the top spec oil, which is not cheap. The 2.5 tdi can be run on the cheap stuff, so keep this in mind as this can slightly offset the raised fuel bills. However, I run mine on the top stuff anyway, which should make my engine last well into very high miles.

Whichever you buy though, beware of the ones that have been on "long life" service schedule, particularly the V6 as the camshafts are not too keen on 20000 mile service intervals especially if driven hard all the time at high engine speeds.

Yes, the VP44 pump on the V6 can fail electronically (£1000 job even though the actual mechanicals of the pump are fine) but if it does fail you will do another 100k miles before it fails again. Compare this to the cost of just one failed injector on the 1.9 tdi, and there are 4 of them!

In terms of maintenance I don't think there is anything particularly more expensive as a routine or preventative maintenance item on the V6 that will cost you more. Belts are a bit more expensive but this is peanuts. In both cases (4 cyl vs 6 cyl) the front end will need to come off for belt changes and this is labour intensive so expect 4 hours labour for timing belt and water pump replacement.

In terms of auto box life - I suggest you buy privately and find a car which has done low miles with an OAP owner so you know the full torque potential of the engine has never been used.

That should make for a long lasting gearbox in your 60 k miles of wonership over 3 years.

If you do decide to go for the V6, I suggest you make sure all the glow plugs work and the car starts well from dead cold. Insist on this prior to the test drive. Glow plugs snapped on mine so needed a new head. That was expensive. But now with 6 new plugs it starts instantly on these cold mornings.

Sorry about the long post, just wanted to give you a bit of help

[rotodiesel]

The V6 diesel has the same overall gearing as the 4 cyl diesels - VAG were too penny pinching to give them a higher final drive gearing ratio which they should have. So, the V6 is not an appreciably better high speed cruiser than the 4 under steady state conditions. The top gear acceleration at speed is better though.

In the UK there is a blanket 70 mph speed limit so unless you travel frequently in a few selected foreign countries, there's absolutely no point in the V6. The 1.9 will get you to 70 mph adequately quickly.

Under part load conditions in town, a V6 slush box uses about twice the fuel of a manual 1.9. Most of us spend a fair amount of time driving under these conditions. Throw in the tax, which gets worse each year, as does the cost of fuel and it's a no-brainer.

The whole point of this (interesting) discussion is that the problems of the 1.9 PD Superb are fixable for relatively little money by the owner. The problems of the other engines are not.

rotodiesel.

[oh_superb]

The V6 diesel has the same overall gearing as the 4 cyl diesels - VAG were too penny pinching to give them a higher final drive gearing ratio which they should have. So, the V6 is not an appreciably better high speed cruiser than the 4 under steady state conditions. The top gear acceleration at speed is better though.

In the UK there is a blanket 70 mph speed limit so unless you travel frequently in a few selected foreign countries, there's absolutely no point in the V6. The 1.9 will get you to 70 mph adequately quickly.

Under part load conditions in town, a V6 slush box uses about twice the fuel of a manual 1.9. Most of us spend a fair amount of time driving under these conditions. Throw in the tax, which gets worse each year, as does the cost of fuel and it's a no-brainer.

The whole point of this (interesting) discussion is that the problems of the 1.9 PD Superb are fixable for relatively little money by the owner. The problems of the other engines are not.

rotodiesel.

Agreed 100%.

[CRC]

I tend to agree that in the cold light of dawn, Spock's logical arguments for the 1.9 are unquestionably correct.

But when that "smooth as silk" V6 starts to spin up, warp drive engages and the stars start to blur ........

[oh_superb]

I tend to agree that in the cold light of dawn, Spock's logical arguments for the 1.9 are unquestionably correct.

But when that "smooth as silk" V6 starts to spin up, warp drive engages and the stars start to blur ........

oh yes.

[johannapam1]

I tend to agree that in the cold light of dawn, Spock's logical arguments for the 1.9 are unquestionably correct.

But when that "smooth as silk" V6 starts to spin up, warp drive engages and the stars start to blur ........

Couldn't agree more!!

[ian0x0r]

If I was being sensible and looking to get best value for money I would go for the 1.9 if I was buying again.

[oh_superb]

If I was being sensible and looking to get best value for money I would go for the 1.9 if I was buying again.

.... ditto. Particularly with fuel at nearly 1.30 a litre now....

But then again all my previous cars were 4 cylinder, so enjoying the smoothness of 6 cylinders I never had before.... You only live once.

[primey]

I used to have a pretty tricked out 2.5 V6 TDi with pretty much all the trimmings. I have to say it wad a cracking car which gave me absolutely no trouble at all what so ever. It was a 6 speed manual Comfort with most of the Elegance toys fitted to it and I loved that car a lot....

I only got rid because I had the urge to buy summat insane!!

[Fred Bloggs]

My 2.5 TDi Elegance on a 55 plate is a very, very nice motor. The best motor I've ever had. Despite never having had water ingress, I check regularly, the interior lights (front) and the side mirror puddle lights are out. So I have the corroded wiring syndrome, but apart from that the car has been faultless. 66k miles, not a huge mileage, but not bad for pretty much fault free motoring. The car is used mainly on the motorways and returns a genuine 44 to 45 mpg but I never go more than 75 mph and usually 65 to 70. I'd definately recommend one to anyone. Cam belt change is a bit dearer than on a 4 cyl, but it is only every 4 years after all.

I just remembered, a rear brake light bulb blew two years ago too.

[PeterKav]

I have an 05 1.9. Trouble free besides water ingress, which I can track the start of to a new windscreen fit. Also had to fit a new electric window mechanism two years back. I believe this is a problem on passats from a passat driver so probably common enough on superbs too?

[ian0x0r]

Primey, what is the V10 Phaeton like on fuel and to drive / service? Ive been looking at these and the price isnt too bad to buy

As mentioned above though 1.9 for sensibleness, 2.5 for smoothness I guess (22MPG on trip comnputer happens all too often for me :/)