hello everyone.

My first post.

I have seen a 2005 octavia tdi with 130k to use as a taxi.

Will be first skoda as using as a taxi, even though round here most taxi's are slowly coming away from vectra's.

What should I be looking out for. ie what are the common faults on these cars.

I dont mind if its a major common fault or a little one any input is greatly appreciated.

or if there is a thread with the information please show me the link.

its had a clutch & flywheel change.

Make sure its had a full service history, and change the oil every 10K

Hello mate and welcome to the site.

Mines a taxi, and it's my 3rd octavia.

Almost everyone round here runs Octavias or Superbs.

As said above service history, and regular oil changes are a must.

Proof of cambelt change including water pump at that mileage as well.

Check rear wash wipe is working, if its not then its most likely spraying water under the boot carpet and will cause havoc with electrics.

Not a hard job to fix though, if caught before its done any damage.

Can't think of anything Octavia specific, just make sure everything is working as it should and there are no warning lights present etc.

Is it a 1.9 or a 2.0 you are looking at, and what model?

Edited 13 November, 201213 yr by JohnSTV6

Prefer the 1.9 tdi

thank you guys for the advice!

@ skippy41, Yes I agree that is a must, changing oil at every 10k, Im more looking at what faults they could possibly have, I know they have alot of dmf failures.

@ JohnSTV6 3rd!! what happend to the other 2, what kind of mileage did you run them upto and what problems did you come across.

will be the facelift as the older ones are emmisions 3 and the local council require emmission 4 cars.

most probably the 1.9 hatchbach/estate manual wouldnt mind the laurin and klement.

@alberg why the 1.9 over then 2.0.

The 1st one was a hand me down off my dad when he retired and I 1st started taxi driving, it was a 1.9 Sdi and clocked up 385,000 miles ish.

The 2nd was an 08 plate classic 1.9 tdi, I kept it for 2yrs and never really had any problems with it 110,000 ish on it.

Sent it back to finance company at half way through finance deal as I wanted the Sport that I've got now.

Reason for getting this one, much nicer car to drive, nicer to look at, has 6 speed box so is better on fuel, 4x electric windows, air con and most importantly CUP HOLDERS :-)

A lot of people say the 1.9 is the better engine without problems, but mine is the 2.0 PD 140 just coming upto 125,000 miles. The only problem I've had has been clutch and flywheel and rear bump stops.

So personally I'd go for a 2.0, but the choice is yours

Laurin and Klement is nice, but you'll pay over the odds for it.....and the nice interior will be trashed by your passengers over time anyway. Better with a lower spec for a taxi. The hatchback has the exact same size boot in terms of floor space compared to the estate....you just get more volume with the estate. But you'll pay more for an estate compared to an indentical spec/age hatchback.....so I'd go for a Hatchback.

The 1.9 is significantly more economical than the 2.0, so from a purely business point of view I think the 1.9 is what you should be after.

In practice, these days I don't think there is much between the two engines in reliability terms but the 1.9 has a better reputation because it's been in production much longer I think.

The car you mention already has had the clutch and flywheel replaced. If it was replaced with a SMF then you shouldn't have any more trouble with it......a DMF might need doing again in 80,000 miles or so, depending how you drive it. As has been mentioned, regular oil changes with the correct oil are very important......incorrect oil causes premature cam lobe wear, especially on the 1.9.

There are other minor common faults, but none of them cost much to fix.

Laurin and Klement is nice, but you'll pay over the odds for it.....and the nice interior will be trashed by your passengers over time anyway. Better with a lower spec for a taxi. The hatchback has the exact same size boot in terms of floor space compared to the estate....you just get more volume with the estate. But you'll pay more for an estate compared to an indentical spec/age hatchback.....so I'd go for a Hatchback.

The 1.9 is significantly more economical than the 2.0, so from a purely business point of view I think the 1.9 is what you should be after.

I've never had an issue with my interior getting wrecked, but I guess it depends on who you pick up and what hours you work

Strange you say that the 1.9 is more economical, as I find talking to the other lads who have them my 2.0 6 speed is more economical :-)

@ booke23- thank you for your input, what are the minor faults, do skoda do a genuine smf conversion.

@JohnSTV6-will look around first both 1.9 and 2.0

@ booke23- thank you for your input, what are the minor faults

, do skoda do a genuine smf conversion.

@JohnSTV6-will look around first both 1.9 and 2.0

Yes the dealers will do it or a decent back street I have had mine done and I have now covered 219,000

Yes the dealers will do it or a decent back street I have had mine done and I have now covered 219,000

any issue's on gearbox, if skoda themselves have bought one out why put a dmf in in the first place :S

I've never had an issue with my interior getting wrecked, but I guess it depends on who you pick up and what hours you work

True. My dad taxied part time in the past, but he only worked late evenings.....usually at weekends. He went through quite a few sets of seat covers!

Strange you say that the 1.9 is more economical, as I find talking to the other lads who have them my 2.0 6 speed is more economical :-)

On paper the 1.9 should be a lot more economical than the 2.0........I think the combined economy figure is 57 MPG for the 1.9 and 51 MPG for the 2.0. But maybe if you're 4 up a lot of the time, the 2.0 does better.

@ booke23- thank you for your input, what are the minor faults, do skoda do a genuine smf conversion.

As someone has said, they do a SMF conversion. Why didn't they do it from new......well, in theory a DMF is superior than the SMF at smoothing out vibrations and gear changes. But in reality, it doesn't seem to make much difference on the 1.9 and the gearbox does not seem to suffer for it. This is not the case on, say a 2.0 DSG (like mine) where you have to put another DMF on as the better damping effect is required on the DSG.

As for minor faults. Someone has mentioned the rear washer leaking into the tailgate.....this hasn't happened to my octavia (been in the family for 7 years since new) but seems quite common. On my octavia, I've had to replace the amplified aerial base (£30), these are a common failure. One of the LED indicator repeaters on the mirror failed due to water ingress and needed replacing a few years back (£40ish). I think it had some front bushes for an MOT a year or two ago. The whole lens assembly on the high level brake light on the tailgate came off earlier this year.......a new high level brake light would have been about £35, but I just epoxyed the lens back on, and it's been fine ever since.

I think that's it for faults on my car........the DMF is pretty worn and been rattling nicely now for 15,000 miles or so, but that's a major fault!

Edited 13 November, 201213 yr by booke23

Oh, just remembered.

I had a four wheel alignment done earlier in the year when I put new tyres on it.....the left rear had worn unevenly and alignment was slightly out. This is a very common issue on Octavias.

It was for the VRS more than others.

It was for the VRS more than others.

Well my alignment was out. Complete with uneven tyre wear and loud wheel bearing noise from the rear.

I have some duff budget tyres on the rear of mine soon to be changed and they sound like the wheel bearings are shot.

Might have been part of the problem with mine. Had the tyres changed at the same time as having the alignment done so not sure.

I had Pirelli P6000's on at the time.....admittedly not much better than duff budget tyres and they sounded awful.

True. My dad taxied part time in the past, but he only worked late evenings.....usually at weekends. He went through quite a few sets of seat covers!

On paper the 1.9 should be a lot more economical than the 2.0........I think the combined economy figure is 57 MPG for the 1.9 and 51 MPG for the 2.0. But maybe if you're 4 up a lot of the time, the 2.0 does better.

I only work days now, so most of the time it's back and forwards from town centre with boot load of shopping.

But I think cos I live/work in a small town and surrounding villages I don't have the stop start driving you would get in more built up areas so can use 6th gear to roll around at 30mph and clock up plenty mpg

I've got a question though avensisd4d786, what happened to the avensis?

I'm assuming you owned one going off your username, only reason I ask is they are also popular to use as a taxi round here.

Make sure its not an old taxi thats been clocked

Re specs L&K has leather I believe, In my experience easier to keep clean than cloth

Make sure its not an old taxi thats been clocked

That's actually a very good point. I viewed a Skoda approved Octavia a few months ago with "47,000 miles" on it. It was a 2005 model and it had extreme wear on the door handles. Around here nearly all taxis are Octavias so I suspected the worse. When I looked through the paperwork, there was no record whatsoever of any servicing etc during the first three years of it's life. That confirmed it for me, so I walked.

The scary part, was that it drove really well, and the rest of the interior was in good condition. Only the door handles gave it away......I think it probably had about 170,000 miles on it!

Re specs L&K has leather I believe, In my experience easier to keep clean than cloth

True......but you'll pay for a L&K. Probably 10% more than an elegance. Even though I own an L&K, I'm not sure they are worth the premium when buying used.

@ booke23. thank you been really helpful.

JohnSTV6@ The avensis is mine- not a taxi driver t spirit 2004,love mine but needs a bit more power only 115 bhp the earlier ones are more reliable eg 03-05 with the cam belt, later ones are prone with a head gasket failure and fitted with the timing chain, headlight bulb holders melting(new headlights, scv need replacing,(£200) dmf failures & clutch, heavy clutch. bit more expensive skoda's.

the question is actually for my father, he has a vectra 1.9 120bhp. dont think he will buying another vectra. he wants to buy to rent out. so its going to be a octavia or avensis.

Ive had three as taxis. First 2 were 2.0 TDIs (140BHP) clocked approx 130,000 on both with no real problems and the current one is a VRS TDI sitting on 70,000 and runnning perfectly. I only use V-Power fuel and change the oil every 8-10K. The cars are bullet proof and I've only ever had niggles that you'd get with any other car. The rear wiper is an issue though as all three of mine leaked into the boot.

Good luck

thank you 16ebp. how come you only took to 130k?

i might give v power ago, silly question but what differences did you come across from normal diesel fuel.

I experimented with V power in my Octavia a while back. I used it for 2000 miles.

I actually experienced a slight reduction in MPG and no noticeable difference in power. I did notice the car was much less smoky when booting it though...especially noticeable at night. So It does seem to be a cleaner fuel but on balance, not worth the extra cost in my opinion.