So what you stated in your last post was made up? The review clearly states the golf did win for other reasons. Did you not read it?

Fair enough that you prefer the octy but you cant just make up things and ignore other things about an article in question to justify why you disagree with it.

As i also edited onto my last post i cant get my dog into a octy hatch so the golf would win for me also. Practical can mean lots of different things and not just the ones that apply to you.

Erm, no.

This is what they say:

"Yet the Volkswagen is slightly better. It’s almost as practical, is sharper to drive and has more premium appeal."

My initial comment at the start of this thread was that the statement about practicality was wrong.

I stand by that.

It's a laughable review on the basis that they have the two cars in the same test..............I would suggest there are very very few people who would be considering either a Golf, a Civic or an Octavia.

Golf vs Civic, fine.

Golf vs Civic vs Focus, fine.

But Octavia?

Not in my view (and aren't these BB's all about opinions?).

Octavia vs Passat vs A4 would be the more appropriate test, again IMO.

Anyway, you are right regarding this "Practical can mean lots of different things and not just the ones that apply to you." All I would caveat it with is that if you can get baby **** in a boot, it's pretty much practical for everything else.

H

Edit: The test starts with "In the cut and thrust of the compact hatch market" - I'd hardly describe the Octy II, let alone the bigger Octy III as a 'compact' hatch.

Edited 13 March, 201313 yr by Herschel

But 0% VAT offer is transparent, you go to dealership and order car with that offer.

I am against advertising extortionate list prices and sticking to them for private buyers (as was the case with Ford, at least back in 2002) and then selling the same cars at 40%+ discount to companies/car supermarkets, or to finance buyers as is now the case for the Rapid (though the gap is closer to 10%).

Totally agree.

Why should someone be punished when buying a car because they can afford to pay cash?

Can someoen explain the logic of fitting a 50 litre fuel tank to me please? I already think the tank in my VRS is on the small side so would hate something even smaller even if the improved MPG offets it somewhat.

Please tell me the petrol versions have bigger tanks? If not LOL what a joke. No way id buy a petrol octy with a 50 litre tank.

I'm guessing but:

• Reducing the fuel tank size is like removing the spare wheel - reduces weight and improves the government consumption/CO2 numbers.
  
• Because fuel consumption has improved the tank range will be similar
  

That said even 55litres seems small to me!

Totally agree.

Why should someone be punished when buying a car because they can afford to pay cash?

Because Skoda UK make money out of the interest you pay on the finance. With cash they only have the margin in the car sale.

Because Skoda UK make money out of the interest you pay on the finance. With cash they only have the margin in the car sale.

I know why they do it.

I'm suggesting it's unfair on those willing to/who can afford to pay cash.

It doesn't happen in any other goods sector I know of; you don't get a discount on a stereo at John Lewis if you take their finance (for example).

It comes back to diesel's issue about transparency and fairness in car pricing IMO.

Because Skoda UK make money out of the interest you pay on the finance. With cash they only have the margin in the car sale.

True, but in case of Rapid and to a lesser extent Octavia 3, Skoda UK still makes 20%+ margin on an overly inflated price, just compare the Rapid prices with like for like spec in other countries....I am quite sure that Skoda Auto is not selling these cars at a loss everywhere else in Europe.

Edited 13 March, 201313 yr by dieselV6

I know why they do it.

I'm suggesting it's unfair on those willing to/who can afford to pay cash.

It doesn't happen in any other goods sector I know of; you don't get a discount on a stereo at John Lewis if you take their finance (for example).

It comes back to diesel's issue about transparency and fairness in car pricing IMO.

If you can afford the car outright with cash then take the finance, get the free 3 year service deal and get a better deal on the initial purchase price, then pay off the finance a month later. That makes it work for the buyer that has the cash waiting in the bank surely?

If you can afford the car outright with cash then take the finance, get the free 3 year service deal and get a better deal on the initial purchase price, then pay off the finance a month later. That makes it work for the buyer that has the cash waiting in the bank surely?

Good point, well made sir.

Dealership servicing cannot match quality of DIY servicing, it seems. I speak from experience of several dealerships in the area, 3 bungled repairs, one overheated head gasket following TB job, and a near engine fire following the head gasket replacement job on the Octy 1. Contrast this with maintenance issue free 7 years with the Superb (including DIY the belts on the 2.5TDI).

I want to buy a Skoda, not salesman's services backed by questionable quality mechanics. Perhaps it is just my bad luck, but so far there was 1 (one) repair/replacement out of 10 or 12 car repairs (warranty or otherwise) carried out at a dealership that was successful.

Ideally, I'd like to be order a car online straight from Skoda Auto Czech website, pick all options, pay and get the car free from VAG Milton Keynes restrictions on trim/options. I am also quite sure that in this model the price would go down by at least 10%-15%. The warranty fixes could be equally well or better carried out by independent garages, with lower cost to Skoda Auto and ultimately the customer.

Edited 13 March, 201313 yr by dieselV6

Thats a personal view though. Ive had impeccable service work from my local dealer and most people would rather get the servicing included on the offer, know that their servicing needs will be taken care of and also that they'll have a couple of dealer stamps in the service book.

Thats a personal view though. Ive had impeccable service work from my local dealer and most people would rather get the servicing included on the offer, know that their servicing needs will be taken care of and also that they'll have a couple of dealer stamps in the service book.

Same here.

It also helps if you have any serious issues down the line that aren't normally covered by warranty (or if you have no warranty).

Still leaves SUK price overshoot when compared to rest of Europe on the new models (Rapid being most notorious, I think first Skoda that's less expensive in Germany than it is in the UK).

Rip off Britain, etc.

All I would caveat it with is that if you can get baby **** in a boot, it's pretty much practical for everything else.

Its not unfortunately. We have a 9 month old and a dog. For big dogs an octy hatch is no use whatsoever. It needs to be a proper hatchback (golf) or an estate.

I dont really find these saloon type hatches that the octy is as being that practical. A focus hatch or a golf hatch are what i think are proper hatchbacks and they are very practical as my dog fits in them. The extra floor space of the octy is pointless as its headroom you need. Because our dog goes in the boot our pram and stuff goes in the car itself, normally the front seat where a golf is the same size as an octavia. Everything else goes on the roof where again an octavia has no advantage as you can fit the same size roofbox to a any car.

The only difference between my octy estate and my old golf hatch is that the dog has even more space to lounge out in which is hardly a major concern considering he could lie down in the golf anyway therefore its wasted space for me.

I bought the VRS cause it was cheap though not because it offered any more practicality for me as it doesnt.

Its not unfortunately. We have a 9 month old and a dog. For big dogs an octy hatch is no use whatsoever. I

But this is a specific practicality point that you accused me of (wrongly) using?!

There are around 52m people in the UK (of driving age), and around 8.5m dogs - what proportion of those are "big" dogs? Let's say 50%.

So 4.5m big dogs would prefer a "proper" hatchback, as you say, out of 52m people; or 8.6%.

That leaves the 91.4% of the rest of us that, if practicality is needed in a car, means sufficient space.

What does all of the above mean?

Well, it means that I've spent 5 minutes of my life researching population estimates on google, to prove a point that the Octavia should never have been in that test in the first place and I now want to lie down in a dark room................

You even said yourself "A focus hatch or a golf hatch are what i think are proper hatchbacks".

Focus vs Golf vs Civic.

H

But this is a specific practicality point that you accused me of (wrongly) using?!

There are around 52m people in the UK (of driving age), and around 8.5m dogs - what proportion of those are "big" dogs? Let's say 50%.

So 4.5m big dogs would prefer a "proper" hatchback, as you say, out of 52m people; or 8.6%.

That leaves the 91.4% of the rest of us that, if practicality is needed in a car, means sufficient space.

What does all of the above mean?

Well, it means that I've spent 5 minutes of my life researching population estimates on google, to prove a point that the Octavia should never have been in that test in the first place and I now want to lie down in a dark room................

You even said yourself "A focus hatch or a golf hatch are what i think are proper hatchbacks".

Focus vs Golf vs Civic.

H

The only point i was trying to make is that practicality means different things to different people. It was you who claimed that if you can fit baby stuff in then its practical for eveything else. It simply isnt.

My initial point was that its totally justified that the golf won. Maybe others prefer the octy, even i do slightly but the point being that a golf win was hardly a revelation and therefore did not justify multiple posts on here from "skoda" owners claiming the result was a farce.

You then added in some made up facts about the review to also justify your disapproval and i merely pointed out the correct facts about the article and also highlighted the points you never read where it clearly stated the other reasons why the golf won.

Since then im not sure what you agenda is TBH other than brand loyalty.

In anothe review im sure the octy will come out on top but you cant expect it to win every test if its not the best car available.

Practicality was only one aspect mentioned and the article clearly stated the golf wasnt quite as good in this respect. It was better in several other aspects so logic dicatates it is therefore the better car. Why cant you accept their opinion on this without claiming the review to be "laughable"??

You then added in some made up facts about the review to also justify your disapproval and i merely pointed out the correct facts about the article and also highlighted the points you never read where it clearly stated the other reasons why the golf won.

Practicality was only one aspect mentioned and the article clearly stated the golf wasnt quite as good in this respect. It was better in several other aspects so logic dicatates it is therefore the better car. Why cant you accept their opinion on this without claiming the review to be "laughable"??

Erm, I didn't make anything up - they said it was "almost as practical" which was one of the reasons why it won - they say it's "slightly better" because it's "almost as practical" (along with sharper to drive and premium appeal), get rid of the first bit and maybe it shouldn't be "slightly better"?

I refer you to my post earlier - it's a laughable review because they did the wrong test IMO; not because the Golf won.

Edit: The test starts with "In the cut and thrust of the compact hatch market" - I'd hardly describe the Octy II, let alone the bigger Octy III as a 'compact' hatch.

I can see why car tests rate 'practicality' but in real life it is mostly a subjective quality. Friend of mine has just bought the new golf 1.4 GT lovely bit of kit and as she rarely has anyone else in the car and never more than one passenger it is entirely practical for her.

A large part of my driving though is days out/ holidays with 4 or five adults aboard sometimes with luggage hiking gear etc and sometimes a walking frame etc. The Golf would simply be too small. (Even the Octavia II let alone the III is considerably roomier then the Golf 7)

As others have said it seems odd to compare them I doubt many people would have both cars on their possible list.

Edit I don't have a dog

Edited 13 March, 201313 yr by Richard46

Erm, I didn't make anything up - they said it was "almost as practical" which was one of the reasons why it won - they say it's "slightly better" because it's "almost as practical" (along with sharper to drive and premium appeal), get rid of the first bit and maybe it shouldn't be "slightly better"?

I refer you to my post earlier - it's a laughable review because they did the wrong test IMO; not because the Golf won.

It doesnt matter. You did make stuff up though. Like where you said they scored it higher than the octy for practicality. They just didnt - you made that up. You even admitted it. But never mind.

You also said it was "laughable" that they can claim the golf to be 50% as practical. How? it is more than 50% as practical and actually more practical for some people i.e me.

Your comments about it being the wrong car for the review are irrelevant as that is not we were discussing in the first place.

No point arguing anymore as your comments are all over the place and i only wanted to add balance to the anti Golf and anti AE theme that was developing.

Its all well and good being loyal to a brand of car but only when its justified and then to slate a publication because it doesnt share you brand loyalty is just nonsense.

I can see why car tests rate 'practicality' but in real life it is mostly a subjective quality. Friend of mine has just bought the new golf 1.4 GT lovely bit of kit and as she rarely has anyone else in the car and never more than one passenger it is entirely practical for her.

A large part of my driving though is days out/ holidays with 4 or five adults aboard sometimes with luggage hiking gear etc and sometimes a walking frame etc. The Golf would simply be too small. (Even the Octavia II let alone the III is considerably roomier then the Golf 7)

As others have said it seems odd to compare them I doubt many people would have both cars on their possible list.

Edit I don't have a dog

I have owned 2 golfs and now an Octy so why wouldnt they both be on anyones lists? They both serve / served me equally well so it seems perfectly conceivable to me that they would be competitors.

It doesnt matter. You did make stuff up though. Like where you said they scored it higher than the octy for practicality. They just didnt - you made that up. You even admitted it. But never mind.

You also said it was "laughable" that they can claim the golf to be 50% as practical. How? it is more than 50% as practical and actually more practical for some people i.e me.

Your comments about it being the wrong car for the review are irrelevant as that is not we were discussing in the first place.

No point arguing anymore as your comments are all over the place and i only wanted to add balance to the anti Golf and anti AE theme that was developing.

Its all well and good being loyal to a brand of car but only when its justified and then to slate a publication because it doesnt share you brand loyalty is just nonsense.

Show me where I made anything up - I think you'll find it's a matter of interpretation of the English I used, not what I actually said. I can read their article and I'm not stupid re: the practicality issue.

Secondly, if car "experts" are going to do a test and suggest two cars are close in practicality terms, they are clearly not talking about the odd occasion when the higher roof of the smaller car helps with big dogs..........they are talking about the overall practicality and space provided (can it take 5 people comfortably, can it take all of their luggage, do the back seats fold totally flat, is it easy to load, etc, etc.).

I stand by my view that a Golf is nowhere near as practical as a much larger car like the Octy III; however, you suggest that we weren't discussing it being the wrong car for the review in the first place - you might not have been, but my initial comment on this thread was that the review was laughable because the Golf is tiny compared to the Octy III, so the point is still valid based on the first sentence of their own review, that the two cars shouldn't be compared (same applies to the Civic, by the way).

I bet if you showed the Octy III in the flesh to 1000 people, and asked them to choose a category to put it in, that "Compact Hatch" would get minimal votes.

There is nothing compact about the car at all.

H

Edited 13 March, 201313 yr by Herschel

Dogs , dogs and more dogs , i say if you want a Golf ,then buy one , also if you want an Octavia then buy one , simple . Me !! i would not put a Golf on my drive . :love: Octavia is the way to go . Do i have a Dog ? NO

I have owned 2 golfs and now an Octy so why wouldnt they both be on anyones lists? They both serve / served me equally well so it seems perfectly conceivable to me that they would be competitors.

Fine I did not say my comments applied to everyone. I would comment that if a Golf serves your needs as well as an Octy Estate then; for practical purposes; you do not need such a big car.

Because Skoda UK make money out of the interest you pay on the finance. With cash they only have the margin in the car sale.

If you have cash buy the car with the finance offer then pay off the loan before it attracts any interest. You're perfectly within your rights to do so and you get the same deal.

Better still, do the deal through DtD or Orangewheels or some other internet broker and you won't even have the bother of haggling.

On the other hand, if you really must pay cash with your local dealer and not get the benefit of the finance discount, at least console yourself that you're helping the local economy and supporting the dealer profits.

It's your choice.

As for discounts available to fleets, well I guess if I was buying anything in bulk I'd expect a pretty good discount against the person/company buying just one, whether it's cars, packets of Daz, wide bodied jets or meat pies!

I am led to believe by someone in the "know" that police forces get even greater discounts than do the fleet buyers, which explains why there are so many BMW's decorated with blue and yellow battenberg on the roads (530d Touring for the price of a Focus anyone?)

Fine I did not say my comments applied to everyone. I would comment that if a Golf serves your needs as well as an Octy Estate then; for practical purposes; you do not need such a big car.

Correct but as i said i bought it as it was cheap and big enough. The extra space is handy though but not essential.