According to the parts book the front and rear suspension fitted to the Rapid is current generation Polo with the main components starting with 6R. The Fabia II that are coming of the line now are previous generation Polo at the back (6Q) and the front a mixture of 6R and 6Q.

http://vagcats.info/base/sk/3/195/726

TP

Thank you - that was the point I was trying to make a few posts up as the Rapid is heavily based on the 6R.

Roomster/ Fabia are last generation Polo tech dating back over 10 years.

Edited 9 April, 201313 yr by J400uk

Actually reading into it some more at The Plumber's link, Roomster appears to be Golf MK4 at the rear as pointed out by some members and Fabia up front. Very different to the Rapid however you look into it!

OP - Sorry for the thread de-rail

Even if the rear suspension components are latest generation polo I think it is stuck to a Octy1/Golf rear axle/floorpan though?

Even if the rear suspension components are latest generation polo I think it is stuck to a Octy1/Golf rear axle/floorpan though?

The rear axle/ floorpan is a generation newer than that of the Golf Mk4 and Octavia 1. Makes more sense after browsing vagcats.info

Regardless of this my original points were its not a Roomster underneath and it is a C-Segment Golf/ Focus etc competitor albeit with a Polo derived chassis (in the same way a Passat/ Superb is a stretched Golf).

I like the fact that my Rapid has a slightly more individual home-made chassis, just like the Roomster did.

As wages in CZ are increasing, building larger cars on modified chassis components from smaller vehicles is one way Skoda have been able to stay cheaper than VWs and I think generally they've done a pretty good job of that (Roomster, Yeti, Rapid...)

The rear axle/ floorpan is a generation newer than that of the Golf Mk4 and Octavia 1. Makes more sense after browsing vagcats.info

It might make more sense to me if it was in English!.. what does the Rapid share it's rear floorpan with then?

It might make more sense to me if it was in English!.. what does the Rapid share it's rear floorpan with then?

Google translate helps, Chrome does it automatically for me! Try http://vagcats.info/base/sk/3/195/726/8/2282 for the rear floor

You should see that nearly all the major parts have a 6R prefix - meaning it shares heavily with the new Polo.

The same page for the Roomster - http://vagcats.info/base/sk/3/197/481/8/5593 shows a mixture of 6Q (Fabia) and 1J (Mk4 Golf) as we thought. No 6R in sight here

I agree with Bossfox: it is a nice car it is just that the pricing is errr optimistic to say the least. It has a good colour (white is in now isn't it) and is nicely specced so if you got a decent deal then congrats

The only thing I would say is being a "press on" kind of driver I would have gone for the 105bhp but the 86 is a lovely refined engine and still does well for its size.

P.S In regard the new Octavia 3 I believe there is some cost cutting over the previous model in that the cheaper models are now beam axle too.

Edited 9 April, 201313 yr by Matt Bodycombe

Finally some sensible discussion, though still a few points to correct. Current Roomster (mine is 2012) is a mixture of Fabia 2 front and Golf Mk4 rear, so front is half 6R and half 6Q. The vagcat pages you looked at are 2006 Roomster, it has been redone/upgraded since then. 2012 Roomster is a mix of 6R and 6Q parts,

E.g. front suspension is 6R but wheel bearing housings 6Q. Rear suspension is even more interesting, as rear axle used to be 1J but is now 6R and still looks the same, looks like the new Polo inherited Golf 4 rear suspension, possibly with some minor modification. You really should test drive a 2012 Roomster to see how much better it is, even though original one was also quite good.

So if you compare 2012 Roomster and 2012 Rapid platform versions, there is half a version difference in the front(Fabia 2 is halfway between Fabia and new Polo), and no difference in the rear. Bottom line, other than bodywork, dashboard, and the Golf 4 vs Mk1 Octavia rear quarters layout, the Roomster and Rapid platforms are very similar. The differences are not enough to justify 30% hike in price.

RapidRonnie, I have a very similar perception of the Rapid when it comes to comparing with Roomster, it is definitely a step in the right direction for this hybrid platform. But charging 30% more just does not make sense. Comparing list prices only when the 0%VAT offer has been around for 2+ years also makes little sense. Even if they make 0%VAT on the Rapid at some point, there will still be a 16% price hike compared to Roomster. Only 10% list price cut and then 0% VAT offer on top would make the Rapid a better value for money option than the current Roomster in the UK.

Finally, regarding the "rapid" Rapids, while I really would like to see it (and buy it!) my main worry about this platform is that it may have some inherent stability problems at high speed turns due to narrower front track. So far, all Roomster engines are electronically limited in the ECU to under 215km/h (190km/h on the 1.6CR and even the Popemobile can max it out comfortably) and now we see this speed as top Rapid speed too. Hopefully it is just VAG making sure these cars are never better than the more expensive ones in the lineup, but who knows.

Personally, I think Skoda would make good money putting even a detuned 2.0CR in the Rapid, 125bhp would be enough to offer close to Mk1 Octavia 1.9TDI experience of a universal car fit for all jobs.

Edited 10 April, 201313 yr by dieselV6

Roomster is cheap because its an old model on run-out pending replacement, whereas the Rapid is an all new model. When they get round to replacing the Roomster (although I've heard rumours it will be dropped altogether) it will be more expensive than the current model just like the Octavia 3 costs more than the 2 did. That will narrow the differential.

They also compete in different segments with the Roomster targeted at supermini MPVs (e.g. Meriva, C3 Picasso etc) whereas the Rapid is C-segment small family (Golf/ Focus etc). Most people looking at one won't consider the other.

2.0 TDI is mechanically possible in the Rapid as its been fitted to the Audi A1 and SEAT Ibiza, but they'd risk cannibalizing Octavia sales as with the right amount of equipment and the right price it would be a pretty desirable package!

2.0TDI will fit in the engine bay, but A1/Ibiza chassis is different in that rear track is narrower than front track (as are most VAG cars). Reliant Robin was never a good high speed cornering car, and while Rapid/Roomster have 4 wheels and a much smaller track difference, the logic still applies to some extent.

Segments/lineups matter mostly to motoring hacks and people with bags of money or a company paying for the car, private purchases are more about value for money than anything else. Buying the latest fad is quickly going out of fashion with the recession around.

After my Mk1 Octy got written off, I went to the Skoda showroom and had a look around. Yetis were on inifinite waiting list, Octy 2 was good but again wait, Superb 2 good but a little underpowered in diesel, and Roomster had everything needed for a family plus a decent price, half of the fully specced Superb 2. So Roomster got bought and constantly proves to be a great family runaround, though in hindsight knowing the 1.6CR troubles and highish fuel consumption in town I should've gone for the Octy2 with 2.0CR. (Latest gripe with 1.6CR is diesel in engine oil, I changed oil 2 weeks ago, took almost 5l out when under 4l go in, and I can already see level is slightly higher than what I put during the change).

Skoda's success was always about value for money, even before VAG days, so constantly hiking up list prices in hope sales will keep growing is not a great idea, and sales of Rapid so far are a clear example of what happens if you overdo the list pricing. In addition, in many ways, the Rapid and Octavia 3 are evidence of a cost cutting driven model design, so new is not neccessarily better than old.

Edited 10 April, 201313 yr by dieselV6

Says who?

Do you know how many have actually been sold?

Do you know Skoda's forecasted volumes for the UK?

As far as you know they may well be doing very well vs. target.

Deliveries for the first quarter

ŠKODA Octavia (87,500; -20.0 %)

ŠKODA Fabia (52,700; -22.3 %)

ŠKODA Superb (26,300; -4.5 %)

ŠKODA Yeti (18,800; -12.0 %)

ŠKODA Roomster (7,600; -18.7 %)

ŠKODA Rapid (15,000; new model)

ŠKODA Citigo (only sold in Europe: 12,500; new model)

Figures from: http://www.inautonew...ch#.UWfCYqKsh8E

Skoda sales globally down, but reported 21% increase of sales in the UK. Sadly they don't seem to present sales figures per model grouped by country.

EDIT: Skoda press release with the sales figures contained https://media.skoda-auto.com/en/_layouts/Skoda.PRPortal/pressrelease.aspx?ID=442

Edited 12 April, 201313 yr by Thecko

Indeed, surprised how strong the sales were in the UK. Rapid also seems to be picking up globally, it was the third best selling car in the Czech Republic in March.

I think Skoda's drop in global sales in the first quarter of the year can be explained largely by people waiting for new/facelifted models. Will be interesting to see if they can recover later in the year.

Do the Rapid figures include the launch cars for dealers? May artificially inflate it a fair bit.

I test drove a 1.2 HTP Rapid last saturday and even though it by no means is what you call a quick car it performs rather well .. When you consider the cheap price it carries it makes a good city car after which you can get rid of in 5 years tme when the warranty runs out ... It pulled well even with the a/c on and the engine seems more smooth than in a Fabia but being an Octavia 2 driver u can clearly see how Skoda removed or didn't even to bother screw and trim that the car can't do without .. At first I though that some one must have ripped out the auxuliary jack cap but looking at other rapids it looks like Skoda saved probably 10 cents off each car by smply removing the cap , the interior looks cheap , a vas mass of black plain dash board , the sound form the stereo is horrible and the tailgate makes a nasty noise when closing .. One key is without any remote at all and can't see the point of the small bin in the rear doors .. Liked the mobile phone holder in the front cup holders though and again at that price it's a big car for the money although if price cut will result in cheap looking cars , Citigo and Rapids for now , who know what will the future will give us that I can't see what bright future Skoda will be having ...

Didn't know there was an HTP in the country! That engine has been further improved from the version in the Fabia.

To be fair you have just tested the cheapest version. The stereo is decent enough with more speakers on SE upwards.

All the doors on mine shut with a "posher" noise and feel than on my Roomster and mine came with two proper flip keys.

The car sits between the Fabia and Octavia on price and size and thus quality too. I think any Fabia driver would be happy with the comparison, Octavia drivers less so, although there are one or two things I think are better on the Rapid than the Octy2 as well.

I don't understand all this soft touch dash rubbish - I never fondle my dash?!

Materials are (in my elegance anyway) better than my vRS fabia, albeit there are no cover for the seat runner bits etc.

As above the doors on mine shut with a nice thump and no hollow or tinny sounds anywhere.

I think octy 2 owners are scared to like it as its more of a replacement for the octy 2 than the octy 3 is turning out to be. Eg - much bigger and more expensive.

Rapid should have come with more engine options - base 2.0 cr and a 1.8tsi.

Even the Octy doesn't get the 1.8TSI in this country though.

I agree re: the dash. I think I've touched it once since I bought the car just to see what all the whinging was about.

Even without touching it though it does look cheap - its just a fairly bland design with a fair amount done in non textured, hard dark coloured plastic - I guess its not about feeling it that's important, more with the ambience it creates in the cabin that's important to me. I've spent the last three weeks around American made car interiors and even after that I was disappointed with the Rapids interior at the weekend. The Fabia is certainly no better and a fair degree worse imo but that's in a very different price bracket. However, Im also trying to bare in mind that I took the Rapid out straight after the Octavia 3 this weekend and to me, the Octy Elegance interior is just better in every way and there isn't enough of a price differential between them to allow the Rapid that much leeway on the interior. Fit and finish was pretty good imo.

Granted the top bit should have been softer touch plastic.

Don't think it's too bad ambience wise tbh - you have come from a Yeti as well, they are top notch.

If they offered more engines and slightly better dash plastics nobody would moan

I don't think its that tbh, at least not for me. I guess I think its more suited to a vehicle costing less money than the Rapid does and that's the sticking point for me I guess. Even the sales man said 'they needed to sort the interior quality out and make it smaller.' That way there is a bigger gulf between it and Octavia (3)' Most of the negativity related to the interior and the pricing structure from the people that had viewed it in the showroom so far. If it was selling for 30% less maybe I wouldn't be so hard on it. From the outside I think it looks good and as a small family car its immensely practical with that cavernous boot and good cabin space. The sales guy also mentioned that there were going to be some exceptional sales incentives coming along in the near future for the Rapid 'even though they've already done a finance contribution and upped the specs so soon after launch, they just aren't selling'. :( If they made them much better vfm Id certainly consider replacing our second car with one!

So it bothers the salesman that the car is too good (ie too close to Octy 3) rather than that SUK overcharge 40% for it (well, probably 30% given rear disc brakes and a few other bits as standard) ...

I'm not sure how you go from "sort the interior quality out and make it smaller" to "the car is too good (ie too close to Octy 3)".

It's clearly saying that it's not good enough, and should have been smaller.

I'm not sure how you go from "sort the interior quality out and make it smaller" to "the car is too good (ie too close to Octy 3)".

It's clearly saying that it's not good enough, and should have been smaller.

As you say - I didn't say that at all! :think:

Even the sales man said 'they needed to sort the interior quality out and make it smaller.' That way there is a bigger gulf between it and Octavia (3)'

So it bothers the salesman that the car is too good (ie too close to Octy 3) rather than that SUK overcharge 40% for it (well, probably 30% given rear disc brakes and a few other bits as standard) ...

I'm not sure how you go from "sort the interior quality out and make it smaller" to "the car is too good (ie too close to Octy 3)".

It's clearly saying that it's not good enough, and should have been smaller.

As you say - I didn't say that at all! :think:

Didn't you? And since when smaller cars should be more expensive Dr Zoidberg? Methinks the salesman would like a better interior and a smaller car so that he could have a better chance of ripping us off by 30%+...

Edited 16 April, 201313 yr by dieselV6