Indeed; I hadn't realised that the Rapid shared platform with the Polo, which is a bit of a gamechanger in terms of quality image.

 

It's an evolution of A05. They're calling it A05+, which I think basically means "the fat rear ended version of A05".

It's a stretched wheelbase Polo effectively yet longer than a MK6 Golf/ MK2 Octavia. Fuel tank capacity is increased too.

VAG as a group are moving towards modular platforms so its not necessarily a bad thing. An Audi A8 is mechanically just a 'stretched A4' but people don't complain about that!

I wish the motoring press, and people in general, would stop using the "based on" language so much as it's becoming increasingly out of date. It makes it sound as if they chopped the body off a Polo and plonked a Rapid on it which is not quite true when it has a longer wheelbase and a different rear axle.

 

It will be even more irrelevant when MQB comes on song, unless they are going to going to say stuff like the next Audi A6, VW Touraeg e.t.c. are "based on a Polo"

One thing I really miss about the old Volvo C30 forum was that back in the day, the guy who designed the car occasionally used to log in now and then and answer people's questions about this and that and why something was the way it was. It would be great if this forum could get some more involvement from Skoda themselves on a topic such as this.

One thing I really miss about the old Volvo C30 forum was that back in the day, the guy who designed the car occasionally used to log in now and then and answer people's questions about this and that and why something was the way it was. It would be great if this forum could get some more involvement from Skoda themselves on a topic such as this.

 

I think they'd all end up comitting suicide if they read some of the stuff on Briskoda.

TheOatmeal said it best when it comes to reading comments/reviews of your own work

 

I wish the motoring press, and people in general, would stop using the "based on" language so much as it's becoming increasingly out of date. It makes it sound as if they chopped the body off a Polo and plonked a Rapid on it which is not quite true when it has a longer wheelbase and a different rear axle.

 

It will be even more irrelevant when MQB comes on song, unless they are going to going to say stuff like the next Audi A6, VW Touraeg e.t.c. are "based on a Polo"

 

I understand your point, and agree with your frustration. However, as a writer my customer is the editor of whatever particular publication I'm writing for and I have to trust they know their reader better than I do. Sometimes that means things are over-simplified in order that the majority of readers understand what's what.

 

Talking about MQB, EMP2, D2xx and so on, means very little to the average reader and would need a hundred words or so of explanation. When you've got an editor enforcing a, say, 600 word limit then you've got to simplify and, to a degree, dumb down. If I had unlimited space and unlimited attention spans then I'd love to get in to much more detail - I could geek out for hours! - but that's not always possible.

I understand your point, and agree with your frustration. However, as a writer my customer is the editor of whatever particular publication I'm writing for and I have to trust they know their reader better than I do. Sometimes that means things are over-simplified in order that the majority of readers understand what's what.

 

Talking about MQB, EMP2, D2xx and so on, means very little to the average reader and would need a hundred words or so of explanation. When you've got an editor enforcing a, say, 600 word limit then you've got to simplify and, to a degree, dumb down. If I had unlimited space and unlimited attention spans then I'd love to get in to much more detail - I could geek out for hours! - but that's not always possible.

 

That's a fair point, but then why say it's based on anything at all if the reader is not fussed on technical details?

This based on business has annoyed me ever since the Mk 1 Octavia came out.  All the reviews of the Octavia just being a redressed Golf.  The Octavia is a lot bigger than the Golf, and other than Engines and a variety of parts that are shared across the complete VAG line up, just how is an Octavia based on a Golf?  Car have not had chassis for years, so just what is the same between these tow cars or say the Rapid and a Poloetc.  Now the Citiogo and Mii are clearly based on the Up.  What are these so called platforms, when two cars so completly different not just in shape, but also size can be built on the same platform?

Edited 14 August, 201312 yr by CitigoAli

That's a fair point, but then why say it's based on anything at all if the reader is not fussed on technical details?

 

I think (gut feel, I've no evidence to back this up!) that most readers want to know something of what's going on under the skin, even if going in to detail about platforms is beyond a non-enthusiasts understanding. Striking the balance between detail and understanding is a dark art that few people, myself included, have ever got right!

 

In hindsight, I should probably have said the cars share a chassis rather than having one car being based on another. I'll bear that in mind for the future.

This based on business has annoyed me ever since the Mk 1 Octavia came out.  All the reviews of the Octavia just being a redressed Golf.  The Octavia is a lot bigger than the Golf, and other than Engines and a variety of parts that are shared across the complete VAG line up, just how is an Octavia based on a Golf?  Car have not had chassis for years, so just what is the same between these tow cars or say the Rapid and a Poloetc.  Now the Citiogo and Mii are clearly based on the Up.  What are these so called platforms, when two cars so completly different not just in shape, but also size can be built on the same platform?

Well, one of my neighbours has a VW Bora. It struck us both just now much it looks like a mk1 Octy in broad if not in detail.

The Mk1 Octy and Mk4 Golf/Bora were *hugely* similar cars.

If you took all the bodywork off you'd see just how much was identical underneath the outer skin, with just the boot area being different.

Plenty of the interior was a straight swap between them all too.

 

They had more in common than the Mk3 Octy and Mk7 Golf do.

The Mk1 Octy and Mk4 Golf/Bora were *hugely* similar cars.

If you took all the bodywork off you'd see just how much was identical underneath the outer skin, with just the boot area being different.

Plenty of the interior was a straight swap between them all too.

 

They had more in common than the Mk3 Octy and Mk7 Golf do.

That may well be the case, the Bora and Octavia did look a lot a like, but neither looked anything like a Gulf.  A Gulf is small, (I have always seen it as a glorified supermini) while the Octavia was almost big enough to be classed along with Mondeos, Vectra cars etc.

Edited 14 August, 201312 yr by CitigoAli

That may well be the case, the Bora and Octavia did look a lot a like, but neither looked anything like a Gulf.  A Gulf is small, (I have always seen it as a glorified supermini) while the Octavia was almost big enough to be classed along with Mondeos, Vectra cars etc.

It really wasn't, except in the boot. The interior dimensions were the same as it had the same wheelbase.

This is the bare MQB chassis in naked form. Seats and wheels aside this is what is fundamentally shared between a  MK3 Octavia, MK3 Leon, MK3 A3 and MK7 Golf:

 

This is the bare MQB chassis in naked form. Seats and wheels aside this is what is fundamentally shared between a  MK3 Octavia, MK3 Leon, MK3 A3 and MK7 Golf:

 

 

But even on those the Octy has a longer wheelbase.

 

The next Fabia, Superb, Yeti e.t.c. will all be MQB too so then the "based on" stuff will really have to stop!

But even on those the Octy has a longer wheelbase.

 

The next Fabia, Superb, Yeti e.t.c. will all be MQB too so then the "based on" stuff will really have to stop!

 

Yep I agree, but the picture illustrates nicely what is actually shared. The modular element means it can be easily shrunken and enlarged to suit a range of models but the core fundamentals remain the same. 

That is not true. Skoda make more profit per vehicle sold than VW, or at least they did in one very recent year.

 

I don't agree that the interior of the Citigo is better than the Rapid. The Citigo is a nice car but it it also all "hard plastics"

 

I had an Octavia 1 and the Rapid's interior is definitely nicer than that.

 

For me it sits perfectly reasonably within the range. A better interior and higer price than the Fabia/Roomster/Citigo but a lower price and less opulent interior than the Octavia.

 

Skoda UK were a little stingy with equipment and pricing at launch but it's getting better, and you will see further improvements to the Rapid over the rest of the year too

 

Indeed . Less efficient = bull

My father had personal experience of the plant.

It was cutting edge and they put the newest tech into that factory. Coupled with extremely productive czecks....

What have you been reading, the VW bull**** times ?

It really wasn't, except in the boot. The interior dimensions were the same as it had the same wheelbase.

Mk1 Octavia was very cramped in the back seats.

Mk1 Octavia was very cramped in the back seats.

Actually not an issue if you normally use them as extra luggage space.

Actually not an issue if you normally use them as extra luggage space.

 

True.. for me at the time I rarely carried back seat passengers but did use the whole boot and more so it was fine. But compared to the Rapid it is a weakness. It was quite weird that for such a large family type car you could barely get anyone in the back. Something they for sure cured with the Octy2, Superb, Roomster, Rapid... 

Mine was the same - it spent 90% of the time with 1 or 2 people, but quite often plenty of stuff in the boot.
Considering how popular the Mk1 was as a Taxi, it actually wasn't all that well suited to the job in terms of passenger space.