Does the jack & other tools come with the spare, or is this another "Extra" that has to be ordered ?

You get the full tool kit too.

Thank you

TBQH you don't want to touch Tyre Weld.

 

If you use it and the puncture is in the centre of the tyre and would normally be reparable, it won't be because you've used Tyre Weld, I have been told that by 3 tyre companies. You will be required to buy a new tyre.

The last three punctures I've had, one was in the centre of a relatively new tyre and was fixed by my usual tyre supplier for about £10-£15, the other two were from dropping into potholes (hidden by puddles) that ripped bloody great right-angled tears in the tyre sidewall each time, both about an inch and a half in each direction - I'm pretty sure Tyre Weld would have been as much use as coleslaw in dealing with those. So by my reckoning, TW would have cost me about an extra £85 on the one time it would have worked, and left me needing a tow home the other two times plus the further inconvenience of getting a new tyre each time without a driveable car to do so.

Apparently it's called progress...

I am told that (in the case of Mazda at least) if you use their own supplied "goo" (which costs £40+ to renew) the tyre cannot be re-used.  However if you buy and use a can of Holt's Tyre Weld (around £8 from Halfords) the tyre can be cleaned up and re-used, provided the damage is not severe and is in a favourable place.

Can anyone confirm if this is true about the Holt's compound, please?  If so, it would seem a good idea to carry a can of that instead. 

I imagine it's the same product. For what it's worth, Porsche say the same "once the tyre sealant has been used the tyre must not again be repaired or used. We recommend contacting your Porscher partner to obtain correct specification replacement tyre".

I imagine it's the same product.

.

Patently not.

What Porsche use is irrelevant.

With goo you only get the tool kit. A factory fit spare wheel will come with a jack and wheel brace as well. If you get a spare that is not 'factory fit option' you'll need to source a jack and wheel brace as well!

Oh! And the tool kit carrier is different so it won't fit in the wheel and you won't have the retainer bolt either so every thing rattles around!!!

The goo is horrid stuff and as said doesn't always work,

 

I have done a changed a few wheels that have had goo put in and usually end up pressure washing the wheel to remove all the goo before we can fit the new tyre to it,

 

If i got a puncture i would have a good go at pumping it up before using the stuff,

 

Personally i don't think i would ever want to run without a spare even a space savers better than nothing at all, altho it does keep RAC and AA in business

.

Patently not.

What Porsche use is irrelevant.

Yes it is. Exactly the same, so it is 100% relevant - your reply seems somewhat aggressive as well as misinformed.

Edited 20 October, 201312 yr by Timoctav

Yes it is. Exactly the same, so it is 100% relevant - your reply seems somewhat aggressive as well as misinformed.

.

Please can you confirm how you know that the Holt's product is identical to the Skoda product?  And if it is, why Skoda say that the tyre cannot be re-used but Holt's do not?

And I am afraid I do not understand what the relevance is of the product used by Porsche.  Could you explain please?

There's no way I'd drive around knowing that my backup was in the form of a can of snot and an air compressor. The spare wheel was option tick no 1. My Superb was minus a spare (ex demo) so I walked away until they added it FOC.

The tyre sealant system has a long way to go before it's reliable enough to be trusted over a good old fashioned spare wheel.

I notice the MkIII has a skinny space saver instead of the reasonable (IIRC) 205/55/R16 that was added to our old yeti and my Superb.

Think the reason Skoda have gone spacesaver for the vRS is the brake disk size; they don't have anything else suitable to take from the VAG parts bin.

 

Our SE should have a full size steel spare I'm lead to believe with having the 150 motor and 16" rims as standard.

 

 

TP

.

Please can you confirm how you know that the Holt's product is identical to the Skoda product?  And if it is, why Skoda say that the tyre cannot be re-used but Holt's do not?

And I am afraid I do not understand what the relevance is of the product used by Porsche.  Could you explain please?

Simple. I've read the COSHH data sheets for both products (we have the Holts one in my wife's Honda Jazz after she had a flat and used the OEM one). And I did have a Gen 2 Octavia (with the gunk) a few years ago so have experience of the Skoda one as well.

And they are both the same or very similar composition. Why wouldn't they be - they do an identical job?  Why Holts do not warn that once used the tyre is only good for driving to a tyre repair facility I don't know. But the warning on one is good enough for me not to attempt to drive a car for a prolonged period on it, whatever the make.

 

Now I have explained that can you explain your apparent agressive tone?

Edited 21 October, 201312 yr by Timoctav

.

And I am afraid I do not understand what the relevance is of the product used by Porsche.  Could you explain please?

Same stuff, different lable on the bottle. Simples. interesting that Honda, Porsche and Skoda all recommend only very temporary use and yet Holt's do not. Perhaps the car manufacturers business is selling cars, not selling tyre repair compound.....

I am not and do not claim to be an expert on the subject, or to be a chemist, or to know what the composition of the various fluids is.  If anyone on here is and/or does, it would be very interesting to hear from them.  Anyone?  Simply asserting that something is a fact unfortunately does not make it so.

It is a matter of record however that Holt's do not state that a tyre cannot be reused after their fluid has been used in it, whereas several motor manufacuturers state that with the fluid they supply, the tyre cannot be re-used.  It may be of course that Holt's are being deceitful or reckless, but not knowing, I can't say. 

The only other manfacturer I have experience of who supplies gunk-and-pump rather than a spare wheels is Mazda with their Mk3 MX-5, where there isn't room for a spare anyway.  (Given a choice, I would always prefer to have a spare wheel - or even both).  Most MX-5 drivers I know and many of the members of the owners' club carry and use the Holt's stuff in preference to the (expensive) Mazda compound, but perhaps they are deceiving themselves or are just gullible.

I am afraid it is still not clear what the relevance is of whatever compound Porsche choose to supply.  

Edited 21 October, 201312 yr by Stuarted

I am afraid it is still not clear what the relevance is of whatever compound Porsche choose to supply.  

Yet another manufacturer that states that gunk is " a get you home measure only" in support of it's short term use. If it was only Porsche one could argue that the tyres fitted to their cars are potentially subject to higher levels of stress due to the high performance potential of their cars. But Skoda? and Honda - only continental drift is slower than my wife's Jazz. Same stuff, same repair, same job, same service - how simple do I need to make my explanations? 

 

You want to potentially risk your life - and other road users - by using Holts or any other similar product as a permanent repair then that's up to you. I for one would not.

Edited 21 October, 201312 yr by Timoctav

... The tyre sealant system has a long way to go before it's reliable enough to be trusted over a good old fashioned spare wheel ...

.

.

And to quote from another post:

"... But the warning on one is good enough for me not to attempt to drive a car for a prolonged period on it, whatever the make ..."

Most people, including me, would probably wholeheartedly agree with both these comments.  And given a choice, I would prefer a spare wheel anyway.

However that is not the issue being debated at present.

On a car where carrying a spare wheel is not an option, carrying gunk-and-pump is better than nothing at all, and there is a widespread opinion (rightly or wrongly) that it's better (as well as far cheaper) to carry and if necessary use the Holt's compound rather than the car maker's compound.  No one is suggesting using a tyre, while it is temporarily sealed with such fluid, for anything other than gently limping home or to  a garage.  The only debate is whether  - if the damage is not severe - the tyre can be subsequently cleaned up, repaired and put back into service.

 

Yet another manufacturer that states that gunk is " a get you home measure only" in support of it's short term use. If it was only Porsche one could argue that the tyres fitted to their cars are potentially subject to higher levels of stress due to the high performance potential of their cars. But Skoda? and Honda - only continental drift is slower than my wife's Jazz. Same stuff, same repair, same job, same service - how simple do I need to make my explanations? 

 

You want to potentially risk your life - and other road users - by using Holts or any other similar product as a permanent repair then that's up to you. I for one would not.

.

You seem to keep repeating the same thing, which no-one disagrees with.

A tyre sealant is merely an emergency, temporary, get-you-home product, not meant for continued use.

No one has ever suggested otherwise.

The issue is: Skoda state that once a tyre has had their compound used in it, the tyre can never, ever be repaired or re-used.  Holt's make a similar product which is not only far cheaper, but which can (apparently) be cleaned off the tyre afterwards and (if the damage to the tyre is not critical) the tyre repaired and put back into service.

If you have a puncture and you have a spare wheel which you immediately fit, would you take the punctured tyre to a repairer?  If they said it could be safely repaired, would you have it repaired and then re-use it?  If so, it would have been a shame - if you had not had a spare wheel - to have had to use the car manufacturer's (expensive) temporary sealing compound when you could have used a (far cheaper) alternative product which would have saved you having to scrap the tyre.

I'll stay with the OEM supplied compound, even if it is more expensive and the OEM recommendations. I would not have the confidence to trust a goo repair from whomever for anything else than a get you home measure. I think we are agreed on that point, at least.

 

If that means a new tyre, plus the cost of replacement compound then so be it. Better that and the cost of a new tyre, than booking a half hour appointment with an undertaker.

Edited 21 October, 201312 yr by Timoctav

I'll stay with the OEM supplied compound, even if it is more expensive and the OEM recommendations ....

.

Which perhaps indicates a belief that the third-party product and the OEM product may not actually be identical after all ...

If, of course, Holt's are lying and the tyre repair company find that they cannot clean their compound off the tyre after all, that won't lead to your death.  It will simply mean that you are no worse off than you would have been if you had used the (far more expensive) OEM compound to get-you-home.

.

Which perhaps indicates a belief that the third-party product and the OEM product may not actually be identical after all ...

If, of course, Holt's are lying and the tyre repair company find that they cannot clean their compound off the tyre after all, that won't lead to your death.  It will simply mean that you are no worse off than you would have been if you had used the (far more expensive) OEM compound to get-you-home.

Not at all. It's all about believing the car manufacturer and having peace of mind. I've been caught too many times in the past as an engineer thinking I am saving money by not sticking to OEM guidelines and recommended products. I don't do it any more, particularly when safety is involved. I am not saying Holts are lying, in these days of product safety liability it's more than they dare do.

Going back on topic - Is anyone considering putting a full-size spare in the boot - or is it not an option due to space restrictions?

.
I am confused.

As an engineer myself, I like to rely on factual information.

Is the Holt's product the same as the sealant supplied by Skoda, or is it different?

Going back on topic - Is anyone considering putting a full-size spare in the boot - or is it not an option due to space restrictions?

.

As far as I can see (looking all around a Mk3 estate in the showroom), at least on the estate, the spare wheel +  jack + wheelbrace, or the gunk + pump, both go into the same circular well below the boot floor, so a spare wheel does not take up any extra space, and it is certainly what I would order.

I would also want the 16" diameter rims (summer and winter - I don't personally like or want large-diameter, bling wheels any time of year; I prefer comfort) but it is not clear what the spare wheel situation would be for anyone wanting to run on larger diameter rims.

.

I am confused.

As an engineer myself, I like to rely on factual information.

 

 

From one engineer to another here is a factual statement from Dunlop tyres - and before you say that isn't relevant my Octavia is fitted with Dunlop tyres!

.

"Dunlop does not recommend the use of liquid sealants. These are a form of temporary repair, and may adversely affect ply material and mask secondary damage caused by a penetrating object.

Reliance upon sealants can result in sudden tyre failure and accident."

 

I think it is fair to interpret that if you use tyre sealant, Holts or otherwise, then the tyre should be replaced. It doesn't say that if you use Holts then repair the tyre and all will be OK. It is also indicative that tyre repair compound is tyre repair compound, whoevers name might appear on the tin.

Edited 21 October, 201312 yr by Timoctav