Build Spec & Build quality?

[IdioSyncrasy]

As an owner of a 2011 2lt TD DSG L&K with only 17K on the clock I was recently invited to have a test drive in the Mk3 Octavia by my local dealer.

 

Firstly I was suprised that the Mk3 doesn't come in the L&K specification, but was advised that I could have all the L&K extras fitted at build but this would add about £4k to the book price.

 

Secondly I thought that it didn't seem to have the solid build quality & weight of my Mk2, it seemed quite tinny & light on the road, I wonder if the've reduced the vehicle weight too much in favour of less power & better predicted fuel consumption?

 

I wasn't very impressed, it seemed more GM then VW in it's overall cost/build quality, might be OK as the standard public service/repmobile but not as a quality private vehicle in my opinion.

Edited 30 March, 2014 by IdioSyncrasy

[Dr Zoidberg]

The L&K has been announced but isn't yet on sale, though the spec doesn't exactly match the Mk2. No issues with perceived build quality on my mk3 compared to the mk2s I've driven.

[Telboy5]

After coming from various VW Group cars including a MK2 Oct and 2 x VW GTI's plus a Passat R36, I have to say the complete opposite to your claim.

 

I also had a Vauxhall Insignia Biturbo for just over a year and many other cars in my 25+ years of driving.

 

I find the mk3 build much more solid/upmarket, certainly in my VRS, and well planted and as for the weight, the lighter the better for me, especially in VRS trim!

 

It's also worth noting that the mk2 still only scored 4 stars on the euro ncap crash tests vs the full 5 for the mk3, so in my eyes, that just confirms my thoughts around the car feeling solid, safe and secure.

[IdioSyncrasy]

The L&K has been announced but isn't yet on sale, though the spec doesn't exactly match the Mk2. No issues with perceived build quality on my mk3 compared to the mk2s I've driven.

I suppose I was quite spoiled, I ordered my Mk2 in July 2010 for delivery & registration in March 2011, I had it fitted with all the "bells & whistles" from build IE: satnav, sunroof, paintguard ETC: only paid £22.200 for it with 50% up front & the remaining 50% interest free over two years from delivery date.

[Neily03]

My mkIII is miles ahead of my mkII in terms of quality.

[greatdane]

My mkIII is miles ahead of my mkII in terms of quality.

mine as well..........my wifes citigo was quality than my mk2 vrs and was hoping my mk3 would be the same and it is  much better than my mk2

[IdioSyncrasy]

It seems the Mk3 has lots of admirers from the vRS owners,but no comments yet from the standard spec owners, does this imply they're not all that happy?

[The Plumber]

Likewise our Octy III 4x4 is noticeably better than the MkII 55 plate Sport we had some time back now, however I don't feel the panel fit or paint finish is quite up to the standard of our previous two Yeti's; Kvasiny seem slightly better at putting cars together in this regard than the main plant at Mladá Boleslav.

 

 

TP

[pipsyp]

Still not entirely convinced on the build quality argument; its not terrible by any stretch but there are bits that feel more flimsy than the v late mk2 vRS i traded in for it. Premature wear of the interior textiles and hard lower dash plastics already a bit of a concern aftet only 1600 miles.

Being light weight it a benefit though; means the 150 TDi is as quick if not quicker than the equivalent mk2 vRS TDi despite the power difference and all helps for efficiency.

[Dr Zoidberg]

It seems the Mk3 has lots of admirers from the vRS owners,but no comments yet from the standard spec owners, does this imply they're not all that happy? I suppose I was quite spoiled, I ordered my Mk2 in July 2010 for delivery & registration in March 2011, I had it fitted with all the "bells & whistles" from build IE: satnav, sunroof, paintguard ETC: only paid £22.200 for it with 50% up front & the remaining 50% interest free over two years from delivery date.

Mine is an Elegance with a few options and I doubt there's much missing compared to a Mk2 L&K. It's got full leather, heated seats, heated screen, sat nav, panoramic sunroof, Canton stereo and better speed and economy than the old 2.0 TDI. I'm paying £23400 with 42 months interest free on a PCP, so I used my old car as a deposit and can keep the money for the final payment sat in my bank account until the end where it's earning me 3% a year.

[Lee Thomas]

My new mk3 is absolutely leagues ahead of my face lift mk2, not even discussion worthy.

[IdioSyncrasy]

My new mk3 is absolutely leagues ahead of my face lift mk2, not even discussion worthy.

As I previously said the Mk3 vRS owners are certainly on message with respect to their vehicles, but there seems to be a lack of comments from the non vRS people.

Edited 30 March, 2014 by IdioSyncrasy

[Lee Thomas]

As I previously said the Mk3 vRS owners are certainly on message with respect to their vehicles, but there seems to be a lack of comments from the non vRS people.

I would put that down to the majority of mk3 owners on here being VRS owners.

[DM1980]

I went from a MkII SE hatch to a MkIII SE estate and I have to say that, with the exception of slightly cheaper interior plastics, the MkIII is a far superior car overall. It truly is a big step up in class and refinement.

[bichti]

Never owned a Skoda before my current car but have to say that interior quality and feel are miles better of the previous Octavia. The Mk2 seems to be the standard model operated by most mini cab companies around here and when I had to use them it has been quite evident that there's been a step change between Mk2 and Mk3.

Would also like to add that the OPs 'rep mobile' comment seems somewhat ill-considered as surely rep mobiles tend to be those with efficient engines and good quality interior?! E.g CC, Insignia, Mondeo, etc?

[dstev2000]

I've had 2 Mk.2 Octavias and SWMBO had a Mk.2 vRS and neither of us can fault the Mk.3 for build quality.

I'm on my second Mk.2 Superb and the Mk.3 seems just as well nailed together as the 3T albeit some plastics feel nicer in the Superb.

Any 'tinny' feeling is down to the thinner metal on some external panels. My FL Superb tailgate sounds very tinny compared to my old pre FL car.

[Matt Pez]

My main build quality grumble with the MkIII compared to the MkII is the quality and fit of the door cards, they are too hard and don't fit tight enough. I've managed to tighten them up a bit using sticky backed velcro stuffed down the gap where it meets the door frame, but the door cards in SWMBOs MkII are still rock solid after 5 years and made from nice squidgy plastic!

Edited 30 March, 2014 by Matt Pez

[skovirg]

As an owner of a 2011 2lt TD DSG L&K with only 17K on the clock I was recently invited to have a test drive in the Mk3 Octavia by my local dealer.

 

Firstly I was suprised that the Mk3 doesn't come in the L&K specification, but was advised that I could have all the L&K extras fitted at build but this would add about £4k to the book price.

 

Secondly I thought that it didn't seem to have the solid build quality & weight of my Mk2, it seemed quite tinny & light on the road, I wonder if the've reduced the vehicle weight too much in favour of less power & better predicted fuel consumption?

 

I wasn't very impressed, it seemed more GM then VW in it's overall cost/build quality, might be OK as the standard public service/repmobile but not as a quality private vehicle in my opinion.

 

So, if you're not impressed, don't join the back of the waiting line. Buy a car you like and get it quicker. Every ones a winner.

[harrysprout]

Still not entirely convinced on the build quality argument; its not terrible by any stretch but there are bits that feel more flimsy than the v late mk2 vRS i traded in for it. Premature wear of the interior textiles and hard lower dash plastics already a bit of a concern aftet only 1600 miles.

Being light weight it a benefit though; means the 150 TDi is as quick if not quicker than the equivalent mk2 vRS TDi despite the power difference and all helps for efficiency.

Well I was in my next door neighbours Golf GTD and I can confirm it is fitted with the EXACTLY the SAME carpets and the SAME harder grade plastic on the glove compartment and lower door card areas. I was very surprised, this was the first thing I checked when I sat in it. The Golf has a few more chromy bits here and there though.

[Neily03]

I wasn't very impressed, it seemed more GM then VW in it's overall cost/build quality, might be OK as the standard public service/repmobile but not as a quality private vehicle in my opinion.

Err it's not a VW, if you want VW quality then you might want to buy a VW.

[Keith64]

I think the Mk3 is miles ahead of the Mk2 I used to have.

[skovirg]

As an owner of a 2011 2lt TD DSG L&K with only 17K on the clock I was recently invited to have a test drive in the Mk3 Octavia by my local dealer

 

I just noticed your image, don't tell me the Navy and RAF have merged? I know Tories cut like mad barbers but that's a bit much...

[gt40]

I just noticed your image, don't tell me the Navy and RAF have merged? I know Tories cut like mad barbers but that's a bit much...

Only since 1924.

Jeez!

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

[BA Baracus]

Well I was in my next door neighbours Golf GTD and I can confirm it is fitted with the EXACTLY the SAME carpets and the SAME harder grade plastic on the glove compartment and lower door card areas. I was very surprised, this was the first thing I checked when I sat in it. The Golf has a few more chromy bits here and there though.

Agreed - bosses GTD is not miles ahead for interior quality than my MkII VRS - step up, yes (marginal) but not worth thousands more.

[IdioSyncrasy]

Err it's not a VW, if you want VW quality then you might want to buy a VW.

Not so, Skoda have/are trading on the fact their build quality is up to the standard of all VW products.