So, MOT just carried out, no issues, and at 129k trouble free miles I'd say the Mk1 Superb does live up to its name.

 

My wife's Roomster hasn't had an MOT yet (first one next year), and it already has a new engine block, injector pipes and a DPF EGT sensor, all replaced under warranty. While I like both cars, Superb for speed and comfort and Roomster for frugality and practicality, I won't be surprised at all if 8yr old Superb outlives 2yr old Roomster... 

 

 

I was just thinking this morning how much I've fallen back in love with the Superb, now all the knocking has gone.

 

Was driving down the road today thinking - where on earth would I get this much comfort and quality for so little?  Done 117K now and hoping for a fair bit more, though the car no longer owes me anything, so all free motoring from now on.

There is now plenty of evidence that the B5.5 1.9PD in its various guises can be a very long lasting car. The engine is good for at least 300k miles given fair treatment, the 5 speed manual transmissions are good and the (mostly) galvanised body lasts well. (Pity about the boot lid rusting around the catch and number plate lamps).

 

What is really essential in order to realise the potential long life of these cars is to address the design faults which can quickly wreck it - water ingress being the worst. There are many others.

 

The next biggest danger to these vehicles is incompetent work - I have just changed the cambelt on a 1.9PD and found white paint marks. The previous belt change was done by a VAG dealer. Some undertray fixings were also missing. 

 

These cars are quite sophisticated and are extremely intolerant of poor workmanship as detailed above. With good maintenance and properly sourced spares, these cars can run to starship miles - with a few bits of front suspension...

 

rotodiesel.

Edited 7 June, 201412 yr by rotodiesel

There is now plenty of evidence that the B5.5 1.9PD in its various guises can be a very long lasting car. The engine is good for at least 300k miles given fair treatment, the 5 speed manual transmissions are good and the (mostly) galvanised body lasts well. (Pity about the boot lid rusting around the catch and number plate lamps).

 

My engine is running nicer now with 117K than when I got it, and I'm slowly replacing all the stuff it looks like the dealerships have broken in the past.  In fact now it is running so well the rusty bits are annoying again.  I've got it booked in with the dealers to chance my arm on the paintwork warranty.  I have both the bootlid and both wings going, plus some other bits.  If not, I guess I'll just have to buy some of those lovely chrome wheelarch trims... (joking!!!)

My engine is running nicer now with 117K than when I got it, and I'm slowly replacing all the stuff it looks like the dealerships have broken in the past.  In fact now it is running so well the rusty bits are annoying again.  I've got it booked in with the dealers to chance my arm on the paintwork warranty.  I have both the bootlid and both wings going, plus some other bits.  If not, I guess I'll just have to buy some of those lovely chrome wheelarch trims... (joking!!!)

Check your service guide reference the paint work warranty.

Thanks for the comment, but not sure what you mean?

 

The service guide states (in appalling English...):

 

Paintwork and body warranty

In addition to the new vehicle sales conditions for new Skoda vehicles - as stated in the Contract of Sale - Skoda contract retailer furthermore warrant that the vehicle sold by him shall:

• 3 year warranty for paintwork defects
• 10 year warranty for perforation corrosion of the bodywork

Should damage of this type nevertheless occur, it shall be repaired free of labour and material charges by any authorized Skoda retailer.

So, MOT just carried out, no issues, and at 129k trouble free miles I'd say the Mk1 Superb does live up to its name.

 

 

Woohooo!!  :clap:    to the first bit, and;

 

Amen (as it's Sunday) to the second 

 

The previous belt change was done by a VAG dealer. Some undertray fixings were also missing. 

 

 

I wonder if there's some strange place where all the undertray fixings are being abducted to?  :think:

 

Gaz

Their toolbox?

There is now plenty of evidence that the B5.5 1.9PD in its various guises can be a very long lasting car.... the 5 speed manual transmissions are good...

 

Errrm... it's actually a rare-ish 2.5TDIV6 with 6-speed manual gearbox (most V6s are Auto), slightly less economical option, but by far and away the most comfortable and sensible if you drive outside UK at all (autobahn). Frankly, it is also more comfortable around town than the 1.9PD, no vibration/harshness and you can smoothly accelerate from idle through the rev range. Even the 1.6CR, which is butter smooth compared to 1.9PD, is nowhere near the comfort of the V6. I agree with all other points you made, though.

 

Nothing wrong with late (BDG code onwards) 2.5TDI engines, all early 2.5TDI injection pump and valve train problems were sorted out by late 2003 or so.  Never had any problems with the 6-spd gearbox either, though I did change gearbox fluid at 4 years and again recently at 8. 

Edited 9 June, 201412 yr by dieselV6

My comments were based on predicted power unit life - not smoothness or performance.

 

The VP44 and the 6 speed manual transmissions both have problems. Google "VP44 problems" and you'll have a month's reading.

 

As a long term proposition - given that these cars are now dogs and worth no money - the 1.9PD 5 speed manual has the best prospects, by a large margin.

 

rotodiesel.

223k miles on my 1.9 and getting (now we're back on "summer" diesel) 54mpg. Not failed the mot yet but had to replace the completely (seems that way to me) pointless headlight washer pump as it stopped working. Unfortunately I am being forced out of my Skoda into a (dare I say it!) VW Golf by my company. Not allowed to run our own cars anymore, so it's back to a company car and lining the tax mans pockets!

 

Anybody had any experience with the 1.6 105 horses diesel? How will it compare moving a Golf estate compared to the 1.9 130 horses moving the 20 ton Superb (slight exaggeration on the weight there of course).

 

One good thing is my wife will be getting her elderly  Seat Toledo (same 1.9 engine with 170k miles) replaced by a luverly (nightfire blue - the best colour) Skoda Superb and so into retirement it will go! She only does about 1500 miles a year.

 

Any info about the 1.6 engine would be great.

 

Cheers!

Google 1.6Cr and you will see a lot of comments on how reliable these engines are. My personal experience is that the 2.5TDI is extremely reliable, and a 1.6CR is an unreliable dog of an engine...I'd stick to my experience rather than google for now, thanks.

A month's reading on VP44 pumps is for older pumps, or pumps in other car makes, post 2004 ones do not have problems provided you treat them well (ie not run on bleached agro fuel or veg oil, and not use modified injectors with huge nozzles and 240bar+ opening pressure).

 

I'm still looking on Briskoda and other forums for that first owner BDG engine owner report of a broken VP44 pump on an unmodified engine.

So far, any mention of failure on a post 2004 car is either a recently bought used car with unknown servicing quality, or a recently bodged timing belt job, in both cases pump failure is more than likely to incompetence of the workshop dealing with the car, nothing to do with (un)reliability.

 

In as much as you do not like the 2.5 V6 engine rotodiesel, it would be nice if you did not slam it every time you post, especially that you seem to have never owned it. I like both 1.9PDs and 2.5V6, and while I prefer the comfort of a V6 and the 6spd gearbox, I am not dissing the 1.9 engine in my every post (or even in any post for that matter).

223k miles on my 1.9 and getting (now we're back on "summer" diesel) 54mpg. Not failed the mot yet but had to replace the completely (seems that way to me) pointless headlight washer pump as it stopped working. Unfortunately I am being forced out of my Skoda into a (dare I say it!) VW Golf by my company. Not allowed to run our own cars anymore, so it's back to a company car and lining the tax mans pockets!

 

Anybody had any experience with the 1.6 105 horses diesel? How will it compare moving a Golf estate compared to the 1.9 130 horses moving the 20 ton Superb (slight exaggeration on the weight there of course).

 

One good thing is my wife will be getting her elderly  Seat Toledo (same 1.9 engine with 170k miles) replaced by a luverly (nightfire blue - the best colour) Skoda Superb and so into retirement it will go! She only does about 1500 miles a year.

 

Any info about the 1.6 engine would be great.

 

Cheers!

 

I have the 1.6 in the Roomster, when it runs, it is a great engine, very smooth and quite lively given the smaller displacement and lower compression ratio. However the "when it runs" bit is crucial, mine has had block already replaced, as well as EGT sensor and injector pipes. (all under warranty, at under 2 years/16k miles). While it might be a case of a one off duff engine unit, I'll wait another 3 years to give an opinion on whether it was worth buying.

 

The DPF on 1.6 (again, when all sensors work) is not much of a problem, ash accumulation is in line with manufacturer statements, should last about 130k miles. On a working engine you have very few active regens, even in mixed driving with a lot of cold starts. Fuel economy is OK, though around town DPF adds 15% on top of brochure numbers.

 

If you switch from 1.9TDI in any guise to 1.6CR, I'd say it's equivalent to drive (except reliability). Switching from 2.5TDI,  obviously the power is missing quite a bit, better to go for a 2.0CR.