Going from Mark II to Mark III

[tuop]

I have a Mk 2 Octavia Estate, 2.0 TDI 140,  L&K edition.  Nice car, 3 years old, but its going back soon as I'm changing jobs and its a company car.

 

I am planning to buy my own this time.  My question is whether its worth getting a Mk 3 estate over a Mk 2.  There's a bit more room in the back from what I understand, and there are other changes like the engines.

 

There are a few vehicles in the second hand channels, and I'm considering a 1.6 diesel this time, ideally an SE or above.  They are coming in around £13K for a 63 plate, 10,000 miles.  I can afford this but at the same time the cash isn't burning a hole in my pocket so perhaps a Mk2 with more miles and age on it would be a cheaper/better balance.

 

Apologies if I sound wet behind the ears as a second hand buyer....years of having a company car means I am way out of practice with this stuff.

 

Any opinions, particularly if you have gone from Mk2 -> Mk3 would be interesting.  I know there are quite a few vRS owners on here, but I'm not in that market (especially as I will be buying my own tyres from now on!)

 

ta,

tuop.

 

[Sheldon.Cooper]

Engine choice aside (1.6 is underpowered compared to 2.0).  A 1 year old car with 10k on the clock is "nothing".  You will still have 2 years warranty and it's only just run in so will provide many years of motoring.

 

The Mk3 is a slightly better car all round compared to the Mk2, everything is improved slightly rather than anything being a big leap forward.  The weight loss the Mk3 has gone through makes a noticeable difference though.

 

As for nearly new or older, you need the best car suited to your needs (expected mileage? carrying heavy loads? residual value? reliability? etc etc)  that will ultimately determine what size car you need, most suitable engine and from that you can find the relevant one within your price range.

[decuk]

I went from mk2 L&k hatch 1.8tsi manual, to mk3 Vrs estate 2.0 tsi dsg. The reasons mainly, there was no Engine equivalent except 1.4 tsi, and I thought that with full loads and my driving style, the turbo would always be in use. Also with the mk2 I always thought the suspension to be a bit "elastic" on the bends.

The Vrs on the other hand,you may find a bit harsher on non motorway roads. But the seats absorb this and are very comfy.I have the std 18" wheels. Regards space, yes rear leg room is very good.I basically love the car, and would struggle to find fault, same went for my mk2.

[pipsyp]

I went from a v late Mk2 vRS TDI Black line estate DSG to a MK3 150 TDI Elegance earlier in the year.

Overall the Mk3 pips the Mk2 as a better car but not by huge margins. I generally prefer the styling of the Mk3 (even in non vRS guise, but is a bit dull) and the interior design is nice, also lots more tech as standard but the Mk2 (being a vRS) still arguably drove a bit better and I think the actual quality of the car may have diminished slightly rather than improved. The interior is nicely designed but full of hard shiny (and easily scratched) plastics and 9 months in I getting a bit rattly in places.

I've also found the engine to become a little more gruff than it was when new, particularly at low revs and does seem to have lost some of the urgency it had when it only had a few thousand on the clock (now has nearly 12k).

For me the fad of having a few more toys has faded and now suffering a little bit of buyers remorse having not plunged for a new vRS as the Elegance was more a head over heart purchase for me.....just finding itna bit dull and sterile but is a great motorway cruiser. The 150 manual does go as well if not better than the DSG equipped 170 though, partly down to the gearbox (may just be me but found DSG sapped performance rather than improve it on the TDI) and significantly lower kerb weight.....still I had trouble sticking with a 316d on a motorway slip the other evening so it's not that quick!

All I would probably suggest if you're happy with the Mk2 L&K would be to go for at least a 150 TDI Elegance or L&K again

[themanwithnoaim]

There is a lot more tech in the Mk3 if that floats your boat and its a lot lighter so, the 1.6 TDI may not be that different to your current car which brings me to my other point. 

 

If your gonna search around for a decent Mk2 you might wanna get in touch with your current car's leasing company and find out how much they want for it, its a car you already know and if you haven't absused it, it could be the best second hand car you could buy.

 

Regards

T

[lostp]

For me the big seller was the new entertaintainment/sat nav system. So much better than the Mk2, which is still early 2000's technology (imo)

[Web Ferret]

I went from a II 2.0 manual estate to a III 1.6 DSG saloon.

 

Private to company so the reverse of your situation.

 

The III is slightly better in all aspects than the II.

 

The 1.6 is adequate and you will save 10% of your annual fuel costs and for me less tax.

 

Personally I'd pay the extra for a 2.0 if it were my money/choice but I'm totally smitten with the DSG.

[PUFPAF]

Some late O2 FLs have more quality interiors than O3 that 's for sure. In any case if you are going for 1.6 CR than the O3 will be more refined and efficient, and you get the better design and equipment.

So pricewise a late O2 will make more sense, but I'd still go for the O3, which also has improved safety features

[pipsyp]

For me the big seller was the new entertaintainment/sat nav system. So much better than the Mk2, which is still early 2000's technology (imo)

The later systems (Amundsen + & Columbus) were v good indeed, simpler for sure but less buggy. Also the standard sound system in my Blackline wiped the floor with the stock mk3 system. It's the biggest single disappointment I have with the car.

[tuop]

Thanks everyone for your opinions, much appreciated. 

 

I'm happy to drop a bit of power for economy.  Going from the L&K I might miss a few luxuries like leather seats but I'm not sure its worth ~1000 pounds to me.

 

I think I'll carry on looking at Mk3s second hand at dealers and Motorpoint...any other good sources ?  I might still look at the big auctions, although the cars tend to be older.  A few ex-company car Octavias will come through.  Perhaps I could buy my current car....

 

cheers all,

Tuop.

[ednmra]

On 23rd Oct. I went from 6 year old 1.8 TSi Elegance hatch manual to Mk. 3 1.4 TSi SE hatch manual.

Very happy so far, though could do without all the  nerdy electronics!

 

Still getting used to it of course but I don't think power difference is going to bother me,

especially when it has settled in over a couple of thousand miles.

If I had my arm twisted I'd say I prefer my pre Facelift  Mk. 2's more classic looks but that seems to apply to most cars these days.

But the Mk. 3 definitely feels smoother, quieter, more refined (mind you, a lot dearer than my Mk. 2 was in 2008.)

 

I purposely went for SE (over Elegance) because, apart from cost, I prefer its fabric upholstery and the 16" wheels.

I had to pay for a (steel) spare wheel as I didn't want the puncture repair kit supplied as standard.

 

It's early days of course but I think me and the Mk. 3 are going to be friends!

(So long as it proves as reliable as the Mk. 2 was.)

[shrops_paul]

I've got both sat on my drive and IMO the mkIII is light years ahead of the II. Apart from the hard plastic on the door cards the rest of the inside and outside is of a better quality. It's also roomier inside too.

[ednmra]

One thing I've already noticed. On my 1.8 TSi, with the mpg indicator on, it used to show about 19 mpg when I left home and went a short way into town.

The 1.4 TSi  today was showing 28 mpg on the same outing !!