I think the mkIII vRS styling is pretty lame. In particular the spoiler on the hatchback is apologetic and as if Skoda didn't even want to fit it. Generally the front of the car looks better but the wheel options are rubbish. I could do better with a crayon.

The best vRS styling is on the mkII FL hatchback. It struck a good balance of puposeful sportiness and not going OTT.

What are your thoughts?

(Btw new Superb pics look cool)

Edited 22 February, 201511 yr by Excision

I bought an estate, because I believed the styling was more resolved. Its no secret on here that I feel the hatch, especially on the rear, is all a bit Friday afternoon. No offence meant to the hatch owners on here and indeed I had a mk1 hatch, and mk2 estate, and we all have our own individual tastes.

 

I have noticed how the model range is gaining a resemblance designed in by the rear creases, so it may be something to do with a corporate styling aim.

 

Opinion given, going back to my hobbit hole in the forest now....

+1 on that. I had a mark 3 hatch and replaced it with an estate and I love the look of the estate. Same thing goes for Superb too, hatch is a tad bit boaring however estate looks great...

I personally prefer the look of the estate over the hatch. I thought the wheel options are good though. The 19" extremes look pretty mean.

I also think the mk2 is starting to look a little dated, especially as most manufacturers have brought out new updated models. The mk3 has slowly grown on me!

I think the styling is about right on the octy vRS as you can't get it right for all the people that are going to buy it and I think it look better then the standard octy.

I got the hatchback because it looked good in corrida red with the black design package and the 19" xtreme on I happen to like the rear of the hatch and spoiler but I am funny like that. but the estate is a better looking car in vRS trim

All I can say is drive one and see if you like it the TSI is good one or two mods and its great and the TDI is good to and it a more all round car with a bit more work it can be very good this is my two penny

Estates a better looking car IMHO.

Mk3 vRS looks better than the Mk2 also, no more garish chrome grille (much neater). Its a shame they didnt just put a lip spoiler on the hatch and a black one with the black pack would have looked alot better.

I disliked the tailgate spoiler on the Mk2 also though.

The spoiler certainly is lamer, but I feel it still resembles the VRS styling over a standard, but just a bit more discreetly.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk the free non retired version!

I think the mk3 looks much better. No swooshy headlights, black b pillars but I has to be in estate form as I've never really liked the look of hatches

As with most things on this forum, it's a matter of opinion, however I actually prefer the looks of the hatch, hence why I've got the hatch  plus 590ltres of boot space is plenty big enough for me, especially when you consider that the hatch still has more boot space than most estate cars in the class above it   

I think the Mk3 hatchback has really grown on me, although I prefer the estate.

Definitely looks better on the 19" extreme alloys though.

Sent from my Passport using Tapatalk

Remember it is only a Skoda. VAG are hardly going to grant their bottom-feeder brand permission to design prettier or sportier looking models than Audi or VW hot hatches. For similar reasons Skoda is not allowed to fit the more powerful 280/300PS petrol engines, bi-turbo diesels, 4WD or the E-Diff options to the VRS.

Edited 22 February, 201511 yr by Orville

Remember it is only a Skoda. VAG are hardly going to grant their bottom-feeder brand permission to design prettier or sportier looking models than Audi or VW hot hatches. For similar reasons Skoda is not allowed to fit the more powerful 280/300PS petrol engines, bi-turbo diesels, 4WD or the E-Diff options to the VRS.

Really, how comes they've let it happen with the new Superb then, that'll be getting the Cupra 280 engine, 4 x 4 and DSG,..

Mk2 was butt ugly for me. I liked my mk1, but it was never a stunner.

Mk3 is a real grower, I thought they were plain when I first saw them, and they seem very colour dependant. I love black cars but the mk3 just looks plain in black or dark colors. It needs to be white, red or yellow to show off the front and rear bumpers. Blue at a push.

I'd get rid of the spoiler on my hatch, but then I hate spoilers on anything.

Mk2 was butt ugly for me. I liked my mk1, but it was never a stunner.

Mk3 is a real grower, I thought they were plain when I first saw them, and they seem very colour dependant. I love black cars but the mk3 just looks plain in black or dark colors. It needs to be white, red or yellow to show off the front and rear bumpers. Blue at a push.

I'd get rid of the spoiler on my hatch, but then I hate spoilers on anything.

Have to agree that it's colour dependant, especially the comment that white is one of the colours that suit it better, but hey, I might be tad biased     

I think the front looks amazing on both vrs options, but the back is a little "meh". I've got the estate, which I (obviously...) prefer to the hatch, but even the estate looks bland from the back. It's the rear lights that look dated to me. They're almost the same as my old 2004 S4 estate rear lights, a bit rounded and soft. They still look OK (just OK) now, but pretty dated. Particularly when compared to the modern, aggressive, angular looking front of the car. It's like they gave up at the back and just pulled stuff out of the old Audi bin!

Edited 22 February, 201511 yr by kitset

For me it's the full length rear reflector which looks a bit Halfords stick on . I've seen normal octy 3s with a sport body kit and similar reflectors to a mk 2 which looks much nicer

I must admi, I preferred the grill on my Mk2 L&K. It to me had a greater road presence, slightly aggressive. However my Mk3 Vrs with black pack stands out in a more subtle way. I went for estate for 3 main reasons, the flat floor, space needed without the tail gate sloping, and I think it is more pleasing to the eye. Just my opinion.

I think the mkIII vRS styling is pretty lame. In particular the spoiler on the hatchback is apologetic and as if Skoda didn't even want to fit it. Generally the front of the car looks better but the wheel options are rubbish. I could do better with a crayon.

The best vRS styling is on the mkII FL hatchback. It struck a good balance of puposeful sportiness and not going OTT.

What are your thoughts?

(Btw new Superb pics look cool)

Personally I prefer the understated looks of the Mk3...I like the performance but I don't need it to scream boyracer..I liked the Mk I and Mk II but I thought the Mk II FL was the worst looking Octy ever..Still to each his(or her!) own

Really, how comes they've let it happen with the new Superb then, that'll be getting the Cupra 280 engine, 4 x 4 and DSG,..

Perhaps because the Superb sits within the A6 size class, and won't be a competitor for other VAG hot-hatches/estates. I cannot see many potential Golf GTI, Golf R, S3 or Cupra owners choosing a Superb instead.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I really like the way my VRS Estate looks, but top end Golf's, Lean's ans A3's look more classy and sporty to me.

Edited 22 February, 201511 yr by Orville

Perhaps because the Superb sits within the A6 size class, and won't be a competitor for other VAG hot-hatches/estates. I cannot see many potential Golf GTI, Golf R, S3 or Cupra owners choosing a Superb instead.

Edit: Don't get me wrong, I really like the way my VRS Estate looks, but top end Golf's, Lean's ans A3's look more classy and sporty to me.

Apparently they are aiming the Superb at the insignia and mondeo size not the A6 sized opposition, this being so they don't take sales away from the new passat, go figure.

 

I get your point, however not sure I agree, only time will tell eh?

For me it's the full length rear reflector which looks a bit Halfords stick on . I've seen normal octy 3s with a sport body kit and similar reflectors to a mk 2 which looks much nicer

Glad it's not just me who dislikes the reflector. Mine looks soo much better now I've covered it in black reflective strip.

Agree totally, even though I changed my MKII vRS FL hatch to the MKIII vRS hatch. If you could put the MKIII interior into the MKII FL body it would be perfect.

 

The wheels are too narrow for the arches, the boot spoiler is too non-descript, (you can hardly get underneath it to clean it), the long rear reflective is pants. I think a few modifications are required. Pity as the 'photoshop' versions in the catalogues and TV adverts look totally different (ride height and wheel proportions).

 

Still admire the MKII FL vRS when I see a nice clean one on the road.

I love the front end of the mk3 , nice and aggressive looking but the rear ..... seems a consistent problem with Skoda the back ends often let them down a bit

I think everyone expects too much, the vRS has only ever been a front and back bumper, spoiler alloys and an exhaust trim. Not exactly radical

I don't see the problem with it to be honest, you can tell the vRS over the standard but it's not flared and extravagant.

It's more like the pre-FL mk2 I'd say, more discrete and Q.

That's not to say a flared arch flame spitting vRS wouldn't be awesome!