There's been a fair bit of chat about Yeti alternatives over the last couple of months, none have really appealed to me. This has got me thinking about the Octavia estate 4x4. In SE spec with the CR150 engine it's about the same price as the SE Yeti Outdoor 4x4 CR140. But it's much more efficient with a much larger boot. The only thing in the Yeti's favour is the ride height 180mm vs 139mm. The Octavia's Rough Road pack increases this by 15mm to 154mm though. In the real world does that 26mm deficit really make much a difference? I'm ruling the Scout out due to its price and unnecessary bling.

 

I haven't driven an Octavia 4x4 yet, how does the ride and handling compare to the Yeti 4x4?

Has anyone moved from Yeti to Octavia, or in the other direction - how do they compare?

The amount of ground clearance depends on where you are going to be driving it, surely?

To me it would make a difference, but then I spend time driving rough forestry tracks, but I suspect for general use it would be adequate.

 

Why do you need the raised ride height?

To me ride height is v important plus minimal front and rear overhang .

I went from a mk2 Octavia vrs est to a yeti L&K ,performance,boot and economy better on the Octavia but for comfort and driving pleasure plus a lot easier to get in and out of its the yeti for me ,and the panoramic sunroof,ride height all better for my needs,wasn't bothered about 4 x 4 but the L & K had it anyway and it does feel safer in bad conditions.

Having prevously owned a Mk II Octavia TSi 4x4 estate, I was recently tempted by the offers on Mk III Octavia Tour de France's. These were effectively rebadged 150 BHP 2.0 TDi SE 4x4 estates, with a few extras (sat-nav) thrown in.

 

The car drove well, but the SE spec came without a number of extras I'd like - multifunctional wheel, centre arm rest \ storage and maxidot.

 

Certainly agree the Octavia is more practical, but my current Yeti seems more characterful and offers all the space and practicality I require. A roof box helps at other times