Skip to content

Would you pay £16K for a '12 plate Octy 2 FL vRS, with almost zero miles?

old newbie2
in Skoda Octavia Mk2 (2004 - 2013)

Featured Replies

There's an advert for such a car, but I'd imagine you'd be crazy to buy it at that price, even at that mileage?

 

DC

There's an advert for such a car, but I'd imagine you'd be crazy to buy it at that price, even at that mileage?

 

DC

Good price...................in 2012, but 4 years later doesn't make sense really - unless you were comparing with what you'd likely pay for the current day MkIII & preferred the look of the MkII.

 

However a 4 year old vehicle is a 4 year old vehicle, whichever way you look at it, so still not good value IMHO.

No, that's MK3 VRS Money. Even still, it seems expensive for a 4 year old car, that with the vat deals at the time, was probably only 2-3k more new. Also the number Plate might show 2012, but the interior and the rest of the car is much older (by design) and it shows when you compare to a MK3.

No way!!! You could buy something with dealer warranty for that price (although it won't be a VRS), however Newer and Warranty will win.

Very low milage, but yeah, £16k is silly money for a 4 year old car, even if it is like new condition.  I'd want to know why it has sat still doing so few miles...

    •
    • Like 2

    I paid just under £16K for a March 2012 (12 plate) vRS CR DSG with less than 9,00 miles; but that was in June 2013, over 2-1.2 years ago!

    These crop up from time to time, Skoda UK use them for training.

     

    There have been a couple of used vRS's appear over the years.

    • Author

    No, that's MK3 VRS Money. Even still, it seems expensive for a 4 year old car, that with the vat deals at the time, was probably only 2-3k more new. Also the number Plate might show 2012, but the interior and the rest of the car is much older (by design) and it shows when you compare to a MK3.

    Agree with your conclusions, but, FWIW we feel that the Mk 3 "feels" cheaper, especially inside. 

     

    Maybe Skoda have had to cut corners to afford the latest MQB based technology?

     

    DC

    Agree with your conclusions, but, FWIW we feel that the Mk 3 "feels" cheaper, especially inside. 

     

    Maybe Skoda have had to cut corners to afford the latest MQB based technology?

     

    DC

    The MkII was more solid. The MkIII seems to have thinner metal and side window glass. It's the eternal conundrum because we all want faster and more economical cars emitting less pollution.

    • Like 2

    Agree with your conclusions, but, FWIW we feel that the Mk 3 "feels" cheaper, especially inside.

    Maybe Skoda have had to cut corners to afford the latest MQB based technology?

    DC

    Unfortunately I do agree that it has a "cheaper" feel, but you do get a much better infotainment (or nav) system, mfsw and Bluetooth (both not available on a mk2 manual vrs) etc. The standard sound system in the MK2 is good and probably slightly better than that in the MK3. So it's all swings and roundabouts really.

    The B7 Audi A4 had a lovely interior, and the B8 A4 was nice inside but not as nice and felt cheaper. Same with the E90 3 series vs the latest F30 3 series. Unfortunately I think this is a common theme across most manufacturers and newer models.

    The MK2 is still a good car, I can't really fault mine, but it's a good buy under 10k rather than at the 16k price bracket. All imo of course.

    Edited by ahenners

    The one special thing about this car is the 'almost zero miles' if you are looking for a car to use, then it would very quickly loose that and you would simply have a low millage car, nothing particularly unique, plenty more like it out there, and worth a lot less.

    •
    • Like 1
    • Author

    Unfortunately I do agree that it has a "cheaper" feel, but you do get a much better infotainment (or nav) system, mfsw and Bluetooth (both not available on a mk2 manual vrs) etc. The standard sound system in the MK2 is good and probably slightly better than that in the MK3. So it's all swings and roundabouts really.

    The B7 Audi A4 had a lovely interior, and the B8 A4 was nice inside but not as nice and felt cheaper. Same with the E90 3 series vs the latest F30 3 series. Unfortunately I think this is a common theme across most manufacturers and newer models.

    The MK2 is still a good car, I can't really fault mine, but it's a good buy under 10k rather than at the 16k price bracket. All imo of course.

    We find that the Bolero unit is reasonable, & a Tom Tom or Garmin works well enough. I'd like to replace it with the appropriate Columbus unit, if at all possible,but the Bolero does provide 

    music from an SD card, & an MP3 compatible CD Multi-Changer & that's enough for us.

     

    Since her car has the DSG box, we do get the MF wheel & Bluetooth, + the all essential flappy paddles, & I'm sure that the Mk3  is a more up-to-date car with better toys , but we have real difficulty convincing ourselves to buy one..

     

    We've driven quite a few Mk 3 vRS's & had 2 weeks with a rental 1.6 D last year, & not really enjoyed them, so perhaps we should consider something else for our next car.

     

    Her vRS is fun to drive, quick & quite economical, & worth more to us than it's cash value, I need to feel the same "feel-good" factor from another car to justify replacing it.

     

    DC

    •
    • Like 1

    That's why I am hanging on to mine. Got it as I want it so no need for a new one that has inferior interior quality etc.

    •
    • Like 1

    That's why I am hanging on to mine. Got it as I want it so no need for a new one that has inferior interior quality etc.

    Having had both models, and recognising that the MkII is a very good car, it was comparatively cheaper and that's what made it so good and easier to overlook the common faults such as G60, wheel hub ABS sensors, air con, and that's just talking about the petrol version. Hopefully the MkIII won't have the same problem with the FL TSI chain tensioner issue. . However, Whilst it has thinner glass and metal in parts, the MkIII's interior is better, it is quieter, quicker, more comfortable, faster and has more toys, which makes it it cost a good deal more, especially without the fake VAT free deals which artificially held the price down on the MkII.

    • Author

    Having had both models, and recognising that the MkII is a very good car, it was comparatively cheaper and that's what made it so good and easier to overlook the common faults such as G60, wheel hub ABS sensors, air con, and that's just talking about the petrol version. Hopefully the MkIII won't have the same problem with the FL TSI chain tensioner issue. . However, Whilst it has thinner glass and metal in parts, the MkIII's interior is better, it is quieter, quicker, more comfortable, faster and has more toys, which makes it it cost a good deal more, especially without the fake VAT free deals which artificially held the price down on the MkII.

    All true, although I don't recognize all the potential problems that you mention, but we've only owned the car since March '13........

     

    The big problem for us, is accepting that it's going to cost us £17,625 to get into a new ( & discounted) vRS 230 hatch, that although technically superior than the old FL vRS, is probably slower &

    less economical. It wouldn't a whole lot more to buy a 220 ps Superb, & that is a much better car than any Octavia.

     

    DC  

    Having had both models, and recognising that the MkII is a very good car, it was comparatively cheaper and that's what made it so good and easier to overlook the common faults such as G60, wheel hub ABS sensors, air con, and that's just talking about the petrol version. Hopefully the MkIII won't have the same problem with the FL TSI chain tensioner issue. . However, Whilst it has thinner glass and metal in parts, the MkIII's interior is better, it is quieter, quicker, more comfortable, faster and has more toys, which makes it it cost a good deal more, especially without the fake VAT free deals which artificially held the price down on the MkII.

     

    How can it be better inside if the materials are thinner etc ?  The handbrake position is annoying, as is the bonnet release, the arm rest, all issues which were properly addressed in the Mk2 but not in the CBA, newer, more expensive, version. And yes, I have driven one but didn't find it any quieter.

    •
    • Like 1

    All true, although I don't recognize all the potential problems that you mention, but we've only owned the car since March '13........

    The big problem for us, is accepting that it's going to cost us £17,625 to get into a new ( & discounted) vRS 230 hatch, that although technically superior than the old FL vRS, is probably slower &

    less economical. It wouldn't a whole lot more to buy a 220 ps Superb, & that is a much better car than any Octavia.

    DC

    I agree that the expense isn't worth it in comparison if you don't want/need the extra toys, the Superb is better, probably a bit too big for me as the Octavia is already more than adequate, SWMBO has 'asked' for us to have a smaller car if we sell her barely used Sirion.

    How can it be better inside if the materials are thinner etc ? The handbrake position is annoying, as is the bonnet release, the arm rest, all issues which were properly addressed in the Mk2 but not in the CBA, newer, more expensive, version. And yes, I have driven one but didn't find it any quieter.

    The handbrake has never been an issue for me and the excellent hill hold function will compensate for any drivers' inability to safely release it. Arm rest is the same type as the MKII. As for interior quality, the thinner materials I refer to are the outer materials, I.e. Grit hitting the sills is clearly heard but overall it's better. If you already have a good condition late model low mileage MkII then of course it's a wise idea to retain it. As for the bonnet release, as long as it doesn't snap, I think I can put up with the 'inconvenience' of walking to the other side of the car to open the bonnet for the weekly oil check. Although judging on the pristine state of the oil filler cap and non-movement of the dipstick level, this might not be required, which was the opposite to my trusty MkII, which due to a short 9 mile commute, had condensation-related yellow gunk on the cap from Oct-March and required regular top ups of oil.

    Edited by Redboy

    • Like 1

    Create an account or sign in to comment
    Go to topic listing

    Recently Browsing 0

    • No registered users viewing this page.

    Important Information

    Welcome to BRISKODA. Please note the following important links Terms of Use. We have a comprehensive Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

    Account

    Navigation

    Configure browser push notifications
    Chrome (Android)
    1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
    2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
    3. Adjust your preference.
    Chrome (Desktop)
    1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
    2. Select Site settings.
    3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.