Yes, this was stated and confirmed several times in the initial pages of the topic.

Good to know for those who have winter wheels. Thanks

Next there will be complaints that the seat leon cuppa produces more PS. Maybe that car needs the 340mm's more than the vrs which produces a lot less power.

Lots of people getting confused about what the car requires and what was offered/sold.

Guess all those who mod their cars should pay for a product but not receive it as "it's not required"?

All the guys who put spoilers or lower their cars from standard should pay for a product and then not receive it as it is not required for a car of equal power on normal UK roads.

All those who purchase a Ferrari should receive a Fiat Punto as that is all that is really required on UK roads.

I'll sell you a 50" 4k HD TV for £2000 but actually send you a 32" 720p TV i purvhased for £500 and you'll be happy with it? Because that's all that is really required in your living room?

It's not what is required. It is what was purchased. Don't keep mixing the two thing up guys.

Sorry for my rant. I'm only looking out for my own and others purchase. If it comes off, great. It's only worth asking Skoda if they will honour the original spec (which has 340mm brakes and cost £300 more when I agreed my purchase in 2015).

What size brakes are on a non VRS?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

312mm on the 1.8 TSI.

For the others, 288mm I believe.

Brake size is not specified in the contract....

Brilliant answer, although it does not answer my questions.

Agreed it is not in the contract (verbal contract?) but then again, it's neither in your contract so I guess you don't require them? ;-). It goes both ways and im sure you'd be annoyed/arguing should you have received your 220 vRS with different spec to what was ordered?

Again, all TDI's in 2015 did have them. I ordered under knowledge and information provided in 2015 on the basis that what I saw and agreed is what will be supplied.

Brakes are a legal requirement. Don't need to be specified in the purchase contract (written or verbal), let alone the size of the discs.

 

And yes, I would be VERY annoyed if they delivered a car with a lesser specification than ordered. Such as, a Bolero if the specification was a Columbus. Or the specification ordered was leather seats and they supplied cloth. In those examples I'd expect them to provide a car with what had been specified, not what had been thought to have been fitted.

 

I repeat, nowhere in any publicity material, printed or on the web, has the size of the brakes been stated. Yes, it's been generally ASSUMED that all vRS's come with larger discs, because that's what's been seen so far. Nowhere is this stated as a fact, or provided as information, or agreed will be supplied.

 

Don't misunderstand me - I would be annoyed in your position, and it's a big PR ballsup by Skoda. At the very least they should have given notice to the dealers that all cars from build week whatever would be fitted with smaller discs, so the dealers could tell the prospective buyers. And they also should say a big "sorry" to customers in this position. I'd also want and expect the dealer/Skoda to make some compensatory gesture of goodwill, at least a couple of tanks of fuel or that level of value, but I really wouldn't expect (though I'd be very pleasantly surprised) much more than that.

 

And I don't think that the diesel is much less a performance car than the petrol. It'll still do over 140 mph (where legal...) and 0-60 in under eight seconds. So why on earth (other than save a few euros, and I'm discounting the lighter weight aspect) do it at all, regardless of whether the smaller discs give exactly the same braking ability?

 

A cockup, but the legal niceties are all in Skoda's favour. Which is morally wrong.

Having owned a mk11 vrs tsi I would say the brakes were inadequate when driving a bit quicker, the 340mm bakes on my current vrs are fantastic, and until now would have been the reason for buying another vrs tdi. I feel like I am now being forced to buy a performance petrol in order to get good brakes. I have also had a gtd for two weeks and after my brakes on my vrs felt inadequate.

Inadequate. Were they worn or were you tailgating or driving too quickly for the conditions or road? I'd understand if it was on a race track, on public roads at legal speeds unless someone pulls out unexpectedly, I would think the 312mm set up would be fine as on my old Mk II.

Edited 30 April, 201610 yr by Redboy

Totally agree. They have not specified this detail and this may be their way out.

I'm playing devils advocate here.

Don't get me wrong - I will be pleasantly surprised if anything happens about this but it is always worth asking just in case.

There are likely to be many who won't know and possibly more who won't argue, I am neither and if I have paid £300 more for a product I have not received (on the basis that I was told it will look like that 2015 model) then I'd like something to be done about it.

I'm not annoyed, I think the car is great but would like an adequate response from Skoda as to this course of action and some way to rectify a mistake/error/miscommunication on their part.

Anyways, when I have bought 2 new cars from them and been a loyal customer I would like some loyalty back (maybe I'm dreaming here?).

Anyways, sorry to keep dragging this on. We shall see what they say next week and let's hope it's positive.

Inadequate. Were they worn or were you tailgating or driving too quickly for the conditions or road? I'd understand if it was on a race track, on public roads at legal speeds unless someone pulls out unexpectedly, I would think the 312mm set up would be fine as on my old Mk II.

I should have said at uk road legal speed they were fine, but on a German autobahn at 130mph, and somebody pulls out in front of you then, I felt they were not up to the job as happened to me. In my opinion, if car can do these speeds then the brakes should be up to the job! I feel that now on my mk3 the brakes would cope much better in the same situation.

Let's face it if you are driving to the limit of 312mm single pot brakes anywhere then 340mm single pot brakes ain't going to save you either. You need to be looking at a proper brake upgrade or a more capable car altogether.

I'm annoyed that I've just realised that Peroni have reduced their big bottles from 660ml to 620ml and I've only just noticed after buying 12 of them. Therefore I firmly believe that if the brake issue had affected me I would not only be miffed but incandescent (Im a stickler for the rules and being fair!) So I genuinely hope something happens for your AirborneVRS.

I need to call into my dealer to pick something up so I will ask them randomly if they are aware of this. Its very likely they won't have a Jimmy choo and I can't blame them if Skoda are just making arbitrary 'factory decisions'

Edited 30 April, 201610 yr by ExSEAT

Brakes are a legal requirement. Don't need to be specified in the purchase contract (written or verbal), let alone the size of the discs.

And yes, I would be VERY annoyed if they delivered a car with a lesser specification than ordered. Such as, a Bolero if the specification was a Columbus. Or the specification ordered was leather seats and they supplied cloth. In those examples I'd expect them to provide a car with what had been specified, not what had been thought to have been fitted.

I repeat, nowhere in any publicity material, printed or on the web, has the size of the brakes been stated. Yes, it's been generally ASSUMED that all vRS's come with larger discs, because that's what's been seen so far. Nowhere is this stated as a fact, or provided as information, or agreed will be supplied.

Don't misunderstand me - I would be annoyed in your position, and it's a big PR ballsup by Skoda. At the very least they should have given notice to the dealers that all cars from build week whatever would be fitted with smaller discs, so the dealers could tell the prospective buyers. And they also should say a big "sorry" to customers in this position. I'd also want and expect the dealer/Skoda to make some compensatory gesture of goodwill, at least a couple of tanks of fuel or that level of value, but I really wouldn't expect (though I'd be very pleasantly surprised) much more than that.

And I don't think that the diesel is much less a performance car than the petrol. It'll still do over 140 mph (where legal...) and 0-60 in under eight seconds. So why on earth (other than save a few euros, and I'm discounting the lighter weight aspect) do it at all, regardless of whether the smaller discs give exactly the same braking ability?

A cockup, but the legal niceties are all in Skoda's favour. Which is morally wrong.

But what If your beloved ordered vrs puts out for example 216PS on the dyno shortly after you take delivery from new. What would you do?

They have sold you a car which the propaganda states 220PS so would you reject the car? Would you waste your time (life) arguing for the missing 4PS?

Or are owners totally paranoid that the QC in S###a is so poor that they will fit whatever is to hand on the production line. Example..the great dipstick scandal.

If someone is so analytical of such items as disc diameter I suggest checking other areas of the octavia which fall short of quality. There are many to choose from.

Sorry I don't buy all the worry about disc size. These are cheap cars. Cheaper than SEATs.

They sell you a 184ps Diesel or a 220ps Petrol and that is the minimum out put on standard diesel or 95 ron unleaded 

at different altitudes and ambient temperatures.

 

Very few that buy a vehicle that has performance well in excess of the minimum figures in the UK where they will never be above 4,000 feet above sea level or in temperature greater than 40*oC or much below -20*oC are going to complain that they have too much torque or maximum power achieved.

 

If anyone that bought the latest version on an Octavia that has smaller discs is concerned about inferior braking performance maybe take it to a MOT testing centre and see how they perform.

 

Also take it to a Dynamic Dyno and see if you got what you paid for in performance.

 

Those with cars needing 'The Fix;  should do that anyway, 

then see if VW / Skoda / Audi / Porsche / Seat are robbing you after they do 'the fix'.

Edited 30 April, 201610 yr by GoneOffSKi

And the quality control on the SEATs has always been 'less than satisfactory' in my opinion. Although what this has to do with that bunch of idiots I don't know.

They sell you a 184ps Diesel or a 220ps Petrol and that is the minimum out put on standard diesel or 95 ron unleaded

at different altitudes and ambient temperatures.

Very few that buy a vehicle that has performance well in excess of the minimum figures in the UK where they will never be above 4,000 above sea level or in temperature greater than 40*oC or much below -20*oC are going to complain that they have to much torque or maximum power achieved.

If anyone that bought the latest version on an Octavia that has smaller discs is concerned about inferior braking performance maybe take it to a MOT testing centre and see how they perform.

Also take it to a Dynamic Dyno and see if you got what you paid for in performance.

Those with cars needing 'The Fix; should do that anyway,

then see if VW / Skoda / Audi / Porsche / Seat are robbing you after they do 'the fix'.

You better add bugatti and lamborginhi in that list too. After all they use common components under the VAG umbrella.

Are they part of the Voluntary recall because of having 1.2, 1.6 or 2.0 litre diesel engines?

Probably

The question of power output raises an interesting question though since I'm not sure whether it is actually part of the purchase contract.

If Skoda/VW/etc suddenly delivered cars with an official but unannounced 30 bhp reduction (say to meet emission regulations?) then are some saying they might be within their rights legally?  I suspect no one would tolerate it despite it potentially making their car 'safer' and 'more economical' and less polluting.

 

I am in complete agreement with AirborneVRS' moral stance and it will interesting to see how he goes with a company attempting to recover from moral bankruptcy.

You are sold a car on the power output, and pay the Tax & Duty and VED on that and it is all set out in official figures and EU testing and given for comparisons.

http://skoda.co.uk/pages/fuel-consumption-statement.aspx

 

If the size of the front disc brakes was in the brochure for the current model year, on the often wrong configurator and on a specification sheet / order sheet then you are half way to having some comeback 

on Skoda CZ Skoda UK or the supplying dealership if the subject was discussed and assurances given on the size of disc brakes.

 

Expectations might be worth nowt.

I can all but try.

Worth asking and we shall see what Skoda would like to do.

I definetely feel for the OP here as people buy goods on the description, and also look and feel of the item where they have an oppurtunity to view before purchase.

Yes maybe the small print covers them from a legal perspective but if its a noticeable difference you should be informed - mainly because it damages their own brand by leaving dissatisfied customers who feel decieved.

I was not particularly upset with Skoda when I didn't have a Sat Nav SD sent to me for three months because I never expected to have sat nav due to viewing MY15 cars, but if they had painted the brake calipers or wheel hubs bright yellow I might have rejected the car on the basis that its not what I expected to recieve.

All of this makes me extremely nervous about ordering a factory order ever again if the manufacturer cant be trusted to maintain the unwritten contract of what you see in the showroom versus what you recieve come delivery day.

To be honest the shenanigans of changing the standard spec every model year are bad enough!

The question of power output raises an interesting question though since I'm not sure whether it is actually part of the purchase contract.

If Skoda/VW/etc suddenly delivered cars with an official but unannounced 30 bhp reduction (say to meet emission regulations?) then are some saying they might be within their rights legally?  I suspect no one would tolerate it despite it potentially making their car 'safer' and 'more economical' and less polluting.

 

I am in complete agreement with AirborneVRS' moral stance and it will interesting to see how he goes with a company attempting to recover from moral bankruptcy.

 

I don't know in UK, but in France for instance, the engine power is part of the identity of the car. It is defined in the registration certificate together with the serial number, the weight, and the used combusitible among other things.

If anything is to be changed compared to this certificate, like in case of an engine reprog, a new registration is required. Which is nearly impossible to get for an individual.

Power is also always defined in the purchase order.

The disc size are not, however.

I don't know in UK, but in France for instance, the engine power is part of the identity of the car. It is defined in the registration certificate together with the serial number, the weight, and the used combusitible among other things.

If anything is to be changed compared to this certificate, like in case of an engine reprog, a new registration is required. Which is nearly impossible to get for an individual.

Power is also always defined in the purchase order.

The disc size are not, however.

I'm sure I remember about that in my old modding days.. Had a love for Pugs and R5GTT's...

Pretty sure the French guys went crazy with styling cos they couldn't tune them. Is that correct or am I dreaming? Lol