If you had a Mk2 before your Mk3 you will probably get the point.

 

To my mind no RH footrest on the MK3 is bad thinking. Foot rests for both feet allowed both feet to sit relaxed but well positioned for quick transition onto pedals when using cruise control.

 

Picture is of course from Mk2 - please excuse the stour.

 

 

Having never driven a MK2 I can't comment on the difference between them however what I would say is with the MK3 I think Skoda have tried to same a little too much money in certain areas, the footrests are one.

 

It's funny as well - when I first drove the Octavia mk3 I was really impressed by the quality of it, after almost 3 years not so much.  Where Skoda have saved money is in the places you may not notice during the test drive but you certainly notice after a while. 

 

We've been looking at replacements mainly the Jag F-Pace and Volvo XC60, whilst these are notably more expensive cars they don't actually feel initially that much better than the Skoda, until you start looking at the lower plastics and design around conversion to RHD etc and then you really notice the difference.

Edited 13 August, 20169 yr by gullyg

If you had a Mk2 before your Mk3 you will probably get the point.

 

To my mind no RH footrest on the MK3 is bad thinking. Foot rests for both feet allowed both feet to sit relaxed but well positioned for quick transition onto pedals when using cruise control.

Totally agree. With having a DSG my left foot is planted firmly on the footrest, but I find that in cruise I just hover my right foot and it becomes very uncomfortable after a while. Certainly miss the right footrest I had in my Octy 2. "Simply not clever"