Kodiaq vs. 22k mile 2016 Superb (35 % cheaper)

[freelunch]

Anyone see The Grand Tour last week? They did a SUV test, first stating they unanimously hates SUV's. They tested the Alfa Romeo Stelvio, Porsche Macan and the Range Rover Velour (or some posh name). Of course, all the tests were extreme, but the cars were useless as sports vehicles, utility vehicles or 4X4 vehicles (the Range Rover faring better than the others. The bottom line was, if you want a SUV, buy a Ford F150 pickup truck for half the price. Though, probably not as good on the school run...

 

I have to admit, Clarkson, May and Hammond do make me laugh.

[penguin17]

If I really needed a 4x4 out of necessity then I'd probably just get a Fiat Panda and fit some mud/snow tyres.  Job done. 

[MorrisOx]

8 hours ago, freelunch said:

Anyone see The Grand Tour last week? They did a SUV test, first stating they unanimously hates SUV's. They tested the Alfa Romeo Stelvio, Porsche Macan and the Range Rover Velour (or some posh name). Of course, all the tests were extreme, but the cars were useless as sports vehicles, utility vehicles or 4X4 vehicles (the Range Rover faring better than the others. The bottom line was, if you want a SUV, buy a Ford F150 pickup truck for half the price. Though, probably not as good on the school run...

 

I have to admit, Clarkson, May and Hammond do make me laugh.

 

Off topic a bit, but TGT has been much better in this second series. Didn’t rate the final ‘expedition’ programme at all, but the other episodes were very good.

[IJWS15]

I'm another one who doesn't understand the SUV thing.  My wife has a Mokka and likes the high driving position but can see just as well out of the Superb.

 

There aren't many SUVs with boots as big as the Superb either, iirc even the Kodiak has a smaller boot.

[BriskodaJeff]

There seem to be a number of parallel threads running here. First is the "what is AWD all about" which has then moved into "AWD to aid tarmac performance of a high-performance car" versus "current AWD SUVs don't seem to be very good off-road". The second is about the relative values, current and future, of a new Kodiaq versus a 2 year old Superb, which is what I think the OP was asking. The problem is there is no history on depreciation on the Kodiaqs, with them being so new. So it would require a bit of creative thinking. What is the asking price on the Superb versus list? What is the depreciation on other manufacturers' versions of the Kodiaq? That might help (I don't know the answer to either question BTW).

 

I guess, to make the OP's dilemma easier or more difficult depending on which way you look at it, the only thing we can guarantee is that he will lose a small fortune on either car - just like we all have .  

[penguin17]

45 minutes ago, IJWS15 said:

I'm another one who doesn't understand the SUV thing.  My wife has a Mokka and likes the high driving position but can see just as well out of the Superb.

 

There aren't many SUVs with boots as big as the Superb either, iirc even the Kodiak has a smaller boot.

Similar to my thoughts on MPV's.  As you say, interior space was never improved over the hatch on which most were based.  A few more cubbies and higher driving position was about the only benefit from what I could see. 

[TonyTonic]

If you ask my wife a Kodiaq, if you ask me a Superb

 

If it's about space, a Superb doesn't get better than that, ginormous. we're talking 7 series or limo space here

Edited 1 April, 2018 by TonyTonic

[xman]

In the interest of balance I say go with the Kodiak. Amongst the other things, its a newer design and the superb will lose value quickly when the facelift is released at the end of the year. Kodiak will hang on to its value for 3 years or so until that gets face lifted.

Plus new kodiak has full 3 year warranty and no mot looming.

[TonyTonic]

3 minutes ago, xman said:

In the interest of balance I say go with the Kodiak. Amongst the other things, its a newer design and the superb will lose value quickly when the facelift is released at the end of the year. Kodiak will hang on to its value for 3 years or so until that gets face lifted.

Plus new kodiak has full 3 year warranty and no mot looming.

If that's the criteria  I would still buy a NEW Superb over a Kodiaq, but thats just me...and a grudge against the (pointless) 4x4 brigade

[TonyTonic]

On 20/02/2018 at 09:17, penguin17 said:

Similar to my thoughts on MPV's.  As you say, interior space was never improved over the hatch on which most were based.  A few more cubbies and higher driving position was about the only benefit from what I could see. 

The raised driving position and maybe the reclining back seats are the only things that are useful for some on the Kodiaq, as for space, the centre armrest is much bigger in the Superb, the glovebox the same apart from the top part, the boot (floorspace) is probably the same or even smaller on the Kodiaq, the door bins are the same AND the door trim is much nicer and softer in the Superb than in the Kodiaq

[mfm959]

Faced similar dilemma, new xc90 at an attractive discount, new kodiaq 4x4 190 at a small discount or a 4 month old superb l&k 4x4 at 4K Miles 30% below new price. Choice was easy, the superb. 

[xman]

This is not really a question for the OP to ask in the Superb owners section and expect an unbiased reply.....