As the title says, l’m interested to hear your thoughts on whether adding 4x4 to my next Superb is worth the extra costs involved?

I’m thinking of an L&K TDi 190ps DSG.

Annual mileage is currently 7k but this will be my “retirement” car so probably up that to 10k and I’m not a speed freak so it’s not as if I’ll be throwing it around corners.

Any advice welcome...

For 7-10k a year and zero commuting, why a diesel? 

17 minutes ago, penguin17 said:

For 7-10k a year and zero commuting, why a diesel? 

The 220ps engine in the L&K is too thirsty, don’t want to downgrade to SEL to get the 1.4. Range is an issue too. Regularly drive down through France and can get south of the Loire valley from home with 200mile left in the tank with my current TDi 150ps.

Once I’m retired the emphasis on usage will switch from urban to extra urban so diesel still makes sense to me. We have a Citigo to do the shopping run...

Ive got the Mk2 4x4 TDF, I wouldn't bother again if and when I get a mk3

Difficult to answer as it's so subjective (climate, location, driving style etc). All I can say is the traction control light on my 190 TDI 2WD has never come on so I suspect I wouldn't benefit from AWD. And would the extra weight of the AWD not impact your fuel economy?

 

16 minutes ago, Rifleman said:

The 220ps engine in the L&K is too thirsty, don’t want to downgrade to SEL to get the 1.4. Range is an issue too. Regularly drive down through France and can get south of the Loire valley from home with 200mile left in the tank with my current TDi 150ps.

Once I’m retired the emphasis on usage will switch from urban to extra urban so diesel still makes sense to me. We have a Citigo to do the shopping run...

When I was looking at new car orders I realized I could order a SEL and add all the extras to give it the same spec as the L&K for less money than the L&K. This was obviously without discounts etc. but well worth looking at since you could then get the 1.4 petrol but the same level of toys at a potentially cheaper price.

1 hour ago, Rifleman said:

As the title says, l’m interested to hear your thoughts on whether adding 4x4 to my next Superb is worth the extra costs involved?

I’m thinking of an L&K TDi 190ps DSG.

Annual mileage is currently 7k but this will be my “retirement” car so probably up that to 10k and I’m not a speed freak so it’s not as if I’ll be throwing it around corners.

Any advice welcome...

 

Although I'm a huge advocate of 4WD or RWD in anything with over about 100hp/tonne, in the circumstances you describe I'd consider it a waste of time.

 

The 4x4 system in the Superb is not capable of eliminating wheelspin coming out of damp junctions etc. (one of the prime reasons I prefer it) and driving like you describe would barely have any other effect, other than to cost a bit more in fuel.

2 hours ago, juux said:

 

Although I'm a huge advocate of 4WD or RWD in anything with over about 100hp/tonne, in the circumstances you describe I'd consider it a waste of time.

 

The 4x4 system in the Superb is not capable of eliminating wheelspin coming out of damp junctions etc. (one of the prime reasons I prefer it) and driving like you describe would barely have any other effect, other than to cost a bit more in fuel.

Interesting, out of genuine interest what makes you say it's not capable of doing the above?

Just now, thebigred said:

Interesting, out of genuine interest what makes you say it's not capable of doing the above?

 

Because mine will happily spin an inside wheel in such situations. The thread below details my experience, and given what others say it would seem to be standard operation. 

 

 

Very interesting thread, thanks!

2 hours ago, juux said:

 

Although I'm a huge advocate of 4WD or RWD in anything with over about 100hp/tonne, in the circumstances you describe I'd consider it a waste of time.

 

The 4x4 system in the Superb is not capable of eliminating wheelspin coming out of damp junctions etc. (one of the prime reasons I prefer it) and driving like you describe would barely have any other effect, other than to cost a bit more in fuel.

 

Must be something wrong with your Haldex system  because I can plant the throttle at a damp junction / roundabout and have no wheel spin.

Interesting Nick_H....

 

Based on the thread you linked to I'm guessing you've checked some of the obvious issues, given that it seems the Haldex errors don't seem to throw a CEL or any obvious messages etc this adds another reason to my list for buying an ODB connector with some software that can check the various modules for errors....

 

I've spotted the notes around changing the default settings using VCDS/ODB tools to "Improved Grip" or something similar, but in honesty I'm hoping to have to fiddle with as few settings as possible, hence I want to drive it a bit first before I bother tinkering with something that may cause more problems later down the line.

15 hours ago, Nick_H said:

 

Must be something wrong with your Haldex system  because I can plant the throttle at a damp junction / roundabout and have no wheel spin.

 

Did you read the thread? Many 4x4 owners reporting the same behaviour, can't imagine all our cars are broken.

 

The Superb is fundamentally a FWD car that is able to shift power rearwards when needed, all this talk of 'pre-emptive lock-up' was debunked in another thread on here/PH/some VW forum (can't find it at the moment) but despite that it does seem that Skoda have, for whatever reason, been very conservative and allowed a fair degree of slip before diverting power. This chimes with what @Baverhanne found when setting 'increased traction' via VCDS.

 

It's possible that 2015 cars like yours have different programming to current production I guess, making them "more 4WD" at the presumed cost of a little extra fuel consumption. That alone would probably explain why Skoda would keep things as loose as possible as they will always be chasing the lowest possible tax band.

 

I'm away to investigate this 'increased traction' setting

 

Seeing as the's settings exist in VCDS and similar the cynic in me thinks the VAG mothership purposefully introduce "performance limitation" config keys for the lower brand cars as to not encroach on VW's and Audi's.   The Audi throttle mod is a prime example of this, "same drivetrain as the A4 but the engine doesn't seem as urgent", nothing to do with Audi having engines made of German unicorn horns, just a tweak in the software.   The Haldex system is 5th gen right?  Used in how many other applications? I can't see VAG spending the cash and resources in making mechanical differences just for the premium brands.  

 

Like I said, call my cynical but I think VAG purposefully reign in what's available in the group so they don't take away the brand advantage of VW and Audi. 

35 minutes ago, juux said:

 

Did you read the thread? Many 4x4 owners reporting the same behaviour, can't imagine all our cars are broken.

 

The Superb is fundamentally a FWD car that is able to shift power rearwards when needed, all this talk of 'pre-emptive lock-up' was debunked in another thread on here/PH/some VW forum (can't find it at the moment) but despite that it does seem that Skoda have, for whatever reason, been very conservative and allowed a fair degree of slip before diverting power. This chimes with what @Baverhanne found when setting 'increased traction' via VCDS.

 

It's possible that 2015 cars like yours have different programming to current production I guess, making them "more 4WD" at the presumed cost of a little extra fuel consumption. That alone would probably explain why Skoda would keep things as loose as possible as they will always be chasing the lowest possible tax band.

 

I'm away to investigate this 'increased traction' setting

 

 

Yeah I did read the thread. Who knows ? All I can say is I can give mine a bootfull away from a wet junction and roundabout and don't get any slip.

11 minutes ago, Nick_H said:

 

Yeah I did read the thread. Who knows ? All I can say is I can give mine a bootfull away from a wet junction and roundabout and don't get any slip.

Nick are you still running the factory fit P7's? 

1 minute ago, penguin17 said:

Nick are you still running the factory fit P7's? 

 

Yeah still loads of meat on them though.

1 minute ago, Nick_H said:

 

Yeah still loads of meat on them though.

That bodes will then as I found the P7's struggled in the damp with the 150PS TDI.  

On 27/02/2018 at 13:03, PSM said:

When I was looking at new car orders I realized I could order a SEL and add all the extras to give it the same spec as the L&K for less money than the L&K. This was obviously without discounts etc. but well worth looking at since you could then get the 1.4 petrol but the same level of toys at a potentially cheaper price.

Really!

 

Be interested to see that, do you have the configurator build numbers?

 

Explain a little more about the engines and options. 

 

What I got for the 220 these are options I would have added:

SEL Ex £37.5k

L&K ~ £36k

as like for like comparison over £1600 more for the SEL Ex

 

and for the 150ps:

SEL Ex

 

Just shy of £34k so only about 2K less but the starting price difference for the 3 variants is:

 

SEL Ex 150PS 6Sp Man - £27720  Extras - £6230

SEl EX 220 PS DSG - £30415   Extras - £7085

L&K 220 PS DSG  - £34075 Extras - £1870

 

Yes you can spec up a 150 and sink a whole load of extra cash, £6230, into it to be close to a L&K but it's still a 150 manual. 

 

So I would say the L&K is more but better value? Perhaps someone could check my figures and confirm.

 

Personally I wanted a petrol engine but found the £4k+ uplift for the 280 and 4x4 too much for any benefit I would gain.

2 minutes ago, Bud said:

Really!

 

Be interested to see that, do you have the configurator build numbers?

 

Explain a little more about the engines and options. 

 

What I got for the 220 these are options I would have added:

SEL Ex £37.5k

L&K ~ £36k

as like for like comparison over £1600 more for the SEL Ex

 

and for the 150ps:

SEL Ex

 

Just shy of £34k so only about 2K less but the starting price difference for the 3 variants is:

 

SEL Ex 150PS 6Sp Man - £27720  Extras - £6230

SEl EX 220 PS DSG - £30415   Extras - £7085

L&K 220 PS DSG  - £34075 Extras - £1870

 

Yes you can spec up a 150 and sink a whole load of extra cash, £6230, into it to be close to a L&K but it's still a 150 manual. 

 

So I would say the L&K is more but better value? Perhaps someone could check my figures and confirm.

 

Personally I wanted a petrol engine but found the £4k+ uplift for the 280 and 4x4 too much for any benefit I would gain.

 

Also worth considering how you are buying the car.

 

If on a PCP one key thing is the residual value (or balloon payment) - a lower spec car, with loads of extras, will likely just be more expensive over the long term. For example an L&K with a popular engine / gearbox will be worth more in 3 years than a SE with a lower end engine (broadly, I know there are exceptions to this). It doesn't matter how many extra options you put on the car, the residual doesn't shift. It's all based on the base model spec and engine type.

 

So if you are buying cash it may make sense to get a low spec and put on most of the bits you want up to an L&K, but on finance it probably won't.

 

Oddly the sportlines are coming out as worth slightly more on the residuals, it seems they think that a SportLine will be more desirable over an L&K in a few years - I can understand the thinking here, but it's still a bit of a surprise....

 

 

54 minutes ago, Bud said:

Really!

 

Be interested to see that, do you have the configurator build numbers?

 

Explain a little more about the engines and options. 

 

What I got for the 220 these are options I would have added:

SEL Ex £37.5k

L&K ~ £36k

as like for like comparison over £1600 more for the SEL Ex

 

and for the 150ps:

SEL Ex

 

Just shy of £34k so only about 2K less but the starting price difference for the 3 variants is:

 

SEL Ex 150PS 6Sp Man - £27720  Extras - £6230

SEl EX 220 PS DSG - £30415   Extras - £7085

L&K 220 PS DSG  - £34075 Extras - £1870

 

Yes you can spec up a 150 and sink a whole load of extra cash, £6230, into it to be close to a L&K but it's still a 150 manual. 

 

So I would say the L&K is more but better value? Perhaps someone could check my figures and confirm.

 

Personally I wanted a petrol engine but found the £4k+ uplift for the 280 and 4x4 too much for any benefit I would gain.

I was looking at the 280 versions and using the Skoda configurator. I think the SEL was 32k while the L&k was something like 37k at the time.  

SEL Ex Saloon, previous was for estate, with 280 PS starts at £33400 before you add anything.  L&K is £37060 so still £3660 to play with in options so would again expect that £1600 extra to get the same (ish) car.

 

And if you went for the 280 PS Sportline; over £41k.  That's penalty VED.

 

So all in for a car that I paid less than £28k out of my own pocket and expect to do over 100K miles and more I feel I got the best VFM from the range.

 

@Rifleman Not sure what you mean by too thirsty but as the premium for the 280 ps 4X4 is £1k and if you are determined that you need 4x4 then the odds are stacked against it from the outset. But you are asking about the 4x4 and are not sure then the question seems wrong to me.  You seem absolutely sold on the diesel rather than a petrol whatever may happen and the 4x4 is an afterthought.  

 

If you chop back to the 220 DSG vice the 190 DSG then you get £1825 back, nearly 1500 litres of fuel, over 25000km at 6 l/100km or 19000 km at 8l/100km fuel price £1.20/l and that is before any issues that may arise due to low/sub optimal mileage in a diesel.  Thirst or otherwise the true marker is cost per mile through life, no?

 

Personally I think SUV type vehicles and 4X4 are a triumph for marketing as they have sold many to people that did not know they needed them when they bought them and still don't.

 

You can see where I went.

  

 

I can’t say I notice wheelspin on mine unless applying too much throttle with a lot of steering input when pulling out.  Possibly in ‘Sport’ mode but not otherwise.  Mine is a Sept 15 build.

 

I would say that having commuted 60 miles today in the snow, my S3 didn’t lose traction once whether up or down hill, or on corners.  I do have winter tyres on as well which may help, but I saw a fair few 2WD cars spinning up and a 5 series deciding against going downhill 

17 minutes ago, FelisBengalensis said:

a 5 series deciding against going downhill 

Was it defying the laws of gravity and singing don't stop me now?

 

The winter tyres do not only help they are the solution.  I went one wheel drive today, went to work on my MTB.