Any thoughts on 2.0TSI?

[Jfhuk]

1 hour ago, silver1011 said:

So Skoda UK say, although everything they print should be taken with a pinch of salt.

 

Check out the blurb on the right...

 

 

This was taken from the Scout's press release, not sure how 194mm compares with the non-Scout versions...

 

 

And there’s the manual which states that the Kodiaq is not an off road four by four 8-)

Edited 6 June, 2018 by Jfhuk

[silver1011]

The manual is largely created by the engineers, the brochure is created by the marketing department.

 

I know which document I'd be more inclined to believe.

 

Although to be fair, Skoda's reputation for accuracy in their manuals isn't great!

[silver1011]

1 hour ago, gojoholo said:

The spec sheet says it has the same overall height, length and wheelbase as the other Kodiaqs, so I guess you've lost some headroom! Or the spec sheet is wrong....

 

It's hard to tell whats right or wrong with Skoda's literature!

 

The Scout is also supposed to be 9mm longer, probably due to the extra silver plastic chin...

 

[Jfhuk]

19 minutes ago, silver1011 said:

 

It's hard to tell whats right or wrong with Skoda's literature!

 

The Scout is also supposed to be 9mm longer, probably due to the extra silver plastic chin...

 

Obviously the Bruce Forsyth memorial edition , extra large chin 8-)

[abaday789]

It's the number of spelling mistakes you spot in the manual as well!

[Jfhuk]

The grammar errors are not far behind the spelling mistakes.

Edited 6 June, 2018 by Jfhuk

[Redboy]

2 hours ago, Jfhuk said:

The grammar errors are not far behind the spelling mistakes.

 

And the grammatical errors... You'd think they'd Czech it before they published it. 

[MyKodiaq168]

Hi guys,

 

Does anyone know which engine is used in Kodiaq 2.0 TSI?

I google it and found some articles saying it's the latest EA88 Gen 3b. (same as 2018 Tiguan)... but would like to get some evidences, i.e.: Specification document, or any official web site, etc.

Anyone?

 

Thank you.

 

Cheers, 

David

Edited 7 June, 2018 by MyKodiaq168

[MyKodiaq168]

On 4/10/2018 at 18:50, Krooked said:

Hi Si1978 - i am in exactly the same situation..ordered mine a couple of weeks ago and have a BW22 allocated. What colour did you go for?

 

I too have gone for  2.0 TSI  Edition model loaded with too many options to list! although i didn't go for ACC - as i don't trust computers driving the car for me.

 

I haven't even test drove one either! I went for the 2.0 TSI because most of our runs are short one's and we do around 6,000 miles PA. Also my brother is a petrol head and kept banging on that i should go for the well proven and regarded 2.0 TSI engine that is used on many cars in the VAG group ( 2.0 petrol engine is the Audi developed EA888 Gen3B which has made use of the valve timing to further improve fuel efficiency). I hear good things about the 1.4 TSI, but I did have doubts on a turbo charged small engine in such a big car. There is no "replacement for displacement' is a phrase by brother uses.

 

Now also with economy figures which is the real reason ppl go for the 1.4 TSI (plus of course the list price saving). There is always a huge difference between reported and the actual achievable figures in everyday driving.  So if not driving it with a heavy right foot, the actual difference between the 2.0 TSI and 1.4 TSI 4WDs i don't think would not be that great. Even between the non 4WD version is only 5 mpg more.. which is £ and pence is nothing really.

1.4 2WD DSG Co2 is 143 Combined consumption 44.8 mpg
2.0 4WS DSG Co2 is 170 Combined consumption 39.8 mpg

 

I also did ask the salesman, and while i do take it with a pinch of salt. He did comment that 2.0 TSI is the most refined engine in the range, but journo's are obessesed with diesels still. Hence why i read most of my reviews on this engine on the Australian reports. "These scores make the Kodiaq one of the more frugal cars in its class – the CX-9 officially drinks 8.8L/100km, and the Santa Fe 2.4-litre petrol, 9.4L.100km.

When it does arrive the diesel will likely cost a couple of thousand dollars more and will use about 20% less fuel – meaning it’ll pay for itself only if you do fairly substantial distances with the car."

 

http://chasingcars.com.au/review/2017-skoda-kodiaq-review-132tsi-petrol/

 

 

Hi Krooked,

 

Could you share where did you learn the Kodiaq 2.0 TSI is using "EA888 Gen3B "?

I google it and found some articles saying it's "EA888 Gen3B " a

I am currently a Kodiaq 2.0 TSI owner I'd really like to know if our engine is EA888 Gen3B or just a EA888 Gen3 without "B", many thanks!

 

Cheers,

David.

 

Edited 7 June, 2018 by MyKodiaq168

[rykard]

will the ones with the new 2.0 be Gen3b?

[silver1011]

Yes, see here, it appears that MY18 is already Gen3B...

 

 

[MyKodiaq168]

Yes, just got confirmation from Skoda online reps. saying that our Kodiaq 2.0 engine is the latest version ea888 gen3b

same as 2018 new Tiguan

 

///

 

Dear mr. Chen,

 

thank you for your question. The engines EA888 are generation 3 with B cycle.

 

Have a nice day,

Tereza MATĚJKOVÁ

 

Informační linka ŠKODA AUTO

800 600 000

[email protected]

Edited 7 June, 2018 by MyKodiaq168

[Ootohere]

VW Group / Skoda just need to keep turning them out then, get the WLTP figures for September, have the order books open, produce enough to meet demand and sorted.

Will VW Group give priority to skoda or VW /Audi late 2018 into 2019?

http://autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/volkswagen-faces-production-halt-amid-wltp-certification-delays 

[rykard]

wow, reading that hasn't filled me with confidence, we were probably going to put an order in this weekend, mid next week for a 2.0 TSi with a couple of additions....

[Jfhuk]

1 hour ago, rykard said:

wow, reading that hasn't filled me with confidence, we were probably going to put an order in this weekend, mid next week for a 2.0 TSi with a couple of additions....

I think most of the car manufacturers are in the same boat as they’ll have to retest almost any possible configuration. Nearly all of them have their test bays running twenty four seven.

[Kenny R]

I read an article recently which said the problem is the UK is the only country that has not allowed an overlap period where a percentage of non WLTP vehicles can still be sold after the 1st September. Thus dealers for any manufacturer that have reasonably long lead times are not ordering any current vehicles for fear of falling foul of the heavy penalties for selling a non WLTP vehicle after 1st September. The Manufacturers also have the problem of selling any stockpiled cars before the cutoff or face having to scrap them.

[TonyTonic]

On 07/06/2018 at 18:02, Kenny R said:

I read an article recently which said the problem is the UK is the only country that has not allowed an overlap period where a percentage of non WLTP vehicles can still be sold after the 1st September. Thus dealers for any manufacturer that have reasonably long lead times are not ordering any current vehicles for fear of falling foul of the heavy penalties for selling a non WLTP vehicle after 1st September. The Manufacturers also have the problem of selling any stockpiled cars before the cutoff or face having to scrap them.

Do you think they will scrap the whole car or just change the engine?

[rykard]

you would have thought there would be large incentives to get these sold wouldn't you?

[jasoncmiles]

I test drove the 2.0 and the 1.4 petrol. I would choose the 2.0 personally for the extra power. The Kodiaq is a big car which benefits from more power and torque. This is not about overtaking and driving like a goon but real world drivability. Despite previous comments on this forum there is no substitute for cubic capacity, period .. even in this day of downsizing with forced induction. Emissions are undoubtedly met but with other compromises. I chose my car based on what I wanted and did not consider the increased cost in purchase price or running costs. I am not intending my comment to be rude, just honest. We all have different criteria when buying a car.

[Yogi-Bear]

6 hours ago, jasoncmiles said:

The Kodiaq is a big car which benefits from more power and torque. This is not about overtaking and driving like a goon but real world drivability.

 

Every car would benefit from more power and torque (to a certain point, obviously!). But the whole point is what is actually needed to day to day "real world drivability" as you put it... and the 1.4/150 is more than adequate. I've done motorway cruising, twisty B-roads, steep hills, fully loaded (Ikea + family!), school run... and I've not once found the engine lacking. It's no sports car, but I don't see how it suffers any lack of "real world drivability" at all. I did also test-drive the 2.0 and yes, you could tell the difference, but it didn't make the 1.4 seem underpowered in any way.

 

Each to their own, and those that want the 2.0 are more than welcome to it. If it was available in 2WD I might have gone for it, but I just couldn't justify the cost differential - it would have been another £60/month on PCP over 4 years!

[rykard]

We ordered a 2.0 tsi (190) yesterday. We holiday in the lake district and Yorkshire dales so are aware of the need for little extra in the hills. We went for meteor grey.

[mlohnork]

I also ordered a 2.0 tsi. Still 3 months to go.   what is expected deliverytime for you? 

[Jfhuk]

I understand how you feel, the wait is frustrating. Good news is that the Bear is a great car. The 2.0 TSI takes a thousand’ish miles to bed in, but then it starts to show it’s form.

[Kalpz]

To give you guys an update, am currently living in Switzerland and ordered the Kodiaq in Feb.

 

Still not build date, in fact nothing from the dealer whatsoever.  Asked them once or twice already and they say no details yet. I suspect that the Swiss have not purchased enough Build slots or something. 

 

Apparently Germany in the same situation.

[rykard]

On 23/06/2018 at 20:00, mlohnork said:

I also ordered a 2.0 tsi. Still 3 months to go.   what is expected deliverytime for you? 

we told 19 weeks, end of October (hopefully).