A friend has a recent S3 Sportback and that seems a bit cramped compared to my Octavia. It does go though- and is quattro. Not so impressive as a Golf R imho.

Just now, gregoir said:

A friend has a recent S3 Sportback and that seems a bit cramped compared to my Octavia. It does go though- and is quattro. Not so impressive as a Golf R imho.

Agreed.  A colleague has the S3 Saloon and that feels only slightly bigger than my wifes Fiesta inside.  Admittedly though the interior is very nice but I don't some trick vents and nicer aesthetics warrant nor justify a price difference of several thousand pounds over the other VAG ~300PS variants.   I'd still take my 280 over it any day of the week. 

 

It's also haldex 5th Gen, not true Quattro. 

9 minutes ago, penguin17 said:

It's also haldex 5th Gen, not true Quattro. 

Audi are very careful to only use a capital Q for the Quattro (and show car tempters), all their other 4WD/AWD versions are badged with a lower case q as quattro.

14 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

Audi are very careful to only use a capital Q for the Quattro (and show car tempters), all their other 4WD/AWD versions are badged with a lower case q as quattro.

Well well, that's something I was not aware of, thank you.  So haldex cars are 'q' and full time 4wd 'Q'?  

 

That is a true golden nugget of info! 

 

Also, before going too OTT, I don't want to make it sound like Haldex is inferior as my limited experience is that it doesn't brake traction.  I've tried a few times on greasy surfaces and standing water, even with all-season tyres which aren't always the best in the warm, wet weather. 

 

 

7 hours ago, penguin17 said:

Well well, that's something I was not aware of, thank you.  So haldex cars are 'q' and full time 4wd 'Q'?  

No - ALL Audi 4wd/AWD cars whether Haldex or Torsen are q - with only one exception the ORIGINAL Audi Quattro, see THE Audi Quattro

 

I've owned an Audi S3 (Haldex), 2 Audi S4s (Torsen) and an Audi RS4 (Torsen) and yes you can just tell the difference between Haldex and Torsen as Haldex takes a fraction longer shift power/torque to the rear wheels than Torsen does but it's so small a difference that the reduced frictional losses with Haldex are a sensible tradeoff IMHO.

34 minutes ago, SWBoy said:

No - ALL Audi 4wd/AWD cars whether Haldex or Torsen are q - with only one exception the ORIGINAL Audi Quattro, see THE Audi Quattro

 

I've owned an Audi S3 (Haldex), 2 Audi S4s (Torsen) and an Audi RS4 (Torsen) and yes you can just tell the difference between Haldex and Torsen as Haldex takes a fraction longer shift power/torque to the rear wheels than Torsen does but it's so small a difference that the reduced frictional losses with Haldex are a sensible tradeoff IMHO.

Useful info. 

1 hour ago, SWBoy said:

No - ALL Audi 4wd/AWD cars whether Haldex or Torsen are q - with only one exception the ORIGINAL Audi Quattro, see THE Audi Quattro

 

I've owned an Audi S3 (Haldex), 2 Audi S4s (Torsen) and an Audi RS4 (Torsen) and yes you can just tell the difference between Haldex and Torsen as Haldex takes a fraction longer shift power/torque to the rear wheels than Torsen does but it's so small a difference that the reduced frictional losses with Haldex are a sensible tradeoff IMHO.

Ah apologies for the misunderstanding.  I thought you had enlightened me on a bit of car trivia.  

2 hours ago, SWBoy said:

No - ALL Audi 4wd/AWD cars whether Haldex or Torsen are q - with only one exception the ORIGINAL Audi Quattro, see THE Audi Quattro

 

I've owned an Audi S3 (Haldex), 2 Audi S4s (Torsen) and an Audi RS4 (Torsen) and yes you can just tell the difference between Haldex and Torsen as Haldex takes a fraction longer shift power/torque to the rear wheels than Torsen does but it's so small a difference that the reduced frictional losses with Haldex are a sensible tradeoff IMHO.

Doesnt the brand new audis (A4 and up) lose the perment 4x4 now? They are also fwd untill they need more traction? Just like haldex. Supposedly to save a few drops of fuel.

11 hours ago, Gromle said:

Doesnt the brand new audis (A4 and up) lose the perment 4x4 now? They are also fwd untill they need more traction? Just like haldex. Supposedly to save a few drops of fuel.

It never was permanent 4x4 as the Torsen differential wouldn't transfer torque to the rear wheels unless needed. The main difference is that Torsen is purely mechanical and Haldex is a software controlled clutch.

 

From 2016 Audi have made a Haldex system the standard which they call quattro ultra see quattro ultra

I am pretty happy with the Haldex, power delivery and convenience balance of my Cupra ST 4drive.

I think it is more spacious than a A3/S3 and on par with the Golf.

I had my car side by side with an Octavia and we pulled out the measuring tape to check trunk size and the difference (to my surprise...) is negligible - I thought it was going to be bigger but it is around 1cm to every direction smaller on the Seat, with the loading width by the door even being wider on the Cupra.

In terms of rear leg room, same thing applies - there is about one cm or so less leg room in the rear seats.

The width of the rear seat is where there is a difference - you can sit 3 at the rear on the Skoda, but you can only sit 2 comfortably on the Seat. I think 3 (if not too chubby) would be possible but not comfortable.

Head room is about the same.

About the A6 vs Octavia, I have a friend that is in the car business and I visit him often and sometimes give a hand.

They had to move a few cars from one location to another and since there were not enough drivers they asked if I could drive an A6.

We had it side by side with the Octavia and all the dimensions (interior, boot, etc) looked about the same. On size alone, I would not choose an A6 over an Octavia.

Driving it, it was a nice car, although it was on the way to a dealership and the brakes were totally gone (they were going to be replaced after) so I could not push it at all.

You do pay a "Audi tax" for that badge, although, arguably, their interiors are of better quality.

Edited 18 July, 20187 yr by Jaco2k

On ‎13‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 11:50, TonyTonic said:

Just received a quote for £2000 to insure this car haha. Might not buy it after all, ridiculous, I pay £280 on the curent car.

 

How much do you guys pay for the vRS Octavias?

Just £280 on my VRS245 but I am ancient(53 )

On ‎13‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 13:46, TonyTonic said:

No idea, outside their criteria apparently. They didn't go into detail. I've been with them for 6 years. This is a powerful car apparently.

 

They put me through to another insurance company and they quoted £2k but they said if I can find cheaper they might be able to match, which is a bit silly. Why not give me a decent quote of the bat?

Group 32 insurance and 0-60mph in 6.5 seconds!

On ‎14‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 09:04, 181ce said:

Not even a remotely fair comparison it's akin to comparing a Micra with a Mondeo.

 

There's a reason why there's so many good deals available in the A6

 

Ultimately I recon it's gonna have free fall depreciation being the previous model of a "premium" brand

 

Having vainly spent years on such "premium" motors I've seen the light just buy a Superb ie an actually direct competitor for that size car

 

It's 7 years old and my brother has had the facelift version since April 2015 which gets replaced soon with a PEUGEOT 5008! GULP!

4 hours ago, Jaco2k said:

You do pay a "Audi tax" for that badge, although, arguably, their interiors are of better quality.

 

Both the A6 and Octavia are great cars. Ultimately both can move people and goods very well. The one you buy largely depending on how much your are able or willing to spend on a car.

 

What's great is that the performance gap between premium and cheaper cars has largely been eradicated. Today your can equip affordable cars torquey engines and automatic gearboxes that, in town, won't be any less competent than big 2-3L engine inside a Mercedes or Audi.

 

A few weeks ago I had a X5 40d as a loaner, while it has good road presence the fuel consumption was so high I couldn't wait to get my X3 back. Further more, the insurance, tyre and finance costs are stupidly high. I couldn't discover what it does better than my Skoda or X3. Hence, I'm now looking to replace the X3 with an Octavia.

 

Who knows, in 3-4 years when my finances are no longer choked by nursery fees I might consider rebuying a premium car.

2 hours ago, Crassus said:

 

Both the A6 and Octavia are great cars. Ultimately both can move people and goods very well. The one you buy largely depending on how much your are able or willing to spend on a car.

 

What's great is that the performance gap between premium and cheaper cars has largely been eradicated. Today your can equip affordable cars torquey engines and automatic gearboxes that, in town, won't be any less competent than big 2-3L engine inside a Mercedes or Audi.

 

A few weeks ago I had a X5 40d as a loaner, while it has good road presence the fuel consumption was so high I couldn't wait to get my X3 back. Further more, the insurance, tyre and finance costs are stupidly high. I couldn't discover what it does better than my Skoda or X3. Hence, I'm now looking to replace the X3 with an Octavia.

 

Who knows, in 3-4 years when my finances are no longer choked by nursery fees I might consider rebuying a premium car.

Eight years ago I was driving a Fabia Estate 1.6Tdi SE (105bhp) and the wife Kia Picanto 1.1 Chill (67bhp). Today I am enjoying the Octy VRS245 and the wife a Karoq 1.5Tsi SEL (148bhp), which shows things can improve given a bit of time!

To me it is a huge difference in road noise inside the A6 vs Octavia. And one thing mot mentioned is the aircon/heater system. So much better in the A6. But it is a premium car. 

On 12/07/2018 at 22:46, mumphie said:

Servicing costs with Audi are usually significantly higher than Skoda...

 

I didn’t find this.

 

A6 is more like he superb for sure.

The stock cars don’t have the emissions fixes for NOx, so be careful as it might be fine in cities or not.

 

otherwise nice car, but be careful of back ache from the driving position. Some are fine, others not with it.

 

oh and the rising falling screen is nice, but expensive to fix out of warranty.

 

i did similar, but went superb as that was still a lot better value and less than £500 between them on the residuals.

Edited 19 July, 20187 yr by cheezemonkhai

Once again A6 v Superb

Octavia is a totally different animal

3 hours ago, KjetilRos said:

To me it is a huge difference in road noise inside the A6 vs Octavia. And one thing mot mentioned is the aircon/heater system. So much better in the A6. But it is a premium car. 

 

Yes. Luxury starts at the A6/5/E. Set the fan speed to 3-4 bars in the 5-Series and it's whisper quiet. In the 3 series or even X3 the fan is loud enough at 3-4 bars to be annoying if you are having conversation with passengers. In the more expensive cars, front passengers also have individual fan speeds and controls for the direction.

 

The A6 will likely have better noise insulation - especially around wheel arches. Leather and other soft touch materials also help with insulation. However road noise is also largely affected by tyres.

 

For overall quietness in the cabin there is little to no difference between my X3 and Fabia. The Skoda is even quieter at low speeds because it has a 1.2L petrol and not a noisy 2L diesel.

 

 

 

Can someone compare the Octavia vs Superb? Is there a massive difference in road noise, comfort etc?

51 minutes ago, TonyTonic said:

Can someone compare the Octavia vs Superb? Is there a massive difference in road noise, comfort etc?

Comfort is a factor of four things:

 

1. The car

2. Your expectations 

3. Tyre profile 

4. Quality of local roads

 

A few months ago I popped into a dealership near Gatwick after dropping off my other half at the airports. The roads around there are amazingly smooth compared with those in Kent which are broken like roads in Mogadishu. Big alloys would be fine around Gatwick but in Kent they wouldn't.

 

If you are strongly considering an Octavia or Superb you are best of testing them on local roads with similar tyre profile.

4 hours ago, Crassus said:

Comfort is a factor of four things:

 

1. The car

2. Your expectations 

3. Tyre profile 

4. Quality of local roads

 

A few months ago I popped into a dealership near Gatwick after dropping off my other half at the airports. The roads around there are amazingly smooth compared with those in Kent which are broken like roads in Mogadishu. Big alloys would be fine around Gatwick but in Kent they wouldn't.

 

If you are strongly considering an Octavia or Superb you are best of testing them on local roads with similar tyre profile.

I have but it's difficult when it's not back to back.

 

All things being equal I would imagine the Superb to be more refined but I just want to know if the difference is huge to justify the price difference.

On 17/07/2018 at 10:52, dunc69 said:

I stand corrected - I have checked and apologies for my A3-based assumption. 

 

Having longitudinal engines with front wheel drive seems an imperfect solution - although, granted, may be better for 4WD. 

 

 

 

It is an imperfect solution for fwd 4 cylinder models.

 

A4 has a very large transmission tunnel in the front for the longitudinal gearbox. This results in a less than perfect driving position and pedals which are offset and cramped especially in the manual.

 

The need for the MLB platform for the A4 is also for the bigger V6 engines that wont fit MQB

Edited 19 July, 20187 yr by logiclee

It's bad enough that all Octavias come with with a huge transmission tunnel just so a few of them can be fitted with four wheel drive.

Superb vs Octy.

 

few octy get independent rear suspension, but get a beam instead.

 

having had a number of octavia including a mk3, the superb is just a more relaxing place to be for motorway cruising etc.

Edited 19 July, 20187 yr by cheezemonkhai