It's that time of year when there seems to be an almost daily accident on the M27 and I have decided this will be the last winter in my 2010 Octavia. It has been really reliable but it's a manual and it is getting to the age and mileage where I fear that big bills are looming.

 

So, next car has to be a auto and strongly prefer petrol as my daily commute is only about 15 miles each way and I fear DPF problems in a diesel. I am leaning towards a Superb as I think they look smarter than the Octavia and have a better spec. Plan would be to buy used, no more than 2 years old and 20k miles on it and keep it for about 7 years or so doing about 11k miles per year and it therefore needs to be reasonably reliable up to about 100k miles.

 

That brings me to the main question of whether to get the 1.4 or the 2.0 TSI DSG. I have read about numerous failures of the dry clutch box that is used in the 1.4 (believe it is the DQ200) at relatively low mileages i.e. 50k whereas the wet clutch box used in the 2.0 appears to be more reliable as long as the gearbox oil is changed at the appropriate times, which I would definitely do.

Downside is the 2.0 is obviously going to be worse on fuel consumption and I don't think I need the extra power. My Octavia has the 1.4 TSI with 122 PS which I feel is adequate on the roads round here and the newer 1.4 in the Superb has about 150 PS and is quicker on paper.

 

Are there people out there that have the 1.4 DSG and have done 100k without any issues? If you have had issues, how much were they to repair? Was there any goodwill from Skoda?

 

Thanks!

Hi Budster, I have the 1.4 DSG in my Superb Sportline and I can tell you that there is plenty of power!, it also does over 50mpg on my 25 mile round trip to work every day and I believe the later DSG boxes fitted to the Skoda M3 are greatly improved on the earlier type and therefore should you buy one it SHOULD last up to at least 100 k providing servicing is carried out as required.

 

Peeler

 

Not sure how you are getting 50mpg, I can just about crack 42mpg if I stay below 50mph!

 

Having said that, mines an estate so that might make a difference?

 

love the 1.4 engine, it’s very refined and quick enough in 99% of driving. Overtakes can require a run up sometimes, but it adds to the driving process as it makes you plan better. I’m amazed by its low down grunt, was not expecting that at all. Costs are comparable to my old 130bhp insignia as petrol is cheaper, but I use a bit more which cancels it all out.

 

Best thing though was getting rid of that diesel grumble, this car just wafts along in relative silence (except for the Canton stereo which is extremely good imho and worth getting if you can).

Now my 1.4 has a few more miles on it I can get 50 on a run and around 40 on shorter journeys. I am very impressed with the acceleration, passengers cannot believe it's a 1.4.

It is said that the newer autos are better, I suppose only time will tell.

My box is perfect but I have very low miles on it.

With the 2 litre 280 ps and if your daily commute is 15 miles each way and the roads are good with little stop start you might get 40 mpg in the height of summer and perhaps 35mpg in the depths of winter. If the commute is urban with plenty of stop start you will be lucky to get high 20s in summer and low 20s in winter. I suspect that the 220 would only be marginally better. In compensation, especially with the 280, you get effortless power and the knowledge that you can turn the sedate and ultra comfortable Superb into a monster with a stamp of your right foot!

Edited 13 December, 20187 yr by Robbydazzler

1 hour ago, Peeler said:

Hi Budster, I have the 1.4 DSG in my Superb Sportline and I can tell you that there is plenty of power!, it also does over 50mpg on my 25 mile round trip to work every day and I believe the later DSG boxes fitted to the Skoda M3 are greatly improved on the earlier type and therefore should you buy one it SHOULD last up to at least 100 k providing servicing is carried out as required.

 

Peeler

 

Thanks. 50mpg is impressive, I've only had that on a purely motorway run i.e. going from Southampton to Edinburgh! 

 

A question on the Sportline, does it have the auto dimming rear view mirror and which year is yours? 

Looking at the brochure available now, it says it's included but none of the ads on autotrader seem to mention it, has it only been added for brand new models this year, I wonder? 

@Peeler   what DSG does your car have that would need an oil change?

Is it not a DQ200 that has no service schedules?

27 minutes ago, Robbydazzler said:

With the 2 litre 280 ps and if your daily commute is 15 miles each way and the roads are good with little stop start you might get 40 mpg in the height of summer and perhaps 35mpg in the depths of winter. If the commute is urban with plenty of stop start you will be lucky to get high 20s in summer and low 20s in winter. I suspect that the 220 would only be marginally better. In compensation, especially with the 280, you get effortless power and the knowledge that you can turn the sedate and ultra comfortable Superb into a monster with a stamp of your right foot!

My commute is about 90% motorway which can be reasonably clear in summer, not so in winter, like today. 

 

I get about 47 mpg in the summer and about 43 in winter so I could afford to lose 7 or so mpg, that would probably only be about £25 a month. 

 

From what everyone else has said, the extra power of the 220 is not necessary and I'm worrying over nothing but I do like the idea of a wolf in sheep's clothing that can give the reps in their A4s and C220s a surprise. 

 

Not that I have anything against reps! 

10 minutes ago, budster said:

Thanks. 50mpg is impressive, I've only had that on a purely motorway run i.e. going from Southampton to Edinburgh! 

 

A question on the Sportline, does it have the auto dimming rear view mirror and which year is yours? 

Looking at the brochure available now, it says it's included but none of the ads on autotrader seem to mention it, has it only been added for brand new models this year, I wonder? 

Yes, auto dimming wing mirrors and rear view.  The rear view mirror is frameless too which is a nice design touch. 

I have had a 220 TSI for 18 months after driving an S3 150 oil burner for the previous 18 months. The difference is remarkable in all respects apart from a bottom line fuel consumption measure. I averaged 45-50 mpg in the oil burner.

 

The 220 is a well balanced car that can be driven smoothly and sedately or, if the mood takes you, like a scalded cat. It puts it's power down a bit aggressively if you really give it a yellow boot but if applied smoothly it still leaves a lot behind. I can't imagine the need for any more horses under the bonnet whilst in the UK.  (for my driving needs that is)

I average between 35-45 mpg in the 220. The higher comes with the longer runs but most of the time it is rural country roads with lots of 40 mph. As with most cars it is about finding the right style of driving for the conditions and making adequate progress. I have no doubt if I was to race off from every start and slam the brakes on late then the mpg would plummet but use it sensibly and it is a surprisingly economic car for its size/weight. 

 

I tried the 1.4 and it is a competent set up for the car but I felt it lacked that mid range get round quick acceleration that is useful for my journeys and often felt a little laboured. The 220 is always within comfortable limits and as a result I think the drive is far more comfortable for both myself and any passengers.

Good luck with it whatever you choose; the S3 is a great car.  

1 hour ago, penguin17 said:

Yes, auto dimming wing mirrors and rear view.  The rear view mirror is frameless too which is a nice design touch. 

Cool, didn't realise it had dimming wing mirrors as well. 

 

Is that the standard spec? 

 

I've seen a few photos of the frameless mirror, looks really smart 

4 minutes ago, budster said:

Cool, didn't realise it had dimming wing mirrors as well. 

 

Is that the standard spec? 

 

I've seen a few photos of the frameless mirror, looks really smart 

It was standard on both my MY17 and MY18 Sportlines so I surmise it is on all Sportlines 

24 minutes ago, Sagalout said:

I have had a 220 TSI for 18 months after driving an S3 150 oil burner for the previous 18 months. The difference is remarkable in all respects apart from a bottom line fuel consumption measure. I averaged 45-50 mpg in the oil burner.

 

The 220 is a well balanced car that can be driven smoothly and sedately or, if the mood takes you, like a scalded cat. It puts it's power down a bit aggressively if you really give it a yellow boot but if applied smoothly it still leaves a lot behind. I can't imagine the need for any more horses under the bonnet whilst in the UK.  (for my driving needs that is)

I average between 35-45 mpg in the 220. The higher comes with the longer runs but most of the time it is rural country roads with lots of 40 mph. As with most cars it is about finding the right style of driving for the conditions and making adequate progress. I have no doubt if I was to race off from every start and slam the brakes on late then the mpg would plummet but use it sensibly and it is a surprisingly economic car for its size/weight. 

 

I tried the 1.4 and it is a competent set up for the car but I felt it lacked that mid range get round quick acceleration that is useful for my journeys and often felt a little laboured. The 220 is always within comfortable limits and as a result I think the drive is far more comfortable for both myself and any passengers.

Good luck with it whatever you choose; the S3 is a great car.  

Thanks. 

I take your point about having that extra power available, I'm normally in the car on my own and it's fine but when we're all in it and the boot is loaded, it can sound a bit strained if trying to get away from a junction quickly. 

 

Suppose I need to test drive both and make a decision... 

34 minutes ago, budster said:

Thanks. 

I take your point about having that extra power available, I'm normally in the car on my own and it's fine but when we're all in it and the boot is loaded, it can sound a bit strained if trying to get away from a junction quickly. 

 

Suppose I need to test drive both and make a decision... 

The 220 is a fabulous engine; an absolute gem.  90% of the time it’s every bit as quick as the 280.

 

If I was more concerned with running costs/MPG then it would be a 220 and I’d be more than happy 

I have a 220 sportline and love it i part ex'd my fl mk2 octy diesel vrs earlier this yeah.  Didnt want to go down in power, vrs has 170hp with the diesel torque, going to a bigger car as well i thought 150 wasnt going to be enough lol.  I originally wanted a 280  but couldnt quite stretch budget to one.  But i am very happy with the 220. Its refined and never strained, always has enough power for overtakes etc.  The only thing i would have liked is the 4motion as it does spin the front wheels a bit esp pulling out of junctions quickly

Do you find the Superb a more refined car than your previous Octy VRS?

 

Peeler

58 minutes ago, Adrian55555 said:

The only thing i would have liked is the 4motion as it does spin the front wheels a bit esp pulling out of junctions quickly

Main reason I opted for the 280 TBH.  I recall my Mk2 TFSI Octavia vRS struggled to cope with 197bhp through the front wheels and even with the improvements in TCS' etc I wouldn't like to try 217bhp on a greasy/wet junction/roundabout,  when a sharp get away was required.  It was also a common 'complaint' from other 220 owners on here, in fact it was probably the only one. 

 

Still a great engine though. Don't forget, same torque output as the 280; only difference is power at the fat end of the rev range (and of course 4x4)

9 minutes ago, Peeler said:

Do you find the Superb a more refined car than your previous Octy VRS?

 

Peeler

Night and day!  Superb is a totally different car. Way more refined! Feels a lot more solid as well imo. 

@penguin17 yeah its only sometimes i accelerate quickly out of junctions etc.  9 outta 10 times it does quite well.  But if i was to ever change to another superb id get the 280 4x4 lol

Yes I agree - the Superb is an excellent driving experience, my Sportline  is a 1.4 and of course is considerably less powerful than yours but I find it suits my needs perfectly and all the fixtures and fittings are of a good quality  - I used to be a Ford fan but I now think vw/Skoda cars are much better, you seem to get a better car for your money.

 

Peeler

57 minutes ago, Peeler said:

Yes I agree - the Superb is an excellent driving experience, my Sportline  is a 1.4 and of course is considerably less powerful than yours but I find it suits my needs perfectly and all the fixtures and fittings are of a good quality  - I used to be a Ford fan but I now think vw/Skoda cars are much better, you seem to get a better car for your money.

 

Peeler

Do you miss the sharper handling of Fords to the Skoda?   We've had a Ka, Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo before moving to VAG and Ford do know how to make a car feel nice to drive.    Even the hottest VAG cars can feel a little vague at times BUT as an all-rounder the Superb takes some beating.  Not withstanding a V60 Polestar, nothing else took my fancy over the Superb. 

Whilst not massively helpful as I haven't driven the 1.4, I bought a 280 Sportline Hatch about 2 weeks ago and an very pleased and impressed with it.

 

Yesterday I made a 300+ mile round trip in it and found it as comfortable as I'm likely to find anything nowadays with a severe back issue and bad arthritis!

 

The biggest things though (and we've had some very fast cars over the years) are the blend of easily accessible and effortless performance, refinement, decent economy and the smoothness of the engine.

 

The downsides are fairly limited to just feeling a bit "computer game", however, I'm happy to live with that.

 

If you can stretch, I would definitely recommend the 2.0.  

 

 

Yes - Fords are well known for their driveabiliy and tend to be the favourites in this class but i do think  the quality of their cars sometimes is not as good s they should be when up against some other makes but I suppose it depends what you want from a car.

 

peeler 

Thanks all for your thoughts. Perhaps subconsciously what I wanted was a reason to go for the 220, but now I'm thinking about the 280 and that might be an easier sell to SWMBO as the 4x4 arguably makes it "safer". 

 

There's not a lot of them about though and they are dearer. Buying outright with my own money makes it a bit harder to justify. 

 

Anyway, to those with the Sportline, regardless of engine, do you find you get a lot of unwanted attention? By which I mean yoofs wanting to race you away from the lights? Of course, you may be a yoof and want that attention but those days are behind me! I do like the subtly sporty looks, especially the alloys. 

No not at all, ive had no one want to race me lol.  Mine is black though, so all black bits lile grill mirror caps spoiler all blend in... 

 

@penguin17 the other cars i looked at before i stuck with skoda was the golf r estate, seat leon cupra 4drive and the arteon.  Didnt go for the vw or seat due to them being high on thieves list.  And the arteon is a lot more than the superb