8 minutes ago, shyVRS245 said:

The last 4 words amused me. Kodiaq's are bloody tractors. And heavy ones at that. The fake piped in noise is worse in a diesel because as you approach 5,000rpm they sound like like they about to implode. Then there is the issue of extra expense adding the AdBlue. Let's face it diesels are designed to pull trailers behind HGV's and pull Caravans mostly which they are good at with maximum torque usually around 1,500rpm.

Well that’s why I bought a diesel, who drives a diesel and pings it off the rev limiter? Day to day driving I never really go over 2500rpm. Plus I’m not interested in carrying 5 people + crap in the boot with the 320nm of the 2.0 TSI yet alone the 200/250nm of the 1.4/1.5. 

My 1.4 TSI also achieves peak torque at 1500rpm. And is able to maintain peak torque right to 4000rpm.

 

And yeah. Agreed on the noise. All diesels just sound naff under 6 cylinders.

 

The fake sounds pumped in are naff. And the tweaking of the exhaust also sounds naff as the rattle from the engine can still be heard.

3 hours ago, ZacDaMan72 said:

I’m not bagging the 2.0 TSI, I found it perfectly fine but come on, it’s a night and day difference going from that to the biturbo diesel. And while a diesel V6 would be smoother and quieter, it’s not like the diesel Kodiaqs are bloody tractors. 

Most people would expect some level of refinement when spending over £45,000 on a new SUV.

5 hours ago, shyVRS245 said:

Then there is the issue of extra expense adding the AdBlue.

Err, £10 every 6000 miles or so. I think I can live with that. Pick the diesel or the petrol to suit your personal needs, and have the self confidence to be happy in your own choice rather than feeling the need to rubbish other people’s choices. 

9 minutes ago, MrTrilby said:

Err, £10 every 6000 miles or so. I think I can live with that. Pick the diesel or the petrol to suit your personal needs, and have the self confidence to be happy in your own choice rather than feeling the need to rubbish other people’s choices. 

Having owned two diesels in 2014, Octavia and Superb 2.0Tdi the only reason was the cheaper road tax but since April 2017 there has been zero incentive plus VW Group fitting emissions devices to corrupt the results in the labs. Our current Karoq seems to give better mpg than most diesel Karoq's on here which is confusing as diesel is supposed to offer better economy. Wife's 148bhp petrol SUV has 144gm/co2 compared to the 2.0 ltre diesel 143gm/co2. The SE petrol is also £2,300 cheaper than the SE diesel.

It can come down to the types and journeys and driving style.

 

I'm getting way better economy in the Octavia Vs the Saab. Even though on paper the Saab should have been better being a diesel.

 

But then the Saab spent longer driving with a "cold" engine, didn't like short journeys and always wanted to be driven spiritedly (felt pants and rough driving slowly).

 

The Octavia warms super quick and feels lovely when driving steady so encourages a sedate driving style.

 

For comparison I'm doing an average of 6.8l/100km (just under 42mpg) and the Saab was doing 8.9l/100km (just under 32mpg)! The Saab also NEVER went under 7l/100km whereas the Octavia regularly shows down as low as 5.3/5.4l/100km (53mpg).

 

So it's possible that people are doing short journeys with their diesels and driving them spiritedly (the torque is addictive).

 

Most people will just blindly buy a diesel because "they're better on fuel" with zero consideration for their journey types of driving styles.

Our petrol Karoq was showing 49mpg over 3,100 miles from 93 hours driving on the Long Term maxidot this morning (148bhp ACT).

I sleep well at night knowing I chose the more environmentally friendly alternative and I don't have a fake speaker in my exhaust to make me sound faster than I am

Fuel prices in here:

dieel 0,999

98 petrol 1,309

(95 is spoiled with bio additives)

 

Doing average 85 000 km annually there`s no question which engine I will run now and in the future. Even with fake speaker behind my back.

 

NB! Audi RS petrol line has fake sound boosters too.

30 minutes ago, Skoda4Lyf said:

...chose the more environmentally friendly...

 

By the way, your 190 PS TSI emissions are higher than 190 PS TDI ones.

& since it is a 180ps 2.0TSI with no GPF n Australia even higher than a 190ps TSI with GPF.

I notice here (Germany) that the 2.0 TDI tax is 284€ and the 2.0 TSI is 168€.

 

Is it the same in the UK? If it's cleaner then why the higher tax.

 

Also I'm using 95 E10 in mine. Noticed zero decrease in fuel economy or performance, it's cheaper and aims to reduce co2 emissions.

5 hours ago, shyVRS245 said:

Most people would expect some level of refinement when spending over £45,000 on a new SUV.

Cry me a river. Not my fault they’re overpriced in the UK. 

50 minutes ago, Skoda4Lyf said:

I sleep well at night knowing I chose the more environmentally friendly alternative and I don't have a fake speaker in my exhaust to make me sound faster than I am

Hahahaha, meanwhile your petrol in Australia is among the worst quality in the OECD with between 5-15x the amount of sulfur that European/NZ petrol has. GFY. 

I thinking anyone boasting about their environmental friendliness whilst buying a heavy truck with the aerodynamics of a brick is only convincing themselves, regardless of fuel type. 

I think its horses for courses. I live in an alpine environment and came from a Golf R that used 8.4L/100kms over 45,000kms. The Diesel VRS is about the same in its' Fuel economy (but weighs 300kg more) and diesel in NZ currently costs 70c a litre less than petrol does although there is road user tax on diesels too. Either way the VRS diesel vs the other Kodiaq diesels and the TSI feels completely different under load and going up hills e.g ski field roads. You might not notice any difference in 320nm vs 500nm and 50hp on the flat but here I found going up decent size hills and overtaking vehicles at 100kph on our single lane roads it definitely is at a different level.

Not sure what is meant about engine noise either outside the sound generator, I cant hear any diesel engine rattle in mine at any rpm unless you open the window so...?

I'd imagine that 8 cylinder diesel in the SQ7/8 to be the pinnacle of SUV motors currently.

Edited 22 July, 20205 yr by snala

1 hour ago, ZacDaMan72 said:

Hahahaha, meanwhile your petrol in Australia is among the worst quality in the OECD with between 5-15x the amount of sulfur that European/NZ petrol has. GFY. 

Petrol quality is something out of my control ZacDaMan72, however choosing a vehicle isn't and the Style Kodiaq has a lot more class and sticks to what a Skoda is all about - value for money. Not an excuse to sell some left over bi-turbo engines from VW

11 minutes ago, Skoda4Lyf said:

Petrol quality is something out of my control ZacDaMan72, however choosing a vehicle isn't and the Style Kodiaq has a lot more class and sticks to what a Skoda is all about - value for money. Not an excuse to sell some left over bi-turbo engines from VW

My point is that you're claiming your car emits less, which it doesn't. Also, I don't get your point about the Style Kodiaq has more 'class' since to no surprise it's not the performance model of the range. I'm not sure what the prices are for the Santa Fe 147kW 440Nm diesel in Australia but one with a smiliar spec to my RS is about $9k more, so not an insignificant amount of money I think you would agree. Still a good value if you ask me, even though it's a niche car. 

 

UK pricing is crazy, so no wonder why they don't sell that well there, but over here for $73k/£38k (plus Kiwi cars are specced almost fully loaded like Aussie ones) it's a damn good deal for a torquey car to chew up the miles.

 

Doesn't matter as you think your car is better than everyone's elses though. I guess you're still in the infatuation stage with your car.

 

  

28 minutes ago, snala said:

I'd imagine that 8 cylinder diesel in the SQ7/8 to be the pinnacle of SUV motors currently.

I've recently driven the X5 M50d (quad turbo 3.0 i6 diesel) and that thing is something else, the BMW inline 6 diesels are bloody awesome. Definitely not keen to own one without warranty though. And honestly the 30d is still real good, with 195kW 620Nm I really wouldn't mind one!

Edited 22 July, 20205 yr by ZacDaMan72

Oh I agree I just think the RS is priced too high for what a true Skoda represents, I'm not in the infatuation stage at all having owned many Skoda's I think the Style is one if not the best value for money Skoda on the market. The only thing is the service I had recently when buying/servicing hasn't been amazing I guess that depends on the dealership!

18 minutes ago, Skoda4Lyf said:

Oh I agree I just think the RS is priced too high for what a true Skoda represents, I'm not in the infatuation stage at all having owned many Skoda's I think the Style is one if not the best value for money Skoda on the market. The only thing is the service I had recently when buying/servicing hasn't been amazing I guess that depends on the dealership!

I agree, the RS and to some extent the 200kW Superb Sportline are quite expensive for Skodas but in general scheme of things they’re bloody cheap. I had a Style Kodiaq before getting the RS, and I still miss the cooled seats...bloody good value for money them in NZ. 

As you guys point out not only is the NZ Kodiaq Vrs cheaper to buy but much better specced and with your diesel costing much less than petrol I understand why it is popular in NZ compared to the UK. Our version has a silly price plus is burdened with near £500 road tax for the first 5 years and of course diesel costs more than petrol in the UK so running one here is likely to work out expensive compared to even my 268Kw Superb which costs £150 per year road tax and has averaged 39.13mpg over 6,000 miles in 7 months.

I've never understood some peoples fascination, obsession almost, on fuel economy.

 

Unless you're covering intergalactic mileage then the £0.02 pence per mile difference between petrol and diesel when factored in with the other costs involved in buying and running a modern car almost pales into complete insignificance.

 

I've even known people change their car so that they can reduce their VED from £200 to £30. Great, you've saved £170 a year but just slashed £5,000 up the wall on depreciation.

 

I've been foolish enough to drive diesel saloons for most of my driving career, blindly following the inaccurate assumption that an annual mileage over 15,000 miles means it has to be diesel. It certainly doesn't today and I'm not convinced it has been for a long time.

 

Times have changed and with a huge swath of the globes commuting mileage slashed it is likely diesel is already dead.

 

Personally I like diesel, it has it's place, I love the smooth effortless torque of the bigger 6-cylinder engines. You don't have to use all of the torque all of the time to be able to appreciate it.

 

But, I don't like DPF's, EGR's and the complexity of the emission controls on modern diesels. Petrol's aren't far behind but it still has the edge, and then there is refinement, nothing can touch a well engineered petrol engine for smoothness and silence.

I've found this an interesting topic. My previous car was a Golf Alltrack 190 DSG 4x4 diesel, so have made the transition to a larger, slightly heavier, petrol car with the Kodiaq. Had also heard some scare stories about the 2.0 TSi slurping petrol. I've now driven > 2000 miles in the new car, and done a sufficient number of journeys identical to the Golf's, such that I can offer an accurate comparison of both real-world performance and fuel economy.

 

First thing to say is that I've been hugely pleased with the Kodiaq's fuel economy. On the sort of journey such that the Golf achieved ~60 mpg, the Kodiaq figure is ~47 (yes, that's 47, not a typo). If the Golf had to undertake the sort of journeys that gave ~50 mpg, the Kodiaq figure is ~40 (fortunately it's rare that I have to drive in stop-start urban crawl).

 

Performance isn't hugely important to me, but I've been impressed by how much low-down shove the TSi is giving me, and I honestly don't feel that the car's real-world driveability suffers at all compared to the diesel, such are the advances in technology for petrol-powered vehicles. The only retrograde step is that the 6-speed wet clutch DSG box in the Golf was pretty much as seamless at low speed as a torque converter auto, but the 7-speeder in the Kodiaq is a bit jerky off the mark when the engine's cold. But that could probably be solved with a software upgrade.

Some people get hung up on spending £85 a month on petrol versus £70 a month on diesel fuel for their 8,000 mile annual mileage, completely ignoring the big elephant in the room that is the £350 per month they're either throwing at a lease or paying for depreciation.

22 minutes ago, silver1011 said:

I've never understood some peoples fascination, obsession almost, on fuel economy.

 

Unless you're covering intergalactic mileage then the £0.02 pence per mile difference between petrol and diesel when factored in with the other costs involved in buying and running a modern car almost pales into complete insignificance.

 

I've even known people change their car so that they can reduce their VED from £200 to £30. Great, you've saved £170 a year but just slashed £5,000 up the wall on depreciation.

 

I've been foolish enough to drive diesel saloons for most of my driving career, blindly following the inaccurate assumption that an annual mileage over 15,000 miles means it has to be diesel. It certainly doesn't today and I'm not convinced it has been for a long time.

 

Times have changed and with a huge swath of the globes commuting mileage slashed it is likely diesel is already dead.

 

Personally I like diesel, it has it's place, I love the smooth effortless torque of the bigger 6-cylinder engines. You don't have to use all of the torque all of the time to be able to appreciate it.

 

But, I don't like DPF's, EGR's and the complexity of the emission controls on modern diesels. Petrol's aren't far behind but it still has the edge, and then there is refinement, nothing can touch a well engineered petrol engine for smoothness and silence.

 

Well said Silver. I for one don't care about fuel economy as long as it's what I'd call reasonable, I get between 35-40mpg and you don't see me complaining considering the heft of the RS (1.9 tonne). If Skoda made a Kodiaq RS with the Octavia RS 245hp engine, I'd be getting far worse economy especially with a loaded car and/or towing. I'm really not sure why some people here love to bash on diesel when it has its place - at speed I can't hear a difference between the RS (with the fake noise turned off) and a 2.0 petrol Kodiaq. Thankfully in NZ road tax isn't much different - £57 for petrols and £92 for diesels.

 

And before tuning is mentioned (yes Shy, I know that the Kodiaq's 2.0 TSI can be tuned to 400nm or turbo swapped and get 470-500nm), some people like keeping their new car warranty with the manufacturer 😀

Edited 23 July, 20205 yr by ZacDaMan72