I'm looking to buy a used Skoda Superb estate (Sportline or L&K hopefully), and all the models I'm currently finding have the 2.0 TSI 220PS engine. Does anyone have the Superb estate with this engine, and any experiences both good or bad?

 

I hear the 1.5 TSI 150PS is the one most of the critics recommend, and better for fuel economy.  However, as these seem to be pretty rare to find in estate version used I may need to go with the 2.0 TSI 220PS which is a bit more common.

 

Be good to get real world experiences. Do I go for the 2.0, or hold fire and wait it out till a 1.5 becomes available?

 

I'm a low mileage driver, so needs to be petrol and auto vs manual.

I'll chuck this in before the debate starts:

The dsg on the 1.5 is the dry clutch DQ200 and has the potential to be not as reliable as the wet clutch DQ250 as in the larger engine car.  It would be worth you doing some research into the 2 types of dsg to understand what to expect.  That being seaid there have been many reliable dry clutch boxes particularly the newer ones.

Does the 1.5 not have the dry clutch DSG which would make the 2.0 the best choice.
edit: beaten to it by MarkyG82

Edited 5 November, 20205 yr by Kenny R

There are many reliable DQ200 newer boxes for the reason they are newer.

Lets see how a 5 year old ones is when 5 years old.

What a pity that the DQ200 DSG that needs no servicing can not have a 7 or even 10 year warranty on it.

What a pity that more than 20 years since the first ones were introduced that even though Skoda produce over 2,200 a day they still put them together with new engines and still need to introduce Software Updates months after refusing to believe drivers of cars are having issues and failures.

 

Skoda / VW are soon to discontinue DQ200's with 1.0 & 1.5 TSI's unless they are Mild Hybrids, so start off under electric power.

I have an S3 estate L&K with the 1.5 DSG, excellent mileage and enough poke for me, but I'm a relaxed driver. Researched the DQ200 box before purchase. Not too worried about it, but I have budgeted fluid changes of the 'sealed for life' unit.

 

If you are looking for a car, I'd prioritize general condition, service history, engine size, options, color. In that order.  If you want to avoid all parts that can break, well, you will never buy a car. Also be weary there are some frustrated people on this board who had bad experiences with their Skoda, and they spend their free time in every thread extolling the virtues of brand Z or Y. Alternatively, they always go for the 'Skoda should do this' or 'nobody should buy this car', etc. They also love to change usernames every once a while. Bit sad really, used to be a fun place this.

 

Good luck with the search!

Edited 5 November, 20205 yr by Too Tall

When I was looking I was tripping over 1.5’s and not finding any 2.0’s. I would go 2.0 any day, as impressive as the smaller engines are, I always felt the caveat that it was good for a small engine but the 2.0 feels significantly stronger.

I don’t think the L&K is available with the 1.5 engine.

8 hours ago, Danny 57 said:

I don’t think the L&K is available with the 1.5 engine.

 

Ah yes I'm in Belgium, maybe they are not available over there.

 

Will also add that I would also prefer the 2.0, but in Belgium they are very expensive in tax so not an option...

Edited 6 November, 20205 yr by Too Tall

I have the 1.5 TSI DSG.

Bought it new July '19 and apart from two false tyre pressure warnings, it has never missed a beat.

I'm no mad racer so it has plenty of `poke` for me.

From what you say I think you'd be happy with either engine. 

I agree. I have 1.5 DSG and cant believe how quickly it accelerates

Try and drive both engines, regardless of trim level or bodystyle. Make your decision and then find the right car.

 

Personally I went straight for the 280 and haven't looked back, I'm sure the 220 is fine for everyday driving but I did get tired in my Leon 1.8 TSI with ~220bhp after a remap which spun the front wheels a fair amount.

I've been thinking of changing my Mk3 1.4 Octy with only 21k on the clock for an L&K but so far not found one I liked, and I do not like the wheels on the vRS, my wife says they are horrible. Anyway, I came across this today:

 

https://usedcars.skoda.co.uk/en/used-cars/skoda/superb/20-tsi-190ps-dsg-laurin-klement-hmcfj5a

 

No idea which DSG box this has, dry or wet clutch?

 

So what do you owners think of this one? Looks good to me but........ Anything to look out for? Not sure if price is fair?

 

States Cruise Control but I would think this is Adaptive CC, am waiting for a reply from the dealer, also would insist on a spare wheel not a can of squirt!

Rough rule of thumb is that any Superb with engines rated at 250Nm or under will have the 7 speed dry clutch and engines over 250Nm will have either the older 6 speed or newer 7 speed wet clutch. So 1.4tsi/1.5tsi are dry dsg and 2.0tsi/2.0tdi are wet 6/7 speed wet dsg. Not sure what the output of the 1.6tdi is but same rule.

 

If you dig deep enough in other manufacturers forums you will see that all dry dsg variants have had issues.

The VW versions were particularly bad in hot and humid countries like Australia but this issue was related to the lubricant used and was fixed by a lubricant specification change a few years back. The UK seemed to have nowhere near the problems experienced here presumably because of a more temperate climate.

Having said that the 'dry' clutch packs can wear prematurely depending on the driver and regular traffic conditions. Again a bigger problem in Australia where drivers are used to torque converter automatics and the use the constant drag they provide on hills or light use of brakes at lights and constant stop/start conditions. This would wear out a manual clutch and I presume the two individual clutches in a dsg are smaller than a manual clutch? Brits are more used to driving manuals than Aussies.

It is interesting to note that a few recent variants of VW/Skoda models are being released here with torque converter boxes fitted, consumption is quoted as worse but that is not a problem here as we are 15 years behind Europe in applying consumptions and emissions controls

 

The 'wet' clutches are far more durable and can cope with the sort of adverse aussie driving habits I mentioned.

 

If I were buying new then I'd be happy buying a dry dsg equipped car (we get 5 year standard warranties here) but buying second hand then I think the wet dsg is a safer bet.

 

As another generalisation you will get about 8 to 10 mpg better consumption with a 1.4tsi/1.5tsi compared to an equivalent 2.0tsi but if you are only doing low annual mileage then the extra cost per annum will be minimal.

 

A Superb is too big for my needs but in your situation buying a second hand car I would probably plump for a 2.0tsi despite the extra costs associated with fuel, road tax and wet dsg oil changes if only because there is a bigger selection available to you and a reduced chance of inheriting someone's issues.

If buying new then I'd probably go for the 1.5tsi.

 

As recommended by another, get as many test drives as you can as there are definitely good ones and bad ones out there and in my experience the difference is noticeable

15 hours ago, ajw1100 said:

I've been thinking of changing my Mk3 1.4 Octy with only 21k on the clock for an L&K but so far not found one I liked, and I do not like the wheels on the vRS, my wife says they are horrible. Anyway, I came across this today:

 

https://usedcars.skoda.co.uk/en/used-cars/skoda/superb/20-tsi-190ps-dsg-laurin-klement-hmcfj5a

 

No idea which DSG box this has, dry or wet clutch?

 

So what do you owners think of this one? Looks good to me but........ Anything to look out for? Not sure if price is fair?

 

States Cruise Control but I would think this is Adaptive CC, am waiting for a reply from the dealer, also would insist on a spare wheel not a can of squirt!

 

It's got the Adaptive CC stalk so yes.

 

 

What are the 2.0 petrol and diesel like for wheelspin pulling away?

 

I need to be quite careful starting off in my 1.4 TSi Sportline estate, especially if it's cold/wet/up hill/on a corner as I can get a fair amount of wheelspin which means the getaway isn't as quick as planned.

 

Coming from a remapped Yeti 170 4x4 which would just grip and go, it's rather disappointing. If I was going for a larger engine than the 1.4, I would have thought getting a 4x4 variant would be a must.

32 minutes ago, Gyp said:

What are the 2.0 petrol and diesel like for wheelspin pulling away?

 

I need to be quite careful starting off in my 1.4 TSi Sportline estate, especially if it's cold/wet/up hill/on a corner as I can get a fair amount of wheelspin which means the getaway isn't as quick as planned.

 

Coming from a remapped Yeti 170 4x4 which would just grip and go, it's rather disappointing. If I was going for a larger engine than the 1.4, I would have thought getting a 4x4 variant would be a must.

 I test drove a 220 and it was pretty spinny on starting  acceleration, especially if turning at the same time. I suspected that would be the case given my experience with my previous 180ps FWD car. It wasn't terrible and I suspect you would adapt your driving style to cope. I solved the issue by going for the 4x4 option which I have never managed to unstick, but I will admit that it is overkill.

220ps does spin on wet,

to minimize that i have installed 034 dogbone mount

and bigger diameter tires 225/55r17

 

new 2.0 TSI 190ps, i think, is perfect compromise between performance and economy,
can't see reasons for looking to TDI tractor, exception is trailing

13 minutes ago, edwards said:

but I will admit that it is overkill.

You say that like it's a bad thing :-)

Given wet or turning starts, my 220 used to spin on the Pirelli P7s, but does not on the Vredestein Quatrac 5s. 

 

@FamilyGuy81 The 220 is a great engine, if a few miles per gallon are not critical.

Definitely go 220. Better box, better engine (think Golf GTI) and if you do small mileages and the marginal petrol costs isn't an issue, 280 is the way to go. 

When I was looking for my used Superb I tried the 1.4  (1.5 was too new) vs 2.0 220. For fuel economy go for the 1.5, I opted for the 220 as it has more power when required. The smaller engines need to work a bit harder.