8 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

It is a family size hatchback with a slightly higher roof height and not particularly good ground clearance and no AWD option.

Isn't that pretty much the definition of a crossover?

 

Quote from wikipedia:"In the United Kingdom, a crossover is sometimes defined as a hatchback with raised ride height and SUV-like styling features."

6 hours ago, chrisluciofg said:

 

in your opinion - which is better value overall ? Kamiq MC or Kodiaq RS ?

For what I paid in the middle of lockdown for my Kodiaq, vs where now everything is full price due to demand, the Kodiaq was better value. Not relevant to many here as their VRS Kodiaqs are about 20% more in Europe compared to NZ. Also, 2 different segments in size and capability with diesel and AWD on the Kodiaq for skiing etc.

I think comparatively Aussie gets better spec vs price on the MC Kamiq than us too.

There are higher/similar specced opposition in the same category for less money than the Monte Carlo, but after driving ours from Chch to Dunedin, then to QT at night, the combination of ride, handling, interior and motor is the best in segment easy.

Also since we have the Kodiaq too, familiarity and easy adaptability etc.

Edited 20 April, 20215 yr by snala

7 hours ago, Nahkri said:

Isn't that pretty much the definition of a crossover?

 

Quote from wikipedia:"In the United Kingdom, a crossover is sometimes defined as a hatchback with raised ride height and SUV-like styling features."

Agree. Kamiq seating is higher in driving position than a standard car. It is no SUV but similiar to a Subaru XV, Outback and Octavia/Superb Scout. I.e you don't fall out but you aren't getting out and having to fully stand up from low down either.

It is a crossover.

So lets be honest. Those mentioned have AWD. A Subaru XV with 220mm ground clearance and AWD is a Soft Roader, and very good for that.

We know what it is similar to by opening our eyes. 

 

170 mm ground clearance really is not a 'raised ride height'  it is just the difference between Ooo and Ahhh!

(182,183 or 188 mm if you get a Kamiq with that ground clearance is a bit of a Raised ride height.)

 

There is from 'Skoda' Media Department,

"With a total ground clearance of 188 mm the Skoda Kamiq is setting the new benchmark in the City SUV segment'

  ie for driving on potholed roads.

 

Examples of 'City SUV's'

 

Edited 21 April, 20215 yr by e-Roottoot

7 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

So lets be honest. Those mentioned have AWD. A Subaru XV with 220mm ground clearance and AWD is a Soft Roader, and very good for that.

We know what it is similar to by opening our eyes. 

 

170 mm ground clearance really is not a 'raised ride height'  it is just the difference between Ooo and Ahhh!

(182,183 or 188 mm if you get a Kamiq with that ground clearance is a bit of a Raised ride height.)

 

There is from 'Skoda' Media Department,

"With a total ground clearance of 188 mm the Skoda Kamiq is setting the new benchmark in the City SUV segment'

  ie for driving on potholed roads.

 

Examples of 'City SUV's'

 

Why isn’t the Honda Crosstar included in the above set of small crossovers? It is actually taller than many and has same drivers height as many. If Toyota Yaris is there I can’t figure out why the Crosstar isn’t. or is it that Honda Jazz and derivatives are deemed "old mens cars" so not worthy of inclusion!!

@Expatman

Likely because it was coming out or came out after that lot and also because they can only include 12 vehicles on a page.

It is the Toyota Yaris 'Cross' that is there. 

Also not there are the SEAT Arona, Dacia Duster, Citroen A3 Aircross, or Kia Stonic with 180mm Ground Clearance.

 

 

Edited 21 April, 20215 yr by e-Roottoot

15 hours ago, e-Roottoot said:

So lets be honest. Those mentioned have AWD. A Subaru XV with 220mm ground clearance and AWD is a Soft Roader, and very good for that.

We know what it is similar to by opening our eyes. 

 

170 mm ground clearance really is not a 'raised ride height'  it is just the difference between Ooo and Ahhh!

(182,183 or 188 mm if you get a Kamiq with that ground clearance is a bit of a Raised ride height.)

 

There is from 'Skoda' Media Department,

"With a total ground clearance of 188 mm the Skoda Kamiq is setting the new benchmark in the City SUV segment'

  ie for driving on potholed roads.

 

Examples of 'City SUV's'

 

 

 

Not really sure what you are trying to say here. All I'm saying is this is a subcompact crossover the same as a Toyota C-HR, Mitsubishi ASX, Mazda CX3, Nissan Juke, Kia Seltos i.e are easier to get out of than a standard car as the seating positions are higher, and we tried all of them. The Kamiq Monte Carlo, even with a 15mm lower ground clearance still achieves this. It doesn't need to have AWD and >180mm ground clearance to be a crossover styled vehicle.

My Kodiaq RS has a ground clearance <200mm also vs your 220mm quoted above, but clearance solely isn't an indication of the overall seating position, as it is seated higher than a Subaru XV/Outback regardless. 

On 10/04/2021 at 13:35, xman said:

 

To each his own but in my case, they must have got a special 1.0tsi SEL when I had a test drive last year. Cheap and nasty interior was my impression, hard plastics all round, some badly fitting, including the top of the dash and doors where I would have expected some squidgy material on a SEL. Had to check it was not the basic model. The rear seat area looked even worse. It was fairly quiet, but had a tendency to bounce around, sometimes quite violently, on less than perfect roads. Rear seat area looked very cramp indeed with lots of exposed hard cheap plastic trims at the sides.

 

Basically a Fabia size interior on stilts, ridiculous pricing for cash buyers.

Cheap and nasty?.  Jesus😂😂

On 10/04/2021 at 13:55, ayrshiredude said:

Don't know what that was because the top of the dash and the front doors are all soft touch.  Yes there are hard plastics lower down, but that's the same in pretty much every car without going to premium cars, even then its not always much better.  The rear seat has a huge amount of room, more than my dad's Karoq by a mile.  The top of the doors in the rear are certainly not soft touch, seems to be common on a lot of VAG cars, but all the doors have a cloth insert which is nicer than the hard plastic in the Karoq.  My thoughts on the drive are based on coming from a Seat Ibiza FR which had lowered Sports Suspension so might not be as soft as other cars.  Certainly my dad's Karoq has a softer ride but it also doesn't handle as well as the Kamiq.  To me its good trade off.  Your always going to get hard plastics in a £21000 car however my Friends Merc GLC isn't much better and it cost over £50000.

I’ve noticed that you keep going on about so called “premium cars”.  What exactly do you class as a premium car?  Bentley? Rolls Royce?  
 

Compared to Fords/Peugeot/Vauxhall etc Skodas are premium cars…….so what are you comparing the Kamiq to

exactly?  If you mean cars like Mercedes/Audi etc then please trust me, they are NOT premium to Skodas, no way.
 

I’ve driven almost every mainstream manufacturer going and without question Skodas are 100% up there and even exceed the quality found in other mainstream cars.  So, I can only assume that your “premium car” comments relate to cars that are out of reach for the majority of normal people anyway, so are therefore non comparable.

Edited 11 April, 20224 yr by carefree

That is exactly what Skoda are, mainstream and really not more premium than a Peugeot or Ford at the same RRP's. 

Skoda is a low volume seller in the UK and are slipping with Quality Control and after sale and warranty issues where there are faults that should never have been signed off or models allowed to leave the factories. 

12 minutes ago, roottoot said:

That is exactly what Skoda are, mainstream and really not more premium than a Peugeot or Ford at the same RRP's. 

Skoda is a low volume seller in the UK and are slipping with Quality Control and after sale and warranty issues where there are faults that should never have been signed off or models allowed to leave the factories. 

Of course Skodas are mainstream, 99% of cars on the road are mainstream….compared to  Rolls Royce etc.  My point is that in terms of quality of materials and fit and finish Skodas are definitely better than Peugeots or Fords etc, therefore are more premium.  Go sit in a Focus for 10 minutes then get in a Skoda, the materials are definitely superior in a Skoda.

 

My last Skoda was a 2004 Fabia vRS, nearly 20 years later I now own a Kamiq Monte Carlo and the difference in build quality is like night and day, they are far better now.  I can’t comment about quality control as my second experience as a Skoda owner has only just started, but I’m sure time will tell.

Edited 11 April, 20224 yr by carefree

@carefree What was the actual RRP of the Kamiq Monte Carlo you have? 

?

How much was a Fabia vRS in 2004, almost £13,000 ?

Literally no idea, and not relevant.

@carefree do you really have no idea how much your Kamiq would cost as you have it specced?

Just for the sake of comparing against a similar priced Ford, Peugeot or Vauxhall since that was mentioned.

 

 

I did know how much Fabia vRS cost at launch, in 2004 and when the last ones were produced.

Edited 12 April, 20224 yr by roottoot

24 minutes ago, roottoot said:

@carefree do you really have no idea how much your Kamiq would cost as you have it specced?

Just for the sake of comparing against a similar priced Ford, Peugeot or Vauxhall since that was mentioned.

 

 

I did know how much Fabia vRS cost at launch, in 2004 and when the last ones were produced.

No.  It’s an 11 month old ex main dealer demo, why do I care what it cost brand new?  All I know is that I got it for less than RRP.

@carefree  Pointless really comparing quality / build / materials with other brands then unless we compare what a used 11 month old ex demonstrator from the other manufacturers at the same cost used. 

 

Can you not say what the Used Monte Carlo did cost?

26 minutes ago, roottoot said:

@carefree  Pointless really comparing quality / build / materials with other brands then unless we compare what a used 11 month old ex demonstrator from the other manufacturers at the same cost used. 

 

Can you not say what the Used Monte Carlo did cost?

A used ex main dealer demo with very low miles and in pristine condition.  Not pointless at all, considering it’s condition, fit and finish and materials are identical to that of a brand new one.  This isn’t my first Skoda and inbetween my first and this I’ve had two Audi A3’s, and BMW and the new Peugeot 208 GT (which incidentally cost more than the Kamiq MC, and far inferior in terms of quality etc).  The 208 I traded in for the Kamiq was the top of the range, the Kamiq I have now is top of the range, and I’m telling you that the Skoda is far better made with much nicer materials.  I’ve been driving for 30+ years mate, and driven some dogs and some great cars, so I think I can recognise what’s good and what isn’t.

 

You clearly aren’t a fan of Skodas and that’s fine, I think they are great cars and superior to many car manufacturers.  We’ve all got an opinion👍

Edited 12 April, 20224 yr by carefree

Ok.  Most people comparing things are comparing on what they cost and quality and value on actual cost.  With cars it can be on price and residues.    In the past with SEAT there was no point looking at the RRP as only idiots or those leasing get them at Full Price.   Skoda models that are not selling well were the same.  Get the price down and get them registered or register cars to Dealerships.    PS. I am very much a fan of Skoda,s.   They can be good value and quality when Skoda get it right and cheap when they mess up as they do quite a lot now.  I have my eyes open though and know what cars have what and how much they cost or are worth. I used to buy and sell them for profit. 

Edited 12 April, 20224 yr by roottoot

Fair enough.  
 

Maybe I am blinkered by my first Skoda owning experience then.   I had the Fabia vRS from new and owned it for 14 years.  In all those years of ownership it only developed one fault when the drivers side window regulator failed, and it was replaced under warranty.   A 14 year old car with that track record is almost unprecedented, and it was driven daily.

 

Dont get me wrong, I’m fully aware that I was probably just lucky but even so, that level of reliability can only strengthen a

manufacturers reputation.  I don’t know whether Skoda cars and Skoda themselves have since nosedived in terms of quality control and customer service, but I did extensively review the Kamiq before purchase and heard nothing but good things about them.  Maybe some of you owners over the last 10 years or so will tell me different.  
 

All I know is that they APPEAR to still be of very good quality, but I suppose time

will tell if my second ownership experience will at least resemble my first🤞

Fabia vRS (mk1) that were £13,000 or so in 2007 can be worth more now or have higher asking prices than a 2010/11 MK2 vRS that was £15,000.  My actual love no matter how flawed. And it is for a very good reason that they are dead cheap.  The original vRS Fabia was a very special car.     But then Suzuki Jimmy,s which I also bought and sold and drove could also hold their value and be worth what people would pay even when over 10 years old.  Then the new versions were selling used for more than you bought the for right from the Dealers.  That was pre Covid and crazy asking prices on many used car models. 

Edited 12 April, 20224 yr by roottoot