Browsing through this weeks copy of Auto Express (I'm off work, very poorly if anyone asks) I noticed that the issue out on 22nd January will feature 'Loaded weapons: Skoda's new vRS estate takes on MG's ZT-T'

I would imagine this will interest a few of you.

I voted MG-ZT-T. Not because I think its the bette car, because I think it will come out on top in a review. I know how bad these things (MG-ZT) feel for my style of driving. I.e. enjoying corners. However I know how much they mean to Rover.............sorry MG.

:think:

Now no doubting these cars are good cruisers and looks the part. I think the vRS estate will suffer in minor areas such as the wheels, bracing we know the things they pick over. Of course having never driven the estate it could be a pile of doodoo compared the hatch.

It will of course be an intresting review, sadly most reviews tend to give the short term, oh wow big wheels you make me pant view and not the drivers honest view.

my 2p anyway.

Hmmm... trying to second guess a motoring hack... here goes...

The skud will be quicker, cheaper and (this was a surprise to me) have greater load carrying ability . But the Austin, err sorry MG will win for no other reason that it is British. :?

:bump:

Relating to Colin's posting has there been any correspondence on the relative merits of the Octavia 4*4 estate and 4*4 hatchback ?

Was probably half asleep .................

As with all mk4 platforms the answer is simple ......if it is for you and 'er its fine , but if it's for you 'er and them then it has to be the Rover .

No, although Ian and I have chatted about it over the odd (and even) pint.

I guess we could do with a day in North wales to compare hatch and estate, now if only we could find somebody with a hatch in North Wales who knows the triangle... :roll:

I still think the 'Skud Missile' is in with a chance of a win in this test...look how favourable the reviews of the hatch were when it came out. Checking through EVO's buying guide , the ZT sedan is just over 20K (ZT190) , how much is the ZT-T?...I am assuming it is dearer than the sedan! , whereas the Skoda will be

This is my first post - here goes.

I've driven an MG-ZT saloon, insanely quick, goes round corners but no where to rest your left foot when not on clutch duty and not the best gear change; both important issues for such a 'drivers' car. ALSO I've been a rear seat passenger in a Rover Tourer boy was it difficult to get in and out of and not too much space once inside. The combination of these short comings means the MG has no chance in my book.

Having just driven an Octavia Estate for the first time I would say it is far ahead in the accomodation stakes, as for the performance I don't know but can only hope it win's there too. Surely if they're testing estate cars it's all about load-lugging!

One Nil to the Skoda boys, one Nil.......

Suprise result ? Well they reckon that with more power, more kit, more space and a price tag that shaves

Good stuff , I knew it would win! To beat the RS Combi on performance they would have had to test it alongside the Zt-t 190 tourer (anyone know how much that is??) I do have to agree RE the 16 in wheels tho , they do look awful. The 17s on the hatch dont look that big IMHO , so fitting 16s to an estate was always going to look 'wrong'. I actually think the 'elegance' 5 spoke 16 looks bigger than the RS 16 on the car , or is this just me? :roll: I dissagree about the interior and the callipers tho , no one that has been in my car says the inside looks bland (especially if they've just gotten out of a Mitsubishi Carisma.. :P ) and I bet the mag didnt say anything about the red callipers on the Golf GTi 25th anniversary (which are exactly the same as the RS' , but red)...but then thats a VW and its allowed to be good , isnt it? :evil:

Ive just finished reading the details in the facts and figures section at the end of the test and it seems that side airbags are a

ZT-T 190 + would be getting on for 22k !!

Don't want to come over all "analy retentive" :oops: but the following are stats from What Car?

ZT-T 2.5V6 24V 190 Tourer - OTR price

DMac - those 'elegance' wheels are 15's mate.. obviously look bigger than they are - however, still look lost in those arches!

:!: nope, the elegance alloys are 16's.... and they do somehow look bigger than they are, I think it's mainly down to the fact they are a simple design with wide spokes, the RS design looks a little fussy when scaled down I think.

As for "lost in the arches" - you should try looking at the 4x4 - to fill the arches I'd need 20"s!!!

(but what a brake conversion I could fit inside that! :twisted: )

My Elegance wheels on my 4x4 are 16"...

It's probably also to do with tyre profile -the RS estate with 16" with low profiles compared with Elegance (Or L&K) 16" with higher profile tyres. Looking at the pictures (on Manny's site) of various models, I think this is a factor. The RS with 17" still looks nicest, in my opinion.

Just my 2p-worth.........

Phil

The 16s on my RS hatch are running on 205/55 tyres. The same as the Elegance and L&K. I'd assume that the combi will run this size too.

I would agree that that in the 16 inch size the elegance has the better looking wheels with the L&K's coming second. Somehow the thicker spokes work better with the higher profile tyre.

Getting back to Auto Express, there is also a mention of the huge bills you can face if you don't run the air-con enough. I've heard about this before but thought it was an old wives tale, apparently not. Take heed everyone.

Talking of old wives, not a cheap day today. My beloved (she reads this sometimes) has been and bought her wedding dress but not before asking me what the limit on her credit card is ( :shock: ) and then she had a little 'head to head' with a BMW. Could she have picked a more expensive car to fix??!!??

Rich

How about a Pagani Zonda S?...Im sure that particular car would have your insurer reaching for the smelling salts :shock: !!

Well she says it was a BMW, she's not very good with cars...

My Elegance wheels on my 4x4 are 16"...[/quote:74d814d663]

Are they 6J x 16 as per the brochure spec or 6

Maybe I'm wrong but has the quoted top speed for the vRS gone up from 135mph to 146mph.

:scratch: Hello... mr anal again :scratch:

Skoda Octavia RS

0-60mph - 7.9secs, Max mph - 146... EVO magazine

0-60mph - 7.9secs, Max mph - 146... WHAT CAR

0-60mph - 8.4 secs, Max mph - 134... MAX Power :roll:

Does that help? :bup:

Skoda brochure....

146MPH