The MOT picked up a weeping front shock absorber and the dealer said it would probably need replacing before the next MOT.  So this could be the opportunity for me to replace all the dampers next spring with more up market ones from Koni or a n other.  I'd like to reduce the slight rubbery ride over broken surfaces.  This was highlighted by the courtesy Fabia 2024 model they lent me, which rode a little firmer but without that slight rubbery quality.  However, overall the Karoq is a nicer car with lower road and transmission noise and a nicer interior + that high seating position I like.  Maybe the fact the Fabia was a manual didn't help either - couldn't live with that these days + there wasn't enough legroom in the driving seat for my long legs.  Still it was impressively rattle free, unlike the almost new Juke I had a couple of years ago, while my Karoq was repared following a bump.

 

They had the new Kodiaq in the dealer showroom + an older one alongside.  I must say the new one looks more upmarket both inside and out - a good looking car with a very attractive interior, but it is a big car.  Pity they don't seem to be planning to give the Karoq the same treatment.

Can't really compare a karoq to a fabia but even just lowering the car slightly with some quality springs will make it feel more planted and responsive on the turns. If you go full shocker/springs you might ruin the ride completely. Can't really tell untill you have done the job. Be nice if you know anyone with a modified car that will let you drive it.

It’s quite possible your 5yr old Karoq would beneficially from having the suspension bushes/mountings replaced. I had Touran prior to my Karoq and after replacing front and rear suspension bushes followed by a laser 4 wheel alignment it felt much better.

Useful couple of replies, thanks.  Thamestrader, were you aware that the original suspension bushes were actually worn, or did you think anyway it was a good idea to have them replaced.  Can you remember which and how many bushes were involved and was it an expensive operation to have done?

 

On my interest in a shock absorber upgrade, a couple of people here have talked favourably about their cars equipped with DCC - adaptive dampers - and I recall seeing similar products available as conversions for existing cars.  However I worry that Skoda did a lot of development work in getting DCC to work well & of course I wouldn't be able to replicate that.  Anyway, this is one example I've come across   https://www.monroe.com/en-gb/products/light-vehicles/shock-absorbers/monroe-intelligent-suspension-ridesense.html

 

Long ago a friend bought a second hand Saab 99 and when I first rode in it I wasn't at all impressed with the bouncy sride.  However he shortly afterwards replaced the dampers with Konis and the ride was transformed.  Maybe that car was a special case though as had a very short wheelbase for the size of car with big overhangs both ends (same wheelbase as the original Golf I recall) and good dampers would have been critical in such a layout.  I mentioned an interest in these Koni Special Actives in March    https://www.koniuk.co.uk/products/special-active   https://balancemotorsport.co.uk/suspension/shock-absorbers-dampers/koni   I will continue researching other options, though I do put down some of my car's ride characteristics to the fact it no doubt has quite firm anti-roll bars to compensate for the highish c.g. - adaptive anti-roll bars not a realistic possibility here.

 

Whilst writing I should have noted in my first message that my recent service included a software upgrade.  The dealer said it was to overcome a slight risk of the car deadlocking in certain situations, whatever that means - never happened to me as far as I know.  Also I wanted to note that the new 1.0 Fabia was predicatably more economical than the Karoq driving locally a few miles from and to Walthamstow + a short shopping trip, but that engine has been worked on a couple of times by Skoda since I bought my 1.0 car 5 years ago.  My Karoq never-the-less does quite well around town, but it is much heavier to start off with + I do further weight it down with various things like a spare wheel etc.

The Touran has a multi link rear suspension, my 2.0 Tsi Karoq rear suspension looks very similar if not identical. I assume your 1.0 Tsi has the same rear suspension. I had the lower arms replaced, they come with the bushes already fitted, it’s quicker less labour so lower overall cost. I was getting uneven rear tyre wear on the inner edges which apparently is “feature” of the VW multi link suspension on PQ35 platform vehicles. Front suspension required the consol bushes which are the ones in the big alloy casting. Again front tyre wear was the visual trigger. Even at 108,000 miles it was still on original shocks. I must admit I was surprised how different it was to drive after the  4 wheel laser alignment, which was necessary after the suspension work. The steering was more precise, the ride around corners was much smoother. 

Mine's the solid rear axle, not IRS. I'm not quite sure, did you replace the bushes at 108,000 miles or was that when you sold the car.  There's no sign of uneven wear on my tyres so I assume the bushes and suspension alignment are OK.  I did once have the alignment done on an ageing BMW 523 (E39 with multilink IRS) when replacing the tyres.  The garage happened to have the equipment and were offering to do it at a reasonable price, so I let them go ahead. I don't think the alignment was out by much though.

 

I've got to say, I've noticed some sort of ride nervousness in all my cars after moving on from an ancient Volvo 122S Amazon, maybe 50 years ago.  That car had a very soft suspension with minimal road noise and of course a heavy solid axle providing the rear wheel drive and this nicely filtered out ridges and minor potholes.  Wallowy on larger road irregularities though and cornering not up to modern standards, but very relaxing around town. The subsequent cars have included a Peugeot 504Ti (a bit crashy, but impressive, if noisy, on really rough roads with large potholes) 505, 405, BMW 523i (nice on smooth roads, iffy on broken surfaces and quite worrying on really bad roads), Saab 9-5 and a Yeti.  All these I've found a bit unsettling on broken road surfaces to varying degrees.  The Karoq is probably better than most of them were around town and certainly quieter re road noise, but still not quite as relaxing as I would like.

108,000 was when I replaced the Touran, suspend bushes was around 5 yrs and 70k miles. From what I read on the forums the multi link is prone to causing wear on the rear tyre shoulders when the bushes wear. 

Are you still on the original tyres?

At that age they could well have hardened, and the noise/ride/handling suffered as a result.

It was something I experienced with Michelin Primacy tyres on my Octavia when they were about 4 to 5 years old and new tyres fixed what I suspected, incorrectly, were suspension issues.

 

Check the weeping shock for yourself and see how bad it really is. Seems that some MOT testers can be overly keen to point out a minor 'moistening'.

Our Octavia is now 10 years old still on the original shocks and it has done a few hard kilometres on corrugated and gibber strewn dirt roads.

 

Edited 29 July, 20241 yr by Gerrycan

Thanks thamestrader for those comments.

 

Gerrycan, no I changed the original Turanzas on 17" wheels to Hankook AW tyres on steel 16" wheels early last year.  There was a significant reduction in road noise and improvement in ride, but maybe I was unrealistic in hoping it might result in XJ6 standards of comfort - not really quite expecting that of course.  Reviews of the Hankooks at the time suggeted it was maybe the quietest best riding A/W tyre around then that was good all-round except for poor wear, but it seems Hankook do play around with tyre compositions quite alot without telling anyone and last year while still getting good reviews, it wasn't quite top of the heap for quietness/ride (I suspect they were trying to improve longevity), but neither was the CrossClimate 2.

 

One aspect to maybe consider with AW tyres is the fact that most need to have a decent tread depth to maintain good wet and snow performance.  Some say 4.5mm is the minimum acceptable for such tyres (mine are around 6.0-6.5mm at the moment), but I recall that Goodyear had managed to engineer in good wet/snow performance in their current A/W tyre when the tread wears significantly below that 4.5mm threshold

 

I take on board what you are saying about MOT testers and weeping, but was just wondering whether to take the opportunity to see what improvement if any there was in going for upmarket or adjustable dampers.

 

Again whilst writing, a curious report from my servicing was that the rear brakes were 75% worn, presumably meaning they'll likely need replacing for the next MOT.  I haven't had any brake pads replaced, so surely the front pads should wear first.

Re the rear brake 75% worn. Agree that fronts should wear faster than rears. Referring to my Touran again at 108,000 the rear pads were still originals, fronts had been replaced at 60k miles. 

More like 25% worn usually.   They often say 80% worn and when asked what the measurement for 100% unworn is they have no idea. 

Service Desk staff / receptionists, NVQ in communications skill, lying without blinking. .  Workshop upselling.

Edited 29 July, 20241 yr by Ootohere

Thanks Root & thamestrader for pointing that out.

 

Back to tyre wear, last year 2023 the garage measured 7mm tread depth all round, maybe 2000 miles after fitting the Hankooks.
2024   This year it was 6.5mm fronts 6.0mm rears, but I'd just had the front / back wheel swap done along with the A/C recharging.  I'm these days typically doing 6,000mls a year.  So the  fronts are maybe wearing at 1mm p.a. and rears 0.5mm p.a.

2026    I'll do my next wheel swap in 2yrs time when the fronts will, via a bit of simplistic maths, be 4.5mm and rears 5mm tead depth, if you follow my logic.

2027    So following that 2nd swap, the following year the front & rears will be 4mm, maybe when the wet snow performance is just beginning to deteriorate.  Anyone still awake or still reading this!!!!

2028    After another year the tyres would be 5 and a bit year's old, having done say 32,000mls and with another year's usage 2029 I would still be comfortably legal by my calculation, but tyre performance would likely be rather poorer.  I'll almost certainly have fitted new tyres by then, as I'll be itching to try the latest quiet tyres then available.

 

Errr, I thought I'd check the tyres today and found tyre pressures were at 35psi (outside temp 22*C, car not having been moved for 20hrs).  I normally run at 32psi, so the dealer must have pumped them up for the MOT.  I reduced them to 32psi, but ride seems only marginally better if at all, but will reserve final judgement for a few days!

I think the tyres are around 36psi for eco and 32 for comfort. Don't think a lot of people will notice the extra 4 psi in terms of comfort tbh. 

@croquemonsieur that’s an impressive schedule for swapping tyres. I swap mine but generally once at 50% worn, I usually replace all 4 at  3mm. Unless the well laid plans are messed up by sidewall damage.

More an idealised plan of action rather than probably what will happen.  At least I won't now have to do a wheel swap for 2 years.

 

Following this service and recent Aircon regassing, I had to go to Bristol yesterday and return same day.  Decided to try an economy run and set the ACC to 65mph (actual say 63mph) rather than my usual 73mph (bang on the speed limit).  80% into the journey I was getting the magic 60mpg but arriving at the destination after driving through the city centre this had gone down to 59mpg..... schucks!  The display showed more naturally and I've deducted the 4% optimistic overread in my figures.  I was there for maybe 1.5hrs so on the return Amundsen hadn't reset the MPG reading.

 

The return journey not quite as good so when I got home the MPG for the whole day was 57mpg.  Other things were in my favour, as there are quite a few slow 50mph stretches on the M25 / M4 and it was hot, which previous discussions here indicate is good for economy - av 27*C going out & 29*C on return.  However some heavy traffic with stop start on the M25 and worse coming back will have dented the figures a little.

 

Generally on previous trips I've been getting 48-50mpg, but with the amount of mileage I do these days driving 7mph slower isn't actually a huge cost saving, but I do find driving at that lower speed a bit more relaxing on a long journey, even if adding an extra 10-15mins to the trip each way.

 

Aircon set at 20*C and fan position 3, it coped well throughout the day - it got upto 32*C outside at one point - there has been criticism of the A/C here in the past.

 

Regarding ACC there were quite a few opportunities to test out my theory on its behaviour driving in heavy traffic on motorways.  If doing above 50mph travelling in a slow lane, but adjacent lane 'overtaking' is actually travelling slower than me, ACC slows the car to the speed of that adjacent lane.  However I had several instances yesterday when travelling below 50 but adjacent lane to right was even slower, ACC allowed me to continue undertaking faster without me needing to override it on the throttle.  Pretty sure it did this every time below 50.  Quite a good feature, but not seen it in the manual nor written anywhere.