yip i do agree, the extra premium is too high, but the quality inside is better, recaro seats, decent sound system and trade in price!!! but yes i do agree

GTi marketing tool? of course, thing is, it really always has been! successfull tho!

i totally agree but if your read back, this isnt what was and still is in question!

Kenny, please forgive me, but I never argued that the Golf IV (or V, but haven't driven that one) is a bad car to drive.

My point was simply this:

- many people today buy Golf because they feel it's a sensible choice

- this is proven by the fact that Volkswagen comes out as "most reliable" in recent brand image surveys

- this is not underlined by facts, as the current Golf scores under par for reliability (like the Astra or the 307)

- which means that the people buying Golfs as a reliable means of transportation are uninformed about the latest facts

- if they would have been informed about them by avidly reading car magazines, they would have noticed that an Octavia RS is not quite the car to take on lightly at a traffic light.

As a sidenote to the reliability issue, I'm talking about averages here. You can buy a Golf and have an extremely reliable motor. It's just that the odds of that happening are better when buying a Japanese car.

Moreover, as I said in another thread, reliability doesn't sell cars - if it did, Toyota would be market leader. Image and looks do, and that's why VAG has kept on doing reasonably well, despite their dropping reliability record, and also why notoriously unreliable but pretty looking cars - to many at least - from Peugeot and Renault are kicking VAG's ass at the moment.

I know I am driving a Golf-platformed car, but I've already explained elsewhere why Skoda's reliability figures are beating those of their VAG stablemates. I would agree that my Skoda a good car, and it's even better than a Golf, which is overpriced for my taste and still has the torsion-beam rear axle.

BTW, all this is from a Dutch perspective - the surveys and reliability figures are Dutch, but I can't see how they could be very different in the UK.

Just to prove how uninformed i am :eviltongu

If hadn't seen the RS at the Motorshow last year' date=' i would quite probably be driving around in a new Astra GSi right now.[/quote']

I did consider the GSi when i saw it at the motorshow.... but when it actually went on sale, it cost more than expected.. then for the same money i could have a Leon R... which was faster, and better looking.. then for lots cheaper, i could have a Ibiza TDi 130 and a REVO.. which is just as fast as a Leon R (apparently) then i could have a Fabia vRS for less, which is better built, more reliable, better looking etc.... and errm.. here i am :thumb:

and funnily enough (you might say the same thing) i dont look back after buying a skoda

I guess i'd better join Kenny in the uninformed corner' date=' as my previous car was an Astra

Come to think of it, i've had 2 Astras...

Maybe i know something some people don't. [/quote']

But I bet that you'd stick with the RS now, wouldn't you, Geoff?

oh by the way, Golf Mk2 16v beats an octy vRS to 60, so does a mk4 180bhp. to be honest my view is they are both really good cars, thats why i own them both!

Um, the Mk IV 180 BHP GTI barely scrapes 8.1. The vRS does it in 7.9 (official figures of course). The Mk II Golf might do it, but I'd be worried about bits dropping off...

Incidentally, I have driven a Mk IV Golf GTI - my boss' old car. I drove it back from Scotland, and it was very nice to be sure, but I think I got far better value out of the vRS.

I'd love an R32 though. With an aftermarket supercharger

But I bet that you'd stick with the RS now' date=' wouldn't you, Geoff? [/quote']

There's always something better

Nice one, Geoff.

Meanwhile, I just thought of a nice analogy that would make Kenny understand why I used the term "uninformed", which wasn't intended to be insulting or anything of the kind. (Apologies if it came over as such, Kenny.)

I'm a generally uninformed PC buyer. I bought an off-the-shelf Dell, a big-brand PC running on a big-brand OS. I'm sure I could get better value and performance from a cheaper system running on a better OS, but I can't be bothered spelling out computer magazines to get there. The Dell was the easy choice for me. If I were to be presented with a better option I wouldn't be able to tell it apart from the Dell, although I could be swayed to its favour after a proper acquaintance.

Similarly, there are more car buyers out there than there are car enthusiasts. A Golf is a big-brand car, like the Astra and the 307. Most big-brand buyers don't even give a consideration to smaller brands because they are only familiar with the big names. Then there's the matter of image and perception, which surveys have shown will alter with the speed of a tortoise that's not quite in a hurry. VW still has the trustworthy, reliable image it built up ages ago. Skoda is still regarded as one of cheapest, tackiest brands around. Both have changed considerably in the past decade but how would you know if you don't keep up with developments in the car industry and, as a consequence, are "uninformed"?

I think an even better example is the current Polo rather than the Golf. I used to have a MK2 and my wife has a the current (MK 4 ?). It's supposed to be one of the superminis to have and fair enough safety levels and equipment are right up there but it's full of cheap, nasty, hard plastics that rattle, rattle, rattle. My old one, no I'm not being nostalgic, always felt tight and well screwed together. My wifes doesn't but they still sell by the shedload.

Um, the Mk IV 180 BHP GTI barely scrapes 8.1. The vRS does it in 7.9 (official figures of course). The Mk II Golf might do it, but I'd be worried about bits dropping off...

another one againtst the golf, just to be different!!!(quite funny actually) afterall my mk2 has loads of bots falling off it.....its probably in better condition than 75% of 2 year old cars!!But feel free to keep slagging them off. oh mk4 180bhp 0-60 in 7.4!!!

wouldnt matter, obiously im not the most educated when it comes to cars.....god i actually bought a golf and would buy another! im not going to try to be different, yea im proud of my skoda but id also be happy to own a golf. . i actually bought my vRS cause golf were getting too popular baut, i wouldnt like to be branded a skoda driver if thats the atitude and "education" that i will get branded with.

Sorry, this must be the Mr.Angry forum. I'll just slip away quietly

Time for a newbie to step in...

There are two arguements here and both are fiarly pointless if you look at it:

1. The Golf IS a superior modle to the Octavia

2. They both drive and handle the same.

Number 1. Yes boys, the Golf is and always will be the superior model to the Octavia. The Octavia is a great car without a doubt. Its a huge car with good performance and at a great price. But the Golf has pedigre. Thats something not on the options list, its something that has been built up over years of motoring. You pay premium for the VW brand, in the same way you pay a premium for a BMW. Sit in a Octavia and it feels well put together and comfortable, but its not quite got the feel of a MK4. I work with a guy who owns an Octavia and I have to say its great. But look closer and you can see materials etc are not up to the standard of the Golf. This is simply because its aimed at a different sector. Its all clever marketing by Volkswagen.

Number 2. The underpinning of both the Golf and Octavia are identical! The engines are also the same, but there is one fact that hinders the Octavia, its heavier than the MK4. This affects performance, but only slightly. The Golf will have the edge in Official figures. The Octavia performnce is on a par with the Bora.

But guys, at the end of the day, why does it matter? They are both VAG cars. Volkswagen dont give a monkey's which you buy, its profit in their pockets.

Therefore, why does it matter to us???

We have a Skoda Octavia vRS attending out region, and I love it. So come on guys. Chill out. Its the same car in a different skin - thats all

kenny, MK 2 golfs... great car if looked after... most sadly have been ruined by "ricer" owners..

MK 4 - sorry but its a big bag of crap... my sis runs a GTI and the octy kills it in every way apart from a red/blue dash. Its slow .. unreliable uneconomical and not very pretty... dont get me wrong the anniversary with 18's and and octy engine is a nice car but the money involved is just stupid if you give a toss about that sort of thing.....

the MK 5 does look nice and hopefully will see a return to form.

1. The Golf IS a superior modle to the Octavia

2. They both drive and handle the same.

1. I was shocked to find a VW Golf which cost more than my car and didn't have either air conditioning or a CD player!

2. The sum of the parts does not always equals the end product. Just because Skoda and VW use the same parts does not mean they use them in the same way!

Rob.

1. I was shocked to find a VW Golf which cost more than my car and didn't have either air conditioning or a CD player!

2. The sum of the parts does not always equals the end product. Just because Skoda and VW use the same parts does not mean they use them in the same way!

Rob.

I would be very surprised if anyone could tell the difference if they drove them one after the other.

Rob, i totally agree with what you said!

ffelan, what makes a "ricer"????

Rob' date=' i totally agree with what you said!

ffelan, what makes a "ricer"????[/quote']

Cheers mate

I would be very surprised if anyone could tell the difference if they drove them one after the other.

between a golf and an octy?

you are taking the ****?

they drive very differently.. golf much more understeery.. where as the leon/octy tend to be more neutral...

the golf is not a bad car.. but comparing across time the MK4 is not a patch on the MK2 the octy is much closer to the MK2 in concept... i.e. weight/value.

ffelan, what makes a "ricer"????

in my opinion ricers mod for style first .... speed second.. which seems to be a mk2 trait... who would mod an Octy to 260+ bhp and then throw neons and ice in it.... a ricer would.... :rice:

its a shame cos have a few mates who play with mk2's for speed and they can be very very quick.... :mouse:

I would be very surprised if anyone could tell the difference if they drove them one after the other.

Hmm...the Pepsi Challenge...

Main difference I noted was that the Golf seats are lot harder than the Octy ones (and that's comparing equivalent pov spec types). Didn't really drive the Golf in such a way as to test the suspension, but I'd agree the ride seems similarly soft between them. Cornering the Golf seemed to roll more, but that might have been an illusion created by sitting "on" the seats instead of "in" them. Engines between the models I tried were different, so not really any point in comparing them.

However, I wasn't going to pay an extra

does the fact that i have lowered my mk2 and put alloys(amoung other things) on it make me a ricer? cause i have not done anything to make mine go faster!?!

Thought "ricers" were people who maxxed Jap cars? What with the whole rice and oriental culture association.

Rob.

:feedtroll :riceboy:

Rob: traditionally yes.. but who cares?

Kenny: you tread the path to the dark side... welcome :grouphug:

so im a ricer???

not as bad as me...

Tavia4x4 is the real ricer on this board.... white car... tints.. mp3s bad ride height.. not very fast.....