NRMA Open Road March/April 2010 - World Beating Wheels

[Jake02]

Sorry I get a little passionate about my Skoda's...

Maybe if they had more dealers like you their sales would go up alot...

[gregozedobe]

..... The Octy is a well built car which is also well engineered and equipped. But, while it is certainly amongst the top, it isnt the best car money can buy, even in its segment.

It is all about individual priorities and preferences. I think the vRS is a better drive than a Golf GTI, you obviously prefer the GTI. And we are both right, because preferences are very subjective (see below for an example).

So, in your opinion, what car IS the best in the Octy vRS 2.0 TSI wagon segment ?

And exactly what are YOUR criteria ? The devil is in the details, as always. If on-the-limit handling on smooth roads is the only thing being evaluated then I agree, a GTI is more suited to those specific conditions. Of course, some people buy a vehicle with more all-round capabilities

My criteria are:

reasonable performance [Golf wagon - way behind],
good handling/comfort compromise - including acceptable ride on really crappy roads [GTI was well behind for me],
lots of room for luggage as well as 4 adults (so 5 door wagon) [GTI - FAIL],
looks that don't make you cringe [Mazda, Peugout etc - FAIL],
acceptable fuel economy,
decent engineering and std gadgets,
relaxing to drive long distances in (eg Canberra-Portland in one day), and can still walk OK after driving all day [GTI was just too "busy" to relax and cruise in for me],
seats that accommodate generous sized posteriors [GTI - FAIL],
performance diesel option [GTI - fail],
all for less than $45K.....

Using MY criteria the Golf GTI doesn't look so good, does it ?

[code618]

My criteria was a mid sized wagon with performance strong enough to make me look forward to driving each day, manual gearbox, reasonable fuel economy, under $45K. vRS wagon was a no brainer - test drove it, bought it.

The GTI was not for comparison as it was not an apples with apples scenario and wasn't in the ball park with my buying criteria. It should NOT be in a head to head comparo with the vRS wagon, certainly not a TDI.

Other cars I considered were: Liberty wagon (not up to it performance wise unless a GT but then too many $$ + the new ones are hideous). Mazda 6 wagon (yawn). Focus XR5 - nice but then I reminded myself what my criteria were. Passat wagon (nice but bang for buck not up to Skoda vRS). I think you could compare all of these bar the XR5 in a head to head.

[mrgolf]

Just throwing a cat amongst the canaries...

I dig the Skoda. It is a great car. Buuuut, the GTI felt special, the RS doesnt.

As for cars in its category that come up trumps, look no further than a Mazda 6 or a Honda Euro. They are better equipped and slightly larger and have newer tech, based on the fact the Octy is built on a 6 year old platform. The RS model certainly has the power advantage and the bang for buck, but for most Australians, the other cars offer better value for money and sadly, for the moment, better brand recognition.

Having said that, I bought a Skoda cos I recognised its quality as an allrounder and it has VW tech which I trust. I love the 2.0TSI. It suited me. I couldnt drive a Honda (although the current one wasnt out when I was shopping around. The new Mazda 6 looks like a bucket of busted buttholes.

As for Octy vs Jetta, Octy all the way. From experience.

[selurs]

Just throwing a cat amongst the canaries...

I think you succeeded

I dig the Skoda. It is a great car. Buuuut, the GTI felt special, the RS doesnt.

Personally, that wasn't my feeling. The old GTI (Mark V) almost put me to sleep the interior was so boring. Yeah, it drove well, but you can't drive at speeds high enough to trouble the handling more than every now and then, it's no great-looker from the outside (nothing wrong with it, but it's not stunning either...and to be fair I feel the same way about the RS), and those round black buttons on the steering wheel were just woeful, and ultimately you drive a car from the inside, not riding on the roof, so I wasn't interested in looking at them all the time. The new one, and I'm only going from photos here, as I ordered my RS well before the new GTI was available, looks pretty much identical to the RS. Same components, same layout. As you'd expect - in terms of interior tech they're all sourced from the same place.

Having driven a 118TSI while looking at cars, it felt the same as the RS. Maybe the red stiching in the GTI makes a difference? That's not a joke - the black steering-wheel buttons turned me off the Mark V, so I can understand the stitching making some think "ooh...niiice".

As for cars in its category that come up trumps, look no further than a Mazda 6 or a Honda Euro.

I disagree with that. Accord Euro "Luxury" spec is $4K more than a TSI liftback Octavia RS, Mazda 6 (available auto-only) just over $1K more than the DSG equpped Octavia RS liftback. That's almost 10% more for the Accord, and just over 2% for the Mazda. Both are nice cars, but the Mazda doesn't feel all that premium, while the Accord does have a bunch of "stuff" extra (HIDs, sunroof, reverse-tilt mirror, full leather, and electric seats), but it's also %10 more. So I'd say they're reasonably even, rather than "better value".

When looking, I tried (among about 10 other options - I wanted to make sure I had the right car!) the Accord Euro. It was very nice. My partner, in her wisdom, decided it was the one I should get (the very effective heated seats had quite a bit to do with that ), but a combination of a grumpy dealer (wasn't really interested in trying to get me a red-manual) and the thought of being a "Honda driver" put me off. The 6-month scheduled services, and Honda's reputation for very expenive repair/service costs didn't help either. I now drive an Octavia. I'd say that means that at least for me, the Accord Euro doesn't come up trumps.

As for Octy vs Jetta, Octy all the way. From experience.

Agree 100% there

[Transporter]

the fact the Octy is built on a 6 year old platform.

The newer platform doesn't always mean - more advanced or better. Sometimes it is cost cutting that brings a new platform that is cheaper but less sophisticated.

[Inego]

The Accord has an upscale look and feel - for two people. The back seat and boot are tiny for such a big car. But it seems more luxurious than the Skodas

The 6 looks great now, but every single model since the early 80s has dated badly and those "upscale soft touch surfaces" just look rubbish after about 18mths. But again, in the showroom, it looks more luxurious than the Skoda.

For me, being into cars, buying a Skoda comes in spite of some of the things I know about the platforms. And having owned a Golf and knowing it is too small for a family car.

I may have said before that, for me, the Outback v Scout comparison (both diesels) only goes the Subaru's way in terms of rear seat space and "known brand" with many dealers. And maybe a little quieter. It looks ugly inside and out and is much too bulky.

[brad]

I have the 1.8TSI M6 hatch.
My wife gets a Falcadore or SUV as a company drive so it was always going to be a #2 vehicle but I needed something that could get by as a family hack if required.

My cross shopping process (probably forgotten some cars).
Ford Fiesta XR4(?) with the 2L. Kids hated the plank like back seat.
Ford Focus XR5. Ford dealer wouldn't let me test drive as "these cars sell themselves". Then didn't want to do a deal - Dominelli Ford have always been up themselves.

VW Polo GTI - kids protested about 2 doors.
VW MKV Pacific diesel - thumbs up all round but I wasn't convinced.
Commodore SS - dealer didn't want to come down to the price I wanted.
Back to VW for a Golf GT SPort. When I said yes they couldn't supply for 4 months.
Decided Golf GTI would do the job - dealer didn't want to negotiate on price or Trade-in
Looked at Octy vRS then asked myself if I really needed a $40k sporty car to trundle 100km per day on a motorway doing 80-110kmh.

Looked at 1.8TSI hatch. $31k plus a stupidly good trade-in price. Had enough go to make me happy-ish. Well appointed. Inconspicuous. Kids like it. Does everything reasonably well & no negatives I can think of. What more could you ask for? Took the family on a holiday with the $9k saving.

[mrgolf]

Personally, that wasn't my feeling. The old GTI (Mark V) almost put me to sleep the interior was so boring. Yeah, it drove well, but you can't drive at speeds high enough to trouble the handling more than every now and then, it's no great-looker from the outside (nothing wrong with it, but it's not stunning either...and to be fair I feel the same way about the RS), and those round black buttons on the steering wheel were just woeful, and ultimately you drive a car from the inside, not riding on the roof, so I wasn't interested in looking at them all the time. The new one, and I'm only going from photos here, as I ordered my RS well before the new GTI was available, looks pretty much identical to the RS. Same components, same layout. As you'd expect - in terms of interior tech they're all sourced from the same place.

Having driven a 118TSI while looking at cars, it felt the same as the RS. Maybe the red stiching in the GTI makes a difference? That's not a joke - the black steering-wheel buttons turned me off the Mark V, so I can understand the stitching making some think "ooh...niiice".

I totally agree with the handling. The composure in a GTI at 8-9/10ths was staggering, but the speeds necessary to feel it were bordering on ridiculous. For mine, the GTI seemed to have 3 distinct stages in its handling. Plodding, enthusiastic and hard. The car would hunker down and firm up the harder it was pushed. The RS might be more plush around town, but the trade off is that the different stages are absent. It feels way more wallow-y.

At this point all the fan boyz will be saying I shouldnt be comparing the two, but if it was good enough for Tiff Needal, its OK with me. Fact is, Skoda have brought it in as their flagship sports model, so a comparison can be made between flagship models. BFYB does this every year. I think part of the reason they do these comparos is because some buyers will be weighing up whether an RS is close to the GTI as they share a platform. And for the most part it is, with extra practicality. If the comparo was about practicality and performance and the RS lost, you could ask questions and your rose coloured glasses would be vindicated. But the comparo is about how the car works as a performance car. The RS deserves to come second. It just isnt as focussed and composed. Coming second to a GTI is not a bad thing. Plenty of good cars have been relegated as a result before this comparo.

On interiors, however, VW has always gone conservative on its interiors. It means in 10 years time, they dont look cheap and nasty like more interesting japanese interiors. I dont care for them. But thats subjectivity. I liked the MkV interior. Especially the blue backlighting.

I also loved the look of the MkV GTI (except the rear lights), although, I think the MkVI is even better looking.

I didnt realise the Accord was that exxy. Ridiculous. I still think most people see it as a better alternative. It is better equipped, and to bring an Octy up to that level would diminish the price gap.

[mrgolf]

The newer platform doesn't always mean - more advanced or better. Sometimes it is cost cutting that brings a new platform that is cheaper but less sophisticated.

Moot point for the uneducated who arent the type of people who hang out on car forums. They make up a high proportion of buyers, so they see newer release = newer platform. No one needs to convince me of the integrity of the MkV/VI platform.

[Jake02]

Amazing that a few of you suggest the Mk VI Golf is a completely different drive to the Octavia - the PQ35 platform is EXACTLY the same. Volkswagen only upgraded the PQ35 slightly for the Mk VI Golf, not completely refurbed or introduced a new one so it's essentially the same as the Mk V.

Mrgolf - if you have so many doubts about the Octavia then why did you buy it? Why not just buy a Jetta or Golf wagon? Or, as you suggest, the class-leaders (something that you suggested wasn't the Octavia).

Both the Accord and Accord Euro are boring. Sedan/petrol-only is the range, unlike saloon/liftback/wagon and petrol/diesel for the Mazda6 and liftback/wagon and low petrol/diesel, medium petrol/diesel and high-end petrol/diesel for the Jetta/Octavia. A friend of mine has one and hates it - says it's massively more boring than his Subaru Liberty 3.0R Spec B, often making me wonder why he bought it.

[woofy]

I did hear there was going to be an Accord Wagon, but I reckon if they put out a hatch back like they had in the 80s, Mazda would lose one of their main advantages, I wanted one or the other as our other car (which was for work originally) and the boot in the Accord Euro is embarrasingly bad with crappy access. Just to compare them together I went to the Melb car show where Honda and Mazda are side by side, there was a Euro with its butt right neat the back of the 6, I opened both and it was like chalk and cheese. A work colleague was looking at both when he started and I told him that half the stuff we had to cart around, would not even fit in the Euro boot. He bought one anyway then complained a few months later when stuff wouldn't fit.

There isn't a day go by when I'm not happy with either, they both suit our purposes, the 6 is well built, has had zero issues in nearly 4 yrs, and from our other Mazda we had, probably never really will. The RS is fun, nicer to get into difficult parks with for work, still has the boot space and the hatch, and has tonnes of kit in it. Would have been nice if it was a bit more spiced up on the outside as its blander than the GTi, but oh well, in 6 yrs time when we go to sell it, it would look old anyway.

Been said lots of times, if Skoda HQ and dealers keep us all happy and new customers happy, the cars will spread by word of mouth. Already in my circles noone asks what a Skoda is anymore, and one bought a demo RS from Bayford due to me liking mine.

[mrgolf]

Amazing that a few of you suggest the Mk VI Golf is a completely different drive to the Octavia - the PQ35 platform is EXACTLY the same. Volkswagen only upgraded the PQ35 slightly for the Mk VI Golf, not completely refurbed or introduced a new one so it's essentially the same as the Mk V.

The MkV GTI is a completely different drive to the Octy. Why shouldnt the MkVI? Same as even the lower spec Octy's with sports suspension. There are a few similarities, but overall, even small changes in suspension can yield a big difference in road handling.

Mrgolf - if you have so many doubts about the Octavia then why did you buy it? Why not just buy a Jetta or Golf wagon? Or, as you suggest, the class-leaders (something that you suggested wasn't the Octavia).

I dont have doubts about the Octy. I know it isnt as good a performance car as the GTI, but I do know it is a good car and it is built better with worse materials. I bought a Skoda because my 3dr GTI wasnt going to cope with family life. Do I regret the decision? No. I like the Skoda. My comments here are not at all saying I think its a crap car. Far from it. You need to read a little deeper. What I am saying is that it isnt surprising the Octy isnt scoring well in reviews considering the following criteria:

1. purpose of comparo
2. 'unknown quantity' of Skoda brand and overcoming old skool understandings
3. odd place that the octy sits amongst competition. ie: too big to compete with Golf and Mazda 3, too small to properly compete with 6 and Accord. its pricing sits awkwardly close to its bigger, better equipped, newer platformed competition. And the RS isnt the focussed flagship sports car the GTI is.

I am just pointing out to the more defensive and seemingly upset skoda fan boyz here that perhaps they should look at why the skoda isnt winning reviews and be more objective about it. Saying that it is ridiculous that the Skoda should beat the GTI in a performance oriented review 'because its more practical' isnt common sense.

I think it is odd that Skoda hasnt received great press here, but it is an emerging brand, and lets face it, magazines have target audiences. And most of them dont hang out on car forums. Magazine reviews are not the sum total of a car. If you are going to cry about it, maybe stop buying magazines and go for an enjoyable drive instead.

[aslsw]

I did hear there was going to be an Accord Wagon,

There is one, in Europe anyway. I saw quite a few while I was there.

What I don't understand is the love affair motoring journalists have with the new Golf. My brother-in-law has a MkV RS32, and every morning on the way to the bus (in Geneva) I would walk past his car first and then a new MkVI. From my point of view, all of the aggression in the design has gone, particularly around the rear end. It now looks like something a good, solid, middle-class European citizen would drive (and they do).

[K1W1]

What I don't understand is the love affair motoring journalists have with the new Golf.

Because they are lemmings.