Tweet
I notice that the majority of Octavia contributors on this site are VRS owners so I thought somebody might be interested in my views of the lower spec car
The car is Candy White with the Plus pack (adding cruise control , 17in alloys, 8 speaker, centre box/ armrest, rear sensors) which was a bargain extra at $1300
Inevitably this ends up as a comparison with our previous much loved car, but since it was an Octavia 2 Ambition 1.9D manual wagon owned for over 6 years it is probably legitimate in this forum.
I would have liked the new car to be another diesel but the combination of much higher cost, DPF, no manual, and relatively close official fuel consumption figures pointed us to the petrol. A quick test drive confirmed ample performance and the order was placed for delivery in 3 weeks.
As is well known the Octavia 3 is an all new platform and offers better internal space, especially for rear passengers, which was about the only small issue I had with the Octavia 2. The 3 is lighter than the 2, especially compared to the diesel.
After 1600 klm of urban driving we finally got away to the country and the 1.4 TSI engine is a little pearler providing ample power and torque for cruising in 6th gear up hills and overtaking is a cinch.
On the flat and no wind, at a true GPS 110 kph (114 kph and 2500 revs indicated) fuel consumption was 5.7 ltr/100. GPS 90 kph and 93 indicated gave 4.7 lt/100.
The Octavia 2 diesel used to show GPS 110, indicated 119, and consumption of 4.8 lt/100.
Hills, air-conditioner use, and cruise control have a more adverse affect on fuel consumption on the petrol than it did on the diesel.
The Octavia 2 cruise control with the diesel could do as good if not better job with overall fuel consumption than I could, the Octavia 3 is the reverse.
Don't get me wrong it holds the set speed very well and you can change gear without the use of the clutch disengaging the cruise (which the Octavia 2 did) but it probably uses up to a 1 ltr/100 more than when I drive at the same 110 speed. Probably more a characteristic of the petrol rather than the cruise.
Petrol consumption increases with speed (duh), the old diesel consumption did not seem to vary much between 110 or 130 kph, or notice the air-conditioner (even on 45+ days).
The steering on the Octavia 3 is much lighter even with the lower profile tyres, which is probably due to the fact it does not have that weighty diesel lump out front. However I did love the 2's steering weight and its accuracy when going straight ahead, not affected by cambers, side winds or 'tram-lining'.
The 3 is less planted and requires a little more attention on a faster remote less well maintained road with varying cambers and some side-winds. The heavier weight seemed to offer more steering feedback (though never any kickback).
The Octavia 3 Ambition does not have lumbar support on the driver's seat and for the first time in years my bum and backs of legs were aching after only two hours of driving. I will have to experiment with seat position and pillows.
The Ambition Plus does have lumbar support and is something that should be considered by others buying a budget model
Also well documented is the omission of the right footrest, which my wife and I really missed and I will have to see what can be done about that (there space for a gizmo that flicks down and back out of the way when not required).
The 3 does not come with mudguards standard but I highly recommend getting them fitted front and rear as they really reduce the amount of crud kicked up on the car. Mine cost $100 from Skoda but there are cheaper options on the internet.
Overall the handling and ride on the 3 with its torsion bar rear suspension is as good if not better than the multi-link on the 2. I think the 2's gas shockers might have deteriorated a bit over time. VAG generally do such a good a job in this area, but for the 3's price point it is fantastic.
The simple Swing radio is not bad around town where reception is good but reception is lost a little earlier with the integrated aerial (in rear side quarter window) compared to the old external aerial.
The sound quality from good recordings on USB and SD-cards through the 8 speaker system is acceptable to me but probably would not suit younger ears.
Bluetooth is easy to use but I am not sure the inductive phone aerial system really makes much difference to reception quality.
The trip meter is very accurate being only 0.1 ltr/100 pessimistic compared to fuelly (6.1 indicated, 6.0 ltr/100 fuelly) for the last tank including the 650 klm of country driving.
The 6 speed manual gear box is pretty good, but a bit more notchy than the 5 speed on the diesel, especially first to second. I actually think that 2nd could be a bit lower, especially for around town and 6th could be a bit higher for cruising.
What I would recommend to anyone engaged in country driving with their Octavia 3 is make sure you attach a suitable piece of soft fibreglass flyscreen to the front of the car with plastic draw-tags.
The front of the radiator on the 2 was easily accessible with the bonnet open to clean off any excessive bug debris but the 3 is completely sealed off and you can only hose off from the front unless prepared to remove numerous bits.
Skoda probably do this for pedestrian safety standards and improve radiator air throughput, but it really does not take Australian conditions into consideration where a bug or locust swarm can completely disable a cooling system and it would be virtually impossible to fix in situe.
Overall I am very happy with the car but it is not necessarily better in all respects compared to its predecessor.
Miss the more comfortable seats the most and the heavier steering then the climate controlled AC. I think the already good fuel consumption should improve as it runs in.
Performance wise I think the 1.4 TSI is exceptional, it provides similar torque to a 2.7 litre normally aspirated engine and over a wider rev range and in a relatively light car. I have not pushed it up to the rev limit but only because I have not needed to (but sooo tempting)
It is certainly much faster accelerating than the old diesel (which had ample in gear acceleration) but with little or no torque steer and possibly better traction.
I would not be at all surprised if actual outputs are higher than advertised as is normal VAG practice.
A dyno run on a standard 1.9D Roomster by Julian Edgar (Autospeed.com, a great website) produced the advertised 77kw but at the wheel, sensationally over the top.
Looking forward to more trips to SA country areas where my son's team is in the footy finals.
The car is Candy White with the Plus pack (adding cruise control , 17in alloys, 8 speaker, centre box/ armrest, rear sensors) which was a bargain extra at $1300
Inevitably this ends up as a comparison with our previous much loved car, but since it was an Octavia 2 Ambition 1.9D manual wagon owned for over 6 years it is probably legitimate in this forum.
I would have liked the new car to be another diesel but the combination of much higher cost, DPF, no manual, and relatively close official fuel consumption figures pointed us to the petrol. A quick test drive confirmed ample performance and the order was placed for delivery in 3 weeks.
As is well known the Octavia 3 is an all new platform and offers better internal space, especially for rear passengers, which was about the only small issue I had with the Octavia 2. The 3 is lighter than the 2, especially compared to the diesel.
After 1600 klm of urban driving we finally got away to the country and the 1.4 TSI engine is a little pearler providing ample power and torque for cruising in 6th gear up hills and overtaking is a cinch.
On the flat and no wind, at a true GPS 110 kph (114 kph and 2500 revs indicated) fuel consumption was 5.7 ltr/100. GPS 90 kph and 93 indicated gave 4.7 lt/100.
The Octavia 2 diesel used to show GPS 110, indicated 119, and consumption of 4.8 lt/100.
Hills, air-conditioner use, and cruise control have a more adverse affect on fuel consumption on the petrol than it did on the diesel.
The Octavia 2 cruise control with the diesel could do as good if not better job with overall fuel consumption than I could, the Octavia 3 is the reverse.
Don't get me wrong it holds the set speed very well and you can change gear without the use of the clutch disengaging the cruise (which the Octavia 2 did) but it probably uses up to a 1 ltr/100 more than when I drive at the same 110 speed. Probably more a characteristic of the petrol rather than the cruise.
Petrol consumption increases with speed (duh), the old diesel consumption did not seem to vary much between 110 or 130 kph, or notice the air-conditioner (even on 45+ days).
The steering on the Octavia 3 is much lighter even with the lower profile tyres, which is probably due to the fact it does not have that weighty diesel lump out front. However I did love the 2's steering weight and its accuracy when going straight ahead, not affected by cambers, side winds or 'tram-lining'.
The 3 is less planted and requires a little more attention on a faster remote less well maintained road with varying cambers and some side-winds. The heavier weight seemed to offer more steering feedback (though never any kickback).
The Octavia 3 Ambition does not have lumbar support on the driver's seat and for the first time in years my bum and backs of legs were aching after only two hours of driving. I will have to experiment with seat position and pillows.
The Ambition Plus does have lumbar support and is something that should be considered by others buying a budget model
Also well documented is the omission of the right footrest, which my wife and I really missed and I will have to see what can be done about that (there space for a gizmo that flicks down and back out of the way when not required).
The 3 does not come with mudguards standard but I highly recommend getting them fitted front and rear as they really reduce the amount of crud kicked up on the car. Mine cost $100 from Skoda but there are cheaper options on the internet.
Overall the handling and ride on the 3 with its torsion bar rear suspension is as good if not better than the multi-link on the 2. I think the 2's gas shockers might have deteriorated a bit over time. VAG generally do such a good a job in this area, but for the 3's price point it is fantastic.
The simple Swing radio is not bad around town where reception is good but reception is lost a little earlier with the integrated aerial (in rear side quarter window) compared to the old external aerial.
The sound quality from good recordings on USB and SD-cards through the 8 speaker system is acceptable to me but probably would not suit younger ears.
Bluetooth is easy to use but I am not sure the inductive phone aerial system really makes much difference to reception quality.
The trip meter is very accurate being only 0.1 ltr/100 pessimistic compared to fuelly (6.1 indicated, 6.0 ltr/100 fuelly) for the last tank including the 650 klm of country driving.
The 6 speed manual gear box is pretty good, but a bit more notchy than the 5 speed on the diesel, especially first to second. I actually think that 2nd could be a bit lower, especially for around town and 6th could be a bit higher for cruising.
What I would recommend to anyone engaged in country driving with their Octavia 3 is make sure you attach a suitable piece of soft fibreglass flyscreen to the front of the car with plastic draw-tags.
The front of the radiator on the 2 was easily accessible with the bonnet open to clean off any excessive bug debris but the 3 is completely sealed off and you can only hose off from the front unless prepared to remove numerous bits.
Skoda probably do this for pedestrian safety standards and improve radiator air throughput, but it really does not take Australian conditions into consideration where a bug or locust swarm can completely disable a cooling system and it would be virtually impossible to fix in situe.
Overall I am very happy with the car but it is not necessarily better in all respects compared to its predecessor.
Miss the more comfortable seats the most and the heavier steering then the climate controlled AC. I think the already good fuel consumption should improve as it runs in.
Performance wise I think the 1.4 TSI is exceptional, it provides similar torque to a 2.7 litre normally aspirated engine and over a wider rev range and in a relatively light car. I have not pushed it up to the rev limit but only because I have not needed to (but sooo tempting)
It is certainly much faster accelerating than the old diesel (which had ample in gear acceleration) but with little or no torque steer and possibly better traction.
I would not be at all surprised if actual outputs are higher than advertised as is normal VAG practice.
A dyno run on a standard 1.9D Roomster by Julian Edgar (Autospeed.com, a great website) produced the advertised 77kw but at the wheel, sensationally over the top.
Looking forward to more trips to SA country areas where my son's team is in the footy finals.
Comment