New Skoda Superb vs BMW 5 series

Drummerboy08

vintagevrs wrote: »

I just priced up a Superb to have similar power, 4x4, DSG and zero other additional options. RRP is nearly 48k!:eek:

An automatic 520d SE is 50k, I take it back

Thats grand, but the 5 Series isn't 4x4 so how much is the comparible Superb as a 2wd?

R.O.R

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

Thats grand, but the 5 Series isn't 4x4 so how much is the comparible Superb as a 2wd?

520d SE Auto - €49,203 ex. Works. €995 for Metallic, €865 for delivery

Superb 190 Style DSG - €40,655 ex. Works. €666 metallic, €650 delivery (?)


€9,092 difference in on the road retail in metallic. Roughly similar standard specification - few more toys in the Superb probably.

carsfan

R.O.R
After 3 years would there still be 9 grand between them or would the gap narrow/widen?

tw0nk

The current BMW's are, with exception of M editions, very ordinary. The drive is, on most of them, very good but everything else is ordinary. Interior is bland, equipment levels are poor, extras are way overpriced and reliability is not what it once was. The prestige is still there, barely.

The historically prestige competitors; Audi and Merc have in my opinion, created much more appealing options this round of models. Audi have come down on price and largely pioneered the PCP market making it very affordable to buy a paddy spec Audi whereas the Mercedes are still very expensive although there are some new cheaper models available, none of which I have driven.

As for the average joe brands: VW, Ford and Toyota, their offerings have really weakened in my opinion. Skoda has caught up and I think overtaken VW this round of models (having driven both extensively). The Korean brands have taken a huge slice of market, primarily with their SUV's (KIA, Hyundai).

It's going to be really interesting for the next iteration of car models, I put my money into Skoda this time round with a Octavia VRS 230 as it was the best driving, quality and spec I could get for my money and has 0% interest from VW bank.

I do fully expect BMW to fight back with a much nicer 5 series next time round.

Wailin

For similar money I think the passat beats the superb for looks and spec. Not as big maybe but there's too big as well.Untitled by Tony, on Flickr

R.O.R

carsfan wrote: »

R.O.R
After 3 years would there still be 9 grand between them or would the gap narrow/widen?

Forecasting around €6,500 difference between the 2 after 3 years and reasonable mileage.

Doesn't tell the whole story though as you'd be more likely to get a higher discount on the Skoda than you would on the BMW. Realistically, the BMW is probably going to cost €4,000 ish more on depreciation than the Skoda.

bazz26

Where does the A6 from Skoda's sister company, fit in with pricing and spec compared to the Superb?

R.O.R

bazz26 wrote: »

Where does the A6 from Skoda's sister company, fit in with pricing and spec compared to the Superb?

Pricing & spec of the A6 is more or less the same as the 5 Series.

carsfan

So the Beemer will only depreciate 2.5 k less than the Skoda?
Would you get discount on the Skoda with it being a new model?
I guess the service costs would be similar due to bmw service pack and guess fuel difference costs negligible.

bazz26

R.O.R wrote: »

Pricing & spec of the A6 is more or less the same as the 5 Series.

Would be interesting to see any Skoda dealers trying to sway an A6 buyer into a better speced Superb then. Doubt it would be allowed though.

mickdw

Having been recently driving around a new Highline Passat, they are a very nice car. Unfortunately the one I was driving was ruined by the engine.

Comhrá

mickdw wrote: »

Having been recently driving around a new Highline Passat, they are a very nice car. Unfortunately the one I was driving was ruined by the engine.

Which engine was it? Agreed, the Highline Passat is a very nice car.

Wailin

mickdw wrote: »

Having been recently driving around a new Highline Passat, they are a very nice car. Unfortunately the one I was driving was ruined by the engine.

1.6Tdi? Absolute muck. Even the 2.0l 150bhp is a little underpowered having driven one recently. There is the option of 190 though.

maddness

I always saw the big attraction of the Superb is that for company car drivers you can get a large car with a fairly powerful Diesel engine and loads of toys for the same price as a less powerful Audi A4 or BMW 3 series.
I always feel that you get what you pay for and while the Superb is a very nice car the A6 or 5 series are worth the greater price particularly if you are not paying for it.
Put it another way, you've the choice of a Superb Style 190DSG or a 520D auto or an Audi A6 190 Tdi auto as your company car. How many of you would pick the skoda? Little or none I'd say.
If the choice was between the same Superb and a 318D or a basic A4 tdi thats a different choice to make.

tw0nk

OSI wrote: »

Funny you say that, I felt the exact opposite. A DSG VRS 230 with the same kit as a 5dr DSG GTI-P with Tech Pack is pretty much the same price. Was convinced someone in Skoda had lost their marbles.

Depends what you need, if you need space (back seats and boot) and lower monthly repayments, the VRS 230 worked out better.

I do like the Golf GTI-P but needed the space.

micks_address

Wailin wrote: »

For similar money I think the passat beats the superb for looks and spec. Not as big maybe but there's too big as well.Untitled by Tony, on Flickr

For comparable spec the money is a lot different.. On my summer test drive day we drove a high line passat 120bhp and a style spec superb.. The superb was 190bhp and was only about 1500 euro more than the paasat.. Full leather on the superb..lots of kit. I don't think I'd have taken the paasat

mickdw

Wailin wrote: »

1.6Tdi? Absolute muck. Even the 2.0l 150bhp is a little underpowered having driven one recently. There is the option of 190 though.

Yes. Beautiful car but its disgusting how a large portion are 1.6 tdi.
It's not even about being underpowered. For a certain type of client, the power in general is probably ok. I found vibration through the pedals to be very very annoying when compared to my petrol car.

Wailin

micks_address wrote: »

For comparable spec the money is a lot different.. On my summer test drive day we drove a high line passat 120bhp and a style spec superb.. The superb was 190bhp and was only about 1500 euro more than the paasat.. Full leather on the superb..lots of kit. I don't think I'd have taken the paasat

Don't know where your getting those differences from. A highline business edition passat estate 190bhp and dsg gearbox is €44250. Superb combi top of the range L&K 190bhp with dsg is €45750. In that combination the passat is slightly better spec'd. Personally I would choose the passat any day everyday. Superb to me is quiet ugly.

Wailin

Wailin wrote: »

...... Superb to me is quiet ugly.

I think it looks very good for the most part but the view from behind is very ish.... Combi looks good though at the rear.

Henry Ford III

I'd have a 520d every day of the week tbh. Skoda were/are primarily a value brand which don't offer that much value anymore - much like VW.

Wailin

Augeo wrote: »

I think it looks very good for the most part but the view from behind is very ish.... Combi looks good though at the rear.

Funnily enough it's the rear of the combI that lets it down for me. Looks out of proportion to the rest of the car. Skodas have come on in leaps and bounds but I still feel they retain that "soviet" look about the styling.

maddness

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I'd have a 520d every day of the week tbh. Skoda were/are primarily a value brand which don't offer that much value anymore - much like VW.

That's the problem for Skoda now, they are too expensive. I got a superb in 2010 when the top spec Tdi 170 Elegance was only about €36,000 if I remember correctly. R.O.R might know better on the pricing from a few years ago though.
If you are buying a budget brand that's not budget what's the point?

Oafley Jones

Wailin wrote: »

Funnily enough it's the rear of the combI that lets it down for me. Looks out of proportion to the rest of the car. Skodas have come on in leaps and bounds but I still feel they retain that "soviet" look about the styling.

I like it, for me it's one of the few bright spots in the Audi/VW/Skoda family. The Passat is one of most dreary looking cars on the road. It just doesn't work at all for me. I remember reading that their current design direction was inspired by Apple. And I can sort of see it. The colours used in the advertising, the minimalism in term clean lines, the subtle changes between generations etc. But it just looks "off" to me. None of it is incredibly well resolved. Which is danger with that design, you either completely nail or it looks just bland. I've said it before, but I'd love to see a clear out in terms of design at Audi and VW.

JoeA3

The initial spy shots of the new Superb looked really good. But I've seen a few in the metal lately and it's really no looker tbh. It looks particularly awkward from the rear 3/4 view, not helped by teeny alloys tucked in under huge wheel arches. Not a good look. The Passat is a far better proportioned looking car imo.

There's night and day between the interior of an Octavia and a Golf too. I sat in my brother in law's new Octavia last week. It felt very "last generation" in terms of switchgear and general fit and finish.

I think the Skoda guys are being very ambitious if they think they'll tempt many 520d owners into a Superb.

R.O.R

maddness wrote: »

That's the problem for Skoda now, they are too expensive. I got a superb in 2010 when the top spec Tdi 170 Elegance was only about €36,000 if I remember correctly. R.O.R might know better on the pricing from a few years ago though.
If you are buying a budget brand that's not budget what's the point?

Figures from Jan 2010 tell me a Superb 2.0Tdi 170 Elegance was €32,435 ex. Works.

Equivalent today is the 2.0Tdi 190 Style at €37,655, so an increase of €5,220 over 6 years.


520d SE Auto in Jan 2010 was €44,519. Now €49,203 - increase of €4,684.

Theboinkmaster

JoeA3 wrote: »

I think the Skoda guys are being very ambitious if they think they'll tempt many 520d owners into a Superb.

That's not going to happen, there's no way you'd go from a 5 series to a superb irrelevant of spec and price. The superb is just ugly and cheap looking.

whippet

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

That's not going to happen, there's no way you'd go from a 5 series to a superb irrelevant of spec and price. The superb is just ugly and cheap looking.

I think you are missing the point that people have been making here .. skoda are looking to reinforce their message to people who might be looking at superb / Passat / mazda 6 / insignia etc.

MarcusP12

whippet wrote: »

I think you are missing the point that people have been making here .. skoda are looking to reinforce their message to people who might be looking at superb / Passat / mazda 6 / insignia etc.

+1 on this....I don't think anyone in their right mind thinks that Skoka thinks the superb is a direct competitor to the 5er. Its just a clever marketing ploy to get people through the doors to test drive. The 5 series in many people's opinion is the bench mark when it comes to executive cars so I guess what Skoda it trying to say is that the difference is not as big as you think, "come have a look for yourself". It creates a certain amount of curiosity with people who might be on the fence in terms of what to go for between superb/Passat/mazda6/insignia/etc and plants a seed. It might make a certain number of people take a look who otherwise might be put off by tradition. The more people test drive, the more people will consider buying the skoda.

I drive a 5 series myself and wouldn't consider a superb a direct rival personally unless I wanted to get something newer and better spec'ed and was less concerned about handling and performance. I rate them though within its traditional category.

CharlieCroker

I always think of the Superb along the same lines as the Ford Granada/Scorpio, Opel Omega, Toyota Camry and Nissan Maxima. Executive car, just without the same image as Merc, BMW and Audi.

Didn't make it any less capable though IMO.

freddieot

Comparing a manufacturers mainstream leading model to an 'Executive' model in this way would be a great idea. I'm surprised Hyundai or Kia have not done it already (Santa Fe compared to X3 or Q5 etc.).

However, when your 'parent company or group is also trying to sell Audi as an 'Executive' option, it smacks of madness in my opinion.

What Skoda are implying is that the difference between the Superb and the BMW 5 Series is not as great as you might think (i.e. value for money - look what you get for a fraction of the cost etc. ) Meanwhile the VAG are by implication trying to fool the world that a VW or an Audi is however worth the extra dosh, totally different scenario, you should always aspire to own Audi etc. Also, no mention of the shared components between the VAG group.

I think this may help Skoda but damage Audi. If people don't buy Audis then guess who the main benefactor will probably be. I can't see too many BMW dealers crying themselves to sleep.

There is a reason why this type of negative or implied negative advertising is rarely used or successful.