Skoda Superb Combi - choose Age vs Miles

Gregor Samsa

Trying to decide between these two 2.0 D Superb estates. Spec wise they’re pretty much equivalent, and both have all the stuff I want. So it’s really down to the individual cars. The difference is the age, mileage and price (although both are within my budget).

Option A: 2015 (mk ii), 162,000 km, €15,950

https://www.carzone.ie/search/202106264293575/advert

or

Option B: 2017 (mk iii), 216,137 km, €18,950

https://www.carzone.ie/search/202107054660632/advert

So option B gives a 2 year benefit (with a model revision), but a 54,000 km deficit, and a 3 grand difference.

Assuming both run well and have no issues, which one to go with?

Stallingrad

I really wouldn't get hung up on the mileage difference between the two, makes no odds really assuming they both have FSH.

Think the real decision is whether the new model is worth the extra €3k to you? Personally I would go for the newer car as it is far more up to date inside and out than the aging, but well equipped and still very capable Mark 2.

3d4life

Go for the FWD unless you need a 4 X 4

colm_mcm

The 2017 without a doubt.

I'd go for the 2015, the money on the 2017 is far too high for the miles. I think if you could get the 2015 for 15k you'd be doing well.

Best of luck.

Gregor Samsa

Well, nobody’s budging at all on price. They know it’s a seller’s market at the moment.

Drove them both, and I went with the 171.

Thanks all for your input.