Skoda Super 1.6TDI. Underpowered?

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:13PM

EazyD wrote: »

Assuming most Skoda buyers are not the most motor savvy

eehh ..??

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:15PM

Jesus. wrote: »

14 seconds to sixty? :eek:

yeah and I had a GTI which got to 60 in less than 7 seconds, but you could count on one hand how many times I ever got near that figure .....

how many times would you need to gun a car to get to 60 in the real world ?

dantastic · 09-10-2013 02:19PM

whippet wrote: »

eehh ..??

Let's be honest about it. They are truly awful! The only thing appealing about them is they're cheap.

14 sec to 60!

And listen to the thing, the road noise was deafening....

Tea 1000 · 09-10-2013 02:25PM

The 1.6 in the Superb is slow. Coming from your A4 with 160bhp it'll feel slow. But some folk on here think that the 1.9 was fine. It was not, it was also slow in the Superb. In fact, there's feck all difference between the 1.9 and 1.6, in fact I prefer the 1.6. But don't pick either. The 2 litre is the only job.

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:28PM

dantastic wrote: »

Let's be honest about it. They are truly awful! The only thing appealing about them is they're cheap.

14 sec to 60!

And listen to the thing, the road noise was deafening....

Cheap ... I suppose €32k is cheap these days alright.

EazyD · 09-10-2013 02:33PM

whippet wrote: »

eehh ..??

Don't get me wrong, Skoda have really upped their game in the last few years, no surprise when you see the sales figures.

However, being realistic(bar the VRs), most owners buy it on it's merits of price/reliability.

dantastic · 09-10-2013 02:38PM

whippet wrote: »

Cheap ... I suppose €32k is cheap these days alright.

€27,520 - €31,720 (http://www.skoda.ie/brochures/documents/prices/superb.pdf)
That is asking a lot for it.

The UK price is just £16k + vat though. That is a fairer price for what it is.

I dunno. All I can see that would appeal would be the price. I find it horrendous in every other way you can judge a car.

Tea 1000 · 09-10-2013 02:39PM

whippet wrote: »

Cheap ... I suppose €32k is cheap these days alright.

One thing is for sure, if I were forking out €32k on any car it would have a lot more than 105 bhp.

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:43PM

EazyD wrote: »

most owners buy it on it's merits of price/reliability.

and that is what I did, but calling it cheap isn't doing it justice. I could have gone for a korean super hatch but didn't.

My priorities when buying the car were economy and size. I need an estate and do about 40k miles a year (all private milage). I nearly bought an ex demo Volvo V70 but when matched against the Skoda it didn't compete especially when you consider the spec.

What is surprising is the cost of upkeep; the servicing is far cheaper from the main dealers than the VW ever was, plus when my missus smashed one of the rear light clusters the cost was €60 to replace in a main dealer (they didn't charge for labour as it was done at the same time as a service)

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:44PM

dantastic wrote: »

I find it horrendous in every other way you can judge a car.

can you elaborate?

pred racer · 09-10-2013 02:49PM

Op, my last car was a c5 2.0hdi that had 110bhp and I considered that just about ok. I presume the superb is bigger and heavier than a mk1 c5. A bigger car with less power, no thanks.
Imo I would think 130 would do, any less would be too slow.
E.g. On some short on ramps, I couldnt actually get the c5 to 120kmh before I had to merge.

Edit: I just checked and the superb is only 60kg heavier.

dantastic · 09-10-2013 02:53PM

whippet wrote: »

can you elaborate?

Well, funny you should mention the V70 which is a very nice car. Interior is nice and tidy, feels sturdy. Very good car to drive and the auto box is very smooth, good power delivery.

The skoda feels like a plastic box. I didn't actually drive it but I didn't find it appealing to the senses at all. It feels crappy, straight up. It is very loud on the inside.

Or how would you compare it the the Volvo yourself?

EazyD · 09-10-2013 02:55PM

whippet wrote: »

and that is what I did, but calling it cheap isn't doing it justice. I could have gone for a korean super hatch but didn't.

My priorities when buying the car were economy and size. I need an estate and do about 40k miles a year (all private milage). I nearly bought an ex demo Volvo V70 but when matched against the Skoda it didn't compete especially when you consider the spec.

What is surprising is the cost of upkeep; the servicing is far cheaper from the main dealers than the VW ever was, plus when my missus smashed one of the rear light clusters the cost was €60 to replace in a main dealer (they didn't charge for labour as it was done at the same time as a service)

Didn't call it cheap in any of my posts, it's as I stated earlier a well priced, quality piece of kit.

Tea 1000 · 09-10-2013 02:57PM

dantastic wrote: »

Well, funny you should mention the V70 which is a very nice car. Interior is nice and tidy, feels sturdy. Very good car to drive and the auto box is very smooth, good power delivery.

The skoda feels like a plastic box. I didn't actually drive it but I didn't find it appealing to the senses at all. It feels crappy, straight up. It is very loud on the inside.

Or how would you compare it the the Volvo yourself?

You thinking of the Octavia? The Superb is up with the most refined in its class.

whippet · 09-10-2013 02:59PM

dantastic wrote: »

Or how would you compare it the the Volvo yourself?

the volvo was nice, as are most Volvos, but €10k nicer? not in the least. Plus the spec of the Volvo was paltry compared to the Skoda. By the time you start ticking the options on the Volvo you are in to mega money.

The cabin of the Skoda is actually quite well built and I don't know where you are going about road noise, the GTI was far worse.

btkm8unsl0w5r4 · 09-10-2013 03:05PM

Underpowered is such a subjective thing. If your a offensive driver who overtakes a fair bit then power if far more important than if you drive in and around the limit and rarely overtake.

I am positive that the 1.6 in a supurb is fine for 90% of the people out there and 100% of the people that would buy a 1.6 supurb.

Torque is what makes people who dont know better think there driving fast

dantastic · 09-10-2013 03:12PM

Um, nope. Just very very unimpressed.

I would absolutely go for the Volvo myself. But then again, I would never consider a 1.6 either.

Jesus. · 09-10-2013 08:37PM

Addilyn Fancy Shipyard wrote: »

Torque is what makes people who dont know better think there driving fast

You wha'?

Leonard Hofstadter · 09-10-2013 08:57PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

What difference would the gearbox make?

The 1.6 B7 Passat I drove was a 132 reg Bluemotion technology one. It was ridiculously over geared - running at 2000 rpm on a speedo indicated 130 kph. If you were on the motorway doing 125 you'd need to drop down a gear just to maintain momentum going up a hill. I thought they used to do a 5 speed one at one time - that would in all likelihood have more sensible gear ratios and thus give it more real world performance, the engine would be running at higher revs and closer to its (limited) power band.

Certainly I bet that in the real world, a B6 1.9 TDI Passat would be quicker than a BMT 1.6. I know the B6 is a different car, but let's face it, a B7 is really just a facelifted B6.

The other problem with the ridiculously overgeared B7 1.6 is the fuel economy - because it's so anemic you need to give it more welly - if it had more sensible gear ratios I'm sure I could have done a bit better than the 50 mpg I averaged when I drove it.

gowley · 09-10-2013 09:38PM

dantastic wrote: »

€27,520 - €31,720 (http://www.skoda.ie/brochures/documents/prices/superb.pdf)
That is asking a lot for it.

The UK price is just £16k + vat though. That is a fairer price for what it is.

I dunno. All I can see that would appeal would be the price. I find it horrendous in every other way you can judge a car.

i judge them now on reliability comfort and value for money. cant complain on any of the above and have 120k in 18 months done. mind you its a 2 litre but you really need to drive one for a period before you slate them

R.O.R · 09-10-2013 09:52PM

The 5 Speed 1.6 Tdi in the B6 was considerably worse than the 6 Speed B7's. Same story with the Volvo S40 1.6D/D2 - much better with 6 gears.

Always try to persuade people in to the 140 models. Not much of a price difference. PDF price list linked above is the old model. Facelift models have come down in general as the larger engine's now have the newer tech and lower emissions.

1.6Tdi Ambition is now €28,745. 2.0Tdi 140 is €30,425. It's then only another €700 to go to the 170, and surely you can find another €700 from somewhere?

corkgsxr · 09-10-2013 11:56PM

Iv tryed various 1.6 diesels.

The 90-110 hp range feels nippy round town and small roads. But motorways, dualers and anything with a hill it suddenly feels like theres no go in them. There economic in the 90-110kph range but go above and economy goes rapidly down.

The 130 hp hdi feels much better but feels twitchy like its too much turboed.

Iv always been able to get better mpg in 2 litre diesels. And feels nicer to drive too.

Ill never buy another diesel smaller than 2L.

Also in winter the buggers wont warm up unless reved hard.

12-10-2013 10:52PM

ballooba wrote: »

Have a family member looking at these and I thought with the size of the car that the 1.6TDI might be a bit underpowered. From a bit of light research it seems like I was prejudiced? It doesn't need a 1.9 or 2.0?

OP - have the prospective buyer test drive the car and see if it suits their needs. Better still, drive it yourself as well and then look over all the posts here again and see what you think then.

Skoda Super 1.6TDI. Underpowered?

Comments