2009 Skoda Octavia Review and Road Test
June 29, 2009 by Paul Maric
2009 Skoda Octavia 1.6 MPI and 1.8 TSI Review & Road Test
1.8 TSI and 1.6 MPI – Beauty and the Beast
Model Tested:
- 2009 Skoda Octavia 1.8 TSI – $35,790
- 2009 Skoda Octavia 1.6 MPI – $31,290 (as tested)
Options:
- None fitted.
1.8 TSI: Inoffensive design cues; bang-for-buck; ripper stereo. 1.6 MPI: Price.
1.8 TSI: Jittery from standing start. 1.6 MPI: Lack of torque; engine note.
CarAdvice Rating (1.8 TSI): 
CarAdvice Rating (1.6 MPI):
- by Paul Maric
You know when somebody does something just because they can? Well, Skoda is now guilty of one of my pet hates.
It has released a variant of the new Skoda Octavia that would have been better off left undone – out of sight and out of mind. The model that has yours truly so riled up is the Skoda Octavia 1.6, with badges dubbing it the ‘MPI’.
The 1.6 designation refers to the engine size, a 1.6-litre, naturally aspirated, four-cylinder is normally found happily nestled within the chassis of a Ford Fiesta or Holden Barina, not a 1.43-tonne family station wagon.
Producing just 75kW and 148Nm of torque, the biggest insult arrives when you refuel. The minimum fuel requirement is 95RON. Until recently, Mazda had a similar issue with regards to minimum fuel requirements, but has acted to resolve the issue, now working with 91RON petrol.
Skoda announced at the launch that it had decided to bring the naturally aspirated petrol model in because it allows it to offer the Octavia with a Manufacturers List Price* of less than $30,000.
The $26,990* price tag for the Liftback, five-speed manual and $28,990* for the Wagon, five-speed manual offer a competitive pricing point, but that’s where the advantages end.
Jump behind the wheel and it’s reminiscent of all other Skoda models on offer. Turn the key and again, similar story. It’s only when you set off and begin driving the 1.6 that you notice how dire have become the consequences of such a small engine.
Coupled to a six-speed automatic transmission, our test vehicle struggled to keep up with traffic – that’s just with one person on board.
Moving off from the traffic lights pushes the engine beyond 4000rpm on a regular basis. The engine note is nothing to write home about either; the noise vibrates throughout the cabin, making passengers think you’re attempting a land speed record.
Overtaking is only taken care of with a big run up and foot firmly planted on the accelerator. Although it’s barely relevant, the 0-100km/h sprint takes a small eternity at 14.1-seconds for the six-speed automatic being tested.
This model really needed a 2.0-litre or at least a 1.8-litre to uphold the image the Octavia current commands, instead of being laughed off the field, with this inappropriate engine.
The fuel economy figure of 8.3-litres/100km is also nothing to write home about. It ends up using more than that due to the amount of revs the engine needs to keep up with traffic.
Our 1.6 test car also had a couple of build quality issues. The first of which was rather frustrating, the driver and front passenger electric window buttons sticking when pushed. They would only release when lifted from underneath. In addition, one of the door trim panels was loose, causing it to constantly rattle when hitting bumps in the road.
BUT, luckily that’s where the problems ceased. In addition to the 1.6 Octavia, I also tested the 1.8-TSI, which at a $4500 premium over the 1.6 is infinitely better. It starts at $31,490* for the Liftback and $33,490* for the Wagon. The premium for the seven-speed DSG is $2300 for both the Liftback and Wagon.
Where the 1.6 lacks torque and is a handful to deal with, the 1.8TSI shines using its turbocharger to up the power to 118kW, likewise with the torque, increasing to 250Nm.
The 1.8-litre, four-cylinder turbocharged engine in the 1.8TSI requires 98RON petrol, but rewards the driver with realistic fuel consumption figures of 6.7-litres/100km and 7.2-litres/100km respectively for the seven-speed DSG and six-speed manual respectively.
More about the drive later though, let’s take a look at the interior and exterior.
Aside from the new front end, the rest of the Octavia’s exterior is much the same. That’s certainly not a bad thing. The styling is discreet and non-offensive, enough to keep even Grandma happy.
Halogen projector headlights are standard fitment across the range, but do a relatively dismal job on country roads at night, even with high beams on. Bi-xenon headlights with washers are available as an option though.
Fifteen-inch alloy wheels come as standard fitment on the 1.6, while 16-inch alloy wheels are fitted to the 1.8TSI and 2.0TDI. Although the entire range is fitted with heated external mirrors (they work a charm on freezing Melbourne nights!), the 1.8TSI and 2.0TDI come with a folding function that helps with tight car parks.
Parking sensors are optional across the range though, certainly a missing option from both test vhicles.
The interior is cosy with enough room to seat five passengers in reasonable comfort. The tilt and reach adjustable steering wheel is comfortable to hold and offers enough adjustment to keep everyone happy.
The stereo is, for lack of a better word, insane. For a sound system sans a brand name, it flogs the pants off any other standard car audio system south of $100,000. The eight-speaker sound system is bass central, with crystal clear treble complementing the entire affair.
A big boot in the wagon offers versatile side storage sections, along with an easy to use retractable cargo blind. The rubber grab handle for the boot door is a bit cheap though and resembles a child’s toy.
The Octavia is known for offering a great set of features for a very reasonable price. Standard features in the 1.8TSI include: dual zone climate control; electric windows; auto-dimming rear vision mirror; electric mirrors; auto headlights and auto windscreen wipers are all included.
Although the 1.8TSI handles much the same as the 1.6, it’s under acceleration and day-to-day driving where it really starts making sense.
It doesn’t need a bucket load of revs to keep up with traffic like the 1.6 and once it starts moving, with the turbo spooling, there’s no real need to rev out the engine.
In typical VW fashion, the DSG does stutter moving off the line though, which became quite a nuisance over time. It was either a gentle take off or a full force tyre-frying take off.
It was hard to land it in between these two extremes, which is only a dire issue on uphill starts in the wet though, where the front-wheel-drive characteristics really shone through – axle tramp and all.
Steering and braking feel is exceptional. The revised Octavia steering wheel is easier to hold onto and provides uniform feel throughout its rotation. You constantly have a feel for what is going on through the front wheels and never lack confidence when powering through corners.
The steering weight is also great in city traffic and parking. It’s light enough to flick the wheel around when moving slowly, while not being overly light. Braking is also uniform throughout the entire application. The pedal grabs right away, so there’s no need to fuss about with pedal position.
The price difference with the two models, the 1.6 and the 1.8TSI, offers a massive step up in terms of driveability and fuel economy as mentioned earlier.
While I couldn’t sing the praises of the 1.8TSI any higher, the 1.6 lacks what the Octavia is all about, value for money and carefree, seamless motoring.
I can now see why there was only one 1.6 available at the launch I attended earlier in the year. The 1.6 really lets the Octavia range down, delete it and it would be hard to complain about Skoda’s offerings in Australia.
Stay tuned for the release of the Octavia RS later in the year, which follows the Superb that CarAdvice first drove last week.
*Manufacturer List Price excludes dealer charges, stamp duty, statutory charges and on-road charges, which are additional and vary between dealers and States/Territories. Customers are advised to contact a Skoda dealer for all pricing inquiries.
Ratings:
CarAdvice Rating (1.8 TSI):
CarAdvice Rating (1.6 MPI):
How does it Drive (1.8 TSI):
How does it Drive (1.6 MPI): 
How does it Look (1.8 TSI):
How does it Look (1.6 MPI):
How does it Go (1.8 TSI):
How does it Go (1.6 MPI):
Specifications (1.8 TSI):
- Engine: 1.8-litre, four-cylinder
- Power: 118kW @ 4500-6500RPM
- Torque: 250Nm @ 1500-4500RPM
- Induction: Turbocharged
- Transmission: seven-speed DSG
- Driven Wheels: Front
- Brakes: ABS brakes with EBD and BA.
- Top Speed: 223km/h
- 0-100km/h: 7.8-seconds
- CO2 Emissions: 157g/km
- Fuel Consumption: 6.7-litres/100km (ADR)
- Fuel Consumption: 6.3-litres/100km (As Tested)
- Fuel Tank Capacity: 55-litres
- Fuel Type: 98RON petrol
- ANCAP Rating: N/A
- Airbags: Six
- Safety: Electronic Stability Control(ESC)
- Spare Wheel: Full-size spare wheel
- Cargo Capacity: 580-litres
- Tow Capacity: 1300kg (braked)
- Turning Circle: N/A
- Warranty: Three-years/160,000km
- Weight: 1510kg
- Wheels: 205/55 R16
Specifications (1.6 MPI):
- Engine: 1.6-litre, four-cylinder
- Power: 75kW @ 5600RPM
- Torque: 148Nm @ 3800RPM
- Induction: Naturally aspirated
- Transmission: six-speed automatic
- Driven Wheels: Front
- Brakes: ABS brakes with EBD and BA.
- Top Speed: 184km/h
- 0-100km/h: 14.2-seconds
- CO2 Emissions: 198g/km
- Fuel Consumption: 8.3-litres/100km (ADR)
- Fuel Consumption: 9.2-litres/100km (As Tested)
- Fuel Tank Capacity: 55-litres
- Fuel Type: 95RON petrol
- ANCAP Rating: N/A
- Airbags: Six
- Safety: Electronic Stability Control(ESC)
- Spare Wheel: Full-size spare wheel
- Cargo Capacity: 580-litres
- Tow Capacity: 1200kg (braked)
- Turning Circle: N/A
- Warranty: 3-years/160,000km
- Weight: 1430kg
- Wheels: 205/55 R15
I am more than shocked that the 1.9 TDI wasn’t mentioned?
Surely that’s a far better engine than any in the review?
For fuel economy, power and torque, leaves all those petrol engines for dead.
Wow, the 1.6 is just as bad as I thought! Skoda why not bring in the 1.4TSI? It’d at least go better, and it did replace the 1.6 on the Golf too.
Gazinwales: the 1.6MPI replaced the 1.9TDI unfortunately.
Paul: about the headlights. My 08 RS headlamps are literally fantastic and they’re not xenon either. Did they get worse with the facelift?
Great car, as long as the 1.6 isn’t chosen. I can really see a crapload of criticism coming, but everyone I know it’s ONLY gonna be on the 1.6.
Paul and Jake
I have to agree about the 1.6. As much as i love my Skoda, what a stupid idea dumping the 1.9TDI (which is what i have) for the weedy and dated 1.6.
Jake, i was going to say the same thing: they should have waited for the 1.4TSI.
G´day. Love to read this website and these comments on cars from Central Europe which come always 6-12 months after all European magazines have sng the praises on the Octavia cars. Happy to hear that the 1.8TSI engine was found OK for Australia. Interesting to find out that – according to the author of this article – the Octavia 1.6 MPI is sooo bad for Australia and Australian roads. I was very lucky to live “down under” for a certain time (I love your country) and could see what type of cars people in Sydney, Melbourne and Cairns use/d, drive/driven and how was the quality of cars made/assembled in Australia. Half of the drivers used to drive cheap Hyundai and Kia cars, 10% people drive European cars ( I mean European with European quality, not something that looks fancy, came with a ship from Europe and origins in Spain or Italy), the rest drives huge Commodore, Calais and Toyota Camry made in OZ with creaking ceeling+door upholstery and dashboard, bad quality of metal coating on all “should-be chrome” plastic parts and huge 3-4 liter engines, which were so thirsty that you have a swirl in the tank. I do not understand, why is Octavia 1.6MPI so unacceptable and unrecommended for Australian roads, when you can drive just max 100/hour anyway.
Look fwd 2 reading this website after a few months, it was the same reading in the UK a few years ago, in last 3 years they sell 50K cars per year in the UK, now when the financial crisis struck in England, the Skoda cars are sold out in the old Europe(even the 1.2 and 1.4 versions :-)
^ Ian K – last time I was there Italy & Spain were in Europe :-)
A bit generous with the 2.5 stars in the looks department. Given the styling is so subjective (and divisive) I wouldn’t have thought you could give it more than 2.5.
IAN K.
you have to understand different countries have different tastes and UK specially who for many years had to endure expensive petrol had to adapt to to small capacity cars or turbo diesel cars.
Here in Australia, Canada, USA all are used to gas gauzzling, rear wheel drive cars and we have become used to this..therefore any new car that comes here with an under powered engine is going to be compared with a similar sized car with a bigger engine.
We also have the issue here that our normal unleaded is inferior, we also pay more for premium (alot more) as oppose to the UK and other EU countries who use Premium unleade as their standard fuel… this also has impact on how Australian’s view European cars.
Although due the fuel increasing dramatically and recession there are a minority group who are shifting to small capacity engines…such as 1.6 SKODA.
Me, if i cant afford a reasonable powered or V6 engine in the near future i will buy a DIESEL for sure…
Ian K, the biggest difference between EUropeans and their driving and Australians is the distance they drive in a single day. The simple fact that a lot of Australians have no problem with jumping into the car and driving from Sydney to Brisbane or Melbourne (or wherever). THe European would fly or catch a train to do the same distance. Unfortunately here in Australia we don’t have (cant afford) the public transport systems and low fares that ease the requirement for long car trips in Europe.
Good write up…….BUT
Around [at least!] $10k TO MUCH.
Ohh, and a orphan brand to boot.Same story as that superb[sic]
NOT for most of us, be ok for a few wood-ducks, al’la Proton style!
Watch the *special* offers and price reductions to follow.
Better out there for same or less.
PASS
Cheers
F-0
Jake02:
My test route involves a bit of country driving at night and although the headlights are okay for city driving, they didn’t project enough for night driving with the high-beams on.
I don’t recall having any issues with the outgoing Octavia though.
Hmm, bad decision by Skoda…VW did dump that engine from the Golf…
2.0 TDI still available… just checked their website…
At first, i dicided that i’m going to buy The Golf 118Tsi at the end of the year, now the octavia 1.8TSI making me hesitage… They are similar price, economic and 0-100.. Golf looks better but Octavia offering more feature also nice sould system….
About the octane rating of ULP/PULP required…..
MUST be a vw theme, the new vw golf requires 98Octane!
WTF, DONT buy a golf if you leave in rural or country, this premium grade fuel is simply not-for-sale.
Plain dumb engineering, if the Japanese can get a hi-po engine to run on the std. low quality stuff, why cant the germans?
75kW lol, what is this 1970 without the light weight vehicles?Makes sense, orphan engine in a orphan vehicle.
*Still* have not seen one……
FAIL
Cheers
F-0
Just to show all you guys/girls i am NOT anti-Czech, FAR from it, i love both there beer and there girls, BOTH first class and BOTH rock!
Tatra was/is great too, Porsche/Hitler stole the T97 design and renamed it a vw beetle!
Hans Ledwinka, a genius, sadly not respected and acknowledged as he should have been.
Cheers
F-0
FrugalOne, I live in South West VIC, about as far away from Melbourne as you can go before you end up in SA. 98/95 fuel is sold all through out my local area.
Also, why would European car makers spend extra money to retune their engines when they only run off 98/95 in the cars country of origin, especially when we are such a small market? I’m going to hazard a guess that the people that are worried about 10c per litre at the pump are not the kind of people who usually buy a European car anyway.
When it comes to the Octavia, I really like it. I think the 1.8tsi offers a great alternative to the Japanese offerings, for no other reason than to have something different to everyone else.
I’m pretty sure these engines would 95 instead 98 petrol, just won’t be as responsive. Not that anyone will care during everyday driving.
I have been driving a 1.8 TSI Octavia for some time – brilliant touring car for this country. I find it somewhat amusing that 98RON is now specified in lieu of 95RON. According to Skoda web sites in Europe the ‘new’ 1.8 requires only 95RON as a minimum. And yes this is for the newer version of the engine with its ever so slightly different specifications (max power and torque the same just slight differences in the rev range associated with both).
http://new.skoda-auto.com/com/model/newoctavia/
documentation/Pages/Documentation.aspx
Isnt it funny that when skoda puts a small engine in a large car its a bad thing yet when mazda annouced it for the mazda 6, all we heard was ‘AMAZING FUEL ECONOMY!’ etc..
Crouchy,
2.5litre engine on Mazda is average its not small.
it also isnt that economical either.
this issue with small capacity doesnt only apply to SKODA… think Citroen, Peugeot, Fiat and more.
small and under powered engines…only now Peugeot offered Turbo Charged 1.6l.
I would like to know if a review of Mazda 6 is due soon. Interested to see the Diesel models compared to above. Anyone have first hand experience ?
Come to think of it this car is just a discount Audi A4 made just south east of the border. Sure it is a little lower spec when it comes to the fruit included and in the looks department the Audi is the prettier of the two sisters.
However for $20K less you are getting a pretty awesome car when you compare it to the Audi! Plus it is quicker and more efficient than the Audi due the 7spd DSG I presume.
Jimbo, i’m sure this is closer to being a Jetta, which is in itself based on the Golf. It’s a nice car, though rather old now and at this price, i would prefer a Jetta with a VW badge.
Alan, I thought a A4 was a A3 with a boot. Also an A3 was just a tarted up Golf. Therefore by that logic doesn’t that make the Octavia a tarted down A4 and Jetta?
I’m of course just throwing the idea out there. After all the A4 and the Octavia share the same engine and I thought the same chassis and perhaps even more components?
I could be wrong, but at the moment I kind of like the idea of buying an Octavia and getting all the same tech as the poor sucker that payed $20K extra for the A4.
Alan,
the Octavia is only 6 months older than the Jetta, and the Octavia has at least had a facelift – the Jetta Is still the same as it was on release in 2004/5, as was the Golf MkV throughout it’s lifetime.
TSI:
I’d reccomend the Octavia over Golf. Principally because of all the extra space available for the same price, as well as equipment and quality. You never know when you may need the extra bootspace that comes with the Octavia…
On the petrol issue, my RS 2.0 turbo happily runs on 95RON, although I see less kms it doesn’t matter so much in around-town driving.
Jimbo, i’m with you. I would buy Octavia and $20K extra i can buy another city car for my g/f
Jake02, yeah the Jetta is quite old, and the boot quite ugly actually. Truth is if i have 30-40k for a sedan, i’ll get an Accord Euro. I referred to Jetta because it is pretty much the same car as Octavia underneath, and for about the same price you can get a VW instead of a Skoda.
Jimbo, A3, Golf and Octavia all uses the same platform, but A4 is not the same as these cars. A4 is more than an A3 with a boot, it is based on a bigger and more advanced platform. Many cars in VW group share engine, so can’t assume them to be of the same platform if they have the same engine.
Not too sure about the green button backlighting – I thought most manufacturers had moved out of the ghastly 80’s green LCD numerals / backlight colouring quite a few years ago now.
It’ll be interesting to see what VW do with the Jetta now. The MkVI headlights & nose are designed for a hatchback body shape & would look quite odd grafted onto a Jetta body.
HAL
good morning/evening.
love Italian and Spanish food, admire Italian style, enjoy reading and listening to Spanish, but not sure about quality of Italian and Spanish machinery industry and logistics :-)
BRUSTER
Good morning and thank you for your nice and well written explication. I do agree with 100% of what you wrote.
Personally would also buy a DIESEL car if had to drive many kilometers/day (as FRONTMAN wrote below: every week from Sydney to Melbourne or Brisbane). Now drive PETROL 1,6/77kW and drive 25.000km/year. Here in Middle Europe it makes sense to buy private car with diesel engine if you drive more then 30.000km/year.
Pops, it’s already been done. Look up the Golf Mk VI estate on this site and you will see that the old Golf Mk V estate (which was REALLY a Jetta estate, as it shared that car’s reprofiled doors and swage lines, which were subtly different to the Golf’s) has had the MK VI nose grafted onto it already.
“Truth is if i have 30-40k for a sedan, i’ll get an Accord Euro.”
The Accord Euro is certainly a nice looking sedan – much better looking than an Octavia. The only problem is that it’s heavy and slow as hell.
One reputable Australian motoring publication has also reported that the Euro has problems with pinging and detonation.
Agree it is a tough sell on the sedan as the looks don’t float my boat compared with euro/mazda 6…but it clearly wins on perfomance and fuel due to better engine/gear box than euro/6.
Wagon harder call – quite like the look and not many other options out there. Mazda looks good and is bigger but has only one engine/trim in the auto wagon – engine a bit soft yet still 2L more per 100 km, hate the silver plastic on the dash/steering wheel and no option for rear sensors or leather…also 10000km service interval is poor.
Octavia has a great drivetrain, great interior, and I think in wagon form it looks good…Any other competitors out there?
I know its just opinion I’m up against, but I would easily have an Octavia over a Euro/Mazda6 (and I did). The Octavia is tricky because in Europe family cars are like Mazda3 and the like, so its hard when it comes out here. Still, despite having a smaller exterior, the interior is quite big (just look at the Superb and Roomster, its something that Skoda does really well) and easily eclipses the Mazda6.
The Octavia does look good in person (yes its one of those cars) but I feel you need big wheels to complete the look (eg my RS) which is why the normal models look abit disappointing. The Euro in person isnt very nice…too many lines, and the rear end is ugly (not boring, but ugly). The 6 is a good car, but rear space is limited and I feel Australia doesnt get enough choice in the line-up (yes I’d like a 6 MZR-CD wagon, but can I get sat-nav or leather? nup).
Octavia offers advantages in pricing, space, economy, power (well not power, but its lighter and therefore quicker) and equipment. The handling is equal to the 6 (eg very good).
Overall these are the leaders in mid-size cars. The Liberty cannot be counted – the replacement is due in 3 months. The Epica is BORING, the Camry is reliablity and nothing else, the Sebring…just no and the Jetta (how could you with the Octavia on offer?).
I test drove the Ocavia RS TDI and Mazda 6 Wagon 2.2 TDI earlier this year and came away impressed with both, for different reasons.
Firstly the Skoda. I was very up in the air about the styling of the Octavia RS. On some angles in photos I thought it looked ok, other angles, just plain boring. Jumping inside my perception changed. Seats were very comfortable and sporty looking, along with the steering wheel. The dash made me feel like I was behind the wheel of my wife’s Golf, no complaints with that. Opening the boot was the biggest surprise as there is heaps of space available.
Driving the car was even better. The RS with DSG certainly gets away quite well with not enough turbo lag to make it an issue. Once it’s rolling though, it just pulls really well and I took it up some decent hills around Wollongong. Handling was more than adequate for my needs and the car was very comfortable and easy to drive. Road noise could have been better but I’d simply sound deaden the car to solve that. So overall I liked it a lot.
The Mazda 6 wagon was also impressive. Visually it has the Skoda’s measure, has plenty of storage and is well put together. It has a decent level of equipment but to get all the bells and whistles you would have to spend another 7k to get the sports hatch.
Driving the car I noticed more turbo lag in the Mazda than the Skoda. First gear was annoying as there is plenty of turbo lag when taking off, once you change into second that disappears as this car really gets up and hauls in any gear. For those that know Wollongong, I drove up Mt Ousley in 5th gear doing 100km and 6th at 110km without any fuss. 6 speed manual worked well but gearing is tall though, so 6th is freeway only. Turbo lag and throttle response are an issue below 1800rpm. A Tunit diesel tuning module would probably sort this out. Handling was also pretty good considering it’s a mid-size family car, and the Mazda was a bit quieter than the Skoda. I preferred the steerig feel in the Skoda, although the Mazda was light and direct, just lacked the feel of the Skoda.
Close call as to which one I would buy. The Skoda RS gets a bit of extra gear and comes in below the 6 diesel sports hatch, but the 6 wagon comes in below the Skoda RS, but not quite as well equipped. I’d be happy with either though.
Jake02: I may be wrong, but I am quite sure that the Mazda 6 is considerably bigger inside than the Octavia. Can anyone back me up there?
Kris:
which one you gonna buy? The RS facelift is out in 2 months.
Phillip:
I completely understand. I was saying that out of personal experience I thought the RS was more roomy than the 6. I sat behind myself (I’m 6 ft 2) in both and found the RS to be better in all directions (especially the RS hatch, it had much more headroom than the 6 hatch suprisingly) Of course, this does depend on the people testing (passengers in both behind a shorter driver will have more space etc.
Jake02: Not sure, I think the facelifted RS looks better than the current one. I’m also partial towards the Mondeo TDCI hatch which will be facelifted in August, but it doesn’t have as much power or torque, still drives nice though.
I’ll take a look at all 3 a bit more closely over the next few months, no rush for me to buy a new car just yet.
hey jake02, you are own the Rs, right?
I just wonder how many kms can you drive from full tank of petrol? Is ir really 8.2l/100kms?
No wonder VW has moved into turbo engines in a big way.That 1.6L proves what I have always suspected,that VW cannot build NA engines.The 1.6L has the same if not less power than the Getz 1.6 or the Jazz 1.5L or the KIA Rio.
If people think that this Skoda looks better than the Euro or Mazda 6 well,I suppose,if they say it as a mantra eventually they will come to believe it.The Skoda looks like it was styled during the Cold War era!it still has lingering design cues of those ugly limosines that used to chauffeur the Eastern Block generals!The rear is very early Korean with those dated light lenses.The interior seems ok.
The DSG didn’t seem to function smoothly and I believe some of the interior trim(?) became loose during the review.
The RS version is somewhat half-decent in looks but I read it has chronic understeer,the suspension has not been uprated at all.
There are better alternatives,even in the VW stable.
1.6 litre? I would rather walk…
What an underpowered and overpriced crap…!! Underpowered cars constantly make drivers annoying and tiring. People who buy this type of cars are simply insane…
manufacturers need to pay attention to what the market desires
ask yourself why the Ford Focus is not sold here with a 1.6 petrol?
honda also have a 2.0 accord overseas and going by how lackluster the 2.4 is here you can see why they passed
as yet we do not have any arcane capacity laws in this country but you would think the importers would do a little market research and see what australians want?
no-one has an issue with direct injected small turbo diesels
what we don’t want is tiny petrol engines in large cars
looks like a blinged nose holden viva
*sighs*
I was in the same boat as a few people here and was looking at the Mazda 6, Accord Euro, Mondeo XR5 and for something from left field, the Skoda Octavia RS.
I drove a Mondeo XR5 that felt really good, but then drove another that had about 5,000 k’s on it and it felt ‘loose’, so it didn’t feel well put together.
The Skoda was a nice car, but not as big as the other three. It is a fair bit narrower and while interior room is comparable, I needed the wider cars. Also, I had massive doubts about the resale value of a Skoda as it bourne out by the prices they are going for second hand.
For me it came down to the 6 and the Euro and I chose the Euro becuase it was far better equipped than the 6 for the same money. Anyone who has driven the Euro in a manual will know that it is not a slow car and it handles very well.
Nice to see some discussion about the Skoda here.
I’m in the market for a new car, and after years of Commodore wagons for the family I’m after a car I can appreciate and enjoy.
Looked at the Mazda 6, Honda Accord Euro, Mondeo and Skoda. In the end, it’s a personal choice isn’t it? But my take was that Mazda 6 was too fussy inside (lots of switches) but great expanses of boring plastic, Mondeo is bland (looks like another family car), Accord is lovely to look at but underpowered (and unconvincing advice from the dealer on that pinging issue). Skoda just seemed to tick all the boxes – and no matter what anyone says I love the DSG having driven extensively with it in Europe.
98RON is a worry, but I guess I just factor it into the budget. Looks? Not racy, but having had the opportunity to have one for a day and then also take it home overnight it does look better in the flesh.
Size? Frankly I didn’t think the Accord made good use of the extra dimensions and travelling with four or even five is a thing of the past.
So, now I just have to finalise the quote and get the salary packaging company organised.
But thanks everyone for the contributions, really good to hear so many views.
TSI:
Yep I own an RS petrol hatch, and around town I get about 10L/100km, not particularly good but my old Subaru Liberty (2000 model) got around 14L/100km around town (all cars are the same) and the Skoda has alot better performance! on a trip from Sydney to Coffs Harbour (490km) it used just over half a tank of fuel, which impressed me immensly especially considering it’s petrol-powered.
I paid the same with the Skoda as I originally did in 2000 with the Sube (37k), and it’s amazing to see how much extra you get for your money now-a-days!
Sorry TSI, I went on to say that around town I get upto 600kms out of tank, and if needed it can last me two weeks at the maximum. I’m pretty imressed!
It is interesting that nobody has compared this car to the older model VW Passat which it seems to look very much like from the rear lights of the Octavia and well basically the drive train and engines are identical in the 1.8 config sans the new DSG auto.
Agree with the reviewer as to why they updated this model in that only really body style has changed a bit and not really much else. I have read though that Skoda is one of the most sought after cars in Germany in that they actually have better quality records compared to their own indigenous built VW’s. I still think the Jetta is a better looking car, but certainly more expensive for just looks really.
All up the Skoda range is really a poor mans Audi – most all of the specs are Audi of years past and certainly great value for money, not that they compete on a style level, that Audi has in spades. I do think the brand will slowly catch fire though, they offer a lot of European car for the money.
I live in Nigeria where information about Car performance is scanty. I just got 1.6 Skoda Octavia. My experience tallies with the test drive report put together by Paul. I too perceive on my first drive that the car is tool big for the 1.6L engine. As I have to rev up to 3600 before moving the car from traffic light stop (causing unnecessary stare from fellow drivers and on-lookers) and before it could change to gear 2. However, the interior and exterior beauty is ok and alright for the price.
If I have got this information early, may be I would have waited for 1.8TSI which from the manufacturer’s datasheet and the above test drive report shows that it has a better engine performance.
2009 Skoda Octavia 1.8 TSI – $35,790
is this price in dollar?
If yes it is expensive I have to say…Which city?
I live in Shanghai China, maybe someone here knows…
the previous Octavia 1.8 TSI comfort version with 6AT is around 150，000rmb
which is around 22,000 US dollar.
Hired a one of these in the OK last month, drove very well. Economy & comfort also good.
No keyless entry was a big draw back, when travelling with others all the time.