[f450]

The car looks very nice. Has a bit of a Volkswagen look on the exterior but interiors are very Mercedes. Seems like a steal at 20. Only downsides are the rear of the car and the fact that, after the launch of the diesel, this car is going to be very very very very common.

Did I mention that the car is going to be very common?

[Vid6639]

Awesome pictures nickatnite. Loved the 3rd pic with the Accord staring at the Superb from outside and the last pic where you can see the honda badge peeping from above the dash.

[diabloo]

There is also a Skoda in that pic that feels neglected after the birth of Superb

Originally Posted by vid6639

Loved the 3rd pic with the Accord staring at the Superb from outside and the last pic where you can see the honda badge peeping from above the dash.

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by diabloo

There is also a Skoda in that pic that feels neglected after the birth of Superb

Being a skoda showroom I'm sure there is.

Also the difference between the Accord and Superb is not 1L. The Accord manual is 17.72L ex-showroom delhi. The Automatic is 18.47L.

The superb is a 7speed DSG AT unit. So comparing it with the Accord AT means the difference is just 33K.

Also honda maintenance may be cheaper for City and Civic but for Accord and CR-V they are way more expensive as per this month's ACI spare parts survey. Accord is one of the most expensive to maintain after the Jetta.

[iraghava]

Originally Posted by vid6639

Also honda maintenance may be cheaper for City and Civic but for Accord and CR-V they are way more expensive as per this month's ACI spare parts survey. Accord is one of the most expensive to maintain after the Jetta.

I find the ACI price list weird, some prices especially for Skoda are way too low. I'm going to do some digging on this soon.

[Mpower]

I feel they should offer i and iL versions like the 7. Not everbody needs a long boat on wheels.

Originally Posted by vid6639

Also the difference between the Accord and Superb is not 1L. The Accord manual is 17.72L ex-showroom delhi. The Automatic is 18.47L.

Is there a manual superb? in other countries?

[Ravveendrra]

Originally Posted by Ardy

A very well written review ...

+1 on that. Nice reviews and pics. The car sounds interesting but it is not for me. If I get myself a driver - then I might think about it, as it seems VFM.

Originally Posted by vnabhi

......I think the exterior looks too old-fashioned---the front grill looks Fabia-ish. .....

LOL Venu, I thought the conservative/evolutionary, 'old-fashined' look would appeal to you! (Just joking) About the Grille - you do have a point there, the grille design is common to all the new Skodas (including the new Octy/Laura which is due to be launched). Perhaps Skoda made a mistake in introducing it first in the Fabia. Then again, it might be a calculated move to move Skoda down the ladder away from the Audis and VWs. Who knows?

Originally Posted by f450

The car looks very nice. Has a bit of a Volkswagen look on the exterior but interiors are very Mercedes. Seems like a steal at 20. Only downsides are the rear of the car and the fact that, after the launch of the diesel, this car is going to be very very very very common.

Did I mention that the car is going to be very common?

But Skodas are supposed to be common and 'common'. Any comparisons with, or allusions to, the 7 series or Mercedes are totally misplaced and odious. The Skodas are not in the same league, they are not meant to be exclusive. I guess that a '3 pointed star' or a 'spinning propeller' would cost approximately twice as much as a Skoda if they had the equipment list that Skoda gives. There is never a free lunch. At the end of the day you get exactly what you pay for. In Skoda's case you get a great equipment list and space at the cost of performance and to a lesser extent - quality and technology. IMO it is a decent trade off. Most of us do not need space age materials and technology for our daily mules.

I was in the Skoda showroom last week for a spoiler and asked about the A.S.S. issues. The man there told me "Skodawale bejaar kar dere". Good for Skoda, if they are making the dealers miserable. He also mentioned that the Skodas are not to be thrashed, if used and not abused they are inexpensive to maintain and last very long. Was it just a sales spiel? I do not know, but tend to agree with him. I often see Octys that are over 7 years old and they do not show their age. The owners too seem happy with them.

Cheers,

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by Mpower

Is there a manual superb? in other countries?

5 and 6 speed manual are available. But no idea which country.

Å*koda Superb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by vid6639

Also honda maintenance may be cheaper for City and Civic but for Accord and CR-V they are way more expensive as per this month's ACI spare parts survey. Accord is one of the most expensive to maintain after the Jetta.

There was a thread where GTO and someone else were discussing Skoda vs. Honda ownership costs. I remember where it was shown that one could service an Accord four times for the money it cost to service a Laura once. I highly doubt ACI's figures are accurate.

[Ravveendrra]

Originally Posted by ImmortalZ

There was a thread where GTO and someone else were discussing Skoda vs. Honda ownership costs. I remember where it was shown that one could service an Accord four times for the money it cost to service a Laura once. I highly doubt ACI's figures are accurate.

AFAIK the Hondas also require servicing 4 times more often than the Skodas.

Deuce!

Cheers,

[ImmortalZ]

Originally Posted by Ravveendrra

AFAIK the Hondas also require servicing 4 times more often than the Skodas.

Deuce!

Cheers,

Oh yeah, petrol Hondas require more frequent servicing than a diesel Skoda. Yep, yep.

[xtremeshock]

160 Bhp seems adequate but not satisfying, now all they have to do is put that motor in the Laura or better yet the Fabia. I know it is only remoltely possible, but can always dream.

I wonder how much a 6 cylinder diesel would cost, that would be worth buying.

[danc]

Originally Posted by ImmortalZ

There was a thread where GTO and someone else were discussing Skoda vs. Honda ownership costs. I remember where it was shown that one could service an Accord four times for the money it cost to service a Laura once. I highly doubt ACI's figures are accurate.

I Recently bought the laura and have got a 3 years 50K all inclusive (parts, consumable and labor) regular services package costing Rs11,111. I think for a 17L car this is inexpensive.
When it comes to "irregular" maintenance, if I believe the ACI spares figures, Skoda is not at disadvantage as compared to vW or Honda, the failures rates is though a different story.

Danc

[Vid6639]

Originally Posted by ImmortalZ

There was a thread where GTO and someone else were discussing Skoda vs. Honda ownership costs. I remember where it was shown that one could service an Accord four times for the money it cost to service a Laura once. I highly doubt ACI's figures are accurate.

That was true for the older accord. ACI has clearly mentioned that the prices of the new accord are hugely different from the older one. They have written that the old accord parts were substantially less but the new ones are expensive as the localization is very less for this one.

For e.g. The radiator for the new one costs 28K but the old one was below 10K.


Superb on road price bangalore is Rs. 22.82L.

[nkrishnap]

Superb on road price bangalore is Rs. 22.82L.

This is a lot of car for the price with all the gizmos. but If Skoda can improve the *** with all inclusive maintenance packages then it will turn out even better.