RE: Cupra Ateca price announced
Saturday 13th October 2018
Cupra Ateca price announced
£35k confirmed for 300hp Cupra flagship - available to order now
While the prospect of another performance SUV may not bring joy to your heart, the arrival of the first dedicated Cupra product in the UK is pretty significant news. It's promising 'Uniqueness, Sophistication and Performance', aiming to conquer a new group of enthusiasts with its wares and, you would have to assume, build on the favourable following the old SEAT Cupra products enjoyed on these shores.
The Cupra Ateca is a car that's been pretty well received in initial reviews, and now a UK price has been confirmed at £35,900. That's actually below estimates - which were nearer £40k - and will include a "high level of standard spec". As a result the only options available will be a panoramic roof, a towbar, a Comfort & Sound pack with BeatsAudio, an Advanced Driving Assistance Pack, and a Design Pack with 20-inch wheels (up from the standard 19) and Brembo brakes. That's it. The six colour choices - Energy Blue, Velvet Red, Nevada White, Magic Black, Rodium Grey and Brilliant Silver - are all no cost.
As for actually buying one, the Cupra Ateca is available to order now from all SEAT dealers. Beginning from the first quarter of next year, 25 Cupra specialists will be available to "offer a more tailored experience to Cupra customers." Expect the cars to arrive in the UK early in 2019.
Interestingly Cupra believes the Ateca is unique, suggesting "there is simply no other car like it available with such a competitive overall package". Certainly as far as SUVs go it's tricky to find 150mph, five-second-to-62mph alternatives at less than £40k, so if you know of any other then now's the time to shout. Finally, for those with more conventional tastes, it might be worth pointing out that the Leon Cupra ST is still available, offering all-wheel drive and the same powertrain for less money. It's quite good, too. PH verdict on the Ateca to follow soon!
Discussion
Like all these Suvs they're not more practical as family cars than a big estate or a people carrier, getting 5 people in that with a dog won't be anymore practical than it would in a Focus. Big on outside small on inside.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
It'll probably sell very well.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
It'll probably sell very well.
FredClogs said:
Like all these Suvs they're not more practical as family cars than a big estate or a people carrier, getting 5 people in that with a dog won't be anymore practical than it would in a Focus. Big on outside small on inside.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
I find the exact opposite. I prefer a SUV to an equivalent estate. Shorter so smaller footprint, easier to park in town, better visibility and access, more comfortable with longer travel and fat sidewalls on small 17s (brilliant for potholes). More practical for our needs with bikes in the car (a Golf estate wouldn't work nor my A4 Avant). Ours is 1,250kgs and returns 40mpg long term average although the estate would have bettered that a little. Ground clearance gives access to places where the estate would struggle but it's no offroader of course, particularly on road rubber.And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
If I want a drivers car for my track days I wouldn't pick an estate either but for mere road use they cope admirably with the laws of physics.
I have nothing against estates though, different cars for different needs. If they invented estates today I wouldn't say "Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question", I would say more choice is a good thing.
FredClogs said:
Like all these Suvs they're not more practical as family cars than a big estate or a people carrier, getting 5 people in that with a dog won't be anymore practical than it would in a Focus. Big on outside small on inside.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
It'll probably sell very well.
Agree on almost all points but small suv packaging does work for a family with 2 small kids both in boosters/baby seats. Purely by virtue of the extra height making them easier to load than in a traditional estate car. Still can’t see the point of sticking lots of power and hard suspension on it though!And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
It'll probably sell very well.
nickfrog said:
FredClogs said:
Like all these Suvs they're not more practical as family cars than a big estate or a people carrier, getting 5 people in that with a dog won't be anymore practical than it would in a Focus. Big on outside small on inside.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
I find the exact opposite. I prefer a SUV to an equivalent estate. Shorter so smaller footprint, easier to park in town, better visibility and access, more comfortable with longer travel and fat sidewalls on small 17s (brilliant for potholes). More practical for our needs with bikes in the car (a Golf estate wouldn't work nor my A4 Avant). Ours is 1,250kgs and returns 40mpg long term average although the estate would have bettered that a little. Ground clearance gives access to places where the estate would struggle but it's no offroader of course, particularly on road rubber.And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
If I want a drivers car for my track days I wouldn't pick an estate either but for mere road use they cope admirably with the laws of physics.
I have nothing against estates though, different cars for different needs. If they invented estates today I wouldn't say "Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question", I would say more choice is a good thing.
Our family car (which my wife drives day to day) has gone from a Skoda Octavia VRs Estate to a Skoda Karoq and I prefer it. For all the reasons above, it works better for us at the job which we want it to do. When I want to do a track day I'll take my Caterham which is the best tool for that particular job.
The fact that there's now a 300bhp version of the Ateca, I think, can only be a good thing.
Quite like this but not sure if I would have one or an estate with the same drive train
Being PH I ‘should’ say the estate but...
Funny, when I was a kid in the mid-60’s, estate cars were looked down on and tended to be quite basic and noisy (thinks Cortina or Escort estate as examples) and 4x4s were for farmers or people who lived in the uppish-regions of Wales or Scotland
How times have changed...
Being PH I ‘should’ say the estate but...
Funny, when I was a kid in the mid-60’s, estate cars were looked down on and tended to be quite basic and noisy (thinks Cortina or Escort estate as examples) and 4x4s were for farmers or people who lived in the uppish-regions of Wales or Scotland
How times have changed...
nickfrog said:
FredClogs said:
Like all these Suvs they're not more practical as family cars than a big estate or a people carrier, getting 5 people in that with a dog won't be anymore practical than it would in a Focus. Big on outside small on inside.
And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
I find the exact opposite. I prefer a SUV to an equivalent estate. Shorter so smaller footprint, easier to park in town, better visibility and access, more comfortable with longer travel and fat sidewalls on small 17s (brilliant for potholes). More practical for our needs with bikes in the car (a Golf estate wouldn't work nor my A4 Avant). Ours is 1,250kgs and returns 40mpg long term average although the estate would have bettered that a little. Ground clearance gives access to places where the estate would struggle but it's no offroader of course, particularly on road rubber.And as a drivers car it'll be massively compromised by the laws of physics.
Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question.
If I want a drivers car for my track days I wouldn't pick an estate either but for mere road use they cope admirably with the laws of physics.
I have nothing against estates though, different cars for different needs. If they invented estates today I wouldn't say "Silly, pointless, ineffective, a poor solution to an unneeded question", I would say more choice is a good thing.
Also I'm a fan of the higher driving position - todays cars are generally poor on visibility due to thicker pillars and raked windscreens and the SUV viewpoint does nagate some of the restrictions to some extent.
I guess that's why there's an emerging market for the performance SUV.
That said it's all down to personal needs are preferences. Estates do look way cooler though!
ducnick said:
Still can’t see the point of sticking lots of power and hard suspension on it though!
I don't get this at all. To me SUVs should be comfortable and wafty. The price doesn't seem bad though - daughter got an Ateca SE-L a few weeks ago and there was some other model in the showroom with a £40K price tag. They get heavily discounted though - daughter's was under £20K - so perhaps they've set an aggressive price and are going to try and limit discounts on the Cupra.
Ex X Power said:
300 bhp SUV for less thatn £40k.... Been done years ago.. 
Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
Fuel & Image Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
My cupra 280 does 40mpg on the motorway IF you drive to the law , i get about 36-7... or 32 when im in a rush. The ateca will be over 30mpg and if it has the golf R fuel tank your talking a 400mile range or near as damn it
I had a 03 hawkeye and the fuel consumption was biblical and wasn't practical whatsoever...
king awful.pimpchez said:
Ex X Power said:
300 bhp SUV for less thatn £40k.... Been done years ago..
Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
Fuel & Image Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
My cupra 280 does 40mpg on the motorway IF you drive to the law , i get about 36-7... or 32 when im in a rush. The ateca will be over 30mpg and if it has the golf R fuel tank your talking a 400mile range or near as damn it
I had a 03 hawkeye and the fuel consumption was biblical and wasn't practical whatsoever...
Ateca is the single dullest car I've ever had the misfortune to drive, not bad - not good, just dull! Even the most rubbish of cars tend to have some endearing quirks that can make them interesting or allow you to bond with them in some ways. With the Ateca there was just nothing however and after nearly 1,000 miles handed it back to the rental company without even so much as a glance backwards.
pimpchez said:
Ex X Power said:
300 bhp SUV for less thatn £40k.... Been done years ago..
Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
Fuel & Image Im not a Subaru Fanboy, but if the Cupra is as capable a all round package as one of these then it desevres to be a success
My cupra 280 does 40mpg on the motorway IF you drive to the law , i get about 36-7... or 32 when im in a rush. The ateca will be over 30mpg and if it has the golf R fuel tank your talking a 400mile range or near as damn it
I had a 03 hawkeye and the fuel consumption was biblical and wasn't practical whatsoever...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff