RE: Skoda Kodiaq vRS: PH Trade-Off!

RE: Skoda Kodiaq vRS: PH Trade-Off!

Sunday 3rd February

Skoda Kodiaq vRS: PH Trade-Off!

The Kodiaq vRS's blend of talents makes it quite unusual. Or does it?



Turns out it was quite appropriate that our first drive of the Skoda Kodiaq vRS took place on a frozen lake. The vast quantities of ice involved in the test drive, after all, were reflected in the rather frosty comments from PHers on the forums. "All fair and well, but what is the point? It's a diesel and doesn't manage 40mpg," said Mike335i. "Octavia vRS estate or Superb estate are better options. Still don't get the obsession with SUVs!" said g7jhp. "This is a WTF moment for me. £43k!" added, ahem, Pumpsmynads.

Mind you, it should come as no surprise, really, that a big, diesel-powered SUV with sporty trappings and a price tag north of £40,000 would receive a fairly chilly reception from the PH faithful. Such things are, in many ways, the antithesis of driving enjoyment. And yet, for drivers who need a practical SUV that can seat seven, but still want to go fast, the Kodiaq might offer a combination of talents that few other cars can match.

"Its performance may not be particularly mind-blowing in the era of the super SUV, and it certainly isn't altogether cheap," we concluded, "but as far as allowing access to a segment of the market which many buyers were previously priced out of, the Kodiaq VRS is a strong opening salvo in what is surely soon to become an all out bombardment of hot SUVs."


But while the concept of the cheaper hot SUV is relatively new, the idea of one with a bit of poke and seven seats is not. So perhaps you don't need to buy new to get everything the Kodiaq can do after all. And indeed, buying used might allow you to circumvent that eye-catchingly high price. So in this week's Trade-Off, we're on the lookout for something that's just as much of a one-car solution as the Kodiaq - but for half its price.

Granted, it isn't an SUV, but in the search for a sporty seven-seater it's impossible to prevent our thoughts first turning to the Ford S-Max. After all, its main remit was to be exactly that. Of course, you'll have to forego the huntin' shootin' fishin' body stylin' (sorry), but the S-Max is still a handsome beast - plus, because it's a proper MPV, you get full-size third-row seats, rather than the vestigial ones you'll find in the Kodiaq.

This 2015 2.0 Ecoboost Titanium Sport should do the trick. It gets a punchy 240hp 2.0-litre turbo - petrol, in contrast with the Skoda's diesel - and as it's top-spec, it's loaded with toys too. However, there's a problem: despite all that power, it's way off the pace - it's unable to match the Kodiaq in acceleration terms and neither is it as wieldy in the corners. What's more, its price - at more than £1,000 over our budget - rules it out.


What about an earlier - and classier - performance diesel SUV, then? An Audi SQ5 might have seemed overblown and overpriced when it was new, but this example at a shade below £21,000 seems to defy at least the latter part of that conclusion. The SQ5 is properly quick, too - with 313hp and a 0-62mph time of 5.1 seconds, it blows away the Kodiaq - and most other contenders.

Problem is, at six years old with 82,000 miles on the clock, this SQ5 is rather leggy. And as an alternative to a brand-new car, one with that sort of mileage is possibly pushing things a step too far. It also lacks that extra row of seats, which will rule it out for anyone buying the vRS for its practicality. Still, if you don't mind the mileage and you don't need seating for seven, its huge performance makes it a tempting prospect.

Seems like it isn't easy to meet all the Skoda's plus points for half its price, then - but it isn't impossible. We reckon about the closest you'll get is with this BMW X5. It's a second-generation model, dating from 2010, which makes it a little older than we'd like - but with 52,000 miles on the clock the mileage isn't off putting. Also in its favour is the fact it's an xDrive40d, giving it a 3.0-litre, six-pot diesel with a whole 306hp to its name.


This particular X5's secret weapon is the fact that its first owner specified the optional seven-seat layout inside. It should be pointed out, however, that the rearmost seats in the X5 are truly tiddly - less spacious even than the Kodiaq's - so best reserved for kids, and small ones at that. Nevertheless, the fact is that the X5 can carry just as many people as our Kodiaq.

It can carry them just as fast, too - faster, in fact. The X5's vital stats of 0-62mph in 6.6 seconds and a top speed of 147mph ace the Kodiaq's 7.0 seconds and 136mph respectively. And given its remarkably deft chassis, the X5 should be a match for the vRS in the corners, too; you'll find well-weighted steering that's full of feel and, as this one's an SE rather than a firmly-sprung M Sport, a suspension setup that treads a pleasing line between ride quality and body control.

And we've got options aplenty - the all-important professional navigation system, for one thing, which has had the TV box ticked; adaptive xenons, side view cameras, heated front seats and front & rear parking sensors are all fitted too, according to the advert. So not only will it overhaul the Kodiaq in a drag race, but it'll feel more palatial while it's doing so. That goes for the way it's built, as well; the Kodiaq's a nice place to spend time, don't get us wrong, but it can't quite match the quality of the X5's plastics and leathery bits.


The best part, though, is the price - for this X5 can be yours for a fairly tantalising £19,500. A whopping £1,935 saving on our already stingy budget and £23,370 less than a brand-new Kodiaq vRS - more than enough to leave you a fair old slush fund for when things go wrong.

What's more, you'll save money on tax, because the Skoda will set you back £515 in its first year and £450 a year after that until it's five years old. The BMW, by contrast, costs just £290 a year. That should offset any extra fuel cost you'll incur - for while the Skoda's 35.3mpg fuel consumption might look less efficient than the BMW's 37.7, the former was recorded using the WLTP, while the latter is an NEDC figure.

So, it turns out you can get all the same benefits as the Skoda Kodiaq vRS offers in a nine-year-old BMW X5. That said, whether you'd be able to bring yourself to spend even half of your hard-earned on a nine-year-old BMW X5 instead of a Skoda Kodiaq vRS is another matter. Over to you, then: could you?


SPECIFICATION - SKODA KODIAQ VRS

Engine: 1,968cc, twin-turbo four-cylinder diesel
Transmission: 7-speed auto, four-wheel drive
Power (hp): 239@4,000rpm
Torque (lb ft): 369@1,750-2,500rpm
0-62mph: 7.0 seconds
Top speed: 136mph
Weight: 1,838kg
MPG: 35.3 (WLTP Combined)
CO2 (g/km): 167 (NEDC Derived)
Price: £42,870

SPECIFICATION - BMW X5 XDRIVE40D SE

Engine: 2,993cc, six-cylinder turbo diesel
Transmission: 8-speed auto, four-wheel drive
Power (hp): 306@4,400rpm
Torque (lb ft): 443@1,500-2,500rpm
0-62mph: 6.6 seconds
Top speed: 147mph
Weight: 2,185kg
MPG: 37.7 (NEDC Combined)
CO2 (g/km): 198 (NEDC)
Price: £19,500

Author
Discussion

st4

Original Poster:

900 posts

71 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Good find that X5 - I wonder how new £40k would go for an X5 40d (wager under 2yrs) - price for price for a new Kodiaq but a whole lot nicer - and still quite new.

snorkel sucker

2,446 posts

141 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Not sure what is more absurd; a new Skoda for £40k or a nigh on 10 year old X5 fpr £20k.

For either option you'd need your head examining.

PSB1967

39 posts

94 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
st4 said:
Good find that X5 - I wonder how new £40k would go for an X5 40d (wager under 2yrs) - price for price for a new Kodiaq but a whole lot nicer - and still quite new.
Decided to play your game whilst having my breakfast, a quick search revealed this: https://usedcars.bmw.co.uk/vehicle/201901153955033...

Not even 1 year old!

st4

Original Poster:

900 posts

71 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
PSB1967 said:
Decided to play your game whilst having my breakfast, a quick search revealed this: https://usedcars.bmw.co.uk/vehicle/201901153955033...

Not even 1 year old!
Yep - that's a more usable real world example.

A pretty new 6 clyinder BMW or a nasty 4 cylinder transverse engine Skoda.

The choice shouldn't be hard...

snorkel sucker said:
Not sure what is more absurd; a new Skoda for £40k or a nigh on 10 year old X5 fpr £20k.

For either option you'd need your head examining.
LOL - both are £10k over priced.

va1o

15,810 posts

145 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Skoda’s pricing here is definitely somewhat ambitious. The VW Tiguan with the same engine lists at £37k, so this is going to struggle unless you really need the 7 seats

For £43k I think I’d be looking at the new BMW X3 M Sport 20d or Audi Q5 S-Line. They’re almost as quick with 8s 0-60 times and will hold their values significantly better.
Advertisement

nickfrog

9,375 posts

155 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Luckily a big chunk of that £10k will be absorbed by the discount on the Skoda.

ahenners

224 posts

64 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Current discount is about 5k based on what I've seen. Still makes it look very expensive.

CDP

5,591 posts

192 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Easy

VW Type 25 Synchro Caravelle with a 911 engine in the back.

Just don't mention corners...

st4

Original Poster:

900 posts

71 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
CDP said:
Easy

VW Type 25 Synchro Caravelle with a 911 engine in the back.

Just don't mention corners...
Campervans are horrible though. An X5 isn't.

numtumfutunch

2,976 posts

76 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
snorkel sucker said:
Not sure what is more absurd; a new Skoda for £40k or a nigh on 10 year old X5 fpr £20k.

For either option you'd need your head examining.
The most absurd is £22.5k for a 4y old SMax

snake_oil

1,118 posts

13 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Options at sub 8s with 7 seats and under 60k.

R or E Class - 14k

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2018...

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2018...

Nice X5 40d at 16.5k

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019...

Q7 - 17k

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019...

XC90 - new shape - 27k (loads of old shapes at whatever your budget)

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2019...

Ok fails the half price test but infinitely more desirable than the Skoda.





WonkeyDonkey

346 posts

41 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
st4 said:
Campervans are horrible though. An X5 isn't.
X5 is an absolute turd to look at.

dunnoreally

252 posts

46 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
If you're dead set on a 7 seater with a hot hatch badge, there's always the Zafira VXR. This is the best one I could find. Possibly a bit pricey, but still less than half the budget.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/2008-Vauxhall-Zafira-2-...

Edited by dunnoreally on Sunday 3rd February 13:35

va1o

15,810 posts

145 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
I’m not usually one for the new vs used game, but it looks like for the same money you can also have a 2018 Audi Q7. It has 7-seats and is a tiny bit less powerful at 218PS but still manages 7.3s 0-60

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...



This Skoda really is a terrible buy at £43k!

st4

Original Poster:

900 posts

71 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
WonkeyDonkey said:
X5 is an absolute turd to look at.
And a Kodiaq and Campervan aren't?

Me, myself, I - I'd look at an estate car for this sort of money or a mid sized saloon and a fun car to drive for the weekends.

I cannot abide campervans, I detest them. I'd much sooner have an X5, or even an X6 than drive a campervan.

st4

Original Poster:

900 posts

71 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
va1o said:
I’m not usually one for the new vs used game, but it looks like for the same money you can also have a 2018 Audi Q7. It has 7-seats and is a tiny bit less powerful at 218PS but still manages 7.3s 0-60

https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201...



This Skoda really is a terrible buy at £43k!
That looks ok actually and loads more space inside. For lugging a large family and clobber - that's what counts. I also suspect it will tow more than the Kodiaq which surely in this segment must be a consideration.

CDP

5,591 posts

192 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
st4 said:
CDP said:
Easy

VW Type 25 Synchro Caravelle with a 911 engine in the back.

Just don't mention corners...
Campervans are horrible though. An X5 isn't.
They can look good in the right trim and colours - besides the Caravelle is a large estate car not a camper. Standard steel roof. Quite a bit smaller in terms of road area too. I'd not want to spend 20K on one but 10 to 15 would be OK. Leave enough money for a decent trailer and an Ariel Atom or similar.

Perfect. (Maybe not but still better than an SUV).

Jag_NE

1,483 posts

38 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
An X5 must be one of the great allrounder family cars. Space, quality, decent performance, 4x4, prestige badge if that matters to you.

CDP

5,591 posts

192 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
Jag_NE said:
An X5 must be one of the great allrounder family cars. Space, quality, decent performance, 4x4, prestige badge if that matters to you.
While a 5 series estate provides all that plus better looks, better fuel consumption and top drawer handling for less money...

snake_oil

1,118 posts

13 months

Sunday 3rd February
quotequote all
CDP said:
Jag_NE said:
An X5 must be one of the great allrounder family cars. Space, quality, decent performance, 4x4, prestige badge if that matters to you.
While a 5 series estate provides all that plus better looks, better fuel consumption and top drawer handling for less money...
No seven seat option on a five series, which is a key requirement for this thread.

The E Class is an option as I posted earlier but the seats are very much an afterthought.