Skoda Octavia 2004 vs Skoda Superb 2002
| Body: | Hatchback | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 210 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Skoda Superb is a more dynamic driving. Skoda Octavia engine produces 48 HP less power than Skoda Superb, whereas torque is 62 NM less than Skoda Superb. Due to the lower power, Skoda Octavia reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.9 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Octavia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Octavia consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb, which means that by driving the Skoda Octavia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 165 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Octavia consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Skoda Superb. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 62 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 950 km on highway | ||
| 720 km with real consumption | 690 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Skoda Octavia engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A4, Skoda Octavia, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Superb might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Skoda Octavia 2004 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Skoda Octavia 2004 1.6 engine Skoda Superb 2002 1.8 engine: The weakest link in this engine is the turbine, whose failure is contributed to by a faulty catalytic converter. The oil pump and chain tensioner also tend to have problems. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.57 m | 4.80 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
| Skoda Octavia is 23 cm shorter than the Skoda Superb, 1 cm wider, while the height of Skoda Octavia is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 560 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1350 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Octavia is 1.6 metres less than that of the Skoda Superb, which means Skoda Octavia can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`915 | 1`300 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Skoda Octavia has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Superb has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Skoda Octavia, so Skoda Octavia quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.9/10 | 9.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Octavia has
|
Skoda Superb has
| |