SEVEN THUMBS UPS
THREE ROWS OF SEATS IN A PACKAGE WITH AMPLE DYNAMIC ABILITY. KODIAQ RS EXITS HAVING MADE ITS USP CLEAR
LET’S OPEN THIS conclusion with some context. Only recently, Volkswagen launched the stupendously rapid Tiguan R SUV in Australia. Wearing a price tag of $68,990 before on-road costs, the Tiguan R is $13K pricier than the 162TSI that previously acted as the hero model – but the bigger spend gets you 235kW and 400Nm and a 0-100km/h time of 5.1 seconds. Worth it? Arguably yes, when most SUVs with comparable performance are more expensive models from premium marques.
It’s not the Tiguan R we’ve got on test here, but at $67,440 before on-road costs, our Kodiaq RS and its 180kW/370Nm 2.0-litre turbo petrol four might seem poor value when held up against the top-shelf Tiguan.
But it isn’t. True, the Kodiaq RS isn’t as quick or as capable, but with a 0-100km/h time of 6.6 seconds, it’s no slouch – and the similar money gets you the third row of seating that more and more buyers are looking at as a must-have.
Ultimately, you’re looking at a horses-for-courses assessment. If what you need is seven seats, and what you want is a sports package with more poke and prowess than the average hauler, you’ll lean more to the Skoda than you will the Volkswagen. You don’t need to agonise over a pros-and-cons list to make that call.
On the road, the Kodiaq RS neatly blends daily commuting comfort with a readiness to respond to whatever brief yearning you might have to pretend you’d never talked yourself into a life that necessitates seven seats. It will respond, and rapidly, thanks to that turbo heart – donated by the Golf GTI and Octavia RS
– and its mostly intelligent sevenspeed dual-clutch auto.
(If it helps, you can even tell your mates the Porsche Macan T has the same engine. Just don’t tell them how it makes more power and torque, as a Porsche should.)
Fuel consumption at the end of our time with the car worked out to 10.4L/100km against a combinedcycle claim of 7.5L/100km. In fairness to Skoda, though, most of our driving was around town, which is listed more specifically at 9.6L/100km. So, a reasonable result.
Inside, it’s clear that while Skoda might still have an outdated image for some as the more cheaply-made ‘budget friendly’ cousin to the Volkswagen brand, fit and finish in the Kodiaq RS doesn’t disappoint. Material quality is on par with its ‘semi-premium’ VW stablemates, and items like diamond-quilted leather seat trim and red feature stitching all combine to establish the RS as a flagship offering.
That said, the Kodiaq is showing its age when it comes to the ‘wow factor’ that buyers increasingly expect to see on the technology front, with a comparatively small 9.2-inch main screen and 10.25-inch instrument digital instrument cluster where a number of brands are now throwing pairs of 12.3-inch monster displays at the dash.
It seems like a lifetime since a 10-inch display was considered large in a car this size, or a full-digital instrument screen was a unique selling point, but here we are.
Still… first-world pretensions, right? Importantly, buyers not obsessed with the latest aesthetic trends will find Skoda’s infotainment is fast, clear, intuitive and – thanks to reliable wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto – perfectly familiar and modern enough to satisfy.
While the infotainment didn’t disappoint this confessed gadgethead, an unresolved bug with the Travel Assist system – regularly resulting in an irritating beeping and an alert in the instrument display – was a different matter, flaring up any time the window-mounted cameras copped a lens-full of glare. Volkswagen didn’t readily have an explanation or solution for us, and a search of the web suggests it wasn’t a bug unique to our car.
That safety concern, while no small point, was at least our only lasting frustration with the Kodiaq RS. Of course, small things like the absence of USB points in the rear rows (something to do with Euro-market voltages), or a lack of ‘Simply Clever’ storage tricks in the second row, might stand out for some.
It’s worth noting that before the RS came along, there was the Kodiaq Sportline, and it still exists now. It’s $14,000 cheaper and, while you get quite a lot less power and equipment for the saving, it still looks primo, inside and out. It could just be quick enough, and well-enough equipped, for your needs.
But, if you do lean to the RS and the price doesn’t offend, you’ll find good value for money.