2004 Skoda Fabia Reviews - Page 7 of 8

2004 Skoda Fabia vRS 1.9 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.9 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.3 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance3500 miles
Previous carLexus IS300 SportCross

Summary:

Totally sound and enjoyable car

Faults:

No problems to report at all.

General Comments:

One test drive and we had to buy it!!!

Dealer was very good(WhiteQuay-Reading)

Fuel consumption and performance both excellent,put the badge mentality away and try one!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd August, 2004

2004 Skoda Fabia vRS 1.9 turbo diesel from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.9 turbo diesel Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance3900 miles
Previous carPeugeot 306

Summary:

A very costly mistake on my part

Faults:

Turbo intake pipe came adrift causing breakdown and AA recovery. Since repair the car has been difficult to start and has lumpy performance. Latest breakdown is due to the failure of the engine management system (another AA recovery).

In addition, the interior of the car rattles.

The most unreliable car I've ever had in nearly 30 x years of motoring. Avoid!!

General Comments:

Great performance and fuel consumption totally ruined by the car's unreliability.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 6th August, 2004

9th Sep 2004, 16:44

It looks like you have got a bad one, but I can't see how you can warn people to avoid when the rest of the reviews for this model are overwhelmingly positive. I for one have just done 22,000 miles in six months in my Fabia TDI and I've not had a single problem or complaint. Take it back to Skoda and kick off because I'm sure you would not have more problems if they replace this example.

2004 Skoda Fabia Elegance 1.4 16-valve from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2004
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.4 16-valve Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired20 miles
Most recent distance1500 miles
Previous carFord Ka

Summary:

Good value for money, but very bland

Faults:

Nothing has gone wrong so far.

General Comments:

The Skoda Fabia Elegance 1.4 16-valve is great value for money.

The 16-valve petrol engine develops 100bhp giving a 0 to 60 time of around 11 seconds - less powerful engines take an agonizing 17 seconds to reach 60mph. But a major drawback is the throttle-lag as you pull away from rest at junctions and roundabouts. Nippy it isn't. This may be down to the drive by wire throttle control: put your foot down from rest and the response is unpredictable - it may pull away smoothly or it may stagger sluggishly for a few seconds, which, if you're trying to nip out onto a busy road, can be embarrassing at best and dangerous at worst.

Once moving, the Fabia drives smoothly with the feel of a much larger car. It drives well on motorways with little noise reaching the cabin from outside.

Outside, the car is much like any other new small hatchback - high-sided and pretty bland. The interior is worse: dull and lifeless with much plastic.

Seats, though very adjustable, are also very firm, and, on one occasion, the belt-loop on the back of my jeans was forced painfully into my back, making finding a comfortable driving position very difficult. I found this odd: something I hadn't experienced before on any other car.

Rearward vision through the rear screen is compromised by the high head-rests on the rear seat - I've removed them and the view is much better. This may be one reason why a parking sensor is an option on this model, but the door mirrors are large and give a good rear-view, largely compensating for the restricted view through the rear window.

I bought the car because of the high ratings it has received in the motoring press, plus the local dealer runs a friendly and reliable operation, but I'm finding adjusting to the blandness of the Fabia difficult after my previous Ford Ka Millennium and my current other car - a Peugeot 306. Maybe I'll get used to it in time.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st August, 2004

21st Dec 2005, 05:56

I have 1.4 16v and it does not suffer from any lag. It's a problem that should be fixed.

22nd May 2012, 06:36

I bought a 2004 1.4 Elegance last year with only 40k miles on the clock. It cost £3.5k, and I have spent at least £1.5k putting right everything that has gone wrong with it.

It still has a rear washer hose that has disconnected itself, leaking doors, a stuck EGR valve, resulting in a permanent engine management light, and the other day it completely conked out when I drove through a large puddle.

It is unpredictably sluggish when pulling away at junctions and roundabouts, and has a jammy gearbox that won't always go into first or reverse on the first go.

Because of the EGR valve not working, it currently guzzles gas, and every couple of months it completely runs out of oil, requiring several litres to top it back up again at great expense.

The bonnet catch broke and set the alarm off, and it took three days to work out how to get the alarm to stop without just leaving the car unlocked at all times; very safe.

I really try to like my car, because it has good elements like the space, neat and tidy appearance, electric features and CD player, but the bad far outweighs the good. I know people who love Fabias and think they are brilliant, but I think, from what I have read online, that this particular model and year is some kind of bad batch, and to be avoided.

Average review marks: 8.3 / 10, based on 23 reviews