There’s a pretty big glass area, too, which makes the interior airy. Most notably, the windscreen, which pushes so far forwards that it’s more MPV than SUV. The number of territories this crossover crosses over are perhaps unsurpassed.
Finish is strong, materials feel solid even if they’re not soft, and there’s a simple digital dashboard and, perhaps obviously, a group-sourced central touchscreen. At least the temperature is permanently displayed and big enough for a simple finger jab. The dash is shaped so that you can rest your hand on it while you’re distractedly prodding the four buttons it takes to turn off the infuriating lane keep assist.
On the 80, there’s the option of paddles on the steering wheel, which increase or decrease the amount of engine braking. That’s denied to 60 buyers, which is a shame if you like driving because it gives you something to do. As it is, there’s the auto option, which thinks about junctions ahead and mostly predicts deceleration levels well, or two standard regen alternatives – quite coasty, and not quite so coasty.
Either way, there’s no one-pedal driving. It’ll creep unless you brake to a standstill. No bother. The driveline is smooth and linearly responsive either way, in a manner that quite suits a Skoda. Ditto the steering, which is accurate and moderately and consistently weighted.
Obviously, with the car being rear-wheel drive, there’s no torque steer tugging on the wheel as you put the power down, but that’s probably the only clue as to which wheels are driven. The Enyaq turns nicely enough, because although it’s heavy, the weight is centred low, but it’s an agreeable rather than exciting companion.
It rides decently, too; the 60 better than the 80, I think, with a little more compliance (although the 80 I tried wore 21in rims to the 60’s 20s, both optional) and certainly better body control. The 60 takes a ‘whump’ to settle after a crest or dip. The 80 wants a whump and a half. The 60’s the more pleasing car to drive – albeit it won’t go as far.