Škoda Type 742

Škoda 105/120 etc.
Škoda 135
Type	Small Family car (C-Segment), Coupé (Garde/Rapid)
Manifacturer	Automobilový Závod, Národní Podnik - Mladá Boleslav (AZNP)
Assembly	Mladá Boleslav (sedan) Kvasiny (Coupé) Bratislava (BAZ - both)
Production	1976 - early 1990 (sedan) 1981 - August 1990 (Coupé)
Body material	Stalinium
Body Style	4-door sedan (105/120 etc.) 2-door Coupé (Garde/Rapid)
Engine	1050cc OHV engine (44 hp) 1200cc OHV engine (50 hp) 1289cc OHV engine (54-64 hp)
Layout	Rear engine; rear-wheel drive
Curb weight	circa 880 kg
Predcessor	Škoda 100/110 (Sedan) Škoda 110 R (Garde/Rapid)
Successor	Škoda Favorit

The Škoda 742 is a relic of Czechoslovak engineering, clinging to outdated design well into the 1980s. Produced from 1976 to 1990, this car stubbornly ignored global advancements in technology and safety. With its rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive setup, it offered performance that could be best described as "leisurely" and a driving experience as retro as its boxy design. A true symbol of an era when the rest of the world moved forward, while the Škoda 742 stayed firmly rooted in the past.

Development

The development of the Škoda 742 reads like a stubborn refusal to embrace the future. When the rest of the world had long moved on to more advanced, practical front-engine, front-wheel-drive cars, Škoda's engineers doubled down on their rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive dinosaur. Launched in 1976, the 742 was essentially a repackaging of ideas that should have been left behind in the 1960s. Rather than innovate, Škoda stuck with what was cheap and familiar—a design better suited to a bygone era.

This is Škoda 1000 MB. Actually quite modern car of it's time.

The car's engineering was, at best, a relic. The rear-mounted, four-cylinder engine ensured questionable handling, with the tail-happy, unpredictable driving experience becoming a notorious part of the Škoda legend. But it wasn’t just the quirky handling that made the 742 seem prehistoric; the engines themselves were laughably underpowered, delivering performance that could barely keep pace with traffic, even in the slower-moving Eastern Bloc. By the 1980s, with the global car market racing ahead, Škoda's commitment to this tired layout was less charming and more tragic.

This is Škoda 100. Can you see that non-existent progress?

Safety? Barely. Innovation? Nonexistent. The 742's slow trickle of updates throughout its lifespan – engine tweaks, cosmetic changes, and marginal improvements to fuel economy – did little to mask the fact that this car was hopelessly outdated. It clung to its obsolescence like a badge of honor. By the time production limped to a halt in 1990, it was a museum piece on wheels, hopelessly outclassed by nearly every car in the world. In a time when others were embracing new technologies and pushing boundaries, Škoda stayed rooted in a past everyone else had gladly left behind.

First Series (1976 - 1983)

Škoda 105 1st series. Can you see that progress??

The first series of the Škoda 742, produced between 1976 and 1983, was a masterclass in how not to design a modern car—if "modern" is even a word you could associate with this relic. The car's rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout was already a throwback to the 1950s by the time it launched, and it brought with it a whole host of problems that made driving the 742 more of a challenge than a pleasure.

Take the steering, for example. Calling it "vague" would be generous—it was like trying to steer a boat on dry land. At any significant speed, the car had a mind of its own, wandering from side to side, while cornering felt like a gamble with your life. The rear-heavy design meant that, in slippery or icy conditions, you were more likely to spin out of control than actually reach your destination. In winter, even getting the car started was an ordeal, with the notoriously finicky engine struggling to turn over in cold weather. Many owners spent more time coaxing it to life with tricks like pouring boiling water on the engine than they did actually driving.

As for the trim levels, they were laughably basic. The Škoda 105 and 120 variants offered nothing close to luxury. The "deluxe" models might have come with a radio or a heated rear window, but most trims were as bare-bones as you could get. Comfort was an afterthought, with hard, unsupportive seats, a clunky dashboard, and a heater that was more of a suggestion than a functioning part of the car. You were lucky if the windows didn’t fog up in winter because ventilation was another weak point.

Despite these glaring issues, Škoda plodded along with the same tired formula, offering minor cosmetic updates here and there, but failing to address the elephant in the room: the car's design was hopelessly outdated even before it left the factory. The first series of the 742 was a nightmare to drive, unreliable in bad weather, and offered next to nothing in terms of creature comforts. A car truly stuck in the past, even as the world raced ahead.

Second Series (1983 - 1990)

Škoda 120 L from 2nd series. You can spot new grille and lights but still, it was hopeless.

The second series of the Škoda 742, introduced in 1983, was Škoda's attempt to breathe new life into a car that was already gasping for relevance. What did they do to improve it? Well, they widened the chassis a bit and slapped on some cheap plastic body parts, hoping that would somehow trick people into thinking it was more modern. Spoiler alert: it didn’t. The car still looked like a clunky box on wheels, now with a more plastic-heavy front grille and new square headlights that did little more than announce, "Look, we tried."

The wider chassis was supposed to improve handling, but let’s be real—it was like putting lipstick on a pig. The infamous rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout was still there, so the car's driving dynamics remained as chaotic as ever. Sure, it was a little more stable in corners compared to the first series, but that’s like saying a bicycle with two flat tires handles better than one with just one flat tire. The steering was still vague and lifeless, and in slippery conditions, the rear end was more than happy to break loose and remind you why modern cars had long since abandoned this layout.

The new plastic grille was not just ugly, it was flimsy. After a few winters, many owners found it cracked or faded, adding to the "charm" of this already outdated vehicle. The "updated" square headlights might have been modern in concept, but in reality, they were barely adequate, offering as much illumination as a candle in a windstorm. Night driving in a Škoda 742 remained a test of nerves and luck.

Under the hood, nothing substantial changed—still the same underpowered engines that struggled to keep up with even the slowest highway traffic. Interior upgrades? Don’t get your hopes up. The cabin remained an uncomfortable place, with a dashboard that looked like it was designed by someone who had never seen a car before. Hard plastic everywhere, and if you were lucky, a clock that might work on occasion.

The second series was essentially a cosmetic band-aid on a car that desperately needed major surgery. It might have looked a little more "modern" to the untrained eye, but underneath, it was still the same outdated, underperforming machine that was outclassed by nearly every car on the market.

Rapid, 125, 135 and 136

Škoda 125 L in Škoda Museum. Can you see the difference from normal 120?

As the Škoda 742 series dragged on into the 1980s, the automaker made a last-ditch attempt to inject some life into the lineup with models like the Škoda 125, 135, 136, and the sporty Rapid. While still anchored to the prehistoric rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout, these models represented a surprising, if not desperate, effort to modernize a car that was hopelessly outdated. The most shocking improvement? A five-speed gearbox. Yes, after years of lagging behind the competition, Škoda finally decided that perhaps a car in the 1980s might benefit from more than four gears.

Škoda Rapid was somehow compared with Porsche 911. Why?

The Škoda 135, 136, and Rapid models even borrowed engines from the relatively more modern Škoda Favorit, a front-engine, front-wheel-drive car that was a break from the past. This was perhaps the only smart move Škoda made during this period. The 135 and 136 came equipped with 1.3-liter engines, delivering a modest boost in performance. Don’t get too excited, though—while these engines were a step up from the lethargic powertrains of the older models, they were still far from thrilling. These upgrades at least made the 742 variants somewhat tolerable on highways, where they no longer risked being overtaken by bicycles.

The biggest surprise was reserved for the export versions of these models, which were actually fitted with catalytic converters and fuel injection—features unheard of in earlier versions. In a rare nod to environmental responsibility, Škoda equipped some of its export-bound cars with these modern touches to comply with stricter emissions regulations in Western Europe. It’s almost laughable that Škoda had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age by foreign markets, while domestic buyers were left with the same old carbureted engines.

The Škoda Rapid, a coupe version of the 742, was billed as a "sporty" alternative, though that’s a relative term here. While it looked a bit sleeker and was a favorite among budget-conscious buyers who dreamed of driving a sports car, its performance was still underwhelming by global standards. The five-speed gearbox and updated engine did give it a bit more pep, but it was no match for real sports cars of the time. Still, the Rapid earned a cult following for its unique design and for being one of the few Škoda models that offered even a hint of excitement behind the wheel.

Despite these improvements, the Škoda 125, 135, 136, and Rapid were still hampered by the fundamental flaws of the 742 platform. Even with a five-speed gearbox and a somewhat improved engine, the car’s handling remained quirky at best, thanks to its outdated rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive configuration. And while the export models with catalytic converters and fuel injection were a step in the right direction, it was too little, too late.

In the end, these models were a valiant but ultimately futile effort to bring the 742 series into the modern era. They may have delayed the car’s inevitable extinction, but they couldn’t hide the fact that the 742 was a dinosaur that had long outlived its time.

Sales

No. This is not a joke and not a fotoshop. This is real Canadian Brochure for Škoda 135 GLi from 1989.

Despite its outdated design, laughable handling, and underpowered engine, the Škoda 742 series—especially the later models like the 135, 136, and Rapid—surprisingly found a market beyond the borders of Eastern Europe. In an almost bewildering twist of fate, these relics of Czechoslovak engineering actually managed to achieve moderate success in Western markets, including places as far afield as the UK, New Zealand, and even Canada.

How did a car like the Škoda 742, which seemed more suited to the scrapyard than showrooms, manage to sell? The answer lies largely in its low price. In an era when Western cars were becoming increasingly expensive, the Škoda 742 offered a dirt-cheap alternative. For buyers on a budget, particularly in the UK, the car was seen as a bargain, albeit one with compromises. Its price tag, combined with its reputation for being relatively easy to maintain, attracted cost-conscious customers willing to overlook its obvious flaws.

Škoda also cleverly adapted some of the later export models to meet Western standards. The 135, 136, and Rapid models, which were equipped with features like fuel injection and catalytic converters to comply with stricter emissions regulations, offered a slightly more palatable product to Western buyers. The five-speed gearbox was another selling point in an era when many budget cars still came with only four gears.

742 series Škoda in Australia.

In Canada, the Škoda 742 made a brief and almost unbelievable appearance. While it never became a major player in the Canadian market, it found some buyers who were looking for a quirky, affordable car that stood out from the crowd. Importing such a vehicle to a market dominated by North American and Japanese cars was a bold move, and while sales were not huge, the mere fact that the 742 managed to land in Canadian showrooms speaks to Škoda's efforts to push the car beyond its Iron Curtain roots.

Across Western Europe, the UK proved to be the strongest market for the Škoda 742, with models like the Rapid earning a reputation as a fun, budget-friendly alternative to more expensive coupes. It was seen as quirky and cheap, yet surprisingly reliable compared to some other low-cost options at the time. Enthusiasts even developed a soft spot for the Rapid’s rear-wheel-drive dynamics, flawed though they were.

In the end, the Škoda 742’s sales success in the West was a mix of timing, pricing, and a dash of novelty appeal. Western buyers who couldn’t afford the likes of Ford or Volkswagen found themselves drawn to the Škoda’s rock-bottom prices and simple mechanics. The fact that it was still selling—albeit in modest numbers—on both sides of the Iron Curtain into the late 1980s is a testament to its ability to survive against the odds, even if it was still a fundamentally outdated car.

Variants

The Škoda 742 series came in several variations, each attempting to cater to different market segments but all fundamentally tied to the same outdated rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive layout. Here are the key variants that emerged from this long-running, stubbornly unchanging model line:

Interior of Škoda 105L (the "Luxury one"). Notice the nonexistent safety features. This one has also gear knob made out of glass. Socialist tuning.

Škoda 105 (1976-1990)

The Škoda 105 was the base model and the slowest of the bunch, powered by an asthmatic 1.0-liter four-cylinder engine. With just around 44 horsepower, this variant was perfect for those who had no need for speed—or any real performance at all. Despite its sluggishness, the 105 was popular among buyers in Eastern Europe, where affordability was more important than excitement. Basic versions came with bare-bones interior fittings, manual everything, and a general lack of creature comforts. The 105 was the essence of utilitarianism, offering just enough to get you from point A to point B—if you were patient enough.

Škoda 120 (1976-1990)

1st series Škoda 120 GLS, the most luxurious variant of Škoda 120. Notice head rests and also big, shiny grille. 120 GLS from second series was indistinguishable from the standard one.

The 120 was a slight step up from the 105, featuring a larger 1.2-liter engine with a more "robust" 49-54 horsepower, depending on the version. This gave it a little more punch, though calling it "powerful" would be stretching the truth. The 120 was also available in more trims, including the L (luxury!) and GLS, which added minor upgrades such as a slightly better interior and occasionally a dashboard clock that actually worked. However, the 120 was still plagued by the same terrible handling and winter-starting woes as the rest of the 742 family. It simply offered a bit more engine under the hood.

Škoda 125 (1988-1990)

As a late addition to the 742 series, the Škoda 125 was essentially a 120 with a five-speed gearbox, offering a marginal improvement in driveability. However, it was a case of too little, too late. The engine remained underpowered, and while the five-speed transmission gave it a touch more flexibility on the road, it didn’t mask the fundamental weaknesses of the car's antiquated design. In some markets, this model was one of the last gasps of the 742 series before Škoda finally moved on to the front-engine Favorit.

Škoda 135 (1987-1990)

The Škoda 135 represented one of the most significant technical upgrades in the 742's life, featuring the more modern 1.3-liter engine from the Škoda Favorit. This variant delivered around 58 horsepower, which was still far from thrilling, but a noticeable improvement over earlier models. The 135 also benefited from a five-speed transmission, making it slightly more bearable on longer trips. Export versions were equipped with fuel injection and catalytic converters, making them cleaner and more efficient, particularly for Western markets. While these updates improved performance and emissions, they couldn't hide the fact that the 742 was still running on ancient foundations.

Škoda 136 (1987-1990)

The Škoda 136 was the most powerful and “advanced” version of the 742 series, again borrowing its 1.3-liter engine from the Favorit but tuning it to around 62 horsepower. With the five-speed gearbox and some additional mechanical tweaks, the 136 was probably as good as the 742 ever got, but it was still leagues behind the competition. The handling remained awkward thanks to the rear-engine layout, and while it was faster than previous models, it was still far from a performance car. Like the 135, export models featured fuel injection and catalytic converters for cleaner emissions and were aimed at more demanding Western buyers.

Škoda Rapid (1984-1990)

The Škoda Rapid, often dubbed the “poor man's Porsche” (a nickname that probably annoyed Porsche fans everywhere), was a coupe version of the 742 and the sportiest model in the lineup. It was offered with engines similar to the 135 and 136, benefiting from the more modern 1.3-liter engines and five-speed gearboxes. The Rapid had a sloping rear, giving it a sportier look, though performance remained modest at best. Despite its limitations, the Rapid earned a cult following, particularly in the UK, where its unique design and rear-wheel-drive dynamics gave it a certain charm in an otherwise uninspiring lineup. Export models featured the same fuel injection and catalytic converters as the 135 and 136, making them cleaner and more competitive in Western markets.

Summary of Variants:

• Škoda 105: Base model, 1.0-liter engine, slow and bare-bones.
• Škoda 120: Mid-range model, 1.2-liter engine, slightly better performance and trim.
• Škoda 125: 120 with a five-speed gearbox, but still slow.
• Škoda 135: Equipped with Favorit’s 1.3-liter engine and a five-speed transmission, export versions had fuel injection and catalytic converters.
• Škoda 136: Slightly more powerful 1.3-liter engine, the pinnacle of 742 performance (which isn’t saying much).
• Škoda Rapid: Coupe version, slightly sporty design, but modest performance. Cult favorite despite its limitations.

Despite these variants, all tied to the aging 742 platform, they remained hampered by their outdated rear-engine layout and underpowered engines. While Škoda tried to make these models competitive with incremental improvements, they were ultimately overshadowed by more modern cars from both Western and Eastern manufacturers.

Specs (120 L) compared to Porsche 911

Rear-engined Škodas are sometimes compared to Porsche 911 for to be honest unknown reason.

The Škoda 120L was a vehicle that, by any reasonable standard, should never have been allowed to roll off the production line. Yet, against all odds, it persisted—offering what can only be described as a budget car for those with extremely low expectations. Let’s dive into the grim reality of the 120L's specifications and features, with an unflinchingly honest comparison to one of the automotive world's legends: the Porsche 911.

Performance

Under the rear bonnet (yes, just like the Porsche 911—except that’s where the similarities end), the Škoda 120L housed a "powerful" 1.2-liter four-cylinder engine. This mechanical marvel managed to squeeze out a grand total of 49 horsepower. Yes, 49. To put that in perspective, the contemporary Porsche 911 was churning out upwards of 200 horsepower, making the 120L’s engine about as effective as a lawnmower on a diet.

The 120L's acceleration? It was more of a gentle suggestion to move forward. Going from 0 to 100 km/h (0-60 mph) took an astonishing 19 seconds, compared to the blistering 6 seconds in the 911. Top speed? A thrilling 130 km/h (81 mph)—just enough to get overtaken by large trucks on the Autobahn. In contrast, the 911 could cruise at over 240 km/h (149 mph), but hey, at least you had more time to enjoy the scenery in the 120L.

Practicality

Now, let’s talk about the 120L's "practical" features, where it truly set itself apart from performance cars like the 911. For starters, it had two luggage compartments—one in the front and one in the rear, offering a laughable nod to practicality. The front luggage space (calling it a "trunk" feels too generous) was essentially a small cavity just large enough to fit a few bags of groceries and possibly your shattered dreams. This front "boot" opened in a manner disturbingly similar to a grand piano's lid, making it as awkward to access as it was useless.

The rear trunk was an afterthought, tucked beneath the rear engine and only useful for storing things you didn’t mind heating up. In total, these two compartments combined to provide about 300 liters of cargo space, which sounds somewhat decent until you consider that most of it was irregularly shaped and poorly accessible. A Porsche 911, in comparison, had a sleek front trunk with superior cargo space despite being a high-performance sports car. Sure, the 911 was less practical, but at least you wouldn’t mistake it for a suitcase with wheels.

Handling and Driving Experience

If you thought the 911’s rear-engine layout might provide a thrilling driving experience, the 120L would quickly disabuse you of that notion. The rear-engine, rear-wheel-drive setup in the 911 was a masterclass in engineering balance, giving it nimble, responsive handling. The 120L, on the other hand, was a wobbling catastrophe. The steering was vague and imprecise, often feeling like you were trying to guide a cruise ship with a pair of chopsticks. In corners, the 120L had a distinct tendency to understeer before abruptly switching to oversteer, providing drivers with the sensation of constantly losing control—which, to be fair, was probably the only "exciting" part of driving it.

In the snow or rain, things got even worse. While Porsche’s engineers fine-tuned the 911 for exceptional grip and cornering stability, the 120L felt like driving a bar of soap across a wet countertop. It wasn’t uncommon for owners to end up facing the wrong way after a gentle corner, making winter driving in the 120L an adrenaline sport for the suicidal.

Price

But here’s where the 120L truly shined—its price. The Škoda 120L could be yours for the incredibly low sum of around £3,000 in the 1980s, compared to the Porsche 911’s eye-watering price of around £20,000. Of course, for the price of the 911, you could have bought several Škoda 120Ls, though why you would want to is a question best left unanswered.

Fuel Efficiency

On the bright side, the Škoda 120L did have better fuel economy than the 911, sipping petrol at a rate of around 7.5 liters per 100 km (31 mpg), compared to the 911’s heavier fuel consumption. But then again, when your engine is barely strong enough to outrun a cyclist, it’s not surprising that fuel economy is your strongest suit.

Interior & Comfort

Stepping inside the Škoda 120L was like being transported to another era—an era in which comfort and style were apparently optional. The seats were flat and unsupportive, making long drives a literal pain in the back. The dashboard was made of the cheapest plastics available, with switches and dials that felt like they could snap off in your hand at any moment. There was no such thing as power steering or air conditioning; the heating system was notoriously underwhelming, so in winter, you were left hoping the engine would at least keep your toes warm.

In comparison, the Porsche 911 was a luxury grand tourer with a well-appointed cabin, leather seats, and a cockpit that made you feel like you were driving something special. Meanwhile, in the 120L, you were mostly praying that the car would make it to your destination without breaking down.

Was it really that bad?

The Škoda 742 series may have been clunkers, but surprisingly, they packed more modern features than you might expect for cars coming out of the Eastern Bloc. Despite being behind the curve in many ways, they weren’t entirely relics, and here’s a deeper dive into the features that made them, at the very least, functional by late 70s and early 80s standards:

Three-Point Seatbelts:

• Starting with the three-point seatbelts, which were fitted in both the front and rear. While seatbelts were becoming more common globally, it was still a safety feature not found in all vehicles at the time. The Škoda’s commitment to passenger safety was, for the time, a decent move forward.

Collapsible Steering Column:

• The Škoda 742 series featured a collapsible steering column, designed to absorb energy in case of a frontal collision, minimizing the risk of injury to the driver. This feature was notable in an era when many budget cars still had rigid steering columns, which posed a significant hazard in crashes.

Laminated Safety Glass:

• The use of laminated safety glass for the windshield was another modern touch. Instead of shattering into dangerous shards, the glass would crack and hold together upon impact, reducing the risk of serious injury in accidents.

Heated Rear Window:

• The heated rear window was a welcome feature for drivers in colder climates, helping to defrost the glass and improve visibility in winter conditions. It was a small luxury, but in the harsh winters of Czechoslovakia and surrounding regions, it was a big plus.

Rack-and-Pinion Steering:

• Rack-and-pinion steering was included, which offered more precise control compared to older worm-gear systems found in many other cars. This made steering more responsive, especially at higher speeds, and was considered a solid upgrade for the time.

12-Volt Electrical System:

• The 12-volt electrical system was a critical improvement. This system allowed for more reliable operation of the vehicle’s electrical components, including headlights, wipers, and heating, providing better overall functionality and durability compared to the outdated 6-volt systems still in use in some parts of the world.

Independent Suspension (Front and Rear):

• The Škoda 742 boasted independent suspension on both the front and rear axles, which was a feature typically found in more expensive cars at the time. This gave it a smoother ride compared to other cars with simpler suspension systems, allowing for better handling on uneven roads.

Disc Brakes (Front):

• The front wheels were equipped with disc brakes, which were superior to drum brakes, providing better stopping power, especially in wet or slippery conditions. This was a considerable safety advantage in everyday driving.

Radial Tires:

• Škoda 742 models came standard with radial tires, which offered better road grip, longer lifespan, and improved fuel efficiency compared to older bias-ply tires. This was becoming more common in Western cars but was still a noteworthy feature for an Eastern European car at the time.

Aerodynamic Considerations:

• While it wasn’t exactly an aerodynamic marvel, the car had some aerodynamic features, such as a sloped front and rear, which helped reduce wind resistance and improve fuel economy. It wasn’t groundbreaking, but it did its job in making the car a little more efficient.

Ventilation and Heating:

• The ventilation and heating system was adequate for the times, providing sufficient airflow and warmth to make the car habitable in winter conditions. Given the harsh winters in many areas where these cars were sold, this was a must-have feature.

Adjustable Seats:

• The front seats were adjustable, both in terms of distance from the pedals and the backrest angle. While this might seem standard now, back then, having such adjustability was not a given in all budget cars.

Fuel Economy:

• The Škoda 742 was relatively efficient for its class, offering decent fuel economy due to its lightweight construction and modest engine size. In a time when fuel efficiency was becoming more important, especially after the oil crisis of the 1970s, this made the Škoda more appealing for drivers on a budget.

Centrifugal Oil Filter:

• The engine was equipped with a centrifugal oil filter, a relatively modern feature for that time, helping to extend the engine's lifespan by filtering out impurities more efficiently than traditional filters.

Comprehensive Automotive Reference Source