Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Did you get a great deal? Let us know in the Values & Prices Paid section!
Meet your fellow owners in our Owners Clubs

2014 Volkswagen Jetta SE: Track Tested

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Posts: 10,059
edited September 2017 in Volkswagen
image2014 Volkswagen Jetta SE: Track Tested

We track test the 2014 Volkswagen Jetta SE to see what differences the new 1.8-liter four-cylinder engine and revised rear suspension have made.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • emajoremajor Posts: 332
    The old 5 cylinder was an interesting alternative to the high-strung torqueless little 1.8 liter engines of just a few years ago. But it was always about 10% slower and 10% thirstier than it should have been, and those smaller 4 cylinders have improved. I'd love to hear the internal calculus that drove VW to create that oddball 5 cylinder for the American market rather than developing a more typical 4 cylinder. But kudos to VW for finding a superior replacement for the 5 cylinder. 7.4 seconds to 60 for a slushbox is quick, and 36 mpg is entirely acceptable. I'd gladly eat that 4mpg to have a compact that doesn't take 9-10 seconds. If VW has managed to achieve just average reliability with this car, I think you could argue that it is one of the best in the compact segment now. They've even put back some of the MkV interior niceties like the tilt/telescope center arm rest and power seatback recline. Although it looks like the independent rear suspension which enthusiasts have been screaming for didn't do a whole lot.
  • bankerdannybankerdanny Posts: 1,021
    I am impressed. If that 36mpg is actually achievable in normal highway driving that represents a HUGE improvement over the 1.8T/5-speed tiptronic combo in my recently sold MkIV Jetta. The best I ever did in that car was 26-27 on long flat cruise controlled 70mph highway stints. Subaru could take note too, what the Impreza needs is an engine with a torque curve like this one, not a hybrid that adds mostly cost and little extra fuel economy.
  • This engine sure seems better than the one it replaces, but let's not gush with praise over it. VW had a 1.8T making 180hp in their Jetta back in 2002. VW seriously lost its way with the Jetta several years ago and only now is starting to remember even part of where it was TWELVE YEARS AGO.
  • greenponygreenpony Chicago, ILPosts: 531
    darthbimmer, I'm quite fond of that 1.8T from a decade ago -- one of the best-sounding turbo 4's I've driven. But the real improvement here comes not with power but with efficiency. You're looking at a 6-7 mpg improvement over the earlier port-injected 1.8T. That's pretty significant.
  • Name Jetta continues to only imply speed
  • reminderreminder Posts: 383
    I just bought an SE last week. I currently have 300 miles on it. The review by Edmunds is quite accurate.
    I was 90% committed to buying a Mazda 6 up until a week before I read about the all new 1.8 motor. The Mazda in Touring trim would've put me a bit outside what I wanted to spend. Both VW & Mazda had the 0.9% financing, so that was a wash, but for a couple thousand less I decided to go with the VW. Never owned one before, but the new motor and the return of the fully independent suspension tipped the scale.
    It has that 'solid' feel that many have remarked about with other German cars. The motor does have nice power at low RPMs. Don't need to put the hammer down to go up steep grades. It up-shifts very early in the pursuit of MPGs, but the torque is solid enough to power through that tendency. Down shifts come quickly as well if you need to pick up the pace.
    I'm taking it easy on the motor this early on, but the engine is smooth & very quiet.
    I read as much material as I could find about this new motor and discovered that it is a completely new 1.8. Essentially just a down-sized version of the 2.0. VW uses a very thin cast iron block with weight reduction in mind. A more advanced cooling system the reroutes coolant in an effort to lower the temperature of the incoming air.
    Time will tell if it was a good decision.
    Hopefully, I didn't shoot myself in the foot.
  • emajoremajor Posts: 332
    "VW seriously lost its way with the Jetta several years ago and only now is starting to remember even part of where it was TWELVE YEARS AGO"

    Riding on a wave of styling and marketing success that was about to crash so hard following serious reliability problems that it would ruin the goodwill of American buyers for the next decade? I'll take the new VW. That 1.8T looks like a great volume engine. If you want the successor to the 2002 1.8T, go for the more powerful GLI.
  • I see the typo gremlins have been chewing at the site again. VW reckon max power is at 6200 RPM, not 4800 as stated in the article. I would buy that car if I were in that market. Having the turbo is essential for areas with any altitude.
  • vvkvvk Posts: 193
    Reading between the lines, this car is crap. The new engine makes things slightly more tolerable when equipped with automatic gearbox but that does not compensate for soggy, disconnected steering and atrocious body roll. Sounds just like my Passat. No thanks.
  • The engineer in me appreciates the obvious technical improvement with the new engine, but personally I always feel a little sad when something unique goes away for something more conventional. Things like inline 5s and 6s, the Mustang's SRA, the Corvette's leaf springs, etc all made the automotive world a more interesting place, even if their replacements are "better".
  • Any chance we could get the 2.5's numbers side-by-side with the new results? Kind of hard to show the difference without showing the old numbers.
  • "What a terrific little engine and what an improvement over the naturally aspirated 2.5. This 1.8 turbo has good power right off the line, in part thanks to the true automatic as opposed to the hesitant DSG"

    Not sure what point you are trying to make here, but the 2.5 I5 never has been paired with a DSG, always the traditional auto.
  • shatnershatner Posts: 176
    Jetta is the car that makes all the secretaries at work cry when the get a call from their mechanic. "How much for a brake job?!!!"
  • shatnershatner Posts: 176
    I see the typo gremlins have been chewing at the site again. VW reckon max power is at 6200 RPM, not 4800 as stated in the article. I would buy that car if I were in that market. Having the turbo is essential for areas with any altitude.
    ______________

    A turbo stinks at high altitude....
  • 15.3 1/4 mile? With a 6 speed Auto and a measly 1.8 Turbo? As fast as the fastest 4 cyl, 4 door "moderately priced midsize", manual tranny Honda Accord Sport? Nice Job VW!
    Right now you can get the same 2014 VW Jetta 1.8T SE with auto for $19.9K at carsdirect.....26/36 MPG
  • Hey guys can any one give me an idea if VW Jetta 2016 can develop it's speed from 0 mph to 47 mph in 500 feet distance?
  • if any one can give me a link where I can get that information
Sign In or Register to comment.