Howdy, Stranger!

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

Volkswagen TDI Models



  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    42 mpg with my automatic Golf TDI and I was smiling ear to ear when I filled up today and there was a $0.39/gallon price difference in favor of diesel. WOOHOO!
  • True market value for it was around 9,800 or something. I think I'm gonna have to pass on her for two reasons:

    #1 - The price, like you said. I was thinking (I don't do that too often) and came to the conclusion that 10K is over the top.

    #2 - I wouldn't mind having a TDI, but since I don't know very much about them, I'm weary about getting a 98 with 63K on her, in case something happens. Most stuff with my car I can do, but the diesel thing is new to me.

    Maybe I'll just settle for a 99.5 Jetta. We'll see...

  • vwinvavwinva Posts: 71
    Ok guys, I must be doing something wrong. I see postings of people getting 45-50mpg. I'm not getting it. I'm only getting 42mpg out of a 02 GLS TDI automatic. And that's after I did a complete service to include installing a K&N airfilter and running Diesel Kleen through the system to clean out the injectors. Granted I am running with A/C on, but I keep that tuned down. I was hoping to get 45mpg out this car. Not a happy camper.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    First off, the EPA rating is 34/45 for an automatic and 42/49 for a manual 5 speed. So a decrease of 5 to 8 mpg is one of the penalties of an automatic vs manual. So 50 mpg-5-8 mpg is 42-45 mpg.= normal or to be expected. You also dont state your speeds and driving condition and or passenger and luggage loading.

    Second, the K/N filter is not advertised to FILTER better than the stock . In fact the stock filter is best for longevity. If it were me I would go back to the stock or oem filter.

    The Diesel Kleen is a good product and not only a cetane boost, provides lubricity which is better to the pump system over the long haul and it helps to trap H2O in your fuel system.
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Posts: 4,085
    (vwinva) There are several 'factors' that can affect the MPG. (Dragging brakes, Injection Timing, Cetane...etc)

    I can second what ruking1 is taying about "Diesel Kleen". I run about 6oz at EVERY fillup. The benifets are tremendus. Until the better-quality diesel fuel becomes available in 2005, I plan on using a Cetane-booster/lubricant.

    As for your MPG... too bad that you ended up with an automatic. If you are looking for the best MPGs. an automatic tranny should not be used.

    Are you aware that the very best economy is at about 1800 RPM. (about 55MPH in 5th gear)

    What was your MPG while the "Diesel Kleen" was in the fuel?

    For the record, I have not gone below 50MPG for the last 5 tankfuls. averaging about 52MPG with 'country' driving. (with AC on full... it has been HUMID!)
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378

    I was also thinking that to aid in managing both your expectations and the actual vehicle with the automatic, here are some other penalty issues. (gas mileage we have already discussed) 1. automatics with belts, especially VW will need belt changes more often. 2. In addition to the performance penalty, there is also a slight weight penalty, for the automatic's "physical plant" weighs more than the stick shift's. 3. The rule of thumb for mileage penalty is for every 100#'s it will set you back 1-3 mpg. 4. While you can not see it, for every 100#'s of weight you need 10hp more to overcome the weight. 5. Brakes, tires, shocks/struts and springs will wear FAR faster than a similar stick shift model (all things being equal, which they never are) 6. acceleration, cornering, braking will be slower 7. Again all things being equal, again they never are, automatics will require more maintenance than a stick shift. 8. In the high performance world, (specifically Z06 Corvettes) the "parasitic loss" on stick shift is app 10-15% as measured on a dyno. To put some numbers to it 385 hp/385# ft of torque x 11% parasitic loss= -minus 42.35 hp/#ft of torque= 343 hp/#ft of torque. The same car, but automatic's figures are more like 20-25%. While I would GUESS it would be similar for the VW, I have run across NO threads that discuss this at all!!
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Quote- 1. automatics with belts, especially VW will need belt changes more often.-end


    Timing belt requires change at 80,000 miles on 02 and 100,000 on 03 for manual transmission or auto. No difference. The new belt and tensioner is applicable to all 99 1/2 to current TDI manual or auto transmission.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Will greater weight equal greater wear? Yes. Is .0000001 less than .0000002? Yes.

    53 lbs is the difference in weight between a GL 4 door Golf TDI manual and automatic. This will not result in any detectable difference in component wear. It is not a valid reason for transmission choice for anyone with any common sense.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378 - =JETTA&year=2003&engine=TDI&odometer=700&units=MI- - LES&submit=Display+Maintenance

    Perhaps a look at the technical item list will further demonstrate why early belt changes can be needed. If you do the check timing belt correctly, it is truly a more than make sure it is there procedure. In fact you are measuring tolerances. So obviously this is a precurser to doing a belt change earlier than say scheduled. Be that as it may, just this weekend, I witnessed the after math of 5/9 belt changes and saw three belt changes. The belts on first glance look remarkably similar both on automatics and the manuals. However, at closer look there were more cracks in the automatics' belts than any of the manual ones'One automatic owners response to this was "MADE IT by the skin of my teeth". But as you will probably agree ALL belts could have gone longer, but at what point do they REALLY break? As you know belt braking can cause catastrophic damage within 100 yards, necessitating almost a new motor or massive work, ie massive dollars if not under warranty.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378

    Well, I am not the one complaining about poor gas mileage due to transmission choice. 53#'s is not the SOLE reason by any means, but by common sense, they ALL add up. Also, in the performance market getting rid of 53#'s is almost a Herculean task. In fact I would hazard a guess that for the OEM to get rid of 53#'s would require a massive redesign, given all the plethora of design parameters. So if you dont think it is a big deal, it ain't! But again 45 mpg vs 49 EPA rated mpg is probably no big deal to you also!? Or in the confines of the range, 5-8 mpg is no big deal???
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Using your rule of thumb the Jetta Wagon TDI which weighs 3161 lbs would achieve less mpg than the Jetta TDI sedan which weighs 2974 lb. The drag coefficient on the sedan is .30 compared to .32 on the wagon so this is also a factor against the wagon.
    The wagon is rated at 42/50 mpg and the sedan is rated 42/49.
    Real world reports also have the owners of wagons acieving higer mpg than sedans. This is according to owners who own or previously owned sedans and now have wagons.
    The heavier, higer cd wagon has better mpg than lighter sedan. Hmmm.

    Theory is nice in the lab but on the street it does not always work.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    So you would say that people that tend to buy Jetta wagons are NOT:

    1. smaller minority group than the 6% of TDI owners

    2. tend not to be more conservative in driving?

    There are always exceptions to the rule, but it is typically American, in fact human nature to make the exception the rule!?

    Pretty soon you will be telling me an automatic can consistently achieve better mpg than the stick? General information, Jetta Wagon are 42/50, 34/45 EPA. Gee according to you I wonder why the Jetta Wagon auto gets 34/45?
  • (1) I hear that their will be a 6-speed ?
    (2) I also heard thta there will be a 100hp version

    (3) What is the real interval for oil change and timing belts?

    (4) How is the reliaiblity?

    (5) any change back to free schduled maintenance? or continue with the current 4yr 50K miles?

    (6) Pricing ? Fincancing?
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Is 45 vs. 49 mpg a big deal? No, not to me.
    For example. Diesel was $1.37 yesterday and if I use the 45 mpg rating the fuel cost is $.03 per mile and if I use the 49 mpg rating the fuel cost is $.028 per mile. $.002 per mile is no big deal to me. Is it to anyone? That is $200 over 100,000 miles using the above numbers. WooHoo, I'm willing to pay the $200.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Final information is not 100% confirmed for 2004.
    What is expected is-

    1. 5 speed tiptronic or 5 speed manual.
    2. 100 hp PD engine
    3. Oil change and timing belt interval, warranty, pricing, are unknown or unconfirmed at this time.

    Expect reliability scores to continue to be below average. Pricing will likely be higher. Warranty will likely remain the same as the 2003 models.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    If you read the auto owners original post. It was a big deal. As you probably over looked, I said the mileage that owner was receiving was NORMAL for an auto.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    quote ruking-Gee according to you I wonder why the Jetta Wagon auto gets 34/45? end quote

    34/45 mpg is what VW states. My explanation is the automatic is less efficient than manual. What is yours?
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    I am not sure why you have a burr in your saddle. I think I have already stated the answer. If you need to be wacked between the eyes with a 2x4, I am not your man.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    The facts are that the timing belt is required to be changed at 80,000 or 100,000 miles irregardless of transmission. This is according to VW who designed the vehicle.

    Anecdotal evidence is just that, anecdotal. Not reliable. I've never seen a failure to timing belt on an auto TDI and three on manual transmission TDI. Means very little to someone who has a failure.

    The intelligent way to proceed is to check the timing belt when required, change it if it requires, and never exceed the recommended manufacturer intervals.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    Correcting misleading information and presenting a different viewpoint or opinion on TDI is my only intent. Having owned both manual transmission TDI and auto, Jetta and Golf, wagon and hatch, I have some experience to relate.

    No 2x4's or saddles involved.
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    "Anecdotal evidence is just that, anecdotal. Not reliable. I've never seen a failure to timing belt on an auto TDI and three on manual transmission TDI. Means very little to someone who has a failure"

    "Correcting misleading information and presenting a different viewpoint or opinion on TDI is my only intent. Having owned both manual transmission TDI and auto, Jetta and Golf, wagon and hatch, I have some experience to relate."

    So I guess even you discount your own information and experiences!!??

    You dont need anyone else for the 2x4 action.
  • moparbadmoparbad Posts: 3,868
    quote rukin "So I guess even you discount your own information and experiences!!??

    The information posted is correct. I do discount "as in make allowance for" my experiences and those of others. If I have a lemon VW it does not make all VW's lemons. Your posts somewhat indicate you have a prejudice against automatic transmissions. Is this true?
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378
    Well good, then we are both in the same boat. I am relating my own experiences with a TDI and Jetta. Whether it the gospel, for sure I know NOT!, I think of it just adding to the data base!

    When you say prejudice what does that mean?
  • abc246abc246 Posts: 305
    Has anyone seen the Edmunds First Drive test on the 2004 Toyota Prius? It beats the TDI 0-60 by 2.5 sec and gets better mpg without manual shift. Does anyone know what the 0-60 time will be for the 05 TDI? I have test driven 2 current TDIs and they make me ill. VW seems to have trouble with turbo lag, even in the 1.8T gaser. I have not driven the 2004 Toyota Prius yet. I want a 55 mpg car that goes 0-60 in 8 sec and is fun to drive. Maybe TDI/electric? VW, are you listening?
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,238
    What's this need for getting to 60mph? Is that the only speed you drive? You can do some easy improvements to squeeze lots of power out of a current TDI without harming the mileage (although you aren't going to get 55mpg on anything drag-racing it 24-7). The TDI is very fun to drive even with a stock engine as the torque band is very usable. But if the only miles you put on your car are from 0-60, then that doesn't matter to you. My TDI will cruise 85mph all day long and still get mid-40's, and actually feel like you have a car under you. Probably hand a Prius it's breakfast through the twisties as well. Those low-rolling resistence tires have a bad side-effect called "buick estate handling".
  • ruking1ruking1 Posts: 18,378

    Best of luck in YOUR new Toyota Prius. I have been buying Toyota's for a while,and while I was recently at the dealer for a smog check on a Toyota Landcruiser, I had a chance to check out a Prius. True the gas mileage is GREAT 45/52 mpg, I was not impressed at all.

    While the Zero-60 benchmark has been around for a long long time, it almost is just another among many of factors. The TDI has a Zero to 60 of (I am guessing) 10-12 seconds? Edmunds lists the Prius as 12.8. One of my TDI Jetta's stable mates is a 4 second zero to 60 Z06 and I got to tell you I have no problem merging into ANY kind of traffic with either. As a matter of fact I don't even KNOW the zero to 60 for the Toyota Landcruisers!!?? So in fact I can add that I have no problem in merging into traffic with ANY of them. If the Prius meets YOUR needs in comparison to the TDI models by all means: GO FOR IT. Again according to, this is a $20k car. I got my TDI for way under that.

    Since unscheduled maintenance was a concern for me in the VW JETTA I got into one of many VW anonymous groups. They have been very helpful in dealing with my addiction :). But I tell you I would be downright apprehensive with a Prius. While they have been selling in Japan since 1997, the fact of the matter that batteries conceptually were NEVER designed to motivate a car or more correctly do not do it effectively and the batteries DO NOT last at all (you are in luck if the batteries last 5 years). I also have driven all electric vehicles in the service and also have towed critical national assets with them, so I do have some special purpose vehicle hands on.

    All of us TDI'ers bemoan the lack of GOOD diesel mechanics. So would you say there are more or LESS hybrid mechanics?

    My take on my mileage is currently we get between 45-50. Part of the reason is that this car seems love being run! XXX digit highway cruising is second nature and in fact the car was designed with the autobahn in mind. (.205 injectors, AW AW AW)
  • bpeeblesbpeebles Posts: 4,085
    Why all the "fuss" abour 0-60 time? I cant think of the last time I went 0-60 at full throttle.

    Under REAL driving conditions, the TDI has plenty of torque to accellerate to pass beyond that of any same-displacement gasoline engine. (40-60 time)

    What about quality interier design, fit -n- finish, handling, braking, ride quality, interiour noise levels, seating position...etc (I could go on for awhile)

    Did you know that many automobile manufactures PURPOSLY tewak the engine-tranny to look good on paper? (ie ... 0-60 times) This has little bearing on REAL driving conditions. There was an interesting 'study' about this.

    Personally, I spend much more time DRIVING my vehicles than I do with FULL-THROTTLE BURSTS from 0-60MPH. I look for a comftable,quiet ride that gets good MPG during NORMAL driving conditions. (I average about 52MPG)

    Besides... those HYBRID vehicles are hard on the envrionment. The battery-packs are HAZZARDUS WASTE and very expensive to replace every few years.

    AS FOR TURBO-LAG... Why do you suggest that VW has "trouble" with it. This is not "trouble" by any stretch of the imagination. It is just the nature of a turbocharger... PERIOD. (Just like lightbulbs make HEAT, lawnmowers make NOISE and it hurts when you hit your thumb with a hammer... it is the nature of the beast)

    There are allready several TDI/electric vehicles available.... just not in NorthAmerica.
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,238
    Thought I'd add that I have a 4X4 Chevy Tahoe that by all magazine reviews I've seen will click off 0-60 in around 8 seconds. That would have to be the only possible way it's quicker than my TDI. I drive both on a regular basis and the Tahoe is not fast, even disregarding the obvious handling difference between the two. Anywhere, anytime, the TDI feels quicker. In fact, when it comes to driving hilly roads, the TDI feels more powerful than my Audi A6 V8. The TDI will eat hills for lunch, where I'm guessing the hybid motors are going to be taxing the batteries quickly and relying on a small gas engine much more. Keep us posted.
  • abc246abc246 Posts: 305
    The facts for the Prius as stated above are for the 2003. I guess you guys did not read Edmunds front page today! The 2004 Prius is 55/55 mpg with auto while near zero emissions! Amazing!!

    I too have a Chevy 4x4 and I completely disagree. The truck amazes me, even pulling 5000 lbs. Throttle response is beyond there. Now I test drive a TDI, hit the gas...nothing happens....when the car is finally is time to shift! VW states 0-60 in 12.5 sec with manual, 14.9 sec with auto (yikes). The 2004 Prius is 10 sec flat with auto. That’s a big difference while getting better mpg. I want good acceleration while getting good mpg and a fun to drive car. I think the 2005 Golf with TDI/manual will be just that.

    Now imagine the TDI having the 295 ft/lbs of torque the Prius has. I think that would overcome the turbo lag and make on heck of a fun to drive car and get even better mpg.

    For the record, I have been driving my friends Audi A4 1.8T with automatic Quattro. I also HATE that car. You can floor the car at a light and let up on the gas and no one in the car would even know you stepped on the gas. Try that in a Chevy.
  • sebring95sebring95 Posts: 3,238
    I think the problem is you're flooring it. If every car was as simple to drive as put your foot to the floor, that would be real fun. You have to know how to drive a diesel, and red-lining it does nothing for performance. I don't have the space to teach you how to drive one, but mine is much quicker than my '02 5.3L 4X4 Tahoe, with the possible exception of flat-out 0-60. The Tahoe is slow unless you peg the throttle right from the get-go. Highway acceleration is phenominal on the TDI. I accelerated from 60mph-90mph half-way up a mountain in WV yesterday to get around a truck. The Tahoe would have still be putzing behind that truck for miles because there is no way it would have pulled that off. But hey, it'll get to 60 in 8 seconds if you want. In summary, if you don't like driving buy the Prius. VW's are fun to drive and with a TDI can be both fun and very economical.
Sign In or Register to comment.