By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
My wife and I both preferred the PREVIOUS Jetta to a Lexus ES300 (both 2001 or so).
The Corolla is excruciatingly boring and plain, I would take a Kia over it.
I personally don’t see the Jetta competing against it, but I suppose that does not prevent people from comparing them. What about a Civic, Neon, Rio versus the Jetta don’t see it, but some may cross shop the Jetta and SUV’s because for the price I guess you could.
I personally don’t find the 2.5 appealing, but a GLI with 2.0T and DSG seems like a nice combination in a vehicle of this size.
We certainly did not cross shop a Corolla. One reason being I pretty much rejected anything under about 3000 pounds for safety considerations. I was suprised, when I actually looked at pricing, how well the Jetta VE compares to the Corolla.
We could have considered cars like the Accord and Camry as alternatives to Jetta. We did not because my wife did not like the appeararance of those. But retroactively I am glad to see that there would be no cost advantage to us. We have the advantage of not wanting fluff like a sunroof...why do people want those :confuse: we find them distracting if opened and kind of pointless when you already have windows, vents and A/C.
A few more responses to some of the comments my comparison generated:
The larger and more powerful engine and 6 speed trans may not make a performance difference, but it is needed as the Jetta has an extra 700 pounds to move. The point was one has to expect to pay more for a larger and more powerful engine. In addition, the 6 speed allows the engine to run at only a bit over 2000 rpm at 70 mph.
I don't get the comment about the engine sound and supposed vibration, what's that all about? I say 5 cylinders is better than 4. The engine sounded fine to me and I did not notice any vibration.
The extra weight is also one reason for the lower mileage. One has to expect a heavier car to use more fuel.
On the Corolla pricing, I think I used Corolla S. I don't know what the difference between that an LE is or which would be the better comparision. I rechecked that and now am getting MSRP of $18,824. This is with Side Airbags, Vehicle Stability Control, Enhanced Power Package, Antilock Braking System, Security System, Carpet Floor Mats, and Trunk Mat. I believe all these added options are standard in Jetta. In any case a "comparable" Corolla is apparently going to sell for something like $2000-$2500 less than Jetta VE.
If you are buying by the pound the Jetta is actually about 12% cheaper...at about $5.90 per pound versus $6.7 per pound for the Corolla.
A properly designed sunroof will allow fresh air in without excessive buffeting or other distraction. They're great for those of us who like the open air on nice days like today but refuse to deal with a convertible.
In Sept. I bought a brand new AWD Jaguar X-Type for $22.6K out the door. Standard 4 yr maintenance and warranty included. Now you may like it or you may not, but checkout the equipment, and then ask yourself what you should expect when you go shopping.
In addition the fact that extending the warranty to 6 years and 80,000 miles would cost about $2700 was a concern, as that indicates that those are expected to be very expensive to keep running.
Note that they had about $6000 cash to dealer incentive on those 2.5 X-types at that time, because Jaguar was apparently desperate to move them. Not too often you are going to see that level of incentive...though they are back up to $4500 currently. Jag recently discontinued that 2.5 model in the US, btw.
At its current performance level, I will keep looking - the TSX or maybe the new IS250 might offer a bargain as they age. I am hoping to avoid FWD if I am going to spend the mid-$20s or higher for a car.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You state: "The point was one has to expect to pay more for a larger and more powerful engine." and "The extra weight is also one reason for the lower mileage. One has to expect a heavier car to use more fuel."
No, one doesnt. The Camry and Accord 4 cylinders can accelerate similarly to the Jetta, and both return 24/34 with their 5 speed automatics, and weigh about 3200lbs, similar to Jetta. Both are significantly larger inside than the Jetta. Both of those 4s are smoother and sound better than the Jetta I test drove (which answers your question: "I don't get the comment about the engine sound and supposed vibration, what's that all about?"). I'm not really sure what the advantage of the 5 cylinders is.
The Jetta VE you purchased is far and away the best Jetta of the current line powered by the 2.5L, as it is the only model that offers reasonable value. It is certainly a leader in safety equipment.
That said, the 2.5L engine is a disappointment, especially when viewed against the concept that THIS very new Jetta will be around for at least 5 years to come. It is not powerful, efficient, or particularly refined sounding. It moves the car smartly, which is great in the VE, but moving into the 24K and 27K ranges with Packages 1 and 2..... this engine doesnt cut it.
~alpha
Yes the Camry and Accord get better mileage than the Jetta, by an average of 3 mpg. This will amount to a cost difference of about $100 per year. I don't know about you but $100 per year difference is pretty much meaningless when deciding on a car to buy. So I would continue to call this an insignificant difference. If you think it is a significant issue, that's fine though.
Would I rather have 34/24? Sure.
The Jetta gets exactly the same mpg rating as the only other similar weight car with a 5 cyl, which is the S40.
As you may know, there will be a 2.0 turbo engine at some point for the Jetta...so the 2.5 will not be the only choice for the whole 5 years. Most buyers are I like me, in regard to engines (but not with regard to sunroofs
I drive about 18,500 miles a year. Averaging let's say...28 MPG in the Camry, and 24 (both 6 MPG less than the EPA Highway rating), thats 661 gallons and 770 gallons respectively. At 2.05/gallon, thats a difference of $223. Over 74,000 miles (or just 4 years of use), thats a difference of about $900. To me, that is substantial, given that the Jetta is smaller and no quicker.
~alpha
me: Agree. In today's paper a 2005 Mazda 6 sedan - auto, 160hp, pw/pl, traction, abs, cd = $15,135. I would guess that would be a competitor to the Jetta?
BTW that price is like $3600 below invoice for the cheapest Mazda 6 w/ATX.
Personally I find this rather interesting. For my situation, fueling up maybe 12 gallons per week results in an increase in cost of about a McDonald’s happy meal. I don’t see what the big “panic” over fuel costs are (if I had a fleet of vehicles that would be different).
If it comes to it I’ll forgo the Sandwich meal rising prices may be the best thing to happen to my waist line
As a portion of total income, what we spend in gasoline costs is at the BOTTOM of the list we spend more on sponge bob toys. When it gets over $5 a gallon I may take notice.
Gas mileage is certainly one consideration, but at some point it becomes an isignificant issue. To me that point is certainly passed by the time you get down to differences that amount to about a penny per mile, which is the difference in cost between a car that gets 26 mpg (this is the avg of 22/30) and one that gets 29 mpg (this is the average of 24/34).
If my concern is saving money, well I can buy a 1 year old car and save maybe $4000. This $4000 would be equal to the gas cost difference in 100,000 miles between a car getting 20 mpg and one getting 30 mpg.
Distance the car can go on a tank of gas is a hassle factor. Didn't the original Miata have a 10 gallon tank? The Jetta's is 14.5, at 30 mpg highway, that's an unimpressive 435 miles, or a real-world 375-400 before you have to fill up.
And so in this case the savings on gas is not very high. But of course the Accord and Camry are both cars in which I could take myself and four passengers and hit the highway to L.A. Jetta is not.
The Mazda6 is a better comparison - on the small side for a "midsize" car. But the 4-cyl engine in this car makes more power than Jetta's 5, gets better gas mileage, and as noted above can be had for a price 25% lower.
Or you could get the V-6 - it has a whopping 50% more power than the Jetta, has fuel economy only 10% lower, and can still be had for the same price or less as the Jetta 2.5.
And finally, since this is already an older model, Mazda can afford to give cash back on it now, contributing to lower prices.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
It is a minor point but the Mazda 6 actually get lower mpg rating (with ATX) as I mentioned above it is rated at 23/28 mpg vs. 22/30 for Jetta.
I don't see 160 HP at 6000 rpm being any great advantage over 150 HP at 5000 rpm. Torque numbers go the other way 170 ft-lbs torque at 3750 rpm for Jetta and 155 ft-lbs at 4000 rpm for the Mazda.
The 25% price differential assumes that they really are selling new 2005s for $3600 under invoice. If they are it sounds like a great deal, if you like the car.
You really have to buy a car/engine that meets your driving needs and style. Some people would/could be perfectly happy with an S2000 or RX8 maxing most of it’s power (talking hp and ft-lb) over 6000 rpm.
My wife would NEVER go over 4000 rpm (3000 is a stretch as well), so shopping for her an extra 10hp or 100hp at 6000 rpm would be a waste. For me that’s another story I’ll use the whole rev range.
Gas: Clarify while I did say it’s not a factor in determining a car purchase (for me) I still do appreciate an efficient/clean engine, and if the next car I purchase achieves 30+ mpg that would be great but not a deciding factor (yet).
Better acceleration, braking, and more efficiency simply by carrying less gas. I also guess I don't consider stopping at a gas station an unpleasant experience.
You may mean sticker? Sticker on this car is right around $20K with the automatic. Mazda is doing $2000 cash back right now. Another $2000 below sticker as a routine dealer discount on a 2-plus-year-old model from Mazda would not be too surprising. In fact, you could probably do better.
MT chimed in on the new Jetta with exactly the same thoughts I had: "loud mediocre engine", "at the early-to-bed 5800-rpm redline, you'll be tempted to put a bullet through the firewall to still the racket", "the five sings an unearthly moan, sounding like a duet of hoarse-throated ghosts".
On the tight back seat: "it's actually more comfortable to stretch out in the cargo hold than compress yourself into the back seat", and on the looks "while the new Jetta's commendable mug is as fiery as its predecessor's was milquetoast, the Japanese sheetmetal that follows it cries out Toyota and even - gulp - Corolla." The picture they use of the rear taillight does plenty to confirm this opinion - from that angle and showing only the light, it looks identical to the Corolla's light.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Even with regard to the resemblance to the Corolla...that Corolla is not a bad looking car. I would not buy one for many reasons, but the exterior appearance is not one of them. Someone on Vortex claimed that the Corolla was derived from the old Jetta...maybe there is even something to that since they clearly copied VW with the antenna location.
My main issue with the Jetta is it's price once you start adding options. I have to have a sunroof and with the roof I am going to spend $24,000. That's the same MSRP as my Accord which is larger, gets better MPG, and has more features. It's not worth it IMO.
MSRP: $26740
Sale price: $23740 [$3,000 off MSRP]
Three cars in stock offered at this price.
Someone else will have to extrapolate from the MSRP about what packages of options this represents, since it doesn't matter much to me - the point is that less than a month after introduction, this is what at least one dealer here thinks is necessary to move the metal.
In the same spirit, GLS Passat TDIs [2005s] were being offered at $21995 - that one had my attention, and in my mind, precisely illustrates the problem with the new Jetta - who in their right mind wouldn't rather have the current-gen Passat TDI at the GLS trim level, than the new-gen Jetta for nearly $2k more? The Passat diesel is nearly as quick to 60 mph, and gets an honest 30 mpg [or more] all day long no matter how it's used or abused.
The advertised price is $1000 below invoice.
Their terminology is goofy...the true base car is called the 2.5 value edition to which almost no options can be added. Then the next step up is the standard 2.5.
Sorry for the wording - the GLS reference was strictly referring to the Passat, not the Jetta. My point was and is that a 2005 Passat GLS TDI at $22k beats a 2005.5 Jetta Pkg 2 at $23740, in my mind at least, any day of the week.
I find it bemusing that no matter how I try to present this information, hopefully for the benefit of all concerned, that you always manage to find something wrong. Look, I understand that you are buying a VE at a specified price, and have no idea the market in which you are trading...all I know is that, historically, this area [Portland OR] has never been the most competitive for new car buying. VEs here seem to be discounted little, if at all, but then they are also rather scarce. I do find it remarkable and kind of interesting that the local VW dealers are already moving this aggressively on the new Jetta. These are new-gen Pkg2 cars with a $3k discount, and I've verified that they have several [more than the three advertised] in stock and available.
I seriously doubt that the situation here is unique. I'd love to have a copy of this weekend's LA Times, for example, just to see what's happening in the world's most competitve market.
Anyway, I'm not trying to annoy you or anyone else here - just trying to add data to the ongoing question about the relative value of this car in the current marketplace. I've been saying from the start, when I first got to see the car in person at the car show here, that this is a fine package that was seriously overpriced against its logical competition. For the time being, the last of the current-gen Passats present some of the most formidable of that competition.
at least you come accross as more consistent. edmunds says the new jetta is better in every measurable way including handling. they regarded the last jetta as very sporting and fun to drive. but now they regard the driving experience as mundane. what!
MT's road test of the new jetta shares edmunds' opinion about the looks of the car but agrees more with me on how well the car handles. actually come to think of it, edmunds' road test pretty much stands alone in their low opinion of the car's handling.
if you think the jetta 2.0t will be overpriced then you're going to think the volvo s40 T5 is insanely overpriced if you price one out.
but WV did drop the ball big time using the 2.5 for the top model. me thinks they will drop the 2.5 from the 2.5 jetta pck2 when the 2.0t becomes available.
if VW doesn't, then i suggest we all give their cousins, the audi a3 (or even an audi a4), a serious look in comparison.
fair or not fair, you seem to be right about the hipness of the new jetta. heck, even a big jetta advocate like myself is now looking at audis for my next car.
Well, Edmunds and me too! :-/
It is not bad for such a heavy car, but it is too heavy to handle well for its size.
Now if Edmunds really wrote that the LAST Jetta was "sporting and fun to drive" (???), then they may have actually been driving the wrong car when they were making notes...
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
You certainly are not annoying me. I appreciate that you are posting about deals that you see advertised. None of the dealers here has advertised these with prices at all.
Someone on vortex posted about this too and offered to email a scan of it to someone else on there. So I emailed him and asked for a copy, so I have seen it myself.
But, when I go to the website http://www.herzog-meiervw.com/en_US/, the cars show a price of $28,740. You can not get the MSRP that high on this Jetta...at least not yet. You can find the ones in the ad VIN Numbers are (last 6 digits are apparently the stock numbers listed in the ad):
3VWDF71K65M600757
3VWDF71K95M607041
3VWDF71KX5M607047
All their A5 Jettas seem to show prices that are exactly $2000 too high. Their lowest priced ones are $24,080 instead of $22,080 which is the MSRP for the standard 2.5.
Some people, such as myself, DON’T want a larger car for the same price. I’m willing to pay MORE for a smaller car that is built well with high quality.
I like the new Passat, but it is just a little on the large side; although I love their theme regarding the interior. The new Jetta seems like a good size, reminiscent of my 97 A4.
I’d lean more towards an A3, just because of the higher grade materials and service.
A body kit and larger factory alloy wheels (and tires to go with them).
VW dealers, on average, are pathetic (I can think of four here in Kentucky that I have personally encountered), so I don't blame you on the service aspect.
But, with respect to the materials, have you looked at an A3? The interior materials seem to be not quite as nice as other Audis (and maybe not as nice as the Jetta), I don't think there's as much of the soft-touch stuff. It's still a nice car, and I prefer it to the Jetta, especially with the sweet powertrain and extra cargo room. I am strongly considering it as my next car.
This is the dealer with the ad for $3k off the Pkg 2 Jettas. They are also the ones [I think - I've pitched the Sat paper and the Sun one is not here yet] who had the '05 Passat TDIs for $22k.
Yes, most of the VW dealers in this market have the insane habit of adding dealer markup to everything in stock, but as you can see, in this case, the offers are in relation to true MSRP, not against some artificially high price. When perusing dealer inventories, it's easy to see who's engaged in this silly business, and who's playing it straight.
In the end, one straight shooter in the market is all it takes - then everyone has to be rational when confronted with the prices that any buyer can get simply by picking dealer X. That doesn't stop the markup practice, of course, because they know they can still pick off the odd buyer who isn't savvy enough to have done any homework.
Armstrong VW also engages in markups, but their internet sales mgr is very rational and cuts to the chase very quickly. The one dealer that seems to be from outside the solar system is Hannah VW here in Vancouver [just across the river from Portland] - I've actually had their sales mgr stick to the markup fairy tale on TDIs even when every other dealer within 200 miles was dealing at $1-$3k off MSRP. Whatever works...
-Any options at all on an A3, and you're staring $30k in the face very, very quickly.
-The A3 is seriously challenged in back seat room - can't compete with the Jetta
-The ride will be a lot firmer with the A3 - which may be what you want, but if it isn't...
Similarly, I don't get all excited by the S40 that keeps getting mentioned here - the leg room in the back seat of that car is simply nonexistent, again, not even in the same ballpark as the Jetta. And another car with a ride that will be firmer, even harsher, over a lot of the junk we call pavement in this country,
No, my problem with the Jetta is that the pricing they think they have to get to make a profit puts them at a serious disadvantage to cars like the Accord V6, and as noted, even the current-gen Passat. And yes, I too am sympathetic with the point of view that bigger isn't better, that a great smaller package can be worth just as much or more than a mediocre bigger one. What I really want is the Golf Plus with the latest diesel technology and a DSG transmission, but no VW is going to the top of my list until they can show that they can bring out a new car that doesn't have a long list of woes that have to be fixed by a dealer body that has shown little ability in the past to keep up with the problems.
They need Japanese reliability - WHEN AND IF THEY ACHIEVE THAT, ALL QUESTIONS ABOUT PRICING AND RELATIVE VALUE WILL GO AWAY. Until then, the last thing VW needs is to be the high-priced spread in every segment. Dr. Piech started this ambitious baloney that wishing to be seen as upscale would make it so, if they only made gorgeous interiors and included lots of features - there's just more to it than that.
This is some crazy business model these guys follow....
(Sigh. "Earth to corporate talking heads....")
When you walk the Lexus walk, then you can talk the Lexus talk. Neither VW nor Audi has any business doing anything except praying that their suppliers back in Germany stop sabotaging their great designs with lousy execution - THEN they can play in the part of the market they think they "deserve" to be in. Bosch and Siemens need a good trip to the woodshed [look at the latest recall for Mercedes] - these guys very badly need to visit a Denso facility to see how it's supposed to be done, but they continue to give their business to the same old German outfits that have been ruining reputations for the past 10 years.
Mass Airflow Sensors, fuel tank sending units, ignition coils, fuel injection pumps, voltage regulators, wiring bundles, computer modules - when the German car makers start demanding the same level of quality from their suppliers that is routine with Toyota and Honda....a new day will have dawned in the market. Until then, caveat emptor.
i suggest you check out the carpet and the plastic used around the steering column in the jetta if you think it's up to A3 standards.
amen!
i'm amazed that some people find the jetta and corolla comparable because they are of similar size. if you can't tell the difference between the two then the jetta is not the car for you.
heck, why spend all that money on a tsx when you can get a roomier civic?
I've looked at the Jetta and A3, and found the A3's dash panel to be kind of grainy and cheap looking, and again there seemed to be a lack of soft-touch trim. The Jetta was also not perfect, but seemed to have more of the soft-touch stuff. The last-generation Jetta, despite its best-in-class interior, did have floormats and carpet that were thinner than a slice of bologna (although they held up well). That said, I would be happy with any of the interiors (A3, Jetta IV, or Jetta V)--I just don't think one clearly outclasses the others.
I find them comparable because they look alike, not because they're of similar size.
Audi can get away with pricing a loaded A3 at or above $30k because they actually are a premium brand, and not a pretender. At that price level, the value equation goes out the window. What you have left are performance and driving dynamics, exclusivity, reputation, quality of dealer body, and styling. The Jetta has good driving dynamics, mediocre performance, little exclusivity, an abysmal reputation, miserable dealer body, and lookalike styling.
The lookalike styling is a big no-no in my book. If you're spending that much for a car, it shouldn't look like a Toyota that costs half as much. Some rhetorical questions: Lexus has the ES330 (which I would never buy) based on the Camry, should they also tart up a Corolla and call it the ES180? Maybe stick the Camry's four in it and call it the ES240? With a different interior, some features like auto climate control, wood trim, heated leather, alloy wheels, and a sunroof, and some minor exterior styling modifications, would that not make it a premium small car that competes with the Jetta? And what premium would it go for, given that the new Lexus IS250 is supposed to start at $27-ish?
I have not compared the optioned up prices myself as we are not interested in those, but apparently those show the Jetta to be pricey.
I actually do prefer the interior design of the Jetta to the A3. I’ve never seen /driven the new A3 so all I know is what I’ve heard mostly form publications (or propaganda if you will).
I actually like the A3 sportback, or Jetta wagon. I forget the url of the last Jetta wagon I posted a few months ago but the wagon has real nice lines to it.
If a wagon GLI with 2.0T and DSG ended up costing in the high twenties that wouldn’t dissuade me.
A3 would give the service (free maintenance and loaners) plus if you wanted to spend extra you could get the AWD and 3.2V6.
If VW got crazy and offered the 2.0T as a base and the 3.6 VR6 as the high end .that may make it a whole lot more interesting (probably not cannibalize Passat).
if the Jetta with package 1 had the 2.0T for $23K, it would be a good deal, IMO. NOW you're talking! And the new Passat is out in six months, which will be similarly equipped for about $2K more, appropriate since it is a bigger car. They could boost the power on the old VR6 engine to a level near what everyone else in the world can do with a similar-displacement engine. Then make THAT the optional enigne for Jetta, leaving the 3.6 fvor the Passat only.
At $21K, the Jetta 2.5 has too little power for the price. Adding package 1 only makes things worse, and if it is such a premium car how come alloys aren't standard on the midrange trim?
The VE is the only new Jetta with a decent value quotient, it seems to me, and it would be really nice if you could add some common options a la carte. And STILL at $18K/19K (manual/automatic), it could use more power.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)