I wouldn't anticipate folks cross-shopping these two vehicles. I happen to like both of them, but the price difference puts one out of my range for now.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Wow, how did they do this! This sounds like it will be almost as big as the current Passat inside. The new Jetta has about the same front (-0.3 inch) and rear (+ 0.1 inch) leg room as the current Passat, also a bit larger trunk volume (+ 1 cf vs. Passat). Its about an inch or so narrow, based on shoulder room numbers...but other than that it seems to be as spacious as the Passat.
I wonder if those who have had the chance to actually sit in one found the back seat leg room and overall interior space to be comparable to the current Passat, as VW's number appear to indicate?
I basically see the Jetta as the “new” Passat. Not to get confused with the real new Passat.
The new Jetta fully loaded (27K) when compared with the CURRENT V6 Passat, will have more options, similar size, stiffer chassis, and have more power than the V6 Passat; which was a very good vehicle (CR best pick).
Perhaps people are associating the Jetta name with a particular type/class of vehicle.
If the Phaeton was named Jetta, it would not make it less of a vehicle probably just affect sales, or affect sales more as it were.
If you don’t need/want the power and options the “base” vehicle may be a real bargain.
Maybe VW should have brought the Polo over here and called it the Jetta and created a new model in between the low end vehicle (our hypothetical Jetta created on the Polo platform) and the new Passat then again I thought the Phaeton was a good idea and car.
Has pricing officially been released? Will the new Jetta be offering 4Motion? The vehicle itself is growing on me, but Im still underwhelmed by the 150 horse 5 cylinder engine that is based on the blowzy current 115 hp 4.
Who cares about the hp it has 170 ft lbs of torque, which is 10 more than Accord and Camry (which are both quite peppy with a manual transmission). You use the high torque throught the rev range. The extra hp only comes into play up near the redline.
Yes and even with an automatic, this sounds like plenty of power for normal driving. The Volvo S40 has similar engine (slightly higher peak HP claimed, but about same torque) and Consumer reports test has it at 9.4 sec for 0-60 w/AT. For us normal drivers, this is fast enough.
The key is, I think, whether there is enough low end torque. I drove a used Jetta ( I think it was about a 96) when looking for my last car. The 2.0 with manual had no torque until at least about 3000 rpm...if I recall correctly. Everything else was nice...handling and brakes were great, but it was too sluggish for me. I bought a Contour instead which also has a 2.0 4-cylinder engine, but the ford Zetec has pretty good low end torque for a 4. The ford zetec is only slightly higher HP than the VW 2.0, which is 115 HP...I think it was rated at 125 HP.
Note that in the same issue (Nov 04) they have Acura TSX with 200 HP and a 0-60 time of 9.2 sec...almost the same as the lower HP (168) Volvo.
These peak HP claims are mostly just an advertising gimmick to appeal to what someone has referred to as "spec sheet racers". As in "I got more HP than you"...never mind if the car is actually slower.
horsepower does matter and it does throughout the rev range. i like both low end power AND an engine that easily revs (horsepower). the slow revving TDI model has abundant torque but still takes a leisurely 11 plus seconds to 60.
where you would see the difference in performance between the TSX and the base S40 would be with a manual transmission comparo. you're right about the TSX, the additional 40 horsies from the accord i4 don't help much with an automatic.
why are some people having a cow over a $27K jetta?
it's most likely going to have exemplary handling/ride traits. it's going to feel solid as a rock like a good german car should be. it's interior ambience is nothing short of a near luxury car. it has all the safety features you can ask for and the overall level of features is astonishing.
if you don't need the goodies just get a base model which is still well equipped and still has ALL the safety features - everybody wins.
i believe most manufacturers have a higher ratio of loaded models initially.
horsepower really comes into play with the 2.0t when compared to the TDI. both have abundant low end torque but the gas turbo maintains its torque at high rpm and thus its much higher horsepower rating. i haven't driven either yet but it's a good assumption that the gas turbo furnishes more power at ALL speeds.
I did not say it doesn't matter...and I particularly did not say actual usable horsepower, that is available in the rpm range that a typical driver is going to be operating in, does not matter.
Look at the TSX stats. 200 HP at 6800 rpm. Who cares about that number? Who is going to run that engine at that speed? The S40 is at 168 HP at 6000 rpm. That is very high rpm also. Almost all the differeence in the horsepower numbers is a result of the rpm difference.
The peak torque numbers for these two engines are almost identical and occur at a more useful rpm of 4400-4500.
Getting back to the Jetta. VW says it has 150 HP...but this occurs at 5000 rpm. The max torque is 170 and occurs at 3750 rpm. This seems like a sensibly designed engine that puts the power where it will be used. It is also not a turbo and uses regular gas two thing that definitely appeal to me and the majority of car buyers.
of course peak torque at high RPM doesn't necessary mean low torque at low RPM. having good torque at both and low RPM would be preferable.
does anybody have the torque curve of the 2.5? it would interesting to see how broad the torque curve is.
nothing wrong with the 2.5 and i'm sure its performance would be more than acceptable for the majority of car buyers.
i on the other hand would be coming from a 03 accord V6. my previous car was a 02 jetta 1.8t. so i'm accustomed to effortless acceleration and would prefer the 2.0t.
and i don't really want to get the so called sports model (GLI) with its gaudy add ons to get it. VW better change their plans and have the 2.0t available as an option on other models.
You go through cars in a hurry, don't you :-). My wife (who would get the new car) would be coming from a 97 Windstar and I drive a 96 contour. Both of these have 0-60 times in the 9-10 second range, so the Jetta sounds like it would have adequate acceleration for us. VW estimate is 9.1 sec for the automatic.
I used to drive a 4 cylinder manual trans mininvan with all of 100 HP and I was almost always the fastest pulling away from the lights and such. My son is driving an old sentra with a automatic and a 1.6 L. Its pretty putzy too, but he says the same thing...he accelerates faster than the vast majority of drivers.
I don't understand why people think they need a powerful V-6, when they are afraid to ever use it (not saying this is you). It seems like most people think they are going to blow the engine if they hit 3000 rpm or something. Why do they get these powerful engines if they are going to take a mile to get up to 50 mph anyway?
"The new five produces 150 horses and is yet another variant of the ancient 115hp, 2.0-liter four whose lineage can be traced all the way back to the first Rabbit."
----------------------------------------------
Anyway, my point is not that 2.5L engine is NOT going to move the vehicle smartly. I'm sure it will be fairly strong.
My point is that I expected a bit more, given that the current Jetta has been around for 6 model years, and that the vehicle is allegedly moving up in price and prestige. Yes, the Jetta's 2.5L bests, for example, the Accord and Camry by 9 to 7 foot-pounds. BUT- the Jetta has a whole extra cylinder, and thats all it can manage?!?.
(FWIW, this 5 cylinder posts 170 pounds at 3750PRPM, and Toyota's 2.4L 4 cylinder posts 163 pounds at 4000 RPM.. not a huge difference in revs, IMO).
Of course, fuel efficiency may make me change my tune, if coupled with the 6-speed the Jetta can trump the Camry and Accord's 24/34.
I know everybody is concerned about the relatively low engine output and the fact that the engine has an iron block/aluminum head vs. the aluminum blocks of their competitors. However VW's iron block is built to diesel specifications, and that lends itself very well to aftermarket applications such as supercharging or turbocharging. So even though the engine seems anemic in stock form, there is a tremendous upside in upgrading the engine's performance.
VW stats say 22/30 mpg. That means about $80 per 10,000 miles in extra gas...this will have no impact on our decision.
I know I could not buy a Camry, I drove a Toyota once...at least I think I did. I was sitting behind the steering wheel and moving it back and forth and the car seemed to go more or less in the direction I was steering, even though there did not seem to be any connection there. :-)
The Jetta value edition is supposed to be priced about the same as the current base model. Even though it will be a significantly larger car with a significantly more powerful engine.
If nothing else, I like the fact that VW switched from timing belts to timing chains in their upcoming engines. That alone will save at least $600+ in parts and labor costs alone. I've changed more than my share of timing belts (myself) in the 20+ years I've been driving VW's, especially on the 87 Golf GT that I've owned 16 of those years (624K miles).
I'm not sure. I was just going by what I read on VWVortex. Where they said it was a "part" of the V10 from the Lambo...detuned.
Either way, doesn't matter where it came from, just where it is.
170ish ft/lb of torque doesn't make me go "wow", but if it is a good (perhaps a little better) than the competition isn't that where they'd want to be? Wouldn't you then have to say "is that all Honda and Toyota can do?"
I was passed by a silver one on the road on Friday afternoon - it had Illinois special plates on it, which may have been dealer plates.
Interestingly, the new Jetta passed a current model silver Jetta, and the contrast was evident, almost as if it weren't the same vehicle. The back end looks a heck of a lot like a Camry or Corolla, and I would've thought it was a Toyota if I weren't tailgating so closely
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
It's been a while since I've done my own vehicle maintenance. Is it practical to do my own timing belt? I'll get the Bentley Sevice Manual, but what about special tools like at the VAG-COM. What else?
Well, I'm partial to the Old New Jetta over the New New Jetta, so i tend to agree. However, I'm prepared to give this one time to grow on me.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
The features are all there. The only instance of feature cost-cutting in the MK4 Jetta that I am aware of was the removal of the standard illuminated vent adjusters.
The official VW spec sheet shows a 14.5 gallon fuel tank, not the 18.5 gallon size previously reported here. Highway range at 30 MPG is a piddling 430 miles.
I couldn't find the crosswind steering correction system listed as a feature anywhere, but stability control, Climatronic, and heated leatherette seats are standard on everything except the value edition. The automatic and manual 2.5L both get 22 city, 30 highway. The manual 2.5L and all TDIs are delayed introduction. The manual will be a five-speed, but the automatic is a six-speed. I was hoping for a six-speed manual that got better mileage than the auto.
I'm not a fan of the styling, but it has all the features I loved in my old Jetta. The driving dynamics will make or break it, because it won't win me over on looks alone. (The old one did, but the driving dynamics of the VR6 model were impressive.)
I had an '00 VR6, and I agree that while appearance is somewhat important, unless it's hideous, it won't make or break the deal. If it drives like my old VR6, I'm going to have to take a look at it.
It also had THE BEST heated seats on the planet
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
If you have a Mk1 through Mk3 (first-generation through third generation) watercooled VW, and you possess very good mechanical skills (and a Bentley or Chiltons manual) along with the proper tools (hex-head sockets, timing belt tensioner adjuster, timing light, etc), timing belt changes are fairly straightforward.
If you have a Mk4 (current generation) VW, save yourself the trouble and find a good mechanic. Timing belt changes on these models are a nightmare for the do-it-yourself mechanic - especially if you have a 1.8T (which I currently own).
The TDI Club guys claim it's no big deal on the TDI. I read the instructions and it is a big deal! My dad has a 2003 Beetle TDI and just had it (timing belt and 100k [same as 20k] service) done at the dealer. He brought his own oil, fuel filter, and pollen filter, (they supplied the timing belt and tensioner and oil filter) and it was in the $800 range, including flushing the brake fluid. They checked but didn't replace the water pump, and noted that most cars need it at 100k, but his didn't. Of course, he still has almost half the tread left on the original tires, so the car has had a pretty easy life. I hope VW will give us the high-output TDIs once we get better diesel fuel in the US.
The corolla looks quite good, for a car that is 12K, it has the Lexus GS look. But for a Jetta to try to look a like a Corolla, it doesn't sound right. Does anyone on the board actually disagree that the new rear end of Jetta is a copy of a Corolla butt?
Does anyone on the board actually disagree that the new rear end of Jetta is a copy of a Corolla butt?
No disagreement here. Autoextremist called it a dud. All I can say is, it had better drive and handle exactly like or better than an Audi A4, because it's getting nowhere on its looks alone. The interior does, however, look nice.
VW Club members usually have (or have access to) the proper tools and facilities to change the timing belt. It is not impossible, but for the novice do-it-yourself mechanic, it can be a nightmare if not planned properly. The key to a successful installation is making sure that the #1 cylinder piston is at top-dead-center (TDC), and the timing marks at the camshaft sprocket and transmission bellhousing are aligned before starting the timing belt removal procedures.
Water pumps on the TDI and 2.0 liter engines normally last at least 150k, since they are still made out of aluminum. The 1.8Ts water pump should be replaced at every timing belt change since the internal parts (especially the impeller) are made of plastic - which is a stupid design change by VW IMHO.
I'm also hoping that the arrival of the low-sulfur diesel fuel will convince VW to offer their higher output diesel engines, especially the 16-valve engines.
I have not seen it in person, but the photos do not look that similar when I put them side by side on my screen. In addition to the general appearance being "lower, wider, sportier"...the license plate mounting area is different, the tail lights are different, the bumper is different...
At least it does not look horribly ugly from the rear, like the Nissan Altima.
At least it does not look horribly ugly from the rear, like the Nissan Altima.
I have an Altima and think the front and rear are its best parts! Hate that they went to red rear turn signals on the 2005 models. The side profile looks like nearly any other four-door car, though, and I also hate the nail-breaker door handles they used instead of the proper grip-type. Audi is using the crappy door handles and red turn signals as well.
The only other thing I hate about the "rear" of my Altima is that the trunk has those insipid arms that intrude on the luggage space. There are superior designs available that don't do this!
...and it's not anything that an aftermarket part will solve. They're shaped almost exactly like the Corolla's, and aftermarket lenses will still have to conform to the shape of the hole in the body dedicated to the taillights. I don't like the huge chrome grille either. The fifth-generation has too much jellybean effect with the styling, causing it to resemble a Toyota.
I have seen and driven the New O5 Jetta, and I really from the beginning, did not agree with using the mojave beige in the press Photos. That color does not show how tight and pretty the lines are. The lines and the build quality has drastically improved. The attention to detail is exquisite. Not to get too technical, VW is using the same dampening materials, and welding that is used in the Passat. There is very little road noise, (I drove it on our lovely dallas highways too) and you can actually drive around town with the moonroof open and hear on your cell phone too. Again not getting too technical, The power is a great improvement over the 2.0 liter. Overall it is very solid, has beautiful lines and I am very very excited about it.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Those of us who used to own Jettas know the *build* quality and fit and finish has always been great, it's the mechanical/electrical quality that's a killer.
The current Motor Trend has a little write up on the Jetta. Not the most encouraging preview. The author wrote that the engine had typical 5 cylinder engine note which he described as "moaning". Also wrote that the car exhibited high wind and road noise and below average sound quality.
The reviewer was struck by the supple ride though.
Well if I was to get a jetta it would with the 2.0t engine and that power plant is getting great reviews in Audi vehicles.
As far as road and wind noise, I'll chalked that up to the car being a pre-production model. I can't imagine the new model being worse in these respects.
Now to the below average sound quality, I'll wait for other opinions on that. This is Motor Trend afterall.
no comment on how the 6 speed auto perform.
As for the 2.5 only getting 22/30 gas mileage, I guess if you're overly concern about fuel economy then get the TDI model.
I'm encouraged that Motor Trend stated that there would be a 2.0t model in addition to the GLI model with the 2.0t. I hope they're right!
We saw the new car yesterday at the Portland OR Auto Show.
The first thing to note is just how much bigger new Jetta is - noticeably so in every direction. Yes, there is now a useful amount of legroom in the back seat. With the driver's seat adjusted for me [6' even, 31" inseam], I could sit in the back seat with as much legroom as in my friend's current-gen Passat. AND, the new trunk is enormous, again, more generous than the current Passat. The car has simply taken a big leap forward in terms of real usefulness for carrying more than 2 adults.
Styling is really too personal to talk about, though I guess I'll observe that the car looks better in the metal than in pictures. While most of the grumping has been about the rear styling, it is the new-gen Golf front that I find harder to get used to - in any case, the way the car looks is not a showstopper, either way.
March availability for the 2.5s, mid-summer target for the TDIs. I'll want to get some seat time early on, but will want to wait for the early production bugs to appear before making any commitments. Besides, the 2006 switch to low-sulfur diesel fuel may make the TDIs even more desireable [more power, lower emissions, less compromise to account for our lousy fuel] 18 months from now.
In sum, this should be a good car for VW if they can resist the temptation to overprice it. It certainly leads the class in my mind, at least until the next-gen Civic appears later this year...
Funny you should mention the front...when I was initially reading all the complaints about the stying, I had assumed they were talking about the front as the rear looked pretty innocuous to me in the pictures. But I never considered the current Jetta to be some sort of masterpiece of styling...nothing wrong with the look of it, its just a sort of innocuous, plain looking car as is the new one, imo.
"it's the mechanical/electrical quality that's a killer."
Forget the looks! Forget the performance! Forget the handling! Forget the price! Forget the interior quality.
If VW has not yet mastered the mechanical/electrical quality of the Jetta then the Jetta will be a hard sell! If US and Korean marques can improve their mechanical/eletrical quality---there is just no excuse whatsoever that VW cannot do likewise!
another not so thrilling preview on the jetta. this time from car and driver. along the same lines as motor trend (maybe these guys compared notes).
complaints on the refinement of the 5 cylinder engine, too much road and wind noise above 65 mph. VW has informed the magazine that they're working on the wind noise - something about how the front doors are not sealed correctly at the A-pillar.
WV is boasting how quality control is TOP priority with this car (extra teams of engineers just for this they said!) and they have problems like this a month before launch. you got to be kidding me. what's with the road noise - is this going to be fixed? the current jetta doesn't have excessive road and wind noise.
on the positive side - ride and handling again got high marks along with the high quality interior. i seen and been in the interior and they're right about that.
i'm still enthusiastic about this car but now i have concerns. only a month away from a test drive to see for myself.
There’s always the 2.0T. The reviews (in other autos) have been great.
“Road and wind noise” I would assume that it would be “inline” with the competition once it’s fixed.
I agree that a statement like that doesn’t inspire confidence.
This may be the early release “bugs” that are common.
My 2003 Accord had the same driver door wind noise problem. Head liner is still water stained. Front passenger speaker has always crackled. Burnt out third break light, burnt out interior light. Speedometer died and had to be replaced (forget the part). Twice it had to spend the night at the dealer for problems. First time I went in for an oil change I had about 5-6 items on my list for them to fix; can’t remember now, nothing huge.
There does seem to be a theme of problems with early release autos (and most things), look at the problems Nissan was having with the products out of Mississippi. Acura/Honda with the auto tannies. My unscientific poll reads “half the people I know with Odysseys have had their transmissions replaced”.
There does seem to be an aura of reliability problems hovering around VW, whether or not it’s justified is another thing. What VW should do is offer free maintenance for the duration of the bumper to bumper warranty. I personally feel that they would see great dividends in that small investment but why would they listen to me I think they (and Audi) should offer overseas delivery, and they still have not implemented that suggestion
I’d be just as confident with a new Jetta as I would be with any newly released auto.
Comments
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
Wow, how did they do this! This sounds like it will be almost as big as the current Passat inside. The new Jetta has about the same front (-0.3 inch) and rear (+ 0.1 inch) leg room as the current Passat, also a bit larger trunk volume (+ 1 cf vs. Passat). Its about an inch or so narrow, based on shoulder room numbers...but other than that it seems to be as spacious as the Passat.
I wonder if those who have had the chance to actually sit in one found the back seat leg room and overall interior space to be comparable to the current Passat, as VW's number appear to indicate?
I basically see the Jetta as the “new” Passat. Not to get confused with the real new Passat.
The new Jetta fully loaded (27K) when compared with the CURRENT V6 Passat, will have more options, similar size, stiffer chassis, and have more power than the V6 Passat; which was a very good vehicle (CR best pick).
Perhaps people are associating the Jetta name with a particular type/class of vehicle.
If the Phaeton was named Jetta, it would not make it less of a vehicle probably just affect sales, or affect sales more as it were.
If you don’t need/want the power and options the “base” vehicle may be a real bargain.
Maybe VW should have brought the Polo over here and called it the Jetta and created a new model in between the low end vehicle (our hypothetical Jetta created on the Polo platform) and the new Passat then again I thought the Phaeton was a good idea and car.
~alpha
I believe that engine line died...
The key is, I think, whether there is enough low end torque. I drove a used Jetta ( I think it was about a 96) when looking for my last car. The 2.0 with manual had no torque until at least about 3000 rpm...if I recall correctly. Everything else was nice...handling and brakes were great, but it was too sluggish for me. I bought a Contour instead which also has a 2.0 4-cylinder engine, but the ford Zetec has pretty good low end torque for a 4. The ford zetec is only slightly higher HP than the VW 2.0, which is 115 HP...I think it was rated at 125 HP.
Note that in the same issue (Nov 04) they have Acura TSX with 200 HP and a 0-60 time of 9.2 sec...almost the same as the lower HP (168) Volvo.
These peak HP claims are mostly just an advertising gimmick to appeal to what someone has referred to as "spec sheet racers". As in "I got more HP than you"...never mind if the car is actually slower.
where you would see the difference in performance between the TSX and the base S40 would be with a manual transmission comparo. you're right about the TSX, the additional 40 horsies from the accord i4 don't help much with an automatic.
even if you add $1k for a 2.0t model you still get an awful lot of car for the money. so i agree with the thrust of your point.
it's most likely going to have exemplary handling/ride traits. it's going to feel solid as a rock like a good german car should be. it's interior ambience is nothing short of a near luxury car. it has all the safety features you can ask for and the overall level of features is astonishing.
if you don't need the goodies just get a base model which is still well equipped and still has ALL the safety features - everybody wins.
i believe most manufacturers have a higher ratio of loaded models initially.
horsepower really comes into play with the 2.0t when compared to the TDI. both have abundant low end torque but the gas turbo maintains its torque at high rpm and thus its much higher horsepower rating. i haven't driven either yet but it's a good assumption that the gas turbo furnishes more power at ALL speeds.
Look at the TSX stats. 200 HP at 6800 rpm. Who cares about that number? Who is going to run that engine at that speed? The S40 is at 168 HP at 6000 rpm. That is very high rpm also. Almost all the differeence in the horsepower numbers is a result of the rpm difference.
The peak torque numbers for these two engines are almost identical and occur at a more useful rpm of 4400-4500.
Getting back to the Jetta. VW says it has 150 HP...but this occurs at 5000 rpm. The max torque is 170 and occurs at 3750 rpm. This seems like a sensibly designed engine that puts the power where it will be used. It is also not a turbo and uses regular gas two thing that definitely appeal to me and the majority of car buyers.
does anybody have the torque curve of the 2.5? it would interesting to see how broad the torque curve is.
nothing wrong with the 2.5 and i'm sure its performance would be more than acceptable for the majority of car buyers.
i on the other hand would be coming from a 03 accord V6. my previous car was a 02 jetta 1.8t. so i'm accustomed to effortless acceleration and would prefer the 2.0t.
and i don't really want to get the so called sports model (GLI) with its gaudy add ons to get it. VW better change their plans and have the 2.0t available as an option on other models.
I used to drive a 4 cylinder manual trans mininvan with all of 100 HP and I was almost always the fastest pulling away from the lights and such. My son is driving an old sentra with a automatic and a 1.6 L. Its pretty putzy too, but he says the same thing...he accelerates faster than the vast majority of drivers.
I don't understand why people think they need a powerful V-6, when they are afraid to ever use it (not saying this is you). It seems like most people think they are going to blow the engine if they hit 3000 rpm or something. Why do they get these powerful engines if they are going to take a mile to get up to 50 mph anyway?
"The new five produces 150 horses and is yet another variant of the ancient 115hp, 2.0-liter four whose lineage can be traced all the way back to the first Rabbit."
----------------------------------------------
Anyway, my point is not that 2.5L engine is NOT going to move the vehicle smartly. I'm sure it will be fairly strong.
My point is that I expected a bit more, given that the current Jetta has been around for 6 model years, and that the vehicle is allegedly moving up in price and prestige. Yes, the Jetta's 2.5L bests, for example, the Accord and Camry by 9 to 7 foot-pounds. BUT- the Jetta has a whole extra cylinder, and thats all it can manage?!?.
(FWIW, this 5 cylinder posts 170 pounds at 3750PRPM, and Toyota's 2.4L 4 cylinder posts 163 pounds at 4000 RPM.. not a huge difference in revs, IMO).
Of course, fuel efficiency may make me change my tune, if coupled with the 6-speed the Jetta can trump the Camry and Accord's 24/34.
~alpha
I know I could not buy a Camry, I drove a Toyota once...at least I think I did. I was sitting behind the steering wheel and moving it back and forth and the car seemed to go more or less in the direction I was steering, even though there did not seem to be any connection there. :-)
The Jetta value edition is supposed to be priced about the same as the current base model. Even though it will be a significantly larger car with a significantly more powerful engine.
Either way, doesn't matter where it came from, just where it is.
170ish ft/lb of torque doesn't make me go "wow", but if it is a good (perhaps a little better) than the competition isn't that where they'd want to be? Wouldn't you then have to say "is that all Honda and Toyota can do?"
Interestingly, the new Jetta passed a current model silver Jetta, and the contrast was evident, almost as if it weren't the same vehicle. The back end looks a heck of a lot like a Camry or Corolla, and I would've thought it was a Toyota if I weren't tailgating so closely
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
The official VW spec sheet shows a 14.5 gallon fuel tank, not the 18.5 gallon size previously reported here. Highway range at 30 MPG is a piddling 430 miles.
I couldn't find the crosswind steering correction system listed as a feature anywhere, but stability control, Climatronic, and heated leatherette seats are standard on everything except the value edition. The automatic and manual 2.5L both get 22 city, 30 highway. The manual 2.5L and all TDIs are delayed introduction. The manual will be a five-speed, but the automatic is a six-speed. I was hoping for a six-speed manual that got better mileage than the auto.
I'm not a fan of the styling, but it has all the features I loved in my old Jetta. The driving dynamics will make or break it, because it won't win me over on looks alone. (The old one did, but the driving dynamics of the VR6 model were impressive.)
It also had THE BEST heated seats on the planet
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
If you have a Mk4 (current generation) VW, save yourself the trouble and find a good mechanic. Timing belt changes on these models are a nightmare for the do-it-yourself mechanic - especially if you have a 1.8T (which I currently own).
I mean, honestly?
No disagreement here. Autoextremist called it a dud. All I can say is, it had better drive and handle exactly like or better than an Audi A4, because it's getting nowhere on its looks alone. The interior does, however, look nice.
With the 2.0T I suspect many will be seeing the rear anyway.
I’m a man who like a nice rear show me one that looks unique.
Water pumps on the TDI and 2.0 liter engines normally last at least 150k, since they are still made out of aluminum. The 1.8Ts water pump should be replaced at every timing belt change since the internal parts (especially the impeller) are made of plastic - which is a stupid design change by VW IMHO.
I'm also hoping that the arrival of the low-sulfur diesel fuel will convince VW to offer their higher output diesel engines, especially the 16-valve engines.
I have not seen it in person, but the photos do not look that similar when I put them side by side on my screen. In addition to the general appearance being "lower, wider, sportier"...the license plate mounting area is different, the tail lights are different, the bumper is different...
At least it does not look horribly ugly from the rear, like the Nissan Altima.
I have an Altima and think the front and rear are its best parts! Hate that they went to red rear turn signals on the 2005 models. The side profile looks like nearly any other four-door car, though, and I also hate the nail-breaker door handles they used instead of the proper grip-type. Audi is using the crappy door handles and red turn signals as well.
The only other thing I hate about the "rear" of my Altima is that the trunk has those insipid arms that intrude on the luggage space. There are superior designs available that don't do this!
My point was to declare that there are similarities; and that the differences are substantial enough.
I do agree that every back end needs a window, trunk and lights. There isn’t much room for individuality.
The new Jetta looks just as unique and just as good as any other car on the road.
BMW 745 looks different
Maxima\G35 a little
Some similar pics
and the front showing the beautiful chrome...
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
The reviewer was struck by the supple ride though.
Well if I was to get a jetta it would with the 2.0t engine and that power plant is getting great reviews in Audi vehicles.
As far as road and wind noise, I'll chalked that up to the car being a pre-production model. I can't imagine the new model being worse in these respects.
Now to the below average sound quality, I'll wait for other opinions on that. This is Motor Trend afterall.
no comment on how the 6 speed auto perform.
As for the 2.5 only getting 22/30 gas mileage, I guess if you're overly concern about fuel economy then get the TDI model.
I'm encouraged that Motor Trend stated that there would be a 2.0t model in addition to the GLI model with the 2.0t. I hope they're right!
The first thing to note is just how much bigger new Jetta is - noticeably so in every direction. Yes, there is now a useful amount of legroom in the back seat. With the driver's seat adjusted for me [6' even, 31" inseam], I could sit in the back seat with as much legroom as in my friend's current-gen Passat. AND, the new trunk is enormous, again, more generous than the current Passat. The car has simply taken a big leap forward in terms of real usefulness for carrying more than 2 adults.
Styling is really too personal to talk about, though I guess I'll observe that the car looks better in the metal than in pictures. While most of the grumping has been about the rear styling, it is the new-gen Golf front that I find harder to get used to - in any case, the way the car looks is not a showstopper, either way.
March availability for the 2.5s, mid-summer target for the TDIs. I'll want to get some seat time early on, but will want to wait for the early production bugs to appear before making any commitments. Besides, the 2006 switch to low-sulfur diesel fuel may make the TDIs even more desireable [more power, lower emissions, less compromise to account for our lousy fuel] 18 months from now.
In sum, this should be a good car for VW if they can resist the temptation to overprice it. It certainly leads the class in my mind, at least until the next-gen Civic appears later this year...
Forget the looks! Forget the performance! Forget the handling! Forget the price! Forget the interior quality.
If VW has not yet mastered the mechanical/electrical quality of the Jetta then the Jetta will be a hard sell! If US and Korean marques can improve their mechanical/eletrical quality---there is just no excuse whatsoever that VW cannot do likewise!
complaints on the refinement of the 5 cylinder engine, too much road and wind noise above 65 mph. VW has informed the magazine that they're working on the wind noise - something about how the front doors are not sealed correctly at the A-pillar.
WV is boasting how quality control is TOP priority with this car (extra teams of engineers just for this they said!) and they have problems like this a month before launch. you got to be kidding me. what's with the road noise - is this going to be fixed? the current jetta doesn't have excessive road and wind noise.
on the positive side - ride and handling again got high marks along with the high quality interior. i seen and been in the interior and they're right about that.
i'm still enthusiastic about this car but now i have concerns. only a month away from a test drive to see for myself.
“Road and wind noise” I would assume that it would be “inline” with the competition once it’s fixed.
I agree that a statement like that doesn’t inspire confidence.
This may be the early release “bugs” that are common.
My 2003 Accord had the same driver door wind noise problem. Head liner is still water stained. Front passenger speaker has always crackled. Burnt out third break light, burnt out interior light. Speedometer died and had to be replaced (forget the part). Twice it had to spend the night at the dealer for problems. First time I went in for an oil change I had about 5-6 items on my list for them to fix; can’t remember now, nothing huge.
There does seem to be a theme of problems with early release autos (and most things), look at the problems Nissan was having with the products out of Mississippi. Acura/Honda with the auto tannies. My unscientific poll reads “half the people I know with Odysseys have had their transmissions replaced”.
There does seem to be an aura of reliability problems hovering around VW, whether or not it’s justified is another thing. What VW should do is offer free maintenance for the duration of the bumper to bumper warranty. I personally feel that they would see great dividends in that small investment but why would they listen to me I think they (and Audi) should offer overseas delivery, and they still have not implemented that suggestion
I’d be just as confident with a new Jetta as I would be with any newly released auto.