Volkswagen Passat 2005 and earlier

wishnhigh1 · May 2002

but I personally like the term World-Over-Taking, or Whomp-On-This!

They give a little more meaning to it, IMO:)

dle01 · May 2002

markcincinatti -- I have no background in marketing whatsoever, but I understand what you are saying. I do not agree with you, however. I have always found it curious that the german "luxury" cars we view as very upscale here in the states (BMW, Mercedes) are offered in a variety of clearly very affordable and "downmarket" models elsewhere in the world that are used as family cars, taxis, etc. VWs are still ubiquitous throughout Europe and the developing world as affordable, durable, basic transportation. I guess in the good old USA we have been marketed into beleiving that a Mercedes or BMW is really something special. Both of these companies have tried unsucessfully to offer entry level products that were somewhat affordable (MB 190; 318i hatchback). We have bought into this marketing persona they have created.

So how is VW different? In my non-marketers view, it has a very positive image as a well built european vehicle that does not have to cost an arm and a leg. You don't have to be a doctor or a lawyer to own one and enjoy the engineering and driving dynamics of a well built car. Recently, probably starting with the B5 Passat design, they have also become stylish and trendy too. I think that's great. Vwguild keeps mentioning the cradle to grave concept, and I think that makes some sense. It presumes that some products will remain affordable to the average consumer like myself, while others become image leaders for those able and willing to spend alot more. An abandonment of the "lower end" of the market may be coming, but I'm not looking forward to it.

I also don't think an expensive Jetta is a possible substitute for someone looking for a base model Passat. I like the Jetta, but it is too small.

georgek44 · May 2002

I pretty much agree with dle01's views. Mercedes Benz in particular has been very successful in selling cars in the USA as "luxury models" that in their home market are sold as taxi cabs and fleet vehicles.

My Passat is a 2000 1.8T wagon. The only other car I considered seriously after a test drive was the Subaru Legacy wagon, either in the GT or Outback version. The Subaru may be better in snow than the Passat, but it is not nearly as pleasant to drive, and my personal experience is that the 1.8 Passat is more reliable. (Mine has 61K essentially trouble-free miles, and just passed a state inspection that included the pads and rotors. At the same mileage my 1994 Legacy had had the front-rear transmission clutches replaced under warranty, the oil and water pumps replaced at my expense and had gone through two sets of brake pads and a pair of front rotors.)

I would buy another Passat today if I were ready to replace this car. My understanding, though, is that the next generation Passat will not share the A4/A6 platform. If it turns out to be just a fancier Jetta, I would instead begin comparison shopping all over again.

The Passat 1.8 GLS is a bargain, providing amazing value for money. The same cannot be said of any Jetta currently sold in the United States. The Jetta wagon offers especially poor value when compared to the GLS 1.8 Passat wagon.

I just hope that VW, in it's upwardly mobile striving, does not go the way of the Volvo division of Ford, or the SAAB division of GM. Volvos used to be somewhat expensive, boxy-looking and reliable. Now they are very expensive, stylish and unreliable. SAABs now are little more than fancy Opels with the ignition switch on the floor, and this is about to worsen. The next generation of SAABs will not have a hatchback version. Can you believe that? IMO, this is the dumbest marketing move since Datsun became Nissan, and promptly lost a third of its customers in the United States.

dle01 · May 2002

I too owned a Subaru Legacy wagon before buying a Passat. We traded our Pathfinder for the Passat, and kept the Subaru as a second car because I was driving alot for work and thought that it would be more reliable over the long run than the truck. Big mistake. Mine was not quite a piece of ****, but close. I traded it at 91k when the whole transmission went. At that point I breifly considered purchasing a new 1.8t Passat wagon base model to replace it. That car was a steal for about $21,000 at the time, and WORLDS better to drive than any Subaru available at the time. Unfortunately, I didn't have the money and wound up with a used Ranger pick-up that I'm still driving when I can't steal the keys to the Passat from my wife.

One other thing -- I didn't mean to infer that the next generation Passat would be a Jetta derivative. markcincinatti's argument was that if the Passat became out of reach financially, consumers in a certain price bracket should be satisfied to buy an upmarket Jetta.

Do you (or anyone else on the board) know anything about the next generation Passat? If it will change to the Jetta platform and be built in Mexico I may want to order my Passat wagon now!

markcincinnati · May 2002

I see very little in your comments that I disagree with. And, my marketing background is limited to courses in graduate school, although I do own a small IT consulting company and must always be aware of marketing.

I really agree, I have never thought of VW's as "cheap" cars -- I am aware that they went through some quality issues when the manufacturing started in Mexico, but I believe Dr. Piech made "quality, Job 1" (or words to that effect).

I too, hope that there are, lower cost VW's on the market after 2005 -- the "grand scheme" of Piech's and his follow-on (sorry I won't attempt his name) seems to me to belie this, however. The grand scheme that I am referring to was in what ever month's issue of CAR magazine that was out about 5 or 6 weeks ago (perhaps the June issue?).

In the magazine, the conclusion that was drawn and that the reader could possibly draw was for VW to move up. I don't think this means the end to a Jetta, for example, I think it may mean that the Jetta will move up content and up price. In the US, at least, even the bottom of the model range will have its, content, quality and price increased steadily but relentlessly for at least the next 3 or 4 model years, when the transition of "differentiation" between VW and Audi will be much further along.

I am not saying LITERALLY that Jettas will be way way more expensive (although I think the term "expensive" is one of those relative terms, and therefore very subjective) but I do believe they will be considerably more costly to acquire than a bottom of the line one is today.

In the US, there is no Audi A3, no A4 with a powerplant less than a 1.8T -- and many luxo touches are standard. I rented an A4 with a 1.6 engine, stick shift and front only power windows (in Germany) the car was great but it had 0 - 100kph acceleration "same day." Here in the US, what we get as the bottom of the model line is actually much higher up from the true bottom of the line.

I suspect that, as I said, what we now call "GLX" trim levels will become, in effect, the entry level configurations for VW's (by calendar 2004, model year 2005). The price, therefore will not go up (in relative terms), it is just that model choices of a shall we say "lower cost" nature will no longer be brought to the US. The effect will be that the lowest cost Jetta of then (the future) will perhaps be closer to the highest cost Jetta of now.

Mercedes missed the mark with the 190, BMW ditto with the "baby bimmers" -- perhaps Piech was correct, it is harder to go downstream than up. I do not claim to know what will happen, I just claim to have read a ton of magazine articles and web columns and the like to have arrived at the conclusion that VW and Audi will be highly differentiated over the years (2 - 5) and that VW will be attempting to compete as 95% of Mercedes in content at 80% of the price. Hence the Phaeton will compete with Mercs that cost 25% more than it will cost. The Passat will compete with the Mercedes "C" class perhaps, or maybe they will move even further up to make the Passat be (in someone's mind) a real alternative to an E class.

Audi, too, will take a similar approach but will consider its rival to be BMW -- and Audi wants to be seen as a truly sporting luxury car -- VW and Audi, today, IMO, share too much for the NEW strategy to work, hence the temporary market overlap and -- for me -- confusion. I still think that a Passat W8 is a heck of a deal and when compared with an A4 or A6 MIGHT be attractive to some -- but not to those of us "in the know" by virtue of our participation on the Edmunds town hall.

So, David, I don't know if you think we are still in polite, friendly disagreement or not -- I find that I am pretty much in "violent agreement" with your POV.

georgek44 · May 2002

I do not know where it will be built, but do recall reading that it will not be on the new A4/A6 platform, although it may continue to share some parts. Through sad experience, my own and that of friends, I would not buy a Mexico-assembled car. While VW's quality control there may be better than Ford's or Chrysler's it is not up to the standards of the plants in Germany, or Hungary, where the 1.8T motors are made.

BTW - the transmission on our Legacy fully self-destructed at 115K miles, a few months after it had been serviced and inspected by a Subaru dealer. Subaru says that there is no generic problem with its transmissions, and that the dealer's "inspection" I was charged for is not intended to verify that the transmission is fit for continued duty, just that it seemed to be working the day they serviced it. Sure.

dle01 · May 2002

Mark -- You clearly are well informed about VW/Audi's plans. "Violent Agreement" is ok with me. I certainly don't disagree with the facts of their move, but I still don't like it. I think VW could probably do just as well not to loose focus on their current market. Now the Passat is in the general class of "family sedans" that includes Camry, Accord, Taurus, Impala, Altima, etc. -- in short cars that can be bought well equipped for 20-25k, and top out at around 30k. There are alot of cars sold in this class, and VW has made many sales to first time customers because they cross shopped those cars and picked the Passat because it is superior in a number of ways. If VW wants to be the next Mercedes. . . well great. They will loose their exposure to people like me who will not cross shop the cars because they are clearly a "luxury" or premium brand, and most likely out of many peoples price range. So I guess I agree with your assessment, but again I don't like it. But I know nothing about marketing.

George -- My transmission self destructed about 6 months and 10k miles after the dealer serviced it to replace a seal. I've always wondered whether Subaru transmissions are crap, or if the dealer did something. All I know is they gave me a great trade in deal for a car that was not in driving condition (acted a little guilty). There will be no Subarus in my future.

markcincinnati · May 2002

I found something to disagree with you on! And, I am almost certainly WRONG!

I, for the life of me, cannot utter the words Camry and Passat together as if they are competitors. I know every car is at some level a competitor of every other -- but I do not look at the Camry as a sporting family sedan. I do, however, see the Passat in that light.

Car and Driver television (Sundays on the TNN network) calls the new Camry a "fine appliance" that doesn't do much to stir the soul -- and they add, that's what most Camry buyers want.

As I recall, they were far more enthusastic about the Passat.

So while I suppose people do indeed shop for a Camry and a Passat ($ similarities) I cannot imagine one would ever confuse one for the other.

I put them in separate, unequal, compartments.

Told you I was almost certainly WRONG!

dle01 · May 2002

Mark - again we have violent agreement. I heartily agree with your assessment of the two cars personalities. My sister has a fully loaded XLE Camry that she loves. I think its great to ride in but boooring to drive! The Passat is, in my calculus, a far superior car that is great fun to drive every day.

But they are competitors. Of the other cars I mentioned (Taurus, Impala, Accord, Altima), only the Altima has as much or more sport in the equation (actually more, from what I've read). But they do compete based on configuration, size, and price.

imprtlvr · May 2002

Yes, the 3.5 Altima does offer much more "sport" than the Passat, but it has the "soul less" interior that plagues Toyota. I test drove the automatic last week, a beautiful car with black/black leather trim. It definitely looks more expensive than it is, but the interior has some very cheap plastic bits, not unlike Ford/GM cars. The Maxima SE with 6 speed would be my choice if I wanted to spend over 30k, but the rear end ruins it for me. The Passat is more well rounded than both of them however.

steveiowa · May 2002

A wise man in his 70s once told me "The Japanese make cars for passengers; the Germans make cars for drivers." I used to do nearly ALL the driving. Then we traded our Camry for a Passat. Now SHE does all the driving (seriously)...I NEVER get to drive.

frapzoid · May 2002

I am shocked and appalled that some of you had trouble with your Subarus! I have an ongoing debate with Subaru owners on the "Passat Wagon vs Subaru Wagon" thread. They have informed me on numerous occasions that the Subarus are infinitely more reliable than our beloved Passats.
They seem like straight up guys... would they be pulling my leg? ;-) hehehe... Of course I have wanted to ask them about the thread on Edmunds regarding trouble shooting Subarus but I haven't the heart to ask... :-) Hmmmm why would there be a need for such a thread if those cars are so bulletproof? These Subaru owners defend their car of choice assiduously and readily call into question the Passat reliability issue with gusto. The knock on Subarus I have heard about is they blow seals...I've had my 2002 Passat wagon almost seven months without even the slightest malfunction...Knock on wood (walnut trim on my dash) LOL. Actually a few of the Subaru guys are ok :-)

pkradd · May 2002

OK. Is the turbo on the 1.8 Tip always engaged? A salesman at my dealership said so.

furena · May 2002

I need some advice. I am looking to get into a pre-owned Passat and have two potential choices: a 1998 1.8 w/ 55k miles or a 2000, 1.8T w/ 73k miles. The 2000 was driven by one owner, all highway (so I'm told). I test drove the 2000, and mechanically it appears sound. There's about a $2000 difference in the price of the two.

What is owner experience with this car in the upper mileage range?

vwguild · May 2002

Are these Certified Pre-Owned VWs at a Volkswagen
Dealership?

frapzoid · May 2002

According to Consumer Report the 2000 would be the better choice. Based on what they say the '98 1.8 is the Passat Turbo to avoid. They do consider the '00-'01 1.8 Passat to be a reliable
used car.

barkasy1 · May 2002

Consumer Reports specifically targets 98's as the year to beware of. For $ 2000.00 difference, get the car that's 2 years younger for sure.

Dave ;^)

merckx · May 2002

no,the turbo is only spinning boost during acceleration. On mine,I can heara very faint whistle when it's working. At steady (even high)speed,it's at rest. That's the whole concept of a turbo. Here,4 cylinder economy most of the time,with 6 cylinder performance upon demand.

pkradd · May 2002

Thanks for the info, I kinda thought so. I do wish people working for VW would get their stories right! No problem, love the car.

mbnut1 · May 2002

Are you saying that you think the turbo is not turning at steady state speed. If so how is that accomplished?

merckx · May 2002

I thought this phrase would convey that normally the turbo is of couse spinning,but it is not forcing air under pressure into the intake to be burned with fuel.

merc1 · May 2002

I generally agree with you all are saying about VW and their upmarket intentions. However why do you all say Mercedes missed it with the 190? The car sold well for 10 years, of which during the last few it had some clearly better cars breathing down it's neck. Didn't the 190 make it possible for a many to own a Benz, didn't it groom them to move up to an E? Didn't the 190 start the small car luxury class in 1983???

M

merckx · May 2002

My problem with this series is that for such a small car,it really should have been FWD. Either that,or made in coupe/convertible form only. The back seat was absurdly small. And I don't think it was driving dynamics mainly that made it RWD. I think it was scale of economy. Its engines were also used it the upmarket E series,and Mercedes obviously didn't want to go to the expense to convert the engines to be used transversly,too.

markcinti3 · May 2002

As I was driving by an VW store in Steubenville Ohio! I saw a silver W8 -- I looked at it from every angle, read the window sticker and have come to the conclusion: "What were they thinking when they brought it to the US market with those wheels and tire?"

Other than that: WOW! What a steal! Replace those wheels/tires, option sat nav and perhaps sat radio -- keep the price under 40K (and of course bring the 6spd/sport edition SOON) and they should sell as many of these things as they can mint!

Oh, now but to drive one!

And -- the above comments pertaining to the 190 were dead on accurate. The Merc 190's were Merc's Cimmarons in my opinion.

vwguild · May 2002

Price point was the principle consideration...The
Sports Pkg. was already cut in stone, and will add
about $1500.00 to MSRP, but you must subtract out the TipTronic at $1075, leaving about a $500 add..
Available around Christmas...

We had an opportunity on this past Tuesday to drive the W8, 330xi, G35, E320 Sport Wagon, and
the X-Type Jag...The W8 did more than hold it's
own, even with the stock wheels & tires.

scirocco22 · May 2002

I just heard a radio commercial for the Passat 4Motion: tongue-in-cheek-- "What are the benefits of Volkswagen's incredible 4Motion? ...it helps keep your car on the road! ...now that's a good thing!"

--'rocco

merc1 · May 2002

Well I agree about the 190's size, but it drove just like any other MB. Mercedes shares engines across the board so I don't know what you're talking about there. The 190 ended up being a good car, if not in the beginning. From about 1987 onward it was a solid car.
Nothing like a tarted up Chevy that Cadillac tried to peddle. Other than rear-seat room it was all Benz.

M

birdboy1 · May 2002

Love driving the 1.8t, hate making regular trips for service. Have 9,000 miles on my 02 passat. So far i have been to service 3x for the MIL lamp. A few weeks ago the cassette began making weird sounds so I said OK , I will wait for the 10,000 mile service, then the power oulet for the cell phone stopped working, and I said, OK , I will wait for the 10,000 mile service, Yesterday the turn signals stopped working , Ans I said ...#####

I do love the car and drive it with passion, however I have had a Honda CRV for 3years, a Nisan xterra for two years, and a mazda 929 for five years and all three cars combined never gave me these annoying problems. I sincerely hope that this kind of unreliability does not continue as all the warranties in the world can not replace time lost waiting in service departments. I hope that these are isolated problems.

markcinti3 · May 2002

The most common reason for the MIL lamp to come on repeatedly (and yes I am guilty) is the failure of the person filling the car with gas to tighten the gas cap at least one click.

Although certainly not the only reason, when this first happened to me, then to my wife then to one of my co-workers (and his was on a Toyota) I now make certain I click the gas cap every time.

imprtlvr · May 2002

How common are the electrical problems with newer Passats? Consumer Reports says many of the problems with the pre-2001 redesign models was electrical. Did this problem carry over? It's unsettling, I've seen a common trend on these and other boards involving problems with 2001-2002 Passats and the majority seem to be electrical related.

pkradd · May 2002

I have a 2001.5 (2002) Passat. i just passed my first year with 11,000 miles and absolutely no problems with electrical or other issues. I suppose there are always going to be cars with such problems - and the complaints will find their way to these boards. Most people don't have any problems and don't bother to post. Sooooo, I'm posting my good fortune so far. I click my gas gap 3 times... never been to Kansas though.

mbnut1 · May 2002

Merc1 is right. The Mercedes 190E was a more solid car structurally than the VW-Audi B5 chassis.

monkeyman6 · May 2002

I just took re delivery of my 2002 Passat after a month in the shop due to some unfriendlies smashing two windows and a door frame in Montreal in search of whatever. the shop had my car longer than I owned it. Anyway, as I reaquante myself with its workings, my question is does the driver's memory seat have a default to return to position one when the car is turned off or am I hallucinating? I thought it did this when I first got the car and it no longer defaults but stays in whatever memory position it was in (1,2, or 3. Also, anyone resolve click click click to the left of the steering column when you start the car? Any help would be greatly appreciated on both points.

merckx · May 2002

To its credit,it did drive the same as the other Benzes. But my point about the engines was that a car that small really should be FWD. You see so many people driving them with the driver's seat 'way past the B-pillar. It just looks silly. and I don't think it was RWD for lofty,purist motives. My point was that the engines were to be used in the larger,RWD sedans. And it appears Mercedes didn't want to spend the tooling to convert these engines to transverse operation.
And,yes,Mercedes did share engines for decades. When the sedans were large and medium,that wasn't a problem. But the 190 was smaller than they'ed gone in many years. And I think it would have been a far more satisfying car with FWD.

mbnut1 · May 2002

The principal reason manufacturers have gone to FWD is reduced cost not driving satisfaction. So I disagree that Mercedes didn't go to FWD due to cost considerations. There is no way converting the car to FWD would have made it a more satisfying drive. It was front end heavy as it was. Driving satisfaction is why BMW's aren't FWD. Again the 190 was every bit a Benz just small.

merckx · May 2002

but that's ok,I think. What I meant by satisfaction was admittedly not DRIVING satisfaction,but overall ownership experience. I think many have gotten way too hung up on RWD. my real world experience is that torque steer is mostly noticeable on a very rare occasion,and that's expressway toll booths! you've been going at least 60mph for a while. You stop to pay toll-it's greasy at the plaza. When you start back up,with your heavy foot used to going 60,you give it too much gas,and your car gets a little squirrely taking off.
Otherwise,it's fairly easy to modulate acceleration enough to avoid torque steer.
I own a RWD Catera and a FWD Passat-I think you should choose a car,not a drive system. And I love both my cars,and although very infrenquently the VW might seem a little "untidy" because of its FWD,what I notice every day is that compared to the Caddy it gets incredible fuel economy and has a back seat just about as hospitable.

So I feel that in every way the 190 completely has Benz DNA,and drives really great. I'm just saying I couldn't live with its tiny back seat.

rayainsw · May 2002

Mark 

While I agree that the 215/55 x 16 Continentals (EcoPlus . . . plus what?) are probably not the best tire choice for those in the W8 target market, I am not so sure about the wheels. My personal preference would have been something like 225 or 235 section, 50 aspect ratio tires. And on 17 rims.

But I can probably live with replacing the Contis with more aggressive rubber on my W8  probably in a 225/50 x 16 size.

Wheel styling (in fact, most styling), OTOH, is such a highly subjective call that I think there is an excellent chance that whatever the factory chooses for the 17 Sport wheels, many would not choose. And the stock wheels actually fit well with the stealth aspect of my W8. I am not interested in anything that would potentially draw unwanted attention (say, from the local or state speed limit enforcement battalions) to my car. I prefer to drive a Q-Ship.

And - I find it MOST interesting that the W8 tested by (BBC) Top Gear in their April 2002 issue had what appear to be identically styled wheels, except in size 17 X 7.5. I wonder if these will end up being the US Sport wheels?

Cheers,
- Ray
Who is now about two thirds of the way through the break-in period  and struggling to decide between Michelin and Dunlop tires . . .

dbmichal · May 2002

Hi, here's the response I received from VW.com regarding the premium fuel question.

Dear David,

Thank you for contacting the Volkswagen website. Volkswagen does recommend
using premium fuel, which is 91 octane or higher in the 1.8T and VR6, V6
engines to receive the best performance out of your vehicle. However, the
vehicles are produced with engine knock sensors, which allow fuel
flexibility, therefore, it is not harmful or detrimental to the engine if
you were to use a lower grade fuel. But you will receive less performance
out of your vehicle, for example, you may lose mpg and overall performance
may be less.

Thank you again for your submission. Have a nice day!

Anett
Volktalk

pkradd · May 2002

Thanks for the info.

mbnut1 · May 2002

Is your Passat a '98 or newer if so IMHO it is the best FWD made in terms of torque steer. That design feature is one of the reasons I bought my A4 quattro.

merckx · May 2002

and I've not really noticed any torque steer at all,but years ago I had a 1981 Chevy Citation that would get a little crazy at times.

blackjetta18t1 · May 2002

Drive a Saab 9000/9-5 Aero and you will know the meaning of torque steer, oh boy it is a monster. I have noticed the 02 Jetta 1.8T's have some torque steer.

georgek44 · May 2002

or Camry, or Accord, or Taurus, or Saturn or almost any other FWD car.

Take a FWD Passat (mine's a 2000 1.8T wagon with Tip)and find a stretch of straight road with no other vehicles alongside. Slow down to a steady 20-30 mph, take your hands off the steering wheel and push the gas pedal to the floor. The passat will accelerate without the least bit of torque steer, wobbling or straying from where it was pointed when you hit the gas.

If VW can manage equal-length drive axles and good engineering design at the Passat's price level, why can't all those other guys?

trlyka · May 2002

Horray!! After waiting 2 weeks for the darn title to come to the owner, I finally took title of a 1999 VW Passat GLS......Dark blue with black velour int., V6, Tiptronic, alloy wheels, CD changer, rear sun shade......oh yeah, it also has 94,000 highway miles on it.

Anyway......

I paid a private owner $8,150 for it and he was looking to get $9,500. The car is clean as a whistle inside and out.

I took it right to the shop for new rotors and pads in the front. You could feel the shimmy in the car when you stepped on the brakes. It seemed like you really had to push hard to completely stop. Although the pads were new, it still had the symptoms of bad rotors. When I took it to my mechanic (before I bought it), he confirmed that the rotors were indeed bad. The owner drove it like that for a month and he said he got used to it. I wasn't comfortable with the way it felt.

I have been hearing that you can not grind down the VW rotors and that it's wise to replace them each time you replace the pads. Does anyone know if that's true? Should I expect to pay $300-$400 every time my front pads wear out?

Thanks

merc1 · May 2002

Oh I totally agree about the 190's back seat. We could hardly fit back there when my friends mom used to carry us to school, but I just loved the way the car rode over RxR tracks and such.

M

imprtlvr · May 2002

The Passat 1.8T doesn't exhibit much, if any torque steer because it is underpowered - it has a low amount of torque to begin with. Test drive a 240hp Altima 3.5 and you'll feel torque steer. That's the only thing holding me back from buying a Passat right now, the lack of power. Quality and class wise it beats everyone else but I've test driven 3 so far and was disappointed in the acceleration(1.8T and V6).

wishnhigh1 · May 2002

actually 165 ft.lbs is quite enough to have some decent torque steer. Volkswagen has some supposed trick suspension geometry or something that limits it...can anybody help me out here?

sda · May 2002

Our '99 Passat GLS 1.8 5 speed came with Michelin MXVs as original equipment. They are nice riding and quiet tires. With 30,300 miles, I will need to plan to replace them in the next 4-5,000 miles. Tire pressure, rotation, and alignment have all been carefully monitored, so I am a little disappointed that we won't get atleast 40,000 miles out of them. What mileage have others with the Michelins experienced? Suggestions for replacement? I am thinking of buying 3 new Michelins to match the spare Michelin tire and rim that is in the trunk. But I am finding the replacement tires $$$. It might be less expensive if I buy 4 new tires of a different quality brand. My wife loves this car and has threatened me with bodily harm if I even mention the idea of trading it!! Enjoy.

markcincinnati · May 2002

You may or may not lend any credence to the source: Car & Driver, but the new issue had a very nice review of the W8 and basically called it "a bargain."

Since this totally agrees with my assesment, well I can only say I feel vindicated, but seriously, this car right now would make me forget about any other Passat -- it is so much more car for so little more money. (relatively)

Note in the article the part about the push upmarket.

charles15 · May 2002

I have owned five VWs starting with a 1971 Variant and now have a 2002 Passat. I plan to keep cars for 10+ years/200k miles - the car I passed on to my daughter when I bought the Passat was a 1989 Volvo 240 with 207K.

My experience with VW has been that they are fun cars but cost a lot to repair. I had a 1984 Vanagon that produced many high repair bills several in excess of $1000 - like $500 headgaskets plus labor. I had real second thoughts about the new Passat but it sucked me in with one drive. The problem that I fear long term is the cost of parts. I know from a friend who worked at VWOA that the company started gouging us on parts to make up for slow sales. Now sales are up but the parts are still some of the most expensive to replace of any car. Anyone hear of any initiative by VW to address this issue. Do you believe that long term (beyond 100K), a VW will be much more expensive to maintain and repair then say a good japanese or american car?

Volkswagen Passat 2005 and earlier

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles