Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Volkswagen Jetta 2006+

191012141528

Comments

  • chrisducatichrisducati Member Posts: 394
    GASP! that is REAL wood? Ohohohhahahahah OMG...stop..your killing me..OHHhohahahahhah
  • chrisducatichrisducati Member Posts: 394
    I think even wood in a Jag looks like krap. No wood for me please.
  • a_l_hubcapsa_l_hubcaps Member Posts: 518
    The new Jetta's been available for a couple weeks now...just wondering if we have any owners here yet. Since this has been a somewhat controversial car, I'm interested to hear what owners think and why they chose to buy it.

    -Andrew L
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    The 3.0 Liter Accord makes 216ft-lb of torque at 5000rpm
    The 2.0T in the VW makes 206ft-lb of torque at 1800rpm.


    actually the accord has 212ft-lb of peak torque. of course your example would have more meaning if torque curves were linear. but yes, turbo engines do have abundant low end torque.
  • joe249joe249 Member Posts: 95
    The Corolla S has a moonroof and cost 40% less than a Jetta. The only thing the Jetta has that Corolla lacks is heated seats.
    Then there's that VW reliability and quality problem. Toyota makes a bullet proof car to me.
    All my cars have been Acura's so for the money rather than a Jetta,I'd go with Honda or Toyota.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    most people preferred the 1.8t to the VR6.

    i've owned both 1.8t and VR6 jettas and the 1.8t wins hand down. it was quieter, smoother, more eager to rev and got better gas mileage. the jetta also had better weight balance with the turbo. but yes, there was turbo lag with the 1.8t and the VR6 wasn't the best example of a smooth refined V6.

    if it's true that the new 2.0t has virtually eliminated turbo lag then a lot of people are going to love this engine.

    the "old" 1.8t puts the new 2.5 to shame in my opinion.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    the corolla is a nice economy car but it lacks far more than heated seats compared to the jetta.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    oops...where did I get 216???

    Yes...I think the 2.0T brags that the peak is available from 1800 to about 5000 or so.
  • rjlaerorjlaero Member Posts: 659
    I was surprised at the prices of the new Jetta. 27 grand for a loaded up 150hp Jetta is pretty steep for a car made in Mexico.
  • mariner7mariner7 Member Posts: 509
    VW says Jetta's moving into Accord/Camry/Altima class. 27K for I-5 is way too expensive. V6's of those cars can be had for less than that. There's no comparison between those V6's and VW I-5.

    BTW, Passat's moving into Avalon/Maxima class.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    well the last jetta was already in the accord/camry/altima class in terms of price. but i agree completely that there's no comparison between the the 2.5l i5 and those V6s.

    VW has to seriously think about having the 2.0T standard for the jetta w/pck2. the previous jetta GLX model had the VR6 standard.
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    "Apparently the majority of american buyers see vinyl as an upgrade over cloth."

    Not really, but some auto makers would like American buyers to think this is true. This is called "marketing", which may or may not have any basis in reality. I have to give them credit for the plan though. Take a cheap inferior product, make it look like something expensive, and then convince buyers that it's actually an upgrade. Brilliant!
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    "but yes, turbo engines do have abundant low end torque"

    Only after you get on the boost. Before that they are about as responsive as a 50-year-old virgin. ;)
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Not really related...but a couple months ago I priced a base Maxima (if you could find on on dealer lots) and the Edmunds TMV came to 24K (rebates etc).

    I was REALLY surprised to hear of 27K Jetta's with the 5cyl. I thought the MAX (loaded with everything) would come to 24ish (and typical configuration under 22K) and the 2.0T with DSG hovering around the 27K mark.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    ....and the 2.0T with DSG hovering around the 27K mark.

    i have a hunch that when the 2.0T is available it will be standard for pck2 jettas (in addition to the GLI model) without much of a price increase. i think VW misjudged our market in what's expected in a $27K sedan.

    otherwise you might as well go for an audi A4.
  • avemanaveman Member Posts: 122
    I still think the value edition is a good deal, even without the avaiabilty of alloy wheels.however, I think the 2.5 series suffers in value because of the option packages. There is no way I would buy a sunroof to get alloy wheels. One good thing about VW's greedy packaging; it gives the buyer a chance to look at the competion and find a better deal.I would have to look a the projected maintenece cost to see if the TDI in base form would be a value.The gas milage of the 2.5 is boderline acceptable to me. I think we are going to take a big hit in fuel cost soon. Subaru legacy 2.5 wagon. All wheel drive, standard 16" alloy wheels, about 22,000. the only barrier there is fuel economy and possibly side impact crash test.
  • wetwilliewetwillie Member Posts: 129
    The 1.8T isn't close to the smoothness of the VR6. I currently own a 1.8T Golf. Before this I owned the 24V, 200hp VR6 GTI. The VR6 is butter-smooth, the smoothest engine I've ever had! The 1.8T does not come close. The VR6 has more on-tap torgue anywhere from idle to redline and has no turbo-lag.

    The 1.8T Audi engine is a fine engine - a perennial Wards top ten engine champ -but it is NOT as refined as the VR6, which possesses BMW I6 type smoothness and response.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    i had the earlier version of the VR6 (16V, 176hp). perhaps the 24V version is a real improvement.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
  • ghostbuster23ghostbuster23 Member Posts: 43
    Wow, that's a brutal review.

    9.1 seconds to 60 with the auto? Hahaha. I know 0-60 times aren't the most important measure of a car's value, but when it's got such a bad speed to dollar ratio it is an issue.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    The 9.1 0-60 is the VW claim. I don’t think they did their own tests.

    Usually magazines list their testing procedures. For automatics they usually apply the brake AND press down on the gas at the same time; then release the brake. This way they get “better” acceleration times than the manufacturers claimed times.

    Not a road burner either way…
  • 600kgolfgt600kgolfgt Member Posts: 690
    ...that being said, anyone who even considers purchasing any car so new in its production cycle is rolling the dice, big time. I usually purchase cars near the end of their production cycle - after most of the bugs have been fixed.

    I know some people who want to be the first on the block to own the new this-and-that, but is it really worth plunking down $20K+ of hard-earned money to become a beta-tester for the automobile industry?

    If anyone has answered yes to this question, then complaining when something goes wrong with a newly-purchased early production automobile will only serve as an object lesson on shooting yourself in the foot.
  • 1point8turbo1point8turbo Member Posts: 1
    Dear Interested VW lovers who want to know about the new Jetta,

    I just leased a 2005.5 Jetta Package 2 and I LOVE IT. I have owned a 1998 Passat, 2002 Passat, 2003 Jetta, 2004 Jetta, and now I am leasing the new Jetta. Best Volkswagen I have had. Better handling, powerful base engine, and I personally love the look of it as opposed to other VW people who say, "eww Carolla". It puts any Carolla to shame with the features it has and new size. The engine is MUCH MUCH faster then the 2.0 liter and feels almost close to the 1.8 T. Great on gas and sounds great. All in all I love the car! If your unsure of what the new Jetta could be like just drive it and then you'll know. Can't wait for the 2.0T to come out should be pretty fast and then a possible 3.6 liter VR6 engine, we will wait and see.

    -Max
  • mazda6smazda6s Member Posts: 1,901
    I was looking at the Jetta again today and the front end looks a little "busy" to me. Sorta looks like it was designed by a commitee - one guy from Japan, one guy from Germany, and two guys from the US (one of whom was drunk and the other had been smoking pot). All joking aside, I liked the front end look of the last Jetta better. And what's up with that big chrome piece in the middle? I like the styling of the rest of the car though.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    And what's up with that big chrome piece in the middle?

    That is known as corporate identity. You better get used to it.
  • stephentobackstephentoback Member Posts: 1
    I am a current Jetta owner (03) and its my second since the redesign (00). I really dislike the new Jetta. I don't think it looks like a Honda, but it does look like a Corolla which is worse (IMHO). The current Jetta is very European and looks more like a Mercedes than anything from Japan. This is a huge step backwards and this will certainly be my last Jetta. :-(
  • lexusrockslexusrocks Member Posts: 56
    I'm sorry that you don't like the new redesign. I think the car is overall quite attractive. However I agree with you when you say the new Jetta's taillights are similar to those of the Corolla. I think the car is a huge improvement over the previous Jetta. The previous Jetta looks a like a very boring car, more boring than any of the other Japanese compacts. The new Jetta looks a lot bigger, almost midsize. Nice job on the redesign, Volkswagen! If only they could reduce the prices slightly, the Japanese cars offer similar, if not better equipment and reliability for a cheaper price.
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Forget equipment and reliability, the Japanese offer significantly more engine and fuel efficiency at the price too.

    Revisted the Jetta at the NYC auto show today- the leatherette is trash, it was already showing age creases from the show wear. Notably, the cloth of the Value Edition was fine and attractive. Doesnt the public deserve better than vinyl when paying 24K for a car? Does VW think its fooling anyone? (For some reason, the leatherette on BMWs is much better...)

    ~alpha
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    "the Japanese cars offer similar, if not better equipment and reliability for a cheaper price"

    perhaps you should re-visit the available features on the new jetta.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    thanks for the info on how easily the leatherette wears and ages. i think it looks nice brand new but i did have concerns on how soon it would show wear. i guess it's real leather or look else where for me.

    when are you going to take the new jetta out for a spin?
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    Ok, so whats on a Jetta Pkg 2 that cant be had on an Acura TSX or loaded Camry XLE V6 (besides 50 to 60 horsepower)?

    ~alpha
  • 600kgolfgt600kgolfgt Member Posts: 690
    The extra 50 or 60 horsepower does one no good while sitting in a traffic jam or driving in wall-to-wall traffic.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    True...but...more is alway better :)
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    Ordered my wife's Jetta Value Edition today.

    The dealer indicated it should be here in May and that the first VEs are supposed to arrive within a couple weeks here in the north. I believe he indicated the first batch are at a port in the US...forgot exactly where, somewhere on the gulf coast I think.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    "True...but...more is alway better :) "

    Is 2,000 hp better than 200? I think the whole focus on hp numbers is getting to be ridiculous. People actually just look at the hp number and will not even consider a car based on that one item. HP is directly related to rpm, and if you are not driving at those high rpms you are not getting that hp. Torque is far more important.

    I actually prefer the much less powerfull TDI to the VR-6 or the 2.0t or the new 2.5.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    Funny…I was just reading an interview with the Bugatti CEO stating that it would have somewhere close to 1100hp…I was thinking “that’s much better than 750”.

    You’re actually singing my tune. I’m a big advocate of the 2.0T over similar 4 cylinders such as the TSX because of the HUGE (relatively) amount of torque down low.

    I think the TDI with DSG would be an excellent combination for general use. I think in the Jetta they are only using the 1.9L TDI whereas the new Passat will get a 2.0L TDI that produced 170hp and 260 ft/lb of torque (0-60 8.5 sec and 39mpg).

    The 2.0T is my sweet spot…
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    TSX lacks the following:

    6 speed DSG transmission
    an engine (2.0T) better suited to an auto tranny
    rain sensor wiper control
    air conditioned compartments
    trip computer - you need the navi with the TSX
    12-way power seats with memory for driver
    power lumbar support
    heated windshield washers
    self centered steering
    real wood applications
    rear window shade

    subjectively i would say the jetta handles as well as the TSX but offers a better ride. it feels great over broken payment.

    i agree with you that you need more than the 2.5l for this trim level. you could never get the old GLX model jetta with the base engine (2.0l).

    since you didn't respond to my last query does this mean you're not going to test drive the new jetta?
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    It means that I hope to tomorrow, if time permits.

    ~alpha
  • alpha01alpha01 Member Posts: 4,747
    The 2.0T is not yet out. Right now, its a 150 hp engine whose suitability to an automatic is arguably better or worse than the TSX. Honestly, the ONLY noteworthy feature, IMO, of those above are the rain sensing winshield wipers. Its not as if the TSX has manual seats, for Pete's sake, its just an 8 way vs. a 12 way adjustment. What the TSX offers that the Jetta Pkg 2 doesnt includes 17 inch vs. 16 inch wheels, and standard Xenon HID headlamps, for example, both features Id rather have than an air conditioned owners manual. To each their own...

    ~alpha
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    The GLI is here in 6 weeks according to this:

    http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=102071

    M
  • 600kgolfgt600kgolfgt Member Posts: 690
    That was spot on!

    As the saying goes: "Horsepower sells engines, but torque wins races"...
  • fish8fish8 Member Posts: 2,282
    If the Leatherette in the New jetta's is anything like the Leatherette in the '04.5 Passat's then you should have no problems with its durability. The passat's leatherette looks and feels (but lacks the smell) like real leather. After 11,500 miles, no wear can be detected.
  • dudleyrdudleyr Member Posts: 3,469
    Generally letherette wears better than leather. It does lack the smell though. I would prefer it to leather because of the durability, lower cost, lower maintenance and easier cleanup. It is far superior to the vinyl from the '70's.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    I always thought it was the other way around…for the most part.

    High horse power would win races because you’re running in the upper rpm band so you don’t need the low end torque (Honda S2000)

    The high end torque would sell more because it gives a better feel, but if your engine runs out of steam over 4000rpm you maybe able to spin your tires at the lights, or tow a boat, but can’t make a quarter mile run (diesel)

    I think high hp figures are just for advertising and may fool some people who would never use the power anyway. Plus hp figures aren’t always accurate or comparable. If you drive a BMW 330 225hp (or even 325 184hp) and compare it to a 240hp Accord, the BMW’s feel much more powerful.

    Either way, engine characteristics and driving style probably make a bigger difference…if you NEVER drag race or go WOT, a diesel with HUGE low end torque may give you the impression that you’ve got a really powerful engine (which I guess you probably do)
  • 600kgolfgt600kgolfgt Member Posts: 690
    Let me put it another way:

    Horsepower gets you there, torque keeps you there...
  • jeffyscottjeffyscott Member Posts: 3,855
    "It is far superior to the vinyl from the '70's."

    Probably true, yet it is still far inferior to cloth, IMO.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    heh...well put...
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    "air conditioned owners manual"

    you never know when an air conditioned owner's manual will come in handy. i hear what you're saying.

    however, the DSG will be a noteworthy feature. i know, it's not out yet.
  • venus537venus537 Member Posts: 1,443
    "If you drive a BMW 330 225hp (or even 325 184hp) and compare it to a 240hp Accord, the BMW’s feel much more powerful"

    BMW must do wonders with that peak 175 ft/lb of torque for the 2.5l. never mind that honda's 3.0l is producing more than that at virtually every RPM.

    since the accord's 3.0l has 90% of it's peak torque as low as 2000 RPM and at the same time reaches peak torque at 5000 RPM i don't see how the BMW's 225hp 3.0l would feel so much faster. perhaps it's the gearing. there sure isn't much difference in measurable terms whether it be 0-30, 0-60, 5-60, 30-50, 50-70 or the 1/4 mile.
  • ivan_99ivan_99 Member Posts: 1,681
    felt like it to me...
This discussion has been closed.