I owned an 80s-era VW Rabbit and now have an 03 Accord. But I don't have anything to say about horsepower comparisons, etc. I never really cared about that.
The Rabbit was very fun to drive but totally unreliable. The Honda is also fun to drive and has been mostly reliable (except for a recurring brake problem).
But I never owned a Jetta, so I'm really off-topic here. These comparison discussions just seem to go around and around and around.
I fear my original statement about my car in reference to the honda was taken way out of context, my point was not a simple 0-60 acceleration comparison, it was more of a real world, normal driving conditions 40-65 comparison. At around 40 you can hit the accelerator on the jetta (hit to to the kick down zone on the auto) and the car takes off like a shot, I do the same in my boss's accord and it does not react nearly as quickly or as flawlessly. This is all a moot point anyway, I have started selecting some aftermarket products and will fine tune my car to my taste, i've never been about 0-60.. not even 1/4mile.. I've always tuned my cars to give me the acceleration where i need it when I need it.. to get me out of those siticky situations.. and not get me into others : My 1992 beretta auto is pushing 6.2 0-60's which is not all that amazing, but for a car that was originally 8+ is quite quick.
My 03 V6 Accord has a delay before it accelerates if I really press on the gas. If I just try to go a little bit faster than I'm already going, there's no delay. But if I punch it, there's a noticeable delay, and then it surges forward. I've learned to allow for the delay/surge when accelerating hard.
"My 03 V6 Accord has a delay before it accelerates if I really press on the gas. If I just try to go a little bit faster than I'm already going, there's no delay. But if I punch it, there's a noticeable delay, and then it surges forward. I've learned to allow for the delay/surge when accelerating hard"
That's the new drive-by-wire throttle system. I'm not a fan of it myself.
We should possibly look at 'acceleration through the gears' figures of both cars.
The delay you get when you stomp on the pedal is the auto tranny downshifting. The Jetta has a turbocharged engine, inherently having a turbo lag, and till you change laws of physics, there is not much you can do about it.
Both are decent cars, I don't personally find the accord as much fun to drive as my jetta (I have to take a 3 hours buisness trip with the company car) but they both are nice enough for most things. The Jetta feels a little bit more sure footed and both have drive by wire systems and the VW reacts quicker, but on the other hand.. neither of them are a haundyi
That's the closest word I can think of to "haundyi."
You're right that they're both nice cars. Each has a very dedicated following.
Between my group of friends there's a Jetta, a Passat, several Accords of different model years, a BMW 3-series, and a baby Lexus. We each enjoy our respective cars greatly, and we rarely have comparison discussions, since it doesn't really matter as long as we're all happy with what we've got.
Not even close... The new Jetta needs a more powerful engine, more space, and more refinement to even come close... and VW's engine troubles.... Never!!!
How about some specifics on VW engine troubles - or do you mean electrical troubles (which would be a much more accurate assessment)?
Whether you realize it or not, the Jetta is still rated as setting the class standard for driving dynamics (feel), fit/finish, and quality of materials and assembly. Their big Achilles' heel has been their reliability...
Speaking of which, I would be concerned about the Accord's history of transmission problems - which only goes to show that no car is perfect.
Not even close... The new Jetta needs a more powerful engine, more space, and more refinement to even come close... and VW's engine troubles.... Never!!!
Well, the low-torque 2.0TFSI (in the regular or GLI versions) seems to me more than adequate for most drivers of sporty sedans. Both have better handling than the Accord IMO. Of course, the Accord is bigger (should be compared to the Passat) and slightly more reliable. Why do I say slightly? Because reliability ratings have been stretched a bit, over the years, where now a factor of 1.5 in incidences seems to predict gloom in some people's minds. (No, we are not talking about 10 times as many "real" problems, nor 2-3 times as many). To me, minor differences in initial reliability are somewhat down in the list of priorities, after safety (a Jetta and VW strong point, by all hard measures and statistics), handling (ditto), and general driving fun.
I also disagree with "VW engine troubles" - have to encounter any yet with my 13 and 5 year old Golf and Passat. Having driven VWs for 30 years, from my not so limited anecdotal knowledge, VW engines are above average, in particular, in the 100,000 - 200,000 mile range (comparing to first-hand knowledge of Honda, Toyota, and Subaru engines). There may be switches and accessories that go wrong in VWs, over time, but not their engines.
No, I believe he was talking about the Jetta. That link you provided was about the Golf.
The Accord is a lot more car than the Jetta for about the same price. The Jetta is overpriced. With the old Jetta, I would've said that the Jetta is better looking, but comparing the 2006 to 2006, they're about even IMO. So far, the new Jetta has been a sales dud and I think it will probably continue to be because it doesn't look as unique anymore, it's too expensive, and VW's reliability history is no secret anymore.
The coil and window problem of the last Jetta are not what would worry me.....the way VW handled those problems is what would worry me. It took them over 3 model years to fix well known and widespread issues and many owners had to go to dealerships more than once to fix the same issue. First, VW replaced faulty coils with faulty coils. Then, they'd replace the faulty coils with new versions, but they wouldn't replace them until they failed, so you'd have people going back to the dealer for coil issues more than once. Similar issues with the window clips. IMO, the way VW handled those issues is completely unacceptable and the reason why I would never, ever, buy a VW and the reason why I think VW is in for serious trouble in this market. They pissed a lot of people off with the last generation of Jetta.
As far as the Jetta still being the "class standard for driving dynamics"......according to who?
What about the Mazda3 and Mazda6?
As far as "no car being perfect" with regards to reliability.......Historically the Accord is a helluva lot closer to being perfect than the Jetta. The Jetta and Accord are in no way equals as far as "no car being perfect".
I owned a 2003 Jetta VR6, which was traded on a 2004 Accord, coupe, V6. The Jetta was hands down the worst vehicle I have ever owned, new or used. In the first 6,000 miles of ownership, the entire top portion of the car needed to be repainted because the paint literally began to fall off during the second week of ownership. From the day I drove it off the lot, upon first start-up, the motor sounded like it had a bad cylinder. The entire exhaust would shake as the spuddering engine did what it could just to stay fired. Try to rev the engine slightly to smooth it out and the car let off a rotten egg smell that I have never experienced before....the dealerships solution....try different gas (which I did to no avail). Beyond these problems, the airbag system NEVER worked....the light was constantly on and VW could not figure out what was wrong, even going so far as to say that they believed the airbag system was still functioning properly despite the warning light. The radio was replaced no less than three times because it did not work....power window stopped working....I could go on and on. I must admit that the car was a blast to drive (engine was very powerful and felt quite sturdy), but the other problems were too much to take. My new Accord has been flawless....30K miles and never a problem. I really do not see any comparison between these vehicles.
Sorry to know that you bought a lemon car. But I think this is only your bad luck, why you first take delivery of the car when you are not satisfied with the engine sound (bad cyclinder). I bought a left over 2004 GLI (VR6) on Apr 1 this year, so far I have 6,500 miles on the car. The handling and the power output will all prevail over Accord - 4 cyclinder. When I cruising 90 mph at freeway, its so stable that I thought I am only driving at 60mph (30lbs heavier than accord). When I want to swerving between the lanes at high speed, its so nimble. Accord has no comparsion at all.
I didn't say I always drive at 90MPH and still get 30MPG. (My GLI only get 21MPG). I only compare the handling and stability between Jetta & Accord at such a speed. Secondly, I will swerve between lanes at 70mph if the traffic is not that bad. I think this is not dangerous at all.
When you said "no car is perfect" you were implying that the Jetta and Accord are equals in terms of their share of problems, which you and I both know is not true.
> When you said "no car is perfect" you were implying that the Jetta and Accord are equals in terms of their share of problems, which you and I both know is not true.
Yo, pal - don't try to put words into my mouth (you don't even know me). I just made a statement - I wasn't implying jack. Don't try to read into my statement for any more than what it is - a statement. If you can find in my statement that I said they were equal, I will give you $1000.00.
The check's in the mail, pal... :mad:
Besides, outside of the tuner crowd, most Accord drivers I've seen on the roads around here are basically the bland, milquetoast, "play it safe" types - which doesn't come (anywhere within a solar system) close to my personality... I'll take my unreliable VWs over any soulless, robotically reliable Accords any day of the week. I prefer to stay awake behind the wheel, thank you...
We're not allowed to bring other vehicles into this discussion. I can think of some worthy alternatives also to the Jetta and Accord, but we're not allowed to talk about those, even though bringing some of the alternatives up would be helpful to prospective buyers.
When I said "No car is perfect", I mean "No car is perfect". What part of "No car is perfect" didn't you understand? I didn't convieniently leave out jack. Once again, you are trying to put words in my mouth. I don't know where you come from, but where I'm from, we don't waste time with the cutesy play on words or phrases with hidden meaning. People in my area tend to be direct (meaning we mean what we say). If others take it as being rude or lacking tact - so be it.
Show me a perfect car and I'll show you a car that doesnt exist.
(Perfect car = a car that never needs maintenance, that never needs refueling, that won't even get a scratch during an accident, and a car that costs around $10)...
Can I make myself any clearer? Or do you still insist on looking for some hidden meaning?
Show me someone that has found perfection and I'll direct them to the nearest psychiatric ward... There is no such animal, my friend.
Okay, there's no need to turn a difference of opinion into a personal confrontation - let's just stick to the cars and realize that we all see things differently - that's what makes the world go 'round, right?
I guess I don't understand what your point is then. All you said is "no car is perfect".....well, so what?
I'm going to stop putting words into your mouth and allow you to elaborate on the "no car is perfect" statement because the statement alone isn't really saying much besides stating the obvious.
> All you said is "no car is perfect".....well, so what?
Now you're getting the picture - To say that some cars are more perfect than others amounts to idealistic, liberal pie-in-the sky stuff. I prefer to take the pragmatic approach to this argument...
My point is - If the Accord does something for you and the Jetta doesn't - so be it.
The reason why I drive VWs (warts and all) is that driving them inspires more passion to me than an Accord. That, and the fact that Accords are a dime a dozen. I prefer not to see myself coming and going, that's all.
Some prefer to lead, others prefer to follow, I prefer to blaze my own trail....
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to continue to help VW owners with their vehicle questions...
"To say that some cars are more perfect than others amounts to idealistic, liberal pie-in-the sky stuff. I prefer to take the pragmatic approach to this argument... "
Since nothing is "perfect", let's not even use the word "perfect", OK?
Saying "no car is perfect" isn't really saying anything at all. It's a totally meaningless and empty statement. That is the reason why I was looking for a "hidden meaning" because all alone, the statement means nothing. You're not making a point with that statement.
Instead of saying "no car is perfect" how about this:
VWs are statistically more likely to have problems than Hondas.
Now THAT statement is meaningful.
BTW, The Accord doesn't do anything for me either. I don't own one.
If I may inject here...my 2003 Jetta is much classier and drives much better than my 1999 V6 accord could have ever been. Yes, accord's are nice with rims and exhaust (tactfully done), but my stock Jetta is perfect stock.
Our Jetta 2.5 Package 1 test car stickered for $24,040, which isn't the smokin' deal the $18,000 Value Package is. For the same money a 240-hp Honda Accord V6 starts looking pretty good
Yup, the 240 hp Accord has it all over any Jetta, turbo or not, especially with the re-done sheetmetal and 6sp manual. Next to the Jetta, the Accord is the bargain of the century.
$24K for a 150 hp Jetta or $24K for a 240 hp six-speed Accord? Hmm.....
If 240 hp and a six speed is bland and milquetoast, give me soulless, robotically reliable, bland and milquetoast please, and keep your VW "drivers" car.
I for one don't think reliable means boring. It's always amusing when VW owners try to make reliabilty seem like a bad trait ie: "robotically reliable". If the windows on my car fall into the doors and the coils leave me stranded, I'm not going to be saying "wow, this car has soul and character". Yeah, the interiors are great, they give you something pleasant to look at while you're waiting for a tow truck.....
>If the windows on my car fall into the doors and the coils leave me stranded, I'm not going to be saying "wow, this car has soul and character". Yeah, the interiors are great, they give you something pleasant to look at while you're waiting for a tow truck.....
I can't say I've had any of those experiences in my 5 VWs over 25 years. Sorry to disappoint you. But hey, thanks for playing. :shades:
B.T.W. - My sister thinks highly of Hondas, especially when her Accord left her stranded hundreds of miles away from home due to an engine oil leak and destroyed crankshaft bearings. But I had a lot of fun towing it home with my 1977 Datsun 280z and a tow dolly from U-Haul. :shades:
No, it's not a stretch. While I have yet to take a long trip in my 04 Accord, we did take a long trip in our 99 EX sedan. We cruised between 90-110 on the way home and stayed at 30 MPG the whole trip. My 04 EX-L gets 33 MPG in my mixed driving with 30 miles of my commute done at 75 and the other 10 miles are in congested (sometimes gridlocked) traffic.
On to other things, VW is good if you just want a VW. However, the new Jetta is a big disappointment. It is very pricey and there are way better alternatives. If the Accord is too boring then a Mazda6 is a cheaper and more reliable alternative. The Accord 4 cylinder puts out more power and is more reliable, not to mention thousands cheaper. So again, if you just want a Jetta then buy one. Those of us who want a more reliable, more reasonably priced, and more powerful car will look elsewhere.
Speaking of disappointments, I saw the Jetta GLI 2.0T at my local VW dealership. There were some people predicting over $30K for the GLI. However, this model was fully loaded including the DSG transmission, dual zone A/C, power seats, leather interior, etc. The sticker price was $28K. The 6-speed manual transmission version is in the $26K range.
I was getting an oil change at my VW dealer this past Saturday - and lo and behold - what did I see in the used car lot in increasing numbers? Those gas guzzling pickups and SUVs being turned in as trade-ins. I saw the same thing driving by the Toyota, Honda, Kia, Subaru, Nissan and Hyundai dealerships.
I'm seriously considering trading in my 2004 4-cylinder automatic Accord sedan for a 2006 auto Jetta TDI, reasons being:
- soaring gas price
- my Accord's interior has quite a few rattling and clinking noises (headliner, dash, door panels, glove box ...). To me, this is quite annoying.
I like my Accord, as engine and transmission are good. Fuel consumption is good as well, but the TDI, I think, is more fuel efficient.
I did not own any VW before, so I cannot compare the two. Could some of you also shed me some light on what are the regular maintenance needed on an auto TDI Jetta, how often, and would it be more expensive to maintenance than my 4-cylinder gasoline Accord?
BTW, I heard that Jettas are being built in Mexico, then I'm just wondering if VW designed it in Germany, I mean the engineering design of Jetta. Not sure if Jetta is available in Europe.
Your 2004 Accord should still be under warranty get the arttling and clinking noises fixed.
VWs are German and have excellent road feel and handling. The TDI has very good real-world performance ( much better than its numbers indicate) and very good mileage, I lamost bought one ...
but read all car relability reports and the volkswagon cars and dealerships are terrible on service. Unless you are very very lucky you will get very good mileage and everyone on the service department will know you on a fist name basis. I had that experience with an Audi LS100 and I do nopt wnat to go through an experience like that ever again. First and foremest on my car criteria is reliability, then manual shift
"...what are the regular maintenance needed on an auto TDI Jetta, how often, and would it be more expensive to maintenance than my 4-cylinder gasoline Accord?"
The performance advantages of a turbocharged diesel will definitely come at a cost. While you won't have ignition system issues to contend with, European cars in general and turbocharged diesels in particular have more demanding motor oil issues, virtually requiring pricey Euro-spec synthetic oils. VW, like MB and BMW, goes a bit above the basic Euro-spec oils. While you can source the required oil formulations at other than VW dealers if you look around, trust that Wal-Mart, Pep Boys, etc. won't likely be one of those sources, though Autozone might with certain Castrol formulas priced around $5.00/qt. (I think I read that the oil capacity is around 7 quarts in these things - someone step forward if I'm mistaken.) Diesels "dirty" their oil quickly because there's no way to fully control blowby past the piston rings when the engine has a 18:1 or higher compression ratio. It's also the nature of #2 diesel fuel to burn with soot production. While traps downstream in the exhaust system can keep the tailpipe emmisions in line, there will be added soot acumulation in the motor oil. You'll be amazed at how quickly a diesel's motor oil turns B-L-A-C-K on the dipstick. If you want a Jetta TDI to live long and prosperously, don't even think about "Quickie-type Lube" $25.00 oil changes. The Accord's 4-cyl gasoline engine by comparison is perfectly happy, if left unmodified and not routinely thrashed, with any of the current API "SM" category motor oils and should have no trouble seeing 200,000+ miles with Honda's recommended oil change intervals. (and, I'm being very conservative with that 200,000+ mile figure)
TDI first oil change is at 5,000 then successive at 10,000 miles. Oils changes at VW run $90-100, because of type and amount of oil needed.
Also if you live in cold climates you need to treat you diesel fuel in the winter.
VW diesel engine is different gets close to maximum torque at 1,800 rpm redline at 4,400 rpm. Even though the 0-60 times are 12-13 seconds, the TDI feels fast off of the line and quick in city and surburban driving. It will also cruise all day long at highway plus speeds.
If you have the auto, then you can buy a ecletronic chio and easily add 30-40 hp. This is not recommneded with the manual transmission.
Before I add my five cents I have a question for anyone? When did the new Jetta appear? I test drove a new Jetta 2.5L, aerodynamic kit, 5 spd this weekend but it was a 2005. Anyway, the dealer had two TDI's on the lot. I asked the sales person for his impressions on the diesels. He was very strait forward, he commented that the hype behind the diesels was over stated. The reason is maintenance costs. An oil change on a diesel costs two-three times more than on a gas engine. It seems the sales staff had calculated a rough 110k miles of use before things would even out. Buying a TDI will not save money unless you plan on keeping it for 100K plus miles. Different note, I'm a Honda fan but I must say that the new Jetta drives very nice. The comments associated with German car road manors are easily seen in the new Jetta. I haven't driven a 6 spd Accord coupe with 17in wheels but the regular coupe is not in the same league as the new Jetta. Unfortunately, Jetta's of the past aren't known for trouble free ownership.
Comments
The Rabbit was very fun to drive but totally unreliable. The Honda is also fun to drive and has been mostly reliable (except for a recurring brake problem).
But I never owned a Jetta, so I'm really off-topic here. These comparison discussions just seem to go around and around and around.
Subjective opinion at it's finest
My 03 V6 Accord has a delay before it accelerates if I really press on the gas. If I just try to go a little bit faster than I'm already going, there's no delay. But if I punch it, there's a noticeable delay, and then it surges forward. I've learned to allow for the delay/surge when accelerating hard.
That may be what sys3175 is referring to.
That's the new drive-by-wire throttle system. I'm not a fan of it myself.
The delay you get when you stomp on the pedal is the auto tranny downshifting. The Jetta has a turbocharged engine, inherently having a turbo lag, and till you change laws of physics, there is not much you can do about it.
You're right that they're both nice cars. Each has a very dedicated following.
Between my group of friends there's a Jetta, a Passat, several Accords of different model years, a BMW 3-series, and a baby Lexus. We each enjoy our respective cars greatly, and we rarely have comparison discussions, since it doesn't really matter as long as we're all happy with what we've got.
http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/volkswagen_news/article_1472.shtml
Whether you realize it or not, the Jetta is still rated as setting the class standard for driving dynamics (feel), fit/finish, and quality of materials and assembly. Their big Achilles' heel has been their reliability...
Speaking of which, I would be concerned about the Accord's history of transmission problems - which only goes to show that no car is perfect.
Well, the low-torque 2.0TFSI (in the regular or GLI versions) seems to me more than adequate for most drivers of sporty sedans. Both have better handling than the Accord IMO. Of course, the Accord is bigger (should be compared to the Passat) and slightly more reliable. Why do I say slightly? Because reliability ratings have been stretched a bit, over the years, where now a factor of 1.5 in incidences seems to predict gloom in some people's minds. (No, we are not talking about 10 times as many "real" problems, nor 2-3 times as many). To me, minor differences in initial reliability are somewhat down in the list of priorities, after safety (a Jetta and VW strong point, by all hard measures and statistics), handling (ditto), and general driving fun.
I also disagree with "VW engine troubles" - have to encounter any yet with my 13 and 5 year old Golf and Passat. Having driven VWs for 30 years, from my not so limited anecdotal knowledge, VW engines are above average, in particular, in the 100,000 - 200,000 mile range (comparing to first-hand knowledge of Honda, Toyota, and Subaru engines). There may be switches and accessories that go wrong in VWs, over time, but not their engines.
No, I believe he was talking about the Jetta. That link you provided was about the Golf.
The Accord is a lot more car than the Jetta for about the same price. The Jetta is overpriced. With the old Jetta, I would've said that the Jetta is better looking, but comparing the 2006 to 2006, they're about even IMO. So far, the new Jetta has been a sales dud and I think it will probably continue to be because it doesn't look as unique anymore, it's too expensive, and VW's reliability history is no secret anymore.
The coil and window problem of the last Jetta are not what would worry me.....the way VW handled those problems is what would worry me. It took them over 3 model years to fix well known and widespread issues and many owners had to go to dealerships more than once to fix the same issue. First, VW replaced faulty coils with faulty coils. Then, they'd replace the faulty coils with new versions, but they wouldn't replace them until they failed, so you'd have people going back to the dealer for coil issues more than once. Similar issues with the window clips. IMO, the way VW handled those issues is completely unacceptable and the reason why I would never, ever, buy a VW and the reason why I think VW is in for serious trouble in this market. They pissed a lot of people off with the last generation of Jetta.
As far as the Jetta still being the "class standard for driving dynamics"......according to who?
What about the Mazda3 and Mazda6?
As far as "no car being perfect" with regards to reliability.......Historically the Accord is a helluva lot closer to being perfect than the Jetta. The Jetta and Accord are in no way equals as far as "no car being perfect".
I bought a left over 2004 GLI (VR6) on Apr 1 this year, so far I have 6,500 miles on the car. The handling and the power output will all prevail over Accord - 4 cyclinder. When I cruising 90 mph at freeway, its so stable that I thought I am only driving at 60mph (30lbs heavier than accord). When I want to swerving between the lanes at high speed, its so nimble. Accord has no comparsion at all.
Its at the bottom of both JD power surveys.
I've owned a Jetta before, and i had countless problems with it.
Vehicle Dependability Study
Initial Quality Study
Well now, that's stretching the truth just a little, wouldn't you say?
Tell that to the owners of failed Accord transmissions...
When you said "no car is perfect" you were implying that the Jetta and Accord are equals in terms of their share of problems, which you and I both know is not true.
Yo, pal - don't try to put words into my mouth (you don't even know me). I just made a statement - I wasn't implying jack. Don't try to read into my statement for any more than what it is - a statement. If you can find in my statement that I said they were equal, I will give you $1000.00.
The check's in the mail, pal... :mad:
Besides, outside of the tuner crowd, most Accord drivers I've seen on the roads around here are basically the bland, milquetoast, "play it safe" types - which doesn't come (anywhere within a solar system) close to my personality... I'll take my unreliable VWs
over any soulless, robotically reliable Accords any day of the week. I prefer to stay awake behind the wheel, thank you...
Legacy GT.
Reliable, fun as heck to drive, and has charater in spades and nowhere near a souless appliance.
Off topic but an alternative.
Regards,
Kyle
Yes, no car is perfect.......BUT some cars are more perfect than others.
The Jetta/Accord comparison is a perfect example of this.
Show me a perfect car and I'll show you a car that doesnt exist.
(Perfect car = a car that never needs maintenance, that never needs refueling, that won't even get a scratch during an accident, and a car that costs around $10)...
Can I make myself any clearer? Or do you still insist on looking for some hidden meaning?
Show me someone that has found perfection and I'll direct them to the nearest psychiatric ward... There is no such animal, my friend.
I'm going to stop putting words into your mouth and allow you to elaborate on the "no car is perfect" statement because the statement alone isn't really saying much besides stating the obvious.
Now you're getting the picture - To say that some cars are more perfect than others amounts to idealistic, liberal pie-in-the sky stuff. I prefer to take the pragmatic approach to this argument...
My point is - If the Accord does something for you and the Jetta doesn't - so be it.
The reason why I drive VWs (warts and all) is that driving them inspires more passion to me than an Accord. That, and the fact that Accords are a dime a dozen. I prefer not to see myself coming and going, that's all.
Some prefer to lead, others prefer to follow, I prefer to blaze my own trail....
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to continue to help VW owners with their vehicle questions...
Since nothing is "perfect", let's not even use the word "perfect", OK?
Saying "no car is perfect" isn't really saying anything at all. It's a totally meaningless and empty statement. That is the reason why I was looking for a "hidden meaning" because all alone, the statement means nothing. You're not making a point with that statement.
Instead of saying "no car is perfect" how about this:
VWs are statistically more likely to have problems than Hondas.
Now THAT statement is meaningful.
BTW, The Accord doesn't do anything for me either. I don't own one.
Yes, most German cars including the Jetta usually have a better driving feel, i.e. when they are not in the "shop" for repair.
However, my 6-speed Accord Coupe with a Borla exhaust and 17 Inch drives does not feel like a bland, milquetoast Accord, nor do I drive it as such.
cruis'n in 6th,
MidCow
I did mention "with the exception of the Honda tuner crowd"... :shades:
The 06 Accord sedan will also get 17' standard on 6 speed and automatic models.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/vdpcontainers/do/vdp/articleId=105254/pageNumber=1
"Our Jetta 2.5 Package 1 test car stickered for $24,040, which isn't the smokin' deal the $18,000 Value Package is. For the same money a 240-hp Honda Accord V6 starts looking pretty good."
Yup, the 240 hp Accord has it all over any Jetta, turbo or not, especially with the re-done sheetmetal and 6sp manual. Next to the Jetta, the Accord is the bargain of the century.
$24K for a 150 hp Jetta or $24K for a 240 hp six-speed Accord? Hmm.....
If 240 hp and a six speed is bland and milquetoast, give me soulless, robotically reliable, bland and milquetoast please, and keep your VW "drivers" car.
I for one don't think reliable means boring. It's always amusing when VW owners try to make reliabilty seem like a bad trait ie: "robotically reliable". If the windows on my car fall into the doors and the coils leave me stranded, I'm not going to be saying "wow, this car has soul and character". Yeah, the interiors are great, they give you something pleasant to look at while you're waiting for a tow truck.....
I can't say I've had any of those experiences in my 5 VWs over 25 years. Sorry to disappoint you. But hey, thanks for playing. :shades:
B.T.W. - My sister thinks highly of Hondas, especially when her Accord left her stranded hundreds of miles away from home due to an engine oil leak and destroyed crankshaft bearings. But I had a lot of fun towing it home with my 1977 Datsun 280z and a tow dolly from U-Haul. :shades:
Yup.
On to other things, VW is good if you just want a VW. However, the new Jetta is a big disappointment. It is very pricey and there are way better alternatives. If the Accord is too boring then a Mazda6 is a cheaper and more reliable alternative. The Accord 4 cylinder puts out more power and is more reliable, not to mention thousands cheaper. So again, if you just want a Jetta then buy one. Those of us who want a more reliable, more reasonably priced, and more powerful car will look elsewhere.
A sign of the times, perhaps? :surprise:
I'm seriously considering trading in my 2004 4-cylinder automatic Accord sedan for a 2006 auto Jetta TDI, reasons being:
- soaring gas price
- my Accord's interior has quite a few rattling and clinking noises (headliner, dash, door panels, glove box ...). To me, this is quite annoying.
I like my Accord, as engine and transmission are good. Fuel consumption is good as well, but the TDI, I think, is more fuel efficient.
I did not own any VW before, so I cannot compare the two. Could some of you also shed me some light on what are the regular maintenance needed on an auto TDI Jetta, how often, and would it be more expensive to maintenance than my 4-cylinder gasoline Accord?
BTW, I heard that Jettas are being built in Mexico, then I'm just wondering if VW designed it in Germany, I mean the engineering design of Jetta. Not sure if Jetta is available in Europe.
Many thanks in advance for advices.
TTB
Your 2004 Accord should still be under warranty get the arttling and clinking noises fixed.
VWs are German and have excellent road feel and handling. The TDI has very good real-world performance ( much better than its numbers indicate) and very good mileage, I lamost bought one ...
but read all car relability reports and the volkswagon cars and dealerships are terrible on service. Unless you are very very lucky you will get very good mileage and everyone on the service department will know you on a fist name basis. I had that experience with an Audi LS100 and I do nopt wnat to go through an experience like that ever again. First and foremest on my car criteria is reliability, then manual shift
cruis'n in 6th ,
MidCow
The performance advantages of a turbocharged diesel will definitely come at a cost. While you won't have ignition system issues to contend with, European cars in general and turbocharged diesels in particular have more demanding motor oil issues, virtually requiring pricey Euro-spec synthetic oils. VW, like MB and BMW, goes a bit above the basic Euro-spec oils. While you can source the required oil formulations at other than VW dealers if you look around, trust that Wal-Mart, Pep Boys, etc. won't likely be one of those sources, though Autozone might with certain Castrol formulas priced around $5.00/qt. (I think I read that the oil capacity is around 7 quarts in these things - someone step forward if I'm mistaken.) Diesels "dirty" their oil quickly because there's no way to fully control blowby past the piston rings when the engine has a 18:1 or higher compression ratio. It's also the nature of #2 diesel fuel to burn with soot production. While traps downstream in the exhaust system can keep the tailpipe emmisions in line, there will be added soot acumulation in the motor oil. You'll be amazed at how quickly a diesel's motor oil turns
B-L-A-C-K on the dipstick. If you want a Jetta TDI to live long and prosperously, don't even think about "Quickie-type Lube" $25.00 oil changes. The Accord's 4-cyl gasoline engine by comparison is perfectly happy, if left unmodified and not routinely thrashed, with any of the current API "SM" category motor oils and should have no trouble seeing 200,000+ miles with Honda's recommended oil change intervals. (and, I'm being very conservative with that 200,000+ mile figure)
TDI first oil change is at 5,000 then successive at 10,000 miles. Oils changes at VW run $90-100, because of type and amount of oil needed.
Also if you live in cold climates you need to treat you diesel fuel in the winter.
VW diesel engine is different gets close to maximum torque at 1,800 rpm redline at 4,400 rpm. Even though the 0-60 times are 12-13 seconds, the TDI feels fast off of the line and quick in city and surburban driving. It will also cruise all day long at highway plus speeds.
If you have the auto, then you can buy a ecletronic chio and easily add 30-40 hp. This is not recommneded with the manual transmission.
Good Luck,
MidCow
Anyway, the dealer had two TDI's on the lot. I asked the sales person for his impressions on the diesels. He was very strait forward, he commented that the hype behind the diesels was over stated. The reason is maintenance costs. An oil change on a diesel costs two-three times more than on a gas engine. It seems the sales staff had calculated a rough 110k miles of use before things would even out. Buying a TDI will not save money unless you plan on keeping it for 100K plus miles.
Different note, I'm a Honda fan but I must say that the new Jetta drives very nice. The comments associated with German car road manors are easily seen in the new Jetta. I haven't driven a 6 spd Accord coupe with 17in wheels but the regular coupe is not in the same league as the new Jetta. Unfortunately, Jetta's of the past aren't known for trouble free ownership.