Volkswagen Passat 2006+

chaz318 · July 2005

need i remind you power nor 0-60 times make a car. yes more power and faster 0-60 times are better but there is much more to the car than that, not saying the sonata is a bad car, nor the passat is a better car, just thats a general fact of life. furthermore that new sonata also makes more power and acceleratres faster than the 2006 bmw 525i with the auto, but ive never heard of that being considered a poor car becasue of its 0-60 time, and i dont see people trading theres in for sonata's (again nothing against the sonata i think its a great car, im just trying to prove a point)
anyways VW i feel isnt targeting the same consumers hyundai is with the sonata. VW has announced it would becoem a luxury brand, and that would make the new passat compare more squarely against entry level luxury sedans

priggly · July 2005

Rationalize all you want, the Passat with the 2.0T is underpowered. Not to mention the fact that even to evoke the power that it has it must resort to the add-on of turbocharging which complicates the engine, causes it to run hotter, be harder on the oil, and makes it more prone to mechanical failure.

On the subject of VW engines, the new Jetta 2.5 again displays a sub-par engine which is also underpowered, runs roughly, and is not doing a whole lot for new Jetta sales.

Moreover, VW would do well to stop trying to be a "luxury" car company and get back to its roots as the "Peoples' Car" company. The W8 was a flop as was/is the Phaeton. If someone wants a "luxury" German car, there are BMW, M-B, Porsche and, to a lesser extent, Audi. The market has declared on no uncertain terms, judging by VW's present financial woes, that the company needs to lose the idiotic "luxury" notion and get back to making reasonably priced cars that run extremely WELL and are highly RELIABLE. In today's ultra-competitive market, a merely "good" car has to be more than that. It has to be GREAT. Wimpy engines is not the route to greatness, particularly in view of today's market trend toward greater HP and torque.

shipo · July 2005

"Not to mention the fact that even to evoke the power that it has it must resort to the add-on of turbocharging which complicates the engine, causes it to run hotter, be harder on the oil, and makes it more prone to mechanical failure."

Sorry, not buying... Turbocharging is a technology that is over eighty years old and is very well understood.

Taken point by point:
1) Turbocharging does not complicate an engine, it actually simplifies it. Why? Three words: moving parts count. The fact is that a typical turbocharged engine has fewer moving parts than an otherwise similarly powerful normally aspirated engine.
2) A turbocharged engine of any given output shouldn't generate any more heat than its normally aspirated brethren, in fact, in reality it probably generates less heat simply because it usually has a higher BSFC (Brake Specific Fuel Consumption), meaning that more of the resultant heat from the combustion process is converted into usable work.
3) Harder on the oil? Well I suppose if you drive at full throttle all of the way into your garage and then immediately shut you motor down without letting the turbine spin down, then yes, it probably is harder on the oil. Having said that, modern synthetic oils (which I use regardless of how my engines are aspirated) are more than capable of dealing with the heat of the liquid cooled bearings of a modern turbocharger under any normal driving environment.
4) More prone to mechanical failure... Hmmm, says who? I've owned a number of cars with turbochargers, and I've known many folks who have as well, and I've never seen any anecdotal or scientific evidence to suggest that turbocharged engines are any less reliable than normally aspirated mills of similar output.

Personally, if I'm looking at two cars that are equally desirable from my perspective, one with a normally aspirated engine, the other with a smaller turbocharged mill of similar output, I'll choose the car with the blower every time.

Best Regards,
Shipo

ivan_99 · July 2005

I agree

I cant remember the last time Ive done a true 0-60 runand Im not that old.

The magazines that do tests with automatics use the brake torque technique, where they hold down the brake pedal with their left foot and the gas with the right foot. Ive never know anybody with an automatic that does that.

5-60 for automatics is really the true measureif thats your cup of tea.

jc9799 · July 2005

If the 2.0T is "plenty fast enough," then why is VW making available eventually the 3.6...?

Well, for one thing, most cars, including the Accord/Camry/Sonata/Altima class, below the Passat, and the 3-Series/C-Class/A4 group just above it, have 2 engines, also. Besides the 2.0T power ratings can hold it's own against the 325 and C260.

I'll agree with you on the Phaeton and W8 Passat. Most folks just aren't willing to spend that much on a VW. However, I don't think the new Passat is a direct competitor to the 325/330. Sure, there may be some overlap in prices, but the Passat should start several thousand dollars less than a base 325. Since you bring up the Sonata: I see the VW to the Bimmer the same way the Sonata competes with the Accord/Camry. A more value laden alternative when similiarly equipped.

jeffyscott · July 2005

If the 2.0T is "plenty fast enough," then why is VW making available eventually the 3.6 l which will be approximately 1 second faster to 60?

I assume because they think they can make greater profits by making that engine available than they could if they did not.

This http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8642963 sounds to me like VW is going to stop trying to be a "luxury" car company and get back to its roots as the "Peoples' Car" company.

Volkswagen's new Mr. Fix-it, Wolfgang Bernhard, didn't mince words in his first public diagnosis of what ails Europe's largest auto maker. Its costs are too high, its quality subpar, and its products too expensive.

The 2.5 engine in the new Jetta is just fine it has plenty of power and torque for any normal driver and it does not run roughly. When I once floored it from a stop the front tires very briefly squealed a bit...why would I need more power than that, so I can spin the wheels more? Passing and entering the freeway is no problem at all...my biggest problem is the car is so smooth that I am going 90 without realizing it such as when entering the freeway

The low sales probably are more due to them having too many loaded up cars. I think our VE Jetta is a great car for the price we paid.

jeffyscott · July 2005

The magazines that do tests with automatics use the brake torque technique...

Yeah that is not something I am too interested in doing with my car. I may floor it from a stop from time to time.

I wonder if magazines aimed at normal drivers, such as CR, do their acceleration tests the way a normal driver would...meaning just flooring it from a stop? If so then their numbers would be much more meaningful to me and most others who are not strictly looking for bragging rights.

I happend to flip across a drag racing run on TV yesterday. The car hit over 300 mph in 1/4 mile and 4 point something seconds. That is fast, but it would be pointless to have that performance in a street car...to me going 0-60 in 4 seconds (or 6 or whatever) is just about as useless.

Somewhere around maybe 10 (or maybe even 12 seconds) for a 0-60 time seems to me to indicate a car has adequate acceleration. If someone want to pay for more that is fine, but I get tired of reading things like a car is too slow because it takes 8 seconds to hit 60. Most drivers (not me) seem to take at least about 1/2 mile and maybe 60 seconds to hit 60 mph after a stop, despite driving cars with 200 HP V-6s, or whatever.

dewey · July 2005

the Passat with the 2.0T is underpowered

A base Passat 2.0T underpowered? 7.4 seconds for a base model is not fast enough?

So what do you want from a base Passat, 0-60 in the 6 or 5 range? Have you seen the more expensive upcoming Lexus IS250. HP is about the same and performance specs unlikely to be better then the Passat! What about the more expensive BMW325 and Audi 2.0T?

So you you are drooling over the Hyundai Sonata! My suggestion is that you do a future test drive Test drive in some future date a Hyundai Sonata, Altima V6 , Camry V6 and Honda V6 and compare it to either the lower hp Passat and IS250! Your likely conclusion will be hp is not created equal among different cars.

Hp has been consistently lower for the benchmark sport sedan 3 series these past three decades and consistently no higher hp vehicles has knocked the Bimmer off its pedestal.

Hp stats are nice to boast about until you actually drive the car! Writing off the Passat 2.0T as tepid before a test drive sounds highly premature!

merc1 · July 2005

I agree that VW should for this luxury car thing and get back to the basics, but a 7.4 0-60 time isn't slow for what is basically an upscale "family" car like the Passat. Also, you're going by projected 0-60 time, not a magazine test numbers, which are usually lower than the MFR times on German cars.

The new Sonata? While nice they're still learning how to build a decently built car and the styling could belong to any car on the market its so derivative. So it gets to 60 mph in 3 tenths of second quicker. Did you stop to think that that Sonata has to have a V6 compared to the Passat's turbo 4 in order to manage a mere 3 tenths of second advantage?

A Passat will be the be the better built car and certainly the more entertaining one to drive...ok so the reliablity isn't going to be a strong point, but then again it isn't for any VW.

Just looking at the interior/exterior I'd rather have the Passat with its .3 second slower 0-60 time over a car that that while improved, looks like Honda/Toyota or Nissan could have built it, but didn't. Also, the Passat will still be the more rewarding drive when you factor in handling and feel, which a Korean car doesn't even begin to address.

M

dudleyr · July 2005

Since we are comparing apples to oranges. Don't forget that the Passat will have a manual tranny available that will in all likelyhood be faster than the automatic Sonata V-6.

600kgolfgt · July 2005

> Rationalize all you want, the Passat with the 2.0T is underpowered

Lets compare specs, shall we?

2006 Hyundai Sonata:

3.3 Liter V-6
237 hp @ 6000 rpm
228 ft/lb torque @ 3500 rpm
hp/liter - 71.8

2006 VW Passat 2.0T:

2.0 L Turbocharged, Direct-Injection I-4
200 hp @ 5100 rpm
207 ft/lb torque @ 1800 rpm
hp/liter - 100

Lets see - VW - 100 hp/liter (out of a "wimpy" 2.0 liters)
Hyundai - 71.8 hp/liter (out of a V-6)

VW peak torque starts @ 1800 rpm
Hyundai needs to be wound up to 3500 rpm to reach its peak torque

VW engine - torque rating higher than horsepower
Hyundai engine - horsepower rating higher than torque

So based on the numbers, the VW puts out a higher output per liter than the Hyundai, a peak torque range between 1800 and 5000 rpm as opposed to a 3500 rpm peak torque rating, and has a better torque/hp ratio than the Hyundai.

Methinks the Hyundai engine is FAR wimpier than the VW engine. In order to achieve the same 100 hp/liter rating of the VW 2.0T, the Hyundai will need an output of 330 horsepower.

Game, set, match - VW... :shades:

dudleyr · July 2005

How does the Sonata base engine compare to the VW base engine?

I am only interested in a stick shift so the V-6 Hyundai is out. While the Hyundai has improved markedly, I still don't think the 4 cyl will approach that of the VW.

tomatopie · July 2005

You folks here seem to know your car stuff.

I commute 100 miles a day and am about to replace my wonderful 1991 Legend LS 5-speed with 215,000 miles. I want a car of similar size and features, a driver's car, with good safety features. I also want to improve on my 25 mpg.

The Passat TDI seems to meet my needs, and offers 38 mpg. I think I might do even better on fuel. I drove one, and it had plenty of power.

Here are my questions:

1) How useful is the TipTronic? Will I find that I just leave it in "D" all the time?

2) Exactly when does the 2006 Passat come out, and how will that affect the price of the 2005 leftovers? A dealer offered me $1600 off list for a 2005 Passat TDI GLS. I didn't find that very compelling.

3) Is it accurate that there will be no Passat Diesel for 2006? Will this actually drive up the price for the last few TDIs on the lots?

Thanks for any insight!

markcincinnati · July 2005

There's more room at the top of the market than at the bottom. There's more profit in the top 1/2 of the market (generally) than in the bottom 1/2.

VW has problems (doh?!?) -- but the upcoming crop of cars (the soon coming Jetta with the "better" engine, is on this list as is the new Passat) will certainly be well received by the buying public. Further they will probably be well reviewed, too.

The Phaeton probably isn't the sales success VW had hoped for.

The Phaeton does seem to be a bargain, however, compared with the A8 and the other Germans. I would be glad to have one.

The W8 was such a good car -- especially when ordered with the manual transmission and sport suspension. The W8 was virtually never marketed.

This was probably a decision made for a vartiety of reasons most of us can't fathom. :shades:

onlysurfer · July 2005

I don't know the 0-60, 50-70 or any of those numbers for my 2002 VW Passat GLX 4Motion but I certainly know that the car is underpowered despite having a V6. What more, reliability is only about 98%, because remaining 2% of the time was spent at dealer's shop, and while the repair was covered by warranty, it wasn't worth it.

Oh, and one more complain, the breaks ain't good either.

Darn it, it's fun to drive though! I just hope I'd be able to resist temptation to buy another VW when time comes.

Have fun!

ivan_99 · July 2005

Oh, and one more complain, the breaks ain't good either.

Ive made the faux pas as wellfingers faster than brain

Brakes, not breaks :shades:

onlysurfer · July 2005

Yep, brakes ain't fast, still the car manages to break faster...!

markcincinnati · July 2005

I test drove the V6 Passat and the Audi A4 1.8T quattro. Now the Passat had the automatic and the A4 had the stick. Despite the "disadvantage" the Audi should have had, the stick made the car "feel" a heck of a lot faster.

I also drove an A4 with the 2.8 (in 2001) and the auto (what a slug!)

If the Passat could've been had with the manual transmission, I would bet the issue of lethargy would have been largely mitigated.

Of course, then VW came out with the W8 with both transmissions (kind of an S4 "light" if you asked me -- but no one did) and the thing died on the vine. The W8's in stock at my local dealership were always highly discounted.

I still think if VW would've tried a dedicated marketing campaign rather than that stupid commercial where the guy in the VW W8 races a kid on a tricycle. . .well perhaps they could've raised market awareness.

Of course VW seems unwilling to go for a real campaign with staying power:

the superbowl ad was great (throwing the shoe into the tree to knock down the bright red VW that "got away from" the driver) why not go with that theme and market the R32 (or its replacement). The Jetta ads are OK, but from what I've read the cars that were first available were, shall we say, "less than stellar."

Anyway, love the cars, confused by the "packaging and marketing."

For the record: ditto Audi.

a911s · July 2005

First of all, yes, the DSG is a Dual Clutch system. I drove a 2006 A3 with the DSG over the weekend and it's incredible. It shifts more quickly than Ferrari's F1 tranny! And even in FWD guise, the car handles VERY well, it's on the short list of the best FWD cars I've ever driven along with the 1991 Lotus Elan SE and the 1995 Corrado VR6.

Secondly, as to power:
The 2.0T powered 2006 Audi A4 *with Quattro* and a 6-speed does 0-60 in 7.1 seconds. That's as quick as a V6 Honda Accord, which is FWD (which means it's lighter) and has 240 horsepower, quicker than a FWD Toyota Camry V6 and very near the 0-60 times of the six-cylinder BMW 330Xi and G35X. The FWD B6 Passat will be at least that quick with a 6-speed, and only marginally slower with the Tiptronic (0-60 should come in around 7.3), so it's NOT underpowered. It's competant to keep up with more expensive, more powerful six-cylinder competitors. The 3.6 litre motor will produce 280 horsepower through a short-ratio 6-speed Tiptronic and Volkswagen's 4Motion AWD system. Rumors from Europe suggest it can match the accleration figures of a G35X and 330XI and outhandle both of them!

a911s · July 2005

I forgot to add before that Car and Driver's 0-60 time for the Hyundai Sonata is 7.0 seconds, and it's base price is $23,495. A Tiptronic 2.0T powered Passat should start at around $22k and have a 0-60 time of around 7.3 seconds. Sure, you could opt for the $18,495 4-cylinder Sonata, but it's no gonna have the 2.0Ts performance. And, obviously, the VW is going to hands down win in the interior quality department (nobody at this pricepoint can beat VW's interior quality) and I'm willing to bet the Passat will be a better driver's car with better handling. Is .03 to 60 MPH worth giving up a superior interior, better handling and higher resale value, all of which you'll get from VW? Not in my book. Plus, who's drag racing mid-sized sedans?

markcincinnati · July 2005

Couldn't agree with you more. My issues with the VW/Audi group are largely marketing issues.

They confound me.

Folks like you, get it -- in the scheme of things .2 seconds is hardly material. The overall fit and finish differentiates the VW from the Korean, no doubt.

However, in certain leagues, the isssue of "putting something behind you" could be so easily addressed. The VW is in a league that is clearly nibbling around the corners of the Audi and BMW -- yet people shop a Camry and a Passat. I would assume that a Camry candidate probably won't shop a BMW 3 series, however.

So what could VW do?

#1 Improve the acceleration by .2 seconds by lowering the final drive ratio very slightly (and they could make 6th gear taller at the same time, more or less cancelling out the highway mileage penalty.)

#2 Market the cars as "business casual" rather than "economy plus" (the Jetta ads seem to attempt this)

If there was no urgency to improve the acceleration (and as you pointed out, there probably really isn't any need to do so from a practical standpoint), then pour your heart and soul (and ad budget) into creating an image of the new "Jetta, Passat, or whatever."

merc1 · July 2005

Exactly!

M

ivan_99 · July 2005

Agreed.

For many years comparison tests would always have an Audi Quattro versus a non AWD car. It would inevitably NOT finish first (ok S4 is a little different).

Now that others are offering AWD configurations, acceleration tests (drag racing !?!) are more comparable.

I even thought the A6Q 2.8l had good accelerationonce you were already rolling (30-50).

tomatopie · July 2005

Anyone have some info on this?

ivan_99 · July 2005

What ya thinking?

I personally would go for the new one over the old one; 2.0T is rated higher than the 2.8L V6, 6 speed auto versus 5 speed (if automatic is your thing), improved driving dynamics, interior etc.

Though, whenever I pass a now older Passat I still think wow, what a nice looking car. I always liked the 1.8T better than the 2.8L; I like better balance than higher power. 1.8T can be easily tuned for more hp. 1.8T also had coil issues (now resolved) and sludge issues (change your oil).

Unless you could get a fantastic deal on a 2005, and the 2006s initially were way over priced (a la Jetta) I think the smart move would be to go for the 2006regardless of the famed first model year issues.

a911s · July 2005

I can comment on the outgoing Passat 1.8T because I spent several months with one and the "old" 1998-2001 B5 platform A4 with the 2.8 litre engine because we owned one for 3 years. The 1.8T Passat is hardly fast, I'll acknowledge that, and the Tiptronic, which could be occasionally sluggish, only exacerbated the low power output from the 1.8T. However, the car never failed to make any of the difficult freeway transitions here in Los Angeles and it did a decent job of moving up onramps and into traffic. The car would cruise at 85 without problem and I never found it's slow performance to be a major deterrant. However I own a 2002 GTI with the same 1.8T motor and a 5-speed and the lighter weight GTI and 5-speed tranny make much better use of the motor. Nontheless, compare the 4-cylinder powered Accord and Camry models to the 1.8T Passat and the performance figures are on a very near plane, so the Passat wasn't really underperforming it's market segment, and it had (has) the best interior. The Passat with the 2.8 was more fun, but for some reason the B5 Passat was/is heavier than the B5 A4 with which it shared it's platform until 2001 which made the 2.8 feel more sluggish. Our A4 had the 2.8 litre motor, Quattro and a 5-speed and was lots of fun. It's 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds was only slightly slower than the 6.8 second time of the RWD BMW 328 that was it's contemporary and it would be on par with the new Honda Accord V6, which has more displacement, 50 more horsepower and doesn't have to deal with the weight or frictional losses occured with Quattro. I think that's a pretty good endorsement of the 1.8T motor. The 2.0T powered Passat's 0-60 time should be at 7.0 seconds or slightly less (6.9 or so) with FWD and a manual transmission and at about 7.3 with the Tiptronic. That means it's on par with the 3.5 litre V6 powered Chrysler 300 Touring, which also has a 7.3 second time, and that it's only negligablly slower than the 6- cylinder powered Accord and Sonata. It's also at about the same level as the 6 cylinder Camry and only slightly slower than the 260 horsepower, V6 Galant. Compare the 2.0T Passat's performance to the 4-cylinder Sonata, Cmary, Accord or Galant and it'll blow their doors off. Not bad considering that the Asian imports all boast more displacement. I'll also venture to say that the Passat should outhandle all of them. I've now driven a 2006 Passat and a 2006 Audi A6 with Sport Package and I can say as a matter of fact that the Audi/VW suspension systems have only gotten better since the previous models were new. If the Sonata's .02 are more important to you than the VW's better interior, superior handling and better resale value than I'd venture to say that either your priorities are out of wack or that you should be looking at motorcycles. After all, a $12,000 sport bike will dust just about any car costing less than $500,000 in a straight line. Maybe I'd be more positive about the Hyundai if it could dip into the mid 6s, but it can't...and the V6 Passat will.

a911s · July 2005

***I meant in my last post that I've driven the 2006 A6 and a 2006 A3, not a new Passat. Sorry for the typo.

maxamillion1 · July 2005

The new Passat is EXPENSIVE!!!

http://photos.imageevent.com/hiegear/carpics/passatpricelist_Page_1.jpg

But its nice... :P

markcincinnati · July 2005

How is this NOT a consideration for an Audi A6 3.2 prospect -- and in that light it is a value.

Tell me that the driving experience will NOT do a great job of feeling very Audi like!

dewey · July 2005

Cant wait to test drive the new Passat TDI Variant(Wagon)
For the riveting details on the new Passat Wagon:

http://www.germancarfans.com/news.cfm/NewsID/2050725.005/volkswagen/1.html

zorro16 · July 2005

hello guys,

buy this time now, every VW dealer should have a demo unit sitting in his lot.i've seen one with my local dealer in milwaukee here.

it looked much more like a baby phateon.i'm not so impressed by its looks as we people have been seeing the phateon for a while.

the demo unit was a 2.0t with the base MSRP of $23990

package 1: $1625
6 speed tiptornic transmission : $1075
coldweather package: $225
destination: $615

total msrp :$27440 loaded with leather and ignition button

dewey · July 2005

"Their output: 77 kW / 105 hp, 103 kW / 140 hp and 125 kW / 170 hp. The most powerful of these TDI engines features an innovative Piezo high-pressure unit-injector system as well as a series-fitted diesel particulate filter. This filter is available as an optional extra in the TDI engine units with 140 hp."

The 170hp sounds perfect for me! What are the chances of the 170hp diesel Passat wagon making it on these shores? 0.5 percent maybe?

ivan_99 · July 2005

Hehwhen looking at the price list I thought it was a pretty good price; at least reasonable.

A 3.6L Passat with Sport package 1 would come in at 35K; I assume negotiations would be minimal when initially released.

A well built German automobile (going on past Passat vehicles as an indicator) with 280HP, AWD, sport package, leather, power/heated seats, dual climate, and other extra stuff seems to be inline with othersG35X (even M35X) comes to mind.

I spent that amount on agulpmini van (do love it though).

a911s · July 2005

The 170 horsepower Diesel will probably never see North American driveways. Expect the 130 horsepower TDI (or a slightly updated version of it) to be the only diesel available here.

driverdm · July 2005

VW is not a luxury brand, period. And those prices are ridiculous. Let's call a spade a spade people.

VW is not a luxury brand. If you look at residual value and performance, it is easily proven. More proof is in the lakluster reception to the Phaeton and Touregg. How can a $35K Passat be reasonable? Acura TL, anyone? At $35K, you get a TL with a long list of features and optional equipment included. The TL will retain its value significantly better than the Passat. Additionally, the G35 and 3 Series can be had for that price. Then you have the juggernuat that is Lexus. If people want to say it isn't a juggernuat, I'll point you to its sales figures since 2000, the JD Power scores (the one where VW is at the bottom), and the reviews for the new IS. At that price it has to compete on styling, features, performance, reliability, and residual value. On those measures, the Passat would not average out to be at the top. VW is making a mistake with this one and the writing is clearly on the wall.

600kgolfgt · July 2005

What's the brand of the crystal ball you are using? And where can I buy one?

So it doesn't rank high on the reliability list or is the top seller? So what?

If I want a soulless, reliable car that is so numerous on the road I can see myself coming and going, that wraps me in sterile luxury and is refined to the point where I'm tuned out from the outside world, I'll opt for the Acura or the Lexus.

The reason why I drive a German car is the road feel, soul, passion, and exhilarating experience I get on the everyday drive. So it has reliability issues (that I haven't experienced in my 20+ years of driving VWs) - BFD. Like it or not, the Japanese still look to the Germans as their target benchmark - and not vice-versa. There is a reason.

There are better cars out there than the Passat. In the words of Lee Iococca - "If you can find a better car - buy it". If you don't like the Passat, buy something else. It's a free country....(or so it seems)....

dino001 · July 2005

Does the term "Peoples' vehicle" still mean anything? I think they should change their name to "Nichtsovielevolkswagen" (short NVVW). Especially after putting $35K sticker on the window, the prophecy will propell itself: No so many folks will buy it...

Those guys in Volfsburg seem to completely lose sight of what they are about. They put their models competing directly against each other. It's like putting a Chevy in price of comparable (in size and equipment, also in so-called "feel") Cadillac (or Ford in Lincoln, Honda-Acura, Toyota-Lexus). Nobody else is doing it, lets see if this is a genius or simply dreams of delusional lunatics.

dewey · July 2005

the demo unit was a 2.0t with the base MSRP of $23990

So you define the above price as luxury? Your definition of luxury is a bit dilluted, dont you think? I consider the above price compelling value for what you are getting.

Residual values? Have you looked at the stats. VW's overall residual values are among the top in the industry!

A FWD TL is you idea of an ideal performance car? I think your definition of a performance car is a bit diluted! FWD Honda accord based platform with a V6 that causes hazardous torque steer is not my definition of a performance car!

The new IS? To each their own, but the BMW 3 series sounds real tempting compared to an IS. Based on every review I read so far the conclusion is that the IS aint a BMW. So why buy a BMW wannabe when you can get the original!

dino001 · July 2005

The Phaeton does seem to be a bargain, however, compared with the A8 and the other Germans. I would be glad to have one.

But you don't, I presume because you don't have that kind of money to spend. Once you did, you would not even consider VW for reasons completely unrelated to the vehicles content, performance etc. Selling high-end luxury cars is a tricky business - it is as much about the badge, dealer experience and other non-tangibles, as much as about the value and content. Actually the price is often the last consideration (if you have to ask, you can't afford it).

Thus, it created catch 22 for Phaeton - no one knows, no one buys, since no one drives, no one knows. For the same reason Lexus did not make big carrier in Russia (or outside US in general), where potential market for newly rich oligarchs and medium businesman would seem to be perfect for such great line of vehicles. Lexus is just too cheap (in sense of price, not necessarily content), too clean, too practical. Has too much value. S-class is the king, even if it has reliability of '85 Buick. S600 is a statement: I am sooooooo rich, I can afford throwing money away. This attitude of course trickles down to lower classes as well, wchich may bite new Passat: too expensive for middle class, too "cheap" for upper. In the middle in no-man's land.

When you sold "peoples' cars" for over 60 years, you just do not come up with luxury and expect people will buy it just because it has more "value".

markcincinnati · July 2005

Conventional and historical wisdom/precedent do indeed suggest that VW is not a luxury brand. However, there are many folks who consider VW's as "more than" Camry's and Accords and Taruses.

VW's have many e-fan-sites. Many car magazines and on-line professional and blogger review sites often find it difficult to pigeon hole VW with its apparent competitors.

The Phaeton, despite its less than stellar sales, appears to be a real luxury car -- and for some folks a serious alternative to an Audi A8 or Mercedes even.

Due in part to the Pheaton's lack of sales success (at least here in the US) there have been great, almost hard to believe, deals on Phaetons. The Phaeton, calling a spade a spade, is a luxury car.

The several Passats that I have driven and ridden in always stike me as being very Audi like (do ya think?!?) Now, if you are not an Audi fan, that statement may have fallen on deaf ears (or "who cares?" ears.) One of my co-workers has a 2004 or 2005 (I can't tell) Passat FWD manual transmission V6 equipped "all options, except AWD and automatic" version. It is kind of a turquoise pearl green and has nice alloy wheels. The interior has Audi-like leather comfort seats, it has On*star and Phat Noise and when it is parked next to my new A6 3.2, even looks like a first cousin.

Riding in it, it has that typical German ability to absorb bumps and it seems (when driven by its owner, not me) quick and fast. At 85MPH it is every bit as solid as my A6 (my A6 is quieter, however.) The sound system, A/C and overall fit and finish seem "of the" Premium class, even though it is clear that it would be "near Premium" only.

If the VW goal remains to "move up market" the new Passat takes at least one step (and probably two based on the pictures and writes ups I've seen so far) in that direction. VW's new Passat (with the 280HP engine, AWD and a couple of packages that drive the price point to or above the mid $30's impresses me more as a car to consider against an Audi A4 and perhaps a Mercedes C class (both of which with their "big engines" cost well into the $40's.)

This VW, alas, will probably remain in the "near premium" class for a variety of reasons -- but it strikes me as a lot of car for the money.

I stand still somewhat confused that a new $35,000+ Passat 3.6 AWD w/280 HP could possibly be compared in several ways (favorably) with my $53,000+ Audi A6 3.2 AWD w/255HP.

HP alone is NOT the reason the Passat will surely please customers and reviewers -- but it will get their attention, I'll wager.

VW is in my estimation "moving on up" to a deeelux apartment in the sky.

dewey · July 2005

S-class is the king, even if it has reliability of '85 Buick. S600 is a statement: I am sooooooo rich

That is not all the case! Benchmark luxury cars have to earn their rating with technology, performance and quality. If MB is not more careful with their relaibility issues they may follow the same path that Jaguar went through since the 1980s.

Similarily to the Acura TL, I cant see how anyone would want to buy a 280hp Passat without AWD!

dino001 · July 2005

Getting a great deal on luxury (I mean high-end, not "near") defeats the purpose. Filty rich people do not brag that they got $10K off their last Mercedes (I think - just cannot imagine a conversation in their country club: "Hey Rob, look what I got - new Phaeton, 10 grand off the sticker" "Wow, I feel like a sucker in my S600 - I paid full retail"

- But maybe they do, who knows.

When you have to discount it, you start appealing to a different audience: those wannabes, having enough to buy a Lexus GS, but getting a deal on new Phaeton. OK, one may say, you sold one. Problem is, this guy was not your target audience - instead of a top partner of a law firm, you sold it to an associate. Thus, you messed up with something: either the product was not good enough, or your marketing completely missed it.

Nobody compares V6 Passat to A6 - rather to A4 3.2. A4 may be smaller, but it was always a logical step up in luxury from Passat. Now they try to sell it as "equal". Good luck with that!

dino001 · July 2005

That is not all the case! Benchmark luxury cars have to earn their rating with technology, performance and quality.

Yeah, by automotive press, who get to drive them for free. Ask those who really buy them, what are their real considerations (if they even tell you - many people answer questionaires the way they think the answer is "correct").

MB is not more careful with their relaibility issues they may follow the same path that Jaguar went through since the 1980s.

I agree in general, but it will take some time. Not in couple of years. US market will be first though, since the pool of rich is probably the largest, thus the competition is the strongest. Going back to VW, it doesn't have exactly stellar reputation either, thus there was even less going for it than for is for Benz.

I also agree on AWD with V6 - my problem is we are getting into mid/high 30s (with full options over 40), area populated by a very strong competition and not so big pool of people buying (we leave in the dust all those fully loaded Camcord buyers, trying to pick up TL/G35/IS/A4/325 buyers. Even with some merrits on VWs side, I just cannot see them selling enough to make real money there. Will they sell some? Sure. How many? Who knows. I just can see those great deals in a year or two, as there are on Phaetons now...

markcincinnati · July 2005

I agree that it is unlikely that the Passat will be compared to the A6 (at least I hope not for selfish reasons).

I would assume the Passat will be compared to the A4.

The Passat, once again, looks somewhat like it could be called an Audi A5 -- THAT could be a problem (for Audi, one would think.)

And, after reading the "rich guy next door du jour" book(s), I think I might actually see people being very pleased that their Phaeton was $10,000 off.

One of the local VW dealerships sold a W12 Phaeton -- I don't know if the buyer was rich or simply over extended -- but he or she probably feels they got a great deal since at that price point their options were pretty much wide open.

I tend to think that I will spend more for an Audi (and have, thus far) than I would for a VW, but that has been because there were clear differentiators between Audi and VW. The lines, while still clear and getting closer to each other.

The idea (Piech's I think) was to have VW target Mercedes and Audi target BMW and both lines (Audi and VW) diverge from each other (more than they have historically.)

Somehow with Audi coming out with the new A3 and VW coming out with the new Passat 3.6 AWD, there is some evidence the plan may have morphed somewhat.

We'll see.

Were I to consider a new car today (and this is unfair since I've had my new Audi less than 6 weeks), I probably wouldn't get the Passat -- but I probably would at least TEST DRIVE it to see what all the noise is about.

Now, if I were a disenfranchised Audi, BMW or Mercedes customer (and, thus far, I am not) I'm not as certain the VW Passat 3.6 AWD with all the goodies wouldn't receive my serious consideration.

Perhaps, in part, VW wants to go with the thought that they will compete with the usual suspects and have at least a chance at luring some disenfranchised owners into the showroom.

bzack · July 2005

My local VW dealer has a 2006 Passat in their showroom. I saw it yesterday when I picked up my 2005 Passat TDI. Although it's a beautiful car, but it is a little bigger in size than my taste. Besides, I was told the TDI model may never come to the North American market due to unsolved diesel fuel issue. Even it eventually comes, the new Passat will use the old 137HP 2.0 engine, not the 170HP in the European market.

600kgolfgt · July 2005

Don't buy one, then. Why work yourself into a rage over this topic?

dino001 · July 2005

I am not in a rage. Rather, I am simply disappointed. Passat has always been on my "watch to buy next year" list, even if the next year means really two years, or never, if you know what I mean. When time comes, real evaluation starts - last time it lost, but it had more to do with my then preferences with something a bit smaller, a bit faster, a bit more Japanese... I always thought, however, it will have a real shot next time, as I progress with age. However, with current trends, it starts driving away awfully fast, if it has not already. And it is a pitty, because I otherwise like it, always have.

I know I can't change it, but what are these forums for if not finding out whether or not I am alone in my impressions?

ivan_99 · July 2005

I disagree with the VW non luxury statement (would take a VW over Lexus any day)its a non luxury name, but not a non-luxury product (double negative?!?)

I do however agree with the disappointment over VWs products. I would have a Touareg in my garage now if it had 3 rows of seats. I just purchased a large vehicle and a small vehicle, both Japanese.

I would venture to say you could get a 3.6L Passat FWD (in a year or so) without extra fluff for 30K or so.

tomatopie · July 2005

Thanks to you and the others who commented.

I am focused on the diesel; I drive 100 miles a day and fuel costs matter a lot. I test drove the 2005 Passat TDI and it had plenty of power for my needs.

I understand that I cannot get a 2006 Passat TDI in the USA; no diesels until 2007. Is that accurate?

I am a bit reluctant to buy the last of a retiring body style, but I figure that once the 2006 models are in the showroom, and the cost of the midlevel trim Passat is around $28,000, I can push down the price of a 2005 Passat TDI to $23,000 or so. I don't need to be hip....I just want a genuine driver's car, with solid safety features, and good mileage.

Does that change your analysis?

markcincinnati · July 2005

Test drive an Acura TL -- wait until it rains, too, then test it again.

Holy torque steer!

The VW with the 3.6 and FWD alone would be a handful -- this car begs to be had with 4motion.

Volkswagen Passat 2006+

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles