Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
VW Passat Wagon vs Subaru Wagons
willy
Member Posts: 2
in Volkswagen
OK. I've been very patient with VW. I've wanted to
drive the AWD Passat wagon with a 6 cylinder for a
long time (seems like they've been dangling it
just out of reach foreve)r. I gather we're looking
at early-to-mid-summer. That's about the same time
as the redesigned Outback.
Any thoughts about the relative merits?
BTW, I have almost always driven a standard shift,
and I hear that the Passat will not have a
standard with AWD. That's strike one, but Passat
seems to have a lot of good things going for it.
- Bill
drive the AWD Passat wagon with a 6 cylinder for a
long time (seems like they've been dangling it
just out of reach foreve)r. I gather we're looking
at early-to-mid-summer. That's about the same time
as the redesigned Outback.
Any thoughts about the relative merits?
BTW, I have almost always driven a standard shift,
and I hear that the Passat will not have a
standard with AWD. That's strike one, but Passat
seems to have a lot of good things going for it.
- Bill
Tagged:
0
Comments
Miro,
97 Legacy GT 5spd.
I will be considering the merits of these two cars. Where did you hear that the 2000 Passat wagon would not be available with both AWD and 5 speed manual transmission? I read something somewhere in the last couple weeks that might have implied that, but I haven't seen anything specific.
I love the looks of the Passat and test driving a manual sedan version last week did nothing to eliminate it from consideration. But if they won't make the AWD in a 5 speed, that would make me the proud owner of a 2000 Subaru!
I was hoping to see the 2000 Subaru at the Baltimore Auto Show a few weeks ago, but they didn't have it. On the outside (from pictures I've seen on the Web), it looks practically identical... which is ok with me. The updated interior sounds like it's worth waiting for.
- Bill
Also, the October 1998 R&T new car issue stated the "1999" Passat AWD would not be available with the 1.8T. I have heard from Denver dealers and seen in print the the all Passat V6s would only have automatics, then my dealer got in a V6 sedan with a 5-speed manual! They didn't even know it would be available and speculated they might only see one per month. So much for accurary of VW press info (there's a surprise, right?).
However, my bet is that there will not be any 1.8T AWD (given the vehicle weight) nor a manuals, just V6 Tiptronics given the EPA certification costs and VW's general character of only offering automatics in more loaded models of the Passat.
Why not save yourself a few thousand bucks and a few hundred pounds and get an automatic with the traction control/electronic differential control for full 2-wheel drive, with some really good snow tires?
Passat has great V6,Tiptronic 5 sp.(Subaru only has 4 sp.sportshift(?)..),
German engineering and great built quality and value,and it feels like a more affordable MBZ.
The Subaru though has extensive AWD technology up their sleeves,better reliability,love the boxer engine,a "Lexus-like" interior and exterior theme and cost
less....Hmmmm.
Regarding the '00 Outback's chack out the Australian web site. They've got a bunch of great looking pictures of the new outback suitable for framing. Obviously, the wheel's on the wrong side, but it looks like they've made quite few changes.
http://www.subaru.com.au/
Also chack out this site:
http://www.outback2000.com/
I still haven't decided. I think I'll wait til they hit the showroom first.
Motor Trend takes a look at the 2000 Outback Limited:
http://www.motortrend.com/may99/subaru/subaru_f.html
I'm wondering why you're trying to decide between two vehicles without having driven them. Will you consider other Legacy wagons too; like the GT or lesser trims? I wonder how many people know that Subaru builds sporty models, not just suv look-a-likes.
Since you're still looking, is the SAAB 9-5 within your reach?
considering the same car but I drive in excess of
50,000 miles per year with a vehicle loaded with
fabric samples. I'm concerned with pick up and
weather the engine would last 200,000 plus. I currently drive a van and hate it.
Anyone have info to share?
thanks!
Dustoff - in regards to Subaru maintenance, I can tell you that in the 5 years I've had my legacy sedan, the only money I spent was for oil changes until I hit 45,000, when I did spark plugs, some of the belts, etc, and spent $250. It's been flawless and I almost hate to get rid of it, but I'm lusting after a 2000 Red GT Wagon....
I have had 4 subaru wagons: 85 , 88 Turbo, 96 Outback, and 98 Outback. About 350K total. Except for a blown plastic radiator in the 88 at 98K miles, nothing but routine stuff and have never broken down on the road. Will order a 2000 White GT in September.
We have a 95Legacy LS sedan, love it. This 00 is a significant improvement in terms of ride and noise & power. No insult to VW, but we liked GT better, despite some hankering for a "European" feel and a new experience.
good explanation of) the major differences of
these two "AWD" approaches? Thanks!
AWD approaches:
http://www.eskimo.com/~eliot/awd.html
My dilemma is my heart says go with the Passat and my brain says to buy the OB. The Passat has many nice features, handles nicely and the acceleration is quite nice with the 4 cylinder, although it can become noisy when pushed too hard. I also test drove a '99 V6 Passat Sedan the same day as the Passat Wagon and did not feel there was that much greater throttle response to justify the extra cost. Besides, one can easily install a computer chip in the 4 cylinder to get up to 40 or 50 more HP at a cost of $400 to $500 extra to make it even more exciting to drive. One knowledgeable VW sales rep told me that he read somewhere where installing a chip into the Passat can cause the valves to prematurely burn. Has anyone heard of this happening? I have read somewhere that the Audi uses the same engine and on one of their models they use an upgraded chip on that engine to give it a greater boost. I don't believe Audi would place an up lifting chip in their engine if the values would burn sooner than they should.
I have to say that having a 10 year powertrain warranty on the Passat would be very nice, but of course it would not be too nice if it required many trips to the dealer for repairs. I have read many complaints of reliability problems in other sites on this car, yet even after all the trouble, these same people absolutely rave about how much they are in love with their vehicle! Unbelievable! Are there any people out there who own a Passat who haven't had any problems? According to the new issue of a certain well known and read consumer magazine on the 2000 Models they have tested ( I do not want to mention their name, since I have heard in the past that this company has filed litigation against people who have utilized their name without their permission ), they have put the reliability of the '99 Passat in practically the same category as they did for the '98 Legacy in their April issue on the '99 Models and therefore they predict the 2000 Passat will provide above average reliability. Unfortunately, this magazine did not put the 2000 Legacy on one of their classical longer term test drives and they would not comment on the reliability of the 2000 Legacy at this point, since they say it is a new model ( due to the re-design and engine revisions no doubt ).
My views of the OB was the nicer fit and finish along with the greater amount of room over the past OB's. I was somewhat dismayed over the lack of pick up and another magazine said that they could achieve 0-60 MPH times of about 9.8 seconds if they used the power brake method by revving the engine to 2,500 RPM then releasing the brake. This would not be a recommended practice on a FWD or a RWD car all the time, but I suspect that it would not be too bad on a Full Time AWD car like the Subbie, since the engine torque is being evenly distributed to more wheels. On one of my test drives with the OB, I did pull from a stop sign with the Trans shifter set at "1" which allows one to rev the engine at a higher RPM before shifting to the higher gear and this definitely increased the performance, but of course the tiptronic feature on the Passat is better for this type of manual shifting that includes 5 gears to the Legacy's 4. The handling around a curve at a higher speed was quite nice in the OB, but I feel the Firestone Wilderness mud and snow tires on this model do not allow for the greatest of handling and one magazine says that the car has a heavy understeer to it which did not produce exciting skidpad results. I am wondering if one can order this car with a different set of tires ( like the GT tires )from the factory? Is there an after market feature that would allow one to bolt on the turbocharger on the OB as the models sold overseas? If so, at what cost I wonder? Thanks for your help.
The Passat 1.8T sedan I drove was quick with the 5 speed, but my friend's Tiptronic wagon was much slower and shifted slowly too. Stick with the manual, or get the V6. Pro: upscale feel, germanic. Con: turbo lag, real world prices are higher, 4Motion still MIA, premium fuel costs $1.69 around me (yikes!).
The 2000 Outback is much improved over the '99: 4 wheel disc brakes, 16" wheels, rear LSD option, seat belt pre-tensioners and force limiters, side air bag option, DRLs, over an inch wider, more cargo room. The fake hood scoop is gone, and it looks more upscale inside, now matching the very nice Passat interior. Pro: full-time AWD, safety, low-end torque mates better with auto, more comprehensively equipped (AWD, alloys, roof rack, fog lights, etc.). Con: a bit heavy, auto models could use more power (H-6 coming for 2001).
It's important to distinguish the various AWD systems. VW/Audi has two: 4Motion and Quattro, and they are different. 4Motion controls how power is distributed electronically, like auto tranny Soobs. Quattro uses a Torsen Differential, with a LSD front and rear. Oddly, the Audi TT uses VW's system.
Auto Soobs work like 4Motion. For 2000, they also offer a rear viscous LSD in the all-weather package, which I highly recommend at its bargain price. Manual tranny Soobs split torque 50/50 all the time. The center diffy is filled with a silicon fluid, which thickens quickly when either axle is spinning quicker than the other.
I own a manual tranny Forester, and basically it's so effective you just never begin to slip.
All these are full-time, active systems that make part-time 4WD seem relatively crude.
Audi charges $1750, I believe, even on the TT. VW should charge in the $1500-1750 range. Soobs have it standard on all its cars.
Snow tires work well, but remember you have to mount them. They're louder and don't handle as well in the dry, so it was not a practical option for me, since we get snow sporadically (I'd have to mount/dismount them constantly).
AWD also has its benefits in the dry. Handling in curves is more neutral. Weight is distributed more evenly front to rear. The front tires aren't overwhelmed having to steer and transmit torque.
Subaru offers an automanual in New Zealand, so it may eventually appear here. They also have a low range tranny, believe it or not. The H-6 engine should arrive this fall, with 205hp, on GT and Outback Limited models, but with auto only the first year.
Sorry about my ranting. Wait for the model you want, drive it, and buy what fits your needs and budget. Both are sweet.
-juice
You just need to decide if you want AWD or not.
business section talking about the LA Auto Show.
"Volkswagen also said it plans to build in 2002 a
convertible version of its New Beetle, which was
reintroduced in 1998. And the company said
four-wheel-drive versions of its Passat wagons and
sedans will be available later this month."
I've heard they'll only offer 4Motion on the GLX automatic, which would be a big mistake. A GLX Wagon with auto stickers for $30k, so 4Motion would push the price into the $32k range.
No way it can compete in that price range. In contrast, you can get a Legacy from $18k to $26k or so.
Let's hope I'm wrong. A high price would also cannibalize A4 Avant sales.
-juice
be processed as the this past week. Thought this info might be of interest to a number of folks
posting on this subject. The dealer is Donaldsons located in Sayville Long Island N.Y.
Bob
Do you recall if 4Motion was an a-la-carte option, as with Audis?
-juice
The salesman at Russell VW indicated that 4-Motion equipped vehicles will be somewhat rare, so don't expect much discounting.
Bob
Price sounds high, but the GLX V6 is well equipped. $30-32k, depending upon body style, is priced way out of my price range.
An Outback Limited Wagon with auto costs about $27k, and even with the H-6 coming this summer it should be about $28k or so.
Still, it's nice to have options, even if they are on the high end.
-juice
I have found this to be typical VW/AUDI-USA policy. Note that the S4 Avant isn't in the USA. Nor is there an A6 Avant with anything but the dog 2.8 motor in the USA.
In Germany, they have:
S4 2.7 twin turbo V6 with a 6 speed manual in 17 different colors.
S6 4.2 V8 Avant with either the 5 speed Tip or the 6 speed manual in 9 different colors.
Perhaps if we had some unlimited speed highways like many of the Autobahns in Germany, we would get better cars from Germany. We get no respect!
Jim
I looked at (automatic only):
4) Audi A4 Avant
3) Volvo V40
2) VW Passat
1) Subaru OB
and some others that did not make the cut. They are ranked in my order of preference. 1 as the best and 4 as still pretty good.
The major question for me was value for the money. I got the Outback Limited with all kinds of crazy wacky zany options for about $27k. About $3000-6000 less than the other with the same/similar stuff. Each car did certain things very well but the balance was on the Subes side. For example if I could take the seats, quality, and looks from the Audi, the engine from the Volvo, the steering feel from the Passat, and the velcro grip of the Sube....then I would have had exactly what I wanted. When I started I did not want the Sube, I wanted the Passat (really badly). BUT the Sube won we over eventually after about 4 test drives of each.
nematode - thanks for sharing the experience. I guess beauty (of AWD) is more than skin deep!
-juice
Have not driven the OB yet. Since 1978, I've owned a host of German autos, from VeeDubs to Bimmers, to an Audi. Current ride is a '91 Passat WGN 5-speed. (BTW, ALL these cars, save one, were sticks.)
I'm leaning toward the Soob for two main reasons: value/budget and proven reliability. The new Passat is SO new, as is the 4Motion comcept (v. Synchro). I can definitely get a lot more for my money with the OB, though the detail in the Passat GLX is, well, spellbounding! I haven't even looked at a 2K OB yet.
My biggest concern is the drive-ability contest. Has anybody made the German-to-Japan conversion? What kinds of "adjustments" (read: compromises) did you have to make? Will the 2.5L 5-speed Soob perform well in comparison to the Tiptronic (the only tranny on the 4Motion WGN)? Certainly just about anything will be a vast improvement over my Passat's 2.0L (thought it does have a lot of pep).
I have enjoyed reading all the feedback, experience, and sage advice in this and the other columns. Will continue to monitor as the buying zone approaches!
Barry
Main reason for not buying a Passat turbo back in Australia was concern over the life expectancy of my license if I did. I had got used to sitting with all the other traffic at 85-90 mph on Motorways in Britain and the Passat Turbo is spinning really nicely at that sort of speed. In Australia, the speeding laws are rigidly enforced and 90mph would lose your license instantly.
Secondary consideration was change in use. Here in Australia, there is a far greater proportion of dirt roads and I tend to use them a fair bit. Subaru AWD is fabulous in these conditions, particularly when wet. Added ground clearance is also a big help as many of the roads I travel have boulders in unexpected places. I have wiped out a sump on one car many years ago and do not wish to repeat the expensive experience.
I went for an Outback Limited which adds leather, dual moon roof and CD player here. Absence of cassette deck drives me nuts and I cannot find how to get around it. The colour, described as Royal Violet is also not wonderful, being closer to metallic purplish blue, to my eyes. Only four colour choices here and when you have a wife and kids, your vote on colour often loses.
Initially, I had problems with the throttle characteristics of the Outback, particularly when the throttle had leaned out a lot on long trips (Engine Control Unit is adaptive and modifies throttle mapping dependent upon recent usage; around town it is more aggressive, on long cruise, runs leaner. This can cause problems with cruise control when switching from zero throttle to minimal throttle, such as on gentle downhill runs after gentle driving for twenty minutes plus). I called Subaru of Australia and mentioned my concerns. "Yes, it is a problem with 2.5l Outbacks and Japan are working up a fix". After experience with Mercedes over too many years of problems with a C class, I was convinced I would never hear anything further. Surprise! A call a day or so later said "We have a new ECU which we would like to fit. Can we call around tomorrow (Saturday). I was a bit surprised as each problem with the MB C class required 4 trips to a disinterested dealer, each time leaving car for days, only to find no fix achieved. The service guy appeared, fitted the new ECU and test drove the car with me. Still not happy, he insisted that the fix was still not right and would be taking the problem back for further investigation.
As it happened, I have found that the ECU was only part of the problem, the more serious one being variable fuel octane ratings here. Shell have introduced a new 98 octane blend here which has fixed the bug and improved economy.
Subaru is not as efficient as the Passat though. I am getting about 25-28mpg (Imperial Gallon, not US) against about 41-45 for the Passat. The Passat 1.8 Turbo is a seriously nice engine, very low polluter, fabulously responsive and super efficient. Possibly even nicer than that in the Mark II Golf, I used to own years ago. The Subaru engine is nowhere near as nice but it does a different job.
I have just moved house with a 6x4 trailer (week before Christmas is not the time to move here; you cannot get a mover or hire a truck for love or money) towed behind the Subaru. Up hill and down dale, I just switched the Outback to low range and it handled it sweetly. The Passat would never have hauled like that.
All in all; two very similar cars to drive but achieving different ends.
Rechecking the spelling, I am reminded that I am still in UK English mode. In Australia and the US, colour would be spelt color although the change only occurred after I had finished school. Too lazy to amend so hope you can all translate!
Cheers
Graham
Autoweek nicknamed the 2.5l engine the "torque pig". It doesn't feel like anything else, really, since it's a water-cooled boxer. It has a characteristic growl to it. Soobs overall have lots of character, dare I say a soul, very unlike other Japanese cars. You also get frameless windows, which can take getting used to but most owners like. They're pretty reliable and they last, and they are excellent in foul weather, which is why they're popular in snowy climates. Australia gets slightly different models, including a low range option not offered in the US, and some Turbos too. The H-6 will come this summer, but should only come with an auto tranny.
The VW is nice, but it takes a more high-tech approach with its V6 and 5 valves per cylinder, and requires premium fuel ($1.749 in Bethesda, MD). It's an Audi platform, too, so it feels upscale and sturdy. The interior is a bit cold to me, especially given the price. It's a shame they don't offer the manual on the wagon 4motion, but I guess their upcoming SUV will fill that niche.
Ironically, owners are similar. I recall from my rec.autos discussion days how passionate VW owners can be, and I have found that Soob owners are no less enthusiastic. They also tend to be adventurous and outdoorsy, so posts usually concern how to load kayaks, bikes, and skis on the roof without scratching the paint.
Drive the Outback and the Legacy GT, and let us know what you think.
-juice
PS Graham - check out the new CD-Recorders, you can make your own CD's (for a price)
In my search for a new wagon, I narrowed it down to these two vehicles. I did this based solely on the numbers. When comparing specs and prices, it's hard to beat the Passat & Outback when it comes to value for the money.
The Outback is nice. Nice exterior styling, well layed out interior. I really like the way this vehicle looks. I found the cloth seats to be a bit narrow. Interestingly enough, the leather seats fit me better even though they are supposed to be identical in design. The Outback was surprisingly nice to drive. Very good handling and excellent visibility. My only real problem with this vehicle is the acceleration, or lack thereof. I test drove an automatic and when I stomped on the pedal I expected those 166 horses to kick-in and start running. Instead, all I heard was ALOT of engine noise and acceleration was very slow and tedious. It's very quiet otherwise and is an acceptable cruiser.
The Passat is also a very nice vehicle. The exterior styling is much more subdued when compared to the Outback. I test drove a Passat with leather interior and the seats felt very nice. The first thing I noticed driving the Passat was that you sit lower than you do in the Outback. I must say, I liked the visibility in the Outback a bit better for this reason. Where the Passat really shines is in the engine performance. Put the pedal to the floor in the 1.8 4 cyl engine and it moves you right along without all the engine noise of the Outback. The turbo provides very nice acceleration. Even though the Passat has 11 less hp, it feels like it accelerates much faster and smoother. The Passat also comes with a 5 spd Tiptronic transmission which can be shifted manually. This is a very nice feature and pretty much decided it for me over the Outback.
Some other notes ... both vehicles were comparable in cargo capacity. However, the Passat has a split bottom rear cushion. This allows you to fold half of the rear seat down completely flat while still allowing a third passenger to ride in the back seat. The bottom rear cushion in the Outback was one piece meaning you had to fold the entire bottom rear cushion up in order to fold the rear seat completely flat, ie. no third passenger. If you plan on carrying bikes inside your wagon (like I do), then this is something you should consider. The Passat also has about 2" more roof clearance in the rear cargo area. Even so, I found I still had to remove my bicycle seat in order to get the bike in standing up.
The Passat is "chippable" meaning that you can boost the horsepower and torque significantly by adding a performance computer chip. The Outback does not have this option. The Passat has a better drivetrain and rust warranty. The Passat gets better mileage than the Outback and comes standard with a security system and side impact air bags. The Passat also has a full sized spare tire. Finally, leather and sunroof are available options on the standard Passat GLS. One must get the Outback Limited in order to get these features. A comparably equipped Passat is about $1000 less than the Outback Limited. About the only downside I found with the Passat was that 15" steel wheels and tires are standard equipment vs. 16" alloy wheels found on the Outback. Several reviews I've read mentioned that the standard 15" Passat wheels are pretty inadequate. The Passat had a slightly nicer rear seat release mechanism. The oil filter on the Passat is located on the side of the engine and looked like it might be a little difficult to get to. The oil filter on the Outback is underneath and is supposed to be better/easier to get to.
In the end, when you add up the checkmarks in each column, the Passat GLS comes out ahead of the Outback both in pricing and in performance.
phil
Well, here's the story:
Passat Wagon (1.8T w/triptronic/leather/heated seats)
- definitely sexier both on the outside and in
- I actually like the interior, it feels refined
- feels slightly faster
- lower seating position, had me fooled I was in a sports sedan until the body roll demonstrated otherwise
- the triptronic was surprisingly good - it was fun
- seats are really good
- has those nifty european side markers
- it does *not* get 41 or 44 mpg as someone stated above. Even the sales guy said max 30 mpg, and we know they always pad the numbers.
Outback
- love those large side mirrors (had to really look hard when passing with the Passat)
- interior has more compartments
- seat does not go up high enough
- acceleration is really close to the Passats, but it just doesn't have that oomph or excitement to it. My guess because the car's so much quieter and slightly heavier.
- it has AWD*
- definitely quieter
- much higher cargo entry area, and it definitely appears to have more room overall
When you add up what you get, it comes down to this: the Outback is a very practical car. You get your money's worth, whereas with the Passat, I love the way it looks and feels. Still, compared to the fact you get AWD with the OB, and you don't with the Passat in the same price range, the value is questionable.
* you can get 4-motion on the Passat, but we're talking only on the V6 and mated with the triptronic. While I would love to have one, the price is at least 3-4k US more than a OB Limited. If I had that kind of money I would probably buy an Audi. (I watched Ronin this past weekend, and am dying for an S8)
This was an educating experience nonetheless. In my dream world, I'd love to own both cars. What am I saying ... I would love to own many many different cars! (no SUVs though
I wish it was possible to own both cars, they're both really good. But alas, most of us have to pick one. Pick the one that's right for you.
I beg to differ on the fuel mileage on the Passat 1.8T. I am a dead boring CPA and very fussy about numbers, particularly where it involves money. The quoted 41 to 45 mpg was Imperial Gallons which are equivalent to 1.2 US gallons. Converted to US Gallons, this works out at 34 to 37 mpg. Okay, I admit that I drive frugally but not slowly but the pattern of driving is consistent on the Subaru which is showing 25 to 28 mpg Imperial or 21 to 23 mpg US. The Passat figure was in line with European mixed use figures set under government standards. I have to admit to not being too wild about the fuel economy of the Subaru but console myself that it is not me paying for it. Both cars were manuals but the Passat was 2 wheel drive, not the 4-motion.
Either way, they are both great cars and good fun to drive
Graham
I beg to differ on the fuel mileage on the Passat 1.8T. I am a dead boring CPA and very fussy about numbers, particularly where it involves money. The quoted 41 to 45 mpg was Imperial Gallons which are equivalent to 1.2 US gallons. Converted to US Gallons, this works out at 34 to 37 mpg. Okay, I admit that I drive frugally but not slowly but the pattern of driving is consistent on the Subaru which is showing 25 to 28 mpg Imperial or 21 to 23 mpg US. The Passat figure was in line with European mixed use figures set under government standards. I have to admit to not being too wild about the fuel economy of the Subaru but console myself that it is not me paying for it. Both cars were manuals but the Passat was 2 wheel drive, not the 4-motion.
Either way, they are both great cars and good fun to drive
Graham
I beg to differ on the fuel mileage on the Passat 1.8T. I am a dead boring CPA and very fussy about numbers, particularly where it involves money. The quoted 41 to 45 mpg was Imperial Gallons which are equivalent to 1.2 US gallons. Converted to US Gallons, this works out at 34 to 37 mpg. Okay, I admit that I drive frugally but not slowly but the pattern of driving is consistent on the Subaru which is showing 25 to 28 mpg Imperial or 21 to 23 mpg US. The Passat figure was in line with European mixed use figures set under government standards. I have to admit to not being too wild about the fuel economy of the Subaru but console myself that it is not me paying for it. Both cars were manuals but the Passat was 2 wheel drive, not the 4-motion.
Either way, they are both great cars and good fun to drive
Graham