Topic: Test-Drive: 2011 Volkswagen Jetta TDI

[Shnak]

A dumbed down Jetta wouldn't sell well if it wasn't priced accordingly, but it is. It seems pretty clear that in this class/size of cars, most people don't want to pay a premium for a better interior and suspension bits; they're willing to sacrifice on the interior for a lower price. And let's be frank, 99% of the car buying population can't make a difference between driving a car with an independant suspension and one without.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

OMG! China gets Golf R AND Scirocco R!

And a New Passat and New Magotan (appears to be our N/A Passat). Curious what the price difference is (but too lazy to check myself at the moment).

[quadzilla]

A dumbed down Jetta wouldn't sell well if it wasn't priced accordingly, but it is. It seems pretty clear that in this class/size of cars, most people don't want to pay a premium for a better interior and suspension bits; they're willing to sacrifice on the interior for a lower price. And let's be frank, 99% of the car buying population can't make a difference between driving a car with an independant suspension and one without.

Unless you are an enthusiast price is usually the top priority. Otherwise, who else would buy cheap clothes, cheap electronics, cheap bikes.....the list goes on and on.

[dirtyjeffer]

How sad it is to see what the Jetta has become, a cheapened shell of its former self just so it can take on the Corolla.
Frankly I thought the marketing department at VW were on crack for unleashing such an abomination , but disturbingly enough it is selling well. Obviously dumbed down cars with a marquee name will sell.
What's telling about this is how it seems to illustrate the mindset of the average NA driver, and to say it's kind of depressing would be an understatement.

as i have stated numerous times, the Jetta has simply become here, what it is everywhere else...a 4 door sedan...only in North America was it considered an "upscale sedan"...it is now simply where it is everywhere else in the world for VW...nothing wrong with that.

[Karumba]

Well I have to say that the new Jetta is a huge hit so far.  There definitely are a lot on the road.  The surprising thing to me is that there are actually quite a few with the base motor.  I actually wouldn't consider this vehicle without the TDI engine.  Both gas engines are not competitive and not something I would want in my vehicle.  As for the comments on how cheap the interior and ride is now I guess it's what had to be done in order to make it cheap enough for some buyers.  In the end if you want better driving dynamics and a higher quality interior then you should get the Golf.  My concern is if the upcoming new Passat will be cheaped down as much as this Jetta.  If so the only option is to get the CC.

They are quite numerous here too, mostly the base model with the underpowered 2.0 L gas engine.  I have a '10 Golf with the 2.5 L engine and don't understand why so many are unimpressed with the engine.  It has plenty of power and tourque and is so quiet and smooth at idle, I often can't tell if the engine is running.  It's also good on gas, with slightly better mileage than my last car, an '08 2.4 litre Camry and more power to boot.  Perhaps it's just perception.  Have you ever driven one?

I'm not saying the 2.5 L isn't powerful enough (because is it competitive with others) but it does seem to be less fuel efficient than others.  The GDI engine that's in the Sonata/Optima come to mind.  It gets better fuel economy and more power.  Or you could look at direct competitors like the Focus, Civic, and Elantra, which all have more fuel efficient engines (even compared to the smaller 2.0L).  I have driven the 2.5L in a 2008 Rabbit and it was a decent engine.  By no means did it blow my mind or anything.  I really think the nicer engines are over in Europe for both the gas and diesel.  I think the upcoming GLI model will get better reviews because of the suspension is completely different, the engine is really good, and there are a few upgrades to the interior.

I just wanted to chime in my opinion here. I myself own a 2.5 golf.

Yes, the gas golf is more thirsty than other compact cars, but what you have to realize is that the golf does not directly compare with cars such as the elantra, civic, etc.  Drive them back to back and you'll realize that the golf's suspension does a better job soaking up bumps than the others, drives much more solid and planted, and is all around much more refined.  To get this level of refinement and solidness, the suspension design is more complex in the golf, the steel is beefier in the golf, and this means it weighs more than the others.  If you compare the weight to other cars, it's more in line with family sedans such as the accord/camry, around 300 pounds heavier than the other compact sedans you are more likely to compare the golf to.  The fuel economy of the 2.5 when compared to cars with similar weight is competitive.  In fact, when you take into account that the golf never feels underpowered, like in the 2.4L accord, I don't feel the 2.5 gasser is bad at all. 

Granted, there are the diesel and the turbo gas engines which has better fuel economy or similar fuel economy but more power, which makes the 2.5 look inefficient.  But you will have to pay more for the more sophisticated engines.

[No H2O]

Volkswagen's new Jetta has a fantastic diesel engine, but its cheap interior doesn't warrant the overall price, says Jil McIntosh.

Says Jil...one opinion. I found the interior quite nice and not tacky like so many cars out there trying to impress me with gimmicks and flash.

Depending on what pricing does in the future, the Jetta TDI will be my next vehicle...if my twelve year old Honda would just die.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Volkswagen's new Jetta has a fantastic diesel engine, but its cheap interior doesn't warrant the overall price, says Jil McIntosh.

Says Jil...one opinion. I found the interior quite nice and not tacky like so many cars out there trying to impress me with gimmicks and flash.

Depending on what pricing does in the future, the Jetta TDI will be my next vehicle...if my twelve year old Honda would just die.

She's hardly the only one to make those observations. A number of people and reviewers on here and much of the rest of the auto reviewers have said the same.

Consumer Reports has it on a list of cars which are worse than their predecessors. Some of the points they made:

- The 2.0-liter four-cylinder TDI diesel gets an impressive 34 mpg overall but the DSG automated manual transmission is sometimes jerky at low speeds

- Handling is not as agile or precise as in the previous Jetta, with more “body lean” on corners.

- Stopping distances were long enough to be disappointing for an SUV, let alone a small car.

- The interior has gone from stylish and comfortable in past models to cheap-looking: All of the interior plastics are hard to the touch and the various textured-plastic trim pieces look tacky.

- Door panels have lots of gaps and misalignments and the seat-height adjustment lever has sharp edges. The trunk lid is only partially lined. Our car also developed a lot of squeaks and rattles.

[No H2O]

- The 2.0-liter four-cylinder TDI diesel gets an impressive 34 mpg.

Somehow I highly doubt it gets a mere 41 MPG Imperial.

- The interior has gone from stylish and comfortable in past models to cheap-looking: All of the interior plastics are hard to the touch and the various textured-plastic trim pieces look tacky.

- Door panels have lots of gaps and misalignments and the seat-height adjustment lever has sharp edges. The trunk lid is only partially lined. Our car also developed a lot of squeaks and rattles.

Well I'll have to look for all that the next time I am at the dealer. Although I doubt hawk-eye missed it.

I've never bothered with magazine reports & evaluations too much. For example, I repeatedly got far more MPGs than the government guide; you just have to be smoooooth. 

I'd be more than happy to go with a CR-V again, but the manufacturers here are too pig-headed to bring diesels in. They have them in Europe...had a great ride in a KIA Sorento 2.2 diesel. Moved quite well and hardly reved at an elevated velocity.

[dirtyjeffer]

...but the manufacturers here are too pig-headed to bring diesels in. They have them in Europe...

it has nothing to do with the manufacturers...it is the government emissions standards that are the "problem"...diesels have to meet the exact same emissions requirements as their gasoline counterparts...they don't have those same standards in Europe (at least not yet)...remember the old "California Emissions" that vehicles in that state had to be equipped with??....well, that is what we all drive now, which is why diesel cars weren't allowed to be sold in CA or NY, until the introduction of the new "Clean Diesel" models...those are the only diesel cars allowed now, in Canada or the USA (new, of course).

[tpl]

...but the manufacturers here are too pig-headed to bring diesels in. They have them in Europe...

it has nothing to do with the manufacturers...it is the government emissions standards that are the "problem"...diesels have to meet the exact same emissions requirements as their gasoline counterparts...they don't have those same standards in Europe (at least not yet)...remember the old "California Emissions" that vehicles in that state had to be equipped with??....well, that is what we all drive now, which is why diesel cars weren't allowed to be sold in CA or NY, until the introduction of the new "Clean Diesel" models...those are the only diesel cars allowed now, in Canada or the USA (new, of course).

It has a lot to do with the manufacturers. Diesels of all car/SUV sizes ( 1.2 -> 4 litres) can be and are cleaned up to meet NA emissions with the urea additive technology.  This tech does add to the price unless the manufacturer is willing to hide the cost.    It looks as if M-B does hide some of it and VW does not... thats ok.    But the manufacturers are not confident that diesels will sell in the price conscious end of the market and so they don't import them. After all it is only a small percentage of EU models are sold here by just a few manufacturers. Also of course since Toyota made the Prius work well  there has been to opportunity for the Asian mfrs to reverse engineer that car rather than fiddle with the intricacies of small diesels.   Lastly, some "opinion formers" don't like diesels as they don't rev, the cars tend to have slower 0-60 numbers and that is anathema to the NA mindset of beating the car in the next lane to the next stop light.


I believe that the EU and NA emission standards for gas engines are really close now but the EU, sensibly in my opinion, allows for the different combustion characteristics of compression ignition engines and allows  a bit more NOx in exchange for less CO2..

[dirtyjeffer]

It has a lot to do with the manufacturers. Diesels of all car/SUV sizes ( 1.2 -> 4 litres) can be and are cleaned up to meet NA emissions with the urea additive technology.

you can't simply take a standard diesel engine, add urea and boom, you are good...it is one component of the newest generation of diesel engines that allows them to meet emissions requirements here...it is also why we currently don't have a Tiguan TDi, even though they make them for other markets...the reason is, the 2.0L TDi engine used in other VW models, when used in the Tiguan, no longer meets emissions standards, likely due to a combination of weight and load characteristics in that application.

[tpl]

It has a lot to do with the manufacturers. Diesels of all car/SUV sizes ( 1.2 -> 4 litres) can be and are cleaned up to meet NA emissions with the urea additive technology.

you can't simply take a standard diesel engine, add urea and boom, you are good...it is one component of the newest generation of diesel engines that allows them to meet emissions requirements here...it is also why we currently don't have a Tiguan TDi, even though they make them for other markets...the reason is, the 2.0L TDi engine used in other VW models, when used in the Tiguan, no longer meets emissions standards, likely due to a combination of weight and load characteristics in that application.

AFAIK the 2.0 TDI is not sold here with Urea and therefore would need to be recertified with it added.  That engine is certainly a latest generation small diesel and should clean up nicely even with the heavier Tiguan.  You are correct I'm sure that many,many, last gen diesels won't meet the standards even with Urea.  You need all the latest gen of emission gear as you say.

I wonder how much the new Passat weighs compared to the Tiguan.

I am not disagreeing with you except in that the Eu manufacturers COULD certify more diesels if they chose and the reasons for them not so doing is marketing at least as much as technology.

I hope but I am sure I'll be disappointed, that when Canada has a FTA with the EU that they could include automobile standards in that. I.e. that any current EU spec car could be sold here. 

[No H2O]

it has nothing to do with the manufacturers...it is the government emissions standards that are the "problem"...

So why do we have tractor trailers on our highways and city buses running empty at off peak periods?

There should be no difference between passenger cars and heavy vehicles. The only reason there is...is politics.

[dirtyjeffer]

So why do we have tractor trailers on our highways and city buses running empty at off peak periods?

heavy equipment is either exempt or has different standards to adhere to.

There should be no difference between passenger cars and heavy vehicles. The only reason there is...is politics.

wrong...while politics may have a small role, it has to do with sheer numbers and cost...there are far more consumer vehicles on our roads than heavy equipment vehicles in use...also, heavy equipment serves specific purposes, so putting emission requirements on them is either not possible or prohibitively expensive...that said, you will see new emission standards over time (it is inevitable)...locomotives require improvements in the next couple of years, so many are investing in systems to improve their fleets.

[No H2O]

Lastly, some "opinion formers" don't like diesels as they don't rev, the cars tend to have slower 0-60 numbers and that is anathema to the NA mindset of beating the car in the next lane to the next stop light.

Your average Canadian driver (region dependent of course) has a tough enough time finding their gas pedal...so I have to wonder why they would worry about 0 to 60 times.  

[No H2O]

So why do we have tractor trailers on our highways and city buses running empty at off peak periods?

heavy equipment is either exempt or has different standards to adhere to.

There should be no difference between passenger cars and heavy vehicles. The only reason there is...is politics.

wrong...while politics may have a small role, it has to do with sheer numbers and cost...there are far more consumer vehicles on our roads than heavy equipment vehicles in use...also, heavy equipment serves specific purposes, so putting emission requirements on them is either not possible or prohibitively expensive...that said, you will see new emission standards over time (it is inevitable)...locomotives require improvements in the next couple of years, so many are investing in systems to improve their fleets.

In a nutshell...politics.

[dirtyjeffer]

In a nutshell...politics.

no, it is far more complicated than that...it would take an hour to explain everything, but in short, a couple of things would be cost and practicality...for one, many of these engines could not be converted to a "clean diesel" design, so you would need to develop and entirely new engine, which would not only be extremely expensive, but also much more complicated...the increased maintenance costs would add to the costs of machines themselves and the running of them...that means, anything that uses these (transport trucks, construction equipment, etc) would cost more, which of course would trickle down to the consumer, so everything would increase in price, everything...secondly, the "practicality" point is two fold...you would be spending huge amounts of money and resources (time and investment) into "improving" on something where the end result will have little impact on the "big picture"...as well, it is quite possible that the "improved engines" don't perform as well, reducing their intended effectiveness to do the job they were originally designed to do.

in short, by forcing those same requirements on them, would be political, rather than practical.

for reference purposes (proving my point about the fact it would make little improvement due to the sheer numbers difference between "passenger vehicles" and heavy equipment), here are the numbers from 2005 for Canada:

Passenger cars and trucks (light and medium): 18,314,103
Heavy Equipment: 294,193

light and medium vehicles account for 98.4% of the vehicles in Canada, meaning it makes no sense to slap silly restrictions on the heavy vehicles.

http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/Publications/statistics/cvs05/chapter2.cfm?attr=0

[Sir Osis of Liver]

The standard for heavy trucks has changed a number of times over the years.

http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.php

Most (all?) new heavy trucks use urea injection since the 2010 standard change.

http://media.factsaboutscr.com/news.php?include=139793



Edit. Some engine suppliers are able to meet the standard with increased EGR.

[dirtyjeffer]

as i said, it is inevitable that it will change, as technology and costs improve...but going after the heavy vehicles isn't a priority as the costs associated with that sector will be felt by all, and the impact made by the changes will be negligible.

[macedonian]

let's go back  to the Jetta
I do have a Jetta 2010 tdi, but out of curiosity I tested elantra, corola lancer and jetta 2.0 gas and 2.0 tdi.
Performance are there, on all gas models, but the tdi adds more performance more punch.
Yes the interior is cheaper but that's jestified with the price.
The build of the jetta is better, I know many will disagree but that's the way I see it.Solid build, doesn't feel cheap
Just close the door and you will know.