Topic: First Drive: 2016 Volkswagen Jetta

[Autos_Editor]

Base Jetta is two-point-slow no mo'.
Two-point-slow to one-point-go?
Read More...

[JohnnyMac]

The addition of the new engine and the USB port is exactly what the Jetta needed.  Sure we can whine and moan a bit about the materials used on the dash but this car sold really well with that old tractor of an engine and that weird cable for people's phones.  Let's just hope that this new engine is reasonably reliable and as fuel efficient as VW claims in real world driving.

[JohnM]

The replacement of the 2 litre lifts the Jetta to a point where it is worth considering.  I only drove the 2.0 for a few days as a rental and I am not a road burner but to be honest, I can't see how anybody could buy that car.  Utterly lifeless.

And from a technical point of view, getting 115 hp and 122 ft pounds from two litres is downright insulting.

Cheers,
John M.

[mmret]

The replacement of the 2 litre lifts the Jetta to a point where it is worth considering.  I only drove the 2.0 for a few days as a rental and I am not a road burner but to be honest, I can't see how anybody could buy that car.  Utterly lifeless.

And from a technical point of view, getting 115 hp and 122 ft pounds from two litres is downright insulting.

Cheers,
John M.

That motor really is from the 70s I think.

EDIT: yup, 1972! Nixon was mopping the floor with George McGovern (wtf kind of name is that)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_EA827_engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972

[dirtyjeffer]

The replacement of the 2 litre lifts the Jetta to a point where it is worth considering.  I only drove the 2.0 for a few days as a rental and I am not a road burner but to be honest, I can't see how anybody could buy that car.  Utterly lifeless.

And from a technical point of view, getting 115 hp and 122 ft pounds from two litres is downright insulting.

Cheers,
John M.

That motor really is from the 70s I think.

EDIT: yup, 1972! Nixon was mopping the floor with George McGovern (wtf kind of name is that)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_EA827_engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972

i don't think that's it...i believe the 2.slow debuted in 1992 or 1993...it was likely competitive at that time, but times have changed.

[OliverD]

I'm not a huge fan of the Jetta by any means but they've made some good improvements since this gen first debuted.

[Noto]

i don't think that's it...i believe the 2.slow debuted in 1992 or 1993...it was likely competitive at that time, but times have changed.

We had a 1997 Cavalier with the single OHV, cast-iron, 2.2L 4-banger rated at 120hp and 140lb-ft (later reduced in 1998 to 115hp/135lb-ft for emissions ).  It always felt fine, despite being 'mated' to a 3-speed automatic ( ).  Yet, somehow, that powertrain was easier to live with than many modern ones (especially DCTs with their odd low-speed behaviour).  Highway passing was a nightmare with that 3-speed auto, though.

In any event, there's nothing wrong (or exciting) about VW's 6-speed slushbox, but it mustn't be thoroughly modern if the manual still gets better fuel economy.  While no DSG (which is probably a good thing), the 1.4T will be a great 'starter' motor...think of what it'd do with a properly made transmission (looking at Subaru's or Toyota's CVTs - purely in terms of fuel economy).

...but, as pointed out by a brilliant JohnnyMac, that's not what the Jetta is.  What the Jetta is, is a perfect econobox for those looking at a larger-than-compact compact at a cheap price with VW's 'fun-to-drive' attitude.  To that end, I'd love to see a head-to-head between the Corolla or Civic and this Jetta Trendline+.  No highlines, LE Ecos, or EX trims...just the volume models that hover around $20,000.  That, my friends, would be the ultimate in terms of the "easy to live with commuter/single family-on-a-budget vehicle" comparo.

By the way, Chris, incredible opening - what a way to frame just how relevant this new engine is!! 

[greengs]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned. 

[OliverD]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned.

Personally I think the 1.8T fits in better with the Golf's more upscale positioning in the lineup.

[redman]

"...our test car averaged 6.1 on a highway route that included both secondary two-lane roads and four-lane highway driving. (That average is according to the onboard computer, so assume some optimism on its part"

What (insert sarcasm) it sounds like you don't trust VW self F.E. values. 

[mmret]

The replacement of the 2 litre lifts the Jetta to a point where it is worth considering.  I only drove the 2.0 for a few days as a rental and I am not a road burner but to be honest, I can't see how anybody could buy that car.  Utterly lifeless.

And from a technical point of view, getting 115 hp and 122 ft pounds from two litres is downright insulting.

Cheers,
John M.

That motor really is from the 70s I think.

EDIT: yup, 1972! Nixon was mopping the floor with George McGovern (wtf kind of name is that)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_EA827_engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972

i don't think that's it...i believe the 2.slow debuted in 1992 or 1993...it was likely competitive at that time, but times have changed.

Might be but this section does strike a very close tune to the specsheet.

90–115 hp 2.0[edit]
engine displacement & engine configuration
1,984 cubic centimetres (121.1 cu in) inline-four engine (R4/I4); bore x stroke: 82.5 by 92.8 millimetres (3.25 in × 3.65 in), stroke ratio: 0.89:1 - undersquare/long-stroke, 496.1 cc per cylinder, compression ratio: 10.0-10.5:1
cylinder block & crankcase
CG25 grey cast iron; five main bearings; die–forged steel crankshaft, forged steel connecting rods
cylinder head & valvetrain
cast aluminium alloy; two valves per cylinder, 8 valves total, hydraulic bucket tappets, timing belt-driven one-piece cast single overhead camshaft (SOHC)
aspiration
cast aluminium alloy intake manifold
engine management
Bosch Motronic or Siemens Simos electronic engine control unit (ECU)
EWG-rated motive power & torque outputs, application, ID codes
37 kilowatts (50 PS; 50 bhp) @ 2,800 rpm; 140 newton metres (103 lbf·ft) @ 2,100-2,400 rpm — Volkswagen Industrial Motor multi-fuel (petrol / LPG / CNG) - CBS (08/06->)
43 kilowatts (58 PS; 58 bhp) @ 2,800 rpm; 143 newton metres (105 lbf·ft) @ 2,100-2,400 rpm — Volkswagen Industrial Motor multi-fuel (petrol / LPG / CNG) - BEF (04/02->)
DIN-rated motive power & torque outputs, ID codes
80 kilowatts (109 PS; 107 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 160 newton metres (118 lbf·ft) @ 3,500 rpm — Ecofuel (bivalent) (CNG) Touran, Caddy, Transporter/Caravelle - BSX
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 165 newton metres (122 lbf·ft) @ 3,200 rpm — AWG, AWF
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 166 newton metres (122 lbf·ft) @ 2,600 rpm — AGG
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 166 newton metres (122 lbf·ft) @ 3,200 rpm — 2E, ADY, ABA
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,200 rpm; 170 newton metres (125 lbf·ft) @ 2,400 rpm — APK, AQY
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,200 rpm; 170 newton metres (125 lbf·ft) @ 2,600 rpm — ATM
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 172 newton metres (127 lbf·ft) @ 3,200 rpm — AZH, AZJ
85 kilowatts (116 PS; 114 bhp) @ 5,400 rpm; 172 newton metres (127 lbf·ft) @ 3,500 rpm — AZM
88 kilowatts (120 PS; 118 bhp) @ 5,600 rpm; 174 newton metres (128 lbf·ft) @ 2,400 rpm — ATF
88 kilowatts (120 PS; 118 bhp) @ 5,600 rpm; 175 newton metres (129 lbf·ft) @ 2,600 rpm — AUZ, ASU, AVA
applications
SEAT Ibiza Mk2 & Mk3, SEAT Córdoba, SEAT Toledo Mk1, SEAT Alhambra, Škoda Fabia Mk1 (6Y), Škoda Octavia Mk1 (1U), Škoda Superb Mk1 (3U), Volkswagen Santana, Volkswagen Polo Mk4, Volkswagen Golf Mk3, Volkswagen Golf Mk4, Volkswagen Vento, Volkswagen Bora, Volkswagen Jetta, Volkswagen New Beetle, Volkswagen Passat B3, Volkswagen Passat B4, Volkswagen Passat B5, Volkswagen Sharan (7M), Volkswagen Industrial Motor, Audi 80, Audi 100, AMC Gremlin
this engine was not assembled in the PORSCHE 924, the Porsche 924-engine based on the "mid-pressure" engine from NSU-Audi (Bore/Stroke
86,5/84,4)

[JohnnyMac]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned.

Personally I think the 1.8T fits in better with the Golf's more upscale positioning in the lineup.

But what if they bring over a 1.4T TSI Bluemotion edition.  They sell pretty well over in Europe, I think a gas powered VW made to get the most MPG's might be a good idea.  Especially with people not jumping back on the TDi bandwagen quite so fast.

[OliverD]

Yeah, that's a good point. Some sort of ultra-efficient gas model would be pretty neat.

But I'm just foreseeing them dumping the 1.4T in the base models or something along those lines.

[JohnnyMac]

Yeah, that's a good point. Some sort of ultra-efficient gas model would be pretty neat.

But I'm just foreseeing them dumping the 1.4T in the base models or something along those lines.

That's probably more likely.  Just hoping for something a bit better I guess.  I would be okay with adding the 1.4T in the base models if it reduces the price significantly (by that I mean the same difference between a 1.4T and 1.8T same trim Jetta).

[GTABeancounter]

The replacement of the 2 litre lifts the Jetta to a point where it is worth considering.  I only drove the 2.0 for a few days as a rental and I am not a road burner but to be honest, I can't see how anybody could buy that car.  Utterly lifeless.

And from a technical point of view, getting 115 hp and 122 ft pounds from two litres is downright insulting.

Cheers,
John M.

That motor really is from the 70s I think.

EDIT: yup, 1972! Nixon was mopping the floor with George McGovern (wtf kind of name is that)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_EA827_engine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972

i don't think that's it...i believe the 2.slow debuted in 1992 or 1993...it was likely competitive at that time, but times have changed.

I remember lusting after the various VR6's available around that time (Jetta, Corrado  , and Golf too IIRC). In today's world where the base Mustang has more hp than the 5.0 of the early 90's and many enthusiasts long for more power from the toybaru twins I don't think the VR6 would be all that competitive either.

I think that 2.slow moniker originated early on largely from fanboi Honda enthusiasts (like me in my 125hp 93 Civic Si hatch   ). In reality the 2.slow transitioned over the past 20 years from being an unremarkable (yet somewhat competitive option) to the dinosaur we view it as today.

[EV-Light]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned.

Personally I think the 1.8T fits in better with the Golf's more upscale positioning in the lineup.

Nope the Golf will be getting the 1.4T and if I remember correctly VW will reduce the price a bit. The idea is to have the Trendline and Comfortline be the bottom feeders and have the 1.8T only available in the Highline.

[Noto]

Yup...and the 2.0T be specifically for the Hi-Po GTI/GLI models.

It makes more sense than what used to be...thinking of the "Wolfsburg" edition.

[JohnnyMac]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned.

Personally I think the 1.8T fits in better with the Golf's more upscale positioning in the lineup.

Nope the Golf will be getting the 1.4T and if I remember correctly VW will reduce the price a bit. The idea is to have the Trendline and Comfortline be the bottom feeders and have the 1.8T only available in the Highline.

Well that's crap.  What if you don't want the highline but want the extra power from the 1.8T.  Middle trim should at least get the option of 1.8T like the Jetta.

[OliverD]

1.4T in the Golf as a base engine would be very interesting.  I can see them doing that much sooner now than planned.

Personally I think the 1.8T fits in better with the Golf's more upscale positioning in the lineup.

Nope the Golf will be getting the 1.4T and if I remember correctly VW will reduce the price a bit. The idea is to have the Trendline and Comfortline be the bottom feeders and have the 1.8T only available in the Highline.

Well that's crap.  What if you don't want the highline but want the extra power from the 1.8T.  Middle trim should at least get the option of 1.8T like the Jetta.

No Jetta trim has the option of both engines. The 1.8T is only in the Highline, everything else has the 1.4T.

[JohnnyMac]

I guess I missed that.  I was thinking about the 2015 and earlier Jetta's that you could get the comfortline with the 2.0 or the 1.8T (and 2.5 before that).  Why would VW want to get rid of one of the more appealing features of the Golf, the higher horse power and torque of their base engine.  Now with this 1.4T it's just competitive and to get the more powerful engine you have to get the highline (overpriced) model.