I always loved the look of the 2000 passat but never had the cash to purchase it until now. I found a silver one with 60,000 miles on it for $9995. I was going to get a '99 Civic because of the gas mileage and reliability factor but then when I found that I could purchase my dream car (well, practical dream car) for the same price I figured I should jump at it. Question, I don't have a lot of money to pay for repairs and have heard some horror stories about VW's in the past, how has been your experience. 2000 owners, are you thinking of getting a new car at this point or are you going to stick with this car for another 5-10 years. I just don't want to purchase a new car that won't last.
"I just don't want to purchase a new car that won't last".....
As an owner of many VW's, I would not characterize a VW as reliable and having a low cost of ownership. Fun to drive, yes. Expensive to repair and repairs needed frequently.. Yes!
an '00 Passat GLS 1.8T with 60K and no extras, in average condition, should go for just a hair over $10K in a private sale, $11,700 in "clean condition".
I agree with Jons post. They are fun to drive and well assembled as far as fit and finish and more distinct then many of the reliable rice burners or the American cars but as with American cars reliability can pretty spotty though you could get lucky and get a good one. Passats seem to be a bit better then some other VW's but it depends. My 2001 GTI has had both a sunroof motor issue that required an adjustment and now a power window regulator issue which its going for tomorrow. Also had a recall that was satisfied recently. Does have its share of interior squeaks and rattles as well which is surprising when you consider how well assembled it appears to be inside.
I completely disagree with any poster who claims VWs are unreliable. We're on our fourth in my immediate family:
'87 Golf - Sold at 93,000 miles in excellent condition (to buy the Passat) '92 Jetta - Caught fire at 146,000 miles from fuel hose leak '98 Passat - Running perfectly at 66,000 miles '04 Jetta - Brand new, replaces '92
(My brother bought an '82 Audi 4000 diesel with 185,000 miles on it, drove it to 305,000. Audi and VW share many parts)
I perform(ed) regular maintenance on these vehicles and other than normal replacement items (batteries, mufflers, tires, shocks) have had no problems at all. I could have avoided the fire if I had checked the fuel filter. We have never had any starting problems in cold Upstate NY winters.
I may be lucky, but if you were to look at other NGs, one would find the same number (or more) whiners who expect their cars to be showroom perfect after 5 years. (Also probably a similar number of posts with problems)
I believe that if your prospective Passat has not been abused or neglected, and you ma> I agree with Jons post. They are fun to drive and well assembled as far as
It costs under $10000 for a reason (nobody wants it ?). You need to budget at least a $1000 for near term repairs. This one is likely to need a timing belt real soon. If you are lucky it could be a nice car or ... could be a hell.
a good friend of mine has a '00 passat and loves it... almost to death! he drives for a living and has put on a whopping 185,000 miles in his car since new about half longhaul and half stop and slow. his verdict? guilty of being the most reliable car he's ever owned (and that's been quite a few considering he only owns cars on average for about 6 months and is now in his 40's). regular maintenance is all he's had to do and the car pulls just as strong as the day he bought it he says. he's selling it and getting another one very soon. hth. everybody has their own experience though... this might b one in a million.
I have a hard time saying they are not reliable as overall I've had good luck, at least with my old ones but looking at the various Internet forums and talking to people who own them as well as my experience with my GTI the recent product coming from VW are not up to par with most of their Japanese counterparts. Besides my A4 GTI I've had a quite a few VW's mostly A1's and A2's and overall they have been pretty reliable. My current 1990 A2 GLI has
166000 on it with an original clutch and except for minor electrical issues with the rear power window switches it has been reliable. My old 87 Jetta coupe had almost 170000 as well with original clutch when I sold it and I had an 84 Rabbit with almost 190000 with original clutch as well. Those cars really had and have no problems that I can blame on anything but age. Now and even then most issues with VW's are of an electrical nature as is with my 2001 GTI which has been in within the last few months with a sunroof switch issue and the coilpack recall. Its at the dealer now as my passenger window broke of the track. This relates to some cheap-ass clips they use to hold it in. That problem is a known issue though VW refuses to make an official recall on but most dealers seem to be fixing them at VW's expense which is good. The biggest big beef with VWOA is their customer service. Getting problems ironed out can be tricky. You need to find a good dealer with a good service team who will stand behind you on issues should they arise. I can't say you shouldn't buy the Passat as it is a fun, distinct and a solid well assembled car but if total reliability is top priority to then a Honda Accord or Toyota Camry is still a wiser choice.
I also agree and surveys like Consumer Reports bears out the "average" reliability.
I purchased a 2000 Passat V6 Wagon new. It has now been about 2 1/2 years and the car has about 50,000. The car is a joy to drive and cruising across the country was comfortable and easy. It is pretty quick and it handles well. I love the way it looks both inside and out.
The car has been maintained by the dealer as per the recommended maintenance. Here's what's been done.
Radio / tape deck died a week after we got the car. New head unit solved the problem.
Brake light switch didn't work properly meaning that unless I pushed the brakes pretty hard, I had no brake lights. Replaced the switch.
One year after purchase the air conditioning suddenly died. They had to replace the compressor.
Rear brakes wore out at 40,000. Required replacement of the rotors and pads for about $450.
Rear window wiper and washer assembly self-destructed. Wiper was erratic and the integrated washer began shooting in different directions. Replaced the wiper / washer assembly.
Heated mirrors both died. Replaced the mirror glass on both sides (no I didn't leave the heaters on despite what the salesman instructed me to do.)
Groaning noise from the front last summer (three years old) turned out to require about $700 of front-end / suspension components.
Luckily I purchased an extended warranty which paid the $1200 bill for the last three. All the others except the brakes were covered in the original warranty.
I'm not including normal maintenance items like tires (at 40K) and probably a new battery in the next month.
Excessive? Yes, compared to my '95 Camry which in eight years hasn't required this much work. Other new cars? I don't know. Seems like a lot to me.
Would I buy the car again? Absolutely. We really like it.
Thanks for all the feedback. So what I'm getting here is that many Passat owners really enjoy their cars but maintenance can be exhorbitant as opposed to a Honda Civic. So the question I have to answer is: Do I want to pay the premium of having a fun car to drive? The truth is that I don't drive much. I commute by train to work and I really just need a reliable car to get me to family gatherings and shopping. I was originally just going to buy a '98 Honda because of the reliability factor then I moved up to a '99 then I noticed I could get a Passat for the same price. It's a nicer looking car but alas from what I'm reading it looks like I'm going to have to go the replicant route at least until my finances change. It just seems like a Passat is out of my league...for now.
I hate Honda's, but I would agree with this. When buying used remember the ORIGINAL price of the car when new... Cheaper car's usually cost less to own and operate, as they don't have as many features that can break down. But some high feature cars have items that don't tend to fail.
Maybe because the Japanese manufacturers recognize that quality and trouble-free operation are the prime reasons people (well, USians, anyway) buy their cars. I suspect Toyota and Honda never would have gone for years with crappy door handles or cheapo plastic power-window regulators, as VW did.
The more I read the more I realize there are car owners and there are VW owners. Car owners expect there vehicle to start in the morning and it gets them to work. They get an oil change every 5000 miles, give or take
3,000.... and they change sparks maybe every 60,000 miles... VW owners on the other hand seem to think it's normal that they drive around with a gallon of Power Services anti gel fluid behind the passenger seat and a tool box complete with extra fuel and oil filters in the trunk... That's its normal to pay 500 for a timing belt change every 40,000 miles... that it's normal to have a window regulator replaced three times... an O2 sensor four times... need I continue..........
Why would you say that? Every reliability rating I've ever seen shows Toyota and Honda much higher than VW. Been that way for years. VW has been showing improvement, but they still aren't at the same level.
My personal experiences reinforce it for me. When I talk with VW owners, they report more maintenance than when I talk with Honda or Toyota owners. My Camry has had no more maintenance in the eight years I've owned it than the Passat I own that is three years old.
I d>I have a VERY hard time believing that these Honda's and Toyota's can be so
I hate Honda's, but I would agree with this. When buying used remember the ORIGINAL price of the car when new... Cheaper car's usually cost less to own and operate, as they don't have as many features that can break down. But some high feature cars have items that don't tend to fail.
much more reliable. Japan doesn't have any more engineering prowess then the Germans do, or the American's for that matter. American cars are designed from day one to fall apart. German cars are designed for performance, and longevity. Japanese cars..... well lets see their home market is so screwed up that you have to get rid of your car after 3 years, so why make it well??? They use the same type of parts.... electrical stuff is electrical stuff..... Heaters burn out, things die.... how is it possible that Japanese
It's not that it's a more reliable car, actually both the Civic and the Passat have the same reliability rating - both below average - on Cartalk's survey page. The reasoning for my choice is cost of parts and frequency of repairs. The Passat is more of a performance / luxury automobile. It will cost more to fix because it has more to break and the fact that Hondas are more prevalent than Passats then the parts will be cheaper and easier to get - less time to fix.
If I drove the car more often or were someone who needed to "feel the road" the Passat would definitely be worth the "possible" additional cost to maintain. But at this point for what I need is a car that will start 99% of the time and will be low maintenance and from what I read that is what a Civic is.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.