The Passat has some very good points, but it is clearly not designed with
any thought to repair. To do even routine work in the engine compartment
requires extensive dissasembly.
The problem is that his notion of quality is probably not the same as my
notion of quality. I can live with readily-repaired defects that he might
not consider acceptable, and I'm extremely frustrated by the sort of repair
procedures that he probably considers reasonable.
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Some of the biggest complaints I heard about were electrical system
problems. If there
were one focusable electrical unit problem, that might be more easily fixed.
problem is spread over a "system", you may never get everything fixed and
It is, IMO, a matter of taking responsibility for citruslike product...maybe
not total lemons
approaching them. GM never did very well at this either, until their ox was
in the ditch.
This is increasingly becoming a problem for ALL car manufacturers. The
complexity of the electrical systems is increasing exponentially, and the
knowledge of the dealer mechanics is not increasing at the same rate. On
top of that, most of this stuff is designed to be replaced in large expensive
modules, in order to make troubleshooting easier. This means even minor
repairs become expensive, and even worse it means that board-swapping
"changineers" can very rapidly turn a minor problem into an enormous expense.
Hell, look at Mercedes...... and don't even get me started on the newer
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
One can say that about any make/model car. They're called "lemons". My
personal experience with VWs is before the mid-90s, they were by and large
dependable at the very least.
VW quality control went when they went fishing for the bigger market almost
a decade ago
Maybe I won't have to. The rate I'm going, it'll be 12 years until I hit
100K miles. By then, my detached garage roof will be covered with solar
cells and the garage will house a Ford electric plug-in.
On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:30:59 -0500, Dioclese wrote:
I was talking to a guy I know today who bought a GMC p/u from me when I
used to sell used cars. 100,000 miles and one tranny later, the thing is
still going. He loads about 3 tons of scrap in it regularly to bring to
I said to him, pointing to my Scion, "Toyota occasionally makes a lemon,
GM ocassionally makes a good one..."
Generalization, but GM would be in better shape if their paradigm more
closely matched Toyota's...
Actually, the Rabbit was kind of hit or miss, too. For every 3 good ones
there was one really horrible copy.
My tC is a 2005 with 26,000 miles. I'll get there sooner, but not by much...
Wow, 13,000 miles and nary a problem yet? That's amazing! You'll have to
accept anecdotal evidence (shouldn't be a problem since you freely offer
the same), but I see virtually every Focus nickel and dime their
customers pretty badly, and a good number cause enough expensive
problems to total the car (as they lose value very quickly that isn't
too hard). It's tough to sell anything as their customers don't spend
any money anyway. As I said in an earlier post, I think the Focus is
actually a bit better in reliability and cost of ownership than most
other Ford products, but that isn't saying much.
Is that why Ford is out selling Toyota and besting Toyota in many of the
Take a look at what vehicles the currier fleets are buying. Currier car are
run 24 hours, a days seven days a week, and easily run to 100,000 miles or
more a year and they are not buying Toyotas. When the do choose a foreign
car over Fords, they buy Korean cars. LOL
I've opened two G5M's, and see no evidence to support synchronized
reverse. Further proof is when you try to go into reverse immediately
after pressing the clutch without letting the input shaft spin down.
It grinds. Both of my G5M's did it. The FSM I have says it's got a
sync'd reverse. I don't believe it. If you look at how the linkage
works, there is a straight-cut gear that flips upward to link the
input and output shafts and reverse the direction of the output in the
process of doing so. There is no syncronizer on the reverse fork that
I can see.
As far as the symptom that the OP is mentioning, it sounds like
something went casters-up in the linkage inside the box. Might be
easier to find a good used junkyard transaxle and put that into the
car and fix the one you have as time permits. At only 30k the bearings
and syncronizers -should- be in perfect shape, so the repair might be
as simple as replacing one or two hard parts and resealing the case
halves. The fact that the forward gears are still working is a very
good sign. The G5M isn't terribly hard to take apart, I did mine with
a a few sockets and a hammer and punch to remove the roll pin from the
5th gear fork. Before you get too far into the repair just remember
that the differential side gears in the G5M's I've worked on are not
self-supporting. You -must- put a PVC pipe or wooden dowel in the hole
for the CV axle once you pull the first axle out, or you will get to
re-align the differential gears. Ask me how I know...I got a 2,000
mile mint used example shipped to me, sans supports for the
differential gears, and had to open the box to fix it.
Yup, on many transaxles the norm is to do away with any machined hub on
the back of the side gears (probably saves a penny), so it is always
wise to secure any unfamiliar differential side gear with a suitable
pipe or what-have-you during axle removal. Bet you're an expert on that
gearbox now, huh?! :-)
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.