Re: VW seems to have lost it's way in the US

Yah the Bora/Jetta I believe does, but it's not very popular (from what I have heard from family/friends who live, or have been to Germany) over there, the Golf sells WAY more units, and is German built. The Jetta wagon, interestingly enough is German built, a friend of mine has a 2003 and it has a WVW VIN number.

I understand the "Jetta" wagon is called a "Golf" wagon, or estate, or whatever terminology they use for "wagon." Not a Jetta/Bora.

What?? Have you really been in both cars? Cause' I've driven both and this isn;t the case. The Passat V6 FWD with Tiptronic needs 8.0 seconds or mor for

60MPh, the Accord doe it in 7.1. The Passat is a DAMN FINE car, but it's gonna lose in the performance department.

I'm aware of economics, and more specifically profit managment which is what you're writing about. VW would be making a LOT more money every year if they could design a car that would sell like the Camry and Accord.

Want and need are different things, and EVERYBODY wants. The current market (at least here in the U.S.) is demanding as much power as possible at as low a price as possible, and the Passat isn't keeping up. The Camry SE with the 3.3 litre motor now makes over 220Hp, the Accord, Galant, Altima and Maxima have anywhere from 240 to 260Hp. And Acur'a TL has 270, and it's very similarly priced to a loaded Passat GLX V6 w/ Tiptronic.

I'm always amazed that Europeans seem to think the TDi is a good performer. The accleration numbers on that thing are hardly impressive. My 1.8T is considerablly faster for marginally more. It's the Fuel consumption of the TDi that makes it worthwhile.

aceleration is not all... but seems to be all americans care right now buying cars.

That's not only the truth, it's my point. SUVs and sports/sporty coupes are what the American market is asking for right now and VW isn't coming real strong with the compacts. The Touraeg is an *awesome* vehicle, but you need the V8 for worthwhile performance and that means $40-41k before options.

Actually, I was replacing an '89 (gas) Jetta, and was looking primarily at the 2.0-liter gas-engined Jetta A4 as a straight replacement. The V-6 Contour cost about the same, so I compared it rather than the 4-cylinder Contour. But I didn't like the Contour's build quality. Unfortunately, I didn't like the performance of the

2.0-liter VW engine (or the relatively poor gas mileage, which you would think would be better for that engine). The 1.8T was not available when I bought my first TDI, and the VR-6 was significantly more expensive than either. So it was on to the TDI. Yeah, it's a strange pairing. But maybe the thought processes help explain it.

sd

There isn't a big difference driving NORMALLY, ie not flooring it to get to

100kph very VERY fast.... I don't know about you but I don't have to floor my 90 horsepower diesel to get on the 400 series highways (similar to interstates) unless the onramps are REALLY short.... These cars I find you barely have to give more then 1/2 throttle.

I find the Passat had a more flexible engine.

Hell, i've driven a Volvo V70 2,4T with 197 hp and 210lb-ft of torque, and it felt even better then either one of those cars (and yah the Accord would still spank it in a 0-100kph test). Its the torque range that's important, not the HP it produces at 6000+ rpm.

Whens the last time you saw one of those 3+ litre midsized cars flooring it to get on the highway, or jackrabbit starting at a stoplight to get ahead.... I've RARELY seen it... In everyday situations the TDI motor cars will not leave you feeling shorthanded.... In fact I seem to get stuck behind the biggest most powerfull midsize cars on on-ramps, this could be because I need more run-up room right after the bend, but still... It really doesn't matter how much power you got, it doesn't make a huge difference unless you're racing.

First off I am not a European.

I have driven cars with 383 Magnums and 440 Magnums, trucks with 396s, Camaros with hopped up 350s. I have no need for such raw acceleration. I am not in some freaking race to do my job of going back an forth to work. The only people that need that are the folks out on the racetrack. Sure I might want raw acceleration but I want better milage more. Just because some small percentage of folks want 300 plus horsepower in a pickup truck does not mean that the bulk of the market does. I don't want a huge gas or diesel engine in a Tourag. I want a decent size diesel that would let me pull 5,000 lbs safely. Not drag race the stupid truck but safely pull the trailer.

Once again there is not proof that dropping some rediculous unneccessary engine in some wacked out new every 4 years body style is going to make VW the largest seller of vehicles in America. Or more important a more profitable company. Who want to be the largest? Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborgini sure don't care. I would rather have a Porsche than some VW but a car is not something worth hanging some silly ego to for me. It is transportation. It is for lots of people otherwise the Taurus and Camray would not sell so well.

I test drove the 1.8T. I have no need for such accelerati>>There is this thing called economics.

Jim B.

have heard from family/friends who live, or have been to Germany) over there, the Golf sells WAY more units, and is German built.

Yes although the Golf has always been more popular than the Jetta/Vento/Bora overseas.

a 2003 and it has a WVW VIN number.

As are all Jetta wagons in North America.

There are both Golf and Bora versions...same cars, different noses, and the Bora versions tend to be more upscale in trim. Both I think are called "Variant" (e.g.: Golf Variant and Bora Variant).

I'm not going to debate this any furthur with you other than to say I drove both cars back to back and the difference is noticeable. The Accord's seemingly low 212 Ft. Lbs. of torque is still more than the Passat's peak ouput and the added displacement (3.0 Vs. 2.8) helps offset the Hond's tendancy to want to revv out. Their also compareable in weight and the Passat's Tiptronic is oddly slow and clumsy in Automatic mode, something that has been commented on in numerous writeups and kills a lot of it's appeal. The Accord's automatic is well suited to it's engine and I found it far less difficult to acclerate and pass with than much smaller engined Preludes, Civics, and Integra/RSXs and even the Passat to some degree. The Passat is one of the slowest selling vehicles of it's price and type in North America and it's partly because VW isn;t matching the price:performance ratio of cars like the Accord.

The Passat feels limp wristed, weak and generally sub-par when compared to the Honda. In fact I can say even as a VW fan that the Accord has got the Passat beaten everywhere except build quality and the differences are hardly worth talking about. I drove both cars back to back and I know which one I'd take - hands down. If it were a comparison of Golf Vs. Civic, I'd feel differently.

It would appear that the V6 in the next Passat will be the 3.2 VR6, probably not as highly tuned as in the R32, so making somewhere around

220-230 hp. Nothing to sneeze at, to be sure, but not as much as the Accord's 240 (assuming the Honda still only has 240 by the time the new Passat is released in the US - it may have even more by then!).

-- Mike Smith

Where I live (Long Island, NY), there are some *very* short onramps on the parkways, and during busy traffic periods I've gotta floor it, even with the V6, and hope for the best. (Of course these moments of excitement are balanced out by periods of crawling at 5 mph once you actually get *on* the parkway... :-/ )

-- Mike Smith