backtop


Print 80 comment(s) - last by coburn_c.. on May 22 at 10:26 AM


2015 Golf Sportwagen R-Line 2.0 TDI 4MOTION  (Source: Autoblog)
Volkswagen is looking to improve fuel efficiency of its vehicles by 15% before the year 2020

All vehicle manufacturers are looking to improve efficiency across the board due to increasing stringent government requirements relating to fuel economy. Volkswagen is doing its part from a drivetrain perspective by developing a new Direkt-Schalt-Getriebe (DSG) transmission and revamped diesel (TDI) engines.
 
Volkswagen already makes available 6-speed and 7-speed DSG transmissions (the latter can be found in the U.S. market on the Jetta Hybrid). But 7-speeds just isn’t enough for the German automaker; Volkswagen AG CEO Martin Winterkorn says that his company is developing a new 10-speed version that will be used in its vehicles.
 
The move to 10-speeds will allow for improved fuel efficiency, and Winterkorn says that the transmission will be able to handle torque loads up to 369 lb-ft.
 
When it comes to engines, Volkswagen also has some new tricks up its sleeve. The company is putting the finishing touches on a new 2.0-liter four-cylinder TDI engine that produces a stout 236hp (the current version available to U.S. buyers makes 140hp and 236 lb-ft of torque). Winterkorn says that the new engine will be optional on the upcoming eighth generation Passat and will surely be made available on other Volkswagen- and Audi-branded vehicles.
 
And if that wasn’t enough, a new version of the 3.0-liter V6 TDI engine is on the way. While the current 3.0-liter TDI offered to U.S. customers produces 240hp and a whopping 428 lb-ft of torque, the updated engine will be available in two states of tune. The first will produce 218hp, while the second will produce 272hp. The former version will see fuel efficiency gains of up to 13 percent compared to the existing motor, while the latter will see its torque output increased to 442 lb-ft.
 
It should be noted that the current 3.0-liter TDI is already an incredibly fuel efficient engine, giving the midsize Audi A6 EPA ratings of 24 mpg city, 38 mpg highway, and 29 mpg combined.
 
It seems logical that Audi could replace the 3.0-liter TDI currently used in its lineup with the new, uprated 2.0-liter TDI and offer the new, high-output 3.0-liter TDI as a performance upgrade in the U.S. market.

Sources: Auto Car, Audi





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

overkill?
By PaFromFL on 5/13/2014 9:10:57 AM , Rating: 2
Ten speeds seems like overkill given the trend toward turbocharged engines. With a broad torque curve, it should be possible to space fewer gears farther apart. What am I missing?




RE: overkill?
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 9:11:31 AM , Rating: 5
Germans = let's make this as complex as possible ;)


RE: overkill?
By Nightbird321 on 5/13/2014 9:16:56 AM , Rating: 3
Repair shops rejoice!


RE: overkill?
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:16:52 PM , Rating: 2
Most shops cant rebuild transmissions.


RE: overkill?
By Cypherdude1 on 5/14/14, Rating: -1
RE: overkill?
By Rukkian on 5/15/2014 10:10:12 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
The Obama Administration should stay out of our lives. First he forces us to sign up for Obamacare at $500/month and if you don't, you get fined a minimum of $95. Now he's forcing automakers to produce more and more complex cars which are increasingly more expensive to manufacture and repair.

At the same time, automakers must stop making perfectly good, durable, models. I take trips to the major metropolitan area nearest to me, about 120 miles away. When I go there, I go on major buying sprees. I literally fill up my full-sized car. The automaker no longer makes this model, probably because of government MPG requirements. I cannot go down there in some subcompact.

President Obama really does seem to be an out of touch law professor who has no clue anymore what it means to struggle to succeed.


WTF does this article have to do with health care? We get it, you are one of the lackys that subscribe to the "its the other party that makes all the mistakes, don't worry about what we are doing".

Also, since you don't mention what car Obama stopped you from buying, I have no idea where you even get this from. There are plenty of big vehicles still being made. Here is a hint, if people want a certain car bad enough, car makers will make them, as it always has been. The latest suburban is one of the biggest ever made, and that is saying something. Every car maker I know of that typically sold full size cars still has them to my knowledge, so please enlighten us on the conspiracy by Obama to stop the mystery car company from making the only car you ever wanted to buy!

While I would lower regulations for the most part, I don't think dems reps, cons, lib, etc actually care about the country, they only care about what will get them more power and money.


RE: overkill?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/13/14, Rating: -1
RE: overkill?
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 10:34:31 AM , Rating: 3
I've got a 6-speed DSG and it's a damn fine transmission. I only have one issue/annoyance with it (and it's the general nature of all dual-clutch transmissions): low-speed lurchiness.

When slowing from cruising speed to a stop, the transmission can get a bit lurchy below 10 mph. Same goes for trying to take off from a stop at full throttle.

I've pretty much irradiated both occurrences from daily driving by:

1) Training my brain to better modulate the brakes when coming to a stop
2) Taking it easy when accelerating from a stop (there's really no need for me to be flooring it from a stop anyway)

It's should be noted that Honda is getting around the lurchiness problem by developing a transmission that combines a traditional torque converter (for low-speed driving) with a DCT once the vehicle is up and moving at higher speeds. It seems like it offers the best of both worlds (although it is more complex... and Honda doesn't exactly have a clean image when it comes to trannies either):

http://www.motorauthority.com/news/1088567_honda-n...


RE: overkill?
By daboom06 on 5/13/2014 2:55:37 PM , Rating: 2
i have a manual 6-speed dsg and i always thought the lurchiness was because the car doesn't weight much and i wasn't precise enough with the clutch. so i just learned to anticipate it and have the clutch in the right place to get rid of the jolts.


RE: overkill?
By Spuke on 5/13/2014 3:11:17 PM , Rating: 2
How can you have the clutch in the "right place" on a DSG?


RE: overkill?
By DLeRium on 5/13/2014 3:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
It's either a manual or a DSG... lol.


RE: overkill?
By Murloc on 5/13/2014 5:31:24 PM , Rating: 2
lol it's either a manual or it's a DSG.
You don't control the clutch on a DSG, you can't have it in the right place.

If it's a manual, then lurchiness is all your own fault.
All DSG cars don't start as delicately as a manual car but it's not really a problem unless you're on ice.


RE: overkill?
By Samus on 5/14/2014 12:36:48 AM , Rating: 4
My best friend had his 2010 Audi A4 towed to the dealer a few months ago, wouldn't go into drive. Needed new transmission control unit. $7000. He junked the car.

I've read on forums of VW owners (2008 R32, Golf Fahrenheit, etc) spending upward of $5000 to replace the clutch pack of their DSG. Many of them junk their cars.

A modern vehicle shouldn't be handed "junk" status when its transmission fails at 100,000 miles. This is the 21st century. My 4-speed Mountaineer had 255,000 miles on it (and still runs for the previous owner) and my wifes 6-speed Escape had 120,000 trouble-free miles before she traded it in.

As an engineer I'm concerned that vehicles are becoming inherently less reliable at the expense of fuel economy, completely negating the fuel savings and reallocating it to repairs, often with a negative margin.

The only way to make vehicles more efficient in the long run is to save weight and improve engine efficiency. Slushbox (torque converter) transmissions, although inherently inefficient compared to a direct connection such as with a clutch, are still superior in reliability to DSG's and CVT's.

Mazda has shown with the Skyactiv 6-speed that a slushbox can be upward of 95% efficient by simply adding a clutch to the torque converter, increasing throttle body pressure, and intelligently calibrating electronics.


RE: overkill?
By inperfectdarkness on 5/14/2014 2:25:31 AM , Rating: 2
I think 6-8 speeds makes sense for most cars. 2 OD speeds minimum, which would give a 6 speed 3 gears below 1:1 and 2 above.


RE: overkill?
By Spuke on 5/14/2014 1:23:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've read on forums of VW owners (2008 R32, Golf Fahrenheit, etc) spending upward of $5000 to replace the clutch pack of their DSG. Many of them junk their cars.
If they couldn't afford the routine maintenance (yes that's routine) of their cars, they should not have purchased them in the first place. $5k is pretty typical for replacing DCT clutch packs. That's why I'm avoiding them (for now).


RE: overkill?
By mars2k on 5/15/2014 8:50:10 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah you should have seen that on some early 2002-2007 Maseratis, normal failure around 20K 40K if you were lucky. Thats why I bought my Spyder with a regular stick. Great car!


RE: overkill?
By speed-tdi on 5/13/2014 3:52:33 PM , Rating: 2
My (2010 TDI DSG) transmission works better with a modified TCU reprogramming from Unitronic. I though it was a great, smooth transmission before, but now shifts smoother and both Drive and Sport mode are much more usable. Worth looking into, an easy, reliable upgrade.


RE: overkill?
By twhittet on 5/13/2014 6:27:43 PM , Rating: 2
Absolutely love my DSG. The first time I test drove it, I didn't know what kind of transmission it was, but thought it acted like both a manual AND an automatic - when I researched it a bit it made more sense!

The low speed lurchiness is easy to fix with a few behavioral changes that don't affect my driving - except when shifting from reverse back to drive while in a hurry. Makes me feel like I'm 16 dropping the clutch on my first car again.


RE: overkill?
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
combines a traditional torque converter (for low-speed driving) with a DCT once the vehicle is up and moving at higher speeds


Isn't Mazda already doing this I think they have a torque converter and then a clutch to lock out the torque converter as soon as possible.


RE: overkill?
By domboy on 5/13/2014 1:26:36 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Germans = let's make this as complex as possible ;)


You can always opt for a manual transmission... that's what's in my TDI.


RE: overkill?
By Spookster on 5/13/2014 3:09:56 PM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't single out the Germans. My new 2014 Jeep Cherokee comes with a 9 speed transmission.


RE: overkill?
By Solandri on 5/13/2014 4:49:32 PM , Rating: 2
Isn't the current-gen Jeep Cherokee derived from the Mercedes M-class platform? You gotta remember that they merged with Chrysler back around the turn of the century.


RE: overkill?
By coburn_c on 5/22/2014 10:26:44 AM , Rating: 2
Chrysler is using German ZF transmissions. Chrysler hasn't made a decent transmission since the 60s so they used Mercedes trans when they took over but FIAT wants to get rid of all the Mercedes parts.


RE: overkill?
By alpha754293 on 5/13/2014 10:55:23 PM , Rating: 3
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed here are solely that of my own and are not representative of Ford Motor Company or its affiliates.

You guys do realize that Chrysler's already got a 9-speed transmission, and both GM/Ford are working on 9- and 10-speed transmissions right?

Read the SAE paper on the GM 8-speed auto.

http://papers.sae.org/2014-01-1721/


RE: overkill?
By m51 on 5/13/2014 9:22:57 AM , Rating: 5
engine efficiency.
the engine load/rpm range for optimum fuel efficiency is still fairly narrow, thus the advantage of a 10 speed transmission to keep it in that optimal efficiency range more of the time.

Also keep in mind that a 10 speed transmission is not twice as complex as a 5 speed. A rough analogy would be 10 speed bicycle vs 21 speed. 5 + 2 gears vs 7 +3 gears


RE: overkill?
By RapidDissent on 5/13/2014 4:25:56 PM , Rating: 2
I believe it all comes down to fuel efficiency. You have to be able to cruise off boost in order to really make the advantages of the small displacement-turbo pairing come to life.

My 6spd DSG has wonderful gearing for all about town, but they clearly sacrificed a high speed cruise gear in favor of a closer ratio for acceleration. The extra speeds should be able to get you a super-cruise gear so you putter along at ~1600-1800 RPM, off boost, at 75mph. This will be more pronounced with the TDIs who have a narrower RPM band to work with.

The end game is likely to be able to have a gear suited for lean cruising at virtually all posted road speed limits.


RE: overkill?
By inperfectdarkness on 5/14/2014 2:30:50 AM , Rating: 2
And this is why I prefer 2 OD gears, one high, and one in the .5:1 range--specifically meant for crusing at 140+ KPH at ~2000rpms or so.


RE: overkill?
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:16:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Ten speeds seems like overkill


You would think at some point the extra weight and energy lost to the torque converter or dual clutch during shifts will use more fuel than it saves. Maybe it makes more sense on diesel engines but on a modern variable valve timed gas engine I'm not so sure.


Reliability
By mgilbert on 5/13/2014 10:10:05 AM , Rating: 4
I've owned several VWs, including one diesel. That car averaged 45 MPG, and often topped 50 MPG on trips. Diesels tend to get better than their rated MPG, where hybrids rarely get what they are rated. I wouldn't mind owning another VW, but reliability is a serious issue with them. I currently drive an Avalon. Gas is cheaper than repairs, so reliability trumps fuel economy in my book.




RE: Reliability
By chunkymonster on 5/13/2014 10:35:13 AM , Rating: 2
Not sure how long ago you drove VW's but I currently own a 2005 Jetta TDI, average 30,000 mixed highway/local miles per year. It's got 270,800 miles and plan on getting at least 400,000 miles before I buy my next car. I still get at least 40mpg and have had no major mechanical issues or breakdowns outside what the increased maintenance a car that gets driven 30K per year would require. However, one thing I have noticed about my Jetta and VW's in general is that you MUST follow the maintenance schedule.

I would consider my Jetta to be the most reliable car I have ever owned, and I've owned several over the years. I would not hesitate to purchase another VW or Audi diesel.

Maybe I got lucky, I don't know, but my Jetta TDI has made me a big believer in diesel cars and a supporter of VW/Audi.


RE: Reliability
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 10:37:05 AM , Rating: 2
The 2009 and newer Common Rail TDI engines are a lot more complex and more failure prone than the engine in your Jetta.

Just Google VW TDI HPFP ;)


RE: Reliability
By killerroach on 5/13/2014 11:07:13 AM , Rating: 2
Then again, the failure rates of those fuel pumps was about 0.5% in model year 2009 and 0.1% in model year 2010 - seems like so long as you get past the '09 models you're doing all right. (Girlfriend drives a 2010 Golf TDI - amazing machine, and still gets about 35-40 MPG in town despite her having no inclination to drive for fuel economy.)


RE: Reliability
By speed-tdi on 5/13/2014 3:56:35 PM , Rating: 3
There are a still HPFP failures in 2011 TDI Jettas as well. I've got one of them. VW covered the entire fuel system (filler neck to injectors) replacement. $4k (their cost), ~$10k if it had been out of my pocket. No more problems with the car so far (120k miles and counting) but I've got this nagging worry in the back of my head...

Love the car, I've got two CJAA-engined Jetta TDIs, no issues with the 2010 (yet, 90k miles.)


RE: Reliability
By Gondor on 5/14/2014 2:22:29 PM , Rating: 2
Um, the old TDIs ("PD" - I guess this translates into "pump-nozzle" or something along these lines: from 1990s and early 2000s) were actually far more expensive to repair when a nozzle gave up, if not less reliable to top things off, than "CR" ones that came after them. Has this really changed so much ?


RE: Reliability
By Reclaimer77 on 5/13/14, Rating: -1
RE: Reliability
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 11:37:40 AM , Rating: 2
I used to have a Mazda 3s Grand Touring Hatchback (2006 model) and I loved that damn thing. Drove it for 80,000 miles.

I WOULD have bought a Mazda this time around, but the current Mazda 3s hatchback (just like the previous generations) is just too small for a family IMHO. If Mazda brought this here, I be driving it instead of my JSW TDI:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2013...


RE: Reliability
By Spuke on 5/13/2014 2:56:18 PM , Rating: 2
That's a sexy beast right there! Just not diggin paying the same money for less power.

Also, what the hell is wrong with Rec's comment?
quote:
My girlfriends Mazda 3 Skyactive gets the same mileage as the Jetta TDI on cheap regular gas. With none of the expensive maintenance costs associated with diesels, expensive fuel, reliability problems or obnoxious rigid maintenance schedules. Diesels had their place once, I just don't see the point in it for passenger vehicles. Leave it to the Japanese makers to find practical, workable solutions to problems. The Germans...not so much.
??


RE: Reliability
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 3:01:03 PM , Rating: 2
I think reclaimer has become a marked man ;)


RE: Reliability
By Spuke on 5/13/2014 4:47:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I think reclaimer has become a marked man ;)
Apparently! LOL! Sorry bro.


RE: Reliability
By Mint on 5/13/2014 6:09:05 PM , Rating: 1
Really?

You don't see why people would downrate that last comment where he's making silly generalizations?

Hell, even his comments on diesels are enough to tick off the diesel faithful, who seem to be all over this article. I'm not really for or against modern diesels, but it's pretty obvious to me that people don't like being told (rightly or wrongly) that they chose an inferior technology, especially when it comes to their car.


RE: Reliability
By Reclaimer77 on 5/13/14, Rating: -1
RE: Reliability
By Reclaimer77 on 5/13/14, Rating: 0
RE: Reliability
By Spuke on 5/13/2014 7:21:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And I think I just fell out of my chair. This coming from YOU, is beyond hypocritical.
We should just call him hypomint from now on.


RE: Reliability
By Mint on 5/14/2014 7:49:08 AM , Rating: 2
You are free to join Reclaimer77 in a search for a post where I called ICE "pointless" or anything of the sort.


RE: Reliability
By Mint on 5/14/2014 7:47:22 AM , Rating: 2
Every post, huh? Why don't you go point out a few where I say ICE sucks? I write posts that defend EVs from those who say people that buy them are idiots or environuts, such as yourself. I even explicitly tout the superiority of PHEV over EV, and in case you didn't notice, PHEV has an ICE in there.

I've never once called ICE "pointless" like you just did for diesel, or said anything like German engineering not solving real problems.


RE: Reliability
By Spuke on 5/13/2014 7:11:39 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I'm not really for or against modern diesels, but it's pretty obvious to me that people don't like being told (rightly or wrongly) that they chose an inferior technology, especially when it comes to their car.
No sh!t! Of course people don't like hearing that. It's called human nature! LOL! Grow up dude! Life isn't fair.


RE: Reliability
By Mint on 5/14/2014 7:52:11 AM , Rating: 3
Shouldn't you be directing that message to Reclaimer and yourself?

You're the ones baffled at him getting downrated. All I did was give you a simple explanation of why people did so.


RE: Reliability
By Spuke on 5/14/2014 1:26:50 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
By Mint on 5/14/2014 7:52:11 AM , Rating: 3
Got your brother rating you up? Rec's opinion was not crazy or ridiculous unlike most of your chilish one's yet you get rated up and he gets rated down. Hmmmm.


RE: Reliability
By Mint on 5/14/2014 3:00:05 PM , Rating: 2
Why do you care so much about my ratings? I don't.

Rec is telling lies about me and, unsurprisingly, not backing them up. You're calling me childish when your previous post says "LOL" and "Grow up dude"? What is so childish about me giving you a simple explanation of why he got rated down when you explicitly asked for one?

Diesel fans don't like him saying it has reliability problems or obnoxious maintenance, and Germans don't like the implication they don't solve practical problems. It's that simple. He may well be correct, but it doesn't matter.

Stop being so paranoid about ghost accounts or ulterior motives.


RE: Reliability
By Reclaimer77 on 5/14/2014 6:42:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Diesel fans don't like him saying it has reliability problems or obnoxious maintenance,


But those are facts. NOT opinion.

VW is one of the worst brands you can buy. Just look at Consumer Reports, Edmunds, whoever.

quote:
He may well be correct, but it doesn't matter.


Well it matters to me, and that's all I care about.


RE: Reliability
By Adul on 5/13/2014 3:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
I was wondering why you went with VW this time around. I am still rocking my Mazda 3 I have had for years. I just rolled 160k on the odometer :D


RE: Reliability
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:30:26 PM , Rating: 2
Yup the Mazda has reliability, fuel economy, and zoom zoom. I think its the best compact car on the market right now, with the 2.5L at least.


RE: Reliability
By clarkn0va on 5/14/2014 2:39:31 AM , Rating: 2
I drive a 2007 Impreza and a 1997 V-Class diesel. The 10 years older 7-seater actually costs me less in fuel, and I haven't had to do a single repair to the drive train.

Not that the Germans do everything perfectly, but the Japanese aren't exactly eating their lunch.


RE: Reliability
By DrKlahn on 5/14/2014 11:06:50 AM , Rating: 2
I bought a Chevy Cruze 2.0 TD in January. The only real maintenance over a gas model is the DEF for emissions. But it's neither expensive nor hard to deal with. As far as mileage the car sees 80/20 HWY/CITY use. In the winter I was averaging 38-40 MPG on a tank (this winter was very brutal temp wise). Modern diesel blends don't have much issues with gelling. As the temps in the mid west have warmed I have been seeing some nice mileage gains with averages climbing into the mid to upper 40's and the last 2 tank fulls have seen about 650 miles on 14 gallons. The mileage is in hybrid territory with none of the complexity. I would be curious to see what your average is with the Skyactive. I doubt it would be comparable.


RE: Reliability
By SniperWulf on 5/19/2014 11:19:41 AM , Rating: 1
Yeah, and my wife has one of the 2014 Skyactiv 3i. The little 2l 4 almost does what it says (It's been almost 6 months and still doesn't sticker MPG), but it still is missing something.

It has no Zoom Zoom.

So, 2014 3i
-less than 40mpg highway
-5k maintenance intervals
-no guts

2012 Golf TDI
-40mpg (45mpg IRL) highway
-10k maintenance intervals
-feels more powerful than it is (ty torque)

Case closed.

And another thing, if diesel is so horrible, why would Mazda even bother to develop their own?


RE: Reliability
By DLeRium on 5/13/2014 3:42:03 PM , Rating: 2
The TDIs are generally reliable based on what I've heard, but Audi and VW continuously get low ratings in Consumer Reports and JD Powers reliability surveys.

In general, cars have gotten more reliable though. Your worst car in 2009 is doing better than your average car in 1999 already, and so perhaps the notion that VW has gotten a lot better since the old 1.8 Jettas dying left and right is true.

There's also too much anecdotal evidence going around when people talk about their cars so its hard to get the big picture for reliability.


RE: Reliability
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:26:28 PM , Rating: 2
Last stat I heard the Japanese brands are still beating everybody in terms of reliability. Everybody has come up in reliability but you still have leaders.


RE: Reliability
By hpglow on 5/14/2014 12:20:53 AM , Rating: 2
I own a 2000 manual and at 207,000 it still starts every day. There are issues with it mostly because I don't have money for some of the parts. It continues to pass emissions. I paid $7000 for it used and have put over 90k of those miles on it myself. It has never left me stranded. When I first got it I would get 45 city and 55 hwy. Now that the egt is broke and the cam and lifters are worn I average 37mpg no matter where I drive. I don't baby it and it has heald up well.


RE: Reliability
By Nutzo on 5/13/2014 12:54:23 PM , Rating: 2
Disagree, as it depends on the Hybrid. Toyota's tend to get better than the rates milage, unlike some of the othe rover-hyped brands.
My Camry hybrid is rated at 38 Highway, yet I usually average between 40MPG and 50MPG on the highway. Really depends on traffic and the average speed. The funny part is that the slower the traffic, the better the mileage. When freeway traffic slows down to 30-40 MPH (not stopped, but just slow), my mileage climbs to over 50MPG.

Try driving your diesel on my typical morning commute - only 6 miles, but all surface streets, slow traffic and long lights. I doubt your diesel would get the rated mileage.


RE: Reliability
By biohazard420420 on 5/13/2014 2:38:51 PM , Rating: 2
The problem with hybrids and fuel economy is that they get their best fuel economy in stop and go traffic generally. More time on the electric motors as low speed, by and large at highway speeds they don't get great mileage because of the smaller lower hp engines. They make perfect sense in the city though as you will be relying on the electric motors the most, matter of fact I saw a guy delivering pizza in a Prius and that has to be about the smartest thing I have seen. I think you would be better off with a small displacement turbo engine as far a mileage on the highway goes.


RE: Reliability
By mars2k on 5/15/2014 8:33:23 AM , Rating: 2
I owned a 1971 VW411 for which I paid $2100 new. The car had been left over from the previous year because no one would pay the original list of $2600 for a VW. Beatles cost $1300 at the time.
It had a flat 4 from a Porsche 914. The car was a 4 door sedan and bigger on the inside than any American mid-sized car at the time. I drove the crap out of that car for 135K miles spending $14 on replacement parts the entire time.
At 135K miles, the car required work on the fuel injection system. After considerable procrastination on the repair the car caught on fire then promptly burn to the ground in a spectacular crowd pleasing conflagration catching several suburban lawns on fire, glorious really.
Within 30 days I had an insurance check in my hand for $2800, $700 dollars more than I paid. To me that trumps anything your crummy rice burner can do so there. Sign me up for a new TDI with that new 10 speed tranny coming up.


Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 10:27:47 AM , Rating: 3
I'll just add that the blue Golf Sportwagen (VW is retiring the Jetta Sportwagen name) is just gorgeous.

You'll never see me in a crossover so vehicles like this just cry out to me.




RE: Hnnnng
By ewhite06 on 5/13/2014 12:38:05 PM , Rating: 2
I'm with you. As long as someone makes sexy wagons like that or say, Audi, or many others, I will never drive a crossover or SUV. Love my Subaru Legacy Wagon to death. Wagons are just more practical - smaller in size, more efficient, more powerful (usually), yet can haul a ton.


RE: Hnnnng
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 7:33:04 PM , Rating: 2
But a crossover SUV is really just a station wagon.


RE: Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 7:54:41 PM , Rating: 2
A station wagon that rides higher, handles worse, is heavier, and gets worse fuel economy.

I want to drive a "car", not a car on stilts. I hate the higher driving position on crossovers.


RE: Hnnnng
By Jeffk464 on 5/13/2014 9:59:32 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah, and I guess that sportwagen looks pretty decent.


RE: Hnnnng
By Mint on 5/14/2014 8:14:34 AM , Rating: 2
A lot of people like higher driving position, especially women. That's why manufacturers have pretty much abandoned wagons for crossovers.

But you're onto something in pointing out that manufacturers have gone too far in ignoring the US wagon market, and I think that is a big reason for the success of the Model S. It has more interior room than an E-class wagon, yet has a sleek exterior shape.

The Mazda6 wagon you pointed out has similar attributes. Far sexier than the stationwagons of years past.


RE: Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/14/2014 8:46:20 AM , Rating: 2
I mean, I guess I can't fault manufacturers for going where the money is, but I just wish there were more options.

I think it's pathetic that the Jetta Sportwagen (soon to be Golf Sportwagen) is the ONLY compact wagon in the U.S. market.


RE: Hnnnng
By piroroadkill on 5/14/2014 9:26:31 AM , Rating: 2
Move to Europe.
All the estates you could possibly want.
American consumers do not align with your view.


RE: Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/14/2014 10:02:12 AM , Rating: 2
If only it were that easy ;)

But it's OK. As long as VW keeps making the Sportwagen, I'll continue to be a customer.


RE: Hnnnng
By Reclaimer77 on 5/14/2014 1:14:27 PM , Rating: 2
Our parents made us ride in wagons.

Now that we've grown up, we don't want to be our parents.

Wagons suck :)


RE: Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/14/2014 1:33:23 PM , Rating: 2
You shut your mouth! :)

If the choice is between a RAV4, CR-V, Rogue, or a CX-5, I'd pick my wagon again and again and again. Living in central NC, where snow accumulation is rarely over a few inches, I see no need to waste my time with high ground clearance and AWD. MAYBE if I lived in the NC mountains...


RE: Hnnnng
By Reclaimer77 on 5/15/2014 8:24:22 AM , Rating: 2
lol :P

Hey I live in the Carolina's too, remember? And AWD still kicks ass.

Know that storm we're getting down here right now? On my way to work I get to drive normally and fly through standing water while everyone else is driving like a pus*y :)

But dude don't justify your wagon to me, you chose what was best for you. And I was just teasing.

Now if I see wood grain trim on the sides....well then we'll talk :P


RE: Hnnnng
By Spuke on 5/14/2014 1:36:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A station wagon that rides higher, handles worse, is heavier, and gets worse fuel economy.
Worse fuel economy is debatable but no one cares about the other stuff just us enthusiasts. Driving position seems to be the more used reason for SUV's of any type. IMO, the difference in handling and weight is not very significant to me. They're all sloppy IMO. I'd prefer a sports car for anything sporting. Far less compromising.


RE: Hnnnng
By domboy on 5/13/2014 1:30:36 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, if I had to replace my 03 Golf TDI (hope not anytime soon) I would probably get a Sportwagen.

Will will say though that I really wish they'd bring the Amarok to the US though. We could really use a good small diesel pickup.


RE: Hnnnng
By Brandon Hill on 5/13/2014 1:46:19 PM , Rating: 2
The brand new Chevy Colorado and GMC Canyon will offer a four cylinder turbo diesel.


RE: Hnnnng
By inperfectdarkness on 5/14/2014 5:36:18 AM , Rating: 2
E55 AMG. *drool*


Why not just use a CVT?
By otherwise on 5/13/2014 4:20:51 PM , Rating: 2
At what point does it make sense to just move to a CVT? The complexity of a 10 gear transmission has to be pretty close to the tipping point.




RE: Why not just use a CVT?
By Murloc on 5/13/2014 5:35:43 PM , Rating: 2
it would freak out european customers.

Plus going from 7 to 10 is an incremental upgrade, not building a CVT from scratch.


By inperfectdarkness on 5/14/2014 5:37:32 AM , Rating: 2
Depends on the load capability. If it can handle 600+hp, then I have no qualms. CVT's can't handle 300hp, so that's a huge ding.


"Nowadays you can buy a CPU cheaper than the CPU fan." -- Unnamed AMD executive
Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki