Username or Email Address
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    VWVortex


    Results 1 to 28 of 28

    Thread: Passat I- 5 resale value?

    1. 03-18-2012 08:34 PM #1
      I just ordered a new 2012 Passat S with the Auto trans. Now I'm told VW is going to drop the I 5 engine. Is that going to destroy the resale value of my purchase before I even drive it?

    2. Member MasVW11's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 6th, 2011
      Location
      Columbia, South Carolina
      Posts
      246
      Vehicles
      2002 Saab 9-3 SE (sold), 2006 Saab 9-3 SS 2.0T (sold), 2008 Volvo XC-90, 2012 Passat SE 2.5 w/ roof
      03-18-2012 09:34 PM #2
      Quote Originally Posted by Bob McGee View Post
      I just ordered a new 2012 Passat S with the Auto trans. Now I'm told VW is going to drop the I 5 engine. Is that going to destroy the resale value of my purchase before I even drive it?
      You'll probably get a wide range of opinions, especially from the non-B7 drivers who troll this forum and who oh so hate the I-5 compared to their turbos.

      Here's one: Given the large number of Jetta 2.5's out there, and given that it's a naturally-aspirated, chain driven, essentially bulletproof engine, maybe the first couple of years of the B7 with the I-5 will actually be desirable down the road....

      I've had 2 Saab 2.0T's over the past almost 10 years (March '02 til Dec '11), and while the turbos are great once you get rolling, they're painful from the line, from 0-25 mph, IMO, even with a MT! That's where the I-5 is a great trade-off between torque and efficiency, and as I drive around the burbs and even merging onto the highway, the I-5 has been great compared to my 2.0T's (205 HP/220 lb-ft in the 02 9-3 and 210 HP in the 06). Fuel economy is about the same, but I run my B7 on 87 fuel, unlike the 9-3's that needed premium gas, and there's simply less to maintain. In sport or manual mode, the B7 is even peppier down the 35-45 mph back roads.

      So I don't miss my turbo....okay that wonderful Saab turbo whine sound for those rare time when nobody's in front of me...., and of course 35-40 mpg would be great ....but at what cost in terms of performance? Now it's not clear why VW wants to have the base B7 compete with the TDi, but it may be competition with Accord/Camry that's the issue, and the Camry does devote an entire analog gauge in the cluster to fuel economy....

      I'm leasing my B7, but depending on the replacement engine, I might just buy it 3 years from now. I've been happy for all 4000 miles on my I-5 thus far.

    3. 03-19-2012 12:33 AM #3
      Is VW planning on dropping the I-5 from all models sold here in the USA, or will some models still be using them? Will this cause the already expensive parts to go even higher, However, I ques what I am mostly worried about is will I be Able to sell it in Five years when I get the itch for something new?

    4. Member mexglx's Avatar
      Join Date
      Apr 21st, 2003
      Location
      Memphis
      Posts
      348
      Vehicles
      '07 B6 Wagon 3.6, '05 E46 M3 ZCP, '96 J3 GL [SOLD], '97 J3 GLX [SOLD] '05.5 JV [Sold],
      03-19-2012 08:26 AM #4
      Don't worry about it. Most prospective buyers don't know the difference. There are tons of 2.5s out there. Engines change all the time in cars. Your resale will be affected by consumers reports reliability ratings and that motor trend car of the year articles. Get that copy of the magazine and keep it until you sell the car to show a prosepctive buyer they are buying a former COTY. Tell them the magazine will cost them $5 to.

    5. Member MasVW11's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 6th, 2011
      Location
      Columbia, South Carolina
      Posts
      246
      Vehicles
      2002 Saab 9-3 SE (sold), 2006 Saab 9-3 SS 2.0T (sold), 2008 Volvo XC-90, 2012 Passat SE 2.5 w/ roof
      03-19-2012 09:02 AM #5
      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      You'll probably get a wide range of opinions, especially from the non-B7 drivers who troll this forum and who oh so hate the I-5 compared to their turbos.

      Here's one: Given the large number of Jetta 2.5's out there, and given that it's a naturally-aspirated, chain driven, essentially bulletproof engine, maybe the first couple of years of the B7 with the I-5 will actually be desirable down the road....

      I've had 2 Saab 2.0T's over the past almost 10 years (March '02 til Dec '11), and while the turbos are great once you get rolling, they're painful from the line, from 0-25 mph, IMO, even with a MT! That's where the I-5 is a great trade-off between torque and efficiency, and as I drive around the burbs and even merging onto the highway, the I-5 has been great compared to my 2.0T's (205 HP/220 lb-ft in the 02 9-3 and 210 HP in the 06). Fuel economy is about the same, but I run my B7 on 87 fuel, unlike the 9-3's that needed premium gas, and there's simply less to maintain. In sport or manual mode, the B7 is even peppier down the 35-45 mph back roads.

      So I don't miss my turbo....okay that wonderful Saab turbo whine sound for those rare time when nobody's in front of me...., and of course 35-40 mpg would be great ....but at what cost in terms of performance? Now it's not clear why VW wants to have the base B7 compete with the TDi, but it may be competition with Accord/Camry that's the issue, and the Camry does devote an entire analog gauge in the cluster to fuel economy....

      I'm leasing my B7, but depending on the replacement engine, I might just buy it 3 years from now. I've been happy for all 4000 miles on my I-5 thus far.
      In all fairness, and having done some additional research, the new TSI turbos appear to include both a supercharger and a turbocharger, and thus eliminate the lag I was referring to above. By using the newer injection technology and a smaller 4 cylinder displacement, they improve fuel economy, with a larger turbo to provide more torque at high rpm's, with the supercharger to fill the gap at low RPMS (where the 5 cylinder works well). I also confess I have yet to drive a TSI engined car too. But again, it's a lot of technology compared with the chain driven 2.5, and as mexglx posted, there are "tons" of them out there, so they will be 'fixable'....

    6. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-21-2012 02:29 PM #6
      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      In all fairness, and having done some additional research, the new TSI turbos appear to include both a supercharger and a turbocharger, and thus eliminate the lag I was referring to above. By using the newer injection technology and a smaller 4 cylinder displacement, they improve fuel economy, with a larger turbo to provide more torque at high rpm's, with the supercharger to fill the gap at low RPMS (where the 5 cylinder works well). I also confess I have yet to drive a TSI engined car too. But again, it's a lot of technology compared with the chain driven 2.5, and as mexglx posted, there are "tons" of them out there, so they will be 'fixable'....
      This is something we considered when my mom was picking up her B7 2.5 SE w/Sunroof. But, we've had a handful of VW's with the 2.5 engine and have been really happy with their reliability and performance. It's nice they don't need premium fuel either, which was required in the Tiguan we traded for the B7. The TSI engine was nice when you needed power, but it was nearly impossible to get away from a stop light without the turbo kicking in. Also, despite the TSI being one of Ward's 10 Best Engines, I had a few gripes with it. It had a very on/off feel. Either the turbo was spooling, full boost or nothing...there was no easy transition. The fact the Tiguan blew three water pumps was another deciding factor to getting the 2.5, too.

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    7. 03-22-2012 10:11 AM #7
      The TSI sold in the US does not have the supercharger/turbo combo. Even so, turbo lag on the VW Turbo engines is minimal. I've had the B5 and the B6. While there was some obvious turbo lag in the B5, it is not perceptible in the B6.
      As far the 2.5 vs the new 1.8T engine, I would not buy the B7 with the new engine at least 1 year into its production cycle. The 2.5 is a decent reliable engine, but it is still a dog compared to the previous 2.0T engine. The 1.8T engine should deliver highway mileage in the high 30's and like current TSI products, should have a nice fat, flat torque curve.

      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      In all fairness, and having done some additional research, the new TSI turbos appear to include both a supercharger and a turbocharger, and thus eliminate the lag I was referring to above. By using the newer injection technology and a smaller 4 cylinder displacement, they improve fuel economy, with a larger turbo to provide more torque at high rpm's, with the supercharger to fill the gap at low RPMS (where the 5 cylinder works well). I also confess I have yet to drive a TSI engined car too. But again, it's a lot of technology compared with the chain driven 2.5, and as mexglx posted, there are "tons" of them out there, so they will be 'fixable'....

    8. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-22-2012 10:26 AM #8
      Quote Originally Posted by goacom View Post
      The TSI sold in the US does not have the supercharger/turbo combo. Even so, turbo lag on the VW Turbo engines is minimal. I've had the B5 and the B6. While there was some obvious turbo lag in the B5, it is not perceptible in the B6.
      As far the 2.5 vs the new 1.8T engine, I would not buy the B7 with the new engine at least 1 year into its production cycle. The 2.5 is a decent reliable engine, but it is still a dog compared to the previous 2.0T engine. The 1.8T engine should deliver highway mileage in the high 30's and like current TSI products, should have a nice fat, flat torque curve.
      "Decent(ly) reliable engine"? The 2.5 is the most bulletproof engine in the VW lineup And, I guess it's a matter of personal perception, but I would disagree with the statement that the 2.5 is a dog compared to the 2.0T. The difference in power output between the two engines is only 30 HP and 30 lb/ft of torque. With a few minor modifications, the 2.5 can easily break 185 HP.

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    9. Member MasVW11's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 6th, 2011
      Location
      Columbia, South Carolina
      Posts
      246
      Vehicles
      2002 Saab 9-3 SE (sold), 2006 Saab 9-3 SS 2.0T (sold), 2008 Volvo XC-90, 2012 Passat SE 2.5 w/ roof
      03-23-2012 06:52 AM #9
      Quote Originally Posted by goacom View Post
      The TSI sold in the US does not have the supercharger/turbo combo. Even so, turbo lag on the VW Turbo engines is minimal. I've had the B5 and the B6. While there was some obvious turbo lag in the B5, it is not perceptible in the B6.
      As far the 2.5 vs the new 1.8T engine, I would not buy the B7 with the new engine at least 1 year into its production cycle. The 2.5 is a decent reliable engine, but it is still a dog compared to the previous 2.0T engine. The 1.8T engine should deliver highway mileage in the high 30's and like current TSI products, should have a nice fat, flat torque curve.
      Then I suspect the 0-25 sluggishness of the 1.8 4 cyl before the turbo spools is still there even with the TSI.....I will drive it, but I have been enjoying the 2.5 coming from a turbo.....and the later generation Saabs were not known for turbo lag either

    10. 03-23-2012 10:30 AM #10
      I agree it has been very reliable. But so have the latest 2.0T TSI engines (EA888 versions since 2008). I have had a Jetta with the 2.5 and I currently have the Passat B6 with the 2.0T. Nothing to complain about either, but the torque rush in the 2.0T is intoxicating. The 2.5 hits its peak torque close to 5000rpm. The 1.8TSI has a flat maximum from 1500 to 5000rpm.

      I'm not into tuning, must most would agree that it is easier to tune the TSI engines than the un blown versions. The 2.0TSI is available in as much as 270hp state of tune.

      Anyway, the main point of the new engines is just not power/performance, but also its combination of fuel economy. The more powerful 2.0TSI is more fuel efficient than the 2.5. The 1.8TSI should hit close to 38MPG highway. Also, both of these engines can run on regular albeit at a small loss in power. Personally, for an average Joe like me, I can't tell the difference between a 2.0TSI running on premium vs regular, but I can tell the difference between a 2.0TSI and a 2.5.

      Finally, with its common architecture with other VW engines, the new engines should be cheaper and more profitable for VW.

      Cheers!

      Quote Originally Posted by jtrujillo86 View Post
      "Decent(ly) reliable engine"? The 2.5 is the most bulletproof engine in the VW lineup And, I guess it's a matter of personal perception, but I would disagree with the statement that the 2.5 is a dog compared to the 2.0T. The difference in power output between the two engines is only 30 HP and 30 lb/ft of torque. With a few minor modifications, the 2.5 can easily break 185 HP.

      - Jeremy.

    11. Member EUROBORA8V's Avatar
      Join Date
      May 15th, 2005
      Location
      Moscow, Russia/Los Angeles
      Posts
      5,946
      Vehicles
      03 Bora Variant 1.8T, 07 Golf 2.5, 08 Polo 9n3 1.4TDI, 14 Tiguan S 6mt
      03-23-2012 07:02 PM #11
      I am on the 2nd car with 2.5. First was 06 Jetta and now 07 Golf (Rabbit). Both are 150 bhp versions. MPGs are mediocre but are the same as 2.5 Altimas. Love the unique sound and adequate power. 2.5 is a bulletproof engine.

    12. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-24-2012 12:46 PM #12
      Quote Originally Posted by jtrujillo86 View Post
      "Decent(ly) reliable engine"? The 2.5 is the most bulletproof engine in the VW lineup And, I guess it's a matter of personal perception, but I would disagree with the statement that the 2.5 is a dog compared to the 2.0T. The difference in power output between the two engines is only 30 HP and 30 lb/ft of torque..
      Those are just peak numbers, at specific RPMs, ie. just single points on the Hp curves. The 2.0T has a much fatter Hp/torque curve.

    13. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-24-2012 12:50 PM #13
      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      Then I suspect the 0-25 sluggishness of the 1.8 4 cyl before the turbo spools is still there even with the TSI.....I will drive it, but I have been enjoying the 2.5 coming from a turbo.....and the later generation Saabs were not known for turbo lag either
      I wouldn't call it 0-25mph sluggishness. More like 0-10. But there is no getting around it, especially with the older autos. Perhaps the new ones are better, but the B5 tip was like that. It's not as big of an issue with manual transmissions. But again, when you are at low RPMs and low load, there is always a bot of a lag. You just adapt to it.

    14. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-24-2012 12:51 PM #14
      Quote Originally Posted by Bob McGee View Post
      ..will I be Able to sell it in Five years when I get the itch for something new?
      It probably will not be an issue for people buying "regular" five year old cars.

    15. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-24-2012 01:27 PM #15
      I guess my disagreement lies with the reliability claims of the 2.0T TSI. Our Tiguan blew three water pumps before 50K miles. There were other Tiguan owners that chimed in on the threads about failed water pumps, too. And while that may not be a HUGE issue for some of you here, it would have cost us $1,400 per repair had wwe not been under warranty. If it weren't for those issues, we would never have traded the Tig for the B7. I'd trade reliability over 0-60 acceleration any day.

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    16. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-25-2012 01:33 AM #16
      Three water pumps??? Are they using plastic impellers by any chance?

    17. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-25-2012 03:33 PM #17
      Quote Originally Posted by av_audi View Post
      Three water pumps??? Are they using plastic impellers by any chance?
      You would think Each time, the seals failed on the pumps, spewing coolant everywhere and causing the engine to heat up.

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    18. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-25-2012 08:16 PM #18
      Quote Originally Posted by jtrujillo86 View Post
      You would think Each time, the seals failed on the pumps, spewing coolant everywhere and causing the engine to heat up.

      - Jeremy.
      Maybe they seriously overtightened it or didn't clean/prep the surfaces for the gasket to sit properly.

    19. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-26-2012 12:51 PM #19
      Quote Originally Posted by av_audi View Post
      Maybe they seriously overtightened it or didn't clean/prep the surfaces for the gasket to sit properly.
      But even the original WP had the same problem. So...if that were the case, it was done at the factory.

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    20. 03-27-2012 08:07 PM #20
      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      You'll probably get a wide range of opinions, especially from the non-B7 drivers who troll this forum and who oh so hate the I-5 compared to their turbos.

      Here's one: Given the large number of Jetta 2.5's out there, and given that it's a naturally-aspirated, chain driven, essentially bulletproof engine, maybe the first couple of years of the B7 with the I-5 will actually be desirable down the road....

      I've had 2 Saab 2.0T's over the past almost 10 years (March '02 til Dec '11), and while the turbos are great once you get rolling, they're painful from the line, from 0-25 mph, IMO, even with a MT! That's where the I-5 is a great trade-off between torque and efficiency, and as I drive around the burbs and even merging onto the highway, the I-5 has been great compared to my 2.0T's (205 HP/220 lb-ft in the 02 9-3 and 210 HP in the 06). Fuel economy is about the same, but I run my B7 on 87 fuel, unlike the 9-3's that needed premium gas, and there's simply less to maintain. In sport or manual mode, the B7 is even peppier down the 35-45 mph back roads.

      So I don't miss my turbo....okay that wonderful Saab turbo whine sound for those rare time when nobody's in front of me...., and of course 35-40 mpg would be great ....but at what cost in terms of performance? Now it's not clear why VW wants to have the base B7 compete with the TDi, but it may be competition with Accord/Camry that's the issue, and the Camry does devote an entire analog gauge in the cluster to fuel economy....

      I'm leasing my B7, but depending on the replacement engine, I might just buy it 3 years from now. I've been happy for all 4000 miles on my I-5 thus far.
      Love the 2.5 - coming from a person who last had the 2.0 in a Passat Wagon. While the 2.0 was a fantastic engine , I have no problem with the 2.5 in my '12 Passat SE. Recently drove Jetta with 2.5 and if my Passat performed like that , I would be pissed - but it is completely different fit in the Passat

    21. Member Kyosho's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 15th, 2012
      Location
      NJ
      Posts
      179
      Vehicles
      2005.5 VW JETTA TDI PKG 1, 2012 VW PASSAT TDI SEL
      03-27-2012 10:27 PM #21
      You don't have to worry any more about VW dropping the I-5 engine, because I just got confirmation from Jay @ askavwsalesguy.com that VW will not drop the engine option from their line-up.
      Here is the link: http://askavwsalesguy.com/blog/2012/3/27/confirmed-25l-i5-engine-not-going-away-any-time-soon.html

      Hope this resolves anyone fear of depreciation for their car because the rumor is not true. And anybody that is waiting for the 1.8t you may have to wait longer then expected.

    22. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-28-2012 12:03 AM #22
      here will be 2.5L configurations for the 2013 Jetta, Passat, and Beetle....
      Which doesn't imply there won't be a 1.8T option available.

      It could be an option available on all trims, or perhaps the S trim will get the 2.5L and SE/SELs will get the 1.8T, which would actually be worse for 2012 SE/SEL owners than completely phasing out the 2.5L.

    23. Member MasVW11's Avatar
      Join Date
      Dec 6th, 2011
      Location
      Columbia, South Carolina
      Posts
      246
      Vehicles
      2002 Saab 9-3 SE (sold), 2006 Saab 9-3 SS 2.0T (sold), 2008 Volvo XC-90, 2012 Passat SE 2.5 w/ roof
      03-28-2012 06:36 AM #23
      Quote Originally Posted by av_audi View Post
      Which doesn't imply there won't be a 1.8T option available.

      It could be an option available on all trims, or perhaps the S trim will get the 2.5L and SE/SELs will get the 1.8T, which would actually be worse for 2012 SE/SEL owners than completely phasing out the 2.5L.
      Sigh....I wasnt worried about it before, and Im not remotely surprised the 2.5 is the base engine in at least 2013 models....folks on this forum who seem to know have stated its 2015. 2014 at the earliest...I can't see them offering a fourth engine which gets the same HP/torque as the 2.5 but fuel economy closer to the TDI any more than it makes sense to have the 2.0 TSI and the 2.5 available with the same fuel economy and 30 HP difference.

      As far as rumors go, it never made sense to me why you'd tool a factory, solve the bugs, and then in only the second year swap out the engine.....better to cut the price on the TDI and make more of them to handle the fuel economy competition.

      AV...as I suggested before, you should drive the 2012 NA Passat...and compare it to a Camry....if there's no twincharging in the TSI, Ill bet the 2.5 is equally spirited as the 1.8....as Wagon 05 says, Jeremy above, and I've said before, and Motor Trend has said (the 2.5 won the COTY award), the 2.5 is well executed in the Passat....but then again, maybe that's a bad idea, as your mind is already fully closed on the I-5.....keep on dreaming of your future 1.8...I'm enjoying my Passat tremendously!

    24. Member
      Join Date
      Oct 16th, 2002
      Location
      Calgary
      Posts
      764
      Vehicles
      2013 Honda Fit Sport, 2012 Honda Odyssey
      03-29-2012 09:56 AM #24
      Read the May issue of C&D.

      Passat 2.5 came out on top by a wide margin compared to Accord, Sonata, Optima, Camry and Malibu.

    25. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-29-2012 11:21 AM #25
      Quote Originally Posted by aleksl View Post
      Read the May issue of C&D.

      Passat 2.5 came out on top by a wide margin compared to Accord, Sonata, Optima, Camry and Malibu.
      THIS. Also, I can't remember if it was C&D or MT, but there was a comparo done with the V6, I5, and TDI Passats up against the different power trains of the Camry and the Sonata, and in each test, the Passats came out on top

      - Jeremy.
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    26. Member jtrujillo86's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 21st, 2005
      Location
      Seattle, WA by way of Fort Collins, CO
      Posts
      2,066
      Vehicles
      2012 MR Beetle 2.5 5MT, 2013 RS JSW TDI 6MT
      03-29-2012 11:24 AM #26
      Quote Originally Posted by BluMagic View Post
      It's a VW; the sensors are as sensitive as women on that time of the month . . . and the dash is as anxious to light up as a stoner.

    27. 03-29-2012 12:35 PM #27
      Quote Originally Posted by MasVW11 View Post
      Sigh....I wasnt worried about it before, and Im not remotely surprised the 2.5 is the base engine in at least 2013 models....folks on this forum who seem to know have stated its 2015. 2014 at the earliest...I can't see them offering a fourth engine which gets the same HP/torque as the 2.5 but fuel economy closer to the TDI any more than it makes sense to have the 2.0 TSI and the 2.5 available with the same fuel economy and 30 HP difference.

      As far as rumors go, it never made sense to me why you'd tool a factory, solve the bugs, and then in only the second year swap out the engine.....better to cut the price on the TDI and make more of them to handle the fuel economy competition.

      AV...as I suggested before, you should drive the 2012 NA Passat...and compare it to a Camry....if there's no twincharging in the TSI, Ill bet the 2.5 is equally spirited as the 1.8....as Wagon 05 says, Jeremy above, and I've said before, and Motor Trend has said (the 2.5 won the COTY award), the 2.5 is well executed in the Passat....but then again, maybe that's a bad idea, as your mind is already fully closed on the I-5.....keep on dreaming of your future 1.8...I'm enjoying my Passat tremendously!
      Yes - if you are worried about perception for resale then it is an issue for you. BUT - if YOU want to be satisfied - drive the 2.5 and decide if it is right for you. Having had the prior gen 1.8 T in a Passat (this is my 5th Passat , the 2.0 WAY better than the 1.8) I can tell you 1.8 wasn't any better than the 2.5. I am still completely amazed at this engine - I was doubting it but after I drove it (even picked it against TDi/DSG combo) I quickly was convinced. I really expected it to be a dog but it is a great match for this car. Will you burn from a dead start - no, but a very, very driveable engine.

    28. Member
      Join Date
      Apr 5th, 2001
      Posts
      6,678
      Vehicles
      02 Passat 1.8T 5M
      03-30-2012 12:32 PM #28
      Quote Originally Posted by Wagon05 View Post
      Yes - if you are worried about perception for resale then it is an issue for you. BUT - if YOU want to be satisfied - drive the 2.5 and decide if it is right for you. Having had the prior gen 1.8 T in a Passat (this is my 5th Passat , the 2.0 WAY better than the 1.8) I can tell you 1.8 wasn't any better than the 2.5.
      If they actually put the 1.8T in this car, it has nothing to do with the old 1.8T. I am hoping they will put the version that has 235lb-ft of torque. It has significantly more oomph than the old 1.8T (166 lf-ft) and it is more efficient to boot.

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •