Volkswagen Passat Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,648 Posts
This kind of thing is all over, I think the reason the 1.8T is not recommended is the coil packs.

But it's sweet that my v6 is recommended.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,396 Posts
gig103 said:
This kind of thing is all over, I think the reason the 1.8T is not recommended is the coil packs.

But it's sweet that my v6 is recommended.
Yep, the coil packs are the reason. If you look in this year's auto issue of CR, you can see that the only thing the survey-takers complained about (and it was just 2001-2002s) was the "Ignition" category, which of course is due to the coilpack issue. The 2003 surveys came back with flying colors. After a couple of years, I expect the 1.8T to get back above the V6 where it had been. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Anyone find it strange, though, that CR recommends the 4cyl Accord and the V6 Passat, not the other way around? I've driven 4cyl Accords, and that engine doesn't compare to the 1.8T at all. However, Honda has *completely* outclassed VW in the V6 department, and I find it very odd that CR would recommend the V6 Passat over the V6 Accord.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
hbar said:
Anyone find it strange, though, that CR recommends the 4cyl Accord and the V6 Passat, not the other way around? I've driven 4cyl Accords, and that engine doesn't compare to the 1.8T at all. However, Honda has *completely* outclassed VW in the V6 department, and I find it very odd that CR would recommend the V6 Passat over the V6 Accord.
The putative reason is the Passat 1.8T's "below-average" reliability ranking in CR this year; they did recommend the Passat 1.8T last year. I agree with you that compared to the 1.8T in the Passat, the Accord's 4-cylinder engine is hardly worth mentioning, but when comparing respective V6 engines, the Accord's is simply outstanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,407 Posts
raneek said:
I agree with you that compared to the 1.8T in the Passat, the Accord's 4-cylinder engine is hardly worth mentioning, but when comparing respective V6 engines, the Accord's is simply outstanding.
Have any of you guys actually driven a 4 cylinder Accord?

Its an extremely nice engine. It makes 10 less hp, and 5 less lb/tq

Its extremely smooth, and gets better gas mileage then the 1.8T.

Understand I do think the 1.8T is a great engine, but you guys are dogging the Accord 4cylinder, like its a piece of shit, and its far from it.

I do agree V6 is no comparison. Espicially when you consider, the Accord V6 runs on Regular, and the 2.8 runs on premium...... :crazy:

-Nick
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,730 Posts
TAckhouse1 said:
raneek said:
I agree with you that compared to the 1.8T in the Passat, the Accord's 4-cylinder engine is hardly worth mentioning, but when comparing respective V6 engines, the Accord's is simply outstanding.
Have any of you guys actually driven a 4 cylinder Accord?

Its an extremely nice engine. It makes 10 less hp, and 5 less lb/tq

Its extremely smooth, and gets better gas mileage then the 1.8T.

Understand I do think the 1.8T is a great engine, but you guys are dogging the Accord 4cylinder, like its a piece of shit, and its far from it.

I do agree V6 is no comparison. Espicially when you consider, the Accord V6 runs on Regular, and the 2.8 runs on premium...... :crazy:

-Nick
I've driven it and while it's far from a piece of shit - it's not as exciting to drive as the V6. Having said that, I don't like the new Accord much at all and I've been a Honda Accord fan since the mid 80's. The new Accord sedan is flat out boring, whether it's in 4 cyl, 6cyl, automatic, manual, whatever - it's not fun to drive like Accord sedans used to be. It's just too big to me for one thing. To me the TSX is more like what I think an Accord should be, lower slung beltline, little bit lower seating position, grippy, firm ride (not harsh) not too big yet not too small but mainly - fun to drive. The current Accord reminds more of my wife's Camry which is somewhat floaty and disconnected and very boring to drive yet wonderfully reliable which is what she cares about.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
126 Posts
don't put your trust in that magazine. If you look at American/Japanese cars in comparison to European cars, you will find that European cars have lots of more technology and functions, creating an opportunity for more problems. Our cars are put together so much nicer than American cars and i dont care how much it costs to repair, our cars will ALWAYS drive better than American cars and will always be safer as well..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Guys,

I really hate to see the debate over Accord/Passat and 1.8T/V6... etc. Honda makes great cars, and I almost bought an Accord when I purchased my Passat. Well, there is no doubt the Passat has a "soul" for spirited driving... :) But Accord is also a great family sedan all around.

The point is, do American-made cars really get better quality than European? From what I've seen, no. I compared most same-level rental cars to my Passat, and it's no match. But since the Big Three keep introducing European-designed platforms to the US (Ford Focus, New Chevy Malibu), it seems like the American cars are getting better and better. Though, I could be wrong...

Just a thought, maybe they added cars like Camry (American-made) so it average higher? :weirdo:


Tim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
TAckhouse1 said:
Have any of you guys actually driven a 4 cylinder Accord?

Its an extremely nice engine. It makes 10 less hp, and 5 less lb/tq

Its extremely smooth, and gets better gas mileage then the 1.8T.

Understand I do think the 1.8T is a great engine, but you guys are dogging the Accord 4cylinder, like its a piece of shit, and its far from it.
TAckhouse1, I apologize if my comment created the impression that the Accord's 4-cylinder is a p.o.s.- I don't think that's the case at all. I have driven 4 cylinder and V6 Accords, as well as the Acura TSX. My point was that compared to the 1.8T, which is an unabashed driving delight and has superb tunability, the 2.4L four in the Accord isn't in the same league. In other words, just comparing what I think is the benchmark 4-cylinder engine in cars <$25,000 (i.e., the 1.8T) to an engine that is merely "nice" (the 2.4L in the Accord)- whereas with the two V6s, the Accord's is the benchmark. Your point about fuel economy is well taken- but that's pretty much the only advantage I find to Honda's 2.4L over the 1.8T.
timho said:
Just a thought, maybe they added cars like Camry (American-made) so it average higher?
timho, CR categorized cars by nameplates, not necessarily by where the vehicles were assembled. Thus, all Toyotas, Hondas, and Hyundais were considered "Asian", all Saabs, Volvos, and VWs "European", and all Dodges, Pontiacs, and Fords "domestic". If you have the April 2004 CR issue handy, pages 16-18 detail the "domestic vs. European vs. Asian" assessment you originally brought up in this thread. Pages 77-78 depict reliability compared to a baseline for each model, and pages 82-93 have detailed reliability ratings. Curiously, CR rated the Buick Regal higher than the Camry on their reliability measure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,181 Posts
timho said:
The point is, do American-made cars really get better quality than European? From what I've seen, no. I compared most same-level rental cars to my Passat, and it's no match. But since the Big Three keep introducing European-designed platforms to the US (Ford Focus, New Chevy Malibu), it seems like the American cars are getting better and better. Though, I could be wrong...



Tim
reliability is somehthing measured over a period of time, not just a one or two week rental.
FWIW, I know plenty of folks with boring Malibus, Impala's, Taurus', etc and no one ever back to the dealer. Yet most of the folks with Euro cars... thats a different story.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top