2014 Passat 2.5 or 1.8T?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Comparing a Volvo diesel to a new VW TDI is not really a comparison. My aunt has a 2013 Beetle TDI, she has a lead foot and with traffic mixed driving never gets under 39.5 mpg, that's what every tank is. On a road trip I believe it would do phenomenal. She also has a 2004 TDI, fantastic engines and tons of power. It too gets 39.5-40 mpg mixed driving.
 
The 1.8T iirc in the passat now gets a traditional 6 speed auto, NOT in fact the DSG. I read the review on motortrend the other day and that was one thing that stuck out to me, because they were comparing the old 2.5 to the 1.8T. And their verdict pretty much was: Buy the 1.8T. Why would you even consider the 2.5?
 
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Why would you even consider the 2.5?

No turbo, no DI = less complexity, and hence potentially better long term reliability, which is what the OP was primarily concerned about.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Why would you even consider the 2.5?

No turbo, no DI = less complexity, and hence potentially better long term reliability, which is what the OP was primarily concerned about.



I haven't driven the new 1.8T, but I've driven the 2.5 in a rental Jetta. Probably my least favorite engine. It's harsh, unrefined, and the 2.0L in my focus feels like it has more power and is more efficient. I would go with the 1.8T any day, simply based on why would you spend that much money and get the older, outdated and thoroughly outmatched engine.

@OP: I haven't seen or heard anything about VW Turbo engines are only good up to 100k. I have a few friends who have some with well over 100k, I think one is up to 175k or something, pretty much original anything but a few small things here and there.
 
I believe the worries about the 1.8t were generated by sludge problems in some VW's models including the Passat around 2002. The turbo runs hot. VW changed the oil spec to synthetic and increased the size of the then small sump to address the issue. The 1.8T in my signature runs like a top after 158k. If the 2.5 doesn't require timing belt replacement then factor that into your decision. I believe the 1.8T belt supposed to be changed at 60k interval. It is not a cheap job on my beetle.
 
I'd go with a 2.5 (in a Mazda6)
wink.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Nick R
but I've driven the 2.5 in a rental Jetta. Probably my least favorite engine. It's harsh, unrefined, and the 2.0L in my focus feels like it has more power and is more efficient.

I've ridden in a friend's Rabbit 2.5 many times, and it did not feel harsh or unrefined at all. It was a stick shift. Seemed like it had plenty of 'go', too. With that said, if you put the same engine in a larger/heavier Passat, it may in fact feel somewhat weak. I guess the OP needs to drive it to determine if it's sufficient for him or not.

Again, this is purely reliability-related discussion, and nothing else. Only time will tell how reliable this new 1.8T will be. Personally, I'd expect it to be reliable, but I won't suggest it to the OP purely based on what I would expect.


EDIT: I now recall test driving a 2010 Jetta with a 2.5 engine, and that one did in fact feel unrefined/harsh. Not sure why that was. The only major difference was that the Jetta had auto trans, as opposed to stick on the Rabbit.
 
The only reason i would get into a Passat would be the TDI. There are better gasoline cars. Honda Accord and Mazda 6 are quite nice.
 
In my personal experience w/my Golf 2.5L, it is NOT harsh, unrefined. It is smooth from idle to redline. I did do an early OC @ 3K and I'm presently using GC 0w-30 oil. It does however NOT get the best gas mileage. The 2.5L is a thirsty engine. Super reliable and easy to maintain. The 1.8T looks exceptional as well.
 
Originally Posted By: dareo
The only reason i would get into a Passat would be the TDI. There are better gasoline cars. Honda Accord and Mazda 6 are quite nice.


I was going to mention this, too. If long term reliability is a concern, is there a reason you are not considering these two cars?
 
Originally Posted By: k24a4
Originally Posted By: dareo
The only reason i would get into a Passat would be the TDI. There are better gasoline cars. Honda Accord and Mazda 6 are quite nice.


I was going to mention this, too. If long term reliability is a concern, is there a reason you are not considering these two cars?

For some personal and political reason (which I do not want to discuss in public), I am trying to avoid Japanese badges at this time. I know they are excellent cars but not for me.
 
My vote is with the 2.5 also. I had one in my 2012 jetta with the 5MT, it was a blast to drive. Lots of torque and don't forget that awesomely unique grunty exhaust note. The 2.5 shares it's basic head/engine design with the 5 litre lambo v10.... Just saying
smile.gif
 
I'm still surprised by the number of 2.5 recommendations over the new 1.8T.

A newer design does not always equal less reliable.

The direction of VW has changed in the recent years, as evident by the recent models. They are fully committed to being a mainstream automaker in the US, and are furthering the commitment by developing designs that will be successful for the habits of US consumers. Keep in mind that the 2.5L was designed back in 03-05 before the new company direction.

I fully expect the new 1.8T to be a reliable design that with a manageable TCO.

At this point, the 2.5L is a dinosaur. It may be simpler in theory, but it was designed during a time where different priorities where in place for VW. And the 2.5L is basically an engine that has the power of a 4, with the fuel economy of a 6.
 
Originally Posted By: The Critic
I fully expect the new 1.8T to be a reliable design that with a manageable TCO.

As I noted, I do, too, but it doesn't change the basic fact that it is a more complex design, and more complexity = higher chance of failure.

As I was saying, we have reliability data on the 2.5 as it's been around for a while. We don't have any reliability data on this 1.8T as it's new, so all we can do is hope that it will be reliable. Time will tell.

Still, someone else brought up a good point - if one is strictly looking for long term reliability and low TCO, maybe one should skip VW altogether. There are other reasons to buy a VW, but overall reliability is not one of them, IMO.
 
I had a golf with the 2.5 and 5-speed manual.

Loved the interior and driving dynamics of the car. The engine was more than enough as far as power is concerned but lacked the fun factor you'd find in some thing like the 2.0T.

Gas mileage wasn't spectacular. Hard to hit over 32hwy and 24-25mpg with mixed driving around town.

On a reliability standpoint I would say the 2.5 since it's been around and is solid. But turbo'ed VW's are fun engines and I would probably go for the new 1.8T just on that alone.
 
Originally Posted By: sparky123
In my personal experience w/my Golf 2.5L, it is NOT harsh, unrefined. It is smooth from idle to redline. I did do an early OC @ 3K and I'm presently using GC 0w-30 oil. It does however NOT get the best gas mileage. The 2.5L is a thirsty engine. Super reliable and easy to maintain. The 1.8T looks exceptional as well.


+1 can't go wrong either way. Our 2.5 is pretty quiet, very smooth, good to drive around. Just missing an of gear for highway, which makes it thirsty, it's geared pretty well for good town MPGs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
2014 jetta 1.8t oil recommendations
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
wavinwayne
W
Audi Q5 or Genesis GV70 part two
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Rand
W
Modern Turbo Engine Reliability and Durability
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
4K
wtd
Elkins45
Any Mazda 5 owners here?
Replies
15
Views
1K
xspeedy
M
Reliable/Low Maintenance or Super Fun Vehicle To Purchase
2 3 4
Replies
65
Views
4K
M1Accord
Back
Top