Auto show results

Status
Not open for further replies.

JHZR2

Staff member
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
53,026
Location
New Jersey
The wife and I went to the Phila. Auto Show. A few interesting results:

-Audi A3: major disappointment. Very cheap and chintzy compared to the VW rabbit, given the price and status premium.
-VW Rabbit 4dr: very nice car, value appears excellent. Too bad the 2.0L isnt available, so it would get the same 32 hwy as the Jetta wagon will.
-Jetta Wagon: Nice lines, as great as we thought it would be... the rabbit and jetta MT TDIs are the reason why we've held off on buying the wife a new car. She really likes these two.
-Acura Line of cars: disapointment across the board. Felt way too cheap for their prices.
-Lexus line of cars: definitely the best overall quality feel, materials picks, etc. of the show. Disapointing how little usable space there is in some of their cars, given their exterior dimensions.
-BMW line of cars: 08 3-series is pretty nice inside. Definitely many steps up from my tried and true E30 318i. BMW rep had an attitude when I told him how happy I was with my E30, and what a great, simple car it was... as if simple means it is a POS junker.
-Smart: I thought the rear-engine thing was neat until I ventured into the "access panel". Good luck servicing this thing... maybe others know something I don't.
-Malibu: Definitely the best feel of the "leather equipped" cars in the sub-$70k class. Central switchgear is standard "gen III GM issue", and Ive never really understood the importance of "soft feel" materials as found in most imports (which offgas more and are more prome to cracking), but this car has it. I liked the lines well enough, the wife wasnt keen.

As it is getting late, one last observation:
The places where historically a chromed plastic or metal-look item would be used, e.g. grille trim, has been generally replaced with a flimsier, cheaper looking metallic-painted silver plastic trim. This isnt automaker specific... say it even on the Porsche Boxter in the side gills and a few other spots. It really cheapens things up, and it is sad to see such fake looking stuff showing up on even mid to higher level cars.

JMH
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
VW Rabbit 4dr: very nice car, value appears excellent. Too bad the 2.0L isnt available, so it would get the same 32 hwy as the Jetta wagon will.

There's a 2008 Wolfsburg Edition of the Jetta that will be launching in several weeks.

A 6MT and DSG will be options, and the engine will be the fantastic 2.0T. The base price will be about $21k for the MT and $22k for the DSG version.
 
Interesting... will this be provided in "rabbit" form, or will it only be for the Jetta?

I saw in the info that the Jetta wagon will be available with the 2.0T, but I wonder if the Rabbit/GTI "thing" is too close of a relationship... though there is the GLI for the Jetta.

If only they'd have the diesel yesterday, it'd be a moot point!

JMH
 
Don't consider a car that comes with screwey [sic] oil specs.
48.gif
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Drive a Tin Lizzie. Use AMSOIL with confidence.
grin2.gif


crackmeup2.gif
 
You made Mike laugh. I only hope VW gets/keeps their act together. Nothing wrong with a separate gas and diesel specification, but give the USA public a break with the numbering system and revisions. I mean it would be one thing if they were truly pushing the envelope with the engines and the oil, but mainly it just a game of catch up. Not sure what Amsoil has to do with it.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Nothing wrong with a separate gas and diesel specification, but give the USA public a break with the numbering system and revisions.


If US fuel quality were up to par, then VW could use one single, combined gas/diesel oil spec (VW 504/507) for almost all current and old engines. The exception would be a few engines that require VW 505.01. That means TWO specs would cover the whole engine lineup, past and present. Alas, US fuel isn't good enough at this time to allow that and US VW owners have to deal with detuned emission systems and "screwey" oil specs. Just don't by a VW, and you don't have to [censored] about it.
 
Besides, what exactly is so difficult about the VW oil specs? A VW owner only needs to look into the manual (I'm somewhat optimistically presuming that most Americans can read and comprehend) the single oil spec that is required by his engine. That's currently one of two specs: VW 502.00 or VW 505.01. If in doubt, VW 505.01 can be used in ANY VW engine available in the US. If all that's too complicated, well, then you better get that Tin Lizzie.
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman
If US fuel quality were up to par, then VW could use one single, combined gas/diesel oil spec (VW 504/507) for almost all current and old engines. The exception would be a few engines that require VW 505.01. That means TWO specs would cover the whole engine lineup, past and present. Alas, US fuel isn't good enough at this time to allow that and US VW owners have to deal with detuned emission systems and "screwey" oil specs. Just don't by a VW, and you don't have to [censored] about it.


Gee, you've been a might touchy lately. I would like to "by" a VW diesel (in the future)....so I was slightly interested. But thanks, you've given me the idea that a well formulated CJ-4 oil would do quite well in a VW.
 
You found a typo? You can keep it.

I didn't peg you as someone who'd drive a VW. Good luck, I hear they suck!
 
Most of the present VWs oil fussiness has to do with the PD injection system. The PD injector roller/cam area deals with high loads and fitting the PD lobe on the cam forced the other lobes to be narrower. I believe PD system will be replaced by another system on new VW diesels, so they should become less fussy about their oil
 
VW announced last year that they will stop making PD engines for consumer cars in the near future (I think they mentioned 2010). They are moving on to direct injection.

I would say a combined gas/diesel engine oil (VW 504/507) spec isn't exactly very hard to remember.
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman
Besides, what exactly is so difficult about the VW oil specs? A VW owner only needs to look into the manual (I'm somewhat optimistically presuming that most Americans can read and comprehend) the single oil spec that is required by his engine. That's currently one of two specs: VW 502.00 or VW 505.01. If in doubt, VW 505.01 can be used in ANY VW engine available in the US. If all that's too complicated, well, then you better get that Tin Lizzie.


Currently? To me? Nothing too difficult. But over the years the average Joe who reads 501 or 502.00 or 503 or 504 or 505.00 or 505.01 or 506 or 507 (etc) may just barely be OK. OTOH For the average person in the USA, VW revising the oil requirement after the fact without a natural numeric or alphabetic progression, for example with the sludge engines, probably caused undue confusion.
 
Originally Posted By: moribundman
I didn't peg you as someone who'd drive a VW. Good luck, I hear they suck!


What the heck? My first new car ever was a VW. You can keep your attitude. Sheesh.
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
But over the years the average Joe who reads 501 or 502.00 or 503 or 504 or 505.00 or 505.01 or 506 or 507 (etc) may just barely be OK.


Joe should look in his manual. It will mention one or two suitable oil specs, plus possible a suitable API spec.

Quote:
OTOH For the average person in the USA, VW revising the oil requirement after the fact without a natural numeric or alphabetic progression, for example with the sludge engines, probably caused undue confusion.


Going by what I heard from the dealer, many average VW owners in the USA didn't follow mandated oil change intervals. Again, an inability to read the manual.

Has non of the tribologists or people "in the know" on these forums here figured out how the VW oil specs are numbered? Somebody needs to crack the code or ask VW!
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
But over the years the average Joe who reads 501 or 502.00 or 503 or 504 or 505.00 or 505.01 or 506 or 507 (etc) may just barely be OK. OTOH For the average person in the USA, VW revising the oil requirement after the fact without a natural numeric or alphabetic progression, for example with the sludge engines, probably caused undue confusion.

Are you saying that using SH SJ SL SM makes more sense than using numbers? How about GL-4 or GL-5 for gear oils? It's not like GL-5 is better than GL-4. They are just different specs. You could make a similar complaint about brake fluids: DOT4 DOT5, etc.

Is Mercedes better for naming their cars A, C, E, S class rather than 1, 3, 5, 7 like BMW?

Seriously, all it takes it to follow the owner's manual. Is that really too much to ask?
 
That's not what I'm saying. But at least with API (who I am NOT defending) progresses alpabetically with motor oils. (Gear oil nomenclature really sucks with the NEW viscosity specs)

Also, following the owner's manual is not that easy when VW jumps from 503 to 505, etc. What you read in the 2002 manual (for example) it is not that translateable to some people. How do I know this? People ask me all the time!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top