This may not be a bad idea, and it was a long time in making, even without the emission scandal.
Ever since its decision to go mass market, quality of materials took a steep dive. They also looked very dull because engineering and production cost was putting constraints on design detailing. For the past 5 years, VW has been making cars that are duller than Toyota Camry of late 90s. They were given benefit of the doubt by automotive press because journalists love German cars. But with its competitors seriously ramping up their product portfolio, riding the coattail of its former glory is coming to an end.
Their current lineup with exception of Golf is entirely uncompetitive, particularly Passat and Jetta. There are far more compelling offerings out there than these dull box on wheel that are product of severe cost engineering.
The American variant of the Jetta was recently a stripped down cheapened version compared to the jettas sold elsewhere.They even removed the multilink rear suspension for the US model.
I feel like the current VW lineup looks like it was made in the 1990s. The new Golf is nice, but my mkIV gti (while bloated and slow) was audi like in its quality. It also spent ever 4th month in the shop but that is largely better now.
I agree with Golf being the exception. I love my (mk7) GTI, and still smile when driving it--a year after buying.
Tried a (United States) Passat for about a week, and it felt like a waterbed on wheels :( not sure if it was "because rental" or if that's how they are; any owners care to comment??
I would disagree. I really like the MKV model (the one that ended in 2010). However, they really cut costs+quality on the car in the next generation to compete with the toyotas. It's a shame because they look really dull as a result.
Being the designated mechanic for my wife's 2005 Jetta convinced me that the only reason I'd ever consider a VW was the TDI. How the hell do teeth start falling off your timing belt at 60,000 miles and 4 years? How can changing a timing belt require so many special tools? How can a car be small AND slow AND handle like crap AND get terrible fuel economy? 25mpg is pathetic. Still though, a clean diesel getting 50mpg sounded pretty compelling.
VW brazenly lying about the TDI emissions took away the only reason I'd ever consider them.
Well on the Jetta you have to remove the engine mount that runs through the middle of the timing belt, and it's an interference engine so the technique in that video would end poorly.
Jetta, Corolla, 3-series, C-class, etc are all compact sedans in the US. The step up (5-series, E-class) is mid-size, and the step after (7-series, S-class) is full-size.
Things like the Yaris, Polo, Fit, 1-series, etc are all subcompacts.
North American cities are largely planned around cars as opposed to having bricks thrown down wherever horses used to walk, gas isn't nearly as heavily taxed, and historically steel was never anywhere near as expensive as it was in post-war Europe. So there's no need for small cars like there is in Europe, and people like the comfort and practicality of larger vehicles.
Jetta is a compact car around here. Its just how it is. Personally speaking, I like the size of American compact cars (ie: what Europeans call mid-size). But everyone around me has a larger car than I do.
Thats quite a fascinating difference in culture/preference. Most people I know think Jettas are "too big" unless you have a family of 5 and need the extra space. Don't people find cars even bigger than that awkward to park in crowded parking lots?
Again, I like compact cars (erm... "normal cars" for you Europeans) because they've got much better handling, lower MPG, cheaper, etc. etc.
But take my Mom: she needs a larger car because she's tired of other drivers "looking down" on her (physically. Like, if you drive a Jetta around in the USA, well over 60% of cars are taller / bigger than yours and look down on you). She was also worried about getting in a collision: the Jetta's safety record may be good for a compact... but there's only so much that design can do when other cars are typically 1000+ lbs heavier than a Jetta.
Jeep Grand Cherokee is 4600 lbs. Toyota Rav4 is 3600 lbs. My boss drives a GMC Suburban at 5,586 lbs. Ford F150 (Pickup truck, which is a surprisingly common commuter vehicle) is 4000lbs curb weight.
The Jetta's 2900lbs curb weight will be a severe disadvantage against the "typical" car around here. There's a legitimate safety reason to go for a bigger car in America. Even if you're into "smaller cars", you typically choose like a Ford Fusion (3400lbs) which has the weight to keep up with everyone else on the road in the case of a collision.
I bet our parking lots and roadways are larger than yours to compensate for the difference in culture. But cars really are just bigger in America.
Thanks for the insight. I never really thought of that aspect. Over here I'm far more likely to collide with a corolla or vw polo than a giant Jeep etc.
I can almost fit a Jetta in the bed of my regular-sized pickup truck...
It's definitely a cultural difference - I always feel like I'm in a death trap, skimming along on the ground with no visibility, getting into a sedan or compact car.
I also grew up in an area with a high rate of moose collisions, and you do not want to see what happens when you hit one of those in a vehicle that's lower than their center of mass.
Dunno why you're getting downvoted for sharing American culture. Your opinion seems to be the mainstream as far as I can tell "in the real world".
I'll +1 you to counteract the downvotes.
To serve as some counter-balance to your post, the bigger SUVs (which are more typical in America) feel unbalanced with abnormally high center-of-balance. When taking a corner at any decent speed, I feel like the car is ready to flip over. Also, big cars guzzle more gas and are inefficient.
Also, I live in an area without Moose. Those things are scary, and I'd definitely get a bigger car if I lived around them.
A jetta would barely fit into my garage. If a "regular" pickup can swallow a jetta does that mean I can expect a "large" pickup to be bigger than my entire 5 bedroom house?
That said, I wish the US had a better selection of small cars. They're either absolute bottom of the line crap or extremely expensive sports cars, there's no mid range small coupe anymore.
In the android phone market, we know that mid-tier phones do very poorly; People can afford a high end one, or they can't afford anything, so they have to get the cheapest one available.
I kind of feel like automobiles are going the same way. Why pay for a mid market car from VW when you can spend another $5,000 and sit in a BMW or Mercedes? Or why spend $30,000 when you can spend $20,000 and get essentially the same thing (Jetta vs. Corolla S, for example)?
The automobile market is not that simple. It's possible for a car to be moderately priced, sell in huge numbers, and make a profit. In the mid '90s Chrysler sold 100k+ minivans a year and made an average profit of $5k. I'm sure today someone is doing almost that well with cute SUVs.
VW has the wrong product mix for North America: no trucks, no popular SUVs. They got burned with US regulation because they cheated. It's easy to imagine that they would do better as a premium brand, but there is no evidence that they have the brand or the competency. Does anyone remember the Phaeton? Google that. VW has had this fantasy before.
It's less simple than you think. Chrysler essentially invented the modern minivan and had a massive jump on sales in the 90s. Great competition like the Sienna didn't happen until the late 90s. When you have a popular new category and no competition, I'd expect to kill it like Chrysler did.
BMW doesn't have any trucks, and Honda didn't for a long time either. It's easy money but it's not the only way to make an auto brand.
(Fun side note: VW's minivan was a rebadged Chrysler.)
I haven't looked at a VW in a long time. I last bought an A2 generation Jetta new in 1991. At that time, I think they were about $11 or $12K, and there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle compared to similarly priced Asian or American cars. Better handling, better gear changes, a more tight and solid feel, and quieter. A Corolla at the time felt like a beer can on wheels, a Ford or Chevy in that price range felt perhaps more solid than a Corolla but had a very bland, generic, vague driving feel.
No idea if they are still that way but at least at the time a Jetta and a Corolla were not anywhere close to the same thing.
I drive a 2015 VW GTI. It is really a very good car. Comfortable, fun to drive, good fuel economy. There is a reason why it is always on the Car and Driver Ten Best list for North America. It just isn't a mass market car. It's a car for people who will pay extra for car just because it is fun to drive but not pretentious or ostentatious in any way.
> there was a definite "German" feel to the vehicle
Could it be placebo effect/confirmation bias? I am not a car enthusiast but I recently bought a new one and test drove both german and asian models and I honestly couldn't tell them apart.
Anecdotal but, I think for someone who truly enjoys driving and looks for the little things there's enough to notice.
I drove a '99 VW until it got wrecked. I picked up a '99 Acura afterwards and immediately could feel the difference in clutch & gearbox. I now drive an '03 VW, my girlfriend an '04 Honda and I can still feel the same differences. She's mentioned it too and says she prefers the "solid" feel of my car compared to hers. I've driven VWs of every generation from MK3 to current (MK7), I've driven Chevy/Honda/Toyota/Hyundai manual transmission cars and nothing feels as tight as the VWs I've driven.
So I'm a pretty big fanboy, but I definitely feel and believe there's a difference that can be felt.
your price differentials are a little off. you can't spend $5000 more than VW prices to get an equivalent Mercedes/BMW/Audi, its more like 10-15k more. VW's whole thing used to be that they were about 5k more than the mass market cars, but were almost as good as a luxury car with a nice feel and unique features. I'd be fine with them returning to this niche model, the american Jettas and Passats are lame.
The other problem with this strategy is that, at least according to Consumer Reports, the reliability of a new VW is way below that of a similar Toyota or Honda. Why pay more for a car that won't last as long?
Ever since its decision to go mass market, quality of materials took a steep dive. They also looked very dull because engineering and production cost was putting constraints on design detailing. For the past 5 years, VW has been making cars that are duller than Toyota Camry of late 90s. They were given benefit of the doubt by automotive press because journalists love German cars. But with its competitors seriously ramping up their product portfolio, riding the coattail of its former glory is coming to an end.
Their current lineup with exception of Golf is entirely uncompetitive, particularly Passat and Jetta. There are far more compelling offerings out there than these dull box on wheel that are product of severe cost engineering.