Car and Driver: 2008 TDI Jetta named one of 2008's most fuel efficient surprises

The 7-speed DSG being initially released is rated only to 250 Nm of torque, which means it will for now only be mated to lower output gasoline- and TDI engines in the VW lineup. The peak torque of the 2.0 16V CR TDI that will be introduced in North America already exceeds the rated limit of this transmission.

VW will be later releasing a higher-rated DQ-500 transmission (500 Nm), and Audi is developing a version of the dual-clutch transmission for longitudinally-mounted layouts, and both of these will find their way to the higher-output engines.

Dunno513 said:

The PD lost ground to the rotary pumps, and the CR is going to lose ground to both. Just a fact of life...

Click to expand...

Not necessarily true. The PD engines had the potential to be just as efficient as the rotary pump engines, but they lost ground due to emissions requirements that were met by burning more fuel than was necessary for motive power.

I'm no emissions expert, but I believe the 2004+ models were constrained by particulate and NOx emissions. These standards are hard on diesels, because the fuel spray from the injectors needs to be exceedingly fine in order to get lower particulates from raw combustion, and lean burning diesel A/F ratios results in NOx generation from high combustion temperatures. The PD engines solved some of the particulates emissions compared to the rotary pump engines because the higher injection pressures from the PD injectors misted the fuel in a much finer spray pattern. Lower particulates resulted (to a point), but that still left NOx to deal with. NOx emissions were just squeaked under the limit by burning the A/F ratio richer than necessary in order to lower combustion temps. So, in short, VW traded fuel economy for emissions performance in order to be able to sell these cars on the US market.

That being said, there is no reason the new CR engines won't be able to have stellar fuel economy performance that surpasses the PD engines, despite higher power output ratings. The exhaust after-treatment equipment available now is vastly superior to what was available just 5 years ago, and that means the current trend is to have in-cylinder combustion optimized for fuel economy - and excess emissions is cleaned up in the exhaust stream before it exits the tailpipe. I honestly think the new CR engines will easily break 50 MPG highway numbers on a routine basis.

Dave, do you know anything about the 6-speed units in the Tiguan? Is the auto an Aisin?

frugality said:

That's what people want, though. People still are drawn more to power than mileage. They'll even buy a higher-performance gasser that requires premium, not actually running the numbers to see what it'll cost them. And of course, buying sport-utes when they aren't really 'needed.'

Consumer demand has to drive fuel economy. I disagree with Congress' move to increase the fuel economy of cars by regulation. They just need to put more tax on fuel so that it's $5/gallon. Put the money into roads and alternative-energy research. Mabye bridges, too, so we don't have them collapsing like the one in Minneapolis.

Click to expand...

what makes you think the feds will do anything good with the extra taxes on fuel ? government has to stop invading other countries, cut military spending and reinvest that money for alternative energy sources.
Tax the SUVs, trucks, and luxury sedans that get poor fuel economy , not punish everybody by raising the gas tax.

Dimitri16V said:

what makes you think the feds will do anything good with the extra taxes on fuel ? government has to stop invading other countries, cut military spending and reinvest that money for alternative energy sources.
Tax the SUVs, trucks, and luxury sedans that get poor fuel economy , not punish everybody by raising the gas tax.

Click to expand...

Not that I disagree, but in the interest of not letting the subject veer into a political- and foreign policy debate, let's not tread in this direction in this thread, please.

DPM said:

Dave, do you know anything about the 6-speed units in the Tiguan? Is the auto an Aisin?

Click to expand...

6-speed DSGs so-advertised will be similar to the ones installed on the Golf R32 and Passat R36. As far as I know, the slushbox automatic is supplied by the same supplier as installed in other contemporary models.

I still am wondering if the Feds don't have more to do with us not getting the very efficient smaller TDI's than we know. The dealer I bought my '06 DSG from tried his best to sell me a 2.5 pkg2 gasser for a VERY competive price. Said they have to sell 1 gas model in the US for every TDI they sell..If that's true ?? then it doesn't pay for them to try and bring a Polo over and sell a million of them if this rule applies. Anyone know this for sure??

WiscVWnut said:

The dealer I bought my '06 DSG from tried his best to sell me a 2.5 pkg2 gasser for a VERY competive price. Said they have to sell 1 gas model in the US for every TDI they sell..If that's true ??

Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind if they sold me a TDI and threw in a gasser as an option

It is sort of true. The manufacturers have some caps on the emissions the entire fleet they sell are allowed to emit. For some reasons, diesels weigh heavily in this equation. As a result, under the old emissions rules there was a ratio of diesel/non-diesel cars VWoA had to maintain. Apparently, with the new diesel emissions rules, this won't be an issue in the future.

This is exactly what I was talking about before... I agree! The 2008 estimates are far off (below) what you will get. The 2006 estimates were close but still a little conservative for the TDI's. The 2008 ratings use a new system and are far harder.

Erdrick said:

I think a big key that people are forgetting is that the EPA ratings changed for 2008. They have also listed a lot of older vehicles with this new rating system. TDIs have always gotten better than EPA in most cases, under the old EPA rating system. With the new ratings, which show almost every car as getting less FE than the previous rating system, the TDIs will shine even more.

People with Priuses will feel better when they are actually able to meet their 2008 vehicle's EPA estimates, and 2008 TDI owners will be delighted to blow away their car's EPA estimates! Not that I am biased to either side, as I drive both. Well, older models anyways... Oh, and one isn't a Prius, but the Lexus 400h.

Click to expand...

tdisedanman said:

The 07 DSG model will have a 7 speed trans thus getting higher mileage. The VW site says 40 city and 50s hwy( I am not sure of the manual trans). My wifes 05 Passat with the TDI and automatic averages about 33 in combined driving. On the hwy, with 4 people, loaded with luggage and cruising speeds better than 70, I got something like 44 MPG. Her car has the 2.0 engine with less refinement than the new Jetta. I don't think you will see a fuel economy reduction at all!

Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet that VW are using imperial gallons to quote the mileage figures. Mid-50s for the A5 Jetta is about right and the Canadian car mags have been saying "about the same mileage as the previous model but more power".

MrMopar said:

.......... I honestly think the new CR engines will easily break 50 MPG highway numbers on a routine basis.

Click to expand...

I agree.

10then34 said:

It is sort of true. The manufacturers have some caps on the emissions the entire fleet they sell are allowed to emit. For some reasons, diesels weigh heavily in this equation. As a result, under the old emissions rules there was a ratio of diesel/non-diesel cars VWoA had to maintain. Apparently, with the new diesel emissions rules, this won't be an issue in the future.

Click to expand...

If this is true that this won't be an issue with the clean diesels, why in the heck doesn't VW bring in a 3cylinder TDI getting 70+ mpg (US) and test the market? I'm still cynical enough to believe that the EPA will penalize these somehow to keep out the very high milage vehicles for tax reasons.
Look at the Smart car that is coming in soon, it only comes with the larger gas engine and is rated at 39mpg hwy! And this thing only weighs around 2000lbs...So it can't just be that the Polo etc are too small that they won't let them in.?

Here's a guy VW should do an ad around

DickSilver said:

We live in South Africa part of the year and Kentucky the other part. In Kentucky we are saddled with an overly-thirsty 2004 Passat wagon (32 mpg long-term with Tiptronic), but in South Africa we drive a 2004 Touran 1.9 TDI 6-speed that gets 35 mpg city, 40 mpg hiway, and has more usable room and a higher, more comfortable seating position.

Click to expand...

Like I said, there's an ad easily made. How many minivan owners would trade in their gas hogs if they were able to get a reliable high-mileage equivalent?

We had a bunch of visitors to my place of work this week from England and they told me that a TON of diesel cars are available over there from just about anyone - what I noticed was that in almost all of them they are 1.9's - does VW own all the patents and thus are collecting on all of these manufacturer's making them ? That would explain why no one is bringing them over here.

No, the various 1.9s aren't all VWs. Infact, most manufacturers are downsizing from the older 1.9 or 2.0 designs and going to smaller (and lighter, yet with the same HP) 1.4 and 1.6l units...

Not to sound skeptical of some peoples dreams, but anyone that thinks that a vehicle with a 5% larger displacement, and 20% higher tq and hp will get better fuel milage just because of a new technology is, well, dreaming.

Why then is the CR keeping the uber high pressures... for S&G's?.. no! they need that fine spray pattern.. That exhaust treatment.. how does that work... ya.. it injects fuel to create the temps needed to burn it off.

Truth will be in the #'s

Oh yea.. and the A5 chassis just about removes any chance of ever getting back to A4 fuel figures..

WiscVWnut said:

If this is true that this won't be an issue with the clean diesels, why in the heck doesn't VW bring in a 3cylinder TDI getting 70+ mpg (US) and test the market? I'm still cynical enough to believe that the EPA will penalize these somehow to keep out the very high milage vehicles for tax reasons.
Look at the Smart car that is coming in soon, it only comes with the larger gas engine and is rated at 39mpg hwy! And this thing only weighs around 2000lbs...So it can't just be that the Polo etc are too small that they won't let them in.?

Click to expand...

Because the vast majority of Americans would never consider such a car.

Drink some "get real" Kool-Aide for a second:

People want:
-Horsepower
-0 to 60 times in under 6 seconds
-Towering vehicles so the soccer mom's can "Feel safer" despite the increased risk of a fatal accident or roll-over which that brings
-A cheap car for less than $10,000 or even $15,000
-A vehicle that gets at most an extra 5 mpg is a BIG deal to most Americans and they would happily trade-in their current car for the next 36-48 months for one...then trade-again!

Unless you are selling 300,000 cars a year to rental car companies with low cost powertrains ($1000-V8 vs a diesels of approx VW/MB $2000-$5000) How do you expect to compete with that?

If you want a car that gets 70 MPG it can be done...without ANY problem and still meet current emissions using the newest diesel engines. However the car WILL NOT cost $15,000 due to the extensive use of aluminum, plastics, and other weight saving components that are extremely expensive to produce. Steel structures are being produced using high tensile strength steel in order to utilize thinner lower grade steel in parts of the frame that do not require the higher strength, in other words put the strength where it's needed most without needlessly increasing weight and material cost. Even then you have additional processes that now need to be integrated into production...net result an increase in production costs in order to save 100#.

Oh, did I mention the Dollar to Euro conversion? Lucky for us we have teh Puebla Mexico plant and the Huntsville, AL. Mercedes plants

DB

Ol'Rattler said:

The 2008 diesel Jetta is not listed yet. At least VW is smart enough not to make one of those ridiculous "flex fuel" vehicles..................

The big 3 must have "helped" Car and Driver "estimate" the 08 Jetta's milage. 31/39 seems ridicuously low.

Click to expand...

Actually the FFV option has worked really great for the big three. Scammed the American public but allowed the big three to scam the CAFE standards. For each FFV car they produce they get a CAFE credit to use towards the gas guzzlers.

I've got a link for a govt study that shows this.

VW should have designed a TDI that could use bioD and lobbied congress to include BioD as a FFV.

WiscVWnut said:

Also, Washington is for sure not going to let anything into this country that might shoot a hole in their road taxes. It's going to take someone like a Ron Paul in office to ever let us see a 70 mpg Polo or something like that..

Click to expand...

He will be getting my vote. But I don't think that he will have the pull to make congress allow high MPG diesel import cars.

Dunno513 said:

Not to sound skeptical of some peoples dreams, but anyone that thinks that a vehicle with a 5% larger displacement, and 20% higher tq and hp will get better fuel milage just because of a new technology is, well, dreaming.

..

Click to expand...

read up on Honda r18 engine. 1.8l engine that gets the MPG of a 1.5l and the power of a 2.0l by the use of technology with the i-vtec, two stage intake, and friction reducing technology.

brucetmoose said:

- what I noticed was that in almost all of them they are 1.9's - does VW own all the patents and thus are collecting on all of these manufacturer's making them ?

Click to expand...

One of the reasons for the abundance of 1.9l engines is the tax structure in germany and italy. In germany, your annual vehicle registration tax is calculated by engine displacement. This creates pressue to create small displacement engines. In italy, a car over 2.0l displacement has to pay 'luxury tax'. Now, that wouldn't be a problem in and by itself. The problem is that payors or 'luxury tax' believed to be at a higher risk of being audited by the tax authorities, which given the national sport (tax-evasion) is something to avoid.

03_01_TDI said:

read up on Honda r18 engine. 1.8l engine that gets the MPG of a 1.5l and the power of a 2.0l by the use of technology with the i-vtec, two stage intake, and friction reducing technology.

Click to expand...

Thats great .. but this engine shares all the same basic functions of its predecessors, right down to it's 2 valves per cylinder. Gota tell ya.. not to many versions of a round wheel to invent here.

the common rail fuel system will be injecting fuel for three or more injection cycles. the pd engines was using two per cam rotation. this is per cylinder.

The vehicle price rules in this segment

I visited the VW stealership here in Canada and the salesman told me that they tried to make the case for Polo, but after they figured out the price it would be so close (if not equal) to Golfs' that they scrapped the idea. Now with the City line of Golfs and Jettas the case for Polo is even further out. They need to figure out how to cut the costs and lower the price before we can dream about these. Honda is having the same difficulty with the Fit-Civic combo.

Drivbiwire said:

Because the vast majority of Americans would never consider such a car.

Drink some "get real" Kool-Aide for a second:

People want:
-Horsepower
-0 to 60 times in under 6 seconds
-Towering vehicles so the soccer mom's can "Feel safer" despite the increased risk of a fatal accident or roll-over which that brings
-A cheap car for less than $10,000 or even $15,000
-A vehicle that gets at most an extra 5 mpg is a BIG deal to most Americans and they would happily trade-in their current car for the next 36-48 months for one...then trade-again!

Unless you are selling 300,000 cars a year to rental car companies with low cost powertrains ($1000-V8 vs a diesels of approx VW/MB $2000-$5000) How do you expect to compete with that?

If you want a car that gets 70 MPG it can be done...without ANY problem and still meet current emissions using the newest diesel engines. However the car WILL NOT cost $15,000 due to the extensive use of aluminum, plastics, and other weight saving components that are extremely expensive to produce. Steel structures are being produced using high tensile strength steel in order to utilize thinner lower grade steel in parts of the frame that do not require the higher strength, in other words put the strength where it's needed most without needlessly increasing weight and material cost. Even then you have additional processes that now need to be integrated into production...net result an increase in production costs in order to save 100#.

Oh, did I mention the Dollar to Euro conversion? Lucky for us we have teh Puebla Mexico plant and the Huntsville, AL. Mercedes plants

DB

Click to expand...

Ol'Rattler said:

The 2008 diesel Jetta is not listed yet. At least VW is smart enough not to make one of those ridiculous "flex fuel" vehicles..................
The big 3 must have "helped" Car and Driver "estimate" the 08 Jetta's milage. 31/39 seems ridicuously low.

Click to expand...

1) Nor will it be listed. There will not be a 2008 Jetta diesel. It has been delayed until late summer '08, by which point it will likely be released as an '09.

2) Not so ridiculously low. Keep in mind that the A5 Jetta weighs nearly as much as a B5.5 Passat; that the new 2.0 engine will put out 140 hp vs the Passat's 134, and 236 lb-ft vs the Passat's 247, and the Passat was rated at 38 mpg highway under the old EPA rules (although Canada rated it at 42 which was more realistic and eminently achievable, in fact I could make about 44 on a road trip). So likely under the new rules, 39 will be close, and 42-45 will likely be realistic. Which is just about what the 100 hp PD gets in the A5 Jetta.

And Merry Christmas folks! Perhaps Santa can bring us one for Christmas 2008!

It's interesting to read how everyone's trying to convince themselves that the C&D mileage numbers are too low. If you dig around here you'll find plenty of threads where A5 drivers (especially DSG drivers) are getting well under 40 MPG.

My A5 is far from broken in (less than 10K on it) and typically gets about 40 MPG. That's in mixed driving, and cruising at 80 on the highway most of the time. In similar driving my A4 would get 44-46, but that car certainly is broken in, and has lots of mods.

Is it true that there may not be any manual transmission TDIs in '09? That would be too bad.

the dsg is a manual transmission. just has a computer do the shifting. my a5 gets 43.3 or better no matter how hard its driven. also interstate driven 95% of the time.

Sorry, no matter what the technology if it doesn't have a clutch pedal I'm not thinking it's a manual. If it shifts by itself it's not a manual. Manual means my hand does the shifting, not a computer. I understand your point, but from a user standpoint it's an automatic.

IndigoBlueWagon said:

Sorry, no matter what the technology if it doesn't have a clutch pedal I'm not thinking it's a manual. If it shifts by itself it's not a manual. Manual means my hand does the shifting, not a computer. I understand your point, but from a user standpoint it's an automatic.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Automatic refers to how it's shifted, not the underlying technology.

If it doesn't have three pedals (or 4 depending on where the e-brake is), it's an auto

well you cant fix stupid.

wrenchman30 said:

well you cant fix stupid.

Click to expand...

To whom is that directed?