www.tdiclub.com

Economy - Longevity - Performance
The #1 Source of TDI Information on the Web!
Forums Articles Links Meets
Orders TDI Club Cards TDIFest 2016 Gone, but not forgotten VAG-Com List Unit Conversions TDIClub Chat Thank You




Go Back   TDIClub Forums > TDI Model Specific Discussions Areas > VW MKVI-A6 Golf family including Jetta SportWagen (~ 2010-2014)

VW MKVI-A6 Golf family including Jetta SportWagen (~ 2010-2014) Discussions area for A6/MkVI (2010-2014) Golf and Golf Wagons (Jetta Sportwagon in the USA).

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 15th, 2010, 01:01   #1
Fixmy59bug
 
Fixmy59bug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Henderson, NV
Fuel Economy: Check my Fuelly Tag for most up-to-date numbers
Default Test drove three different TDI's (and one gasser) back to back to back to back

Sit back and get ready to do some reading. I know how to type a lot.

Today while I was waiting for a friend to show up at my work, I decided to do something to kill some time. So I got the keys for 4 cars and took them all for a test drive.

2011 CC 2.0T DSG R-Line - I have always been in love with the outside of the car and I knew (or so I thought I knew) there was no way this car could disappoint me. I gotta say, I was wrong. Looking at the seats, they appear to be true bucket seats by every definition of the word. They look like they will sit nice and low in the car and be very supportive. Well, Supportive they were. But it felt like I was sitting so high in the car I could stick my head out of the top of the car (if it had a sunroof). Yes, I checked to make sure the seat was all the way down. Several times. Also, the car had some pretty serious blind spots (both in front and rear). I know, How can a car have a blind spot in the front. Right? I have never encountered something like this either. Considering how high up I was sitting, the rear view mirror was blocking a pretty serious chunk of real estate. I had to bend forward to get a view under the mirror a couple times. Finally, Performance. Maybe I have been spoiled by the torque of the diesel, but the acceleration of the 2.0T gas motor seemed ...... well .... lackluster comparitively speaking. It just didn't suck me back into the seat like my TDI does. There was no feeling of strong acceleration. Honestly, after driving my TDI for almost a year I really don't think I could be happy day in and day out if I had to go from the Diesel to the CC 2.0T

2010 Jetta TDI Sedan DSG - Honestly, absolutely no different than my car. What can I say. Same car, two years newer.

2011 Jetta TDI Sportwagen DSG - Surprisingly it drove and felt exactly the same as the Jetta Sedan, just with more "greenhouse" behind me. I liked the fact that it was much easier to see out of the area where the C pillars would be on the sedan. I have always thought that the C pillar area of the sedan was a (minor) inconvenience when backing up into my parking spot (or garage). The Sportwagen would make that easier (not that it is hard in my sedan). What surprised me about the Sportwagen is the fact that it did not seem to have a higher center of gravity like I was expecting. There was no more roll in the turns than my sedan has. What WAS wierd though, I KNOW for a fact that I was able to hear the turbo on this sucker. I confirmed it about 20 times, each time easily repeatable. Radio off, Windows down did not increase the volume of the song, Only from a dead stop. Step on the gas and about 1800 RPM's - 2200 RPM's I cold hear a faint whine. It sounded like it was coming from right in front of the dashboard / firewall area (right where the turbo is). It surprised and enticed me. I get back in my car and try to duplicate the siren song, and nothing.

2011 2 Door Golf TDI 6 Speed - Wow. This car surprised me. I went into it knowing that I would stall it atleast once. After all, The TDI manual is impossible to drive without stalling, Right? That seems to be the general consensus. LOL. Wrong. I think someone's wife just can't drive a stick, even after 6 months of practice. I never stalled it once, and even a couple times I tried by not using any throttle to start moving. Once moving, the manual Golf seemed to accelerate better than the DSG Jetta. The two door has a wider door so there is more entry and exit room (which a big guy like me could really use). This car is EXACTLY what I would have bought if I had more of a choice with only 3 exceptions. This golf had no sunroof (never had one, wanted one), No Leather (agan, same story), and was Shark Blue (think baby blue, not big on light blues). Everything else was perfect (Xenons, 6 speed manual, 2 Door, 17" Portos, Dynaudio). Add in the Sunroof, Leather, and paint it Blue Graphite and I might have been filing for another Alternative Fuel Vehicle Tax credit.
__________________

Last edited by Fixmy59bug; August 15th, 2010 at 01:05.
Fixmy59bug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 01:53   #2
den9
Veteran Member
 
den9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: doylestown pa
TDI(s): 04 Jetta
Default

what made you think you would stall on a TDI, they have so much torque its the easiest thing to learn on, you can shift 1,2 and 3 possibly 4 without any gas pedal without stalling.

i dont know what you mean, i think the 2.0T has alot more acceleration than the TDI, its about 2 seconds faster 0-60

Last edited by den9; August 15th, 2010 at 01:55.
den9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 02:20   #3
Fixmy59bug
 
Fixmy59bug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Henderson, NV
Fuel Economy: Check my Fuelly Tag for most up-to-date numbers
Default

I know. There have been many threads about people complaining about constantly stalling the car becase of the sensitivity of the ECU.

More than 20 people in one thread about it here:

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=288530

More here:

http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=289837

And here:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...light=stalling

And that's after just a 2 minute search. I know I have read more. This thread was more of a review than anything. But I just had to add the jab about all those complaining about stalling it. I really don't see what the problem is.

As far as the 2.0T having more acceleration, It may be so, it just doesn't feel like it. You can tell me that a ferrari accelerates from 0 - 100 in 3.2 seconds, but if it feels like it can be outran by a Hyundai it's gonna be a hard sell. I wanna feel the power brotha! LOL.

Then again, Coming from an 88 Chevy Corsica, 73 Cadillac Coupe Deville, 1988 Chevy Suburban, and a 2000 Jetta 2.0, my butt dyno may need to be adjusted. It was my impressions though.
__________________
Fixmy59bug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 04:36   #4
MPBsr
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NJ
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by den9 View Post
what made you think you would stall on a TDI, they have so much torque its the easiest thing to learn on, you can shift 1,2 and 3 possibly 4 without any gas pedal without stalling.

i dont know what you mean, i think the 2.0T has alot more acceleration than the TDI, its about 2 seconds faster 0-60
Shame on you...LOL.

Go back and read your post. It's not a "gas" pedal.
MPBsr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 06:04   #5
steveditt
Newbie
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: hopewell junction
Default 2.0T Lackluster ?

We have a 2.0 T 2010 Passat wagon and found it very hard to believe you found the 2.0 lackluster compared to the TDI. We did a lot of comparing before deciding on the Passat over the Sports wagon considering our driving needs and the cost difference between the two vehicles we decided on the Passat. We average 31 mpg and have gotten 36 H.W depending on your driving habits, but if you put it in sports mode that 2.0 T rocks. Iíve owned VW diesels since 81 and they do have the torque but the 2.0 T has balls!
steveditt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 06:10   #6
PaulGiz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by den9 View Post
what made you think you would stall on a TDI, they have so much torque its the easiest thing to learn on, you can shift 1,2 and 3 possibly 4 without any gas pedal without stalling.

i dont know what you mean, i think the 2.0T has alot more acceleration than the TDI, its about 2 seconds faster 0-60

1. On a TDI the computer shuts off the car at ~750 rpm. On most cars you can add a little throttle, let the clutch up until it starts to catch, then add throttle and go. The problem is, at the point the clutch starts to catch, the revs drop. If they drop 1 rev below the computer-defined floor, you stall.

Easy enough to relearn your launch, adding throttle and clutch simultaneously, but the TDIs can be stalled easily.

2. 0-60 times are a nice way to compare similar vehicles, but by no means demonstrate real-world drivability.

Good 0-60 times require good power and minimum shifts. You rev the engine to 3500 or 4000 rpm, dump the clutch (or release the brake on an auto) and bang to the red line 2 or 3 times.

My wife's old Civic Si did a time of around 6 or 7 seconds in all the magazines. It had an 8000 rpm redline and made no power at all under 4500 rpm. Power band of 3500 rpm and close-ratio box.

If you were playing boy racer and kept the revs above 4000, boy that car was fast. And noisy and tiring to drive. If you drove normally, shifting at ~3500 rpm, then punching the gas gave you nothing. You needed one or two downshifts before you'd pick up speed in a smart manner. Even upgrades on the interstate required a downshift.

The Tdi does a time of around 10 seconds in the magazines. It has a 5100 rpm redline, but just makes noise above 4200 or so. Although the torque is there at 1700 rpm, the power really starts near 3000. So your power band is under 1500 rpm and wide ratio box.

Basically in a drag race the thing runs out of steam within 1500 rpm, gets banged down below the power band (wide ratio box), pulls to the band well, but not hard, and then runs quickly out of steam. Twice.

Also--a diesel revs more slowly than a gasser--higher compression, heavier flywheel and balancers.

The Tdi is totally unsuited for the 0-60 world. However with 236 pound feet of torque available almost from idle, it has real-world punch. It is not a fast car, but it never feels slow. What I like is that I can drive hard and still get 38+ mpg. If I drive like a spinster, I get close to 50.

Take that Si, Evo, WRX etc.

P
PaulGiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 06:44   #7
Mr. Timewise
Veteran Member
 
Mr. Timewise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hawthorn Woods, ILLINOIS, USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixmy59bug View Post
2011 CC...But it felt like I was sitting so high in the car I could stick my head out of the top of the car... Also, the car had some pretty serious blind spots (both in front and rear). ...Considering how high up I was sitting, the rear view mirror was blocking a pretty serious chunk of real estate. I had to bend forward to get a view under the mirror...
I'm 6' 6" and I agree 100%. Super looking car, but I'd be dangerous on the road if I were to drive it because I couldn't see any car coming from the right as I stop at an intersection.

I had to move the mirror on my Jetta closer to the head liner for the same reason. At least the Jetta allows me to seriously lower the seat. And move it back for my longer legs. I do wish the steering wheel would move backwards another inch or two.
__________________
2010 Jetta SE 2.5L Tiptronic Salsa Red | 9W7 Bluetooth | RNS-510 | Homelink sun visor | Extendable passenger's sun visor | MFSW w/ paddle shifters | Hi-line SWCM | Hi-Line MFD+ cluster | Auto-dimming mirror w/ compass | Trunk release switch in grab handle | Silver lens tail lights | Front & Rear door warning/puddle lights | Walnut interior trim
Mr. Timewise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 06:57   #8
DriverFoundNC
Veteran Member
 
DriverFoundNC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Cary, NC
Default

I had an '07 Passat wagon...found I was able to get low enough in the car by jacking the seat all the way down. I'm 6 feet tall. And found early on that somehow the car had nasty blind spots at the A pillars. They're seriously wide. I liked the 2.0T engine but had to leg it to get the serious pull. Took a lot of revving to get it, but when I really stood on the gas it was a pretty darn quick car. But despite having the rear end aligned four times in three years, it was hell on back tires...and the interior creaked and rattled which I found very disappointing. Here's hoping my JSW isn't as rattle prone inside.
__________________

Current oil hammers: 2010 JSW - 2005 Golf TDI
Previous oil hammers: 2004 Passat TDI - 1991 300D 2.5 - 1983 240D - 1981 Peugeot 504D
DriverFoundNC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 14:49   #9
saucer
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: AVL NC
Default

and the bickering over stalls comes to another thread.....

I don't know what's wrong with these cars, but if read one more person telling someone to "learn how to drive" I'm gonna start typing in CAPS

I've driven 5 different manuals over 15 years and have never popped the clutch like I do in my TDI. Granted, I'm getting better, but there is either some inconsistency in these cars or some people in here are MT prodigies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by den9 View Post
what made you think you would stall on a TDI, they have so much torque its the easiest thing to learn on, you can shift 1,2 and 3 possibly 4 without any gas pedal without stalling.
Sorry, but this is nothing short of impossible in my car. I have tried this on two separate occasions in a flat parking lot in my house and killed it every time. If I'm on the slightest of hills in traffic, I have to nearly floor it to engage from a dead stop. I'm asking my dealer about this when I head in for my courtesy checkup soon...
saucer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 15:26   #10
Fixmy59bug
 
Fixmy59bug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Henderson, NV
Fuel Economy: Check my Fuelly Tag for most up-to-date numbers
Default

MPBsr, Did I say "gas" pedal? Wow, One trip in a gasser and already I have been corrupted after a year of the TDI life. I'll have to watch my choice of words. LOL. Oh wait, you weren't talking to me. But I was just as guilty.

Steve, Correction about the 2.0T below. Maybe the CC just wasn't in the mood to be flogged. Maybe the DSG in the CC made it react differently than the 6 speed manual in the GTI reviewed below. I still remain firm on the overall CC review though. Not for me as much as I had hoped.

Driver, Believe me, I made sure I had the seat all the way down. I checked several times. I know the seats are different in the CC vs the regular Passat as is the much lower roofline. I think that may have been a major contributing factor in my review.

And I have a modification to my reviews....

I went back today and drove the same JSW, Golf, and added a 2011 2.0T GTI into the mix.

UKUK has requested specific information regarding road noise. So I took all 3 cars on the same exact trip which consisted of black tar asphalt, crossing railroad tracks, 2 miles of freeway, regular patched road, and dirt road (Yeah, New car sales dept loved me taking 3 new cars down a dirt road). I did not take my own car down this dirt road, but everything else was duplicated in my own car for comparison purpses. All 3 cars were driven in an identical fashion. Windows up, radio off, A/C on, Recirculate on, and a fan speed of 2. I wanted to make sure there was no variable that would make a significant difference.

In a rating of 1 - 4 for road noise, I would say Jetta Sedan (mine), Golf, JSW, GTI.

My Jetta is completely stock for all intents and purposes of comparing road noise. OEM 16" Bioline wheels with Hankook tires. It was far and away the quietest. On the black asphalt and regular patched road, the clicking of my DSG paddles was louder than any road noise. Of course, patches on the road would make a little bit of noise, but that is to be expected. On a (uncertified) road noise test level of 1 - 10 (1 being absolutely deafening silence, 10 being all windows down radio up kinda noise), I believe my Jetta sedan would rate a 2.

The Golf TDI was marginally louder But I don't think it was road noise. I think it was more diesel noise because I use B7 biodiesel and the new golf was running regular ol D2. Maybe the 17" portos and 45 series tire (as compared to my 16" wheels and 55 series tires) attributed to the additional road noise. On the same scale of 1 - 10, I would rate the Golf a 2.5 (maybe a solid 3).

The JSW made a little more road noise than the Golf or Jetta sedan, but it wasn't a louder volume, it was a lower frequency. More bass to the road noise. The lower frequency is the only thing that made it more noticable. I would rate the JSW at no more than a 3. The volume of road noise was at about a 2.5 (same as the Golf) but the frequency was at an annoyance of a 3.5 rounding the whole thing out to a solid 3.

The GTI was far and away the funnest car I have driven in a while. The 2.0T in this car was shining really bright. The exhaust note at WOT was intoxicating and made it hard to keep my foot out of it. At the end of the freeway onramp I realized I was doing 95 and had to let off the gas. In the GTI, the 2.0T could really move. However, with the sportier suspension and even lower series tire, it would make even more road noise. All together road noise was about a 4 - 4.5 But the fun of the car made it a moot point. You should know what you are getting into when you get the GTI package. With this car I spent more time on the freeway just because it was so much fun. I would LOVE to have a new GTI, but I would get so many speeding tickets it would hurt. LOL.
__________________
Fixmy59bug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 17:47   #11
Pelican18TQA4
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Default

I agree, the 2.0T in stock form feels a little lackluster initially compared to the new TDIs. However, it's really only initially because the 2.0T lacks the low-end torque punch that the TDI has. The powerband on the 2.0T is much more linear and the torque plateau wider so you don't get the punch of the TDI, but the 2.0T is smoothly, quickly, and consistently building horsepower. Compared to a stock 2.0T, I prefer the torque punch of the TDI. However, a 2.0T with a stage 1 tune is unbelievably torquey and beats the TDI hands down. Of course, it'll also beat the TDI to the fueling station too
__________________
"I interviewed the late Steve Yokich, then UAW president, almost ten years ago. When I suggested that Detriot might be putting too many eggs in one basket with its utter devotion to SUVs at the expense of passenger car development and asked if the union might take a position in favor of more economical cars, he started screaming at me." -Jamie Kitman, Automobile
Pelican18TQA4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 18:44   #12
nhdoc
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Nashua, NH
Default

Someone posted that the latest reflash of the ECU solves the stalling issue on the stick TDI so it is likely that the 2011 model you drove is already upgraded with the new software...just FYI.
nhdoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 22:53   #13
den9
Veteran Member
 
den9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: doylestown pa
TDI(s): 04 Jetta
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixmy59bug View Post
As far as the 2.0T having more acceleration, It may be so, it just doesn't feel like it. You can tell me that a ferrari accelerates from 0 - 100 in 3.2 seconds, but if it feels like it can be outran by a Hyundai it's gonna be a hard sell.
no it wont, theres alot more to a ferrari than 0-60, compared to a 30k dollar car that might be close in 0-60 times.

either way i dont think any hyundai will feel like it can outrun a ferrari any day.



i didnt realize the new tdi's shut off under 750rpm, i usually keep my rpms at 1k steadily until im 3/4 off the clutch
den9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2010, 06:48   #14
Sundowner
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NJ
TDI(s): None yet
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixmy59bug View Post

As far as the 2.0T having more acceleration, It may be so, it just doesn't feel like it. You can tell me that a ferrari accelerates from 0 - 100 in 3.2 seconds, but if it feels like it can be outran by a Hyundai it's gonna be a hard sell. I wanna feel the power brotha! LOL.
the TDI and 2.0T are very different engines and need to be driven differently.
I'm farmilar with both engines (my wife has an older 2.0T A3) and the A3 is MUCH faster than the TDI, and if you take the time to learn how how to tap into its torquew curve, you'll feel that.

FWIW, the newer valve lift 2.0T's in the Audi's actually make more torque than our TDI motors. A new A4 is hideously fun to romp around, and returns good mpg.
Sundowner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 16th, 2010, 07:12   #15
PaulGiz
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Rhode Island
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundowner View Post
...FWIW, the newer valve lift 2.0T's in the Audi's actually make more torque than our TDI motors. A new A4 is hideously fun to romp around, and returns good mpg.
I think many of us here at the TDI forum would love a new A4 Avant.
Let's see, trade-in my 2010 JSW, tax & title--I'd need about $20K to pull it off.
Oh, wait!!! I don't have $20K!!!
Donations can be sent to me via PayPal
P.
PaulGiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:57.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright - TDIClub Online LTD - 2017
Contact Us | Privacy Statement | Forum Rules | Disclaimer
TDIClub Online Ltd (TDIClub.com) is not affiliated with the VWoA or VWAG and is supported by contributions from viewers like you.
© 1996 - 2017, All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.18797 seconds with 10 queries
[Output: 137.16 Kb. compressed to 115.87 Kb. by saving 21.29 Kb. (15.52%)]