http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-volkswagen-jetta-18t-first-drive-review
Word on the Tex is that they are arriving at dealers now.
Word on the Tex is that they are arriving at dealers now.
Car and Driver "First Drive" of 1.8t Jetta.
- Thread starter DuckRyder
- Start date
- Status
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Not to mention the 2013 car is heavier.
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Not to mention the 2013 car is heavier.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
How much bigger/heavier is the car?
170hp is more than plenty, I'd guess it is a marketing thing do the engine doesn't compete someplace. Could also be a smaller, lower inertia turbo, which IMO is the best (have it in my Saab and there is zero lag).
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
How much bigger/heavier is the car?
170hp is more than plenty, I'd guess it is a marketing thing do the engine doesn't compete someplace. Could also be a smaller, lower inertia turbo, which IMO is the best (have it in my Saab and there is zero lag).
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Jetta=junka $16000 for a manual with nothing to over 30000 in a hurry.
Just wait till the turbo or the famous injectors go out just past warranty.
Famous VW quality. 3 year 36 and 5 -60 power train.
Wait till the famous 100000 mile "tuneup".
Not in my lifetime.....
Just wait till the turbo or the famous injectors go out just past warranty.
Famous VW quality. 3 year 36 and 5 -60 power train.
Wait till the famous 100000 mile "tuneup".
Not in my lifetime.....
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Originally Posted By: victorkoga
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Exactly it is just a smaller version of the 2013.5 GLI motor. Nothing at all other than the name in common with the old motor.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Exactly it is just a smaller version of the 2013.5 GLI motor. Nothing at all other than the name in common with the old motor.
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
How much bigger/heavier is the car?
170hp is more than plenty, I'd guess it is a marketing thing do the engine doesn't compete someplace. Could also be a smaller, lower inertia turbo, which IMO is the best (have it in my Saab and there is zero lag).
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Yep. The old 1.8T (AGU engine) can go up to 350 DIN hp on stock block/head and still run troublefree and reliable.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
How much bigger/heavier is the car?
170hp is more than plenty, I'd guess it is a marketing thing do the engine doesn't compete someplace. Could also be a smaller, lower inertia turbo, which IMO is the best (have it in my Saab and there is zero lag).
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Yep. The old 1.8T (AGU engine) can go up to 350 DIN hp on stock block/head and still run troublefree and reliable.
Originally Posted By: victorkoga
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo.
I wasn't suggesting it was the same engine. I was just pointing out that from an output perspective, there has been little improvement during those 12 years.
Quote:
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Pretty much any turbo engine from the factory is tuned low for longevity and smooth torque curve. I'm sure this new 1.8 is no different.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo.
I wasn't suggesting it was the same engine. I was just pointing out that from an output perspective, there has been little improvement during those 12 years.
Quote:
Also wasn't the old 1.8t way undertuned (perhaps to protect vr6 sales), and could make a LOT more HP?
Pretty much any turbo engine from the factory is tuned low for longevity and smooth torque curve. I'm sure this new 1.8 is no different.
Yes, bought a 1988 GTI with piston slap and VW wouldn't do a thing about it. I will never ever consider buying another VW. Traded it for a Honda and haven't looked back.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
and since the 'all new' US-fitted style now they have a really cheap interior comp'd to previous generations.
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
and since the 'all new' US-fitted style now they have a really cheap interior comp'd to previous generations.
Also, the new 1.8T is a completely different engine design than the old sludge-prone one.
JHZR2
Staff member
Originally Posted By: victorkoga
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Hopefully. We will see with the final MPG numbers and the lag characteristic. We have a 2.5 and while not my optimal engine (wanted a TDI but they didnt offer one when we were in the market), it does make good torque down low and is a good round-town engine, if too big and overly powerful.
I really cant complain about our 2.5 thus far. I did wish that they had put a 6 sp in the rabbit - it doesnt have a good highway gear. But it likes to rev low and put out torque, so around town it cant be beat if driven right!
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
Its a completely different engine only commonality is displacement and a turbo. The new 1.8 is replacing the 2.5 and is a major step up.
Hopefully. We will see with the final MPG numbers and the lag characteristic. We have a 2.5 and while not my optimal engine (wanted a TDI but they didnt offer one when we were in the market), it does make good torque down low and is a good round-town engine, if too big and overly powerful.
I really cant complain about our 2.5 thus far. I did wish that they had put a 6 sp in the rabbit - it doesnt have a good highway gear. But it likes to rev low and put out torque, so around town it cant be beat if driven right!
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
10 mpg increase highway, 7 combined.
Not to mention the '14 Jetta is 10" longer, 1.7" wider, but only 70 lbs heavier.
I guess I'm generally more optimistic, but I'd say that's all pretty striking progress.
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
10 mpg increase highway, 7 combined.
Not to mention the '14 Jetta is 10" longer, 1.7" wider, but only 70 lbs heavier.
I guess I'm generally more optimistic, but I'd say that's all pretty striking progress.
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
If you take a look at 2001 gas 4-cylinder Jettas on Fuelly, of which there are 37, the range is 21-32 mpg average. As far as I can tell, there are 2 engines represented, the 1.8T and the two-point-slow. Even if we say that the upper half of the range represents the 1.8T (which is doubtful), the EPA estimates for the new engine are better.
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
If you take a look at 2001 gas 4-cylinder Jettas on Fuelly, of which there are 37, the range is 21-32 mpg average. As far as I can tell, there are 2 engines represented, the 1.8T and the two-point-slow. Even if we say that the upper half of the range represents the 1.8T (which is doubtful), the EPA estimates for the new engine are better.
Originally Posted By: NateDN10
Even if we say that the upper half of the range represents the 1.8T (which is doubtful), the EPA estimates for the new engine are better.
And how does that contradict what I wrote above?
I did concur that the new figures are better.
Even if we say that the upper half of the range represents the 1.8T (which is doubtful), the EPA estimates for the new engine are better.
And how does that contradict what I wrote above?
I did concur that the new figures are better.
Regardless of fuel economy, they are just flat out bland. Not ugly, not gorgeous, just plain Jane boring to look at.
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
Talk about an apples and oranges comparison. If they stick this new 1.8 in an Audi it could very well be tuned to 220 hp, thereby putting your 2001 Audi to shame. Heck Ford's 1.6 ecoboost puts out nearly 200 hp, also putting your Audi to shame.
And then you go on to compare the 2014 Jetta's EPA ratings to what you achieved in your Audi. Those are non-comparable situations my friend. Your Audi's EPA highway rating, adjusted to the 2008 rating scheme, was 25. So if you were able to maintain 32, kudos to your hypermiling techniques. But you should then be able to achieve well over 40 in today's Jetta with your subdued driving style.
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Back in 2001, the VW 1.8T had 170hp. Fast forward to 2013, and it still has 170hp, although the torque is up by 18 lb-ft. The MPG numbers are only slightly better.
According to my sources that engine was rated 170 only in the Passat. It was never more than 150 in the Jetta. So there is a 20hp increase in this application and almost 30 ft-lb torque increase.
And slightly better fuel economy you say? 2001 Jetta: 20/22/26. 2014 Jetta: 25/29/36
I was speaking of the VAG 1.8T 170hp engine in general, not specific to any particular model. My 2001 A4 had it.
As for the fuel economy, my A4 would get 32 mpg on the hwy easily. And that was the AWD model that was heavier and suffered additional driveline-related mpg losses. A FWD Jetta with that engine could have done better. So yeah, I stand by my "slightly better" comment.
Talk about an apples and oranges comparison. If they stick this new 1.8 in an Audi it could very well be tuned to 220 hp, thereby putting your 2001 Audi to shame. Heck Ford's 1.6 ecoboost puts out nearly 200 hp, also putting your Audi to shame.
And then you go on to compare the 2014 Jetta's EPA ratings to what you achieved in your Audi. Those are non-comparable situations my friend. Your Audi's EPA highway rating, adjusted to the 2008 rating scheme, was 25. So if you were able to maintain 32, kudos to your hypermiling techniques. But you should then be able to achieve well over 40 in today's Jetta with your subdued driving style.
- Status
