Scott, that's exactly how my GTI feels. It feels stiff and solid
but kind of 'hollow' even compared to the (cheaper) Cooper.
.
VW PASSAT OPINIONS PLEASE
- Thread starter Smoky14
- Start date
- Status
Scott, that's exactly how my GTI feels. It feels stiff and solid
but kind of 'hollow' even compared to the (cheaper) Cooper.
.
i have a cpo 2013 vw passat s 2.5 five cylinder that i bought at 9k miles in 2014. it is still going strong at 105k miles. dealer serviced. i have posted a bit about it on bitog. timeless design, cloth seats, solid roof, real auto trans, roomy, great highway cruiser and surprisingly nimble in the suburbs. i may give it to my younger son who is moving from army to grad school in 2022. i’m reluctant to replace it with a newer 2.0tsi passat (i actually like the 2.5 that the automotive press illustrati panned). i am thinking of a jetta replacement, which has become almost as big. with a depreciated price and longer warranty cpo is the way to go. in short, upvote on a passat from me, especially a cpo simple base s model.
Funny!
Seriously, if you find the right dealer you can STILL get discounts on new VWs despite the current market.
Seriously, if you find the right dealer you can STILL get discounts on new VWs despite the current market.
- Joined
- May 5, 2018
- Messages
- 27,808
True...I threw out a deep discount and they said okay. Avoid the zero percent interest as that is where they nail you and the penalty for it isn't worth it.
The 2022 Jetta with the 1.5 T might be worth a look.
- Joined
- May 5, 2018
- Messages
- 27,808
How many miles on it?
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
It is basically based on Skoda Superb from that period that used PQ46.
The later US models are only equipped with a 4 cyl 2.0T, so keep that in mind.
Had a 2021 earlier this year for a week. So we got a pretty good idea of what it was like to own.
Car only had 8,000kms so about 5,000 miles when we started, so fairly new.
Overall it was "ok".
-Seat comfort wasn't amazing, nor was it the worst.
-Cargo area and rear seat area were pretty cavernous
-Felt slightly engaging to drive on winding highways
Only glaring issues we had were:
1) infotainment screen would randomly fail to work....just a black screen. We thought it could have been related to extreme heat, but it randomly happened in cool rainy weather too.
2) driving around town, the transmission struggled to find the correct gear. Only happened around a certain speed, but could be replicated easily.
After 2-3,000 kms, I was ready and willing to return it - read, nothing worth going out of you way for.
Compared to a late model Altima with AWD I rented, that thing was the antithesis of what I thought I was getting....we REALLY enjoyed that one!
There wasn't anything particularly GREAT about the Passat, nor was there anything terrible either (aside from what was mentioned above).
It was just a car that left you feeling indifferent about it....and for that reason I'd recommend it as a cheap commuter, nothing more.
Had a 2021 earlier this year for a week. So we got a pretty good idea of what it was like to own.
Car only had 8,000kms so about 5,000 miles when we started, so fairly new.
Overall it was "ok".
-Seat comfort wasn't amazing, nor was it the worst.
-Cargo area and rear seat area were pretty cavernous
-Felt slightly engaging to drive on winding highways
Only glaring issues we had were:
1) infotainment screen would randomly fail to work....just a black screen. We thought it could have been related to extreme heat, but it randomly happened in cool rainy weather too.
2) driving around town, the transmission struggled to find the correct gear. Only happened around a certain speed, but could be replicated easily.
After 2-3,000 kms, I was ready and willing to return it - read, nothing worth going out of you way for.
Compared to a late model Altima with AWD I rented, that thing was the antithesis of what I thought I was getting....we REALLY enjoyed that one!
There wasn't anything particularly GREAT about the Passat, nor was there anything terrible either (aside from what was mentioned above).
It was just a car that left you feeling indifferent about it....and for that reason I'd recommend it as a cheap commuter, nothing more.
For these two reasons alone, I think it's not really fair to compare your Passat to the current model offered.
Yours is (aside from the electrical issues) practically a fine-tuned sleeper.
Like the Passat from 2006 to 2010?
I looked up a 22 Passat.
- Spark Plugs every 4 years or 40K. Toyota does not require a spark plug service until 120K.
- Transmission Fluid every 80K. Toyota is lifetime fill and from what I have seen, it has been a non-issue on the passenger cars.
- Brake Flush every 3 years. Toyota does not require one.
- Sunroof drains every 2 years. Not required for Toyota's.
Don't forget the walnut blast service every 60-100k which seems to be needed on every EA888 motor.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
Oh, but you missed A LOT:
1. Spark plugs on Toyota are 60k in DI engines. VW is DI. Good luck changing in V6.
2. Transmission in VW and Toyota is the same, except, VW doesn’t have history of problematic transmissions like Toyota does.
3. I would be concerned that Toyota doesn’t make that recommendation! Toyota makes same recommendation about brake flush in Europe. I wonder what they are hiding from you? If you pass 3 years with brake fluid, regardless of vehicle manufacturer, you have an issue. By the way, VW uses DOT4 fluid, Toyota DOT3.
4. Sunroof drains are not required for Toyota. That is why Toyota charges replacement of sunroof in Sienna $5,800. You don’t need to maintain, but be ready to pay.
And to add:
Toyota in certain models now requires mandatory brake booster vacuum pump replacement every 120k. Part is $1,200 and then labor. It is issue they are having forever (guess how I know).
1) Not true. Only on the DI V6 models. The DI 4-cyls still carry a 120K service interval.
2) Again, not true. The 09G's had lots of valve body issues. The Toyota transmission have had wipe-spread issues aside from the first 1-2 years of the 6 and 8 speeds, and most of those were software, not hardware.
3) Brake fluid flushes with DOT3 are not a bad idea to do, but are not absolutely necessary. With DOT4 and DOT4LV, very different story.
4) No idea what you are talking about...
https://parts.lakelandtoyota.com/p/...-Booster-Vacuum-Pump/14760914/293000P011.html
it's listed for 120k service, not that anybody would bother lol
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
Well familiarize yourself with brake booster and master cylinder issues.
1. Ok, 120k. But you drive Toyota naturally aspirated engine. Absolutely nit worth it.
2. 6 speed transmission in VW and Toyota as well as 8 speed is THE SAME! They are both Aisin units. And Toyota, unlike VW, had issues with 8 speed, and both manufacturers had initially same issue on 6 speed.
3. DOT3 has to be change too. Absolutely unnecessary? How so considering low wet boiling point? DOT3 doesn’t attract moisture? It is still hygroscopic fluid. But even so, worth it over Toyota brakes (if one can call them that way). Comparing execution of brakes on VW and Toyota is like comparing F16 to Cessna 152.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
So I asked my friend whether he had on his Sienna soft, then hard brakes and so on. He said: “oh yeah, i had that.”
I was thinking, great I don’t need to disassemble vehicle to looks for cause. So, I asked what was it? “Nah, it didn’t bother me. I just drove like that. Great car though.”
I posted before he added that into his post. The brake booster is required for the V6 DI models, not the 4-cyl.
It has mostly been the hybrid models and the ABS actuators, not the booster.
??
Similar yes, identical - no.
Toyota disagrees with you. And so did GM and Ford when they specified DOT3. Brake systems are fairly well-sealed. DOT3 can benefit from changing but it is hardly imperative compared to DOT4 or DOT4 LV.
edyvw
$50 site donor 2026
1. Again, you drive VW Turbo engine. Big difference compared to Toyota 4cyl naturally aspirated engine.
2. Nope, Highlander had master cylinder issues, Sienna, Camry. I recently had to replace assembly on my Sienna. Hopefully won’t have to donut again, but I doubt.
3. Toyota doesn’t recommend a lot of stuff that are common sense. They are champions in shifting blame from issues they are guilty of to customers. But, whether Toyota disagrees with me or not they can’t disagree with chemical process laws. Brake fluid get moisture regardless how “sealed “ it is. And Toyota is not any kind of exception to the rule. One could argue that their flimsy cap on brake fluid reservoir is definitely not sealed well compared to VW one (which is same all European manufacturers use, so when you flush brakes you can use same adapter on all of them). Now, I still didn’t hear how is that DOT3 doesn’t have to be changed considering that it is hygroscopic fluid?
Still, even if I had to flush it yearly, it is worth it considering braking performance on VW’s compared to Toyota.
4. As for transmission fluid. Yes units are different bcs. vehicles are different. Same as ZF8 in Chrysler is different from ZF8 in BMW. But, there is NO such thing as lifetime fluid. Vehicle manufacturers say it is lifetime, transmission manufacturers don’t! VW here is fallowing what Aisin recommends.
1) VW is building a car to compete in the American midsize segment. If you want to be competitive, then your requirements for upkeep need to be competitive. But their's are not.
2) Stuff breaks. Just because you had to replace one doesn't mean it is a common issue.
3) Brake fluid is hydroscopic but there needs to be a way for the water to enter. Most modern systems are fairly well-sealed. Also, just because the fluid contains moisture does not mean it needs to be condemned. The boiling point may still be adequate for the anticipated use and the corrosion inhibitors could still be sufficient.
This article is a bit dated but the principles remain the same. The info is from the Big 3:
"BRAKE FLUID -- Ford does not recommend changing DOT 3 fluid or flushing the system. Ford says their recommendation is a "risk versus benefit" assessment because there's a potential for doing more damage than good. If sediment or contamination from the master cylinder is pushed through the ABS unit, it can cause big problems. Flushing the system also increases the risk of air entrapment and leaks, says Ford.
Ford says their brake systems are engineered to tolerate brake fluid contamination of up to 3 percent moisture without fluid boil (which is close to the saturation point for DOT 3 brake fluid). If the fluid has more moisture, it probably has some liquid water in it and should be changed.
Ford said they measured the water content in 7 to 10 year old Ford vehicles and found that the water content was actually quite low: only 1 to 1-1/2 percent. So based on their findings and the design target of 3 percent water, they see no need to change the fluid for preventive maintenance.
Does pushing the caliper pistons in when changing the pads push contaminants from the calipers back toward the ABS unit or master cylinder? Ford says no. There's not enough movement or migration to cause a problem."
"
With the exception of Viper, all current domestic Chrysler products use high temperature DOW 1000 DOT 3 brake fluid, which has a boiling temperature of 550 degrees F and surpasses the government's minimum performance requirements for DOT 3 brake fluid. Chrysler says their fluid can absorb up to 3 percent water and still meet the DOT 3 specifications for boiling temperature. Consequently, they see no reason to change the fluid for preventive maintenance.
In the past, European brake systems used vented master cylinder caps and lower quality hose and seal materials which allowed moisture to contaminate the fluid relatively quickly. Because of this, the brake fluid had to be changed periodically. But this is no longer true. Most European and domestic vehicles use sealed master cylinders with EPDM hoses and seals that resist moisture penetration. So fluid changes are a thing of the past, Chrysler says."
https://www.aa1car.com/library/procut3b.htm
- Status
