# New Passat Pricing Announced



## [email protected] (Jul 1, 2002)

Following being the subject of the most popular commercial during the Super Bowl, Volkswagen's new Passat is at the top of everyone's mind this week. Little detail is known about the cart thus far, but the commercial did give us one bit of insight; the price will start around $20,000.

*FULL STORY*


----------



## Pizza Cat (Dec 2, 2006)

Isn't this really just a case of 'Captain Obvious' talk? 

That C&D blog doesn't really tell anything that we didn't already know from watching the Superbowl Ad...and VW had been saying all along that the base model would start around 20k anyways. (which they even cite in said blog)


----------



## iPinch (Oct 25, 2008)

DUH! it was on the Superbowl ad fine print LOL!


----------



## Njaneer (Oct 2, 2006)

Interesting marketing to see the Passat priced in the same range as the Jetta, I really wonder how this is going to fly in the long haul?


----------



## luckeydoug1 (Feb 11, 2001)

[email protected] said:


> Following being the subject of the most popular commercial during the Super Bowl, Volkswagen's new Passat is at the top of everyone's mind this week. Little detail is known about the *cart* thus far, but the commercial did give us one bit of insight; the price will start around $20,000.


(emphasis in the quote is mine....) Intentional mistake or slip of the tongue ??  Reminds me a bit of the Mercury official a few years back that referred to the Mercury Mystique as the Mercury Mistake in a press conference!


----------



## NewsJunkie (Sep 29, 2004)

Njaneer said:


> Interesting marketing to see the Passat priced in the same range as the Jetta, I really wonder how this is going to fly in the long haul?


besides the more upmarket B6, how is that any different from previous models?

Better question: how is that different from any other brand ever?


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*2.5.... Good lord the plot is gone.*

Not lost but gone. Gone for good. A 2.5 slow or a 3.6 heavy and thirsty.



[email protected] said:


> Following being the subject of the most popular commercial during the Super Bowl, Volkswagen's new Passat is at the top of everyone's mind this week. Little detail is known about the cart thus far, but the commercial did give us one bit of insight; the price will start around $20,000.
> 
> *FULL STORY*


----------



## BostonB6 (Nov 16, 2005)

2.0T Wolfsburg?


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 23, 2009)

Lets hope the VR6 doesnt cost that much! If so VW might as well throw in the towel now and forget about competing with te Accord and Camry


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

[email protected] said:


> Lets hope the VR6 doesnt cost that much! If so VW might as well throw in the towel now and forget about competing with te Accord and Camry


A loaded Accord is also $32K :what:


----------



## keycom (Sep 27, 2001)

*When?*

Still haven't seen anything, anywhere that says *when* it will be available.


----------



## Njaneer (Oct 2, 2006)

NewsJunkie said:


> besides the more upmarket B6, how is that any different from previous models?
> 
> Better question: how is that different from any other brand ever?


When was the last time you could buy a Jetta for the same price as a Passat or vice versa? GLX Jetta, GLI dipped into that range but not the base models.


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

keycom said:


> Still haven't seen anything, anywhere that says *when* it will be available.


Around August


----------



## XM_Rocks (Jan 29, 2005)

VR6? What a strange decision... I am surprised they wouldn't drop in a K04'd 2.0T. 

CAFE anyone?

The 2.5 @ $20k is an amazing value. :thumbup:


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*Maybe*

Its an amazing value if (a) performance or mileage is unimportant and (b) the materials quality is not Jettaesque.



XM_Rocks said:


> VR6? What a strange decision... I am surprised they wouldn't drop in a K04'd 2.0T.
> 
> CAFE anyone?
> 
> The 2.5 @ $20k is an amazing value. :thumbup:


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

2011 Toyota Camry XLE
Invoice $28,238
MSRP $31,146 


2011 Honda Accord Sedan EX-L V-6
Invoice $27,419
MSRP $30,180


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

```
[I]Interesting marketing to see the Passat priced in the same range as the Jetta, I really wonder how this is going to fly in the long haul?[/I]
```


The BASE Price for the 2011 Jetta is around $15k the 2012 Passat will be around $20K. 

I think being $5k apart does not qualify as "the same range" but... I could be wrong!


----------



## TOMPASS (Apr 6, 2010)

"No hard figures... until spring"=New Passat pricing has NOT been announced. Idiots!:banghead:


----------



## XM_Rocks (Jan 29, 2005)

liquid stereo said:


> Its an amazing value if (a) performance or mileage is unimportant and (b) the materials quality is not Jettaesque.


Well seeing how B6 Passats at premium pricing languished on dealer lots and VWoA is hemorrhaging money something has to change.

BTW I disagree with your points.

Have you driven a MK6 Jetta or Golf with the 2.5?

My wife's Golf with the 2.5 gets 32-34MPG on the highway and the engine has a good amount of torque in the mid-range that makes it feel faster than it is.

The days of the 2.5 getting mid 20's is over. The gearing in the new MK6 cars make the car amazingly frugal.

Especially when you consider you are using regular gas.

The only drawback to the 2.5 is that it is a bit unrefined and coarse but honestly its probably the most reliable engine VW makes so I can look past it.

Remember the Passat has IRS and no 2.Slow.

While I believe the exterior is yawn inducing the interior is nicer in form than the B6 imo (not a fan of the angular design).

The soft touch is overrated... how often do you touch your dash? Both my MK5 GTI and MK6 Golf have it but do I care? No. Would I rather have $500 in my pocket? Yes.

Everything else in the Passat makes it equal to the competition. So where as the B6 was priced well above the competition and was getting pwned in the market this car can be competitive.

So every dollar saved and the more Jetta's and Passat's sold might mean better products for the US market. More R models etc.

:thumbup:


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

I agree that VW has to do something. What's surprising is the little they're doing.
I have driven the 2.5 (in a Jetta). Very pedestrian. Its fine for a base engine.
The 3.6 is a nice engine. The problem is the in-between...



XM_Rocks said:


> Well seeing how B6 Passats at premium pricing languished on dealer lots and VWoA is hemorrhaging money something has to change.
> 
> BTW I disagree with your points.
> 
> ...


----------



## vwtool (Jul 21, 2003)

liquid stereo said:


> Its an amazing value if (a) performance or mileage is unimportant and (b) the materials quality is not Jettaesque.


a) The 2.5 is adequate to the task at hand. It gets good mileage, has a nice torque band and only suffers when compared to the amazing 2.0t. b) The new Jetta isn't nearly as bad as the internet squawkers make it sound. We own a 2010 GTI and I would drive a MkVI Jetta and not think twice about the dash. It's a damned good interior, price considered, and the price is pretty attractive. 

VW seems determined to sell more cars by making them affordable to more people. _Volks_-Wagen, remember? Sounds like a reasonable plan to me. And face it, we enthusiasts have been doing a piss-poor job moving cars off the lot lately. I've seen exactly two new GTI's on the road here in my corner of CT since we bought ours. Back in the day, I used to pass Mk1 and Mk2 GTI's left and right.


----------



## mexglx (Apr 22, 2003)

> Njaneer;69891572 Interesting marketing to see the Passat priced in the same range as the Jetta, I really wonder how this is going to fly in the long haul


It will fly great. Base Jetta $16K vs base Passat $20.5K yeah, not the same range. GLI $27K vs SEL $32.5K again not the same. Sure an expensive Jetta costs what a stripped Passat costs. An M3 costs what a stripped 7er or middle 5er costs. An RS4 costs a lot more than an A5 or A6. Stop hating.



> Lets hope the VR6 doesnt cost that much! If so VW might as well throw in the towel now and forget about competing with te Accord and Camry


Base Accord starts at $21.5K vs $20.5 Passat S, Accord EX-L v6 $33.5K vs Passat SEL $32.5. Passat beats it, basically the same or cheaper. Stop Hating!

They are going head to head with the Accord and the Camry and have the price advantage at first glance. They only need to work on the reliability and service capability. Which they have time to do. In going with tried and true reliable engines in the Passat they are avoiding possible bad 1st impressions. I just drove an Impala LTZ (3.9L, 233 hp, rental)from Memphis to St. Louis and only managed 24mpg in 20deg weather, clean roads, sunny. Cruised at 75 the whole way. My Passat wagon 3.6 gets 27 mpg or better on-hwy. 


VW has a great strategy to be successful in N.A. We will get a couple enthusiast models that only we like that will be low volume and VWs olive branch to us (new GLI, GTi, Golf R) We may not get a Passat Wagon but we will get the Passat TDI. Can't have it all but it looks good. Plus is they can reach their sales goals, I am sure we may see more and cooler models find there way here. Lets hope for 100K Passat sales within 2 years even if we vortexers all buy Golf diesels and Jetta GLI's


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

XM_Rocks said:


> VR6? What a strange decision... I am surprised they wouldn't drop in a K04'd 2.0T.
> 
> CAFE anyone?


The VR6 gets pretty decent mileage, and a "K04'd 2.0T" simply does not fit this car's market. But how do you know they are not going to put in the transverse 260ft-lbs 2.0T from the Audi TT, as late introduction? Or a frugal ~200hp 1.8T - one of the engines supposedly going to be built in the new Mexican engine plant? What about making very mild hybrid standard (start-stop, and smart alternator)?

I am not going to defend VW on this - their timing is always awkward and conservative and never quite fits even the most obvious realities of the US market development (in part because traditionally, we got modified Euro or world market leftovers). Yet, they should have 1.4T, 1.6T, and 1.8T engines available - _now!_ - for much of their range. They should also have either the Up! or Polo ready for the US market, now.

In Europe, their strategy of being late but the best works - but here, they are also the most expensive, and viewed (rightly or not) one of the least reliable. So, being late, expensive, and questionable is not a good thing. Their market strategy should incorporate clear pathways of how to enable high-quality, reliable products _over a wide range of models and engines in demand in the years ahead_ at a competitive price, in the US (and Canada, and Mexico). They have made progress, but the latter, italicized aspect is still lacking to such an extent that I still have doubts about the speed at which they can implement change. 

The urgent need for more and frugal engines and the _mild_ hybrid technology has been addressed (by myself and others) here for at least a decade. It's like back in the early nineties, when I had discussions with one of the lead VW engineers (responsible for the development of crash safety strategies - but nevertheless). I asked him why VW was not developing a car-based, practical, somewhat frugal CUV - a market that was easily predicted to have enormous growth. All I got was blank stares - he truly did not know what I was talking about, had never heard of it, and knew that there was _nada_ in the _five-year plan***_. :banghead:

(***) I stuck that in on purpose, because it has the East German, "Es geht alles seinen sozialistischen Gang," snail-pace, slime-viscous, little drive - little progress, connotation. :facepalm:


----------



## Pizza Cat (Dec 2, 2006)

feels_road said:


> The VR6 gets pretty decent mileage, and a "K04'd 2.0T" simply does not fit this car's market. But how do you know they are not going to put in the transverse 260ft-lbs 2.0T from the Audi TT, as late introduction?


Well, I know that the 'K04'd 2.0T' is dubber-speak...but the 260 lb/ft tq 2.0T from the TT and upcoming Golf R _is_ the K04'd 2.0T :laugh:

Personally, I'm glad they're using the VR6 instead of a higher-output 2.0T


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

_Base Accord starts at $21.5K vs $20.5 Passat S, Accord EX-L v6 $33.5K vs Passat SEL $32.5. Passat beats it, basically the same or cheaper. _

Where did you get pricing for the new Passat?

The order guide only shows the 2012 EOS & CC.


----------



## MrTopher (Jul 4, 2003)

Any word on a wagon being produced? 
VR6 or TDI wagon would be really slick!


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

Rabbit5GTI said:


> Well, I know that the 'K04'd 2.0T' is dubber-speak...but the 260 lb/ft tq 2.0T from the TT and upcoming Golf R _is_ the K04'd 2.0T :laugh:
> 
> Personally, I'm glad they're using the VR6 instead of a higher-output 2.0T


No - that's the engine in the TT-S. The TT has *a transverse version* of the longitudinal 211hp, 258ft-lbs Audi engine in the A4 etc. - the one I was talking about. eace:


----------



## Pizza Cat (Dec 2, 2006)

feels_road said:


> No - that's the engine in the TT-S. The TT has *a transverse version* of the longitudinal 211hp, 258ft-lbs Audi engine in the A4 etc. - the one I was talking about. eace:


Gotcha...just automatically thought tt-s.


----------



## mexglx (Apr 22, 2003)

OZ.IN.USA said:


> _Base Accord starts at $21.5K vs $20.5 Passat S, Accord EX-L v6 $33.5K vs Passat SEL $32.5. Passat beats it, basically the same or cheaper. _
> 
> Where did you get pricing for the new Passat?
> 
> The order guide only shows the 2012 EOS & CC.


It was in the first post of this thread.

"Well today, Car and Driver's blog claims to know the actual number. The base-model Passat S will cost $20,590, and will be powered by the company's 2.5-liter 5-cylinder engine."
http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/article_2875.shtml
http://blog.caranddriver.com/2012-v...20590-plus-destination-v6-model-to-run-32950/


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

mexglx said:


> It was in the first post of this thread.
> 
> "Well today, Car and Driver's blog claims to know the actual number. The base-model Passat S will cost $20,590, and will be powered by the company's 2.5-liter 5-cylinder engine."
> http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/article_2875.shtml
> http://blog.caranddriver.com/2012-v...20590-plus-destination-v6-model-to-run-32950/


Thanks. I saw that post but we already now the *Base* price. I was questioning the $32K price as I haven't seen this price in any official VW pricing yet.


----------



## Pizza Cat (Dec 2, 2006)

OZ.IN.USA said:


> Thanks. I saw that post but we already now the *Base* price. I was questioning the $32K price as I haven't seen this price in any official VW pricing yet.


The 32k price is noted at the end of the darth vader commercial for a VR6 SEL


----------



## mexglx (Apr 22, 2003)

Rabbit5GTI;700[RIGHT said:


> [/RIGHT]26577]The 32k price is noted at the end of the darth vader commercial for a VR6 SEL


 Thanks for the follow-up.
:beer:


----------



## OZ.IN.USA (Jan 29, 2011)

Rabbit5GTI said:


> The 32k price is noted at the end of the darth vader commercial for a VR6 SEL


OK thanks but as Tom Cassady quoted in his article, "_No hard figures will come out until spring, but we'll be sure to update you once that happens._"

So until I see official pricing from VW of America on the Order Pricing Guide I'll take that as an estimate.


----------



## KevinC (Feb 16, 1999)

Same dumb strategy as the new Jetta.  Have a bargain-basement base price "stripper" model that a) nobody will want to buy, and b) nobody will be able to, because no dealership will stock them, except for MAYBE a single unit loss-leader or two for the Sunday ad in the paper, to drag in suckers that they will then (attempt to) up-sell to a more optioned-up unit on the lot. And $32k+ for the VR6 version? Please. Will they upgrade the interior materials in that model, as they've done with the Jetta GLI? Actually it's not that they "upgraded" them, they just didn't stick us with the downgraded US market-only low-rent interior that all other Jettas get.

Time will tell, but this seems to me to be the most idiotic marketing strategy in VWoA's history, and that's really saying something, since they have a long history of horrendous marketing. They already tried "Americanizing" the product line with the Westmoreland plant back in the late '70's, and those of us old enough to remember, know how that turned out. I don't see this strategy working at all. They're going to alienate people who like VWs for their "Euro-ness", and have a REAL hard time attracting that Camry/Accord/Hyundai buyer.

I drove a 2.5 for the first time in a rented Jetta a few weeks ago. That thing is about as agricultural as a '93 Civic's motor. And it gets lousy gas mileage for a "base" motor. Good luck selling that turd to the buyer's they're trying to seduce over from the competition.


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

KevinC said:


> Same dumb strategy as the new Jetta. Have a bargain-basement base price "stripper" model that a) nobody will want to buy, and b) nobody will be able to, because no dealership will stock them, except for MAYBE a single unit loss-leader or two for the Sunday ad in the paper, to drag in suckers that they will then (attempt to) up-sell to a more optioned-up unit on the lot.


Oooohhh, I might have to disagree with this statement. The dealership that my son works for sells as many Jetta "S" models as they do well-equipped "SEL's." The mid-range "SE's" are the ones sitting on the lots. I drove an "S" with auto trans on a 250 mile dealer trade a couple of weeks ago and it really isn't that bad of a car. It's the perfect entry-level VW for someone looking for basic transportation or a parent looking for a car for their first-time driver. And, whatever VW is doing, it helped VW sell 97,448 Jettas in 2010, which was up 8% from 2009.

The Passats on display at the Chicago Auto Show were well received and one of the most popular cars at the VW display, especially the TDI.


----------



## Ewinkdub04 (Oct 5, 2010)

chheeeeeap


----------



## Pizza Cat (Dec 2, 2006)

Ewinkdub04 said:


> chheeeeeap


No, you're wrong. If anything, the new Passat has a higher-quality feel than the more expensive previous model.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

KevinC said:


> Same *dumb strategy* as the new Jetta. ... I don't see this strategy working at all.
> 
> I drove a 2.5 for the first time in a rented Jetta a few weeks ago. That thing is about as agricultural as a '93 Civic's motor. And *it gets lousy gas mileage* for a "base" motor. Good luck selling that turd to the buyer's they're trying to seduce over from the competition.


Jetta sales are up 30% in January, compared to last year. But don't let the numbers bother you.

As to the (latest version of the) 2.5 engine, IMO it is really smooth with good low-end torque, and has a nice sound to it. And since when is 23/33 mpg (in the Jetta) "lousy gas mileage"?


----------



## Al Friedman (Mar 23, 2000)

*How many buy VWs as basic transportation?*

"I drove an "S" with auto trans on a 250 mile dealer trade a couple of weeks ago and it really isn't that bad of a car. It's the perfect entry-level VW for someone looking for basic transportation or a parent looking for a car for their first-time driver."

I don't disagree with this statement, but I wonder how many folks are interested in buying a Passat 2.5 as basic transportation. If I wanted basic transportation, I would buy a Honda.


----------



## DJMcGoven (Mar 2, 2007)

Can VW not be basic transportation?


----------



## vwbugstuff (Mar 27, 2004)

Al Friedman said:


> "I drove an "S" with auto trans on a 250 mile dealer trade a couple of weeks ago and it really isn't that bad of a car. It's the perfect entry-level VW for someone looking for basic transportation or a parent looking for a car for their first-time driver."
> 
> I don't disagree with this statement, but I wonder how many folks are interested in buying a Passat 2.5 as basic transportation. If I wanted basic transportation, I would buy a Honda.


Al,

Sorry I didn't clarify that better - I was referring to a Jetta "S" with the 2.0 and auto trans.


----------

