# Sixth Generation Volkswagen Jetta Debuts - Official Pics!



## [email protected] (Feb 26, 1999)

Today marks a big day in the world of Volkswagen, with the announcement of the next Jetta, available to the U.S. market in October. The sixth generation of Volkswagen's smaller sedan has seen some major changes from previous generations, most notably the fact that it no longer shares a platform with the Golf, as all five previous versions have.

The Jetta VI has grown over three inches in length when compared to the previous version, with 2.6 of those inches being realized as additional rear legroom. The base models (S and SE) will also see the return of the two-liter four-cylinder from the fourth-genereation car, but the 2.5-liter five-cylinder will be available on those trim levels, as well as the SEL. If you're a fan of the two-liter turbocharged engine seen elsewhere in the range, you'll have to hold out for the GLI model, which won't be available until next year. The GLI will also afford you multilink rear suspension, as well as an expected appearance upgrade.

The new Jetta is also priced much more aggressively, starting at around $16,000. Check here for pictures.


_Hey All - So I just got back from Volkswagen's very big public debut of the new Jetta VI in Times Square, New York. VW pulled out all the stops setting up beach chairs, umbrellas, sand, grass, a stage, loads of lighting and more to turn Times Square into a beach party of sorts. Katy Perry also performed at the event singing three of her hit songs and taking a few minutes to mug for photos. Photos from the NYC introduction can be found *HERE*. 

At the center of it is the all-new Jetta VI. The new car looks better in person than in photos, has nice proportions and a very clean look to it. We're almost inclined to say a "safe" look to it since it is a departure from the hotly debated Jetta V look, but each generation of the Jetta always seems to need some time to soak in a bit. Plus we're still waiting to see the GLI model which is the version most of us are waiting for.

We had a chance to sit in the car and rear seat legroom is up a whopping 2.5 inches giving the rear seat area a LOT of extra room. Most everything else on the interior seems familiar and right, however we noticed that a few of VW's hallmark soft touch materials have given way to harder plastics. Overall it is still great cabin that looks detailed and upscale, but if there was some cost cutting to get the new price point, some of the dash plastics reflect this. The trunk area also looks a bit spartan with exposed trunk hinges and fasteners that we haven't seen in a VW product in a long time. Oh and the MK4 generation 4WD ride height is back again. That covers the complaints.

Overall the car still has an upscale look to it. Opening and closing doors still gives that reassuring thunk that we expect in modern VW's. Seat materials are still top notch and the headliner is still the familiar nicer weaves used in recent models (as opposed to that horrible mouse felt stuff you see in other products). Switch gear is the same as all other modern VW's with a few new twists like push button start, a new RNS310 nav system option, tweeters in the A-pillars and more. Gauges are more spartan and look like they may have been borrowed from the new Polo. VW has overall treaded a fine line between taking too much out yet still making it feel like a proper German car. Overall everything looks and feels (with a few minor exceptions) like a proper sequel to the current Jetta V despite the drop in price. We'll know for sure when we drive it next month.

Since the new Jetta won't go on sale till September/October later this year, there are some details that haven't been announced - final pricing, fuel economy figures and more. However you can expect a base price for the bargain-basement shopper of around $14,995 with a decently equipped version for around $16,000 - a nice price drop. Feel free to ask any questions and I'll do my best to get answers. - Jamie_


----------



## robin_lantigua (May 10, 2000)

Very nice...


----------



## Steve-VR6 (Apr 24, 2008)

its ok, cant wait to see the GLI


----------



## PennStateVR6 (May 28, 2004)

I like the wheels on the blue car at the reveal, got any more pics of that? Any more info on tech specs?


----------



## Blue Turbo (May 11, 2006)

Huh, dunno if I care too much for the view of the front as seen head on. Looks decent from the other angles though. The interior shots looked promising but where's the full on photos?

Still can't believe they've brought back the 2.slow. Does that mean we might see the same engine showing up in the Golf VI?


----------



## Smartass (Aug 8, 2000)

The car looks great...

Just looking at the minor details I could pick out of the video though the features have gone backwards a little:

-Climate controls have gone back to full manual from the semi auto climatic (the temp dial is back to simple hot/cold)
-The gauge cluster looks nice but REALLY basic, no external temp display, no engine temp gauge, simple led fuel gauge.
-2.0 from the MK4? Damn! It's a reliable _old_ engine, but wow a little low on power considering it's an even bigger car than the MK5.

Probably a good call by VW to remove some content in favor of a lower entry price. I'm very curious to see what will be in the GLI, considering it'll have a different rear suspension I'd imagine there might be some major trim differences.


----------



## thesilentmovies (Jun 15, 2010)

I love that the 2.0 liter is back, if only to freak out the types who think every Volkswagen should have a million horsepower and be like the GTI.


----------



## vdubchop2k4 (Jun 30, 2004)

ok so i really hope that they the 2.0 is a complete revision and hope its at least an 16v cause 8v's is not going to cut it in a chassis that heavy lets be real cause even the 8v in the mk4 that thing could barely get out of its own way


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

vdubchop2k4 said:


> ok so i really hope that they the 2.0 is a complete revision and hope its at least an 16v cause 8v's is not going to cut it in a chassis that heavy lets be real cause even the 8v in the mk4 that thing could barely get out of its own way


Barely get out of it's own way? Really? What are you, 16?

The first V8 chevy had all of 150 horsepower and this Jetta would likely keep up with it. Just because some people are spoiled with hp doesn't take away from the fact that some people want a cheap car and a tractor-simple 4 popper is a great way to get them into your showroom and into a new car. 

If _you_ want more power, judy pony up for the 5 banger and stop bitching, it's not like there isn't an option. If it were the only engine available, you'd have a gripe, but it isn't and you don't.


----------



## mikeness102 (Jul 23, 2008)

Air and water do mix said:


> Barely get out of it's own way? Really? What are you, 16?
> 
> The first V8 chevy had all of 150 horsepower and this Jetta would likely keep up with it. Just because some people are spoiled with hp doesn't take away from the fact that some people want a cheap car and a tractor-simple 4 popper is a great way to get them into your showroom and into a new car.
> 
> If _you_ want more power, judy pony up for the 5 banger and stop bitching, it's not like there isn't an option. If it were the only engine available, you'd have a gripe, but it isn't and you don't.


Easy there... lol The 2.0l issue that he raise is actually a pretty good point. All of the competition has revised their engines to provide either more power or better fuel efficiency, or even both. If VW expects to be looked at as a leader in automotive innovation, they can't be simply reintroducing an engine that they've been using since the mk3 (correct me if I'm wrong but I think it's been that long). 

When the Jetta will be compared with the competition in a baseline fuel showdown, it will fail miserably. In a comparison of 7 compacts (don't remember which exactly, sorry for the vague ref lol) the city golf ran out of fuel the second and therefore finished fifth in the test. And with only the 2.0l and 2.5l, the Jetta will not provide any innovation in terms of fuel efficiency in the petrol engines. Saying "we have a TDI" is just not good enough, and this lack of innovation could have ramifications in terms of where the brand sits in the consumer's mind.

Aside from that, I'm curious to see what the 0-100 will be on the Jetta with that 8v :laugh:


----------



## sleepbelowstars (Sep 16, 2004)

thesilentmovies said:


> I love that the 2.0 liter is back, if only to freak out the types who think every Volkswagen should have a million horsepower and be like the GTI.


I actually agree with you.

I think it's a pretty good way to get that 15K price point.

I owned a 4 door golf with that motor, and for a commuter car it was nice. Plus it's a cheap engine to fuel and maintain.


----------



## vivalamexico (Dec 29, 2003)

The rear end is very 3 series-like


----------



## JETwagen (Mar 1, 2002)

vdubchop2k4 said:


> ok so i really hope that they the 2.0 is a complete revision and hope its at least an 16v cause 8v's is not going to cut it in a chassis that heavy lets be real cause even the 8v in the mk4 that thing could barely get out of its own way


My Mk4 WAGON with 2.0L scoots along just fine and gets out of it's own way very easily. So it's not the fastest thing on the road, doesn't need to be, just needs to be fast enough to keep up with traffic and little more, which it does. It's a tried and true engine that has made back it's development $$$ and was probably chosen to get to that $16k price point, it should do well for the majority of people who will buy the basic model.

On to the real topic. Love the look of the new Jetta inside and out. If I were to buy one I wouldn't mind any of the engine choices, but I would love to see how the TSI is going to perform. :thumbup:

EDIT: a Toyota Corolla base model has a 1.8L 16v producing 132hp, the Honda Civic base model has a 1.8L 16v producing 140hp... throw 16v on the 2.0L and call it a day, it's a base engine in a base car, it's not like it's in the GTI or GLI, stop the bitching.


----------



## vivalamexico (Dec 29, 2003)

JETwagen said:


> ..I would love to see how the TSI is going to perform. :thumbup:


Like a GTI with better weight distribution.


----------



## cloakster (Jun 2, 2010)

To all those saying that they need to update the 2.0 engine, name me another car at the same price as the Jetta that will keep up with it in a straight line. The Jetta, even with the extra weight will still be faster than anything you can buy in this price range. And if you really need the extra power, chip it. Most of the competition involves 170-180HP N/A engines. I would definitely take the 2.0 Turbo engine over any of the other choices 

Now my opinion on the new look, the exterior only got a little bit of an improvement, which looks more like a mid-gen facelift than a new generation and the interior looks exactly the same or even worse.


----------



## onevrsix (May 27, 2010)

Really like the lines on this gen. happy I held out. I was actually looking away from vw cause I really wasn't happy with recent models but hopefully this GLI produces :thumbup:


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

mikeness102 said:


> When the Jetta will be compared with the competition in a baseline fuel showdown, it will fail miserably. In a comparison of 7 compacts (don't remember which exactly, sorry for the vague ref lol) the city golf ran out of fuel the second and therefore finished fifth in the test...


You have a point with the magazine tests. :beer:

Do most people buy cars based on magazine tests? Perhaps they do. I may get some info from them, but if they compare one car with one engine and the other powerplant is what I'd want, I don't compare that part of the test. It's null and void. I've owned an 8 valve 2.0. For freeway cruising it's a much, MUCH better engine combo than what's in the Fit, even though they're rated at the same hp. It's not even close. Naturally, the Fit is far more frugal, but if the new one is rated at 30 mpg then it's only 3 mpg less and I could certainly live with that. (Not that they are direct competitors anyway) I just get tired of hearing that the 2.0 is a lame, slow engine. It's torquey and pulls great. It's a bulldog of an engine. Exactly what it needs to be. It's the modern-day equivalent of VWs own 40 horse. Simple and robust with adequate power. That's it. Nothing sexy. They have other engines available if that's why you're buying the car.


----------



## Slipstream (Feb 8, 2002)

The problem with the 2.0L is not the power (as others have pointed out, most don't need or care for much more than the 2.0L puts out) it's the efficiency. If the car is going to come with an inexpensive, lower-powered engine, it sure as hell better bring impressive MPG figures. I'm not super familiar with the 2.0s of old but weren't they somewhat inefficient compared to other 2.0L engines?


----------



## bubuski (Jun 14, 2001)

Has anyone seen the platform code for NCS.


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

cloakster said:


> To all those saying that they need to update the 2.0 engine, name me another car at the same price as the Jetta that will keep up with it in a straight line.


I do not think that 2.0 means what you think it means [/Inigo Montoya]


----------



## kornjd (Jun 10, 2001)

cloakster said:


> To all those saying that they need to update the 2.0 engine, name me another car at the same price as the Jetta that will keep up with it in a straight line. The Jetta, even with the extra weight will still be faster than anything you can buy in this price range. And if you really need the extra power, chip it. Most of the competition involves 170-180HP N/A engines. I would definitely take the 2.0 Turbo engine over any of the other choices
> 
> Now my opinion on the new look, the exterior only got a little bit of an improvement, which looks more like a mid-gen facelift than a new generation and the interior looks exactly the same or even worse.


There are three 2.0L engines that are being discussed. Just to be clear;

2.0L Gasoline - 115 HP - (Base Engine)
2.0L Diesel - 140 HP
2.0L TSI Gasoline - 200 HP

:thumbup:


----------



## VR6 NRG (Apr 23, 1999)

I think i know why i like it, it looks very much like the current B8 Audi A4.

nice job VW


----------



## cloakster (Jun 2, 2010)

Oh lol, thought the only 2.0 Liter engine they made was the turbo one 

Edit: Your right, the TDI engine is also 2.0L...nvm then


----------



## phorever (Jun 3, 2004)

Looks good! I LOVE LOVE LOVE that the good'ole 2.0 is back! No more replacing camshafts at 60,000 miles!

The whole line is getting a bit large though...Now we need something smaller!


----------



## AudiVwMeister (Oct 22, 2002)

this looks to have the formula for another classic jetta. people will hate, people will love. i think it looks good. nice and chiseled. looking forward to seeing it in person and seeing how it drives.


----------



## TheGermanExperience (Dec 11, 2002)

phorever said:


> Looks good! I LOVE LOVE LOVE that the good'ole 2.0 is back! No more replacing camshafts at 60,000 miles!
> 
> The whole line is getting a bit large though...Now we need something smaller!


i like it but this is true...just as the Audi A4 got larger there needs to be a Polo/Polo Sedan and A3/A3 sedan. There is beginning and will continue to be a smaller car movement and VW needs something to fill out the bottom now (and it doesn't need to be a bargain basement item, either) Need to see the new Jetta in person and see some weight figures, but it may be too big for my needs now.


----------



## vivalamexico (Dec 29, 2003)

Agreed I was so hoping they'd bring the polo GTI to the US to fill in the sub-compact market thats growing in the US. I mean ford brought back the fiesta for christs sake....


----------



## AudiVwMeister (Oct 22, 2002)

oh and do the bottom range cars go back to a torsion rear end vs IRS?


----------



## Uwe (Jan 16, 2000)

> All Jetta engines will be offered with a manual transmission as standard equipment.


:thumbup:

The 2.0 is a winner only if it offers class-leading fuel economy. VW had a non-turbo 2.0 direct-injected engine in Europe which would do that, but somehow I doubt that's what we'll get getting.

This car is being built in Tennessee, right?

I find it curious that the photos and video were shot in Japan.

-Uwe-


----------



## chois (May 12, 2000)

So um. With the new dimensions, isn't this just a new Passat with a lower price point?

I would love to see the whole NA product planning picture, and what segments they are targeting with which vehicles.


----------



## Troike (Jul 21, 2003)

viva la 2.0 

But yes I assume this is a non-turbo version of the mk5's 2.0 FSI rather than the ol' ABA/AEG straight-outta-'99 8-valve we know & love so much 
(fvck you haters!  )

Sad to see the Jetta mk6 will not share a platform with the Golf for the 1st time ever ... and bigger, great .. guess it's all part of VWoA's NMS market-research, though.

As a non-Jetta fan, I'm just happy the TDI finally made it into the Golf again.


----------



## volks-dragon (Jun 15, 2010)

nice!!!


----------



## sleepbelowstars (Sep 16, 2004)

Troike said:


> viva la 2.0
> 
> But yes I assume this is a non-turbo version of the mk5's 2.0 FSI rather than the ol' ABA/AEG straight-outta-'99 8-valve we know & love so much
> (fvck you haters!  )


You know what happens when you assume?


----------



## jtrujillo86 (Aug 21, 2005)

I was really excited to see/hear about the MKVI Jetta. However, just like when the MKV debuted, it's gonna take me some getting used to 

And for all the haters bitchin' about the 2.0...I'm sure they've never even driven a MKIV Jetta powered by one. IMO they're reliable, efficient, and cheap to maintain. What more could you want from a BASE engine? 

- Jeremy.


----------



## Ola (Jun 15, 2010)

*Engines from the stone age*

North americans just have to get their heads out of the sand!
What does VW offer Europeans?
Downsized engines with turbo (and compressor). A 1,4L offers basically the same power (hp and torque) as the old VR6 with great milage. Why stay in the olden days when technology is moving on. 

From the press release: "Jetta, delivering style, precision German engineering..." :what:

If this 2,0L turns out to be the old one from the 90's, I will be very disappointed in VW. And it will for sure not be precision engineering, whatever country it is from.


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

Ola said:


> If this 2,0L turns out to be the old one from the 90's, I will be very disappointed in VW. And it will for sure not be precision engineering, whatever country it is from.


Get used to disappointment in your life if that's all it takes.

Do engine designs get less precise with age? Is my Air-cooler less precise than it was 40 years ago? 

The engine is dated, yes. You can dislike it all you want, it's a base engine for people looking almost exclusively at the bottom line. If you like the car and hate the 2.0, just get the 5, TDi or the turbo. What's the difference to you?


----------



## sys3175 (Jan 26, 2004)

Blue Turbo said:


> Huh, dunno if I care too much for the view of the front as seen head on. Looks decent from the other angles though. The interior shots looked promising but where's the full on photos?
> 
> Still can't believe they've brought back the 2.slow. Does that mean we might see the same engine showing up in the Golf VI?


I doubt they are bringing back the old 2.0 considering that the 2.0 was phased out mostly due to it's age, the harshness etc.. etc.. they are likely going to be offering a non-turboed version of the TSI.. so direct injection and all the goodness with probably around 150hp.


----------



## sys3175 (Jan 26, 2004)

vdubchop2k4 said:


> ok so i really hope that they the 2.0 is a complete revision and hope its at least an 16v cause 8v's is not going to cut it in a chassis that heavy lets be real cause even the 8v in the mk4 that thing could barely get out of its own way


Wow.. all it takes to make an engine more powerful is more valves? I didn't know... I think I'm going to design a 100valve 4 cyl.. man that would rock.


----------



## LindsayLowhan (May 29, 2010)

Had a great time today, got to meet Katy Perry again, lovely person. Overall the new Jetta is great looking in person. The styling is very low key but the lines are smooth and crisp. Every body panel of the new Jetta flows so well into the other. Can't wait to see one bagged out on Rotiforms!  :beer:


----------



## mk3trekk (Mar 11, 2005)

very disappointed we're on page 2 and there are no chops of this thing on its belly...


----------



## sys3175 (Jan 26, 2004)

Uwe said:


> :thumbup:
> 
> The 2.0 is a winner only if it offers class-leading fuel economy. VW had a non-turbo 2.0 direct-injected engine in Europe which would do that, but somehow I doubt that's what we'll get getting.
> 
> ...


Mexico along side the polo. The first car to be produced in Tennessee will be the Passat replacement.


----------



## KahviVW (Feb 26, 2009)

I like the exterior a lot. Sure it's boring and forgettable but it has nice lines that will age well. 

The interior looks better than the leaked one. The center stack with the HVAC controls bothers me. I don't like how it is receded into the panel, it seems poorly designed. I'm nitpicking, but it brings flashbacks of cheapo 90's Japaneses interiors.

The model is larger than the MK5 because they added length to the backseats. I always had people complain about rear space in older generation Jettas, and this will help the Jetta appeal to the masses. It might be a little too big for my taste however... 

Finally, I just don't understand the rational for reviving the old 2.0. Obviously VW is trying to keep the price down, but the 2.0 can't be that much cheaper than using the 2.5 or the old 1.8t. It's also not an efficient engine, which is the entire point of a base model.


----------



## sys3175 (Jan 26, 2004)

Ola said:


> North americans just have to get their heads out of the sand!
> What does VW offer Europeans?
> Downsized engines with turbo (and compressor). A 1,4L offers basically the same power (hp and torque) as the old VR6 with great milage. Why stay in the olden days when technology is moving on.
> 
> ...


Europeans also drive much differently then americans. The cars are mostly used in towns or cities, they rarely travel the distances that the average american commuter does. While the 1.4TSI may be a cool engine, would it stand up to the long range mileage that american drivers subject their cars to? If this does turn out to be the old 2.0 I'm sure it will have considerable updates. On the other hand, I thought these engines were out of production, and obviously retooling a factor to build an engine which is not shared with any other platform no matter how much is saved in research and development is not as effective as using an engine which is currently in production and shared with other platforms.


----------



## sys3175 (Jan 26, 2004)

Air and water do mix said:


> Get used to disappointment in your life if that's all it takes.
> 
> Do engine designs get less precise with age? Is my Air-cooler less precise than it was 40 years ago?
> 
> The engine is dated, yes. You can dislike it all you want, it's a base engine for people looking almost exclusively at the bottom line. If you like the car and hate the 2.0, just get the 5, TDi or the turbo. What's the difference to you?


The engine is also out of production, the factories which built them have been retooled for newer products. I cannot see VW putting an engine back into production simply for the NA market.


----------



## jdubber11 (Oct 13, 2008)

body looks 'ok' but cant wait to see if theres a gli:thumbup:


----------



## Brimjolt (May 16, 2008)

ya the GLI should look siiick.

Any p-shop attempts anyone??


----------



## boostedbastid (Aug 31, 2009)

ugly as sin


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

[email protected] said:


> Since the new Jetta won't go on sale till September/October later this year, there are some details that haven't been announced - final pricing, fuel economy figures and more.[/i]


Actually, the VW international press release does mention fuel economy.

The 115hp 2.0 is rated 28 mpg combined - that's 1 mpg shy of a Corolla and Civic, and 4mpg better than the MK4 with the 2.0. It also says the 2.0 is a "new engine". 

https://www.volkswagen-media-servic...premiere_of.standard.gid-oeffentlichkeit.html


----------



## .:FrankRizzo:. (Jul 12, 2008)

I didn't read the whole VWvortex article but read another release and apparently the old beam rear suspension is coming back too except on the GLI? Talk about taking a step back. I was really looking foward to a MKVI chassis based Jetta coupe, I thought that would be cool. Hopefully VW offers a smaller sedan or brings the Polo over or something. VW keeps teasing me with cool concepts ( Jetta Coupe, all the sports car concepts) and then making cool cars and not bringing them to the USA (Golf R, Scirocco, Polo)


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

the 2.0L could be based on the 2.5L, with a cylinder lopped off.

since us owners with direct injection are concerned with the inevitable clogged intake manifolds... the last thing VW needs is that type of costly maintenance concerns for the volume model.


----------



## Mouser (Aug 20, 2002)

I'm struck by the redesign with an overwhelming sense of "Meh." I was expecting something...sexier?

And since the ugly tail end of the current Jetta wagon isn't getting any much-needed love this year, I guess I'm back to deciding between GTI or Golf TDI - or waiting another year entirely.


----------



## YNO WGN (May 27, 2005)

Less Jetta, more Katy Perry.

seriously though, pretty "meh" in my opinion as well. really can't picture a MEAN version of this car.


----------



## LindsayLowhan (May 29, 2010)

Ola said:


> North americans just have to get their heads out of the sand!
> What does VW offer Europeans?
> Downsized engines with turbo (and compressor). A 1,4L offers basically the same power (hp and torque) as the old VR6 with great milage. Why stay in the olden days when technology is moving on.



Uhm....You need to shut your mouth. I could go on for days about half the stuff we don't get here in the States but I'll just sum it all up with 1 particular thing...


----------



## vancity 1.8t (Jan 12, 2003)

*Generic Looking?*

Is it just me, or is this car just very boring and generic looking? I mean it doesnt really look much like a previous Jetta. I mean you could put another badge and model on it, and pass it off as someone else's car.

I mean no one would mistake a BMW or a Mercedes, but this car could belong to almost anybody.


----------



## Max_O (Dec 23, 2003)

About what I expected it to look like based off of the Jetta Coupe concept. I am personally hoping they do release the Jetta Coupe with the 2.0T as the Jetta just has gotten too big for me. I think my Mk5 Jetta is too big personally. Will be interesting to see what the GLI looks like though....


----------



## tagsvags (Nov 25, 2005)

I like it overall. I'm sure that the base 2.0L will not be the old 2.slo. For sure will be a updated version, lets all just see what VW has to offer before going off the deep end. After all the 2.0 turbo will have a home in the GLI, correct?


----------



## BROCorradO (Apr 25, 2003)

The tail is screaming B8 A4 styling.

A company as "forward thinking" as VW should, in my opinion, design around new ideas rather than drawing from other ideas in their line-up. I could understand if it were more akin to a previous edition Jetta, Golf, etc. but this is just odd to me. Unless I'm seeing something that totally doesn't exist... maybe pictures will illustrate this?


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Ola said:


> North americans just have to get their heads out of the sand!
> What does VW offer Europeans?
> Downsized engines with turbo (and compressor). A 1,4L offers basically the same power (hp and torque) as the old VR6 with great milage. Why stay in the olden days when technology is moving on.


The 1.4 TSI makes 122 hp & 147 lb-ft... that's not basically the same power & tq as the outgoing 2.8L DOHC VR6, not even the SOHC VR6.

Plus, the 1.4 TSI requires 95 RON (roughly 91 AKI)--- people that buy the Jetta won't want buy a car that requires premium to operate.

There are 2.0T owners out there that don't want to use premium on their cars:sly:


----------



## 1Point8TDan (Sep 4, 2003)

The new Jetta even gets Katy Perry excited! 










Looks like a car that we will be seeing lots of on the street. Nothing overwhelming appealing like the CC but still better than the competition.


----------



## ownerizer (May 15, 2005)

Ola said:


> If this 2,0L turns out to be the old one from the 90's, I will be very disappointed in VW. And it will for sure not be precision engineering, whatever country it is from.


Prepare to be dissappointed. The "2.0" In a general sense has been around since 1974 in the first Rabbits. My 1.8L 8v Scirocco had 364,000 miles on the original motor, never opened, before I sold it. The 2.0 that you think of, is the same general design with newer fuel injection and such. I personally hate the 2.5. It drives like a 4 and drinks like a 6.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

ownerizer said:


> Prepare to be dissappointed. The "2.0" In a general sense has been around since 1974 in the first Rabbits. My 1.8L 8v Scirocco had 364,000 miles on the original motor, never opened, before I sold it. The 2.0 that you think of, is the same general design with newer fuel injection and such. I personally hate the 2.5. It drives like a 4 and drinks like a 6.


I stand corrected.... here is what jaime wrote:



> The Jetta VI has grown over three inches in length when compared to the previous version, with 2.6 of those inches being realized as additional rear legroom. *The base models (S and SE) will also see the return of the two-liter four-cylinder from the fourth-genereation car, but the 2.5-liter five-cylinder will be available on those trim levels, as well as the SEL.* If you're a fan of the two-liter turbocharged engine seen elsewhere in the range, you'll have to hold out for the GLI model, which won't be available until next year. The GLI will also afford you multilink rear suspension, as well as an expected appearance upgrade.


----------



## Grillman (Jun 9, 2000)

*No analog temp. Or fuel gauge?*

How cheap can VW get? You have to be kidding me. The cheapest cars sold in America have these basic gauges. And a PUSH BUTTON to start the car? Come on VW, kill the gimmics.


----------



## 155VERT83 (Aug 1, 2000)

I like it. Can't wait to see the GLI. Note to VW: Please add 4Motion (and send over the New Scirocco too)!


----------



## Nexus (Jul 1, 2005)

4.2 rwd coupe please  R42 anyone?


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Grillman said:


> How cheap can VW get? You have to be kidding me. The cheapest cars sold in America have these basic gauges. And a PUSH BUTTON to start the car? Come on VW, kill the gimmics.












It's sporty. Remember the 2000+ Celica? It is digital coolant & fuel gauge

The Cobalt has digital coolant temp gauge (but the Aveo has the analog ones)

The Yaris is missing the analog fuel/temp gauges

The Accent is missing the analog fuel/temp gauges

The Forte is missing the analog temp gauge......

The New Beetle has an idiot light for the coolant temp


----------



## Toby16custom (May 16, 2006)

Grillman said:


> How cheap can VW get? You have to be kidding me. The cheapest cars sold in America have these basic gauges. And a PUSH BUTTON to start the car? Come on VW, kill the gimmics.


I know right!? Christ at the current rate I will be swaping engines into my 98 jetta vr6


----------



## Crash6 (Sep 28, 2001)

Mixed feelings on this.

The car as is, doesn't look like a forward evolution as one would expect. It stands to reason that every new iteration should somehow be nicer, more refined, have more options, new engine technology, etc.

HOWEVER

I've been secretly wishing for VW to go this direction for a long time. They need to get back to making reliable, well engineered, economical cars that can be fun to drive, for a reasonable price. This doesn't necessitate soft touch plastics, Audi level ergonomics, 250+ hp engines, etc.

This is the embodiment of an old philosophy, being introduced to a new generation. 

I personally hope it goes over well.


----------



## da_17 (Mar 1, 2006)

It's quite likely the 2.0 engine will be the 2.slow...

Don't forget it is still being produced in Mexico for the Mk4.5 Jetta that's still on sale in Latin America. Quite easy to put it in the 2011 Jetta.


----------



## vdubfrodo09 (Jan 2, 2008)

Crash6 said:


> Mixed feelings on this.
> 
> The car as is, doesn't look like a forward evolution as one would expect. It stands to reason that every new iteration should somehow be nicer, more refined, have more options, new engine technology, etc.
> 
> ...


I like how you think :thumbup: I really like the look of this it looks like a good "visual modding" platform.. i like the rest cant wait to see the GLI


----------



## mixedpartsbmx (Apr 19, 2003)

>


QFT

MOAR Katy Perry Puhleeez


----------



## Mr Bubblehead (Jun 4, 2001)

*2.0*



sys3175 said:


> The engine is also out of production, the factories which built them have been retooled for newer products. I cannot see VW putting an engine back into production simply for the NA market.


2.0 engine never stopped production. 
VW still sells 2.0 equpped VW's in North American Market. Ever heard of Canada? http://www.vw.ca/ca/en_ca/models/city_golf.html
Golf City is sold in Canada in 2010 and it should look somewhat familiar.

2.0 in the base 2011 Jetta is the same 115 hp 2.0 that we love and remember.


----------



## biggles1 (Sep 2, 2009)

i was waiting to see new jetta i guess its cool but i like the suzuki kizashi better plus it seems you get more for the money.


----------



## sticky euro (Nov 23, 2009)

Just logged on, this looks fantastic! I'm excited, only drawback for me are the tail lights, which would look better if they weren't so similar to the new ugly audi tails


----------



## Martell (May 18, 2010)

Anyone Photo shop a GLI look yet?


----------



## jarapiri (Jun 12, 2006)

GLI better look like the below.










Not sure why but, with the whole unveiling it kinda reminded me of a late nineties Toyota Camry. :banghead:


----------



## rdevine (Feb 12, 2004)

Well the styling certainly doesn't wow me in the least, and I too was hoping for a little more uniqueness in the sheetmetal...especially after the MKV debacle. This thing will quietly go about its business and fade into the background. I can't help but feel VW has dragged the Jetta downmarket, and I think they're doing the nameplate a disservice. Isn't that what the Polo is for afterall...to capture the $15,000 crowd??

Two things stand out to me concerning the styling. First, I think the interior actually looks lower rent than the MKV. The gauge cluster in particular looks downright plain and cheap. Hop into the MKVI Golf or GTI, and the interior is just executed perfectly. The Jetta should have adopted the Golf and GTI interior...much better-looking in my opinion. And secondly, what's with the chrome strip only along the bottom edge of the windows? It looks very odd to me. It would look much better if the chrome wrapped around the tops of the doors as well. Or better yet, just make the whole trim black for consistency.


----------



## vwlippy (Jul 17, 2001)

Very nice. Sort of like a mini Audi A4....but I was really hoping the announcement would be they were giving us the Scirocco. I'll keep dreaming....


----------



## Michael T Borelli (Dec 29, 2000)

*jetta*

Horrible...just horrible What was VW thinking:what:


----------



## JWoody (May 17, 2006)

Totally looks like the B8 A4 in the rear, first thing caught my eye. And holy wheel gap batman! Ugh are they really that high stock? The front needs to look like the concept coupe more. I always thought the Thunder Bunny body kit looked great on the MKV, a la TDI Cup Edition, what happened to that concept? I am holding reservation for the GLI, christ it better look better. Otherwise I am going over to the Audi or BMW camp.

-J


----------



## Blue Golfer (Feb 4, 2003)

It looks a little like the Ford Fusion.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

So would people prefer a CrossFox cluster instead?










and they get the full MFA


----------



## v_dub89 (Jan 20, 2010)

*trash*

they lost there touch completely what the **** were they thinking.... it looks nothing like a volkswagen and thats very sad... and to think it took me awhile to get use to the mKv this is just garbage in my opinion... :thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:


----------



## tomh009 (Nov 28, 2001)

v_dub89 said:


> they lost there touch completely what the **** were they thinking.... it looks nothing like a volkswagen and thats very sad... and to think it took me awhile to get use to the mKv this is just garbage in my opinion... :thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:


Personally ... I think it looks *more* like a Volkswagen, has more Volkswagen DNA than the Mk V did. Black grille, no massive headlights, crisp lines rather than soft contours, and understated styling. That's all VW.

A4 tail? Similar (though nowhere near identical) taillight shape, otherwise the design is different.

Gauge cluster? I *like* the understated gauge cluster without chrome embellishments -- it's what  a VW gauge cluster should look like. And I also don't mind the chrome trim only along the bottom of the doors. Moderation in chrome bits -- leave the massive overchroming to Ford.


----------



## TWinbrook46636 (Apr 18, 2003)

BsickPassat said:


> It's sporty. Remember the 2000+ Celica? It is digital coolant & fuel gauge
> 
> The Cobalt has digital coolant temp gauge (but the Aveo has the analog ones)
> 
> ...


Kind of sad we now have to compare it to the Yaris, Cobalt, etc. rather than the Corolla and Civic it was designed to compete with.


----------



## NJRoadfan (Sep 16, 2006)

While cheap, this car comes with features that the Audi A4 doesn't offer in its base trim.

-The ski pass through (A4 only has 60/40 rear split in the US)

-The keyless push button start. You have to upgrade to the top of the line $40k+ "Prestige" trim on the A4 to get that.

The wood trim tends to ruin the "value" image though. The 2.0L won't be fast at all, my 23+ year old car will likely outrun it (its lighter). They could have put a more modern port injected 16V DOHC engine in there for better fuel economy and power. Hopefully they at least pair it with a modern 6 speed automatic. I don't see why people are comparing it to the Honda Fit, this car is much bigger. Why isn't this being built in the US, wasn't that the point in investing in that big TN plant? (which turned out to be a bad hedge since the Euro dropped)


----------



## TWinbrook46636 (Apr 18, 2003)

Hajduk said:


> Actually, the VW international press release does mention fuel economy.
> 
> The 115hp 2.0 is rated 28 mpg combined - that's 1 mpg shy of a Corolla and Civic, and 4mpg better than the MK4 with the 2.0. It also says the 2.0 is a "new engine".
> 
> https://www.volkswagen-media-servic...premiere_of.standard.gid-oeffentlichkeit.html


It also says the 140hp TDI engine is new which it is not. It is the same 115hp engine used in the Golf City in Canada. That engine only manages to get the Golf City to 60 in 10.4 seconds for the manual and 11.7 seconds for the automatic. No way to tell for sure how performance will be in the new Jetta but consider the Golf City weighs considerably less. That is not a good sign. Volkswagen has stated combined fuel economy for the new Jetta as 26 for the automatic and 28 for the manual with the 115hp engine.


----------



## tomh009 (Nov 28, 2001)

NJRoadfan said:


> Why isn't this being built in the US, wasn't that the point in investing in that big TN plant? (which turned out to be a bad hedge since the Euro dropped)


Because (1) the TN factory isn't ready, (2) the TN factory won't have enough capacity, at least initially, and (3) the Puebla plant has capacity, low costs and good quality.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

NJRoadfan said:


> -The keyless push button start. You have to upgrade to the top of the line $40k+ "Prestige" trim on the A4 to get that.


It's not keyless. See the rectangular slot in the steering column? That's where the key goes


----------



## veedublvr (Feb 2, 2001)

Viva la 2.0 ! 

I can't wait for a base model !


----------



## thatofinthedistance (Apr 1, 2009)

What do we all expect for a _base_ model? Im confused. 
In one aspect I like how it is the 2.0, because it will be reliable, and something that everyone will be able to afford. But yet at the same time, I wish that this was equiped with the 1.8t, or at least a 2.5 base model. 
I *DONT* like the gagues. They look so fake. Ive always liked VDubs styling because it was set apart from all the other stuff thats out there, and now it just looks fake, like plastic.
The front end, im not a huge fan of, something is just off to me.. But i do think that the car flows very well.
All in all I think that this car will be a hit. Slam it/Bag it put some decent wheels on it, and it will be a beaut. 
And I am anxious to see the GLI, maybe a Coupe?:laugh:
Wishfull thinking!


----------



## Peter Tong (Jun 17, 1999)

Not sure i like the front end...

Looks like VW cheaped out and went GM style on the rear trunk hinges...

Interior looks decent...


----------



## A2gtirulz (Dec 23, 2003)

All this wait for "meh" styling.

Let's see what the GLI looks like.


----------



## AliensWanted (Aug 24, 2004)

Air and water do mix said:


> Barely get out of it's own way? Really? What are you, 16?
> 
> The first V8 chevy had all of 150 horsepower and this Jetta would likely keep up with it. Just because some people are spoiled with hp doesn't take away from the fact that some people want a cheap car and a tractor-simple 4 popper is a great way to get them into your showroom and into a new car.
> 
> If _you_ want more power, judy pony up for the 5 banger and stop bitching, it's not like there isn't an option. If it were the only engine available, you'd have a gripe, but it isn't and you don't.


Try and market a 115hp car against Toyota, Honda and the others....good luck. This engine will FAIL unless it is tuned to at least 135-140hp.

And no one has officially stated that this is the old 8v 2.slow engine, have they? What if it is the 2.0 turbo not turbocharged at 150hp, like the one in other markets non American?


----------



## eatpiealot (Jan 25, 2008)

Everytime I look at the new Jetta, I can't help but think Accord. Very similar lines as the last two models. Not saying that the Accord is a bad looking car, at all, but I was hoping for more originality. Not sure why it's no longer based off of the Golf anymore, but to each his own.

I do love the 2.0l idea, that there will be a ''small'', cheap to repair engine in the market again, but for now, I think I'll stick to my mki Rabbit.


----------



## OneVW2many (May 29, 2002)

I think we bought VW's because we liked the european styling and characteristics that made them somewhat unique as cars. VW will fail trying to homogenize the brand to become the perfect faux 'North American' marketing wet-dream. Step to the back of the line with Kia, Hyundai, Toyota... ! 

Simply mind-numbing.


----------



## vichercules (May 2, 2006)

Great, a Camccord. Just what the world needs another boat.

Not to mention it will be the slowest boat at the boring family dock.

VW used to an alternative to the blandness out there, now they are selling a Jetta with fake wood on the dash.

This and the supersizing of the A4 have left me disturbed. Now, it appears that nobody wants my money. I guess I will keep my B7 until the wheels fall off.


----------



## Mr Bubblehead (Jun 4, 2001)

*2.0*



AliensWanted said:


> Try and market a 115hp car against Toyota, Honda and the others....good luck. This engine will FAIL unless it is tuned to at least 135-140hp.
> 
> And no one has officially stated that this is the old 8v 2.slow engine, have they? What if it is the 2.0 turbo not turbocharged at 150hp, like the one in other markets non American?


VWoA officially stated the 2.0L engine was 115 HP.


:what:


> What if it is the 2.0 turbo not turbocharged at 150hp, like the one in other markets non American?


:banghead:


----------



## 1Point8TDan (Sep 4, 2003)

mixedpartsbmx said:


> QFT
> 
> MOAR Katy Perry Puhleeez





















The rear end of the new Jetta looks similar to the MK3. The Jetta 4 looked small compared to the 3, as did the 5, but the 6 looks pretty big now.


----------



## JETTAWOLFS98 (Aug 13, 2002)

TWinbrook46636 said:


> Kind of sad we now have to compare it to the Yaris, Cobalt, etc. rather than the Corolla and Civic it was designed to compete with.











This is HORRIBLE !!! Tell me only the base model would have it. 

Man I'm buying a 2010 TDI.

Car looks fine but those small cut cost are killing it.

Oh man K. Perry is H O T.


----------



## NJRoadfan (Sep 16, 2006)

BsickPassat said:


> It's not keyless. See the rectangular slot in the steering column? That's where the key goes


Then whats the point of the start/stop button then? The Passat and A4 have the same slot, except you insert the fob and push the fob itself to start/stop the car. Advanced key systems with push button start aren't unheard of in this price point, Nissan sells a lot of sub-$20k cars with it.


----------



## dub_IN (Apr 29, 2004)

Peter Tong said:


> Not sure i like the front end...
> 
> Looks like VW cheaped out and went GM style on the rear trunk hinges...
> 
> Interior looks decent...


At first I was like 









Then I was like :banghead:


----------



## dub_IN (Apr 29, 2004)

NJRoadfan said:


> Then whats the point of the start/stop button then? The Passat and A4 have the same slot, except you insert the fob and push the fob itself to start/stop the car. Advanced key systems with push button start aren't unheard of in this price point, Nissan sells a lot of sub-$20k cars with it.


IMO, it's a stupid feature anyway.


----------



## DaWolfsburg (Sep 12, 2002)

NJRoadfan said:


> Then whats the point of the start/stop button then? The Passat and A4 have the same slot, except you insert the fob and push the fob itself to start/stop the car. Advanced key systems with push button start aren't unheard of in this price point, Nissan sells a lot of sub-$20k cars with it.


I rented a Nissan Altima on a business trip that had the keyless push button start. As long as the key was somewhere in the car you can use the button to start it. It had a slot for the key but it was not needed... Guess they kept a place to put the key out of tradition? 

On that note, the Altima looks way cooler than the Jetta VI... (not to mention quicker)


----------



## pubahs (Apr 2, 2002)

Having owned a 2008 Ford Focus for a year - I can definitely say that is the current competiton for this car. Based on the cost cutting, and engine models the Focus will be a good competitor. 

The things I grew accustomed to owning a VW really bothered me in a Focus, ie. the cheap trunk finish, cheap interior, terrible engine, etc.

Another competitor would be the new Chevy Cruze too

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/06/15/the-16-000-question-focus-cruze-or-jetta-w-poll/

autoblog referenced.


----------



## Bav17 (Mar 13, 2009)

The Dodge Caliber comes with a a outside temp guage... and a Jetta SEL won't?
Really? 
How much money did they save by not installing a 1 inch large screen and include that.
I love having that feature on both of my cars.


----------



## VWYankee (Jan 13, 2000)

*Bad lines*

It's amazing to me how slight changes in the lines from the concept can absolutely destroy the look of the car. The hard lines on the rear of the concept are very nice and give it an aggressive look. They softened that right up to give it a nice Kia Forte mix with a 2002 Accord rear end so it's uber bland. The roofline, the front end lines. All of them have the same changes from the concept to make what appeared to be the best looking Jetta yet to the most bland looking with just minor changes to those lines. I prefer a hatch anyway, but it's just sad that the design changed that much from the concept that looked so great. The GLI doesn't have a chance outside of some minor things they will change (headlights, grill and maybe a more agressive front bumper). It still won't look as good as the concept.

From Great:

















To Terrible with just minor line changes:


----------



## paul99 (Oct 1, 2000)

I am hoping that they fix those problems with 2.0 L base engine, eating excessively oil, :sly:


----------



## Green Hare (Oct 21, 2003)

NJRoadfan said:


> Then whats the point of the start/stop button then? The Passat and A4 have the same slot, except you insert the fob and push the fob itself to start/stop the car. Advanced key systems with push button start aren't unheard of in this price point, Nissan sells a lot of sub-$20k cars with it.


I'm not seeing anywhere that the push button is located, unless I'm just looking with my eyes closed. 

As for my opinion, I agree it's a progression, but yes, not my favorite design. I do hope they build the coupe version of the car, especially with a TDI 6-speed. 

One thing I do like is finally a universal trunk for NA and ROW cars... seems they started this trend in the Tiguan, then progressed through the JSW and Mk6 Golf/GTI twins. It's about time for that one VW :thumbup:


----------



## NJRoadfan (Sep 16, 2006)

Green Hare said:


> I'm not seeing anywhere that the push button is located, unless I'm just looking with my eyes closed.












Its kinda small, but its there.


----------



## toneman (Apr 2, 1999)

2 W's:

weight?
wagon?


----------



## jaegervw2 (Aug 19, 2006)

agreed, the concept has that 'something special', sadly the production model has lost it

too bad, because I was looking forward to it, maybe it's better in person....


----------



## tomh009 (Nov 28, 2001)

dub_IN said:


> IMO, it's a stupid feature anyway.


+1


----------



## TOMPASS (Apr 6, 2010)

If anyone's interested, I did a post regarding the Jetta VI design in the Car Lounge forum under [email protected]'s VW Jetta VI Official Photos Released Early post, reply #144. 
I probably should have had the sense to post it here. (MODS: Is it possible to copy it to this post? If so, please do.) Long story short, I like it.


----------



## villalobos (Jun 21, 2002)

jtrujillo86 said:


> I was really excited to see/hear about the MKVI Jetta. However, just like when the MKV debuted, it's gonna take me some getting used to
> 
> And for all the haters bitchin' about the 2.0...I'm sure they've never even driven a MKIV Jetta powered by one. IMO they're reliable, efficient, and cheap to maintain. What more could you want from a BASE engine?
> 
> - Jeremy.


Not sure YOU have driven a car with the 2.0. It is not really that efficient (you gotta baby it big time to get 34 on the highway), not particularly reliable (burning oil like there is no tomorrow) : the 2.0 as it was sold in 99 is not competitive anymore. Let's see if they tweaked it.


----------



## 71sbeetle (Apr 12, 2002)

will it be made in Mexico ?


----------



## GoFaster (Jun 18, 1999)

toneman said:


> 2 W's:
> 
> weight?
> wagon?


Weight I have no idea, but wagon I do. What you folks in the States know as the Jetta Sportwagon, is something the rest of the world (including Canada) knows as the Golf wagon, and it will carry on unchanged for at least a couple more years. Maybe it will be renamed the Golf wagon in the USA now, too. Same vehicle, though.

And that's a good thing, because when the time comes to replace my Mk5 Jetta TDI sedan, the most likely replacement will be a Golf wagon. I'm not feeling the heavy de-contenting that the Jetta sedan is seeing. Instruments ... arrrrgh. Trunk hinges ... argh. Torsion beam axle rear suspension ... ARRRRGH! The Golf (hatch or wagon) is a much nicer vehicle.


----------



## child_in_time (Aug 9, 2006)

Why is everybody obsessed with the push button start switch? Is that supposed to be some kind of measure for luxury or whatever? It is just a switch after all, it does not cost anything more to make than traditional turn key switch..if you think about it, it should actually cost less, not having to machine key slot components. On another note, why is everybody upset with the cheap version of Jetta? Isn't the VW after all a "people's car" . If you want somewhat luxury and bit of performance, spring out some money and get yourself an Audi. I think that's what VW is doing, they do not want the Jetta to be competing with some of their other brands meanwhile trying to lure some Corolla, Civic and similar customers into showrooms. However I do agree that using outdated 2.0 8V with 115 HP just does not make sense, it lacks power, lacks fuel economy, and it belongs to a car made 20 yrs ago not in 2011. European 1.2 liter makes 105 HP and 1.4 makes 122hp or 160hp for a twincharged version. I own a 2.0 Golf and I am not into racing or anything, it is my daily driver, but with 4 passengers and AC on, the car feels like I am towing a house behind me, and then I have to climb hills...good luck 2.0 with hauling that bigarse sedan.


----------



## 71sbeetle (Apr 12, 2002)

the way I see it, and it may not seem like much, but push button is safer in a crash. I haven't read the whole thread (I'm a typical Vortexer lol) so I don't know what people are saying about it


----------



## Green Hare (Oct 21, 2003)

NJRoadfan said:


> Its kinda small, but its there.


Thanks... I'm not obsessed with it, more a curiosity. And also, could this spell the end of the switchblade key? That is one seriously fat slot for the key... 

Garey - it has been stated that these will be built in Mexico... 

Wagon? Great question, I have heard nothing of plans to change from the current Golf Mk6 Wagon (oh, that would be Jetta Wagon here in the USA). :laugh:


----------



## rdevine (Feb 12, 2004)

VWYankee said:


> It's amazing to me how slight changes in the lines from the concept can absolutely destroy the look of the car. The hard lines on the rear of the concept are very nice and give it an aggressive look. They softened that right up to give it a nice Kia Forte mix with a 2002 Accord rear end so it's uber bland. The roofline, the front end lines. All of them have the same changes from the concept to make what appeared to be the best looking Jetta yet to the most bland looking with just minor changes to those lines. I prefer a hatch anyway, but it's just sad that the design changed that much from the concept that looked so great. The GLI doesn't have a chance outside of some minor things they will change (headlights, grill and maybe a more agressive front bumper). It still won't look as good as the concept.
> 
> From Great:
> 
> ...


I agree with you 100%. The production car is a letdown after seeing the renderings. They were much more aggressive and distinctive compared to this wallflower design. It amazes me that VW couldn't just tweak the sheetmetal a bit more for a homerun design. It was almost there...so close.

When the spy photos leaked out, I knew I was going to be disappointed. People kept harping on the fact that the details were hidden, but I begged to differ. The design was there for all to see, and like you said, the sharp and angular lines of the rendering made it much sportier than the production version revealed. Again, they finally had the opportunity to break away from the "Golf with a trunk" stigma, and really distinguish this car. They failed.

Maybe a GLI or R (wishful thinking) version will change my perception of the thing, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Njaneer (Oct 2, 2006)

*2.SLOW * still ticking strong at 115K in my MKIV beater.


----------



## 71sbeetle (Apr 12, 2002)

Njaneer said:


> *2.SLOW * still ticking strong at 115K in my MKIV beater.


my 96 Golf had a strong 2.0 with over 220k on the clock when I sold it (only maintenance was oil changes, spark plug and plug wire changes, and air filter change) it now has over 350k miles and still going strong


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Hajduk said:


> Actually, the VW international press release does mention fuel economy.
> 
> The 115hp 2.0 is rated 28 mpg combined - that's 1 mpg shy of a Corolla and Civic, and 4mpg better than the MK4 with the 2.0. It also says the 2.0 is a "new engine".
> 
> https://www.volkswagen-media-servic...premiere_of.standard.gid-oeffentlichkeit.html


2.slow is rated 28 mpg combined for the manual. It's 26 for the automatic. However, it's forecasted, not official EPA.

So... compared to the Corolla 1.8L:
manual: 2 mpg shy
automatic: 3 mpg shy

And the Civic, 1mpg shy for the manual & 3 mpg shy for the automatic


----------



## 20th875 (Feb 11, 2004)

Well, couldn't figure out how to quote yet, (first time back since the website update, ha) but VW took a very nice looking concept and changed the lines and it is pretty uninspiring now. Saved me some money I guess.


----------



## DaWolfsburg (Sep 12, 2002)

71sbeetle said:


> my 96 Golf had a strong 2.0 with over 220k on the clock when I sold it (only maintenance was oil changes, spark plug and plug wire changes, and air filter change) it now has over 350k miles and still going strong


No one is doubting longevity or reliability. I have owned both 1.8 and 2.0 (non-turbo) VWs and the motors just last. The issue with using the 2.0 in the MKVI is the 115hp will be worked that much harder in the heavier car. 

The MKIII and MKIV cars were around 2,900 lbs
MKV around 3,230 pounds (MKVI likely close or heavier) 

Definitely felt a performance decrease when my 2.0 car was loaded up.


----------



## 71sbeetle (Apr 12, 2002)

my Mom's Golf MK5 has a 1.4 engine in it, 75hp IIRC, it's fine


----------



## vesvw (Sep 5, 2001)

Its not so much the power specs of the 2.0 that bother me, but a lack of forward progress. And I agree with other posters I was super excited for the jetta when I saw the renderings. The production car is a complete dissapointment compared. I would sorta like the car if I never saw the pre production renderings


----------



## CCRlineBlack (Apr 6, 2010)

The push button start looks like a last minute job. I wonder what else they did at the last minute :sly::screwy:

The push button feature is better than sticking in the key fob, but it would take sometime to get use to it. Pushing in the key is almost like using a normal key, maybe thats why the first decided to go with pushing in the key.


----------



## vivalamexico (Dec 29, 2003)

Well at least the Volkswagen / Honda rivalry will see a decline seeing as they won't be able to tell each other apart anymore.


----------



## B5V (Apr 1, 2000)

I hope the 2.Slo 8V (*2.0 R4 37-88kW*) would be one of the "improved" (or exceeding engine codes)...AUZ, ASU, AVA engines:

88 kilowatts (120 PS; *118 bhp*) @ 5,600 rpm; 175 newton metres (*129 ft·lbf*) @ 2,600 rpm — AUZ, ASU, AVA (Note: _*Timing belt*_):thumbdown::thumbdown:

Better yet, the 2.Slo (or 2.Go) 16V (*2.0 R4 16v FSI 110kW*):

110 kilowatts (150 PS; *148 bhp*) @ 6,000 rpm; 200 newton metres (*148 ft·lbf*) @ 3,500 rpm :thumbup::thumbup:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines#2.0_R4_80-86kW


----------



## Rend It (Jan 26, 2005)

*NA 2.0L = 150 hp*

Based on this link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines#2.0_R4_16v_FSI_110kW

I think this is what we'll see in the new Jetta as far as petrol engines go:

*Base* = NA 2.0L 4cyl 150 hp
*2.5* = NA 2.5L 5cyl 170 hp
*GLI* = Turbo 2.0L 4cyl 208 hp


----------



## Yorch (Sep 19, 2001)

Wow ! the car is amazing!

I want to see all the technical specs.

And the best, will be built in Mexico !! :laugh::thumbup:


----------



## Mouser (Aug 20, 2002)

This reminds me of seeing the new Mustang concept years ago at the LA Auto Show. When I saw that car I was blown away. I thought "if the production car looks anything like this, the Mustang will be the first American car I own since I was 16." (My first car was a '77 Camaro I'm embarrassed to say.)

Needless to say, Ford completely screwed up the car for production and what came rolling off the assembly line was a cheap-looking, boring version of its concept-car self. I did not buy a Mustang.

I'm getting deja vu from this new Jetta. A real shame.


----------



## Mccian (Nov 29, 2008)

*2.0 Slow Oil Usage*



paul99 said:


> I am hoping that they fix those problems with 2.0 L base engine, eating excessively oil, :sly:


I still drive a '98 MkIII - just over 209 000 miles with no engine work, never had to add a drop of oil between changes (every 3K - 5K) . 
My wifes' '99 MkIV GTI GLS with 2.0 slow - now that is a different animal altogether, drinks oil all the time.:banghead:
Basically same engine - two totally different results.


----------



## Blue Golfer (Feb 4, 2003)

OneVW2many said:


> I think we bought VW's because we liked the european styling and characteristics that made them somewhat unique as cars. VW will fail trying to homogenize the brand to become the perfect faux 'North American' marketing wet-dream. Step to the back of the line with Kia, Hyundai, Toyota... !
> 
> Simply mind-numbing.


Yes, but we should all hope for the mass success of the Jetta becuase it will allow VW to sell more interesitng cars like the Golf as loss leaders. Let the Jetta and the NMS make enough money for VW here and maybe they'll even bring the Scirocco over, too!


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Rend It said:


> Based on this link:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines#2.0_R4_16v_FSI_110kW
> 
> ...


However it does not make sense to have a base engine require premium fuel. Yes, the 2.0 FSI in europe requires 95 RON (roughly 91 AKI here).


----------



## randy (Feb 18, 1999)

I don't know how VW product planners nailed this as well as they did. Remember, this car probably was started planning at least 3-4 years ago. That was pre-recession.

So VW gives you a great value product! In today's society, people are watching every penny. Good job VW!

And it's now almost as big as the B5 Passat........ hmmmm, with 2.0 T engine, I may be persuaded to get this car (provided they offer some upgrades in a couple years... like external temp gage, and chrome ring gauges).

-Randy


----------



## Andrew 16v (Jul 29, 2003)

VWYankee said:


> It's amazing to me how slight changes in the lines from the concept can absolutely destroy the look of the car. The hard lines on the rear of the concept are very nice and give it an aggressive look. They softened that right up to give it a nice Kia Forte mix with a 2002 Accord rear end so it's uber bland. The roofline, the front end lines. All of them have the same changes from the concept to make what appeared to be the best looking Jetta yet to the most bland looking with just minor changes to those lines. I prefer a hatch anyway, but it's just sad that the design changed that much from the concept that looked so great. The GLI doesn't have a chance outside of some minor things they will change (headlights, grill and maybe a more agressive front bumper). It still won't look as good as the concept.
> 
> From Great:
> To Terrible with just minor line changes:





rdevine said:


> I agree with you 100%. The production car is a letdown after seeing the renderings. They were much more aggressive and distinctive compared to this wallflower design. It amazes me that VW couldn't just tweak the sheetmetal a bit more for a homerun design. It was almost there...so close.
> 
> When the spy photos leaked out, I knew I was going to be disappointed. People kept harping on the fact that the details were hidden, but I begged to differ. The design was there for all to see, and like you said, the sharp and angular lines of the rendering made it much sportier than the production version revealed. Again, they finally had the opportunity to break away from the "Golf with a trunk" stigma, and really distinguish this car. They failed.
> 
> Maybe a GLI or R (wishful thinking) version will change my perception of the thing, but I'm not holding my breath.



You guys are blind. The car in the renderings looks 99% like the car revealed. The difference is obviously the apperance package (spoiler, bumpers & side skirts).

Do you really think VW would release renderings of a base model? They're gonna release rendrings of the most elegant looking model to get the buyers attention. 

The pictures I've seen of the new Jetta looks like one of the best looking 16k dollar cars I've seen. 

Quit your crying and wait till the GLI comes out if your that concerned about apperance. But ofcourse you'll complain then also so. . . .


----------



## SAPJetta (Feb 3, 2001)

While I don't mind the looks of it, per se, I can see all over where corners were cut to keep the costs down.

No IRS, trunk hinges from the 80's, return of the hard plasticy interior bits (no different from my cheapo Rabbit), boring gauge cluster, viva la 2.slow!, etc etc.

I will be very curious to see what they do with a GLI since the base model is starting at $14.9 or so. Give us a GLI around $22k and that gives them quite a bit of additional room to work with.


----------



## spiceykim82 (Feb 15, 2010)

Yup I am going to be sticking with my MKV this is awful! I do not like the look of it at all....looks like something an old person would drive F that crap.


----------



## sofaman (Jun 17, 2010)

OK, I'm gonna be in the minority, but just for diverse views, I'll give the family guy perspective. . .

And, just know, I kinda hate saying this, but the added size is welcome. Really I hate the automotive bloating trend, but as an owner of a much loved Mk V, we only needed two things: a bit more rear room for the dog plus two teenagers, and. . . a diesel (which was unavailable when we bought.)

The look is ever more generic, agreed, but it's not offensive. If we could get all the above with the improved chassis (right?) and wind up with a roomy, economical, decent performing german sedan for a mere $20kish, then this becomes the family car, my Mitsubishi Endeavor goes away (finally) and I'm thinking of a used first gen. Honda Insight (cue laughter). 

Now before you scream "get a Passat" we tried that. Way too soft and "american."


----------



## buggy4cars (May 12, 2008)

Anyone hearing anything more about 4 wheel drive coming to the Jetta line? Read it a few weeks back but haven't heard anything since.


----------



## DJMcGoven (Mar 2, 2007)

Maybe I missed it somewhere in between the 5 pages, but was it stated that the SE, SEL or TDI trims WON'T have the Full MFD? Was it offically stated or are we just guessing based on what was released?

Also... any word on when official US stats will be out? Another month or so?

I think the look is nice, though I am slightly worried it will be like the Corolla (mostly) as far who buys it. I say that because as far as the newer VWs, owners take care of their cars well. I don't see dented up CCs or Eos'. I've even seen fairly taken care of MKV Jetta's. I'm just hoping to not see these MKVI's dirty, dented and abused... lol. I probably take too much pride in VW


----------



## thund3rh4wk (Jul 28, 2004)

Looks classy. Not particularly excited about the de-contenting but I understand the need for an affordable product. Hopefully the GLI will still be a good value. I also hope that in general this thing drives well and reviews well and is not the beginning of the end of VW's exciting yet affordable european vehicles.

Btw, it looks better low :thumbup: :thumbup:


----------



## rav_75 (Dec 5, 2001)

*Not great, not bad*

The latest Jetta is okay, kind of plain looking. Actually the last Jetta I liked, and drive, is my MK4 Wolfy. Still love it. The new one just doesn't seem to invoke as much excitement. I'm glad however that they've moved away from the Corolla design. I know it's in the push to lower price, but the article stated that they cheapened up the interior materials a bit. That's unfortunate, that was one of the key areas that grabbed me when I bought my MK4, the sweet interior. Even today, almost 10 years later I think it still looks great.

Anyhow, my two cents.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

The bean counters are going to kill VW... 

Since when do you come out with a updated model, that is a downgrade in many important areas..
Losing the multi-link rear suspension..
Trunk hinge design from 1980..
Trunk lid that is not fully lined..
Gauges that would look at home on a Polo..
Going to levers to adjust the recline of the seats..
"B" pillar design that would look at home on a mid 80s Corolla..
I've heard the base model will have drum brakes in back..
What else have they cut, scaled back, or done away with that we don't know about??

Yes, VW needs a cheaper car, but don't take a great car and strip it down to meet a price..
VW has cheaper cars all over the world. Bring some of them here, and leave the Jetta alone..
I have a MK5, and was really looking forward to the MK6, but I'm not going backward, and that's what VW is doing with this car.. 

Selling cheap crap may increase your sales, but it will also kill your reputation for building quality cars..


Buy the way, someone posted about the MK6 Jetta Wagon.. It doesn't exist yet.. The current Jetta wagon is a MK5 chassis with a MK6 Golf nose and dash.. Underneath it is still a MK5, so it doesn't have the benefits of the MK6 chassis..


----------



## Mr Brown (Aug 15, 2006)

The trunk hinges make it a non-starter for me, what's next lever operated seat recline? I love the styling but the cost cutting went way too far, any long time VW owner can see it. VW went backwards BIG time on this one when compared with the value for $$$ of the early MKV's. I am glad I bought out my MKV lease, if this is the road VW is going down it will be my last VW.


----------



## 71sbeetle (Apr 12, 2002)

my neck started hurting from looking at the trunk hinges all the time while I drove my wife's 07 Jetta so now I don't look at those anymore while I drive, so I don't give a rat's a$$ what they look like


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

Mr Brown said:


> The trunk hinges make it a non-starter for me, *what's next lever operated seat recline?* I love the styling but the cost cutting went way too far, any long time VW owner can see it. VW went backwards BIG time on this one when compared with the value for $$$ of the early MKV's. I am glad I bought out my MKV lease, if this is the road VW is going down it will be my last VW.


Here ya go, 










That looks like a lever where the knob used to be to adjust the seat recline..


71sbeetle, I don't care what the trunk hinges LOOK like..
I don't look at them while driving either, but stuff your trunk completely full, as I have done many times, and try to shut it with hinges like on the new Jetta.. This is a step backwards, just to save a few pennies, and it makes the car look cheap..


----------



## tomh009 (Nov 28, 2001)

LMGS said:


> Trunk hinge design from 1980..


The trunk hinge design is straight from the 2010 AMG C63 -- that's $54K vs $15K for the Jetta:
http://l.yimg.com/dv/izp/mercedes_benz_c_class_c63_amg_sport_sedan_2009_other_trunk.jpg

Semi-independent rear suspension and drum brakes are for the base model. If you want a $15K car you probably don't care -- and if you buy the GLI, you'll get disc brakes and IRS. What's the problem with that?


----------



## NJRoadfan (Sep 16, 2006)

tomh009 said:


> Semi-independent rear suspension and drum brakes are for the base model. If you want a $15K car you probably don't care -- and if you buy the GLI, you'll get disc brakes and IRS. What's the problem with that?


Audi did this in the 80s/90s. FWD cars came with drum brakes (later on rear disc became standard) and torsion beam rear suspension. quattro models always got IRS with disc brakes.


----------



## friffith (May 9, 2005)

I love love love the styling of the MkVI Golf and GTI but the Jetta has somehow gone terribly wrong.

I see a Honda Accord front end









...and and Audi A4 rear end 









I dig the share of Audi styling but from the rear tire forward is not doin it for me.

Just my .02


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

tomh009 said:


> The trunk hinge design is straight from the 2010 AMG C63 -- that's $54K vs $15K for the Jetta:
> http://l.yimg.com/dv/izp/mercedes_benz_c_class_c63_amg_sport_sedan_2009_other_trunk.jpg
> 
> Semi-independent rear suspension and drum brakes are for the base model. If you want a $15K car you probably don't care -- and if you buy the GLI, you'll get disc brakes and IRS. What's the problem with that?


Not quite the same.. I'm sure those hinges slide into pockets, so they don't take up room in the trunk.. If the hinges on the MK5 were the same as they are on the MK6, then it wouldn't be that big of a problem for me.. I see the MK6 hinges as a downgrade, and I like it when VW improves their designs.. 

Why go to the expense to have two different suspensions for the same car, and why screw the people who can only afford a base car??? 

The R32 is AWD, and it has the same rear suspension as the FWD GTI..


The whole MK6 Jetta is a *BIG* disappointment to *ME*..


----------



## rdevine (Feb 12, 2004)

Andrew 16v said:


> You guys are blind. The car in the renderings looks 99% like the car revealed. The difference is obviously the apperance package (spoiler, bumpers & side skirts).
> 
> Do you really think VW would release renderings of a base model? They're gonna release rendrings of the most elegant looking model to get the buyers attention.
> 
> ...


Quit my crying and complaining? Obviously, I'm a lifelong VW fan, and I've demonstrated that by actually BUYING VWs. I've owned 4 Jettas, and currently have 2 $30K+ VWs in my garage. I'm not interested in saving a few bucks at the expense of a quality product. That's why I kept coming back to the marque. If the Jetta oozed the kind of quality that we've all come expect (such as the new GTI), this forum wouldn't have the countless posts expressing disappointment. Styling wise, the new Jetta looks more than acceptable. But everytime I climbed inside, I would be seriously bummed. My last 4 VWs have completely spoiled me in that regard.

Face it, they've taken the Jetta and moved it back in class. I would happily pay $25-30K for a worthy GLI successor with the new GTI interior. An R model would up the ante even more. But I fear the GLI will still be stuck with a good deal of the crappy cost-cutting feel.


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

A lot of you are missing the point. Yes, obviously some measures were taken to reduce the price. We can all see that. VW is trying to increase their sales volume and be more competitive with the Civic, Corolla, ect. If they have to reduce costs to get to that point and move more cars, so be it. Most people looking at a Civic, Corolla, or now Jetta don't know and/or care what kind of rear suspension it has or what the trunk hinge design is. They care how it looks, both inside and out, the price, and the name. VW has covered all those bases. The point is volume will go up. And for VW's entry level car, that is a good thing. It will give them more room to make new and exciting products.

Remember that this is just the Jetta. Most of us want the GLI or possible R anyways. We should wait to see how those turn out before we all jump to conclusions. I'll say that I love the lines of the car and the interior design. The GLI has potential for greatness. Think how much better a GTI looks compared to a base Golf. With some more aggressive bumpers, a lower stance, and some good wheels; we could have something great.


----------



## Docpsycho (Feb 12, 2006)

*My Notes*

1. Hood shape curve from cowl to grill -phaeton-esque :thumbup:
2. Front headlights trying to be a H. Accord trying to be BMW-ish 
3. Had to replay vid... swore I was looking at the rear of an A4 for a moment :thumbup:
4: Hard crease down side of vehicle..... BANGLE = BAD, again BMW-ish:banghead:
5: line of lower grill opening don't flow well to the crease line of the hood. it flows up and out, but then you must strait line up to the hood crease, which cut the inside corner of the headlights.... doesn't flow well 
6: door side of mirrors........:what:
7: cluster display... love the minimalist look. hope it cycles for temp reading.
8: SPORTWAGEN!? 

9: WTF on the Japanese type trunk hinges? bring back the clean MK3/4 style. a wide opening is useless with those in the way!

Otherwise, an overall improvement from generation 5 IMHO.:beer:

PS Wondering what speciality tools are need now for us mechanic types...........


----------



## wuzilla (Oct 14, 2001)

LMGS said:


> Selling cheap crap may increase your sales, but it will also *kill your reputation for building quality cars..*




I know the forum look has changed, but is this still the vortex? You guys feeling ok?


----------



## Blue Golfer (Feb 4, 2003)

Who cares about the trunk hinges? The fact is, I wouldn't buy it because it has a trunk! Give me a hatch any day!


----------



## eatpiealot (Jan 25, 2008)

tomh009 said:


> Semi-independent rear suspension and drum brakes are for the base model. If you want a $15K car you probably don't care -- and if you buy the GLI, you'll get disc brakes and IRS. What's the problem with that?


Drum brakes are coming on the base model? My problem with that is that my 99.5 base model Golf came equipped with rear disc brakes. My 1980 Rabbit, on the other hand, came with drum brakes, and that's just pickled.


----------



## jt203 (Oct 8, 2009)

Overall, I really like the car, I really like the style... but a few items I think they may have skipped a few too many beats on:

(These are more directed at the SEL & GLI models)
- No Projecter Headlights?!?
- No Dual Zone Climate Controls? ...My wife's 2005.5 Jetta had it.
- Is Real Leather going to be available again?
- Please tell me they will put in the full heads-up MFD for the models with Nav!
- And why is this not the same steering wheel from the Passat and CC??
- Power front seats?
- And lastly, and most important to me.... WHAT ABOUT THE WAGON?!?!?! ...Please tell me this update will make it to the tourer too!


----------



## idunno (May 9, 2001)

*6th Gen Jetta*

Not crazy about this...seems like a _*slightly *_undersized Passat. Is that really what
we're calling for here?


----------



## sleepbelowstars (Sep 16, 2004)

idunno said:


> Not crazy about this...seems like a _*slightly *_undersized Passat. Is that really what
> we're calling for here?


We? Meaning people on the enthusiasts that constantly post on the forums, no (so far I would say there are more negative comments, then positive).

We? Meaning people in the US. Only time will tell.

I slightly undersized, stripped down version of the Passat that cost around 15K. It might just work.

I don't think this is going to be a car that people (not the base model anyway) are going to get all giddy and excited about, but I think it'll sell just fine.


----------



## Rage In The Machines (Aug 27, 2002)

What a bunch of cry babies! Hinges, who cares, the Ferrari F40 had a piece of cord to close the door. the Porsche speedster had a leather strap for the handle. The 2.0, that is a solid bulletproof motor with roots going back to 74'. The 8 valve can handle up to 700 hp in accordance to tectonics. The IRS or lack of it, come on! The trailing arm design rides on rails if setup right. People were critical when the Mk3, Mk4 and Mk5 Jettas came out. I remembered they called the Mk3 a Hyundai look-alike. the Mk4 they called it a Neon look-alike and the Mk5 they even said "Is VW trying to get out of the American market?"


----------



## TOMPASS (Apr 6, 2010)

VWYankee said:


> It's amazing to me how slight changes in the lines from the concept can absolutely destroy the look of the car. The hard lines on the rear of the concept are very nice and give it an aggressive look. They softened that right up to give it a nice Kia Forte mix with a 2002 Accord rear end so it's uber bland. The roofline, the front end lines. All of them have the same changes from the concept to make what appeared to be the best looking Jetta yet to the most bland looking with just minor changes to those lines. I prefer a hatch anyway, but it's just sad that the design changed that much from the concept that looked so great. The GLI doesn't have a chance outside of some minor things they will change (headlights, grill and maybe a more agressive front bumper). It still won't look as good as the concept.
> 
> From Great:
> 
> ...


Just to set the record straight: 
If you go back to the original KM article, it clearly states "Based on what we have seen, numerous spy photos and more WE HAVE CREATED A FAIRLY ACCURATE DIGITAL RENDERING..." This was never an official VW Concept, rendering nor even a real car. 
While your comments make sense, don't blame VW for those differences.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

LMGS said:


> Why go to the expense to have two different suspensions for the same car, and why screw the people who can only afford a base car???


The B5 Passat is the same way: mine has IRS, but the base/FWD models had the torsion beam suspension. And the B5 - when it came out - was lauded as the best family car in the US (rightly so, because of its longitudinal engine, great weight distribution, aluminum suspension bits, and Audi chassis).



LMGS said:


> The R32 is AWD, and it has the same rear suspension as the FWD GTI..


Only because the MkV got IRS - in the MkIV, only the R had IRS.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

paul99 said:


> I am hoping that they fix those problems with 2.0 L base engine, eating excessively oil, :sly:


Mine did not use any oil in 170,000 miles - ever.

You are probably referring to the limited series that had a piston ring installed upside-down.

That said, they should have (i) accelerated the design of the new 2.0, and (ii) waited until that one was ready to go. Or simply used the 1.4 TSI. The old 2.slow just look bad, in 2010: the competition has 40 - 50% more power and gets 30% better mileage.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

B5V said:


> Better yet, the 2.Slo (or 2.Go) 16V (*2.0 R4 16v FSI 110kW*):
> 
> 110 kilowatts (150 PS; *148 bhp*) @ 6,000 rpm; 200 newton metres (*148 ft·lbf*) @ 3,500 rpm :thumbup::thumbup:





Rend It said:


> Based on this link:
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines#2.0_R4_16v_FSI_110kW
> 
> ...



VW pretty much discontinued that engine several years ago (AWD Passat may be the last application). The reason: it is rough, unrefined, and expensive (needs a special piston head and NO_x catalytic converter, and needs ultra-low sulfur, super-premium high octane gas) --- but never kept the promise of lower fuel consumption. Which is logical: it just saves gas in lean-burn mode, when you don't use much to begin with.

VW has much better engines than that one.


----------



## B5V (Apr 1, 2000)

feels_road said:


> VW pretty much discontinued that engine several years ago (AWD Passat may be the last application). The reason: it is rough, unrefined, and expensive (needs a special piston head and NO_x catalytic converter, and needs ultra-low sulfur, super-premium high octane gas) --- but never kept the promise of lower fuel consumption. Which is logical: it just saves gas in lean-burn mode, when you don't use much to begin with.
> 
> VW has much better engines than that one.


You're referring to this discontinued *non-FSI *EA113 2.0 variant (Engine code ABF):

2.0 R4 16v 100-110kW

identification
parts code prefix: ???, ID codes: ABF, 9A
engine displacement & engine configuration
1,984 cubic centimetres (121.1 cu in) inline-four engine (R4/I4); bore: 82.5 mm (3.25 in), stroke: 92.8 mm (3.65 in), stroke ratio: 0.89:1 - undersquare/long-stroke, 496.0 cc per cylinder
cylinder block & crankcase
CG25 grey cast iron, five main bearings, die-forged steel crankshaft, forged steel connecting rods
cylinder head & valvetrain
cast aluminium alloy, four valves per cylinder, 16 valves total, double overhead camshaft (DOHC)
aspiration
cast aluminium alloy intake manifold
engine management
Siemens 5WP4 304 (Golf & Ibiza) CIS-E, or Bosch Motronic, or Digifant (ABF) engine control units
DIN-rated motive power & torque outputs
9A: 100 kilowatts (136 PS; 134 bhp) @ 5,800 rpm; 180 newton metres (133 ft·lbf) @ 3,500 rpm (CIS-E & Motronic)
*ABF: 110 kilowatts (150 PS; 148 bhp) @ 6,000rpm; 180 newton metres (133 ft·lbf) @ 4,800 rpm*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...l_engines#Four_cylinder_EA827.2FEA113_petrols

The new 2.0 150hp I'm referring to is *FSI *(Engine code: BPG or exceeding) and is still in production:

2.0 R4 16v FSI 110kW

identification
parts code prefix: ???, ID code: BPG
engine displacement & engine configuration
1,984 cubic centimetres (121.1 cu in) inline-four engine (R4/I4); bore x stroke: 82.5 by 92.8 millimetres (3.25 in × 3.65 in), stroke ratio: 0.89:1 - undersquare/long-stroke, 496.1 cc per cylinder, compression ratio: 11.5:1
cylinder block & crankcase
CG25 grey cast iron; five main bearings, die-forged steel crankshaft
cylinder head & valvetrain
cast aluminium alloy; four valves per cylinder, 16 valves total, low-friction roller finger cam followers, double overhead camshaft (DOHC), continuously adjustable intake camshaft
aspiration
variable intake manifold and dual-branch front pipe
fuel system
common rail Fuel Stratified Injection (FSI), single-piston high-pressure injection pump, air-guided homogeneous combustion process, stratified lean-burn operation with excess air at part load
DIN-rated motive power & torque output
*BPG:110 kilowatts (150 PS; 148 bhp) @ 6,000 rpm; 200 newton metres (148 ft·lbf) @ 3,500 rpm
*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_Group_petrol_engines#2.0_R4_80-86kW

Get your facts straight.


----------



## borapumpkin (Nov 23, 2005)

i love this car. this is definitely one to get excited about!


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

B5V said:


> You're referring to this discontinued *non-FSI *EA113 2.0 variant (Engine code ABF)


No.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

borapumpkin said:


> i love this car. this is definitely one to get excited about!


Well to each, his own......

This car is a total disappointment to me... I've had a MK1, MK2, and my current MK5 Jetta, all bought new.. This is the first new Jetta that I really don't even care about.. It is not "new and improved", it is a huge step backwards.. 

I guess my next new car, will not be a Jetta.. Hopefully it will still be a VW..


----------



## B5V (Apr 1, 2000)

feels_road said:


> No.


:screwy:


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

B5V said:


> :screwy:


No :screwy: necessary - I know which engine I am referring to - the engine with direct fuel injection. It was touted as the the next best thing after sliced bread when introduced, and failed miserably in most aspects: too expensive, harsh, not nearly class-leading power, and never achieved the desired nor claimed fuel economy. Therefore, it was withdrawn from all of its major applications years ago. Cheers. :beer:


----------



## liquid stereo (Feb 26, 2003)

*very hum drum.*

I will be purchasing a new sedan this Fall/Winter and I can safely say it will not be a VW. I was hoping for the next Jetta or Jetta Sportwagen but they've lost the plot.

The styling is simply ridiculous.
Plus, back to the torsion beam.

The Jetta is competing with the Corolla and Hyundai is kicking everyone's butt with CLS-style aesthetics.
Hyundai Sonata it is.


----------



## B5V (Apr 1, 2000)

feels_road said:


> No :screwy: necessary - I know which engine I am referring to - the engine with direct fuel injection. It was touted as the the next best thing after sliced bread when introduced, and failed miserably in most aspects: too expensive, harsh, not nearly class-leading power, and never achieved the desired nor claimed fuel economy. Therefore, it was withdrawn from all of its major applications years ago. Cheers. :beer:


So what "crappy FSI" engine is that..specs, engine code?

I read nothing but empty rants..:screwy:


----------



## MeineFolks'wagen (May 8, 2002)

BClear said:


> A lot of you are missing the point. Yes, obviously some measures were taken to reduce the price. We can all see that. VW is trying to increase their sales volume and be more competitive with the Civic, Corolla, ect. If they have to reduce costs to get to that point and move more cars, so be it. Most people looking at a Civic, Corolla, or now Jetta don't know and/or care what kind of rear suspension it has or what the trunk hinge design is. They care how it looks, both inside and out, the price, and the name. VW has covered all those bases. The point is volume will go up. And for VW's entry level car, that is a good thing. It will give them more room to make new and exciting products.


This ^^

Every time VW makes something new, all of the "enthusiasts" start crying foul because of petty nonsense (i.e. trunk hinges). VW is out to make a mass market appeal vehicle that is dependable and at a good price point. Like the guy said above, your average buyer couldn't give a rats ass about hinges, B pillars, levers for the seats, etc. You want something better, buy a fancier more expensive car. Or buy the base model and spend $20K modding it out


----------



## vwventovr6 (Nov 9, 2001)

Well, I've been waiting for this car for a while as I'm looking to move up from my Mk3 Jetta GLX, which has served me well. I think VW did nice job with the Mk6. From a styling perspective, it is an improvement over Mk5. Yes it does take some cues from Audi's design but it also reminds me of a smaller version of the Passat CC. 

I'm disappointed with VW's decision to offer the vehicle at such a low price point. My understanding has always been that "City" line was to offer customers a vehicle at a low end price point. VW's have been gaining a reputation amoung new buyers that they are getting vehicles that look more expensive than they are. Have you seen the interior of a base Civic lately? 

I hope the GLI or GLX version (since I'm Canadian I always prefered the GTX badge on the Mk2 and the GLX badge on the Mk3 & early Mk4) takes the car to the next level. As for hardcore enthusists, they will always have something to say or do. The only mods on my Mk3 have been related to the suspension. The VR is fantastic engine and I was happy with it for my needs. Friends still get a kick out of the torque it has. In anycase, if I end up with a Mk6, I'll probably do the same suspension mods simply because, I would never expect VW to do a sport suspension that involves more than shorter springs and stiffer dampners.

I'm assuming that the GLI will feature the same 2.0L FSI engine found in the Mk6 GTI. Does that seem a little weak compared to other "sport" models? Yes, we can chip these guys but I would prefer to see more power from the factory...


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

MeineFolks'wagen said:


> This ^^
> 
> Every time VW makes something new, all of the "enthusiasts" start crying foul because of petty nonsense (i.e. trunk hinges). VW is out to make a mass market appeal vehicle that is dependable and at a good price point. Like the guy said above, your average buyer couldn't give a rats ass about hinges, B pillars, levers for the seats, etc. You want something better, buy a fancier more expensive car. Or buy the base model and spend $20K modding it out


Wrong...

So VW is saying screw the "enthusiast", who have always bought their cars, so they can sell to morons who don't care anything about the cars?? They just want something cheap!!! Not a good way to build your business, and not a good way to get future purchases..

I agree that VW needs a cheaper car, but don't kill an established car to get it..

Carry on......


----------



## GolfTango (Feb 15, 2001)

VW took a huge step backwards with the MK VI. Yes, it's larger, has some nice exterior design elements (but looks more like a Kia Forte than a A4). But power the base model with the 2.0? Really VW? I don't care how proven it is, VW could have developed a smaller displacement powerplant to be on the same level as Honda, Toyota, GM and Ford. But instead, took a cheap way out by dusting off the 2.0. Heck, even the GM Ecotec 2.4 is light years ahead of the 2.0 and puts out a nice 160 horsepower plus. 

Then there is the interior. Horrible. Boring, lackluster, budget. Not what VW has prided itself on. Shame on VW. I'd rather drive the MK IV.


----------



## leftside (Sep 25, 2005)

meh


----------



## sleepbelowstars (Sep 16, 2004)

LMGS said:


> Wrong...
> 
> So VW is saying screw the "enthusiast", who have always bought their cars, so they can sell to morons who don't care anything about the cars?? They just want something cheap!!! Not a good way to build your business, and not a good way to get future purchases..
> 
> ...


You are talking about a base model. Most enthusiasts aren't buying the base model anyway. Sure the hinges might stay the same, but the GLI will likely have A LOT of upgrades from the model listed.

Only time will tell.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

sleepbelowstars said:


> You are talking about a base model. Most enthusiasts aren't buying the base model anyway. Sure the hinges might stay the same, but the GLI will likely have A LOT of upgrades from the model listed.
> 
> Only time will tell.


So.........

Check out a base model MKV, and a MKV GLI... Notice that they both have independent rear suspension.. Both have rear disc brakes.. Both have the same trunk hinges, and yes the hinges DO matter to me, because I have stuffed my trunk full on many trips, and was still able to close the trunk.. 

Yeah, the GLI has a better engine, suspension tuning, bigger brakes, and many other upgrades that makes it a GLI.. But the basic car is the same, just upgraded with better stuff..


----------



## JohnTT (Dec 7, 2001)

I remember not too long ago when the MKV first appeared. :screwy: Everyone thought is was too expensive. Now VW finally has a Jetta that is priced just right. We will sell more of these than the previous versions.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

There is a fine line between stripping a car down to a price, and still keeping enough content in it to make people feel that they got a good value for their money..

I'm all for VW selling more cars.. Bring in the Polo, bring in a REAL VW minivan, bring in the pickup..
http://www.worldcarfans.com/109060419756/volkswagen-amarok-name-announced-for-new-pickup-truck

Even bring in the UP car, http://www.vw.com/upcomingcars/upconcept/en/us/

All I've tried to get across in this thread, is don't ruin the next Jetta, by making it into a cheap car, just to get sales.. 

And yes, I think going back to the trunk hinges that look flimsier than the ones that my 1989 Jetta had, is a mistake.. That is something people see, and it just screams cheap!!


----------



## JETTAWOLFS98 (Aug 13, 2002)

*here is the video*


----------



## sleepbelowstars (Sep 16, 2004)

LMGS said:


> So.........
> 
> Check out a base model MKV, and a MKV GLI... Notice that they both have independent rear suspension.. Both have rear disc brakes.. Both have the same trunk hinges, and yes the hinges DO matter to me, because I have stuffed my trunk full on many trips, and was still able to close the trunk..
> 
> Yeah, the GLI has a better engine, suspension tuning, bigger brakes, and many other upgrades that makes it a GLI.. But the basic car is the same, just upgraded with better stuff..


I get what you are saying, I'm just guessing there will be bigger changes from the base to GLI than in previous models.

15K car vs. ~24K should have significant upgrades. It might even feel like a whole new car on the same platform.

The trunk hinges however, might stay constant, and I completely agree that stuff like that does matter.


----------



## Jetty! (May 10, 2006)

Biggest Jetta ever, multilink rear is no longer standard?, and for some reason they're bringing back that dreaded 2.Slow.

Looks real nice at least. Can't say I'd ever get one, especially since a new GLI will just be the same as a GTI, but with a trunk. Not much of an upgrade from the previous generation.


----------



## JohnTT (Dec 7, 2001)

LMGS said:


> Wrong...
> 
> So VW is saying screw the "enthusiast", who have always bought their cars, so they can sell to morons who don't care anything about the cars?? They just want something cheap!!! Not a good way to build your business, and not a good way to get future purchases..
> 
> ...


Wait until the TDI or GLI arrive.


----------



## groundupjetta (Feb 1, 2010)

2.slow is baaack 
I loved the new look and I'm happy to see the 2.0 back but I just cant believe it. This engine is been around for 3 decades winner - winner - winner :thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## charlie_murphy! (Apr 6, 2009)

Hey lady, nice rental car!


Nothing at all like the coupe teaser.....


----------



## sbtwo (Jun 7, 2005)

wtf? did vw fire the mk v designers it stole from the corolla team in order to hire some new ones from hyundai? jetta vi is hideous.:thumbdown::thumbdown::thumbdown:


----------



## 85GTI (Dec 19, 2000)

VWYankee said:


> From Great:
> To Terrible with just minor line changes:
> ]


Don't really see much difference.


----------



## rexxmann (Sep 4, 2002)

I know the press release does say the 2.0 is returning from the MK4 but hopefully they are just referring to the displacement and not the actual engine itself. There is nothing wrong with the 2.0. In it's day it was a very decent engine with lots of torque and decent mileage. My wife had it in her MK4 Jetta and it was plenty quick for a work-a-day engine (just not for the stoplight racer crowd). 

With all the new technology and advancements I would hope VW can provide an improved version. I'm thinking 130-140 hp with ~ 32-35mpg highway. Of course new technology (like direct injection) means additional cost. Still, I appreciate what VW is trying to do from a marketing standpoint. VW sales numbers have been dropping for a long time. They sell half as many cars as Hyundai and a fraction of what Toyota, GM, Ford, Honda, Nissan and Chrysler sell. The majority of people who flock to Corollas, Civics, Elantras, Focus, etc are buying because of some vague perceived sense of value for the money. I am sure that a torsion beam suspension versus a multilink is totally lost on them and I'm sure a 2.0 is just a 4-cylinder to them without the 2 point-slow baggage most people seem to carry around here. Being able to advertise the Jetta as starting at $14,995 should bring some new customers into the showroom especially when they see Jettas on the road and realize it's bigger and (IMO) better looking than the competition.

On a side note, I'm glad to hear the GLI will come with the multilink rear suspension. :thumbup:


----------



## munich1 (Aug 7, 2003)

*2009 Jetta SE*

After seeing this new version, I more inclined to hold onto my '09 Jetta SE. I'll probably keep it 10 years in fact.


----------



## bmwloco (Oct 14, 2006)

I work at a VW dealership. In fact, I am a Certified Master.

That said, I have no opinion and will not say anything until I drive the damned thing! See it in the flesh!

And I will, in August. 

Until then, they are pictures.


----------



## captain coordination (Nov 4, 2004)

*meh*

i dunno. can't decide if i actually like the looks of it or not...kinda just looks like every other new sedan on the road IMO.

the pics of the silver one in the pic gallery looked WAY better than those of the one in the article, however.

maybe it will grow on me but.......


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

I want to post a few of my thoughts: LONG POST!

first most of you are bitching because you are jealous you either have an mk3 or mk4 and can't afford a new car, or that you think VW has "SOLD OUT" to the hardcore even though there is and never was really anything hardcore about VW or especially JETTAS for that matter. VW wants to make a corolla killer and they succeeded and to succeed you only need to make a car that's just slightly better to get that sale from college students and milfs. 

second, this car shouldn't come out till 2012. with 10,000 jettas selling every year, if it ain't broke don't fix it. 

*my thoughts on the engine: *

who cares about the 2.0, if you don't want it don't buy it. if nobody buys the base engine, then vw will discontinue it, just like that.. if people do buy it, who cares, the majority of losers drive civics and corollas so they don't care about performance or valves. 

*price: *

for $15k lets be honest you will get a crummy car with cheap plastic pillars and cloth and 15" hubs and that trim will be the best seller so they can use mass production to keep prices lower

the car you see with moonroof, touch screen radio, 18" wheels, leatherette, automatic, faux wood will be an SEL and it will probably be around $22-24k because they will not be mass produced and hence the mass production discount will not be as great. 

*exterior: *

the exterior looks fantastic. a definite slight step up from the mk5 which was a def step up from the mk3/4. I wish they offered xenons and LED tail lights tho. 

the pillars should have been fully chromed out though

the headlights should have been a little more aggressive, something doesn't look right about the nose.. it just dives too much. 

*interior: *

here is where i get upset. the center console looks cheap and plasticy like something fisher price manufactures. Not nearly as nice as the older mk5 which had great looking faux wood or aluminum. just plastic looks bad. 

*misc:*

happy that the new models won't come with discs in the back or independent rear suspension. they have to cut costs somehow, plus i'm happy they are degrading the handling/performance as it makes my car seem better in comparison and more sought after having these things. I would be pretty angry if they made the new jetta leaps and bounds better than my mk5 so i am glad they didn't. 

so i can still feel good my car handles better knowing i have better suspension, brakes and a few other things to make the old gen stand out. cars kept getting better and better but now with the failing world economy things just get worse and worse. 

*ALSO I AM HAPPY THEY ARE BRINGING BACK NORTH SEA GREEN COLOR!*

the color they chose to display appears to be northsea green. a limited edition color that I own that was discontinued in 06 i believe. 

so anyway i don't know where i stand with this one yet but so far i'm happy with my performance/lux infiniti and my green mk5 and don't see a need to upgrade any time soon so i'm glad mk6 isn't worth beasting over. 



















ps. who cares about trunk latches? I don't even use my trunk...


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

LMGS said:


> Wrong...
> 
> So VW is saying screw the "enthusiast", who have always bought their cars, so they can sell to morons who don't care anything about the cars?? They just want something cheap!!! Not a good way to build your business, and not a good way to get future purchases..
> 
> ...


Wrong... 

look at nintendo, they went from a powerhouse gamecube to rival the lackluster ps2 and lost..

now they make wiis that have tech from 1997 to rival against the state of the art ps3 and 360 and they are dominating sales in every possible segment and swimming in money. 

nobody cares about a few disgruntled "enthusiasts" they care about "mass market" domination and making as much $$$ as possible the only way for that to happen is to gain market share by catering to people who are on a budget.

if you have the cash go for an S4 and be done with it.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

jawnz said:


> I want to post a few of my thoughts: LONG POST!
> 
> first most of you are bitching because you are jealous you either have an mk3 or mk4 and can't afford a new car, or that you think VW has "SOLD OUT" to the hardcore even though there is and never was really anything hardcore about VW or especially JETTAS for that matter. VW wants to make a corolla killer and they succeeded and to succeed you only need to make a car that's just slightly better to get that sale from college students and milfs.
> 
> ...


If you don't use your trunk, then why did you pay for one???:screwy:

I use my trunk.. 128,000 miles in four years equals quite a few trips..

I do like the North Sea Green....:laugh:


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

cool, mine is a 2005.5 with 17,654 miles as you can see i live 4 sq miles away from everything i need.. how the **** did you get 128k in 4 yrs! i was hoping you would have a 2.5l like me so you can tell me about any inherent problems i should look forward to with the early batches of mk5s

i like having a trunk.. even though i never use it. a car simply doesn't look good without one. 

love what you did with the wheels.. i've been meaning to do some upgrades to mine as it is 100% stock.

although if you were going to black out the grille and smoke the headlights you should have considered going with some kind of anthracite wheels rather than machined.


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

jawnz said:


> cool, mine is a 2005.5 with 17,654 miles as you can see i live 4 sq miles away from everything i need.. how the **** did you get 128k in 4 yrs! i was hoping you would have a 2.5l like me so you can tell me about any inherent problems i should look forward to with the early batches of mk5s
> 
> i like having a trunk.. even though i never use it. a car simply doesn't look good without one.
> 
> ...


OK, that makes sense.. I do use my trunk, but even if I didn't I would probably still have one, since I don't really care for hatchbacks..

My car has the 2.0T, but is not a GLI.. I live in Ar, and most of the car club GTG's that I belong to is in OK, so that adds up to a few miles.. I do like to drive, and have taken several trips to the surrounding states.. 

The wheels are painted Hypersilver... I don't really care for dark wheels.. The grille is a long story, but is still a work in progress..

Back on topic:
I'm pretty disappointed with the new Jetta, so my next car may be something else.. Hopefully still a VW..


----------



## boboised209 (Nov 4, 2004)

Ola said:


> ...as the old VR6 with great milage. Why stay in the olden days when technology is moving on.


ummm... i'm a fan of the little super-turbo but in case you haven't heard... the VR6 sounds amazing... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMoHDlc9sxo


----------



## dboogie (Feb 19, 2008)

*The new Jetta slogan should be......*

..... IT'S A KIA!!!!!!. I apologise if i offend anyone. But this new car looks like a korean clone of a german car. It looks worse than the prevoius generation Jettarolla. And that is something i never thought i would say.I love the new touareg and scirocco, so please do not take me as a volkswagen hator but this new car is just so bland. the interior is georgeous. but i doubt that we can still "stance out" this car and make t look as good as a MKI,II,III,IV? ... or even...V. The german fat boy look is gone. instead-- Kia and Hyundai are out-germaning the germans at making a germanic car.


----------



## ZeroGravity97GT (Sep 19, 2005)

I'm not quite sure I can call myself a VW enthusiast, but I'm a fan. I'm on MK3 number 3 and what I've done with all three has been limited, I've definitely fallen in love. Jetta GT, to GLS, to now a GTI. All 2.0's, also all of which entered my possession with well over 100K and a handful of problems (often lurking). 

I graduate college in 2 years and plan on driving the GTI or something similar until then. 

A kid I went to high school with some how managed to buy an MKIV R32 a couple years after he graduated. Pretty sure his parents had money. My parents don't have money and I don't make much. Some of what I make is put towards the money that has accrued from fixing my past and now current car.
I get by but have always considered something "better."

First I wanted a MKIV 1.8T, which I almost bought. Then it was non-VW, then it was back to VW's, MK5 Value Editions with 70K+.

The new GTI came out and immediately I fell in love. My jaw drops everytime I see one on the road. I still don't know the specs on them, but I know I can't afford it. To keep myself happy I've been telling myself that after I graduate I'll get one. I doubt it. I'll have even more bills to pay by then.

----------------


Now this. Not the sexiest VW ever, but I'm willing to keep my mind open on it until I see it. I honestly don't find MK5's to be "sexy" or to have the same styling elements as older VW's, but I still like them in their own way. I like the idea of a cheap VW, but I agree, bring over a different model. I wouldn't mind a US Polo, but in a couple years I think I like the idea of an affordable pre-owned VW without excess mileage.

I'm a simple please though. That's me, the exact type of consumer they're looking for. 


I felt like I had more to contribute, but oh well, my two cents. :beer:


----------



## plap17 (Jun 24, 2010)

*My first*

Today I am picking up my first VW. 2010 Jetta DSG/TDI, Blue/Black. Got $1000 off sticker, plus rebate. 
I waited and watched for the '11s. My (very unexpert) 2 cents: I have always liked Jettas. Always thought them well designed, equipped, the looks hold up. I heard the gripes about the Mkv - and understood somewhat the design complaints. Perhaps the Mkvi will satisfy many. 
Here's why I went with the '10:
Designers grow and grow and grow cars - to suit american "taste". Jetta has always been, for me, the ultimate compact sedan. I have seen up close an '11. Like the design or not, it's crossed the line (for me) of compact. I know this happens based on market research and often smaller models are introduced. IE Corolla grows, enter Yaris. So perhaps Polo is not far behind.
For me, for now, the '10; I didn't want/need bigger, better. I wanted a Jetta.
Hope I enjoy the purchase. Wish me luck.


----------



## Ondaora20 (Apr 19, 2010)

I found the recently unveiled Mark VI Jetta to be underwhelming initially. But the Jetta I want is going to be their higher end model, whether it's a GLI or an 'R'. The coupe that was unveiled in January was a grand slam IMO. And comparing pictures of the low budget Jetta to the Coupe it's clearly obvious that there are only a few lines/creases/trims on the outside that distinguish the two.

So, I hope the masses find the new Jetta appealing and buy it in droves, because I want VW to make _my_ Jetta next....and if the coupe is any indication of what's coming in the GLI or 'R' versions, I'll be first on line. It's perfect.


----------



## ScottRPriester (May 24, 2010)

thesilentmovies said:


> I love that the 2.0 liter is back, if only to freak out the types who think every Volkswagen should have a million horsepower and be like the GTI.


I've always loved my 2.0 in my Golf GLS. Was more trouble free than my 2.0T


----------



## [email protected] (Sep 17, 2003)

dub_IN said:


> At first I was like
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wow....another excellent example of things they used to do well and go the extra mile and now are taking a back seat to the Japanese....

I used to sell VW for several years and now sell Subaru as a result.

The new Legacy is a way better car and AWD is just the Start......and it has zero intrusion trunk hinges.


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

nobody will really buy a GLI or R jetta the price point will be around $30g with nav/18" wheels/xenons/leather and maybe $25g for a base model and the R could possibly cost upwards of $35g

for $30-35 grand you could start to get real lux or performance car status and not a measly jetta that will never have much more prestige than a corolla or civic


----------



## racingvw92 (Apr 17, 2003)

First, no that impressed.
Second, where's the Fu


----------



## duke_seb (Jul 29, 2003)

vivalamexico said:


> The rear end is very 3 series-like


i thought it looks like an audi

i really like the back actually..... the front... well the lights are nice.... not really digging the bumper though

but overall i like it

im looking forward to seeing the GLI


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

jawnz said:


> nobody will really buy a GLI or R jetta the price point will be around $30g with nav/18" wheels/xenons/leather and maybe $25g for a base model and the R could possibly cost upwards of $35g
> 
> for $30-35 grand you could start to get real lux or performance car status and not a measly jetta that will never have much more prestige than a corolla or civic


You have no idea how much it will cost. Why are you making up figures? Really.


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

racingvw92 said:


> First, no that impressed.
> Second, where's the Fu


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

Air and water do mix said:


> In order:
> 
> If you've never bought a new car, why would VW care if you're impressed or not? (I don't know your buying history, but I'd bet $20 that you haven't)
> 
> ...


You didn't ask me, but to answer your last question, LOOKS... I like a car with a trunk, and the Jetta has always been a "Golf with a trunk"..

I've owned three NEW Jettas.. I will not buy the cheap piece of crap that is the new Jetta...

Of course VW is counting one or two other people who don't know / care what they have done to a great car to buy one, for every enthusiast who walks away...


----------



## Billburt (May 2, 2006)

damn, just saw one debadged drive by my...I recognized it right away. Idk I'm a mkiv GLI guy and hated the mkv styling, but this new jetta at least looks better than the mkv's do...I cn't wait to see some pics of the GLI coming out...I might have to snag one if its decent.


----------



## Air and water do mix (Aug 5, 2004)

LMGS said:


> You didn't ask me, but to answer your last question, LOOKS... I like a car with a trunk, and the Jetta has always been a "Golf with a trunk"..
> 
> I've owned three NEW Jettas.. I will not buy the cheap piece of crap that is the new Jetta...
> 
> Of course VW is counting one or two other people who don't know / care what they have done to a great car to buy one, for every enthusiast who walks away...


IMO, the new one _looks_ better than the old one.

Drive then decide whether or not you can put up with 'cheap piece of crap' trunk hinges. Most of the competition has them as well.

There are 100 regular people for every enthusiast. For them, there is the GLi. Is that what you got in the past? I've owned a couple of Jettas in the past as well. My Mk3 (2.0) was a car... in the generic sense. I liked the way it drove better than a Corolla, but it's certainly no enthusiasts car. I had the same-year GTi VR6 "driver's edition". Some similarities, many differences. Tuning can do much. Basically, "why not give it a shot?" Really. You might be surprised. You might not, too. That could be decontenting within an inch of it's life and it could be because of preconceived notions.

Also, if that 2.5 were in the '97 Jetta I had, it would have gone a long way toward making that car an absolute blast to drive. (brakes and suspension would be needing upgrades as well.)


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

Air and water do mix said:


> IMO, the new one _looks_ better than the old one.
> 
> Drive then decide whether or not you can put up with 'cheap piece of crap' trunk hinges. Most of the competition has them as well.
> 
> ...


That's one reason the Jetta stood out above the competition, they didn't use cheap crap.. Everywhere you looked, it looked like an upscale car.. Now everywhere you look on the new one just screams cheap.. Even if I could live with the trunk hinges, there are other things like the rear suspension, that I will not live with.. It is a step backwards.. None of my Jetta's were GLIs.. When I bought my first one they didn't even have a GLI.. But all the Jettas I bought were the same underneath, as any other Jetta.. Just different trim levels, but what counts was still there, and that's not the case with the new one..

I'm sure I will drive one.. It will be interesting to see how much they have changed them, and how it compares to my four year old car..


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

lol I DO KNOW how much the jetta GLI will cost

just looking at the msrp of the mk4 and mk5 + inflation = $25 grand for a base GLI, 30 grand for a well equipped GLI and $35 grand for an "R" type with AWD

it's not rocket science. 

nobody cares about a GLI which is why they were discontinued in the first place!


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

there is no question the new jetta is a natural evolution aesthetically. the back bumper is very 3 series and the lights are very A4

the front grille has fog lights and looks very CC

the problem is how ****ty the actual BASE model will really be and what a step back the handling will be due to lack of independent rear suspension and possible drum brakes among other cost cutting measures


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

Rant Warning

1) This car isn't even out yet. Quit bitching about how cheap everything is. You all sound like morons passing judgement about something you've never seen. Wait till an actual production model is on a dealership lot with a window sticker, go check it out, drive it, and then bitch if you still see fit to. 

2) You "enthusiasts" and your Jettas kill me. I literally "LOL" every time one of you talks about how you're such a badass enthusiast with your Jetta. It's VWoA's entry level piece. Maybe my idea of enthusiast is skewed, but enthusiast seems to imply high performance, custom, high end; along those lines. Don't go look it up in Websters. We don't care. That's not what it means in real life. It's definitely not something high school girls drive. Just because you appreciate details in a car, doesn't make you an enthusiast.

3) The trunk hinges: fine, maybe some of you stuff your trunks; buy a different car then because of trunk hinges. I dare you. 

4) All of you freaking about the rear suspension, just shut up now before you dig yourself deeper into your stupidity hole. No one can tell. It's not a sports car. You're not going to be tracking it. If you care about the rear suspension, you most likely care about performance, so get the GLI. It will have IRS, and a turbo, that's the performance model. If the GLI went to solid axle, we would have something legit to bitch about. The Jetta is no sports car, it's fwd and less than 200hp. If the axle brings the price down so volume increases and drives just as well, great. I suppose that there is a chance it could ride terrible, but again, let's wait to drive them before freaking out. Ford made the new Mustanks handle amazing with a solid rear end, in a performance car, so it's hard to imagine this being bad.

Cliffnotes: Wait for the car to pass judgement. It's not an enthusiast's car. Buy the GLI if you care. STFU.


----------



## jawnz (Feb 19, 2010)

lol maybe you can't tell the difference in handling. it doesn't matter if 90% of people like you are oblivious to handling 

the fact is they have taken more quality parts and replaced them with outdated parts. period.


----------



## DJMcGoven (Mar 2, 2007)

jawnz said:


> lol maybe you can't tell the difference in handling. it doesn't matter if 90% of people like you are oblivious to handling
> 
> the fact is they have taken more quality parts and replaced them with outdated parts. period.


Not to argue... but... if 90% can't tell the difference between "quality" parts and "outdated" parts... what's to stop them from buying? These "outdated" parts you refer to are cheaper to make, install and maintain. For years 90% of people would buy the cheaper because they have other places their money needs to be.

VW is trying to make profit in America... your logic is a bad business decision.


----------



## PsyberVW (Jul 10, 2000)

vancity 1.8t said:


> Is it just me, or is this car just very boring and generic looking? I mean it doesnt really look much like a previous Jetta. I mean you could put another badge and model on it, and pass it off as someone else's car.
> 
> I mean no one would mistake a BMW or a Mercedes, but this car could belong to almost anybody.


I thought it looked like a new Volvo from the front, an old BMW from the rear...

I'll have to see it in person - but so far, I like the MKV more. The MKV GTi/Golf and now Jetta - both look more like newer designs, while this looks like it fits squarely between the MKIV and MKV - like VW jumped out of sequence..

Still a "nice" car design, just not "great"...


----------



## LMGS (Sep 21, 2007)

BClear said:


> Rant Warning
> 
> 1) This car isn't even out yet. Quit bitching about how cheap everything is. You all sound like morons passing judgement about something you've never seen. Wait till an actual production model is on a dealership lot with a window sticker, go check it out, drive it, and then bitch if you still see fit to.
> 
> ...


1) We HAVE seen it, and read about all they have done to cut costs..

2) I don't really care if you "LOL" when we talk about our Jettas.. My car is "high performance" and "custom".. You don't have to have a high performance car to be a enthusiast.. Enthusiasm has nothing to do with performance, it has more to do with a passion for your cars..

3) The trunk hinges DO matter to some people.. 

4) You are showing your stupidity by saying the rear suspension doesn't matter.. It does matter, especially on a FWD car.. I DO TRACK MY CAR!! And against a MK4, the rear suspension makes a HUGE difference in the cornering.. You don't need 500 hp, and RWD to have a good handling car.. Of course you claiming a Ford "Mustank" is an amazing handling car, really shows you don't know what you are talking about.. 

Maybe to YOU the Jetta is not an enthusiast's car, but to a lot of people it is.. Those people do care what VW is doing to a car they love..


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

capclassicv2 said:


> Not to argue... but... if 90% can't tell the difference between "quality" parts and "outdated" parts... what's to stop them from buying? These "outdated" parts you refer to are cheaper to make, install and maintain. For years 90% of people would buy the cheaper because they have other places their money needs to be.
> 
> VW is trying to make profit in America... your logic is a bad business decision.


Thank you for understanding it's a business move.


----------



## Mouser (Aug 20, 2002)

BClear said:


> 2) You "enthusiasts" and your Jettas kill me. I literally "LOL" every time one of you talks about how you're such a badass enthusiast with your Jetta.


And there are people who literally "LOL" when *you* talk about being an enthusiast with *your* car, whatever car that is - because there are certainly cars out there *far* better and far "more enthusiast-oriented" than whatever you drive. FYI.


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

LMGS said:


> 1) We HAVE seen it, and read about all they have done to cut costs..
> 
> 2) I don't really care if you "LOL" when we talk about our Jettas.. My car is "high performance" and "custom".. You don't have to have a high performance car to be a enthusiast.. Enthusiasm has nothing to do with performance, it has more to do with a passion for your cars..
> 
> ...


:banghead: Yes, you, the majority of Jetta owners, and VW's target demographic are hardcore track enthusiasts. Definitely.


----------



## duke_seb (Jul 29, 2003)

BClear said:


> :banghead: Yes, you, the majority of Jetta owners, and VW's target demographic are hardcore track enthusiasts. Definitely.



wow did you even read what he wrote?


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

Mouser said:


> And there are people who literally "LOL" when *you* talk about being an enthusiast with *your* car, whatever car that is - because there are certainly cars out there *far* better and far "more enthusiast-oriented" than whatever you drive. FYI.


1) I never claimed anything for myself.
2) Duh, there will always be bigger, badder, faster fish in the sea. 
3) You have a valid point. However, in the grand scheme of things, VW's entry level, Corolla-fighter isn't very high up on the enthusiast scale. Sorry. 

I understand the niche that the nice Jetta's have forged. Bottomline is it doesn't matter. If VW can trade one of your sales for 5 sales to the average consumer that doesn't know/care, they're going to. It's just business. Buy something else if you're not happy anymore. That's why there are other automakers.


----------



## BClear (Jun 18, 2010)

duke_seb said:


> wow did you even read what he wrote?


Yes I did. And I had initially started typing a long, detailed response to every point. Then I realized I didn't care that much. I'm not here to try to be an e-thug. They're are valid points either way, and I understand that some feel as though VW has sold out on them to the masses. They have probably lost some potential buyers that were mkv owners. Simply put, the Jetta was never a performance machine. It aimed at the entry level buyer, and obviously VW feels the need to be more aggressive targeting that demographic. Thankfully they will still make a GLI with a turbo and IRS for those concerned with performance.

I'm not here to fight. Some just need to see it's a business move to increase sales volume. That is all.


----------



## Pitz585 (Apr 29, 2011)

I have seen a couple of these driving around Dallas. I think when I retire my Jetta thats what I will pick up.


----------

