# Atlas Test Drive and Lease info



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

So I went to my go to dealership for the past 10 years today for a test drive. They actually had the same one I wanted in stock, Black SEL Premium Black/Golden Oak leather loaded. I didn't think I would like it as much as I did, but damn I was impressed. Was going to lease it but the numbers are ridiculous. They didn't mark it up over MSRP but they won't budge from it. Residual of 57% and a money factor of .00240. Not sure exactly how they factor those numbers but my R is a 70% residual and a money factor of .00143. No Atlas for us, time to start looking around. Might be the first time in 24 years I get something besides a VW.


----------



## CiDirkona (May 1, 2007)

GTi_4_Life said:


> So I went to my go to dealership for the past 10 years today for a test drive. They actually had the same one I wanted in stock, Black SEL Premium Black/Golden Oak leather loaded. I didn't think I would like it as much as I did, but damn I was impressed. Was going to lease it but the numbers are ridiculous. They didn't mark it up over MSRP but they won't budge from it. Residual of 57% and a money factor of .00240. Not sure exactly how they factor those numbers but my R is a 70% residual and a money factor of .00143. No Atlas for us, time to start looking around. Might be the first time in 24 years I get something besides a VW.


I saw that too, whopping $1k discount off MSRP for a lease, but the residuals are so bad that the payment is the same as buying it outright.


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

Yeah it was $22 a month more to buy it, ridiculous. Oh well, hopefully they sit on the lots and drop. I'm in no rush lol


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

We sold our first couple Atlases already. Leasing is definitely not the way to go here


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

shawshank redemption said:


> We sold our first couple Atlases already. Leasing is definitely not the way to go here


I've gotten better lease deals thrown at me for an Audi Q7 Prestige on a lease and that's $25k more on the MSRP. I'm hoping VWoA does some better lease deals later on the year, I'm in no rush.


----------



## GjR32 (Dec 22, 2010)

GTi_4_Life said:


> So I went to my go to dealership for the past 10 years today for a test drive. They actually had the same one I wanted in stock, Black SEL Premium Black/Golden Oak leather loaded. I didn't think I would like it as much as I did, but damn I was impressed. Was going to lease it but the numbers are ridiculous. They didn't mark it up over MSRP but they won't budge from it. Residual of 57% and a money factor of .00240. Not sure exactly how they factor those numbers but my R is a 70% residual and a money factor of .00143. No Atlas for us, time to start looking around. Might be the first time in 24 years I get something besides a VW.


So what was the monthly lease rate you were quoted?


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

GjR32 said:


> So what was the monthly lease rate you were quoted?


$800a month


----------



## GjR32 (Dec 22, 2010)

GTi_4_Life said:


> $800a month


Wow that is pricey! A 50k Touareg goes for low $600's a month


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

GjR32 said:


> Wow that is pricey! A 50k Touareg goes for low $600's a month


Exactly my thoughts, I could of gotten a Q7 Prestige for around $800 a month. Hopefully these sit on the lots and drop by the end of the year.


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

GjR32 said:


> Wow that is pricey! A 50k Touareg goes for low $600's a month


Just rolled a Touareg. 36/10k. $0 down including taxes and fees. $770/month. Under invoice deal.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

GTi_4_Life said:


> So I went to my go to dealership for the past 10 years today for a test drive. They actually had the same one I wanted in stock, Black SEL Premium Black/Golden Oak leather loaded. I didn't think I would like it as much as I did, but damn I was impressed. Was going to lease it but the numbers are ridiculous. They didn't mark it up over MSRP but they won't budge from it. Residual of 57% and a money factor of .00240. Not sure exactly how they factor those numbers but my R is a 70% residual and a money factor of .00143. No Atlas for us, time to start looking around. Might be the first time in 24 years I get something besides a VW.


My wife and I were so impressed by Atlas, that I thought wife is going to say: trade X5, let's get it. That was until we tried it and figure out that Yugo's engine struggles less with weight. 
They could give it 10K below MSRP I am not driving that snail.


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

edyvw said:


> My wife and I were so impressed by Atlas, that I thought wife is going to say: trade X5, let's get it. That was until we tried it and figure out that Yugo's engine struggles less with weight.
> They could give it 10K below MSRP I am not driving that snail.


I didn't think it was that bad but to be fair I don't have anything similar to compare it to, we have a Tiguan and an R. I guess everything is underwhelming compared to my R lol.


----------



## domfearns (Jun 6, 2013)

GTi_4_Life said:


> $800a month


My local dealer quoted me $560/month with $720 due at signing for a 36 month lease / 12,000 miles/yr on the Launch Edition. This makes me think he's just pulled that figure out of the air and it'll change the minute I step foot into that dealership.....


----------



## sevensis (Mar 12, 2017)

You guys should get addresses in Canada... Much cheaper on lease especially accounting for the exchange rate. For my Comfortline, residual is at 50% on a 48 month term.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

GTi_4_Life said:


> I didn't think it was that bad but to be fair I don't have anything similar to compare it to, we have a Tiguan and an R. I guess everything is underwhelming compared to my R lol.


Man, Tiguan moves, this is dead horse. I tried Toyota Highlander (2017), Mazda CX-9 and Honda Pilot, and Toyota definiately has more power, but Mazda is clear winner if you want to get something that has passing power, torque etc. 
I think VW will eventually offer stronger engine, until then, I am sticking to my X5, which might be too small for expanding family, but at least it goes like nuts.


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

edyvw said:


> Man, Tiguan moves, this is dead horse. I tried Toyota Highlander (2017), Mazda CX-9 and Honda Pilot, and Toyota definiately has more power, but Mazda is clear winner if you want to get something that has passing power, torque etc.
> I think VW will eventually offer stronger engine, until then, I am sticking to my X5, which might be too small for expanding family, but at least it goes like nuts.


yet both the cx-9 and Atlas were both tested at 7.5 seconds for 0-60

http://www.motortrend.com/news/mazda-cx-9-2017-suv-of-the-year-finalist
http://www.automobilemag.com/news/2018-volkswagen-atlas-sel-review-first-drive/

Honda pilot is the winner at 6.5
http://www.motortrend.com/cars/honda/pilot/2017/


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

edyvw said:


> Man, Tiguan moves, this is dead horse.



:laugh::laugh::laugh:

And your Tiguan was 7.5 and 8.2 depending on trans and drivetrain

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/tiguan/2012/


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

The Tiguan and Mazda are turbocharged. So they wouldn't lose as much power at high altitude as the VR6. 

Still, I suspect edyvw is exaggerating a tad.


----------



## utsava (Jun 5, 2002)

Hajduk said:


> The Tiguan and Mazda are turbocharged. So they wouldn't lose as much power at high altitude as the VR6.
> 
> Still, I suspect edyvw is exaggerating a tad.


Considering his impressions are the outlier among dozens of other official and unofficial reviews I've read (and my own driving impressions), I'd say yes. I'm sure some of it is due to the altitude though. Here at sea level, this wasn't my impressions at all.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

shawshank redemption said:


> :laugh::laugh::laugh:
> 
> And your Tiguan was 7.5 and 8.2 depending on trans and drivetrain
> 
> http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/tiguan/2012/


Who cares about 0-60? I mean seriously? Because people do 0-60 on every stop light? I would be driving BMW X5 5.0i if that was imperative. 
I am talking about torque, every day driving etc. 
There is NO WAY Atlas will catch up with Tiguan in every day traffic, not to mention going uphill.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Hajduk said:


> The Tiguan and Mazda are turbocharged. So they wouldn't lose as much power at high altitude as the VR6.
> 
> Still, I suspect edyvw is exaggerating a tad.


Sure, point taken. But Atlas is not as power as Honda and Toyota which I tried in same area. 
My impression is that it lack power comapred to previous generation of Honda Pilot.


----------



## utsava (Jun 5, 2002)

edyvw said:


> Who cares about 0-60? I mean seriously? Because people do 0-60 on every stop light? I would be driving BMW X5 5.0i if that was imperative.
> I am talking about torque, every day driving etc.
> There is NO WAY Atlas will catch up with Tiguan in every day traffic, not to mention going uphill.


Does torque affect 0-60 times?


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

utsava said:


> Considering his impressions are the outlier among dozens of other official and unofficial reviews I've read (and my own driving impressions), I'd say yes. I'm sure some of it is due to the altitude though. Here at sea level, this wasn't my impressions at all.


Dozens official reviews (I am not talking about those people who woke up one day and decided to have youtube channel) are talking how engine feels underpowered, both C&D and Motor Trend.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

utsava said:


> Does torque affect 0-60 times?


Of course it dose. But, it also matters where it is positioned, curve and fact that Atlas has diesel like third gear which chokes engine. Not sure why they did it considering 8 speed transmission. 
Either way, that thing can catch up with Tiguan in dreams, and only on sea level, only when it is flat, only empty, and apparently when stars are aligned properly. 
Offering this engine is OK, problem is VW does not have anything to compete with Explorer Ecoboost, CX-9. IMO there should be NA engine in stable for people who do not want anything more. Fine. But they will lose bunch of people who will go to CX-9 or Explorer because of power.


----------



## jspirate (Jan 15, 2011)

edyvw said:


> Of course it dose. But, it also matters where it is positioned, curve and fact that Atlas has diesel like third gear which chokes engine. Not sure why they did it considering 8 speed transmission.
> Either way, that thing can catch up with Tiguan in dreams, and only on sea level, only when it is flat, only empty, and apparently when stars are aligned properly.
> Offering this engine is OK, problem is VW does not have anything to compete with Explorer Ecoboost, CX-9. IMO there should be NA engine in stable for people who do not want anything more. Fine. But they will lose bunch of people who will go to CX-9 or Explorer because of power.


The 4 cylinder is where its at. A simple tune makes it the best engine in class. But, they screwed that up because there is no SEL premium.


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

edyvw said:


> Dozens official reviews (I am not talking about those people who woke up one day and decided to have youtube channel) are talking how engine feels underpowered, both C&D and Motor Trend.


C&D and Motor Trend never said the engine felt under powered in their reviews.


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

edyvw said:


> Who cares about 0-60? I mean seriously?


Its a measurable comparison... unlike your personal opinion.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Hajduk said:


> C&D and Motor Trend never said the engine felt under powered in their reviews.


Google reviews and read whole reviews. 
This is where the problem is: VW made car that should appeal to traditional VW drivers and Toyota drivers. Same mistake was done by BMW with current X5 F15. While initially attracted a lot of traditional buyers of Lexus and MB because of its softer ride, light steering etc. once those drivers started to experience typical European and BMW demands of maintenance like unique oil specifications and problems that stem from hi-tech solutions, they bailed out. Problem is, traditional BMW buyers did not want that car. Traditional BMW users knew that BMW comes with strings attached, but they are willing to live with it because of crisp steering, crisp handling, power etc. 
So VW will attract typical buyers of Toyota. Even sales persons are apparently trained to sell BS to buyers like the one that gave me lecture how there s no body role (there is) because engine sits low, and how transverse engine is better because it sits more to the back (at that point I almost fainted). But, that works with Toyota drivers because as long as you tell them it has V6, they are fine. So they will be sold on interior (no doubt about that, it is IMO by far best designed and practical interior in that class), and then it will start with: yeah, you need VW 502.00 oil, and you 10min oil change station does not have that, etc. etc. Traditional VW buyers who want some power and fun to drive will bail out to CX-9 or some other vehicle, while Toyota drivers after lease or some time will go back to Highlander. VW wants to please everyone, and IMO they are much closer to that then BMW, BUT they need to add much stronger engine as option. That is it.


----------



## Hajduk (Jan 24, 2000)

edyvw said:


> Google reviews and read whole reviews.
> This is where the problem is: VW made car that should appeal to traditional VW drivers and Toyota drivers. Same mistake was done by BMW with current X5 F15. While initially attracted a lot of traditional buyers of Lexus and MB because of its softer ride, light steering etc. once those drivers started to experience typical European and BMW demands of maintenance like unique oil specifications and problems that stem from hi-tech solutions, they bailed out. Problem is, traditional BMW buyers did not want that car. Traditional BMW users knew that BMW comes with strings attached, but they are willing to live with it because of crisp steering, crisp handling, power etc.
> So VW will attract typical buyers of Toyota. Even sales persons are apparently trained to sell BS to buyers like the one that gave me lecture how there s no body role (there is) because engine sits low, and how transverse engine is better because it sits more to the back (at that point I almost fainted). But, that works with Toyota drivers because as long as you tell them it has V6, they are fine. So they will be sold on interior (no doubt about that, it is IMO by far best designed and practical interior in that class), and then it will start with: yeah, you need VW 502.00 oil, and you 10min oil change station does not have that, etc. etc. Traditional VW buyers who want some power and fun to drive will bail out to CX-9 or some other vehicle, while Toyota drivers after lease or some time will go back to Highlander. VW wants to please everyone, and IMO they are much closer to that then BMW, BUT they need to add much stronger engine as option. That is it.


I have no idea what that blurb is and why you posted it.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

shawshank redemption said:


> Its a measurable comparison... unlike your personal opinion.


LOL. Typical sales person pitch that is aimed at people who do not know anything about cars. What matters in SUV is good 40-60mph or 50-70mph acceleration, and that is COMPLETELY absent in Atlas. I do not want even to try how that snail moves with full trunk, roof box etc. and then try to negotiate Rocky Mountains. I would have to bring oxygen tank and defibrillator just on case to resuscitate engine.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Hajduk said:


> I have no idea what that blurb is and why you posted it.


OK, we will see in 6 months what reviews are saying and how sales is going.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

I've been biting my tongue on this for a while now.

Lets just leave the discussion where it is. Obviously you are not happy with the engine. You want more torque, more power, etc. You are entitled to your opinion as is everyone else, but no need to continue to blast the same thing over and over again. For you the engine is obviously high on your priority list. For others it may well be the same. But its very difficult to say that the vast majority of people need acceleration in the 40-60 range. Sorry but that is just opinion.

Everyone here is here as they like the vehicle and want to share constructive feedback on it - so I would prefer to keep it that way. For me that means hearing all of the good with the bad. However keep in mind that while someone may think the cargo capacity is the best feature, someone else may think opposite. Same goes for the engine - although extremely important to you - perhaps less important to others who want the space for 7, etc.

In my opinion when you are buying a 7 passenger sport ute, you are often sacrificing driving dynamics and lets face it, these aren't designed to be sports cars. So while yes I agree the Ford Ecoboost in the Explorer is a stronger engine - I passed on the Explorer over a year ago as the seating confort, ride and handling were sub par to me. While the CX-9 my have an awesome torque-y engine, it absolutely sucks in cargo capacity (compared to the rest)

Regardless, I own a 2012 X5 35i. Sure the engine is great but I am looking elsewhere as the interior space is getting cramped and I don't care for the stiff suspension anymore. So maybe that means some body roll, but im at the stage in life where I want comfort. So if that means cornering at 60 instead of 80 it's a trade off I am willing to take.

Once I test drive I will be happy to share my opinion and driving impressions as compared to the X5. Additionally, I am located 3500' above sea level so will be able to give some input as to acceleration at altitude.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

jkopelc said:


> I've been biting my tongue on this for a while now.
> 
> Lets just leave the discussion where it is. Obviously you are not happy with the engine. You want more torque, more power, etc. You are entitled to your opinion as is everyone else, but no need to continue to blast the same thing over and over again. For you the engine is obviously high on your priority list. For others it may well be the same. But its very difficult to say that the vast majority of people need acceleration in the 40-60 range. Sorry but that is just opinion.
> 
> ...


Like I said in other thread, Atlas check literally all boxes. I am in same boat as you. X5 is getting cramped and we do a lot of long trips. While all that is doable with one kid, another one is in plan, and that will become issue. But, precisely because we are doing a lot of driving, having underpowered engine under the hood is an issue. That is why I am literally pissed, because this thing drives good, has good brakes, is PERFECT family vehicle, and then they drop the ball on engine. If they do not do something, and I must replace X5 due to space, this would be first time since 1996 that I would not have VW in garage.


----------



## cwescapexlt4x4 (Jan 2, 2003)

I would be that @edyvw is finding the N/A engine just not liking the higher elevation he is at and the much thinner air = less power for N/A engines.

I haven't driven an Atlas with no plans to, but i bet that's a real issue with this large vehicle without a ton of power.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

cwescapexlt4x4 said:


> I would be that @edyvw is finding the N/A engine just not liking the higher elevation he is at and the much thinner air = less power for N/A engines.
> 
> I haven't driven an Atlas with no plans to, but i bet that's a real issue with this large vehicle without a ton of power.


I drove Toyota Highlander, Dodge Durango (V6), Honda Pilot here too. It is not turbo, but you never have feeling that there is lack of power in those vehicles.


----------



## cgvalant (Nov 14, 2005)

So, I stopped by the dealer yesterday and put eyes on my first Atlas, which was an SE. Didn't drive it, but my son and I climbed all through it. Good first impression. It really has a car like feel to it and its proportions are deceiving. You don't realize until you sit in it just how big it is. It's going to be replacing the Armada, so it might have just been the difference in height that made it so deceiving.

Only thing I didn't like was how big the black trim was around the bottom of the car. Really makes me want the r line, but not sure if I'm willing to go down to the SEL and give up the digital instrument cluster, led tails and real leather with cooling seats. 

Maybe I'll get lucky and can force an order of an SEL premium with r line like the folks north of the border can. I don't care about the self park or 4 view camera that you lose with the rline.









Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


----------



## GiddyGTI (Sep 28, 2005)

dealer here is advertising $439 ($3299 down) for the SE w/ tech

I'm looking to purchase the car. how does this translate to the cost of the vehicle?


----------



## GjR32 (Dec 22, 2010)

GiddyGTI said:


> dealer here is advertising $439 ($3299 down) for the SE w/ tech
> 
> I'm looking to purchase the car. how does this translate to the cost of the vehicle?


Where is here?


----------



## RedHotFuzz (Nov 16, 2015)

Guess I'll be sticking with my Durango R/T with the Hemi.


----------



## GiddyGTI (Sep 28, 2005)

GjR32 said:


> Where is here?


NY Mohegan lake dealer


----------



## domfearns (Jun 6, 2013)

GiddyGTI said:


> NY Mohegan lake dealer


Is that for the V6 model or the 2.0? My dealer is quoting me $544/month with $3299 down


----------



## rnm2013 (Oct 7, 2015)

domfearns said:


> Is that for the V6 model or the 2.0? My dealer is quoting me $544/month with $3299 down


There are no 2.0T's yet. Only V6. What trim level did they quote you $544 on?


----------



## shawshank redemption (Jan 29, 2009)

GiddyGTI said:


> dealer here is advertising $439 ($3299 down) for the SE w/ tech
> 
> I'm looking to purchase the car. how does this translate to the cost of the vehicle?


Where are the taxes and fees getting paid? On top of the $3299 or included in there?


----------



## ERHAU175 (Aug 7, 2014)

*Lease track-back*

For comparison, I took a look at the GTI lease that VW offers on their website as of today, $319*/month for 36 month lease., $2,349 due at signing.
That calculates back to a residual value of 57.8% off MSRP and a money factor of 0.001358. There are some variables, but the APR on that lease then is 3.26% based on the info from the advertised lease.

So, a residual of 57% for an Atlas does not seem so far off. The money factor of 0.0024 mentioned in this post however is pretty steep, basically an APR north of 5.5%.
When negotiating a lease, the dealer probably can not go off the residual or the money factor as that is a given by VW Finance (separate corporate entity). In order to lower the lease payment, the dealer has to increase the discount on the MSRP and that, in this,early stage, probably is limited by what the current dealer invoice is or what VW approves.
I probably also have to wait a bit until the first promotions come out.


----------



## GTi_4_Life (Dec 24, 2004)

ERHAU175 said:


> For comparison, I took a look at the GTI lease that VW offers on their website as of today, $319*/month for 36 month lease., $2,349 due at signing.
> That calculates back to a residual value of 57.8% off MSRP and a money factor of 0.001358. There are some variables, but the APR on that lease then is 3.26% based on the info from the advertised lease.
> 
> So, a residual of 57% for an Atlas does not seem so far off. The money factor of 0.0024 mentioned in this post however is pretty steep, basically an APR north of 5.5%.
> ...


From what I was told, the residual is non negotiable and only changes based on lease terms length/mileage. The MF is based on credit score and is also controlled by the dealership somewhat. My credit score is 800+, VW can kiss my ass on an almost 6% APR on a lease. I had a deal on an Audi Q7 Prestige for almost the same monthly payment that VW wanted on the Atlas SEL Premium, and the Q7 was $75k.


----------



## rnm2013 (Oct 7, 2015)

GTi_4_Life said:


> From what I was told, the residual is non negotiable and only changes based on lease terms length/mileage. The MF is based on credit score and is also controlled by the dealership somewhat. My credit score is 800+, VW can kiss my ass on an almost 6% APR on a lease. I had a deal on an Audi Q7 Prestige for almost the same monthly payment that VW wanted on the Atlas SEL Premium, and the Q7 was $75k.


Residual is set by the manufacturer and can only be adjusted for mileage. The residual is actually pretty strong on the Atlas; on 15k/year the RV is 59 for FWD and 61 for AWD. That's on par/a little better then class leaders like a cx9/pilot. VW sets the MF but a dealer can mark it up a certain amount of points. If you're an 800+ you'll most likely be around 3.9 equivalent apr.


----------



## bugzy (May 29, 2000)

For those that have issues with lease/money factor, why not purchase the vehicle. You can probably find a credit union giving out 1.49-2% APR.

Considering the 6yr/72k mile, I think it's actually a decent deal for a longer term purchase. Plus, to be honest, leasing isn't worth it. Unless you are writing the lease off for business.


----------



## domfearns (Jun 6, 2013)

rnm2013 said:


> There are no 2.0T's yet. Only V6. What trim level did they quote you $544 on?


SE with Tech. Same as yours it sounds like, just an extra $100/month thrown in for good measure :banghead:


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

RedHotFuzz said:


> Guess I'll be sticking with my Durango R/T with the Hemi.


Yeah, i am sticking to BMW until they replace that hairdryer under the hood.


----------



## ryan mills (May 3, 2002)

*FV-QR*

I have a sneaking suspicion that the 3.6 will eventually be replaced with a 2.5T.... I just don't know how long that's going to take. 
I'm going to wait on the larger Tiguan, and hope that it is big enough for our needs, as there is no digital dash option for the 2.0T.
I like gadgets, and the Tiguan will have them, I just wish the Atlas had the SEl premium with 2.0.... Hell, I guess in the mean time, I could lease a Q7, and wait for something a little more powerful 
I think I'm really going to miss our current TDI with its mileage, price of fuel, and torque. APR made it pretty darn nice. Oh well, we will see!


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

ryan mills said:


> I have a sneaking suspicion that the 3.6 will eventually be replaced with a 2.5T.... I just don't know how long that's going to take.
> I'm going to wait on the larger Tiguan, and hope that it is big enough for our needs, as there is no digital dash option for the 2.0T.
> I like gadgets, and the Tiguan will have them, I just wish the Atlas had the SEl premium with 2.0.... Hell, I guess in the mean time, I could lease a Q7, and wait for something a little more powerful
> I think I'm really going to miss our current TDI with its mileage, price of fuel, and torque. APR made it pretty darn nice. Oh well, we will see!


I am hoping too they will introduce 2.5 in the U.S. If they offered that, they would already have my deposit.


----------



## der_apoteker (Mar 27, 2017)

*ANother test drive complete*

So i test drove the 3.6l 4motion Launch Edition this past weekend.... i will be looking at the SE/tech or SEL as the LE just doesnt' have enough for me... but i like how it drives.


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 23, 2009)

edyvw said:


> I am hoping too they will introduce 2.5 in the U.S. If they offered that, they would already have my deposit.


1st one I delivered was an SEL Premium my customer has had it for a week and absolutely loves it. He came out of a 14 Touareg TDI R-Line and says the Atlas is a much better ride, significantly quieter and has tons of power. I have been a SE/Tech for a few days now and can say that it has plenty of pep gobs of torque and is just as fast as the Highlander(which I have in my Toyota store next door and have driven for extended periods) so all the nonsense about the Atlas not having enough power or torque is just that NONSENSE!! I have had over 15 people test drive the Atlas and not a single one complained about the drive-train in fact nearly everyone is impressed with the power especially since it is not a small vehicle. Maybe for you it just isn't enough and guess you will not get to enjoy one now but for everyone else they are enjoying it and it is an important addition to the VW lineup!


----------



## jspirate (Jan 15, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> 1st one I delivered was an SEL Premium my customer has had it for a week and absolutely loves it. He came out of a 14 Touareg TDI R-Line and says the Atlas is a much better ride, significantly quieter and has tons of power. I have been a SE/Tech for a few days now and can say that it has plenty of pep gobs of torque and is just as fast as the Highlander(which I have in my Toyota store next door and have driven for extended periods) so all the nonsense about the Atlas not having enough power or torque is just that NONSENSE!! I have had over 15 people test drive the Atlas and not a single one complained about the drive-train in fact nearly everyone is impressed with the power especially since it is not a small vehicle. Maybe for you it just isn't enough and guess you will not get to enjoy one now but for everyone else they are enjoying it and it is an important addition to the VW lineup!



Dude. Come on.
I drove it and do not share your opinion.
If you want to say that its fairly powered for its class, then I will roll with that.... I guess.
"Tons of power" and "gobs of torque" is not how I describe the Atlas.

The good news is that I can wait for the 4 cylinder and with a tune, that will be a great engine in the Atlas.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

[email protected] said:


> 1st one I delivered was an SEL Premium my customer has had it for a week and absolutely loves it. He came out of a 14 Touareg TDI R-Line and says the Atlas is a much better ride, significantly quieter and has tons of power. I have been a SE/Tech for a few days now and can say that it has plenty of pep gobs of torque and is just as fast as the Highlander(which I have in my Toyota store next door and have driven for extended periods) so all the nonsense about the Atlas not having enough power or torque is just that NONSENSE!! I have had over 15 people test drive the Atlas and not a single one complained about the drive-train in fact nearly everyone is impressed with the power especially since it is not a small vehicle. Maybe for you it just isn't enough and guess you will not get to enjoy one now but for everyone else they are enjoying it and it is an important addition to the VW lineup!


LOL, if you have your opinion, fine. But please, do not insult intelligence here. Keep your selling lines for dealership, this is forum. 
Are you also seller like one that told me transverse engine drives better then longitudinal? 
Tons of power? Compare to what? Hair dryer available in Wal mart?
I drove Highlander, and no, Atlas cannot compare to Highlander engine because of torque curve line. Selling points and physics do not go together. 
Again, keep those selling lines for customers (God help them). But at least here keep it bit objective.


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

Today my wife and I took her Grand Cherokee Altitude in for an oil change. Jeep dealer is across the street from a VW shop, which had two new Atlases. While the Jeep was in, we checked out the Atlas. 

It's fine, but absolutely nothing to get excited about. This, coming from a lifelong VW owner and fan. 

The Jeep dealership gave us an offer to swap her '15 Altitude (lease) with a '17 Overland model, which was spec'd roughly $10,000 more at $50k. We walked out the door with the new Overland at the exact same price and terms. Literally, a trade up/swap. 

Point being: Jeep is putting some serious incentive money behind their cars right now and making some serious deals. The Atlas may be a 7 seater and may be nice, but they'll really have some serious competition from a strong player.


----------



## jspirate (Jan 15, 2011)

Travis Grundke said:


> Today my wife and I took her Grand Cherokee Altitude in for an oil change. Jeep dealer is across the street from a VW shop, which had two new Atlases. While the Jeep was in, we checked out the Atlas.
> 
> It's fine, but absolutely nothing to get excited about. This, coming from a lifelong VW owner and fan.
> 
> ...


No thanks. No jeeps for this kid.


----------



## RFGuy_KCCO (Feb 22, 2016)

Travis Grundke said:


> Today my wife and I took her Grand Cherokee Altitude in for an oil change. Jeep dealer is across the street from a VW shop, which had two new Atlases. While the Jeep was in, we checked out the Atlas.
> 
> It's fine, but absolutely nothing to get excited about. This, coming from a lifelong VW owner and fan.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but it's a Dodge. I would never even walk on a Dodge/Jeep lot, let alone purchase one. 

Each to their own, however. I hope you enjoy it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

jspirate said:


> No thanks. No jeeps for this kid.


I hear you - I was never into Jeeps until we got the first one and the JGC sold me. The Altitude was good, but the air suspension in the Overland has sold me moving forward. 

We really wanted a T-Reg when we got the first one, but the pricing is so out of whack with reality that there was no way I could justify it. To give you an idea - the JGC Overland we got has dual roof, Xenons, blind spot, navigation, heated/cooled seats, heated steering, Harmon/Kardon 19 speaker system, V6 AWD, air suspension, towing package, front collision monitor. 

In terms of value - it's a no brainer, unless you need the 3rd row, which we don't. 

My point in bringing this up isn't to start any one-upsmanship, only to point out that as nice as the Atlas is, the money that ChryCo is putting on the hoods of the JGC right now makes them an extremely attractive option and, outside of needing that third row, I'd go Jeep every time. Yes, I drank the cool-aid and get why people love the JGC and Wrangler.


----------



## cgvalant (Nov 14, 2005)

The Jeep is also not a 3 row SUV. Kind of apples to oranges.

I I test drove its sibling, Durango, a while back when dodge advertised a 20% off deal. Funny how it didn't apply to any local Durangos! 

Anyways, I was not blown away at all. I was looking at the r/t in white with the blacktop package. I like the looks, the power was awesome and the current transmission actually make it usable (original trans was garbage). Other than that I was left disappointed. I really wanted to like it, but in the end I think it was the fit and finish and the lack of space that made me walk away with no regrets. 

It was noticeably smaller than our Armada while the Atlas is actually within a cubic foot of it with the back rows folded down. Plus the atlas utilizes the space a lot better, including more third row leg room. That's what sold my wife and I on the next hauler for our three kids. Plus it'll go well with the GTI. 😀

Now it's just a matter of being patient until I can get a deal below invoice or it is included in the VW partner program ($500 off invoice plus any other incentives for being an SCCA member).

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk


----------



## Travis Grundke (May 26, 1999)

RFGuy_KCCO said:


> Yeah, but it's a Dodge. I would never even walk on a Dodge/Jeep lot, let alone purchase one.
> 
> Each to their own, however. I hope you enjoy it.
> 
> ...


Well, I see you've got a T-Reg, and as I mentioned, that was what we really wanted originally. Combined with limited availability, the T-Regs were all pricing out at between $200-$400 more per month and while the JGC isn't finished as well as the T-Reg, there was just no way we could justify that kind of spread for less equipment.


----------

