# Is the 2.5 reliable?



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

I'm looking into buying Jetta Sportswagen with 2.5. I did search for topics about it but got nothing. How reliable is the I5? While I was at the dealership, the salesguy was getting the car out for test drive and I noticed blue smoke at start up. Is that normal?


----------



## uglybaby (Mar 19, 2006)

blue smoke is not normal. Sure it wasn't water vapor from a cold start? Was it early in the morning?
As for the engine..drive it. I really wanted a TDI and wasn't excited at all by the prospect of the 2.5, but due to a wreck we needed a car fast and found a JSW in 2.5 flavor. It is one of the most satisfying family haulers I've driven. Even in auto. Just needs a drop to close up the wheel gap. 


_Modified by uglybaby at 6:02 AM 8-31-2008_


----------



## marga (Aug 31, 2007)

the engine is typically really reliable, if that helps at all.
with the actual engine in the sportwagen you're looking at though, it's hard to say. water vapour would be my first guess, but if not, then it's definitely abnormal.


----------



## spitpilot (Feb 14, 2000)

*Re: (marga)*

Ii'd think by now after about 3 years of production (Jetta's came out with it in 2005) we'd be seeing posts about problems..like we did on Passat Forum with the poor 1.8T timing belt tensioners after the 98's were on the road for a few years. Time will tell..I like the engine, enuff torque for my needs..yeah the turbo motor will beat it hands down...but for day to day driving and enuff grunt to feely you can get up to freeway speed safely...the 2.5L will do the job! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## veedubb87 (Mar 28, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*

13.5k on my car, no problems.. clutch could be a little more manly but it does the job
it's a big step up from the entry 2.0L on the MK4's 
I have a REVO software flash and Evolution motorsports intake and there is plenty of power for a N/A engine, I would guess it is producing 180~ HP (or high 170's )


----------



## oceanjetta (Jun 12, 2002)

*Re: (spitpilot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spitpilot* »_Ii'd think by now after about 3 years of production (Jetta's came out with it in 2005) we'd be seeing posts about problems..like we did on Passat Forum with the poor 1.8T timing belt tensioners after the 98's were on the road for a few years. Time will tell..I like the engine, enuff torque for my needs..yeah the turbo motor will beat it hands down...but for day to day driving and enuff grunt to feely you can get up to freeway speed safely...the 2.5L will do the job! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

Must be why they went to a timing chain with the 2.5 to prevent problems with the timing belt, making it more reliable ...


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: (spitpilot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spitpilot* »_Ii'd think by now after about 3 years of production (Jetta's came out with it in 2005) we'd be seeing posts about problems..like we did on Passat Forum with the poor 1.8T timing belt tensioners after the 98's were on the road for a few years. Time will tell..I like the engine, enuff torque for my needs..yeah the turbo motor will beat it hands down...but for day to day driving and enuff grunt to feely you can get up to freeway speed safely...the 2.5L will do the job! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

I like the I5. It's has enough power to move the car with ease. I do see that it requires less frequent maintenance than the turbo engine. I wonder how the 6spd auto will hold up with time.


----------



## charlie.macpherson (Jun 15, 2008)

i have an 06 jetta with the 2.5 and i have had noproblems at all. then engine sounds great to. with exsuast it kinda sounds like the older vr6's. although i heard that they are goign to discontinue the engine?


----------



## sl33pyb (Jan 15, 2007)

34k with no engine problems and i drive the car very hard. oil changes every 5 k


----------



## uglybaby (Mar 19, 2006)

*Re: (SinisterMind)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SinisterMind* »_
I like the I5. It's has enough power to move the car with ease. I do see that it requires less frequent maintenance than the turbo engine. *I wonder how the 6spd auto will hold up with time.* 

Me too...


----------



## TOPLEVEL (May 8, 2005)

20k miles here. 5 speed. No problems at all. It's my girlfriends car but I beat on it pretty regularly. Plenty of burnouts and high rpms.


----------



## xjdaddy (Nov 19, 2006)

*Re: (TOPLEVEL)*

44K on my 6 speed auto and 40K on my 5 speed and zero problems so far. I really like the low end torque of the 2.5. In the mountains where I live, it comes in really handy at times...


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SinisterMind* »_... I noticed blue smoke at start up. Is that normal?

Blue smoke at start-up isn't uncommon at all in most engines. Actually, I'd think a brand new engine that isn't broken in and doesn't have the rings well seated yet could be expected to.
Can't say for sure my Rabbit does (18K miles) but I wouldn't be alarmed if it does.
My Maxima V6 puffs blue smoke at start and uses 1 maybe 2 qts of make-up oil between 10K oil change intervals, depending on how much city driving I do. A qt every 4-5K miles is still quite good, so there's nothing to be alarmed about IMO.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (TOPLEVEL)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TOPLEVEL* »_20k miles here. 5 speed. No problems at all. It's my girlfriends car but I beat on it pretty regularly. Plenty of burnouts and high rpms. 

Hope you're nice to her 'cause she'll probably be buying a new tansmission for her Rabbit. The one weak part of this car seems to be the differential, judging by the number of grenaded ones on Vortex.
And don't expect warranty to cover it: VW is notorious for voiding it if they suspect anyone beats on it.


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_
Hope you're nice to her 'cause she'll probably be buying a new tansmission for her Rabbit. The one weak part of this car seems to be the differential, judging by the number of grenaded ones on Vortex.
And don't expect warranty to cover it: VW is notorious for voiding it if they suspect anyone beats on it.


My wife doesn't beat on cars, so I should be safe. I might be buying a Sportswagen soon.


----------



## thumper87 (Sep 11, 2007)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SinisterMind* »_I'm looking into buying Jetta Sportswagen with 2.5. I did search for topics about it but got nothing. How reliable is the I5? While I was at the dealership, the salesguy was getting the car out for test drive and I noticed blue smoke at start up. Is that normal?

Blue smoke = Silicon in the gas tank from when they shipped it over here. I can't remember exactly why they do it, but they do. I saw the same thing in my Rabbit that had 11 miles on it. The dealer told me that's what it was. It also smelled funny. Now, the fumes are very normal shade of pink.







J/K
Also, I beat the absolute crap out of my Rabbit from day one and it keeps on running strong. I race it in Autocross and there are times when I drive quite spiritedly on the street and it's never had even an inkling of an issue. No rattles or strange noises either as a result of getting tossed around the corners and driven down the rough roads we have here in Texas. I'm sure I'll have a problem some day, but it happens, I'll still be shocked.


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (thumper87)*

The Jetta we drove had 26 miles on it, so I guess that explains the blue smoke. Thanks


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (thumper87)*


_Quote, originally posted by *thumper87* »_
Blue smoke = Silicon in the gas tank from when they shipped it over here. I can't remember exactly why they do it, but they do....

Silicon = sand (ok, not exactly, but you get the point).
Do you mean silicone? think boob job







as in an oil...maybe covering metal parts to protect against corrosion in the salty air on board ships?? Seems reasonable...a LOT more reasonable than sand!










_Modified by BuddyWh at 12:13 PM 9-2-2008_


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (SinisterMind)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SinisterMind* »_My wife doesn't beat on cars, so I should be safe. I might be buying a Sportswagen soon.

Sorry...that response was intended for someone else!







I wasn't trying to suggest your wife would.
I think anyone who drives their cars 'normal' like (which includes the inevitable, and occasional, expression of excess spirit







) can expect few problems. Or at least, I've seen nothing that suggests otherwise.


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_
Sorry...that response was intended for someone else!







I wasn't trying to suggest your wife would.
I think anyone who drives their cars 'normal' like (which includes the inevitable, and occasional, expression of excess spirit







) can expect few problems. Or at least, I've seen nothing that suggests otherwise. 

I know your response was meant for the other poster.


----------



## thumper87 (Sep 11, 2007)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_
Silicon = sand (ok, not exactly, but you get the point).
Do you mean silicone? think boob job







as in an oil...maybe covering metal parts to protect against corrosion in the salty air on board ships?? Seems reasonable...a LOT more reasonable than sand!









_Modified by BuddyWh at 12:13 PM 9-2-2008_

Ahh... That's exactly what I meant! Sorry... I guess I had boobs on the brain.


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (thumper87)*

mmmmmm boobies








Anyway, local dealer told me to wait until after the 2nd of this month for possibly better financing deals. The current deals are laughable.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (thumper87)*


_Quote, originally posted by *thumper87* »_
Ahh... That's exactly what I meant! Sorry... I guess I had boobs on the brain.

Ahh...no prob...and I really wasn't trying to be pedantic! 
Recalling an active anti-corrosive in many antifreezes is silicon (coats the aluminum surfaces inside the engine and radiator cooling galleries) I wracked my brain trying to think why they'd want that in the fuel system. Not being chemist enough to figure it out, I thought I'd ask if you meant silicone instead which I could figure a good use for!


----------



## Fitz Ingarage (Aug 25, 2008)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*

I'm still trying to figure out how they plumbed the twin exhaust pipes from an I-5.








This is a good discussion and with my wife as a potential SportWagen buyer, I'm interested in all of the details.


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (Fitz Ingarage)*

Consumer Reports does give the Jetta with I5 thumb up and recommendation.


----------



## spitpilot (Feb 14, 2000)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*

Consumer Reports has no clue! They voted Passat a "check mark" super reccomendation back in the early 2000's...now they say "car to avoid"! Bottom line is the 2.5L motor hasn't run much beyond 50K in the vast majority of cars out there...if there are long term problems that will crop up between 50-100K miles...most of us haven't got there yet...we're venturing into the vast unknown! I bought the 2.5L on a leap of faith..a new motor design, not the tried and ture 4 banger that VW built since the 70's...but the car around it was so much better than the alternatives..I had to buy it....no turbo motors for me...added complexity and problem areas and the expense of premium gas put me off..the power was fun in some test drives though!


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (spitpilot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spitpilot* »_the expense of premium gas put me off..the power was fun in some test drives though!









At 1 full tank a week, thats $4.17 extra a week....ouch, what a money eater


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (travis3265)*


_Quote, originally posted by *travis3265* »_
At 1 full tank a week, thats $4.17 extra a week....ouch, what a money eater









Woohoo.. Free six pack every week when you buy a Rabbit!


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_
Woohoo.. Free six pack every week when you buy a Rabbit!












































Even less given that the GTI will get better mileage when driven carefully.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Even less given that the GTI will get better mileage when driven carefully.

LOL...I see... so I should spend $6,000 more on the GTI and drive it like a little old lady to get better gas mileage than a Rabbit where I can bank the $6K, save a six pack a week by using regular and drive it like I want. Somehow this logic eludes me.
No....I'd get a GTI to drive it hard, hang the gas mileage, hang the expense of premium. I GOT a Rabbit to drive it hard (even if a little slower) and save some money all 'round.
In short: sure, GTI is more fun but Rabbit is still plenty fun and I save money all 'round. The comment wasn't meant to be a knock against the GTI, just a 'penny saved is a penny earned' remark. 
This whole GTI vs Rabbit thing is just silly at times.


----------



## spitpilot (Feb 14, 2000)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (spitpilot)*

[QUOTE....no turbo motors for me...added complexity and problem areas and the expense of premium gas put me off..the power was fun in some test drives though!







[/QUOTE]
Hmmmm strange that eveyone jumped on the last phrase of my post about fuel cost and no one spoke to "added complexity and problem areas..." of turbo motors.














Anyone wanna chime in here with what a turbo R&R costs if you can't get it done under warranty? Or the associated turbo plumbing?....That was the main basis of the decision...along with the wet clutches on the DSG (my trans of choice since it shifts better than I do and I"ve driven some very hi strung manual trans cars and thought I was pretty smooth). The serious $$'s in the cost of long term (not 3 and out lease here) is in the maintenance expenses, not the fuel cost of premium vs regular!


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (spitpilot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spitpilot* »_
Hmmmm strange that eveyone jumped on the last phrase of my post about fuel cost and no one spoke to "added complexity and problem areas..." of turbo motors. ....

Hey! really...don't read so much into my comment! it really was just meant as a stupid joke!
If I WAS to jump in for serious...I WOULD agree with your concerns about turbo's. I know VW has kinda lead the way to main-streaming them with 'better' reliability. But even so, they are problems I just don't want, and the history of them has shown this is true. I want basic reliabilty, or extremely simple repariability. That's exactly what the VW beetle was about...and the first gen Rabbit.
I don't think VW can get back to it like that (emmissions and safety makes it impossible) but I think the 2.5l gets a lot closer than the 2.0t and I'm confident that experience will prove it to be true. At least, for the basic engine internals...motor accessories (like water pump, SAI pump, alternator, etc.)
are another matter. 


_Modified by BuddyWh at 3:00 PM 9-7-2008_


----------



## SinisterMind (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*

When I'm shopping for cars for my wife I have to consider that she's not a car person. She wants a nice car that goes from point A to B. Turbo engines need more care and I'm not going to buy a turbo car for her. She is known for quick accelerations on a cold engine during winter. I cringe when she does that and remind her not to do that. The I5 is quick and seems to be reliable so far.


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*


_Quote, originally posted by *SinisterMind* »_Turbo engines need more care and I'm not going to buy a turbo car for her.

Ya know? I've heard that repeated so many times that it seems to have become a "truth". That said, properly maintained, a turbocharger on a modern engine should easily last as long as the engine itself.
Said another way, ten years from now it is my bet that if we look back on the 2009 Jetta vs. GLI and Rabbit vs. GTI, we'll see virtually no difference in engine maintenance between the TSI and the I-5 motors (assuming that both engines are left stock). That said, at least in the case of those who drive manual transmissions, it seems an odds-on-bet that the folks with the I-5 will see many-many more gearbox failures.


----------



## Fitz Ingarage (Aug 25, 2008)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*

< That said, at least in the case of those who drive manual transmissions, it seems an odds-on-bet that the folks with the I-5 will see many-many more gearbox failures. >
Yikes. Is there something about the VW 5-Speed I need to know about?


----------



## uglybaby (Mar 19, 2006)

I'll let you know my feeling on 2.5 reliability in a couple of days. My JSW (one week old) just went into the shop with what sounds like bad timing chain guides to me (12v anyone?). Also a check engine light for 2 evap leaks that has the tech foreman puzzled. Wish me luck.


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (Fitz Ingarage)*

Over in the MKV forums there are any number of discussions about case failures of the 5-Speed manual transmission. I've yet to see a single issue with the 6-Speed unit, and I'm wondering if the difference is the fact that the transmission in the GTI uses two different final drive gear sets.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (uglybaby)*


_Quote, originally posted by *uglybaby* »_I'll let you know my feeling on 2.5 reliability in a couple of days. My JSW (one week old) just went into the shop with what sounds like bad timing chain guides to me (12v anyone?). Also a check engine light for 2 evap leaks that has the tech foreman puzzled. Wish me luck.

If it's only 1 week old then it's a manufacturing defect and not a reliability issue. They are completely different things.
Technically, reliability is determined by characteristics inherent in the design, engineering and materials used and even poorly designed engines manifest "poor" reliabilty in time periods far longer than one week.
The warranty period is intended to provide buyers relief against manufacturing defects, not really for reliability issues cause they SHOULD appear only after it's expired. That's why we are all so interested I think!


_Modified by BuddyWh at 10:43 AM 9-9-2008_


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Ya know? I've heard that repeated so many times that it seems to have become a "truth". That said, properly maintained, a turbocharger on a modern engine should easily last as long as the engine itself.
....

I think that's the point...it has to be properly maintained...I'd really like not to have such a finicky little beast that requires a lot of TLC.
I see what you say about the 5 speed...arent most of the failures due to people who've been beating on it? But that is early in their life... it makes me wonder if it be strong enough to hold up for we who don't beat on it so much. Only time is gonna tell.
I'm feeling good I got that 10yr/100K mile extended warranty. I'll be getting rid of it by the time that expires! LOL


_Modified by BuddyWh at 10:52 AM 9-9-2008_


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_I think that's the point...it has to be properly maintained...I'd really like not to have such a finicky little beast that requires a lot of TLC.

What do you call "a lot of TLC"? I ask because all the TSI motor needs in that department is an oil change every 10,000 miles and the usual periodic application of spark plugs and filters. Said another way, the maintenance requirements of the TSI are almost identical to those of the I5 in the Rabbit and Jetta.

_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_I see what you say about the 5 speed...arent most of the failures due to people who've been beating on it? But that is early in their life... it makes me wonder if it be strong enough to hold up for we who don't beat on it so much. Only time is gonna tell.

I've seen reports from both camps. There have been failures from folks who've chipped and modded the crap out of their cars, and I've also heard of failures form folks who have bone stock cars that have never been beat on. For my part, given that I'm most likely going to be putting between thirty and forty thousand miles per year, I'm going to opt for the GTI, a car that I believe to be a tad more reliable and more economical than the Rabbit. Oh! And more fun too.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
...I'm going to opt for the GTI, a car that I believe to be a tad more reliable and more economical than the Rabbit. Oh! And more fun too. 

Show me the cash flow analysis that even hints a GTI is more economical. And it had better include at least $6k in the bank in the Rabbit's favor.
Maybe history will prove you right... about the 2.0t's reliabilty... but I wouldn't want to be the poster child for proving you wrong. I'll leave that to others with more money to burn. 
No...the only clear advantage to the GTI is more fun...that's the reason to buy it if it's important, as it was to you!


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

hardly any 2.5 trannys have failed. they can be counted on 1 hand. 
also...its not a TSI. its an FSI, am I right?


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (BuddyWh)*

Well, the base price difference is $7,100 between the Rabbit 2-Door and the GTI 2-Door, however, since I like a car that is a bit tarted up, I'd have to dump $1,350 on 17" alloy wheels for the Rabbit and a couple of bucks for options that the GTI has that the Rabbit does not (and the GTI has plenty of goodies that aren't even an option on the Rabbit, not the least of which are the better seats, suspension, brakes, and steering wheel controls), so the apples-to-apples price (as close as it can be made) is more like a $5,000 difference.
That said, I'm more inclined to buy a 4-Door, and when configured as closely as possible, the price difference between the Rabbit and the GTI drops to about $2,500.
Back to my original statement, I never intended to imply that the GTI would be economical enough to offset the purchase price difference between the two cars. My comments were simply regarding the cost of operating the car once obtained. So, you're quite correct in stating that you can pay for LOTS of gasoline and maintenance with the price difference between the two. That of course leaves me with figuring out the price tag that I'd place on a car that I view as both more fun and more reliable, and that's where I lean toward the GTI over the Rabbit.


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: (travis3265)*


_Quote, originally posted by *travis3265* »_hardly any 2.5 trannys have failed. they can be counted on 1 hand.

Check around, I think the number will alarm you. Even worse is VW's response when the failed transmissions are brought in for repair.

_Quote, originally posted by *travis3265* »_also...its not a TSI. its an FSI, am I right?

No, the FSI motor is officially extinct. All new GTIs (in fact, all new cars with a 2.0T) come with the new TSI motor.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_...That of course leaves me with figuring out the price tag that I'd place on a car that I view as both more fun and more reliable, and that's where I lean toward the GTI over the Rabbit.










And THAT is exaclty why these rabbit vs. gti arguments are all doomed to utter failure...it's a personal preference. All I say, is drive it like you own it!


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Check around, I think the number will alarm you. Even worse is VW's response when the failed transmissions are brought in for repair.

I've taken dealer responses to be the result of identifying the car's been abused...but I hardly know all of them.
I think the proximal cause of the failures is the horrible wheel hop the rabbit's prone to...a combination effect of suspension, soft motor mounts and the ESP system. That doesn't make it a reliability issue, instead I call it a possible design defect that doesn't account for the kind of drivers their crazy ads appeal to.
Anybody practicing their wheel spins will grenade the diffy sooner rather than later with any car prone to wheel hop. Root cause is, of course, the lemon behind the wheel who thinks that's fun way to drive their car. But even unintended wheel hop can do it...like I get on wet pavement only too easily. 
Puttin in a dog-bone insert helped that a lot with that, and firmed up shifting at the same time. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Modified by BuddyWh at 2:22 PM 9-9-2008_


_Modified by BuddyWh at 2:25 PM 9-9-2008_


----------



## travis3265 (Nov 15, 2003)

*Re: (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Check around, I think the number will alarm you. Even worse is VW's response when the failed transmissions are brought in for repair.

No, the FSI motor is officially extinct. All new GTIs (in fact, all new cars with a 2.0T) come with the new TSI motor.

i have checked around, ive been on this forum since 2003 reading just about every week. the amount of broken tranny's reported compared to the number of 2.5's on the road is such a small fraction of a percent that its just a tiny blip on the radar, if that. what...do you expect that all cars are going to be perfect forever? im sure there are way many more 2.0T's that went in for major service than 2.5's, thats for sure.
as far as pricing things out...compare a base gti to a base rabbit, then do the cash flow.


----------



## Jimmy Russells (Feb 4, 2007)

*Re: (travis3265)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Check around, I think the number will alarm you. Even worse is VW's response when the failed transmissions are brought in for repair.
.

Hah, how many GTI's have had clutch/slave cylinder issues? How many have had bad intake flap motors? Fuel pump cam lobes wearing away? Airbag lights? 3 qts oil consumption between changes?
Not saying it's a bad car whatsoever, just stating that it has its own issues. 


_Quote, originally posted by *travis3265* »_
i have checked around, ive been on this forum since 2003 reading just about every week. *the amount of broken tranny's reported compared to the number of 2.5's on the road is such a small fraction of a percent that its just a tiny blip on the radar, if that.* what...do you expect that all cars are going to be perfect forever? im sure there are way many more 2.0T's that went in for major service than 2.5's, thats for sure.


This.


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: (RedRabidRabbit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_Hah, how many GTI's have had clutch/slave cylinder issues?

Haven't heard of any 2007 or 2008 models with that issue. Not saying that there aren't any, but I certainly haven't seen any complaints reflecting that kind of a problem (at least, not on unmodified cars).

_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_How many have had bad intake flap motors?

The vacuum motor for intake flap changeover is a completely redesigned unit compared to the units that regularly failed on the old FSI engine.

_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_Fuel pump cam lobes wearing away?

Not an issue with the TSI engine.

_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_Airbag lights?

Are the airbag lights isolated to the GTI models? Said another way, doesn't the Rabbit have the same issue?

_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_3 qts oil consumption between changes?

There's a thread in the TSI forum that addresses this very issue. So far at least, there hasn't been a single TSI owner that has reported high oil consumption.
I'll stick with my original statement, I believe that the 2009 TSI equipped GTI will be more reliable than a 2009 Rabbit. Time of course could certainly prove me wrong; however, based upon the research I've done, I'm willing to bet otherwise.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
....I'll stick with my original statement, I believe that the 2009 TSI equipped GTI will be more reliable than a 2009 Rabbit. Time of course could certainly prove me wrong; however, based upon the research I've done, I'm willing to bet otherwise.









LOL...then I have to think you're very naive about assessment of reliability! Put very simply, reliability can thought of as a probability of failure at some point in a system's life and calculate it as the sum of the probabilities of failure of it's constituent parts, to that same point in time. The 2.5l engine has fewer parts, and those parts it has are proven to have lower probabilites of failure.
The 2.0 has two balance shafts with cobs, idlers, bearings, chains and tensioners while the 2.5 has none... the 2.5 has one more cylinder with crank, bearings, valves, springs. I believe the cylinder components are very low-tech and very reliable with large design margins therefore low probability for failure as can be said of balance shafts although chains/tensioners are known wear areas in any mechanical system. For simplicity, I'll just allow that they even each other out although though I'm granting you a big one here.
Otherwise, both engines are fairly conventional DOHC, VVT (intake cam only), cast iron block designs: that is, well understood, simple, elegant and low risk design approach with ample room for design margin. Both have chain driven cams. The 2.5 is low compression, lightly stressed. The 2.0 is low compresion too...but that's misleading. It needs premium fuel, for a reason....
What the 2.0t has is a turbo: a highly stressed complex system requiring oiling, cooling, highly complex air control valves and high temp corrosive exhaust gas control valving. Not to mention the high-speed, highly stressed, very hot running (conditions that raise great big glaring red flags for any reliability engineer) turbine itself . A lot of highly stressed parts the 2.5 just doesn't have. History has repeatedly proven these components fail at a much higher rate than other engine components... they have very high probabilty of failure (or low MTBF's), as compared to other engine components. It's just flies in the face of common sense that that VW will have solved all those problems, affordably, with this one engine. Granted, VW has made these systems MORE reliable, but they still have more, and far more expensive, repairs than other systems in modern engines.
The 2.5 doesn't even have variable intake runners with attendant failure prone valving. As low tech as modern digital managed engines can get, and proven to be very reliable.
You might have a notion that VW has made some terrible design shortcuts but that's not a reliability problem. Those are design defects: not that it matters, we owners still have to bear the expense in the future if VW doesn't extend warranties when they identify them. 
But even then, why should we believe that if VW engineering is so poor in execution with the Rabbit, they would not also be with the GTI? And since we're looking at more complicated engineering solutions in the turbo system with much tighter design margins, those defects will show up with much greater effect, e.g., sooner, more frequently, and greater cost for repair.
It just appears to me your comparative assessment of reliability is terribly naive and sounds more like rationalizing the extra cost of a GTI: well don't bother. It's marvelous fun machine, that's enough reason.









_Modified by BuddyWh at 9:38 AM 9-10-2008_


_Modified by BuddyWh at 10:31 AM 9-10-2008_


----------



## spitpilot (Feb 14, 2000)

*Re: (BuddyWh)*

Well said! I'd have put up with the GTI additional complexity just to get the DSG and more torque to play with....but the wet clutch design put me off..having the heat and debris of clutches in the tranny fluid isn't super reliable design..Audi/VW has recognized this and the second gen DSG has dry clutches outside the tranny fluid..and one more gear too! If and when they bring that over (might not because of weak dollar profit issues in US)...sign me up! http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## Jimmy Russells (Feb 4, 2007)

*Re: (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
*I'll stick with my original statement*, I believe that the 2009 TSI equipped GTI will be more reliable than a 2009 Rabbit. Time of course could certainly prove me wrong; however, based upon the research I've done, I'm willing to bet otherwise.









Alright, so here's what you said


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
I'm going to opt for the GTI, a car that I believe to be a tad more reliable and more economical than the Rabbit. Oh! And more fun too.









Where does that original statement say 2009?
Don't get me wrong, the GTI is a fantastic car, I just don't buy the reliabilty being better. Perhaps the TSI is a lot better than the TFSI, but we won't know for years. I do know I've had my car 18 months and 23k, and I haven't even had to change a bulb. 



_Modified by RedRabidRabbit at 9:49 AM 9-10-2008_


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: (RedRabidRabbit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *RedRabidRabbit* »_Where does that original statement say 2009?
Don't get me wrong, the GTI is a fantastic car, I just don't buy the reliabilty being better. Perhaps the TSI is a lot better than the TFSI, but we won't know for years.

You quoted me out of context (you didn't check back far enough to get to the beginning if the exchange). The following quote was taken from the second to last post of Page 1:

_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_Said another way, ten years from now it is my bet that if we look back on the 2009 Jetta vs. GLI and Rabbit vs. GTI, we'll see virtually no difference in engine maintenance between the TSI and the I-5 motors (assuming that both engines are left stock). That said, at least in the case of those who drive manual transmissions, it seems an odds-on-bet that the folks with the I-5 will see many-many more gearbox failures.


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (spitpilot)*


_Quote, originally posted by *spitpilot* »_....but the wet clutch design put me off..having the heat and debris of clutches in the tranny fluid isn't super reliable design...

That's an interesting observation: I mean, most fully automatic transmissions have their clutch packs immersed in the ATF and they have high reliability now. Higher that most manual tranny/clutch systems, if I recall correctly.
Why would the DSG design be so much more demanding in that regard?


----------



## crosshare (Mar 4, 2008)

Been talking to a few dealerships around my area and I've been told that the 2.5 is a tank and one of most reliable VW has built. No blown engines and not even minor issues.


----------



## spitpilot (Feb 14, 2000)

*Re: (BuddyWh)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BuddyWh* »_
That's an interesting observation: I mean, most fully automatic transmissions have their clutch packs immersed in the ATF and they have high reliability now. Higher that most manual tranny/clutch systems, if I recall correctly.
Why would the DSG design be so much more demanding in that regard?

Maybe because DSG uses different type of clutch than other styles of auto trannies? If there was no issue with wet clutch DSG..why would Audi/VW go to the trouble to design a dry clutch upgrade and publicize the fact that the new generation was "dry clutch"? Automakers usually only point out changes that are perceived as improvements...wanna bet the the fluid change interval is longer for the new dry clutch DSG than the 40K for the current one?


----------



## jtrujillo86 (Aug 21, 2005)

I've posted this a million times before, but my mom just turned in her 2005.5 5-speed 2.5 for a Tiguan. She put somewhere between 65-70K miles on the Jetta with only two *very minor issues*: two check engine lights, both because there was improper air flow from the aux. air pump...no big deal, fixed by clearing the code. 
They're rock solid, IMO. The only thing that bothers me, that I'm starting to see on my 07 with 17K miles, is the slight stumble you feel at idle. I've been told it's simply because the 2.5's don't have harmonic balancers. My mom's Jetta, my Rabbit, and my new Jetta all had/have this stumble, so I'm sure it's nothing to worry about. 
- Jeremy.


----------



## pezzy84 (Apr 12, 2003)

*Re: (jtrujillo86)*


_Quote, originally posted by *jtrujillo86* »_The only thing that bothers me, that I'm starting to see on my 07 with 17K miles, is the slight stumble you feel at idle. I've been told it's simply because the 2.5's don't have harmonic balancers. My mom's Jetta, my Rabbit, and my new Jetta all had/have this stumble, so I'm sure it's nothing to worry about. 
- Jeremy.

My '06 2.5 did this until I changed the spark plugs, it did it REAL bad when it was hot outside. The stock plugs are thin wire platinums (not sure why they specify 40k change intervals) and I changed them to some el cheapo autolite coppers and it runs smooth as butter ALL the time now.


----------



## pezzy84 (Apr 12, 2003)

*Re: (pezzy84)*

Back to the original question. 







Just realized my response has nothing to do with the OP. 
I have 42k on my '06 2.5 with ZERO engine or engine electrical problems - no hiccups whatsoever that I remember. Timing chain rattle/slap comes and goes but I figure its normal. I burn MAYBE 1 quart of oil during a 10k oil change interval.


----------



## shipo (Jan 3, 2006)

*Re: (travis3265)*

To the folks who were trying to convince me that the 5-Speed manual transmission on the 2.5 liter cars is a solid unit, here's two more that have had a problem: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4042775


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_To the folks who were trying to convince me that the 5-Speed manual transmission on the 2.5 liter cars is a solid unit, here's two more that have had a problem: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=4042775

pffft
Prolly more cause entry level cars are driven by entry level drivers and entry level drivers beat the crap out of manual transmissions.
Can't draw any conclusions at all from the paltry few obsessive members of VWVortex that post every petty little thing that's wrong with their car (including me). The vast majority of 2.5's out there you never hear anything about because their owners are just to busy driving them to mess with talking about how there's nothing exciting happening with their ride. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 
Besides: this is soooooooo off topic...the OP was asking about reliability of the 2.5, not the 5spd manual tranny










_Modified by BuddyWh at 7:27 AM 9-25-2008_


----------



## pjohn221 (Sep 27, 2008)

i love VWs. ive owned 2 volkswagens, now im currenty looking for a new car. i really like the new jettas but the one thing holding me back frm gettin one is the reliability issue. i hate to say this but i might go for Japanese car(honda SI)


----------



## BuddyWh (Nov 11, 2006)

*Re: (pjohn221)*


_Quote, originally posted by *pjohn221* »_ i love VWs. ive owned 2 volkswagens, now im currenty looking for a new car. i really like the new jettas but the one thing holding me back frm gettin one is the reliability issue. i hate to say this but i might go for Japanese car(honda SI)

I have to agree, even though I bought a VW this time. I was really worried about getting into one after reading all the problems with MkIV's in particular, especially interior fixtures like window regulators. That lead me to get a 10yr/100K extended warranty the extends the bumper to bumper all the way to 100k miles.
I also liked the 2.5 engine: naturally aspirated, about as low tech as you can get in this day and age. Many major, expensive, repairs with VW engines have been turbo-related, something this 2.5 doesn't have.
So far the Rabbit is proving to be a very good car: one mfg. defect (leaky transmission seal) is all I've had to worry about. My last acura needed new headliner, new power set regulator under warranty and I replaced the motor mounts, oil pan and the clutch needed replacement WAY to early...only about 80K miles...I got rid of it when the electricals started going flaky at about 110K, a lousey reason to dump a car as even British cars have reliable electricals these days.


----------



## Mr. Damir (Sep 27, 2003)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (shipo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *shipo* »_
Ya know? I've heard that repeated so many times that it seems to have become a "truth". That said, properly maintained, a turbocharger on a modern engine should easily last as long as the engine itself.


Yeah, it seems like it.
I've driven my GTI since I bought it new. at 10,000 mi, I chipped it, 3" exhaust, 3" dp, and whatnot, 20psi of boost, track and all, and I have 88,000 miles right now. Other than a failed coilpack, window regulator, and regular maintenance, it has been problem free.


----------



## quaudi (Jun 25, 2001)

*Re: Is the 2.5 reliable? (SinisterMind)*

I bought a 05.5 Jetta VE new. I've had 14 water cooled VWs and never had a dud. But this 2.5 is as reliable as a stone. Now have 57K miles and have not had an issue with anything outside of routine maintenance. I get 30-32 mpg highway at 75-80 mph. I do use more oil in this car than any VW I've ever owned and its been that way since day one. I go through 2 qts. of synthetic every 5K miles. It was actually higher consumption when new. So much so, that I called it to the dealers attention. But there are no signs of excessive oil burning and it is dropping so be it. Other than some issues of interior finishes on the early models I have nothing but good things to say about the 2.5. With the newer ones having 20 more HP than mine I'm sure its a great car now.


----------

