# Atlas' weak points- regrets?



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

I will be in the market for a 3 row vehicle soon after my TDI buyback is completed. One of the options for my family is the Atlas. Two of main complaints I've been hearing about are underpowered engine and poor gas milage. I've noticed that most people who complain about the underpowered engine are those who don't even own one. How does it look in a real life? Do you regret purchasing this vehicle based on engine and gas consumption? Are there any other negatives you discovered after driving it for a while?


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Sorry for only adding limited feedback here - New owner but haven't even gone through a tank of gas. My experience on the highway drive home from the dealer was great and haven't experienced any lack of power issues.

Wanted to give a :thumbup: for going through the previous posts and pointing out that most of the criticism has originated from posters who do not own :laugh:


----------



## ArgyleVR6 (Jul 12, 2001)

I am sort of in the same boat. We have a 2014 Durango coming off a lease in the next month, and it's been great - we've been really happy with it, and definitely considering buying another. I am leaning towards the Atlas due to warranty, more room, more safety features when comparing dollar to dollar, smaller outside dimensions even though it's roomier inside, tech is a little better, etc.

I do have concerns and the fuel economy, the smaller gas tank, the underwhelming power... I also took one out at night after reading about the headlights, and I def felt underwhelmed on their reach also. Brights are awesome though.


----------



## kkress (Sep 11, 2017)

Just a couple turns of a screwdriver can help any vehicle out on low beams. I've owned a number of VW and the headlights are always pointed low. Pointing them up a bit isn't harmful. If you've gone too far you'll get some feedback from oncoming drivers, then turn back down a bit.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

jkopelc said:


> Sorry for only adding limited feedback here - New owner but haven't even gone through a tank of gas. My experience on the highway drive home from the dealer was great and haven't experienced any lack of power issues.
> 
> Wanted to give a :thumbup: for going through the previous posts and pointing out that most of the criticism has originated from posters who do not own :laugh:


Yes, because when you buy Atlas you get bump of 50lb-ft 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Care to share details on Atlas headlight aiming (in the IIHS discussing the headlights?). i think a number of people would benefit from that (myself especially as I have been discussing a number of points there)

As for the underwhelming low beams - is that apples to apples compared to the Durango? I have driven the Durango numerous times (work rental vehicle) and felt the low beams (which are projectors) are weak and definitely do not shine as bright as the LEDS. As for actual testing the IIHS only starting testing headlights in 2017 I believe so don't have any real data comparing your model (likely a 2014/15 if you are coming off lease) to the 2018 Atlas.


----------



## trbochrg (Dec 1, 2004)

Seriously, as long as they aren't as bad as the halogens on the Routan we owned. Might as well have been holding a candle in front of the car.

My wife wants an Atlas when her lease is up on the Touareg. Yes, the Touareg which was a car she's wanted since they came out in 2004. Finally gets one in 2015 and now is already looking forward to something else. Sigh....


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

ArgyleVR6 said:


> I am sort of in the same boat. We have a 2014 Durango coming off a lease in the next month, and it's been great - we've been really happy with it, and definitely considering buying another. I am leaning towards the Atlas due to warranty, more room, more safety features when comparing dollar to dollar, smaller outside dimensions even though it's roomier inside, tech is a little better, etc.
> 
> I do have concerns and the fuel economy, the smaller gas tank, the underwhelming power... I also took one out at night after reading about the headlights, and I def felt underwhelmed on their reach also. Brights are awesome though.


Durango is definitely going to feel different then Atlas. It is Mercedes Benz based platform, more precisely GL based. It will behave better thru curves due to longitudinal engine. Transmission is better since it is ZF (same as one in Audi and BMW). 
However, VR6 is better engine then Dodge V6, if you considering V6. Dodge has 295hp, but same torque. HP is irrelevant in these vehicles. Torque is what matters. Dodge is much heavier vehicle. I drove V6 Durango and Atlas is faster on the feet, no doubt about that. Also, while 2018 Durango comes with new tech, it also comes with old brakes, which are not on par with Atlas. 
Now, HEMI is different thing. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ArgyleVR6 (Jul 12, 2001)

jkopelc said:


> As for the underwhelming low beams - is that apples to apples compared to the Durango? I have driven the Durango numerous times (work rental vehicle) and felt the low beams (which are projectors) are weak and definitely do not shine as bright as the LEDS. As for actual testing the IIHS only starting testing headlights in 2017 I believe so don't have any real data comparing your model (likely a 2014/15 if you are coming off lease) to the 2018 Atlas.


It is... my wife has the '14 Durango, and I have a '15 JGC, which are basically the same headlights. I don't think anything's changed about them since, so 2017/18 should be the same. The projectors (to me) seem to project more evenly, and further... that said, it could certainly be a case where the Atlas headlights were a self-fulfilling prophecy when I test drove it, since I was actively looking for it. The saleguy agreed that he could see where people thought they were weak though.

Headlights are just one of several reservations I have though, similar to the OP.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

ArgyleVR6 said:


> .....Headlights are just one of several reservations I have though, similar to the OP.


So, how did you exist with the headlights of the 70s, 80s and 90s? Today's headlights in all vehicles are better than they have ever been.


----------



## Atlas123 (Sep 18, 2017)

I purchased one very recently and definitely feel that the engine is underpowered, even with it in sport mode. I am getting terrible fuel economy, but that?s in sport mode and mostly short jaunts and plenty of city driving. 

If being a new model year, there are definitely some for and finish issues (pieces coming off, a button being defective). My vehicle was built in October, so they clearly still haven?t worked these out. 

The lights all around are subpar. I particular think the reverse lights and the trunk lights are too weak, in addition to the low beam issue. 

But with all of that, I still don?t regret it. At least not yet. There are downsides or compromises to everything and the Atlas is strong overall. 

If you are on the fence, I?d look closely at the new Traverse.


----------



## rider5000 (Sep 28, 2017)

I've owned my SEL premium for about 1.5 months and feel the headlights are fine after being adjusted. The stock fog light aren't that great but can easily be replaced. I do agree that the engine is a bit under-powered, but for daily driving and road trips it does just fine. The 8 speed trans does a good job of keeping the RPMs where they need to be to make decent power and get the Atlas moving. Gas mileage isn't bad. On the highway/ freeway I get 23-27 mpg average for the trip running cruising from 55-80 mph running premium fuel. Do I regret buying it... No, I bought the Atlas not for being quick but for comfort and the ability to haul my family around safely and it does that well.


----------



## knedrgr (Jun 6, 2011)

2018 Atlas LE V6 4Motion owner here with 3500+ on the OD. 

Very happy owner. Power is pretty much on point, for a V6 and a 4500lb SUV. I do drive this thing in mostly Sport mode for the quicker acceleration and heavier steering. If driven in either Eco or Normal mode, the steering is too numb. You do have the option to do a "Custom" mode where acceleration is in Eco and steering is Sport, but I do like the quicker response when changing lanes and moving from a stop sign. My MPG hasn't been drastically affected by the constant Sport mode. Although, with the colder air, my MPG is lowering, so I don't contribute to it with the Sport mode.

Also, we did take a road trip to DC w/ 3 adults and two kids. The car was packed with family stuff. The drive was comfortable for the 7 hour drive. At a few points, I'd adequate power to make some passes in the mountain roads of PA and VA. Didn't feel that the car was under power. 

LOVE the forward reclining/sliding second row seats to get access to the third row seats. This was pretty much the main feature that had sold us on the Atlas. Currently carting around a toddler and infant, so they'll be in car seats for a while. This was a great feature when I had to drive around with 6 additional passengers, on a trip around DC. Really nice feature for those sitting in the back.

The AC does take some time to cool down the car. However, I'm also coming from a Golf, which was like 1/2 the size of the Atlas, so I'm not used to the cavernous interior space that needs to cool down.

My only other complain is the lack of heated side mirrors on the LE model. However, I'm pretty happy with the huge panoramic sunroof, so I'll enjoy that daily over the heated side mirrors.


----------



## TeamAtlas (Oct 17, 2017)

Totally happy with mine. No regrets at all. It does exactly what we need it to do. 

I do not understand people's power expectations. The car is plenty quick for what it is, a 4500 lbs V6 SUV. If you were expecting it to accelerate like a GTI, then yes, you'll be underwhelmed, but you shouldn't have expected that. 

I think the numb steering is also totally acceptable for a vehicle this size. I don't want to wrestle the wheel in a daily-driven family hauler and I'm not at the traction limit of my tires, so feedback is not even a consideration. 

The vehicle overall is much more refined than a van or a GM suv, as far as I'm concerned there is no comparison.


----------



## knedrgr (Jun 6, 2011)

TeamAtlas said:


> Totally happy with mine. No regrets at all. It does exactly what we need it to do.
> 
> I do not understand people's power expectations. The car is plenty quick for what it is, a 4500 lbs V6 SUV. If you were expecting it to accelerate like a GTI, then yes, you'll be underwhelmed, but you shouldn't have expected that.
> 
> ...



It's funny, since it's only been 2 months with my new Atlas, and I've completely forgotten how much harder the steering wheel is on the Golf/Jetta. Just from a parking/slow speed steering, it's night/day difference when I have to drive my wife's MK6 Jetta.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

TeamAtlas said:


> Totally happy with mine. No regrets at all. It does exactly what we need it to do.
> 
> I do not understand people's power expectations. The car is plenty quick for what it is, a 4500 lbs V6 SUV. If you were expecting it to accelerate like a GTI, then yes, you'll be underwhelmed, but you shouldn't have expected that.
> 
> ...


Expectations are that if you are buying 2017 VW, it should accelerate and more importantly accelerate between 40-80mph better then 2009 Pilot. But currently Atlas accelerates exactly same as 5 speed, 250hp Honda Pilot from 2009, and gets similar mpg. In 2027, maybe they will catch up with current Pilot.


----------



## JohnNS (Sep 21, 2015)

Execline Atlas (Canadian version of top trim) - zero regrets, very happy with it. Around 6000kms in now.

No problem with power, in fact we drive in eco mode pretty much all the time. On very steep, longer hills we'll put it back in normal, or the rare time we want to get past a slow 18 wheeler before the passing lane ends we'll put it in sport. Fuel economy I think we're around 10.5L/100km on probably 85% highway. On long highway trips we can get it around 9.5L/100km. Beats what our 2008 chev colorado could do (2.9L) and is 1000lbs heavier. Is it a speed demo? No, but it has no problem passing or getting going.

Haven't had any trim or function issues to speak of. I noticed one retaining clip for a wire under one of the seats in the second row not in, so clicked that in place, barely worth mentioning.

Style wise it stands out, some say good, some say bad, I like how it looks - it's a big monster sitting in the parking lot when we walk out of the store.. other cars auto park themselves 3 spots away on average - both out of fear and respect. 

Handling is very very nice, long road trips are very comfortable.

Only dislikes and they're very very minor is the interior lights not being LED (just received mine from deAutoLED though so that'll be fixed soon) and not having LED fogs, still debating making that switch.

See if your dealer will let you use one for an extended test drive or for a day/weekend, some are very accommodating.


----------



## jkopelc (Mar 1, 2017)

Not everyone has an expectation that "it should accelerate and more importantly accelerate between 40-80mph better then 2009 Pilot"

Don't project your own bias as an opinion of everyone else here.

As a buyer I am definitely still in the honeymoon phase - so I for one definitely try to keep an unbiased opinion of the good and the bad (as I have stated many times, no car ticks off all the boxes - we all make a choice to place greater emphasis and weight on certain features more than others)


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

We're happy with ours. Power is sufficient. If I want to move, take twistys at speed, drive like a hoon, I get in the GTI, if I want to take a trip with the whole family, for hours, on the highway, and be comfortable, I get in the atlas. If my wife wants to go anywhere or do anything, her weapon of choice is the atlas. She's coming from a mk2 tiguan (2014). It was her daily before the atlas. it took her about a week to get used to the size difference. she's good to go now. it's, ultimately, hers. she hasn't had any gripes so far.

I replaced the interior lights with leds the first week. brake and turns LED around the same time. added guage sweep via vcds. planning on led fogs at some point soon. besides that, the car is well suited for my purposes. on the wife's checklist, it ticks all the boxes. she drives it confidently, can accelerate as much as she wishes, and it's got room for all our stuff when we go on trip.

My opinion, on the power topic... it's fine. doesn't scare me, like I can't get out of my own way. I want to pass, I pass. onramp, not a problem. 

Also, brakes are really good. They dust like hell, but stop the car well and feel good doing it. Confidence inspiring. I don't see a lot of people talking about them, but the car stops well and the pedal has good feel.


----------



## TeamAtlas (Oct 17, 2017)

Ditto on the brakes (and also the trans cal). It does inspire confidence and is much better than 2012 wagon with DSG.


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

Thank you all for your feedback. Atlas felt under power for me when I test drove it. But so did Honda Pilot and Mazda CX-9. Quite a difference when compering to a GTI. I think one should understand the purpose of a vehicle. I drive GTI differently than Jetta SW TDI. I have a DSG on that TDI although I’ve never driven it in a Sport mode- it was always about gas mileage.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

TeamAtlas said:


> Ditto on the brakes (and also the trans cal). It does inspire confidence and is much better than 2012 wagon with DSG.


VW really hit with brakes, no doubt there. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## juched (Nov 12, 2004)

Enjoying our Atlas. Still breaking it in so not pushing it hard. Seems a little under powered but running eco mode and don?t stomp on it. Nothing to concern me. 

Brake dust is collecting fast 

I don?t regret this purchase!


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

jkopelc said:


> Not everyone has an expectation that "it should accelerate and more importantly accelerate between 40-80mph better then 2009 Pilot"
> 
> Don't project your own bias as an opinion of everyone else here.
> 
> As a buyer I am definitely still in the honeymoon phase - so I for one definitely try to keep an unbiased opinion of the good and the bad (as I have stated many times, no car ticks off all the boxes - we all make a choice to place greater emphasis and weight on certain features more than others)


Bias? Check numbers. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Since a lot of people is interested in tests, here is new one:

http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/atlas/2018/2018-volkswagen-atlas-first-test-review/amp/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kamouche (Sep 22, 2017)

1 month in and 1,000 miles later and so far my wife has no regrets with the purchase. She's coming from owning a 2006 Murano to now the SEL Premium Atlas and she doesn't see any power issues (We are a family of 4, 2 adults a 6 year old and 2 year old). She normally drives it in Normal mode and I drive it in Sport and I think it does the job. I agree that the fog lights are sub par and like what others have said that can easily be changed. There are some minor hiccups with the infortainment system but a quick reset seems to fix that. Apart from that, we haven't had any real issues with the purchase.


----------



## Atlas123 (Sep 18, 2017)

edyvw said:


> jkopelc said:
> 
> 
> > Not everyone has an expectation that "it should accelerate and more importantly accelerate between 40-80mph better then 2009 Pilot"
> ...


He doesn?t disagree with the numbers, he disagrees with their import.


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

juched said:


> Enjoying our Atlas. Still breaking it in so not pushing it hard. Seems a little under powered but running eco mode and don?t stomp on it. Nothing to concern me.
> 
> Brake dust is collecting fast
> 
> I don?t regret this purchase!


Dust gets much better after the first 2k miles. Ours took a bit to bed. They still dust, but not nearly as bad as when it was brand new.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Atlas123 said:


> He doesn?t disagree with the numbers, he disagrees with their import.


Importance?
Atlas is getting the worst mpg in that class. Two things are cause:
1. Hp/lb ratio. 
2. Obsolete engine. 
That engine saw a day of light first time in 2005. It is fuel dilution monster. All competitors built their direct injection engines based on the shortcomings of first generation FSI and TFSI engines. So VW decided to compete with others offering engine that served as sample of what not to do when building DI engine. With 10K OCI it will be interesting to see wear metals after 100k in mostly grocery getting regime. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## matsavol (Jul 26, 2015)

edyvw said:


> Importance?
> Atlas is getting the worst mpg in that class. Two things are cause:
> 1. Hp/lb ratio.
> 2. Obsolete engine.
> ...


In actual car&driver test the Atlas was among the best in fuel consumption:
https://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/three-row-suv-test-vw-atlas-vs-dodge-durango-gmc-acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-7

Mazda CX-9 was slightly better but if you account for it using premium fuel it actually turns out more expensive per mile.

It seems VW was very conservative when making claims of the fuel economy while other manufacturers were much more optimistic.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

matsavol said:


> In actual car&driver test the Atlas was among the best in fuel consumption:
> https://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/three-row-suv-test-vw-atlas-vs-dodge-durango-gmc-acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-7
> 
> Mazda CX-9 was slightly better but if you account for it using premium fuel it actually turns out more expensive per mile.
> ...


EPA is making claims. Do not get me wrong, I think methodology is ridiculous. 
However, when you selling cars people are looking at those claims. 
Also, VR6 is known as thirsty engine from other applications. 23mpg claim is really not surprising. However, with such bad hp/lb ratio, what will be mpg when you put 4-5 people in it with luggage and roof box? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dieselpwr (Mar 7, 2004)

edyvw said:


> Importance?
> Atlas is getting the worst mpg in that class. Two things are cause:
> 1. Hp/lb ratio.
> 2. Obsolete engine.
> ...


for someone who hates the Atlas so much (in this thread and in others) you sure follow the Atlas forum alot. We test drove one and for the money, I really don't see any other SUV out there that compares. Sure a few more HP would be nice, but it's the same engine as our Q7, and that tows our 5000lbs jetboat without any issues.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

dieselpwr said:


> for someone who hates the Atlas so much (in this thread and in others) you sure follow the Atlas forum alot. We test drove one and for the money, I really don't see any other SUV out there that compares. Sure a few more HP would be nice, but it's the same engine as our Q7, and that tows our 5000lbs jetboat without any issues.


I think car is everything one needs for family, except engine. yes, it is same engine as in pre facelift Q7, but you know, Audi had very good 5cyl turbo engines in 80's, they would also tow 5000lbs without any issues etc. 
I owned numerous VW's, and like I said before, t is an insult to traditional owners. 
Now, we all have different understanding of power. I know people who think that Honda CR-V has a lot of power, and it need 14.2sec to 60mph.


----------



## kkress (Sep 11, 2017)

matsavol said:


> It seems VW was very conservative when making claims of the fuel economy while other manufacturers were much more optimistic.


Ditto on the conservatism. My experience, for VW's I driven long enough to get a read on fuel economy, I have to really beat on them to get equal or lower than EPA ratings. For most all others, I have to try hard and baby to get EPA. My data only includes small, turbo-charged diesel and gas engines though. Proponent of the 2.0T in the Atlas and believe it will do fine for it's purpose.


----------



## stevehayes01 (Aug 5, 2005)

edyvw said:


> Durango is definitely going to feel different then Atlas. It is Mercedes Benz based platform, more precisely GL based. It will behave better thru curves due to longitudinal engine. Transmission is better since it is ZF (same as one in Audi and BMW).
> However, VR6 is better engine then Dodge V6, if you considering V6. Dodge has 295hp, but same torque. HP is irrelevant in these vehicles. Torque is what matters. Dodge is much heavier vehicle. I drove V6 Durango and Atlas is faster on the feet, no doubt about that. Also, while 2018 Durango comes with new tech, it also comes with old brakes, which are not on par with Atlas.
> Now, HEMI is different thing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The ZF in the Dodge is garbage... I just traded my 15 Challenger R/T in for my Atlas and during the 2 years I owned it the dealer had it for over 65 days due to trans issues and if you troll the Dodge groups you will see the same experience from failed valve bodies on the 8 speed ZF's. Mine was bad enough that dodge gave me cash out on it just for my issues.


----------



## knedrgr (Jun 6, 2011)

edyvw said:


> Also, VR6 is known as thirsty engine from other applications. 23mpg claim is really not surprising. However, with such bad hp/lb ratio, what will be mpg when you put 4-5 people in it with luggage and roof box?



3 adults, 2 kids, and the back was full of luggage (folded 3rd seats). Extended trip to/from DC, and we saw 25 mpg average, and average speed was 70-75mph. Although, no roof rack, but still, pretty impressive MPG given the car was full.


----------



## ArgyleVR6 (Jul 12, 2001)

stevehayes01 said:


> The ZF in the Dodge is garbage... I just traded my 15 Challenger R/T in for my Atlas and during the 2 years I owned it the dealer had it for over 65 days due to trans issues and if you troll the Dodge groups you will see the same experience from failed valve bodies on the 8 speed ZF's. Mine was bad enough that dodge gave me cash out on it just for my issues.


FWIW, our '14 Durango and '15 Grand Cherokee have been flawless in the trans dept. In all depts, for that matter. Only gremlins for either have been in her headunit... it can't seem to remember where I like the sound EQ to be. Pretty minor.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

knedrgr said:


> 3 adults, 2 kids, and the back was full of luggage (folded 3rd seats). Extended trip to/from DC, and we saw 25 mpg average, and average speed was 70-75mph. Although, no roof rack, but still, pretty impressive MPG given the car was full.


I believe you. I get sometimes 29-30mpg in BMW. However more often then not I get 24-25. My wife gets in her Tiguan regularly 27-28mpg. I on other hand get on HWY 23 at best.
Roof box? I did in total 6500 road trip miles with BMW this year with Yakima Skybox 16. Colorado Springs -Chicago-Co. Springs and C.Springs-Vegas-San Diego-LA-Vegas (2week stay at in laws)-C. Springs. Average consumption with full trunk, 3 adults, 10 month old and that Skybox was 21.7mpg. There is no way Atlas will come anywhere close to that in those conditions (high winds, mountain passes over Rockies etc). I am aggressive driver, there is no doubt. I will go over passes keeping 75-80mph if not more. So there is no way I would get close to 20mpg since engine would be overwhelmed. Is it possible to get better mpg? Sure, but then why not getting something more established that drives that way and proven? Highlander &co? What is VW trying to do? Offer VW or Toyota? My wife never owned European vehicle. She is Asian, growing in family where everything starts and ends with Japanese cars. When we were about to move from Sa Diego to Colorado, she wanted AWD, preferably CR-V or RAV4 (she hats big SUV’s). Anyway I convinced her to try Tiguan and she never looked back. Reason is passing power. She hates cars, she hates driving, and for her biggest obstacle in life was merging on interstate. Turbo in Tiguan solved issues for her. First time we tried Atlas she was amazed by car’s space. When we got on interstate she said: i am afraid this poor thing will have cardiac arrest. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

stevehayes01 said:


> The ZF in the Dodge is garbage... I just traded my 15 Challenger R/T in for my Atlas and during the 2 years I owned it the dealer had it for over 65 days due to trans issues and if you troll the Dodge groups you will see the same experience from failed valve bodies on the 8 speed ZF's. Mine was bad enough that dodge gave me cash out on it just for my issues.


So it is garbage in Audi and BMW? Each company has different programming, but valve bodies are same. Can you find failed ZF in Audi and BMW? Absolutely, same like failed Aisin transmissions. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

kkress said:


> Ditto on the conservatism. My experience, for VW's I driven long enough to get a read on fuel economy, I have to really beat on them to get equal or lower than EPA ratings. For most all others, I have to try hard and baby to get EPA. My data only includes small, turbo-charged diesel and gas engines though. Proponent of the 2.0T in the Atlas and believe it will do fine for it's purpose.


Problem with 2.0T is that VW doesn’t want to add Haldex in it. It is only 160lbs and this BS story from VW how it is too much for engine is just excuse for real issue: protecting Audi. However, we might get it if Honda puts its 2.0T in Pilot. VW will have to do something if it want to stay competitive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

matsavol said:


> ....It seems VW was very conservative when making claims of the fuel economy while other manufacturers were much more optimistic.


Every maker uses the same EPA test procedure to determine the ratings. VW would not be making up numbers.


----------



## Gromicide (Nov 1, 2017)

edyvw said:


> Durango is definitely going to feel different then Atlas. It is Mercedes Benz based platform, more precisely GL based. It will behave better thru curves due to longitudinal engine. Transmission is better since it is ZF (same as one in Audi and BMW).
> However, VR6 is better engine then Dodge V6, if you considering V6. Dodge has 295hp, but same torque. HP is irrelevant in these vehicles. Torque is what matters. Dodge is much heavier vehicle. I drove V6 Durango and Atlas is faster on the feet, no doubt about that. Also, while 2018 Durango comes with new tech, it also comes with old brakes, which are not on par with Atlas.
> Now, HEMI is different thing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The V6 Durango doesn't get the same 8 speed auto as the Hemi. They are both 8 speed but the hemi one is the ZF and is a better tranny. I had a 2014 V6 Durango for 3 years and it was a great SUV. It made me want a GL benz...lol


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

Gromicide said:


> The V6 Durango doesn't get the same 8 speed auto as the Hemi. They are both 8 speed but the hemi one is the ZF and is a better tranny. I had a 2014 V6 Durango for 3 years and it was a great SUV. It made me want a GL benz...lol


Both are ZF. Difference is in max torque it can handle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ndavies9897 (Jul 31, 2012)

edyvw said:


> I believe you. I get sometimes 29-30mpg in BMW. However more often then not I get 24-25. My wife gets in her Tiguan regularly 27-28mpg. I on other hand get on HWY 23 at best.
> Roof box? I did in total 6500 road trip miles with BMW this year with Yakima Skybox 16. Colorado Springs -Chicago-Co. Springs and C.Springs-Vegas-San Diego-LA-Vegas (2week stay at in laws)-C. Springs. Average consumption with full trunk, 3 adults, 10 month old and that Skybox was 21.7mpg. There is no way Atlas will come anywhere close to that in those conditions (high winds, mountain passes over Rockies etc). I am aggressive driver, there is no doubt. I will go over passes keeping 75-80mph if not more. So there is no way I would get close to 20mpg since engine would be overwhelmed. Is it possible to get better mpg? Sure, but then why not getting something more established that drives that way and proven? Highlander &co? What is VW trying to do? Offer VW or Toyota? My wife never owned European vehicle. She is Asian, growing in family where everything starts and ends with Japanese cars. When we were about to move from Sa Diego to Colorado, she wanted AWD, preferably CR-V or RAV4 (she hats big SUV’s). Anyway I convinced her to try Tiguan and she never looked back. Reason is passing power. She hates cars, she hates driving, and for her biggest obstacle in life was merging on interstate. Turbo in Tiguan solved issues for her. First time we tried Atlas she was amazed by car’s space. When we got on interstate she said: i am afraid this poor thing will have cardiac arrest.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Edyvw, i have to laugh, you praise your Tiguan and i have driven one a number of years ago and i was very nice but awfully small on the inside. A Golf 5dr at the time had more space. Power was decent but i had to look up some numbers. I found from Motor Trend; “On the track, the slightly heavier 4Motion turned in roughly the same numbers as the front-drive Tiguan. The dash to 60 mph took 7.8 seconds and it ran through the quarter mile in 16.0 seconds at 87.2 mph, matching the Tiguan SE to 60 mph and besting it by 0.2 sec and 0.8 mph in the quarter.” Source; http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/tiguan/2012/2012-volkswagen-tiguan-sel-4motion-first-test/

So a recent comparison test by Car and Driver https://www.caranddriver.com/compar...acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test 

put a V6 Atlas at 7.9 seconds to 60 and the quarter mile at 16 seconds at 89mph. I don’t know about you but those numbers are pretty darn close... so that kind of blows that whole theory about power out the window. 

Furthermore, you keep going on about the Pilot and how great it is but they opened the comparison with this;

“earning our scorn and its last-place finish when its brakes started smoking after a few runs up and down our twisty road. “ 

and were not impressed with the transmission and the vehicles “sloppy handling” 

I used to work QA for Honda manufacturing where the Pilot was produced and even back then Honda had problems with the brakes. Guess not much has changed in over a decade...

I have driven both the Highlander and a Pilot and both had there highs a lows. The Highlander is quite a bit smaller than either the Atlas or the Pilot. The third row is just about useless for anyone over 5’7. The Pilot feels much like a minivan that Honda sells, i drove one of those as well when we were looking at replacements for our Passat. I agree that the Pilot is lighter and feels quicker when you drive it pedal to the floorboard but i can tell you most people don’t drive like that on a daily basis. My wife who is by no means a car person commented that the Pilot felt very “floaty”. My previous vehicle prior to my Golf Wagon was a 100hp Jetta diesel with a 0-60 time of 10.2 seconds and never did i have a problem merging onto an expressway. 

To each his own i guess, i settled on a Fwd Comfortline 2.0Tsi Atlas and a good set of Michelin snow tires. I have lived in Ontario, Canada all my life in a rural area where we get a lot of snow and ice for 5 months of the year and have not gotten stuck in over 20 plus years of driving. 

On a side note i took our Comfortline Atlas to an MTO scale and it weighed in at 4213lbs quite a bit less than the 4728lbs that C and D weighed in a fully loaded VR6.

I have no idea what the 0-60 time is for our Atlas or the quarter mile but it surprisingly does not feel underpowered with four of us on board. To boot it has been getting excellent fuel economy. No its not the perfect vehicle but i do not believe any vehicle is. 

You can bash and trash the Atlas all you want and complain how its not made for VW drivers but i have driven VWs in Europe as rentals and some of the Gas engines there are a joke compared to what we have here...Your X5 is in a much different league especially if its a diesel and you cannot compare that to an Atlas... 

Maybe in a few years VW will offer a turbo V6 much like when the Passat came out with the 2.5 five and a few years later the 1.8T replaced it. Until then i am sure Corporate VW does not give a hoot that edyvw on VWvortex keeps complaining about the VR6 in the Atlas. They are selling these things and people are buying them.

The vast majority of folks who have purchased an Atlas have been quite happy with them. And remember, nobody said you have to buy an Atlas, there are lots of Pilots and Highlanders out there for you! Cheers! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## redzone98 (Jun 10, 2004)

at 275 hp/tq i would imaging that the Atlas would be just fine doing its job. I believe its 'slugishness' might be a programming issue with the auto trans. IMHO im kind of glad its 'slow' because maybe it will remind drivers that they are driving around 5000lbs of metal, and make them be more responsible on the roads... unlike other SUV drivers


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

ndavies9897 said:


> Edyvw, i have to laugh, you praise your Tiguan and i have driven one a number of years ago and i was very nice but awfully small on the inside. A Golf 5dr at the time had more space. Power was decent but i had to look up some numbers. I found from Motor Trend; “On the track, the slightly heavier 4Motion turned in roughly the same numbers as the front-drive Tiguan. The dash to 60 mph took 7.8 seconds and it ran through the quarter mile in 16.0 seconds at 87.2 mph, matching the Tiguan SE to 60 mph and besting it by 0.2 sec and 0.8 mph in the quarter.” Source; http://www.motortrend.com/cars/volkswagen/tiguan/2012/2012-volkswagen-tiguan-sel-4motion-first-test/
> 
> So a recent comparison test by Car and Driver https://www.caranddriver.com/compar...acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test
> 
> ...


Which part of my post: acceleration during merging you understood that my wife makes a stop in merging lane and then accelerate from 0 to 60?
Numerous times before I said here that acceleration 40-80 or 60-80 is much more important then 0-60. 
My point about 0-60 is that that is what average American driver cares about. Same like MotorTrend talk about need of 300-400hp which is irrelevant in this vehicle. What matters is torque that will provide elasticity. That is something Tiguan has due to the nature of turbo engine and lb-ft/lb ratio and Atlas with NA does not.
If priority for me was 0-60, I would be driving BMW 35i not 35d. 
As for VW, considering their social media advertising and involvement of their marketing department in campaign, I would say they do care a lot what is being said around. 
As for future engines, maybe. VW Atlas supposed to have 2.0 bi-turbo diesel with 363lb-ft that would be aimed at traditional VW customers. However, we all know that will not happen now. VW needed Atlas badly to improve numbers so it did not wait to offer probably 2.5 VR6 TSI that is available in Teramont. 
That is why all campaign is revolving around 3rd row, functional 2nd row and not obsolete engine. 
I said this before, sale numbers will show that Atlas will have to have facelift probably 2-3 years after start insted of 4 as usual.
As for what I am going to buy, no I do not want Highlander or Pilot. It would be same as buying Atlas. Vehicle for people driving 10 below speed limit in left lane. I guess VW was successful in attracting those drivers.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

redzone98 said:


> at 275 hp/tq i would imaging that the Atlas would be just fine doing its job. I believe its 'slugishness' might be a programming issue with the auto trans. IMHO im kind of glad its 'slow' because maybe it will remind drivers that they are driving around 5000lbs of metal, and make them be more responsible on the roads... unlike other SUV drivers


Top speed doesn’t have to do anything with elasticity of engine. 
275lb-ft from 2.0TSI will be available when VW decides that Atlas is not a threat to Q7. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ndavies9897 (Jul 31, 2012)

edyvw said:


> Which part of my post: acceleration during merging you understood that my wife makes a stop in merging lane and then accelerate from 0 to 60?
> Numerous times before I said here that acceleration 40-80 or 60-80 is much more important then 0-60.
> My point about 0-60 is that that is what average American driver cares about. Same like MotorTrend talk about need of 300-400hp which is irrelevant in this vehicle. What matters is torque that will provide elasticity. That is something Tiguan has due to the nature of turbo engine and lb-ft/lb ratio and Atlas with NA does not.
> If priority for me was 0-60, I would be driving BMW 35i not 35d.
> ...


Again look at the the 30-50 and 50-70 numbers right from Car and Driver (see attached screenshots) for both the Tiguan and Atlas. I think they speak to your numbers above quite well and make your point kind of mute about the general power of these vehicles.

Granted the specs are from a lighter 2015 Fwd Tiguan. Both those times are a few tenths of a second quicker in the 4motion Atlas than the “elasticity of the torquey” Tiguan. As a matter of fact those numbers would also suggest the Tiguan is a full half second slower in their tested 50-70 at 5.8 sec vs 5.2 sec for the Atlas. Heck for arguments sake even the 0-100mph is a tad quicker in the Atlas. (Not that i would want to go that fast in any SUV...) I drive a non civilianized Ford Explorer Interceptor at work with a NA V6 not the twin turbo ecoboost and for 95 percent of what service uses them for they work just fine. I had to look up the “performance” numbers for a regular run of the mill Explorer and low and behold they are nearly identical to the above Atlas. Ford sure sells a whole lot of them every year.

I would have loved and perhaps down the road hated a diesel in the Atlas, we owned both a 2012 Passat Tdi replaced by a 2016 Passat Tsi and my 2004 Jetta Tdi. But what i would have not liked would have been all the problems with the associated “clean diesel” technology that comes with them. My father in law a man who is German and was a diehard Mercedes diesel fan got rid of his ML350 Bluetec and vowed to never buy another diesel powered vehicle (he probably had 5 or 6 over the years dating back to the late 70’s). His ML became a money pit just outside the warranty. Our 2012 Passat had both the Adblue heater fail and the Nox sensor replaced with less than 80000kms on it. In contrast my 2004 Jetta Tdi had in excess of 600000kms when i sold it and the only sensor i changed was an o2 sensor. I was also a diehard diesel fan and thought thats all i would ever buy and drive, but the reality is a modern diesel is too $$$ to keep running and often longterm any fuel savings would be very quickly erased. I know our Passat was the perfect example.

Tiguan:









Atlas (far right)













Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

ndavies9897 said:


> Again look at the the 30-50 and 50-70 numbers right from Car and Driver (see attached screenshots) for both the Tiguan and Atlas. I think they speak to your numbers above quite well and make your point kind of mute about the general power of these vehicles.
> 
> Granted the specs are from a lighter 2015 Fwd Tiguan. Both those times are a few tenths of a second quicker in the 4motion Atlas than the “elasticity of the torquey” Tiguan. As a matter of fact those numbers would also suggest the Tiguan is a full half second slower in their tested 50-70 at 5.8 sec vs 5.2 sec for the Atlas. Heck for arguments sake even the 0-100mph is a tad quicker in the Atlas. (Not that i would want to go that fast in any SUV...) I drive a non civilianized Ford Explorer Interceptor at work with a NA V6 not the twin turbo ecoboost and for 95 percent of what service uses them for they work just fine. I had to look up the “performance” numbers for a regular run of the mill Explorer and low and behold they are nearly identical to the above Atlas. Ford sure sells a whole lot of them every year.
> 
> ...


I agree on SCR technology. It is pain in the ass, though there are ways around fixing DEF tanks. Granted there are no ways around NoX sensors. Who is not DIY inclined and takes cars to dealerships, it will bankrupt them. 
As for 30-50 and 50-70 I would seriously like to see Atlas achieving those results (or any of those vehicles except Mazda) in top gear in the real world. What is then acceleration in lowest gear in Honda and Toyota where torque is positioned well above 4,000rpms? I am not disputing results as Tiguan has pretty long 6th gear and we are talking also in top gear turbo lag, but sorry, Atlas will not catch up with Tiguan in attempt to merge, especially with that flat torque at high rpms. 
Not to mention that you can throw all that away (again except Mazda) once you start climbing mountains. I guess that is why I saw so far only one Atlas in Colorado. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## is95a (Jul 6, 2017)

I had a 2014 Durango Citadel with a HEMI and while that could haul ash, I don't miss the power while driving the Atlas in everyday driving. There are times it feels somewhat underpowered but 95% of the time I am perfectly happy with it. Plus it gets better gas mileage


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

Looks like the consensus is: people that own Atlas don't mind the power and fuel economy; people that don't own it mind it.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

sMartino said:


> Looks like the consensus is: people that own Atlas don't mind the power and fuel economy; people that don't own it mind it.


Sure, they bought it. There are people who do not mind power in Nissan Leaf too. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## AK5555 (Nov 5, 2017)

I went to test drive and buy a Pilot at the VW dealer and ended up buying a atlas. Doesn't really matter what the stats say. The driver experience in the Atlas is a lot better than the Pilot.


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

edyvw said:


> Sure, they bought it. There are people who do not mind power in Nissan Leaf too.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My gti is stage 2. It's a sporty car. Stock power wasn't quite enough. Its purpose is purely for me to enjoy driving it. I could have bought a golf tsi, but I planned to tune it and probably, eventually, drop in an is38. That car doesn't haul the family. From time to time a car seat goes in. Short trips...

My atlas is stock. Stock power is enough for me. That car hauls the family and makes trips to Sam's club to pick up paper towels and diapers, in bulk. Occasionally it picks up lumber from lowes. It replaced a mk2 tiguan that was a little too small for comfort. It does what I need it to do.

Nissan leaf. Nope. I'm not that guy.

Sent from my K01A using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

nkresho said:


> My gti is stage 2. It's a sporty car. Stock power wasn't quite enough. Its purpose is purely for me to enjoy driving it. I could have bought a golf tsi, but I planned to tune it and probably, eventually, drop in an is38. That car doesn't haul the family. From time to time a car seat goes in. Short trips...
> 
> My atlas is stock. Stock power is enough for me. That car hauls the family and makes trips to Sam's club to pick up paper towels and diapers, in bulk. Occasionally it picks up lumber from lowes. It replaced a mk2 tiguan that was a little too small for comfort. It does what I need it to do.
> 
> ...


I thought Atlas supposed to be road trip cat too, but apparently not. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

edyvw said:


> Sure, they bought it. There are people who do not mind power in Nissan Leaf too.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You've never bought anything that you later regretted? Just because they bought it it doesn't mean they must like everything about it. It seems tho, majority of people don't find the engine too weak for the purpose of this vehicle.


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

edyvw said:


> I thought Atlas supposed to be road trip cat too, but apparently not.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That too. Took it on a 700 mile, each way, this past July. With a 6 month old and all her stuff. Then on a 300, each way, in August. Super comfortable all around and the acc was awesome. Especially enjoyed changing diapers on the folded-down second row seats. Car seat was able to stay attached to the one side and we were able to fold the other side. Also, feeding in the car went smoothly with her in a booster. Tiguan just wasn't going to do it with all our luggage in the car. 

We specifically bought it to do the feedings and changes in the car. We make that 700 mile trip, yearly. Decent rest stops are few and far between on that route.

Also, the sun shades give excellent privacy for diaper changes.

Sent from my K01A using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

nkresho said:


> That too. Took it on a 700 mile, each way, this past July. With a 6 month old and all her stuff. Then on a 300, each way, in August. Super comfortable all around and the acc was awesome. Especially enjoyed changing diapers on the folded-down second row seats. Car seat was able to stay attached to the one side and we were able to fold the other side. Also, feeding in the car went smoothly with her in a booster. Tiguan just wasn't going to do it with all our luggage in the car.
> 
> We specifically bought it to do the feedings and changes in the car. We make that 700 mile trip, yearly. Decent rest stops are few and far between on that route.
> 
> ...


On diaper topic. For all shortcomings of BMW X5 as family SUV, I think it is most practical one when it comes to diaper changes due to lift gate in the back. However, I never found it enjoyable 
My point was not whether Atlas is comfortable (it is), or practical (it definitely is). I just do not see how car weigh that much with engine like that can be enjoyable let say negotiating Rockies, or Sierra Nevada etc. where you loose 3% of power for every 1000ft in naturally aspirated engine. Add to that all the weight you haul (I know, I do every year 5-7000 miles of road trips, East and West) and we move from it is enough power to adequate power. Yugo also had adequate power. I actually made 900 miles trip in Yugo, not as comfortable (that would be understatement), but power was adequate. We came in time. 
One thing I saw on social media is that people are complaining about AC. Please elaborate on that (times I drove Atlas I made sure AC is turned off)? What was temperature outside and was compressor power good enough for that huge space inside?


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

Diaper changes never are...

We only touched 100 outside a few times since we've had it. We run AC most of the time as it nearly always seems muggy here. No issues with cooling the car down quickly in heat or any hot spots in the cabin. We also don't have the sunroof in our SE, which likely helps insulate it. I vagcom disabled start/stop the first week of ownership. That helps too, as it was decreasing cooling power when the engine would stop. You could totally feel it warm up at a stoplight As far as parasitic loss, it's not all that noticeable to me. Although you can clearly hear it, outside, in lower gear uphill when the compressor is on and the windows are down. It's like a hissing sound added to the sound of the engine. Doesn't do it when the ac is off. Power feels pretty close, but I don't drive it like my GTI, so it may just be because i'm not in the upper revs or sitting at peak torque for very long.

We don't do any driving in higher elevations. Haven't yet, anyway. I bet the loss with thinner air would be considerable. Typically our roadtrips are to the coast of the southeast. Pittsburgh, while super hilly, isn't in the real mountains.


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

I have one, an '18 R-Line. I live around 4500' and drive up to 8000' with a trailer on a regular basis. The vehicle has plenty of power. I've owned a range of SUVs from Pilots to the big QX56, and I am very happy with it. The engine has a torque character reminiscent of a straight 6, since it almost is one. I will concede it is not the fastest, but it has the most engaging driving dynamics in the segment, my favorite interior design, gobs of low down torque, and plenty of power for 97% of the time when your not drag racing.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

nkresho said:


> Diaper changes never are...
> 
> We only touched 100 outside a few times since we've had it. We run AC most of the time as it nearly always seems muggy here. No issues with cooling the car down quickly in heat or any hot spots in the cabin. We also don't have the sunroof in our SE, which likely helps insulate it. I vagcom disabled start/stop the first week of ownership. That helps too, as it was decreasing cooling power when the engine would stop. You could totally feel it warm up at a stoplight As far as parasitic loss, it's not all that noticeable to me. Although you can clearly hear it, outside, in lower gear uphill when the compressor is on and the windows are down. It's like a hissing sound added to the sound of the engine. Doesn't do it when the ac is off. Power feels pretty close, but I don't drive it like my GTI, so it may just be because i'm not in the upper revs or sitting at peak torque for very long.
> 
> We don't do any driving in higher elevations. Haven't yet, anyway. I bet the loss with thinner air would be considerable. Typically our roadtrips are to the coast of the southeast. Pittsburgh, while super hilly, isn't in the real mountains.


I love Pittsburgh, spent a lot of time there. Reminds me of my hometown in Europe. 
Anyway, that is issue I saw on VW blast ad's on Facebook mostly, people complaining about AC. I would not be surprised if they borrowed compressor from smaller vehicle, as Europeans like to do that. Hans in Wolfsburg was probably thinking: why would people need bigger compressor.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Surprised towing capacity w/o the factory installed hitch didn't make this thread yet.

Very little (2000 lbs) compared to the 5000 lb factory hitch.

At least it has standard side rails, unlike the Pilot, which you have to get the Touring trim to get side rails. One of my co-workers bought a Pilot EX-L, and had the dealership add the side rails as an accessory. I hope the mounts are existing on the body, because I would fear them drilling holes into the roof, which of has the risk of leaking over time.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

edyvw said:


> Importance?
> Atlas is getting the worst mpg in that class. Two things are cause:
> 1. Hp/lb ratio.
> 2. Obsolete engine.
> ...


Direct injection has been around longer than 2005. Modern direct injection has been around 10 years prior, with Mitsubishi GDI in 1996, with Nissan, Toyota & Renault joining the party shortly thereafter, in that order. VW/Audi first generation FSI was introduced in 2000.

Heck when the 2.0T & VR6 FSI was introduced, Toyota was already on its D4S technology, with the combined direct & port injection,


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

kamouche said:


> 1 month in and 1,000 miles later and so far my wife has no regrets with the purchase. She's coming from owning a 2006 Murano to now the SEL Premium Atlas and she doesn't see any power issues (We are a family of 4, 2 adults a 6 year old and 2 year old). She normally drives it in Normal mode and I drive it in Sport and I think it does the job. I agree that the fog lights are sub par and like what others have said that can easily be changed. There are some minor hiccups with the infortainment system but a quick reset seems to fix that. Apart from that, we haven't had any real issues with the purchase.


I had to reset the infotainment as well, I saw strange behavior when switching profiles when someone opened a door, I know that sounds weird but I have working in Software Quality for like 15 years.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

BsickPassat said:


> Direct injection has been around longer than 2005. Modern direct injection has been around 10 years prior, with Mitsubishi GDI in 1996, with Nissan, Toyota & Renault joining the party shortly thereafter, in that order. VW/Audi first generation FSI was introduced in 2000.
> 
> Heck when the 2.0T & VR6 FSI was introduced, Toyota was already on its D4S technology, with the combined direct & port injection,


My point was that competitors looked at shortcomings of FSI and TFSI in building current engines. 
As for other DI engines, yes Mitsubishi had it in Carisma, but NoX levels were too high even for Euro norms which allowed at that times much higher NoX then EPA and CARB. 
Renault never had big traction in Europe with DI in the beginning nor others until actually FSI showed up, which again was sideshow since 70% of cars were diesels.


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

edyvw said:


> My point was that competitors looked at shortcomings of FSI and TFSI in building current engines.
> As for other DI engines, yes Mitsubishi had it in Carisma, but NoX levels were too high even for Euro norms which allowed at that times much higher NoX then EPA and CARB.
> Renault never had big traction in Europe with DI in the beginning nor others until actually FSI showed up, which again was sideshow since 70% of cars were diesels.


Did they? Where's the proof that other companies benchmarked the FSI/TFSI design in order to design their engines? Other a unsubstantiated claim?

NoX is from the stratified mode (ultra lean burn) in many of the GDI systems, including FSI in Europe, which is why in the US/Canada, the "S" became "Straight" instead of "Stratified" in Europe.

Direct injection had big traction in Japan, as Toyota was originally retrofitting GDI in their popular engines.

Audi FSI made the most noise due to high rate of intake valve deposits and cam follower wear/HPFP failures. Toyota/Lexus stayed under the radar, because they didn't advertise it as much as Audi, but their 1st generation GDI (D4) still had the deposits which they issued a TSB instead. While the Audi FSI was being heavily publicized for intake valve issues, again, Toyota/Lexus stayed under the radar with their D4-S, which eventually, Audi adopted in the 3rd gen ea888, when they added twin-injection.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

BsickPassat said:


> .....Audi adopted in the 3rd gen ea888, when they added twin-injection.


The EA888 Gen3 got rid of the deposit issue without adding port injection to the USA versions.


----------



## nkresho (Aug 8, 2010)

I wish they had added the twin injection to US models. We only got a single set of direct injectors on the ea888. ROW got a second set in the intake manifold to keep the valves clean.


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

BsickPassat said:


> Did they? Where's the proof that other companies benchmarked the FSI/TFSI design in order to design their engines? Other a unsubstantiated claim?
> 
> NoX is from the stratified mode (ultra lean burn) in many of the GDI systems, including FSI in Europe, which is why in the US/Canada, the "S" became "Straight" instead of "Stratified" in Europe.
> 
> ...


I absolutely agree that Toyota stayed under radar when it comes to DI and CBU. Generally, Japanese manufactures stay under radar until issues are solved, and then they advertise it like it is best thing after sliced bread. However, which part of “current “ engines did you miss when I said that? All engines now available are new. My point is their development is based on “know how” of issues on FSI and TSFI engines. Also, that means they looked at other engines and their shortcomings. VW is doing same, it is not like it is that complicated. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

nkresho said:


> I wish they had added the twin injection to US models. We only got a single set of direct injectors on the ea888. ROW got a second set in the intake manifold to keep the valves clean.


US consumers love cheap cars. If 99% of them don’t know what purpose they serve, why bother? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## deAutoLED.com (Jun 1, 2012)

JohnNS said:


> Execline Atlas (Canadian version of top trim) - zero regrets, very happy with it. Around 6000kms in now.
> 
> No problem with power, in fact we drive in eco mode pretty much all the time. On very steep, longer hills we'll put it back in normal, or the rare time we want to get past a slow 18 wheeler before the passing lane ends we'll put it in sport. Fuel economy I think we're around 10.5L/100km on probably 85% highway. On long highway trips we can get it around 9.5L/100km. Beats what our 2008 chev colorado could do (2.9L) and is 1000lbs heavier. Is it a speed demo? No, but it has no problem passing or getting going.
> 
> ...


:thumbup: thanks for the support! 

We cannot see why anyone would regret purchasing an Atlas, it is a nice looking different SUV and it has a lot more style than most cars out there.

But we do agree that the LEDs are lacking, when we found out there was hardly any LEDs in the Atlas we were a bit shocked. It is a big cabin so most want to have that extra light plus it looks cleaner, the trunk use tiny 194 wedges but our LEDs are some of the brightest ones you can get on the market so it lights up the trunk.

Interior kit reference:
http://deautokey.com/product/complete-error-free-interior-led-kit-fits-volkswagen-atlas

We have the new Atlas fog LEDs out now that won't cause any glare but are still very bright, it is worth upgrading the fog LEDs:
-they match the OEM headlight perfectly
-they shine past the headlights
-helps light up the corners

Fog LEDs:
http://deautokey.com/product/new-de360-complete-led-fog-light-kit-fits-2015-mk7-golf










Anyone interested in LEDs missing in the Atlas:
brake/tail:
http://deautokey.com/product/complete-brake-tail-led-kit-bright-error-free-fits-volkswagen-atlas

rear turn:
http://deautokey.com/product/amber-red-or-white-rear-turn-signals-fits-volkswagen-atlas

Reverse:
http://deautokey.com/product/bright-error-free-reverse-leds-fits-volkswagen-atlas


----------



## JohnNS (Sep 21, 2015)

deAutoLED.com said:


> :thumbup: thanks for the support!
> 
> We cannot see why anyone would regret purchasing an Atlas, it is a nice looking different SUV and it has a lot more style than most cars out there.
> 
> ...


Got our LEDs in today, wow, what a difference! The mechanic that was switching over our tires to winters was really impressed with the difference in the interior with your LEDs, pretty sure everyone in the dealership saw them by the time we left 

I suspect a couple orders may come through from the people that work there.

Next up we'll do fogs and other exterior lights.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

JohnNS;108604290......the difference in the interior with your LEDs said:


> What do you do in the interior that needs the unattractive bright over-white LED light?


----------



## TexasBrandon (Nov 5, 2017)

I'm strongly considering the Atlas to replace my 2016 Tacoma. I haven't been happy with it for over a year now and the quality issues with it are getting out of hand. MY wife's 15 Passat TDI SEL has been perfect, the service department is top notch, and overall has been a good experience so I'm looking to get another VW and ditch the pos Toyota. Read quite a few posts on this forum and this one was the last so I could see what people didn't like. As it stands I'm looking to get an SEL AWD. I'd get the premium but I've seen many people complain about the digital dash. The price tag is a bit much as well so SEL it is. My other vehicles I'm considering are the CX-9 and the Traverse.

I will be taking an extended test drive next week sometime with the SEL 4Motion so I can see if its what I want. I would like to get another truck but the prices on a full size with 4WD and leather are out of control. The Atlas still has massive amounts of room for hauling, kayaking, and other stuff plus it can tow 5000 pounds which gives me the utility I'm looking for. I'm sure, despite the lesser power in the Atlas, it has it where it needs to be. Unlike my Tacoma where I need to rev it to 4.5k before the torque and hp kick in.


----------



## deAutoLED.com (Jun 1, 2012)

JohnNS said:


> Got our LEDs in today, wow, what a difference! The mechanic that was switching over our tires to winters was really impressed with the difference in the interior with your LEDs, pretty sure everyone in the dealership saw them by the time we left
> 
> I suspect a couple orders may come through from the people that work there.
> 
> Next up we'll do fogs and other exterior lights.


:thumbup: thank you, we appreciate you taking the time to leave this feedback. We actually do have many VW dealers that purchase LEDs from us to install in cars as an added upgrade.


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

TexasBrandon said:


> I'm strongly considering the Atlas to replace my 2016 Tacoma. I haven't been happy with it for over a year now and the quality issues with it are getting out of hand. MY wife's 15 Passat TDI SEL has been perfect, the service department is top notch, and overall has been a good experience so I'm looking to get another VW and ditch the pos Toyota. Read quite a few posts on this forum and this one was the last so I could see what people didn't like. As it stands I'm looking to get an SEL AWD. I'd get the premium but I've seen many people complain about the digital dash. The price tag is a bit much as well so SEL it is. My other vehicles I'm considering are the CX-9 and the Traverse.
> 
> I will be taking an extended test drive next week sometime with the SEL 4Motion so I can see if its what I want. I would like to get another truck but the prices on a full size with 4WD and leather are out of control. The Atlas still has massive amounts of room for hauling, kayaking, and other stuff plus it can tow 5000 pounds which gives me the utility I'm looking for. I'm sure, despite the lesser power in the Atlas, it has it where it needs to be. Unlike my Tacoma where I need to rev it to 4.5k before the torque and hp kick in.


Cx9 is nice although considerably smaller. You won't be able to put an adult in the middle seat of the second row (seat is higher and there is a big bump in the floor)or in the third row if they are more than 5'8''; also trunk space is tiny unless you put third row down. No Apple Car Play as well. Other than that CX9 is nice- especially fuel economy.


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

matsavol said:


> In actual car&driver test the Atlas was among the best in fuel consumption:
> https://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/three-row-suv-test-vw-atlas-vs-dodge-durango-gmc-acadia-honda-pilot-mazda-cx-9-comparison-test-final-scoring-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-7
> 
> Mazda CX-9 was slightly better but if you account for it using premium fuel it actually turns out more expensive per mile.
> ...


I think you were looking at Honda Pilot. Atlas has the worst fuel economy.


----------



## matsavol (Jul 26, 2015)

sMartino said:


> I think you were looking at Honda Pilot. Atlas has the worst fuel economy.


Did you look the* tested results*, not claimed data?


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

kkress said:


> Just a couple turns of a screwdriver can help any vehicle out on low beams. I've owned a number of VW and the headlights are always pointed low. Pointing them up a bit isn't harmful. If you've gone too far you'll get some feedback from oncoming drivers, then turn back down a bit.


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

I'm in a Grand Cherokee with "ZF" transmission but it's built by Chrysler in Michigan and gave problem from first day on. Maybe the Durango has a better transmission but no transmission
has had more problems ever compared to the one in the Grand Cherokee. Me thinking the Altas simply must have a better tranny?




edyvw said:


> Durango is definitely going to feel different then Atlas. It is Mercedes Benz based platform, more precisely GL based. It will behave better thru curves due to longitudinal engine. Transmission is better since it is ZF (same as one in Audi and BMW).
> However, VR6 is better engine then Dodge V6, if you considering V6. Dodge has 295hp, but same torque. HP is irrelevant in these vehicles. Torque is what matters. Dodge is much heavier vehicle. I drove V6 Durango and Atlas is faster on the feet, no doubt about that. Also, while 2018 Durango comes with new tech, it also comes with old brakes, which are not on par with Atlas.
> Now, HEMI is different thing.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

sMartino said:


> I think you were looking at Honda Pilot. Atlas has the worst fuel economy.


Not according to the C&D 400 mile test loop, the atlas' 20 mpg isn't the worst. It betters the pilot's 19 mpg and Durango's 16 mpg (worst in test)

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

BsickPassat said:


> Not according to the C&D 400 mile test loop, the atlas' 20 mpg isn't the worst. It betters the pilot's 19 mpg and Durango's 16 mpg (worst in test)
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


I’m happy with the gas mileage so far, it’s mid pack but they are all within +-5 of each other


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

tallguy09 said:


> I'm in a Grand Cherokee with "ZF" transmission but it's built by Chrysler in Michigan and gave problem from first day on. Maybe the Durango has a better transmission but no transmission
> has had more problems ever compared to the one in the Grand Cherokee. Me thinking the Altas simply must have a better tranny?


FCA had problems with programming on ZF that also influenced other stuff. Mechanically, FCA, Audi, BMW, RR etc. have same tranny (difference can be in amount of torque they can handle). 
Aisin was never on performance par with ZF. ZF in BMW is faster then some dual clutches (but that is BMW programming), however Aisin made some of the most reliable transmissions in Toyota. This one in Atlas should be bulletproof. It is used for sometime now to know that there are no big problems. As is it better then ZF? My preference is ZF. Aisin is probably better for family vehicle like Atlas. I would say it is more “dumbproof.” 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

tallguy09 said:


> I'm in a Grand Cherokee with "ZF" transmission but it's built by Chrysler in Michigan and gave problem from first day on. Maybe the Durango has a better transmission but no transmission
> has had more problems ever compared to the one in the Grand Cherokee. Me thinking the Altas simply must have a better tranny?


I beg to differ. The ultradrive 4-speed automatic in Chrysler' s in the 90's were extremely troublesome.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

edyvw said:


> FCA had problems with programming on ZF that also influenced other stuff. Mechanically, FCA, Audi, BMW, RR etc. have same tranny (difference can be in amount of torque they can handle).
> Aisin was never on performance par with ZF. ZF in BMW is faster then some dual clutches (but that is BMW programming), however Aisin made some of the most reliable transmissions in Toyota. This one in Atlas should be bulletproof. It is used for sometime now to know that there are no big problems. As is it better then ZF? My preference is ZF. Aisin is probably better for family vehicle like Atlas. I would say it is more “dumbproof.”
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


One of my purchasing decisions on the atlas was the speed and quality of the shifts, that’s why Porsche, Lexus, and Cadillac uses them (also in a few BMWs). I’ll take it over the ZF 9 any day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## edyvw (May 1, 2009)

BsickPassat said:


> I beg to differ. The ultradrive 4-speed automatic in Chrysler' s in the 90's were extremely troublesome.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


Oh I think it is impossible to make such POS again. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

OK, that's great to know.




0macman0 said:


> One of my purchasing decisions on the atlas was the speed and quality of the shifts, that’s why Porsche, Lexus, and Cadillac uses them (also in a few BMWs). I’ll take it over the ZF 9 any day.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

What I meant to say is that the shifts and quality of the shifts will be of the essence when buying a new vehicle.
The Grand Cherokee (WK2) shifts when it should not, and when it should, it doesn't. This has been such a bad experience, ruins it completely for me, so good to read
that the Atlas tranny seems to be good for now. 




edyvw said:


> FCA had problems with programming on ZF that also influenced other stuff. Mechanically, FCA, Audi, BMW, RR etc. have same tranny (difference can be in amount of torque they can handle).
> Aisin was never on performance par with ZF. ZF in BMW is faster then some dual clutches (but that is BMW programming), however Aisin made some of the most reliable transmissions in Toyota. This one in Atlas should be bulletproof. It is used for sometime now to know that there are no big problems. As is it better then ZF? My preference is ZF. Aisin is probably better for family vehicle like Atlas. I would say it is more “dumbproof.”
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

dieselpwr said:


> for someone who hates the Atlas so much (in this thread and in others) you sure follow the Atlas forum alot. We test drove one and for the money, I really don't see any other SUV out there that compares. Sure a few more HP would be nice, but it's the same engine as our Q7, and that tows our 5000lbs jetboat without any issues.


I'll test drive one myself soon, TDi engine or Turbo V6 option and lots of low end torque would have been nice, hybrid...
I get that the Atlas mainly targets families who need a Minivan replacement, so for that it's all good I think.


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

tallguy09 said:


> What I meant to say is that the shifts and quality of the shifts will be of the essence when buying a new vehicle.
> The Grand Cherokee (WK2) shifts when it should not, and when it should, it doesn't. This has been such a bad experience, ruins it completely for me, so good to read
> that the Atlas tranny seems to be good for now.


Strange, while the sport mode on my 17 gc was overly harsh, the 8 speed was pretty awesome. I'm thinking you must have a dud. Have you asked them to replace it/ compare it to one on the lot?


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

sMartino said:


> Cx9 is nice although considerably smaller. You won't be able to put an adult in the middle seat of the second row (seat is higher and there is a big bump in the floor)or in the third row if they are more than 5'8''; also trunk space is tiny unless you put third row down. No Apple Car Play as well. Other than that CX9 is nice- especially fuel economy.


The Atlas has so much more content for like 4k more loaded. 

Carplay android auto
360 cam
Park assistant
Front pdc
Digital cockpit
Rear buckets (the cx8 gets these. Why not the cx9?)
Foot tailgate
Hitch
Remote start
Pano roof
Terrain knob
V6
Cornering fog lights
Power fold mirrors
Frameless rearview mirror

You get the idea


----------



## nemesis099 (Mar 16, 2002)

0macman0 said:


> One of my purchasing decisions on the atlas was the speed and quality of the shifts, that’s why Porsche, Lexus, and Cadillac uses them (also in a few BMWs). I’ll take it over the ZF 9 any day.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I just drove an Atlas SEL Premium this past weekend and I found the transmission to be more of an issue than the engine. This was a short drive and at one point I'm pretty sure it made a clunking noise and it seemed to not know where to shift when getting onto the highway. I still like most everything else about the Atlas and I'm debating between the Atlas and Traverse. I want to see what Subaru comes out with on the 29th just in case it is amazing but I'm worried about a new engine being in the vehicle and a CVT being in a vehicle that large.


----------



## 0macman0 (Nov 6, 2017)

nemesis099 said:


> I just drove an Atlas SEL Premium this past weekend and I found the transmission to be more of an issue than the engine. This was a short drive and at one point I'm pretty sure it made a clunking noise and it seemed to not know where to shift when getting onto the highway. I still like most everything else about the Atlas and I'm debating between the Atlas and Traverse. I want to see what Subaru comes out with on the 29th just in case it is amazing but I'm worried about a new engine being in the vehicle and a CVT being in a vehicle that large.


I’d test drive another. I drove about 4 before I purchased and never heard any clunks during shifts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

ice4life said:


> Strange, while the sport mode on my 17 gc was overly harsh, the 8 speed was pretty awesome. I'm thinking you must have a dud. Have you asked them to replace it/ compare it to one on the lot?


Yes, they said it's fine and eventually gave up, no more FCA for me for sure.


----------



## prettygood (Jun 19, 2002)

SEL Premium owner. No regrets whatsoever. I never expected high 20’s mpg, or acceleration like my chipped Passat 2.0 or heavily upgraded Beetle 1.8T. For the complete package, VW hit a home run. Love the looks, technology, ride comfort, roominess, towing capability, and especially the sunroof. 

You won’t regret it, and if you need more power, get a 2.0 and chip it or wait for the aftermarket supercharger that is bound to come out at some point.


----------



## snobrdrdan (Sep 10, 2008)

prettygood said:


> wait for the aftermarket supercharger that is bound to come out at some point.


For the V6?

I wouldn't hold my breath. The same 3.6 has been in the B6 Passat, CC, and the NMS Passat for years and nothing was ever introduced.


----------



## nemesis099 (Mar 16, 2002)

0macman0 said:


> I’d test drive another. I drove about 4 before I purchased and never heard any clunks during shifts.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I plan to as we grabbed the only SEL premium on the lot which was silver (I want red) and had a very light tan interior while nice I know will look terrible with two kids and a dog.



prettygood said:


> SEL Premium owner. No regrets whatsoever. I never expected high 20’s mpg, or acceleration like my chipped Passat 2.0 or heavily upgraded Beetle 1.8T. For the complete package, VW hit a home run. Love the looks, technology, ride comfort, roominess, towing capability, and especially the sunroof.
> 
> You won’t regret it, and if you need more power, get a 2.0 and chip it or wait for the aftermarket supercharger that is bound to come out at some point.


I'm not worried about the MPG as much as my current vehicle gets around 13MPG city and 19 Highway so everything should get better MPG. I actually wish I could get the 2.0T in the SEL Premium with AWD. I love turbo engines and wish more vehicles came with them.


----------



## sMartino (Sep 16, 2010)

To answer my own thread question, I don't find the engine underpowered so far although I have been easy on the throttle to control gas consumption. I am getting 20-24 MPG in suburban driving: no highways, frequent 45-55 mph stretches, stop signs and traffic lights.


----------



## juched (Nov 12, 2004)

sMartino said:


> To answer my own thread question, I don't find the engine underpowered so far although I have been easy on the throttle to control gas consumption. I am getting 20-24 MPG in suburban driving: no highways, frequent 45-55 mph stretches, stop signs and traffic lights.


This is with a V6 model?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

juched said:


> This is with a V6 model?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah idk what suburb he lives in. I'm getting 15 in the same situation. And its in normal mode. V6


----------



## juched (Nov 12, 2004)

ice4life said:


> Yeah idk what suburb he lives in. I'm getting 15 in the same situation. And its in normal mode. V6


Maybe they are seeing L/100km. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

nemesis099 said:


> I just drove an Atlas SEL Premium this past weekend and I found the transmission to be more of an issue than the engine. This was a short drive and at one point I'm pretty sure it made a clunking noise and it seemed to not know where to shift when getting onto the highway. I still like most everything else about the Atlas and I'm debating between the Atlas and Traverse. I want to see what Subaru comes out with on the 29th just in case it is amazing but I'm worried about a new engine being in the vehicle and a CVT being in a vehicle that large.


I wouldn't worry about the 2.4DIT/CVT combo unless you planned on towing all the time. But the subaru is still 8 months out. And it will be another 8 months before you can walk in and just buy one. 

As for the traverse/atlas convo, i was in the same boat between the two. Each car has things the other didnt. And the list was long enough on each to be interested. The big thing is that the traverse was more expensive. 3-5k more depending on what accessories from the port it had. And i just felt the list of atlas pluses, coupled with the cheaper price made it the better option.

For more, see post #34: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?8790769-vs-18-Traverse/page2


----------



## nemesis099 (Mar 16, 2002)

ice4life said:


> I wouldn't worry about the 2.4DIT/CVT combo unless you planned on towing all the time. But the subaru is still 8 months out. And it will be another 8 months before you can walk in and just buy one.
> 
> As for the traverse/atlas convo, i was in the same boat between the two. Each car has things the other didnt. And the list was long enough on each to be interested. The big thing is that the traverse was more expensive. 3-5k more depending on what accessories from the port it had. And i just felt the list of atlas pluses, coupled with the cheaper price made it the better option.
> 
> For more, see post #34: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?8790769-vs-18-Traverse/page2


After seeing the Subaru I'm going to wait for it to be out unless my car just up and dies.

Also for pricing near me I could get a good amount off on a Traverse around 6K where as the Atlas only had around 1.5-2K off making the Traverse much cheaper. The big thing with Subaru is that the cloth seat model might have all the tech I need really which would be substantially cheaper than either Traverse or Atlas.

I don't tow a lot but use the hitch quite a bit for bikes.


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

nemesis099 said:


> After seeing the Subaru I'm going to wait for it to be out unless my car just up and dies.
> 
> Also for pricing near me I could get a good amount off on a Traverse around 6K where as the Atlas only had around 1.5-2K off making the Traverse much cheaper. The big thing with Subaru is that the cloth seat model might have all the tech I need really which would be substantially cheaper than either Traverse or Atlas.
> 
> I don't tow a lot but use the hitch quite a bit for bikes.


Based on this i'd wait for the Ascent.

Check out post #58 for trim info (I am a subaru ambassador): http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ing-this-week-to-compete-with-the-Atlas/page3

Or the brochure: https://www.subaru.com/guides/ascent/#p=20


----------



## nemesis099 (Mar 16, 2002)

ice4life said:


> Based on this i'd wait for the Ascent.
> 
> Check out post #58 for trim info (I am a subaru ambassador): http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...ing-this-week-to-compete-with-the-Atlas/page3
> 
> Or the brochure: https://www.subaru.com/guides/ascent/#p=20


My wife and I plan on waiting. I had a 2002 WRX that I really enjoyed and convinced my sister to get her Outback last year. I was debating on getting an Outback but I really need that extra room and third row with the two kids.

Also never heard of a Subaru Ambassador but checked it out and that is awesome.


----------



## tallguy09 (Nov 14, 2016)

prettygood said:


> SEL Premium owner. No regrets whatsoever. I never expected high 20’s mpg, or acceleration like my chipped Passat 2.0 or heavily upgraded Beetle 1.8T. For the complete package, VW hit a home run. Love the looks, technology, ride comfort, roominess, towing capability, and especially the sunroof.
> 
> You won’t regret it, and if you need more power, get a 2.0 and chip it or wait for the aftermarket supercharger that is bound to come out at some point.


“Chip it” OMG, that’s Dieselgate 2.0


----------



## ice4life (Nov 6, 2017)

tallguy09 said:


> “Chip it” OMG, that’s Dieselgate 2.0


how so lol?


----------



## Tiddy14 (Oct 3, 2019)

*Atlas Owner*

It was time to retire my Expedition. I was worried about downsizing, but was pleasantly surprised with the cargo space of the Atlas. Fits my family of five with a dog crate in the back. The Expedition I was looking at was $75k and the Atlas was $45k. The selling point for me was a combination of a $35k difference and a the VW warranty coverage was twice Ford's. The interior reminded me of an Audi I previously owned.

The Atlas interior is great and luxurious. The interior space is excellent. The only downside is the V6 does feel underpowered. When traveling to Tahoe, I have to get on it. I basically drive in sport mode all the time. The mpg is ok. I was used to driving a V8 Expedition, so anything is better.

Bottom line...my Atlas out the door was $45k and everyone thats seen it thinks I paid way more.


----------



## comish (Oct 3, 2005)

Tiddy14 said:


> It was time to retire my Expedition. I was worried about downsizing, but was pleasantly surprised with the cargo space of the Atlas. Fits my family of five with a dog crate in the back. The Expedition I was looking at was $75k and the Atlas was $45k. The selling point for me was a combination of a $35k difference and a the VW warranty coverage was twice Ford's. The interior reminded me of an Audi I previously owned.
> 
> The Atlas interior is great and luxurious. The interior space is excellent. The only downside is the V6 does feel underpowered. When traveling to Tahoe, I have to get on it. I basically drive in sport mode all the time. The mpg is ok. I was used to driving a V8 Expedition, so anything is better.
> 
> Bottom line...my Atlas out the door was $45k and everyone thats seen it thinks I paid way more.


Basically agree with the above, except we paid $36ish which is a huge selling point. Engine blows. marginal gas mileage, no balls. Everything else has been great. Interior room is amazing after a couple Audi Q7's. Significantly bigger. The electronics are great, ride and tranny are good. 

The engine...


----------



## BsickPassat (May 10, 2010)

Tiddy14 said:


> It was time to retire my Expedition. I was worried about downsizing, but was pleasantly surprised with the cargo space of the Atlas. Fits my family of five with a dog crate in the back. The Expedition I was looking at was $75k and the Atlas was $45k. The selling point for me was a combination of a $35k difference and a the VW warranty coverage was twice Ford's. The interior reminded me of an Audi I previously owned.
> 
> The Atlas interior is great and luxurious. The interior space is excellent. The only downside is the V6 does feel underpowered. When traveling to Tahoe, I have to get on it. I basically drive in sport mode all the time. The mpg is ok. I was used to driving a V8 Expedition, so anything is better.
> 
> Bottom line...my Atlas out the door was $45k and everyone thats seen it thinks I paid way more.


I always bother the VW reps at a show, about the engine, telling them I want AWD and a boosted motor... for the higher elevations, such as Tahoe or Mammoth... for the ski trips.

But.. the 3rd row useability and access is what keeps me coming back to the Atlas.


----------



## casadmack74 (Jan 20, 2021)

I read all the posts about how great it is and what people love about their Atlases. But what don't you like about it? We're looking at getting a three-row seater and we've seriously looking at Atlas SE w/tech or SEL. Bit I would like to hear what are the annoyances you're heaving with the car?


----------



## Chris4789 (Nov 29, 2017)

I'm sure if you bothered to use the search feature you would see good discussions on your question. Or you can check out the Facebook posts where this question is raised every other week.


----------

