# 2.5 engine



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

Since I'm driving a loaner, the only thing i can't complain about is the smoothness of the 2.5 engine. its so responsive and torquey....
waaaay better than the regular 2.0's . 
anyone share my thoughts?

i had only driven 1.8t 6m, 1.8t 5m, 2.0FSi, VR6AT, 2.0AT&5m... until today....
the Jetta value edition is by far the best bang for the buck


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

*Re: 2.5 engine (xxGLIxx)*


_Quote, originally posted by *xxGLIxx* »_Since I'm driving a loaner, the only thing i can't complain about is the smoothness of the 2.5 engine. its so responsive and torquey....waaaay better than the regular 2.0's . 


It may be good, but nothing beats the VR6 for smoothness and lowend torque and nothing beats the 2.0T for performance per $.


----------



## nastybags (Nov 29, 2005)

*Re: 2.5 engine (xxGLIxx)*

the 2.5 sucks


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: 2.5 engine (GTINC)*

It may be good, but nothing beats the VR6 for smoothness and lowend torque and nothing beats the 2.0T for performance per $.[/QUOTE]
true true. but if you are in the proce range of $16-17k the jetta VE beats anything out there on the market. the quality alone of the car is comparable to $30k cars. 
but, so far ...
1. 2.0T
2. VR6
3. 2.5 
am i right?


----------



## nastybags (Nov 29, 2005)

*Re: 2.5 engine (xxGLIxx)*

2.0T
VR6
2.5FSI
2.5


----------



## the.ronin (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nastybags* »_the 2.5 sucks


----------



## Bob Weaver (Jun 14, 2006)

Why would anyone want a 2.5 when you can have a 2.0T? 

j/k


----------



## IchBinDarren (Nov 5, 2005)

yeah its a great base engine, they didnt "under do it" like they did with the 2.0.


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: (IchBinDarren)*

we need a 7 cylinder engine. just screw all even numbered engines...


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nastybags* »_2.0T
VR6
2.5FSI
2.5


I didn't know that there WAS a 2.5FSI. I still don't think that there is.
And to the other posters - I think the Rabbit beats the Jetta VE for value...


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: 2.5 engine (CivicMinded)*


_Quote, originally posted by *CivicMinded* »_
I didn't know that there WAS a 2.5FSI. I still don't think that there is.
And to the other posters - I think the Rabbit beats the Jetta VE for value...

oooooo
this is true...


----------



## nastybags (Nov 29, 2005)

*Re: 2.5 engine (CivicMinded)*

there is a 2.5FSI in Europe....I'm sure of it http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif ...me thinks


----------



## Kyle_ibb (Oct 30, 2006)

*Re: 2.5 engine (xxGLIxx)*

2.5L http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## corradokidg60 (May 14, 2002)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*

The 2.5L I5 engine is for North America only, no? Europe gets their 150hp fix from a 2.0FSI non turbo.


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nastybags* »_there is a 2.5FSI in Europe....I'm sure of it http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif ...me thinks









I don't think so. The 2.5 was developed for the American market exclusively and I don't think they would develop direct injection for it.


----------



## ShadowWabbit (Aug 16, 2006)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*


_Quote, originally posted by *nastybags* »_there is a 2.5FSI in Europe....I'm sure of it http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif ...me thinks









u may be thinking of the audi TT 2.5T? and that we will get here in the states
and also i think the 2.5L is a great engine, but could ppl not compare it to the 2.0FSI. thats like comparing the 2.0L to the VR6 in MKIVs. but if u compare the 2.5L to the 2.0L as it is it's replacement then ppl might agree that its a vast improvement http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 


_Modified by ShadowWabbit at 3:44 PM 1-18-2007_


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: 2.5 engine (ShadowWabbit)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ShadowWabbit* »_
u may be thinking of the audi TT 2.5T? and that we will get here in the states
and also i think the 2.5L is a great engine, but could ppl not compare it to the 2.0FSI. thats like comparing the 2.0L to the VR6 in MKIVs. but if u compare the 2.5L to the 2.0L as it is it's replacement then ppl might agree that its a vast improvement http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

_Modified by ShadowWabbit at 3:44 PM 1-18-2007_


OMG, i couldnt have said it better...
its like comparing apples and steak... i don mayke no seanse


----------



## TaxMan5 (Jul 13, 2002)

Here is the order I would go with:
3.2 VR6 
2.8 24v VR6 and 2.0t would be a tie for me
2.8 12v VR6
2.5 I-5
1.8t 20V
2.0 16v
1.8 16v
2.0 8v
1.8 8v


----------



## corradokidg60 (May 14, 2002)

*Re: (TaxMan5)*


_Quote, originally posted by *TaxMan5* »_Here is the order I would go with:
3.2 VR6 
2.8 24v VR6 and 2.0t would be a tie for me
2.8 12v VR6
2.5 I-5
1.8t 20V
2.0 16v
1.8 16v
2.0 8v
1.8 8v

What, no G60?


----------



## CorporateTrash (Jun 30, 2005)

*Re: (xxGLIxx)*


_Quote, originally posted by *xxGLIxx* »_we need a 7 cylinder engine. just screw all even numbered engines...


well the 2.5 is a 5cyl motor


----------



## pug (Apr 13, 2003)

Glad to know that I am exciting about getting my rabbit and people are bashing the engine.


----------



## CorporateTrash (Jun 30, 2005)

it's great i love my 2.5 so much potential
then again i've only owned an 8v haha


----------



## CeeMonk (Aug 24, 2006)

*Re: (pug)*


_Quote, originally posted by *pug* »_Glad to know that I am exciting about getting my rabbit and people are bashing the engine.

Don't listen to them. The 2.5 is a great engine for the money. It's no 2.0T, but I'm not complaining about mine one bit.







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## ACschnitzer23 (Nov 3, 2004)

*Re: (CeeMonk)*

I am not sure I like the 2.5l engine. It sounds good and it is an improvement, but I think VW could have produced similar hp/tq with a 4 cylinder engine. I know some buyers are turned off by the fact that its a 5 cylinder engine. Old Audi's could get away with it because at that time Audi was known to make "quirky" cars. It is a decent engine though and is definatly an improvement from the ancient 2.0, but I dont forsee the aftermarket really embracing this engine like the 2.0 8v. Who knows though. 
That being said I like the 2.0 FSi but I really dont like its exhaust note, its too thrashy, almost lawnmowerish. I know the motor got some negative feedback based on its exhaust note. SCC for one.


----------



## ATC98092 (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: (ACschnitzer23)*

I got the 2.5 because I couldn't wait for the TDI that was coming equiped the way I wanted (pkg2 w/navi) and there was no 2.0t available either. I had a problem with my MKIV Jetta and needed a replacement. Overall the 2.5 is OK. It actually feels peppier than my future son-in-law's '96 328is. I'm not thrilled with the 6 speed auto, and really wish I had the DSG. It shifts strangely when using Tiptronic mode and searchs around sometimes. Gas mileage in town could be better (usually around 20-21), but freeway MPG is great (32 no problem).
Bottom line: a vast improvment over the old base 2.0.


----------



## BenDreaden (Jan 19, 2007)

love my 2.5


----------



## blackoutjetta (Jul 3, 2006)

2.5l does its job on the highway and passes any car no problem. from stop is not that impressive, sometimes i slam on the gas and it surprises me on how fast or quick it is for the engine. I wish the 2.0T was out when i got the 2.5l because i want the 2.0t so bad, but yea the 2.5 does its job and i like it, especially on the highway http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif










_Modified by blackoutjetta at 12:56 AM 1-19-2007_


----------



## pug (Apr 13, 2003)

Well compared to my 2000 Jetta 2.0 the 2.5 is a vast improvement, when I drove it.


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

*Re: (pug)*


_Quote, originally posted by *pug* »_Glad to know that I am exciting about getting my rabbit and people are bashing the engine.

Dude, the Rabbit is a bomb car. I love it, and the 2.5 hauls in that car. I've owned both, and there was nothing I didn't like about the 2.5. 
And when you really get into it around 3500-5000 RPM, it's makes that great five-cylinder thrum that sounds awesome.
Enjoy it, and F the haters!


----------



## racerbunny24 (Dec 2, 2006)

*Re: (pug)*


_Quote, originally posted by *pug* »_Glad to know that I am exciting about getting my rabbit and people are bashing the engine.

yeah i love it...

dont worry
and althought the gti is waaaaaay better...

my rabbit doest suck!


----------



## carfanguy (Aug 12, 2005)

*Re: 2.5 engine (xxGLIxx)*


_Quote, originally posted by *xxGLIxx* »_
It may be good, but nothing beats the VR6 for smoothness and lowend torque and nothing beats the 2.0T for performance per $.

true true. but if you are in the proce range of $16-17k the jetta VE beats anything out there on the market. the quality alone of the car is comparable to $30k cars. 
but, so far ...
1. 2.0T
2. VR6
3. 2.5 
am i right?[/QUOTE]
More like 
1. 2.0
2. 1.2 TDi
3. 1.21 Gigawatts
4. VR4
5. 1.4 TDi
6. 2.0T
7. VR6


----------



## Mrb00st (Jun 26, 2005)

*Re: (Bob Weaver)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Bob Weaver* »_Why would anyone want a 2.5 when you can have a 2.0T? 

j/k

god that's annoying


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (Mrb00st)*


----------



## Bob Weaver (Jun 14, 2006)

*Re: (Mrb00st)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mrb00st* »_
god that's annoying

You do understand I was knocking the 2.5 haters.


----------



## huevosrancheros (Dec 13, 2006)

*Re: (xxGLIxx)*


_Quote, originally posted by *xxGLIxx* »_we need a 7 cylinder engine. just screw all even numbered engines...

Hahaha LOL


----------



## huevosrancheros (Dec 13, 2006)

*Re: (Mrb00st)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mrb00st* »_
god that's annoying


That's annoying


----------



## GTI-Gabe (Nov 22, 1999)

*Re: (huevosrancheros)*

My friend believed the 2.5 model was better than the 2.0T due to the higher displacement.
I'm sure most people out there assume the same, so there you go 2.5L haters!


----------



## JJJETTA (Feb 13, 2000)

*Re: (GTI-Gabe)*

I have both. 05.5 A4 2.0T with 6speed auto, and an 07 Rabbit 2.5 with 6speed auto.
2.0 feels faster at HIGH speeds (because it is). The 2.5 sounds WAY better though. The 2.0T doesn't whistle like the old 1.8T's did. Of course, its less rubber bandy than the old 1.8T too. However, the 2.5 is better in the city, more responsive and smooth. 
One selling point, to me (and the reason I leased the Audi and bought the VW) is that any turbo engine is an expense waiting to happen, in my opinion. Long haul cars are better NA, to me anyway.


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: (JJJETTA)*

The point is that the 2.5 rabbit or jetta is the best engine in its class, within the price range.
we never needed any 2.5L bashing. 
i drive a 2.oT and i love it, i also think its better in a lot of ways, but, the 2.5 is an amazing engine. 
i like ramen noodles as well.


----------



## vr_vento95 (Nov 26, 2004)

*Re: (GTI-Gabe)*


_Quote, originally posted by *GTI-Gabe* »_My friend believed the 2.5 model was better than the 2.0T due to the higher displacement.
I'm sure most people out there assume the same, so there you go 2.5L haters!









true. The min a turbo kit is on the market, bye bye 2.0T!! For the extra $8k you can do alot more with the 2.5 not to mention the 2.5 is under rated from the factory who says it has 150hp & 170tq when the actual numbers are 166hp & 184tq stock and if you wanna go the n/a route with just a CAI, chip, and cat-back exhaust your right there with the 2.0T


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: (vr_vento95)*

hm. ok. valid point. but chip the 2.0T, intake and exhaust, and the N/A 2.5 can't get anywhere near it. Plus, buy a brand new engine if you are going to spend $8k on a turbo kit. it just doesnt make any sense.


----------



## waterpumper (Nov 9, 2000)

*Re: (xxGLIxx)*

I have owned:
1.8 8v
1.8 16v
2.0 16v
2.0 8v
2.8 24v 
1.8 20v Turbo
Now I have a 2.0t and a 2.5. In comparison to all around value for money the 2.5 is amazing is 400x better than 2.0 aba motor, which is what it replaced. That is really what it should be compared to. Comparing it to the GTI motor is really not a fair comparison. With the Mk4 there was a good reason to debate the 1.8t vrs. the VR6. They were both motors that came in the GTI.


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 29, 2003)

*Re: (waterpumper)*

People still comparing the 2.0T to the 2.5L?








How about we compare the new BMW aka "GTi Killer's" motor to the 2.0T? It would'nt be fair seeing as both cars are in different classes.
The 2.5L is a base motor
The 2.0T is a top end motor
2.5 > 2.0
2.0T > 1.8T
Thats the way it should be looked at.
PS: Stock dyno shows 166hp and 184tq







http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

*Re: (@[email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *@[email protected]* »_
The 2.5L is a base motor
The 2.0T is a top end motor
2.5 > 2.0
2.0T > 1.8T
Thats the way it should be looked at. 


Yep. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## xxGLIxx (Jun 16, 2004)

*Re: (CivicMinded)*

well, when i started the thread, i wasnt trying to compare, but just praise the 2.5.
i have had the 2.5 for 5 days now, and i miss my 2.ot. i hope they finish soon. the 2.5 is getting booooring


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (xxGLIxx)*

The longer you drive the 2.5 the better it gets IMO!


----------



## a123slonky (Dec 9, 2006)

*Re: (Mike Gordon)*

Have the 2.5 and don't think this personally, but a buddy of mine drove it and said it sounded loud inside the car when you get on it. Anyone else think the engine is loud inside the car?


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 29, 2003)

*Re: (a123slonky)*


_Quote, originally posted by *a123slonky* »_Have the 2.5 and don't think this personally, but a buddy of mine drove it and said it sounded loud inside the car when you get on it. Anyone else think the engine is loud inside the car?

Its because the 2.5 actually makes a nice sound thats audible from the factory, unlike your grandma's sunfire. I personally love it. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## rams19801 (Aug 18, 2006)

*Re: 2.5 engine (nastybags)*

Why do some you say the 2.5 sucks? Because it doesn't have a "cool" turbo. Has anybody ever driven a 2.5 manual on the freeway? I don't want to burst any bubbles but "is there a fast VW"? It sure isn't the 2.0T's? 200HP. WOW! Does that make the car cool, or fast? No.
An IS 300 will beat any VW? Guys, they are cars. The 2.5 doesn't suck. The 2.0T isn't the greatest. I actually prefer my 03 GLI VR6 over a "cool" 4 banger turbo"! Oh yeah. I traded in my 03 GLI for a new 06 GLI. The new Jetta overall is better but the Turbo lag SUCKS! I wish I had my VR6 back anyday. I drove the 2.5 to work while my car was being serviced. Heck, I should have bought that instead of paying an extra 4K on a Turbo that lags? Oh well, live and learn.


----------



## mezonesxbox (Jul 7, 2006)

2.0 T = headaches and quality time with the repair man


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

*Re: 2.5 engine (rams19801)*


_Quote, originally posted by *rams19801* »_Why do some you say the 2.5 sucks? Because it doesn't have a "cool" turbo. Has anybody ever driven a 2.5 manual on the freeway? I don't want to burst any bubbles but "is there a fast VW"? It sure isn't the 2.0T's? 200HP. WOW! Does that make the car cool, or fast? No.
An IS 300 will beat any VW? Guys, they are cars. The 2.5 doesn't suck. The 2.0T isn't the greatest. I actually prefer my 03 GLI VR6 over a "cool" 4 banger turbo"! Oh yeah. I traded in my 03 GLI for a new 06 GLI. The new Jetta overall is better but the Turbo lag SUCKS! I wish I had my VR6 back anyday. I drove the 2.5 to work while my car was being serviced. Heck, I should have bought that instead of paying an extra 4K on a Turbo that lags? Oh well, live and learn.









Dude, the 2.0T practically has no turbo lag at all. Seriously. I'm not saying this because I drive a 2.0T, and choose to bag on the 2.5. I love the 2.5. I even commented on what a great motor it is earlier in this very thread. 
Drive a 1.8T, or better yet, a 300D Turbo Diesel Benz, and re-acquaint yourself with turbo lag.


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: 2.5 engine (CivicMinded)*

the 2.0T barely has turbo lag. 
btw, the 2.5 is a great engine, and its "loud" when you get it on it because its SUPPOSED to be loud at higher rpms.... duh
and yes, it DOES sound nice, unlike the rest of the 4bangers out there (2.0T included)
if the 2.5 gets compared to the 2.0T, then i would LOOOOVE to compare the "GTI Killer" to the 2.0T










_Modified by mujjuman at 6:15 PM 1-27-2007_


----------



## ssd-spec (Dec 1, 2006)

*Re: (a123slonky)*

Yes kinda of loud. 2.5 = 87 octane=great gas savings


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (ssd-spec)*


_Quote, originally posted by *ssd-spec* »_Yes kinda of loud. 2.5 = 87 octane=great gas savings

not for me... let me explain my situation.
over here, 
87 octane = $2.39
93 octane = $2.69
how big is our tank? i forgot, but when i fill up my tank, i put in 12 gallons. 
how often do i fill up? about 2.5 weeks if i drive everyday... much longer if i skip a few days, and i dont drive everyday anymore. lets just say 2 weeks for easy calculation.
so by purchasing 87octane gas for 1 tank, i saved *$3.60*. (if tank = 12gallons)
how many times do i purchase a full tank (@ 12 gallons every 2 weeks)? i think its around 24 times (someone check my math if im wrong, lolllz cuz im soooo tired) 
so, 24times x $3.60 = $86
i save $86 every year if i buy 12 gallons of 87octane gas every two weeks. big whoop, if you ask me. 
others may buy gas WAY more often than me, so i can see them "savin' maj0r gazz y0" 
however, i cannot see myself saving much money... 
if i save $86 every week, then that would be a cool thing, but saving $86 every year isnt much to me. Thank God


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (mujjuman)*

ah just did my math over again, i would be filling gas 26 times a year if i fill up every 2 weeks... 
thats $7.20 more, so that would be *$93.20*


----------



## LeChefJosh (Nov 20, 2002)

*Re: (mujjuman)*

We have both an 07 GTI and an 07 Rabbit. I've got a lot of seat time in both and I think the 2.5 is a perfectly fine engine. I think the 2.0T is a lot more fun but the 2.5 is still enjoyable. It's got decent torque and runs on 87 octane, the performance is perfectly fine for a base model car. I do wish it got better mileage, though, that's points against it these days.
You can't really compare the 2.5 to the old 2.0l. Of course its better, how could it not be? VW could have shopped at Home Depot and found a good replacement for the 2.0l. The 2.5 should be compared against other engines in its class, and thats where it's a little bit mediocre, there are some really nice engines in affordable cars out there now.
The 2.5 isn't class-leading but it's not bringing up the rear, either. All in all I think VW has packed a lot of value into the Rabbit and Jetta VE.


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (LeChefJosh)*

^^ thanks for your decent post. i agree 100% http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## BoUnCyRaBbIt (Aug 29, 2006)

*Re: (vr_vento95)*


_Quote, originally posted by *vr_vento95* »_
true. The min a turbo kit is on the market, bye bye 2.0T!! For the extra $8k you can do alot more with the 2.5 not to mention the 2.5 is under rated from the factory who says it has 150hp & 170tq when the actual numbers are 166hp & 184tq stock and if you wanna go the n/a route with just a CAI, chip, and cat-back exhaust your right there with the 2.0T









Can someone post a stock dyno if one's available? thanks...


----------



## VW adict (Jan 17, 2007)

*Re: (mujjuman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mujjuman* »_ah just did my math over again, i would be filling gas 26 times a year if i fill up every 2 weeks... 
thats $7.20 more, so that would be *$93.20*

You didn't take in consideration that the Rabbit fuel consumption is not as good as the GTI.


----------



## VW adict (Jan 17, 2007)

*Re: (VW adict)*

Looks like this thread is more for bashing the 2.0 turbo engine that for praising the 2.5. And we hear all the time complains about how Rabbit owners are looked down at by the GTI owners. Maybe is a reason for that...like this thread. I mean in what twisted world the cheaper car made by the same manufacturer is the better car. Is like saying that a BMW 328 is better than the 335 or Porsche 911 is better than the 911 turbo. Come on...2.5 is a good engine .. was put in a good car but let's face it ...you get what you pay for. 
And to make it clear I didn't say that the 2.5 engine is a bad engine or the Rabbit is a bad car. All I said is that the GTI had to be better in order to sell for more money and win the Automobile car of the year.
I am not better than a Rabbit owner because I drive a GTI... but I have a better car. If what I said in this post is not reality it means that all the auto press and all people including me that bought a GTI are insane for paying more money for an inferior product.
If this post was intended to praise the 2.5 engine you should do it by comparing with other engines in similar cars like Mazda 3's 2.3 engine not by bashing the turbo charged VW engine. 


_Modified by VW adict at 8:00 AM 1-29-2007_


----------



## foomgti (Feb 13, 2003)

*Re: (VW adict)*

I own both the 2.0 engine and the 2.5 engine. The 2.5 feels a lot nicer and faster than the 2.0 but the 2.0 is better on gas. Also, the 2.0 has never given me any problems and I have 230km on the car. Both engines are good for what they are for: base economy engines.
Neither will be uber fast without FI and both will live in the shadow of the VR6 and 2.0t respectively. So lets stop the hate and appreciate the engines for what they were built for.


----------



## BoUnCyRaBbIt (Aug 29, 2006)

need stock dyno


----------



## rodriguezgerar (Jan 20, 2005)

*Re: (Mike Gordon)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mike Gordon* »_The longer you drive the 2.5 the better it gets IMO!

What he said


----------



## mujjuman (Jul 29, 2004)

*Re: (VW adict)*


_Quote, originally posted by *VW adict* »_
You didn't take in consideration that the Rabbit fuel consumption is not as good as the GTI. 

i wasnt talking about the GTI nor the 2.0T, i was talking about the 2.5 in the Jetta and the Rabbit. 

_Quote, originally posted by *VW adict* »_
Looks like this thread is more for bashing the 2.0 turbo engine that for praising the 2.5. And we hear all the time complains about how Rabbit owners are looked down at by the GTI owners. Maybe is a reason for that...like this thread. I mean in what twisted world the cheaper car made by the same manufacturer is the better car. Is like saying that a BMW 328 is better than the 335 or Porsche 911 is better than the 911 turbo. Come on...2.5 is a good engine .. was put in a good car but let's face it ...you get what you pay for. 
And to make it clear I didn't say that the 2.5 engine is a bad engine or the Rabbit is a bad car. All I said is that the GTI had to be better in order to sell for more money and win the Automobile car of the year.
I am not better than a Rabbit owner because I drive a GTI... but I have a better car. If what I said in this post is not reality it means that all the auto press and all people including me that bought a GTI are insane for paying more money for an inferior product.
If this post was intended to praise the 2.5 engine you should do it by comparing with other engines in similar cars like Mazda 3's 2.3 engine not by bashing the turbo charged VW engine. 

thats not the reason why the GTI owners look down upon the Rabbit owners.....


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 29, 2003)

*Re: (mujjuman)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mujjuman* »_ah just did my math over again, i would be filling gas 26 times a year if i fill up every 2 weeks... 
thats $7.20 more, so that would be *$93.20*

I just did this test in the Car Lounge.
Basically if it states 24MPG in city and you average 22MPG you just spent $160 more in gas a year. I don't see the huge frikken deal with this as something make it.


----------



## Mike Gordon (Apr 11, 2005)

*Re: (@[email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *@[email protected]* »_
I just did this test in the Car Lounge.
Basically if it states 24MPG in city and you average 22MPG you just spent $160 more in gas a year. I don't see the huge frikken deal with this as something make it.









I can't stand The Car Lounge sometimes. A lot of armchair drivers over there.


----------



## CivicMinded (Sep 25, 2003)

The 2.5 is a great motor. Period.


----------



## @[email protected] (Aug 29, 2003)

*Re: (Mike Gordon)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Mike Gordon* »_
I can't stand The Car Lounge sometimes. A lot of armchair drivers over there.

Rofl! If you think some GTi owners are craping on the 2.5 you should see some of the ignorant a-holes in there who drive Camrys. They are the worst! They never even drove the damn thing and will google paper stats all day on the 2.5 and point out only 150hp when everyone knows VW underrated it. Lmao, Car Lounge is a hoot sometimes though, but the Rabbit thread their is full of know it all Armchair googlers. http://****************.com/smile/emthdown.gif


----------



## VWkid2112 (Jun 27, 2005)

I love my rabbit. Like what somepeople said before, it all depends on the money that you have to spend. I only had less than $20K to spend, and it was a debate between the Mazda3, Scion tC and the Rabbit, I got the rabbit for around $17K, which is great. I love the engine and can't wait to put a couple of mods on it. Is it going to be the fastest? no probably not, but I'm okay with that. Would I have bought the GTi if i had the money? Absolutley, but I dont. Deal with it people.


----------

