Others considered... NAC : TDI mileage
urq at pacbell.net
Wed Dec 3 01:24:08 PST 2008
Funny, there's a VW dealer right down the street from where I'm working, and I stopped by the evening after I read that a Jetta TDI Wagon was going to be offered in the USA ... wouldn't you know they had one of the beasties right there in the lot! I wasn't serious enough to ask for a test drive, but the sales guy was quite knowledgeable ... and while I've been a died in the wool MT guy, I think I could get used to a DSG-based drivetrain. We started the motor ... no one would likely notice it was a diesel. If it were only a little bigger I might actually consider my first new car since my '78 Fox GTI.
But then I've been reading the specs on the V6 TDI ... BIG drool ... put that in a larger bodied wagon, A6 perhaps? Yummy!
I'm paying the price for my earlier stated disdain for diesels now though. My usual comment on a diesel is that they ought to have the exhaust come out in front of the car so not only those following the car would be forced to breathe the exhaust has been internalized by SWMBO ... so I guess I'm going to have to do some retraining ...
By the way, who says TDI equates to NAC? The first car I saw with the new generation TDI drivetrain was an Audi model of some sort ... it had no badges other than the four rings ... and manufacturer plates ... and bumper sticker proudly announcing that it was powered by diesel ... sitting in traffic I wouldn't have guessed it was a diesel if I hadn't seen the bumper sticker ...
San José, CA (USA)
I got the chance to drive a 2009 Jetta TDI this afternoon. This generation
uses the dual-clutch automatic rather than the Tiptronic-style of the
previous generation. That makes a big difference in how smooth the car is
I drove it back-to-back with a Passat 2.0t with the regular automatic
Once I got past the incredibly short amount of time the engine spends
revving before each shift it was really quite nice in the Jetta. The trunk
on the Jetta has to be 30%-40% larger than the Passat too. When you couple
the much higher degree of usability with the much lower price the Jetta
really is the logical choice for someone driving longer distances.
If only the diesel fuel itself weren't such a slimey substance to deal with.
Any contact seems to linger with you for half a day!
On Tue, 2 Dec 2008 19:28:27 -0500
"Louis-Alain Richard" <larichard at plguide.com> wrote:
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(r)
Oh I forgot the most important : we dynoed it at Brady's shop, and
hp at 4000 rpm, 277 lb-ft at 2100 rpm. Nothing spectacular, except
"at the wheels" figures... So the real HP is closer to 160, if we
drivetrain loss in consideration. But we are the only one to know it
160 horse is exactly where my 1983 Quattro was back then. Now, this
a 2,0 litre diesel engine can normally develop, while producing 100
more than my 2,1 turbo. That's progress.
I drove one of them TDI 2009 last fall with everyone aboard : I
hit the 4,2 L/100km mark, 0,6 L/100km better than advertised. Oh, for
guys, it means that I achieved 56 mpg while the Transport Canada
51 mpg, for US gallons obviously.
I wrote a post about this on TDICurious.ca : �
If you held a gun to my head to buy new, I'd look at a VW
TDI diesel or maybe a hybrid. Right now I've got a consulting
contract through January that has me commuting from NH to
RI -- 280 miles a day. Good highway manners, high mileage
and lots of miles between fill-ups mean a lot.
More information about the quattro