Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

"Charles Lasitter" <spoof@address.com> wrote in message
news:24nc52tcbdg7a2e0d17d2mcjnb26159dm2@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> All up, my advice is to get over this "6M" hangup and go some leg work.
>> Picking the right machine based on technical specifications is all well
>> and
>> good but you're setting yourself up for some major disappointment.
>
> I drove the 6M Passat today, and I was very favorably impressed.
>
> I like the transmission. Very tight, short throws compared to the Honda
> 5M.
>
> And there were a number of features Edmunds forgot to mention, like
> limited slip differential, which I also like.
>
> It also has a trip computer that I REALLY like, giving you your fuel
> economy RIGHT NOW, a compass, and external temperature display.

These are not safety features. They're distractions. You may crash whilst
noticing you're returning 34.6 to the gallon.

> The feature list on my Honda LX is pitiful by comparison.

Reliability comes as standard.

> I have no doubt as the the reliability of my Honda. I'm just saying
> that we deserve more of the standard features that everyone else gets to
> take for granted.

I agree to a point, but that point, well it depends. We bought an older '99
machine because it had the three specification things I absolutely required
(cruise control, ABS, air conditioning) and the one thing it couldn't do
without (reliability). Everything else is nice to have.

The most accurate fuel computer still shows "--.-" when you're broken down
because of a missing coil back. Or the reverse light switch.

<shrugs> Thousands buy VWs year after year. Thousands don't need to
replace their Ford / Honda / Nissan / Toyota year after year...

--
The DervMan
www.dervman.com

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

>> There are very good reasons for this. One is that VAG's
>> quality control is lacking. Honda are one of the few
>> manufacturers making money on selling cars. The VAG are
>> not...

Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
shorter warranty?

And a 12 year warranty against rust thru versus five?

>> All for 2006, VW offers:

>> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Ratings
(MSRP $23,790)

>> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $21,990)

>> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $22,950)

>> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $23,590)

and a 2006 Accord V6/6M EX:
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $27,300)

And from Consumer Reports:

"The Volkswagen Passat was our top-rated family sedan from
1998 to 2004. Based on the previous-generation Audi A4 and
A6, it provided an inviting blend of comfort, roominess,
interior craftsmanship, and handling. The Passat was a
family sedan that was fun to drive. But inconsistent
reliability was its Achilles' heel.

So there are reliability issues, but CR is not alone is
liking the Passat.

> And most of these are frightfully dull to drive.

Compared to what? Not my Accord LX.

And they all have these safety features standard:

>> Emergency Brake Assist Traction Control Stability Control
>> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution DRL ABS w/4-wheel disk
>> Alloys on all but the Passat

> How exactly is having alloy wheels a safety feature? They
> can be added afterwards if wanted.

Familiar with "moment of inertia" as it applies to
centrifugal force? By replacing the steel wheels and the
tires on my LX, I cut 5-6 lbs off my Accord's unsprung
weight on each corner. The result, among other things, is a
shorter stopping distance, because it's easier to stop a
wheel from lower mass from turning.

>> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even
>> normally aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX.

> Which compared to the VAGs is an inspired drive.

For +$10k, I should hope so.

> The latest crop of VWs are better than before, but you'd be
> delusional if you bought a Golf or Passat thinking that it's
> a European tight handler.

I was comparing the VW models to a Camry and the Accord LX that
I now drive. Anything further is a straw man. But since you
brought it up:

Again from Consumer Reports:

"The GTI is comfortable, well finished, powerful, and fun to
drive. Based on the Jetta and redesigned Golf, this
hatchback can be an alternative to a sports sedan, with
capable handling; a relatively comfortable ride; a
well-crafted interior; and a surprisingly roomy back seat. A
four-door version arrives in June 2006.

"THE DRIVING EXPERIENCE

"Handling is agile, and body lean is controlled. The steering
is quick, well-weighted, and has good feedback. Emergency
handling was stable and forgiving, posting an impressive
speed through our avoidance maneuver.

"Around the track it was well controlled and entertaining
with well calibrated stability control. The ride is firm but
steady and compliant. The GTI is fairly quiet inside. The
200-hp, turbocharged four-cylinder engine is smooth and
powerful and got 25 mpg in mixed driving, but it required
premium fuel.

"The standard six-speed manual transmission has appropriate
ratios and we found it easy to shift. Volkswagen's quick
shifting DSG automatic transmission is optional. Braking
distances were short, but the pedal sometimes felt touchy."

I don't get "it really sucked" from reading this.

And: It goes 0-60 in six seconds.

>> Getting the 6M and safety features in an Accord means you
>> have to get a V6 EX and shell out enough to have me looking
>> at entirely different cars.

> Yes, but you'd be getting a wholly better short and long
> term ownership proposition.

Can you quantify this for me?

>> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and
>> safety / performance items like stability / traction control
>> aren't even available as options.

> Ya like, dude, drop this perception that the more forward
> gears the better.

This wasn't my idea. I happened to notice that they showed
up in lots of "driver oriented" cars.

> Nooo! Having lots of forward ratios can mean a few things
> such as:

> * The power band is so narrow that it needs lots of ratios.

Indicated by a turbo engine making peak torque at 1800 RPM?

> * The fuel consumption is artificially flattered by an
> overly long bunch of top ratios, so you need third for any
> gradient up or down.

> * They fit the X speed manual 'box to the top of the range
> model and got a bargain deal on the rest

> * They reckon people want more forward gears.

All up, my advice is to get over this "6M" hangup and go
some leg work. Picking the right machine based on technical
specifications is all well and good but you're setting
yourself up for some major disappointment

I've been doing nothing but "leg work". If I've overlooking
other obvious choices that represent a value for the money,
then enlighten me. If major driving magazines think this
engine / tranny combo sucks, I'm all ears.



+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

>> There are very good reasons for this. One is that VAG's
>> quality control is lacking. Honda are one of the few
>> manufacturers making money on selling cars. The VAG are
>> not...

Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
shorter warranty?

And a 12 year warranty against rust thru versus five?

>> All for 2006, VW offers:

>> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Ratings
(MSRP $23,790)

>> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $21,990)

>> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $22,950)

>> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $23,590)

and a 2006 Accord V6/6M EX:
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $27,300)

And from Consumer Reports:

"The Volkswagen Passat was our top-rated family sedan from
1998 to 2004. Based on the previous-generation Audi A4 and
A6, it provided an inviting blend of comfort, roominess,
interior craftsmanship, and handling. The Passat was a
family sedan that was fun to drive. But inconsistent
reliability was its Achilles' heel.

So there are reliability issues, but CR is not alone is
liking the Passat.

> And most of these are frightfully dull to drive.

Compared to what? Not my Accord LX.

And they all have these safety features standard:

>> Emergency Brake Assist Traction Control Stability Control
>> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution DRL ABS w/4-wheel disk
>> Alloys on all but the Passat

> How exactly is having alloy wheels a safety feature? They
> can be added afterwards if wanted.

Familiar with "moment of inertia" as it applies to
centrifugal force? By replacing the steel wheels and the
tires on my LX, I cut 5-6 lbs off my Accord's unsprung
weight on each corner. The result, among other things, is a
shorter stopping distance, because it's easier to stop a
wheel from lower mass from turning.

>> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even
>> normally aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX.

> Which compared to the VAGs is an inspired drive.

For +$10k, I should hope so.

> The latest crop of VWs are better than before, but you'd be
> delusional if you bought a Golf or Passat thinking that it's
> a European tight handler.

I was comparing the VW models to a Camry and the Accord LX that
I now drive. Anything further is a straw man. But since you
brought it up:

Again from Consumer Reports:

"The GTI is comfortable, well finished, powerful, and fun to
drive. Based on the Jetta and redesigned Golf, this
hatchback can be an alternative to a sports sedan, with
capable handling; a relatively comfortable ride; a
well-crafted interior; and a surprisingly roomy back seat. A
four-door version arrives in June 2006.

"THE DRIVING EXPERIENCE

"Handling is agile, and body lean is controlled. The steering
is quick, well-weighted, and has good feedback. Emergency
handling was stable and forgiving, posting an impressive
speed through our avoidance maneuver.

"Around the track it was well controlled and entertaining
with well calibrated stability control. The ride is firm but
steady and compliant. The GTI is fairly quiet inside. The
200-hp, turbocharged four-cylinder engine is smooth and
powerful and got 25 mpg in mixed driving, but it required
premium fuel.

"The standard six-speed manual transmission has appropriate
ratios and we found it easy to shift. Volkswagen's quick
shifting DSG automatic transmission is optional. Braking
distances were short, but the pedal sometimes felt touchy."

I don't get "it really sucked" from reading this.

And: It goes 0-60 in six seconds.

>> Getting the 6M and safety features in an Accord means you
>> have to get a V6 EX and shell out enough to have me looking
>> at entirely different cars.

> Yes, but you'd be getting a wholly better short and long
> term ownership proposition.

Can you quantify this for me?

>> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and
>> safety / performance items like stability / traction control
>> aren't even available as options.

> Ya like, dude, drop this perception that the more forward
> gears the better.

This wasn't my idea. I happened to notice that they showed
up in lots of "driver oriented" cars.

> Nooo! Having lots of forward ratios can mean a few things
> such as:

> * The power band is so narrow that it needs lots of ratios.

Indicated by a turbo engine making peak torque at 1800 RPM?

> * The fuel consumption is artificially flattered by an
> overly long bunch of top ratios, so you need third for any
> gradient up or down.

> * They fit the X speed manual 'box to the top of the range
> model and got a bargain deal on the rest

> * They reckon people want more forward gears.

All up, my advice is to get over this "6M" hangup and go
some leg work. Picking the right machine based on technical
specifications is all well and good but you're setting
yourself up for some major disappointment

I've been doing nothing but "leg work". If I've overlooking
other obvious choices that represent a value for the money,
then enlighten me. If major driving magazines think this
engine / tranny combo sucks, I'm all ears.



+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
wrote:

>> There are very good reasons for this. One is that VAG's
>> quality control is lacking. Honda are one of the few
>> manufacturers making money on selling cars. The VAG are
>> not...

Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
shorter warranty?

And a 12 year warranty against rust thru versus five?

>> All for 2006, VW offers:

>> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Ratings
(MSRP $23,790)

>> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $21,990)

>> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $22,950)

>> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
= 9.1 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $23,590)

and a 2006 Accord V6/6M EX:
= 9.4 Edmunds Consumer Rating
(MSRP $27,300)

And from Consumer Reports:

"The Volkswagen Passat was our top-rated family sedan from
1998 to 2004. Based on the previous-generation Audi A4 and
A6, it provided an inviting blend of comfort, roominess,
interior craftsmanship, and handling. The Passat was a
family sedan that was fun to drive. But inconsistent
reliability was its Achilles' heel.

So there are reliability issues, but CR is not alone is
liking the Passat.

> And most of these are frightfully dull to drive.

Compared to what? Not my Accord LX.

And they all have these safety features standard:

>> Emergency Brake Assist Traction Control Stability Control
>> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution DRL ABS w/4-wheel disk
>> Alloys on all but the Passat

> How exactly is having alloy wheels a safety feature? They
> can be added afterwards if wanted.

Familiar with "moment of inertia" as it applies to
centrifugal force? By replacing the steel wheels and the
tires on my LX, I cut 5-6 lbs off my Accord's unsprung
weight on each corner. The result, among other things, is a
shorter stopping distance, because it's easier to stop a
wheel from lower mass from turning.

>> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even
>> normally aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX.

> Which compared to the VAGs is an inspired drive.

For +$10k, I should hope so.

> The latest crop of VWs are better than before, but you'd be
> delusional if you bought a Golf or Passat thinking that it's
> a European tight handler.

I was comparing the VW models to a Camry and the Accord LX that
I now drive. Anything further is a straw man. But since you
brought it up:

Again from Consumer Reports:

"The GTI is comfortable, well finished, powerful, and fun to
drive. Based on the Jetta and redesigned Golf, this
hatchback can be an alternative to a sports sedan, with
capable handling; a relatively comfortable ride; a
well-crafted interior; and a surprisingly roomy back seat. A
four-door version arrives in June 2006.

"THE DRIVING EXPERIENCE

"Handling is agile, and body lean is controlled. The steering
is quick, well-weighted, and has good feedback. Emergency
handling was stable and forgiving, posting an impressive
speed through our avoidance maneuver.

"Around the track it was well controlled and entertaining
with well calibrated stability control. The ride is firm but
steady and compliant. The GTI is fairly quiet inside. The
200-hp, turbocharged four-cylinder engine is smooth and
powerful and got 25 mpg in mixed driving, but it required
premium fuel.

"The standard six-speed manual transmission has appropriate
ratios and we found it easy to shift. Volkswagen's quick
shifting DSG automatic transmission is optional. Braking
distances were short, but the pedal sometimes felt touchy."

I don't get "it really sucked" from reading this.

And: It goes 0-60 in six seconds.

>> Getting the 6M and safety features in an Accord means you
>> have to get a V6 EX and shell out enough to have me looking
>> at entirely different cars.

> Yes, but you'd be getting a wholly better short and long
> term ownership proposition.

Can you quantify this for me?

>> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and
>> safety / performance items like stability / traction control
>> aren't even available as options.

> Ya like, dude, drop this perception that the more forward
> gears the better.

This wasn't my idea. I happened to notice that they showed
up in lots of "driver oriented" cars.

> Nooo! Having lots of forward ratios can mean a few things
> such as:

> * The power band is so narrow that it needs lots of ratios.

Indicated by a turbo engine making peak torque at 1800 RPM?

> * The fuel consumption is artificially flattered by an
> overly long bunch of top ratios, so you need third for any
> gradient up or down.

> * They fit the X speed manual 'box to the top of the range
> model and got a bargain deal on the rest

> * They reckon people want more forward gears.

All up, my advice is to get over this "6M" hangup and go
some leg work. Picking the right machine based on technical
specifications is all well and good but you're setting
yourself up for some major disappointment

I've been doing nothing but "leg work". If I've overlooking
other obvious choices that represent a value for the money,
then enlighten me. If major driving magazines think this
engine / tranny combo sucks, I'm all ears.



+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:36:27 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure you'll really find a car with all that, since you want
>> 'sports' features (the 4Wheel disc, 6M) and then you want what is an
>> economy feature (the 30mpg) - I doubt you'll get both. If you do,
>> let me know.
>
> I was absolutely floored by what I turned up on searching with "6M" as a
> keyword on Sunday. It turns out that a number of Volkwagen models come
> jam-packed with features and performance at very attractive prices.
>
> VW has several models with 6M standard, and combined with a Turbo i4
> that makes nearly the same torque as the J30 V6 but at 1800 RPM, I
> should think it would take off like a kick in the pants!

but then youre stuck with a VW. high maintenance costs, parts costs,
electrical probs, oil burning probs. VWoA considers burning a quart of
oil every 1000 miles normal.

plus a lot of the dealership techs are audi and porsche mechanics, and
they get paid as such.

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:36:27 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure you'll really find a car with all that, since you want
>> 'sports' features (the 4Wheel disc, 6M) and then you want what is an
>> economy feature (the 30mpg) - I doubt you'll get both. If you do,
>> let me know.
>
> I was absolutely floored by what I turned up on searching with "6M" as a
> keyword on Sunday. It turns out that a number of Volkwagen models come
> jam-packed with features and performance at very attractive prices.
>
> VW has several models with 6M standard, and combined with a Turbo i4
> that makes nearly the same torque as the J30 V6 but at 1800 RPM, I
> should think it would take off like a kick in the pants!

but then youre stuck with a VW. high maintenance costs, parts costs,
electrical probs, oil burning probs. VWoA considers burning a quart of
oil every 1000 miles normal.

plus a lot of the dealership techs are audi and porsche mechanics, and
they get paid as such.

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 19:36:27 -0400, flobert <nomail@here.NOT> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure you'll really find a car with all that, since you want
>> 'sports' features (the 4Wheel disc, 6M) and then you want what is an
>> economy feature (the 30mpg) - I doubt you'll get both. If you do,
>> let me know.
>
> I was absolutely floored by what I turned up on searching with "6M" as a
> keyword on Sunday. It turns out that a number of Volkwagen models come
> jam-packed with features and performance at very attractive prices.
>
> VW has several models with 6M standard, and combined with a Turbo i4
> that makes nearly the same torque as the J30 V6 but at 1800 RPM, I
> should think it would take off like a kick in the pants!

but then youre stuck with a VW. high maintenance costs, parts costs,
electrical probs, oil burning probs. VWoA considers burning a quart of
oil every 1000 miles normal.

plus a lot of the dealership techs are audi and porsche mechanics, and
they get paid as such.

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Mon, 01 May 2006 08:24:02 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's a lazy engine and VAG build quality is nothing like it used to be. So,
>> buy at your own peril.
>
> This may well all be true, but they're offering a 4/50k warranty vs

they ought to offer a 6/60k.


> Honda's 3/36. And here's what really gets me:
>
> All for 2006, VW offers:
>
> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
>
> And they all have these safety features standard:
>
> Emergency Brake Assist
> Traction Control
> Stability Control
> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution
> DRL
> ABS w/4-wheel disk
> Alloys on all but the Passat

and how much does each model run? i seem to recall the 2dr GTI being
damn close to $30k.

and thats for a 2dr hatchback, albeit a nice one.

VW isnt giving their cars away.
>
> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even normally
> aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX. Getting the 6M and
> safety features in an Accord means you have to get a V6 EX and shell out
> enough to have me looking at entirely different cars.
>
> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and safety /
> performance items like stability / traction control aren't even
> available as options.
>
> I just think an unfortunate number of auto makers has missed out on this
> combination of performance, safety and fun-to-drive (6M)
> characteristics, at the very least in an attractive price range.


> +-----------------------------------------+
> | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
> | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
> | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
> +-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Mon, 01 May 2006 08:24:02 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's a lazy engine and VAG build quality is nothing like it used to be. So,
>> buy at your own peril.
>
> This may well all be true, but they're offering a 4/50k warranty vs

they ought to offer a 6/60k.


> Honda's 3/36. And here's what really gets me:
>
> All for 2006, VW offers:
>
> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
>
> And they all have these safety features standard:
>
> Emergency Brake Assist
> Traction Control
> Stability Control
> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution
> DRL
> ABS w/4-wheel disk
> Alloys on all but the Passat

and how much does each model run? i seem to recall the 2dr GTI being
damn close to $30k.

and thats for a 2dr hatchback, albeit a nice one.

VW isnt giving their cars away.
>
> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even normally
> aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX. Getting the 6M and
> safety features in an Accord means you have to get a V6 EX and shell out
> enough to have me looking at entirely different cars.
>
> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and safety /
> performance items like stability / traction control aren't even
> available as options.
>
> I just think an unfortunate number of auto makers has missed out on this
> combination of performance, safety and fun-to-drive (6M)
> characteristics, at the very least in an attractive price range.


> +-----------------------------------------+
> | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
> | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
> | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
> +-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> On Mon, 01 May 2006 08:24:02 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
> wrote:
>
>> It's a lazy engine and VAG build quality is nothing like it used to be. So,
>> buy at your own peril.
>
> This may well all be true, but they're offering a 4/50k warranty vs

they ought to offer a 6/60k.


> Honda's 3/36. And here's what really gets me:
>
> All for 2006, VW offers:
>
> Jetta GLI 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> GTI 2dr Htcbk 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Passat VE 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
> Jetta 2.0T 4Dr/Sdn 2.0L Turbo 6M
>
> And they all have these safety features standard:
>
> Emergency Brake Assist
> Traction Control
> Stability Control
> Electronic Brakeforce Distribution
> DRL
> ABS w/4-wheel disk
> Alloys on all but the Passat

and how much does each model run? i seem to recall the 2dr GTI being
damn close to $30k.

and thats for a 2dr hatchback, albeit a nice one.

VW isnt giving their cars away.
>
> And you can't get this 4cyl/6M combination from Honda, even normally
> aspirated, unless you go with a +$10k Acura TSX. Getting the 6M and
> safety features in an Accord means you have to get a V6 EX and shell out
> enough to have me looking at entirely different cars.
>
> The only 6M you can get from Toyota is a Corolla TSX, and safety /
> performance items like stability / traction control aren't even
> available as options.
>
> I just think an unfortunate number of auto makers has missed out on this
> combination of performance, safety and fun-to-drive (6M)
> characteristics, at the very least in an attractive price range.


> +-----------------------------------------+
> | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
> | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
> | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
> +-----------------------------------------+

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
> that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
> shorter warranty?

i guess hyundai must be the best, since they offer a 10yr/100k mile
warranty!

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
> that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
> shorter warranty?

i guess hyundai must be the best, since they offer a 10yr/100k mile
warranty!

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

Charles Lasitter wrote:
> Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
> that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
> shorter warranty?

i guess hyundai must be the best, since they offer a 10yr/100k mile
warranty!

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

On Mon, 01 May 2006 18:59:14 -0400, Charles Lasitter
<spoof@address.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>
>>> There are very good reasons for this. One is that VAG's
>>> quality control is lacking. Honda are one of the few
>>> manufacturers making money on selling cars. The VAG are
>>> not...
>
>Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
>that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
>shorter warranty?

If they had the same warentee, what would you go for?

You have to love marketing, they can take a major drawback with their
vehicle, and turn it into what many people consider a major plus
point.

Its not that 'the longer warentee is best', its simply 'our car is
unreliable, so we'll extend the warentees so that people will ignore
eliability, because the manufacturer will pay for some of it

THAT is why there are ones of differing length. An unreliable car is
still an unreliable car, no matter who pays for the repairs, its still
broken down in the first placeI don't know about you, but I'd rather
have a car that breaks down 3x less, than one where they'll pay the
repairs 3x longer.
I mentioned previously about my fathers golf, that melted an
alternator - when we found out, it was 2am, we were in the middle of
nowhere, it was the end of november, and the battery was flat. at that
point, I couldn't care less WHO paid for the repairs, I was more
concerned with not freezing, whilst I tried to attract attention, so I
couldget help to get me and my passengers back in time to get to our
jobs.

think about things properly, and not how marketing want you to think.

Re: Show cars having specific features?
 

On Mon, 01 May 2006 18:59:14 -0400, Charles Lasitter
<spoof@address.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 May 2006 16:53:12 GMT, "DervMan" <dervman@ntlworld.com>
>wrote:
>
>>> There are very good reasons for this. One is that VAG's
>>> quality control is lacking. Honda are one of the few
>>> manufacturers making money on selling cars. The VAG are
>>> not...
>
>Wait. I think Hondas are great cars, but how does it follow
>that their reliability == the manufacturer gives you a
>shorter warranty?

If they had the same warentee, what would you go for?

You have to love marketing, they can take a major drawback with their
vehicle, and turn it into what many people consider a major plus
point.

Its not that 'the longer warentee is best', its simply 'our car is
unreliable, so we'll extend the warentees so that people will ignore
eliability, because the manufacturer will pay for some of it

THAT is why there are ones of differing length. An unreliable car is
still an unreliable car, no matter who pays for the repairs, its still
broken down in the first placeI don't know about you, but I'd rather
have a car that breaks down 3x less, than one where they'll pay the
repairs 3x longer.
I mentioned previously about my fathers golf, that melted an
alternator - when we found out, it was 2am, we were in the middle of
nowhere, it was the end of november, and the battery was flat. at that
point, I couldn't care less WHO paid for the repairs, I was more
concerned with not freezing, whilst I tried to attract attention, so I
couldget help to get me and my passengers back in time to get to our
jobs.

think about things properly, and not how marketing want you to think.