2.0, 1.8T, or TDI? (in 2003 Jetta Wagon)

Eric,

I would lean towards the 2.0L, only because it has been around the longest,
has minimal problems, and has proven itself quite reliable over time. It
evolved from the 1.8L 8-Valve engine used in A2 Golf/Jetta vehicles. The
1.8T still has some problems that have yet to be 100% worked out, so I would
avoid it for long term reliability. The TDI is a reliable work horse, and I
would make it a very close second, but the MAF sensor is still a problem,
parts can be more expensive for a TDI and if you end up getting the TDI,
using the synthetic oil at every oil change gets very expensive.

- Peter

--
--
1968 Beetle GLX (Rhett)
1990 Jetta GL Wolfsburg Edition (Jude)
"It's not a car, it's a Volkswagen"

...

I ended up getting the passat 1.8 but if there was a TDI verision I
would have gotten it--no question. With the jetta you just can't beat
the gas milage. That said, I feel the 1.8 has plenty of power and the
extra cash saved over the V6 will go a long way in repairs (if needed).



Remove S.P.A.M in email adddress
Climb <at> mac <dot> com

I really hate that arguement. "You have to drive a lot to make a TDI worth
while." That's bullocks. My 1.8T is costing me twice as much as my TDI did in
fuel. I only drive 10-12K miles a year and the 1.8T is costing me hundreds
more dollars each year than the TDI did. Twice as much is twice as much,
period, end of discussion. Burning less fuel should be the aim here. The TDI
is far more reliable, runs more smoothly (yes, it does), and creates less CO2,
and will last far longer than either the 1.8T, 2.0, or even the VR6.

If its got to last 10 years, plan on a new Turbo for either of the T cars
1.8T or TDI. But thats what extended warranties are for IMHO. Shop the
extended warranty hard before you go into the dealership. they are all 3rd
party insurance contracts so the dealer doesnt provide any added value. I
found GEICO's to be much cheaper than what VW offered, w/ only a slightly
higher ded.

...

I just advised the poster to do the math. Twice as much is not the "end of
the discussion" because twice as much of a very small number may not be
enough to offset the drawbacks of the diesel.

Here's the math: The TDI costs $1400 more initially. With taxes, fees,
etc. and the fact that TDI's aren't nearly as heavily discounted, I'd
estimate that the average TDI costs about $2K more initially than the 2.0
gas. If you drive 12K per year and using the EPA ratings, the TDI would
use about 190 gallons less fuel in a year's driving, and at about
$1.45/gallon, this is a yearly savings of $275. Even ignoring the time
value of money you have to put towards the TDI upfront, it takes about 7.25
years before you break even economically. If you drive a lot, then the
payback is much quicker.

I'll concede the CO2 argument, but the rest of your points are highly
debatable. And while certainly the TDI emits less CO2, it emits similar
amounts of the standard big-three health pollutants (CO, NOx, and HC) and is
much, much worse emitter of particulates.

One thing that is not debateable is that the TDI is a 90-hp engine, the 2.0
is a 115-hp engine, and the 1.8T is a 180-hp engine.

I have nothing against the TDI. But there are tradeoffs.

- Mark

How about insurance cost and depreciation?

How many people really use premium fuel to extract the 1.8T's potential -
180 HP. I don't see the masses at 6500 RPM in their new 1.8T's. I use all
my TDI's torque everyday at 1900 or so RPM.

Please run the numbers again with insurance, depreciation, and premium gas
figures. That 7 year figure may change. Diesels aren't that unattractive.

...

One additional fact is the insurance is considerably less on the
diesel than it is on the 1.8T.
It varies from State to State but the TDI would be about $400 less per
year than my WRX. I know different make etc... But there are many
factors including theft that factor into your insurance. Diesels are
stolen a lot less than high performance models.

On the TDI, work the numbers for how the mileage will affect your overall
cost of ownership. You've got to drive a lot of miles for the fuel savings
to amount to a signfiicant amount. I'd tend toward the TDI if you drive a
lot on the highway and put on big miles. Otherwise, I'd tend towards the
lower initial cost, smoother, quieter, easier-to-start, and much greater
power gas engines.

Between the 1.8T and 2.0, it really boils down to whether you want a sporty
wagon or a utilitarian wagon. The 1.8T is a wonderful engine and has proven
very reliable. If you like to drive at all aggressively, then I'd tend
towards the 1.8T. OTOH, if you're just wanting a nice wagon for
transportation, then the 2.0 should be fine.

If was buying, it would be the 1.8T with a five-speed and the sport package.
This would be a fun sports wagon.

Good luck,

- Mark

...
but the MAF sensor is still a problem, parts can be more expensive for a TDI
and if you end up getting the TDI, using the synthetic oil at every oil
change gets very expensive.

True but I wonder if the fuel savings would favorably offset the maintenance
costs. I guess one would have to sit down and do the numbers based on what
one drives a year.

Matt