VW interior quality vs jap/koreans

[Soran]

So much argument about VW quality vs JP/Korean....aiyo

 

We all have our own likes and dislikes. For me, what i like about VW's interior is that it has soft plastic on the dash, the steering wheel feels solid and the dash is simple and straight to the point. Not too over-designed just to make it look pretty (I never did understand the FD2 Civic's rationale for splitting the speedometer and the tacho into two separate "decks")

 

But what i like about the car is the drive. Once you have experienced the power of twincharged, you will never want to drive any normally-aspirated 1.6 litre car ever again....

[Kiadaw]

Bro I used to think you can be better than this, didn't expect you to be just like your good supportive buddy here

 

In any case, please refer to my post #141. I made a comparison between Golf and Jazz if you insist, although I was actually comparing VW hatches in general and not just just the Golf you pointed out. I also made it clear that I wasn't comparing the cars physically per say, but rather in the context of status and accessibility based on the different conditions between Europe and SG.

 

My intention to post here was just to broaden the perspective of things, rather than engage in petty bickering which I often get myself into when the usual suspects misquote me. German engineering emphasizes on precise engineering, maybe some of the bros who claim to appreciate German engineering here can exercise some of this precision when they read through the posts' of others before making criticisms. Just expressing my views, nothing personal and hope you do not take any offense. Cheers.

 

Oh, my bad. Its not meant to be critical of you, I just explain why I compare Jazz with VW. Maybe I didn't read the previous post well, so my apology.

 

.You know, in office, cannot spend too much time on internet, so have chance, just post & go, if you know what I mean.

 

I will be a little more careful when I post in future.

 

Cheers.

 

 

 

 

[HoLiaoLiang]

your post is nothing constructive. if you don't have anything good to say, pls keep your mouth shut

else tell me where i went wrong

You just need to test drive the Twincharged version, and then test the K5, you would've known the difference. If you still can't, then you shouldn't spend so much on cars, just buy a normal Toyota/Honda/Nissan (Durable/Parts easy to get etc).

 

I'm not being rude or sarcastic, don't get me wrong. But it's true because when you buy a car, you should handle/feel the car, and not let the car handle/feel you.

 

Cheers!

[HoLiaoLiang]

So much argument about VW quality vs JP/Korean....aiyo

 

We all have our own likes and dislikes. For me, what i like about VW's interior is that it has soft plastic on the dash, the steering wheel feels solid and the dash is simple and straight to the point. Not too over-designed just to make it look pretty (I never did understand the FD2 Civic's rationale for splitting the speedometer and the tacho into two separate "decks")

 

But what i like about the car is the drive. Once you have experienced the power of twincharged, you will never want to drive any normally-aspirated 1.6 litre car ever again....

Truely agree... After I went back to my "Modded" vehicle, I felt sad. LOL. You can take an existing 2.0L car and turbo charged it, probably you can't even win the 1.4 TSI. Yes, it's that powerful. Probably for N/A(2.0L & Below), Type R is the only one that can beat. But also depend on the driver.

[Datura]

to me the handling of the car is more important and VW handling is definitly much better than MIK. when i buy a car the most impt is the drive (handling), performance and lastly aesthetics (interior), no point having a fantastic interior and drive is bad.

 

Cheers

[HoLiaoLiang]

to me the handling of the car is more important and VW handling is definitly much better than MIK. when i buy a car the most impt is the drive (handling), performance and lastly aesthetics (interior), no point having a fantastic interior and drive is bad.

 

Cheers

Yes, Interior can always be done up. But if performance has no base, you wanna make it as powerful, you need to go the illegal way. When it's illegal, Many things to worry. Headache.

[Sabbie]

Truely agree... After I went back to my "Modded" vehicle, I felt sad. LOL. You can take an existing 2.0L car and turbo charged it, probably you can't even win the 1.4 TSI. Yes, it's that powerful. Probably for N/A(2.0L & Below), Type R is the only one that can beat. But also depend on the driver.

 

Are you sure? 1.4twin tfsi sure faster than a 2litre but highly unlikely faster than a 2.0TC la....take a GTI vs a GT and it will show....but yes 1.4 twin charge can match a 2.5litre....

 

on paper 0 to 100 8.1seconds not that fast....even you do a stage 2....maybe 7 seconds only...

[Coupecabriolet]

I'm not a car expert, but my understanding is the more gears just means that the ratio of the gears is nearer. No reason to put in a 7 speed and the ratio like 4 speed auto. Once it reach a higher gear, car will feel underpowered if the speed is not fast enough. Then again, how often can we push our car over the fast enough speed to maintain in 7th gear?

 

Not entirely right. more gears doesnt mean gear ratio is nearer. DSG behave differently as you drive differently. gradual acceleration, when you hit 50km/h, it is in 5th gear already. 70km/h onwards is in 7th. so there, it hunts for the tallest gear possible so as to reduce RPM and ultimately your FC.

 

when you do hard acceleration from a stop and reaches 100km/h, you will only be in 2nd gear. this is possible in both D and S mode.

 

as for underpowered or not, the DSG downshifts when you need the power (depress the pedal), and because it shifts fast (very fast), your gearbox will hunt for a lower but more powerful gear, say 7th drop to 4th. i don't know which automatic gearbox nowadays do not downshift when you press the pedal, i thought it would be same across the board.

 

despite all the above and the DSG being alot of fun when you are in the mood, the same cannot be said when you are in a traffic jam, even worse if you are on an up-slope.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Coupecabriolet

[Coupecabriolet]

Are you sure? 1.4twin tfsi sure faster than a 2litre but highly unlikely faster than a 2.0TC la....take a GTI vs a GT and it will show....but yes 1.4 twin charge can match a 2.5litre....

 

on paper 0 to 100 8.1seconds not that fast....even you do a stage 2....maybe 7 seconds only...

 

i have been checking out a lot of youtube videos for twincharged roc, 8s claimed is not entirely true. so many videos show it hits 100km/h in less than that. so far fastest i think 7.1s (which is the GTI 2.0TSI timing).

 

the same happens when i drive the GTI, it feels faster than paper timing 7.1s & significantly faster than my twincharged roc.

 

it seems that vw always states the timing for century sprint abit longer than what the car can do. in addition, the way german car makers measure this is different from japanese car makers (the no. of passengers, level of fuel in the tank etc).

[Sabbie]

i have been checking out a lot of youtube videos for twincharged roc, 8s claimed is not entirely true. so many videos show it hits 100km/h in less than that. so far fastest i think 7.1s (which is the GTI 2.0TSI timing).

 

the same happens when i drive the GTI, it feels faster than paper timing 7.1s & significantly faster than my twincharged roc.

 

it seems that vw always states the timing for century sprint abit longer than what the car can do. in addition, the way german car makers measure this is different from japanese car makers (the no. of passengers, level of fuel in the tank etc).

 

Yup, I also felt it is faster than what is quoted on paper but don't want to say la lest people say we haolian, but you are right on the dsg being really sucky at low revs and on start stop traffic.....even my passenger complains....especially with my R brakes....very jerky....

[Kelpie]

Are you sure? 1.4twin tfsi sure faster than a 2litre but highly unlikely faster than a 2.0TC la....take a GTI vs a GT and it will show....but yes 1.4 twin charge can match a 2.5litre....

 

on paper 0 to 100 8.1seconds not that fast....even you do a stage 2....maybe 7 seconds only...

 

Fast in which way? pick up or top speed? I don't feel the TSI that fast, top speed also machiam like my FD2. I now owned both Sirocco 1.4 TSI and a FD2.

 

Anyway, don't quite believe in paper specs these days. Ultimately, the driver also counts.

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

[Coupecabriolet]

Yup, I also felt it is faster than what is quoted on paper but don't want to say la lest people say we haolian, but you are right on the dsg being really sucky at low revs and on start stop traffic.....even my passenger complains....especially with my R brakes....very jerky....

 

aiya nothing to haolian, 7.1s fastest (if true) also not very fast lah under 5-6s then v fast

 

everytime i see traffic jam infront, i face palm.

 

Jetta sports brake already v good, brake disc probably the size of some small car rims.. you still upgrade, alamak. my roc brakes still v sensitive after 1yr, going change bpads soon.

[Kiadaw]

i have been checking out a lot of youtube videos for twincharged roc, 8s claimed is not entirely true. so many videos show it hits 100km/h in less than that. so far fastest i think 7.1s (which is the GTI 2.0TSI timing).

 

the same happens when i drive the GTI, it feels faster than paper timing 7.1s & significantly faster than my twincharged roc.

 

it seems that vw always states the timing for century sprint abit longer than what the car can do. in addition, the way german car makers measure this is different from japanese car makers (the no. of passengers, level of fuel in the tank etc).

 

Germans carmakers then to be under declare their centruy sprint & maybe power/torque figures. My car also seems much faster than official figure.

 

 

[Coupecabriolet]

Fast in which way? pick up or top speed? I don't feel the TSI that fast, top speed also machiam like my FD2. I now owned both Sirocco 1.4 TSI and a FD2.

 

Anyway, don't quite believe in paper specs these days. Ultimately, the driver also counts.

 

Regards,

 

fast for acceleration from a stop, maybe due to supercharger?

 

top speed is very low, i think twincharged roc only 218km/h on paper. low because is forced induced puny engine 1.4L only mah. after 140-160km/h, its a crawl already.

[Sabbie]

Fast in which way? pick up or top speed? I don't feel the TSI that fast, top speed also machiam like my FD2. I now owned both Sirocco 1.4 TSI and a FD2.

 

Anyway, don't quite believe in paper specs these days. Ultimately, the driver also counts.

 

Regards,

 

Pick up only, for top speed, not too much we can do with a 1.4 engine....there is also no replacement for displacement for top speed....

[Sabbie]

aiya nothing to haolian, 7.1s fastest (if true) also not very fast lah under 5-6s then v fast

 

everytime i see traffic jam infront, i face palm.

 

Jetta sports brake already v good, brake disc probably the size of some small car rims.. you still upgrade, alamak. my roc brakes still v sensitive after 1yr, going change bpads soon.

 

hehe....i on 18 rims and can still wheelspin mah....so think get better brakes...

[RogueGTR]

Truely agree... After I went back to my "Modded" vehicle, I felt sad. LOL. You can take an existing 2.0L car and turbo charged it, probably you can't even win the 1.4 TSI. Yes, it's that powerful. Probably for N/A(2.0L & Below), Type R is the only one that can beat. But also depend on the driver.

 

Actually if you're referring to 40 tiang or the track, then i agree with you wholeheartedly but not when you're talking about 'give & take' traffic in which you need to power up & squeeze into another lane- the Golf 1.4TSi will most likely have the FD2R for breakfast/ lunch & dinner easily.

 

i have been checking out a lot of youtube videos for twincharged roc, 8s claimed is not entirely true. so many videos show it hits 100km/h in less than that. so far fastest i think 7.1s (which is the GTI 2.0TSI timing).

 

the same happens when i drive the GTI, it feels faster than paper timing 7.1s & significantly faster than my twincharged roc.

 

it seems that vw always states the timing for century sprint abit longer than what the car can do. in addition, the way german car makers measure this is different from japanese car makers (the no. of passengers, level of fuel in the tank etc).

 

 

You'll be pleasantly surprised if i share with you that a 1.4 TSi could be modded more ppowerful than a Golf GTi & it's taken from http://www.vagsg.com/forums/showthread.php...ighlight=ivaner with very little hardware & equates to lesser monies spent for enhancing the power. Make that 227Km/h @6200rpm on 6th gear! It's GPS Corrected Speedo & NOT car speedo. 313NM@2977rpm & 207Hp@600rpm.

 

The above % increment in power from a Golf are much easier & cheaper to extricate then from any NA unless it has oddles of CC (6000 cc & above or else one needs bigger block for bigger CC/ Higher lift cams/ Higher compression ratio pistons & tougher crankshaft/ oversize valves & oversize valves seats with head fully pot & polished & benchflowed to start with)

 

In short, you'll see so many more VW's for whatever models (be it 1.4L TSi or 2L Turbo guise) then you'll see other 'sportier' (read - can go not just 'show') marque on the streets. enuf said

 

 

 

 

[HP_Lee]

i've been wanting to change my car for a few months now, was at a car wash when a driver with the new jetta pulled up beside and i chatted with him about his new car

according to him he's able to get 13 - 16++km/l easily despite the car being new and haven't ran in, plus because there is no vtec the car's power can be felt without having to hit 4.5krpm

 

so i dropped by VW today after work to view the jetta, was extremely disgusted by the interior quality

- no boot release lever, its a button recycled from the windows up/down plastic

- hard interior plastics reminds me of the hyundai getz, the car might look good when new but it certainly won't look the same after 3 years

- car seat railings are clearly exposed

- leather seats lack the premium leather touch that you'll find in a passat

- steering wheel feels cheap, like from a getz

- despite reviews saying that the interior space has increased the car is not more spacious than a honda accord. the accord is the least spacious when compared against the camry, teana, i45 and k5

 

i decided that it would be well worth it to top up the 10k to get a scirocco, went over to the car and found the same lousy quality interior for what is supposed to be a premium car. i had expected at least quality on par with a honda accord or a civic but the touch was bad, the rear passenger seats lack space and unlike the kia koup, the front seat pull down lever doesn't automatically push the seat forward. worst, there is no such lever for the driver's seat

 

the only car i could live with was the golf but i don't like the idea of driving a hatchback. the passat feels solid too but its too big for me to drive

 

 

i'm very surprised that sgcarmart's reviews say that VW's quality is amongst the best. during my visit i dropped by honda to view the civic and kia to view the k5 and koup. the k5 had the best interior, koup's interior was good too. the new civic is very cramped but has an interior that is slightly better than the koup. but the worst interior quality was in the jetta and followed very closely by the scirocco

i found myself more comfortable in the cheapest car i saw, the kia koup than in a premium scirocco.

i can't decide which is worst, the cramped civic or the lousy quality jetta

 

am i the only one thinking this way?

 

 

the koreans were amazing! top notch interior, plastics felt expensive, leg rooms are great

the k5 even has a foldable gps unit built into the pillar. i'd have a hard time deciding between the k5 and the passat if the passat were priced the same against the k5.

 

 

edit:

i didn't test drive any of the cars, i was originally interested in the sport tsi jetta or the scirocco but was too turned off by the interior to ask for a test drive.

is the drive that amazing? online reviews say that the older jetta's handling is beyond words terrific.

 

how's the kia koup's drive? the car impressed me a lot! the k5 too, but i'm more into a 1.6L car for the fuel economy and lower road tax

 

There are some other discussions on VW. I link you : VW Jetta