1.8T/1.9/2.0 volkswagen beetle?

[OS]

 

[Frosty3799]

Originally posted by: weezergirl
No, I'm not *dead* set on it. But its' the only car that I really like. Other than that...i don't care what kind of car i get...I"m not even really a car person

why not get a jetta?? they are nice and reliable also.

 

[OS]

 

[LittleWolf]

If you really like the VW Bug, then I think you should go for it. It isn't as bad as some folks would like to portray it. Basically all companies have their own lemons. Anyhow that said, do expect the Bug to be a bit less reliable than a Civic. But then you can also find absolutely "bug-free" Bugs too ...

If you plan to buy a VW Bug, either opt for the TDI (atleast you get way better mileage, safety and power than any other vehicle on the road, including the crappy Honda /Toyota hybrids). If you tend to be leaning towards more sportiness, then buy the turbo S (1.8T - 180hp with 6 speed). That thing really flies and Beats the pants of many so-called "sport cars".

And as for as Civics as concerned, I see no point in buy it over a Hyundai, except for the possible higher resale value over the Hyundai.

I don't think you will be disappoined with the Bug and plus with the new VW warranty for 4yrs B2B and Road-side assistance/5yr transmision+engine, I think you will be well-covered. Plus I believe the Bugs have 0.9 % APR on the 2002 models. IMO go for the Turbo S or TDI Bug depending upon your priorities.


-j

 

[LittleWolf]

Ok yeah you're right, I was thinking about the turbo S, not the standard 1.8T. My comments about turbos in general still stand though. They cost a bit more to insure and a couple years down the line, a b*tch to pass smog.

I am not sure where you are getting the smog problem information. It is nothing like that. Do you have any evidence to substantiate it or is it just anadoectal stuff?

Well designed turbo engines have absolutely no such problems. And VW/Audi turbo designs are the best in business. And so are the Volvo's. Haven't you seen old volvo's still chugging on the road? VW/Audi has been putting this 1.8T on their cars for quite a while (almost a decade) and I have yet to see any real smog issues on these engines.

Of course, get a qoute from your insurance agent first, it varies from car to car.

Absolutely, get a quote. But I wouldn't be suprised if the Civic is equally expensive to insure, considering it hsa the dubious distinction of being one of the most stolen cars. Plus the Bug is a darn safe car too in an accident.

-j

 

[bozack]

Wow sure looks like there are alot of practical people in here

Personally I would never, ever, ever, ever own any Honda product just because they are so boring.

I would do as others suggested and go with the 1.8T (GF has a jetta with that and loves it) or get the TDI as the mileage is amazing on that car.

Good luck

 

[geekender]

Diesel....but get the Jetta!

 

[erikistired]

you ppl are scary. vw makes a great car, i drive a 2001 vw gti and i love it. they have no more problems than any other car out there (including hondas). the tdi is a sweet engine, if you're not a car person and don't need a zoomy fast car it'd probably be the best choice (assuming you can get diesel where you live). the 1.8t is fast fast fast, but you won't get 50+ mpg (i have a vr6 fyi, but if i bought another one i'd go tdi golf).

~erik

 

[StageLeft]

Basically I want to get the cheapest possible car, yet still have it run "ok".

Sentra, civic, corolla, etc. Get your mind off a VW if the above really is the case.

 

[RossMAN]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Basically I want to get the cheapest possible car, yet still have it run "ok".

Sentra, civic, corolla, etc. Get your mind off a VW if the above really is the case.

He's right ya know?

 

[Nemesis77]

I'm starting to think that VW dumps their bottom-of-the-barrel cars to USA. The VW's we have here are relatively trouble-free (altrough there has been few horror-stories. There always are) and the maintenance-costs are low (in fact, among lowest there is).

Of course it might be because VW's in USa are made in Mexico (to my knowledge), whereas VW's here are made in Germany

 

[NutBucket]

18.7K for a Beetle? if you're gonna spend that much on a car why not just get an Accord. I'm sure you can haggle down the price on a LX to that, especially with a new model due next year. As for the diesel cheaper then gas, well in LA diesel costs more then premium and isn't to be found at every gas station.

Anyway, I just heard a Norm Reeves' radio ad this morning for a decently loaded Accord, 15K(Not a "one at this price" as far as i could tell). IMHO, I would much rather have the Accord then the Civic if the price is about the same.

OuterSquare has a good point with the Prisms but I think Chevy stopped selling those. Besides, he's lookin into another car kinda sorta anyway, so how much does he really[i/] like that Prism?

 

[Thegonagle]

Originally posted by: Nemesis77
I'm starting to think that VW dumps their bottom-of-the-barrel cars to USA. The VW's we have here are relatively trouble-free (altrough there has been few horror-stories. There always are) and the maintenance-costs are low (in fact, among lowest there is).

Of course it might be because VW's in USa are made in Mexico (to my knowledge), whereas VW's here are made in Germany

That may have a lot to do with it. The US market Bugs, Golfs, and Jettas are all made in Mexico. The Passats we have here are all made in Germany, and they has a relatively good reputation, though not as good as the best Japanese cars (most of which are built in the US).

 

[weezergirl]

Originally posted by: NutBucket
18.7K for a Beetle? if you're gonna spend that much on a car why not just get an Accord. I'm sure you can haggle down the price on a LX to that, especially with a new model due next year. As for the diesel cheaper then gas, well in LA diesel costs more then premium and isn't to be found at every gas station.

Anyway, I just heard a Norm Reeves' radio ad this morning for a decently loaded Accord, 15K(Not a "one at this price" as far as i could tell). IMHO, I would much rather have the Accord then the Civic if the price is about the same.

OuterSquare has a good point with the Prisms but I think Chevy stopped selling those. Besides, he's lookin into another car kinda sorta anyway, so how much does he really[i/] like that Prism?

Yeah, this is what my dad is saying to me too. I'm torn, do I go for the practical car? Or the car I really like? I wouldn't kill myself if i had to drive an accord or civic. But a beetle would put a smile on my face. Not sure if it's worth it for the extra dough though.

If I do get a beetle I'm leaning towards a TDI. I don't think it's that hard to find diesel in LA right? I've seen them at most gas stations I pass by. But yeah, it ususally is the most expensive.

Anywyas, thanks for everybody's input. I'm reading every single one of them! keep them coming

 

[RossMAN]

If you do go for the VW Beetle, look into getting an extended warranty and make sure to read all the fine print.

 

[OS]

 

[CocaCola5]

I wouldn't get the Honda Accord, if you do decide to go this route I would get the new Toyota Camry or the new Altima instead, both offers more than the Accord imo. You should get the beetle TDI I think, it sounds like your type of car. Also the beetle will not facelift like other cars, so thats something nice I think.

 

[OS]

 

[OS]

 

[Kelvrick]

Whats your old car, weezergirl? Whats the new occasion? Whats your budget?

I don't like beetles..

I'd go with the civic.

 

[N8Magic]

That may have a lot to do with it. The US market Bugs, Golfs, and Jettas are all made in Mexico. The Passats we have here are all made in Germany, and they has a relatively good reputation, though not as good as the best Japanese cars (most of which are built in the US).

Partially correct.

US market Jettas and Beetles are assembled in Mexico. US Market Golfs and GTIs are assembled in Brazil. Passats are still built and assembled in Germany, along with the VR6 and TDI engines that are shipped to Brazil and Mexico to be installed in the Golfs and Jettas.

That being said, I wouldn't worry about the reliability of VW's. Mine now has over 11,000km on it and I have yet to have a single problem. If by chance you do have a problem, VW has an excellent warranty program that covers virtually everything.

 

[NutBucket]

Originally posted by: OuterSquare

Originally posted by: LittleWolf


I am not sure where you are getting the smog problem information. It is nothing like that. Do you have any evidence to substantiate it or is it just anadoectal stuff?

Well designed turbo engines have absolutely no such problems. And VW/Audi turbo designs are the best in business. And so are the Volvo's. Haven't you seen old volvo's still chugging on the road? VW/Audi has been putting this 1.8T on their cars for quite a while (almost a decade) and I have yet to see any real smog issues on these engines.

-j

There is a 1988 Volvo 740 turbo parked outside infront of the house which recently failed CA smog. It took some work to get it to pass. The car has been well cared for and never abused. By no means is my experience extensive, but atleast I have first hand, long term knowledge on what happens to turbo cars. My 1989 accord had no such problems passing smog.

Naturally, your stance begs the question of, what do evidence do you have to back your claims?? Anecdotal evidence?? Do you even live in CA? Unless you are a smog technician or an emissions engineer, I seriously doubt you should be going around accusing people of using "anadoectal stuff." If you are, then I take that all back, but if there is one thing I can't stand, I can't stand hypocrites.

The reason turbos are harder to smog is really quite simple. Turbos absorb exhaust gas heat. Catalytic converters need to be hot to do their jobs. And on all cars I've seen, the turbo comes before the cat in the exhaust piping. Which means the cat won't be getting as much heat as it does on n/a car. Which means the cat won't work as efficiently as it does on a n/a car. Which means you have more crap coming out of the tailpipe.

This isn't a problem on new cars, but several years down the line, when everything doesn't work how it should, there is a good chance you might run into problems.

I think there's something more to that story. Buddy of mine has a 85 760 Turbo wagon that passes cleaner then most new cars.

IMHO, you should get a car that you can afford. If you can truly afford the Beetle, then you should get it. If the 3-4k makes that big of a difference on your budget, then either wait a little longer or go with a different car.

Oh, forgot to mention. Friend of mine has a nice 01 Jetta with the 2.0 and 5 speed. It moves pretty decent IMHO. Would you be gettin the auto or a stick? I assume since you are in LA you would tend towards the auto for traffic (I wish I had one sometimes). Point being, I think the whole deal with cars feeling "sluggish" to people is that most cars do feel sluggish with an auto unless they have lots of power.

 

[OS]

 

[777php]

why not get an altima? Base price is around $16k? I'm sure the Nissan fanboys can tell you more about it than I can.

 

[LittleWolf]

Originally posted by: OuterSquare
There is a 1988 Volvo 740 turbo parked outside infront of the house which recently failed CA smog. It took some work to get it to pass. The car has been well cared for and never abused. My 1989 accord had no such problems passing smog. .........

I don't live in CA, but I do and have been following VW/Audi for quite a while. I also do a good bit of reading on their various NGs. I have yet to find a real trend of their turbo engines having smog problems. As for your Volvo, I have a bunch of buddies who drive old mid-80's Volvo turbos and they clear smog/emission everytime and are going quite strong. So there...

The reason turbos are harder to smog is really quite simple. Turbos absorb exhaust gas heat. Catalytic converters need to be hot to do their jobs. And on all cars I've seen, the turbo comes before the cat in the exhaust piping. Which means the cat won't be getting as much heat as it does on n/a car. Which means the cat won't work as efficiently as it does on a n/a car. Which means you have more crap coming out of the tailpipe.

While you are right about the turbo's absorbing heat, you also should realize that they run on exhaust gas and hence go pretty high up in temperature. But the fact also is that the turbos are built to retain much less heat in themselves, i.e. they dissipate a good bit else they would melt. And about CATs requiring heat to do their job, you are correct on that front too (the rare-metal elements in the CAT need to be trigged by temp & act as a catalyst), but VW engine management is quite good in that aspect of quickly heating up the CATs to optimum level. e.g. as soon as you on the car, it typically runs at a bit higher rpm for a few minutes to purposely heat the CAT early and get best emissions. Plus VW turbo engines are already Euro 4/5 complaint, and BTW these standards are much tougher than the US emission standards.

This isn't a problem on new cars, but several years down the line, when everything doesn't work how it should, there is a good chance you might run into problems.

Yeah, maybe like 15-20 years down the line, as with any car of that age, hypothetically you "might" have a problem. But I feel you are putting too much "over-emphasis" into this aspect.

weezergirl, I would suggest that you set aside the emission issue. IMO it is a non-issue.


-j