We get accused a lot of being anti-diesel. In reality, most of us love driving them. Paying for them is another issue. VW has just announced pricing on the new 2010 Golf VI, and the diesel premium is…premium. As in $4500. Strictly speaking, that investment also buys you a slightly lowered suspension (cost to VW: $0), and a slightly better audio unit (cost to VW: $50?). Here are the numbers: 2 door gas (2.5, 170 hp, EPA: 22/30) starts at $17,490; 2 door TDI (2.0, 140 hp, EPA: 30/41) starts at $21,990. Annual fuel cost savings are $362 for the TDI. Maintenance and repair costs favor the gas engine. Zero to sixty is similar with either model, with the gas (7.8 seconds) edging out the diesel (8.6 seconds) by a nose. The question we have is why not bring over VW’s excellent new 1.6 liter TDI engine, which makes 105 hp, and can easily top 50 mpg. Do diesel drivers prefer lowered suspensions and high(er) performance, or maximum mileage and a lower price?
99 Comments on “The Dirty Business Of Clean Diesels...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
Like the other German makers, they seem to be missing a trick here. Maybe gas prices are too low again now, but I certainly can see a market for a 1.6 TDI or for that matter a BMW 118d at the right price.
Because most Americans (even diesel lovers) wouldn’t consider a 1.6 liter anything as a “real” engine. I’d be pleased as punch with the 1.6 TDi along with the torque it brings, not to mention the fuel economy…but, if it came at a huge premium (as does the 2.9 TDi), then it becomes a non-starter. Sure, they’ll advertise the 41 MPG, but as shown, the average fuel savings would be (let’s be gracious) around $400. It would take 11 years to recover the cost differential! Another case of VW shooting itself in the foot, then quickly reloading the gun…
Because most Americans (even diesel lovers) wouldn’t consider a 1.6 liter anything as a “real” engine. I’d be pleased as punch with the 1.6 TDi along with the torque it brings, not to mention the fuel economy…but, if it came at a huge premium (as does the 2.0 TDi), then it becomes a non-starter. Sure, they’ll advertise the 41 MPG, but as shown, the average fuel savings would be (let’s be gracious) around $400. It would take 11 years to recover the cost differential! Another case of VW shooting itself in the foot, then quickly reloading the gun…
Obviously they should be selling both, but my bet is they aren’t making any real money on the TDI’s in the states yet. If that guess is correct then the TDI’s, kinda like the GTI I guess, are on lots to help sell Jettas.
I guess the question that matters is, “Could VW sell a 1.6L TDI cheaper than they push the current 2.0L?)
If that guess is correct then the TDI’s, kinda like the GTI I guess, are on lots to help sell Jettas.
I wonder about that – in my neighborhood there are 3 GTIs for every one Golf. I’d be interested to see the actual sales ratio. I checked, but it seems that while VW release sales by modle it doesn’t break down sales between Golf/GTI and Jetta/GLI.
One rare positive consequence of the higher CAFE standards is that some makers, and especially the German LUXURY car makers, will be FORCED to bring in their smaller as well as larger diesels, in order to achieve their CAFE MPG increases.
In the past, they preferred paying the few millions in penalties, but under the new rules, this is NOT an option.
Somebody like VW may be able to avoid this because it has high-volume efficient VW models countering the thirstier Audis, but Merc and BMW can’t do the same.
The suspension and other mods baffle me to be honest. For a while we had two VWs here at home and I swapped the 205/70 tires off the gasser onto the normally 195/70 shod TDI and the results shocked me. MPG dropped from ~50 MPG to about 42 MPG overnight. Needless to say the narrow 195s went back on the TDI asap.
VW can sell Diesel here in the USA IF and ONLY IF they can demonstrate big MPG numbers. the 1.6 can do that. So can the old 1.9 TDI. They seem to have lost the plot with the 2.0 though.
I will challenge your “Maintenance and repair costs favor the gas engine” statement however. Compared to VW’s 1.8T and 2.5 gasoline mills the TDIs have proven to be dirt cheap to own and operate. High reliability has been the TDI’s record to date. Only the old 2.0 I-4 gasoline engine (or the old VW aircooled flat four!) can compare in terms of reliability and cheap repair costs. The only pricey job on a VW TDI is the injection pump and timely filter changes will keep it running well for decades. That filter is a $30 part and a 5 minute job to DIY with three tools every shade-tree wrencher owns already.
–chuck
Never understood some people’s fascination with longer molecules.
At $22k, a person must be out of his mind to choose a 140hp TDI over a 249hp Sonata V6.
Perplexing, especially as VW seems to have no problem selling every one, yet BMW puts $4500 on the hood and still can’t move them.
As I’ve said before, VW has a niche and I think they are still just selling TDI’s to that club. It will be very interesting to see if they can expand that in any real way.
One thing that ALL manufacturers seem to be doing very carefully is bringing diesels that perform exactly as well as the gas models. There is still a lot of baggage left from the US 80’s diesel disaster, and I think everyone, even VW, is terrified of bringing over anything that might be seen as sluggish, noisy, or in any way “worse” than a gas version of the vehicle. Even if that means the mileage gains aren’t stellar.
The 1.6 TDI is probably insignificantly less expensive to manufacture. Parts count will be the same and it will still need the same exhaust system aftertreatment. But they can probably have an easier time selling the 2.0 TDI because of the North American desire for horsepower, and it would be too expensive to EPA-certify both powertrains (with both available transmissions).
As for the price premium … The quoted cost savings per year are based on average drivers, but at least around here, most folks who drive TDI are doing so because they put on high annual mileage (I was in that category until the recession hit).
At today’s local fuel prices based on the Shell station around the corner (92.7 cents/litre regular unleaded, 88.9 cents/litre diesel) and based on a real-world-expectation 5.5 L/100 km for the TDI (that’s on the high side of what my previous-TDI-engine Jetta uses) and 9.0 L/100 km for the gas engine, and C$5000 to account for the currency, the TDI will go ahead of the game on cash flow in about 140,000 km. Until the recession, I was doing that every two years.
Diesel lovers prefer low-end torque, coupled with great fuel economy.
A VW customer that prefers a lower suspension, and better performance will always opt for the GTI.
I opted for the GTI, but the TDI was still a very nice car.
That Diesel premium is indeed insane.
The pricing for the Golf GTI and the Golf GTD here in Germany is different, however. They differ marginally, given the price level of almost 30,000 Euros for both (c.f. http://cc5.volkswagen.de/cc5/configurator/fs_base.aspx?context=default&app=ICC-DE ).
Diesel Fanboys:
Diesels are much more expensive to design, produce, and service. That is fact.
I like diesels, but they do not make economic sense when TCO is taken into account. Cleaning up the emissions has lowered efficiency and increased cost and complexity.
Most of you are missing the mark here.
Diesel enthusiasts tend to log on very high miles. I would say that most drive north of 20k per year, and about 40% are north of 30k (judging by what I see at the auctions).
I would also add that in another two years, the Germans may be patting themselves on the back instead of shaking their heads. But with the dollar… who knows.
My sister has owned 4 or 5 VW diesels going back to an 81 Rabbit diesel. As they have grown in size, a 50 mpg car seems to be down to a 40 mpg car, but the flip side is a lot more power. She remains very happy and a loyal VW diesel person. The last 2 or 3 have been TDIs, going back, I believe, to a 95 Passat.
For whatever reason, even VW has struggled to keep a regular diesel supply here in the states. There have been times when sis kept a car longer than she wanted to while waiting for diesels to be reintroduced in the US.
After her experience, I would definitely consider a diesel, but the price premium is brutal. This is true in VWs and in Ford Excursions.
We get accused a lot of being anti-diesel. In reality, most of us love driving them. Paying for them is another issue. VW has just announced pricing on the new 2010 Golf VI, and the diesel premium is…premium. As in $4500.
One of the things that bugs me about diesel advocacy is thus: the ills of hybrid cars (supposed reliability, increased cost and complexity) also exist with diesels, yet this rarely gets play. The inherent conservatism in automobile fans plays a big role here.
Diesel cars are no longer appreciably more reliable, from a holistic point of view, than gas cars. Hybrids are proving to be as reliable, or more reliable, than gas cars. The “diesel advantage” that came from a massively over-engineered block doesn’t really exist, not now that everyone seems to have sorted out fuel injection and modern metallurgy.
Diesels are not mechanically simple: there’s a lot of tight-tolerance, high-cost, high-complexity components in these cars, in addition to the mess of electronics in every car. This ain’t your granddad’s Mercedes 300D.
I’m not saying diesels are bad, only that a lot of the virtues vis a vis normal cars aren’t really significant, or are outright detriments.
On a recent 2 week vacation in Scotland with my wife and another couple we rented a nearly new (400 miles) beautiful dark blue Peugot 308 SW equipped with a 1.6 HDi engine and a manual transmission.
http://www.peugeot.com/en/products/cars/peugeot-308-sw.aspx
First it was amazing that this fairly small station wagon could swallow the four of us and all our luggage in relative comfort. The glass roof (the entire roof) and very supportive seats front and rear were terrific. But what we continued to be blown away with was the ability of that small diesel engine to so willingly pull us over 1000 miles of both city and highway driving, all the while delivering mileage in the mid/high 30’s. We even saw low 40’s over the course of 2 days of mostly highway driving.
Is there a place in our world for green diesel engines, certainly. Just wished the manufacturers could figure out how to get them to us for something less than a $1000… perhaps Hyundai should turn their engineers loose on this :-)
If I drove alot of miles, then I’d consider one. A diesel may last for quite a long time, but I’m afraid the surrounding VW will not. I would consider a Jetta wagon TDI, if I were to consider any VAG product. Torque, excellent mileage (more for the lack of needing to stop for refueling), and a comfortable ride from a tidy package is appealing…all for the price of your average, and smaller, FWD crossover.
Finally, the price premium is diminished a little with a tax credit (at least for the 09 Jetta TDI).
Steven Lang-
I would imagine that the manufacturers would like to get past selling to “diesel enthusiasts” and start selling them to everyone. This distinction doesn’t exist in the rest of the world, only in the US where it has required an effort to hunt down the few available cars, find fuel, etc. and some folks even go so far as to brew their own! Rarity breeds this type of enthusiasm.
There many issues to deal with before diesel is nothing more than a check-box option in the US, but I believe that is the ultimate goal.
@ Niedermeyer:
The question we have is why not bring over VW’s excellent new 1.6 liter TDI engine, which makes 105 hp, and can easily top 50 mpg.
Probably because a Cocker Spaniel could outrun the thing…:)
I’m just not sold on diesels, and I don’t think America will be either, unless a) fuel goes up 300% in price, and b) diesel is a lot cheaper than gas. Those are the conditions that made diesel such a hit in Europe; our market just works differently.
And don’t even get me started on the BMW 335d…who the hell thought a $45,000 economy car was a good idea? A 3-series is a trophy car, one you roll up in front of your buddies and brag about how fast it is. Somehow, “Yeah, this baby will get 35 miles per gallon” doesn’t quite do it…
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I personaly don’t just look at the initial price premium and then divide by the annual fuel savings when making the gas vs. diesel decision. It’s not all about dollars and cents anymore. Some of us just want to feel a little bit less piggish about our fossil fuel consumption. I love my 98 Jeep Wrangler 4.0, but these days feel like a bit of a prick driving it, at 16 mpg or whatever. If they would put the 3.0 turbo diesel in the new Wrangler, it would be about enough to assuage my guilt, and I would consider buying one.
I really don’t think I am the only one who feels this way. Spend a bit more to help out the environment. Why not?
Steven Lang :
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
Most of you are missing the mark here.
Diesel enthusiasts tend to log on very high miles. I would say that most drive north of 20k per year, and about 40% are north of 30k (judging by what I see at the auctions).
True, but let’s be honest: drivers who log that kind of mileage are a minority. Most drivers drive 12-15,000 miles a year, so the cost savings of diesel just don’t add up. I think that’s why they have such a limited market here.
WAY back in the day, though, I used to sell advertising over a five-state territory, racking up well over 40,000 miles a year, and if I’d had something like a Mercedes Bluetec diesel, it’d have been a Godsend.
Here in Canada, the upcharge for diesel is $2300, so I’d assume that you’re getting some more bling along with your diesel for your $4500 price. And even if lowered suspension doesn’t cost Volkswagen anything, it’s something that any enthusiastic driver would pay some extra money for. No other manufacturer that I know of offers free sport suspension either.
Figuring the annual fuel savings using today’s price may not be accurate. If I buy a new car I’m going to keep it 5-7 years (or more if I’m enjoying life) and I’d assume that over those five plus years fuel is going to get more expensive. I recall paying $1.5 per litre of premium not too long ago, so I expect that I’ll see that price again in the not-too-distant future.
Looking at this ‘your way’ the upcharge for a GTI over a Golf is ridiculous because mostly you’re getting a Golf with sport suspension, bigger rims and a turbo motor.
What becomes of this $4k “diesel premium” once you factor in depreciation? Assuming one traded in his diesel after several years for another one.
Around here TDIs are the only cars to depreciate less than Civics and Corollas, so that $4k diesel premium mostly comes back you in the end.
I would also add that in another two years, the Germans may be patting themselves on the back instead of shaking their heads. But with the dollar… who knows.
That’s why they are building a factory in Chattanooga – no matter what happens to the dollar they will be fine. Same with BMW and Mercedes – no reason they can’t expand if it becomes necessary.
Am I correct that all X5s sold worldwide are built in South Carolina?
A 3-series is a trophy car, one you roll up in front of your buddies and brag about how fast it is. Somehow, “Yeah, this baby will get 35 miles per gallon” doesn’t quite do it…
What part of torque do you not understand?
335d = 425 lb-ft
M3 = 295 lb-ft
Call me crazy, but I would be willing to pay a premium because in my own humble opinion I just love the way a diesel drives. I don’t understand that people demand a price premium is objectively justified. I would consider it paying for a feeling, a driving sensation; not for “more expensive components” or “better fuel economy”.
jmo :
October 2nd, 2009 at 5:23 pm
What part of torque do you not understand?
335d = 425 lb-ft
M3 = 295 lb-ft
Torque is great – it’ll get you off the line quickly – but after 3500 rpm in the 335d, the show’s over. The gas version is just getting started. That’s why the gas version will beat the diesel by about a second to 60. It’s not even close.
Don’t get me wrong. The 335d engine is brilliant, but if you’re buying a performance sedan, which are you going to spend your hard-earned bucks on: the model that costs more and goes slower, or the faster one that costs less? In this application, I’d argue that fuel economy is probably the least of a buyer’s worries, as long as the car gets reasonable mileage (which the gas 335 does – 17/26).
Torque is great – it’ll get you off the line quickly – but after 3500 rpm in the 335d, the show’s over. The gas version is just getting started.
Um…the 335d redlines at 5000 rpm .
Do you do most of your driving sprinting from 0-60?
425 lb-ft at 1750 rpm is much more usable in the real world than 414bhp at 8000 rpm.
Great – you can get a compact car that gets 32/41. Lots of other options in that category already. There’s one that gets 50+ mpg already for a small premium over the Jetta.
What about a minivan that carries seven that gets 32/41? Or a 5 passenger wagon with 40 cu ft luggage capacity that gets 32/41 and can tow 2000 lbs?
Is it is just me or do there seem to be a relatively small number of choices in vehicles to buy? Can VW import the Sharan already and stop putting all its effort into the most crowded market segments??
What part of torque do you not understand?
I personally don’t understand the fixation on torque, when the vehicles aren’t any faster because of it.
According to Edmunds, a 335i gets to 60 1.1 seconds earlier than a 335d. The fact that the 335i has 125 fewer lb/ft of torque doesn’t matter — the gas motor is still quicker.
Meanwhile, the diesel is consuming a fuel that requires more oil to produce, creating an mpg difference which is largely illusory when accounting for the amount of oil actually being consumed. It isn’t reasonable to directly compare gasoline MPG with diesel MPG, but that doesn’t seem to stop the fans from doing it.
The only question we should be asking is whether the cars will sell at that price or not. I have a feeling they will.
Everyone missed one big difference in the actual purchase price. The gas version can be purchased for dealer invoice, the diesel version is MSRP at minimum. Obviously the diesel’s mileage can’t come close to making up the initial cost difference making the diesel a non starter IMO. It’s a comparable scenario with the Fusion Hybrid about $6k more than the 2.5L. These vehicles are both completely overpriced for what they offer in comparison to their gas models and other competitors. There is no way to justify purchasing them based on MPG. At $22k about the very last vehicle I would buy is a Golf TDI, too many nicer vehicles for the same or less money.
Wow, feel the love in this place.
On most Canadian highways the fastest thing on the highway is a TDI . Cruising at 130/140 kmh’s while getting pretty good mileage . Also not having to stop every two hours makes most other cars fall way behind at the end of the travel day.
Also in Regina , diesel is 40 cents a US gallon cheaper.
I see TDI’s as a viable alternative unless low HP’s numbers challenge your street cred.
“…High reliability has been the TDI’s record to date.”
CR VW diesel engine reliability is a mixed bag.
00,01 worse than average, 02 somewhat worse than average, 03,04 average, 05 better than average, 06 somewhat better than average. Rated average used car buys 00 – 05, somewhat better than average 06.
Pch101 :
Meanwhile, the diesel is consuming a fuel that requires more oil to produce, creating an mpg difference which is largely illusory when accounting for the amount of oil actually being consumed. It isn’t reasonable to directly compare gasoline MPG with diesel MPG, but that doesn’t seem to stop the fans from doing it.
Do you have any technical documents you could refer me to ? From what I have read , Gas and diesel are cracked at different temperatures in the stack out of a the same barrel of oil. Diesel is done in one step , gasoline is done in more sub steps.
@ kevnsd
perhaps Hyundai should turn their engineers loose on this
They already have. We get the diesel models in Australia and they seem to be selling no problems. It think the 1.6L and 2L TDi engines are available in quite a few Hyundai cars in Australia.
@ Freedmike
And don’t even get me started on the BMW 335d…who the hell thought a $45,000 economy car was a good idea? ….. Somehow, “Yeah, this baby will get 35 miles per gallon” doesn’t quite do it…
You’ve used that one before eh? You might as well ask why does anyone buy ANY luxury item? Come up with the answer and I know you can head up Saatchi or earn $millions/year on the business speaking circuit.
(Don’t tell anyone else yet if you do know).
@ Pch101 (also @ Dorian666)
Meanwhile, the diesel is consuming a fuel that requires more oil to produce, creating an mpg difference which is largely illusory when accounting for the amount of oil actually being consumed.
I respect your comments, but you make it seem like refining is as simple as poor-in some Crude at the top, fiddle some knobs and get fuel out the bottom. In reality there is a diminishing return on cracking the longer chains. Refiners tune (within limits) for a $$$ return at the lowest input cost (crude and process energy).
I am continually amazed by the number of people who wouldn’t think twice about spending several thousand dollars on an upgraded trim package, or a DVD navigation system they seldom use, but suddenly when it comes to diesel or hybrid it’s all about dollars and cents. I’d bet that if you put together all of the Escalade drivers in the world, you would find that they were subjected to less unwanted cost benefit analysis from other people for overpaying for their Chevy with better seats and worse wheels, than just one average VW TDI or Toyota Prius driver. Really, I’m far more offended that VW chooses to call their Golf a Rabbit in the US, than I am offended by the cost of their diesel option. Diesel drivers are paying for torque at low revs, and a long cruising range, and arguably a lower carbon footprint, far more than they are making an investment in a technology that has a guaranteed payoff. If it were all about dollars and cents, and nothing more, there wouldn’t be an unusual or interesting car on the road.
Vehicle pricing is not set by the cost of the components. Even so the rather vague stab at component cost in this article is pretty poor. Usually any off standard component, eg lowered suspension, will cost more, because it costs the supplier more to tool up for it, and the OEM more to develop it.
A lowered suspension will often contain the following – new springs (obviously), shock calibration, and bump stops. Possibly new sta bars. Each will have a development cost and a tooling cost, even if there is no hit on variable cost.
It also may need a different alignment setting – more complexity in plant, and possibly shims to set camber.
I realise that in TTAC-world all of this stuff is mere details, but it’s the details that get ya.
Diesel gas isn’t at every station here in metro Chicago. Having to remember what station sells it or not finding a station with it could be a reason they’re not bought.
Too bad; I thought the diesel premium (at least on the Jetta) was around $2000. Now it’s a tougher decision. Or not.
Given that it brings more revenue to the government in the form of higher per gallon tax, one can only be in awe that Obama hasn’t already mandated that by 2010 fully 50% of road cars must be diesel!
@PCH101
Huh? Back when I took chemistry, diesel cracked out below petrol. It took less energy to refine crude to diesel and diesel was more energy dense (more btu/gallon) than petrol. Has neu chemistry done for the discipline what neu math did to my kids? And, man, do I miss my little stretch of PCH 101!
@gslippy, Without analyzing the Jetta model content, it appears that the premium there is indeed only about $2000. (And as someone else pointed out, in Canada the Golf TDI premium is in the same range.)
Interestingly for 2010 Canada has also switched to VW’s global model nomenclature, including Golf GTI (no longer just “GTI”) and Golf Wagon (no longer Jetta Wagon). Also the trim lines are the usual sportline, comfortline and highline; meanwhile, US Jetta models have S, SE and SEL.
The direct comparison of engine torque between diesel and gas cars misses an important point: the gear ratio. This makes the torque at the wheel (the one that matters) nearly identical. And this is what may be termed as the theoretical torque at full boost. Then you have to factor the turbo lag. In most of diesels they appear to perform with some kind of slow motion thinking between pressing the gas pedal and the engine transient response is appalling. The higher the output (high boost), the worse they are. This is mostly noticeable in town driving which cancels its key advantage: where the engine is most efficient is also very unsatisfying to drive. Diesel engines work in very stressed (thermal and mechanical) environments and therefore high durability is only in our memories. Also their efficiency (mpg) has being going down because manufacturers have been reducing the compression ratio in order to improve the drivability. So in the end it only makes sense for those who drive really a lot and, because of the tax subsidies to the fuel is some countries. But I acknowledge that there is a great benefit of diesel motoring: that smell of truck driver one gets at ever fill up. Very professional looking and priceless. Particularly in a high end automobile.
For $2k the diesel would be a consideration at $4,500 it’s off the table.
Do you have any technical documents you could refer me to ?
You don’t need them. This is basic chemistry.
When viewed in terms of weight, gas and diesel have about the same energy content. That is to say, a pound/ kilo of diesel has about the same energy content as does a pound/ kilo of gasoline.
But the specific gravity of diesel is about 15% higher than it is for gasoline. When comparing them when using a liquid measure such as gallons or liters, a given unit of diesel has more energy content than a unit of gasoline. Diesel is a heavier fuel, presumably because it has been refined less.
In other words, a pound of diesel takes up less space than does a pound of gas, which means fewer gallons of it. That doesn’t make diesel better or worse, it just makes it more compact.
The problem is that the average dieselhead doesn’t know squat about chemistry, but was raised by car commercials to equate “mpg” with “efficiency” while failing to understand that mpg and l/100 km only work as efficiency measures if you are comparing the same kinds of fuels across comparable vehicles.
If our gas stations sold us our fuel by the pound, then there would be less confusion about the concept of “efficiency.” But because we were raised to buy it in gallons or liters, there is a lot of ignorance about what it actually means.
you make it seem like refining is as simple as poor-in some Crude at the top, fiddle some knobs and get fuel out the bottom.
That’s a real stretch. For one, I didn’t discuss refining in this context. For another, it’s completely irrelevant to what I am talking about.
Again, the problem is with the fact that the average person talks about fuel using liquid measures. The diesel fans misinterpret what this means and then distort it beyond recognition.
Diesels are slightly more efficient than gas motors because they run at higher compression. But most of the mpg difference between gasoline and diesel comes from this issue of this difference in energy content of the fuels when compared using liquid measures, while some of it often comes from the fact that the diesel motors almost always have turbos while the gas motors usually don’t. Again, if we bought fuel by weight, instead of by liquid, this wouldn’t be an issue.
I looked up the 15 cars and 10 trucks on Autoblog that made the short (?) list for COTY and TOTY.
The 335d was there, and deservedly so, and I ranked it No. 2 of 15 (Prius III being no. 1 in my book), but I was outraged that among the 10 insignificant POS trucks, the outstanding BMW X5 D was missing!
Motorweek tested it and its ACTUAL average MPG (Average!! Not Hwy) was 27++ MPG, higher even than the EPA HIGHWAY number (26) for this 7 seat behemoth!
As a former TDI owner (we used to have two, but the mileage between the cars was so close it was getting expensive to maintain two on the same service schedule. My wife’s Jetta remains) who chipped and upgraded the suspension on his car, I can tell you that 1.) there is a market out there for Diesels with at least sporting pretensions and 2.) there is a thriving community out there for people who tinker on their TDIs to improve both mileage and performance (I’m looking at you, TDIClub.com)
While VW has built a following with the TDI, one of the drawbacks has always been (at least for us 2-door Golf fans) that to get a 2-door Golf TDI you had to do without niceties such as a sunroof, bigger wheels, a sport suspension, etc. The cars were the base model GL(or what passes for base model with VW, my car had power windows, Monsoon sound system, A/C, etc.). If you wanted any of the creature comforts that help a long commute pass by you had to go with the 4-door or buy a Jetta. Too bad the mileage isn’t quite what it was with my ‘03, which was EPA rated at 42/49, and which I regularly exceeded, even after having the chip installed.