You are here: Forums Sedans Volkswagen Passat VW Passat Wagon vs Subaru Wagons

VW Passat Wagon vs Subaru Wagons

742 messages,  Last post on Dec 23, 2008 at 11:00 AM

You are in the Volkswagen Passat Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Volkswagen, Subaru, Wagon

Messages Page 73 of 75 1 ... 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#713 of 742 Re: I don't know if it is considered a wagon, but [taft4] by daisymae Oct 08, 2004 (6:57 am)
Replying to: taft4 (Jun 17, 2004 2:01 pm) I have never owned either the Forester or the Passat but I have test driven both and done a lot of research. I found the 2005 Forester to handle well but the engine was so incredibly noisey. I felt like I was overstressing the engine and my natural reaction was to ease up on the gas pedal. I don't want a car in which I feel I have to baby it becuase I'm afraid of the noise! Especially not when its a 2.5L engine!! I also do not like how the Foresters age. The ones on the road that are just a few years old look so old and tired. They may hold their value but not their good looks. I own a VW Jetta now and am very aware of the electrical problems and difficulties with VW reliability but I too think I am going to take my chances. German engineering and design is just too hard to beat. Besides my Jetta has not done me wrong! I can go without a functioning dome light!
#714 of 742 Comparison by experience by taft4 Oct 08, 2004 (4:44 pm)
We owned a 2003 Forester 25XS Premium with leather for 18 months and put 12,000 miles on it. Mechanically, the car was faultless and when we traded it in we were pleased by its low depreciation.   However, its ride was stiff (hard) and it was noisey. By that I mean there were no rattles but the engine was louder than what we were used to especially when accelerating or traveling at expressway speeds. The automatic shifter was just plain goofy, something CU has also commented on. The 4-wheel drive was a waste in flat Chicagoland territory. Perhaps we were spoiled by the car we traded in on the Forester which was a 97 Towncar, which we loved but decided that it was getting too cumbersome in crowded parking spaces and our underground garage.   After looking at a lot of cars we bought the 04 Passat (GLX V6 sedan) and in the 6 months we have owned it we have enjoyed its smooth ride, its size, its good handling, and especially its quietness. For us and our usage and needs, the Passat is far superior to the Forester. Replies to this message: snarks (Oct 09, 2004 1:03 pm)
#715 of 742 Re: Comparison by experience [taft4] by snarks Oct 09, 2004 (1:03 pm)
Replying to: taft4 (Oct 08, 2004 4:44 pm) I would not compare a Forester at all to a Passat (apples and oranges). The Forester shares its platform with the Impreza both smaller cars. A true comparison would be a Legacy GT or Outback (with Turbo or V6) and I think they are comparable. It just comes to personal preference, nice interior Passat or much more power in Subaru etc.
#716 of 742 Re: HEAD GASKETS [shad12] by fendertweed Oct 10, 2004 (1:33 pm)
Replying to: shad12 (Feb 25, 2003 10:50 pm) Sorry, beg to differ, 90k is not a huge amount of miles on a modern car, they are routinely engineered to do well over 100k, often up to 200k or more without major engine work.   I have a friend in CT who had a Legacy GT that also died last winter, fried head gasket. His mechanic up there said he'd seen at least 4 of the same last winter.   It's definitely scaring me away from Subies, which are near the top of my list when I have to shop for a car next. There's no excuse for head gaskets at 100k or less on a car that's been properly maintained IMO.
#717 of 742 by ateixeira Oct 10, 2004 (3:50 pm)
Boxers have a characteristic growl, but rev it up, no harm done!   Mine has 69k miles, and I'm still on my original brake pads. Repairs have cost me exactly $0.   Passat competes at a price level above the Forester, if you compare the Legacy it's more of a match, more refined, quieter, etc.   Subaru has stretched the warranty on head gaskets to 8 years or 100k miles, so apparently they agree with you.   Besides, it's been nothing compared to the problem VW had with ignition coils, not even close.   -juice
#718 of 742 4motion vs Subaru AWD by zscottie Nov 21, 2004 (7:21 am)
Can someone tell me the differences between VW's 4motion vs Subaru's AWD system? I'm trying to decide between an Outback XT vs Passat 4motion sedan/wagon (1.8T 5spd auto)
#719 of 742 so you want comparison by krzyss Nov 22, 2004 (4:49 am)
between 170HP car and 250HP "truck" ?   Krzys
#720 of 742 by ateixeira Nov 22, 2004 (7:27 am)
4Motion is a marketing name, I say that because it's used on several different systems.   In the case of the Passat, it actually gets Audi's Quattro, i.e. the center torsen diffy with traction control added to both axles.   I did some research and found a couple of limitations. First, it can only send up to 67% of power to either axle. Also, while a torsen is fast acting, it's still mechanical and reactive.   Subaru's VTD starts with a 45/55 default power split, but that AWD system can send 100% of power to either axle. It's also proactive in that it'll shift power to the rear axle when you're on an uphill, to the front when traveling down hill, and so on. Power shifts before there is slippage, so I consider it proactive.   However, with available stability control, the VW manages both axles, i.e. power split from side to side. The Subaru has a rear LSD only, so the front axle is not managed.   In summary, the OB XT isn't limited as to how much power can be sent to one axle, plus it can be proactive.   The Passat, however, manages both axles.   On the road both are plenty more than enough, it'll depend more on the tires you have mounted. The OB does have a lot more ground clearance so it would still be the better choice in deep snow.   The post above hints that a Legacy GT would be more comparable to the Passat, and I'd have to agree.   -juice
#721 of 742 it was a hint by krzyss Nov 22, 2004 (8:26 am)
to power difference too. VW 1.8T compares well to basic 2.5 Subaru engine. Subaru's 2.5T requires VW to bring 3.2VR6. Passat does not offer comparable engine to 2.5T, for now (W8 had comparable power but was much heavier - it is discontinued by the way).   Krzys   PS AWD system is minor difference in this case. Suspension, tires and power clearly make them different animals. IMHO.
#722 of 742 by ateixeira Nov 22, 2004 (8:29 am)
Yeah, Subaru's base engine is N/A, the upgrade engine a turbo (let's ignore the H6 for a minute).   VW has the opposite, base is turbo and upgrade a V6.   W8 was nice but they priced it too high.   Nice to have lots of AWD choices, though.   -juice

Messages Page 73 of 75 1 ... 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Sedans Volkswagen Passat VW Passat Wagon vs Subaru Wagons