Sign In Join 



2009 VW Passat CC

143 messages,  Last post on Nov 22, 2009 at 6:29 AM

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

What is this discussion about? Volkswagen CC, Volkswagen Passat, Coupe, Sedan


Messages Page 8 of 15
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
15
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#63 of 143
Re: 2.0T part 2 [milkman1] by 600kgolfgt
Mar 07, 2009 (6:45 pm)
Reply

Replying to: milkman1 (Mar 05, 2009 7:05 pm)

He followed the maintenance plan to a T and still had the sludge, outside warranty, low miles.
 
Chances are:
 
1) The dealer performed the oil changes using their oil (either the bulk 5w30 oil or a hydrocracked " (petroleum base stock) synthetic" oil which meets the minimal VW 502.00 spec).
 
2) The owner changed the oil himself with a motor oil that does not conform to VW 502.00 or VW 503.01 spec.
 
3) The owner didn't adhere to the 5000 mile oil change interval (went over the 5000 mile interval a few times.
 
I have two 1.8Ts with 135,000 and 98,000 miles, respectively. No sludge. Not even a hint of sludge. Would you like to know why?
 
Before I reveal the answer, see this link for a background of synthetic oils:
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_oil
 
Based on my nearly 30 years of VW ownership (as both a mechanic and a regular owner), here's my secret - I use Group IV (synthetic base stock) motor oils that are on the VW 502.00 list. The handful of VW 502.00 spec Group IV motor oils available in this country include:
 
Mobil 1 0w-40 European Formula
Motul 8100 X-Cess 5w-40 (My preferred motor oil)
Elf Excellium NF 5w-40 (Formerly known as Excellium LDX)
 
The newer VW 503.01 Spec Group IV motor oils (which your friend's GLI should have been using) available in this country include:
 
Mobil 1 0w-40 European Formula
Castrol Syntec 0w-30 (Bottle must say MADE IN GERMANY)
 
All other oils on the VW 502.00 spec sold in this country consist of dino-based "Hydrocracked" Synthetics.
 
I refuse to use the Hydrocracked Group III motor oils. Period. End of Story.
  
 Anyone who doesn't do the research and sweat the details on the oil isn't the
"master of detail" that they appear to be..
 
But don't take my word for it. I will gladly refer you to my colleague Shipo for his knowledgeable perspective on this topic.
#64 of 143
Re: 4 seats [bvdj84] by ivan_99
Mar 08, 2009 (11:49 pm)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Mar 06, 2009 7:46 am)

4 seats because it's cool...like the CLS, CLK, 3 series, 6 series, A5
 
not un-cool like the Accord coupe & Altima coupe
 
I understand the reasoning...2 comfortable seats in the back as opposed to 3 uncomfortable ones, but I need 3 uncomfortable ones for small children
 
I loved the CC (except the no nav with manual) but the 4 seats excluded it from my list...
#65 of 143
Re: 4 seats [ivan_99] by bvdj84
Mar 09, 2009 (7:45 am)
Reply

Replying to: ivan_99 (Mar 08, 2009 11:49 pm)

Well, the mercedes is just butt ugly! it really is in my opinion. Well, perhaps the car will sell like the EOS, with no real incentives on it. I would think the would need to offer something, as the current passat is not selling to hot. The same Passat I test drove last year 08 Spring, is still their on the lot. New.
 
I love the CC too, my mom and I sat in one at a car show! Love how you sit back snug in the drivers seat. The leather felt so good. I could possibly get by without the 5th seat. But, I certainly won't pay over cost for one on a lease. Other cars will shine better on lease deals. Even the new Acura's out now are selling for amazing deals.
#66 of 143
Re: 4 seats [bvdj84] by ivan_99
Mar 09, 2009 (1:44 pm)
Reply

Replying to: bvdj84 (Mar 09, 2009 7:45 am)

The dealer I spoke to about a month ago said they could offer under invoice.
 
This was for a CC sitting in port (or just came in); base/manual.
 
I don' think there is much room to go under invoice, but it certainly is a good starting point.
#67 of 143
Re: 4 seats [ivan_99] by bvdj84
Mar 13, 2009 (7:01 am)
Reply

Replying to: ivan_99 (Mar 09, 2009 1:44 pm)

The issue now is that I am currently in a lease, and have been for one year. Spring always gets me thinking of a new car...lol. I am in a GM car, the reason I want out!
#68 of 143
Re: Driving impressions [ambuono] by 55396
Mar 24, 2009 (9:48 pm)
Reply

Replying to: ambuono (Oct 19, 2008 9:28 am)

We test drove a CC VR6 2wd today. We owned an Audi 5000 at one time and drove a used A4 recently. Not fun cars IMO. We found the CC to be a pleasure. It handled, was sporty, very attractive compared to the ugly Passat. Well, maybe not ugly, but plain and boring. After the Audi and reliability on European cars in general, I swore I would never buy another. But I liked this car. My wife really liked it. There were two exceptions - road noise, and the 4600# weight. Yeow! Baby Phaeton? Not sure how it compared to others with large wheels and short sidewall tires though. They may all have their share. I noticed complaints about the ride. We prefer a sporty suspension. This was firm, but compliant, not harsh. I won't suffer harsh. Too old to put up with that. For us, it was just right for driving fun. We have an 03 Avalon, and replaced the struts with KYB GR2's and Energy performance bushings on the sway bars. HUGE improvement over stock, but those who don't like the CC suspension may not like that either, but my wife sure does.
 
The one thing that bothers me is reliability. Not sure I want a first year car. My old room mate had an older Passat, and made sure it was long gone before the warranty ran out. One thing after another. How has the CC been? Have you owners had any problems? After a Toyota, I can't/won't live with that. What kind of real world mileage figures are you seeing?
#69 of 143
Re: Driving impressions [55396] by ivan_99
Mar 25, 2009 (10:23 am)
Reply

Replying to: 55396 (Mar 24, 2009 9:48 pm)

and the 4600# weight
 
I think you mean 3600lbs...
 
which is about inline with all 6cyl cars of this size (meaning too heavy )
#70 of 143
Re: Driving impressions [ivan_99] by 55396
Mar 25, 2009 (10:31 am)
Reply

Replying to: ivan_99 (Mar 25, 2009 10:23 am)

"and the 4600# weight
  
I think you mean 3600lbs... "
 
Just quoting the salesman. I asked the weight. He guessed 3100. I said More like 3600. He found the label on the door post and said Wow. 4600#. We were both wrong. I didn't verify.
#71 of 143
Re: Driving impressions [55396] by kcram HOST
Mar 25, 2009 (7:50 pm)
Reply

Replying to: 55396 (Mar 25, 2009 10:31 am)

The door jamb label gives the gross weight rating, which is the total allowable weight of vehicle plus passengers and cargo. Edmunds has the curb weight of the CC as 3300.
 
kcram - Pickups/Wagons Host
#72 of 143
Re: Driving impressions [kcram] by 55396
Mar 25, 2009 (8:20 pm)
Reply

Replying to: kcram (Mar 25, 2009 7:50 pm)

"The door jamb label gives the gross weight rating, which is the total allowable weight of vehicle plus passengers and cargo. Edmunds has the curb weight of the CC as 3300."
 
Now that makes much more sense. More what the car felt like. At first the salesman couldn't find it and went in to ask, therefore I didn't question it, and we got off on something else. Thanks for clarifying it. It just didn't sound right.

Messages Page 8 of 15
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
15
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement