Drew Dowdell

Probably not. From a capacity perspective, the capacity being allocated to Malibu and Volt is coming from the discontinuation of the DTS and Lucerne. I believe the Malibu will also be built at Fairfax with the Lacrosse. Anyone know what's going into Kansas City after the current Malibu leaves there?

Fixed. Chi was the stillborn FWD sedan platform based off Lambda. DT7 and NG-Lucerne. I think Sigma is dead after this round. It will be Alpha and next gen Zeta. Alpha being as modular as Zeta could explain a large weight range between the extreme ends of the platform applications. If they build an Alpha CTS-V that weighs 4,100lbs.... so what? That's what it weighs today.

Different Epsilon. Either way, none of those cars are meant to compete with the 3-series. Driving dynamics are everything. None of the bigger Alpha cars will be meant to compete with the 3-series either.

again, there is no way a 4-cylinder vehicle the size of the 3-series will weigh more than the 5-series unless they are building it from lead and lining the doors with gold. Could the Alpha weigh up to that number? Sure... since they are planning on putting the CTS on it eventually too. GMI is making a lot of hay over this... but some addition, subtraction, and basic deduction will lead you to a different conclusion than theirs. The Epsilon platform can weigh as little as 3100lbs (Saab 9-3) or over 4200 lbs (Lacrosse AWD, Saab 9-5) and probably even more for the XTS. ZOMG! Sky is falling!

The 2.0 is only 8 valves and still SOHC, as before. It hasn't changed. Also, I'm not sure what or who gave you the idea that the 2.0 returns decent fuel economy compared to the 2.5. As far as the EPA ratings are concerned, have a look below. The automatic 2.5 actually gets better gas mileage than the anemic automatic 2.0... with 55 more horsepower, no less. --Manual Jetta 2.5: 23 city/33 highway Jetta 2.0: 24 ctiy/34 highway --Automatic Jetta 2.5: 24 city/31 highway Jetta 2.0: 23 city/29 highway For what's it worth, in my experience, the 2.5 is more deserving of its place than the 2.0. The latter will make for a good iron-block boat anchor some day. It's far past its prime. There's not really much to fight about. The Jetta's interior is solidly assembled with bargain-basement plastics and designed around parts-bin controls, neither of which go away until you enter the GLI. doh! I totally knew it was an 8-valve but I typed 16v. I've seen claims of much better than EPA with the 2.0. It may be one of those engines that doesn't do well in the EPA test but does better in real world. *shrug* You're right about it being a boat anchor though.... 115hp with 125 lb-ft at 4,000 rpm is simply insufficient for a car this large. I'd really like to get my hands on a diesel Jetta.

I'm glad I have backup on that one. I was expecting a fight there. I pretty much agree with the rest of your assessment so far. The interior design isn't as refined, but it is put together well for what it is. I just want to make that distinction.

Well I know that Zimbabwe is right out.

ah, I was just looking for another way out.

what? again?

Did any of the A-bodies have rear disk? I bet you could find all the parts needed to swap to that.

The Jetta is really approaching small-mid-size class if not by EPA standards at least by everyone else's. It feels about equally roomy as a Fusion. I'm not in a position to look it up right now, anyone know the official EPA classification? I'm surprised they are still using the 2.5 AND the 16 valve 2.slow in the really base version, but at least that engine returns decent economy numbers.

I don't think it has front drums brakes.

Why couldn't you take a rental car to Canada? The flights from Pittsburgh to Toronto are super expensive if you go direct and only a little less expensive if you connect in Newark or Philly. If you take a connecting flight, total travel time downtown to downtown is greater than just driving it. When I priced flights for this trip I was coming up with rates of $650 round trip and travel times of 8 hours. I rented the Jetta for 6 days for $240 plus tax and drove it in 6 hours (took my time). The cup holders are good and sturdy, and can handle a big gulp. They have 4 spring loaded arms that come out and hold your cup in place. NVH is ok. The engine is smooth enough but gets loud if you rev it to pass. There is a lot of tire noise. Outward visibility is excellent, I'd rate it much higher than any of GM's current offerings. My main comparison is the Cruze 2LT since I had one two weeks ago as a rental. Cruze is much quieter and the interior is more warm and welcoming. Jetta has more power, feels more solid, and is much roomier. The Jetta platform feels like it is a mid-size car in the compact class; but in this trim, it is held back by its engine, spartan interior, and some cheap materials in noticeable places. The 2.5 is the biggest issue with the car. Changing that one thing would likely change my opinion of the car. If I'm going to drive something spartan like this, it should at least get better gas mileage, right? I'm going to go over the car in more detail later this week, but the fit seems excellent and the platform feels very solid... not tinny. However, they used cheap plastic materials in a lot of places they shouldn't have.

Iiiiinteresting new headlight design. I like the departure from the "I had one too many eye lifts" look that we've been suffering through from nearly every brand since about 2003

What part is rusted? check out RockAuto.com There is no way the parts aren't available. There are still lots of A-bodies out there.

Here's another thing about the Jetta.... it uses cables to operate the HVAC airflow control..... what other car still does that? I'm going to ask my friends in Germany their opinions about the Jetta's image. I remember them saying something about "old men in hats"

It is solid. Very solid car in that regard. Much more so than the Elantra or Kia or even above a Ford Fusion. The engine turns me off by doing nothing well except make noise. I get that a 5-cylinder is supposed to be a compromise between a V6 and a 4-cylinder, but the 312 HP Camaro gets 30 mpg now. So why is this 170hp unit only rated at 31? It doesn't seem to have much torque low in the power band because the transmission is always wanting to kick down. I did the speed limit the whole trip. I get that concrete roads are loud, but some cars handle them better than others.

It's roomier than the Cruze by a lot. The trunk is massive for a mid-size much less a compact. In 2.5 form, it doesn't feel *that* much faster than a Cruze turbo (which I had two weeks ago as a rental). Interior wise, the Cruze uses nicer materials, but the Jetta is put together better.... though in the case of this car, that isn't really hard when most of the buttons are blanks.

I don't think the new one is a chick car at all. I'm not embarrassed to be seen in it because most people won't even notice it's there.

well... um... it has Cruise.

Before anyone says anything about my wish for the Impala over the Jetta... it's purely in the "I have to sit in this thing for 6 hours going in a straight line how can I stay comfortable" sort of way.

This Just In: 2011 Volkswagen Jetta SE I'm in Toronto for training for the week and picked up my rental 2011 Volkswagen Jetta SE with just 14 clicks on the odometer. Ride long with me as we go looking for some Fahrvergnügen. Interactive Review: 2011 Volkswagen Jetta SE

Interactive Review: 2011 Volkswagen Jetta SE Due to incredibly crappy weather here in Toronto - Stock Jetta Photo Shown I'm in Toronto this week for training. Work policy dictates that if I need to drive more than 200 miles, I am to rent a car instead of using my own. The nice lady at the rental counter gave me my choice of 2011 Chevrolet Impala, 2011 Ford Fusion, or 2011 Volkswagen Jetta. I thought "Hey, the Jetta would make a good car for an interactive review since it's been debated so much already". I got all of 5 miles before I regretted not going with the comfort of the Impala..... so just remember the sacrifices I go through for you lot. You better ask LOTS of questions to make this worth it. Clearly not a good start eh? (only been in Canada about 8 hours now). For one, road noise in the Jetta on concrete highways is loud.... it's turn-your-stereo-up loud. Seat comfort on the other hand is excellent. The leatherette VeeDub is putting into this Jetta will fool a good number of people into thinking it's leather. The dash looks soft touch, but it's not. The interior is a sea of gray and punch outs where switches would be if it were a better equipped version. I've counted no less than 8 punch outs for non-existent buttons. The Interior is VERY roomy. I'll look up specs later, but being the largest of the compact class surely has some advantage. I'm thinking that this new Jetta is larger than some mid-size cars from years ago. What has already been said in other threads about the 2.5 liter 5-cylinder is entirely true. I question it's very existence. It is the only non-turbo engine I have ever driven that feels like it has turbo lag. The lag is so distinct I'm going to actually try to get a video of it. It provides neither the power of a V6 nor the fuel economy of a 4-cylinder. The transmission is very shift happy and it needs to be to get any power. All sport mode does is stop the transmission from lugging the engine constantly. In typical driving, the engine note is smooth and pleasant. Under full throttle it's loud. The Jetta is EPA rated at 31mpg highway and my first fill up calculated out to be a smidge over 26mpg. However, I don't know that the tank was truly full , so we'll see more fuel economy postings later. Fuel economy numbers also could be down because I am the very first customer in this car. It had 14 miles on it when I picked it up. Knowing the area, it had to have rolled from the dealer to the gas station to the rental lot into my hot little hands. Handling is unremarkable so far, not that the weather has allowed for any pushing of the car. So have at it C&Gers, what do you want to know about this 2011 Volkswagen Jetta?

What car would you re-badge back? An Opel Omega sold in the US as the Cadillac Catera who's owner turned it back into an Opel "Re-badging" and "Badge Engineering" are 4-letter words amongst auto enthusiasts. Car companies do it to shave the cost of developing a whole new vehicle. Usually in the process, the brand identities of both the donor and recipient brands get muddled. In our example above, Cadillac was trying to shoot for the European entry luxury market by importing and re-badging the respected in its home market, but decidedly not luxury, Opel Omega. The Omega probably could have sold successfully on it's own merits had it not been sold at Cadillac dealerships and priced accordingly. Dear departed Pontiac had two imports from down under. The G8 and the GTO originated from GM's Holden Division. Holden's SS line fit in with Pontiac's sporting image perfectly. The GTO came first. It's design language fit Pontiac, but it fit Pontiac about 5 years too late. By the time the GTO came ashore, it ended up looking like a previous generation Grand Prix coupe. Pontiac followed up with the G8 that actually led Pontiac in a new styling direction rather than following an old one. Unfortunately, General Motors as a whole was too far gone and Pontiac's days were numbered. But enough of the history lesson. What say you faithful C&Ger? What car sold as a rebadge in the U.S., if you got your grubby little hands on, would you convert back to it's original brand? Would you be like our friend up there and convert a Catera to an Omega? Would you do a Pontiac to Holden swap? Or would you go the easy way out and rebadge an Eagle Premier as a Renault?

Bet the crossover goes to Buick too.