RE: VW Passat Estate R-Line Edition | Driven
Discussion
Have had my Passat Estate for nearly 3 years now and with the miles creeping up (130k) I'm thinking about replacing it. When i bought it i had a 320d M-Sport Touring and was adament i wanted another one but i saw this Passat for sale and thought that it wouldnt hurt to have a look, it was a 'Sport' model and in Tornado Red looked great.
Its a 2014 2.0 TDi Bluemotion 'Sport' where the 'Sport' equates to 15mm lower suspension and some nice black and silver multispoke wheels.
It drives great, id go as far to say its a quicker point to point car than my BMW was.
Its great for holidays, loads of room for bikes etc, and a dismantled shed that i still cant beleive i managed to fit in to take to the tip. With 2 kids and 2 dogs in tow its a perfect family bus.
Averages 48-52 to the gallon and is £30 a year to tax.
Theres a couple of cars in my budget (£11k) that are potential replacements;
Passat Estate GT
Octavia VRS Estate
I've driven both of and the Passat is a much nicer drive, but I've always fancied a VRS
I really like the look of this new one, shame its a bit out of my price range!
Its a 2014 2.0 TDi Bluemotion 'Sport' where the 'Sport' equates to 15mm lower suspension and some nice black and silver multispoke wheels.
It drives great, id go as far to say its a quicker point to point car than my BMW was.
Its great for holidays, loads of room for bikes etc, and a dismantled shed that i still cant beleive i managed to fit in to take to the tip. With 2 kids and 2 dogs in tow its a perfect family bus.
Averages 48-52 to the gallon and is £30 a year to tax.
Theres a couple of cars in my budget (£11k) that are potential replacements;
Passat Estate GT
Octavia VRS Estate
I've driven both of and the Passat is a much nicer drive, but I've always fancied a VRS
I really like the look of this new one, shame its a bit out of my price range!
Jon_S_Rally said:
How much would the equivalent BMW or Merc be? I think I would prefer a 530i over this in terms of looks, but it would be interesting to see the cost difference. I just can't get on with Merc interiors, so that would be out for me.
A mate has a 520d 18 plate - was £53k list but he got it for £37k as it was a pre-reg....Oh and re the fuel economy, I have the 258bhp petrol in my Merc coupe is averaging 32mpg over the 12,500 miles it's done in the last 6 months so 38mpg sounds pretty good to me!
Elmariachi said:
I do like these but 38.8 mpg on a long run? Is that something to be proud of?
No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
On the surface I'd say that is pretty poor, yes. My 2003 XJ8 4.2 with 300bhp quotes 34.9mpg extra urban use and will quite easily do that if you drive for economy, and that's with a 6 speed slusher and a far nicer engine to use than a four pot.No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
Edited by Elmariachi on Tuesday 12th November 06:52
I'm sure that the farting VAG will do better than 17.8mpg in town though, and the emissions will meet far higher standards....
Otherwise it's a drab car made slightly less drab by not being underpowered. I'm sure it's fine, but would be better on 17" wheels, baloon tyres, and suspension setup by a company that can actually make a car ride properly.
I am currently driving an Arteon 272ps R line which is essentially the same car underneath and just in a little black dress.
As a way of getting about it’s a great thing, sharp enough to drive and comfortable to boot. The car is full of gadgets and just makes driving easy.
It is still is far from being a petrol heads choice though!
As a way of getting about it’s a great thing, sharp enough to drive and comfortable to boot. The car is full of gadgets and just makes driving easy.
It is still is far from being a petrol heads choice though!
DeltonaS said:
Johnnytheboy said:
At what bhp point does an R-Line get to be called just an R?
It's only a couple of dozen behind the current R Estate after all.
When I see 'R-Line' I assume it's just a 2.0 TDi in a party frock!
The only R is the Golf R.It's only a couple of dozen behind the current R Estate after all.
When I see 'R-Line' I assume it's just a 2.0 TDi in a party frock!
Rest is R line.
Johnnytheboy said:
DeltonaS said:
Johnnytheboy said:
At what bhp point does an R-Line get to be called just an R?
It's only a couple of dozen behind the current R Estate after all.
When I see 'R-Line' I assume it's just a 2.0 TDi in a party frock!
The only R is the Golf R.It's only a couple of dozen behind the current R Estate after all.
When I see 'R-Line' I assume it's just a 2.0 TDi in a party frock!
Rest is R line.
stickleback123 said:
Elmariachi said:
I do like these but 38.8 mpg on a long run? Is that something to be proud of?
No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
On the surface I'd say that is pretty poor, yes. My 2003 XJ8 4.2 with 300bhp quotes 34.9mpg extra urban use and will quite easily do that if you drive for economy, and that's with a 6 speed slusher and a far nicer engine to use than a four pot.No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
Edited by Elmariachi on Tuesday 12th November 06:52
I'm sure that the farting VAG will do better than 17.8mpg in town though, and the emissions will meet far higher standards....
Otherwise it's a drab car made slightly less drab by not being underpowered. I'm sure it's fine, but would be better on 17" wheels, baloon tyres, and suspension setup by a company that can actually make a car ride properly.
On what planet will an XJ8 easily do 35mpg?
38mpg for the Passat is pretty decent for a 270hp petrol estate. No idea why anyone would expect better.
thiscocks said:
stickleback123 said:
Elmariachi said:
I do like these but 38.8 mpg on a long run? Is that something to be proud of?
No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
On the surface I'd say that is pretty poor, yes. My 2003 XJ8 4.2 with 300bhp quotes 34.9mpg extra urban use and will quite easily do that if you drive for economy, and that's with a 6 speed slusher and a far nicer engine to use than a four pot.No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
Edited by Elmariachi on Tuesday 12th November 06:52
I'm sure that the farting VAG will do better than 17.8mpg in town though, and the emissions will meet far higher standards....
Otherwise it's a drab car made slightly less drab by not being underpowered. I'm sure it's fine, but would be better on 17" wheels, baloon tyres, and suspension setup by a company that can actually make a car ride properly.
On what planet will an XJ8 easily do 35mpg?
38mpg for the Passat is pretty decent for a 270hp petrol estate. No idea why anyone would expect better.
ruprechtmonkeyboy said:
thiscocks said:
stickleback123 said:
Elmariachi said:
I do like these but 38.8 mpg on a long run? Is that something to be proud of?
No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
On the surface I'd say that is pretty poor, yes. My 2003 XJ8 4.2 with 300bhp quotes 34.9mpg extra urban use and will quite easily do that if you drive for economy, and that's with a 6 speed slusher and a far nicer engine to use than a four pot.No matter it has 270bhp, it's still a brand new four pot with presumably the more efficient DSG option and I'd expect better than that.
Edited by Elmariachi on Tuesday 12th November 06:52
I'm sure that the farting VAG will do better than 17.8mpg in town though, and the emissions will meet far higher standards....
Otherwise it's a drab car made slightly less drab by not being underpowered. I'm sure it's fine, but would be better on 17" wheels, baloon tyres, and suspension setup by a company that can actually make a car ride properly.
On what planet will an XJ8 easily do 35mpg?
38mpg for the Passat is pretty decent for a 270hp petrol estate. No idea why anyone would expect better.
tty turbocharged four pot does make you wonder why exactly you can't have a proper engine.Aluminium XJs will quite easily do 35mpg+ on a run. Most large naturally aspirated V8s made after around 2005 will, in fact. Around town is down into the teens though
stickleback123 said:
Obviously they aren't very comparable, but the point of the comparison was that 38mpg on a long run from a stty turbocharged four pot does make you wonder why exactly you can't have a proper engine.
Aluminium XJs will quite easily do 35mpg+ on a run. Most large naturally aspirated V8s made after around 2005 will, in fact. Around town is down into the teens though
Right. What an excellent comparison after all.... tty turbocharged four pot does make you wonder why exactly you can't have a proper engine.Aluminium XJs will quite easily do 35mpg+ on a run. Most large naturally aspirated V8s made after around 2005 will, in fact. Around town is down into the teens though
MC Bodge said:
stickleback123 said:
Obviously they aren't very comparable, but the point of the comparison was that 38mpg on a long run from a stty turbocharged four pot does make you wonder why exactly you can't have a proper engine.
Aluminium XJs will quite easily do 35mpg+ on a run. Most large naturally aspirated V8s made after around 2005 will, in fact. Around town is down into the teens though
Right. What an excellent comparison after all.... tty turbocharged four pot does make you wonder why exactly you can't have a proper engine.Aluminium XJs will quite easily do 35mpg+ on a run. Most large naturally aspirated V8s made after around 2005 will, in fact. Around town is down into the teens though
In a world where eco is all the rage, the reality is it is hardly any more fuel efficient than some of the old dinosaurs a few of us drive.
And my God would that Passat bore me to death.
SidewaysSi said:
I think you need to see the post above. All these comparisons with older/larger cars are merely showing how inefficient this car is.
In a world where eco is all the rage, the reality is it is hardly any more fuel efficient than some of the old dinosaurs a few of us drive.
And my God would that Passat bore me to death.
Thank you. I'm not sure if the previous poster was being wilfully obtuse or not.In a world where eco is all the rage, the reality is it is hardly any more fuel efficient than some of the old dinosaurs a few of us drive.
And my God would that Passat bore me to death.
35mpg and 280-300bhp in a 1650KG car is something that we used to get with a lovely V8 or 6 cylinder engine. Getting the same from a miserable four pot seems a poor trade to me.
I don't half get bored of people slating four-cylinder engines on this forum. Yes, there are some lovely six and eight-pot engines out there, but there are also some great four-bangers and some genuinely st bigger lumps. Given that this is supposed to be a forum for car enthusiasts, you'd think people would be a bit more open minded 
Do have to laugh at the fuel efficiency comments too. Yes, this Passat doesn't do masses more to the gallon than some older stuff on a run but, in town, you can bet it will be doing a chunk more than 16/17mpg. That justifies the change on its own, as most journeys are short.
t bigger lumps. Given that this is supposed to be a forum for car enthusiasts, you'd think people would be a bit more open minded Do have to laugh at the fuel efficiency comments too. Yes, this Passat doesn't do masses more to the gallon than some older stuff on a run but, in town, you can bet it will be doing a chunk more than 16/17mpg. That justifies the change on its own, as most journeys are short.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff