The downfall of Volkswagen


Recommended Posts

Heh, calling a German car rice because you can't name a food Germans eat ... brilliant!

Anyway, it's not suprising they'd make it look like a Toyota. In case you haven't noticed, Toyotas sell like crazy over here. My real problem with the VW is that here they're just "poor" Audis, because Audi refuses to release cheap cars anymore. I bet they'll sell tons of A3s to people considering Jettas.

have you seen new a4 ? its changed too.

actually i liek the way new jetta looks, much better then colrola!, though similar. its because that new golf has changed a lot, jetta (which is a sedan version of golf) changed too.

new passat looks great by the way. but i am all for changes.

cannot wait to see new bmw 3 series on the street to deside for sure if i like it.

but new audi a4 is wierd from the back and the front is not that great too.

so if you want classic looks its mercedes now (only because they completely changedd their looks long before bmw or audi did, old s600 were sooo much classier - in black with tinted windows, this car was pure respect!!!)

ps. did i mension the old jetta was far from looking great. the front was ugly.

so dont compare this changes to changes in bmw which were awesome all the way along. :rolleyes:

It's not mine.? I wish it was.? I drive a truck without any modifications.? And no, it doesn't have a wing.? I just don't understand why people call everything a ricer anymore.? I don't think they understand either and I'm not sure they have a clue what they're talking about.

585660127[/snapback]

you know what.. i completely agree with you, nowadays anything that isnt factory standard is automatically 'rice' (which in itself totally annoys me)

rice: phrase derived from STUPID modificications of an asian cars

By definition saying a vw is rice even if they are only for show mods is incorrect, and on the other end of the spectrum saying a supra or rx7 with a wing is rice is also incorrect. They are powerful cars that may actually need / make use of the downforce!

A civic on the other hand is perfect rice material, as is any other economy family asian car (hyundai, kia, etc)

personally i feel that golf is a little overdone, its too blingy and not my taste, but each to his own i guess..

i have respect for people who modify their cars, aslong as they actually know what they are doing and dont go around talking out of their ass about stuff they dont know, and do ****ing stupid mods on **** cars.. (like wings on front wheel dr:/es :/)

on another note..

Not only was it overpriced, $27,000 which gets you the lousy 2.5l engine.....

585659517[/snapback]

only a 2.5?! thats a tiny little car (by US standards) with a pretty big engine, my dad only has a 1.8 in his passat ffs

finally..

ya, i wanted a GTi, until i saw that picture. damn VW.

585659698[/snapback]

thats not a GTI, this is, and an r32 is much n:)er :)

post-24841-1111637392.jpg

Edited by BGM
The Jetta is a familly saloon tbh thats how volkswagon allways meant it to be atleast.

their sports hatchback is the golf.

And What a Car.

585661169[/snapback]

maybe he thought

veener moveel

schnitszel moveel

and

kraut moveel

wouldnt sound good.

p.s. im solid german i can make fun.

R32? I didnt realise VW had already bought out the R32 in the Mk. 5... Hell the GTI has only just really been brought out in Europe

585659945[/snapback]

That picture is not an R32 as it is NOT offered in the MKV's. However, they do have plans for both the R32 and an R36 in the MKV.

Also, the 1.8T engine is a great engine and contrary to what someone said, the new 2.5l is naturally aspirated whereas the 1.8T is not. While the 1.8T is smaller, it packed more of a punch in the MKIV Jetta and Passat as it put out 180hp in the former and 170hp in the latter. This new 2.5l will only generate 150hp. Weak and very poorly designed. VW's newest turbo will be strapped to a 2.0l engine to hopefully produce well over 200hp which VW needs to put in a Jetta.

I'm happy with my 2003 VW Golf. :D

I hate the new VWs. They look really bad. :cry:

585662451[/snapback]

yeah, but in 10 years people will complain about the new designs and point back to this very new jetta and say "now this is a classic"

get with the times. new designs are nice. btw those new designs will last for many years from now on with slight modifications only. the big changes just happened.

yeah, but in 10 years people will complain about the new designs and point back to this very new jetta and say "now this is a classic"

get with the times. new designs are nice. btw those new designs will last for many years from now on with slight modifications only. the big changes just happened.

585662544[/snapback]

Styling is all subjective. We'll see, 10 years down the road how the new changes effect VW on the bottom line.

lol, VW is going downhill and BMW too, we only have left Audi and MB to watch, tho I've never liked MB

585662362[/snapback]

VW has gone downhill, not BMW. I love BMWs newest designs by Chris Bangle, especially the E60 5er and E87 1er. They're distinctive in a good, elegant way. I've never really liked Audi, it looks too much like a glorified VW to me. I love Mercedes-Benz with a passion, just like BMW, but the new CLS was a huge disappointment.

Also, the 1.8T engine is a great engine and contrary to what someone said, the new 2.5l is naturally aspirated whereas the 1.8T is not. While the 1.8T is smaller, it packed more of a punch in the MKIV Jetta and Passat as it put out 180hp in the former and 170hp in the latter. This new 2.5l will only generate 150hp. Weak and very poorly designed. VW's newest turbo will be strapped to a 2.0l engine to hopefully produce well over 200hp which VW needs to put in a Jetta.

585662531[/snapback]

ah good call, that someone would be me :)

learn something every day i guess, cheers!

Unfortunately I am of the school of thought that says the late 80's and the early to mid 90's were when VW made their best cars.. they truely made some awesome machines back then but unfortunately business is business. One of the head honcho's at VW was quoted as saying very recently (on comments about a possibly successor to the Corrado) basically that they don't make cars that people 'like' or don't make cars that VW fans want - they just make cars that will sell! There is no love loss - pure business at VW simply because the market is way too cut-throat to take gambles on cars that might only sell to a handful of people!

In a way i'm glad.. i'd rather never see a successor to cars like the Corrado - keeps residual values of mine higher for a start, but I think they'd never manage to make it quite as good if they ever did make a new one if that Jetta styling is anything to go by!

and do ****ing stupid mods on **** cars.. (like wings on front wheel drives :/)

r32 is much nicer :)

585662410[/snapback]

FWD cars benefit from wings as well. And funny enough, small, decent looking spoilers are usually useless. It's only the gigantic race car knock offs that actually provide downforce (assuming they aren't made of plywood) ;)

but isnt audi the upmarket brand for VW. Kinda like lexus and toyota?

585664459[/snapback]

Yes. My Passat GLS shares the same engine, drivetrain, etc. with the A4. The suspensions are different, as is the dash, badging, etc.

The A4 has a more sporting suspension overall, and the quattro is cheaper on the A4.

That said, it isn't worth the extra cash to go for the A4, at least, it wasn't for me.

You only get the difference when you get into the A6/A8 or Passat W8/Phaeton debate. Then the Audi is a better buy. Or BMW. :D

I'm not terribly concerned with the Jetta looking like a Corolla-they all look alike in that price range to me (Honda/Toyota/VW) so who really cares?

BTW, the Passat GLS rus you what a high end Jetta would +$1,500 or so, so why not stretch for the larger/better car?

but isnt audi the upmarket brand for VW. Kinda like lexus and toyota?

585664459[/snapback]

Yes. My Passat GLS shares the same engine, drivetrain, etc. with the A4. The suspensions are different, as is the dash, badging, etc.

585664546[/snapback]

If by yes you mean no, then you're right ;)

VW, Audi, and Porsche share parts, but they're independant companies (all owned by the same group). While I agree on sharing engines, some of their designs are much too close, and as I said before, having the A3 in America will only complicate things.

If by yes you mean no, then you're right  ;)

VW, Audi, and Porsche share parts, but they're independant companies (all owned by the same group). While I agree on sharing engines, some of their designs are much too close, and as I said before, having the A3 in America will only complicate things.

585664756[/snapback]

Same body structure, same internals, and you say no? Shows how two people can look at the same thing and see something different. The specs on the 2 cars are as close as those of any Buick and Chevy built on the same platform.

VW has gone downhill, not BMW. I love BMWs newest designs by Chris Bangle, especially the E60 5er and E87 1er. They're distinctive in a good, elegant way. I've never really liked Audi, it looks too much like a glorified VW to me. I love Mercedes-Benz with a passion, just like BMW, but the new CLS was a huge disappointment.

585662570[/snapback]

Here is an example of car design being subjective ;) I personally love the new CLS and think that BMW is going downhill with Bangle becuase he isnt making the elegants, sober cars they used to make but some "futuristic" version of their cars. shame on them :(

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!