The List: 4 Refined Picks For Under $25 Grand

I'm not sure how the Passat can be called refined, since the new model has the 2.5L boat-anchor..which as been described as "agricultural" sounding. That doesn't sound refined to me, unless we are talking about a tractor! I can't really see a diesel as refined either. So unless you pop for the 3.6L Passat, it won't be a refined drive. That car will be into the $30s. No thanks!

They dropped the ball on this one by not using their 2.0T which gets good fuel economy and power. It must be somewhat refined if it is in most of the Audis!

Terrible job by VW once again.

Gotta agree with Chrisa - the 2.5 takes the Passat from a possibly great car to a mediocre/bottom tier car. At least with the 2.0T you had a pretty powerful, efficient engine. The 2.0T is the best thing about our Audi.

Too bad both the Passat and Jetta now look like they should come in a white box with black letters that say "car."

the passat and the the jetta look VERY similar in online pic but i saw one testing in NYC and it did not look like a jetta. plus it stood out from the s-class,7series,ls460's.

chrisa222:

I agree with a lot of what you said, BUT VW has made it clear they want to sell more. With the new Passat, they will. They may have an engine that sounds "agricultural", but they have a package that costs less overall, and is less complex. Thats exactly what most consumers are looking for.

They'll sell them in droves, they look classy and they'll fell different than they Japanese and Korean counterpoints.

Funny - a lot of VW fanboys would rather have the Kia Optima than the Passat.

Having said that, VW did a better job with the new Passat than the new Jetta.

Once again IL takes a highly subjective word like "refined" to defend what seems to be an unjustified slant toward particular vehicles.

Nothing wrong with Hyundai, but nothing special about them either. Kudos for bring yourself up to snuff with the competition, but the overblown lovefest in the automotive press really leaves me guessing.

VW has a continuing history of poor quality. They downgrade the materials to push their vehicles to the masses and IL calls it refined? Really?

The Kizashi is an interesting little car, but from an objective standpoint, it's outclassed by much of it's competition.

I can't agree with the Passat or the Tucson. The Tucson is probably one of the least refined of the newest Hyundais, with a stiff ride and too much noise. And at the $25K mark, the Passat, especially with that 2.5, just isn't anything special compared with anything else out there.

I would put the Hyundai Sonata instead of the VW Passat. The Sonata, unlike the Passat doesn't look like what one other poster said "looks like it came out of a white box with black letters that say car". The Sonata, I think is one of the best looking, inside and out of any midsize sedan. Not to mention the good quality on the interior and the good turbo engine.

how does the Kizashi compare to the Sonata/Optima on these terms?

An odd list followed by odd comments. You can find something "refined" in just about any car, and many have refined aspects juxtaposed with unrefined, such as the Passat's chassis and interior compared to the 2.5 liter engine. Not sure how this list was constructed.

Also odd that so many here are criticizing the new Passat even though no one but the auto journos have actually driven one. And most of them seem to be reviewing it positively. Boat anchor? That's a tired borrowed term. And used to describe the old 2.0 four. The 2.5 is not silky smooth or cutting edge, but it is no boat anchor.

emajor - the 2.5 is in the Jetta. It's a lousy engine.

Tuscon.

And the new Passat has been cheapened in value to get it to that price tag.

blueguy,
I know it's in the Jetta. I've driven it.

It's a lousy engine? I'll see your bald-faced subjective assertion and raise you one: No it's not.

But VW will need something better for the next generation.

why is the tuscon on the list? The exterior styling is a mess and the interior quality is just average for the class. What stands out about the tuscon that exudes "refinement"?

As for the Passat, C&D and automobilemag confirm its been dumbed down and enlarged for American tastes. I sat in the car and the interior does NOT seem to be a step ahead of the competition.

1487:

"As for the Passat, C&D and automobilemag confirm its been dumbed down and enlarged for American tastes. I sat in the car and the interior does NOT seem to be a step ahead of the competition. "

I think in line with the competition is what VW is going for. They are homogenizing their product line, and while that may not make enthusiast happy it does make the average consumer very happy. If you don't agree just look at the sales of the new Jetta. It is outselling the old Jetta by leaps and bounds.

We will see a lot more Jettas and Passats on the road because people still view VW as a quasi-luxury brand. And now with a much lower entry price they can get that perceived luxury experience even if the Passat is more Camry than A4.

agreed about the potential success of the Passat. My point was the interior/exterior do not exude refinement at all. The interior is about on par with the Accord- a car that debuted in 2007. The materials, switchgear and ambiance are just OK for the class, nothing more. The car is a clear step down inside from the CC. The fact that IL is saying wait for the car because it bests the competition is a joke. It bests them in backseat space- thats about it.

@emajor - in terms of efficiency, power, smoothness and build quality, yeah the VW engine is lightyears behind everybody else. It's like Mazda's nasty 2.0/2.5 in their Mazda3/Mazda6/Mazda5 cars. Just plain garbage for this era.

"As for the Passat, C&D and automobilemag confirm its been dumbed down and enlarged for American tastes. I sat in the car and the interior does NOT seem to be a step ahead of the competition."

Where?

blueguy,

...and they tip poorly at restaurants, make passes at your girlfriend, and never wash their hands after going to the bathroom.

Were you burned by one of these engines at some point?

Blueguy:

Slow down on the engine insults. I'm a biased fan of both Mazda and VW, so your really starting to hit close to home. I would like some explanation as to why you are so vehemently against the aforementioned engines.

I've driven both and owned a mazda with the 2.3 (the 2.5's predecessor), and while they might not be fuel sippers they are modern torquey engines with character.

Seriously, explain your hate.

@power - I currently have a 2010 Mazda3 2.5. It's a cranked up lawn mower engine. Rough on idle, clattery/ratty to redline. It doesn't have any torque, delivers horrendous gas mileage and is one of the worst engines I've ever had to endure. Second worst engine I've lived with... my 2003 Protege ES. At least that car got reasonable gas mileage (about 30 on the highway as long as i kept it under 75) but all the other features (common to Mazda) were on display. Ironic as I actually had my 335i lemoned for engine problems but even on its worst day its actual smoothness was beyond reproach (and the engine delivered better gas mileage). Hell, my 2003 330i stuttered at 4k on wide open throttle...still a better engine on a daily basis.

As for the VW 2.5 - I've only experienced it on test drives. But man is that a bad engine. There's no Honda smoothness. No silky BMW build. It feels archaic...kind like Nissan's 2.5 in their Altima. Just a shoddy engine after you experience the TSX's inline 4.

To each his own.

Not as refined as a TSX, and no silky BMW build? Not as nice as the 2.0T in your Audi? That's because it powers a $20K car. Same with the Mazda. Are you sure you are shopping in the right segment? One doesn't often get fillet mignon at ground chuck prices in the automotive world, you know...

blue,

First off its Powell. I'm confused why you went back to Mazda after having a so so experience with the protege. If you want smoothness than go to Honda that seems to be their bag. Maybe you have bad luck with cars, but my experience with the 2.5 has been favorable in my wife's CX-7. I know they don't have the same exact engine tune, but I feel the engine has been adequate and it consistently returns 25-28 in a car that weighs 1,000 pounds more than your sedan.

I'm not trying to win you over. I'm just giving anyone who reads these comments a chance to see the other side of the coin.

powell - I loved the handling of the Pro and it was bulletproof. The Mazda3 (at the time) provided nice handling and again it's been solidly reliable. As for the engine's efficiency and smoothness - the rather poor dealer service insists 20 MPG is normal for a 2.5 driven almost entirely freeway at 65-75. 17 months and counting...

emajor - Everything is rated on the same scale - food, cars, movies, furniture, tools, etc. You rate based on price, thanks, I'll rate on a scale of what's available.

The Pasaat/Jetta both find their way up into the mid-20s with this BOAT ANCHOR. We are no longer talking about a $17000 car anymore. Bluedotcomguy is right. I was set to buy a brand new Jetta....all I needed was a test drive. I thought I had read enough about the car so just a quick drive and I was ready to sign up. That is when I experienced the dreadful 2.5. It was pokey, despite its pretty good 170HP rating. It was far from smooth....I went to a Honda dealership and ended up with a last-gen Accord. The difference between Honda's 2.4 and VW's 2.5 is like night and day. The Accord is larger and less powerful and yet feels MUCH quicker. The engine is smoother, and I'm getting 32MPG normal driving with the 5MT. The Jetta was a nice car in need of a real engine. And now they are putting that engine into an even BIGGER and HEAVIER car? IT was a slug in the smaller Jetta which had a 6MT. This car will have a 0-60 in around 10 secs with the automatic, which will make it worst in class. And it will sound strained in the process, vibrating away at its 5500RPM redline. And that is refined???