Originally Posted by rai,Apr 4 2006, 07:52 AM

I see, however he did say the VW may not be running after 3 years. According to Honda's own comparison the GTI will have 31% resale and the SI 32% resale after 5 years. So in other words they're very close to the same.

the point about VW being less reliable than a Toyota or Honda is true. But that does not mean the VW will never run. Maybe the VW has 0-6 issues in 3-4 years while the Honda may have 0-4 issues (I'm just making up these numbers). But the VW does have a longer warranty, it'd be nice if Honda backed up it's reliable product longer IMO.

Also today by and large all cars run for a long time. Car magazines routinely do 40K or 50K mile evaluations and seems to me the RL (honda) had just as many issues as you'd expect from a VW. Also not once have I seen a car fail out of a long term test unless it was as a result of a auto accident.

My 100K mile Passat is worth ~$7k (est.) so it's assumed it will still be running several years from now don't you thinK?

Originally Posted by sw05s2k,Apr 4 2006, 08:39 AM

Most of the problems the VW/Audi's have had in the past were electrical issues, they are now using the same company Toyota uses for the main wiring harness and the major electrical components of their cars. I think VW/Audi's reliability will start to rise this year because of this, at least they are trying to fix the problems.

Originally Posted by Axel6,Apr 4 2006, 09:57 AM

You do have to give them credit. The Big-3 in the US deserve some credit as well. Their cars are truly much better overall than say 10 years ago.

That being said, trying is not always enough. I have a very good friend that graduated with me from college who works for the Ford Ranger product development team. They are trying CONSTANTLY to narrow the quality (perceived or otherwise) gap between them and the Tacoma. They succeed in many fronts, but even he agrees that panel tolerances and other measures of quality are simply not up to par and may never be. This is not due to lack of trying but rather to other factors including engineering and assembly methodologies and the labor employed (don't get me started on that one).

Originally Posted by rai,Apr 4 2006, 08:25 AM

I'm not going to run out and buy a GTI, however for what I'm looking for ie. a car to go with the S2000. I'd rather have a GTI

Originally Posted by slicksilver,Apr 4 2006, 08:34 PM

You make it sound like German and US cars are up and coming like the Koreans. I will remind you that when the Japanese were making bicycles, the Europeans and Americans were making the most advanced automobiles of their time.

If anything, it's the Japanese and Koreans cars that are truly much better than they were 10 years ago...

Originally Posted by Axel6,Apr 5 2006, 07:56 AM

My point is that the Americans, and Germans to some extent, have been playing catch-up on the quality and fit-and-finish front for some time. All the automakers have come a long way in the last ten years, but credit should be given to the Americans (yes, the Koreans as well) for raising their game. However, my point is that the quality and fit-and-finish of American and German automakers may never be up to par to the Japanese. The Americans tend to compete on price and value while the Germans compete on luxury and overall driving satisfaction.

Again, since the Japs got serious about marketing their cars in the US, they have raised the bar. Compare a 1990 Accord to a 1990 Ford Tempo. The differences are stark (and I speak from first hand knowledge )

Originally Posted by slicksilver,Apr 5 2006, 12:03 PM

How do you define quality?

I would have to say that the Germans make far superior interiors to the Japanese. I would also say that the Germans use much better paint and external trim on their cars. So to me, German cars are of a higher quality than Japanese cars.

If to you quality means reliability, then you can argue that the Japanese have an edge...