Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Yes, I saw that article. And to be honest, I'm conflicted.

On the one hand, I believe that what they are describing is technically feasible.

On the other hand, I'm trying to remember the last time that a concept car actually made it into production intact and lived up to the hype.

On the gripping hand, I'm just not sure who the target market for the car is. People who want an actual two seat sports car are going to continue buying Boxsters, Miatas, Z4s, etc. And people who want an extreme high-efficiency vehicle are going to continue buying Leaves, Volts, Sparks, Pious Plugins, etc.


I mean, you're suggesting that $30k is an unreasonably low price for a compact diesel hatchback. I grant you, the performance numbers (on paper) appear impressive. But I'm not sure that the kind of people who actually care about lightness and 1/4 mile times are going to opt for this car as opposed to an Elise or a Corvette, and I don't think that this car is going to seriously detract from the sales of all of the other small, lightweight 70 MPG diesel cars available all over Europe at half the price.


If they'd have scaled back on the ICE and put in a plug-in-able EV drivetrain good for 20-30 miles, then maybe I'd be singing a different tune. But as it stands, I'm not sure why anybody would want to buy this car even if it does make it into production as it stands now, much less after the inevitable happens and it misses the ultra-optimistic benchmarks presently being set by 30-50%.

Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

First I am going to ask why you keep mentioning diesel? They are talking about using the 2.0T gas engine from the GTI.

I assume people would buy the car because it would be fun and to be different. The same reason people buy a lotus or alpha romeo 4c. It is not going to be a high volume car but it would definitely be something I could see myself using as a commuter/track car.

The split of performance/efficiency would be a better argument for a car like the cr-z which failed miserably in both aspects. This would really be more of a performance car that is efficient as a byproduct. After all, increasing performance is just increasing the efficiency of any number of components. I would drive this if it got 30mpg because it would be an absolute blast. The 70 mpg is just a bonus.

I do understand your skepticism about the claims though. However, the BRZ/FR-S pretty much hit the nail on the head for most of the initial claims they were targeting. I followed that particular car for 3+ years and I was planning on buying one but I needed a new car before it was on the market. The price was about the only thing that was off and it was not by very much.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Oh, my bad. I just assumed it was going to be a diesel, since the XL1 was and that's what everyone's comparing it to. Seems like it would have made more sense to use the 260 ft/lb 2.0 TDI engine...


So, basically, it's a 1999 Honda Insight with the hybrid drivetrain stripped out, one extra cylinder and a turbo added in, and at a much higher price.


All in all, I have about as much faith that we'll see this car come to market in its presently-envisioned form as any of the other wacky concepts that VW has come up with over the years, including the 640 HP W12-equipped Golf GTi that they built in 2007: Revealed: 641bhp VW Golf GTi - MSN Cars UK

Ryan_G

iTrader: (8)

I feel like that is a vast oversimplification of it but yes. That sounds like a winning recipe to me. The price will be the make a break part of it and I think they could reasonably get it around or under 40k. I am not a marketing expert by any means and I have no idea if the car would be a flop in practice but I still think it would be one hell of a car.

2ndGearRubber

But you can charge it anywhere!


Maybe after pushing it somewhere willing to let you charge a car off their outlet, the owners took some time to save baby seals, or picket outside a gas station.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

Somewhere a crate full of check engine lights are humming with anticipation.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

Why can't a car company just release a 1.0 liter turbo diesel hatch that gets 1xx-mpg and has zero-frills?

Edit: Volkswagen, **** YOU. Give me my Lupo tdi

2ndGearRubber

Because no one would buy that car.


0-60 in 20 seconds, manual trans, no AC, etc. No big-gulp-chugging American would sacrifice infinite convenience and consumption of 10mpg if it meant driving one of those.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

I'd buy the **** out of that car.

jesus christ, this nation of fat ***** and status **** are ruining my chances of getting the best ******* daily in the world. Seriously, everyone else has these awesome cars besides us and we waste so much time and money on these retarded hybrids.

butthurt/

2ndGearRubber

Preach it brotha'. I'd love to have some of the euro cars. But 'murica refuses to allow even the current polo to be imported.


Personally, I blame obama.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

I'm not so sure about that.

VW sold over 1.4 million first-gen Rabbits in the US alone between 1974 and 1984, of which 406,000 were diesels.

That's roughly double the entire GLOBAL sales of the Miata from 1989 to the present day, and EIGHT TIMES total Miata sales in the US when adjusted for an equivalent time scale.

See also: VW Beetle, Datsun 210, Chevy Chevette, AMC Gremlin, Ford Pinto, Smart Fortwo, etc.

viperormiata

iTrader: (24)

Old, old, old and older. People aren't like that anymore, Joe. They need a big ******* tractor to haul around their beatuss kids and require antarctic a/c systems to keep the hamplanets cool.

By the way, there is a MINT mk1 rabbit diesel around here. I will offer cash for it if I ever get the chance.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Aren't they really?

I honestly don't know.

I mean, I was around then, and while I do remember the hair being larger and the TVs being smaller, I'm not sure that we've really changed all that radically. Granted, they fucked up the recipe for Chicken McNuggets and you can't get a McDLT anymore because the requisite dual-compartment styrofoam packaging is no longer socially acceptable, but aside from that, I really don't think we've evolved all that radically as a species. The white people still want all the oil, the brown people still want to kill the white people, and the President is still a ******* retard...



A/C is not that big a deal. Hell, it was available as an option on the SuperBeetle in the 70s. A modern A/C system does not add all that much weight, nor place all that much drag on the engine. In fact, there is some empirical evidence to support the claim that, in a modern car at highway speeds, the load on the engine from the A/C compressor is LESS than the aerodynamic penalty of having the windows down.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Joe - Yes, people's expectations and desires are significantly different than they were in the 1970s.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

The 100mpg Lupo cannot exist because the Nanny State now requires so much extra weight be added for crash bars, door bars, stability control systems (and all the components/computers/ABS), 43 airbags, active seatbelt tensioners, active headrests, etc. And the Murican consoomer can't abide manual mirrors, hand-crank windows, non-tilt steering wheels, non-electric seat adjusters, non-self dimming mirrors, a two speaker single DIN radio, a manual trans, 155 series tires, a lack of sound deadening material, the absence of illuminated vanity mirrors, no GPS navigation system, no cruise control, no satellite radio or bluetooth connectivity, no intermittent wipers, no power steering, and paltry acceleration.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

are you trying to say that gov't regulation stiffles progress?!

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

That perception, to a degree, is unfairly influenced by the Vocal Minority.

It's commonplace, and always has been, to believe that avarice, ignorance and vanity are "modern" innovations, the product's of one's own generation, and that "things were different back then."

I don't know how old you are, so forgive me if it seems I'm talking down, but I can assure you that in the 1970s and 80s, the American people, as a whole, were every bit as greedy and moronic as they are today. I mean, we had polyester leisure suits and pet rocks, for crying out loud.

Weird Al's 1984 song "Gonna buy me a condo" is practically a homage to the materialistic superficiality of the 1970s.


In fact, American automakers made precisely the same claim in the early 1970s as are being made now. Amid a sea of musclecars and land-yachts, the Big Three were absolutely convinced that virtually no market at all existed for stripped-down, no-frills, ultra-compact economy cars. (Remember that back then, cars like the Ford Falcon and the Chevy Nova were considered "compact." By today's standards, those cars were beasts.)

They were, of course, proved to be devastatingly wrong by the Japanese when "genuine" economy cars like the Datsun 210, the Honda Civic and the Toyota Carina started flooding across the ocean in droves.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Nor would it be reasonable for most people to want that. Those that would be willing to sacrifice all the modern conveniences and creature comforts would be in such small minority that no manufacturer would be able to make money selling such a shitty car.


Joe, I know your grasp of history is better than you are letting on. You are telling me that sometime in the early-to-mid 1970s, small economy based cars really took off? Wow.

That's shocking, pun intended.

As in, "oil shock."

You are also comparing a time when full-size, feature-laden domestic cars were getting high teens for combined fuel economy and the stripped-out import econo cars were getting over 80% better fuel economy (~12 vs 23 MPG in 1973) .

If you want to get 80% better fuel economy than a full-sized, feature-laden sedan now (about 28 MPG), you can buy a full-sized, feature-laden 50 MPG Prius.

If you want a cheap, no-frills, ****-box economy car, you can get a 35 MPG Nissan Versa for less than that 1970s Civic would have cost (adjusted for inflation) and STILL get features like AC and stereo.


Sources:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/cafe...alcarfleet.htm
http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/ri...ble_04_23.html
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymod...an_Versa.shtml

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

No, I am telling you that in the years leading up to this, American automakers blithely ignored the trend in both Asian and European automakers beginning to export small, no-frills cars to the US on the grounds that "nobody will want them."

In other words, the same argument which certain people are putting forth right now, and again at a time in which the consumer price of gasoline is a major issue.

The early econoboxes coming over from Germany and Japan in particular weren't just small and efficient, they were bare-bones. It wouldn't have added much weight to the car to tack on a bit of chome trim, or use higher-quality plastics and fabrics in the interior, or even style them such that they didn't look like a shoe box.

But this didn't really matter- people bought them despite the fact that they were ugly and felt cheap.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

We had one of these Honda Civic wagons for several years brand new. Dead nuts reliable, 5-speed, plenty of room, hand crank windows, rubber floormats, etc.



If they were sold new today they would weigh 500lbs more and need bigger engines and brakes and suspension components, etc.

If they were allowed to be sold in identical form to the way they were back then, I believe they would still sell very well because they were good cars and they made sense.