VW was once known as innovators of fun cars at a good price point. People will drive a lower hp/better mileage car if there is some other redeeming feature, like great styling, packaging, and engineering. Add a touch of “return to our roots” nostalgia, and this project seems like a slam dunk.

I have a VW. I like the older ones up to MK4, but VW has really lost it’s way IMO. I’ll believe this when I see it.

Interesting car, I’d never buy one though

This is pretty cool. This is the type of car I’d rather see instead of hybrids. A Yaris costs $15k and gets an average of 36mpg as compared to a Prius which is much heavier, costs $7k more, and only gets an estimated 4mpg additional milage. Smaller, lighter vehicles with a smaller engine. I can’t imagine this car being in real need of an advanced traction control system with a 3 cylinder engine… The issue with a rear engine car is when the driver lifts off the gas around a corner, the car will want to spin out. How much of that can really be generated by a 3 cylinder? I don’t know, but I am curious.

Theoretically, I think small cars are great. A bit daunting to have to share the road with so many full size pick-ups, SUV’s and semi’s. My guess is $5/gallon gas and we were really see them populate the highways of North America.

No power steering, that’s progress for ya!

Whoa Nellie, 130 inch wheelbase, ten inches more than a Chrysler 300? How about 103?

No power steering?? Why bother putting in windows or a transmission while their at it.

If this thing seriously has a 130 inch wheel base, that would be pretty interesting to see.

3 cylinder engine = no power steering. Might actually have to ‘drive’ the car. What a novelty.

Sounds good. I grew up driving 67 VW Beetle. It was a great little car, very simple, very reliable.

Good move if they can pull it off. Rear Engine has some great packaging efficiencies especially for small cars. Now, if they can only put a 4cyl boxer motor in it, then they’d have themselves something really special!

What’s the point?

Having the engine hanging out over the back just causes all sorts of problems that have to be solved using trickery in order to give a stable ride. There’s nothing to gain by doing this that wouldn’t be much better if they went for a mid mounting instead. ‘A sophisticated stability control system’ really just translates as ‘lots of electrickery to dull the ride and stop you putting yourself through a hedge backwards’. The 911 may still be rear engined through bloody mindedness, but I don’t know anyone who doubts that the Cayman has the potential to be a much better car, and would be if it wouldn’t ‘t damage sales of the 911.

Pointless.

Stridder44: As for power steering – you get used to needing it with torque heavy front wheel drive cars, but a well balanced, lightweight rear wheel drive with a light engine makes it pretty much redundant. If you ever get to drive an old Lotus or a Caterham, you’ll forget power steering ever existed

Does it seem odd to anyone else that the man who pushed VW to move out of the people’s Car arena is now pushing to get them back? That said however I like the idea a lot. The present Beetle always seemed like the anti-beetle; heavy, expensive, complicated and a total loss when it comes to functionality.

is there a reason that the rear engine car would still have a grill? I am referring to the picture in the link that shows what hte car might look like. thanks.

GRAND IDEA! better be a new beetle for the masses.

Who needs power steering when you have a lightweight RWD car??

hmm good. now i can have an daily driver in my driveway and a mustang in my garage

130 inches total length, not wheelbase. It’ll be just short of 11 feet long. That’s small — about ten inches shorter than a MINI Cooper.

This could be the REAL Beetle 2.0 — a subversive, stylish, popular, efficient car that is genuinely different, not a piece-of-**** Golf plartform with a new shell plopped over it.

Gas prices hit $3 last summer and they’re already over $4 in some places this summer. $5 next summer seems like a real possibility. “Insanely high” prices are the New Normal. Anything small car with a little style or cachet to it will sell like mad. Chrysler Aspens, not so much.

Thanks Tom F, I read the article a little too fast. Power steering,well with electric assist it could be done, but like interphase said you might not miss it; wow,a car with true road feel. Hopefully they’re not thinking of bringing back the air cooled engine. HA.

yeah bring back the old beetle

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitsubishi_i for the haters of rear engined cars

mitsu already did it and made a bunch of cash. now if VW can make it sporty plz do. I drove a friends fiat 500, and that was a blast. so if Vdub can make something similar go for it.

On paper the idea is very interesting and could prove to be a hit with the proper tuning. The idea of a nav system in it though seems counter-intuitive to the idea IMO. I’m also afraid that unless the weight is very low the lack of power steering will turn this car off to many non-enthusiast that have never driven a car without it. While, as an enthusiast, I like the car I fear that if it’s ever produced the market for it would be too limited. This will turn into another Pheaton, just cheaper.

If VW wants to do another Beetle – the “NEW NEW Beetle” or “Beetle 3.0″ – this could very well be the right way to go.

About the Prius supposedly ony getting 40 MPG?
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/LongTerm/articleId=101393
Know a REAL owner of an 04…last tiem we spoke to her was last yearaorund this time. 44K miles, bestMPG was 54 city , 48 hwy, avg 50 mpg, she said.
Worst mpg WAS FIRST TANK of fuel…..39 MPG combined( see, this is what irks me, these magazines do a 1-2 week test of a new car, not 100% broken in, and claim” low mpg”LOL… Edmunds STILL has the 04, to 100,000 miles… and has hit OVER 50 MPG. Just like Anne’s car, the more miles the better the MPG it gets. her’s got 42-44 until 25,000 miles, then , suddenly, climbed more and more each tank. Edmunds seems ot prove this phenomenon, BUT NO ONE MENTIONS IT IN THE PRESS! Our tC got 30 first tank, 28 for the next 60000 miles, then after 7K miles, or 2 months of ownership, our Scion tC started getting 30-31MPG hwy, now gets 32-34. Been this way the past 75K miles, nearly 3 years).

Enough off my griping and complaining(and fact finding).
130 inches long?Maybe if I lived in Japan, or this were 1980, when the other cars were smaller than today’s.
Today we call a Accent sedan a subcompact(at 14 feet long, give or take an inch), where as in 90,they were called compact cars.

Yesteedays mid-sized sedan is today’s compact, and so on.

As for new VW Beetle? Got an emial awhile back with Just a photo… showed a conpceptual drawing, of a Sports Coupe with VW Beetle like front end. That’s what ya need, not some golf cart.
I am sure someone is willing ot take a chance on getting squashed by an Accent in an accident, lol, but not me!

Make it look like a Beetle. Keep those price points, and they’d sell a million of them.

The Ariel Atom is also rear-engined (in addition to the 911 and Smart).

This is much better than the proposed FWD Scirocco concept.

For a short range city car, I’d definitely consider one at a $14,000 price point.

You can’t beat the neatness of a rear engined economy car.

LJ – I’m going by Motor Trend’s long term review of a 2004 Prius… “41.6″. I guess I rounded down 1.6mpg.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/112_0601_2004_toyota_prius/gas_mileage.html

Hyperion – It certainly would be different to throw a briefcase under the front hood!

I think so too, Piablo!

In addition to the front hood, if there is just a bit of room for a travel suitcase in the back it will be perfect.

WIth the Ariel Atom, the majority of the engine’s weight is slightly in front of the rear axle – I’d say that makes it mid engined, even though the minimalist bodywork suggests otherwise. The Atom is too much for an average driver to use every day, and this car would have to have completely benign handling to work for its target market.

testing

Eh, no thanks…I’ll stick with front-engined cars WITH power steering.

Well, the Atom’s engine sits atop the rear axle: http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/ariel-atom-13.jpg and with a 36/64 weight balance, I would say that it is rear engine. I just mention it because it was ignored in the article.

Ah. I see. Thank you interphase and TomF for clearing that up/explaining.

Volkswagens are for gays. Always have and always will be.

Seems a bit pointless to revert to rear-engine/RWD for a low-price car and have to add expensive stability control to make it handle and steer predictably. Where the New Beetle was touted as “Round for a Reason”, this should be called “Retro for no Reason!”

Of course, if VW does decide to revert to rear-engine/RWD, expect the next Ford Ka to feature the hand-crank start and complex transmission from the Model T.

Volkswagens are for gays. Always have and always will be.
Comment by V-series, posted on May9 at 10:09 pm

classy comment… this is one true expert on cars AND life

This VW concept is also the subject of a two-page spread in the new Automobile magazine.

autonutt, I think the New Beetle was one of the the most pointless frivolities money could buy. It was a VW Golf and it had nothing to do with a “Beetle” other than its general shape. That car was the epitomy of “retro for no reason”.

On the other hand, a new rear engined Beetle that is smaller than the last model and is built on the same engineering philosophy as the old car with a smaller engine than the outgoing 2.0 Turbo… that represents to me “retro FOR a reason”.

I’ll pay for some stability control just to get a rear drive small car.

No power steering? Excellent!