The wheels do look original, not a bad effort compared to that last one. Looks very porsche .
Volkswagen Beetle car review
Retro car designs fall into one of two categories. The Good like the Fiat 500 and the Bad like the 1998 VW Beetle and BMW’s huge Mini. The 1998 Beetle was a particularly bad example with underpinnings that represented a nadir of VW engineering and a body that betrayed its lazy California-penned origins. It was an insult to …
-
Friday 9th November 2012 08:22 GMT Anonymous Coward
So a rebodied golf for people who want to look cool.
The golf is already massively overrated for what it is. To then rebody it so that people who want form over function can then show it off to their "friends" means you actually have a rubbish car that is the exact opposite of what Ferdinand Porsche was going for (a practical car and affordable car to get the masses moving and make Germany glorious again). This is a car for people who want people on facebook to like them.
85%? I don't think I will be rushing out to buy one.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 08:35 GMT Toxteth O'Gravy
Re: So a rebodied golf for people who want to look cool.
Eh? What the heck is wrong with form over function? Who *doesn't* buy a car they think looks good*? That's half the point. You're right, the Golf is overrated, but that doesn't make it bad, or this one either just because of its looks. The Beetle is not for me but I can see why other folk might want one.
*Fiat Multipla owners excepted, obviously
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 11:45 GMT Kristian Walsh
Re: "golf is already massively overrated"
Yes it can be overrated, and it regularly is. Soft-touch interior plastics are no replacement for competent electrics, reliability or water sealing. But these aren't showroom impressions; they're the things that only show up after months of owning the car, and people are generally too proud to say "I was a fool to rave about this car - it's junk" after spending twenty grand on it.
Anything you can't see is cut back to the minimum: The new Golf VII has a torsion-beam rear suspension to save money on the entry models (below 120 bhp). Of course, this is passed by without mention by the reviewers who praise the handling and ride quality of the independently-suspended high-spec models they're given for review...
-
Friday 9th November 2012 12:31 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: "golf is already massively overrated"
Nice touch pre-emptively disenfranchising anybody who disagrees with you with the "too proud" comment, you should be a politician :)
VAG are usually considered amongst the best in class for reliability, and this certainly matches my experience. Can you back up your assertion of the lack of "competence" with sources?
-
Friday 9th November 2012 13:17 GMT Kristian Walsh
Re: "golf is already massively overrated"
"Considered" is what I was saying. VW are at best a middle-ranking manufacturer in reliability, but they used to be much better, and the perception persists, helped along by a lot of ad spending. Perceptions work both ways: In the USA, VW is considered to be an unreliable brand, and this belief is much stronger than the facts would bear out.
Have a look at Warranty Direct's Top 100: http://www.reliabilityindex.com/top-100 - highest placed VW is the Polo, at #23. VW Golf comes in at #97. This table is based on claim cost and frequency.
This index is skewed towards older models, as doesn't include vehicles within the manufacturer warranty period. Also, it doesn't distinguish between generations of a vehicle. All that said, it's still one of the most reliable indicators of actual performance.
the 2011 J.D. Power (self-selected, I know), rates VW slightly above average overall, but no better. If you want a perception challenged, Alfa Romeo are ranked joint 10th with VW in their latest survey.
This is in line with what acquaintances in the motor trade tell me: VW have a developed a quality problem in recent years, they're trying to fix it, but they're also trying to increase marketshare and margins while reducing costs - these are incompatible goals.
-
Monday 12th November 2012 08:11 GMT DRendar
Re: "golf is already massively overrated"
I own, and still absolutely love my nearly 10 yr old Golf mk4, PD TDi. Started life as a 110, but with an economy mapping thats up to 130ish with a slight increase in MPG. I've done nearly 160k in it and it's still going strong - built like a tank.
It's as reliable as I could possibly hope it to be - the only thing that's ever gone wrongwith it (outside of the usual running costs / exhausts, brakes etc) was a short between the rear demister and the brakes, which amusingly caused the brake lights to come on when I put the demister on. This was fixed in 10 minutes by my local garage during a service I wasn't even charged for it as it was so minor.
However for my next car, I'm seriously considering going elsewhere for my next cat, which I'll be purchasing in the next 12 months or so... The reason being that ever since this period, VW reliability has gone down the drain.
My local VW specialists advise me that mk5/6 Golfs get brought in for faults 2-3 times as often for little problems as the mk4s did, apparently they started using "cheap Spanish components" that fail all the time.
This is a real shame, but probably the reason for the low reliability ratings. VW trying to cut corners on the more recent models.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 08:48 GMT Anonymous Coward
Why the 500 works
The 500 sells because although more expensive than the panda (on which it is based), it retains a lot of the charm of the original. It's also not too overpriced.
The bini is a fake and many mini owners won't touch one. It's also too expensive, you can spec some to over £40k!
The beetle is the same, an overpriced golf in drag, completely defying the precept of the original.
This or a golf, neither.
-
-
Monday 12th November 2012 10:31 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Why the 500 works
The currently generation of Bini's are fat and heavy, while they handle ok, they don't have the feel of the Mini. It's closer to a Go kart than a car.
You need to rev the tits off the engine to get it to do anything, one of the benefits of the A Series is the low down torque.
The fundamental benefit the Mini had, was that it wasn't pretentious, the Bini is the complete opposite.
Given that over 5 million Minis were sold over the years, you would think that would be the first market they would be aiming for!
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 09:32 GMT Bodhi
Re: Why the 500 works
I take it those are the people driving round in original Minis with "100% BMW Free" proudly written on the back? I always found those stickers to be fairly pointless - we can tell BMW had nothing to do with your car, by the fact half the trim has fallen off and all the steam coming out from the engine bay.....
-
Tuesday 13th November 2012 10:31 GMT MJI
Re: Why the 500 works - free marketing
It also has the best marketing money cannot buy.
Name 2 well known Fiat 500 owners.
Name 1 well known Fiat 500 fan.
If you are going to recommend a small car, why would you not choose the Top Gear endorsed one.
Richard and Mindy Hammond have them.
Jeremy Clarkson likes them.
James May prefers the Panda.
Now two of 500 fans work on a well known TV show and have driven a lot of cars, so I think their choice is very good for marketing.
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 11:13 GMT Michael Strorm
Re: An improvement
"At least with this remake you can tell the difference between the front & the arse."
You said pretty much what I was going to say.
It always struck me that, viewed side-on, the old "new" Beetle was near-symmetric, whereas the original definitely wasn't- at a basic level, they were actually quite different shapes. The "new(er)" Beetle succeeded in that people would look at it and know it was meant to be a Beetle, but put next to its namesake it was quite clearly different.
This new one at least more closely resembles the original in this respect, but it also has undeniable Porsche 911 vibes. Maybe not surprising as both were designed by the same guy and ultimately variations on the same basic theme, albeit taken from totally different directions.
Of course, it's still an overpriced pastiche, a total lifestyle-accessory sellout of the original "people's car" concept. Then again, one probably doesn't want to be *too* purist about respecting its origins- which were, let's not forget- as a Nazi-commissioned car for the "peoples" of the Master Race by a guy who also designed military hardware for them. :-O
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 09:05 GMT Esskay
Not a bad looking car, they've done a much better job of capturing the original than they did with the last one, particularly with that roofline... but unfortunately, it's going to be sold in the same showroom as the Golf and the Polo.
Essentially being a (soon to be superceded) Golf with contrived interior space due to the styling, you'd have to be a really massive beetle fan (or a really massive wanker, depending on perspective) to try both and still choose the Beetle. Even if you convince yourself you can live without the space, you then have to justify to yourself that it's worth more than a Polo - despite the fact that the smaller, cheaper to buy, cheaper to run, (presumably) cheaper to insure, less wank-ish & better handling Polo also comes with an extra seat in the back.
Also the imitation sidestep on the bottom of the doors look pants.
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 11:17 GMT I ain't Spartacus
Re: weird
It's a hell of a lot nicer looking than the last
abominationattempt. But, as you say, the back looks wrong. It seems to be riding higher than the front, and seems a bit too long, and not quite curvy enough - I guess to get a bigger boot.I still think the Fiat 500 wins hands-down though. It's not horrifically expensive and looks great. The problem with doing a reboot of the Mini and the Beetle is that they were both supposed to be cheap cars for the masses, and now they're premium 'lifestyle' products.
The other big problem is that modern safety systems, not to mention modern lard-arses, require cars to be so much bigger. I guess that's worst for the Mini, which simply isn't, because of the name. But the Fiat is also huge, compared to the old 500, and it doesn't look wrong, in the way the Mini does.
-
-
-
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 12:10 GMT VWDan
Re: Can't drop a 911 lump in
Who is "they"? I'm sure there are Beetles around with 911 engines in*, but I doubt there is many and I doubt there ever was many. That's an absolutely huge undertaking.
The Suburua engines you're thinking of are Flat 4, which is miles apart.
*I say this because, like I said in my previous post, anything is possible. I've even seen a Dodge Viper powered split screen camper van.
-
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 09:33 GMT elaar
The new mini (in any form) has had its image completely ruined, as it has been bought and driven mainly by annoying little (daddies) girls.
I quite like the look of the new beetle (much more so than the previous new beetle), however, the performance sounds pretty shocking for a new car.
My Golf TDI has better 0-60 performance and averages 60mpg per tank. Why such a lousy engine in a new car?
-
Friday 9th November 2012 09:55 GMT Arrrggghh-otron
Why the hate for the last version?
My first car was the 1970 1200 Beetle. I still have it and thanks to lowered suspension and wider alloys, is as much fun to drive as a go-kart. (I would also add that it is about as much fun to drive in winter as a go-kart due to the feeble heating - I blame the after market heat exchangers - when it was all original VW parts the heating vent would be hot enough to burn my foot!).
Mrs Arrrggghh-otron bought a 'new' beetle 12 years ago, we still have it, and I have to say that it has been great as a daily driver (it too has uprated suspension as the original was a bit sloppy). I still don't like the look of the arse end and the head room in the back is awful, but those are my only complaints, neither of which really affect me.
I do like the look of the new new beetle in profile, looks much more like the trusty 1200 but the arse end is still a bit weird in these photos - anyone else see the resemblance to a Volvo?
I reserve judgement until I see one in the flesh.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 10:44 GMT /dev/null
Platforms
So the A4 (or PQ34 as VW Group call it now) platform was "dull and wretched", but the A5 (or PQ35) platform is "a country mile better". In terms of dynamics, the main difference between the two was the rear suspension - torsion beam on the former, multi-link on the latter. Interestingly, the New New Beetle only gets the PQ35 rear suspension on the 2.0 TSI model. What do the lesser variants have? You guessed it, torsion beam!
As for the "daft rear spoiler", I don't think that back end is going to generate much downforce by itself, so I think I'd rather have one, thanks. Anybody remember the hasty recall of the original, spoiler-less Audi TT?
-
Friday 9th November 2012 11:51 GMT The New Turtle
These comments are funny, though a little sad. I wonder which of the Astra drivers reviewing cars from their desks have ever sat in the '98 version or will sit in (let alone drive) one of these.
I like the look of this one, and it's a car that I feel I could drive without embarrassment, where as the last one was so obviously a womans car. As for heritage, this one definitely has an early Porsche look to it, where as the older 'new' beetle was much more faithful to the later versions of the original beetle.
Thank goodness for cars that aren't all identical tin jelly moulds, painted silver and grey.
GO! seems most appropriate for a car review.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 12:32 GMT Wize
Don't like
They like to try and sell cars based on the original and popular originals (Mini, VW Beetle , etc) by using their names. They only have a passing resemblance to them, especially the new mini that looks like its eaten a few old Minis in its time.
Part of me wants them to re-do the VW Camper van. Would love to see new versions of the Split Screen model with its iconic lines, but worried what kind of nightmare it would look like. Probably a number 27 bus with a bad two tone paint job going by what they do with everything else.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 12:59 GMT Jemma
No, no and again no
Firstly you forgot to mention the man behind the Beetle in the first place - chap called Adolf if I recall. Had a penchant for odd moustaches and his own neice (amongst his more likeable attributes).
As to Porsche 'designing' the original he didnt. He nicked the T97 from Ledwinka and Tatra, changed a few angles and phoned it in from a Nuremburg beerhall. VW were sued over that post war and Hitler personally banned the production of the T97. The T87, the 97s bigger brother earned itself a place in history when an official order went out banning the SS from using it on the basis that it killed more SS officers than the entire czech resistance (V8 in the boot and crossply tires are a baaaad combination, ask a 911 owner).
If you are going to review what amounts to little less than a cynical marketing exercise at least get the story right. Saying Porsche designed the original beetle is like giving John Cooper the credit for the original Mini.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 14:01 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: No, no and again no
Hmmm, so which parts are interchangeable between a Beetle and a T97? The prototype Beetles weighed about 650 kg, whereas the T97 was more than 1100 kg - doesn't sound like quite the same car to me?
Anyway, it's not Hitler you want to thank for the Beetle, it's Major Ivan Hirst of the REME. Without the British Army getting the factory up and running after the war, the Porsche Typ 60 would have been a forgotten pre-war curiosity.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 15:37 GMT Git
Re: No, no and again no
Yes. I met him when I was a young lad, and he had an NSU Ro80 at the time. Lovely old chap, still very proper and clearly an educated and experienced man. He lived near Huddersfield, and I was taken to meet him when visiting relatives in the area. His contribution to the German car industry is overlooked by many, but was clearly very influential.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 17:12 GMT Jemma
Re: No, no and again no
The concept was the same down to the air cooled engine, location & shape. Ledwinka successfully maintained with good reason it was a copy since its documented that porsche was looking over his shoulder at the blueprints. As to the british soldier you mention, your dead right, but my point still stands - if Adolf didn't commission it he wouldnt have been able to rescue it. That story is trotted out every time to make vws pink and snugly and kiddie friendly - just like bayer and basf strangely dont call themselves IG Farben these days. Odd how nasa are really quiet bout a chap called von braun and his brother, you know the ones, the high ranking SS too. Whitewashing the truth, like that, is dangerous because in time the reality is lost and then its time for the next koom valley spectacular.
-
Friday 9th November 2012 17:59 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: No, no and again no
Air-cooled engines, rear engines and funny-shaped cars were hardly unique to Tatra in those days - have a look at a Mercedes-Benz 170H for instance, or the Standard Superior (another car that the Beetle was allegedly a straight copy of). And the quotation you refer to was from Porsche himself - "Well, sometimes I looked over his shoulder and sometimes he looked over mine". Not so much industrial espionage, as two engineers in the same business sharing ideas, perhaps?
-
-
-
-
Friday 9th November 2012 15:36 GMT Chris 228
Hardly
The '98 New Beeetle was an excellent update on the original Beetle and sold well as a result. The latest rendition roughly based on some early drawings of the original Beetle that Ferdinand Porsche wisely chose to abandon, is FUGLY and not selling well at all as a result. The latest model was some pipedream of a marketing group who thought the New Beetle was too feminine so the current model is suppose to be more masculine. People voting with their wallet have decided the current model sucks.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
