I personally think that a South African proudly stating with a straight face he owns the last Volkswagen Citi Billabong ever built would be the height of awesomeness. [www.vw.co.za]#vwgolf
best autocross car I ever had was a 77 VW rabbit 4 door. Stiff little chassis, roll down rear windows, slapped a little koni shocks, 50 series 15" pirelli p700Z tires and some stiff anitroll bars and the thing was as roller skate. Weighed next to nothing (1750lbs as I remember) and with a JH big valve 110horse engine was fast and revy. Closest car I have found yet was the Focus SVT which I now own. Light, revy, taut and discreet. How a city car should be. #vwgolf
@compOsvt: 1 h-click on the SVTF choice. Why? Because all the 3 cars I've ever owned in my life were Focuses. 1) 01'ZX3 2) 03' SVTF 3) 04'SVTF Euro (current car)
@ppiddy: the four door was a different animal. Much shorter door opening then the 2 door and a nice stiff column in there too. Back inside tires spent much of their life up in the air around any corner. Like I said for a 1750lbs car it was stiff, for a WRC rally car not so much. #vwgolf
This is the kind of VW I grew up with and miss the most. Well, I actually grew up with a 600,000 mile Sirocco but you get the point. I know the MK 1 Golf would of never made it to the U.S. thanks to current safety standards, but I wonder what our world would be like if these cars were sold up to this day? #vwgolf
Not to nitpick here, but the orginal Mk1 came out in 1975, which means we're at 35 years, which is more than a bit more than a quarter century. The 25 years was the South African production.
Now where am I going to get my modern-looking VW steering wheel without the airbag?
FTGDWolverineEdition'09 promoted this comment
Edited by Jimal is a non-attorney spokesperson at 11/06/09 10:14 AM
Jimal is a non-attorney spokesperson was starred
Jimal is a non-attorney spokesperson was unstarred
The first-gen Golf was the near-perfect in-town car.
Small, light, roomy as hell, and ultra simple. The diesel version, while painfully slow and loud, came with its own built-in smokescreen capability and got like 50 MPG. Plus, it needed no anti-theft system. Who'd bother...and you'd be able to catch 'em on foot.
Nowadays, 2,000 lbs. is just the add-on crap in a small car.
"But where are my 43 air bags and my dual 9" DVD monitors?"
@I was drivin' that Model A: I knew a guy who had one of the diesels. Yeah, gutless, but still kinda fun to drive. He lent it to some moron who thought he was being thoughtful when he filled the tank before returning it. With gasoline, of course. Probably wasn't the first or last time that ever happened. #vwgolf
@layabout:
I wonder what the differences are between these and the ones that rolled out of the factory in PA back in the day. (aside from the whole steering wheel thing) #vwgolf
@Tiberiuswise: Notice how the grille is slightly leaned back from vertical on the pictured car, like on the Mark II Golf. All original Mk. I Golfs/Rabbits had strictly vertical grilles. The US-made version got rectangular headlights, wraparound front signal lights, wide taillights, and an interior that was color-coordinated to hell and back. #vwgolf
@tonyola: By "pictured car", I mean the car featured in the article, not my posted picture, which is an '82 US-made Rabbit. My edit pencil turned up missing. #vwgolf
@tonyola:
Also, the wheels look pushed out a little on the black one in the post. I'm tempted to think some suspension and other engineering refinements were made. #vwgolf
@Tiberiuswise: I'm sure that there were some minor engineering changes for US production. Also, the wraparound turn signals and wide taillights were only on the 1981 and later cars. The '79-'80 Rabbits had more Euro-like front end and rear lights, though still with rectangular headlights. #vwgolf
Like Ben said, GM did it the right way. Not only can you drive 40 miles on electricity alone, but because the engine is not directly connected to the drivetrain, it provides additional benefits.
Now I'm not sure how GM is going to use this advantage, but being that it is only running to charge the batteries, you could benefit by only running the engine at its most efficient operating conditions (Wide open throttle, peak torque, etc.), unlike a normal engine which has to run over its entire range of operating conditions, with most of them way below peak efficiency.
@Eiknujrac: Like Ben said, GM did it the right way. ... being that it [the engine] is only running to charge the batteries.
But that's not what Ben said and that's not how the Volt works. Ben wrote "It doesn't make sense to charge the batteries and drive the wheels." When the Volt's battery pack runs down to ~50% state of charge, the engine runs to generate electricity to power the motor to turn the wheels. Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah says "We’re going to tune the system to operate efficiently at a few points" and they can route any electricity generated beyond the instantanteous demand of the motor to the batteries, but the Volt is not trying to return the batteries to full charge. Should the batteries get to 80+%, maybe because you slammed on the brakes or drove downhill for a while, then the engine will turn off and the batteries will take over again.
Take all of this with a grain of salt since NO ONE outside of GM has driven a Volt with a depleted battery pack, but gm-volt.com is reporting the engineers' latest thinking.
You want to recharge a battery at home where electricity is cheapest - otherwise we'd all run gasoline generators to power our homes!
Ben Wojdyla promoted this comment
Edited by superbadd75, now I remember why I left... at 10/09/09 4:55 PM
superbadd75, now I remember why I left... was starred
superbadd75, now I remember why I left... was unstarred
GM wants to get you where you're going with the cheapest energy source available. For the first 40 miles, that's electricity, for the rest of the available range, that's gasoline. It doesn't make sense to charge the batteries and drive the wheels. Drive the wheels with the e-motors, keep it simple without some complex engine decoupling mechanism.
When you get home, plug in the car and juice the batteries with cheap electricity instead of filling them up with expensive gasoline generated electricity.
11/06/09
[www.vw.co.za] #vwgolf
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
@Mr_Sives_Remotoc:
Italian design + Russian Improvement + Egyptian build = this. #vwgolf
11/06/09
11/06/09
Just love them. #vwgolf
11/06/09
What a sad day. #vwgolf
11/07/09
11/08/09
11/09/09
11/09/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
11/06/09
Now where am I going to get my modern-looking VW steering wheel without the airbag?
11/06/09
11/06/09
Small, light, roomy as hell, and ultra simple. The diesel version, while painfully slow and loud, came with its own built-in smokescreen capability and got like 50 MPG. Plus, it needed no anti-theft system. Who'd bother...and you'd be able to catch 'em on foot.
Nowadays, 2,000 lbs. is just the add-on crap in a small car.
"But where are my 43 air bags and my dual 9" DVD monitors?"
Sigh. #vwgolf
11/06/09
11/06/09
I hope the last ones are all GTi-s #vwgolf
11/06/09
11/06/09
I wonder what the differences are between these and the ones that rolled out of the factory in PA back in the day. (aside from the whole steering wheel thing) #vwgolf
11/06/09
@Tiberiuswise: Notice how the grille is slightly leaned back from vertical on the pictured car, like on the Mark II Golf. All original Mk. I Golfs/Rabbits had strictly vertical grilles. The US-made version got rectangular headlights, wraparound front signal lights, wide taillights, and an interior that was color-coordinated to hell and back. #vwgolf
11/06/09
11/06/09
Also, the wheels look pushed out a little on the black one in the post. I'm tempted to think some suspension and other engineering refinements were made. #vwgolf
11/06/09
@Tiberiuswise: I'm sure that there were some minor engineering changes for US production. Also, the wraparound turn signals and wide taillights were only on the 1981 and later cars. The '79-'80 Rabbits had more Euro-like front end and rear lights, though still with rectangular headlights. #vwgolf
10/09/09
Now I'm not sure how GM is going to use this advantage, but being that it is only running to charge the batteries, you could benefit by only running the engine at its most efficient operating conditions (Wide open throttle, peak torque, etc.), unlike a normal engine which has to run over its entire range of operating conditions, with most of them way below peak efficiency.
10/10/09
But that's not what Ben said and that's not how the Volt works. Ben wrote "It doesn't make sense to charge the batteries and drive the wheels." When the Volt's battery pack runs down to ~50% state of charge, the engine runs to generate electricity to power the motor to turn the wheels. Volt chief engineer Andrew Farah says "We’re going to tune the system to operate efficiently at a few points" and they can route any electricity generated beyond the instantanteous demand of the motor to the batteries, but the Volt is not trying to return the batteries to full charge. Should the batteries get to 80+%, maybe because you slammed on the brakes or drove downhill for a while, then the engine will turn off and the batteries will take over again.
Take all of this with a grain of salt since NO ONE outside of GM has driven a Volt with a depleted battery pack, but gm-volt.com is reporting the engineers' latest thinking.
You want to recharge a battery at home where electricity is cheapest - otherwise we'd all run gasoline generators to power our homes!
10/09/09
10/09/09
GM wants to get you where you're going with the cheapest energy source available. For the first 40 miles, that's electricity, for the rest of the available range, that's gasoline. It doesn't make sense to charge the batteries and drive the wheels. Drive the wheels with the e-motors, keep it simple without some complex engine decoupling mechanism.
When you get home, plug in the car and juice the batteries with cheap electricity instead of filling them up with expensive gasoline generated electricity.
10/10/09
10/09/09
10/03/09
10/04/09