VW Beetle economy?

OzJavelin · 01-08-2006, 08:23 AM

Does anyone have an idea of L/100km a stock 1300/1600cc Beetle (early) would get? I've always liked early Beetles and thought might be an alternative daily driver, but I'm not sure if their economy is actually that good compared to a modern small car? I thought their light weight might help?

A friend of mine had a 56(?) oval window on '69 IRS floorpan with disc-brake frontend (adjustable torsion bars), twin-port 1600 .. and the mandatory 12V conversion. It was black with red slotted rims, Wolfsberg hubcaps, lowered and IMHO looked very cool. Not a bad one for a daily driver ..

Leah · 01-08-2006, 10:06 AM

Hey OzJavelin.... My first car was a bright purple '67 beetle. We live in the hills and do quite alot of driving. (30-35 kms roudn trip to work every day) + weekends etc. I would go through on average $30 a week or $40 if there was alot of driving. But that was a few years ago when fuel was cheap.

I still think I'll get another beetle in the near future. IMO theyre such cool cars if done up well!

GreenMachine · 01-08-2006, 10:17 AM

Apparently not THAT good on fuel, somewhere around 14-15/100 from memory. I reckon they're terrible to drive too, but that's just me!

OzJavelin · 01-08-2006, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Apparently not THAT good on fuel, somewhere around 14-15/100 from memory. I reckon they're terrible to drive too, but that's just me!

That's what I'm wondering? Doesn't sound any better than 3.8L/4.0L 6-cyl?

max · 01-08-2006, 11:20 AM

In the old money they (the 1300cc version) got about 26 miles per gallon around town.

plext · 01-08-2006, 11:39 AM

Which, if my mental arithmetic has not left me completely, is about 12.2-12.3 l/100km.

Not the most frugal beast in the world, but way less public shame than being seen in a Kia.

max · 01-08-2006, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plext

Which, if my mental arithmetic has not left me completely, is about 12.2-12.3 l/100km.

Not the most frugal beast in the world, but way less public shame than being seen in a Kia.

True true. I would rather a Cooper S (the original kind, circa 1968) than a
beetle. More driver fun, loads of mod scope.

**Mechan1k** · 01-08-2006, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by max

True true. I would rather a Cooper S (the original kind, circa 1968) than a
beetle. More driver fun, loads of mod scope.

Have to agree there ... the good ol' flying brick is a fun machine to fling around

OzJavelin · 01-08-2006, 04:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mechan1k

Have to agree there ... the good ol' flying brick is a fun machine to fling around

An old friend of mine had both a MkI and MkII Cooper S at the same time .. the MkII had a 45mm DCOE weber .. it truely "sucked"!!

39ClevoUte · 01-08-2006, 05:20 PM

A beetle uses no fuel what...so...ever!!!!! After you take it to the crusher.

Sourbastard · 01-08-2006, 07:42 PM

VW's are very efficient. This effort took only 5 litres of fuel.

Casper · 01-08-2006, 07:47 PM

Bah, after you roll one into oncoming traffic and kill yourself you wont worry about economy at all.

I would rather walk than get into a deathtrap like them... they are REALLY that bad in accident.

OzJavelin · 02-08-2006, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Casper

Bah, after you roll one into oncoming traffic and kill yourself you wont worry about economy at all.

I would rather walk than get into a deathtrap like them... they are REALLY that bad in accident.

Hmm .. in my opinion I'd still say I'd have a greater chance of death on a motorbike? At least most people could probably manage to see a Beetle ..

Casper · 02-08-2006, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OzJavelin

Hmm .. in my opinion I'd still say I'd have a greater chance of death on a motorbike? At least most people could probably manage to see a Beetle ..

No argument there.. the VW will beat the motorbike in an accident.. just.

GreenMachine · 02-08-2006, 08:43 AM

Bollocks! At least no one's ever been trapped in a burning motorbike...

Casper · 02-08-2006, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Bollocks! At least no one's ever been trapped in a burning motorbike...

no, thats true. Usually after an impact hard enough to trap someone in a car, even a VW, a motorbike rider is somewhere on the side of the road in a crumpled heap looking at the bright light at the end of the tunnel

:

max · 02-08-2006, 09:54 AM

When's someone going to come up with seat belts and air bags for motor bikes???

GreenMachine · 02-08-2006, 10:04 AM

I'm sure the '07 GoldWing has them, along with the heater and the 6-speaker sound system.

merlin · 02-08-2006, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by max

When's someone going to come up with seat belts and air bags for motor bikes???

We don't want all that extra weight and size! Best safety feature of a bike is being able to throttle and/or squeeze out of a trouble.

BTW my mates and I once had a Kombi van - it went through 8 engines in 12 months...

Steffo · 02-08-2006, 10:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plext

Which, if my mental arithmetic has not left me completely, is about 12.2-12.3 l/100km.

Not the most frugal beast in the world, but way less public shame than being seen in a Kia.

26 mpg = 9L/100km.

12.3L/100km = 19.12 mpg.

Steffo · 02-08-2006, 10:20 AM

Structurally, old Beetle's are pretty solid. I've seen one head on a 90s Golf and destroy it (MkIII Golf), and drive away from it.

They have little to nothing for actual driver saftey though. The car won't crumple, but you might inside it...

max · 02-08-2006, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

Structurally, old Beetle's are pretty solid. I've seen one head on a 90s Golf and destroy it (MkIII Golf), and drive away from it.

They have little to nothing for actual driver saftey though. The car won't crumple, but you might inside it...

No worse than a 1982 Mitsubishi L300 van eh?
Is a 2006 Barina any better if you got T-boned?
It all depends on how, what and the velocity at which you strike something, no? Don't like the juice being up front, but. Also, a battey under the back seat??? ****ty headlight strength courtesy 6 volt electrics. Gimme the Cooper S!!!!

new2ford · 02-08-2006, 07:34 PM

VW Beetle economy? That's not the real criterion for an old car surely? Better to go for a Leyland P76 which gets 10.1 - 12.5 Litres per 100 km with a V8 engine. Much more space, goes like a bat out of hell and you can chuck it around corners in a way that would see a beetle on its roof. (I once knew someone who rolled a beetle in Brunswick, Melbourne, which is as flat as a plate!) And if you get hit you're more likely to live than be flame grilled. I think you want a Beetle because you want a Beetle - no other reason is needed is it?

OzJavelin · 03-08-2006, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

I think you want a Beetle because you want a Beetle - no other reason is needed is it?

Kind of .. I want a Beetle because it's interesting and it's smaller, lighter and hopefully more fuel efficient than this:

.. or this ..

jim1606 · 03-08-2006, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plext

Which, if my mental arithmetic has not left me completely, is about 12.2-12.3 l/100km.

Not the most frugal beast in the world, but way less public shame than being seen in a Kia.

Dont diss kia they are a good lil company (a lil bland but better than any chinese company) and any old car tend to have poor feul economy. my advise is to buy a subaru because they are offering free feul with there cars at the min!

plext · 03-08-2006, 09:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steffo

26 mpg = 9L/100km.

12.3L/100km = 19.12 mpg.

True if you use American gallons.

Mind you, I was incorrect anyway, it's closer to 10.8L/100km.

new2ford · 03-08-2006, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OzJavelin

Kind of .. I want a Beetle because it's interesting and it's smaller, lighter and hopefully more fuel efficient than this:
.. or this ..

You could put a couple of davits on the stern and winch the Beetle onboard!

new2ford · 03-08-2006, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plext

True if you use American gallons.

Mind you, I was incorrect anyway, it's closer to 10.8L/100km.

On the P76 calculation, 10.1 L/100km is 28 mpg so you sound about right. So not only could the VW get shamed by a V8 on fuel economy its contemporary rival, the Mini, was getting about 50 mpg!! The VW did make a nice cack cack noise though, which is probably where the fuel consumption was going.

I always found having my face pressed against the windscreen while knowing there was a fuel tank about 10cm in front of me a bit disconcerting - not to mention the handling, admittedly no worse than than the Yank Tanks illustrated by OzJavelin in this thread.

OzJavelin · 04-08-2006, 06:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by new2ford

I always found having my face pressed against the windscreen while knowing there was a fuel tank about 10cm in front of me a bit disconcerting

Just like an A-model Ford!