Why did the old VW die?

Question

In 1935 VW had a car that got 35mpg in the 70's it was averaging around 50 and above...with this threat of global warming(I say that with caution)....why can't car manufacturaers make a car that gets that much MPG?
It's bit funny that a gasoline engine was getting 50mpg back way when and now we have to figure out how to get that much MPG with a hybrid.

Answer 1

I've asked that same question.

I know someone who had a Honda back in the 70's and she says it got 60 mpg. I don't know how much gas was then, but she also told me that the front page of Time magazine told us all we were going to die from the Coming Ice Age.

We were supposed to be all dead before the year 2000.

These same scientists are still trying to convince us of the next impending doom.

But back to the subject... I think the engines back then were really small and 4-cylinder and no one wants those anymore so they prefer to use more gas and get more power.

I don't think hybrids pay for themselves. So hybrids are kind of a scam, just like "global warming."

Answer 2

That VW and the Honda had no air conditioning, no stereo system, no pollution control equipment, no safety features like airbags, an unreinforced frame, a manual transmission, and a much smaller engine. You could make a car like that today that would get fairly high mileage but nobody would buy it because it wouldn't go 0-60 in 6 seconds, you couldn't listen to Kruntmuphin with the bass turned up so the guy in the neighboring time zone could hear, and if some trouserweasel in a Hummer hit you, you would be served up as quarter-pounders at mickey-D's. Not to mention the air quality in most major cities would be so bad it would be like living in a smokestack 24x7.

You could make a car that would get around 70 mpg today and have all the safety features, pollution control, and amenities like stereos and such, but it wouldn't accelerate very well, and most men equate their virility with how fast their car gets to the next red light 400 yards down the road.

The problem is not technology, fast inefficient cars are what people want. Hell, there are people here who would claim it is their *right* to drive such a vehicle because that is what freedom is all about.

Answer 3

Well some of it has to do with the restrictive polution equipment we have to put on cars such as the cat converter. Other reasons are things like reformulated gas and 10% ethonol. You do realize that these gas blends lead to lower fuel economy don't you? Lets not forget that in 1935 and 1970 we had Lead Gas.

Part of the problems with you guys is you look at stats like this with this mindset but don't understand the bigger picture. It's just like the compact floresent light bulbs your pushing today. Yeah, they are great, but now we are dealing with a mercury contamination problem as the start entering the waste disposal system. Sometimes more is less.

Answer 4

I had a VW in the 70's. Anyone that says they got 50 mpg did not know how to divide or was prevaricating. As far as you conspiracy theorists deciding that "they" killed the VW because it was too good, that isn't the case. They were such polluters that it was not economically feasible to make them for the US market. They were also very unsafe, almost sure to crack your head on the windshield even if you had a minor accident, even with seat belts on. They were also slower than snot, and the heater did not work when you were at stopights.

Answer 5

It was too good of a car. Good gas mileage, good simple engine, good body work, it lasts and lasts and lasts...
Soooo... they killed it!
Business is no business if you keep hanging on to a certain product and you don't change and buy new products
In fact, the VW beetle is bad for business. How are they going to make more money if nobody buys new cars?
So they killed it.
By the way, the VW is not the only car that got killed. There are others like the Morris Minor and Austin Mini from England, The Fiat 850 from Italy, Norton and Triumph bikes and Willys Jeeps.

Answer 6

The automakers don't make nearly as much profit off of smaller cars as they do huge gas guzzeling SUVs. Plus they have been marketing the bigger trucks and SUVs to the American public much more than any small fuel efficient vehicle that now that's all anyone wants. Most Americans are like lemmings, they buy what the TV tells them to, and the TV has been telling them they need more power and their full size truck needs to haul 3 tons of bricks, so that's what they buy.

Answer 7

In reality it didn't really die, just in the US.
Long after the US pronounced it dead they were still being built in Mexico.

Answer 8

it was too rusty basically