It's official: Volkswagen drops the GX3
Volkswagen has officially announced that it will not build the radical GX3 3-wheeler because of the potential for product liability issues in the U.S. market.
The two-seater runabout was a huge hit when it debuted at the Los Angeles Auto Show in January, and customer reaction to the GX3 since then can be summed up in two words: "build it!" Unfortunately, VW concluded that changes to the vehicle to reduce the risks of lawsuits would have compromised the GX3's design and driven costs out of reach for its intended market.
[Source: 4Car]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
GhostDoggy 7:09AM (7/05/2006)
How can this thing have any higher liability than a crotch-rocket does?
Reply
Autonews 7:10AM (7/05/2006)
That is not a surpise, but maybe in the future we will see a car like this on the roads.
http://www.auto-power-girl.com/
Reply
j-dawg 7:58AM (7/05/2006)
1--
I suspect they worry that people will expect a car like this to be as safe as a car when in reality it's not taht much safer than a bike. Sense of security + high power-to-weight = attempts to drive past one's capacity, mourning family, lawsuit.
Reply
GhostDoggy 8:09AM (7/05/2006)
3-
I didn't even think of it like a car, but rather a trike. Of course, imagine driving that thing to/from work on any of the USA's Top 20 worse highways and the thought of the Urban Assault Vehicle driving over you is a bit scary.
Reply
chriseh 8:29AM (7/05/2006)
And the point of the vehicle was? Its a motorcycle with 3 wheels, or should we call it a "tricycle", since a "car" its not.
Reply
Phelix 8:39AM (7/05/2006)
Bummer. I probably would've bought one. It looks insanely fun.
Reply
Honestly? 9:05AM (7/05/2006)
Thank you to the lawyers of America!! Thanks to you, we get screwed out of another cool product.
Reply
Raoul 9:18AM (7/05/2006)
An equivalent (very close) is already available:
http://www.3wheelers.com/trex.html
I have seen several of them. Looks fun and interesting.
One danger is that under heavy rain the big wheel just project too much water behind. There is no way to see them at dark.
Reply
Elias 9:55AM (7/05/2006)
I guess there's always the Ariel Atom...
Reply
Rich 9:59AM (7/05/2006)
They should have spent the moonraker money on quality control, and not on vehicles for PR purposes. Maybe then my Jetta V with 8k on would rattle and squeek less then my Golf III which has over 180k on it. Just a thought.
Reply
AutoFan 11:38AM (7/05/2006)
Oh no. An ugly, stupid deathtrap won't make it to our roads. The shame of it all!
Reply
Richard 11:45AM (7/05/2006)
I am utterly devestated. I cannot describe in words how I feel about this. I had my life all re-tailored for this thing.
Figures.
Reply
Los 11:52AM (7/05/2006)
I guess it all comes down to a matter of curcumstances.
My commute consists of 5 miles down side roads to and from work every on a set of roads that is mostly empty at the time I drive. I would have loved one.
But I will agree with anyone who says this would be a niche vehicle at best. I can't say this would be nice to drive on California Highways in rush hour, especially seeing as a Surburban tailpipe will probably sit rigth in the drivers face.
At least VW tried to come up with something that wasn't so "econo-box" like... maybe next time.
Reply
the question will never be answered... 12:06PM (7/05/2006)
"What if authenticity had a radical edge?"
Now we'll never know.
But I say good riddance. This thing was doomed from the moment it was announced. This vehicle is just too niche to not lose your shirt on.
I agree, VW spending their Moonraker on something stupid like this is nuts. The idea was to figure out what Americans would want and would buy, not make oddball concepts and marketing slogans.
Reply
Clarence 12:28PM (7/05/2006)
Okay, why not put another wheel on it?
Reply
ZoomZoomin' 12:45PM (7/05/2006)
It's a shame...depending on performance, it could have been fun for the track and maybe helped expand the market for these kinds of vehicles. I'm still searching for something fun & cheap for the track. Unfortunately the best vehicle that fits that mold is a motorcycle, which is far too insane. This may have been slightly less insane and hopefully much cheaper than an Atom or buying and fixing up a used 3-series or another car for track days.
Reply
Mitch 1:32PM (7/05/2006)
This type of "Car" are producted since 1990 by Campagna. The T-REX was producted in Quebec, Canada.
( www.go-t-rex.com ) Vw only copy this "Car".
Engine: 1164cc Inline 4 cyl., DOHC, with Ram-Air.
Transmission: Sequential 6-Speed close ratio gear box, purpose designed reverse gear, rear wheel torque damper
Reply
Joel 1:40PM (7/05/2006)
Looked like a fun alternative to a crotch rocket.
Oh wells. Your loss VW.
Reply
PJ 2:06PM (7/05/2006)
A big thank-you to everyone buying 6,000 lb SUVs and pickups to commute to work, and the litigous ninnies who expect someone, *anyone* else to be held responsible for their misjudgments, for preventing this vehicle from seeing production.
This wouldn't have been a money-maker for Volkswagen, certainly, nor would it have been much of a seller. But it would have been, as Phelix said, insanely fun for a select few enthusiasts to use as a track toy, weekend joyrider, or--if they were comfortable with it--a fuel-efficient commuter.
It also would have had a meaningful factory warranty and a wide dealer support network, unlike the similar limited-production specials mentioned above.
And, finally, it would've helped VW regain some of the edgy, sporting image it began to lose in the 1990s, and has almost completely squandered now with its baby-Phaeton lineup of sedans (the new GTI is a welcome exception).
I'm probably more bitter than I should be, considering that *I* probably wouldn't buy of these living in the Bay Area. It just highlights the rapid loss of the small, light, hard-wired driver's cars I love. Most automakers, like VW, now deem such cars unfeasible as the average paranoid, distracted driver demands bigger, taller, fatter, and softer sets of wheels to protect them from themselves in.
Reply
Greg A. 2:09PM (7/05/2006)
#13 "Okay, why not put another wheel on it?"
My guess is, because it would then be a car, it would have to conform to much stricter safety requirements.
Reply