Volkswagen is working hard to make the up! a reality, but the technological challenges of a rear engine, RWD car are proving to be more daunting than expected. The VW engineering team is reportedly having trouble conjuring up a low cost rear-engine layout. The problem has been trying to accommodate a radiator in the up!'s nose and transferring coolant through the car. Early up! prototypes are also having a difficult time with cross-wind stability due to the unbalanced heft of its rear drive/rear engine layout. To correct these issues, some styling changes may be necessary, but if the basic shape of the up! is compromised, the German automaker may have to look at front wheel drive as an option. In spite of any problems engineers are having, VW executives are confident any difficulties will be overcome.
We're hoping that means we can still expect the inexpensive hatch to be pushed via the rear wheels just like the original Bug. Then again, the Mini has proved that small cars can be fun and driven by the front wheels, and as long as the up! is cheap, efficient, and adorable, there will be plenty of buyers.
[Source: Autocar]
2010 Nissan Cube breaks cover in Japan
Officially Official: 2010 Ford Mustang!
2010 Ford Mustang revealed early on Ford's own website!
2009 Nissan 370Z rolls out early in So. Cal
VIDEO: 2009 Nissan 370Z revealed early in So. Cal.
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 HUMMER H3T Alpha
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Mercedes Benz C63 AMG
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Hyundai Genesis
In the Autoblog Garage: 2009 Chevrolet Traverse LT
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
DCragtop @ Jul 18th 2008 1:06PM
surely everyone is NOT suprised by this news.
geo.stewart @ Jul 18th 2008 2:40PM
more importantly, who CARES?
its an econobox. It will not matter one iota the drivetrain configuration if its cheap, gets good mileage, and handles decently.
sure it will be quirky if it is different but that alone wont make it a game changer
Temple @ Jul 18th 2008 4:04PM
Actually I'm somewhat surprised. In the concept the engine was mid-rear mounted, which made it cheap to do RWD. Also, improved front-crash safety being that there wouldn't have been an engine up-front that could be pushed back into the cabin.
This design that VW planned in the Up! is currently in production by Mitsubishi i (iCar) which is a 2,000lb mid-engined RWD turbo vehicle. It does 45mpg and costs around $11k for the base version and around $14-15k for the top of the line 4WD. Its an amazing city car.
My thoughts were that VW would do the same on a global level. So the Up! if its FWD will likely be front-engined (unlike the concept) unless they plan on having a drive-shaft coming from the rear to the front (unlikely).
tankd0g @ Jul 18th 2008 1:08PM
If only this company new how to make an air cooled rear engined car...
1337 @ Jul 18th 2008 2:13PM
Agreed.
2 options:
1) make it air cooled.
2) SIDE SCOOPS! unlike the plastic atrocities on '90s Mustangs, the Up! side scoops would actually provide cooling for the engine.
Jeff Banks @ Jul 18th 2008 10:54PM
I guarantee it won't pass emissions. Two-stroke engines are fun too. But I GUARANTEE you'll never drive one again.
tankd0g @ Jul 19th 2008 8:51AM
Unless it's form Mazda and triangle shaped.
Torrent @ Jul 18th 2008 1:09PM
fine.
nastinupe1 @ Jul 18th 2008 1:09PM
Didn't they do this a long time ago? Why is it so difficult now.... like 70 years later. Sometimes I wonder about today's engineer's. The ones in the 30's and 40's seemed so much more intelligent.
Markus @ Jul 18th 2008 2:28PM
If the requirements regarding safety, performance and comfort and especially cost efficiency were the same as in the '30s, I'm pretty sure even us modern-day "just-not-like-they-used-to-be" engineers would be able to still produce those same designs ;).
davido @ Jul 18th 2008 2:46PM
Nastinupe1,
The guys in the thirties produced a car that was highly prone to oversteer, especially if you entered a corner too quickly and backed off the throttle. The back end broke away INSTANTLY!
They also produced a car that was highly unstable in crosswinds. Instability in crosswinds is one the problems the post said they're confronting now.
I drove a friends old Bug for three months once, on back roads and on highways. I learned about trailing throttle oversteer on a two lane by spinning the car. I learned about crosswind instability on the interstate where the front end would "hunt," something drivers of older 911's know about, meaning the front end is constantly moving off center as you drive and you have to keep making corrections to keep the car pointed straight.
JS @ Jul 18th 2008 4:44PM
no hell , they had 4WD bugs in the 40s
styleguy @ Jul 18th 2008 1:17PM
Looks like Ford will have some serious competition for the new Fiesta, as the looks of the vehicle blow the doors off of the Yaris 3-door hatch. If this becomes a hybrid, the CR-Z and Nissan hybrid coupe will also be competitors.
Corey L @ Jul 18th 2008 1:17PM
Can any one explain the benefits of having a rear-engined RWD in a minicar, aside from the illogical "z0mg!! FWD FTL!!1!one!1!!!"
AC @ Jul 18th 2008 1:41PM
More cabin space relative to the size of the car, think tucking the engine under the rear seats as opposed to the front footwell.
Donald @ Jul 18th 2008 1:59PM
VW is pushing for RWD on this car because:
-It would provide excellent interior packaging
-Help lighten the weight of the car by reducing the need for power steering (no engine and drivetrain over the front wheels reduces the weight enough to not need it)
-Help meet pedestrian collision safety standards (empty trunk in the front makes it easier to provide pedestrian compliance without the needed for external airbags, lengthened front overhangs, or trick pop-up hoods)
Stability and traction control, along with better placment of the engine in relation to the rear axle, can accomodate oversteer.
I don't know where everyone is getting this idea that the car was going to be a stellar handler because of its RWD layout, but it takes more than powering the rear wheels to make a car a sports car, and VW never gave any indications that was their intention with this configuration. The RWD setup was supposed to be for cost and fuel/space economy concerns.
ML @ Jul 18th 2008 1:18PM
I don't agree. I think the up! SHOULD be FWD for the sake of interior volume. And I hope it comes to the U.S. so I can buy one since VW isn't going to sell the Scirocco here and the GTI doesn't get good enough mileage to satisfy me. Oh sure, the up! isn't a 'performance' VW (like the Scirocco), but if I'm going to eventually buy an econo-car because of gas prices edging towards $5,6,or 7-dollars a gallon, then I'd rather drive the up! than a Yaris or Fit or Beat, et al.
YourNameHere @ Jul 18th 2008 1:24PM
my mk5 gti continues turns in 27+ in mixed driving and 33+ on highway trips. i do my best to keep it under 70MPH
P.V. @ Jul 18th 2008 2:33PM
Apparently the Mitsubishi i is quite roomy for its size, considering it is a rear-engined, RWD vehicle.
Todd @ Jul 18th 2008 1:19PM
REQUEST: Hey Autoblog editors, will you start using a new special tag for posts like this? So I can track this new "Abandon RWD" trend. Up next...
1 - 2011 Camaro to be FWD only
2 - Audi announces next gen AWS system stays in FWD only mode by default
3 - Ford ceases all RWD production