

| Subject: | Re: NYTimes.com Article |
| From: | Andrew Grebneff |
| Date: | Tue, 30 Nov 2004 23:58:36 +1300 |
>Not everyone was enraptured with the ungainly "bread loaf," Ungainly? try telling me arestored Samba uis ungainly!! >as kinder critics Fools. >called the early models. The first >Microbus was skewered for being a 2,500-pound vehicle with >motive power on par with today's riding lawnmowers. The >van's size and shape brutally overtaxed the >1,131-cubic-centimeter, 25-horsepower engine, which was >limited to a "long-distance maximum speed" of 47 miles an >hour, according to the manual. The van porpoised down the >road, Utter rot. >its wheels tended to fold under in turns Really? The writer has obviously never driven one with enthusiasm. >and it would >all but stop in a headwind. With only 36hp, mine would hit and hold 70mph, fully loaded, on the flat, with headwind. >The VW bus was both crudely primitive Compared to what?? ALL cars were crude in the 50s. >and cleverly innovative With monococque construction and 4-wheel independent suspension, very much so. And with walkthrough an option from early days and sliding doors from 64. VW holds the car-sliding-door patent. -- Andrew Grebneff Dunedin New Zealand Fossil preparator <andrew.grebneff@stonebow.otago.ac.nz> Seashell, Macintosh, VW/Toyota van nut
Have something to add on this topic today? Revive this thread in the forum »