(first posted 5/31/2017) Thank you for your patience: I realize this is the moment some of you were waiting for, our final chapter, the death of NSU. Unlike the two previous installments, which had a Buddhist / reincarnation feel to them, this one is the very essence of a Deadly Sin. The rapid rise and precipitous fall of NSU, which essentially only ever made two cars (the Prinz and the Ro 80), has been documented by a number of people. Time to give it the CC treatment.
As we have seen in Part 1 of these “Chronicles”, NSU have quite the automotive back story. Once they sold their car factory to Fiat in the late ‘20s, it seemed their involvement in four-wheeled transport was behind them. However, the Neckarsulm motorcycle maker did dabble in cars in the ‘30s, albeit briefly: a certain Dr Porsche knocked on their door in 1933 and persuaded them to use their facilities to make a bug-shaped rear-engined prototype. Yes, NSU’s Typ 32 was one of Porsche’s early drafts for the “people’s car” he had been tasked to do by Hitler. But Porsche was soon on his way: NSU were not interested in pursuing the matter at that juncture.
The firm became a true bicycle and motorcycle success story, though. NSU two-wheelers were extremely popular, both at home and abroad. NSU were the biggest motorcycle manufacturer in the world in the ‘30s and ‘50s. With success came money, and with money came the need to invest more in the business to continue its growth. This led NSU back to cars almost inevitably.
By the early ‘50s, a small four-wheeled prototype was being tested around Neckarsulm. It had a secret weapon in its tail: a brilliant 600cc NSU air-cooled twin. Seeing the success of Lloyd, Goggomobil, BMW’s Isetta and a dozen other tiny cars, NSU were compelled to give their design a shot at the big time. The NSU Prinz began series production in March 1958 and sales took off instantly.
The Prinz was a cut above the rest. It was relatively cheap, had very good dynamics, great performance and a whole network of dealers ready to sell it. By early 1959, a slightly better-trimmed Prinz II was unveiled and a 30 hp (DIN) version was available – as much power as a VW 1200 for DM600 less, not to mention much better fuel economy. In 1960, the Prinz III came out with further refinements. But NSU knew that they wouldn’t be able to fight VW (and DKW, Glas, Neckar, etc.) with the Prinz as it was. The styling had already aged quite a bit and the interior space was insufficient for a growing number of German families. A new Prinz was about to ascend the throne.
Launched in late 1961, the NSU Prinz 4 was perhaps the starkest example of the ground-braking Chevrolet Corvair’s stylistic influence in the ‘60s. There were many others, but somehow NSU’s Corvair-lookalike was the most clear-cut, perhaps because it too was rear-engined. It may not have been quite as pretty as the BMW 700, but it was more timeless – indeed, this shape created by Claus Luthe was not one NSU would ever improve on for its rear-engined cars.
The boxy and utilitarian Prinz 4 was perfect for the family-minded, but there were a number of bachelors to be catered for too. NSU, like many of its esteemed rivals, contracted an Italian house to make a sporty and trendy coupé / cabriolet – something with panache, lots of brightwork and a pointy tail. Bertone obliged and the Prinz Sport was born.
Dr Felix Wankel (1902-1988)
Time, at this point in the story, to introduce a particularly shady and bizarre character (cue spooky theremin music), Dr Felix Wankel. The man had a sulfurous history, having been kicked out of the Nazi Party in 1932 (he had joined in 1922) for being a bit too extreme. During the war, he was an officer in the SS for a couple of years, but was discharged for unknown reasons (one shudders to think…). But if the subjects of politics, culture and philosophy were not broached, he could be seen as a gifted engineer. In particular, Dr Wankel had been working on a revolutionary engine design since the mid-‘20s, something truly innovative. But the original design was impossibly complex, as both the trichodoidal piston and its housing rotated within another (static) housing. In 1951, Felix Wankel was hired by NSU as a technical consultant and the design was changed to something less improbable, with a rotating piston spinning within a distinctively shaped stator.
It’s not my place to educate the few CC readers who would not be familiar with the rotary engine – others (especially Aaron Severson) have done it with far more competence than I ever could. Suffice to say that Wankel’s design, after three decades of development, was still not ready for prime time. But NSU’s engineering staff worked with Felix Wankel and, with subtle but essential changes in the design, things seemed to be very promising. The engine was first tested by 1957 and NSU soon began to issue licenses to a number of interested parties, including Alfa Romeo, Curtiss-Wright, Deere, GM, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Nissan, Norton, Rolls-Royce, Suzuki and others. From circa 1978 to around 2000, some rotary-powered cars were also made by AvtoVAZ (a.k.a Lada), but it’s unclear whether they acquired the NSU license.
Rolls-Royce’s two-stage Diesel rotary research did not result in production engines. ‘A’ for effort, though.
The rotary engine promised to be a great improvement on the reciprocating piston engine, both much more compact and with far fewer moving parts, and consequently – it was hoped – higher revving capabilities, as well as easier manufacture and servicing, not to mention a significant noise reduction. Known drawbacks included metallurgical issues, rotor tips wearing out, high fuel and oil consumption, problems in effectively cooling the stator and imperfect combustion. NSU were going it alone for the “beta” version, but already Citroën were showing tremendous interest in teaming up with Neckarsulm to develop the Wankel engine further. In 1964, NSU and Citroën co-founded the Comobil, based in Geneva, to share rotary-related engineering tasks and resources. Both firms would come to regret this, but at the time, other automakers’ engineers were green with envy.
But NSU had got there first and wanted to show it. So despite the Wankel engine’s lack of development, NSU decided to launch the world’s first rotary-powered car in 1964. It was, quite simply, a Prinz Sport convertible with a single rotor in its tail. There was little to distinguish it from its “normal” brethren, aside from the completely different engine note. And the price. Cutting-edge technology doesn’t come cheap, and this little drop-top was pretty expensive. The motoring press and the public at large saw it for what it was: a Bertone-styled convertible test-bed for the rotary.
NSU did not neglect the rest of their range while the Wankel experiment was going on. The Prinz 4’s little twin was good, but a larger engine would enable NSU to increase its market share and give VW something to be really worried about. The NSU Prinz 1000, launched in 1963 with an air-cooled 969cc 4-cyl. providing 43 PS (DIN), was another hit for NSU. It also spawned a number of interesting developments, both within NSU and elsewhere.
The NSU 1000 TT (above) was quick, but the TTS (below) was the proverbial pocket rocket.
Within the company, the 1-litre car was seen as an obvious contender for a bit of a tune-up, not unlike the Mini Cooper, the Fiat 600 Abarth or the Renault 8 Gordini. The 1965 1000 TT (with a 55 PS 1.1 litre 4-cyl.) and 1000 TTS (with a 70 PS version of the 1 litre that could be further souped up to 85 PS for rally use) became the most fun one could have with one’s clothes on. These little proto-GTIs were successful on many a track and helped further NSU’s image as an exciting brand.
The family-oriented 1000 also spawned the Typ 110, whose revised front end sported rectangular headlamps and a full-width fake grille, as well as a 49 PS version of the 1000 TT’s engine. By 1967, a 1.2 litre engine was devised and installed in the Typ 110 (which became the NSU 1200) and the 1200 TT.
Mummy mia!
Let’s take a look at NSU’s influence beyond West Germany for a bit. Time for some weird cars you’ve probably not heard much about. First stop: Egypt. Huge country, but no automotive industry to speak of? NSU to the rescue! The Egyptian Light Transport Manufacturing Co. teamed up with NSU to foist the Ramses on an unsuspecting public. Several iterations of this Prinz-based design were made. The convertible above, the Ramses Gamila, was designed (if one could call it that) by none other than Vignale.
A Ramses II saloon, based on the Prinz 4, was also proposed in the mid-‘60s. Build quality was perhaps not up to scratch, so few have made it to this century. It bears an uncanny resemblance to the Israeli Rom Carmel, from a stylistic point of view, though the underpinnings are completely unrelated.
The NSU P-6, or why Uruguayan coachbuilders never really made it big internationally.
NSUs were assembled in various foreign countries, and CKD Prinz 4s and 1000s soon found their way to Uruguay, where local industrial firm NORDEX put them together. But the Uruguayan market seemed to be hungry for more interior space, so NORDEX devised a home-grown wagon on the Prinz’s platform. The result was not exactly beautiful to look at (nor practical, given the engine’s location), but this unique variant was sold for a few years in the late ‘60s, both as the P-6 (2-cyl.) and the P-10 (4-cyl.).
Finally, a complete copycat made in the USSR: the ZAZ Zaporozhets 966/968. This was decidedly not an NSU, as the underpinnings and the body were Soviet-made and unrelated to the original. But the Zapo was an obvious copy of the Prinz 4 / 1000: rear-engined (with an air-cooled V4) with a mini-Corvair body, it came out in 1966. The car lost its cute Mickey-Mouse-ear air intakes in 1979, along with most of its chrome, but ZAZ kept on making them until 1994 – making it the longest-lived Corvair-inspired car in the world.
“That’s all well and good, T87, but get to the Ro 80 already!” Yes, yes, yes, we’re almost there…
Above: a forgotten forerunner of the MPV, the Autonova Fam; below, the sleek GT.
In a foretaste of what was to come, NSU presented the Autonova prototypes in 1965, designed by Michael Conrad and Pio Manzù. Based on the NSU 1000 floorpan, the Autonova GT coupé and the Glas 1304-based Autonova Fam proto-MPV wowed the public with their highly innovative and clean lines. Something big was going to come out of Neckasrulm.
Crudely camouflaged Ro 80 prototypes in cold weather trials in the winter of 1966/67.
NSU started working on a completely new executive-class car in 1962. Not unlike Glas, NSU’s strategy was a relentless climb up the ladder of engine displacement and car segments. And not unlike Glas again, they were going at it very quickly indeed. But whereas the Dingolfing firm’s technical innovation, while laudable, was somewhat prudent, NSU wanted to push the envelope well beyond the likes of BMW or Mercedes and into the risky realm of the Citroën DS: a big front-drive spaceship of a car, with an aerodynamic body – and the Wankel engine, of course. The DS was already ten years old, though it didn’t look it. NSU’s car needed to be at least ten years ahead of its time – suddenly, it’s 1980!
In 1967, NSU launched its bombshell and the world was stunned. Immediately, automotive critics waxed lyrical on virtually all aspects of the Ro 80. The twin-rotor engine, the superb roadholding, the slippery yet handsome shape, the build quality – everything about the car was superlative.
Well, almost everything. Some found the interior to be less than perfect for this segment. The dashboard was a little barren, perhaps even boring. It did not match the exterior’s sophisticated detailing, that’s for sure. The Saxomat 3-speed semiautomatic transmission was also deemed less than perfect by some. Why not have four or five gears? Why have this unlikely set-up, with the clutch being engaged electrically? How durable and reliable would that be? Why not a fully automatic transmission?
But the rest of the car won most critics over. The styling was particularly well done – modern, owing virtually nothing to then-current trends, yet providing an airy cabin and a large trunk. Touches such as the flush-fitted windows, integrated door handles, the overall wedge-like shape (yet devoid of straight lines), the sculpted headlamps and the diminutive grille were well ahead of their time. The car’s slippery lines weren’t just for show: the Ro 80’s 0.35 Cd was leagues ahead of its time.
The twin-rotor engine was a delight to use. Producing 113 hp (DIN) out of only 995cc, it had an uncanny ability to rev up beyond its 6500 rpm redline while producing a very distinctive and discreet whirring noise. It was so smooth and seemed so at ease that it was impossible for the driver to detect that the engine was revving too fast, with potentially disastrous consequences. Critics soon noted the Wankel’s appetite though – that was a clear weakness of the design from the get-go. On average, it drank an impressive 18 litres / 100 km (13 mpg US), which seemed at odds with its relatively small displacement. But then, everything about the Wankel was so different that comparing it with a 1000cc piston engine was completely pointless. It was more comparable to (at least) a 2-litre or more 6-cyl. in terms of power – and comparable to a V8 in terms of fuel consumption.
RHD markets and the US received the Ro 80 with quad headlamps.
The rest of the car was up to date as well – no drum brakes on this baby. The compact engine sat ahead of the front wheels, which used McPherson struts, coupled with BMW-inspired rear semi-trailing arms. This, along with a stiff monocoque body, FWD and ZF-assisted rack-and-pinion steering, made for a very competent and comfortable package on the Autobahn. The launch price of DM 14,150 was a bit on the expensive side, reflecting NSU’s precarious financial situation and the car’s long and costly development. What did that kind of money represent in West Germany in early 1968? Well, competition was pretty fierce, as the table below will show.
For space reasons, the comparison is limited to 11 models, but several others would have been in contention, such as the Glas 1700 TS or the Opel Commodore 2500 (both just under DM 10,000), or imports such as the Triumph 2000, the Fiat 2300 or the BMC “Landcrab” saloons. The new Mercedes-Benz “stroke-8” series were especially dangerous rivals: the dearest 4-cyl. and the cheapest 6-cyl. were less expensive than the Ro 80 – and the bigger 6-cyl., the 250, cost just DM500 more than the NSU. Fuel injection was starting to appear in these later ‘60s, soon to be used by BMW, Citroën and others to boost power and limit fuel consumption. This would also erode the Wankel’s appeal over time.
Above: Brutally honest UK ad; below: French ad stressed quietness.
In export markets, the situation was even more challenging: in the UK, the NSU cost about £1900 (as much as a Jaguar 420); the base list price in France was FF24,000 – a Citroën DS 21 cost about FF8000 less. And most folks knew NSU as a maker of mopeds and small cars. The marque did not exactly have the cachet that its product required. So it took some devotion to new technology to buy a R0 80 in 1967-68.
Nevertheless, the NSU Ro 80 won the coveted European Car of the Year award for 1968. But now that it was out in the wild, it did not take long for the first signs of trouble to appear. Engine failures were beginning to take place even before the car’s first birthday – careless owners perhaps? By mid-1968 though, the extent of the Ro 80’s fragility were becoming too stark to ignore.
The main issue was the rotor’s seal tips, which tended to wear at an excessive rate. The boffins at Comobil were already working on a solution, but it wasn’t quite production-ready as of yet. The other Wankel-engine car (also launched in 1967, but hardly known in Europe), the Mazda Cosmo 110 S coupé, was experiencing similar issues, albeit to a lesser extent: Hiroshima’s twin-rotary engines had been bench-tested more thoroughly than Neckarsulm’s and their apex seals, lubrication and transmission were different. But at least the Mazda was an expensive sports car, which limited the problem to enthusiasts. NSU had gone for the most competitive segment of the market, the large family saloon, after its Wankel sports car had dipped its toe in the water. It’s not like the head of testing at NSU, Herbert Brockhaus, hadn’t warned the top brass, either: he had told them in late 1966 that the twin-rotor needed at least a couple more years to be sorted out.
Some folks obviously hedged their bets by carrying a second mode of transport on their Ro 80.
NSU had few options but to replace the engines under warranty, sometimes beyond warranty and often more than once per car. The scale of the epidemic led to increasing bad publicity, as more and more Ro 80s were seen sitting on the edges of the Autobahn, motionless and smoking. The NSU’s distinctive body shape and the PR campaign that had accompanied its launch meant that nobody could mistake it for something else. The lifespan of the twin-rotor, when used by a driver with a heavy right foot, could be as low as 15,000 km. Folks who were more careful with their precious NSU could hope to reach 30,000 km on average before the inevitable happened. In city driving, the Wankel’s expensive spark plugs would quickly foul up and require to be replaced, usually around the 8000 km mark. The Ro 80 was quickly becoming a big problem for NSU.
NSU’s last great hope: the K70. Unfortunately, the K stood for Kancelled.
By the beginning of 1969, NSU’s finances were in tatters. The rear-engined cars were still selling well, but it was not like they had much of a future. Ro 80 sales peaked in 1969 at around 7300 units, well below break-even – and constantly fitting new engines under warranty was also draining the company’s finances. NSU’s third all-new car, the K70, was about to be launched, so development costs for that were also adding to the red ink. On top of that, another joint-venture with Citroën, the Comotor, had already started making a revised Wankel in its entirely new factory in Germany for the Ro 80, soon to be followed by a single-rotor motor for the Citroën M35.
NSU’s K70 adverts were ready to go in early ’69, but got pulled at the last minute.
Volkswagen smelled blood on the water. NSU were keener on striking a deal with Citroën, but the French weren’t interested. Out of options, the NSU top brass went to Wolfsburg. VW had taken over Auto-Union / Audi but four years previously, and fancied merging Audi and NSU, as both operations were comparable in size and output. Another benefit of using Audi to swallow NSU was that VW did not have to get the deal signed off by its stockholders, meaning the Federal and State authorities. VW’s number one concern was to get their hands on the new K70, which was ready to be launched at the 1969 Geneva Motor Show. The K70 was a ready-made way out of VW’s rear-engined / air-cooled monoculture, which by the end of the ‘60s increasingly looked like a dead end – the Typ 4 debacle was proving that unequivocally.
Neckarsulm factory, circa 1970 – Audis now shared the Ro 80’s assembly line.
The boards of NSU and VW announced that merger talks were under way in March 1969. VW CEO Kurt Lotz sweetened the deal by allowing NSU shareholders to keep a portion of the Wankel licensing arm in their possession, as this was NSU’s cash cow. But the Israeli British Bank (IBB) managed to gain a blocking minority, forcing VW to increase the dividends allocated to NSU shareholders via the Wankel licenses. This led to a strange parallel market in NSU-Wankel “ghost shares” (no shares having been certified), which collapsed when the Federal authorities declared this speculative innovation null and void.
After a June 1969 visit to the NSU factory, VW’s Kurt Lotz (right) is leaving Neckarsulm in style.
Meanwhile, Lotz tried to buy as much genuine NSU shares as he could on the cheap, soon owning 60%. On 26 April 1969, a long shareholders’ meeting took place to iron out the deal. Minority shareholders learned of the shenanigans VW and IBB had been up to and things got rather stormy. The merger went ahead in practice, but IBB and their proxies ended up siding against VW, which held up the legal takeover of NSU for a couple of years, until VW settled out of court and bought IBB’s stake in NSU for three times the amount that was offered originally. NSU and Audi “properly” merged in 1971.
1971: One big happy family…
Audi-NSU-Auto Union AG, headquartered in Neckarsulm, was headed by NSU’s former CEO, Dr Gerd Stieler von Heydekampf. It was clear that NSU’s smaller cars were going to be axed in the near future, as they were competing with the Beetle. By the end of 1972, the rear-engined NSUs were no more; the Neckarsulm factory’s main output was now Audis.
The K70 was launched in 1970 as a Volkswagen, despite its stark family resemblance with the Ro 80. Around 210,000 were built for five model years, which hardly made it a hit. But then it did compete with the VW Typ 4 and the Audi 100, so perhaps this might have been expected.
The NSU Ro 80 carried on regardless. Europe’s only Wankel-powered car was perhaps too symbolic to be thrown to the dustbin of history. It was briefly joined by the Citroën GS Birotor, but the 1973 Oil Shock put a definite nail in the Wankel engine’s coffin in most places – Mazda being a notable exception, as well as a handful of motorcycle makers. Mercedes-Benz and GM both gave up on the rotary engine by the mid-‘70s, despite having spent considerable time and money trying to develop it. Citroën went bankrupt and also gave up on the Wankel around this time. The NSU Ro 80 got an unexpected butt lift in 1975, with larger tail lamps and new badging set in ominously black blocks.
One of the few specials on the NSU Ro 80 platform, made by Pininfarina in 1971.
The plus was finally pulled on the Ro 80 in 1977, after around 37,000 units in ten years. The automaker kept the name “Audi-NSU AG” until 1983, when it became Audi AG; the company’s HQ went back to Ingolstadt, though the Neckarsulm factory is still very much in operation. It is said that some of the later Ro 80s were kept in the company’s motor pool until the mid-‘80s, as they were still seen as something to be intensely proud of by the Audi top brass. The NSU Ro 80’s genes were plainly evident in Audi car design of the ‘80s and ’90s, which is also a testament to the car’s avant-garde nature. All except the dreaded rotary, which never did live up to its hype.
Literally the best Ro 80 ad ever published.
If there ever was a poster child for the Deadly Sins, here it is. The NSU Ro 80 – a brilliant car in so many ways, yet so flawed that it killed its maker in three years. The NSU story (and, to a lesser extent, the 1975 Citroën takeover by Peugeot) served as a warning for other automakers: rotary engines are poison, and only Mazda are immune. It’s fair to say Audi owes its current place as one of the most innovative automakers to NSU’s engineering staff, but it could also be argued that NSU could have survived if it had launched its revolutionary car around 1969 instead of 1967. Not a few Deadly Sins were committed by over-confident executives who pushed out a product that was half-baked.
If you made it this far, thanks for reading! This is the end of the Neckarslum Chronicles and of the German Deadly Sins (for now). Our next stop on the European DS Tour will probably take us to the one country we have yet to visit. And no, it’s not Luxembourg or Portugal. Think of a nation whose outstanding contributions to European history, art, science and culture include the very concept of “Deadly Sin”. Yes, we will go to Italy, ragazzi, for the most beautiful DSs ever made. Ciao tutti!
Related CC posts:
Automotive History: The Cars Of Claus Luthe, by Perry Shoar
Cohort Classic: NSU TT/TTS – A Legendary Giant-Killer, by PN
Automotive History Capsule: NSU Ro80–The Tragic Automotive Goddess, by PN
I think they made a rotary powered motorcycle as well. I can’t find it right now, but it was not japanese, I’m sure it was an NSU motorbike.
edit: I just found it, it’s a DKW W-2000
http://www.visordown.com/sites/default/files/article-images/7/75338.jpg
I mentioned those in passing in the DKW piece. Those were made by Hercules — different company, then owned by ZF Sachs. No NSU mototrcycles were made after about 1965.
Superb article! The Ro80 was really a groundbreaking design.
As a footnote, here in Argentina, Autoar assembled the first Prinz up to 1962. They were nicknamed ‘the little top-hats’ (galeritas).
It’s a pity that NSU was in such a rush to bring the Ro80 to market, because it’s one of the most beautiful cars ever made. I’ve only ever seen one and it was very impressive in the metal. Still and all, as a conservative buyer I’d take a Peugeot 404 or even a Renault 16 over the Ro80. Excellent series, thank you!
One of the more famous owners (if not ‘the’ most famous) was astronaut John Glenn, who may have bought a brand-new Prinz I from a dealer in Vancouver. I wonder if he was influenced by the Road & Track magazine ad?
Tom Wolfe documented Glenn’s eccentric choice in The Right Stuff. All the other Mercury astronauts drove Corvettes, supplied gratis by local dealers. But Glenn tooled around in a boxy little sedan that looked the same coming and going, proving he wasn’t quite “one of the boys.”
Glenn was offered the same sweetheart lease deal on a Corvette as the other astronauts, but he chose an Impala station wagon for his family, instead. He would get his revenge when he wrote on a blackboard one day, “Definition of a sports car – a hedge against male menopause”. Later on, it looks like he switched to Fords as there are pics of him behind the wheel of a Mercury convertible.
I was a little surprised to learn that Glenn had bought his Prinz in North America. As a career military man, I would have bet he bought it while stationed in Germany and brought his car back with him to the US, as many returning servicemen did.
Glenn was a Marine aviator and served in the Pacific in WWII and Korea. I don’t believe they ever had squadrons in West Germany.
A fine article about an extremely promising car that led to disaster. As an aside, I once read in a book that NSU had planned on producing a Wankel-engined version of the K70 called the R70.
Wonderful and detailed article as always!
This little nugget showed up at the Orphan show in Ypsilanti last fall.
Fortunately, displayed with the hood open.
Not a bad looking interior either.
If only NSU (along with Citroen) followed by Mazda’s lead in initially reserving the Ro80’s Wankel engine for sportscars and instead producing the more conventional 2-litre version of the K70 engine or the Flat-6 engine considered early alongside the Wankel during the Ro80’s development (which was rejected as undesirable by NSU higher-ups).
Surprised 4-door versions of the NSU Prinz 1000 and NSU Type 110 / 1200 were not considered given their similar sizes to the rear-engined Simca 1000 and Renault 8 respectively, would have also been interesting seeing NSU produce enlarged road-going 1300cc versions of the engine loosely based on the NSU 1300 TT units.
For smaller cars, two-door saloons were always more popular in Germanic markets for some reason (see: DKW, VW Typ 1 and Typ 3, NSU Prinz, DAF, Saab, etc.). And four-doors were almost de rigueur in Latin markets (Renault 4CV, Panhard Dyna, Citroen 2CV, SEAT 800, etc.). That’s not to say that there were no exceptions (e.g. Renault 5, Fiat 850), but it was a well-known marketing fact, just like the Hispanic reluctance to embrace the hatchback, which carries on to this day.
There was a slightly upsized NSU 1200 model, name for the increased displacement. The wheelbase was stretched about four inches, but in the other direction, towards the front. That finally gave sufficient legroom for the average adult driver. The 100 was a very short-wheelbase car, which helped give it such a nimble feel. Even with short legs, I’d often bend my left knee and prop my foot up on the wheel well like a hitching post.
My belated thanks to the author, who gives a fine history of this innovative company. The 1000TT was the most fun car I ever had.
Wonderful write-up,Tatra87! It was such a shame that these beautiful cars didn’t live up to their promise. Quite a few UK market Ro80s had their dead Wankel engines removed and replaced by Ford 2 litre V4s more usually seen in Corsairs, Zephyr 4s and Transit vans. The compact V4 block meant that it fitted the space formerly occupied by the Wankel unit without major bodywork surgery. Whilst the original engine was one of the smoothest in the world, the vibratory Ford V4 was probably one of the roughest. Today you can obtain a Mazda rotary conversion which would be much more the ticket.
Makes one wonder why the 1.6-litre Lancia V4 was never considered as an alternative unless the narrow-angle of the Lancia V4 somehow made unsuitable for the Ro80.
Possibly scarcity, expense, and lack of knowledge about the Lancia mill. I’d imagine just about any garage could make a Ford V4 run – well, as well as it was going to. Those early V4 Transit vans had quite a distinct exhaust note – very much at odds with the silence of the rotary.
Still there must of been another suitable alternative to the Ford V4 or Mazda Wankel engines let alone the existing NSU Wankel unit.
I remember the Ford V4 conversions always featured some kind of ugly bonnet lump as they were quite a tall engine. I guess the narrow-angle Lancia V4 would be even taller.
I wonder if any flat fours would have fitted? Alfasud or Lancia at the time maybe, and nowadays Subaru! I don’t know if the Ro80s space would be wide enough though.
The K70 was a ready-made way out of VW’s rear-engined / air-cooled monoculture,
The NSU deal has puzzled me for a long time. VW already had a path out of it’s air cooled/rear engine architecture through Audi. Why not a reskinned F103/Audi 90, instead of going to all the bother of buying NSU? iirc, the K70 was also quite fragile, so having it badged as a VW would injure the brand as much as the fragile early Audis. The ultimate proof was that the K70 was a road to nowhere, while the first gen Passat used an Audi platform.
Did VW need the production capacity? The Audi 100 was a run away hit, but VW had just built a new assembly plant at Salzgitter in 70. It appears that Salzgitter’s assembly capacity was surplus as the plant was converted to producing engines and parts in 75.
Did VW need the brand? Today VW aspires to continue moving up market. With that ambition, NSU could have been the “value” brand that Skoda is. But in 1970, VW was an entry level car, so the NSU brand was redundant, the proof being the NSU brand was extinguished in only a few years.
“Why NSU” keeps echoing. They didn’t need the platforms, nor the plant, nor the brand. VW management hubris, they wanted to be lord of all they surveyed? Backchannel pressure from the German government to “save jobs”?
K70s and Type 4s coming off the Salzgitter line.
Interesting you mentioned Volkswagen’s need for NSU, could Volkswagen have survived with just NSU had Mercedes decided to keep DKW / Audi?
..could Volkswagen have survived with just NSU had Mercedes decided to keep DKW / Audi?
NSU would have had more of a role to play had Mercedes kept DKW, but the DKW deal had been done in iirc 65, so VW already had a front drive platform and a purpose built, 4 cylinder, liquid cooled engine. iirc, the engine in the K70 was based on the NSU air cooled engine converted to liquid cooling.
Given the size and resources of VW circa 1970, I don’t see why they could not reverse engineer something suitable, like a Simca 1204 or Renault R12 to arrive at their own platform. If DKW, and the Mercedes designed 4 stroke 4, were available for less than the cost of an in house design, fine, but NSU simply looks redundant to me.
Looking at it from VW’s perspective, there were a few key reasons to do the NSU deal:
1. As I understand it, Lotz figured that the K70 (which was totally production-ready) would be a formidable rival for both the VW Typ 4 and the Audi. He initially wanted to kill it before it was launched, but the Typ 4’s terrible sales made him change his mind. Remember, in those days, Audi and VW dealerships / engineering staff were still very separate, so getting a VW-badged FWD water-cooled mid-range car was important for the VW marque. The K70 ended up not being a hit, but in 1970 nobody could have forecast that.
2. NSU engineers were some of the best in the business. Always good to have competent R&D. The Neckarsulm factory must have also been part of the appeal to help Audi production, as Daimler had kept the DKW works in Dusseldorf and Spain when they sold Auto Union to VW.
3. NSU’s small cars were competing directly with VW. Those pesky Prinzes needed to go, and not a moment too soon. The Prinz range was on borrowed time anyways: the Audi 50 / VW Polo (designed by Luthe) took their place in ’74-’75, based on the NSU K50 project started around the time of the Audi merger.
4. NSU’s cash cow was their Wankel licensing arm. Back in 1969, that still meant considerable business. Most people thought it was only a matter of time before GM, Daimler, R-R, Suzuki and many others were going to launch Wankel-powered cars/bikes/whatever. The technical difficulties would probably be overcome at some point — this was still cutting-edge technology. Then the fuel crunch of ’73-’74 happened and killed the Wankel. But in 1969, rotary engines were the golden egg and NSU had the goose.
To “reverse-engineer” the Simca 1204 would have been less cost-effective, I would have thought, than getting a company who had made all the work and had a production-ready car. It ended up costing VW a lot more than they bargained for, of course, because of Lotz’s cavalier attitude towards NSU shareholders and the collapse of the Wankel’s potential.
But that can only be seen in hindsight. When VW and NSU signed the deal in March ’69, it looked like VW had made a shrewd move.
But that can only be seen in hindsight. When VW and NSU signed the deal in March ’69, it looked like VW had made a shrewd move.
All good points, though, I think, were I in Lotz’s shoes, I would have waited for NSU to completely collapse, eliminating the K70 and Prinz as competition, then cherry pick the best NSU engineers and dealers. Meanwhile, do a hatchback version of the first gen Audi 100 as a VW and produce both the Audi 100 and the VW version at Salzgitter to meet demand for the 100 that exceeded capacity at Ingolstadt.
The dealer network issue is a possibility for the appeal of NSU. As NSU was folded into the Audi division, were Audis sold through NSU dealers in Europe? I would suspect the DKW dealer network VW inherited was rather weak. Here in the US, Audi was usually dualed with Porsche.
I’d never heard of the K50 before, so thanks for the info.
I’d long suspected some NSU engineering involvement in the Audi 50 / VW Polo, noting the crossflow heads and transverse engine placement which had both been brilliant features of the Prinz range.
A great read. I stumbled upon a tv show recently called Restoration Garage on the Velocity Network. In one episode the guys are dealing with a Ro80 that – guess what – needs its engine rebuilt. They ran into a hiccup trying to find a decent distributor cap.
This story sounds so un-German. The typical German car story is about pretty good to very good cars being undone by management or financing problems. This is a story more typical of an American company – “We need money so I don’t care if it’s ready or not, get it out the door NOW!”
I will agree that it was a groundbreaking design, but I will step back from the love-fest. I have never been a fan of the look. I guess the subtle wedge shape is not my thing. And the long front and short rear overhangs, while modern, do not give the car the best proportions (IMHO). Anyhow, looking forward to the next installment.
This is a story more typical of an American company – “We need money so I don’t care if it’s ready or not, get it out the door NOW!”
Indeed. Very much like the Cord 810, Avanti, and the 55 Packard V8 and Ultramatic. Company on the brink of collapse swings for the fence, but in too much of a rush to lace up a pair of spikes, so, with the mighty swing, slips and collapses in a heap of dust.
What a great analogy: “They didn’t even have a chance since they forgot to put spikes on before they even got to the plate…”.
I never would have guessed Claus Luthe of BMW fame designed the Prinz 4!!
Thanks for a brilliant article. NSU Ro 80? Oh dear.. so beautiful, so sad.
Thanks for finally doing the Ro80 justice here.
My understanding is that the transmission solution, which included a torque converter, was chosen (at least in part) because the torque converter would help mask the inherently weak low rpm torque of the little rotary. Plus, the Germans seemed rather infatuated with this set up, as also used in the VW Automatic Stickshift and Porsche’s Sportmatic.
The Ro80 made a great autobahn cruiser, but was not really a good city car, due to its low torque and the need for high revs. That alone impacted its overall appeal and utility, although in Germany at the time, it was quite common to only use a car primarily for trips, as city dwellers typically used mass transit for their in-city transport.
The influence of the Ro80 on Audi is hard to understate, as its design language can of course be seen in every modern Audi ever since.
The K70 was ultimately not destined for great commercial success either. It was to complicated to build cheaply, with its inboard brakes and such, and IIRC, it had a rep for being a bit thirsty too, despite its piston engine. But Audi rationalized many aspects of it and its own 90/100 in the seminal Audi 80, which benefited from both, and was the true first modern Audi (and VW, in Passat form).
I was deeply infatuated with the Ro80 when it came out. It was sad to see it so quickly succumb to its developmental shortcomings. I vividly remember reading ever more dire articles on the subject in auto, motor und sport, although they avoided the worst of it, since they didn’t want to make a bad situation worse for one of their advertisers. But the deadly truth could not be contained for long.
The Saxomat was popular in Germany and many automakers had it on the options list. And Citroen went that way too with the GS Birotor, so it must’ve made sense. What was in the contemporary Mazdas? (Though those were RWD, so perhaps not a great analogy…)
I think I’ve only ever seen one Ro 80 in traffic. I distinctly remember it — it was in London, about 20 years ago. They were out of production by the time I was born, so that explains that. Plus I was living in France, hardly more than 3000 units were ever sold there.
But I do remember them from a children’s book on cars we had when I was very young, like 4 or 5 years old. That book must have been made in the late ’60s. It was in French, and it featured many cars I was regularly seeing on the streets back then, such as the Peugeot 204 or the Renault 16. And one model they were claiming was “the car of the future” was the Ro 80, which I recall left me puzzled because they were never seen and my parents didn’t know what it was either.
There was even a diagram of the rotary, which I naturally didn’t understand at all. But the shape of the piston made me think of the Fina oil company logo, so I remember figuring that these cars must have needed Fina-brand petrol.
There was I think a Saxomatic version of the 3.6 DKW another high revving mid/low torque engine.
The intake port arrangement of the KKM 612 engine created a problem with exhaust gas being drawn back into the engine under certain overrun conditions, which produced a nasty “snatch” effect. NSU found that using a torque converter rather than a mechanical clutch largely avoided this issue without needing to redesign the intake ports. It also helped to make up for weak off-idle torque, but my understanding is that that was kind of a bonus rather than the principal goal.
Er, rather than ONLY a mechanical clutch, I mean.
In the ad with the Black Forest wild boars must have fun to shoot. They are aggressive animals and especially true with a female and her young. I am surprised they did not shred the car with their razor sharp and dangerous tusks. By the way a growing population of wild boars is expanding northward from southern Oregon, I think they might have made it to the Eugene-Springfield area by now.
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/conservationstrategy/invasive_species/docs/ferel_swine_fact_sheet.pdf
http://www.huntwildpig.com/state-specifics/oregon-pig-hunting/
I think that picture also showed up as one of the humorous photos on the last page of Road & Track years ago. Can’t remember the caption they gave it, unfortunately.
Gorgeous cars in the metal the RO80 but always a rare sight on the road, they were very expensive new like all German cars here, One member of a local FB classic car forum has pulled another RO80 into his collection recently by finding yet another non runner in someones back garden, so they are still out there. Interesting eulogy to NSU I enjoyed it.
Great piece, with so much information.
The Ro80 was truly a great car with just the flawed or premature execution of its engine preventing it being seen as a true Citroen DS successor, in many ways, and is definitely the inspiration for the 1976 on Audi 100/200 cars. One of my 1960s favourites, and something that showed how conservative most of the British industry was by then
I saw one last year at a show, brought over especially from Holland.
Love the colour!
So rare to see one in a more conservative hue like a dark blue.
It was rust that killed mine, the engine was fine at nearly 50,000 miles / 9 years.
10 years on I had an ’88 Audi 100 – a good car for sure, and aimed at exactly the same market.
Not special to drive though, unlike the Ro80 which always felt special. But the Audi was rust free!
This is a very well written series, but please allow me to correct a minor detail: The Autonova cars were not designed by Claus Luthe. This was a project realised by the journalist Fritz B. Busch (1922-2010, longtime columnist of “Auto, Motor und Sport”) and the designers Michael Conrad (born 1940) and Pio Manzù (pseudonym of Piero Manzoni, 1939-1969, son of a famous Italian sculptor, designer of the Fiat 127). The Autonova GT was indeed financed by NSU and used the platform of the Prinz 1000 and the engine of the Type 110, but the Autonova Fam was based on the Glas 1304 and the money came from Veith-Pirelli.
You’re quite right, I’ve amended the text. Though sitting on a Glas 1300 platform, the Autonova Fam was still presented on the NSU stand at the ’65 IAA. Pity the Autonova effort petered out after such incredibly modern concept cars were made (and apparently widely admired).
Saw this ad today. Made me a bit depressed..
http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/232354205249?rmvSB=true&ul_ref=http%3A%2F%2Frover.ebay.com%2Frover%2F1%2F710-53481-19255-0%2F1%3Fff3%3D4%26pub%3D5574637365%26toolid%3D10001%26campid%3D5337441449%26customid%3D%26mpre%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fitm%2F232354205249%26srcrot%3D710-53481-19255-0%26rvr_id%3D1221154820071&_mwBanner=1&ul_noapp=true
I had 2 nsu prinz cars a 1959 and 1960 2 cyl aircooled.loved em both and miss them dearly so i still have a soft spot in my heart for anything nsu…also had a 65 renault dauphine gordini. Ive had plenty of american musclecars and ponycars but the thrill of american horsepower and v8 noise lacks the cuteness and economical simplicity of the european cars of the age.nothing sounds like the little prinz twin or compares with the prinz …i sincerely wish someone would build em again…theyre simple enough…and im sure with the technology we have today theyd be the perfect “world car”. Id buy one! Just please stick with the original prinz 1,2,&3 styling.
Thanks for a sad story. Weren’t too many FWD Wankel engine cars. They were rotary engine motorcycles, snowmobiles & lawn movers in the 1970’s. Cheers
Only FWD Wankel engine cars I know of were the Ro80, Mazda R130, (limited-production) Citroen M35, and Citroen GS BiRotor.
Great series! I am a fan of small tuned cars and I would love to see and drive a Prinz 1200TT. Unfortunately I have never seen one in the metal. I do remember seeing a Prinz Sports Wankel on the Long Island Expressway in NY back in the ’60s. And a friend has an early Prinz 2 cylinder.
Picture 25. Was this an advertising photo? With wild hogs?
Yes as I noted in my earlier comment.
“The man had a sulfurous history, having been kicked out of the Nazi Party in 1933 (he had joined in 1922) for being a bit too extreme. During the war, he was an officer in the SS for a couple of years, but was discharged for unknown reasons (one shudders to think…). ”
What evidence do you have of his being kicked out of the Nazi Party “for being a bit too extreme,” other than repeating what’s been said in a Jalopnik article (which also provided no such evidence.)
Excellent article other than this section, IMO.
Oh, there’s plenty of evidence out there if you use Google translate or read a bit of German (Jalopnik doesn’t feature among my research all that much in general.) For instance:
http://www.badische-zeitung.de/lahr/die-annaeherung-an-einen-unfassbaren–41347435.html
https://books.google.com.mm/books?id=PIe0a_NB4BcC&pg=PA52&dq=Wankel+strasser&hl=en&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Wankel%20strasser&f=false
Wankel was a follower of the Strasser brothers. That landed him in hot water (and prison) when Hitler gained power and purged the NSDAP of its more revolutionary elements, ultimately leading to the “Night of the Long Knives”. But Hitler greatly admired Wankel’s technical genius and allegedly personally intervened to release him from prison.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strasserism
Very engrossing and fascinating series! I now see how Audi ‘come up’ with TT and TTS monikers for its excellent roadsters.
For the first time, I could see the price comparison for Alfa Romeo 1750 Berlina against its competitors. I had wondered for a long time how much it really cost when new and where on the totem pole it was at. I was surprised that 1750 Berlina was priced closer to Mercedes-Benz W115.
My father bought a secondhand 1971 Alfa Romeo 1750A Berlina in 1972 to replace his beloved 1968 BMW 2002 whose two doors were getting too impractical for a growing family of four. He paid DM 10,000 (with inclusive taxes and fees) and said it was cheap deal because nobody wanted a car with automatic gearbox unless one is a luxury car connoisseur (a.k.a. Mercedes-Benz S-Class owners).
Tatra87, mind telling me where you find the source for the price? I am very curious how much a 1971 Alfa Romeo 1750 Berlina cost when new. Thanks!
I can’t remember the exact source, unfortunately — finding these prices isn’t an exact science. Wikipedia is a pretty good source (German version for prices in DM), as are fan sites and forums for specific makes / models. The alfabb forum might be where I dug this up. It takes a fair amount of sleuthing.
Google images can also help: some period ads include prices, or period mags, especially the ones that covered the motor shows. I found the Peugeot Deutschland official pricelist for 1968 on Google images — just someone who had it and put in on Pinterest or something. On the other hand, I looked for the Triumph 2000 for ages and got nada…
Thanks very much for the tips!
German Wikipedia did show DM 11,600 for a 1969 model. I also saw the 1969 advertisement in German for DM 11,599. Basing on historic inflation chart for Germany, I would hazard a guess of 1971 price to be about DM 13,000-14,000. That wasn’t much of a difference when my father paid for it in 1972.
I have used alfaBB before in response to the query about the ‘mythical’ 1750A Berlina. Alfistis who own 2000A didn’t think it exist because there was tiny and obscure information out there, documenting the ‘Alfa unicorns’ as one-off mules in preparation for the launch of 2000A.
I uploaded what is perhaps the only photos in existence of 1750A Berlina. Alfistis jumped around like Tigger, clamouring and rubbing their eyes in astoundment.
That’s interesting about the 1750A. I lived with a guy who had a 2000A but never even knew about the smaller version. I don’t have the 1969 edition, but the 1970 and 1971 World Car Catalogues list the 1750 Berlina’s variations as Spica injection pump for US only and electrically heated rear window. No slushbox.
72 lists both 1750 and 2000 Berlinas. Only the 2000 has the automatic in Variations. By 73 the 1750 Berlina is gone; which makes me think the 1750A might have been a late 72 model-year entry after the auto had first been used on the 2000A. Except for the fact that your father’s was a 71.
That is the source of confusion and scepticism about whether 1750A really existed or not.
From what I have gathered so far, Alfa Romeo built 249-251 units of 1750A Berlina during 1971, perhaps as the last hurrah before switching to 2000 and 2000A Berlina in the late 1971. I had the official owner’s handbook on operating and maintaining ZF automatic gearbox. Ours was 36th built (VIN: AR1780036).
The compliance plate in our 1750A did not list the manufacturing year, yet the German registration document showed 1971.
I put together the photos so you know it’s a real deal.
Fascinating Oliver. I had that engine in the 71 coupe. Much fun, and the BEST gearbox and lever throw I’ve ever experienced. The print run for German 1750A handbooks must have been minuscule.
If your dad’s had metallic paint or Texalfa interior, these were introduced as options for ’72’.
The guess about the price trend wasn’t far off: According to AMS 6/1971, the German list price of the Alfa 1750 was DM 12 490 with manual shift.
In 1969 I comparison shopped various cars in the under $4k range and the Alfa 1750 Berlina was priced almost the same as the BMW 2002, which was $3800.
Audi’s “TT” trunk insignia was exactly the same size and style as the TT badge on the back of my NSU 1000.
Awesome!
The block letters “TT” on the back of the modern Audi model were exactly the same shape and size as on the back of my old NSUs. I used to enjoy informing Audi salesmen about that obscure fact.
Cool. In some ways the K70 has a better profile, but from any quarter the Ro80 shape wins.
Hindsight is 20:20 vision, I know but I am still amazed by how many manufacturers fell for the rotary’s siren song. This after all a revolutionary concept – I would have expected people like MB and GM to put it somewhere in their skunk works until it all the problems (which should have been clear even in the early 60s) were thoroughly ironed out. It seems to me the only thing which saved them from REALLY bad loses was the 1973 war. Had fuel prices remained what they were in 1972, I have no doubt MB, GM and others would have committed themselves to the concept in some way or another.
As for NSU, pride comes before the fall. A sensible company would have concentrated on the K70, which would have sold a lot better without the bad rub-off effect of the Ro 80. THAT they might have introduced in 1970, once the rotary was developed to the level where it at least could hold to 100,000 Km without blowing up (the later versions could). Not having the K70 meant that NSU was in the same absurd situation as BMW a few years earlier (offering a small economy car and an executive sedan with nothing in between). That – as a matter of corporate strategy – should have never happened.
Along with emerging modern metallurgical technology and heaping amount of diligent and patient research, I am sure Wankel engines would have succeed later down the road.
Another one is Stirling engine, which showed a lot of promises in the 1970s, but nothing ventured out of it. Ditto for turbine engines as well. Let’s see, um, yeah, fuel cell and hydrogen fuel that are still in perpetual ‘developmental hell’ to this day.
Come to think how much effort it took to convince the public and manufacturers, especially European, to even consider the hybrid technology and practical electric vehicles before they finally took off. Obviously, lot of people have taken the wait-and-see or what-comes-first-chicken-or-egg attitude when it comes to very different technology.
To tie in with a couple days ago, front wheel drive. I wonder how many of the people who kept buying Chevettes into the mid ’80s had been burned on early front-drivers like the first couple years of VW Rabbits (or first year of most of its’ clones), or for that matter on a ’70s Japanese import with brilliant initial quality and miserable rust protection?
There are some other motorcycle tie ins in this story. When the 4 cylinder Prinz came out Friedl Munch (who deserves his own CC feature) started using them as the basis for his Munch Mammut motorcycles. Also in addition to the pioneering DKW/Hercules motorcycle, Suzuki built the oh so seventies RE5 and in the 80s Norton got into the rotary engine business, peaking with a win at the Isle of Man TT around 1991. Interestingly Norton’s biggest market for rotary engines was target drones, which required a compact high output engine but had no real need for longevity.
A tragic but stylish saga, well told. The Beetle prototype may have been built by NSU, but Tatra claimed VW cribbed the design from them, and won a settlement after WWII:
And it’s interesting that Tesla has taken the opposite approach of NSU in developing its groundbreaking sedans, prioritizing driveline reliability and settling for clean but hardly innovative visuals:
Could both NSU and Citroen afford to hold back any further on introducing mainstream cars with Wankel engines and instead produce say a jointly-developed Wankel-powered equivalent of the Volkswagen-Porsche 914 along similar lines to what Mazda did with the Mazda Cosmo?
Essentially a lower-volume NSU-Citroen sportscar that is significantly more potent and sophisticated than the earlier rear-engined NSU Spider done by NSU, with Citroen producing their own version perhaps even featuring hydropneumatic suspension thereby allowing both companies to produce halo models while focusing on sorting out the Wankel engine’s issues before introduction on mainstream cars. .
Going back to my envisioned Mazda-inspired lightweight Citroen-NSU Wankel-engined sportscar idea in place of both companies rushing mass produced Wankel powered models before the bugs were ironed out.
NSU’s version would essentially be a more performance orientated 2-seater version of the NSU Trapeze concept in a rear/mid-engined rear-wheel drive layout (akin to the Porsche 914) with 2-door coupe / targa bodystyles.
Citroen’s version meanwhile would be a slightly heavier more GT-focused sportscar resembling a smaller 2-seater (or 2+2) CItroen SM featuring the same front/mid-engined front-wheel drive layout as the latter with 3-door fastback hatchback / 2-door convertible bodystyles (in essence sitting on roughly the same platform as the NSU version albeit reversed and possibly featuring hydropneumatic suspension).
Both Citroen and NSU versions would initially feature similar 995cc twin-rotary engines as found in both the Citroen GS Birotor and NSU Ro80 rated at 105-136 hp (may have to take the latter figure quoted by an anonymous source with a grain of salt), prior to a possible NSU-only production version of the 150-180+ (?) hp 1494cc triple-rotary prototype engine originally intended for a high-performance version of the NSU Ro80 should Comotor achieve the same results as Mazda in sorting out the Wankel engine;s issues.
There was a Danish magazine (Motor Classic) that did a profile on these fantastic cars last year. The featured car had done more than 200,000 miles on the original engine. I can’t recall what the owner said was the secret. I believe it was regular oil changes, but I will see if I can find the article. The owner insisted that with the right type of care the engine is very reliable.
NSU really was an engineers’ auto company. Let me describe the sheer brilliance hidden underneath the dowdy little body of an NSU 1000.
At the front, we have a double-wishbone suspension with kingpins. I don’t know much about kingpins, but I wish my current car had then, considering that my NSUs never needed wheel alignment and got 40k miles to a set of Michelin Xs. The car tracked like an arrow, and there was very strong self-centering due to gyroscopic forces, as the front wheels took on strong negative camber in turns. In back, it sat on semi-trailing arms with swing axles, a suspect configuration that never seemed to bite me in hard cornering, which I did every chance I got. (“Hard” cornering, of course, wasn’t so frightful on those narrow tires.)
Oh, and it had a Hemi- with an overhead cam, to boot. The all-alloy engine nestled between the rear wheels, parallel to the rear seat. As the owner’s manual pointed out, the 150-lb engine counterbalanced the driver’s weight to yield perfect weight distribution, more or less. There was an economy of design that was almost artistic. The flywheel was also the cooling fan. The distributor was horizontal, an extension of the camshaft.
If there was any availability in the US market, I would probably own one of these now. The ultimate sleeper car, a brilliant chassis and a fierce one-liter motor hidden underneath styling inspired by an overturned bathtub. No wonder I drive a GTI…
Is it true, as I’ve heard, that you could change the clutch on an NSU 1000 in 20 minutes.
It was very easy.. Accessible like a motorcycle without separating engine and gearbox. The feature was carried on with the K70.
1) Undo the fan shroud by popping off a half-dozen spring clips.
2) Remove the flywheel (wish I could remember how- it’s been 30 years).
3) This reveals the clutch. Remove it (see above notes) and replace friction linings. (I seem to remember the clutch plate operating as its own spring.)
4) Reverse previous steps.
It sounds easy, and it is pretty easy, compared to other cars. No need to separate the engine and transmission.
Fantastic to see you guys writing about one of Germanys (almost) forgotten gems ! My father knows so much about this topic that he could write a book about it… and he actually did ! But it was only printed in small numbers and only in German so I can’t even find a picture of it. But I can ensure you that my father is one of THE NSU experts in Germany, so anyone who wants to dig into the subject any further – just contact me !
He still owns a Prinz 3 but slightly modified in handling and performance, with BMW 700 cylinder heads and a few more goodies, you wont believe how agile a little 2 cylinder car can be ! We have another one, a Prinz 4 from 1971, the “small corvair”.
He also had a couple of RO80s in the early 70s, it surely had it’s problems but let me tell you that even today, german motor authorities will tell you this car was ahead of it’s time, at least the design was.
Then there are the TTs, the great forefather of everything AUDI is selling these days with a TT or TT RS badge (even tough technically not related in ANY way to them) and let me tell you, these ruled every smaller circuit or hill climb event and some of them still do.
A ‘not so fun’ fact is also that a nationalist terrorgroup here in Germany also used the abbreviation NSU for their murders, in this case meaning “National “Social” Underground, which makes it quite hard to even wear a NSU shirt or cap these days. Lots of people know the terrorists but only few remain to know the car maker which is a shame….
So it’s great to see that even people overseas keep those cars in good memory, thank you !!
That’s sad to hear. The NSU nameplate had lousy connotations in the USA, too. In in those sexually frisky years, I and my peers caught multiple cases of Non-Specific Urethritis.
NSU Prinz in Argentina:
http://amigosdelnsu.blogspot.com.ar/
http://www.testdelayer.com.ar/nsuprinz.htm
Disappointing, that the stunning and ground-breaking styling of the Ro80, seemed to have limited impact on Audi or Volkswagen styling through the 1970s and early ’80.
The Ro80 had design character, interest, and beauty, the ’84 Audi 5000 never achieved, IMO.
Just yesterday I saw some lovely extra body styles created by a talented artist on Pinterest. There are a couple of coupes, but could I interest you in a Ro80 wagon?
No need to buy a NSU book anymore. Great work!
“Producing 113 hp (DIN) out of only 995cc, … But then, everything about the Wankel was so different that comparing it with a 1000cc piston engine was completely pointless. It was more comparable to (at least) a 2-litre or more 6-cyl. in terms of power …”
Just to compare: When the Ro80 was launched, Ford needed a 2.3 litre V6 to deliver DIN-108 hp (Ford 20M), Opel needed a 2.5 litre I6 to deliver DIN-115 hp (Opel Commodore A).
Here is a handy comparison table, from auto motor und sport 3/1968. (“Höchstegeschwindigkeit” means “maximum speed”; the rest should be pretty self-explanatory even if you don’t read any German.)
Such a great write-up! Thank you!
I’d like to add just another tiny bit of information: When Audi was about to develop the “Type 43” = 1977 Audi 100 & Audi 5000 there was a very ambitious engineer in charge: Ferdinand Piech! Two options for powering that car were taken into consideration: The 5 cyl in line piston engine and a Wankel engine. I have seen photos of a broadly grinning Mr Piech next to a Wankel powered Audi 5000 proto! As we all know, that did never go into mass production while the 5 cyl did. And well, the very first “Type 43” Audis came with a 2 liter 4 cyl engine (code “WA”) as the 5 cyl (WB, WC, WE, WJ turbo, WK turbo, CN Diesel and DE turbo diesel) were not yet ready for the street in Summer 1976.
Joe
Excellent write up on my favorite transport since 1965, I still drive my 1200 TT every weekend. and am restoring the body of my Prinz 4 .I had a Ro 80 which was imported to Ireland from Australia in 1970 into which i put a German Ford Tanus v4 which ran very well for the few years i had it.
I now live in Australia for the last 34 years and enjoy the looks i get when accelerating away from traffic lights and overtaking more sedate cars.
I too would buy NSU cars again if they were ever manufactured.