In my other post, Ads and More from Road & Track, June 1978– one of the comments asked to upload the Diesel Rabbit (Golf) report, so that we could compare this to present times’ Diesels. More to the point- VWs, in light of the recent Diesel debacle they’ve inserted themselves in.
* Scroll down for the updated report.
Here you go, click the images for better resolution:
As per the headline, I found among R&T’s July 1979 issue a 60,000 Miles update, so you can read about this car (and its calamities) further:
I like these cars … and put quite a few miles on a friend’s ’80 diesel Rabbit. I’d probably have a diesel Caddy (pickup) if I could find a good one and had more parking room. But, after 24K miles to have multiple clutch problems, a few broken latches and burned out tail light bulb, and 42 mpg overall? Our ’08 Prius has 102K miles and also had a burned out tail light bulb. That’s it. And it has averaged more like 49 mpg. An unfair comparison, perhaps, but just a reminder, that really, in objective terms, cars have gotten much better. On the other hand, will CC reprint Prius road tests in 2045? I doubt it …
We did not believe it.
Till then, only Peugeot had a small Diesel in the 204 Station wagon, which was slow.
It did about 65 mph, or 90/95 k, if you got over that the longivity was seriously shortened.
And here was the Golf Diesel, it mocked all the laws of having large and heavy cast iron engine blocks, the Golf Diesel’s engine looked like a Gasoline or petrol clone and it perfomed like a Ferrari, it was fast, peppy and economical.
This is actually the car that made Diesel a serious alternative for normal people not being a rep doing 100000 k per year or a taxi driver.
The Golf Diesel actually made a bigger impact as the Golf GTI did.
We seriously could not believe it, a small Diesel being so good !
It’s true; the diesel Golf was revolutionary. And then nobody knew yet that these engines would end up so durable; they were almost impossible to kill. There’s still quite a few on the streets here.
In 1979-1980, during the second energy crisis, folks in LA were bidding up the prices of diesel Rabbits to ridiculous amounts, as much as $12,000, or double the list price. Folks took out the spare, and installed a second fuel tank, and thus could run 600-800 miles on a fill-up.
FWIW, if I was gentle on the throttle, I could top 700 miles on a tank in my TDI New Beetle. That 90HP (USA trim) ALH engine was pretty darn good, as long as you exercised it (turbo actuator would stick otherwise) and monitored the intake for oil coking (think PCV).
Are you from Europe, Rammstein ?
I always thought, that the Golf I GTD made an even bigger splash!
Maybe you’r e right, dunnow, it was quite expensive the GTD model, in my simple world the 205 Peugeot took over from the Golf, in Diesel land with its ridiculous enormous 1.9 liter engine
Then it was time for the common rail Diesels, an Alfa Romeo invention developed by Bosch with Alfa and then these Diesels simply became king of the hill and emperor of the world.
Terribly frightening fast and drinking drops of diesel instead of liters.
I still am hooked on these cars today !
Loads of torque, smoothness, quiet, economical strong and cheap to run
Ow, the Golf 1 Diesels were green, unbelievebly green just take one look at the picture !
There’s one exactly like that still on the streets here. I just saw it again the other day in traffic.
I’ve done several previous posts on diesel Rabbits, but let’s just say there’s still a number of them being used here. They’re very much a cult object.
There seem to be quite a few diesel Rabbits and Caddys here in Richmond, too, but that photo made me think of something–none of them seem to be 5-door models. Lots of 3-doors, lots of Caddys. What happened to all the 5-doors, I wonder? Or were they not a big seller in the first place?
I’ve seen a car just like this in Eugene, Oregon… is this it? I’ve got an 82 convertible rabbit.. that I’m fixing up.. it’s coming along nicely! Should be out and about before to long.. (not diesel) but cool car…
@Michael ;
.
Fun cars if slower that the Sedans because the Rag Tops only came with 1960’s…
.
Plenty of aftermarket A1 platform suspension bits are available to make it far more fun to drive spiritedly .
.
FWIW, sex in there with the top down in remote places is great, give it a try =8-) .
.
-Nate
Oops ~
.
Fat fingers to match my head :
.
I meant 1600 C.C. engines .
.
I was surprised to discover this when the crank pulley came loose and ruined the crankshaft ion my ’82 Rabbit DHC, I went and scrounged up a perfect std/std. crank and new bearing sheels, seals and so on then discovered it wouldn’t fit =8-^.
.
-Nate
Like the way they gloss over the “problems”. Sounds as bad as any domestic of the era.
Initial quality and reliability of lots of US cars were at their absolute worst in 1977. GM had unleashed the Vega, Ford had the Pinto and Chrysler has put the utterly putrid Volare out there–many of which barely ran when brand new due to emissions and Chryslers lean-burn technology. These cars had some serious engineering flaws and very poor quality. There was a reason that they lost so much market share in the 1970’s and it wasn’t because of hood latches and shifters.
Most of the early Rabbits had to be rebuilt by VW itself. Two clutch plates in 24,000 miles is not a minor problem.
But you would expect that sort of thing re: VW from Road and Track.
The dealership should have replaced the disc and pressure plate together the first time. Then it would have been fixed for good. And you know these test drivers probably were not gentle on the clutch, or the rest of the car for that matter.
I have to agree. I’ve never owned a VW Rabbit Diesel, but I’ve heard about some of the problems these early water-cooled VWs had, and I believe that instead of rushing things into the showroom *before* everything’s ready, they should’ve worked out all the “bugs” *before* they’re released on to the car buying public.
I would rather say that Detroit’s QC during that period was inconsistent & resulted in cars with anywhere from stellar to lemony reliability. Thus the folk stories about cars built on Mondays & Fridays, & constant differences of experience in forums like these.
The main flaw in the Pinto was that its fuel-tank inlet detached easily in collision, making fuel spillage more likely; one author claimed that statistically, the fatality rate for Pintos was no worse than for most other small cars. Gas tanks explode mostly in action movies, not real accidents.
The Pinto was actually reliable. Unlike the Vega and Chryslers equipped with the Lean-Burn system, the Pinto wasn’t unreliable because of designed-in flaws. Any problems were rooted in uneven quality control – problems that plagued GM, Chrysler and AMC during these years, not just Ford.
I too was surprised that they kept saying the car was pretty good despite glaring shortcomings in the inability to support air-conditioning, the glacial acceleration and the numerous mechanical failures.
I’d have to call out R & T on a little import bias on this one.
Very different from most long term reviews you see in the magazines today where they frequently report zero problems. The worst modern review I’ve seen in quite a while was on one of the smaller Jeep products.
I have not driven a diesel first gen Rabbit, but it was my impression that they were glacially slow–this certainly dispels that myth–at least when new–they seem to have had the same or similar power as the gasser. It is also pretty interesting how the economics of diesels have become so much less advantageous here in the US with diesel fuel prices 20% higher than gas now and the price premium for a diesel car (with all of the necessary emissions hardware) now much more substantial than it was in 1977.
In response to dman above I actually think that the Prius will always be viewed as one of the milestone cars in automotive history—it single-handedly mainstreamed the hybrid by years earlier than it would have happened by being so affordable and bulletproof overall. I would put the Prius alongside the VW Beetle and the Model T in terms of how it will ultimately have redefined what a car is and can be.
They were quite slow; significantly slower than the gas engine version. But they were just fast enough to keep up with normal traffic, which was generally much slower back then, during the time of the 55 mile speed limit. And other cars generally accelerated slower too back then.
In the hands of a good driver who was willing to row the gears effectively, the diesel Rabbit was adequate, for the times. In today’s world, not so much so.
I’ve never owned or driven a VW Rabbit, gas or diesel, but I’ve ridden in both as a passenger, and I found them more comfortable than they look like they could be. I liked the Rabbit Diesel for no other reason than its fuel economy. It may have been painfully slow, but I found that it could go for a long time before needing to be refueled.
Right.
Back then, a Diesel time of less than 20 seconds for the 0-100 km/h acceleration was considered sensational!
By the standards of the time, the gasoline Rabbits were pretty sprightly. The diesel was OK around town, once you got used to the torque curve, but could indeed be glacially slow on mountain highways with the 4 speed; a downshift to 3rd put you in the truck lane. I drove my friend’s up I5 from California to Eugene. The mountains in Northern California and southern Oregon were fun. 85 mph downhill, then slowing gradually at full throttle on the next uphill, with a quick downshift to 3rd as often as not, then right foot back on the floor. By the time we got to Salem, with about 600 miles on the tank and still reading 1/4 full, I was ready to buy one. Then my friend casually mentioned that he’d put in the auxiliary tank, so mileage was only in the 40’s, not 70’s as I was calculating. Still, it was probably the most engaging drive up I5 that I’ve done over the last 35+ years.
I’d buy a Diesel Volkswagen if I could find a decent example, one that hasn’t been abused or modified to death. I’d prefer either a Dasher Diesel or a Rabbit Diesel.
I was surprised they didn’t mention how slow these things were but more surprised that they only cost $170 more than the gas version. The diesel engine price premium has certainly increased. The survival rate of these motors are incredible, definitely worth the extra $170.
We’ve found that when one drives a Prius in “Eco” mode, one must accelerate glacially to stay out of the “Power” indicator zone if you want the best MPG. My sister-in-law can’t bear it & keeps her Prius in “Power” mode all the time, but she’s still happy with the economy.
BTW, does the EPA test regimen use “Eco” or “Power” mode on hybrids?
FWIW my non-hybrid Civic’s salesman said mpg tests were not done in eco mode.
In 1977 Consumer Reports tested a Cutlass Supreme sedan with the little 260 V-8 engine (gasoline), and recorded a 0-60 time of 21 seconds.
In the wake of the first fuel crunch, it was all about fuel economy, not 0-60 times, for many buyers.
No, just no.
The Prius might be a big deal in the US, but not much elsewhere.
It has been a while since I saw a new Prius. Simply because those who are interested in a Toyota Hybrid prefer the C-segment Auris hatchback and wagon Hybrid (same powertrain as the Prius).
50K + price tags on Prius put a lot of people off them here, they economy is not really much better than some smaller petrol or diesel options that are much cheaper to buy.
So far as I’m concerned, the Prius is C-segment (vs. Golf/Mazda3/Focus/Corolla/Civic), and the Prius C [confusingly] is B-segment (vs. Mazda2/Fiesta/Yaris/Versa). And the Prius V has interior space comparable to the Camry, & competes with Ford’s C-Max.
I guess people prefer the Toyota Auris Hybrid because it’s a more conventional looking car, both the hatchback and the wagon are typical C-segment cars, yet with the Prius’ powertrain. The current Auris model (the first gen was introduced in 2007) is sold as Scion iM in your country. The Corolla is not offered in Europe.
Recently the Auris also got a brand new 1.2 liter 4-cylinder turbo engine, it replaced the 1.6 liter engine.
The B-segment Yaris is also available as a hybrid.
Actually, Toyota is the only Japanese automaker in Europe that offers a model in all segments, if you include Lexus.
The Prius is a huge seller in Japan, does very well in the U.S., and does seem to have some following in Europe.
2013 Global Prius sales:
Japan: 679,000
U.S.: 358,000
Europe: 153,000.
In 1989, my American friend and I holidayed in Germany during our spring break. It was his first ever trip to Europe so lot of new experiences awaited him. We stayed at my relatives deep in the Black Forest for a few days. One of my aunts had a 1987 three-door Peugeot 205 XLD with 1.8-litre diesel motor.
I was most familiar with her driving style: she drove mercilessly fast through the windy roads in the forest. I rode with her many times in her former Autobianchi A112 when I grew up. My American friend from Texas wasn’t. He was too accustomed to sedate Church Lady driving in Lone Star State.
We took off from one town and drove on the road through the forest to other town. The road became narrower and narrower as well as windier and windier. We got thrashed more than the chicken in ‘Shake-N-Bake’. Her driving style didn’t dissuade me at all but did overwhelm his Texas-grown senses, prompting the primordial fear within my friend. He stiffened up into rigor mortis; his stomach, bladder, and colon debated whether to let go or keep the valves closed; the colour drained from his face; and so forth.
After we alighted in the next town, my friend scrambled out of the car and did some sort of papal ground kissing. My aunt and I along with a few locals were bemused by the spectacle.
‘What do you think of her car?’ I asked my friend.
‘It’s damn fast! Your aunt’s crazy! She could have gotten us killed! What if somebody comes at us…’
‘Oh, I forgot to tell you we were driving on one-way street. Sorry. By the way, you realised it’s a diesel car, don’t you?’
‘Hell, no! It can’t be! It’s too fast to be diesel!’
The argument ensued for a while until my aunt intervened. A look in the engine bay and a close inspection of registration document convinced him otherwise.
I had a ’80 diesel Rabbit twenty years back and do very much regret ditching that car.
I remember this generation VW Golf/Rabbit Diesel, Dasher and Dasher Diesel, and Scirocco. At the time, I found the cars hideous to look at, kind of like the Yugo of the 80s. But looking at Volkswagen’s Golf, Jetta, and Passat of today, I find it more attractive than today’s Volkswagen. I’d buy a 1980 Rabbit, and a Dasher Diesel.
Unlike Jason, and understanding that style is judged by the individual, I found the Golf/Rabbit attractive in a lean, efficient way…quite the opposite of, say, the overblown, blimplike Ford Torino. I did find the diesel to be slow, whereas the gasoline Rabbit felt quick until it ran out of oomph at around 50 mph, at that point a reminder that the Malaise afflicted cars from other countries imported to the USA, too.
It’s true, though…the level of quality in the tested car, especially bearing in mind that Volkswagen knew it was a test car for a magazine…would today be considered abysmal.
My aunt and uncle had one of these (their “other” car was a 61 VW beetle). I got to drive the diesel a few times on short trips and compare it to the “test drives” I had taken in similar gas Rabbits. The diesel is slow and I felt like it could have gotten by with just 3 or 4 speeds. By contrast, the gas versions always felt…..eager.
Both cars felt quite solid, certainly in comparison to my 80 Fiesta. Still, I think I’d rather have that Fiesta back.
I knew quite a few people that suffered engine failures with Rabbit and Dasher diesels when they were under warranty or just off warranty. While some of them have endured, it certainly didn’t seem like the rule when they were new.
The article praises the Rabbit Diesel’s hill climbing ability. Compared to what? An office chair? Actually, I think these were relatively quick compared to the really slow diesels from Mercedes-Benz and Peugeot.
I owned a 1981 Rabbit D with the 5-speed for about ten years; it was one of my favorite cars that I have owned so far. It’s the only car in which I physically leaned forward to will the car onward while merging onto freeways!
Reading that article, there is a HUGE omission in necessary maintenance that contributed to the early death of countless VW diesels: “. . . at 60,000 the fuel injectors are cleaned or overhauled.”
“Class, At 60K miles, what necessary service is required to prevent catastrophic engine damage? Anyone? Anyone? The timing belt. Which, does or does not need to be replaced periodically? Anyone? Does need to be replaced.”
For people who formerly had only driven cam-in-block, timing-chain/gear American cars, replacing the timing belt at 60K miles wasn’t even on their radar. Many of those cars were simply sent off to the boneyard when their mechanic informed them that they needed a remanufactured cylinder head (and timing belt, and head gasket, etc.).
[addendum – Paul, I know we are supposed to support this site by viewing the ads, but it’s super-annoying when the video ad at the top finally loads and starts playing, and the page keeps auto-returning to the top to show the video when one is trying to enter a comment at the bottom of the page – this is happening using both IE and Chrome]
I’m in the middle of trying to track down and block that ad.
Thank you–that’s driving me batty too. It’s maddening for it to keep jumping to the bottom when reading the article, then to the top when reading comments!
Thank you for running this 🙂 I very nearly traded my ’83 Subaru GL Wagon for an ’81 2 door Rabbit C Diesel. The Herb Tarlek interior, the buy-here, pay-here nature of the lot and an intuition stopped me.
I had a bit of experience with these. My sister and BIL bought a used 77 gas Rabbit right after they got married. I got to drive it on about a 60 mile road trip, and it was a hoot. That car woke me up to how fun (and quick) the Rabbit was, and why they had such appeal.
Their next car was an 81 Rabbit Diesel that they bought used in maybe 1984 or so. It was one of the American Rabbits, so felt like a low-trim Chevy inside. But sis could get nearly 50 mpg out of it in her 50 mile daily commute.
Paul mentioned above that these would keep up with traffic – but there was one exception. I was with the owners one night when the car was fighting a stiff headwind. They struggled to maintain 50 mph wide open on flat road under those conditions. Their next car was an 86 Golf diesel, bought new. That one was significantly more powerful, but sis’s fuel mileage dropped to about 45. It was just last year that she ditched her 05-ish Jetta TDI for a Subaru Outback.
I forgot that Mrs. JPC had an uncle who bought a new one around 1979 or 80. He drove it until he died a few years ago, and one of his kids is still driving it. I have no idea what kind of miles it has had racked up, but it is a LOT.
I remember those American-made Rabbits. If I recall correctly, VW put a former GM executive in charge of its North American operations (and Pennsylvania factory), and he trimmed the early 1980s Rabbit like a late 1970s Chevrolet Malibu, down to full wheel covers on the upscale versions. It made for some odd-looking Rabbits.
That is one reason I worry about foreign car companies hiring Michigan suits, fearing they might bring bad Detroit habits with them.
And I never understood why VW called them Rabbit here; Golf is a perfectly good name, and that it’s a rich man’s sport in America hardly matters in that market segment. Ironically, a golfer told me the sport is more egalitarian in the UK. And why not the Polo? VW never bothered to compete in the B-segment here, leaving it wide open to many others.
Curious. The ’81 and ’86 had the exact same 52 hp 1588cc engine, but the ’86 was a bigger, heavier car. Maybe the ’81 wasn’t running right?
The 68hp turbochargerd diesel was available starting in 1984 or so, but I’ve hardly ever seen or heard of it in a Rabbit/Golf. it was typically seen in Jettas. But it’s possible your SIL’s ’86 had the turbo. That had significantly more oomph.
Interesting. I’m sure it was not the turbo. Possibly that it was new while the 81 had some age and miles on it. Also, the 86 was a pretty aerodynamic car for the era, likely moreso than the Rabbit, but that should have helped the fuel mileage.
My ’77 Rabbit (gas) really ran good. And after I replaced it’s 4 speed with a wide ratio 5 speed, it was really a lot more fun, 4th to pass and 5th to haul azz.
My diesel Citroen is a 5 speed 4th is good for over 100mph but its startin to rev pretty hard into the red zone, 5th will pull from about 750 rpm all the way to the red zone that low rpm off turbo diesel torque is great.
A refrigerator-white VW Golf Mk1 diesel with a 4-speed manual, my driving lessons car, back in 1984. I especially remember how easy it was to drive. You could drive it flawlessly while asleep behind the wheel, sort of.
Unlike our family’s 1979 Ford Fiesta 1300S, with its pedals that worked like on/off switches. And recalcitrant manners. Plus a crap automatic choke. No wonder my own 1987 Ford Escort had a manual choke.
When I was working for VW a co-worker/friend’s Dad bought the first Diesel Rabbit our dealership received, it was a ’77. 4 door mid trim level, with normal 3 point belts. He drove it to 250k miles, and glow plugs and one clutch was all it needed. He did get one of the spare tire well fuel tanks in the ’79 fuel ‘shortage’. He could go 800 miles no problem. He drove 50-55 on the freeway and would get 52 mpg on long trips. He drove super slow all the time, short shifted and was passed by almost everyone. He traded it in on new ’80 or ’81 5 speed Westmoreland model. That one did blow a head gasket and cracked the head at 150k miles, but after that he ran it up to 300k miles before he passed away. The early ones were super durable, the only weakness was glow plugs would have to be replaced from time to time. When VW went to the larger 1.6 motor, there were some that would blow head gaskets and sometimes crack heads. They were not as durable as the original motor. Some would be fine, others not. The same friend bought a new diesel ’81 pickup with 5 speed and AC, if you really wound it out it went OK. I got it up to 95 downhill with a tailwind once. I would say powerwise they felt pretty close to a 1600 Beetle. Nice to read this old article, I was hoping it would be reprinted. His cars were always serviced at the dealership following the factory recommended intervals.
Glow plugs are a wear item and require replacement at regular intervals Ive put two sets into my Citroen I fitted aftermarket items about 3 years ago they were cheaper, mistake this time I went with genuine parts hoping they last longer.
We used to sell “fast start” kits with 4 plugs and a new relay. It really cut down on the warm up time. The problem was when replacements were needed, which type was now in the owners car?
Nice to read everyone’s thoughts and experience .
-Nate
I drove all the diesels I could find before I bought the one I have now including a 97 Turbo D Golf it was an ok car but it had other maintenance problems looming so I passed, I already had a very tired clapped out non turbo Toyota Corona diesel and I was looking for more performance, comfort, lower mileage and better dynamics with no loss of fuel economy so it was back to the XUD engine range which happens to be very DIY friendly for repairs should the need arise and a rep for 500,000 kms before a rebuild is required.
I wonder why the firewall was streaked with diesel fuel. Sounds like something wasn’t right. If it was the leak(s) around the injector pump, why didn’t they get it fixed?
On another note, I had a friend who had a Rabbit diesel. It was very loud and shook hard enough that the dash’s vibrations were clearly visible. She drove it slow and loved the car, but after many years she traded it…. for a GTI!
Up to the early 2000s these were still somewhat common over here in Portugal. I hated getting stuck behind one as they always smoked like chimneys. NVH was equally appaling. Definitely not my cup of tea. You guys in the US don’t know how good you have it with the lack of diesel cars and their noise and smoke…
I was working on those in the mid 80’s. Not very impressive powerwise, did a few expensive injection pumps and piles of more expensive replacement heads from failed timing belts. Didn’t take much for a belt to fail. Usually something else would crap out and shred the belt and crunch. Rebuilt one that the cylinder bores were worn into the next county while the pistons were at new specs still. Ever seen one ralph enough oil into the intake to run away? Typical Euro 7 to 10 year car with expensive for the day maintenance requirements. I very rarely see one on the road here and I shed no tears over it.
The thing I find most interesting in that article is that they claim that some of the drivers actually like the stupid door mounted seat belts. Everyone I knew that had them from any mfg ranged from extreme hate to mild annoyance but never anyone who preferred them over conventional seat belts.
These old-style (pre common rail/electronics) diesels taught one about patience but, once you accepted your lot in life, the benefits of stupidly high MPG figures sweetened the bitter pill of snail-like acceleration and being confined to cruising at 60-70 MPH tops. Never had one of these Golfs/Rabbits but my Ford Escort diesel was very much the same; 59 hp and 47 MPG come rain or shine. 1000 Km range between fill ups – very useful for a student when diesel prices in Austria were significantly lower than gasoline ones. My modern, direct-injected, 1/4 hybrid gasoline Mazda 3 so far managed 40 MPG combined and that was driving with the _aim_ of saving fuel. Push hard and it soon drops, whereas with the primitive Ford it seemed not to make any difference how you drove it… 45 MPG was the lowest I got. So we gained on acceleration and top speed at the cost of “heaven help us if something goes wrong” (no way you will be able to repair anything on your own with the modern diesels). Hmmmm….
I drove the families’ stick shift Dasher diesel in high school. Not sure if same drive train as Rabbit, but that car went well over 100,000 miles with no real issues, until a cracked head killed it. My dad was pleased with the results of his slightly used Dasher purchase though.
How much of the gas and diesel engine architecture was shared? Both seemed pretty durable.
I just picked up a ’79 Rabbit diesel, my first diesel and I was laughing loudly at the part about how undiesel like it was. How bad were other diesels back then?
Don’t get me wrong, I like mine but there’s no doubt that it’s a diesel. The damn thing sounds more like a piece of farm equipment than a car.
Every time my brother gets in it he makes some sort of “let’s go harvest the crops” comment.
However, I have to say that while it is slow, painfully at times, it is not as bad as I thought it would be. It’s still driveable today. Although this is coming from someone who drives a 36hp ’59 Beetle as well…….
Photo is of my Rabbit and my best friend’s ’87 Jetta, which used to be mine.
A high school friend had one of these, tha car was only 9 years old at the time. He originally had s ’69 Cougar that he was sick of wrenching on, so his Dad gave him his brown, 4 door Rabbit Diesel 4 speed. He loved it! Indestructable! He also wanted to find an Isuzu P’up diesel, but could never find one for sale. That Rabbit was some car!
I still see a few VW diesel pickups in service here in Portland. Check out this 10 year old chart from the Canadian DesRosiers Automotive newsletter that compares light truck/SUV longevity by make. 97 % + of Canadian VW trucks 21-25 years old were still on the road.
I still see some VW Caddys in and around Tacoma, Washington. Not very many Rabbits, either gasoline or diesel.
Bought a new deluxe two door 1979 rabbit diesel, with a 5-speed, drove it for two years. Loved the car, but it was hardly trouble free. The engine oil filter seal blew out twice – yikes, what a mess! The glued-on vent pane latches were forever falling off, sometimes into traffic. The passive seat belt was a pain, and a pretty scary thing, with no lap belt. R&T was right, if understated, about the diesel stink; it followed you everywhere, as did a stinky black plume of exhaust smoke if you were “on it”, which was pretty much all the time. The car was SO slow! The gasoline Rabbit, even with an automatic, felt positively jet-propelled by comparison. And loud, oh was it noisy inside, and that was with the 5-speed. The 4-speeds were so noisy that a radio was essentially useless. The engine rattled and shook like a reducing machine, and the shifter was notchy and stiff and vague and loose and obstinate all at the same time.
I vividly recall driving from Los Angeles to Reno one winter, up US 395, over the Sierra Nevada mountains. Leaving Bridgeport the road begins to climb in dead earnest (and believe me, you feel even tiny grades with a mighty 52 HP on tap), so we got in the slow lane, shifted down to third, wedged a handy paperback book beside the go pedal to keep it floored, sat back and relaxed, while Pintos with four people aboard, and luggage strapped to the roof, zipped by on the left. By the time we got to Conway Summit at 8,200 feet we were in second, trailing a smoky plume visible from Skylab, no doubt. The thing was a bitch to start at 15-20 degrees, even after diluting the diesel fuel with kerosene, and was loud enough to wake up the entire block until you got it warm enough to move.
Passing on a two-lane road was terrifying. The trick was to identify the passee, then fall back, way, way back. Looking FAR ahead on a long straight stretch of road, identify a gap in traffic, downshift, ring down to the engine room for “all ahead full”, then slowly build up speed until you were traveling around 20 MPH faster than the target. If you timed it just right, just as the last opposing vehicle flashed past you were nearly on top of the vehicle to be passed, and you could dart out into the opposing lane and zip past the slower vehicle. Without any noticeable ability to accelerate, you depended entirely upon momentum. Then, as often as not, a hill would materialize in a mile or so. Once again you’d be struggling along, and the recently passed slowpoke would motor by.
But you know what? I loved it, and hated to see it go, but a huge city bus did it in. The car had great handling and good brakes (although it hardly needed them with all that diesel engine compression), and was a perfect illustration of the fun to be had driving a slow car fast, rather than a fast car slow. It was comfortable and roomy, considering its size, and could accommodate 4 passengers, provided they were not in a hurry. I once managed to get an entire King-sized waterbed (it was the 80’s, OK?), complete with massive wooden frame, packed inside it, with the hatch closed. It got very good mileage, more than 50 MPG when not being flogged over the mountains, and diesel cars were exempt from rationing during the fuel shortage. You could drive right past the luxo barges waiting in hours-long lines and pump your 8 or 9 gallons of diesel, and be on your way. It was pretty small and easy to park. In stop ‘n go traffic you could pretty much creep along without using the accelerator. It had a lot of torque and would easily start out from a stop at idle without stalling. We had many fun adventures searching out diesel fuel in remote areas, and more than once resorted to truck stops, thereby meeting an entirely new and interesting group of people.
I think it wouldn’t be the car for today, though it was great in its time. They were very small, and rather fragile, and fared badly in accidents. Stinky, slow, and noisy, they would be unlikely to impress drivers today. Even the cheapest economy cars today are decadently luxurious by comparison.