The VW Diesel Rabbit (Golf Mk1) really was a game changer, and I’m not using the word lightly. Finally there was an affordable, compact ultra-efficient car that could actually be fun to drive. Up to this point, that had not been a reality, as diesels were just about anything other than that.
Sure, 0-60 in 15.8 seconds sounds pretty lame in today’s world, but that was typical for gas engine small cars of the time, and faster than a Fiat X1/9, Dodge Colt, Datsun B210 and a Chevette. But straight line acceleration isn’t what makes a car fun to drive. The Rabbit had already developed a rep as being the most-fun to drive small car since its arrival in 1975, and the diesel engine only dampened that slightly. The expression “driving a slow car fast beats driving a fast car slow” never applied more to a car. And getting 42 mpg while doing it was the icing on the cake.
The $170 additional cost for the 1.5 L diesel engine, which was rated at 48 hp at an unusually high for a diesel 5000 rpm, was very reasonable. When the second energy crisis hit, I remember seeing folks paying up to $10k for a diesel Rabbit, almost double its list price. There was a popular kit that added a second tank where the spare was, and the spare was mounted continental style, or just done without. It made for close to 1000 mile range between fill ups.
The second reprint is R&T’s 24,000 mile long term test of a Diesel Rabbit they bought. Given that it was VW’s first new diesel engine, and given the Rabbit’s bad start reliability wise in 1975-1976, this one acquitted itself fairly well, considering a few issues were typical with just about all new cars back then.
The early VW diesels weren’t all perfect, but VW worked out the bugs and they became legendarily durable, attested by the numerous ones still on the road in Eugene. They’ve become icons, although in this post-diesel era, the numbers are fading finally.
Good example of where numbers “faster than a X-19” don’t translate into a funner ride.
Nice review, pleasant reading of simpler automotive times. A shame that VW destroyed the diesel’s reputation for passenger car use. Btw, by 1980 the Fiat X1/9 would get a larger 1492 cc fuel injected engine, good for 0-60 in about 11 seconds, quite an improvement.
My brother had this car and I used to drive it occasionally. It was indeed very fuel efficient. But everything inside smelled like Diesel, at least this was my impression. So no, nothing for me. And it wasn’t fast at all, it was one of the lamest things around.
When I fInished university in Halifax NS in 1979, I started looking for a car to drive west to Vancouver. There was a nearly-new Rabbit diesel for sale for C$5000, which seemed a sensible long term choice.
But I ended up buying a slightly rusty 1973 BMW 2002 instead for (I think) about C$2300. The whole glow plug thing and the sound of the Rabbit at idle just didn’t kindle many automotive fantasies. The BMW on the other hand? Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Financially of course it was a poor decision. The BMW had completed its rust-out by 1981, leading to the purchase of a new Scirocco that year for C$11 000. In salt-free Vancouver the nearly-new $5k Rabbit would likely have been with me for a good 10 years, if not more.
But it’s impossible to regret owning the 2002. The same goes for the Scirocco, despite high maintenance and repair costs over the years.
Emotion – 2. Practicality – Big Fat Zero.
Your mention of the additional fuel tanks triggered a memory of reading reports that Diesel owners in SoCal would fit these extra tanks, then cross the border into Tijuana for government-subsidized PeMex Diesel at pennies per gallon.
I’m not sure if your timeline puts you in SoCal in this era, Paul. If so, were the reports true, or was it only a few people and media exaggeration?
They certainly did just that, and not totally uncommonly so.I knew of one guy with a Peugeot 504 diesel that had a big auxiliary tank in the trunk, and would drive down to TJ once in a while and buy diesel there for the subsidized price of something like 10-15 or so cents a gallon. He could make it last a month or so.
Just how many did that I can’t say.
It seems they quite liked it, and for a non turbo diesel they went quite well for the times, ability to cruise at decent speed with good fuel economy is more important than 0-60 sprint times and still is real world acceleration between 70kmh and 120kmh is much more usefull than beating traffic away from a light. The same type of car as the diesel Golf/Rabbit came from many manufacturers later on all the Europeans had one or two and the Japanese entered the game in the 80s but to get the most out of these type of cars turbo charging is a must the jump in torque improves real world performance past petrol powered equivalents and the shove you get at high speed out of a turbo diesel four needs to be felt to be appreciated especially when the pain at the pump isnt there at fillup time, I curse our pathetic speed limit itts far to low for how my car is geared wind it up to 30-40kmh past the legal limit its a joy to drive and the fuel readout drops signifigantly.
The first turbo diesel I ever drove was a VW Golf Mk2 GTD (70 DIN-hp), shortly after I got my driver’s license in 1984. Driving lessons + test in a VW Golf Mk1 D (54 DIN-hp). Our family car back then was a Ford Fiesta 1300S (66 DIN-hp).
Whopping numbers…but then again, all of them were flyweights by today’s standards and all had a 4-speed manual to sort things out.
Mrs. JPC had an uncle who had a daily commute to and from his engineering job of about 50-75 miles. He put in his order for a diesel Rabbit not long after they came out and finally got a car after waiting nearly a year as I recall the story. He never bought another car, but kept driving that Rabbit until he finally got too sick to drive maybe about 5 years ago. I think one of his kids has it now.
Wow, that’s impressive.
I wonder if he ordered it just before or during the second energy crisis, as demand for them went through the roof. I saw folks offering to sell their brand new ones in LA for about a 100% mark up. Insane.
“I wonder if he ordered it just before or during the second energy crisis” I believe that he probably did.
This car was great…for 32,000 miles. That’s when the 48,000 mile test of the Rabbit Diesel was interrupted to rebuild the engine following a cascading failure that took out the oil line to the vacuum pump, the crankshaft, and all the bottom end bearings. It needed another new clutch as part of the repair too.
Before 48,000 miles the injectors needed refurbishing, radiator expansion tank was replaced, the door mechanism broke, the alternator belt broke, and normal maintenance parts like brakes wore out.
For the record, this reflects that both long-term VW Rabbits Road & Track tested needed major engine repairs in less than 48K miles. That’s a big reason that VW went from being the dominant import to being a niche one.
The information I included was from an article in the June, 1981 Road & Track wrap-up of their time with the Rabbit Diesel.
That’s the not-uncommon reality with brand new technology. FWIW, VW stuck with it, addressed the issues, and this family of their diesels eventually developed quite a good rep. See JPC’s comment a bit further up.
I know a few people who are(or were) long-time VW diesel proponents, but most of them signed up after VW had spent a few model generations sorting out their diesels. I knew quite a few early adopters too, and most of them came away feeling burned.
I just found the 100k test results, and will be posting them here shortly.
Despite the maintenance/repair costs, it was still extremely cheap over all.
I wonder if 24,000 mile tests are worth the trouble. The May, 1981 issue has one of the Citation X11. Issues? The clutch acted up from the jump and the dealer finally diagnosed a throw-out bearing as the cause. Then they said it wasn’t covered by warranty and the labor alone would be $224, an amount that probably covered a month’s rent of a two-bedroom apartment in San Francisco at the time. They decided to live with the bad clutch, and it wasn’t replaced until after 24K miles were completed, so it didn’t factor in their costs.
Other than that, their complaints were limited to the notchy cable shift mechanism and boring driving experience. It even returned 23.2 MPG, very respectable for a gasoline car big enough for five adults at the time.
There was nothing in the Citation article to indicate that they’d just spent a year with an early production version of one of GM’s biggest volume killers of all time.
These were not good cars; even the later ones.
My father owned two diesel models, a 78 and an 81, both which spent many weeks out of each year at Abbotsford’s Valley Autohouse undergoing expensive repairs.
The last one had virtually everything mechanical replaced before he frustratedly sold it for next to nothing, after which it provided the owner with many years of trouble-free driving.
My dad likely would have been better off with almost any other small car, Pinto or otherwise.
However, they were fun to drive, even somehow peppy, and fuel mileage was unbeatable. It was somewhat of a hobby for my dad to track his mileage, which was occasionally over 50 mpg.
I have an 82 Volkswagen Rabbit pickup also known as the caddy I also have a Mercedes diesel I’m in love with that Volkswagen I would SELL the Mercedes before the Volkswagen I understand it’s two separate animals but that Volkswagen just makes me smile just looking at it
A friend had one, and we shared a drive from the SF Bay Area up to Eugene one winter, after he had installed an extra fuel tank without telling me. After we had driven up I-5 about to the Oregon state line, and the tank was still reading 3/4 full, I was mentally calculating the fuel economy and planning how soon I could buy one for myself. The reality was good, but not the 65-70 mpg I was thinking we were getting. Of course, if we had kept the speed down, it would have been even better, but there is indeed something fun about drafting the trucks at full throttle – in 3rd gear – up some of the steep grades between Redding and Roseburg. I don’t remember if my daily driver then was my Vega or my Fiesta, but either one felt much more responsive at freeway speeds than the diesel Rabbit. But a heavy snowfall while exploring some dirt roads in the Mt Hood National Forest a few days later, showed me that the Rabbit had phenomenal traction … decent low end torque and lots of weight over the drive wheels made it much better than anything I had driven to date.
A friend of mines dad had one, timing belt failed, massive bill for smashed cylinder head and mangled pistons. Being a mechanic he had asked me if I was interested in fixing it, no way. This was around 1979-80 and it was rare that anyone proactively replaced a timing belt, just drive it still it stops. A work buddy had one also, great mileage, I think it used and leaked more oil than fuel. Management told he had to park it out back in the dirt lot as the oil leaking was eating holes in the black top.