VW Eco Performance CC Concept

Comments

2 responses to “VW Eco Performance CC Concept”

1. 

   Samuel A. Falvo II

   November 13, 2008

   33MPG? That’s it? In the 80s, cars were regularly hitting 50MPG. They were lightweight-enough to not need all that HP either; you can still get the performance with a smaller engine.

   http://www.aptera.com/ — How about 150MPG? True, it’s all electric and aerodynamic as hell, but, still — it blows the snot out of the VW’s allegedly “eco” challenge.

   And there is the Mazda 3, wherein I get 30MPG on average, due to the city driving I do in between freeway stints. On a pure stretch of freeway, I get 34MPG. It’s got plenty of that Mazda Zoom-Zoom action too. I’ve chirped the tires three times by accident already. 🙂

   I guess I’m just responding to the whole “eco”-thing. So many companies don’t gave a rat’s @$$ about eco-anything. They just use the name in conjunction with mere =token= measures to improve fuel economy to capitalize on the current environmental situation.

   Give me a high milage car with reasonable performance that I can use today. I don’t care about the drivetrain. I only care that it works. Right now, pure electric appears to be the only solution to the problem. It’s a pity I cannot afford such a car at the moment.

   Reply
2. 

   jasonjcrowther

   November 23, 2008

   Yeah, 33MPG is nothing to write home about for a true eco car. But, you got remember Passat is a semi-luxury car. There aren’t many cars in the same space that get the same power and economy out of 6 cylinders.

   If I were looking at something more in the real eco friendly, I’d probably look toward the VW TDI’s (currently just Jetta, probably Rabbit soon.) Clean diesel and low 40s for mileage. Sadly, they’re pretty far of their original claims of mileage in the mid 50s.

   But the way, the bigger tires on the new Passat are awesome on dry and wet pavement. But snow, eeeeek. May have to consider getting some snow tires.

   Reply