…and, then there would be the problem of controlling a Model T that was traveling at more than 40-45 mph.
Would any sane person want to drive one of these cars at more than 40 mph?
That Bangladesh tractor will probably out handle a Model T. Henry only saw it necessary to out handle a buckboard.
A childhood friend’s brother drove a Fiat 600 during medical school. The main attraction was that it was cheap. He drove it from suburban DC (home) to school in Baltimore. There was a beautiful, wide, multilane interstate highway between the two cities, but he didn’t go near it. The 600cc engine just couldn’t handle it. He instead drove on Route 1, traffic lights and all, figuring he could at least keep up with traffic on it.
How does a Fiat 600’s performance compare to a VW Beetle of the same period?
I drove my 59 Beetle on the interstates. It’d hit 70 if you kept the gas pedal on the floor but would lose a little going up hills and gain a few going down them. I’d just keep the thing floored all the time. It was fine on two lane roads too where the speed limit was 65. I couldn’t imagine taking back roads to avoid a major highway with it.
The Beetle was a little better than the Fiat
Both were pretty slow. I had a first hand experience in Italy in 1960, driving from Florence to Rome through the mountains. I had a 1958 bug with 36 hp and was following an Italian driver in a Fiat 500. He really knew the road, and made the very best use of his gears and brakes. I managed to keep up, but barely so.
My bug had a top speed of around 115 kph, or about 70 mph. Not sure about the Fiat. Neither car of that era would be safe on today’s Interstates, except by hugging the slow lane.
I would never have considered trying a modern highway in my '61 Beetle (I owned it in the late '60s), but it got me around town okay. Albeit without heat.
The Beetle was never originally designed for today’s speeds. It was designed solely to provide a very cheap, very basic means of transport for the German people. In later years of its production it evolved to where it was capable of highway speeds, but the Beetles of the late '60s were very much changed from the early Beetles. When the Beetle name was revived as the “New Beetle” it was a totally, completely different vehicle designed to capture a niche market rather than as an inexpensive means of transport. I was extremely disappointed, as you could buy other economy cars cheaper than the New Beetle. I felt they lost/ignored the original intent and misused the model name. I never liked the New Beetle.
Actually, I felt the same way about the Mini. The original was designed as a dirt-cheap means of transport for a war-ravaged Europe. The only resemblance between the original and the new version is some styling elements. It’s expensive (I think) to buy, very expensive to own, rides like a rock, ergonomically poor, and of questionable reliability. I call it a “young person’s car”. Youth can ignore practicality and comfort, and often has yet to develop a sense of value. For many young folks it’s about image. That isn’t a criticism of young people (I used to be one) just a comment on the market segment being targeted by the Mini.
1 Like
Agree! Both the New Beetle and the Mini, as well as the Fiat 500 are niche and image cars. None of the trio are cheap to own, are not reliable, but get a good following among young and “trendy” people. One lady working at a local hair salon had the mirror housings of her Mini covered with Union Jacks, the British flag.
True basic econoboxes are made by Suzuki, Hyundai (Accent), Mitsubishi (Mirage), Nissan (Micra) and the very basic VW models not sold here.