Volkswagen to produce 1-Liter car in 2010, should get over 200MPG

Although you can definitely pre-order an Aptera if you're okay with space-aged design, Volkswagen is hoping to provide another option for those looking for ridiculous MPG and a little bit of normalcy in construction. Okay, so maybe the 1-Liter isn't exactly standard fare -- with its plastic / magnesium shell and all-glass roof -- but at least it packs four whole wheels and an iconic VW badge, right? According to Motor Authority, the automaker will be producing said vehicle and pushing it to market as early as 2010, and while the minuscule engine will only take you to 75MPH, it will still seat two people -- one in front of the other, though -- and get around 235MPG. No word on a price or any of that good stuff, but we're hearing that they'll only be produced in "limited numbers" whenever they're launched.

[Via EcoGeek, thanks Yossi]

[Timothy Sottek @ May 9th 2008 9:29AM]

Das.... Auto?

[mymaclife @ May 9th 2008 12:55PM]

And you spell litre how?

[Geert @ May 9th 2008 1:09PM]

It looks a lot like a Messerschmidt;
http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&channel=s&rls=org.mozilla%3Anl%3Aofficial&q=messerschmidt+car&btnG=Search+Images

[x20mar @ May 9th 2008 4:30PM]

@mymaclife:

Silly Americans, can't even spell the word "colour"

[Keaton @ May 9th 2008 10:13PM]

Come on Engadget.... Read the article.... and get it right!

"..its power source will be a one-cylinder engine displacing just 0.3L. Top speed will be 120km/h and consumption will fall around the 1L/100km mark (235mpg), reports AFX."

So much for 1 litre...

[Secret Squirrel @ May 12th 2008 3:33PM]

...and i bet it goes from 0-60 in 60 seconds!

[DAvid Relan @ May 9th 2008 9:30AM]

Now that I will buy.

[Anthony @ May 9th 2008 9:58AM]

I totally agree. Very reminiscent of an early Porsche, but w/o a back seat (& a wonky passenger one) I can't do more than look.

[x20mar @ May 9th 2008 4:33PM]

@Anthony:

You do realise that a third of Porsche is owned by Volkswagen?

[hamster3000 @ May 9th 2008 9:32AM]

It's like staring at the 1950s and what they thought the 90s would look like.

[System48 @ May 9th 2008 9:39AM]

Seriously, and who would have thought it was going to be fuel economy that would give us such strange looking cars.

[J @ May 9th 2008 9:41AM]

Why do companies like VW even waste their time on this kind of concept? Isn't it well proven that with a aerodynamic design, tiny engine and light weight materials you can get 200+ MPG? We need usable cars that can get to 100, 200, 300 MPG, not underpowered sportster styled cars.

If, however, this is a stepping stone for bigger and better and more fuel efficient designs from VW, I'm all for it. But why try to productize it when it's clearly not ready?

[RG man @ May 11th 2008 1:19AM]

Don't be a debby downer.

[Bakari @ May 9th 2008 10:11AM]

Please tell me how this car is unusable?

Your reply better not be "it's not an SUV."

[BigDaddyM @ May 9th 2008 10:37AM]

What regularly mass produed car gets 200 MPG?

Now granted, a concept is nice, but I will get excited when it is available for a reasonable purchase.
M

[gr8_aaron @ May 9th 2008 11:56AM]

1 liter isn't underpowered. There are loads of 1, 1.1 and 1.2 liter cars in the UK. They're nice and nippy and cheap to run/insure with lower road tax. I think they're great.

[Ian @ May 9th 2008 2:47PM]

umm this isnt a concept car, they say its going to be available in limited numbers. which i have to say is disappointing but still you will be able to buy one. (maybe if your lucky)

[Keaton @ May 9th 2008 5:17PM]

My VW right now is 1.8 litres...

It's not skimpy whatsoever...

The Smart fortwo is only 1 litre too...

235 mpg is quite a claim though...

[RG man @ May 11th 2008 9:43PM]

@Bakari

at least it's not an SUV.

[Technex @ May 9th 2008 9:45AM]

Hah, it's all fine sticking a small engine into a ugly small car, but what happens when you wish to accelerate out of a crash-to-be for example? There wouldn't enough torque or acceleration, unless it has some crazy gearing numbers and/or really low weight.

[Frank Furter @ May 9th 2008 9:47AM]

When does accelerating -ever- get you out of a crash?

[adam @ May 9th 2008 9:55AM]

When you can overtake the idiots that are about to have an accident

[Zzephyr @ May 9th 2008 10:21AM]

Really? Accelerate out of a crash? I saw that in a James Bond movie a few times - featuring lots of cutaways and really cool music in the background, but in real life, you go "yikes" and BAM you're in it.

[Brian @ May 9th 2008 10:25AM]

That's odd....I have avoided at least 3 accidents (none would have been my fault) because I was able to accelerate away from the other cars.

Of course, I do pay attention when I drive and I do not text while driving.

[Karl @ May 9th 2008 10:32AM]

I personally accelerated out of crash just two weeks ago.

I was in the left lane passing two semi-tractor trailers. Something fell off of a car in front of the first semi and he locked up his brakes. I braked as well because it was unclear if the debris might also come into my lane. The second semi swerved into the lane behind me to avoid the first one and was bearing down on me fast. I got off the brakes and nailed the accelerator to pull away from the second semi (which obviously could not brake as hard as I had been just moments before).

[Mike @ May 9th 2008 12:40PM]

Brian,
I'm texting and driving right now, you dont see me getting into an accide

[Reid @ May 9th 2008 1:57PM]

I've accelerated out of a crash before. But usually the people pissing and moaning about small cars like this having no power or safety are the same people who buy a huge SUV because they think it keeps them safe from their own crappy driving.

Nevermind that most SUVs probably couldn't out-accelerate this thing, and they're CERTAINLY more lethargic. Nothing like missing a light because a line of clumsy, lumbering dinosaurs in front of you could barely get rolling before the light turned.

[GTMac @ May 9th 2008 9:46AM]

"Although you can definitely pre-order an Aptera if you're okay with space-aged design"

Space-aged design? We've been in the space age for 50 years. I think you're referring to the 50's (and prior) designs that speculated as to what space-age design would look like. A Hummer or a Prius may not look like a Flash Gordon Rocketship, but they're still space-aged design.

[MC @ May 9th 2008 11:06AM]

"A Hummer or a Prius may not look like a Flash Gordon Rocketship, but they're still space-aged design."
And they're both almost as ugly as this thing.

Seriously, if they want people to buy these things quit making them so ugly. Of course I agree that they may do this on purpose like one of the others have said just to be able to say that they tried to make a more fuel efficient vehicle but no one bought it.

[Steve_S @ May 9th 2008 9:47AM]

At $6/gallon this would save me $400/month in gas, so as long as the payment is under that it’s a free car.

[BloodyGerman @ May 9th 2008 9:48AM]

"1-Liter car" in this case has the meaning that it needs 1 liter of gasoline for 100 km. So saying a 1-Liter car should get around 235 MPG is not really additional information. Non-metric units :P

[wrabbit @ May 9th 2008 10:01AM]

Doesn't 1 litre means it's a 1L engine?

In any case, I don't understand why it's so hard to take (for example in VW's case) something like Golf and just optimize it for better fuel consumption, whether it's by putting 1L engine, or by making it hybrid, or whatever else - why is every hybrid/electric/low-mileage car has to have some quirky and weird design? I'm all for interesting innovative designs (I actually think that in general cars look too similar) but when you're trying to bring new technology to the people you gotta put it in a familiar package - otherwise it's too much, too new, too fast. Use what works and what people like and you'll have easier time selling it, speaking of which...

What's with the limited production? If car companies are not willing to commit to fuel-saving cars then the people will never adopt them. Again, just stick this 1L engine in a golf and start producing them just like you do the golf - you might loose a few million on low sales for the first couple of batches but eventually it'll catch on.

This whole transition to hybrids and electrics and the like is way too slow, much slower than what the tech allows it. And why is that, 'cos the CEOs of these car companies are afraid that taking some risk might cost them their private jets. Idiots!

[Mike @ May 9th 2008 10:08AM]

1 Liter = 0.2641721 (US) Gallons. 100 km = 62.13 miles. 100 km/L = ~235 mi/ga. So yes it is informative since they (and I) did the conversion for you.

[James Bowe @ May 9th 2008 10:11AM]

Actually believe it or not, customer surveys have shown that the majority of green car buyers WANT strange looking cars that stand out. That's part of the reason why honda's accord hybrids have been discontinued. People like you and I just want efficient cars on the road, but aren't necessarily in the market to buy them, and may not be able to afford the premium placed on them. Those that can afford it, often want to make a statement.

[Spandex @ May 9th 2008 10:15AM]

No one likes it when a Bloody German is right, but in this case they are... Here, 1 Liter refers to the the concept of attempting to achieve 100Km per 1L of fuel. The engine itself will have a displacement of 0.3L.

[Leo @ May 9th 2008 12:22PM]

no one likes it when a German is right?

You f*cking racist, please leave. The war was ages ago and germany has a green-incorporated government and generally a really nice populous.

[Jeebus @ May 9th 2008 12:41PM]

@Leo: You're the racist by implying that Germans are a race. That's what Hitler did too. Aryan race, remember?

[sinjinn @ May 9th 2008 2:26PM]

@ bloody german.

"1 litre car" means the cars valves have a 1 litre capacity .

[Leo @ May 9th 2008 2:49PM]

yeah I'm clearly racist for DEFENDING germany and getting my terminology mixed up. Kill the messenger why don't you.

[Ian @ May 9th 2008 11:26AM]

Do Want.

[Pluton @ May 9th 2008 9:58AM]

I prefer my Camel. No......Thank you, VW.

[BloodyGerman @ May 9th 2008 9:55AM]

"First up Winterkorn stressed that the 1-Liter “would not be a best seller” and thus will only be produced in limited numbers."

Meaning: "We will produce only very few of them, for a ridiculous high price."

So that they can later say: "We tried! But the customer does not like our highly innovative environment-friendly cars."

[Jon Acheson @ May 9th 2008 9:57AM]

And if you are ever in an actual collision with any other vehicle, the seats fold down to turn it into a ready-made coffin.

[Brian @ May 9th 2008 10:00AM]

LOL!

[SyR @ May 9th 2008 10:08AM]

LOL -- I really laughed out loud on that one...

[Zzephyr @ May 9th 2008 10:27AM]

Heheh +

[facebookfake @ May 9th 2008 12:39PM]

Well, maybe if auto manufactures stopped producing friggin' tanks, or better yet if soccer moms and douche bags stopped buying them, you wouldn't have to worry about a bumper coming at you at face level. The potential for serious injury goes down if an accident involves two lighter cars as opposed to a light car and an Abrams.

[Jon Acheson @ May 9th 2008 12:52PM]

So, if we get rid of all other cars on the road, this will be safe?

[LittleJoe @ May 9th 2008 9:35PM]

If you do some research you'll find that the magnesium shell and compact size of the car make it extremely safe.

"Despite the lightweight construction of all components, safety has been a major element in all phases of the development of the 1-litre car. For example, the concept vehicle's safety equipment includes anti-lock brakes, ESP electronic stability program and a driver's airbag. Deformation elements at the front end and the spaceframe construction provide impact and roll-over protection comparable to that of a GT racing car."

http://www.seriouswheels.com/cars/top-vw-1-liter-car.htm

[kal326 @ May 9th 2008 9:59AM]

I think I'll stick with a Hayabusa powered smart for two. It may not get 235mpg, but it gets better mileage then my current car and can beat a Ferrari in a drag race.