This is the Volkswagen Concept BlueSport, as shown at the Detroit US Auto Show this week.

It has a mid-mounted, VW 2.0-litre TDI engine producing 134 kW and 350 Nm. Power goes to the rear wheels via a six-speed dual-clutch DSG gearbox.

It can go 0-100km/h in 6.6 sec and reach 225 km/h, yet uses just 4.4 litres /100 km, and emits only 113 g/km of CO2. It can also be fitted with VW's Eco-mode stop-start system with brake regeneration, for even greater efficiency.

Not planned for production - yet - but what a nice machine !

Very nice

I like it a lot, just remeber the New
Beetle was originally shown at a motor show and it went into production so lets hope this does too.

Damo.

Very nice
the vents in the bootlid remind me of the vents in a notchback!!
Cheers

Gorgeous!

Looks like a cross between the Audi TT and a Boxster, much nicer than either though.

Will be interesting to see what sort of $$$$ they put on it if production actually happens

Looks a little S2000 ish in the front but I do like....

http://www.ultimatecarpage.com/car/3990/Volkswagen-Bluesport-Concept.html 

Quote from today's Daily Telegraph: "Volkswagen provided the best looking car of the show with its Concept Blue Sport." Sorry Pete, you are outvoted.

It was built as a study for the current Detroit Auto Show ( http://www.naias.com/ ), which has a green theme, so VW's choice of engine was entirely appropriate for this show. If it gets a good reception, then there will be plenty of time to fit GTI engines and V6s and so on later.

The Detroit show also features the Toyota FT-EV electric; Chevolet Converj (Volt), Lexus HS250 hybrid, Ford Taurus Eco, Chrysler 200C EV hybrid, BMW petrol-electric X6 and Subaru Legacy, among others. Do I hear any vitriol against them as well?

I love this car. I would buy it over a boxter or TT without a doubt. I have driven the boxter and didn't like it as a daily driver so bought something else. Depending on how this drives and how much they want for it, I would buy it.

I would prefer a petrol engine but even though they are saying it is diesel powered, it is still faster than the GTI anyway.

Yogie

Absolutely, it's easy to forget how fast technology moves on, and to keep things in perspective.

My 2-litre Kombi makes 51 kW and 127 Nm, and its performance is adequate, shall we say, for what it is. My old Beetle with a 2007cc twin Weber engine would have made about 65 or 70 kW, which I thought was the bees knees at the time. I won lots of traffic light drags and I lost my licence a few times too. I recently bought a '95 Golf Mk3 GL, which is a fantastic daily driver, and it makes 85 kW.

Now here is a modern high-tech VW diesel that only drinks 4.4 L/100 km (my Golf averages around 9.0, my Beetle used to get about 11 and the Kombi drinks up to 12 or 13 L/100km), yet it makes 127 kW - and 350 Nm ! With that sort of torque, performance around town, and up to the speed limit, would be awesome. In fact on our roads you would never be able to make use of its potential - 0-100 in 6.6 sec, and 225 km/h. It would be barely idling at our 110 km/h max.

It would be difficult, but not impossible, to build a VW air-cooled engine that would make 127 kW (170 bhp). But it would never make 350 Nm, nor would it drink only 4.4 L/100 km (64 mpg).

I spend my days driving a 103kw/320nm peugeot wagon. I had a great time driving it up out of kangaroo valley yesterday round hairpins. It weighs about 1400kg and I reckon that softop would weigh similar. if VW wanted to sell me a "sports" convertable with only 25 more KW and 50 more NM of torque for $50k+ (and we all know it would be that), I'd feel very ripped. And 0-100 in 6.6 seconds is pitiful for anything calling itself a performance car.

Here's a list of VW TDi motors.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Volkswagen_AG_diesel_engines 

I'll have the above hairdresser's car with the last engine in the list please.

I doubt it would be within a couple of hundred kilos of the weight of the Pug. Seen in its market place, it would be 50-60% the price of the boxter and probably 75% the price of the Z4 or SLK.

Considering the Golf GTI has won the best sports car for under 60k and this would be faster than it, I would think most people would feel happy getting that performance for not much more. I would not feel ripped by the performance for the price if I bought one.

As for it being a hairdressers car, well, that can be compared with the saying that sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. Only used when nothing else can be thought up.

Yogie

0-100 in 6.6 is definetly not slow, although it would be no where near as good as if it was a petrol engine. Diesel engines are good if you put fuel economy and pulling power at the top of your list, but the power just runs out too soon. Kinda defies the point of being a sports car. Doubt it would sound very sporty either, unless you think trucks sound sporty

Its cool, in a new car kinda way...

Quote:

Originally posted by trickysimonDiesel engines are good if you put fuel economy and pulling power at the top of your list, but the power just runs out too soon. Kinda defies the point of being a sports car. Doubt it would sound very sporty either, unless you think trucks sound sporty

max power and torque figures are pretty useless without a graph anyway. If you arent making decent grunt over a long rev range then you had better have a lot of gears or you're going nowhere. Being a diesel it would make near max torque from low revs, so it would smack a similarly powered petrol engine.

Not that power is everything to a market place. What is probably the biggest selling open top sports car in recent australian/japanese/US history, the mazda mx5 has nowhere near that kind of power/torque as far as I know yet it pretty much kick started the whole market for convertibles again. Soon after people were buying the new BMW Z3's for big BMW $$$ which were puss in anyone's language and with the extra weight of a vert might struggle to outdrag a similar vintage toyota corolla. I dont know the exacr numbers but the Z3 had less than 100kw, and a corolla probably had mid to high 80's. No idea what the power figures of a 1.6 litre MX5 but It would probably have given the Z3 a run as well.

Funny how a forum for 30-50 yr old cars which in standard form have bugger all power could whinge about 134kw being not enough. Just because someone would prefer a peugot wagon doesnt mean the car isnt a nice peice of kit either. My brother in law thinks he got ripped when he bought a C4 and its not as good as his suzuki. I have a 250hp falcon which I would swap tomorrow for a 36hp VW in same condition... if the missus would let me.