vw continuing to tease us with mid-engined golf derivatives (ecosport, concept R), but the concept bluesport that debuted in detroit this past week looks like a significant step toward a produceable product in that category.

I'd bet on it being available with a variety of vw's transverse motors with dsg and maybe even the conventional manual if it came here, but the one shown in Detroit had the new Jetta TDI's 2.0L motor with the dsg transmission... 180 hp, 262 lb ft... 55 mpg and 0-100km/h (62 mph) in 6.6! (european cycle). 2600 lbs curb weight.

At any rate, it looks great.


http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/11/detroit-2009-volkswagen-bluesport-concept-turbodiesel-done-rig/
http://jalopnik.com/5128770/volkswagen-bluesport-concept-42-mpg-roadster-officially-revealed
http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/vortex_news/article_2562.shtml
http://www.supercars.net/cars/4339.html
http://www.motorauthority.com/volkswagen-execs-hint-at-production-possibility-for-bluesport-concept.html

[Edited on January 17, 2009 at 12:46 AM. Reason : ]]

1/17/2009 12:46:14 AM

video clip by autocar at detroit, speaking with Peter Wouda, chief exterior designer of the bluesport
http://www.autocar.co.uk/VideosWallpapers/Videos.aspx?AR=236942&CT=V
.
.
.

damn. looks great. I hope they make it and offer a 2.0T with a manual...

[Edited on January 17, 2009 at 1:06 AM. Reason : .]

1/17/2009 12:52:41 AM

kinda like a mini r8 roadster... with a little bit of YES! roadster at the back...

1/17/2009 1:09:29 AM

1/17/2009 2:34:40 AM

i think it looks great.

only the concept will be 2600lbs lol. A mx5 is within 100lbs of that and is as small as any car will get.

1/17/2009 11:34:44 AM

kinda reminds me of a TT

1/17/2009 11:39:59 AM

I like it, but I don't believe it's going to be 2600 lbs in production either.

1/17/2009 12:28:05 PM

^ agree. it'll be 3500 lbs with a polo engine.

1/17/2009 1:15:38 PM

I'm going to stay vigilant in the hope that they keep the weight down. The TT 2.0T coupe fwd is quotes as 2965 lbs in various places, so, with a smaller wheelbase, higher aluminum content... I think 2600 lbs is possible, especially if the production footprint stays about the same, b/c this looks about the size of a miata, if not stubbier (shorter, if not shorter and wider) , so, about a foot shorter---corrected:10 inches---, than a TT coupe...

2.0T tt coupe (4178 mm=165 inches)..... 2965 lbs
nc mazda miata (length 3955 mm (155.7 in)).....2414 lbs

I think 2600 lbs is what an nc miata would weigh if it were built by volkswagen instead of mazda...

Also, if this is kept under 30k (and therefore not threatening boxster sales) by using some small, previously euro-only engine, like the twincharger in the Golf GT Tsi... while that would be a shame for the missed opportunity of making a 2.0T mid-engine rwd roadster, I also suspect that would make it even easier to hit their weight target.

1/19/2009 1:30:21 PM

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/19/audi-version-of-volkswagen-bluesport-in-the-works/

aww, shoot. I was just getting used to the idea of it being a vw-only model.

Now, what I bet is going to happen:
If audi and porsche get a version, that makes the 2.0T look pretty unlikely for the VW version, except as some "R20T" or some such special edition... kinda like how an R32 is a limited-quantity edition but you can get an a3 3.2v6 as a regular (overpriced) production model. Also, given this car's obvious r8-tones, I'd be afraid they'd put an audi face on it and then give vw some other body... neither of which would be as good at this one. And of course, the porsche version, since it has to be positioned below the boxster, will either mean that the boxster as we know it will go away (making some high end version of this one the porsche model) and porsche will attempt to support itself on the wider set of more-independent (less traditionally porsche) models (panamera, cayenne, 911), leaving the replacement boxster and cayman to have to deal with not being considered "real" porsches.... OR, the boxster would remain a foundational product for porsche and force this "not real" porsche to stay well below it in terms of spec, which would also mean, that b/c porsche>audi>vw, that the highest-performance model would be limited and the vw and audi would have to make due with some lesser engine, most likely not the 2.0T engines... boooooo.

although, on the other hand:

Quote :

"<silver lining>Volkswagen is expected to announce a production decision on the Concept Bluesport in the next two months, and we're hoping that the completed version will bow in Geneva. </silver lining>"

[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 2:16 PM. Reason : quote]

1/19/2009 2:11:28 PM

not a fan...looks like a New Beetle got it on with a 350z convertible or something.

and yeah, ever-growing curb weights are getting ridiculous, although it's only partly the fault of the automakers--the U.S. government mandates more and more stuff that adds weight and expense (I think the Nissan said they they had to add something like 200 lbs of stuff for new and upcoming government mandates when they redesigned the Z-car)

1/19/2009 3:27:02 PM

[edit: whoops, forgot the link!]
http://www.worldcarfans.com/9090113.014/vw-concept-bluesport-roadster-needs-audi-and-seat-to-make-it-into-production

----

Quote :

"At the moment there's about a 70 percent chance of the mid-engine rear wheel drive roadster making it into production, according to VW. The decision will depend on whether SEAT and Audi can also develop their own versions to give VW Group the right economies of scale. "

...hmmm... so maybe it'll be seat and NOT porsche to be the third brand... I'd definitely prefer that as seat wouldn't be selling cars here, so that'd keep from over-diluting the platform's identity beyond vw and audi...

maybe the vw's will all be convertibles and the audi's will only be coupes? ...

Quote :

" There is no fancy technology - the 1200 kilo (2645 lbs) roadster has a steel body and uses existing Group components with the front suspension, for example, from the new Golf. Everything about the car is production ready. The engine for the Detroit show car is a 2.0 TDi with 180PS mated to a 6-speed DSG dual clutch transmission; CO2 emissions are just 113g/km with 0-62mph acceleration in just 6.6 seconds and a top speed of 142mph. It has an automatic start-stop system."

NICE! steel body and existing components and they STILL quote 2645 lbs? plus the steel body will help keep prices lowwww and away from boxster/cayman sales...

Stop-start's pretty cool, esp for a non-hybrid, too. I think BMW has something similar on its european models, but I can't think of any non-hybrid US-market vehicles that have start-stop. Maybe this'll be the first.

... c'mon 2.0T..... geneva can't come soon enough!

[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 4:09 PM. Reason : forgot the link I was quoting]

1/19/2009 4:07:28 PM

Quote :

"2.0T tt coupe (4178 mm=165 inches)..... 2965 lbs nc mazda miata (length 3955 mm (155.7 in)).....2414 lbs I think 2600 lbs is what an nc miata would weigh if it were built by volkswagen instead of mazda..."

the miata has no spare tire, no powered roof, no turbo, no DSG......But it will help save weight by being mid engine. To put it in perspective a mid engine MR2 spyder weighs ~2000lbs.

FWIW an s2000 has a powered roof, and spare tire that when both are removed would bring the car down to ~2650lbs. You think VW can produce a car that weighs less then that? The s2000 is stripped like hell compared to any VW ive ever been inside of. There will be no roadster that weighs less then a miata. Not even within 200lbs. Hey someone link to a 70,000$ lotus that laps slower then a cobalt SS and call me an idiot.




[Edited on January 19, 2009 at 10:00 PM. Reason : .]

1/19/2009 9:59:58 PM

^hmm. I think its do-able. whether or not vw pulls it off is a different issue. I hope you're wrong, b/c I really want a 2600 lb mid-engine vw that looks like this. Do you think making a TT 10 inches shorter, cutting off the roof and its associated glass, and maybe using a non-powered top could save ~250-300 lbs? You seem to be suggesting that removing the spare tire and the powered top in the s2000 does nearly that.

Quote :

" Honda S2000 — Curb Weight: 2864 According to http://www.detroithonda.net/s2000 "

compared with the 2650 lbs as you've said is possible for an s2000, with mods that did nothing to eliminate length, width, wheel weight, tires, proportionately shortened/ minimized components, means a savings of 214 lbs. Don't you think it's possible that the sorts of things I just listed could make up the remaining 40-60 lbs to create the necessary weight saving off of a car like the tt? Even if the mid-engined roadster is made without the audi's aluminum hood, doors, and fenders?

I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that they pull it off.

btw, I'm sorry I haven't alluded to an s2000 yet. I've driven a few, and they're really fun. VTEC just doesn't do it for me, though. The changeover at 6k is just not my thing. I generally like variable valve -timing and/or -lift systems, but VTEC is just too "either/or" for me.

Have you driven an NC miata? It feels more like the s2000 than the older miatas. I'm not saying it's better. Just that it's an interesting comparison. For lower-than-high-rev driving, it feels nearly as quick b/c of the similar size and torque/weight ratio. I like the s2k's instruments and interior better though. I'm not a tall guy, so I fit.

1/20/2009 4:12:05 AM

The first convertible i looked at was an "nc" (does that mean new body style?) mx-5. It was garbage inside. The photos online make that fake leather molded plastic look like fake leather (which is better then plastic).

You realize an rx8 engine is about the same as the s2000, without vtec, lol.

[Edited on January 20, 2009 at 8:14 AM. Reason : /]

1/20/2009 8:13:51 AM

^maybe in terms of torque delivery down low. But definitely not in terms of smoothness. to each their own

1/20/2009 12:27:11 PM