Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    Volkswagen Say No To Subcompacts In The US (For Now)

    With automakers building/bringing over subcompact cars to the US, one automaker is missing in the action. That automaker is Volkswagen which built it’s empire on small vehicles (Beetle and Golf). When asked if the company would bring over any subcompact vehicles, like the Polo or new UP!, Volkswagen said no.

    Volkswagen cites the traditional argument of small cars having a small profit margin, especially when they have to be imported like the Polo and UP!

    Futhermore, Volkswagen recently re-established a production facility in the US and plans to expand capacity in an effort to become a true volume player over here. Because of their plans, Volkswagen will be expanding their dealer network and supply chains, which means the timing to introduce a subcompact doesn’t make sense.

    But that doesn’t mean Volkswagen will never introduce a subcompact model. Volkswagen product planner Rainer Michel said to Car & Driver that, if needed, VW “could bring the Polo here tomorrow.”

    gallery_10485_267_752980.png

    Source: Car & Driver

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    I don't believe for a second that "VW could bring the Polo here tomorrow" yet they haven't. VW has HUGE ambitions for their sales numbers and they won't leave a model on the shelf that would pass U.S. regs.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • Posts

    • You say that now.....  but once you've got two little ones only 1 year apart, you're gonna be rocking the man-van.  And honestly, they aren't at all bad to drive. I'm quite aware it is an image thing, but they have the ride height with more utility, and they have a soft ride like a car.   But that's also why I suggested keeping the MKC and finding a van for the dad duty stuff.  In about 3 years, those rear screens will be useful for you to start memorizing the Bluey theme song.   Have you figured out a charging situation at home yet?  You don't want to be charging a Lightning on a 110v outlet. You might be able to get away with it on something with a smaller battery, but not a full-size truck.  The F-150 Hybrid could potentially beat your MKC in lifetime mpg, depending on your driving patterns.  You'll be in EV mode more often if you're predominantly suburban driving.    Yeah, your dad is right on this one. It's a bit hypocritical of me to say not to buy a truck, but I keep mine parked as much as possible and use the 300 or bike as much as I can.  There's a new job I'm going for, and if I get it, I'll be using public transit as often as I can.
    • Hahaha well our first was due Jan 5th and she was 2.5 weeks early.  Ehhhh I...just...don't want a minivan... I wouldn't mind us having one for the overall utility and convenience, but I don't think I want to drive one of those every day. But, who knows what I'll think in a year or two when I have two kids running around and approaching school and activities-age.    Part of that is why I want a Lightning. I don't want a $100 gasoline bill per week or thereabouts. If the hybrid *actually* gets its 23/23 rating, then that's about my lifetime MKC average anyway (22.6mpg over 52,234 miles of ownership). Our bulk orders will be filled like that anyway for things like 2x4s, drywall, insulation. We have a local lumberyard that delivered for free in the past, although I doubt it's free now, because we were only like 2 miles from them.  I do believe there's a U-haul dealership in town but if I'm doing that, I'm just borrowing my dad's Taco. He's told me not to buy a truck because I can use his anytime. So there is that. He genuinely does not mind me borrowing it any time.  The DOHC is another ~60hp/50tq over the SOHC one. I believe in the Mustang GT it was 240hp/270tq and in the Mach 1 it was 305hp/320tq. I LOVE how the ford 4.6's sound. I can't get enough of how they sound. 
    • If that rear skirt was removed, you ended up with an untrimmed wheel arch and it would look mismatched from the front. 
    • What I was really randomly thinking:   reminiscing ... something I saw in Yosemite National Park when I went with my parents on a cool overcast November day and was smitten ... with both the national park and this ... ... except that it was dark metallic forest green with an apple green landau and interior. Look at the stupid things on this one:  manual windows, a vanilla looking bench seat, and black seat belts. These looked good with either the rear wheel skirt or without ... but I prefer them without it.  It looks like they can easily be removed.  The fully exposed rear rally wheel makes it look less chunky and more sporty. - - - - - I was looking at where this car and the other GM stablemates went with the 1977 downsizing.  Except for the Cadillac, I didn't like most of them, since they went too slab-like and lost most rounded elements.  The full-size Pontiac floundered from the late '70s to the mid '80s, right down to occasionally oddly proportioned styling and a weird assortment of engines that they came with ... and that came and went.
    • Wow.  Interesting dashboard. Rectilinear and curved ... but more rectilinear! Definitely Lincoln styling vocabulary and not much GM seen here. I know what driving a Ford SOHC 4.6L V8 felt like ... as in very good.  However, I am not remembering its sound.  For some reason, low displacement V8s, especially when newer and have intact exhaust systems, tend to purr beautifully.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search