Can a small actor assist make a Volkswagen appear massive?
Hollywood is thick with quick main males. Do you know that Robert De Niro clocks in at simply 5’6”? Joe Pesci is even shorter, measuring simply 5’ 4” tall. Now, neither of those guys appears to have suffered a lot from their incapability to succeed in issues on the highest shelf, as their resumes are chock filled with nice movies.
1966 Volkswagen Fastback
Dustin Hoffman
Dustin Hoffman, nonetheless—one other nice actor—appears to have scored an early position exactly as a result of he was quick. Standing 5’ 5”, Hoffman slots between De Niro and Pesci on the peak chart, and was as soon as employed by a carmaker to assist make a comparatively small automotive look bigger. Don’t imagine me? Learn on…
For 1966, Volkswagen added a mannequin to its Kind 3 (sadly, that’s really the mannequin title) lineup. Becoming a member of the Kind 3 Notchback (2-door sedan) and Squareback (wagon) in VW dealerships for ’66 was the Fastback. Although endowed with simply two doorways, VW referred to the Fastback as a sedan, and to spice up gross sales, the maker was eager to exploits the automotive’s measurement. And, fact be recognized, the Fastback was bigger and roomier than the Beetle (Kind 1) it was offered alongside.
Business
To get the Fastback phrase out, VW’s advert of us produced a TV industrial that includes spokesperson Dustin Hoffman. Take a look:
There’s no probability that this creator may have weaseled his means into the again seat, after which hopped into the entrance seating row. Hell, even Hoffman appeared to have a tough time executing the maneuver.
How Roomy?
Whereas we imagine that 4 Dustin-Hoffman-sized adults may match comfortably in a 1966 Volkswagen Kind 3 Fastback, we have now considerations concerning a number of of the claims made by Hoffman throughout the industrial. And, it’s not that VW lied precisely, it’s that they could have steered that the Fastbacks specs and efficiency had been extra spectacular than they actually had been.
VW Kind 3 Fastback versus Ford Falcon
To make our level, we will probably be evaluating the Fastback to Ford’s then hyper-popular Falcon compact automotive. We’re thus evaluating VW’s largest automotive mannequin, to Ford’s smallest. For the file, Ford offered greater than 200,000 Falcons in 1966, whereas Volkswagen moved an estimate 25,000 Kind 3 fashions.
Room for 4 Adults
Whereas that is declare is true, no less than for less-than-full-sized adults, the Ford Falcon boasted room for six, thanks partially to its three-passenger entrance bench seat. The Ford was additionally really a bigger automotive, stretching 184 inches on a 111-inch wheelbase, in comparison with the Fastback’s 171-inch total size on a 171-inch wheelbase.
High Velocity of 84 MPH
I’m unsure to whom 84 mph sounded good to in 1966, however within the U.S. that boast in all probability didn’t impress even essentially the most informal automotive fan. Dustin tells us that the Fastback is supplied with the most-powerful engine ever put in in a VW, which is reasonably miserable.
For 1966, all Kind 3 fashions had been outfitted with a 1.6-liter 4-cylinder engine rated at 65 horsepower. Observe that earlier Kind 3 fashions made do with 1.5-liter engines good for simply 53 horses.
The Falcon, alternatively, was supplied with the customer’s selection of there engines, the least-powerful of which was a 2.8-liter six rated at 105-horsepower. And although the Falcon did weight extra (2800 kilos versus 2200), interval testing put its prime pace at as much as 95 mph.
Trunk Area
So, the Kind 3 boasts each a entrance trunk (“frunk”), and a rear truck. Did that mixed area add as much as a lot actual room? Seems, it did, however not an excessive amount of greater than the Falcon. The VW’s entrance compartment was good for about 7 cubic toes of area, whereas the rear compact added one other 10. The Falcon’s solely cargo compartment, the trunk, measure about 13 cubic toes. So, rating one for the Volkswagen. Additionally, the engine was beneath the rear storage compartment. Gifting away its location are the cooling vents stamped into the rear fenders.
Cash
Whereas Hoffman by no means will get round to costs, it’s the cash that probably saved the Falcon fashionable, and the Kind 3 comparatively obscure. In 1966, the Fastback began at $2250, whereas the Ford listed for $2171. In 2025 {dollars}, that’s $22,300 and $21,500 respectfully.
And whereas most folk aware of Volkswagen on the time will let you know that the Kind 3 was the higher constructed, extra dependable, and extra fuel-efficient car, the Ford supplied a lot extra space and energy for much less cash. Additionally, and that is key, the Ford wasn’t some “bizarre” import—it was comfortably acquainted.
Again to the Area Factor
Trendy estimates put the inside quantity of the Kind 3 Fastback at about 75 cubic toes. The less-expensive Falcon 2-door sedan got here in round 90 toes. So, regardless of Dustin’s claims, the Volkswagen wasn’t actually large enough, although because of his diminutive proportions, it kinda regarded larger. Now that’s performing.
Take heed to the Automobile Stuff Podcast
1966 Volkswagen Fastback Photos
Click on beneath for enlarged photos
1969 Dodge Adventurer: Favourite Automobile Advertisements (Pics and Historical past)
