(first posted 12/28/2012) In the Pantheon of automotive gods and godesses, the Ro80 occupies a long-guaranteed spot. Simply put, it is one of the boldest, most influential and revolutionary cars ever–despite being a dismal failure. Its tragic story comes straight from the Greek legends; perhaps it should have been called the Icarus.
NSU was a small maker of little cars and motorcycles. Both their 600cc Prinz and slightly larger 1000/1200 were notable for their Corvair-like looks, as well as for having an air-cooled rear engine tucked in close to the rear wheels. But as consumer income grew throughout the ’60s, the German (and European) market quickly expanded into larger classes, and NSU made a bold double bet.
Their decision to expand up-market with a new four-door sedan was certainly ambitious, and got even more so: What was initially intended as a Ford Taunus competitor was later scaled up to directly compete against the smaller Mercedes models and BMW’s Neue Klasse. Ambitious indeed–but that was the relatively easy part.
Having signed a development contract with Felix Wankel, NSU co-developed what became the modern rotary engine (Wankel’s original design, which featured a rotating engine case, was scrapped). Their new engine debuted in the limited-production NSU Spider (seen above in an interesting contemporary street shot).
Only 2,375 of the single-rotor, 50 hp cars were built, more or less as rolling test labs. It wasn’t long before the engine exhibited problems, mostly with the tricky apex seals–something that should have given NSU pause about powering the Ro80 with a larger, two-rotor version placed ahead of the front (driving) wheels.
The Ro80’s 995cc, twin-rotor engine was rated at 113 hp (115 PS). Because of the rotary’s tendency to run rough on overrun with a manual transmission, NSU turned to a Saxomat semi-automatic transmission, built by Fichtel and Sachs (and also offered by Porsche as the Sportomatic). It combined an shift-lever actuated automatic clutch with a torque convertor. Although there was no clutch pedal, one shifted through the three gears manually, much like the automatic stick shift found in some contemporary VW Beetles.
Inboard front disc brakes rounded out the very ambitious drive train, which was designed to shine on the German autobahns that were mostly uncrowded in the early- and mid-sixties. Unfortunately, the drive train was less ideally suited to dense traffic and city driving.
You already know where this is going: The Ro80’s engine was woefully underdeveloped in terms of durability. It became a nightmare of warranty costs and earned such a bad reputation that NSU was eventually forced to accept a takeover by Audi. That said, let’s focus instead on one of its indisputably superb qualities: The very enduring influence of its body design.
The Ro80 body design was an in-house job executed by Claus Luthe. It is utterly brilliant, even if some of its proportions seem a wee bit eccentric from certain angles. But that just adds to its allure, at least in the eyes of its admirers.
Needless to say, you’re looking at the mother of all Audis here–and the Taurus and, to some extent, just about every modern sedan. The drooping front nose, the overall wedge shape ending in a tall tail, the gracefully arching roof. The R080’s vast and enduring influence is unmistakable. And its aerodynamic Cd of 0.355 was excellent for the times.
The Ro80 was the significant link between that other goddess, the 1955 Citroën DS, and just about everything that followed. The utterly uncompromising shape of the DS was hardly conducive to cribbing; it was certainly revered, but mostly at a distance. In contrast, the R080’s design was seen as a more pragmatic way forward, as it incorporated the key advantages of the Citroën’s long-wheelbase and aerodynamic design in a more palatable and practical solution.
Only 37,398 Ro80s were built over its decade-long lifespan. NSU tried valiantly to address the severe issues involving engine life (some engines showed apex-seal wear after as little as 15,000 miles and were worn out by 30,000). Still, it was a losing battle. Although it would later be fought with relatively greater success by Mazda, similar issues plagued their rotaries as well.
Many frustrated owners refitted their Ro80s with the little Ford V4, which was the only engine that fit. It was an ironic choice: The rotary’s biggest asset was turbine-smooth running, and the Ford V4 was one of the rougher engines ever built. Of course, Saab took the same road with their two-stroke 96, but did so officially.
A modest number of Ro80s were sold in the U.S. I’ve never seen one, nor do I expect to, so the prospect of an in-depth write up here is not terribly likely. But ateupwithmotor has published his article on the Ro80, and it is (as always) very comprehensive–as its historical value is more appreciated than ever (during the late seventies, one could hardly give away an Ro80). The Ro80 was COTY in Europe in 1968, beating out the Fiat 125 (second) and Jensen FF (AWD).
Related: The Cars Of Claus Luthe by Perry Shoar
If one could find one of these in need of an engine I think it would be a very nice wrapper for that new 1.0 eccoboost ford. As I have never set eyes on one, does anyone know if it would fit in the slot? It should make for an ammusing and beautiful car with a little drivway engineering it could take the ro80 to mileage levels never before seen.
I saw an Ro80 at an antique car show at the CNE about 15 years ago…likely with the Ford V4, or maybe it’s owner managed to fit a newer Mazda rotary under the hood. I’ve read that Ro80 drivers used to give each other signals when they passed each other to indicate how many engines they’d gone through. I’ve always liked the styling, and the Ro80 set the mark for so many cars that came along later. The car was ahead of its time…too bad the drivetrain wasn’t.
I can’t emphasise enough how much I love these cars. And yet I’ve never driven or ridden in one. Genius is like that.
This one does absolutely nothing for me. Sure, it was a bold try from a small company. I can also see that it was very predictive of styling in the 1980s and 90s. But honestly, I don’t find it all that attractive. Maybe its my American eyes, or the fact that every time I look at a picture of one, I see a late 80s Buick Regal sedan, which I have never considered attractive. The proportions strike me as badly “off”, and embody my least favorite features of most modern designs.
The incredible self-shredding drivetrains that are the worst since the 1940s Lincoln V-12s are certainly not the kinds of things that bring “German engineering” to mind.
But I guess I can understand how someone can love (or perhaps have a fatal attraction to) the car – it was nothing if not unique.
I think one had to have lived through the Ro80’s debut to fully appreciate it, especially if one was young or a serious gearhead. It was one of those OMG moments, a breakthrough in defining the car of the future (regardless of how that turned out). I can readily understand how it might not do much for someone looking back on it from a more recent vantage point. In fact, I would be somewhat surprised otherwise.
Agreed … I was both young and a serious gearhead and I still have distinct memories of the magazine coverage, though I have no memory of ever seeing one. But I still think it’s too exotic to warrant CURBSIDE Classic status. Kinda like the Mazda Cosmo or Toyota 2000GT (though I agree neither was as significant technically). BTW Paul, I’m surprised you didn’t mention the VW K70, which was really just a slightly more conventionally styled piston engine Ro80, and sold in decent numbers.
The K70 was originally a scaled-down Ro80, which, had it been built by NSU, would have offered with either a four-cylinder piston engine or the KKM612 two-rotor. The K70 was clearly related to the Ro80, but was intended as a class down in size and price, like the difference between a BMW 1602/2002 and the bigger Neue Klasse sedans.
I didn’t realize the Ro80 was so much bigger. I thought the K70 was an effort to capitalize on the development of the car after admitting defeat on the engine, but I was wrong.
Very interesting, I also believed that the k70 olny should have to be equipped with a classic piston engine. I have learned too that Nsu planned to launch a next fwd small car to replace Nsu Prinz by a Nsu K50 and incidentally, this prototypes became the VW Polo/Audi 50.
I was only 9 when it came out. I would also imagine that living closer to one of the coasts where foreign cars were more common might help. In the midwest at that time, if it wasn’t from one of the big 3 (and maybe AMC), it just sort of became part of an unrecognizable blob of never-seen cars from other countries that did not resonate with any kind of common experience.
The more I think it over, my biggest problem with this car is that damned Buick Regal that I think of whenever I look at it.
Funny thing is, I think that Buick is a pretty good looking car, unlike some other GM designs of the era, which don’t appeal to me at all. Can’t please everyone. Come to think of it, if you could please everyone, all the cars would always have looked the same. Perish the thought.
Over the years I’ve found a lot of Buicks attractive. They managed to look understated and classy while most of the rest of the market was diving into variations of “overwrought”. Especially the grille and headlight treatments. Then I’d get inside one, and the whole effect was ruined. I’m just not interested in driving my aunt Ruth’s sitting room around.
I can’t un-see the resemblance to the Buick now!
I’m in complete agreement with you. I was a third grade kid when these came out, and although I’ve never seen one in the metal, the pictures, then and now, elicit the same feelings. Oddball proportions, disjointed body side to roof transitions. And as you stated, these are the very things that make newer cars highly unattractive to me as well. I don’t care how revolutionary it may have been, it predicted a dismal future, where everything looks alike. That coupled with a self destructing engine, do not make for a “Goddess” in my book.
Dont worry. We can not get the point all the time, can we?
another big issue with this car was the massive fuel (and oil) consumption…after the oil crisis nobody wanted a car so expensive to keep…a wonderful, fascinating car anyway! It may have been a technological overkill but the styling it’s simply a work of genius…
“…Some of its proportions seem a wee bit eccentric from certain angles. But that just adds to its allure, at least in the eyes of its admirers.”
Of which I am one. The Ro80 is one of the most beautiful postwar cars. I just can’t imagine one fitted with that gruff Ford V-4. The Ford engine suited the rough and ready nature of the Saab 96, but not the NSU. Perhaps the Saxomat transmission muted some of the coarseness.
European design has always confounded me, therefore, it has very little appeal. Ironically, I do love the Citroen DS because it’s so unusual, plus my junior year art teacher drove one – the first I had ever seen. The Volvo PV544 attracted me due to my friends having one – and a buddy still has his 1961. Another friend drove a P1800, which I also liked.
I liked the Morris Minor as well as the Cortina, but the rest? Perhaps a few, but most of the cars featured on here I had never heard of. Some are beautiful, most are odd – especially the French.
The Ro80 is rather nice, though. A poor man’s Jaguar – at least in looks.
My CCOTY nomination will be forthcoming – and rather obvious.
I believe the Ford V4 morphed into the Cologne V6, eventually ending up under the hood of my ’94 Mazda Navajo (Ford Explorer). Crude but durable.
Not exactly; the four was a development of the V-6, but both engines were developed at the same time. The four had a 60′ angle making it about as rough as possible. Any attempts to counterbalance it with a weight on the camshaft can’t have made a lot of difference. This thing was R-O-U-G-H as it got.
I drove one in a Saab and it was one of the worst car experiences I can remember. Vibration, noise and little go!
How much do I love thee? Try: Given the choice between a Ro80 with all its drivetrain shortcomings, and anything American/V-8/automatic transmission/rear drive/bench seat; I’ll take the NSU in a heartbeat. And live with the consequences, gladly. That is the absolute anti-American car, and God bless it for having existed.
The idea that an American car is any good at all is a wierd concept but the RO80 was a brilliant idea and it worked apart from the durability angle and out here the parts supply was very thin Though Ford Transit engines were easy to find as replacements.Like most German cars it was well thought out but it had normal German reliability ie none.
You 2 should get a room together, meanwhile I’ll go blasting past this broken down pile in a 68 Riviera GS.
The NSU was a pretty design though,,,,,,
are seriously saying all German cars are not realiable? I mean…seriously???
I think the Ro80 was hugely significant … bringing FWD into the German mainstream (even though the car itself didn’t sell in volume, it was the predecessor for all subsequent VW/Audi architecture), and unlike the Citroen DS, the styling which seemed so radical doesn’t look unusual even today. I was 11 when it came out and still remember reading about it in Road & Track. But a Curbside Classic? No, this car is too exotic and rare. After a lot of thought, my vote is for the Toyota Corolla. Not only a hugely successful car worldwide, but available in both dull and performance versions, many body styles, and still gracing curbs everywhere, some still with live axles, leaf springs and pushrods. Even before the DOHC GTS models, the 2nd gen 1600 Corolla was considered a poor man’s 2002 and was the first Japanese sedan marketed as a performance car in the US.
In late 1993, after our 1st-gen BMW 528 broke down one too many times with small babies on board, we bought a new 1993 Corolla wagon. 5 speed, no options (not even factory air; we had the dealer add it), it served us well for 10 years and almost 100K miles (nothing for a Corolla) before we decided to go AWD with a new Forester. This was only a few years before our kids started driving, and I kicked myself for having sold the perfect teens’ car. The only problems with the Corolla were when I took colleagues out to lunch, they would just walk away from the car without locking the doors, since everyone assumed it had a remote, or at least power locks and that I would lock up with the push of a button; and as our kids got older, say 5 or 6, none of their friends knew how to use hand-cranked windows: they had never seen them!
I love the “poor man’s BMW” thing. My 2T-C Corolla was rated at 102hp but since the car only weighed 1600 lbs, it was a rocket for its day and there were loads of bolt on go fast stuff for them.
I still have a soft spot for the much maligned Corolla. Read the buff mag “tests” of the Corolla; they hate it but it’s consistently in the top ten of sales, usually high up. That’s because a Corolla CE with air and goes on the road in Canuckistan for $17,000. It will last 15 year easily. That is incredible value, just like the Corolla has always been.
You’d better not read the latest Automobile magazine then; they have a needlessly snarky piece about the latest Corolla. Personally I loved my old FX16 GTS.
“The only problems with the Corolla were when I took colleagues out to lunch, they would just walk away from the car without locking the doors, since everyone assumed it had a remote, or at least power locks and that I would lock up with the push of a button; and as our kids got older, say 5 or 6, none of their friends knew how to use hand-cranked windows: they had never seen them!”
I drive a 1999 Jeep Cherokee base model which has crank windows and manual door locks. I don’t think my kids (the oldest is 10) have ever been in another car that didn’t have power windows and locks.
The funny thing is, my wife’s current vehicle, a 2006 Chevy Trailblazer, is the only vehicle we’ve ever owned that had power windows and locks. Before we bought the Trailblazer in 2007, my wife drove the Jeep (we bought it new back in 1999) and I drove a 1995 Ford Escort (also purchased new). With our car purchases being fairly infrequent, and most of them being relatively low-end models, we still haven’t entirely caught up to the reality that virtually all cars today have power windows and locks.
I have the same problem with my Kia minivan. Everyone walks away and leaves the back doors open, assuming that they are power. They are not (and it was very hard to find one without).
Obviously Paul’s criteria for COTY is the most advanced most forward thinking vehicle released that year.
Personally I’d prefer not to nominate an evolutionary dead end. Yes the styling is predictive but how many rotary engine sedans are there for sale today?
Quite attractive to my eyes, and it’s easy to see the influence on decades of sedans that followed.
But that rotary engine is the very definition of an Achilles’ heel.
I’ll second the kudos to Aaron “Ate Up With Motor” Severson for yet another well-researched history on this landmark car. The Ro80 leaves one with more questions than answers if you don’t first understand the backstory.
There are many things to love about the Ro80’s styling, including the perfectly integrated headlights and the character line, flowing but sharply carved, that runs along the flanks through the door handles. But my favorite feature is how the windshield stands a couple inches taller than the side windows. The little Prinz 1000 pictured here does the same, to lesser degree.
This extra windshield height actually was a safety factor, I think. Our eyes are drawn to brightness, and this way, the driver’s eyes are gently tugged in the direction of forward movement. With most modern, ex-streamlined cars, the windshield is like an afterthought, unwanted by designers and aerodynamicists. It’s flattened by the wind tunnel and pinched narrower by low roofs and high beltlines. Add the growing degree of blingy chrome in our interiors, plus the epidemic of dashboard video screens, and it becomes an effort to see out the windshield at all.
Many American cars of the ’50s had an extended windshield height, even curving the glass to meet the roof angles. That’s one retro-futurist element that I’d love to see return.
When I was about 13 or 14, I thought the NSU TTS was the coolest thing around (solely based on magazine pictures and one NSU race car I’d seen here in the States). Not really a Curbside Classic, at least here, but thanks for bringing back those memories with your user name!
My NSUs were the “American TT,” lacking the twin Webers and the extra HP they enabled, but power aside, they all came with near-perfect steering and handling. I know of one that’s been built for amateur racing. I’ll try to get some photos and work up a trackside classic. They’re so rare, I guess it’s up to me to do it.
I can remember when the Ro80 was launched I thought it bizarre , with its’ low nose and high tail – it took years before I realised how far ahead of its’ time it was. There was a crashed one outside a Dealer near me , and I really wanted to buy parts off it (seats) but because it was on German plates and not customs-cleared its’ status was in limbo, and it got to be used as night-time accomodation for vagrants. The appeal of the styling gradually grew on me though – it’s only the extreme height of the screen that still jarrs. I presume that in the 21st century a Subaru motor might fit…..
As for COTY, the Jensen does it for me – 4WD and anti-lock brakes really were the future.
This begs the question, since Mazda did eventually solve the rotor tip seal issue, has anybody re-powered an Ro80 with a modern Mazda rotary, or retrofitted modern tip seals to a surviving NSU rotary? It seems like an obvious solution to retaining the smoothness of a rotary while addressing the reliability issues. Of course it does affect originality, just like putting a Rover V8 in a Triumph Stag, or an SBC in a Jaguar.
Yes, a fair number of surviving Ro80s got Mazda 12A or 13B engines after the fact. In the late ’70s and early ’80s, Ro80 resale values just tanked, so you could pick one up for a song — particularly if you weren’t concerned about the condition of the engine. The rest of the car itself was generally quite sound unless it had been in a wreck; keep in mind that the Ro80 was originally a very expensive car, actually more than a carbureted Mercedes 230 sedan and a LOT more than something like an Opel Commodore.
The problem with the original tip seals was not that they were primitive — they were really very sophisticated — but that they didn’t get the sort of pre-launch testing and development that they desperately needed. It wasn’t until after introduction that NSU did a lot of testing in stop-and-go driving, which was where the seals became the most troublesome.
The KKM612’s original seals were actually in three pieces, designed to allow combustion gases to pass under the tip seal and force it closer to the chamber wall in direct proportion to engine load. By doing that, gas pressure would make the seals self-adjusting, which was supposed to accommodate seal wear while reducing friction. (Compared to one-piece graphite seals, the KKM612’s tip seals reduced friction by 25 percent, which is why NSU was interested.) On a test stand or on the autobahn, the design worked perfectly worked well, but what NSU didn’t realize until after introduction was that in stop-and-go-driving, the corner segments would actually wear faster than the tips. Once a corner seal failed, the tip seal would no longer self-adjust properly. That corner of the rotor would then be out of balance with the other two, causing the rotor to wobble. You can guess what happened next.
NSU eventually adopted much harder seal materials that largely solved the problem, but by then, the damage was done in terms of cost and reputation.
This wins hands down just on the revolutionary styling, which still looks modern today!
At the risk of waxing hackneyed, if you had to cite an example of ‘timeless’…this begs to be taken into Illustrator/Photoshop, as I’d be interested to see how it would look with contemporary Audi wheels/facia/hardware. Hmmmm…
Are there any of these left that are still rotary powered?
Yes; a number of them. In ateupwithmotor’s article, he has pictures of one that has been in the owner’s hands since 1975, in Washington. Still spinning away on the original engine. http://ateupwithmotor.com/luxury-and-personal-luxury-cars/298-nsu-ro80-history.html?start=4
His car has the early seal design, as well. He pointed out to me that the conditions around where he lives are very much like those of Neckarsulm in terms of roads, climate, and traffic volume, which shows off the Ro80 to best effect. NSU didn’t have enough time for pre-launch testing to realize the problems in other environments.
I first heard of the Ro80 via Australia’s Wheels magazine. Former long-time editor Peter Robinson professed great love for them – he may even have bought one in later years. I thought they were fairly ugly, but as time’s gone by, and more and more cars have appeared resembling them, I’ve grown to really appreciate the simple beauty and modernity of the design. The Ro80 was available new here in NZ, they still pop up for sale on trademe occasionally. This gorgeous brown one, still with the original NSU rotary, was for sale just before Christmas, NZ$10K, same owner since 1977:
Nice Corvair in the NSU Spider photo.
I saw that too… I wondered if it was intentional or not…
One now-rare feature the Ro80 shares with the DS is the lack of wheel cutout in the rear door.
Paul’s presentation sold me. This is one beautiful car. It is obvious where Audi drew it’s inspiration from starting with the 5000 onto today. It had to have started here. Simply blown away how nice that design is.
It should be noted that Claus Luthe became chief stylist of Audi after NSU was acquired by Audi/Volkswagen. (He later went to BMW and did the E30, E34, and E36.) Luthe didn’t do the exterior of the Audi C2 (Audi 100/200/5000), but the similarities were certainly not coincidental.
In fact, Audi strongly considered offering a second-generation Ro80 based on the C2 and came very close to using a Wankel engine in what became the Audi 200. There were a number of C2 prototypes running around Germany in the late ’70s with the latest 1,493cc KKM871 rotary engine. It would have had something in the vicinity of 170 PS, about the same as the eventual 2.1-liter turbo I-5 that Audi offered instead.
The reason they canceled it was not reliability, which I think they’d sorted fairly well by that point, but the fact that the Wankel was just too thirsty. Even with fuel injection, the combustion chamber’s huge surface-to-volume ratio is a killer on thermal efficiency and fuel consumption and there’s no easy way around that one.
Courtesy of Ran When Parked, here’s a pic of one of the rotary C2 prototypes:
The Ro80 may have been in itself a flop, it ushered in a whole new generation of technology. Have a look at the interior of one; it was the trend used in all VAG cars for the next two decades. The way-out engine ahead of the axle layout was introduced in this car as was the suspension system. Finally, last but not least, the rack and pinion steering. The ideas that NSU learned by making this body went up into the entire VW range in short order, making for light, strong shells that had road holding unheard of in the cars of the previous generation.
Claus Luthe didn’t do the exterior of the Audi C2, but he did do the interior, so the similarities in interior design between the Ro80 and the early-80s Audi 100/200/5000 again are not coincidental…
Yes, this was a young designer’s dream car. Too bad they didn’t try a more phased approach to the most potentially troublesome technology, e.g., offering the rotary on a top-of-the-line model. A lower base price might have also given the car badly needed volume.
That’s a good idea. NSU was certainly capable of making another great piston engine. The one in the 1000 series was a little marvel: all-alloy with five main bearings and hemi heads. The tuned TTS engines claimed 100 HP per its liter. It was a pair of conjoined two-cylinder motorcycle engines, so it should have been simple to bolt another on to make a 150-hp six. Air-cooled… hmmm, might be tough to cool an inline six. NSU, being an engineer’s company, might then have tried a three-bank radial engine, you suppose?
Well, NSU was going to do exactly that with the Typ 70, which became the short-lived, ill-fated Volkswagen K70. The Typ 70 would have had a piston engine as standard, but provision for the KKM612 rotary for top-of-the-line models, sort of NSU’s answer to a BMW 2002. Volkswagen didn’t offer a rotary in the K70, of course, in part for complicated political reasons related to the acquisition of the company — among other things, Volkswagen would have had to pay royalties on any rotary engine in a VW-badged product.
I saw one drive by an office where I was hanging curtains, about a year ago. I damned near fell off the ladder. No idea if it was running a piston engine or not – my ears aren’t sophisticated enough to ID a motor by sound. Looked to be in good daily-driver condition.
One is on display at the Tampa Bay Auto Museum in Clearwater, FL http://www.tbauto.org/cars/nsu.htm . Sexy, sexy car.
Last mention I heard of these some British car-mag staffer was running one and reported that the latest rotor-seal design was holding up very well, thank you. Having got to the age at which anything that’s happened in the last twenty years is thought of as Recent I’ll leave it up to you to translate that …
I did see one of these when they were current, at some town on the Russian River in NoCal whose name I’m forgetting but it was recovering from yet another flood, it was swarming with (other) hippies and there was a crafts fair going on. And there, parked amongst the VWs and wildly painted school buses, was this gorgeous yellow-ochre vision, a car so tidily proportioned and so calmly sure of itself (or so it seemed) that I’d have gladly swapped my Mini Countryman for it, though I doubt very much it would have covered even the smallest down-payment. Some cars you just really need to see in person.
Until a few years ago, there was a nice silver RO-80 in my hometown that belonged to a body shop owner. He also had a Rover V8 parked next to it which was also interesting to me because of it’s Buick V8 but certainly not looking as good. He did drive the NSU occasionally to local car shows but even if it stayed outside during summer, it was certainly not a daily driver. This car had very interesting styling. I don’t think I’d enjoy owning one but I did enjoy seeing it!
Wow, short of the A pillar and a slight reverse of the cant of the B pillar, that greenhouse highly resembles one of my favorite sedans – a common look to all 1957 – 1959 Chrysler sedans…………..
When this car came out, I was a teenager. It absolutely blew me away. Even though the wheelbase was long for the body by the idiom popular in the 1960s, it was breathtaking. The only problem with its looks are that it’s impossible now to see it without the intervening 15 years of design that gradually caught up to it. Time squeezes it all together for anyone that didn’t live through it. Many people who came of age when the Taurus and second gen Audi 5000 were introduced were surprised to learn of the Ro80. I am among those who wonder if its stunning looks became odd simply because the car was a dog.
I would say it’s because the overall shape and proportions were so widely copied with each one refining and putting their own spin on the basic concept that it left the original looking a bit like a rough draft by comparison.
Back in the summer of 1978, when I spent 3 months in Bremen and was a newly minted rotary-head (having bought my first Mazda some months prior), I saw a few of these being driven around. The locals I was staying with, who were also into cars, commented that it was amazing to see them actually in motion, given their reputation. They appeared well maintained (as most German cars do, as they must pass regular visual examinations), and stood out as exceptionally good looking cars, long and swoopy.
I saw one of these unicorns once, probably in 1989 when I was registering a car, parked on the street in front of the DMV in San Francisco. It came out in 1968, people. Here’s a direct German competitor from 1968, not that there is anything wrong with it. But the Ro is about 20 years ahead.
It was just stupid of them to not really do adequate testing, and then when they saw the problems crop up almost immediately not buy some normal engine to use as an option. I guess there wasn’t room for anything longer than a V4, and the Ford one sucked, but still…Actually I had a friend with one of the Saabs with that engine back in the day and didn’t notice anything any worse than other fours at the time.
Ford UK used the Essex V4 in the Ford Corsair Ford Transit Ford Zephyr MK4 and the Ford Capri GT, its rougher running than a Wankel rotary but its not as bad as some here think.
Another 1968 Euro stab at the original, certainly a different kind of, uh, beautiful….
(Actually I owned one, and in this color, and I appreciated the looks.)
I agree, the Renault 16 was a beautiful car, in how it looked and in what it did. A friend of mine owned one in the early Seventies, and the seats were out of this world. This from a former Citroen owner, at that…
A friend’s parents had an R12 in the mid seventies in the same colour with a tan interior. It looked, drove, and felt almost like a luxury car compared to similar-sized competitors.
Well, the 16 was intended to be the People’s DS. Plus hatchback.
By having FWD, putting the spare tire under the hood and the gas tank in its typical position at the time under the trunk, the 16 also did the Honda Fit thing of having a big flat floored tall space available for carting stuff if you took the rear seat out, or folded it in one of many complicated positions.
The Ro80 was the car of choice of architects. You would think it had appeal to any professional career person. Sure, but for architects it was a must-have. It’s the first Bauhaus study on wheels. Form follows function. Obviously, the main function was to accommodate the driver and passengers, the second was to cheat the wind.
So what’s up with that super high windscreen? The function was to allow easy observation of traffic lights. In Germany the traffic lights are located on the near side of the intersection. You have to duck forward and twist your neck back to get a look at the overhead traffic lights. Except if you drove a Ro80. The French have an extra set of small traffic lights at eye level mounted to the posts. In the US the traffic light is on the far end of the intersection.
I love that wide-eyed, upswept windshield! I think it’s a safety factor, because our eyes tend to be drawn to the biggest, brightest part of our vision span. In most of today’s streamlined cars, that seems to be the side window. I’d probably buy a Mini if it didn’t give me that “peeking out from under the table” sensation from its low windshield header.
This may well be, but I don’t think that this was the reason to make the screen that high. I seem to remember that the official reason was to make it easy to see the (German) traffic lights. The Ford Taunus 17 M had this design as well.
Wolfgang,
thoughtful reply.
My Dad was an architect, yes he raved about them.
The Saturn L 300 is a darn close copy of the Ro80.
First thought I had when I saw the yellow one above was lemon shark.
I see a W-body Regal sedan in the greenhouse.
I only recently learned that these were exported to the US. I’ve never seen one. But just looking at the pictures, I have to imagine this car had the best outward visibility of any sedan ever made.
I happen to love the looks of it too. Even the oddball rear door that is widest at the bottom. But it’s the low hood and huge windshield that really grabs me, as well. Thicken the pillars and slap black gloss paint on them and it could be a 2016 model.
Very few here have seen one, let alone driven one.
Very few understand how far ahead of it’s time it was .
Memorable car to drive in it’s sophisticated design and driving.
made cars like the Rover 2000 seem crude, which was a great design.
Very pretty, and very advanced in it’s day. It is hard to believe that they had finalized the design and had prototypes running around toward the end of 1964! There are actually some very creative types who have made some “what if” renders that are floating around the web:
For those who prefer a little more flair, if you will:
Lovely!
Wagon no. Coupe very yes.
Previous posters have written that a few examples have been converted to Mazda rotaries, a logical choice for fit. Has anyone installed a modern 4 cylinder engine, perhaps dry-sumped to fit under the low profile hood? How about a Subaru?
There is a guy who put an Audi 100 engine in the Ro80. It wasn’t easy though.
http://www.carsablanca.de/Oldtimer-Youngtimer/nsu-ro80-audi-100-motor
Danke schoen!
I never liked the relationship between the C pillar & rear wheels. I’ve shortened both the wheelbase and rear overhang here.
Thanks for an enjoyable article, Paul. You’ve filled in a lot of gaps in my knowledge of the Ro80.
There s one in the next village to me, two owners and still with a rotary engine. Seals solved the problem says owner.
A 2017 German TV series ‘The Same Sky’ is currently running on Netflix. It’s set in 1974 Berlin (East and West), and the dashing Stasi agent/seducer drives a Ro80. Lots of Euro CC’s to behold in the background.
A 2023 video report on the Ro80, with a lot of drive time. It looks great in motion.
While the 365 lbs Ford Cologne V6 was looked at for an NSU Ro80 engine conversion yet dismissed for its thirst, size (requiring body modification) and weight (not quite having the right the handling balance), would a lighter 308 lbs (or below) V6 have worked for an NSU Ro80?
Also has anyone ever fitted a 90-degree V6 into a NSU Ro80 as opposed to a typical 60-degree V6?
I owned and ran both a 1973 Ro80 and a 1973 K70. Very different cars, despite common parentage.
The K70 had a 1605cc 90PS engine, quite robust and very spacious, but very heavy unassisted steering. Not easy to park in tight spaces if you were in a hurry. None of its parts were shared with any other Volkswagen or Audi except for the oil and air filters. VW only built 800 RHD cars for the UK market, and mine was one of these.
By contrast, the Ro80 was everything the K70 wasn’t. Delightful and easy to drive. An interior where you could really spread yourself – the floor was virtually flat, with no centre console to get in the way. Mine had the 13B Wankel from the Mazda RX-7, so it was a sight quicker too. Not many left in the UK, with about 30-40 still active on the road this year. A real privilege to have one.
I’ve heard that the K70’s performance and fuel economy weren’t outstanding. What was your experience?
NSU’s deadly sin for sure, even as it would have been a great car if the engines were more durable.
I’m not sure I’d ever grow to like a 3 speed semi-automatic transmission though. Also, given how artful and prescient the styling was, the interior ambiance is a bit disappointing. The Citroen DS is as spacey and futuristic inside as out, but the Ro 80 looks more like an old, inexpensive 1960s British roadster inside.
I only recently learned these were sold in the USA (anyone know what years?). Was the K70 ever sold in the States? I’ve never seen either of them. The K70 is a real orphan of a car, becoming a Volkswagen at the last minute (after some NSU K70 brochures had already been printed) and sharing almost no parts with any other VW or Audi. I can imagine an alternate universe where K70 variations instead of Audi 80 and 50 variants ushered VW out of the Beetle era.
Interesting factoid – although the last Ro 80 (and last NSU) rolled off the line in 1977, the merged Audi-NSU was still officially named “Audi NSU Auto Union AG” as late as 1985, when they finally became Audi AG. Much like how Studebaker-Packard didn’t drop “Packard” from the name until 1962, long after the last Packard was built.
A 1970 Ro80 in Seattle features in Ate Up With Motor’s Ro80 history. One of the commenters there says he saw a new Ro80 in the showroom in Boulder, Colorado, in 1972, but he didn’t remember what model year it was. Aaron of AUWM states that there’s no sign that Audi NSU tried to make any NSU meet the NHTSA bumper standards, which kicked in in MY 1974.
A handful of K70’s have found their way into the States, but it was never officially sold here.
I don’t have a link handy, but there was a less stark dashboard design that wasn’t adopted for the production cars.
Six years ago I did some extensive work on my Citroen 2CV and I bought a number of body parts from a company in France. They had an agent in Canada and I picked up my order from him. I did not know him, but I knew his name from some Citroen events. It turns out he was more of a Peugeot fan. His daily driver was a 505 wagon and his wife drove a 205. In addition he had a lot full of interesting cars, which included a beautiful white Ro80. He said that it had the original engine and it ran well, but it was not licensed. It was a striking car.
I’ve enjoyed reading the Ro80 comments. Until a few years ago I owned a two owner 1971 with 77000 miles, the motor had never been rebuilt. It was a fantastic car, drove like a modern car, beautifully smooth and the faster you drove the better it felt. They had great handling for a big (by New Zealand standards) car, fabulous brakes and absolutely comfortable. Nothing of its era was comparable. Stupidly I sold it when I was short of storage and was made a seemingly reasonable offer. How great would they be with an Audi 5 speed gearbox? The best thing was overtaking in the middle gear, like driving a turbine! Incidentally, the owners instruction book said that engine revs above the red line (7000 rpm from memory) for short periods was acceptable, but “do not operate continuously in the red zone” ! I’d have one again in a heartbeat….
I brought one off a work mate about 6-7 years ago, original engine etc, needed brake work and body tidy up. Still has live rego and should have been an easy back on the road job, but as usual farm and life got in the way. Last drove it 4 years ago . Should sell it, but it’s always been a life long passion and can’t quite bring myself to list it. Under rated cars and that type of advancement (like the DS) I don’t think I’ll ever see in my lifetime again