Back in the 80s, I used to go to this cool little record store (remember records?) where the sign over the door read, “Since 1969.” The store actually opened in 1970, but the guy who painted the sign thought 1969 sounded cooler. I know by the placement of the front turn signals that this VW Westfalia camper was made between 1968 and 1971. I’m sure there are other clues to this Westie’s build year but I don’t know them. So I’m just going to call it a ’69, because it sounds cooler.
My Westfalia experience is nil. Heck, even my second-gen Bus experience is limited. A close friend’s family had one when I was in elementary school, a cheerful Bus in white over medium blue. And one of my high-school teachers had an early one in tan over brown. I rode in it once; I can’t remember why now. But I distinctly remember my awe at that Bus’s lack of power. It would be a kindness to describe its acceleration as leisurely. VW put more powerful engines in later Buses, but in ’69 the Bus still used the Beetle’s 1600 engine. So I can just imagine how slowly a ’69 Westie with all its gear would get up to speed.
This Westie’s heavily dimpled haunches appeal to me. They say that this Bus has been well used. But everything else about this camper says it’s been shown plenty of love.
I’d love to know what that “Nude Bus Club” sticker is all about, but Almighty Google has little to say beyond where to buy a sticker of your own. That search also links me to a lot of sites that my teenage boys don’t need to see me looking at.
The owner’s a member of the local VW club. I hoped I’d find more info about his Westfalia on the site, but I came up empty. At least I get to see this Westie every day – it has been parked here during the workday all summer, and I pass it during my commute. Props to the owner for driving it daily.
“One pill makes you larger and one pill makes you small.
And the ones that mother gives you don’t do anything at all.”
An excellent counterpoint to Toyota week. It seems that while VW continued its attempts to keep its 1940s-era platform relevant (a task that continued into the wasserboxer era), Toyota was going its own way with an innovative mid engine design (that also seemed to end at the end of a cul de sac.)
These Westies don’t really call my name. I guess I am just not enough of an outdoorsman or camper, and would prefer one of the standard passenger wagons to one of these. But in a rare turnaround, these would be in my bottom 20% of vehicles that I would want to own, so I have trouble ginning up much excitement over this one.
I agree that it is nice that the owner gives it some regular exercise. And thanks for saving me the trouble of googling nude bus club. 🙂
Okay, why no shots of the front of the bus? I’m imagining it with a Dharma Initiative emblem where the VW badge normally would be. That’s Hurley’s bus!
Becauuuuuuuse my front shots didn’t turn out and I haven’t had time to stop to get more!
Here it is:
Jim Grey’s pictures not turning out? Isn’t that like Bobby Flay burning the burgers? 🙂
I thought these were great when I was young and sat in the drivers seat of a white over red Westfalia with plaid seats at the New York Auto Show in the mid 1960s. I had no thoughts about crash safety or acceleration times. I just thought these were really cool.
If only someone use the chassis and drivetrain of ’00s era Porsche 911 AWD under a Westy body …..
Fortunately the owner has not installed the external insulation package like the Chinook.
I did a little research on VW bus performance, since it’s come up quite often lately. The 1968-1969 version, like this one, did the 0-60 in some 37-39 seconds, and topped out at 65 mph. Even for the US standards of the time, that was pretty darn slow.
But VW kept putting bigger engines in these. The ’72 had the 1.7L engine from the 411, and that knocked the 0-60 down to 22 seconds. In ’74, it got the 1.8, which did it in 20 seconds. And in 1976, it got the 2.0L engine, which resulted in a 19 second run to 60.
That may still sound slow, but wasn’t at all bad, for the seventies, given the VW’s roominess and versatility. Mid-teen 0 to 60 times were typical for small cars (and some bigger ones) at the time.
In a 1971 Motor Trend comparison oo the VW bus with a Chevy Sportvan, Ford Chatau Club van, and Dodge Sportsman, the VW was the slowest, but it was picked the winner overall:
“The Volkswagen Station Wagon came out best in terms of size, finish, quality and ease of handling,” the magazine said. “But, for sheer load space, the VW couldn’t hope to match the Ford, Dodge or Chevy Vans. VW was also at a distinct power disadvantage, with an engine less than one-third the size of the optional V-8s available in the Detroit-made vans.”
But, Motor Trend concluded, “For everyday driving, though, our staff still preferred the VW van over the rest of the group.”
That was the 1971 version, with the 1600cc engine. The VW bus had some very compelling qualities, and drove and handled much better than the big American truck-based vans. And with the 2.0 L engine (which many old ones have been retrofitted), it really isn’t all that slow either.
What you are not mentioning here, Paul, is the tremendous amount of “love” required to keep any Westy on the road, no matter when it was built. When I was in university, these things were all the rage from hippies to Eco-preppies. By this time, all the Westis around were “well loved” and required a lot of “loving” to keep them going. I was never really interested in providing that “love” as it required a lot of time, money and dirt. No thanks.
Instead I had a Volare wagon for camping duty. The rear was 7′ long and with a 4″ foam, and with Slant Six and Torqueflight, it made a very reliable fishmobile. The extent of the “love” that Volare needed was a muffler and occasional oil changes. Said Volare never needed any unexpected “loving” in the most remote places. Having to “love” a vehicle when you are 300 km from the nearest garage is hardly something I wanted to experience and I never did.
Westies are still very popular, so much so that foreigners can rent them here in Canuckistan. I saw two of them struggling up the Rockies on our trip there this week.
http://www.westybc.com/
Yeah I had a 68 Transporter 1600cc twinport engine quite slow but I knew that when I bought it.
What I didnt know was the built -in casting fault 1600 engines all came with and the resulting cracked oilgallery behind the flywheel that oil drips at the clutch end of the engine signify.
It died with a loud banging sound from the crankcase I nursed it to a wrecking yard that catered for VWs and sold it quite simply the van was not worth any more love from me I’ve repaired plenty of VWs for friends replacement engine cases from Brazil are available for 1600 twin port engines and it is the only cure a later suitcase engine will not fit the earlier engine bay easily. Good find Westies are quite rare here and sought after by Vdub nutters.
What??? A 71 VW van was better built than a 71 Dodge Sportsman? Unthinkable! 🙂
Seriously, my car-mentor Howard bought a 73 Dodge van. It was a great vehicle, but had the worst paint job I had ever seen on a new car. The light yellow color sort of hid the complete lack of shine on several body panels caused by paint spray that had clearly mostly dried by the time it hit the primer.
Always amusing to read about the Love-and-Peace cult status of (old) VW Beetles and vans in the US.
A Beetle was a simple and reliable Joe the Plumber vehicle and VW vans were the most versatile compact commercial vehicles on the road, for many decades in a row.
My neighbor comes to mind. He had a ropery and he stuffed his T2 from the floor to the roof, and from the front seats all the way to the back. The rear wheels looked like the ones of a Citroën CX. (I think you know what I mean)
As for the hippie scene: for them we had the Citroën 2CV and HY-vans….
I’ll bet you all know the 2CV, so here’s the HY:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Citro%C3%ABn_HY_van.jpg
If we’re assuming it’s all original, then the side marker lights make it not a 68, and the style of the hubcaps would make it 71. In 71 they switched to the new small pattern wheels and added discs up front.
Thanks for sleuthing this one down, Matt. I’m sticking with ’69 anyway, though, just because it sounds cooler!:-)
Yep, a ’71, like mine (The Mayfield Belle). Last year for upright engine, first year for disc brakes. The perfect combination in my book.
The ‘Belle was a Standard Campmobile (no popup roof), and I gutted it after I bought and got it running. Lightened in this manner, it was reasonably “fast” for a VW bus. Except for the steeper grades in the mountains, it would hold 65 on my weekly run between Charlotte, NC and Knoxville, TN when I was transitioning jobs back in the ’90s.
I have had many of these vans. They were great to travel in when you were single and had no money. I bought a 1971 Westfalia for $250 in 1990 and drove it 10,000 miles cross country with a friend just after I graduated college. It is totally not true that these were expensive to run or fix! The problems were simple, predictable and easy to fix if you are at bit technically inclined. I lived out of one of these for a whole month on that trip while getting 22 mpg. Even though they had no power, they were fun to drive in their own way. Of course back then people didn’t drive that fast on the highway – now they would be dangerous with a real top speed of about 60. 65 would push the engine too hard! There is a reason so many are still on the road.
I think the 56 I had would have taken months to hit sixty. I just never tried. A perfect car for the Panama Canal Zone. Legally I don’t remember any place you could drive 60.
IIRC that was a 36hp engine. It might have been old but it sure was slow.
Ive been 60mph indicated in a 57 bus on skinny crossply tyres downhill in the rain no thanx not again
My favorite mechanic is an old hotrodder who is slightly insane. He saw a restored Kombi sell on TV, supposedly, for $40k. Thus inspired, he took an old Westi and bolted in a souped up bored and stroked 912 engine that he claimed did 240 bhp on the bench, no doubt true. Alas, I never saw the finished product. Overheating may have posed a practical problem. Possibly, the gearbox and differential were not quite up to the task.
I was able to cruise at a relaxed 65 mph in a friends ’65 multi window van. The motor was relaxed but I was anything but, as I was drafting five feet off the ass end of a semi on Route 66 in Illinois. The thing was seriously slow. Never again.
Our college radio station had one of these vans with a broadcast console constructed of 2 x 4s and masonite mounted inside, topped with an ancient and very “solid” Western Electric 23C mixer. Not just slow, but the load was not centered, so driving this beast was probably unsafe at any speed. But what kid has any sense of mortality?
This Craigslist ad merely reinforces the unfortunate stereotype.
Hello all, I know this post was from a few years ago, but….. this is my bus. I have loved reading these comments. And yes it’s a 71 and it is very well loved. When I got this I had to replace almost the entire bottom section of metal the whole way around, didn’t expect to do that much work but once you start digging you always find more rust. Oh the fun of vws, I guess I can’t get enough to because I am almost finished with my new project a 68 single cab. Thanks for stopping to look at my love, I call her pita (pain in the arse, due to motor in rear). Be safe out there peace grease and vws. ✌
can someone tell me about the history of the nude bus club? Where does it come from? From the USA? Scandinavia? Who came up with this? I hope that someone can help. Thanks in advance.