When the Volkswagen Scirocco arrived on our shores in 1975, it was a revelation: a lightweight, sharp-handling stunner that mated the practicality and efficiency of a transverse-engined, front-wheel-drive layout to a sleek, rakish design and capable suspension setup. It was unlike anything marketed by American manufacturers at the time, and though it was never a massive sales success in the United States, it sold respectably through the mid-1980s. But as that decade waned, it became clear that the Scirocco was losing ground, with sales suffocated at both ends. On one end, the rising prominence of Japanese sport coupes such as the Honda Prelude was impinging upon the Scirocco’s turf, and on the other, the similarly-performing GTI out of Volkswagen’s own stable was more than 25% cheaper, and more practical to boot. So what was Volkswagen to do?
Their answer: go back to the drawing board, and move the Scirocco upmarket. The first step was to give the styling a makeover: while the original Giugiaro-penned Scirocco was a looker, the in-house facelift of the Scirocco Mk2 was less well-received, and by 1990, the shape was looking quite dated. Early prototypes of the Corrado showed radical departures from the Scirocco’s low-slung hatchback silhouette, with a more upright (and a bit ungainly) appearance, with a somewhat-droopy rear end and low-mounted taillights. (Interestingly, one of the most striking lines on the production Corrado is the upswept beltline behind its front doors: a complete 180 from the prototype’s design, and somewhat reminiscent of the Alfa Romeo 75/Milano’s controversial styling.)
This later prototype was much closer to the Corrado’s production form: while the greenhouse was still more upright than the Scirocco’s, head VW designer Herbert Schäfer lent the car a chunky, squared-off look that deviated significantly from the more rounded, circular forms the Japanese competition was adopting at the time. The overall result was fairly attractive, and certainly distinctive: but like the prototype, the rear-end treatment was probably the styling’s weakest link – I know I just complained that the prototype’s taillights were too low, but I can’t help but think that the production model’s lights were mounted just a bit too high (I think the freestanding, out-of-place VW badge placed underneath the lighting assembly throws the visual off for me). But I digress.
Like the Scirocco, the Corrado’s platform was derived directly from the contemporary Golf model (in this case, the Mk2 Golf), and shared most of its drivetrain components. This, of course, reduced the engineering capital needed to design the car, and theoretically allowed costs to stay down (more on that later). However, the Corrado had its own party piece – the engine. When the Corrado was introduced in the fall of 1988, it debuted with a supercharged 8-valve inline-four, dubbed the “G60.” The nickname arose from the G-Lader supercharger affixed to the engine (itself so-called due to its G-shaped configuration), and the 60mm spiral depth of the supercharger’s displacer plate. Producing 158 horsepower and mated to a five-speed manual, it propelled the Corrado to 60 miles an hour in eight seconds flat – very quick for 1988. Strangely, the base engine in the Corrado (which was never marketed stateside) was a more technically advanced 16-valve engine, but aside from a few prototypes, it was never paired with the supercharger.
You may have noticed I still haven’t mentioned the VR6. That’s because it wasn’t introduced to the Corrado line until 1992 – for its first three years, four cylinders was all you could get. And that was a problem; not because the engine was bad, but because despite a $4,000 price hike over the Scirocco, the Corrado still wasn’t any faster than the much-cheaper 16-valve GTI, with which it shared a platform and a laughably awful cable-controlled gearbox (described by a contemporary review as “inharmonious as a warped record and as vague as a horoscope cast by a fair-ground fortune-teller”). Despite attempting to move the Corrado upmarket, in the eyes of many buyers, the Corrado was just as redundant as the Scirocco was by the end of its lifespan. Even more confusingly, the Corrado was actually marketed alongside the Scirocco in Europe until 1993. That meant that during this time, you could buy a 16-valve GTI or a 16-valve Scirocco or a much-more-expensive-but-not-any-faster Corrado. From a marketing standpoint, this was pure madness.
But all this is not to say the Corrado was without its positives. Handling, for the most part, was a particularly strong suit, with commendable steering feel and top marks for agility and directional stability. It’s this aspect of the car that has cemented the Corrado’s legacy in motoring lore, as many regard it among the best-handling front-wheel-drive cars ever made. However, more than one reviewer complained about oversteer that was too easy to induce during high-speed cornering, with more than a little twitchiness at the limit. It was clear, then, that Volkswagen had gotten part of the formula right – but it was also increasingly clear that the G60 engine was not going to cut it, at least not in the US market. Sales, which had registered at a paltry 5,500 in 1990, sunk to new depths during the following year. Something had to change.
Enter the VR6. I’ll spare you the in-depth technical details, but I would be amiss to not at least touch upon its innovative configuration. The VR6 was developed by Volkswagen as a space-efficient six-cylinder engine – one that could fit neatly into engine bays designed for smaller-capacity motors. Think of it as a cross between an inline-6 and a V6 in terms of layout: like a V6, there are two cylinder banks across from one another, but in a VR6, the angle of the “V” in the engine is much narrower (10-15 degrees), such that the cylinders are staggered more closely than in a V6 engine (which usually has a 45-90 degree angle between cylinder banks). Since the angle is so tight, this allows the VR6 engine to utilize only one cylinder head, compared to the two necessary in a traditional V6 engine. In a nutshell, this strikes a compromise between the length of an inline engine and the width of a V-configuration engine, allowing the VR6 to be both shorter than an inline-6 and narrower than a V6: the perfect setup in an engine bay designed for a smaller-displacement motor.
The VR6 was released to the European public in the 1991 Corrado model, and came to our shores the following year. The critics loved it: its “razor-sharp throttle response” and the exhaust’s “growling snort” yielded a driving experience that many opined should have accompanied the Corrado to begin with – impressions no doubt boosted by the VR6’s new suspension components sourced from the latest Golf Mk3. It was faster, too: most contemporary accounts clocked it at a sub-seven second 0-60 run, finally outpacing its GTI stablemate. Here, then, was the car Volkswagen had intended to market the whole time: a legitimate sports coupe, with a competent chassis, sharp handling, and a terrific engine to boot. There was only one problem – nobody bought it.
Despite the VR6’s shot in the arm, the Corrado’s sales continued to flounder. Sales slipped to 3,500 for the 1992 model year, and after VW killed the G60 model for 1993, they cratered to just over 2,000. By 1995, it was gone for good, after just around 18,500 sold in five model years. I can’t find any year-by-year breakdown for European sales, but while it was ultimately more successful overseas, global sales of 97,500 over seven model years (that’s including US sales) trailed the Scirocco (800,000 sales over 20 years) by a considerable margin. Hardly a success, then. But why?
The first reason, as was commonplace for European imports around this time, was the price. The 1993 Corrado SLC (VW marketed the VR6 model as the SLC in the United States, with the SLC ostensibly standing for “Sport Luxury Coupe”) stickered for a steep $22,540 – that’s $40,000 today – which was around two grand more than a Prelude Si and thousands more than something like a Probe GT. While the VR6’s added performance and superior handling arguably justified the price, there’s no doubt that it was a steep price to pay – especially for a Volkswagen.
And by “especially for a Volkswagen,” I mean two things. The first is that Volkswagen wasn’t (and still isn’t) an upmarket brand: while they tried to position themselves as a sub-premium brand in the 1990s, $40,000 (adjusted) was pushing that self-imposed moniker to the limit. It’s the same problem – on a smaller scale, admittedly – that they ran into with cars like the Touareg and Phaeton (a story for another day). A base-model 3-series was the same price as a typically-equipped VR6 Corrado, and while there’s no doubt the Corrado would run rings around a 318i, the reality is that most people would have rather ponied up the cash for the brand name. Enthusiasts are a vocal faction but a tiny fraction of the buying public, and there simply weren’t enough well-heeled enthusiasts around to keep the Corrado afloat.
The second reason was the nail in the coffin for the Corrado: its build quality, or rather, the lack thereof. People love to bash Volkswagen for their cars’ unreliability: some of it is deserved, and some unjustified – as always, your mileage may vary. But there’s no denying the Corrado had a particular penchant for masochistic tendencies. The list of common pitfalls could itself comprise an entire post: chain tensioners with sporadic timing advances, brittle radiator plastic, flaky fuel pumps, copious coolant leaks, and enough electrical gremlins to make Lucas blush. Seriously: I spent a decent amount of time on Corrado forums while researching this article, and it very much seems that Murphy’s law is in full effect for the Corrado: whatever can go wrong, will go wrong. The sunroof, the steering rack, the ABS, the window regulators, the spoiler motor, and basically every electronically-activated switch inside the car – you name it. One new forum member asked what the VR6’s common problems were, and the first reply was “If you want help you will need to be specific as to which type of self-inflicted pain you are choosing.” Want to hear a good Corrado joke? Hold on, I’m working on it.
In the end, the Corrado never really stood a chance. It was a good car – a great car, even – let down by competition within its own manufacturer’s lineup and a serious case of sticker shock, and felled by its inability to stay in one piece for any reasonable amount of time. Still, in the years following its demise, it has acquired quite the following: for some people, the siren song of a sweet-handling sports coupe is enough to outweigh even the most pernicious build quality concerns. Indeed, the average price of a well-kept VR6 model has risen sharply over the last year, and a prime example will now set you back over $10,000. Perhaps as the car ages, its chronic ailments are more in keeping with the expectations for a 25-year-old car than for a new one. Or maybe it’s yet another example of a new generation reaching the age at which they can finally buy the dream cars of their youth. One thing’s for certain, though – one way or another: if you hop on the Corrado train, be prepared to be taken for a ride.
1993 Corrado SLC photographed in Glendale, CA – December 2017
1990 Corrado G60 photographed in Playa del Rey, CA – March 2012
I never got the appeal of those.
For a fun sports car they just looked way to dull.
Main problem for becoming a successful successor to the Scirocco was its high
price though.
Really fascinating article that homes on why Corrado wasn’t a runaway success as its predecessor. I recalled Volkswagen having same quality issues with Golf Mk3, especially the Mexican-built ones.
One thing that gets under my skin for a long time is renaming the VR-configuration as W-configuration once Volkswagen added more cylinders: W8, W12, and W16. Anyone knows that one line in the letter represents one bank: I, one bank; V, two banks; W, three banks; X, four banks; etc. Each bank has its own intake and exhaust ports, valve train, etc. regardless of how the cylinders are arranged within the bank.
Yet, looking at W8, W12, and W16 engines, you only see two banks rather than three. Bugatti had a mad prototype W18 with three banks of six cylinders each in the 1990s (see the attached photo). That is a proper W18.
This thread is of course a little old now but just to clear things up:
After posting my response later in this thread, I’ve just see this earlier reference regarding your incorrect translation of VR (many people seem to do this unfortunately).
VR in German means “Verkurtz Reihnmotor” which translates to “shortened inline-engine”.
The VR6 essentially has a pair of three cylinders staggered within an inline 6 block and cylinder head and is therefore principally an inline engine, not a vee engine. The correct translation of ‘VR’ used by Volkswagen reflects this.
Unfortunately, VW totally confused the situation by (incorrectly) badge-engineering their later VR models as ‘V’ models (VR5 as V5, VR6 as V6) and as you’ve pointed out, the other designated ‘W’ models add to this confusion.
The W engines would likely by be best described as shortened vee engines (e.g. a W12 would be described as a shortened V12 engine / VV12), the 2 x Vs making it look much like W12 – lol!
Ah, the Germans. Always making things more complicated than they need to be. Why develop a completely new configuration for a V6? Why not just use a I-5 turbo instead? It’s not like that wasn’t available down the hall.
I think the same guys who worked on this also developed the later 4.2 Audi V8 with the self-destructing timing chain system.
This car is an interesting embodiment of VW’s predicaments at the time. When it launched into the crowded sporty coupe segment in the U.S., other than its high price, there was nothing about it that topped competitive offerings (especially from Japan). Plus, VW’s quality was dismal back then–noted by road testers and owners alike–all at a time when the Japanese (once again) were setting the pace for quality and even the Americans (or at least Ford) were getting respectable again. The alleged “German substance” and vaunted “German driving feel” were no where near enough to offset the Corrado’s demerits, no matter what was under the hood.
That said, I actually liked the styling of the car, though agree that it is a bit awkward from some angles. But it certainly was distinctive, with a nice “chunkiness” that gave it real presence and uniqueness.
A car I always liked a great deal, but was priced well beyond what I could afford (what I could afford back then, and owned, was a Dodge Daytona, 2.5 with a 5-speed). And in my area, there essentially weren’t any available used, due to the dearth of sales, new.
IMO, the original Scirocco was, and is, one of the best looking cars EVER! It stood out in Europe and America.
As a kid, I wanted one! In 1976, a fuel-injected Scirocco was $4995 MSRP (a base Rabbit was $3495). That was not inexpensive. For around $5000, one could get a midsize car with V8, auto, ps, pb.
At the same time, in 1976, if one wanted a fuel-efficient, QUICK, small car, what else was there? A Celica? That cost as much. A Capri?
Cars are RELATIVE. In the 1970s, the Scirocco looked WAY better, and drover better than the other offering.
In 1990, the Corrado looked kinda fat and bland (sorry). The supercharged engine had the numbers, perhaps. In terms of looks and performance, the car did not stand out–Honda Prelude, Mazda MX6, Ford Probe, Nissan 240 SX.
And it was overpriced.
That’s why one car sold 800,000 copies and the other 11% of that.
A very good looking car.
I always liked this print ad from the late 70s
I’ve had considerable experience with the VR6 Corrado because my father bought a used one in the mid 1990s. In some ways it was an odd car for him because he was in his mid 50s, but then again, he had once owned a ’75 Scirocco, so he probably was trying to rekindle the fun driving of his youth.
The Corrado was outrageously fun to drive. I was in my 20s at the time and it was probably the best all-around performance car I’d ever driven… fast and wonderful handling. It made me yearn for German cars in a way I’d never done before.
But owning this car was painful. It had problems that I never imagined a car could have: mechanical problems, electrical problems, build quality problems… you name it. The most memorable recurring problem was that the lights would randomly come on when the car was parked, draining the battery. This would happen occasionally, so it couldn’t be predicted, and then it would stop for a few months. We could never figure out what caused it, but that was far from the only problem.
After 2 or 3 years, Dad got tired of the problems and sadly got rid of the Corrado. It’s really too bad the car wasn’t better made, because it sure was a great car to drive.
As mentioned in the article, I’d have to concur that the pricing killed the Corrado before its problematic build quality ever had a chance to. I looked at one in late ’89 in consideration of trading in my 1985 Conquest. I was fairly smitten with it, but I do remember the sticker being somewhere not far from $20 grand for the 4 cylinder. My Conquest had stickered around $14K, and at the time a new Conquest TSi was somewhere in the $18K range iirc. All this at a time when to the target market (like myself, early 20’s, new career, single yuppie-wannabe types, UGH) still thought of VW as a marque for tree hugging, granola eating types rather than the Cavaricci-clad, Drakkar-scented cognoscenti. (facetiousness on fleek here.)
It was also a bit staid and germanic in its presentation, which is hardly a negative, but when 300ZX’s and Conquests and Supras were decked out in all manner of whiz-bang bling, with dazzling eye-popping dashboards, bold graphics and ground effects packages the Corrado came off more as an econo-hatch that had been optioned to the hilt. It was just not one of the more compelling options in a field of offerings that were at the height of their heyday.
OK I laughed out loud at your description of the late-eighties “young yuppies” of which I was one. Luckily I avoided Cavaricci pants, but I will admit to having had a bottle of Drakkar Noir…..
I also agree with your assessment of the Corrado’s positioning problem. I drove an ’88 Prelude, and then got a ’92 Prelude, and I didn’t even bother cross-shopping with the VW. I just found it to be way too expensive for what was on offer. To your point, you could step up into sleek (and loaded) Japanese sports cars for not that much more money, making the VW a tough sell. And with the fast, fun GTI priced below it, or the option of spending more but getting lots more with a BMW 3-Series, the Corrado was even hard to justify for German car enthusiasts.
I recall only one sighting of a Corrado. It was at a autocross event maybe 9 years ago. The owner specifically purchased his Corrado for this purpose. The G-supercharger needed an overhaul at a significant expense. He achieved very respectable ETs with this Corrado. A toy used as a toy.
I had completely forgotten about these. I had been briefly infatuated with the 2nd generation Scirocco, but its big price premium over the GTI (that performed just as well) killed that.
I was intrigued by these when they came out, but once again the price seemed silly high (instead of just the normal high the Scirocco had been).
In the GTI Volkswagen had found its true niche – the German road car for those unwilling to pay BMW prices. Yet VW has spent the last 30 years trying to be everything else. Volkswagen will never have the snob appeal of BMW, and if it is to ever have success it will have to show that it understands this.
Volkswagen will never have the snob appeal of BMW, and if it is to ever have success it will have to show that it understands this.
One would suggest that is why they have Audi, but as the VW brand is the market leader in both Europe and China, it’s hard to argue that they are wrong. For that matter, Audi’s DKW roots hardly argue that that is a “premium” brand either. And I don’t remember many people bragging their Isetta was the “ultimate driving machine”.
Maybe, over the next decade, Skoda will join the other VAG premium brands. The rumor mill has it that a cheap brand to slot below Skoda is in development for China and India.
I should have clarified my comment to say “in the U.S.” VW is indeed a big seller in Europe and in China – and its success is as a mass market brand. VW has never built a good enough car to be a successful mass market brand in the US in the way that the best Asian manufacturers have been able to do. To find success here it needs to build a car as good as anything from Toyota and Honda, or at least Ford and Hyundai/Kia. If they cannot do that, they can at least play the “German road car” card because that is a thing that will bring a certain number of enthusiasts in the door, and those people can be influential.
Recent anecdotal reports are that VW has upped its quality game in recent years. If they can keep that up they may make some inroads here that have eluded them in the past. But a car has to stand for something. Unless VW can come up with something else, it has never done better in modern times than when it was synonymous with Fahrvergnügen.
VW has never built a good enough car to be a successful mass market brand in the US in the way that the best Asian manufacturers have been able to do.
In Europe, the Golf defines mass market, regardless how far upmarket it has moved over the years.
My sense is that, besides the problematic reliability of the past 3 decades, VW has been a niche player because it has been selling models here derived from it’s European offerings, while North American tastes are different. It’s a chicken and egg thing. They did not develop specific North American models because their volume in this market was so small and their volume was so small because the models did not meet the fat part of the market.
VW started to catch on with the Mk VI Jetta, which was downgraded in both engineering and trim quality from the Mk V, but it was cheap. Terrible, cheap, nasty car (I have driven a couple of them), and it sold far better than the Mk V had.
They finally hit the fat part of the market with the new Tiguan, offered here in the long wheelbase version vs the SWB European version. The Tig, in a matter of months, has become the best selling VW and gets most of the credit for VW continuing to run sales gains in the US while many manufacturers have seen their sales soften.
The Atlas is now their second best seller. The Atlas is so big it is only sold in one other market, China, where it uses a different name.
Without those two new SUVs, 2018 would be a disaster for VW.
In China, VW and prestige do not seem to be incompatible. The Phaeton did well enough there for VW to introduce the China only Phideon.
More on to your point as to why VW isn’t a big seller in the US; their dealerships (and to a point their service departments) have horrible customer service. I could care less that the current GTI is top notch for the price. I’ve dealt with VW dealers between my friend who has a Jetta and my Father’s Beetle. They all suck, and this is an observation across multiple states. My most recent displeasure involved making an appointment for Dad’s Bug to have the tires replaced. Called days in advance, came at the scheduled time, and it still took over four hours. Don’t even get me started on the crap I had to help my friend deal with on her Jetta while it was under warranty. No, VW of North America, a clutch that fails at 6,000 miles is NOT a wear item.
…their dealerships (and to a point their service departments) have horrible customer service.
VW dealers have had a horrible reputation for years, as has VoA corporate owner relations.
That has not been my experience, so far. A couple years ago, I noticed a whine in the transmission of my wagon. It was only in a small speed range, but it should not have been there. Brought the car in to the dealer where I bought it in Farmington Hills, along with a cassette tape of the whine. They provided me with a free loaner (Jetta sedan) and set to work. It took about 4 weeks, and they got the VW zone service rep involved, but they replaced the entire transmission. Problem solved in one trip. For the record, the trans was an Aisin automatic, not anything produced in house by VW.
I stopped using the shop in Farmington Hills for the simplest of issues: the people in the service department never answer the phone when I want to make a service appointment.
Took the car in to the dealer in Ann Arbor for a tiny rattle that I heard in the rear, when I went over short, sharp, bumps. They found it on the first try: a clip was missing from the left rear brake, allowing the rattle. Fixed under warranty.
Took the car into the Ann Arbor dealer for repair of a punctured tire. Puncture repaired, car washed and vacuumed. No charge.
A friend uses the VW dealer in Toledo. He reports excellent service.
Now, I could expound on the rogering I have gotten from various Ford, Lincoln and Honda dealers, and an interaction I had with Ford owner relations that had me on the brink of homicide , but that would be off topic.
This was the only Corrado I had remembered. 🙂
Oliver Twist:
I don’t have a picture of the VR6, but I would think it looks like it has a single bank of cylinders under that cylinder head.
The W engines are designed to fit in the same space as a 4 cylinder, obviously a W12 is shorter than a conventional V6.
I always thought that the Corrado looked too long and/or narrow, like a Scirocco that had been rolled out like dough.
For nostalgia’s sake (?), VW re-introduced the Scirocco a few years ago and after just 1 generation they recently discontinued it so as to free up production for a SUV/CUV.
By the way, the G supercharger, in smaller form, would eventually appear in the VW Polo.
DanEKey,
That didn’t really clear up anything. You just answered the same thing I wrote earlier. VR6 is a clear description since the V means the cylinders are arranged in staggered, narrow-angled, V-form within same bank as indicated by R which stands for Reihe (German for inline). Combining VR accurately describes this configuration. My argument is the number of banks the engine has rather than whether the cylinders are arranged in straight or staggered form. Volkswagen calls it W, which is essentially three banks rather than two banks. I posted the photo of Bugatti prototype W18 engine above that shows three banks.
Lancia had four-cylinder motor in similar configuration (1922-1976) but called it V4.
Yet, Volkswagen didn’t bother using plain V or double VR instead of W. The “W”12 engine is just a double VR6 combined. Volkswagen could just call them V12 regardless of how the cylinders are arranged within the bank. I know it’s just a marketing ploy to differentiate itself from the competitors.
Lastly, nope, Volkswagen’s W12 engine is much longer at 513mm, wider at 710mm, and higher at 715mm than four cylinder motors.
“Lancia had four-cylinder motor in similar configuration (1922-1976) but called it V4.”. Yes, I was going to bring up the Lancia engine when The Professor called the VR6 “innovative”, but you beat me to it.
Updating an engine design from 1922 is hardly what I’d call “innovative”, but perhaps someone can explain the innovations.
This thread is of course a little old now but just to clear things up:
Your translation of VR is partly incorrect (many people seem to do this).
VR in German means “Verkurtz Reihnmotor” which translates to “shortened inline-engine”.
The VR6 essentially has a pair of three cylinders staggered within an inline 6 block and cylinder head and is therefore principally an inline engine, not a vee engine. The correct translation of ‘VR’ used by Volkswagen reflects this.
Unfortunately, VW totally confused the situation by (incorrectly) badge-engineering their later VR models as ‘V’ models (VR5 as V5, VR6 as V6) and as you’ve pointed out, the other designated ‘W’ models add to this confusion.
The narrow-angle layout is particularly useful in the large Bentleys, which have the Audi-style longitude-FWD layout, wherein the engine is pushed way forward and the longitude transmission is directly in line with the front wheels (making it a transaxle). A conventional V12 wouldn’t fit in those cars, but the W12, made up of two narrow-angle V6s, fits just fine, because it’s no longer than a V6.
I remember being rather skeptical of the price myself. I remember commenting to someone when I saw a Corrado parked nearby “a 20 grand Volkswagen?”
Of course, it wasn’t long before the VR6 was available in the GTI.
Speaking of German car reliability of the 90s, a coworker traded in her Golf for a 318ti in the late 90s. I finally asked her what color her’s was as I would alternately see a silver one, a red one and a green one in the parking lot. Her’s was the sliver one. The others were loaners because her Bimmer was a POS that spent most of it’s time in the shop.
I did enjoy the TV advert for the Corrado.
Volkswagen = People’s Car and that’s why VW will never be an upscale brand no matter how much they try. The horrible reliability doesn’t help one bit, either. The Corrado was nicely styled but that’s the only nice thing I can say about it.
Does VW still build these VR6 engines? It’s an interesting concept but I’ll bet they had reliability issues too and were expensive to fix.
Yes, you can still buy a new VW Passat or Atlas with a VR6. They are badged “V6”, though.
Enthusiasts are a vocal faction but a tiny fraction of the buying public, and there simply weren’t enough well-heeled enthusiasts around to keep the Corrado afloat.
That is the best explanation of the issues and maladies affecting the automotive market both in the past and today. Enthusiast, which we on this site are, tend to say we want certain things, desire certain combinations of engines, transmissions, and suspensions, all contained in certain body styles, and yet the general public has zero desire to purchase such cars. That is how we end up with the mythical brown manual diesel wagon being the catchphrase car of dreams, when the ideal car now, based on real sales in 2017, is a F150. Really, I am amazed that the car companies even try any more….
They don’t. Hence why all you see in commercials is the touting of fake trophies and decimal point differences in various lab tested efficiencies versus the competition. They’re one step above having no identity at all. But the MBAs are happy at least.
One of my earliest memories is of my uncle showing me a 1994 VW brochure, and these were in there. All through my childhood I continued to think Corrados were really cool, but never actually saw one until well into the 00s.
I test drove a new Corrado in about 1992, a G60. I had little experience with fun cars back then but I thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed my jaunt in that little red car. The thing that blocked me from buying it — though deeply discounted at the end of the model year — was that it was an automatic.
I’ve never forgotten that car and sort of have always regretted not buying it anyway.
After reading about its unreliability here, I no longer regret it.
I test drove a Corrado G60 in about 1992. While I wasn’t yet experienced enough in the ways of fun cars to know whether this thing was good, bad, or indifferent compared to other fun cars — holy cow did I enjoy my test drive, in which the salesman encouraged me to push it.
It was an automatic, and back then I was a staunch stick man. Despite a deep discount for being so late in the model year, I didn’t pull the trigger. But I never forgot that car.
After reading here about this model’s unreliability, I now no longer regret not buying it.
I understand that the supercharger in the G60 would wear out fairly quickly.
Here is a comparison review from Car and Driver with the Corrado and it’s peers from 1992; gives you a good idea as to why it was “meh” relative to the competition (I don’t buy the Probe win, price be damned). Click on “Show All” near the top of the page to read the whole article:
https://www.caranddriver.com/archives/honda-prelude-si-vs-ford-probe-gt-mazda-mx-6-ls-mitsubishi-eclipse-gsx-volkswagen-corrado-slc-comparison-test
Magazines at the time just looooved the Mk2 Probe, which made sense in the narrow realm of comparisons like Motor Trend‘s Bang for the Buck, but even seeing it on the street next to the MX-6, it was pretty clear where the money was saved.
There were two cars of the 90s that consistently excited me as a child of the decade: 1) Subaru SVX, 2) the VW Corrado. I don’t know what that says about me, as both models kind of had similar problems in the marketplace.
For me the Corrodo was a return to form for the Scirocco, which I thought was completely neutered aesthetically in mkII form, and the Corrodo paid homage to the mkI greenhouse perfectly. I used to mix up their names for a very long time too, which I blame my Dad for, as he used to call the Corrado a Scirocco too. It was a dumb decision to give it a different name, even if they were trying to use it as a more upmarket flagship.
The naming convention was a result of the fact in Europe they were sold concurrently thru 1993; the Corrado was a step up from a Scirocco. North America never had the two overlap.
Ah the Corrado. It was fun to drive and sounded great but I will concur with the other about the price and reliability factor.
By the time the Corrado came out, there were lots of other cars you could buy that were more fun (and cheaper to buy)
The rise of the Mitsubishi Eclipse raised the bar. the 90-94 Eclipse was probably one of the most fun cars to drive. It was quick and handled great. Nowadays Mitsu has a reputation for having cars nobody wants to buy but back in the early 1990’s the arrival of the Diamond Star cars was like being hit by a train. There was a huge wow factor.
I also think the Mazda MX-3 also gave the Corrado trouble. It was fast, small, cheap to buy and also offered a V6 (I think the 1.8l V6 is still one of the smallest V6 engines that was made?)
Of course the late 1980’s into the mid 1990’s was game on for sports coupes with lots of good cars competing in the field.
Loved these cars growing up. A neighbor, who I never actually saw driving/in the car had one in British Racing Green… used to see it regularly for two decades or so until 3-4 years ago. After all that time, wonder what made him/her finally give up the ghost. My grandmother’s neighbor has a purple one but it’s been sitting with four flat tires since the 90’s. Poor thing.
A car I wanted to like that never quite made it. So schizophrenic — an engaging engine, at least in VR6 form, but a clunky shift linkage; hyper-conservative and rather dated styling*, but some ridiculous gimmicks like the motorized spoiler and not terribly practical. U.S. cars were also saddled with the infuriating mouse belts for an absurdly long time, which was hard to accept at this price. A fine chassis in search of sensible product planning and better customer service, I guess.
* I feel like the styling would have been the business if it had come out in, let’s say, 1983–84, around the time of the Mk2 Golf. By 1990, it looked to contemporary coupes like the Chrysler A-body sedans looked next to a CB Accord.