You owe us a solid, Volkswagen. No, I’m not talking about making up for Dieselgate; I’m referring to the current rather lackluster model lineup and the unqualified disaster that the revived Type 2 “bus” turned into. Honestly, VW needs to do themselves a favor and atone for these missteps.
Thankfully, I can see a product that would likely be a true attention-getting hit for them and give the market a product we’ve been begging for but just haven’t gotten. Yes, VW, we need you to do an EREV thing for us. Not a thing, but the Thing.
Is This Thing On?
One of the earliest things I can remember is a nighttime drive past a local VW dealership in the early seventies. As I watched the world roll by from the back seat, the illuminated, brightly colored cars were literally seared into my retinas. Just look at these gumdrops that made up Wolfsburg’s finely crafted lineup at the time:
If I say “Volkswagen,” what cars appear in your head? I’m guessing a Beetle, a Karmann Ghia, or maybe a black GTI forms as a mental image. I’m almost certain you are not picturing anything on VW’s current website, a collection of somewhat dull crossovers and remaining sedans. I got a rental Jetta a little while back since Enterprise was out of Toyota products, and I honestly don’t remember anything about it. I think it was like a Camry, which I am sure is what Volkswagen intended in a marketing move that is both logical and flawed at the same time.
Yes, Volkswagen obviously needs affordable products in popular categories to hit the competition head-on. But if there aren’t any truly distinctive values to their comparable offerings, why wouldn’t buyers just get the Toyota or Honda competitors and just be done with it? Absolutely nobody believes that the German-branded products will offer the forget-about-it reliability of the top sellers, so the VWs need that extra something to be appealing. Currently, I don’t know if they have it.
The New Beetle was certainly such a product when it was released back in 1997, and we had high hopes for the ID Buzz. When we heard about this supposedly $40,000 electric reboot of the Type 2 VW Bus, I had a feeling that we might need to have local police controlling the traffic around Volkswagen dealers when the first ones appeared. Sadly, the product we got looked great but only sat two in the third-row bench, realistically had around a 200-mile range, and ended up with a sticker of over $70,000 when fully equipped. Sales proved so dismal that we didn’t even get a 2026 model as some dealers still had 2025s on the lot a year later.
Is there something that Volkswagen could do to help us forget about this unfortunate flub? Well, the Thing is..
It’s A VW Thing- You Wouldn’t Understand
It’s possible that one of the ID Buzz’s failures in the American marketplace was the lack of interest in minivans, or at least the inability to see it as a high-end, aspirational vehicle, which the steep price demanded that you did. If VW launched another New Beetle today similar to the earlier one, it would likely fail as well since nobody has much interest in small hatchback coupes. You might remember that I suggested a four door New Beetle based on the compact crossover SUV platform of the EV Porsche Macan, since that’s what it would need to be to sell:
No, for better or worse, the public seems to want SUVs or car-based crossovers, and oddly enough, Volkswagen was one of the pioneers in this area. In 1968, they launched what was officially called Type 181: a mild off-roading vehicle that used components from VW’s air-cooled, rear-engined passenger cars (such as Karmann Ghia floorpans and Type 2 rear axles). This was a continuation of a formula that had begun with their World War II-era Beetle-based Kubelwagen, which was essentially the Germans’ take on the Jeep concept.
Americans didn’t get the Type 181 until 1974, likely spurred on by the popular dune buggy conversions of Beetles. Why wouldn’t VW offer their own factory-built buggy since they had one sitting right there?
Naturally, this was back in the time when VW of America had great marketing and a sense of humor, so they changed the numeric name of this thing to, literally, “Thing.”
With only rear-wheel drive and limited ground clearance, it didn’t have the complete capabilities of a contemporaneous Jeep CJ, Ford Bronco, or International Scout, but around 25,000 buyers found that it was the perfect mix of soft-top playfulness and practicality in the two years it was sold here. Even our own Toledo-transfer-case-juice-in-his-blood David Tracy saw the appeal when he experienced one for himself:
As someone who has extensive Jeep experience and limited VW experience, what did I think of the Thing? Well, I think in many ways it may be superior to the Jeep.
If you’re not doing crazy off-roading, the Thing is better for the driver and for the rider — it is an absolutely fantastic package, and a whole lot of fun.
Jeep gods, you may now strike me with your wrath.
Yeah, that’s David talking; you can imagine that Average Joe or Jane would agree. I was offered a “free upgrade” to a Wrangler on a recent trip that was going to involve five or six hours of driving. I said absolutely not, to which the Enterprise person replied that I made a good choice. Imagine what an earlier CJ was like; fifty years on, we can really see the 181/Thing was a right option for most on-road driving.
New safety regulation for 1975 ended the Thing’s brief run here, and European production stopped by 1978 with VW’s move towards water-cooled, front-engined rides. Anyone seeing a surviving example of these ugly runts on US roads today can’t help but point and smile. That kind of joy-sparking is something we could all use now on our grey metallic world, especially struggling Volkswagen. Let’s make it happen!
I Did A Thing
As you’d expect, a bunch of AI imprecations of a New Thing exist online but, to me at least, most miss the mark. I think it’s like the Wrangler; if you make it too civilized-looking, you fail. I want a Thing that, from fifty feet away, would seem like a restomod. I started with a boring Teams meeting scribble:
As with the first Ford GT, at first glance it would appear to be identical to the car it’s emulating, but on closer inspection it shares very little. The proportions are different, and I’ve moved the cut line for the frunk down to be parallel with the “reinforcement bumps” on the flanks.
There’s a license plate recess on the front that can be blocked off with a body-colored panel if you don’t need or want a front tag; this one has an available illuminated VW logo as well (with a plug in the round hole above for the standard small logo). Per my rough sketch, headlights are LED DRL rings surrounding projector lamps, and “frosted crystal” turn signals on top mimic the originals. Tough-looking steel bumpers would allow for hooks or adding a winch, but beyond that it’s a Thing, pure and simple.
In back, the soft top model would have a taillight panel with LED lights simulating the Thing’s “elephant foot” Beetle taillights. Sections inside shapes would illuminate as brake and turn signal lights per Jason Torchinsky’s instructions; backup lamps are next to the license plate while lights in the bumper would be rear fog lights or repeaters for when the trunk lid is open. Note also the high-mounted cabin exhaust vents that mimic the original’s engine intakes; these would be great for crossing streams.
That trunk lid on this soft top might be replaced by a hatchback on ones with an optional hard top. With the top down, it stacks rather high in back but that’s part of the convertible air-cooled VW charm. The remaining roll bar system is rather reminiscent of the structure on VW Rabbit Cabrios. Frameless door glass seals against the “roll cage” edges, not unlike the current Bronco. You can see on the example below the license plate hole cover removed and the smaller “OG” style logo; if you don’t want to use a front plate, you could also fill the space with lighting.
Inside, the original Thing was an exercise in simplicity with a Jeep-like steel dash containing a bunch of Beetle gauges and switches, including the FASTEN SEAT BELTS light, which was placed so you had to turn your head sideways to read it.
For the New Thing, I’ll rehash the dashboard from my proposed Macan Beetle but add some body-colored inserts:
I got in trouble at the Chicago Auto Show by lifting the center console box out of the ID Buzz. Not a good interaction:
Bystander: Oh, that is so cool! The center box is a cooler!
VW Person: Sir, please put that back! It doesn’t do that!
Bystander: Damn, that sucks then.
You can be sure the center console boxes of the New Thing will absolutely come out. I might even have two of them; one as a cooler and another for more belongings.
With a totally flat floor, we could add another twist by stealing from the two-door Land Rover Defender. As an option, a center front seat would be available to allow the New Thing to accommodate a total of six passengers: as much as the standard ID Buzz! You could replicate that picture I showed earlier of the impromptu Thing band jam.
Doors can be removed with a simple twist-lock system inside the car and stacked neatly in the trunk or even frunk (the fixed quarter glass on the rear windows pops off to reduce door size).
Sizewise, my New Thing’s length and width would be nearly as big as the Wrangler or Bronco. That’s gargantuan next to the original Thing, but don’t forget that the original Jeep was significantly shorter than Volkswagen’s proto-SUV, so the size creep is to be expected. What’s also nice is that unlike the four-door Jeeps and Broncos that never, ever existed back in the day, the Thing was always a “sedan” so a new one would be true to its roots.
The question is, do we really need another Wrangler/Bronco product in the mix? I think we do, for two big reasons. At the Autopian, many of us believe that range-extended EVs are the answer for the current charging infrastructure in American. Stratospheric sales of hybrids versus all-electrics are proving that’s what the buyers want. With a rather subpar range, the ID Buzz’s failure was sealed by the lack of usefulness as a distance cruiser. The New Thing would solve that with an optional under-floor gas extender motor, making it a unique product in the marketplace. With the aerodynamics of the New Thing, I am guessing it will need the help! Fold down that back seat, and you’d have a heaping hunk of cargo space for sure, even without the frunk.
Also, while the Wrangler and Bronco are obviously hardcore off-roaders, the New Thing would totally avoid the body-on-frame and live axle seriousness of those products. Some crazies would cry foul, but the average buyer will happily trade some Moab-climbing capability for independent suspension comfort. Seriously, if Jeep started building Wranglers for suburban markets with the transfer case secretly removed, how long would it take for anyone to notice? Would they ever?
Here’s an animation of the two modern 1940s-era successors:
Not that the New Thing wouldn’t be a capable off-roader; with locking differentials, it could undoubtedly go where what began as its World War II rival could, with a few exceptions. More importantly, it would have that look which The People want.
Nutin’ But A Baby G Thang
Like the original Thing, the new one would also prove that you can have top-and-doors-off beyond-the-pavement excitement with more efficiency and better on-road comfort than the usual players (don’t get David started on his Jeep-rear-seats-are-useless rants). The archaic looks combined with state-of-the-art mechanicals would make it sort of an affordable Mercedes G-Wagen; a good thing since it’s likely that the New Thing would be likely be more expensive than Broncos or most Wranglers.
No, a VW New Thing would not be enough to save the company, but it would point the direction for Volkswagen to take and get back to their roots of being practical, fun, and different. Remember that as hot as VWs were in the early seventies, they were forced to rapidly change direction and start from scratch with entirely new cars after 1974. Instead of failing, they ended up building what was arguably the greatest front-wheel-drive compact of the latter part of the twentieth century. Volkswagen could have such a second act again.
This funny-looking SUV might be a great place to start. What does VW have to lose? At this point, they should be willing to try any Thing.
Top graphic base image: Jeep
How is that range extender going to breathe and cool? You’re going to need those OG air vents.
Other than the headlights and taillights, I like it!
I got to drive an original Thing one summer back around 1990. We got it running, but it didn’t have much compression. So we went to a junkyard on a Friday and pulled the engine out of a wrecked Beetle for around $150. Then we went over to my friend’s house and started pulling the engine out of the Thing. The next morning we got the replacement engine installed. We were driving it down the road that afternoon.
It still went 0-60 in two tries, if the second try was either slightly downhill or if you had a tailwind. But it was fun to drive.
Usually, I like your renderings of how you’d fix everyone else’s problems. It’s often a nearly head-smacking moment of, but of course!
I can’t go there with this. I can’t imagine what something like this, based on the Cayman EV platform, would sticker for.
And I was repulsed by the googly eye headlight treatment and wasn’t fond of the taillights either.
TL;DR: THIS is not something I would ever buy.
But thanks for the picture of the 412. My elementary school principal had one and it definitely stood out in the faculty parking lot, and I thought it looked interesting. In a good way.
Now is seems to be the perfect time for such a vehicle and the thing is so deserving of a come back. Having a bare interior option as and ode to the original. But also to the point it was designed to spray the interior out like so many did with the 70s things that would be a plus. And something the market always seems to be looking for but probably extremely unlikely will see.
I had a friend in high school that had access to a Thing, and we would use it just to cruise around the beaches and try to buy alcohol. It was fun, but probably the most bare-bones car I had ever seen in my life.
I’ll take mine without the range extender, but I dig it!
A friend has the Thing that was in the 1980 movie, “The Fog”. A number of years ago they were thinking of selling it. I asked him to let me know if he was going to. I never heard from him. Bummer, I would love to own a Thing.
I had one VW when I was young and it left a bad taste in my mouth for anything VW. That said, the Thing was, well, interesting. But this concept, even as a VW sceptic, would definitely require a hard look.
Can’t put my finger on it, but there’s an appeal to it.
The US got the Thing for model years 1973 and 1974. All of the pictures are pre ’74. The illustration ad is a ’74 as evidenced by the different rear side vents. I would love to see VW bring it back, but I doubt I would ever be in the market for another one.
A couple observations & questions:
Why not use the platform for the SWB ID Buzz? Doing so would lower development costs, and make the Buzz and the Thing more affordable by reusing existing and common systems and platforms.
In which case, you reuse the Buzz dashboard rather than creating yet another dashboard.
And at that point, you might as well share the platform to create a new sedan – such as a Dasher/Passat
It needs an available hardtop – but does it really need removable doors?
If it is going to have a range extender – it needs to be up front. Because an SUV in which you can’t flip a lid or two to throw things in back is going to be a non-starter.
With the center-front seat – Where is the center-front airbag?
VW already makes the id.7 sedan and wagon (sorry, estate) on the MEB platform along with the 3, 4, and 5 as well as the Euro Explorer. Not sure how many of those have the same wheelbase, etc though.
Agreed it helps with dev costs, and the reduced frontal area of the Things compared to the Buzz would probably help a lot on the range issue.
Honestly we need way more electric convertibles, same for range extended convertibles.
The drawings were awesome. But as you stated that in 1974 the Thing was cut because it couldn’t meet 1975 safety requirements. Did I miss it or did you not do anything to make it safer, and then suggest off-road driving for what is a motorized dumpster with wheels?
Bish, I a lot of times disagree on your takes with these redesigns, but I think you are 100% dead on here. This would be brilliant and absolutely grab the market.
As much as I want to see Scout happen, I kind of wonder if Volkswagen shouldn’t just do this instead
VW x Rivian collab for the R3X?
You nailed it. Gimme that Thing! It’s a great urban commando.
Can we all just admit we love odd cars but the true measurement is that is this the one odd car we would buy?
What a deranged, mutant creation of a disturbed mind.
Approved, when do we start production?
The body lines are still not right with the past. Need to take the original body and figure out the chassis and drive train from there. Had 2 in San Diego/ Baja, worked awesome on beaches.
If it is good enough for waste management it’s good enough for me. No safety no crime (think Bob Marley) no way it’s road legal.
Bishop, as always I appreciate your work. I’m totally on board with a new Thing, especially a range-extended EV.
Love this design as well as the Beetle sedan. The Thing doesn’t meet my use cases for cars but I love the look
I find it hard to see this concept selling in volume outside of the few ancient VW model fetishists, but I’m willing to be argued with.
If VW wants to resurrect their brand in the US, they should give every VW dealership in the US a Skoda dealership alongside and try to use the “cheaper but still hella good” value proposition to drive foot traffic. Oh, and also reconsider their entire model line.
Of course it would not be popular with the stockholders because of the initial cost and risk, but it would be cool if manufacturers would occasionally release a “hey, what if we tried THIS” special interest product, sort of like what Nissan did with the Figaro years ago.
I’d be on board with that Thing. I’ve been tempted to restomod an old Land Rover body onto a more modern chassis, but it would be lots of work. Land Rover people would also be very upset with me.
Hmmmm…
Usually I’m salivating for The Bishop’s new design. This one, not so much.
For the underlying structure, maybe a car or CUV to reuse one of the few that will soon survive the great VWG slaughtering of models? Perhaps even the US Jetta to take up some of that capacity? A rear-wheel drive design (swap FWD ICE bits to the rear) might be fairly doable to make a small engined EREV with battery sized for EPA rating of 65+ miles?
In New America where Subaru owners and Jeep owners now touch tips, this thing would sell.