Fox wagon on CL $2000

looks legit...

http://wilmington.craigslist.org/cto/3487632470.html

I'm not sure how they respond to modifications, but I remember those being just awful when they were new.

Woody wrote: I'm not sure how they respond to modifications, but I remember those being just awful when they were new.

I know someone who is modifying his slightly.

I think the hood, doors, and trunklid are the only things stock. Maybe not the hood, it may have been clearanced to fit the 3B.

There are a few turbo Foxes in Ohio. The problem is that it's easy to make enough power to be able to gently break the transmission from a roll.

When my wife and I realized we actually did make a baby and it wasn't going away, we decided we needed something with four doors. Found a used Fox and bought it. It did the job, but it wasn't, like... What's the word I'm looking for? It wasn't exactly...

It wasn't good. No. It really wasn't. I miss almost every car I've ever owned, but not the Fox. Still think those wagons are cool, as long as someone else is driving them.

I always thought these werent that different from the Golf except for the longitude engine layout, what makes them so bad?

that looks like an $800 car to me

Ah, I was thinking Fairmont......

WilberM3 wrote: I always thought these werent that different from the Golf except for the longitude engine layout, what makes them so bad?

I don't know Golf, so can't say about that.

Mine was just not a good thing to drive. Clutch was absurdly heavy but with a really short area that actually did anything. Shifter was a vague mess, steering was really heavy but without much feedback. Really underpowered and didn't particularly like to change direction.

The brakes were pretty good as I recall. And in the couple of years we owned it I think all I did to it was replace a radiator.

WilberM3 wrote: I always thought these werent that different from the Golf except for the longitude engine layout, what makes them so bad?

Brazilian build quality meets engineering that won't accept parts from other VW models. The engine and injection is similar to the late Mk2 Golf 1.8, but with all the good removed(low compression, ill flowing head). Trans, suspension, and body is fairly Fox-specific. Seats need to come from Audi, nearly everything else in the cabin is Fox only.

I think they'd be great fun if they could be made to handle, but there's barely an aftermarket. They're good winter beaters as they are, though.

WilberM3 wrote: I always thought these werent that different from the Golf except for the longitude engine layout, what makes them so bad?

The Golf was an "A" chassis.

The Dasher/Quantum (and Audi 4000, and Audi Fox) were the "B" chassis.

The VW Fox was kind of a B chassis. Made in Brazil and designed to be a cheaper car than the Golf/Jette (in the 80s!). Most people call it a "Bx" chassis. B1/B2 parts fit with some fiddling. Unfortunately, there isn't much aftermarket for B1/B2 and what aftermarket there IS is geared for the AWD models. It's kind of a joke that "cut here, file there, weld that piece on, and it bolts right in!" is the Fox motto.

The frustrating things about the Fox is that they didn't get the 4000's 5-speed until the final year or two of production (all other were 4-speed), they were cheap cheap cheeeeeeap interiors (meh, I prefer that look) and the brake pedal placement makes it almost impossible to drive unless you're barefoot. Can't fit a wide shoe between the brake pedal and the trans tunnel.

I've seen some hilariously fast foxes over the years. I remember getting my butt handed to me in my VR6 gti at a drag event by a guy running 13's in an all motor brown fox... As a Rabbit guy I'm predisposed but still not my favorite of the 80's vw/audis.

Looks neet to me, but i couldnt answer question#7 :(