|
|
1950 Transporter T1
Flat four cylinder, 1131 cm3 (75,0 mm * 64,0 mm), compression ratio, 6,6 : 1, engine control ohv, simple carburetor, 2 valves per cylinder, cooling blower, 76 Nm at 2000 rpm, 18 kW (25 HP) at
3400 rpm, rear engine, longitudinal, rear drive, clutch, single disc, dry, manual four-speed, front suspension, crank arm, rear suspension, swing axle, wheelbase 2.400 mm, wheels, 5.50-16, length
4.100 mm, width 1.700 mm, height 1.900 mm, tank capacity, 40 liters, payload, 560-830 kg, kerb weight 940-1.205 kg + driver, approx. 90 km/h, 1950 - 1959, purchase price, from 5.975 DM, up to 1967 approx. built 1.8
million times.
The Pon brothers' company was still responsible for the general import of VAG vehicles to the Netherlands. And it had been for a long time. The first contacts go back to 1939 and the Netherlands were the first export
country for VW from 1947.
| VW never called it 'Bulli' for patent reasons. |
And what does that have to do with the VW Transporter? Quite a lot, because it was one of the two Pon brothers who initially presented the idea of ??a transporter based on Beetle technology to the British with little success
and then, in long discussions, with more success to the first VW director, Heinrich Nordhoff (Image 2). Of course, as with almost every good idea, he was not the sole originator.
Shortly after the Second World War in 1946, there were vehicles in the factory (pictured above) that had to take on transport tasks because the transport equipment borrowed from the British occupying forces was taken with
them when they withdrew, and these vehicles emerged as a result of the search for a transporter within the factory. A loadable surface was screwed onto the chassis of the VW Beetle from the front to the engine at the back.
A bench seat and a steering wheel connected to the front wheels were attached above the engine.
Ben Pon presented the vehicle to Dutch registration authorities, but failed because they believed that the driver should be positioned in front of the load and not behind it in order to have a better overview. Ben Pon then
came up with the idea of moving the driver's seat right to the front in front of the front wheels. It is the basic idea of the T1. Ferdinand Porsche had probably had this thought earlier, but in the post-war period and with
existing business relationships, no demands were made there.
The sketch above was created in 1947 during a visit to the British military headquarters in Minden, when Pon presented his changed vision. It took until the end of 1948, however, before it was put into practice. The
prerequisite was the installation of a civilian management with Heinrich Nordhoff at the helm. The currency reform in mid-1948 will also have played a role, because it promised significantly more purchasing power.
| Did Ferdinand Porsche and his team already have such an idea? |
Recently, Volkswagen has been moving a bit away from the idea that Ben Pon made a significant contribution to the invention of the VW Transporter/Bus. It is believed that material was already available in the Volkswagen
factory's annals that was used in the development of the vehicle. Perhaps this also explains the striking and yet relatively aerodynamic face of the T1. But perhaps the changes are due to the fact that VW is now majority
owned by the Porsche holding company and not the other way around.
Technically speaking, the 1950 VW bus had a number of special features. It was a good thing that the Beetle platform wasn't stable enough and the van had to be given a box frame in the middle under the loading area.
This at least meant that it had a low floor.
It was therefore designed to be much more self-supporting than the Beetle, but still drew its main stability from the chassis. But the roof also contributed significantly. Incidentally, the box had to take over this part in the
flatbed vehicle that was developed later. Otherwise, the Beetle parts were adapted at the front and rear.
Due to the approximately 250 kg higher empty weight and the significantly higher payload, stability and suspension naturally had to be adjusted. The tires also had a higher load-bearing capacity. At least it was possible to
achieve a drag coefficient similar to that of the Beetle. However, the larger cross-sectional area, weight and higher gear reduction increased fuel consumption.
The heating was a problem and remained so for a long time. However, the company was doing well compared to its competitors, where you sometimes had to order it separately. But then this provided significantly more
heat due to the coolant circulation. In the van it was perhaps enough to keep the window on the driver's side free of fog.
The engine compartment at the back also remained a problem for decades, until it finally disappeared completely in 1990 with the T4. It became a little lower if the spare wheel was not arranged vertically as above, but
rather lying above the engine. Putting it all the way to the front didn't make sense (yet) because the tank with its filler neck was so high.
Strangely enough, there were prototypes with filler necks directly to the outside. However, this idea was not pursued any further, perhaps because of sealing problems between the neck and the outer wall. Incidentally, it
was not at all unusual at the time to open a larger flap for refueling, and this was also the case with the Beetle.
The rest of the drive technology was adopted from the Beetle relatively unchanged. Fortunately, the 'Kübelwagen' (pictured above) already had two additional reduction gears on the right and left in the rear axle. However,
this meant that the van engine could easily over-rev in the lower gears, which in some cases resulted in a dramatic reduction in its service life.
The advertising naturally highlighted the ideal weight distribution, regardless of the load, as was the case for a long time with the Beetle. In fact, it took decades before deficiencies in this area could be compensated for by
sophisticated chassis technology. At least the cargo area was easy to load and unload via the double side door. The load was secured using an insertable square bar (picture). The longitudinally corrugated floor resisted
cleaning attempts somewhat stubbornly.
Although there was only a widened holder for the steering wheel instead of a dashboard, the equipment was still relatively complete. Indicators, sufficient oil pressure and high beam were indicated by small lamps.
Lighting was available at the front, in the middle and in the engine compartment, along with ventilation at the front through the doors twice and also in the cargo area.
Although there was only a widened holder for the steering wheel instead of a dashboard, the equipment was still relatively complete. Indicators, sufficient oil pressure and high beam were indicated by small lamps.
Lighting was existing at the front, in the middle and in the engine compartment, together with ventilation at the front through the doors twice and also in the cargo area.
If you look at the running-in regulations, you can see the progress made in 50 years of automobile construction:
| Top speed | kept until ... |
| 45 km/h | 500 km |
| 50 km/h | 2000 km |
| 65 km/h | 4000 km |
Inspections with oil changes were due at 500, 2000 and 4000 km. The 4000 km interval was retained, only interrupted by a so-called minor lubrication service. After all, the chassis still had enough grease nipples. Ten
years later, the intervals were relaxed to 2500/5000 km.
|
|
|
