1966 Volkswagen Fastback: Favorite Car Ads | The Daily Drive

Can a small actor assist make a Volkswagen appear giant?

Hollywood is thick with brief main males. Do you know that Robert De Niro clocks in at simply 5’6”? Joe Pesci is even shorter, measuring simply 5’ 4” tall. Now, neither of those guys appears to have suffered a lot from their lack of ability to succeed in issues on the highest shelf, as their resumes are chock filled with nice movies.

1966 Volkswagen Fastback

Dustin Hoffman

Dustin Hoffman, nonetheless—one other nice actor—appears to have scored an early position exactly as a result of he was brief. Standing 5’ 5”, Hoffman slots between De Niro and Pesci on the peak chart, and was as soon as employed by a carmaker to assist make a comparatively small automobile look bigger. Don’t consider me? Learn on…

For 1966, Volkswagen added a mannequin to its Kind 3 (sadly, that’s really the mannequin identify) lineup. Becoming a member of the Kind 3 Notchback (2-door sedan) and Squareback (wagon) in VW dealerships for ’66 was the Fastback. Although endowed with simply two doorways, VW referred to the Fastback as a sedan, and to spice up gross sales, the maker was eager to exploits the automobile’s dimension. And, reality be recognized, the Fastback was bigger and roomier than the Beetle (Kind 1) it was bought alongside.

Industrial

To get the Fastback phrase out, VW’s advert people produced a TV industrial that includes spokesperson Dustin Hoffman. Take a look:

There’s no likelihood that this creator may have weaseled his means into the again seat, after which hopped into the entrance seating row. Hell, even Hoffman appeared to have a tough time executing the maneuver.

How Roomy?

Whereas we consider that 4 Dustin-Hoffman-sized adults may match comfortably in a 1966 Volkswagen Kind 3 Fastback, now we have considerations concerning a number of of the claims made by Hoffman in the course of the industrial. And, it’s not that VW lied precisely, it’s that they might have prompt that the Fastbacks specs and efficiency had been extra spectacular than they actually had been.

VW Kind 3 Fastback versus Ford Falcon

To make our level, we shall be evaluating the Fastback to Ford’s then hyper-popular Falcon compact automobile. We’re thus evaluating VW’s largest automobile mannequin, to Ford’s smallest. For the report, Ford bought greater than 200,000 Falcons in 1966, whereas Volkswagen moved an estimate 25,000 Kind 3 fashions.

Room for 4 Adults

Whereas that is declare is true, at the least for less-than-full-sized adults, the Ford Falcon boasted room for six, thanks partially to its three-passenger entrance bench seat. The Ford was additionally really a bigger automobile, stretching 184 inches on a 111-inch wheelbase, in comparison with the Fastback’s 171-inch total size on a 171-inch wheelbase.

Prime Pace of 84 MPH

I’m undecided to whom 84 mph sounded good to in 1966, however within the U.S. that boast most likely did not impress even essentially the most informal automobile fan. Dustin tells us that the Fastback is supplied with the most-powerful engine ever put in in a VW, which is reasonably miserable.

For 1966, all Kind 3 fashions had been geared up with a 1.6-liter 4-cylinder engine rated at 65 horsepower. Observe that earlier Kind 3 fashions made do with 1.5-liter engines good for simply 53 horses.

The Falcon, however, was supplied with the client’s alternative of there engines, the least-powerful of which was a 2.8-liter six rated at 105-horsepower. And although the Falcon did weight extra (2800 kilos versus 2200), interval testing put its high velocity at as much as 95 mph.

Trunk House

So, the Kind 3 boasts each a entrance trunk (“frunk”), and a rear truck. Did that mixed house add as much as a lot actual room? Seems, it did, however not an excessive amount of greater than the Falcon. The VW’s entrance compartment was good for about 7 cubic ft of house, whereas the rear compact added one other 10. The Falcon’s solely cargo compartment, the trunk, measure about 13 cubic ft. So, rating one for the Volkswagen. Additionally, the engine was beneath the rear storage compartment. Making a gift of its location are the cooling vents stamped into the rear fenders.

Cash

Whereas Hoffman by no means will get round to costs, it’s the cash that doubtless stored the Falcon fashionable, and the Kind 3 comparatively obscure. In 1966, the Fastback began at $2250, whereas the Ford listed for $2171. In 2025 {dollars}, that’s $22,300 and $21,500 respectfully.

And whereas most folk acquainted with Volkswagen on the time will inform you that the Kind 3 was the higher constructed, extra dependable, and extra fuel-efficient car, the Ford supplied a lot extra space and energy for much less cash. Additionally, and that is key, the Ford wasn’t some “bizarre” import—it was comfortably acquainted.

Again to the House Factor

Fashionable estimates put the inside quantity of the Kind 3 Fastback at about 75 cubic ft. The less-expensive Falcon 2-door sedan got here in round 90 ft. So, regardless of Dustin’s claims, the Volkswagen wasn’t actually sufficiently big, although due to his diminutive proportions, it kinda seemed greater. Now that’s performing.