Today

Latest VW California on sale today from £66k

Order now for early 2027 delivery - best get planning those summer holidays already...

---

This is a clever bit of timing from Volkswagen. The clocks have gone back, the nights are drawing in and the temperatures are dropping as the end of the year approaches. So what better opportunity to be thinking about warmer months and a new family van to enjoy them in? Very smart. UK orders for the facelifted California open today, with first deliveries due early next year - or ‘just in time for the summer season’. It’ll be here before you know it… 

While still recognisably a California, the latest one gets a new look up front that brings it more in line with the rest of the passenger car lineup. VW says the larger LEDs lend ‘the characteristic VW Bus face an even sharper appearance’. There are some fresh wheel designs, too, which you can obviously sell when the BBS arrive, plus power doors and boot to save any faff there. 

Probably of more use for the average Cali customer are the upgrades inside, as even the big bus didn’t escape from some of VW’s more questionable interior decisions in recent years. It now boasts a ‘sophisticated control centre for your home away from home’, also known as a new pair of screens for the centre console and the driver; new materials ‘for a premium finish and enhanced comfort’ are also promised. The least that should be expected, really, given what a California costs.

The range now kicks off from £66,334 on the road, which buys a 150hp California Beach TDI. And if that seems a lot, bear in mind that the rest of them are £70k-plus - so the kids best really appreciate the new ambient lighting and uprated USB charging. 

The 245hp 1.5 PHEV is from £74,637, the Coast cars start at £71k with the diesel you really want, and it’s from £80k for an Ocean. PCPs are from £550, with £16k down -  a Cali costs a lot however you cut it. Even with five services, five years’ roadside assistance and a five-year warranty included. Maybe a good time to remember the residuals are strong… 

Need proof? There’s one on PH from this decade at less than £50,000; there are vans from 2010 commanding more than £30k; even 20-year-old Californias with a hob, fridge, oven and PD power (perfect apocalypse spec) are more than £25,000. So with the money retained, holidays in a California wouldn’t actually cost much. It’s just the remortgage needed to buy one new that might be tricky. 

---

• 2025 VW California Coast | UK Review
• 2025 VW ID Buzz GTX | UK Review

[sunnymountainroads]

Is this a transit underneath?

[RedWhiteMonkey]

sunnymountainroads said:

Is this a transit underneath?

No, its based on VW's Multivan, so its actually a car underneath. Its VW's latest Transporter that is a Ford Transit underneath.

[dxg]

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

[Twoshoe]

I'm going to go against the grain here and say that I thought Californias were even more expensive than that. Not sure why I think that but I can't afford it anyway and am quite happy blatting around in my 25-year old T5 that's worth about 37p.

[SDK]

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

Yep, it's no longer 2006 !
Wait to you see the cost a proper camper

[Ed Boon II]

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

Didn't take long

[Lotobear]

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

Or thinking about it another way - the price of an average EV where you have to drink st coffee in a motorway service station (and st in their horrid bogs), experience charger rage before getting your st coffee, suffer eye watering depreciation, and you still can't sleep in them.

I think I know where I'd stick my 66k

..not that I'm in the market for either.

[Firebobby]

I'd rather spend the money on a 2 year old proper size motor home. Not a modified work a day van!!

[stavr0ss]

RedWhiteMonkey said:

sunnymountainroads said:

Is this a transit underneath?

No, its based on VW's Multivan, so its actually a car underneath. Its VW's latest Transporter that is a Ford Transit underneath.

I was going to naively ask if it wouldn’t be better to base it on a van to cope with the weight before I remembered that ‘car’ now covers vehicles up to 2.5 ton

[Mr Peel]

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds. And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

This is like looking at a Boxster and saying "Sixty-six-thousand-pounds. And you can't get the kids and a week's shopping in it."

Campers are not a logical, rational choice. People own them because they love them. You'd think PH regulars might understand that.

[breadvan]

On the face of it, it looks like pretty good value.

But VW have arguably killed the golden goose by systematically dismantling the Transporter brand.

Half the range is now a rebadged Transit, complete with all the associated wet-belt concerns, while the other half is essentially a Maxi-Golf, built on the same MQB platform.

How they've managed to dilute such an iconic brand and lose so much of its identity is beyond me.

Madness.

[malaccamax]

breadvan said:

On the face of it, it looks like pretty good value.

But VW have arguably killed the golden goose by systematically dismantling the Transporter brand.

Half the range is now a rebadged Transit, complete with all the associated wet-belt concerns, while the other half is essentially a Maxi-Golf, built on the same MQB platform.

How they've managed to dilute such an iconic brand and lose so much of its identity is beyond me.

Madness.

Nameplate holds pretty much all its identity, I'd say? Car platform gives passenger versions up-to-date tech, Transit share makes the van version cheaper. Hard to get too sentimental about the metal bits and drivetrain

[RedWhiteMonkey]

stavr0ss said:

RedWhiteMonkey said:

sunnymountainroads said:

Is this a transit underneath?

No, its based on VW's Multivan, so its actually a car underneath. Its VW's latest Transporter that is a Ford Transit underneath.

I was going to naively ask if it wouldn t be better to base it on a van to cope with the weight before I remembered that car now covers vehicles up to 2.5 ton

Its a valid concern. My own opinion is that whilst the Multivan based California is undoubtedly a nicer drive than the previous Transporter based one it fundamentally flawed in terms of payload. This is particulary noticeable if you want a hybrid engined Beach variant, which only comes with two rears seats instead of the standard three due to payload issues. For me, practicalities of actually camping are more important than driving dynamics, I feel VW made a mistake on this one.

[DaveyBoyWonder]

The old T5/5.1/6/6.1 based California wasn't massive but used the space pretty well. I've been in one of the new Multivan based Californias and they're noticeably less spacious. They are a better thing to drive though but space is definitely far more cramped. I'd say theres no way I'd chuck 66k on one (and I wouldn't) but when I bought my 3 year old ex-demo from a decent conversion company, 12 years ago it was less than half this. You see 3 year old converted T6.1s now for this kinda money so maybe, for a brand new, VW original van maybe its actually pretty decent value!?

[Mercutio]

malaccamax said:

Nameplate holds pretty much all its identity, I'd say? Car platform gives passenger versions up-to-date tech, Transit share makes the van version cheaper. Hard to get too sentimental about the metal bits and drivetrain

I couldn't disagree more fundamentally with this post.

I don't think belittling the previous poster by saying they are "sentimental" is the way forward.

Go and read about the wet belt Transit issues if you think this is a bit of emotion about the "metal bits and drivetrain".

Maybe some people want the OEM layout and functionality of a California but don't want to have to put up with being gaslit when a wet belt Ford inevitably goes wrong.

Maybe they want newer versions to be improvements, not bodged together manufacturer platform shares with issues .

[RedWhiteMonkey]

The California shown in the article is not based on a Transit, there are no wet belt issues to consider.

[whp1983]

You see so many around… these and other expensive campers…. Always amazes me

[Antj]

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

You don't have to st outside , although it is frowned on if you don't

[Twoshoe]

whp1983 said:

You see so many around these and other expensive campers . Always amazes me

What, that other people have different lifestyles from you?

[nismo48]

Antj said:

dxg said:

£66k

Sixty-six-thousand-pounds.

And you have to stand outside to cook and sh*t in the woods.

You don't have to st outside , although it is frowned on if you don't