WBK oder TDI? | Posts 16+

Jan6K wrote:

Hi, "Regarding the engine speed: It's something like that... although some cars have also had it recently. For example, the slightly older ASZ engines in the Polo (like Ulf's) and Ibiza are geared in a way that they reach a real speed of 60 km/h in 6th gear at 1000 rpm. This means they definitely won't reach their maximum speed, as they won't be able to achieve a real 240+ km/h, even on steep hills (even though the Ibiza forum promises otherwise). Instead, you'll get around 200 km/h at 3400 rpm... that must be amazing. However, they seem to have moved away from that with the newer ASZ engines." ... Best regards, Jan

The translation is also available for the Golf4 ASZ & ERF transmissions (6th gear, maximum speed around 3600/min).

Does ERF exist with different translations?
My ASZ-engine Golf runs at approximately 4,050 RPM at its maximum speed.

Does the ERF exist with different translations?
My ASZ-Golf engine, with that modification, reaches approximately 4,050 RPM at its maximum speed.

Hello,
I experienced this effect in my first Bora, which had a 115 hp engine.
The transmission was a real 'gentle' transmission! (5+E gearbox)
I don't remember the gearbox identification letter anymore.
Best regards,
Günther.

Roger and I probably have the same ERF .

Roger wrote:

Does the ERF exist with different translations? My ASZ-Golf engine, with that modification, reaches approximately 4,050 RPM at its maximum speed.

with vmax, I naturally mean 205 km/h .

The topic, I believe, has been discussed before *using the search function* , specifically:

/viewtopic.php?t=6864&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=asz%20erf&start=24

Excerpt from my calculation (DZR is also possible, of course!).


I used this formula:

v = (n x U x 0.06) / (ü1 x ü2 x 1000)

v: Speed in [km/h]
n: Motor speed in [revolutions per minute].
U: Tire rolling circumference in [mm] (see table).
Translation of the differential.
Sure, here is the translation of the German text into English:

"ü2: Translation of the selected route."

The specified outer diameter is 1929mm.
At 4000 RPM, the formula yields:
v = 463 / (u1 * u2) [km/h]

ERF values (in the 5th and 6th positions): ü1 = 68/26 = 2.615, ü2 (6th position) = 35/43 = 0.814, ü2 (5th position) = 39/40 = 0.975.
So, that's it:
v(6.) = 463 / (2.615 x 0.814) = 217.5 km/h
v(5.) = 463 / (2.615 x 0.975) = 181.6 km/h

"For ERG, the following applies:"
v(6.) = 463 / (62/20 * 34/45) = 197.7 km/h

The ERF values might be correct because at 6th gear, with an engine speed of approximately 2000 RPM, the speedometer indicates a speed of around 115 km/h. At 4000 RPM, the speedometer shows around 230 km/h, minus a certain tolerance.

I have never tested Vmax .

---------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, the calculated values for the 5th gear on the ERF are also correct. At 2000 RPM, I reach approximately 95 km/h.
Looking at a typical power curve graph, the auxiliary system (ASZ) delivers about 5% less power at 3600 and 4400 RPM compared to 4000 RPM. Ideally, this would only reduce the maximum top speed by about 1-2%.

Hello,

SeatArosa1.7SDI wrote:

In the 1980s, some VW diesel engines had an electric gear, where the maximum vehicle speed (v max) was no longer reached, but the constant speed at the most fuel-efficient operating point of the engine (see Muschel diagram), i.e., in this gear, the maximum vehicle speed (v max) for that gear, ~90% of the maximum torque (m max), and the maximum engine efficiency (Wirkungsgrad max) all coincided.

This "E" gear was only available on gasoline engines; the "E" gear in diesel engines was not a distinct economy gear, but rather it was the gear in which the maximum speed (v_max) was reached. In the first-generation Golf, the naturally aspirated engine achieved 145 km/h with the 4-speed transmission, compared to 143 km/h. The 4+E transmission in the second-generation TD is the same one that later became known as a standard 5-speed (identified by the code 4T) and was also used in the more powerful gasoline engines (GTIs).

Quote:

Why was the "E" gear discontinued? Did they think people were too stupid to understand it ("huh, I'm going slower in the highest gear? Something must be broken on the car")

He was just no longer called that. The "E" was trendy for a while, everyone adopted it, but then the zeitgeist changed , and the "E" disappeared, as mentioned above. The "economy" mode (which many cars in the US still have, but even more pronounced) in gasoline cars has largely disappeared or has been modified so that the cars can at least run a little faster in that mode than in the second-to-last gear.

dieselmartin wrote:

I switched from a swirl chamber engine to a DI Turbo engine (from a Golf 2 with 54 hp to a Golf 3 Variant with 90 hp). No comparison

.

Of course not .

Quote:

But based on my very old experiences with the WirbelTurbos (driving school) and now occasionally with T3 TD models, I would definitely go for a TDI. They have more torque (for comfortable cruising) and, as far as I know, are also more fuel-efficient

.

Have you ever driven a 2.0 TDI with a pump-injector engine (80 hp, intercooler standard)? With a slightly increased fuel injection rate, it will outperform a 3.0 TDI with a 1Z engine. With increased boost pressure and an adjusted fuel pump, it can even keep up with an AFN engine up to around 160 mph (that's where it starts to fall behind due to the short gearing). Because of the small turbocharger, the pump-injector engine is usable from 1800 rpm, where the standard boost pressure of 0.7 bar (1.7 bar absolute) kicks in. By the way, my pump-injector engine has 485,000 km on it. The head gasket is still the original one.
My girlfriend's Passat 35i with an AAZ engine (1.3 tons, 1.9L, standard 75HP, with an added intercooler, 1 bar of pressure, and a faulty EGR system) consumes an average of 6.2-6.4 liters of vegetable oil per 100km when driven at a brisk pace, but only up to 140 km/h. Surprisingly, even when fully loaded for a vacation with a trailer, it doesn't consume significantly more.
I'm saying all this just to hint at the potential that Wankel engines also have. VW has really focused on direct injection, and they've withheld the "new" possibilities from the rotary engines, so you hardly notice it.

Undoubtedly, direct injection systems generally offer a higher efficiency.

Best regards, Uli.