Wie funktioniert das Twincharger-System im Golf GT? | Posts 32+

And to bring this whole thing to a somewhat meaningful conclusion:

Quote:

Despite the gray cast iron block and the additional supercharger with its drive, the engine, with all its accessories, weighs only about 170 kilograms. The supercharger adds approximately five kilograms to this weight. It has a maximum power requirement of 3.3 kilowatts,

and the magnetic coupling consumes about 50 watts. It transmits a maximum torque of 60 Newton meters.

If the numbers are correct, then the climate compressor is indeed the winner http://www.faz.net/s/Rub1DABC609A05048D997A5F315BF55A001/Doc~EBEC0CCED63A54C3D8568A628E26EF8CC~ATpl~Ecommon~Scontent.html.

Please provide the German text you would like me to translate.

I found some information in another forum.

Quote:

The compressor should only have a power consumption of 3.3 kW, and as mentioned, it disengages at 3000 RPM, allowing the turbocharger, which provides a boost of 1.5 bar, to take over.

LG
Maxx.

/edit: Roger was probably faster .

Okay... I concede, given the new information!

Now, the thought arises again that, following a "build-it-yourself" approach, the coupling for the climate compressor was adopted 1:1 .

Roger wrote:

@Mampf: Quote: After 2 engine revolutions, all cylinders have completed their 4 strokes . Think about it again . In a 4-stroke engine, a complete cycle, as the name suggests, takes 4 strokes. So, it took 4 revolutions of the crankshaft for all cylinders to complete one full cycle. Therefore, in suction mode, roughly simplified, 1/4 of the stroke volume is required per revolution. However, on top of that, there is naturally the (which I shamefully omitted ) charging to 1 bar, so roughly speaking, half of the stroke volume is actually required per revolution. So, Matthias was, of course, right, even though his specification of 1,500 RPM was a bit confusing to me.

Even though it seems like the matter is pretty much settled...

Four-stroke engine:
Intake stroke (piston moves downwards): 0.5 crankshaft revolutions.
Compression stroke (piston moves upwards) +0.5 crankshaft revolutions.
Expansion stroke (piston moves downwards) +0.5 crankshaft revolutions.
Exhaust stroke (piston moves upwards) + 0.5 crankshaft revolutions.

This results in a total of 2 crankshaft revolutions for all 4 strokes.

In a two-stroke engine, theoretically, the full displacement volume is pushed through the engine every two revolutions of the crankshaft, meaning only half the volume is pushed through with each revolution.

With a turbocharged engine producing 1 bar of boost pressure (which translates to 2 bar of absolute pressure), the engine displaces twice the volume of air with every 2,000 RPM, meaning the engine displaces its total volume every revolution.

Best regards,
Munch.

@citronist

Did you receive my private message?

Regards,
Malte.

The TSI would currently be the only gasoline engine that could potentially make me stray away from the diesel craze - if it proves to be reliable. The technology seems quite attractive to me, except for the compressor issue.

I completely agree, especially due to the DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) issues with the current 2.0 TDI engines . Therefore, I was pleased to find today in an automotive magazine the engine data for the Scirocco successor, codenamed 'Iroc':

Power: 1.4 TSI 16V -> 210 hp
Normal fuel consumption: 7.5 liters, RON 95.

pro wrote:

Roger wrote: The TSI would currently be the only gasoline engine that could potentially make me stray away from the diesel craze - if it proves to be reliable. The technology seems quite attractive to me, except for the compressor issue. I completely agree, especially due to the DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) issues with the current 2.0 TDI engines . Therefore, I was pleased to find today in an automotive magazine the engine data for the Scirocco successor, codenamed "Iroc": Power: 1.4 TSI 16V -> 210 hp Normal fuel consumption: 7.5 liters, RON 95

.

Take a look at the exhaust systems of direct-injection gasoline engines; if this development continues, they might soon no longer be allowed to drive in "emission control zones" .

Aron wrote:

Take a look at the exhaust systems of direct-injection gasoline engines; if this development continues, they might soon no longer be allowed to drive in "smog zones"

.

"With gasoline engines, the black stuff coming out of the exhaust is actually licorice, everyone knows that..."

No, the TFSI engines are not inherently bad; the problem is often caused by incorrectly installed, jammed, or faulty crankcase ventilation systems. This issue has been particularly noticeable in the A4 and A4 Cabriolet models, and changes have been implemented to address it.

vagtuning wrote:

No, TFSI engines that fail have only incorrect/jammed/faulty crankcase ventilation systems installed...especially the A4 and A4 Cabrio models have been particularly affected and have been redesigned.

However, it should be noted that a direct injection engine that operates with stratified charge, meaning it burns in a similar way to a diesel engine with a lean mixture, has some areas in the combustion chamber that are extremely lean, while others are extremely rich, which leads to soot formation.

A cycle requires half a rotation, each time from the top dead center (TDC) to the bottom dead center (BDC) and vice versa. Okay, so it's 1/2 displacement per unit.

Hi,

Quote:

One should also understand that a direct injection engine, which uses stratified charge combustion, meaning it operates in a very lean mixture, similar to how a diesel engine works, has some areas in the combustion chamber that are extremely lean, while others are extremely rich = soot.

This isn't just the case with "layering" techniques; for example, enriching the fuel mixture to reduce exhaust gas temperature.

Besides this, a faulty crankcase ventilation system can also cause excessive oil to enter the combustion chamber. It is clear that a defect can lead to excessive smoke emissions. However, even gasoline engines that are in good working order sometimes emit a significant amount of exhaust fumes.

Regards,
Sure, here is the translation of the text from German to English:

"Micha"

According to Wendehals ADAC, an Otto engine does not emit soot.

Click
Sure, here is the translation of the second paragraph, first sentence:

"The second paragraph, first sentence."


I like the ADAC. Seriously, they're always like... well, pro-car drivers, even if they say something different all of a sudden .

bastion wrote:

According to Wendehals ADAC, an Otto engine does not emit soot. Click Sure, here is the translation of the second paragraph, first sentence: "The second paragraph, first sentence." I like the ADAC. Seriously, they're always like... well, pro-car drivers, even if they say something different all of a sudden

.

"relatively verschandeln with a regulated catalytic converter," as if the old Euro 1 gas guzzlers were still the standard. There's a huge difference between that and a Euro 4 gasoline engine.

"If a Euro 4 diesel engine is already in a worse position compared to a non-superior Euro 4 gasoline engine, then I think it's good that even the old, polluting gasoline engines are also affected by the driving bans."

As if all we need is a regulated catalyst, and then everything would be fine, I still can't believe it .

Hi,

What the ADAC (German Automobile Club) does still remains a mystery to me. I still believe that one can make a good living through lobbying. If you can cater to two lobbying groups at the same time, you can make even more money.
Let's compare, for example, the fuel price monitors in the "ADAC motorwelt" magazine with the prices at gas stations located near the border (not necessarily directly at the border). The fuel prices there are significantly lower than those listed in the ADAC publication. Why is this information not published? Isn't that putting too much pressure on things?

Regards,
Sure, here is the translation of the text from German to English:

"Micha"