VOX und 9ff versuchen 3Liter Golf zu bauen | Posts 48+

Hello,

Also, I also have an AMS lying around here from 1982.
Engineers have modified standard cars (Golf 1 Formula E diesel and W123 200d) in such a way that the Golf has a 2.2-liter engine and the Mercedes-Benz has a 2.35-liter engine.

Can you scan this report and make it available to me or the community?

@Rainer,

'Is it permissible to place such reports in the download area if there is a source citation?'
If not, please send me a private message with my email address.


Important considerations for the VW Golf 1: weight, frontal area, tire width, and the absence of a turbocharger, which significantly reduces fuel consumption at full throttle.
Things get interesting when it comes to the W123...

Best regards, Jochen.

@ernie_bc,

I share your experience. While driving at about 100 km/h behind a tour bus from Berlin to Bavaria, I was able to achieve a fuel consumption of 4.1 liters per 100 kilometers at night, without using the brake or accelerator pedals, in my then-untuned AFN engine.

And that's with 215-size tires. If the car had a longer gear ratio or even a sixth gear, the '3' before the decimal point would have been realistic.

All modern four-cylinder diesel engines, whether in compact or mid-size cars, up to around 1500 kg, can be driven with approximately 5.5 liters per 100 kilometers (if you drive like a retiree with an 'Arac' legal protection sticker and a set of golf clubs in the trunk). Trying to teach such a car to save fuel is like putting Ottfried Fischer into a clinic for anorexic girls.

'After all, there are already fun-focused compact cars being produced, like Ulf's Polo, and alternatives such as the Ibiza and Fabia, each with 130 horsepower. They probably also consume around 4.0 liters per 100km if the drivers want them to. Or the new 120 hp diesel with 177 hp (drool). If I want it to, it only uses 4 liters, but if I don't want it to, I can unleash its power on the six-cylinder lane of the highway.'

Hi,

"I completely agree. My ASV-Ibiza can easily be driven at a constant speed of 90 km/h on the Berlin city highway from Britz all the way to the second village north of the city limits (about 35 km), consuming only 3.7 liters per 100 kilometers without needing to follow anyone closely – and that includes 1 kilometer of access road and 3 kilometers of exit road after the highway. It really just depends on how heavy your foot is, or in this case, the traffic conditions."

Best regards,

Jan.

ObenbeiMutti wrote:

.... All modern four-cylinder diesel engines, whether in compact or mid-size cars, up to around 1500 kg, can be driven with approximately 5.5 liters per 100 kilometers (if you drive like a retiree with an "Arac" legal protection sticker and driving gloves in the glove compartment). ...

Okay, then I must be doing something wrong.
I was getting a fuel consumption of 5.4 liters per 100 kilometers with a relatively fast driving style... (on winding and hilly roads, no highway).
I really need that weight of 1550 kg (measured), because I often ride uphill and downhill, and I like to maintain a good momentum.

Incorrect approach with the Volkswagen Golf 3.

Take a basic Volkswagen Golf 1 (meaning with no extra features), equipped with the 1.6-liter diesel engine.
The diesel engine is being removed and replaced with a 1.7L SDI engine (which was used in cars like the Seat, for example). This engine fits almost perfectly, meaning it's very inexpensive and presents few challenges for the person doing the conversion.
Then I got the body back in shape (replaced wheel bearings and suspension bushings, put on fuel-efficient tires, removed rust), and threw out the spare tire.

This whole project should cost around 2000 euros if done well, assuming you don't have to buy a Golf 1 (which would likely be quite expensive if you can even find one in decent condition).

With a relaxed driving style, I think it's possible to achieve fuel consumption figures with a "3" before the decimal point. Okay, achieving 3.0 liters per [unit of distance] is probably not realistic.

Regards,
Jens.

Hi.

Quote:

@Rainer, "Is it permissible to place such reports in the download area if there is a source citation?" If not, please send me a private message regarding my email address.

It depends on what the author/copyright holder says. If in doubt, always ask.

Best regards, Rainer.

Quote:

I wonder where the progress is. I once had a Golf Mk1 with a 4-speed gearbox and 54 horsepower. It used to have an engine with a displacement of 4.3 to 4.8 liters and weighed around 900 kg.

Overall, I completely agree with you that the whole thing is a bit nonsensical or would be much easier to achieve with other cars, but the point is to make it more modern and, this, more fuel-efficient... not a G1, G2, or anything else.

There should be no compromises when it comes to comfort, safety, or performance.

"nevertheless, it remains absurd... what costs have already accumulated in addition to the carbon roof being broken... the front doors (made of whatever material) didn't fit, etc..."
probably the Greenpeace SmILE was cheaper .

Jens 16syncro wrote:

"Crazy inventor builds a 3-liter car for 4000 euros! "

Okay, great, I need to go a little off-topic for a moment:

There are also "crazy" people who install modern internet browsers on 25-year-old 80286 computers, and those used much less power. But would you want to browse the internet with one of those?

The driving force behind our economy is technological progress. This ensures economic growth, your jobs, the standard of living, pensions, and even my education.

No one wants to drive around in an old Golf 1 anymore, regardless of whether it consumes 3 liters or 10 liters. A G5, on the other hand, is modern, up-to-date, and with a 3-liter engine, it's certainly very desirable. From that perspective, the approach is probably good, even if the execution wasn't successful.

slightly off-topic.

''Crazy DIY enthusiast builds a 3L car for €4000! '

What would really be amazing:

'Crazy DIY enthusiast converts a Volkswagen Golf IV for €2000 to make it a 3L car.'

That would be something interesting.
Then let's get to the instructions for building it.

'Keep in mind that you'll initially need to drive about 2000 kilometers with a basic fuel consumption of 5 liters.'


Economically speaking, I am now convinced that the standard version is the most cost-effective option.

Best regards, Jochen.

I just dug out that booklet.

It was a competition featuring various vehicle classes.
The goal was to determine the minimum possible consumption.
It all took place at the large Hockenheimring circuit in 1981.
Each car had to complete six laps of the ring track at a minimum speed of 50 km/h, and it was not allowed to be turned off during the race.

They had to be production cars.
Sure, please provide the text you would like me to translate from German to English. I will only provide the translation without any explanations. Just make sure to include the phrase "following parts must not be changed:" if there are specific sections that need to remain untouched.

-The body with its standard hood and doors.
- Engine block, crankshaft assembly, crankshaft, and connecting rods.
- Housing for the transmission and axle drive.

Result:

1. Renault 5 TL with a 2.64-liter engine (Super grade fuel).
VW Golf 1 diesel Formula E with a 2.0-liter diesel engine.
4. Mercedes W123 200D with a 2.87L diesel engine.
etc.

Der Golf hat Sparreifen und einen Frontspoiler nekommen. Nothing else.
The Benz has an aluminum front spoiler and underbody cladding made of aluminum foil?!

Unfortunately, I can't scan the images because I don't have a scanner.
Okay, I'll bring the AMS (presumably a document or device) to work tomorrow and scan it.
The report is 26 years old; I don't believe anyone here would violate any copyright laws.

I happened to catch a glimpse of it while channel surfing yesterday.

'They rationalized the LLK (likely referring to a component or part) to save 8 kg, and I have great respect for that achievement!'

Forget research, innovation, and new frontiers; this is just pathetic.

ObenbeiMutti wrote:

I also happened to glance at it yesterday. "They rationalized the LLK (likely referring to a component or part) to save 8 kg, and I have great respect for that achievement!" Forget research, innovation, and new frontiers; this is truly pathetic.

I told you so.
back to basics...

Golf1 Diesel

The 145s can also get quite hot when the composite brake discs are heavily engaged.

Awesome project! When I saw that with the LLk, I also had my own thoughts .

@ Jens,

because you just mentioned it.
There are some beautiful Volkswagen Golfs for sale in the area, some of them from the original owners and in excellent condition with no rust.

If I had the knowledge, time, inspiration, and workshop, it would really be a hobby.
Converting a car, for example, to a 2.0 TDI engine with 125 kW, if it fits , allows you to pursue weight optimization of, say, 600 kg using methods that might be considered extreme. With a power-to-weight ratio of 3.5 kg/hp, even serious enthusiasts will be impressed. And to save weight and CO2, I would even omit the DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter). To those who then receive fines for particulate matter emissions, I would say that, for weight reasons, the EGR (Exhaust Gas Recirculation) system has been completely removed, which results in a very verschandeln combustion process, making the DPF entirely unnecessary.The fuel-efficient 'green' car... without the turbo lag.

'What do I need airbags, ABS, side impact protection, etc.? We're going to die like real men anyway.'

When does this show actually air? I'm having trouble finding the time to watch it.