max Verbrauch 6.Gang beim ASZ? | Posts 48+

Roger wrote:

Wouldn't there be a noticeable jolt every time with a magnetic coupling, or ?

Isn't the main cause of a sudden jolt when a mechanical connection is made between a mass and another mass of roughly the same size, but moving at significantly different speeds?

But what mass does a small compressor even have compared to the moving parts in the engine, let alone an entire car?

And if the magnetic coupling were to slip slightly instead of engaging like gears (I have no idea how that thing works), the suspected minor jolts would be even smaller.

That's my theory...

A magnetic coupling works on the same principle as a normal clutch, except that the pressure plate is pressed against the clutch disc by a magnetic field and lifted off by a spring.

When it's turned on, there's a very noticeable jolt because not only is the mass of the compressor being accelerated, but primarily a refrigerant circuit with maximum pressure needs to be brought up to speed. Therefore, the compressor starts under load (at full load in the summer).

In vehicles like Polos and similar models (e.g., Fabia, or even Julian's A4), an externally controlled compressor is used. This compressor is always running and is controlled via PWM (Pulse Width Modulation) by the climate control unit, within a range of 2-100%. It is, of course, gently ramped up, so there are no jolts.

By the way, my air conditioning briefly shuts off when I accelerate uphill using the kickdown function. Interestingly, when I'm in the third gear, you can barely feel the slight 'clunk' of the AC turning on, but the stopwatch shows the same time whether the AC is on or off. I also haven't noticed any difference in performance or top speed on the highway.
I'll check the fuel injection amounts sometime.

CU Gremlin.

Hi,

I checked it today using channel 19 on the CT. No shutdown is reported, and even when running at full throttle for over 30 seconds, the shutdown condition remains at "0," which means... Compressor running.

Could it be that the compressor, like in the 9N, is simply reduced in output via a swashplate?
Because, I've never felt any jolts before, not even with the G III and CT previously.
The only noticeable jolt occurs when switching from Econ to Auto mode. If that were to happen every time under full load, it would be noticeably felt...

I agree with Roger, especially because I myself have never felt any vibration except when turning it on. The fact is that my LED goes out for a moment at full throttle, which causes the compressor's clutch to disengage. Unfortunately, I can only say that it also sometimes goes out while running, but I (due to the installation position outside the field of view ) have also NEVER been able to precisely observe the clutch engagement process, except when turning it on manually. If you connect a notebook and log the fuel injection amount with the climate control turned on, and then try the same thing without it, perhaps you will see something. Yes, I know it's difficult, but maybe I'll manage to do it this weekend, because the power adapter for my laptop is supposedly finally arriving. With the battery in that thing, I can't even make it out of the garage, it's dead already, and the new notebook doesn't have a serial port anymore .

Hello Ulf,

Now, let's get back to your original topic:

Yesterday, I filled up the tank (at 99 cents per liter) when the temperature was 12 degrees Celsius.
The data was recorded.
My car, with its ERF (likely referring to an engine control unit or similar), consumed 15.7 liters at exactly 200 km/h (according to the speedometer) and 3600 RPM.

Hi,

Quote:

My car, with its ERF (Engine Redesign Feature), consumed 15.7 liters at exactly 200 km/h (according to the speedometer) and 3600 RPM.

Were you pushing it really hard (i.e., going over 200 and reading 200 or more), or were you maintaining 200 and easing off the throttle accordingly?

Regarding the latter, I find the fuel consumption to be extremely high. The ASV, with its consumption of approximately 11.5 liters, is significantly lower, and our cars likely don't differ much in terms of aerodynamics, nor in speedometer accuracy.

Best regards,

Jan.

Hello.

I painted the entire surface, and I read a speed of approximately 200 km/h at the point where the gauge reached its maximum value.

My car's ECU has been chipped by ***, increasing the horsepower to 164 PS according to the DZR standard. Sure, I can help with that. Here's the translation:

"Yes, it comes from there too."

The higher diesel consumption!?

Is it actually normal for the ASZ (Automatic Speed Zone) to operate at such a low speed? "I'm in 6th gear, going full throttle downhill, and I can barely reach 3800 RPM?"

Best regards, Klima96.

Hi,

If you've floored it, the fuel consumption is obvious... with that brilliant translation, it's probably going to shoot up to 220 or more.

The low gear ratio is fantastic... and it makes the ERF a brilliant gearbox because the engine doesn't reach its maximum RPM at the factory-specified top speed, which is something that's possible with almost all other TDI gearboxes. Therefore, with tuning, you can also increase the top speed (Vmax), whereas normally there's almost no further improvement possible, because even with tuning, increasing the engine's RPM is only achievable to a limited extent.

With the standard 5-speed gearbox (around 44,000 RPM at 1000 RPM), the car reaches its maximum speed in 5th gear when going downhill, and I've seen the tachometer reading as high as 4600 RPM.

Best regards,

Jan.

Klima96 wrote:

My car, with ERF, consumed 15.7 liters at exactly 200 km/h according to the speedometer and 3600 RPM.

That would correspond to approximately 57 mg of injection volume.
My oxygen sensor gives a reading of about 49 mg at 3600 rpm, so yours would be about 16% higher.

Extrapolating based on the nominal maximum power (Pmax), that would be 151 horsepower instead of 130. Adding in the normal variation typically seen in production engines, your engine would likely be in the range of 160 horsepower.

Another piece of evidence suggesting that the advertised ~180 horsepower figure was a "customer smile measurement" rather than an accurate reading.

Do you see Ulf?

And with your DZR (dyno sheet), I calculated 164 horsepower. That would mean everything is almost perfectly accurate!
It actually drives really well. It only makes a buzzing and rumbling noise when accelerating from 1500 RPM.
...in the area of the engine where the turbocharger connects. At approximately 1700 to 2000 revolutions per minute.
Is something wrong? I once read in a forum that the crankshaft and camshaft might not be aligned correctly.

Best regards, Klima.

Klima96 wrote:

I once read in a forum that the crankshaft and camshaft might not be aligned correctly with each other.

Okay, I'm ready. Please provide the German text you want me to translate.

Hello ULF.

Thank you for the link.
It's described really well how to do the setup.
However, you mention that the performance drops off in the higher RPM range.
Do you think my loud rumbling and throbbing sound might be caused by a misaligned camshaft?
I think I read something somewhere about the camshaft and my problem.
(I don't want to create a new section for that.)

Regards,
Klima 96

Klima96 wrote:

Do you mean that my loud rumbling and throbbing sound also originates from the misaligned camshaft?

I can hardly imagine that - it's more likely due to the increased tire pressure resulting from the modifications.

Test: Only use enough throttle so that the power output is roughly equivalent to the standard performance.
If the humming becomes quieter, then my assumption is likely correct.

I would like to briefly revisit the experiences regarding the displayed current consumption.
My car has now exceeded the 66,000 km mark, and somehow I have the feeling that it has become incredibly sluggish.
Recently, the car was taken in for its 60,000 km service, and it received new oil, new filters, and so on. I thought that after the service, the issue would resolve itself, but subjectively, it seems to be performing slightly worse than before.
In numbers:
The acceleration from 1600 to 2500 RPM is indicated as 14.5, sometimes 14.6, by the MFA (presumably a measurement device). The value is reached starting at approximately 2000 RPM.
Initially, this doesn't represent a difference from the value I posted at the beginning of this thread.
However, I achieved the following in the 6th grade. 'On the highway, driving at full speed, I'm now getting 13.3 liters per 100km, compared to 13.7 liters per 100km before. Now I'm wondering if this could be related to the outside temperature, or if something might actually be wrong, and I'm just imagining it.'
My friend can already smell the coal and has invited me on an hour-long flight for 60 euros. Now, I just wanted to hear again whether 13.3 might actually be a correct value, and if I'm unnecessarily worrying about this .

Hi,

I wouldn't worry about that. The fuel consumption at full speed on the highway depends on so many factors that a difference of 13.7 versus 13.3 is absolutely insignificant. Does it still reach approximately the same top speed?

While it's not a PD (presumably referring to a specific type of engine component), in my ASV (another engine type), the fuel consumption at maximum speed varies by more than a liter depending on the environment. It depends on how far you get into the range where the fuel injection amount starts to decrease. However, this phenomenon might not apply to you, as most ASZ engines have that incredibly long sixth gear. "To have a rough running engine and not even get close to the maximum RPM (the automatic speed limiter limits the engine in 5th gear, even when accelerating uphill with full throttle, preventing it from reaching its full potential... I was already at 4500 RPM in that situation, with a fuel consumption of around 11.x instead of the usual just under 13)."

Best regards,

Jan.

Well, top speed is a tricky thing. On a flat road, you can reach about 205 km/h in 6th gear. Speed approximately 3700 RPM, final value...
Normally, it would always be around 210-215 km/h, but that was with summer tires. Now I have winter tires, size 195.

I think I'll try the leak test now. I completely forgot about it amidst all the work I was doing with the mass airflow sensors. If the DZR is correct, then my system should be doing well.

I'll post the time again later, maybe someone will have a chance to share their opinion on the result then.