Polo 1.4L 59kW TDI DPF BlueMotion - Is it any good?

Hello everyone,

I have a question about the topic of "diesel engine technology." Unfortunately, it's not discussed as often anymore because practical problems tend to take center stage.

Does anyone here know the engine differences between the Polo 1.4L 59kW DPF TDI BlueMotion and the standard Polo 1.4L 59kW DPF TDI?

I'm getting conflicting information here. I think I know the differences in terms of the transmission and vehicle itself. (Specifically: rear hatch edge design, aerodynamic package, lightweight alloy wheels with low rolling resistance tires, longer gear ratios for gears 2-5, adjusted standard equipment - no air conditioning or driver assistance systems included as standard).

But what about the engine? Are there any hardware changes, especially regarding port designs or combustion processes (piston bowl/cylinder head geometry), EGR coolers, ATL (Air Throttle Valve) or LL (Low Load) range? What about the MSG data set (ECU part number)? Does it have a different meaning? And what about exhaust aftertreatment (coating of DPF, monolith substrate/geometry, sensors)?

Is there anything different here compared to the non-BlueMotion version?

I can't really imagine that the BlueMotion version received any special treatment here (due to cost considerations), but with Volkswagen, you never know.

Is the engine code the same?

I would greatly appreciate any well-founded information, even if sent as a private message.

I would also be interested in your opinions on the Volkswagen BlueMotion concept, which is intended to mark the beginning of a "sustainability initiative."
The term itself should remain unmentioned for now, but could you become familiar with this concept – which is technologically rather simple, relatively inexpensive compared to others, readily available, and has proven its worth despite its modest impact – or is your opinion just a marketing gimmick?
If you were to buy a new car in this category today, would the BlueMotion be a contender?

Best regards,

Hello Bavarian.

Regarding your question about the engine, I am currently unable to provide any information, as we have not yet worked with this particular engine in our workshop.

My opinion on the BlueMotion concept:

'Finally, someone has made Ulf's polo shirt market-ready.'

No, I'm serious. I think there will be demand for these vehicles. The desire to reduce fuel consumption is significant. Unfortunately, the manufacturers have taken the wrong approach here and prioritized comfort over environmental concerns.
It's important to add that we, the consumers, blindly followed this trend. Because hardly anyone asked for vehicles that were lightweight and offered with minimal equipment. Ulf's Polo is the best example of how this concept isn't new, as you already mentioned.

Building a vehicle optimized for fuel efficiency wouldn't have been a problem if it had truly been desired. And I'm not even talking about the 3-liter Lupo here.
A Golf3 with an ASV engine could have achieved an impressive fuel efficiency of around 4 liters per 100 km (approximately 56 mpg) even in 1998, if the driver was skilled and drove accordingly. And this would have been a relatively inexpensive way to save fuel.

The general problem is the cost.
The overall cost of the 3L Lupo was so high that the reduced fuel consumption wasn't a compelling reason to buy it.
The BlueMotion is also €1000 more expensive than the cheapest Polo with 80 horsepower and a DPF. When you compare the fuel consumption figures of both vehicles, the slight reduction in consumption doesn't make a significant difference. Therefore, based on calculations, it's still advisable to opt for the 'basic Polo' model.
'That's why I still believe this car will be more successful than the 3L.'
The advertising and the current debate about gasoline prices make him seem better, thanks to his supposedly lower fuel consumption. His reduced equipment is now being presented as a 'feature.'
And it's not actually that much more expensive.

I personally am a pragmatist and not easily swayed by buzzwords. Furthermore, I don't particularly like the three-cylinder diesel engine. I know of alternatives, such as Ulf's Polo, which are much more fun.
No, I won't buy this Polo, even though I drive a lot.

Best regards, Jochen.

Now, I also don't have a specific answer to the question.
According to Volkswagen, the BlueMotion's curb weight is 1084 kg. The standard Polo with an 80 hp engine and a diesel particulate filter weighs 1091 kg.

The demand is there, because delivery times are already around 4 months. I recently had the idea of starting a business offering something like this as an alternative to the 3-cylinder gasoline-powered Polo.

Since the Blue Motion engine delivers exactly the same specifications as the standard Polo engine, I assume it's only a modified transmission, as you mentioned, and not any change to the engine itself. VW themselves only mention aerodynamic improvements and minimization of rolling resistance.
The Bluemotion version costs €15,750, while the Trendline version costs €14,950; now you can compare the details of the equipment and features.
Since we'll mostly be using this car for short trips in the city, where speeds rarely exceed 70 km/h, I decided not to go with the BlueMotion version. Also, I'm holding off on getting a regular Polo for now; I'll still be driving this older three-cylinder gasoline model for a while. My partner likes it, but I hate it – I can't even explain why, as there's nothing particularly wrong with it.
Okay, maybe someone with more knowledge about the new engine can tell us more. For now, I'll stick to my opinion that the engine is completely identical. Unfortunately, I couldn't see the engine code of the displayed car because it was covered; they probably didn't want to sell that one.

Regarding mechanical changes, the only modification mentioned is a longer gear ratio in the transmission.
The 3rd to 5th gears, as well as the axle ratio, are a total of 25% longer.

Besides modifying the front end, a rear spoiler was installed (resulting in a Cd of 0.30), and lighter wheels with low-rolling-resistance tires were fitted.
That's why it's only €800 more expensive.

Source: Gute Fahrt 08/06

[Please provide the text you want me to translate.]

I used to be interested in that device, but it's not worth it; I'm a more demanding user.
I would like to take a test drive sometime... Does anyone happen to have one available?

I don't understand how the "BM" (presumably a specific car model) can achieve the same acceleration figures as the standard TDI, even though it has a longer gear ratio and the same engine.

And if a slightly cooler grill plastic reduces energy consumption so much, why doesn't every Polo have it?

The Opel Calibra already had a cw value of 0.26, so a value of 0.30 isn't particularly remarkable.

The ADAC (German automobile club) completely tore apart the easily deformable tires of the 3L Lupo in their tire test.

Okay, please provide the German text you would like me to translate into English. I will only provide the translation.

Well, the acceleration is quite strange, as it's specified to be exactly the same. However, the BlueMotion is 2 km/h faster, for those who are interested: 174 km/h versus 176 km/h.
However, I think a Cd value of 0.3 for a steeply sloped hatchback like the Polo or Golf is quite acceptable; the Calibra had significantly better aerodynamic properties from a purely design perspective.

However, the fact is that the BlueMotion concept seems to be well-received, even though there are some things I don't quite understand.

Oh yes, and the magazine "Gute Fahrt" will never write anything negative about a new Volkswagen; they always portray them as the best.

It's clear to me that low rolling resistance tires aren't the ultimate solution; somewhere, the effort to minimize rolling resistance must have a negative impact.

But seriously, Ulf's Polo is from the series with the very long gearbox; it probably wouldn't consume much more fuel even if driven gently.

I'm interested in knowing what the process of "zukleistern" (applying a paste) to the grill does.

3Llupo and BM have this single-use grill... I think I might close mine up during the winter too.

The G3 already has a large hole at the bottom anyway.

Okay, please provide the German text you would like me to translate into English. I will only provide the translation.

The 'closing' of the grill (which actually functions like a spoiler) creates a more precisely controlled airflow under the hood and, consequently, in the engine compartment.
This reduces air turbulence under the hood and the underbody, thereby lowering the drag coefficient (Cw value).
This would also work with a standard Polo, but it would need to be adjusted in each case to account for the heat generated by the engines.

By the way, all of the 80 horsepower diesel Polomo engines were modified starting with the 2007 model year.
The torque now kicks in earlier. The 'BM' version essentially just has a different gearbox.

What bothers me about this is that Volkswagen could actually offer this gearbox to all Polo models, especially since the Polo diesel engines aren't particularly fuel-efficient anyway and rarely achieve the stated consumption figures.

I drove a three-cylinder diesel car for two weeks. The fuel consumption was 5.5 liters.
0.5 liters larger than what I have in my Golf 4 ALH, which has more displacement and weighs more.

matthiasTDI96 wrote:

But seriously, Ulf's Polo is from the series with the very long gearbox; that one probably wouldn't consume much more fuel even if driven gently.

Let's say we're more "consistently economical," as long as the urge to accelerate doesn't kick in – on average, I (or rather, my car, "Poldi") consume about 4.5 liters per 100 kilometers.

Quote:

I drove a 3-cylinder diesel car for 2 weeks. The fuel consumption was 5.5 liters. 0. 5 liters higher than in my Golf 4 ALH with more displacement and more weight.

Which three-cylinder engine was it?

The 75 hp version actually has a turbocharger with a wastegate that responds very slowly.

Therefore, it likely consumes more for the same reason as the 90 hp engine compared to the 110 hp Golf 3 TDI – in that case, the AFN engines with VTG were also more fuel-efficient.

Okay, please provide the German text you would like me to translate into English. I will only provide the translation.

Here's one more thought about aerodynamics:

Although the VW emblem on the hood of a Golf 3 doesn't directly touch the hood, after an extended drive in heavy rain, you can often see a prominent dirt streak in the middle of the hood. This streak likely originates from the emblem in the grille, so it seems like that's definitely something worth investigating.

Okay, please provide the German text you would like me to translate into English. I will only provide the translation.

But what about the engine? Are there any hardware changes...?

I've been reviewing some reports and tests.
Most people also talked about changes in or to the engine.
A few people mentioned something about 'improving charge transfer.'

However, it was not possible to obtain precise information.

"Improvement in loading/unloading speed" means how quickly I can get the case of beer out of the trunk!

But why is it then more fuel-efficient?

Okay, if I get to the beer faster, I'll get drunk quickly (hence "bluemotion"?), and won't be able to drive around as much, so I'll consume less diesel.

but that is then the absolute consumption... strange.

Okay, please provide the German text you would like me to translate into English. I will only provide the translation.

The 'closing' of the grill (which actually has a kind of spoiler function) creates a more precisely controlled airflow under the hood and, consequently, in the engine compartment.
This reduces air turbulence under the hood and the underbody, thereby lowering the drag coefficient (Cw value).
This would also work with a standard Polo, but it would need to be adjusted in each case to account for the heat generated by the engines.

Hello,
ob man hier von einer Spoilerfunktion sprechen kann, lasse ich jetzt mal dahingestellt. Denn hierfür müsste man den gesamten Lufteinlassbereich aerodynamisch (Luftleitbleche etc) anpassen, was bei Serienfahrzeugen nicht passiert. Das Probelm hier ist, das diese Strömungen von der Luftgeschwindigkeit abhängt und diese im normalen Fahrverkehr sehr schwer vorsehbar ist. Das Verschliessen dient dazu die Karosserie aerodynatisch zu glätten, was den Luftwiderstand verringert. DeThe airflow is not directed more specifically by this.

From a UTM perspective, closing the front panel at low speeds and high loads means less ventilation is available. This represents a significant area of work for UTM.
To optimize the vehicle's aerodynamics, all openings would need to be closed. This would reduce air resistance and lower fuel consumption. As part of the UTM testing, efforts are now focused on finding the best compromise between openings for cooling and closing them off to save fuel, without overloading the engine thermally.

@dieselmartin:
You can also close the upper part of the cooler in summer, but you shouldn't then request high loads at low speeds.
So, always drive fast to ensure sufficient cooling .
Don't expect miracles in terms of fuel consumption. The closing mechanism is just one factor among many that need to be considered when trying to reduce fuel consumption, similar to how you should close the windows when driving above 100 km/h to prevent excessive fuel consumption.

Best regards, Jochen.

Hello everyone,

First of all, thank you very much for your feedback and private messages.

Just to potentially save you some unnecessary work, I'd like to mention that I have already thoroughly researched all readily available sources, such as press kits, journals, conference proceedings, publications, etc., and have not found sufficient answers to my questions.
I was hoping someone with specific knowledge about the Blue Motion system would be able to help me, as I'm looking for information from someone who has experience with it.

The Blue Motion is currently only available new throughout Europe and is no longer obtainable as a used vehicle (I bought the last one today in Belgium). In Germany, delivery times are 2-4 months. This may be partly due to supply difficulties caused by problems in Pamplona, but also due to significant demand for this model.

...we welcome helpful suggestions and further comments.

your Bavarian