First DZR test

Hello,

I had the initial DZR tests performed at a mileage of 460 km.

Result: approximately 132 horsepower , taking into account all uncertainties to the best possible extent (rolling radius measured, rollout test performed, weight calculated as accurately as possible...).

According to the constraint logs, everything is as it should be: the rotational speed (Drehmo) remained significantly below the smoke threshold and the driver's desired speed throughout the acceleration process.

The values for the idle running adjustment are a maximum of +/- 0.3 mg, so I don't have a "particularly weak" cylinder.

Let's see if a few more horsepower will be unlocked during the remaining break-in period...

What I noticed when I first used VAGCOM:
The accelerator pedal value goes up to 100%, and the idle contact switches, but unlike my old Golf, it doesn't seem to have a kickdown contact - or the accelerator pedal sensor is adjusted so tightly that while 100% is reached, the kickdown contact still doesn't close, even with the floor mat in place.

That would only be effective, however, if the kickdown function increased the torque limit.
By the way, the engine control unit's coding is something related to "SG," which is correct for manual transmissions.

Hello Ulf!

"Kickdown contact?! I've never encountered that in the Motronic (ME) blocks for 1.4L engines. I've seen idle contact issues, though. In which Motronic block should I be able to read that value – if it exists?"
MWB2 - Field 3?! There's only the second value for LL. The first and third relate to the climate...

Best regards,
pretzel

P.S.: I think that some other things might still happen. But I think that even now, polo isn't "boring" .

brezelmann01 wrote:

Kickdown contact?! I've never noticed anything like that in the MW blocks of the 1.4 engines. I have seen idle contact issues, though. In which MW block should I be able to read that - if it exists? MWB2 - Field 3?! There's only the second value for LL. The first and third relate to the climate...

Hi,

You might be right - I just checked the AFN label file again, and there's nothing mentioned about "kickdown" .
Nevertheless, he exists at least in the AFN golf system - but perhaps I only checked it for functionality with an ohmmeter once - it was quite a while ago.
With a setting of "1 mm before the bottom plate," a full 100% pedal value was already detectable significantly earlier (estimated 1 cm before the bottom plate).

Edit:
I didn't have a suitable label file during the log analysis, which is why I could only interpret a few values, and even that was very difficult.
I've now translated an English 3-cylinder PD file and revised it based on the target value table.
Let's see if this time I'll get something that's at least somewhat meaningful.

But one thing is already good: I can access all STGe with my old K-L adapter, which means that the K-CAN gateway in the Polo at least works with it.

Okay, in my car, the kickdown works exactly as you would expect it to.

The accelerator pedal signal is at 100% when fully pressed. Then, you press it a bit harder, and you hear a 'click,' the pedal moves another centimeter, the kickdown contact closes, is displayed, and the transmission downshifts.

so, a completely normal kickdown switch .

I'll check on Monday to see if there are two different types of pedal levers available.

CU Gremlin.

Gremlin wrote:

So, in my case, the kickdown works exactly as you would expect it to: das gaspedalsignal ist bei anschlag auf 100%, dann tritt man etwas kräftiger und es macht *klick*, das pedal gibt noch nen zentimeter nach und der kickdown-kontakt schliesst und wird angezeigt und das getriebe schaltet runter...

Hi Ralf,

Do you happen to know which group displays the "Kickdown" indicator?
I haven't searched those endless sequences of 1100011110 yet.

Yes, there are different pedal assemblies, specifically designed for automatic transmissions and for manual/standard gearboxes.
My AFN had the correct SG sensor installed, and yet it still had what we'll call, for the sake of distinction, a "full gas contact."
But without that small bracket located just above the bottom panel.

Hi.

According to the wiring diagram, the G3 always has 2 contacts on the accelerator pedal.

Therefore, I believe he always has both an idle contact and a "full throttle" contact.

In my opinion, the only difference between a kickdown switch and a regular accelerator pedal is the mechanical lock in the kickdown switch. This is because the kickdown switch not only serves to achieve the full 100% accelerator pedal range, but it also needs to be noticeable to the driver, as the automatic transmission will usually downshift a gear when the kickdown is activated.

m;

EDITH: How many milliseconds did your new projectile take to reach the target in the DZT?

What purpose would a kickdown contact serve in a manual transmission?

@ULF
How long did you spend in the DZR (presumably referring to a specific training or program)?

Yes, I would also be interested in that. I've only seen this feature on automatic vehicles so far.
However, if you are absolutely certain that the manual transmission is at 100% load, then nothing more can happen, regardless of what happens with the pedal?
or am I misunderstanding something now!

@ Martin

I believe that with the automatic transmission, the 100% power output is already reached before the kick-down point. Only when you press the accelerator beyond that point does the car shift down again, even at higher RPMs, as I understand Gremlin correctly.

"Kickdown" is nothing more than the automatic transmission downshifting, which puts the engine into a higher RPM range, which makes perfect sense for a gasoline engine. For a diesel, it's only effective to a limited extent. And even before engaging the "kickdown," the accelerator pedal should already be fully depressed!

ich glaube beim Automatik werden die 100% schon vor KickDown erreicht nur wenn über diesen Widerstand getreten wird schaltet der Wagen auch bei schon höherer Drehzahl noch mal beherzt zurück, wenn ich da gerade Gremlin richtig verstanden habe!

you have

Otherwise, everything seems normal. The idle speed is 0%, and when the pedal is fully depressed, it's 100%. There's also a 'switch underneath' that gets activated by pressing the pedal with more force. When that switch is activated, the pedal depresses further.

CU Gremlin.

x world one wrote:

@ULF Welche Zeit hast du benötigt im DZR?

Hi,

Average: 6.6 seconds.
This results in approximately 130 horsepower on paper, considering the longer translation of the automatic transmission (~55-110 km/h), a combat weight of around 1250 kg, and a relatively high rolling resistance.

The average fuel consumption reading is quite consistent with the fuel consumption measured during refueling (5.4 liters), so a "bottleneck" in the fuel system can largely be ruled out. This would be a situation where less fuel is actually injected than the engine computer calculates based on the fuel consumption reading (if the injectors are only partially filled).

The compression seems quite even, at least in the "bouncing downhill" test, and the engine starts beautifully -> so far, it always starts on the first compression stroke, whether it's cold or warm.
Oil consumption is practically undetectable during the first 500 km, despite the thin, factory-filled longlife fluid .

In the Ibiza forum, according to publicly posted data from dyno tests, the factory-specified power output ranges from 135 to 147 horsepower. I'm now wondering to what extent mine might have been incorrectly assembled, or how I could check it.
NW falsch eingestellt, OT-Geber verdreht montiert . . .
Does anyone here know how to check the neutral position setting on a PD 4-cylinder engine?

Or, based on certain experiences, is it reasonable to expect that some additional kilowatts might emerge from their "hidden reserves" during the remainder of the break-in period?

Hi Ulf,

Given everything that has been written in the Ibi forum, I wouldn't worry if I were you. On the one hand, some people have written that the results improved significantly later on. On the other hand, I wouldn't trust all of those "measurements" – just think about the "interpolation issue" or the question from the last few days, when someone used counting (21, 22, 23...) to time themselves...

I highly doubt that anyone else put nearly as much effort into gathering the data as you did.

Best regards,

Jan.

Jan6K wrote:

After everything that was written in the Ibi forum, I wouldn't worry if I were you. Firstly, some people wrote that the parts actually got much better later on, and secondly, I wouldn't trust all those "measurements" -

Hi Jan,

Well, the calculated average power output of the 7 Ibis is approximately 140 horsepower.

And even if there's some blatant nonsense posted in the forum from time to time, I still believe that the average is quite realistic (e.g., with measurements taken in both directions).

So, let's just wait and see and drink some tea... maybe things will still work out somewhat well, because I'm absolutely not happy with my fuel consumption of over 5 liters - with an AFN Golf instead of the Polo, I would have been at least 1 liter more fuel-efficient (although part of it is due to the higher rolling resistance).

If, at some point, a portion of the excess energy consumption were to be redirected to increase internal friction within the engine, and this additional friction could then be harnessed to provide extra peak power, that would be a positive development.

Hello Ulf,

Don't worry, it can easily take over 20,000 km for the engine to fully break in.
Some BMW gasoline engines may require up to 50,000 kilometers to reach their optimal performance.
You can now document this perfectly with your new [device/software/etc.].

Sincerely,
Christian

6.6 seconds? Wow, that's impressive, and also your unladen weight.
I just read some data about the new Volvo V50 with a 2.0-liter diesel engine, producing 136 horsepower and 320 Nm of torque.
It weighs almost 1500kg and has the same 0-100 km/h acceleration as your Polo. Are those 300kg only offset by different gear ratios during acceleration compared to the Polo?

For breaking in:
We have two 100 horsepower PD Golf4 wagons at the company. One is mostly used for shorter and medium-length trips, often by a single driver. The other, with its navigation system, was originally intended for long-distance travel, and consequently, more people use it on a rotating basis. The car without the navigation system noticeably performs better, and it's unlikely that the extra weight of the cruise control and navigation system is the sole reason.
I suspect the car with the navigation system is simply suffering from the many different drivers and, from the beginning, the use of the highway with constant full acceleration. The difference wasn't so extreme initially. So, I think it's clear that proper break-in can make a difference.

ulf wrote:

x world one wrote: @ULF Welche Zeit hast du benötigt im DZR? im Mittel 6,6 sec. ....

Hi Ulf,

I can understand your disappointment.
My AXR (including VAT) achieves a 0-100 km/h time of 7.5 seconds with a weight of 1545 kg. That means my "Pampersbomber" is a whopping 300 kg heavier, but only 1 second slower!
I expected more from you.

I'd prefer to wait a bit longer before discussing it; let's talk more about it when we reach 10,000 km.