VOX and 9ff are trying to build a 3-liter Golf

Hello everyone,

I found the above-mentioned announcement in today's newspaper.
An attempt is being made to reduce the fuel consumption of a Golf with a TDI engine to 3 liters per 100 kilometers.
Technically, the Dortmund-based company 9ff will carry out the conversion and contribute its expertise.

There isn't much information available online about this topic yet, except for the press release from VOX:

http://www.presseportal.de/story.htx?nr=961743&firmaid=6952

Does anyone know any more details?
The structure should be based on a TDI and primarily achieved through weight reduction.

Perhaps we can find a few simple and inexpensive tips that can help reduce fuel consumption in our TDIs.

Best regards, Jochen.

Quote:

The structure should be based on a TDI and mainly achieved through weight reduction.

Let's be surprised to see what remains of the Golf, or how much such a vehicle would cost if it were produced in series.

If one were to assemble an aerodynamic potato box with four wheels and a seat, and equip it with a TDI engine, I believe such fuel consumption figures would not be a problem at all.
The question is whether such vehicles will be accepted by the public (e.g., see the 3L Lupo).

Well,

3L Lupo... Magnesium hood and doors, and steel plates used for weightening in the bumper.

We need to be more like Ulf. A more aerodynamically refined Polo (a hatchback, ugh, how ugly) without all the unnecessary extras, weighing 640kg and with 160 horsepower... that would allow for very acceptable individual performance figures, depending on the driver's preference: fast or economical.

matthiasTDI96 wrote:

We need to be more like Ulf...

And everyone is waiting for the others to start first, so that one can jump in as the very last.

Hello,

A major problem I see is the lack of road safety due to "flex-fit tires." The braking distance of these types of budget tires is often inadequate.

Best regards, Rainer.

Naja, 3L mit nem Golf ?? Volkswagen Golf 5?
Whatever modifications they make, it only works at speeds of 80-90 km/h. Even a heavily modified vehicle will start consuming excessive fuel at speeds above 160 km/h.

Awesome avatar

Thanks .

Let's be surprised by what remains of the golf course.
(..)
If one were to assemble an aerodynamic potato box with four wheels and a seat, and equip it with a TDI engine, I believe such fuel consumption figures would not be a problem at all.


Hello BM.

One could probably not have said it better.
The fuel consumption should be manageable with a lightweight car. Unfortunately, my Leon weighs 1400 kg , but even so, I can drive it with 4.9 liters per 100 km if I WANT to.

We need to be more like Ulf. A more aerodynamically refined Polo (a hatchback, ugh, how ugly) without all the unnecessary extras, weighing 640kg and with 160 horsepower... then very acceptable individual performance figures should be achievable, depending on the driver's preference: fast or economical.

'Exactly something like that (though perhaps with a more attractive body style, maybe an open-top two-seater) is what I envision for myself. Then I can decide how much my driving experience is worth to me.'
I think Ulf's approach with the car is the right one (as I've mentioned before). Unfortunately, his Polo suffers from a fundamental problem.
This combination in an 850 kg body would certainly be a solution. However, with lightweight English kit cars, it's difficult to get approval if there's a diesel engine .

Let's wait and see what the experiment reveals.
Best regards, Jochen.

At the last meeting in Osterholz, there was a 6N1 with a large diesel engine (130+ horsepower) - it probably already has fuel efficiency advantages . I don't remember off the top of my head what the weight difference is between the 6N1 and the 9N.
But since it only had two racing seats and a roll cage installed, I think it was still a bit lighter.

According to my TV magazine, the base engine would be a 1.9-liter TDI, and fuel consumption should be reduced without compromising performance or safety.

The fuel consumption should be manageable with a lightweight car. Unfortunately, my Leon weighs 1400 kg , but even so, I can drive it with 4.9 liters per 100 km if I WANT to.


Okay, so I now have a Scenic 1.5 dCi (empty weight: 1400 kg) with an 82 hp common rail diesel engine.
He gets a fuel consumption of 5.5 liters per 100 kilometers with my driving style (I'm used to 3 liters with a diesel engine ).

When I'm driving on the highway at speeds of 90-110 km/h, my fuel consumption is approximately 3.6 - 3.9 liters.

Ultimately, it depends on the specific operating conditions under which the 3-liter limit needs to be maintained.

Best regards, Rodion.

"So, it seems Renault has cracked the laws of physics. A car with such a large frontal area achieving such a low fuel consumption of 3.6 liters? If that's actually true, I need to get a Renault. Even if I drive very carefully, I can't achieve 3.9 liters in my Golf, which has a longer gear ratio, is lighter, and has less frontal area..."

Hi,

So, according to the information I have, the body composition measurements seem quite accurate; I've checked them multiple times.
And during a highway drive at the specified speed, it showed an average fuel consumption of 3.7 liters (with the air conditioning off).
In my area, the highways are quite empty and not very hilly, which also plays a crucial role.
Furthermore, it's important not to depress the clutch pedal when going downhill. This also saves a bit of fuel.
If I had a cruise control system, I could further reduce fuel consumption.

Best regards, Rodion.

Well, I would never use the cruise control to go downhill, it doesn't reduce fuel consumption... so, hats off, good car.

You're making me feel guilty , I will pay closer attention to consumption in the future.