0-60 N/A Diesel

[Rising]

Okay so here's the question I'm having:

Stock times listed for a N/A diesel rabbit is 21.3 0-60 and 1/4 mile in 22.2 listed at: http://www.albeedigital.com/supercoupe/articles/0-60_Quarter_Mile_Times/T_Z-60times.html

(Turbo Diesel is 17.9 and 21.0 respectfully)

Now that seems about right to me personally. I tested my rabbit before I swapped in this engine and I got right at around 21.00 0-60. Considering the 1979 rabbit listed on that site was a 1.5 diesel and considering my less than perfect driving skill and lame tires and not perfect drag strip i'd say that is a fair estimated 0-60.

So here's the thing. I swapped in a turbo diesel block which I am running N/A. Turbo Diesel injectors, fuel screw unadjusted and max throttle screw turned out a few turns... The car feels alot faster than my old n/a diesel. It seems to run much smoother and starts so much easier. All in all I love the way this thing feels. And I attributed the feeling of being faster to being just a butt dyno misconception thing. HOWEVER:

Today I went out and timed my car. I timed it multiple times and returned right at about a 16.00 0-60 every time. SO I'm curious how this is possible? What do your N/A Diesels run? Is this unreasonable? I'm going to go do some more tests tomorrow since my phone died halfway through my tests, but I want to know if a N/A rabbit could be that .... "Fast"? 

[JamesT]

My 1.5 N/A ran 17.5 seconds by the speedometer running 0-100km/h yesterday morning. Probably slower in the afternoon. That was loaded down with crap too. Empty, it feels almost as peppy as it did with the tired 1.6 gasser, which used to run around 13 seconds. More tests must be done.

[Rising]

Out of a 1.5! Excellent! Stock fueling? Also I should've noted my rabbit was packed to the ceiling with junk... I'll empty it tomorrow


Also the back is gutted...

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2

[jseeley]

I'm scared to know how long mine would take, 20secs sounds about right though... 0-45 seems fast though, probably under 10secs.... Then another 10 to hit 60 

[RabbitJockey]

I agree the 0-45 is pretty good after that I think the weight of the car stops brig and factor and it's all wind resistance.  Here's a move of my old automatic I forget what I did electing I think I didn't have the pedal jammed down the whole way so it shifted to third early

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ys6jVBWt3ms&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[damac]

Did vw change the fueling on na pumps on 1.6 engines between all the different mk1 and mk2 chasis?

I am now daily driving my 85 jetta and threw a non turbo setup on it and it has been a hell of a downgrade.  I have to worry about merging now and 5th gear is terrible except cruising on flat ground.

Then I see factory non turbo cars say heavier than a rabbit with power steering and ac and it makes me wonder because my jetta has niether!  Its a dog now, I keep trying to rev it out like the turbo was still in it but nothing happens

I can't wait to get my 79 rabbit going here in a couple weeks with a fresh turbo motor

[Rising]

JSeely: go time yours! We need information!

Trevor: i used the youtube timeline and it seemed like yours took about 24 or 25 seconds to get to 60. Of course that wasn't full throttle and "missing" the shift to third. Seems about right.



Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2

[Rising]

Damac: I'm unaware of any changes to fuelling but that would be interesting to find out. They certainly should have done something to account for the extra weight of a mk2.

I'm running a mk2 engine with a mk1 pump. But I also realized I don't have AC or power steering. So if we assume the worst about that time posted. That it was a 1.5 and AC and powersteering and a slush box. Then significantly faster times could be expected from a manual base model.

However that still doesn't explain why my old car was so much slower... unless it was just a bad motor with low compression from the start...

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2

[JamesT]

OK, My car is really loving this cool, damp air. I emptied all the excess crap out of it, and managed 14 seconds off the line to 100km/h.
Not stock fueling. I'm running a dual outlet exhaust manifold, a cold air pipe into my airbox, 3/4 turn of the fuel screw, and an early GC 4-speed. I don't shift into 4th until over 100km/h. I think early rabbits are lighter than the westy's though. In any case, I'm really enjoying this low powered performance driving.

[R.O.R-2.0]

OK, My car is really loving this cool, damp air. I emptied all the excess crap out of it, and managed 14 seconds off the line to 100km/h.
Not stock fueling. I'm running a dual outlet exhaust manifold, a cold air pipe into my airbox, 3/4 turn of the fuel screw, and an early GC 4-speed. I don't shift into 4th until over 100km/h. I think early rabbits are lighter than the westy's though. In any case, I'm really enjoying this low powered performance driving.

OMG...

you dont shift 4th gear till 60mph? (4450 rpm)

WOW.. you must really like revving the guts out of that poor thing...

you are aware that if you shifted 4th gear by ~30-40 mph, you would get MUCH better mileage..

the early GC was the lowest geared trans VW ever produced (020 type atleast)

why do you rev your engine that high? you arent driving a honda, you know?

[8v-of-fury]

OK, My car is really loving this cool, damp air. I emptied all the excess crap out of it, and managed 14 seconds off the line to 100km/h.
Not stock fueling. I'm running a dual outlet exhaust manifold, a cold air pipe into my airbox, 3/4 turn of the fuel screw, and an early GC 4-speed. I don't shift into 4th until over 100km/h. I think early rabbits are lighter than the westy's though. In any case, I'm really enjoying this low powered performance driving.

OMG...

you dont shift 4th gear till 60mph? (4450 rpm)

WOW.. you must really like revving the guts out of that poor thing...

you are aware that if you shifted 4th gear by ~30-40 mph, you would get MUCH better mileage..

the early GC was the lowest geared trans VW ever produced (020 type atleast)

why do you rev your engine that high? you arent driving a honda, you know?

Lmao, what are you talking about!? These 1.6 engine make their 54bhp at 4800rpm! Hardly considered Honda revving lol.

4450rpm is not revving the guts out of it, come on K3v0 you should know better than most what these engines are capable of spinning. They will spin 5300 (wot in neutral) all day long, they were designed to.

That shift only drops you in to 4th at 3350, and you are almost too low at that point even to be back in the power. I am sorry, but without a turbo charger... these are diesel fueled gas engines.. they like to spin and have ZERO balls down low.

[R.O.R-2.0]

OK, My car is really loving this cool, damp air. I emptied all the excess crap out of it, and managed 14 seconds off the line to 100km/h.
Not stock fueling. I'm running a dual outlet exhaust manifold, a cold air pipe into my airbox, 3/4 turn of the fuel screw, and an early GC 4-speed. I don't shift into 4th until over 100km/h. I think early rabbits are lighter than the westy's though. In any case, I'm really enjoying this low powered performance driving.

OMG...

you dont shift 4th gear till 60mph? (4450 rpm)

WOW.. you must really like revving the guts out of that poor thing...

you are aware that if you shifted 4th gear by ~30-40 mph, you would get MUCH better mileage..

the early GC was the lowest geared trans VW ever produced (020 type atleast)

why do you rev your engine that high? you arent driving a honda, you know?

Lmao, what are you talking about!? These 1.6 engine make their 54bhp at 4800rpm! Hardly considered Honda revving lol.

4450rpm is not revving the guts out of it, come on K3v0 you should know better than most what these engines are capable of spinning. They will spin 5300 (wot in neutral) all day long, they were designed to.

That shift only drops you in to 4th at 3350, and you are almost too low at that point even to be back in the power. I am sorry, but without a turbo charger... these are diesel fueled gas engines.. they like to spin and have ZERO balls down low.

dude, there is NO REASON to rev a n/a diesel that high.. modified or not...

they just make more noise, as you rev them higher...

im not saying the engine wont take the abuse, cause they will..

but economy will be better, shifting at a lower RPM..

there isnt any power to be had up that high anyways..

sure, max POWER is at 4800, but max torque isnt...

[8v-of-fury]

Max torque is 2000rpms.. Absolutely no balls at 2000rpms.. I can damn well gurantee that.

Max seat of the pants feeling of power will be directly in the middle of those two spots.. Do the math where does that put you?? 3400. Where does shifting the GC at 4500 put you for 4th gear?? 3360, BAM.. Right dead center of the power.

So yea there is a reason to rev them that high.. To grab the next gear above the "Dog Zone" of the rpm range.

Who shifts that high for economy?? Lol

[RabbitJockey]

U feeling ok

[Rising]

This is the only forum I know of that someone would bring economy into a discussion of best shift points for 0-60. Lol. I can honestly say that's a first.

Sent from my Thunderbolt using Tapatalk 2