VWDiesel.net The IDI, TDI, and mTDI source.
Engine Specific Info and Questions => IDI Engine => Topic started by: burn_your_money on March 02, 2008, 05:27:20 am
-
I see that my highway speeds will be around 4000 RPM. What kind of mileage do you get at these speeds?
-
My wife is driving a mk2 golf with that tranny. Running close to 50 mpg (as much as 950km on a tank) Not a lot of 4 lane running, mostly 2 lane back and forth to work. Wouldn't want gearing any higher with the stock 1.6na engine, not enough grunt to handle any more gear.
-
I see that my highway speeds will be around 4000 RPM. What kind of mileage do you get at these speeds?
That's about the worst tranny-engine match VW ever imagined. I think they were trying to make the 1.6NA in those years feel "sporty". It's great to accelerate up to 50 MPH, but after that, you're winding out the motor and putting excessive wear on it. I had one on my 1991 Jetta Coupe, I couldnt' get rid of it soon enough.
With that trans in there, I was lucky to get 37-41 MPG on the highway at 65-75 MPH and 4000-4300 RPMs. With a lower 5th geared trans, I was able to drop the RPMs down to about 3300-3600, and improved the fuel economy up to 45-48 on the highway.
Do yourself a favor and start looking for a MK II trans with a 3.94 or 3.89 final drive, and a .75 5th gear. I think that the AOP, ACH, or AGS are the only direct fit trans codes. You may be able to make a MK I trans work. A 4S or a 7A might work, but you'd have to make sure the final drive housing had the bosses for the MK II mounts.
Good luck.
-
i have an FK tranny (3.89 FD) with a .71 5th gear, and it does awesome on the highway... about 2800 rpm's at 70mph...
-
Perfect thanks guys. I'll have to see what I have in stock, I know I have a 7A
-
7A should work according to EKTA, but make sure the bosses are all there for the rear trans mount.
-
I used to have an AWY in my 90 Jetta (when it was NA). I was getting 44mpg no matter what type of driving or speeds.
GO TALLER young man.
That 3.94 rp with the .89 5th is brutal for anything over 55mph. The motor finally let loose like a grenade while on an interstate doing 67mph (3472 rpm (calculated), right on the governor).
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l193/PhlatOut_2006/Diesel-brokenrod-01.jpg
I had a FF put in the mk2 case with a .76 5th and I still wish I had gotten bold and put a 3.67rp and .71 5th in it. I put a TD in at the same time so mpg results don't compare.
Fortunately my commute is mostly surface streets and 55 is the top speed I see on regular occasion. It is still short enough that I take my gasser if I am going to be on an interstate for more than 30 min.
VelocityConservation
-
Ooooh. 3.67 R&P. I'm not so sure about that. With a 1.6, you really need at least 3.89. I put a 3.67 on a 1.6 NA, and I'd roast the clutch trying to reverse, or taking off in first gear. It was great on the highway, I could cruise at 80 MPH all day long, but getting the car up to that speed was a challenge to say the least.
-
this is interesting. im new to diesels and dunno about all these transmissions. is there a list somewheres of these trans codes and their guts. like, is there a magical super tall trans? lolz
-
this is interesting. im new to diesels and dunno about all these transmissions. is there a list somewheres of these trans codes and their guts. like, is there a magical super tall trans? lolz
http://www.scirocco.org/gears/
-
I had a FF put in the mk2 case with a .76 5th and I still wish I had gotten bold and put a 3.67rp and .71 5th in it.
VelocityConservation
I would KILL for a .71 5th.
You want to sell??
Seriously?
-
Ooooh. 3.67 R&P. I'm not so sure about that. With a 1.6, you really need at least 3.89. I put a 3.67 on a 1.6 NA, and I'd roast the clutch trying to reverse, or taking off in first gear. It was great on the highway, I could cruise at 80 MPH all day long, but getting the car up to that speed was a challenge to say the least.
That setup would be fine you just need more power :D
-
I found 4 transmissions during lunch with the .75 5th gear.
I think 2 had the 3.67 final and 3 had the 3.94 final.
If anyone is interested in one of these I would be willing to assist.
Drop me a PM so we dont clutter this thread, I'm not really trying to sell transmissions but if anyone needs one like Tyler and I do I'll do what I can to help.
4000 rpm just isn't going to work to well for me either.
I'll be getting me a 3.67 and .75 trans.
These are ACH and ACN coded transmissions.
-
http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l193/PhlatOut_2006/Diesel-brokenrod-01.jpg
Dude!!!!!! I have a block that looks JUST like that :)
Bummer huh?
-
Ooooh. 3.67 R&P. I'm not so sure about that. With a 1.6, you really need at least 3.89. I put a 3.67 on a 1.6 NA, and I'd roast the clutch trying to reverse, or taking off in first gear. It was great on the highway, I could cruise at 80 MPH all day long, but getting the car up to that speed was a challenge to say the least.
I dont know about that.
I think a 3.67 R&P with a .71 5th would be great. 82 mph @ 3200 rpm.
Sweetness!!
There just inst enough difference in the 3.67 and 3.94 R&P to cause a problem.
-
I am not sure that I would be advocating that tall of gearing (3.67rp w/.71 5th) for a NA that had to live at altitude or in the mountains. But here in NC where it is relatively flat it would not be too bad even with a NA motor.
Now with a 1.6TD even stock. I think that is the best solution available in the 020.
I currently have only added a Passenger Performance downpipe to my TD and it has plenty of power to pull the taller rp.
VelocityConservation
PP business plug here ;) http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l193/PhlatOut_2006/downpipe.jpg
-
I am not sure that I would be advocating that tall of gearing (3.67rp w/.71 5th) for a NA that had to live at altitude or in the mountains. But here in NC where it is relatively flat it would not be too bad even with a NA motor.
Now with a 1.6TD even stock. I think that is the best solution available in the 020.
I currently have only added a Passenger Performance downpipe to my TD and it has plenty of power to pull the taller rp.
VelocityConservation
PP business plug here ;) http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l193/PhlatOut_2006/downpipe.jpg
I dont think I said anything about a NA... let me look hold on....
Nope nothing there about a NA engine.
Even if you had a NA and the ratio's I mentioned you can always down shift, that's one nice thing about a handshaker ;)
In my TD engine I'll look for the tallest gearing I can muster up, I live @ 4500 ft and lots of mountains, not hills, big as$ mountains.
Piece :)
-
Now with a 1.6TD even stock. I think that is the best solution available in the 020.
I dont have the info here, what are the ratios of the 020?
Isnt the 020 just a basic general clasification? There are several differant codes for the 020 no?
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
and the R&P
-
Here is another site with trans codes.
There seems to be some discrepancy between the 2 so I guess it's just a guideline at best.
http://www.vwtransaxles.com/code.html
-
I have been doing a lot of looking about transmissions lately. My ACH that comes with my 85 golf NA is a 3.94 with a .754 5th. I have small tires and rims so I am turning 4371 at 75mph.
I wanted to see the difference a .71 and a 3.67 would make. All at 75 mph with:
175/70 r13
3.94 w/.754 = 4371
3.94 w/ .71 = 4116
RPM drop = 255
3.67 w/.754 = 4071
3.67 w/.71 = 3833
I then looked at different tires and rims:
195-55-14
3.94 w/.754 = 4130
3.94 w/.71 = 3889
3.67 w/.75 = 3847
3.67 w/.71 = 3622
Total rpm diff with tire / RP/ and .71 change
749
Thats a pretty good drop. I did not figure in any 15" rims. I thought they would slow the car down too much.
I need a new 5th anyway, and should have the tranny gone through before I get it going again( bolt kit etc).
The other option I was looking at was a 020 2Y. I saw a link on the vortex where the .71 5th could be modded to fit correctly. It looks like this trans may be a bit stronger, close ratio up through 4th(if the new 5th is swapped in), comes with the 3.67, and can use a true 16v clutch disc.
It would still turn 3622 at 75mph. a bit high, but I may need the higher rpms if I go to a large turbo.
-
Umm, I think your numbers are a bit off, actually, quite a bit off. If you use the calculator in the excell spreadsheet in the Scirocco.com gears page (on the bottom of the page). If you plug in your numbers for tire circumfirence for your 175/70 R13 tires (71.1) and set the RPMs to 3250, you'll see that you're only at 3250 RPM at 75 MPH with your stock trans. Frankly, I'd leave it alone, or just swap in the .71 5th gear. If you do that, then you'll be going 78 MPH at 3250 RPMs. With a 3.67 R&P, you'll be giong 80 MPH at the same RPMs. That's not a huge difference between any of them. If you run 15 inch rims and tires (73.7 circumference) with a 3.94 R&P and a .71 5th, then you'll be doing 81 MPH at 3250 RPMS and be right in the middle of the powerband.
While you may drop your RPMs more with a 3.67 R&P, you'll spend most of your day in 4th gear, unless you drive on the Autobahn. You'll be able to go 85 MPH at 3200 RPMs, but you'll have no grunt to accelerate around town. I've tried the 3.67 and it kinda sucked. If top speed and/or lowest possible RPMs are your interest, then go for it. But if you want something you can drive everyday without constantly downshifting to accelerate, then keep your 3.94 and swap in a .71 5th gear. I'd really recommend that route if you're gonna put bigger rims and tires on your car.
-
Yep, looks like you are right, my numbers are off. Looks like I should not do data input after self medicating with cocktails :)
I will re-input my numbers later today.
Even if I go with the 3.67, I might just have some additional HP to deal with it :twisted:
-
I love my 3.67..
I still would like a .71 5th. i think I would have to get a smaller turbo though. A 10mm pump is a tad to big for a K24 @ 4500 feet.
At higher RPM's its fine but I would like to run about 72 mph and at that speed I'm only turning 3000 rpm now. The RPM is fine but the larger K24 isn't moving much air at 3000 rpm cruising speed.
-
What's the power band we should be running these in for economy?
Anyone?
-
Not sure. Once I get my 1.9 head that Dave has ported, I'm sure the numbers will change. I also have a Giles 9mm super pump for it.
I am going to get a .71 gear set for it. You can still get them new.
-
What's the power band we should be running these in for economy?
Anyone?
if i drive mine just back and forth to work , no faster than 75km per hour , i'm doing around 70 miles per gallon ( imperial gallon , 4.5 liters ) .... my comute is in the middle of the night , which means no stops and starts once i hit the highway , just a straight shot into work... and same thing when i go home .
that is just a hair under 2000 rpm in 5th on my car . roughly 1100 to 1200 km per tank of fuel .
that is also with tall and skinny stock type tires .
with the fancy rims and wider tires , it's around 950 - 1000 km per tank of fuel .
as soon as i break 3000 rpm i notice it uses alot more fuel .
i've also noticed that by going from 20- 50 or 15 -40 to 0-40 oil , i use much less fuel over 3000 rpm .
i went down to vancouver last week , and averaged 43 miles per gallon , but 90% of the time i had the engine wound out to 3500 to 4000 rpm the whole time .