1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Road Race: 2.0FSI v 2.0TDI

Discussion in 'A3/S3/Sportback (8P Chassis)' started by lilya, Jul 1, 2005.

  1. Japper
    Offline

    Japper Ibis S3 Fan Club

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    and that they don't feel sporty. The latter reason is why Ferrari/BMW don't use a dual-clutch, and instead have their own SMGs and such. They feel sporties when you can feel the change /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]

    That'll be why Porsche are developing their own DSG box then /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif because, hey, well porsche's aren't sporty are they /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
    #41
  2. imported_CurryMilkShake
    Offline

    imported_CurryMilkShake Guest

    Yak - totally agree with the initially perceived 'loss of sensation', as with a constant surge you dont get the repeated surges with each gear change.. though your perception changes with use, definately.

    however, correct me if I'm wrong - there is less transmission 'loss' than you might think - normal autos lose a lot through the torque converter (does this include DSG? not sure) as this wastes energy.

    The Multitronic doesnt have a torque converter, it has conventional clutches, which are electronically controlled, so once engaged doesnt lose any more energy there than a manual. one of the big issues in development apparently was the lack of any 'creep' like you get from a normal auto. The 'creep' that you get from a multitronic is actually software controlled clutch slippage, to 'simulate' the same effect!

    the only other area of loss (compared to a manual) would be the chain, but since this is never allowed to be slack, and is held at the best ratio, theres not going to be significant loss there.

    Torque limits - yes, agreed - I believe the spec for it is 350lb/ft or so, which is pretty respectable, (same as the dsg limit I thnk?)

    I think Audi have got work to do with both variants of the autos, Multi & DSG, but the concepts of keeping the power on during gear changes is good - I think the concept of keeping the engine at max efficiency/power, and then varying the ratio at which that power is applied, while a different way of thinking to what we are used to, is a more pleasing solution from an engineering perspective.

    and I've diverted the thread, whoops - apologies!
    #42
  3. Japper
    Offline

    Japper Ibis S3 Fan Club

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    however, correct me if I'm wrong - there is less transmission 'loss' than you might think - normal autos lose a lot through the torque converter (does this include DSG? not sure) as this wastes energy.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    No, there is no torque converter on DSG. It has 2 conventional clutches so is a manual box with electronically controlled clutches, one for odd and one for even gears.
    #43
  4. Mark_N
    Offline

    Mark_N Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    www.audi.co.uk.......
    2.0FSI, 0-100kmh 9.1 secs,top speed 131mph.
    2.0TDI, 0-100kmh 9.5 secs,top speed 129 mph, and thats from "the horses mouth"

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Yeh and VW had the 1.8T 150bhp engine quicker on paper than the PD150 Golf but everyone knows the TDI left the 1.8T Golf for dead...happened to me many a time in my GTI where I was wasted by a PD150.

    One of the reasons why I went for a diesel.
    #44
  5. Mark_N
    Offline

    Mark_N Member

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2005
    Messages:
    250
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    I've never managed to get 28mpgs from my car, not even in the middle of winter and when I've been driving just short periods in the city. I wonder how they got that reading?



    [/ QUOTE ]

    You've never seen 28 or less than???
    #45
  6. Japper
    Offline

    Japper Ibis S3 Fan Club

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    1,495
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    I've never managed to get 28mpgs from my car, not even in the middle of winter and when I've been driving just short periods in the city. I wonder how they got that reading?



    [/ QUOTE ]

    You've never seen 28 or less than???

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Damn, I wish I had bought the FSI now as it's far more econommical than the TDI /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

    Oh and Audi as well as every other manufacturer does not do their mpg figures in a bench. They have to, by law do a very strict test route following set procedures.
    #46
  7. OutLore
    Offline

    OutLore VOIP Dude

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,206
    Likes Received:
    1
    [ QUOTE ]
    Damn, I wish I had bought the FSI now as it's far more econommical than the TDI /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

    [/ QUOTE ]

    LOL! me too! Mine regularly drops to 11 or so if I am gunning it! have seen 5mpg too /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif but only for a second, and normally between on and off throttle....

    Maybe we should have a "Who can get the lowest average" thread instead of the usual "how many can you get to a tankful" ..... I think the 3.2 guys might be up for it anyway /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
    #47
  8. JaminBen
    Offline

    JaminBen Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    532
    Likes Received:
    2
    ah, no?
    #48
  9. slimbloke
    Offline

    slimbloke Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    0
    60-0 litres in 100 miles, he-he.

    My MPG calculations often go to zero, or even --- when the computer gives up!
    #49
  10. yak
    Offline

    yak Member

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    377
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]

    You've never seen 28 or less than???

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Averaging a 28 mpg per tank, no I haven't. That would be 10,8l/100km and that's pretty high.
    #50
  11. chipper
    Offline

    chipper New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2005
    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    'Do you really think manufacturers set their gear ratios to deliver the best 0-60 time'

    they do - a few examples

    0-60 is led alot by no of gear changes (non dsg owners take note!) and rev limit
    2 changes = fast 0-60 - 3 not so good - obviously engine has to be powerfull enough to pull a gear!

    citroen saxo vts - massively long second gear to get the 0-60 time down - hence a big hole in 3rd to make up for it! (very annoying except from the lights!)

    porsche boxter - regeared the car to make its 0-60 worse - reason - so that 911 owners could laugh at them and wouldnt be tempted to buy a significantly cheaper car which is in the real world as quick! (still a hairdressers car ;-)

    my 911 has a short ratio box option - so not as quick as a few 0-60 wise as i have another gear change to fit in - but on a twisty..... mmmmmmm nice
    #51
  12. slimbloke
    Offline

    slimbloke Member

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Messages:
    298
    Likes Received:
    0
    [ QUOTE ]
    [ QUOTE ]
    60-0 litres in 100 miles, he-he.

    My MPG calculations often go to zero, or even --- when the computer gives up!

    [/ QUOTE ]

    --- means you are not using any fuel at all doesn't it? IE off throttle and decelerating - moving foward keeps the engine running, so no fuel is required...

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I know what you mean, but this time... unfortunately, no. the rapid reduction in the MPG figure shown, followed by --- seems to happen (in this case) when I press the fun button too hard /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif
    #52

Share This Page