Mini Test Review: 2006 Volkswagen Golf GT 1 2
Is This the Future of Gas Engines? A VW engine with a supercharger and a turbo might spell a shift away from the diesel.
BY RAY HUTTON
July 2006
About half the new cars sold in western Europe have diesel engines under their hoods. Diesels have enjoyed a decade of relentless growth and development encouraged by their less-aggressive appetite for fuel and favorable taxation. Now some European automakers are trying to convince a skeptical motoring public in the U.S. that diesels are the future. Ironically, this latest push, conducted in the name of carbon-dioxide (CO2) reduction, comes at a time when the diesel engine may have passed its peak. The technology required to meet ever-tightening emissions regulations — especially for oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and particulates — will make diesel engines so expensive that gasoline engines with new refinements will likely look more attractive. It seems the diesel revolution is ending and the gas engine is starting to fight back.
Volkswagen, a longtime leader in diesel cars, is now offering the first of a new generation of gasoline engines that could replace the diesel. The idea behind the “twincharger” TSI engine is that by outfitting an engine with a supercharger and a turbocharger — supercharger for low rpm, turbocharger for high rpm — a direct-injection, small-displacement, gas-burning engine can be made to produce the equivalent power and torque of a much larger unit but with less CO2 emissions and fuel consumption. Jan Brockman, VW’s head of powertrain development, predicts the company will be downsizing its gas engines in the near future.
The first TSI engine is now available in Europe in the Golf GT, a car that, aside from its engine, is quite similar to the GTI. (Incidentally, the Golf GT will not be coming to the U.S.) Instead of the GTI’s 200-hp, 2.0-liter direct-injection turbo four-cylinder, the GT uses a 1.4-liter direct-injection supercharged and turbocharged four-cylinder that produces 170 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque. Turbo lag is effectively erased by the high compression ratio of 10.0:1 and the low-end boost provided by the supercharger. Below 2400 rpm, all the boost comes from the supercharger; at 2400 rpm, both the supercharger and the turbocharger provide boost; and beyond 3500, the turbo works alone as the supercharger is disengaged by an electromagnetic clutch. The transition, controlled by the engine management computer, is seamless and undetectable.
On the road, it’s hard to believe the Golf GT is powered by a 1.4-liter. It feels like a larger 2.0-liter engine. With fuel consumption that rivals that of diesel engines, the only downsides to the TSI mill might be a slightly rough engine note and a bit more vibration than one might find in VW’s 2.0-liter engine.
Interestingly, the Golf GT is also available with a 2.0-liter turbo-diesel (TDI) that also makes 170 horses. According to European Union carbon-dioxide figures, the gas version puts out only eight-percent-more CO2.
The critical point is whether the extra cost of the TSI technology is less than the cost of the equipment that comes on the latest diesels. VW is tight-lipped about the cost of building its engines, but in Germany the Golf GT equipped with the TSI engine is roughly $3100 less than the diesel TDI version. The GT’s optional diesel engine has an expensive, highly precise fuel-injection system, four valves per cylinder, a variable intake manifold, twin balance shafts, and several pricey exhaust-treatment systems such as a particulate filter. In comparison, the gas TSI engine has a turbocharger and a supercharger, but the turbo is small and lacks variable vane technology. Also, the gas engine can meet emissions standards without the complex devices that diesel engines require.
Man, that used to be a joke we would tell when we were kids. "Yeah, my car's got a supercharger and a turbo. hu huh" Well, proves me wrong. It's really a smart idea though. Take the best of both worlds and combine them. Of course, it's not comming to the states, but hey, it's a start!
Team GREEN
Suspension Division - "Handling Before Horsepower"
Making the turns since 1999
1998 EK Civic Hatch - Yes, it's a Honda.
There will be larger and smaller versions of the 1.4-liter TSI. The next will likely be a 1.6-liter engine making perhaps 190 horsepower, and a smaller 1.2-liter version with about 150 horses should follow. The 1.6-liter could replace the current 2.0-liter turbo engine, but VW’s Brockman is doubtful that a four-cylinder will ever replace a six-cylinder engine, or if a twincharger V-6 will ever replace a V-8: “America, in particular, isn’t keen to give up its V-8s.” As much as we enjoyed our first encounter with TSI, we know he’s probably right, as a premium is usually paid for a V-6 or a V-8.
Vehicle type: front-engine, front-wheel-drive, 5-passenger, 3-door coupe
Estimated base price (Germany): $22,500
Engine type: turbocharged, supercharged, and intercooled DOHC 16-valve inline-4, iron block and aluminum head, direct fuel injection
Displacement: 85 cu in, 1390cc
Power (SAE net): 170 bhp @ 6000 rpm
Transmissions: 6-speed manual, 6-speed manual with automated shifting and clutch
Wheelbase: 101.5 in
Length/width/height: 166.0/69.3/57.7 in
Curb weight: 3150 lb
Manufacturer’s performance rating:
Zero to 62 mph: 7.9 sec
Fuel economy:
European urban cycle: 29 mpg
extra-urban cycle: 46 mpg
combined: 38 mpg
Those are the specs that I forgot to add.
Team GREEN
Suspension Division - "Handling Before Horsepower"
Making the turns since 1999
1998 EK Civic Hatch - Yes, it's a Honda.
Hmm didnt get through the whole thing yet but it seems like a waste of money to me. Wouldn't have been so much cheaper to go one route or the other also more mechanically sound?
05 M6 YJ GTO 1 of 447
see im not the only one doing the twin charged set up ... even car companys are... i read up on this and they work there set up total different though but none the less very cool to see
The First Twin Charged jbody
blue car (R.I.P) - 240whp @7psi..
silver car - 305whp 315lbs.tq @15psi (91 Octane) or 420whp & 425lbs.TQ @20psi (94 octane+Alcohol Injection)
All dynos run on a Mustang dyno
I have seen cutaways of that motor. you would never belive how long it takes the air to get to the cylanders once it comes into the air cleaner housing. lots and lots of air ducting.
imo, overcomplicated. especially to the fact that now you have the parasitic loss of 2 power adders and the parisitic loss gained by the air and exaust having to go every which way to get to its destination. not to mention once that car gets 100,000 miles on it and @!#$ startes breaking, how much will all that cost to fix one day??? turbo+s/c has been done before to several cars but it usually proves to be just for show.
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
when you beat someone in a civic people wine and make excuses
when you beat someone in a cavalier they pull over and check under thier hoods
The idea VW had was to make it peppy while being fuel efficient. Notice it is a 1.4L.
BTW wasn't this topic posted before? lol
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
NUTCASE . wrote:I have seen cutaways of that motor. you would never belive how long it takes the air to get to the cylanders once it comes into the air cleaner housing. lots and lots of air ducting.
imo, overcomplicated. especially to the fact that now you have the parasitic loss of 2 power adders and the parisitic loss gained by the air and exaust having to go every which way to get to its destination. not to mention once that car gets 100,000 miles on it and @!#$ startes breaking, how much will all that cost to fix one day??? turbo+s/c has been done before to several cars but it usually proves to be just for show.
explain the parasitic loss of a turbocharger please
id like to hear that one
its there, just alot less then that of a supercharger. like I said before any time air has to change direction it looses momentum and therefore will take a little more pressure to move. that and for every pound of boost that is pushing back on the impellar that does translate back to the turbine side. ever hear people talk about how turbo headers can get extremely hot and therefore you can't cheap out on the metal and crafsmanship as much as you can with n/a headers. thats becouse of the exaust gasses being held back in the header before the turbine.(not to be confused with inversion where exaust goes out one exaust port and then tries to go in another). and also the shaft bearings, granted ball bearings are very low friction not all turbos are BB. so yes, it does take a small amount of power to operate the turbo system itself, just alot less than a supercharger
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
when you beat someone in a civic people wine and make excuses
when you beat someone in a cavalier they pull over and check under thier hoods
It takes energy to turn the turbo yes, however; it uses the exhausts thermal and kinetic energies to turn it. It doesn't really put any more load on your engine.
05 M6 YJ GTO 1 of 447
all i can say is my Twin charge set up was designed by just me... and my old man (lots of work and calculations when in to it, it wasnt just slapped togeather)... and it works damn good so far with out even being tuned... but i can only imagine how well this set up being made by a big company would do... especially with some mods to the supercharger and turbo.... there is sooooo much you can do to move your power band around with this set up.... i honestly predict to see some of these cars once in the hands of some good tuners pulling off some damn good numbers even with the 1.4L engine...
The First Twin Charged jbody
blue car (R.I.P) - 240whp @7psi..
silver car - 305whp 315lbs.tq @15psi (91 Octane) or 420whp & 425lbs.TQ @20psi (94 octane+Alcohol Injection)
All dynos run on a Mustang dyno
Ok, point # 1---- the 1.4 TSI is very old news. By about a year.
Point #2--- Turbochargers DO have parasitic loss through backpressure, PERIOD. However, said parasitic loss is minimal when compared with the massive drag of a supercharger. If the turbine and turbine housing of a turbo didn't restrict power, why do you think that going to a bigger a/r housing gets higher peak power?
Arrival Blue 04 LS Sport
Eco
Turbo
Megasquirt
'Nuff said
...