GolfGTIforum.co.uk
General => General discussion => Topic started by: martinb on 29 September 2005, 13:00
-
Anyone heard about the new golf gttsi? was chatting to a mate of mine who works as a sales manager for vw and he says they are due to be released soon! basically its a 1.4 mk5 with a supercharger and a turbo pushing out about 170bhp! sounds way cool!
-
or you could buy a less stressed gti with less bits to break down and more power...
I thought this car was an exercise not a production model?
-
http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/previews/59942/volkswagen_golf_gt_tsi.html
Apparentally it will be produced.
So whos up for taking the supercharger and turbo charger setup off one of these and dropping it onto a V5 motor? :wink:
-
and more:
http://www.vwvortex.com/artman/publish/volkswagen_news/article_1496.shtml
-
why a 1.4??? i cant see the engine putting up with much abuse, why not do that to a 1.8 or 2.0 engine?????
-
cheap tax and supposedly good fuel economy? wonder how much it will cost?
-
thinking about it seems like a good alternative to a gti if you do mostly city driving?
-
Anything under a 1.5 is the lower tax bracket.
That article quotes econmy at 39.2mpg, but surely thats not the case if you're pushing it.
This is a new engine, not a standard 1.4, so hopefully they've designed it to take the extra pressure of super and turbo charging it.
It's like getting decent power out of the rotary engine in the RX8 which is a 1.3l, so has cheap tax, but has a nice amount of power (but apparently fuel economy is rubbish).
It'd be interesting to see what insurance would be like because some companies look purely at the engine size rather than the BHP.
And presumably it'll cost less than the 200BHP Mk5 GTI, so it'll appeal to people with less money and get them a car with good performance but without paying as much.
-
why a 1.4??? i cant see the engine putting up with much abuse, why not do that to a 1.8 or 2.0 engine?????
a friend of mine has a 1.4 R5 turbo running 24psi of boost and putting 300BHP to the tarmac. he used to be a pit crew machanic and knows how to build a motor but it still blows every 3,000 miles. I dont see how a puny 1.4 will handle a turbo and supercharger, However the Wolfburg boys did turn smokey diesels into power houses so im sure they can manage this!
-
i think its a quality idea.
Think its really clever how they can get that much power out of such a small engine. Presumably being a smaller engine its goin to be lighter too so it will feel faster!?!
-
a friend of mine has a 1.4 R5 turbo running 24psi of boost and putting 300BHP to the tarmac. he used to be a pit crew machanic and knows how to build a motor but it still blows every 3,000 miles. I dont see how a puny 1.4 will handle a turbo and supercharger, However the Wolfburg boys did turn smokey diesels into power houses so im sure they can manage this!
Thing is, the R5 engine is a manky old 2 valve per cylinder pushrod item that is based on 70's French technology (ie none). Even in standard trim, the renault 5 GT Turbo was fragile (take it from me, I killed mine). No matter what you did to these things, monster power meant monster boost, which meant they would eventually blow themselves apart.
The engine that Volkswagen are using is considerably more complex/technologically advanced and will be built to withstand the boost involved. Additioanlly, the idea is that the supercharger provides the boost at low revs (as it is chain driven in winds up with zero load required) and it is then replaced with the turbocharger as the laod (and therefore exhaust gasses) get the turbo spinning nicely. It's not going to be a mega-boost monster!
-
i think its a quality idea.
Think its really clever how they can get that much power out of such a small engine. Presumably being a smaller engine its goin to be lighter too so it will feel faster!?!
Probally not mate, Although the block will be slightly smaller it will have to be more robust to take the extra boost, you also have a fairly hefty supercharger bolted ontop and a turbo charger with the extra turbo manafold waight behind that so it could even waigh more than a 1.8 NA motor.
*EDIT*
Some good points from S11EPs tho. Im sure the VW boys will pull somthing out to suprise us.
-
the idea is that the supercharger provides the boost at low revs (as it is chain driven in winds up with zero load required) and it is then replaced with the turbocharger as the load (and therefore exhaust gasses) get the turbo spinning nicely. It's not going to be a mega-boost monster!
and to think there was a plan to do this to my rallye :lipsrsealed: :grin:
-
Ahhh, but yours WILL be a mega boost monster!!!
-
i like the idea of it, bit like the wankel rotary engine in rx7's and 8's. they're 1.3's (i think) and put out lots of power. i know the enginedesign is totally different but the principal is the same. small engien big power!
-
the wankel :wink: rotary engine could be 3.9 or 1.3 depends who you ask!
Isnt the mk2 made by awt using a supercharged and turbocharged 1.8t engine? (bloody vw they have no original ideas!!)
-
why a 1.4??? i cant see the engine putting up with much abuse, why not do that to a 1.8 or 2.0 engine?????
actually the opposite is true.. with a smaller bore the cylinder walls are likely to be thicker and stronger and more likely to handle the extra stress...
-
Why don't they just make a tubo that works through all the rev range by having the inlet pipe nozzle jib (gotta love the engineering termws form an undergrad...) adjust to the speed of the engine....i.e. when you are at low speed/revs, the nozzle is smaller so the air flows through it quicker (continuity, think i have been paying to much attention in lectures....better get back to sleep), thus spinning the turbine blades quicker, then as your speed increase the inlet nozzle adjust and becomes larger to compensate for the extra air that is coming in.......or you would blow the turbo apart :grin: :undecided:
-
the idea is that the supercharger provides the boost at low revs (as it is chain driven in winds up with zero load required) and it is then replaced with the turbocharger as the load (and therefore exhaust gasses) get the turbo spinning nicely. It's not going to be a mega-boost monster!
and to think there was a plan to do this to my rallye :lipsrsealed: :grin:
dont let it stop you john! :wink:
-
Why don't they just make a tubo that works through all the rev range by having the inlet pipe nozzle jib (gotta love the engineering termws form an undergrad...) adjust to the speed of the engine....i.e. when you are at low speed/revs, the nozzle is smaller so the air flows through it quicker (continuity, think i have been paying to much attention in lectures....better get back to sleep), thus spinning the turbine blades quicker, then as your speed increase the inlet nozzle adjust and becomes larger to compensate for the extra air that is coming in.......or you would blow the turbo apart :grin: :undecided:
uhh.. why not just use a supercharger?
-
Dunno.....would be cool to have an awesome turbo....
-
Nice Idea from VW this. I like it alot. :smiley:
What I really want to know is, who will be the first to drop this lump into a Mk1/Mk2 ! lol :shocked:
Although I doubt it could be done easily!!
:smiley:
-
well a charger kicks in instantly where as the turbo kicks in at set revs, so i guess having both stops turbo lag and so a much smoother drive? Also may make the charger last longer if it stops when the turbo take's over? well vw did make the polo g40 which was a quick 1.4, fair one it only had the charger! great idea though, wonder what the insurance will be? :smiley:
-
Seems a daft idea to me, but its must be down to engine size as in a single turbo fitted to an engine that size must have turbo lag, and smaller twin turbos makes for complication with the exhaust plumbing etc hence the super charger which has been used on other VW models in the past, engine reliability wont be a problem, F1 cars used to be 1.5 litre remember and kicked out huge horse power, so a marginal output like this wont be a problem as long as the heat can be dispursed properly.
-
small engine doesn't necessarily mean turbo lag... my starlet turbo was a 1.3 pushing out 154bhp with minimal lag. When it was standard it was 141 with no lag.
I guess fuel economy is the main reason
-
Have a good read of the link jv posted. It answers all of your questions basicly.
-
engine reliability wont be a problem, F1 cars used to be 1.5 litre remember and kicked out huge horse power, so a marginal output like this wont be a problem as long as the heat can be dispursed properly.
they only ran their engines for one race though....