Sharan VR6

[Stirring Moose]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

[AudiA8Quattro]

Its also nonsense.
All 2.8 vr6's were AAA engine code and were 174bhp.

[DazVR6]

Its also nonsense.
All 2.8 vr6's were AAA engine code and were 174bhp.

Was there a vr6 engine, code AES that was in the vw Transporter and had 140bhp..?

[DazVR6]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

I got confused, wasn't the Sharan lump that was 140bhp but the VW Transporter T4 which had 138 bhp and 177ft/lbs. For a start the inlet mani is/looks very restrictive and i guess they used a detuned map.

[Wayne]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

I got confused, wasn't the Sharan lump that was 140bhp but the VW Transporter T4 which had 138 bhp and 177ft/lbs. For a start the inlet mani is/looks very restrictive and i guess they used a detuned map.

Is that the same version they fitted in the Mercedes v class or did that have 170bhp.

[VR6_Wherry]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

I got confused, wasn't the Sharan lump that was 140bhp but the VW Transporter T4 which had 138 bhp and 177ft/lbs. For a start the inlet mani is/looks very restrictive and i guess they used a detuned map.

That's correct Don't know about the detuned part, but it must have been! 

[DazVR6]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

I got confused, wasn't the Sharan lump that was 140bhp but the VW Transporter T4 which had 138 bhp and 177ft/lbs. For a start the inlet mani is/looks very restrictive and i guess they used a detuned map.

Is that the same version they fitted in the Mercedes v class or did that have 170bhp.

No that had 174 bhp.

[Wayne]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

I got confused, wasn't the Sharan lump that was 140bhp but the VW Transporter T4 which had 138 bhp and 177ft/lbs. For a start the inlet mani is/looks very restrictive and i guess they used a detuned map.

Is that the same version they fitted in the Mercedes v class or did that have 170bhp.

No that had 174 bhp.

Thanks for the info 

[thai-wronghorse]

Regardless of it's 174 bhp, it's still dog slow thanks to it's fat arse.

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/summary.aspx?model=1021

[Rmachines]

Think the power is down on the golf lump, was reading over on vr6oc thatit only had 145bhp but not sure how reliable that info was.

2.8 litres. 145bhp. Er, how the hell do you make an engine that inefficient?! That's only just over 50bhp/litre. That's HORRIFIC!

S.M.

8v?!?  Lol!   My 8v is 115bhp -  My honda jazz company car is... 1.4L ... 115bhp  (and dont laugh at the jazz part) I wouldnt put it past VW to make an inefficient engine