VW Owners

Groo2 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:07 pm

All,

Thanks for the advice. I shot a copy of your posts to my buddy... this was enough to get him in going in the right direction.

Thanks again.

Groo2 · **Posted:** Wed Jul 16, 2008 7:12 pm

Sorry,

I posted to the wrong topic, but hey I do truly enjoy both the discussions and camaraderie. No where Have I group of people with a better mix knowledge and willingness to help one another. Really it is a privilege to get to read through this forum.

Thanks for all the ammo you have given me to take to the dealers

TDI4BY · **Joined:** Sun Apr 02, 2006 11:56 pm **Posts:** 644

"I tell them what I am averaging "around 33 mpg". "

There is NO WAY :roll:

danoid · **Posted:** Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:24 pm

With regard to fuel economy, don't forget that some of the things that make it a unique vehicle and made us choose it are the same things that reduce fuel economy.

The cooling system: It's way oversized for gliding down the freeway at it's curb weight. It's capable of slogging for hours at low speed in 4WD low, AND able to tug 5000# (remember that thing in the owners manual about 64 sq ft of frontal area?) at reasonable highway speeds. (I admit I'm one of the worst offenders on that one...) I was disappointed to find out the Jetta TDI didn't have ANY trailer tow capacity, but that's not what that vehicle is for.

The t-case: not needed for getting down the smooth paved road. Having a low range and a neutral are (quickly vanishing) features that are extremely useful to some.

The axles: not needed for getting down the smooth paved road. A FWD based AWD system would be smaller, lighter, and less drag. But such a system didn't exist in the Chrysler parts bin to handle 300 lbf-ft of diesel so it would have needed to be designed from scratch - $$$ - think Porche Cayenne.

The transmission: ok, this one is needed for getting down the smooth paved road. But Chrysler had one readily available. It may not be perfect, but it helped hold the cost down.

The list goes on. My point is, this aint a Rav 4, a Jetta, a Cummins truck, or a Wrangler. It's about in the middle of those things, with some of the good and bad of each.

geordi · **Posted:** Wed Jul 16, 2008 10:46 pm

The Jetta has no towing capacity? You might want to check those facts with the numerous people who have (and use) a trailer hitch with the Jetta. I'm one of them.

The heaviest I pulled with my Jetta was either (take your pick) a mostly-loaded 6x12 enclosed Haulmark trailer that I was pulling to the scales - It weighed north of 2900 lbs. The other was a 1997 Jeep Grand Cherokee that I dragged by it's tow bar home from a mechanic who had been working on the Jetta trying to solve a hard-to-start problem that turned out to be the injection pump.

That's right - With a STILL FAULTY injection pump (weak internal seal) the TDI pulled about 3500 lbs of Jeep home without complaining.

And all of that was on the AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION model. I only sold it b/c I know those weights would have rapidly killed the transmission if I had done it more than a couple times. I wish the Touareg was offered with the 5-cyl version that is available in Europe... Same towing capacity as the V10, and better economy. But that's why I got my KJ.

'Has no towing capacity' Feh! :lol:

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

All true enough, up to a point. Liberty CRD has gotta have a beefy transfer case and good cooling system, it doesn't have to weigh 4500 pounds or have the aerodynamics of a shoebox. There is no way you can build a vehicle for it's purpose and get mileage comparable to a Jetta TDI (or even the much heavier Passat TDI), but I do think its possible to do better than the mileage of a Sprinter or a 5.9 cummins Ram.

When I was reading about the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles program, I read about Chrysler testing a 1st generation Dodge Durango with a 6 speed transmission, high geared rear end, and an off the shelf 4 cylinder Cummins, and the thing was returning highway mileage in the low to mid 30's. In a much bigger vehicle than our CRD's.

I am pretty happy with my Jeep so far, but even with all the mods I've done and driving conservatively, I've never really felt good about the mileage it gets for a vehicle of its size.

On towing with a Jetta, I think Danoid was referring to the current generation (2005.5 and newer) TDI's... the triptronic automatic they use in them is designed to mimic the performance feeling of a 6 speed manual, and not to take much punishment. Given the problems folks had with them early on, I'd never want to tow much more than a small utility trailer with mine.

Now the Passat TDI is a different story. As I recall, the last generation they offered here was rated to tow either 2500 or 3500 pounds. I hope they roll out a new Passat wagon TDI with the new engine, but a beefier transmission than the Jetta.

The aerodynamics and wind drag of the vehicle are not necessary to fulfill it's intended role.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

All true enough, up to a point. Liberty CRD has gotta have a beefy transfer case and good cooling system, it doesn't have to weigh 4500 pounds or have the aerodynamics of a shoebox. There is no way you can build a vehicle for it's purpose and get mileage comparable to a Jetta TDI (or even the much heavier Passat TDI), but I do think its possible to do better than the mileage of a Sprinter or a 5.9 cummins Ram.

When I was reading about the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles program, I read about Chrysler testing a 1st generation Dodge Durango with a 6 speed transmission, high geared rear end, and an off the shelf 4 cylinder Cummins, and the thing was returning highway mileage in the low to mid 30's. In a much bigger vehicle than our CRD's.

I am pretty happy with my Jeep so far, but even with all the mods I've done and driving conservatively, I've never really felt good about the mileage it gets for a vehicle of its size.

On towing with a Jetta, I think Danoid was referring to the current generation (2005.5 and newer) TDI's... the triptronic automatic they use in them is designed to mimic the performance feeling of a 6 speed manual, and not to take much punishment. Given the problems folks had with them early on, I'd never want to tow much more than a small utility trailer with mine.

Now the Passat TDI is a different story. As I recall, the last generation they offered here was rated to tow either 2500 or 3500 pounds. I hope they roll out a new Passat wagon TDI with the new engine, but a beefier transmission than the Jetta.

Uffe · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 7:52 am

I just wanted to let you know that I'm back from the south of France. I had four grown people in the car, and it was stuffed with holiday-ish things.

3000 miles. 68 gallons. Average speed 70mph over 1200 miles on the return trip. That's 44 MPG averaged at 75mph freeways and mountaindriving while down there.

I saw lots of KJs in France, not one was modified. I was constantly thinking about my fuel economy - because that's all there is to think about on small TDIs. Let them bang on about fuel economy, there is nothing more to talk about in those cars

curtis · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:02 am

Don't forget that the grade of Diesel is better over, The Epa has our blend choked down for the environment....

Uffe · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:27 am

curtis wrote:

Don't forget that the grade of Diesel is better over, The Epa has our blend choked down for the environment....

Not forgetting, just enjoying knowing I don't have to think about getting good grade fuel, because it's everywhere here

ac5501 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:31 am

TDI4BY wrote:

"I tell them what I am averaging "around 33 mpg". "

There is NO WAY :roll:

60-65 80% Freeway, 15% hwy, 5% city 105 mile per day commute - mostly flat roads. Last 3 tanks 32.7, 32.5, 32.9 Hand calculated at the same pump - close enough to 33 for me.

Nitrogen filled tires 40 psi - got a 2 mpg boost out of that
Removed muffler - 2 mpg boost from that.
Don't use the AC much - it takes me down 2 - 4 mpg when I do
Windows Open usually.

Still need to clean MAP sensor (yes I know don't say it).
Will be switching to full synthetic.

I'll report back as to whether the last two "todo" items make a difference.

This is the same commute that my 06 TDI would get 47-50 mpg. Although that was driving 70 -75. If I drove my Jetta at 60-65 I probobly would be getting closer to 53-56

danoid · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 11:53 am

geordi wrote:

The Jetta has no towing capacity? You might want to check those facts with the numerous people who have (and use) a trailer hitch with the Jetta. I'm one of them.

geordi wrote:

I know those weights would have rapidly killed the transmission if I had done it more than a couple times.

Many people (myself included) successfully exeed the manufacturers recommended towing capacities. They are conservative enough so that the average driver with a well maintained vehicle won't blow it up hauling his trailer out of Death Valley on vacation.

I based my statement from the owners manual of my 1998 Jetta TDI which stated that it was not rated to tow a trailer of any weight.

I'm not bashing the VW, I wish I still had mine for commuting.

GypsyCRD · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 8:36 pm

Well here is my take on the MPG thing. I have an 82 Isuzu Pup Diesel 4x4 and usually get around 30 mpg. It only weighs 2600#. It won't tow very much and top speed is about 60 and has no ac or ps. My 06 CRD gets less BUT, it is heavier, can out run, out tow and is much more comfortable ect. ect. Now the CRD's MPG is not really all that bad considering the Pup diesel was one of the most efficient pickups EVER. The 2wd version get 40 mpg+, My dad has 2 of them. It really makes me wander what MPG one of the CRD's would get in a 2wd version. Hmmmm.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

curtis wrote:

Don't forget that the grade of Diesel is better over, The Epa has our blend choked down for the environment....

It is? Their diesel is slightly higher in sulfur than ours, but sulfur is not the same thing as cetane. In fact, the high sulfur rot gut diesel that used to be sold in truck stops was some of the worst cetane fuel out there (meaning, less energy in it per gallon than a high quality, high cetane fuel).

Sir Sam · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 9:10 pm

GypsyCRD wrote:

Well here is my take on the MPG thing. I have an 82 Isuzu Pup Diesel 4x4 and usually get around 30 mpg. It only weighs 2600#. It won't tow very much and top speed is about 60 and has no ac or ps. My 06 CRD gets less BUT, it is heavier, can out run, out tow and is much more comfortable ect. ect. Now the CRD's MPG is not really all that bad considering the Pup diesel was one of the most efficient pickups EVER. The 2wd version get 40 mpg+, My dad has 2 of them. It really makes me wander what MPG one of the CRD's would get in a 2wd version. Hmmmm.

I don't know what a 2wd jeep would be like, I can only imagine it would be having a C*ock without any B*alls

dieselenthusiast · **Posted:** Thu Jul 17, 2008 10:40 pm

Threeweight wrote:

I'm hoping that with $$ for fuel where it is, we'll see some SUV's and small pickups that pay more attention to aerodynamics and weight. Those are the two big killers for the Liberty CRD's mileage, and neither of them are necessary for the vehicle to fulfill it's intended function.

My dream rig would be something the size of the previous generation Tacoma's, with a diesel in the 2.5-3 liter range, hitting 25 mpg city, 35 mpg highway.

Your dream is about to come true with the new Mahindra truck coming out. :wink:

nursecosmo · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:29 am

Threeweight wrote:

curtis wrote:

Don't forget that the grade of Diesel is better over, The Epa has our blend choked down for the environment....

It is? Their diesel is slightly higher in sulfur than ours, but sulfur is not the same thing as cetane. In fact, the high sulfur rot gut diesel that used to be sold in truck stops was some of the worst cetane fuel out there (meaning, less energy in it per gallon than a high quality, high cetane fuel).

Most diesel in Europe is now lower in sulfur than in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Low_Sulfur_Diesel Their Cetane requirement is however higher than in the US, although with modern electronically controlled injection it is not as much of an issue as it was in past designs.

Cetane # has nothing to do with the energy content of diesel anymore than octane has anything to do with the BTU content of gasoline. Both terms refer to the ignition characteristics of the fuel.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

GypsyCRD wrote:

Well here is my take on the MPG thing. I have an 82 Isuzu Pup Diesel 4x4 and usually get around 30 mpg. It only weighs 2600#. It won't tow very much and top speed is about 60 and has no ac or ps. My 06 CRD gets less BUT, it is heavier, can out run, out tow and is much more comfortable ect. ect. Now the CRD's MPG is not really all that bad considering the Pup diesel was one of the most efficient pickups EVER. The 2wd version get 40 mpg+, My dad has 2 of them. It really makes me wander what MPG one of the CRD's would get in a 2wd version. Hmmmm.

Different generations of diesel technology. Does the Isuzu even have a turbocharger?

I posted something a few months back about a late model (2006) Mitsubishi diesel pick up that was used in two ordinary Joes on an endurance run in England to test hypermiling techniques in a diesel pickup. This was a previous generation Tacoma/Frontier sized truck. As I recall they were getting in the low 40's mpg with it (adjusted for US gallons).

The CRD doesn't get bad mileage. It gets great mileage compared to the other options at the time. It just doesn't get the mileage one would expect from a small SUV running a 2.8 liter diesel (when compared to giant Sprinter vans or older 3/4 ton Ram pickups).

nursecosmo · **Posted:** Fri Jul 18, 2008 2:34 am

Threeweight wrote:

The CRD doesn't get bad mileage. It gets great mileage compared to the other options at the time. It just doesn't get the mileage one would expect from a small SUV running a 2.8 liter diesel (when compared to giant Sprinter vans or older 3/4 ton Ram pickups).

10-4 I think that the mileage is good in comparison to other American market options but I would still like to see another overdrive gear.

Threeweight · **Joined:** Mon May 14, 2007 5:57 pm **Posts:** 679

nursecosmo wrote:

Most diesel in Europe is now lower in sulfur than in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-Low_Sulfur_Diesel

Technically, not until next year. That Wiki notes that 2008 Euro specs are 50 parts per million sulfur, dropping to 10 ppm next year. Current US standards are 15 ppm.

Hopefully the standardization will lead to engine designs that meet the clean air rules on both continents. The new MB and VW stuff is being sold in both markets.

It would be cool to see some of the tinkers out there putting energy into home made plug-in hybrids instead spend some time on small diesel SUV's or pickups capable of towing a decent load. I think our 2.8, in a 3500# chasis, with a six speed manual, 3.73 rear end, and decent aerodynamics could easily hit 35 mpg highway, maybe more.

VW Owners

Who is online