donDavide
Veteran Member
subscribed
With Popcorn.subscribed
I think you're correct. Car and Driver can't even read the chart they posted with the article: The US compliant engine will have between 105-110 kW or about the same power as the current CR.I'm 90% sure the 140 hp engine is NOT going to be upgraded to 190. I read the same press release car and driver sees and the writer read it wrong. According to the release, gains will be "up to" 12% and "as much as" 26%. 140-190 is 36%.
The max power of 190 will probably be for the 170hp GTD engine, not the 140 hp engine currently sold in the US. Not saying it's not coming to the US, just saying the 140 hp engine will probably end up "up to" 12% and "as much as" 26% so I'm guessing 150-155 hp.
Just a guess, but maybe moving to non-interference design? So lifetime until it fails without destroying the motor.How's that possible?
As an European, I'd be royally pissed about a car that disintegrates after 150k miles... and I know a lot of people who drive cars with much more than that.Keep in mind, VW has gone along with the shorter 'lifespan" of their vehicles in Europe as 7 to 8 years between disposal of cars. Also keep in mind that with the price of fuel in Europe, and the size, the distances driven are not as large as those in the USA. So, in VW's eyes, 150k miles may very well be a life time for the car...
That's because the 2.0 isn't the replacement for the 1.9 in other markets... The job of being the "economy" option for a Golf, Beetle or Passat is now the 1.6 TDI's, while the 2.0 TDI is a more powerful, less economic option.The shift from the 100hp PD to the 140hp CR did not come with no change in fuel consumption either.
I easily achieve more MPG then my friends 2006 jetta tdi ....but i will also leave him 5 cars behind if we were to race... wanna talk about engineering...Sure, it would be good news but somewhat contradicts the laws of physics (if engineers could do that why not increase hp/torque while cutting fuel consumption in half ). The shift from the 100hp PD to the 140hp CR did not come with no change in fuel consumption either. Somehow, fuel economy is being lost in this and that is the whole point of small diesels (at least to me).
Exactly!That's because the 2.0 isn't the replacement for the 1.9 in other markets... The job of being the "economy" option for a Golf, Beetle or Passat is now the 1.6 TDI's, while the 2.0 TDI is a more powerful, less economic option.
Who does VW think they are fooling??? When the "lifetime" of the belt is over, so is the engine. I can hear it now "Mr. Smith, your belt has failed and it will cost you (five figures) to replace it. As an added feature of this service, you will receive a new engine." How about some realistic numbers for that lifetime? I've never seen a belt last 15 years/200K miles, but that is my current expectation from a vehicle.Probably just like the "lifetime" fluids, keep it long enough or enough miles and it needs replaced, even chains need replaced.
I'll be the fraction of the fraction. This is way more powerful than the 1985 Mazda GLC that I limped along till about 150,000 miles. I think that 1.5 Liter put out about 70 hp with a top speed of about 85mph with a tail wind.If you want fuel economy, the 1.6TDI will bring that with a very satisfactory 105hp. But how many Amercians woudl go for that? A fraction of the fraction that go for diesel in the first place...
Count me in for another fraction of a fraction. I've enjoyed 440k miles in a 52hp 1.6L Jetta, so a 105hp 1.6L TDI with literally more than double the output would be perfectly fine with me.I'll be the fraction of the fraction. This is way more powerful than the 1985 Mazda GLC that I limped along till about 150,000 miles. I think that 1.5 Liter put out about 70 hp with a top speed of about 85mph with a tail wind.
That Jetta must have been substantially smaller than today's Jetta though. In any case, if that car satisfied your needs (which it must have, if you drove it for 440k miles ), what you want right now is this:Count me in for another fraction of a fraction. I've enjoyed 440k miles in a 52hp 1.6L Jetta, so a 105hp 1.6L TDI with literally more than double the output would be perfectly fine with me.