235 MPG VW XL1 Diesel Hybrid getting closer

bugget

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2005
Location
Bainbridge Island, Washington
TDI
Jetta TDI GLS 2000
Okay my German isn't the greatest in the world but this quote makes me think that this new version isn't quite 1 liter per 100 KM anymore:

Die Studie verbraucht 1,49 Liter auf 100 Kilometer

Did I read that wrong?
 

Boost_virgin

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Location
Sullivan MO
TDI
2000 Jetta
I want it. Even if you put US emission stuff on it and it ONLY got 125mpg I would buy it in a heart beat. My 750 mile weekly commute would only cost me $15.00 a week. That would rock. 90% of the time I travle alone.
 

Ski in NC

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Location
Wilmington, NC USA
TDI
2001 Jetta ALH 5sp stock
The focus on super high mpg is a little silly.

The gains from going from 50 to 60 to 70 to 80 to 90 mpg diminish rapidly the higher you go.

Driving 15000 miles per year, the gallons burned for each mpg:

50 mpg 300 gal
60 250
70 214
80 188
90 166 This last ten mpg improvement is 22 gal per year.

The real gains come from improving things on the lower end of the mpg scale.

10 mpg 1500 gal
12 1250
15 1000
20 750 This ten mpg improvement saves 750 gal per year (!!!!)
25 600
30 500
35 428
40 375


We don't need impractical 150mpg cars, we need practical 40-50mpg cars.

And very few 10 mpg vehicles (or at least ones driven unnecessarily).

Also, the mpg rating is a very poor measure for comparing vehicles, as shown above.

How about "GP15K" (gallons per 15k miles) or GPY (gallons per year) or something like that with the dependent variable in the numerator, not denominator.

Hummer: 1500 GPY (10 mpg)
Camry: 600 GPY (25 mpg)
Jetta: 375 GPY (40 mpg)

The gpy numbers look a whole lot more scary than the mpg numbers!!! How 'bout those numbers pasted on window stickers??

(not ragging on the L1 specifically, I think it is very cool)

-Eric
 
Last edited:

MrPolak

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2003
Location
Atlanta, GA
TDI
2001 New Beetle TDI
Ski in NC said:
The focus on super high mpg is a little silly.

The gains from going from 50 to 60 to 70 to 80 to 90 mpg diminish rapidly the higher you go.

Driving 15000 miles per year, the gallons burned for each mpg:

50 mpg 300 gal
60 250
70 214
80 188
90 166 This last ten mpg improvement is 22 gal per year.

The real gains come from improving things on the lower end of the mpg scale.

10 mpg 1500 gal
12 1250
15 1000
20 750 This ten mpg improvement saves 750 gal per year (!!!!)
25 600
30 500
35 428
40 375



-Eric
It looks like you've discovered that MPG are a non-linear representation of fuel consumption? If we could now get the rest of public to realize the same. :)

By the way, I like your idea.

I'm all for gallons per 100 miles (GPM? G/100mi?) which is a much better representation of consumption as compared to MPG and reflects the European L/100 km standard more closely. Maybe we can then get people thinking of USAGE instead of DISTANCE, eh?

10 MPG = 10 G/100mi
15 MPG = 6.7 G/100mi
20 MPG = 5 G/100mi
25 MPG = 4 G/100mi
30 MPG = 3.3 G/100mi
35 MPG = 2.9 G/100mi
40 MPG = 2.5 G/100mi
45 MPG = 2.2 G/100mi
50 MPG = 2 G/100mi

1.49 L/100km = 157 MPG = .64 G/100mi



And maybe, just maybe someday we'll all come to our senses and go metric.
 

atc98002

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2006
Location
Auburn WA
TDI
2014 Passat TDI SEL Premium (sold back), 2009 Jetta (sold back), 80 Rabbit diesel (long gone)
bugget said:
Okay my German isn't the greatest in the world but this quote makes me think that this new version isn't quite 1 liter per 100 KM anymore:

Die Studie verbraucht 1,49 Liter auf 100 Kilometer

Did I read that wrong?
Nope, they kept the name, but it doesn't mean 1 liter per 100Km anymore. However, I wouldn't kick at 1.49 either:D

I imagine they decided to use the same name because it still has a lot of the same styling cues. Personally, I'd have to see it in person. I've seen too many cars that looked good (or bad) in pictures but seeing them live has changed my mind. I wasn't too sure about the latest Jetta until I saw one. Guess I liked it; I bought one!
 

Lug_Nut

TDIClub Enthusiast, Pre-Forum Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 20, 1998
Location
Sterling, Massachusetts. USA
TDI
idi: 1988 Bolens DGT1700H, the other oil burner: 1967 Saab Sonett II two stroke
No, thanks. 1.5l/100km can be 152.7 mpg or 162.2 mpg depending if the 1.5 is 1.54 rounded down or 1.46 rounded up.
We have a hard time measuring fuel to 1/10 gallon and don't trust the pumps anyway, now we have to measure fuel to .01 liter (0.0026 gallon?) to avoid a 10 mpg error at the rate this L1 drinks?
I'm keeping with mpg (or km/l) for my own economy calculations. There more psychological satisfaction in gaining 5 mpg than there is in using 0.01 liter less fuel.
 

Boost_virgin

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Location
Sullivan MO
TDI
2000 Jetta
Ski in NC said:
The focus on super high mpg is a little silly.

The gains from going from 50 to 60 to 70 to 80 to 90 mpg diminish rapidly the higher you go.

Driving 15000 miles per year, the gallons burned for each mpg:

50 mpg 300 gal
60 250
70 214
80 188
90 166 This last ten mpg improvement is 22 gal per year.

The real gains come from improving things on the lower end of the mpg scale.

10 mpg 1500 gal
12 1250
15 1000
20 750 This ten mpg improvement saves 750 gal per year (!!!!)
25 600
30 500
35 428
40 375


We don't need impractical 150mpg cars, we need practical 40-50mpg cars.

And very few 10 mpg vehicles (or at least ones driven unnecessarily).

Also, the mpg rating is a very poor measure for comparing vehicles, as shown above.

How about "GP15K" (gallons per 15k miles) or GPY (gallons per year) or something like that with the dependent variable in the numerator, not denominator.

Hummer: 1500 GPY (10 mpg)
Camry: 600 GPY (25 mpg)
Jetta: 375 GPY (40 mpg)

The gpy numbers look a whole lot more scary than the mpg numbers!!! How 'bout those numbers pasted on window stickers??

(not ragging on the L1 specifically, I think it is very cool)

-Eric
The real change would come if all the 1 person SUVs that I see on my 750 mile commute would change to L1. Most people travel alone when going to work. No matter how hard we have tried to change that in the US it is still the norm. So since we like to travle alone give us a car that is made for just me. It makes total since. I would have 3 cars at that point. The L1 for my commute, and JSW as the wifes / family car, and a surburban for moving lots of people or stuff. I think it comes down to having the right tool for the job. The thought right now is we can have one tool for all jobs. Anytime that happens there are trade offs.
 

Dooglas

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 24, 2007
Location
Portland, OR
TDI
'06 Jetta
abctdi said:
Not everyone can afford that much car insurance...
It is amazing how many people around here seem to be able to afford commuting by themselves in a Ford F-250 4WD. I would think that insurance would be the least of their worries.

An ultra high miler for long commutes would certainly be good, but the discussions above support the fact that getting people to use a 50 mpg vehicle for applications that don't require substantial cargo or towing capacity instead of a 15 mpg vehicle is where the real quantum leap occurs.
 

Boost_virgin

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Location
Sullivan MO
TDI
2000 Jetta
Agreed. I'm just ready to take the next big leap. I already drive something that gets 50mpg. :D I want to take the next step. Only if it's a 5 speed that is! :p
 

abctdi

Top Post Dawg
Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Location
ABQ, NM, USA
TDI
2005 Passat GLS
Dooglas said:
It is amazing how many people around here seem to be able to afford commuting by themselves in a Ford F-250 4WD. I would think that insurance would be the least of their worries.
Whether an individual chooses to commute solo in an F-250 (not me for sure) or have one to tow an RV (like me) and is fortunate enough to be able to do so financially does not change the fact that the majority cannot afford to do so. Most are lucky to afford one good vehicle to perform the majority of their automobile tasks, whether it be going to work or hauling their family around. That's all I was sayin'.
 
Last edited:

German_1er_diesel

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Location
Ratzeburg
TDI
BMW 118d
Mike_M said:
According to what I read (can't find the link), that's at 100mph. It's still 1L/100km at normal freeway speeds.
According to their own press release, it's in the standard European test cycle.
 

hank miller

Veteran Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2005
Location
Monticello, MN
TDI
'06 Jetta
Ski in NC said:
The focus on super high mpg is a little silly.

The gains from going from 50 to 60 to 70 to 80 to 90 mpg diminish rapidly the higher you go.


The real gains come from improving things on the lower end of the mpg scale.

-Eric
You are asking the wrong questions. The average person drives 12,000 miles a year (or something like that). I drive more than double that, and some here drive double what I do. A lot of fuel can be saved by focusing on the drivers who drive many miles, and they are the most likely to care.


While the improvement to 150 mpg doesn't seem like much, it is very significant. I make my car payments just in fuel savings over my truck. (and at 22mpg it does very good), a 3 times improvement of my Jetta would be noticed in the pocket book.
 

Dana Bartholomew

Veteran Member
Joined
May 22, 2000
Location
Burbank, CA
TDI
Golf, 2000, satin silver
Latest and greatest L1 and other diesel-electric hybrids:

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-neil18-2009sep18,0,1785583,full.column

European carmakers rev up the electro-diesel concept

BMW's experimental Vision sport coupe, shown at Germany's Frankfurt Motor Show, would get 75 miles per gallon. Electro-diesel vehicles planned for production include Volkswagen's L1, a 170-mpg tandem-seater due out in 2013. (Dan Neil / Los Angeles Times / September 15, 2009)


By Dan Neil September 18, 2009

Reporting from Frankfurt, Germany
If you think all hybrid cars are like the Toyota Prius -- mirthless, ugly hair shirts of green conscience -- BMW would like you to meet its Vision: a stealth submarine of a car, lower than a boxing foul, all folded geometry and LED tracer lights. The signature BMW grille glows blue like a reactor cooling pond. The transparent doors open like dragonfly wings.

The all-wheel-drive Vision sport coupe is the Usain Bolt of hybrid cars: zero to 60 mph in under 4.8 seconds, top speed of 155 mph, 356 horsepower, and handling and braking comparable to the company's brain-melting M3 coupe.

Fuel economy: 75 miles per gallon. And you can plug it in.

Santa Monica might never be the same.

The Vision is one of several so-called electro-diesels at the Frankfurt Motor Show that put a typically European spin on Japan's signature eco-tech of hybrids. By combining electric motors and batteries with the huge torque and efficiency of direct-injection turbo- diesels, the European automakers are breeding a species of car that delivers V-8 performance with the fuel economy of mopeds.

Behind the menacing grille of the Vision, there's a small, 1.5-liter, 163-horsepower three-cylinder turbo-diesel engine and a big electric traction motor; arrayed like a capital "I" running down the spine of the car are rows of lithium-polymer batteries. At the rear axle is another electric motor, which gives the car essentially all-wheel drive. Together these components produce a whopping 590 pound-feet of torque, considerably more than your average Lamborghini.

The Vision, which uses batteries developed for Apache attack helicopters, is only an experimental vehicle for now. But "all the components are very realistic," said Philip Koehn, BMW's director of concept vehicle development. The batteries, the diesel components and electric motors are "off the shelf," he said.

Too flashy for you? At the other end of the performance spectrum is Volkswagen's L1 concept, a hyperlight, tandem-seat oil-burner, like a bobsled for the road. Getting its world premiere in Frankfurt, the L1 is powered by a small, two-cylinder turbocharged direct-injection (TDI) diesel engine and a small electric motor.

The L1's marquee number: 170 mpg, or about four times that of a Honda Insight hybrid. If it comes to market as planned in 2013, the VW L1 could claim the title of most fuel efficient passenger car on the road.

It would also be one of the cleanest. On a carbon-gram-per-mile basis -- that's the emissions metric that Europeans are most concerned with -- electro-diesels can outperform the thriftiest gas hybrids on the planet.

In the case of the Vision, BMW says the car produces 99 grams of carbon per kilometer on its own; plug it in and that number drops to 50 g/km.

To compare, a Toyota Prius has carbon emissions of 89 g/km in the European emission test cycle.

Depending on what you call a hybrid, electro-diesels have already arrived. Audi sells two diesel cars that are equipped with small starter/generators and battery packs to give them stop/start capability (the engine shuts down when the car is put in neutral).

However, Americans think of hybrids as cars with powerful electric motors that can move at low speed on battery power alone. The first such diesel car to come to market will be the Peugeot 3008 HYbrid4. Arriving in spring 2011, this mid-size sport-utility vehicle is expected to get about 62 mpg and produce 99 g/km of carbon.

A HYbrid4 version of the company's RCZ sports coupe is all but certain.

For years European automakers, who are the acknowledged masters of turbo-diesel technology, have quietly stewed as Asian companies reaped the green-image benefits of hybrid technology.

On a cost and emissions basis, German automakers argued, turbo-diesel engines are more efficient. One reason is that diesel fuel itself has a higher energy content than gasoline.

Still, hybrids offer some advantages. They recover kinetic energy as they brake or coast and use it to charge the batteries. They also save fuel by shutting down the internal-combustion engine when the vehicle comes to a stop. And they can move on electric power alone at low speeds, where internal combustion engines are less efficient.

So why not combine the best of both technologies?

Cost, mostly.

"Normal turbo-diesels are already so powerful and efficient [on the order of 30% more efficient than gasoline engines] that it was a challenge to improve on that and very expensive," said Volker Mornhinweg, the head of Mercedes-Benz's high-performance AMG division.

Then there's the inherent incompatibility of diesels and electric power sources. Both produce torque at low revolutions per minute. Gasoline engines, in contrast, product most of their torque at higher speeds. So in a gasoline hybrid, the engine torque ramps up just as the electric motor torque is falling off. That creates a seamless yin and yang, a complementary blending of mechanical forces that's missing in the diesel-electric union.

But thanks to some advances in the field, including software necessary to smoothly integrate diesel and electric power, the hybrid diesel equation has become more promising. It's still difficult. And expensive. But the eye-popping gas mileage of this marriage is what keeps the Europeans pushing.

"It's better in terms of total fuel efficiency to make a diesel hybrid," said Christophe Chateau, technology spokesman for French automaking giant Peugeot.

It can also be better marketing. Chateau pointed out that because Peugeot's hybrid system situates electric motors on the rear axle (like some Lexus gas hybrids) the cars are in effect all-wheel drive. Buyers who might not pay the extra price for an electro-diesel might be willing to pay a premium for AWD.

"We will get much more sales for this big amount," Chateau said.

Peugeot and other manufacturers see battery-electric powertrains as the most likely technology for small urban cars of the future. Because of the cost factor, electro-turbo-diesel will probably remain an up-market option. "We will not find this combination in too low-cost cars," BMW's Koehn said.

But there's an unknown out there: the increasing cost to rein in diesel emissions. In Europe, diesel cars command about 60% of the market; however, Europe has less-strict rules regarding diesel emissions of particulates and nitrous oxides.

"If the [European Union] moves to the emissions standards of the U.S.," said Koehn, "diesel will become more expensive and the relative cost-benefit of hybrid and diesels will change."

As Europe and the U.S. get closer in emissions regulations, the cost to homologate (legally certify) cars for both markets will drop. So one day, the hybrid that blows your doors off might itself have transparent doors.

dan.neil@latimes.com
Copyright © 2009, The Los Angeles Times
 
Last edited:

German_1er_diesel

Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2008
Location
Ratzeburg
TDI
BMW 118d
Behind the menacing grille of the Vision, there's a small, 1.5-liter, 163-horsepower three-cylinder turbo-diesel engine and a big electric traction motor; arrayed like a capital "I" running down the spine of the car are rows of lithium-polymer batteries. At the rear axle is another electric motor, which gives the car essentially all-wheel drive.

actually the diesel is behind the back seat, not behind the grille.
 

FredIA

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Location
North of Cedar Rapids, IA
TDI
2006 A5 Jetta, Shadow Blue, Pkg #1/XM, rear side curtain airbags
You gotta love the user commentary below that article. My kinda of smart a$$, that is for sure. Thanks for the lunchtime entertainment! :D

I think I am going to make a 6 passenger 35+ MPG TDI Minivan. It's imaginary too... But I admit it! ;)

Fred
 

bhtooefr

TDIClub Enthusiast, ToofTek Inventor
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Location
Newark, OH
TDI
None
Huh.

I didn't think VW would go that way with the design, given the added width of a side-by-side layout. (Then again, the ingress/egress challenges and the handling issues of a tandem car were probably why they went side-by-side.)

I'm also surprised they're getting that good fuel economy, despite going from 640 pounds and 0.159 Cd in 2002, to 838 pounds and 0.195 Cd in 2009, to 1753 pounds (over double!) and 0.186 Cd in 2011.

Edit: Figured it out.

Plug-in hybrid. (And their figures are even NEDC... but wanna bet NEDC allows PHEVs to be fully charged at the beginning of the cycle?)

Bastards.
 
Last edited:

bhtooefr

TDIClub Enthusiast, ToofTek Inventor
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Location
Newark, OH
TDI
None
Someone on The Car Lounge caught something interesting... They did screw up and take imperial MPG figures at face value, and missed some of the math, but they still had an excellent point...

gtivr4 said:
Anyone else catch this gem?

"The result is a car that can return 313.9mpg and emit just 24g/km of CO2 — while being capable of a top speed of 100mph (electronically limited) and a 0-62mph time of 11.9sec. Despite having a relatively small 10-litre (2.64 gallons) tank for diesel, the XL1 has a range of around 340 miles."

Umm if it REALLY got a TRUE 313.9mpg, it would have a range of 830 miles! But in reality it gets 130mpg, plus whatever the batteries give you. Impressive yes, 300+mpg NO WAY IN HELL.
And here's what I posted in reply to that...

bhtooefr said:
To be fair, the 313.9 mpg figure is for imperial, not US gallons.

The appropriate figure is 261.3 mpg, for that comparison. (0.9 L/100 km is the NEDC combined rating.)

Still, the point stands.

(Somewhere, I saw that the range was also NEDC. 35 km range on electric only, 550 km total range, so about 515 km range on a flat battery, making it 121.1 miles per US gallon. Like I said, it'll break 100 easily (and it'll probably break 150 on the highway, properly driven - that's a combined figure,) but 260? No way in hell.)
 

Lug_Nut

TDIClub Enthusiast, Pre-Forum Veteran Member
Joined
Jun 20, 1998
Location
Sterling, Massachusetts. USA
TDI
idi: 1988 Bolens DGT1700H, the other oil burner: 1967 Saab Sonett II two stroke
This is 'progress'?!?

"The result is a car that can ..... emit just 24g/km of CO2 — while being capable of a top speed of 100mph (electronically limited) and a 0-62mph time of 11.9sec. Despite having a relatively small 10-litre (2.64 gallons) tank for diesel, the XL1 has a range of around 340 miles."

and back in 2003, a 1996 stock VW Passat, one that already had 250,000 miles on it, had a CO2 score of 33.2 g/mi (20.64 g/km), got 82.7 mpg (2.85 l/100 km), had a top speed of about 115, a 0-60 (ok, not 62) time of 9.5 seconds, and a range of over 1000 miles.
http://www.mail-archive.com/sustainablelorgbiofuel@sustainablelists.org/msg24940.html
 

bhtooefr

TDIClub Enthusiast, ToofTek Inventor
Joined
Oct 16, 2005
Location
Newark, OH
TDI
None
There's a reason that it has a small tank - because of all the batteries, and so that there's still luggage room. (Even then, there's not much.)

And, your (I'm assuming it was yours, anyway) Passat was being hypermiled, whereas that'll get 120 MPG combined, not hypermiling, on an empty battery. You could probably break 150 MPG without too much problem.
 
Top