Realisation that you guys are martyrs to the cause.

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dicky, Sep 25, 2013.

Page 2 of 3
  1. Joker

    Joker

    The highly superior type 4 engine is even less fuel efficient than the wheezy geriatric lawnmower engine you're running now. It will just get you up hills better. And allow you to overtake more. And pull away from junctions without having to second guess. And keep you ahead of those knob head prostitute killers on the motorway.

    It will also prolong the life of your gearbox as you'll have to shift gear far less often.

    Did I also mention that they're easier to work on? And more robust. And look nicer too.

    Wish I had a scooby though
    :)
     
    Joker, Sep 25, 2013
    #21
    baygeekster likes this.
  2. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator

    Although I respect what you say I think you are misguided in some of the facts you state ( like all of us, I know) It is no good me pointing out the pitfalls in your statements as you always seem to know better.

    The lorry driver thing is a bit strong mate!:(
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #22
  3. rickyrooo1

    rickyrooo1 Hanging round like a bad smell

    just been chatting with a lorry driver at work who has got a T25 aircooled 1980 2 litre on carbs, he insisted he gets 30mpg on a run? i can't believe that, i'd love 20 - what is the official mpg on a 2 litre anyone know?
     
    rickyrooo1, Sep 25, 2013
    #23
  4. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator

    Some basic pointers.

    Aircooled engines are not as fuel efficient as watercooled so we will never be looking at 40+ mpg we can however tune our engines and get them running as efficiently as possible, you can try driving as this guide on fuel efficient driving from the RAC states http://www.rac.co.uk/advice/car-knowledge/top-ten/fuel-consumption/ there are other factors too such as weather conditions. An headwind will significantly reduce mpg, warmer weather gives better fuel consumption read the reasons why here
    http://www.topspeedracer.com/better-gas-mileage-in-summer-than-winter.html

    The above tips do work, I know that we don't mind using a bit on weekend trips etc and the vehicle is a bit of a luxury to most but if you are saving 10-15% on your yearly holiday to Cornwall or France then the saving becomes significant.

    @rickyrooo1 yes the t25 "wasserboxer" is more fuel efficient driven properly but have no idea on the wc - the guy you just said told you that was a pro driver.

    Official vw stats re fuel consumption in us gallons - remember they err on the side of caution!

    1987/88 4 spd 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 20•3 mpg 29•7 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 5 spd 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 32•5 mpg 35•7 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 Syncro 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 29•1 mpg 32•1 mpg Not Given
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #24
  5. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator


    These are the official vw fuel consumption figures in us gallons - just read 24.9 for 1600 bays:(

    But yours is worse :)



    Fuel Consumption Data to DIN 70030 (Part 2)

    Model years Trans. Engine & Fuel Specification @ ¾ max speed & ½ load

    1972~73 4 spd 1584cc C.R. 7•5:1 50 bhp Petrol 24•9 mpg @ 51 mph

    1972~73 4 spd 1679cc C.R. 7•3:1 66 bhp Petrol 22•0 mpg @ 58 mph
    1973 Auto 1679cc C.R. 7•3:1 66 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 56 mph

    1974~75 4 spd 1795cc C.R. 7•3:1 68 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 58 mph
    1974~75 Auto 1795cc C.R. 7•3:1 68 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 56 mph

    1976~79 4 spd 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol 23•9 mpg @ 58 mph
    1976~79 Auto 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol 21•7 mpg @ 56 mph

    1980~83 4 spd 1584cc C.R. 7•5:1 50 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 51 mph

    1980~83 4 spd 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 58 mph
    1980~83 Auto 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol ? mpg @ 56 mph


    1983 4 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 60 bhp Petrol 25•9 mpg @ 55 mph
    1983 5 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 60 bhp Petrol 25•9 mpg @ 55 mph

    1983 4 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 24•1 mpg @ 61 mph
    1983 5 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 24•7 mpg @ 61 mph
    1983 Auto 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 22•6 mpg @ 59 mph

    1987/88 4 spd 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 24•1 mpg @ 61 mph
    1987/88 5 spd 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 24•8 mpg @ 61 mph
    1987/88 Auto 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 22•6 mpg @ 58 mph
    1987/88 Syncro 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 21•6 mpg @ 58 mph

    1987/88 5 spd 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp Petrol 21•9 mpg @ 70 mph
    1987/88 Auto 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp Petrol 21•2 mpg @ 68 mph
    1987/88 Syncro 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp Petrol 18•7 mpg @ 67 mph

    1987/88 4 spd 1715cc C.R. 23•0:1 57 bhp Diesel 32•1 mpg @ 54 mph
    1987/88 5 spd 1715cc C.R. 23•0:1 57 bhp Diesel 34•9 mpg @ 54 mph

    1987/88 5 spd 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 31•0 mpg @ 59 mph
    1987/88 Syncro 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 28•5 mpg @ 57 mph


    Fuel Consumption Data to DIN 70030 (Part 1) or Equivalent British Standard

    Model Trans. Engine & Fuel Specification Urban 56 mph 75 mph

    1980~83 4 spd 1584cc C.R. 7•5:1 50 bhp Petrol 17•9 mpg 23•7 mpg Not Given

    1980~83 4 spd 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol 16•8 mpg 25•0 mpg Not Given
    1980~83 Auto 1970cc C.R. 7•3:1 70 bhp Petrol 19•6 mpg 23•2 mpg Not Given

    1983 4 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 60 bhp Petrol 21•9 mpg 25•2 mpg Not Given
    1983 5 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 60 bhp Petrol 23•7 mpg 26•2 mpg Not Given

    1983 4 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 22•1 mpg 26•6 mpg Not Given
    1983 5 spd 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 20•3 mpg 27•7 mpg Not Given
    1983 Auto 1913cc C.R. ?! 78 bhp Petrol 22•4 mpg 22•8 mpg Not Given

    1987/88 4 spd 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 20•3 mpg 29•7 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 5 spd 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 25•9 mpg 30•1 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 Auto 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 20•5 mpg 26•4 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 Syncro 1913cc C.R. 8•6:1 78 bhp Petrol 19•0 mpg 25•2 mpg Not Given

    1987/88 5 spd 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp FI Petrol 23•5 mpg 32•1 mpg 21•6 mpg
    1987/88 Auto 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp FI Petrol 20•5 mpg 29•4 mpg 20•9 mpg
    1987/88 Syncro 2109cc C.R. 10•5:1 112 bhp FI Petrol 19•9 mpg 23•7 mpg 17•4 mpg

    1987/88 5 spd 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 32•5 mpg 35•7 mpg Not Given
    1987/88 Syncro 1588cc C.R. 23•0:1 70 bhp T Diesel 29•1 mpg 32•1 mpg Not Given
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #25
  6. bernjb56

    bernjb56 Supporter

    Mines a '?' o_O
     
    bernjb56, Sep 25, 2013
    #26
  7. Violetta

    Violetta

    What sort of engine have you got that you can reach 80? My poor little van can only reach 60 and that's pushing it. I don't actually want to go too fast but it might be nice to be able to keep time with the lorries on the motorway rather than hold them up.
     
    Violetta, Sep 25, 2013
    #27
  8. Barneyrubble

    Barneyrubble

    to be honest though who cares , we could all be dead tamorra ,spend ya shillings on what ya luv n chill maaaaaaanz :oops:
     
    Barneyrubble, Sep 25, 2013
    #28
    the crumpets, Robo, Beakey and 1 other person like this.
  9. bernjb56

    bernjb56 Supporter

    Too right Mr Rubble :thumbsup:
     
    bernjb56, Sep 25, 2013
    #29
  10. Majorhangover

    Majorhangover

    My last one would do 90mph down hill with the wind behind it (1800 type4) and sit at 70 pretty well, but my current is happiest at 50 -60mph (1800 knackard type4) :( as for mpg anything approaching 20 will do at the moment, though i'm probably nearer 17mpg. till the rebuild then i'll worry about tuning etc :)
     
    Majorhangover, Sep 25, 2013
    #30
  11. Joker

    Joker

    Don't be like that mate you know I'm only kidding. I don't know better at all and don't profess too. 95% of what I write on here is said in jest the other 5% is nonsense. Everything else is accurate. You know that. I also know that you're probably in the minority of friendly not knob head like truck driver.

    Now, put your shovel down, make a nice brew and go and have a yorkie.

    Chocolate bar that is, not street walker
    :)
     
    Joker, Sep 25, 2013
    #31
    baygeekster, Beakey, the crumpets and 2 others like this.
  12. Joker

    Joker

    For the record. I used to have type 1 engines in my vans. I always referred to them as lawn mowers as that's what my Grandad called them.

    If anyone is genuinely offended by that please let me know. When I've stopped laughing I'll consider an apology.
    :lol:

    ;)
     
    Joker, Sep 25, 2013
    #32
    steveagain, Majorhangover and Violetta like this.
  13. Dicky

    Dicky

    How do you mean 'you guys'. I thought you had one too?!?
    :)[/quote]

    Of course I do but I dont think id have one if I could only drive at 50 and stll not get decent mpg. Mine happiest sat at around and indicated 65 to 70 and yes it slows on hills and yes I only get low 20s fuel consuption, and I agree that the extra speed doesnt equate to a great deal of time saved on a journey but it would drive me batty!!!
     
    Dicky, Sep 25, 2013
    #33
  14. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator

    :D:D
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #34
  15. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator

    Sad fact is - the faster you go the more fuel you will use and they are not efficient anyway:(

    Oh my poor pocket:oops:
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #35
  16. Joker

    Joker

    Of course I do but I dont think id have one if I could only drive at 50 and stll not get decent mpg. Mine happiest sat at around and indicated 65 to 70 and yes it slows on hills and yes I only get low 20s fuel consuption, and I agree that the extra speed doesnt equate to a great deal of time saved on a journey but it would drive me batty!!![/quote]

    So what engine have you got then? And why does it slow on hills?
    :)
     
    Joker, Sep 25, 2013
    #36
  17. steveagain

    steveagain

    but there is truth P.T.2 in the public not realising/caring? re a truck being limited to 56.5 mph, the constant overtaking (slowly) to make that delivery cos well ,boss is "on their case" running out of tacho time etc , I mused for quite some time as to weather I cruised at 55mph cos it felt ok to do so ,or was it because I was so used to driving at that speed in truck that I was like attuned to it ? until as I have previously said ,so many trucks were sitting on my rear bumper/overtaking me > still not sure but I do make room for them insomuch I either ease up on throttle till they are a way past or floor it (usually the former cos I go back to 55 mph and they catch up and it starts again ,but then again I see it thru experience of both vehicles>me so old I do remember there used to be "public information" adverts on tv , honestly ,> how to cross the road safely >,how to lag your home water pipes for winter ,> sounds funny I know but perhaps the public simply do not realise the speed limit on a truck and the transport manager banging on re the next delivery?oh yeah , also ,in a fight with a truck I reckon I would be minced so >give em room !
     
    steveagain, Sep 25, 2013
    #37
    Poptop2 likes this.
  18. Sven

    Sven

    none taken. I find it a much greater achievement to get someplace in a lawnmower.
     
    Sven, Sep 25, 2013
    #38
    Joker likes this.
  19. Poptop2

    Poptop2 Administrator

    :lol::lol::lol:
     
    Poptop2, Sep 25, 2013
    #39
  20. Joker

    Joker

    Germany are looking to impose a speed limit network wide. Not for safety. Environmental factors. The auto makers are powerful over there though so will lobby against it. So watch out for the new F1 technology to flow down to road cars within a couple of years.

    1.6 V6 turbo hybrid anyone?
    :)
     
    Joker, Sep 25, 2013
    #40
Page 2 of 3

Share This Page