2014 Volkswagen Golf SV TDI DSG 5door
- Thread starter Beachball
- Start date
- Jul 15, 2008
- 3,822
- 958
- 20,935
........ I would go for the Passat estate which is well proven as a tow car with plenty of space for the extra kit needed for caravanning.
We have the MK7 SE with the 2 litre diesel and 6 speed manual box, though we don't tow with it.
A lovely torque-y flexible engine in a nice handling body.
I have to say I am not a fan of domestic cars with twin friction clutch "auto boxes" for caravan towing; simply because towing the slip torque inevitable during gear changes and starts is getting on for twice that the box is optimised for . IMO a torque converter clutch has a better chance of enduring this abuse. If towing only forms a small part of the vehicles usage then clearly this eases that concern.
The Golf with its minimal rear over hang has one of the fundamental characteristics for towing very right. But this comes at the expense of a pretty small boot.
A lovely torque-y flexible engine in a nice handling body.
I have to say I am not a fan of domestic cars with twin friction clutch "auto boxes" for caravan towing; simply because towing the slip torque inevitable during gear changes and starts is getting on for twice that the box is optimised for . IMO a torque converter clutch has a better chance of enduring this abuse. If towing only forms a small part of the vehicles usage then clearly this eases that concern.
The Golf with its minimal rear over hang has one of the fundamental characteristics for towing very right. But this comes at the expense of a pretty small boot.
We tow with a Skoda Octavia 1.9 tdi dsg and pull a Lunar 524 with no problem at all the limit for this car is 1400kg and the lunar is 1360kg fully loaded but we never have that amount of load round about 1310kg which gives us a match of about 92% ,the dsg gearbox is a dream to use as you can use it manually as well so gives you both options ,great boot space plenty of cabin space good visibility would recommend it fitted a tuning box which lifted the bhp from 105 to 138bhp which is worth doing it made a big difference to the cars performance hope this helps your search for a tow car.
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,675
- 3,933
- 50,935
richardc said:
I hope you have informed your insurers as tuning is classed as a modification that enhances performance and as such must be made known to your insurers. Failure to do so may invalidate your insurance and can result in having difficulties in getting insurance of any kind in the future.
ProfJohnL said:
Does retuning/remapping an engine also affect the output emissions and therefore the taxation band? Could one be charged with revenue evasion?
No - unless you submit the car for full Type Approval! Some big fleets have had diesel vans remapped and been given that answer by HMRC.WoodlandsCamper said:
Remember that any additional fuel used will already have the extra duty paid.
I suppose if how this particular module works is understood its quite easy to see how emmisions can be lowered.
I've just looked at Steinbauer's website - no reference to reducing emissions or fuel consumption, just power/torque increases.
But at £799 plus VAT - they're having a laugh surely?
But at £799 plus VAT - they're having a laugh surely?
depends if you know what to look for. emissions and by that i mean CO2 which is what in theory is measured for car road tax, has a direct link to mpg.the more miles per gallon you get the less CO2 you are pushing out and indeed other pollutants. so if a remap's so called claim to improve mpg is to be believed [some should be so should not] then your emissions will be lower,all things being equal...but then barely anybody really gets the so called manufacturers claimed average CO2 figurers/mpg figurers .find it strange the fuss about it. "emissions from remaps or tunning box" when. as caravanners when towing our emissions are usually double/worse than those so called manufacturers figurers anyway.ProfJohnL said:
i know nothing about the company but if i went by their claim of only 20% more power, that would get my attention in a world full of silly claims of xxx more power.but then i look at that box of tricks and i can see plainly they are plunging into more than just one sensorthe fuel rail pressure or indeed the more modern addition of 2 sensors turbo boost ..they seem to be connecting into 4 sensors...not cheap but then quality never is...RogerL said:
As i said in the previous post,when understood its simple.I can only speak for Steinbauer,the system they use does not connect to any external sensors.Instead it connects directly to the injector solinoids and thus the redundant injector harness then connects to the module.It benifits by not raising the fuel pressure.Because of this set up it has direct control over the injectors by means of pwm control(pulse width modulation).This means as well as making the opening duration last longer,it can shorten it to.So whilst coasting on neutral throttle the fueling can and is backed off.A reduction in emmisions is gained.
That implies that the £££££zillions spent originally made a mess of the injector timings.
But clever injector timings are what makes modern turbo-diesels so much better than earlier versions - each injection cycle is actually made up of several different pulses of different length and reduces the traditional diesel "clatter", optimises power/torque output, ensures complete combustion and keeps the exhaust clean.
All that a chip altering the pulse length is doing is adding more fuel, same way that crude chipping has always been done.
But clever injector timings are what makes modern turbo-diesels so much better than earlier versions - each injection cycle is actually made up of several different pulses of different length and reduces the traditional diesel "clatter", optimises power/torque output, ensures complete combustion and keeps the exhaust clean.
All that a chip altering the pulse length is doing is adding more fuel, same way that crude chipping has always been done.
Call it what you want, thats how it works.An engine producing more power can be cleaner and save fuel.There are other ways to gain power without increasing fuel rate.
I did inform my insurance company (Admiral) and there was no extra premium to pay, this tuning box can be remove at any time so it is not a permanent fixture to the car (TDI Tuning)
- Mar 14, 2005
- 18,675
- 3,933
- 50,935
seth1 said:
Hello Seth,
Most tuning boxes are applied to increase the power and torque performance of the standard vehicle. Most tuning boxes do not make any physical changes to the engines mechanical components, so the fundamental efficiency characteristic is not changed. Assuming an engine is not mistimed to begin with to get more power through the same engine at any given speed you basically have to put more fuel in. As the efficiency characteristic is not changed more fuel must equal more emissions in proportion to the fuel used.
Ok John without blinding everyone with science thats correct to a degree.The degree is if the engine was getting tested at the flywheel.If the engine was fitted as an example to something automotive spec,the gain in fuel which would lead to a power gain which would then lead to less gear changing and lower engine speed equals less emissions.
But getting back to my post and not veering off on to something else the particular module ive refered to can and does lower emissions for the reasons ive stated.
While were on the subject though your a brave man to start talking about fuel injection timing regarding modern common rail systems,i doubt very much if you begin to understand their operation.Pin point the start point of injection? well it changes on every firing stroke depending on what the cylinder before it has done.
But getting back to my post and not veering off on to something else the particular module ive refered to can and does lower emissions for the reasons ive stated.
While were on the subject though your a brave man to start talking about fuel injection timing regarding modern common rail systems,i doubt very much if you begin to understand their operation.Pin point the start point of injection? well it changes on every firing stroke depending on what the cylinder before it has done.
That assumes an increase in efficiency as engine rpm drops - while that's true at higher rpm, there is a maximum efficiency point and reducing rpm below that point makes effiency worse, not better.seth1 said:
Hi Roger do you understand the reasons for diesel engines going to electronic control in the early 90,s?It wasn't purely to do away with throttle cables although it helped.
High engine speed leads to excessive fuel usage and high emissions, of course boost conditions play another factor at the same time.But looking at this factor alone its white easy to understand why.
We now have 15litre engines returning 12mpg,max torque at 1000rpm the trend if you havint noticed is low reving engines and high fuel returns as a result, and yes low emissions in fact so low the RPC has now been scrapped.
We on average carry out 2-3 hp calibrations a week,mainly lifting the hp for a major engine maker so their not calibrations made up in a garden shed but factory calibrations.The options are vast but on the hole most operators take the biggest calibration for their engine available.This brings the torque in earlier and ends it sooner.All report of 1-2 mpg improvement.Plus generally 1 gear up on before.(less emissions)
Thermal efficiency springs to my mind by this I mean the correct size of engine for the correct hp.For example a 14liter engine rated at 290hp is not brilliant but the same engine at 675hp is much much better.Have a look at Scanias take on euro 5 and 6.
High engine speed leads to excessive fuel usage and high emissions, of course boost conditions play another factor at the same time.But looking at this factor alone its white easy to understand why.
We now have 15litre engines returning 12mpg,max torque at 1000rpm the trend if you havint noticed is low reving engines and high fuel returns as a result, and yes low emissions in fact so low the RPC has now been scrapped.
We on average carry out 2-3 hp calibrations a week,mainly lifting the hp for a major engine maker so their not calibrations made up in a garden shed but factory calibrations.The options are vast but on the hole most operators take the biggest calibration for their engine available.This brings the torque in earlier and ends it sooner.All report of 1-2 mpg improvement.Plus generally 1 gear up on before.(less emissions)
Thermal efficiency springs to my mind by this I mean the correct size of engine for the correct hp.For example a 14liter engine rated at 290hp is not brilliant but the same engine at 675hp is much much better.Have a look at Scanias take on euro 5 and 6.
Seth - do you understand the effect of BMEP and how the internal design of the engine affects it.
Modern engines do indeed have maximum BMEP at lower rpm than they used to - but going below that rpm will result in loss of efficiency - no ifs/buts or fancy electronics, it's a basic law of nature in reciprotating piston engines.
Modern engines do indeed have maximum BMEP at lower rpm than they used to - but going below that rpm will result in loss of efficiency - no ifs/buts or fancy electronics, it's a basic law of nature in reciprotating piston engines.
Facebook
Twitter