[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference terri::cars_uk

Title:	Cars in the UK
Notice:	Please read new conference charter 1.70
Moderator:	COMICS::SHELLEYELD

Created:	Sun Mar 06 1994
Last Modified:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	2584
Total number of notes:	63384

1483.0. "AUDI coupe and Golf GTI mills!" by IRNBRU::WILSON () Thu Jun 27 1991 18:04

    Hi,
    
    Have just purchased an 1988 1.8I Audi Coupe. Having had a Audi Coupe 
    1.9 GT5S before, I am truly amazed at the increase in performance and
    better fuel consumption with the 1.8I (39MPG) vs the 1.9carb (28MPG).
    
    I realise that the engine is probably straight out of the Golf GTI, but
    as a check, where there any "mods" done by Audi before fitting it into 
    the Coupe?
    
    Fuel injection is NOT the reason for increased performance....could it
    be......gear ratio's?, head/cam modifications?, lighter body?
    
    Thanks in advance....John.

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
1483.1		NEWOA::SAXBY	A light bulb lasts longer?	`Thu Jun 27 1991 18:10`	5
	Why do you say FI isn't the reason for improved performance? I always thought it would give better performance... Mark
1483.2	Ford EFI.	KERNEL::OSBORNE		`Thu Jun 27 1991 18:50`	4
	FI on Fords makes them thirsty around town but more efficient on long runs compared carb'd versions. Dave.
1483.3	FI does not always = >performance.	44126::WILSON		`Thu Jun 27 1991 19:22`	9
	FI does NOT automatically enhance your cars performance.... Ferrari have been using webbers on their cars for years!! As a time served motor vehicle engineer, who specialised on FI systems, I can confirm that it is not always the case that FI improves performance. It is certainly more efficient with regards to (MPG). John.
1483.4		45286::SAXBY	A light bulb lasts longer?	`Thu Jun 27 1991 19:33`	8
	But why does the original noter state that the performance improvements are NOT due to the FI? You always get better performance if the engine is more efficient, don't you? Mark
1483.5	MPG and BHP.	44126::WILSON		`Thu Jun 27 1991 19:38`	1
	More MPG does add to more BHP!
1483.6		NSDC::SIMPSON		`Thu Jun 27 1991 19:52`	3
	Overall I average 39-40 mpg my Golf GTI, 45-47 on the motorway at a steady 130 kph (81 mph) - so it doesn't look as though they've made any modifications before putting the engine in the Audi.
1483.7		NCEIS1::CHEVAUX	Patrick Chevaux, Nice, 828-6995	`Thu Jun 27 1991 21:04`	19
1483.9	TBC	IRNBRU::WILSON		`Fri Jun 28 1991 14:57`	20
	Hi, Yes, I agree that the FI will deliver the "punch" lower down, but what I am trying to understand is:- * Why is the 1.8I so "nippy" overall when compared to the 5 CYL 1.9 unit. I kept the 1.9 tuned to the best of my ability (VAG dealer inc). My old coupe, 1921cc (CARB) pushed out 115BHP, the 1798cc (FI) pushes out 114BHP. The GTI Golf (1.8I) produces 110BHP....could it be the gear/diff ratios? Also: I had presumed that the engine in my Audi was a "bog" standard GTI Golf engine, but the 4BHP difference makes me wonder. John.
1483.10		SUBURB::SCREENER	Robert Screene, UK Finance EUC	`Fri Jun 28 1991 15:06`	18
	I know that the audi's get bigger throttle bodies than the VW's. The throttle body is the bit in which the two butterfly valves sit, which are opened to let air be sucked into the engine as you press the throttle. The larger of the two valves (opened over the very last inch of accelerator travel) varies in size according to the engine installation. i.e. Audi is bigger than a MKII GTI is bigger than a MK1 1.8 GTI is bigger than a MK1 1.6 GTI. A bigger body is a great modification to MK1 golfs. Reputed to gain a good few BHP and a bit of torque. It certainly makes the engine feel more powerful. Rob.
1483.12	5cyl vs 4cyl	OASS::BURDEN_D	He's no fun, he fell right over	`Fri Jun 28 1991 18:17`	11
	I've got a US spec GTI with the 1.8 ltr 4cyl and I've also driven the 5cyl Audi engine in a friend's 4000q. Basically the same engine plus one cyl. The GTI engine will pull higher revs (6700+) while the 5cyl runs out of breath around 5500. Basically the 5cyl has more torque but not the top end punch of the 4cyl. Of course, I'm comparing them in two cars that differ in weight by about 1000lbs.... 4cyl - 1.8 ltr - 90bhp 5cyl - 2.2 ltr - 110/115bhp? Dave
1483.13		NSDC::SIMPSON		`Fri Jun 28 1991 19:48`	8
	RE: .9 by IRNBRU::WILSON >> My old coupe, 1921cc (CARB) pushed out 115BHP, the 1798cc (FI) pushes >> out 114BHP. The GTI Golf (1.8I) produces 110BHP....could it be the >> gear/diff ratios? My GTI in Switzerland is quoted at 115 bhp. The more recent one with catalytic converters are quoted at 109 bhp.
1483.14	Jumping in ....	DCOPST::BRIANH::NAYLOR	Tigers fly, Spiders roar!	`Wed Aug 14 1991 23:20`	18
	I just bought an Audi 4000CS Quattro and so far it seems to be amazing. Fuel economy for the past 150 miles has run out at abour 42 mpg (imperial) and the performance is, to say the least, sparkling. The book quotes it at 130 BHP (SAE). It's not sad thirsty as my Spider, goes faster and is quieter ....... but there's really no comparison between the two :-) Only gripe is that headroom is MUCH better in the Alfa than the Audi, but the Audi seat does go down to accomodate me. Comparing with VW - and my wife's (ex) Rabbit (Golf). That had the basic 1.8l engine, and turned in around 35 mpg overall, but it's performance was rather pathetic. Mind you, after 90,000 miles it wasn't expected to be too good. Anoyone any experience with the Quattro? I think it's the same model as the 80 Quattro in the UK. Brian