Turbo Intercooler Muffler??

[9 iron]

tried to the search function to see if this has popped up before... nothing came up...

is this a factory part fitted to all mkv gti's?

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Turbo-Intercooler-Muffler-VW-GTI-Jetta-Mk5-MkV-05-2-0T_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQhashZitem483441199fQQitemZ310114326943QQptZMotorsQ5fCarQ5fTruckQ5fPartsQ5fAccessories

if yes is it easy to get to and remove?

[gregozedobe]

I'm bored, so I'll bite : Why do you ask, grasshopper ?

[Greg Roles]

Certainly nothing like that in the inlet tract of the TDI.

[POLARBEAR666]

Certainly nothing like that in the inlet tractor of the TDI.

Tag your it cog

[Greg Roles]

*Disclaimer - Don't rely on me, seek your own professional advice. Audi R8 E-tron. 230kw 4500nm! (not a typo).

Electric cars have no transmission, so this is the torque at the wheels, quite different to "crank" torque. Your typical 1.6 petrol car transmission multiplies its torque around 15 times (in first gear), so we have say 150nm at the crank x 15 = 2250nm at wheels. The R8 V8 engine delivers to the wheels similar torque as Etron via it's tranny and diff, 430nm crank * 3 * 3.5 = 4515nm. All an electric motor has over a conventional engine is instantaneous torque, the figure itself is basically marketing spin.

SNAP!

As you were......

[POLARBEAR666]

Electric cars have no transmission, so this is the torque at the wheels, quite different to "crank" torque. Your typical 1.6 petrol car transmission multiplies its torque around 15 times (in first gear), so we have say 150nm at the crank x 15 = 2250nm at wheels. The R8 V8 engine delivers to the wheels similar torque as Etron via it's tranny and diff, 430nm crank * 3 * 3.5 = 4515nm. All an electric motor has over a conventional engine is instantaneous torque, the figure itself is basically marketing spin.

SNAP!

As you were......

I don't think so. If you were correct then why do dyno's show torque at engine and wheels as being only 15-30% different. Drivetrain losses on a FWD are about 15-20% so I don't see where your getting this 15 x, 10x maths. Petrol car power figures are also done using the 1:1 gear in that car eg 3rd or 4th gear. So that is the same as the electric motor as it is always 1:1.

In first gear, using your example, the 1.6 would have a higher power and torque reading on a dyno but it would not be 15 times higher. You can't be suggesting that if a 1.6 has 100nm output that it suddenly is able to provide 1000nm at the wheels in first. It simply isn't possible. What is possible is that in first gear the cars 100nm gets applied to just a few turns of the wheel and then as you change to 2nd it is applied to more turns of the wheel and so on as you speed up.

[Wolfman_36]

I don't think so.

Sorry Polar - its all in the math. The engineering principle is

Power = Torque * rotational speed.

It is power that is conserved (apart from transmission losses) through the gearing, and the torque is proportionally increased or decreased whether the output speed is geared down or up respectively.

Let's say we have 240 Nm at the flywheel and a fictitious set of gearing ratios (gearbox + final drive) to give different wheel speeds:

Flywheel=2000 rpm, Wheel = 500 rpm, Wheel torque = 960 Nm
Flywheel=2000 rpm, Wheel = 1000 rpm, Wheel torque = 480 Nm
Flywheel=2000 rpm, Wheel = 2000 rpm, Wheel torque = 240 Nm
Flywheel=2000 rpm, Wheel = 3000 rpm, Wheel torque = 160 Nm

So, if you are measuring torque at the wheel, you need to correct it for the gear ratio if you want to quote it at the engine rpm.

Sideline - it is the torque that gives acceleration (cf Acceleration = Force/ mass) where force = Torque at wheel/ wheel radius)

[POLARBEAR666]

Ahh ok I see what cog was getting at now.

Unlike some people on here I can admit when I was mistaken.....looks at the tragic topgun fan.

[gregozedobe]

Sideline - it is the torque that gives acceleration (cf Acceleration = Force/ mass) where force = Torque at wheel/ wheel radius)

It all gets a bit confusing at times, but I'm pretty sure it is Power that gives you acceleration, not Torque (and acceleration is largely dependent on power to weight ratio). Power being the ability to do do Work over time. Power units are often defined as the ability to raise a specified weight a specifed height in a specified time.

On the other hand you can have a great deal of torque applied without doing any work whatsoever eg strong bloke applying a lot of torque via a 1" socket with a 2M extension onto a frozen wheel nut, until the nut moves or the stud breaks there is zero work being done (despite all the sweating) and therefore no power being produced.

[Wolfman_36]

It all gets a bit confusing at times, but I'm pretty sure it is Power that gives you acceleration, not Torque... .

Greg, yeah, it gets confusing. However, I am going to have to stick to my guns on this one. The basic driver for un-constrained acceleration is force, as noted before F=m.a. The accelerating force comes from the torque applied by the driveshaft to the wheel (F=T/r).

The power is the rate at which work is done, and is therefore tied to the velocity - not the acceleration. P=F.v.

Of course, power and torque are related by P = T.w (w=rotational velocity)

When the car is not accelerating, the steady state power required on a level surface = the product of (i) the force from wind resistance + (ii) the force from rolling resistance and losses.

Similarly, for lifting weight at a steady velocity, you have a constant force F=m.g so power = F.v = m.g.v. The beauty of this measurement is that it is relatiely easy to set up, as gravity is nearly constant and mass can be measured accurately.

You are right about power to weight, cos weight is mass, and F=m.a has a smaller "m" so a bigger "a" for a given "F".

When you come to a hill, you need to add the vector component of the gravitational force that acts parallel to the surface.

Of course, all bets are off if your car is parked against a brick wall. You can generate torque at the wheel but all of the power is dissipated in the clutch as the wheels are not rotating. Therefore, you are not delivering any power to the wheels. If the wheels are spinning, then the power is dissipated into melting the tyres.

Electric motors are great because they deliver huge torque when stalled, but of course, all of that energy is being dissipated as heat in the windings, and the sucker will burn out quickly if you don't let it rotate.

[kryten2001]

When you come to a hill, you need to add the vector component of the gravitational force that acts parallel to the surface.

Trust me, when hills are involved, you don't want to introduce vectras.

Gutless pieces of garbage they were.

[POLARBEAR666]

Yes but as we all know,

[kryten2001]

Polar, I think you're definitely missing a square root.

[Kiel_GTI]

Trust me, when hills are involved, you don't want to introduce vectras.

Gutless pieces of garbage they were.

[gregozedobe]

That is a seriously scary picture !!!