Surely instead of messing with the gearbox, a decent non-aggressive remap would gives these results without endangering your dsg?
DSG gearbox - How to make it longer?
- Thread starter Camalogui
- Start date
I think a remap wouldn't change the ratio. Agressive or not, I would continue doing the same rpm ate the same previous speed.
At this moment I am thinking using Mac advice or just let it stays how it is. But will look for some way to change the ratio.
Thanks you all
![[B)]](/forums/styles/seatcupra/oldforumsmileys/shades.gif "Cool [B)]")
Sorry if I'm teaching you to suck eggs, but drag increases exponentially as speed increases linearly. Basically you get 4 times the drag at 3mph than you get at 2 mph and 6 times the drag at 4mph than at 3mph. Scale that up and at the speeds you're talking about and a small change in speed can increase or decrease the drag quite dramatically. This increases the load on the engine significantly at those speeds, Hence my suggestion of covering the big seat badge grill, this will give a better aerodynamic profile with less drag. This will also affect the load on the engine and hence your MPG, which is what I guess is what you want to improve?
Thanks for your help!
So you "Laugh Out Loud" when you are bored! Keep coming here, Laugh is very good to health
hahaha im sorry
I know you are probably joking again but there are no need to be sorry.
I put a question/doubt and some people are trying to help (even if I didn't or couldn't explain well my point/goal).
Goal: don't force so much engine (less than 3.000rpm). I know I could go slower but I make 1.000km every week, in highways, and it isn't easy to go always slowler (reach clients sooner, reach home sooner, ...)!
And, I confess, sometimes I also like to go even faster and I feel gearbox reachs its limit very sooner. I know it's more "funny" to drive but I am trying to find a middle term between a funny/short gearbox and a longer gearbox.
Also thanks for the advices to save some fuel. With 1.000km every week this is important (and I know if I go slowler I will save more).
So, thank you all!
covering the grill will probably give you heating problems , would be ok for aerodynamics but not ok for the engine
should try it anyway
the only real solution is to change ratio or tires
that /45 tire will give you Speed Variance: 3.41% too fast. it's not much
change the car or gear ratio if it;s possible
should try it anyway
the only real solution is to change ratio or tires
that /45 tire will give you Speed Variance: 3.41% too fast. it's not much
change the car or gear ratio if it;s possible
If your concern is cost (of fuel) vs. time, then you need to have a look at the figures.
Assuming that you can drive at a constant 150km/h (obviously not if you live in the UK or any other country with overcrowded roads), then 1000km per week takes you 6.7 hours. Driving at 130km/h takes 7.7 hours, so you save an hour per week.
From my car's fuel consumption at those speeds, I would guesstimate the difference in fuel consumption between those two speeds to be (@150km/h=7.3l/100km & @130km/h=6.3l/100km) 10 litres per week.
At UK prices, that gives you a cost in fuel of £13.39 to save an hour of your time per week.
I am not a mechanical expert by any means, but I would have thought that at a constant speed, the engine is working to overcome friction/air resistance, and the energy required for that isn't going to change no matter what the engine's doing. There may be some small reduction in internal resistance, but I would have thought it's very small indeed.
Try an experiment; drive in a lower gear at 3000rpm, then in a higher gear at the same revs, and see if there is a difference in the consumption. I suspect there will be, which will show that it's not the rotation of the engine that's the determining factor of consumption.
If you like driving fast, drive fast, but accept that there's a price to pay.
Assuming that you can drive at a constant 150km/h (obviously not if you live in the UK or any other country with overcrowded roads), then 1000km per week takes you 6.7 hours. Driving at 130km/h takes 7.7 hours, so you save an hour per week.
From my car's fuel consumption at those speeds, I would guesstimate the difference in fuel consumption between those two speeds to be (@150km/h=7.3l/100km & @130km/h=6.3l/100km) 10 litres per week.
At UK prices, that gives you a cost in fuel of £13.39 to save an hour of your time per week.
I am not a mechanical expert by any means, but I would have thought that at a constant speed, the engine is working to overcome friction/air resistance, and the energy required for that isn't going to change no matter what the engine's doing. There may be some small reduction in internal resistance, but I would have thought it's very small indeed.
Try an experiment; drive in a lower gear at 3000rpm, then in a higher gear at the same revs, and see if there is a difference in the consumption. I suspect there will be, which will show that it's not the rotation of the engine that's the determining factor of consumption.
If you like driving fast, drive fast, but accept that there's a price to pay.
Probably I will do that
If your concern is cost (of fuel) vs. time, then you need to have a look at the figures.
Assuming that you can drive at a constant 150km/h (obviously not if you live in the UK or any other country with overcrowded roads), then 1000km per week takes you 6.7 hours. Driving at 130km/h takes 7.7 hours, so you save an hour per week.
From my car's fuel consumption at those speeds, I would guesstimate the difference in fuel consumption between those two speeds to be (@150km/h=7.3l/100km & @130km/h=6.3l/100km) 10 litres per week.
At UK prices, that gives you a cost in fuel of £13.39 to save an hour of your time per week.
I am not a mechanical expert by any means, but I would have thought that at a constant speed, the engine is working to overcome friction/air resistance, and the energy required for that isn't going to change no matter what the engine's doing. There may be some small reduction in internal resistance, but I would have thought it's very small indeed.
Try an experiment; drive in a lower gear at 3000rpm, then in a higher gear at the same revs, and see if there is a difference in the consumption. I suspect there will be, which will show that it's not the rotation of the engine that's the determining factor of consumption.
If you like driving fast, drive fast, but accept that there's a price to pay.
Concerning the second part of your answer!
With a lower gear it could bring two problems:
- lower gear at the same 3.000rpm will reflect a lower speed
- lower gear at 150km/h will do more rpm and more engine effort
With a speed of 150km/h it's possible for me to not fail de schedule (Business and Family) and, normally, it's okay to Police (I mean, normally, they tolerate a little). In other occasions, they are not so happy but we need to understand that Police is doing their job
The first part is very interesting and useful! In Portugal, the amount of cars in street depends on the place and the time. Normally, I use Highways and those are not so crowded.
Thanks, Hugo, for your opinion
Similar threads
