Hello! Log in or Register   |  Help  |  Donate  |  Buy Shirts See all banner ads | Advertise on TheSamba.com  
TheSamba.com
 
Mileage master motor
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Forum Index -> Performance/Engines/Transmissions Share: Facebook Twitter
Reply to topic
Print View
Quick sort: Show newest posts on top | Show oldest posts on top View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Quokka42
Samba Member


Joined: December 02, 2010
Posts: 3117
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quokka42 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think the idea of the larger engine is to get specs to obtain the qualities you want. Of course a larger engine will have more friction and pumping losses than a smaller one -if they have the same standard parts. It's a crying shame performance parts aren't readily available for the 1300, as I love what manufacturers such as Audi and BMW have done with small engines. Imagine if we could get the chamber shape and compression we want with a 1300, or even experiment with roots and centrifugal blowers?
_________________
There has only ever been one man who was perfect, and they nailed Him to a cross.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Classifieds Feedback
jeff68
Samba Member


Joined: November 02, 2007
Posts: 298
Location: Sarasota, Florida
jeff68 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For more information on a "mileage motor"......If you have a subscription to HotVw's I think they will send you a link for a digital article on building a mileage engine. It is basically a compilation of what the magazine did when building theirs. They did tests on various products, carburetors, efi, Berg's jetavator, gearing, etc. Seemed like a good source of information to get ideas from at the very least.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
madmike
Samba Member


Joined: July 11, 2005
Posts: 5291
Location: Atlanta,Michigan
madmike is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

HVw did two Mileage motors one back in the 70' with 40 idf's ,, but the newer version did fuel injection,, Guess which was better?????
_________________
'Black Ice'Drag Buggy 'Turbo'
Rail Buggy 1915 turbo
76 Drag/Street bug 2180cc 'Turbo' 11:85 @113 mph"If I go any faster I'll burn up the Hamster" ,gets 28 mpg. also 10/09/22 11.90 @115 mph
"If I'm ever on Life Support,UNPLUG Me, Then Plug me back In see if that Works"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Eaallred
Samba Member


Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 5756
Location: West Valley City, Utah
Eaallred is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 6:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Juanito84 wrote:
Danwvw wrote:
I like the Idea of the 1300! But I would do one of the following maybe.

74mm Stroke
88mm bore


I like the idea of a 1300 too! But why jump from such a small engine to such a large one? I personally don't understand why some guys recommend a bigger engine for more fuel mileage. Just look at the specs on the different VW engine sizes. The smaller the engine the better the effciency. The only exception is when you compare an engine with a better AFR and timing curve like the Digifant engine with one that doesn't. Imagine what MPGs a 1200cc Digifant engine would get! If a 1300SP gets 28.5mpg and a 1600SP gets 26.1mpg then I'm betting your stroked and bored engine will get even less.

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.



I don't think it's engine size as much as vehicle speed. The MPG specs VW lists was at top cruising speed. Which is much lower for the smaller engines. Considering the cars are the same other than the engines, to push the VW 65mph takes the same HP regardless of engine size or potential. Push the VW up to 75mph, and it's going to take more fuel. If you drove the larger engine VW's to pace the smaller engine cars at their slower speeds, i'd bet the MPG figures would be pretty similar.

Just as an example, my 2276 when N/A was able to get 39.98 MPG holding 70mph for an hour cruise. (all done with GPS to track mileage and speed). The car still ran low 12's at the track, it wasn't built for MPG's.

IMHO, it's more about the tune than engine size, and to some extent, engine combo.
_________________
Eric Allred

You have to remember something: Everybody pities the weak; Jealousy you have to earn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Juanito84
Samba Member


Joined: March 17, 2012
Posts: 2436
Location: Colorado Mountains
Juanito84 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

VW didn't test at full speed. My 1971 manual says right in it that the fuel mileage test was at 60mph, whereas the maximum speed is 81mph. Yes, the older ones were tested a bit slower, like 58mph in a 1966 model.

Like I said, the tune will give the most results. But mathmatically, a smaller engine has more potential for better fuel mileage.

If you were to do the math and draw a graph with the maximum possible efficiency from idle to full throttle at X amount of RPM you would see you start with 0% efficiency at idle, which slowly climbs to peak efficiency at full throttle. (Of course the lower the RPM, the better the efficiency too.) The only reason efficiency tends to drop off in the real world at full throttle is because of the need for enrichment. But still, more open is better. Both smaller engines and higher gearing will help keep that throttle open more, therefore increasing efficiency. It's all in the math.

I have done tests that span over 600 miles through mountains and on highways going 75mph and have gotten 48mpg total for the whole trip in a gasoline powered 1.6L Mazda with the only change to the tune being I advanced the timing. That's a lot better than 39.99mpg for an hour.
_________________
If a water cooled engine cools its water with air, isn't it just an overcomplicated air cooled engine?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Danwvw
Samba Member


Joined: July 31, 2012
Posts: 8892
Location: Oregon Coast
Danwvw is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What I always liked was the in town millage of the 36 horse engines. Seems like I used to fill up about once a month and they were about 29 MPG around town. The 1300 could probably do the same, perhaps a 1300 with a little tiny Solex like the 28PICT-1 or FRD or Kadron-Solex or something, the W-100 cam would be a good performance cam for it but the scat C-20 or C-25 cam would probably be the right cam for MPG's.

Scat C-20 Cam .350" 234' @ .050"
Scat C-25 Cam .365" 234' @ .050"
W-100 Cam .420" 236' @ .050"
_________________
1960 Beetle And 1679cc DP W-100 & Dual Zeniths!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Facebook Twitter Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Eaallred
Samba Member


Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 5756
Location: West Valley City, Utah
Eaallred is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Juanito84 wrote:

If you were to do the math and draw a graph with the maximum possible efficiency from idle to full throttle at X amount of RPM you would see you start with 0% efficiency at idle, which slowly climbs to peak efficiency at full throttle. (Of course the lower the RPM, the better the efficiency too.) The only reason efficiency tends to drop off in the real world at full throttle is because of the need for enrichment. But still, more open is better. Both smaller engines and higher gearing will help keep that throttle open more, therefore increasing efficiency. It's all in the math.


We'll have to agree to disagree on this part.
_________________
Eric Allred

You have to remember something: Everybody pities the weak; Jealousy you have to earn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
vwracerdave
Samba Member


Joined: November 11, 2004
Posts: 15279
Location: Deep in the 405
vwracerdave is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back in the 70's you could safely drive 55-60 MPH anywhere in the country and enjoy life. There were many years back in the 70's when the National speed limit was 55 MPH and a 1300 had no problem keeping up. Today speeds are hitting 75-80 MPH. A 1300 can be dangerously slow and driving 60 MPH can flat out get you killed on many highways today.
_________________
2017 Street Comp Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble, OK
2010 Sportsman ET Champion - Mid-America Dragway - Arkansas City, KS
1997 Sportsman ET Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble ,OK
Featured in Dec. 2001 HOT VW's Magazine page 63

Watch my racing video's http://www.youtube.com/user/okvwracer/videos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
67 Sunroof
Samba Member


Joined: February 22, 2014
Posts: 1836
Location: Salisbury, MD
67 Sunroof is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eaallred wrote:
Juanito84 wrote:
Danwvw wrote:
I like the Idea of the 1300! But I would do one of the following maybe.

74mm Stroke
88mm bore


I like the idea of a 1300 too! But why jump from such a small engine to such a large one? I personally don't understand why some guys recommend a bigger engine for more fuel mileage. Just look at the specs on the different VW engine sizes. The smaller the engine the better the effciency. The only exception is when you compare an engine with a better AFR and timing curve like the Digifant engine with one that doesn't. Imagine what MPGs a 1200cc Digifant engine would get! If a 1300SP gets 28.5mpg and a 1600SP gets 26.1mpg then I'm betting your stroked and bored engine will get even less.

Image may have been reduced in size. Click image to view fullscreen.



I don't think it's engine size as much as vehicle speed. The MPG specs VW lists was at top cruising speed. Which is much lower for the smaller engines. Considering the cars are the same other than the engines, to push the VW 65mph takes the same HP regardless of engine size or potential. Push the VW up to 75mph, and it's going to take more fuel. If you drove the larger engine VW's to pace the smaller engine cars at their slower speeds, i'd bet the MPG figures would be pretty similar.

Just as an example, my 2276 when N/A was able to get 39.98 MPG holding 70mph for an hour cruise. (all done with GPS to track mileage and speed). The car still ran low 12's at the track, it wasn't built for MPG's.

IMHO, it's more about the tune than engine size, and to some extent, engine combo.


Man, I know I am a newb but I find that hard to believe.....
2276, 40mpg, and 70mph can't all go in the same sentence. Can it? That's incredible.
Madmike, which ONE WON? The HVw article is what got me thinking about the motor. I have it on my iPad and have been reading up on it. I would think the efi would have beat the carbs with better atomization.
On a side note:
Is that why peeps don't like the "step" on the later heads? I believe the step was supposed to provide a better quench area and better efficiency right?
I dunno, maybe I think too much-lol


Last edited by 67 Sunroof on Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:05 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
miniman82
Samba Swamp Donkey


Joined: March 22, 2005
Posts: 9515
Location: Southern Maryland
miniman82 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's called closed-loop fuel injection.
_________________
Build thread: http://www.thesamba.com/vw/forum/viewtopic.php?t=212747

Glenn wrote:
satterley_sr wrote:

I just wanted to bitch but I'm getting no sympathy.


Welcome to the Samba.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Gallery Classifieds Feedback
bdub475
Samba Member


Joined: April 05, 2009
Posts: 577
Location: Los Lunas, New Mexico
bdub475 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 5:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's called building an engine with parts that work together and tuning it correctly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
TURBOEDVW
Samba Member


Joined: July 13, 2004
Posts: 181

TURBOEDVW is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know this is about building an efficient motor but there are plenty of other variables to consider when making a vehicle fuel efficient. Such as running thin oil such as 0w-20 and running narrow tires with plenty of air pressure.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
vwracerdave
Samba Member


Joined: November 11, 2004
Posts: 15279
Location: Deep in the 405
vwracerdave is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There is a whole lot more to good MPG then just the engine. Remove your roof rack and you will gain 2-3 MPG. Add a Harold Helper and you can gain another 1-2 MPG. Take all your junk out of the trunk and magically there is another 2 MPG.
_________________
2017 Street Comp Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble, OK
2010 Sportsman ET Champion - Mid-America Dragway - Arkansas City, KS
1997 Sportsman ET Champion - Thunder Valley Raceway Park - Noble ,OK
Featured in Dec. 2001 HOT VW's Magazine page 63

Watch my racing video's http://www.youtube.com/user/okvwracer/videos
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Brian
Samba Moderator


Joined: May 28, 2012
Posts: 8340
Location: Oceanside
Brian is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't there a running thread about how to get max mpgs? It was something along the lines of; run stock everything, lower the car an inch and don't drive like you're from Californy
_________________
Wash your hands

'69 Bug
'68 Baja Truck
'71 Bug
'68 Camper

Only losers litter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Danwvw
Samba Member


Joined: July 31, 2012
Posts: 8892
Location: Oregon Coast
Danwvw is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It should be possible to get 40 MPH on a big engine for example the New Beetle is 2.5 Liters and I think it will get 40 MPG under Ideal conditions. Probably more like 32 MPG Highway though on the New beetle as well as the old Beetle Milage Master.

When I was a Kid I was driving around a Studebaker 6 cylinder 170 CI or 2.8L, (OHV) Model with 112 HP 1962 model I think. It was tough to get it up to speed on the freeway before running out of ramp. Then I got a VW Beetle 1300 and It would zip right up to freeway speeds no problem. There is really hardly any difference in the performance of the stock 1966 1300 beetle and the stock 1971 1600!
_________________
1960 Beetle And 1679cc DP W-100 & Dual Zeniths!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Facebook Twitter Gallery Classifieds Feedback
GTV
Samba Member


Joined: March 27, 2004
Posts: 2084
Location: Si'ahl
GTV is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vwracerdave wrote:

Add a Harold Helper and you can gain another 1-2 MPG.


The only thing that did for me was raise my oil temps.
_________________
EMPI Power Rules!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Brian
Samba Moderator


Joined: May 28, 2012
Posts: 8340
Location: Oceanside
Brian is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danwvw wrote:
under Ideal conditions.


Variables man.
_________________
Wash your hands

'69 Bug
'68 Baja Truck
'71 Bug
'68 Camper

Only losers litter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Lionhart94010
Samba Member


Joined: January 04, 2005
Posts: 1417
Location: SF Bay Area / Silicon Valley / So Cal
Lionhart94010 is offline 

PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you go with ACN you could build a super squishy piston engine, 94mm x 69mm (= hi compression; low heat) and get both, lots of power and great MPG, it would be a super efficient engine and if you wanted to you could have a bit of fun getting onto the freeway, if it worked out, I bet it would be something a vw magazine may be interested in…

IMO you would recoup the $650 pistons + Barrels investment with the better mpg if your really drove it as a DD for several years.
_________________
Current VWs 71 T2 Westy SO-72/6(Miami), 71 Crew Cab, 2015 GSW TDI
Other owned VW’s 59, 68 1500s, 69 & 71 Bug’s; 72 & 73 S-Bug’s; 67 Westy, 67 Deluxe, Other 71 DC, 72 KG GT that now lives in Australia, 12 JSW TDI, 2015 GSW TDI, 2023 Tiguan
VW technical information sights
thesamba - www.ratwell.com - www.shoptalkforums.com/ - www.vw-resource.com - http://www.type2.com/
http://bobhooversblog.blogspot.com/ - www.aircooled.net/gnrlsite/resource/articles.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Gallery Classifieds Feedback
madmike
Samba Member


Joined: July 11, 2005
Posts: 5291
Location: Atlanta,Michigan
madmike is offline 

PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 4:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey 67, I'll have to dig threw my HVW library Wink But I thought it was the IDF's ,also remember we had REAL fuel back then ,not the cat piss they pass off as fuel now days:lol:
_________________
'Black Ice'Drag Buggy 'Turbo'
Rail Buggy 1915 turbo
76 Drag/Street bug 2180cc 'Turbo' 11:85 @113 mph"If I go any faster I'll burn up the Hamster" ,gets 28 mpg. also 10/09/22 11.90 @115 mph
"If I'm ever on Life Support,UNPLUG Me, Then Plug me back In see if that Works"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Eaallred
Samba Member


Joined: May 18, 2003
Posts: 5756
Location: West Valley City, Utah
Eaallred is offline 

PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2014 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The last bus I had, with small nut reduction boxes got 31.11 mpg doing 65mph which was 4000 rpm.

So when someone says "small displacement", and "lower the rpms" to get good mileage, I do disagree. I've proven both wrong.
_________________
Eric Allred

You have to remember something: Everybody pities the weak; Jealousy you have to earn.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Gallery Classifieds Feedback
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Performance/Engines/Transmissions All times are Mountain Standard Time/Pacific Daylight Savings Time
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 3 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

About | Help! | Advertise | Donate | Premium Membership | Privacy/Terms of Use | Contact Us | Site Map
Copyright © 1996-2023, Everett Barnes. All Rights Reserved.
Not affiliated with or sponsored by Volkswagen of America | Forum powered by phpBB
Links to eBay or other vendor sites may be affiliate links where the site receives compensation.