We drive Volkswagen's Lupo 3L TDI for Day 4 of TDI Week. Full Story...

1.6 4v - 100 hp <--! (needed for better price points)
2.0 4v - 145 hp
2.0T 4v - 200 hp
3.2 4v - 240 hp

and then in 2006 all the new tdi's

I hate how my friends civic has a 1.6 4v in his 91 si shitbx, and it took VW till 99 to "get in the mood" and put a 1.6 4v on the market.

quote:

---

The 1.2l TDI also utilizes a Garrett turbocharger with variable-vane turbine geometry. At high revs and high load, the duct directing the exhaust gas against the turbine blades forces the variable-vane blades open to increase flow. Correspondingly at low-rpm's the vanes close to produce a smaller surface area with virtually no lag - it is almost like having two turbos in one package.

---

If I understand what you wrote, I think this is actually backwards. The vanes decrease surface area at high revs/ high load because maximum boost is already achieved. In the same manner, a wastegate opens up. Both methods, channel exhaust directly out the downpipe and away from the turbo.

Anyway, I love the Lupo. I would prefer the weight savings features of the 3L but with the 1.4l TDI. I can deal with 3.5 L of consumption given the extra performance. Also, roll out those back wheel wells!!! The Lupo looks weak this way.

D'

quote:

---

What's 3l/100km in MPG?

---

However...I'm curious, I always heard that leaving a car running is better than stopping/starting - as more fuel is burned in a startup than a few minutes of sitting idle.

With this system of on again/off again - isn't that less fuel efficient than just leaving it sitting idle for a few seconds?

Diamond in the back, sunroof tooped,
digging the 726, with a gangsta lean

http://www.cencalvw.com

It would be a great little city car or for work commutes.
I know my wife would gladly drive it.

The Lupo IS a really GREAT car. I drove a Lupo GTI and VWoA MUST bring this car to North America.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON 9/11?
CLiCK here!!! [url=HTTP://WWW.PRISONPLANET.COM]
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.thepowerhour.com

quote:

---

Jamie, did you drive the Lupo 3L in USA or Canada? I see you write that VW only had limited amounts of low sulfur diesel at hand, which restricted your drive to city driving only. This doesnt sound like anywhere in Germany or Europe in general. I can buy LS diesel fuel at any gas station here, and in fact I drive on it in the diesel Peugeot van at work.

---

Drove it here in the Chicago area.

why did VW have the Lupo in the US? Was it just for the vortex, for "testing" purposes or just because they could?

That Lupo is so nice, I want it!

quote:

---

Jamie,

why did VW have the Lupo in the US? Was it just for the vortex, for "testing" purposes or just because they could?

That Lupo is so nice, I want it!

---

No the car was brought here for publicity and was given to a number of publications.

It's not a VWoA nor VAG fault! Blame it all on "freedom standards" like EPA and DOT, plus all other bureaucracy regulations for "clean air" with "refined kerosene" and "PREMIUM" 91 octane gas with tons of additives, and 5MPH "fat bumpers"....

[Modified by Egorka, 6:16 AM 4-4-2003]

quote:

---

Neat car...and I would definitely buy a GTI version over this

However...I'm curious, I always heard that leaving a car running is better than stopping/starting - as more fuel is burned in a startup than a few minutes of sitting idle.

With this system of on again/off again - isn't that less fuel efficient than just leaving it sitting idle for a few seconds?

---

I've heard that with a modern car it is more fuel efficient to turn it off if you will be idling for more than 30 seconds.

Anyway, sounds like VW found a use for all that technology from the 1L concept car.

quote:

---

...the car was brought here for publicity

---

Don't understand why VWAG would do that for a European (not to be released to the NA) market car...unless they're trying to get people to move to Europe.

http://lupogti.moddedcars.com/rrday/fin4.jpg
http://lupogti.moddedcars.com/rrday/fin5.jpg
http://lupogti.moddedcars.com/rrday/fin8.jpg

Matt

"Its small, its fast......its just gone past"

That silver Lupo GTI is a wonderful car, we here sadly in the USA with our endless "freedoms" cannot buy this car.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED ON 9/11?
CLiCK here!!! [url=HTTP://WWW.PRISONPLANET.COM]
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.thepowerhour.com

quote:

---

ModdedCars:

That silver Lupo GTI is a wonderful car, we here sadly in the USA with our endless "freedoms" cannot buy this car.

---

Anyways.

I'd really like one of these, if only the load space was a bit larger... like, Polo sized I quite often pack out the little beast to the roof, which is just enough space, so losing that 18 inches or so behind the rear wheels would be a pain. At the moment it looks like it's got just enough space for my normal complement of a small toolkit, litre of top-up oil, and gallon canister of spare fuel... teensy.

Indeed, maybe they should go all the way and make a Polo concept version of it - much more widely marketable, and shouldn't lose more than 5mpg at worst (heck, don't the smallest cars usually lose on economy compared to small-to-average ones, because of an unaerodynamic shape and engines that get thrashed?).

As the Lupo 3L itself has a good 15hp over me and probably twice the torque (as well as a nice automatic (at last!) and less than *half* the consumption), I'd have no troubles with, say, a 1.1L Polo version. It'd accelerate far better, though having approx the same top speed might be a pain. Still, being able to claim I drive a 100mpg car (which with careful nursing, and the unit conversions, I'd be able to claim here in the UK instead of a 40mpg would be worth it. Could buy one new and make the savings in fuel in a couple years, the way it's going.

Interesting... if the company would ever do it... a range of small TDi units similar to the existing gasoline powerplants. VW have already brought the power-per-litre pretty much into line with what the mid 90s gas engines managed so they wouldn't be seriously underpowered, particularly with all the lightweight improvements to the design.

Indeed the engine and body-mod benefits could be applied across all models, both diesel and gas (surely those can be improved a little, plus the bodywork savings...), to put the company at the top of the consumption pile, while not losing any speed or safety standings And it wouldn't matter which fuel you could get either.

The one annoying thing... tyres that grip better give worse consumption. Standard 145/75s are bad enough, if not for it's considerable lack of mass the Lupo could be quite tricky on tight or fast corners. Getting 3L/100k is one thing, but losing it because you dared go faster than the average truck round a mountain bend, taking an injured child to a rescue post... not good.

By the same chalk... a GTi model would be nice. That silver rollerskate looks like good fun.. Maybe tune up the 3L's suspension, hire some Honda experts to work a bit of V.V.T. magic, give the ECU a more variable program.. presto, one hot (warm??) hatch that still pulls 3-3.5/100..

Finally.... people saying about turning off the engine wasting more fuel when you start it... I can't see where that comes from, maybe from the days of using the choke on a carb car, where if you let it cool you'd have to make the mix really rich until it warmed up again (which it looks like the TDi simply doesn't do - I wonder if they left the cooling fan out, to lighten it all up that extra 2lbs..). Hmm. Sitting at the lights really shouldn't do that, there's maybe the small matter of the fuel pump re-priming the line every time, but come on... try it out in your own car next time you're in a queue of traffic or at the lights. If it really wasted so much fuel to cut the power for fifteen seconds... then when you started it again, that fifteen-seconds-plus of fuel would have to go *somewhere*. Maybe foul the catalyst, combust in a dangerous manner, produce a whole lot of smoke for a second or two, or leave a nice fat gas deposit on the ground behind the pipe. Don't think you'll see any of those actually happen though...

It's a shame that America has such crappy fuel, too crappy for this car to happily run on. Maybe that's why it's comparitively so much cheaper than europe.. you get the leavings we don't want. Standard 89 octane and so-called Premium 91 octane unleaded, we wouldn't touch at the gas station... and might use it in the lawnmower, if there was nothing else left... I wonder what the equivalent conversion from our 95 and 98 octane unleaded to that 89 & 91 is so far as diesel is concerned. It can't be too pretty
(my user manual reccomends not using anything less than 93, and that power output will have to be reduced in order to keep a lid on emissions from anything less )

Modified by Tahrey (Polo1L) at 12:10 AM 4-29-2003

I look forward to the PD for the North American market. I'm keeping my fingers firmly crossed!

I know. Even my 2800 lb golf tdi at 90 bhp feels fast. Faster than the 2.0. For a commuter car, I woul love a smaller, more efficient TDI. at 50-54 mpg, the golf is so much better than what I had (A SAAB) that it almost pays for itself. And it is still plenty quick for Boston traffic.

The diesel fuel sold in the Chicago area is classified as Lower Sulfur (LS), but it is not low in sulfur, especially compared to European spec. diesel.

I'm wondering if VW would ship a Lupo or Bora to me if I promised to only use biodiesel.

Can you only imagine a car being sold in the US that gets 78mpg!!!

Big Oil would **** themselves. Oh and for the ignorant, this car has plenty of power for everyday driving, and not all Americans require a four ton monster truck to drive back & forth to work. And I could care less to hear the "you'll get crushed" comments. You can get messed up in any accident.

If only we had the ability to drive this, but with our moronic government, a car with this high of MPG would be considered a threat to national security.