Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-21-2019, 06:40 PM   #1 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 3

Van - '97 Volkswagen Transporter
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Greetings from Vancouver Island

Hi Folks,

Awhile back I created an account, but haven't even lurked all that much.
When the emails come with updates on the forum, I sometimes check them out and find them interesting. Today is one of those days, and I was inspired to come on and say Hi.

I have always appreciated small cars that get great fuel economy. My first was a 1980 Ford Fiesta Sport purchased in '85. Then in 1993 I was given a 1990 Chevy Sprint (Canadian Metro with flush polycarbonate headlights and 1.0 engine) It was agreed that this car would be given to me by the original owner if I allowed him to trade in my Fiesta in 1990 toward the purchase of the new Sprint. I didn't need a car for those 3 years anyway.

With that Sprint I was able to routinely use less than 5L/100km driven and once got it down to 3.6L/100km by driving 60 kph on a flat highway for 200km.

In 1997 the Sprint was totalled when it plowed into a Camry that had run a 2-way stop sign. The car was still driveable but not worth the bodywork required, I guess. With the insurance money I was able to get a 1989 Swift GTi which was the same body style but with 100hp vs the Sprint's 55. The best fuel economy (and driveability) mod for that car is to advance the timing and road test, repeating until the engine pings then back off a hair. Suzukis don't generally use knock sensors and the GTi was able to run on 85 Octane gas from the factory, quite unusual for such a high output engine.

I sold that car when my wife was pregnant with our first child in 2003. It had 400,000km on the original engine, transmission and clutch. But I bought another one that same year, actually before selling my other Swift, from a senior citizen who was selling it due to terminal cancer. He had owned it since new and it was in the best shape of any I had ever seen, so I bought it and drove it every third summer or so until taking it out of my storage shed last spring to put Collector plates on. This car gets 5.5 L/100km when driven responsibly, which takes some restraint. These cars really like to run hard.

Our other vehicle is a 1997 VW Transporter. The Transporter vans, in Canada, were the long wheelbase trades variants of Eurovan usually with no rear seats or windows and usually with a 5 speed 5 cylinder diesel. Mine was converted for the original owner by an RV conversion company called GTRV in Richmond, BC. They took the original front seats out and replaced them with Chevy Astro captain's chairs with swivelling bases, adding matching Astro Van sliding bench seats for 2nd and 3rd row seating. These seats will fold back and flat,and will form a 7-ft long bed with the headrests off. A pop-top roof was also added as part of the conversion.

These vans come with 15 inch wheels and extra load tires to handle the van's weight plus 1.2 metric ton payload capacity. The previous, and second, owner fitted the van with 16 inch wheels which are larger diameter and wider. This results in less rolling resistance but I don't think that is why he had it done. The choice of tires in this size is a lot greater. I am using XL tires even though I don't really have to. They are Bridgestone Ecopia. The larger wheels are one fuel economy mod.

The other fuel economy mod is a 6-speed kit from Eurotuning.

I pulled the van's gearbox and sent it to the mfg company which installed the kit and sent it back to me. This particular van, and most transporters I suspect, has very short gearing to match the gutless non-turbo motor.
The kit I ordered replaced the 5th gear with a taller one and added the tallest 6th they offer. Now the van runs at 100 kph with 2200rpm in top gear vs 3100rpm originally. It doesn't make a huge difference in fuel economy but boy does it make for a more relaxed highway experience.

Considering this vehicle sleeps 4, seats 8, and has carried a ton of cinder blocks home many times the observed fuel economy of 6.5-7.0 L/100km is impressive in my opinion. Given that diesel is usually cheaper than gasoline where I live, especially and even more so in the summer, the fuel cost of running this van is similar to that of a modern compact car.

My next planned mod is to advance the pump timing when I replace the cam and pump timing belts, probably next year. Currently I drive with the cold start lever pulled out all the time. That advances the pump timing a few degrees. It runs better and has more power. I'm sure it gets better economy too, so I'd like to adjust things so that the same timing can be achieved without the cold start lever pulled out.

  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-03-2021, 12:50 AM   #2 (permalink)
It's all about Diesel
 
cRiPpLe_rOoStEr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Posts: 10,010
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,188 Times in 1,049 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tosca View Post
With that Sprint I was able to routinely use less than 5L/100km driven and once got it down to 3.6L/100km by driving 60 kph on a flat highway for 200km.
Was it fitted with a manual transmission, right?


Quote:
In 1997 the Sprint was totalled when it plowed into a Camry that had run a 2-way stop sign. The car was still driveable but not worth the bodywork required, I guess.
I guess with some makeshift bodywork it could have still been reasonable for a winter beater


Quote:
With the insurance money I was able to get a 1989 Swift GTi which was the same body style but with 100hp vs the Sprint's 55. The best fuel economy (and driveability) mod for that car is to advance the timing and road test, repeating until the engine pings then back off a hair. Suzukis don't generally use knock sensors and the GTi was able to run on 85 Octane gas from the factory, quite unusual for such a high output engine.
It's quite impressive how such a small naturally-aspirated engine can outrun some Euro stuff from the same period and 50 to 55% greater displacement.


Quote:
Our other vehicle is a 1997 VW Transporter. The Transporter vans, in Canada, were the long wheelbase trades variants of Eurovan usually with no rear seats or windows and usually with a 5 speed 5 cylinder diesel.
It does surprise me this engine was ever offered in Canada.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2021, 04:46 AM   #3 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 20,227
Thanks: 5,675
Thanked 6,610 Times in 5,329 Posts
After five posts you can post pictures.

I had an aftermarket conversion in my VW Type III that added a fifth gear. I found the most benefit between third and [the new] fourth.
__________________

."Once men turned their thinking over to machines thinking this would set them free. This only allowed other men with machines to enslave them." Frank Herbert
____________________

Sadhguru: Yesterday isn't good or bad, it's gone.
____________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2021, 11:58 AM   #4 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Stubby79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 1,746

Firefly EV - '98 Pontiac Firefly EV
90 day: 107.65 mpg (US)

Little Boy Blue - '05 Toyota Echo
90 day: 33.35 mpg (US)

BlueZ - '19 Nissan 370Z Sport
90 day: 17.19 mpg (US)
Thanks: 75
Thanked 570 Times in 425 Posts
Unless the forum has gone bonkers, the original post was from 2019...
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Stubby79 For This Useful Post:
freebeard (01-03-2021)
Old 01-03-2021, 05:22 PM   #5 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 3

Van - '97 Volkswagen Transporter
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
[QUOTE=cRiPpLe_rOoStEr;639865]Was it fitted with a manual transmission, right?

Yes. In addition, small light cars are most efficient at lower speeds than larger heavier machines generally, so at 65 mph the FE wouldn't be as impressive, therefore I suspect the FE potential of the little Suzukis was lot on a lot of people who insist on driving fast.




I guess with some makeshift bodywork it could have still been reasonable for a winter beater

Perhaps, but that was the insurance company's choice and not mine.




It's quite impressive how such a small naturally-aspirated engine can outrun some Euro stuff from the same period and 50 to 55% greater displacement.

A heck of an engine for its time (starting in 1986) in a flyweight body with good aerodynamics and minimal frontal area.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2021, 06:12 PM   #6 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
freebeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: northwest of normal
Posts: 20,227
Thanks: 5,675
Thanked 6,610 Times in 5,329 Posts
Quote:
My first was a 1980 Ford Fiesta Sport purchased in '85.
In ~1980 I was working for a geodesic dome company that got two Fiesta[s] for company cars. We were working in Riddle OR where people still liked to sit on the hoods of cars to talk. That wasn't kind to the poor little Fiesta.
__________________

."Once men turned their thinking over to machines thinking this would set them free. This only allowed other men with machines to enslave them." Frank Herbert
____________________

Sadhguru: Yesterday isn't good or bad, it's gone.
____________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2021, 01:45 PM   #7 (permalink)
It's all about Diesel
 
cRiPpLe_rOoStEr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Posts: 10,010
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1,188 Times in 1,049 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tosca View Post
Yes. In addition, small light cars are most efficient at lower speeds than larger heavier machines generally, so at 65 mph the FE wouldn't be as impressive, therefore I suspect the FE potential of the little Suzukis was lot on a lot of people who insist on driving fast.
Sure a featherweight and aerodynamic model such as the Swift is great for fuel-efficiency, yet the available 3-speed automatic was awful on that matter.


Quote:
A heck of an engine for its time (starting in 1986) in a flyweight body with good aerodynamics and minimal frontal area.
Last time I saw a Swift GTi was in 2014, yet it still impressed me.

  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com