Mariosti

What your talking about is "Full time AWD" vs "Part time AWD". Full time AWD is often vaguely called 4WD (which is not really correct, as a car doesn't have to have specifically 4 wheels, while the whole point of this differentiation is not about that at all), and Part time AWD systems are usually called AWD (but again, that's layman speech). Part time system with locked haldex works exactly like a Full time system with locked central diff, so in the basic setup it gives better traction than a Full time AWD system with 3 open diffs and no trick electronics.

Tell me what do you want to know exactly. You can see some general info on functionality with specific models, and it basically supports all VAG cars with OBD and an ECU. Here's the search site for supported cars: https://obdeleven.com/en/supported-vehicles For my car it's only ecu and immobiliser modules, but when i looked up newer Felicia models (ones with abs, airbags etc) it had support for more modules for them. I can 100% recommend it for data, fault codes etc. readout, and fault codes clearance. It's supposed to be able to do much more even on Felicia, but as mentioned I didn't have the need to try it yet, so I can't say if or how well it works. Also I think that there's a cheaper "non pro" version without the coding functionalities, so that's also an option.

I use obdeleven and it works fine for reading error codes, and live view of sensor data. Didn't try to program anything though as I didn't have the need yet. I use it on a 1998 pre face lift 1.3 mpi

Sorry for digging up an old thread, but the last thing mentioned above is actually more complicated than that. About Optimal BSFC for 1.3 mpi, it is sort of between 2-3k rpm and between 50-80% of engine load. To use that you should try keeping to the lower end of that spectrum, and to add onto the complexity the throttle position vs engine load depends also on rpm. At low rpm there is very little difference in power produced between throttle half open and full open, while it matters a lot at high rpm. So if we wan't to get into that optimal BSFC around 2k rpm we actually have to try open the thottle only around 1/3 way up, and opening it up a bit as the rpm goes up. It would be much easier to hypermile that car with: 1. longer gearbox 2. trip computer like the TC-6 3. custom ECU with a wideband O2 sensor and a fueling map with lean (16-17:1 instead of ~14.7:1) burn at low-mid rpm and low/mid engine load.

I'd say that it would be easiest by far if you got a running felicia from a scrapyard with a gearbox and everything, and literally swap it all into your car. While at it, it would be easy to do a thorough service of the mpi engine, replacing seals, cleaning the cylinder head, replacing the gaskets, and so on. Having a working donor car would mean that you'd have all of the components there.

I actually have the 2001 front bumper on a 1997 felicia, and there is a small gap in the middle where the 2001 grille would have it's bottom. When fitting the 1997 bumper onto a 2001 felicia the grille might scratch/lock into the bumper as there will be no gap at all for it.

Hi, I'm quite certain that both terms are correct. Explanation article

Hi, The Felicia 1.3 engine is sort of specific as it's cylinder walls are not integrated into the engine block. Instead it has cylinder sleeves that are a separate part. In an engine with high mileage before you put a new gasket and a refreshed cylinder head you must measure that those cylinder sleeves seat at the correct level above the top of the engine block plane. From what I remember this is described in Haynes manual. The cylinder sleeves seating level can be tweaked using special copper shims that are placed under the cylinder sleeve inside the engine block. There are different thicknesses available of those. If they are faulty, or not tight enough they will leak coolant into the crankcase. At that point it's also a good idea to put new piston rings in, and perhaps new cylinder sleeves if the old ones are shiny and polished inside (they should have so called honing marks for better lubrication), or have some dents or steps. At that point you can also check and if needed replace all of the crank bearings. With high mileage new nominal once could potentially fit, and mitigate the need to grind the crank.

The first kW number and Nm numbers are read from a power/torque curve graph, therefore they have some error in them. The second kW number is effectively calculated from the Nm value read from the graph. The difference is below 1kW so it should be clear that those numbers effectively match exactly. The thing you suggested with constant power and different torque at specific speed is actually contradictory to the law you mentioned. What's true is that at constant engine RPM you have constant power, and if you then increase the gear ratio then you'll trade torque for speed at that engine rpm

Actually power won't stay the same. Take the felicia as an example. 1st gear. a. super long diesel gearbox in first gear you have a gear ratio of 3.350 (final drive) x 3.308 (1st gear) = 11.08 (gear ratio between engine and the wheels). b, short 1.3 mpi gearbox in in first gear you have a gear ratio of 4.118(final drive) x 3.462(1st gear) = 14.25 (gear ratio between engine and the wheels). At 20km/h we'll have: a. ~2036 engine rpm, giving around 20kW of power and around 90Nm at the engine. (looking at the above graphs) b. ~2619 engine rpm, giving around 26kW of power and around 95Nm at the engine. (looking at the above graphs) The wheels will have 20km/h = 333,33m/minute 185/60 r14 wheel circumference is 1,814 m, that gives us 183,8 rpm at the wheels at 20km/h That gives us at the wheels: a. 90Nm * 11.08 ~= 1000Nm at the wheels, at the same time (1000 Nm*183.8 rpm)/9550 = 19.2 kW b. 95Nm * 14.25 ~= 1350Nm at the wheels, at the same time (1350Nm*183.8 rpm)/9550 = 25,98 kW Therefore as you can see torque times rpm is just power, which is why if via gear reduction you have more torque at given car speed than your engine will have more rpm and must produce proportionally more power at the same time, because torque doesn't come from nothing. If the engine didn't produce more power at the higher rpm, than even with gear reduction you wouldn't gain any torque at the wheels.

The biggest one should be on 14sk with final drive 4.118 as it has the most teeth. That's the 1997 and later 1.3mpi 50kW gearbox as far as I know

Hi, Here's a chart that I've calculated off gear ratios and off 1,3 mpi 50kW power/torque curve. The light green graphs show engine power in kW at specific speed in all gears. Light blue shows what i calculated for the super long 3.335 diesel gearbox. The dark red line is the calculated theoretical drag based on car's cx, frontal area, weight and rolling resistance. The power is a bit high as i based it on a low resolution image of the engine power/torque curve, so it should be about 2-3kW lower across the chart. Usually engine manufacturers state engine specs at the crank, while you need power at the wheels to push through the combined resistance forces, which is why these would get even lower, although it would require some more calculations to do, as the transmission resistance depends on rpm and on power transmitted. When you take all of that into consideration the chart is spot on compared to real world. @Papez I'm after both fuel economy bump and noise reduction. I mostly use my car for ~300km routes. I don't have the heart to use it in the city on short routes where it's can't even heat up. One more thing. Once I've talked about engine power at specific rpm, there's no need to talk about torque. Torque times rpm gives power, and it's in fact power at the wheels that gives you both acceleration and top speed. The difference between full throttle power at specific rpm and actual combined resistance is the engine load ratio(while cruising at that speed in that gear). So basically I'd like to suggest to not talk about torque at all as it's totally unnecessary. The only thing that really matters is the power curve of the engine. Torque figure is useful basically only to the engine/transmission engineers, as their designed strength must cope with maximum torque. Besides that it's a useless information. As to the gear reductions etc. I still have to do them now, so it makes no difference really if i have to change to 3rd instead of 4th on a steep climb.

@KenONeill 50kW 1.3 mpi has like 10% more torque across the rpm than the 40kW 1.3 spi engine, and yet, the 50kW engine has 4.118 final drive and the weaker 40kW engine has 3.833 final drive. As i mentioned in another topic, factory gear rations aim at getting near the theoretical top speed in fifth gear, not real world economy at constant speed of 90-140km/h. The fuel consumption testing cycles also didn't really test this, which is why the factory gearbox has in fact not the best gears configuration for a specific car and engine. Of course the 1.3 mpi will not have the same acceleration in a diesel gearbox fifth gear, it will most likely have a significantly lower top speed then. But at the same time, with the longest gearbox, the 4th gear will be a tiny bit shorted than the 5th gear in 1.3 mpi box, which means that it will have better performance in 4th, and most likely a bit better top speed in 4th, while at the same time long 5th gear would work more as an "overdrive" for high speed cruising. This is important for two reasons - one is engine noise, 1.3mpi is far more noisy doing 3-4k rpm than 2-3 k rpm. second - this type of engine has the best efficiency at around 50-75% engine load at 2-3,5k rpm. Engine load depends on the car's speed, and on the potential maximum power of the engine at specific rpm. This whole idea comes from understanding actual numbers. For example, a felicia at 62mph (~100km/h) will require around 10kW of power from the engine to just cruise around on a flat road. With the stock 1.3 mpi 4.118 fd gearbox in 5th gear you get around 2950rpm (lets say 3k rpm), and the engine at full throttle at 3k rpm actually can produce over 30kW (stock engine). This means that cruising with the stock 1.3 mpi engine and stock 4.118 fd gearbox you get less than 33% engine load. In this situation the engine has very poor efficiency (even two times worse than in the sweet spot rpm/load area). With the longest diesel gearbox you should be doing around 2200rpm at the same 62mph(~100km/h) in 5th gear. At this rpm the stock 1.3 mpi engine produces a peak of ~21kW of power , which means that the engine will have around 50% engine load, (and similar/more engine load at 100-140km/h) this means that the engine will run at it's maximum break specific fuel consumption, meaning it will use the least amount of fuel to produce a given amount of hp. And as we wan't to cruise at the same speed, we need the same amount of hp, and that's why I expect a significant fuel consumption reduction with this gearbox swap. (this answers the question, that yes, the engine has more than enough power/torque to accelerate even in 5th gear with a diesel gearbox, although the power surplus will be halved compared to the short box, which is why it will be two times worse at accelerating from that speed/rpm. The thing is you don't often accelerate in 5th anyway, so this doesn't really change anything, as you still have to do a gear reduction to get a reasonable acceleration, but you'll just have to go to 3rd instead of 4th) @Papez From what @RicardoM mentioned in another topic, the 14s 1.9d gearboxes have these gear ratios: 3.398, 1.913, 1.267, 0.927, 0.717 and final drive of 3.35 or 3.579. At the same time 14sk 1.9d gearboxes have these: 3.462, 1.957, 1.310, 0.975, 0.756 and final drive of 3.579. To get the actual engine to wheels rpm ratio you have to multiply the gear ratio by the final drive. This means that comparing 5th gears, in 1.3 mpi 14sk 5th gear is 0.756 and fd 4.118 gives actual ratio of 3.113 engine rotations per each wheel rotation. For this example I'll use 185/60 r14 tyres that i use, they have 577.6mm diameter (2,8% more than stock 165/70 r13), and circumference of 1.814 meter. Therefore when i cruise at 62mph my wheels have to rotate at ~918.8 rpm. So in 5th gear at 62mph (~100km/h) you'll get this many engine rpm: 1.9d 14s 0.717 fd 3.35 -> ratio 2.402 -> rpm 2223 1.9d 14s 0.717 fd 3.579 -> ratio 2.566 -> rpm 2357 1.9d 14sk 0.756 fd 3.579 -> ratio 2.706 -> rpm 2486 1.3mpi 14sk 0.756 fd 4.118 -> ratio 3.113 -> rpm 2860 It kind of lines up, although i'd guess that the 1.3 mpi should calculate a bit closer to 3000rpm, although I'm not sure how precise the tachometer is. i mean the signal from injectors is 100% precise as it exactly represents the amount of engine cycles and that's exactly half of engine rpm. I'm just not sure about the scale precision, as indicated i get 3k rpm at about 102km/h measure by gps, which would give us about 2941 rpm at 100km/h, but that's just 80 rpm off the calculation, so it's possible that it's just the measurement errors. So to sum up. If I'm mistaken then please tell. @RicardoM Thanks for the comparison drawings, great info! One last question still holds. What pre lift 1.9 diesel felicias had the 3.335 final drive and which had the 3.579 final drive? I'm currently looking to buy one, and have a shop ready to rebuild it to ensure it's reliable, and would really like to get the longest gearbox possible, to bump up the engine cruise efficiency to the theoretical maximum and actually just drive it around, and collect fuel economy data, and compare it to current gearbox data.

Apologies for digging up an old thread, but I have a pressing question. 1. How can you distinguish between the 14S and 14SK gearboxes? (I'm guessing that 14SK were used after the facelift, although most likely pre-lift cars from 97-98 might have the 14SK also, so is there a way to identify one from the other looking at just the gearbox?). 2. What kind of felicias had the 14S gearbox with 3.350 final drive? (And as in the previous question is there a way to distinguish them). The 3.350 14S would have a very nice 5th gear for cruising 60-70mph.

Hi All, I've finished a 1,5 years long rebuild of my Felly, and during this process I did complete sound deadening of the floor, trunk, roof, doors and the engine bulkhead (both from inside and outside). All done with proper sound deadening mats system. I'd like to know if anyone tried to do this with success. The thing is, that while the sound deadening works significantly on the sound the doors make when they close (sound nicely now), the engine noise didn't get dampened at all (I didn't do any measurements, but I surely would notice a significant difference). There is one single element in the engine bulkhead that wasn't dampened, and that's the cursed ventilation unit. Looks like it'll need a lot of sound deadening to isolate the engine noise going through that to the interior, and as a secondary priority I think that properly deadening the bonnet should also help a bit with this. I was also wondering if someone tried to soundproof the airbox? As i understand majority of engine noise comes from the intake, and the airbox does look like a possible analog sound amplifier for the intake air noise. If anyone's interested I could make a topic on the Felly restoration effect.