So… You are saying that a family station wagon going 200kmph consumes as much as a sports car going 300kmph with the same engine size?
Sir I call your statement utter bullshit and here’s why:
Let’s take the Mercedes AMG A 45s 4Matic+ with 1991cm3 and 421hp. Not really a sports car but who the heck produces sports cars with the same engine size like normal station wagons? And the VW Passat Variant with the 2.0 TSI engine and 190hp. The VW consumes up to 20L/100km at 200kmph and the Mercedes going 270kmph (I know not even 50% faster) consumes 50l/100km going full throttle.
Give me any other modern good quality cars that prove me wrong and I’ll apologise but till then that’s not even close to make sense. Heck the sport’s car’s have to cool the engine with fuel to not overheating, how on earth will your claim ever work?
Are you even allowed to drive a car yet?
Well sorry how I phrased that. But explain to me how that works.
I already did some math. Ok the golf is going what? 130? Then the TT goes 195kmph.
The VW EA888 is not available as 130hp edition, especially not in a Golf, there it’s used in the R Models or as 190hp edition. The smallest equivalent engine I could find was the Golf VI 1.8T with 160hp. The CDAA engine.
But ok, let’s just ignore the engines for now, focus on resistance.
In this calculation I use a density of 1.29kg/m³.
Audi TT8J with the spoiler retracted has a drag coefficient of 0.31 and that’s really impressive. We have a surface area of 2.09m² and a speed of 195kmph.
That results in 1226.12N drag force applied to the Audi TT
The Golf has CW values ranging from Golf 1 with 0.42 to 0.27 Golf 7 Blue motion.
But let’s assume we have a Golf 6 from 2010 with 0.31 CW (sounds familiar) a surface area of 2.23m² and the speed of 130kmph. That results in 581.44N drag force.
Explain to me like, how will the Audi manage to go that fast, with that drag force applied and consume the same amount of fuel like the Golf? I mean even the engine should be the same size. So either the Audi TT has a magical rolling resistance that he can compete with the golf fuel consumption. Don’t know how the math here work’s, especially in regard that the golf is 100kg lighter.
Are there much more efficient air conditioning systems/assistant systems in the sports car that reduce the fuel consumption?
I don’t know… The Audi you mentioned consumes 7,7L/100km. Let’s take the worst engine the Golf 6 has, that has less horsepower that the Audi: the VW EA 113 1.6L with 102 hp. Btw the same engine plattform like the Audi’s engine. That consumes 7.1L/100km.
So please, enlighten me. How can the “sports car” go 50% faster and consume the same amount of fuel? The drag force is more than doubled. The engine consumes by default more. How?