NewBeetle.org Forums banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Hi, I would apreciate any/all comments:
We have a 2002 Beetle and a 2003 Golf in our houssehold. Both have the same power train 2.0 L engine and an aoutomatic 4 spped transmission. Both cars start practicaly instatntly and the engines run very nicely.
I replaced the Neutral Safety Switch on both cars, on Beetle it stopped the engine from cranking. On both cars it fixed and occasional clunky shift.
What I would like to solve is why the Beetle has a noticably better acceleration and more power. Here is some information on both cars:

Beetle: my wife's car: ~75k miles, very good condition, I recently changed spark plugs (Denso K20PBRS10 ), thermostat and both O2 sensors ( due to error codes), new K&N Air filter. None of these made any noticable difference to the running of the car. The car's mileage is consistently between 22 mpg and 29 mpg, most of the time it is around a 28 mpg mark.

Gulf: my daughter's car. ~140k miles, I replaced the timing belt, water pump, spark plugs - platinum, thermostat and air filter when we got it 2 years ago at ~115k miles. When I replaced the belt, I marked the gears and the belts so the timing stayed same as before. My daughter does not keep track of her mileage :(

Since the Golf is a bit lighter, [ Gulf = 2,771 lb ; Beelle = 2,817 lb ] I would expect the Golf to be a bit "snappier" to the throttle - however this is not the case. Mind you the 46 lb is insignificant comparing to the weight difference.

[On my son's Volvo 740, [ same car as what I drive] I found the timing belt to be one notch off this made the car slightly sluggish, until I needed to replace his water pump, and replace all belts and set the timing gears correctly - this fixed his sluggish response and an occasional cold starting issues. Could the timing belt be off on the Golf? Would it show a host of other running issues if this is the case?}

Thank you in advance for taking your time to read this and make suggestions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
75 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
More info for Beetle vs Gulf

I will keep adding info as I get it.

Beetle:
Engine Code: AVH
Trans Code: FDF
Tire Size : 205/55-16R
RPM @ 50 mph = ~2250



Both cars have alloy wheels:


Golf
RPM @ 50 mph = ~2250
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
39 Posts
Some cars are just freaks. I used to have a Camaro that was much faster than other camaros. It also beat a few cars that had significantly more power. My daughter also has a Beetle that is tuned perfectly and runs great, yet never gets better than low 20s for mpg.

I guess the real question is, is the Golf running below it's potential or is the Beetle running better than it should. I would rule out the trimming belt thing because, as with your Volvo, if it was off. It would run rough and probably set the engine light because the crank and cam sensors don't agree with each other. You could do a compression on both cars and see if the Golf has lower compression numbers.

Re'
 

·
Older but not Wiser
Joined
·
1,015 Posts
its a GOLF not a gulf. just saying. the beetle has always been faster than the golf. i dunno why to be honest. and the 1.8t gti is faster than the 1.8t beetle. it really weird. i only know this from the years of street racing to prove my bug against the others. same goes with beetles. my friend had a turbo-s and i used to beat the socks off of them in my turbo-s when we were both stock. i even ran their car and they ran mine and my car still won. its nuts i know.... i really.... really dont know.

-jd
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top