Third-Generation VW Sharan Van Will Offer Fuel Consumption As Low As 5.5 L/100km (43 mpg US); Start-Stop and Battery Regeneration
01 July 2010
|
|
| Fuel-consumption and emissions lowering features on the new Sharan. Click to enlarge. |
Volkswagen will introduce its new third-generation Sharan MPV (minivan) this summer. The new Sharan, which is larger than its predecessor, will offer a choice of two direct injection TSI gasoline and two TDI diesel engines that are up to 21% more fuel-efficient than the comparable engines of the outgoing model.
Featuring a start-stop system and battery regeneration, the Sharan equipped with the 140 PS TDI—the most popular engine version in Europe for the existing Sharan—will consume 5.5L/100km (43 mpg US), equivalent to 143 g/km CO2.
The two TSIs output 110 kW / 150 PS (148 hp) and 147 kW / 200 PS (197 hp), while the TDIs develop 103 kW / 140 PS (138 hp) and 125 kW / 170 PS (168 hp). Each of these Euro-5 engines is also available with a 6-speed dual clutch gearbox (DSG); it is standard equipment on the 200 PS TSI. For engines ranging up to 170 PS in power, a BlueMotion Technology pack is implemented with a start-stop system and battery regeneration (recovery of kinetic energy by storing it in the battery).
Start-Stop system. As soon as the driver brakes to a stop, shifts into neutral and takes his or her foot off the clutch (with DSG it is sufficient to take the foot off the brake pedal), the engine shuts off momentarily. In the multifunction display the text “Start Stop” appears. Depressing the clutch (or with DSG simply releasing the brake),re-starts the engine and clears the “Start Stop” text. The system saves up to 0.2 liters per 100 kilometers in the city.
Unlike vehicles without the Start-Stop system, the BlueMotion Technology models have an extra battery data module (for acquiring momentary battery charge status); a reinforced engine starter; a DC/DC converter; and a durable deep-cycle glass mat battery on board.
Battery regeneration. During coasting and braking phases of the Sharan—i.e. whenever the driver releases the accelerator pedal or brakes—the system elevates the voltage of the alternator (generator), and this electricity is used to intensively charge the vehicle’s battery.
With this alternator control as a function of engine load, and the optimally charged battery that results, the voltage of the alternator can be reduced whenever this is desirable—e.g. when accelerating or while constantly maintaining a desired speed. The alternator may even be shut off entirely.
This relieves engine load, which in turn reduces fuel consumption. The constantly fully charged battery supplies the vehicle’s electrical system during the stopped phase of the engine (e.g. at traffic lights). Battery regeneration requires special software for energy management and modified engine controller software.
TDI Engines. The TDI with 103 kW / 140 PS is the entry level diesel. The 1,968 cm3 16-valve four-cylinder engine has a power output of 103 kW / 140 PS at 4,200 rpm. At a low 1,750 rpm, the TDI (with a 16.5:1 compression ratio) develops a maximum torque of 320 N·m (236 lb-ft). This turbocharged engine with manual gearbox accelerates the Sharan to 100 km/h in 10.9 seconds, and has a top speed of 194 km/h (121 mph).
The 125 kW / 170 PS TDI of the new Sharan is a 2.0-liter 16-valve, four-cylinder engine also applied in the current Golf GTD. The top speed of the TDI occurs at 4,200 rpm. Between 1,750 and 2,500 rpm, the engine develops a maximum torque of 350 N·m (258 lb-ft). Accelerate to 100 km/h takes 9.71 seconds, and top speed is 207 km/h (129 mph). Combined fuel consumption is 5.71 L/100 km (41 mpg US) with associated CO2 of 151 g/km.
SCR catalytic converter. Both TDIs are fitted with an SCR (Selective Catalytic Reduction) exhaust aftertreatment system. The SCR catalytic converter works together with the additive AdBlue to selectively convert nitrogen oxides (NOx) in the exhaust gas stream to nitrogen and water. An oxidation catalytic converter and diesel particulate filter are also fitted to reduce a wider spectrum of emissions.
The AdBlue, stored in a 17-liter (4.5 gallon) auxiliary tank is continuously sprayed into the exhaust gas via a module downstream of the diesel particulate filter and oxidation catalytic converter. This substance is continuously sprayed into the exhaust gases upstream of the SCR catalytic converter. The metered rate is based on the mass flow of the exhaust gas. Engine management, which receives information from a NOx sensor downstream of the catalytic converter, enables precise control.
Finely atomized by a screen, the urea is converted to ammonia in the hot exhaust gas upstream of the SCR catalytic converter. In the SCR catalytic converter, the ammonia then breaks down the nitrogen oxides into nitrogen and water. AdBlue is consumed at an average rate of about 0.1 liters per 100 kilometers. The tank capacity of 17 liters yields a range of about 15,000 kilometers between fillings.
TSI engines. The Sharan is one of the first MPVs to be offered exclusively with charged and direct injection engines, including gasoline engines. A 1.4-liter TSI engine with a power of 110 kW / 150 PS (at 5,800 rpm) is the new base gasoline engine of the Sharan. Its twincharger—combining turbocharging with supercharging—delivers fuel consumption of 7.2 L/100 km (33 mpg US) gasoline with 95 ROZ; 167 g/km CO2; and maximum torque of 240 N·m (177 lb-ft) between 1,750 and 4,000 rpm. The Sharan reaches a speed of 100 km/h in 10.7 seconds with this engine and a manual gearbox; its top speed is 197 km/h (122 mph).
The supercharger, mechanically driven by a belt, increases the TSI’s torque at low engine speeds. This is a charging unit based on the Roots Principle. A special aspect of this supercharger is its internal gearing, which enables high supercharger performance even at low engine speeds.
At higher engine speeds, the exhaust gas-driven turbocharger (with wastegate control) kicks in. Then the supercharger and turbocharger work in series. The supercharger is operated via a solenoid clutch that is integrated in a module within the water pump. A control gate ensures that the flow of fresh air required for the operating point reaches the turbocharger or supercharger. In pure turbocharger mode the control gate is open. Then the air takes the familiar path of conventional turbocharged engines via the front intercooler and throttle valve and into the induction pipe. Starting at an engine speed of 3,500 rpm the supercharger turns all of the work over to the turbocharger.
At the highest power level, the Sharan is driven by a 147 kW / 200 PS (between 5,100 and 6,000 rpm) TSI unit. The same 2.0-liter engine in turbocharged form is applied in the current Golf GTI, although on that car it has an extra 10 PS. Fuel consumption for the 200 PS TSI in the Sharan is 8.1 L/100km (29 mpg US).
Maximum torque of 280 N·m (207 lb-ft) is available between 1,700 and 5,000 rpm). The 2.0L TSI Sharan accelerates to 100 km/h in 8.3 seconds, and has a top speed of 218 km/h (129 mph).
Other fuel economy features. The 2010 model year Sharan is a completely redesigned vehicle. Among the features contributing to the lower fuel economy are a lighter weight (for example, the Sharan 1.4 TSI BlueMotion Technology was made 30 kilograms lighter than the comparable version of the previous model) and improved aerodynamics, with a Cw of 0.299—a 5% improvement over the previous model.
The new Sharan will launch in Germany at the end of August 2010. Total production for the Sharan (all generations since the initial launch in 1995) is 607,700 units.
Amazing demonstration of what can be done to improve the overall efficiency of a large ICE driven vehicle. With the same logic, most ICE vehicles could do 50+ mpg. What can be done to convince all manufacturers to do so within 24 months? Would updating CAFE to 50+ mpg by 2014 do it?
Posted by: HarveyD | 01 July 2010 at 08:10 AM
This vehicle with those diesels is illegal in the USA. Those engines are Pollution Pigs meeting the nonsensical and ridiculously polluting EU 5 specification.
When this vehicle is available with EU 6 plus enough more cleanup equipment to meet the still dirty T2B5 spec, it will be welcomed into the US. But likely by then we will have rightly tightened US specs to SULEV II or sub T2B2 for such dieselsl as well as Otto gasoline ICEs which routinely meet that spec, at least in the US, where the EU automakers don't cavalierly poison their fellow citizens and customers.
CARB has already proposed such a Generation III toxic emissions specification, and is the process of adopting it.
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 01 July 2010 at 10:54 AM
"147 kW / 200 PS (197 hp)"
That is high output from a small engine. The regenerative start stop system is good. You get zero miles per gallon at a stop light.
Posted by: SJC | 01 July 2010 at 11:11 AM
Stan:
That's how we blocked competition for many decades. A regulation to block the sale or impose heavy fines on all vehicles not doing 50 mpg would make more sense and help the country to reduce oil imports. However, sales of the local Big-3 gas guzzlers would simmer down for a few years because they can't produce higher efficiency vehicles.
Posted by: HarveyD | 01 July 2010 at 01:38 PM
Stan, you must have misiterpreted a couple of things totally...
Engines with SCR can meet Euro 6 easily. You can also meet T2B5 quite easily, as VW and other manufacturers have shown on vehicles sold in the USA. Where the limit of this technology is, we do not yet know. If VW choose to certify this particular vehicle for the US market is a completely different story. Since the US market is so negative to diesels in general, they might not bother to do that. Diesels are not welcome in the US whatever emission limit they might meet. Consequently, the US buyers might not get the option to buy a car with a clean and efficient diesel engine.
When we discuss "Pollution Pigs", I must remind you about another fact. Euro 5 & 6 regulate particle number emissions, i.e. also the smallest nanoparticles. So far, this limit has only been set for diesel cars but a limit for gasoline cars will be set later. CARB is now discussing particle number limit in LEV III. However, this limit will be approximately 10 times higher than in Europe. So, maybe your pigs are 10 times bigger than European pigs. (I wonder what George Orwell would have said about that? Re. the "Animal Farm"...). So, the moral might be: if we set the same particle number limit for gasoline cars in the EU, we might block the US competition.
Posted by: Peter_XX | 01 July 2010 at 03:20 PM
Peter_XX,
I don't follow you. All I've read till now says only diesel combustion produces any reasonable amount soot and particulate matter.
That's unlike NOx and CO that would be produced by any hydrocarbon fuel oxidized [burned, combusted] at high temperatures on the presence of air (producing NOx) or with poor atomization or lack of sufficient oxygen (producing CO).
All papers I've seen say T2B5 has far more stringent controls on diesel emissions than Euro V, and that the added cost of attaining those levels would be to high to adapt most Euro-V spec engines/after-treatment to US.
Lowering the sulfur content of the available fuel (to avoid SOx) would also be a problem, and hard to achieve without big investments in new costly refining processes.
Are you saying that gasoline produces more particulate matter than diesel ?
Are all world regulations on combustion engines emissions wrong/stupid ?
Don't they regulate what matters ?
Are you saying there is a greater evil hidden in otto cycle engine emissions ?
Can you link us to a reliable source which would explain this ?
Posted by: CelsoS | 01 July 2010 at 05:31 PM
An unbelievable demonstration of what can be done to improve the overall efficiency of a large ICE driven vehicle –
I mean that literally; unbelievable, unless they mean “As Low As 5.5 L/100km (43 mpg US)” but not in normal driving.
With the same lack of logic, most ICE vehicles could do 50+ mpg.
In fact the 305 hp “Mustang V-6 Averages 48.5 mpg in the Mustang 1,000 Lap Challenge at Bristol Motor Speedway at an average speed of 43.9 mph." (GCC 24 June 2010)
Posted by: ToppaTom | 01 July 2010 at 10:03 PM
Diesel engines produce (before aftertreatment) less CO, HC and NOx than gasoline engines but much much more particle emissions. Nobody can argue about that. Due to the efficient catalytic converter that gasoline engines use, NOx emission after the catalyst are lower than for diesel engines that have had to rely solely on in-cylinder NOx control. However, we now have emerging technologies also for diesel NOx aftertreatment. Though not as effective as on gasoline cars, recall that NOx emissions are about 10 times lower at the "engine-out" stage. Thus, NOx levels are approaching. All new diesel cars that have SCR or NOx adsorber catalyst meet Euro 6. Euro 5 can be met without any NOx catalyst at all. Prototype cars can even meet Euro 6 and T2B2 without aftertreatment. Of course, if you add aftertreatment on those engines, you can achieve even lower levels. All in all, NOx is not that much of an hurdle as most people think. Certifying a car for US limits is more a matter of marketing strategy, not technology.
Modern gasoline cars with direct injection have higher particulate emissions than diesel cars with particle filters (DPFs). At ideal conditions, the conventional gasoline car with indirect injection can be at the same level. However, during cold starts, high accelerations etc., not included in the test cycles, emissions are higher. Thus, real-life emissions of these cars are also higher than from DPF diesel cars. To meet the Euro 5/6 particle number limit, a gasoline car with direct injection would need a gasoline particle filter (GPF). This is something CARB want to avoid, so they will set the limit at such a high level that GPFs will not be needed. I suppose US manufacturers love this proposal. This is the concern they show for the health of their fellow citizens and customers.
If you want to know one more fact about particle emissions, I can tell you that I have made measurements on my own DPF diesel car. The level is lower than in ambient air. Thus, when I drive into the city center of Stockholm, I am cleaning the air. Is this not good enough for Americans?
Posted by: Peter_XX | 02 July 2010 at 01:14 AM
TT:
(Facts) My neighbour's Mustang does 18 mpg (average) over the last 12 months.
Posted by: HarveyD | 02 July 2010 at 08:33 AM
I am on average close to 50 mpg on my MY´08 BMW 320d Touring, i.e. about the same as the EU certification data. Last fill was 50+ mpg. I would consider myself as a "normal" driver. However, with 25+ professional carieer in the business, I know some tricks about ecodriving with diesel cars. Most people tend to drive diesel cars just the same as gasoline cars, which is not a good option for getting low fuel consumption. I have difficulties to believe that a Mustang could get similar mpg but I could imagine it is more fun to drive and also more popular with the ladies.
Much to my regret, the 320d was not availale with the NOx adsorber catalyst, which was later introduced as an option on the 330d. This version fulfils Euro 6.
Posted by: Peter_XX | 03 July 2010 at 02:21 AM
Not really - (Facts) Your neighbor CLAIMS his Mustang does 18 mpg (average) over the last 12 months.
(Assumption) Your neighbor's Mustang actually does get 18 mpg (average) over the last 12 months – (Why would anyone buy a Mustang and then keep track of the mileage?)
Now - if he spent the BIG bucks to buy a Third-Generation VW Sharan Van (if they sold them in the US) it's anybody's guess what he might get, and what he might claim.
Posted by: ToppaTom | 03 July 2010 at 02:37 AM
The fact that they sell Mustangs and Camaros at all in the U.S. these days says a lot. Not everyone wants to drive a Prius, some want muscle and performance AND get great mileage.
There is a company that converts new Mustangs to EV and they have great performance. He will not sell many because they are expensive and do not have the engine sound.
We may never learn the lessons that we need to learn until we have to, hopefully it will not be too late. There are wants and needs, as long as those are far apart we will pay the price.
Posted by: SJC | 03 July 2010 at 08:17 AM
TT:
More and more people are keeping track of their gas guzzler mileage and gas consumption these days and many more may do so next year. Cheap gas will not come back and average wages (including the 8+ M new unemployed) is going down across the country. Not everybody can afford to feed a V-8 Mustang and/or heavy 300 hp pick-ups. Many will be interested and will consider buying more efficient 50 mpg vehicles, regardless where they are built.
Posted by: HarveyD | 03 July 2010 at 08:05 PM
The difference between the EU V and EU VI toxic emission specification is comparable to the difference between a candle and an electric light bulb. It is Night and Day.
That is not to say the EU VI emission regulation is any great shakes, it isn't. But it at least get the EU into the toxic emission game, finally. There is no exact correlation between the forthcoming (in 2016!!) EU VI and US regulations, but comparing it to T2B10+ would be charitable to the EU. Such vehicles were legal in NAFTA circa 1984.
When they really desire to clean up the environment, rather than make nice, phony, speeches about it, EU Greens could simply adopt the NAFTA toxic emission specs that their EU automakers all already meet on their exports to North America, while they poison their own citizens. Those specs are sub-T2B2 for gasoline ICEs, (which is ZEV and no pollution at all!) and T2B5 for diesels.
Long BEFORE EU VI is promulgated into full force in 2016, the USA and CARB will have tightened its Diesel regulations to sub-T2B2 for Diesels, the exact equivalent as its gasoline ICEs, as well.
This will result in ending the effort to clean up the automobile with 100% success, even without EVs, which are coming as well.
Unfortunately the EU doesn't even have projections on when they might tighten their specs to those levels looking out 25 Y-E-A-R-S into the future, post 2030!
Posted by: Stan Peterson | 05 July 2010 at 01:21 PM
Stan:
You have proven to me that you do not understand anything about exhaust emissions. First, you should at least learn the nomnenklature before starting to debate. Euro V and VI applies on engines for heavy-duty vehicles. Euro 5 and 6 is for passenger cars. The NEDCE test cycle for LD vehicles is much tougher than the US FTP. Second, you should learn how the US emission legislation is implemented. A good site to learn more is: www.dieselnet.com. Come back when you have studied this in some detail...
Posted by: Peter_XX | 07 July 2010 at 04:08 AM