Did VW make a Jetta Diesel '85- '92 ?

I recall seeing lots of old Rabbit and (A1 ?) Jetta Diesels. I don't believe I've ever seen an A2 Jetta or Jetta-III diesel. (At least not here in the USA).

Or am I mistaken ?

- FM -

Reply to
Fred Mau
Loading thread data ...

believe I've ever seen an A2 Jetta or Jetta-III diesel. (At least not here in the USA).

There were both A2 Jettas and Golfs with diesel power but not in all years in the US.

Golfs were available here with normally-aspirated diesels for the first several years of the A2 being sold here. Not sure exactly when they quit selling diesel Golfs here in the A2s but it might have been 1987.

Jettas were more or less the same except that they could be had as either diesels or turbo diesels. I think they also went away in the late 1980s but they did return for 1991-1992 with the ECOdiesel turbo diesel engine.

There were no diesel A3s for a while until 1996 when the TDI appeared in the Jetta. It was supposed to get put into the Golf too but VWoA decided against that for our market.

Canada got more diesels in the A2s and A3s than we did (possibly w/o any interruption but not totally sure)...they've been more diesel-friendly in general. They got a 1.9L diesel in the early A3s that I think was related to the 1.6 ECOdiesel (I think it was just a larger 1.9 version, more or less) and then got TDIs around 1996 replacing the older unit.

Reply to
Matt B.

Canada has had diesel in Golf and Jetta lines since the 1970s. We have never had an interuption in diesel sales!

:o)

Reply to
Pete Cressman

Good summary, and hate to nit-pick, but the 91 and some 92's (I think) were just plain old 1.6 diesels, 52 HP...no turbo. I believe the Eco-diesel had a turbo, used more for efficiency than power, as they only had about 59HP if I am remembering right.

I have a 91, and have had the dealer tell me "they didn't make one" when I went looking for parts...that is always encouraging!

My 91 is a nice car, but 52 HP with the A/C on is glacially slow.

Reply to
Tony Bad

snip

Well in Chicago I have worked on 3 A2 Jetta Diesels; 1985, 1986, 1989

The 1985 was just hit in the side, like 3 weeks ago, and the owner is looking to purchase another A2 diesel. The only one he could find was many states over and a 1991. He is currently fighting the ins co. of the idiot that hit his Jetta! :-(

The 1986 was also hit many years ago, so the owner purchased his current 1989. Rust is getting the better of that, but it has over 260K miles and no engine work yet to my knowledge.

later, dave Reminder........ Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you are a mile away from them, and you have their shoes. Frieda Norris

Reply to
dave
60Ps over here. The Eco-diesel did lack the fuel-enrichment-valve, thus no additional fuel at boost -> less power and less smoke.

Ingo

Reply to
Ingo Braune

60 DIN PS ~= 59.2 SAE HP. (1 PS ~= 735.5 W, 1 HP ~= 745.7 W)

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

Yep, as long as both are measured the same way on the engine. BTW: 1PS was derived from a horse being able to lift 75kg up 1m in 1s - IIRC it's 735.5W because g was assumed less than the "normal" 9.81m/s² nowadays. But where does HP come from? A horse of course, but no metric weight in there?

Ingo

Reply to
Ingo Braune

You've got it sort of backward, I'm afraid. The term "horsepower" was first used in the UK in (IIRC) the 18th Century (invented by James Watt, for whom the watt is named!), and defined as 550 lb-ft/s. (Why 550 pounds? I have no idea, but that's what it is. ;-) The PS ("pferdestarke") came along later, and was defined to be close to the HP, but using MKS units, thus 75.0 kgf-m/s, which was calculated out to

735.5W based on a "g" of about 9.807 N/kg.

-- Mike Smith

Reply to
Mike Smith

Hey my melon isn't as soft as everyone says! How come I remember the HP rating on an Eco-diesel, but forget my way home sometimes???

Reply to
Tony Bad

Uhm - didn't want to relocade Mr. Watt's steam machine to germany. But AFAIK the horse was used as an "excuse" for itroducing the unit "PS" over here too.

Ok, so it's at least kind of a round lot in imperial units. Maybe as the transfer to kilogramm and meters would have given a really crude number, so someone decided to go for 75kgm/s.

AFAIK this was supposed to be the workload that a horse was supposed to deliver continously when working 12hours per day. Easy calculation for the factory owner how many horses could be replaced by a steam engine.

kgf stands for "KiloGrammForce"? At least over here the abbreviation "kp" was used for the force equally to a mass of 1kg - before kp was completely disposed in favour of Newton.

Ingo

Reply to
Ingo Braune

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.