Vario - engine revs

Post by **Vario Si** » 06 Jun 2005 07:34 pm

I recently installed a new instrument panel with rev gauge, and it's probably my imagination but the car seems to run much better!

Anyway, I've noted down a few speeds...

Idle 800/900
30mph 2600-3200 (depending on incline)
50mph 4000

The car goes up to around 3000 (or just over) on reasonable acceleration, and pretty much stays there unless you're going downhill at 30 or if you're more towards 50 and then as I said it's doing 4000 ish.

Can any people give me ideas of whether this sounds usual/common?

Before I got the rev counter, I noticed you could ease off the accelerator a fair bit and maintain speed (at 50+), but I don't see the revs dropping much although the sound does...?

Anyone tell me of reasonable speeds/revs that the car should do?

Cheers very much, Simon

Post by **Vario Si** » 07 Jun 2005 10:15 pm

How many of the few CVT drivers here have a rev counter fitted I wonder!

Post by **Duvel78** » 07 Jun 2005 10:50 pm

Not me

It's in a box, ready to be installed! (for the Smith panel cause it's an early mk2)

Post by **wjp01908** » 08 Jun 2005 07:08 am

Hi Vario

Your figure of 4000 rpm @ 50 mph does sound a bit on the high side - are you sure that the trans had changed up completely? Based on a few rough and ready calcs you should be hitting about 65 @4000rpm at a 4:1 ratio (the CVT ranges between 14.15:1 and 4:1) and about 90 at a redline of 5500.

That said I could`ve arsed up the maths......

The CVT is quite under geared and could really do with an overdrive for motorway cruising - mind you this contributes to it`s nippiness at lower speeds which for me, driving mostly in town traffic, is more important than flat out speed. You need to be able to do some swift standing starts from roundabouts in Milton Keynes and the CVT excels at this.

Will

Post by **Vario Si** » 08 Jun 2005 08:28 am

Hmm, perhaps my previous test run wasn't the best then!

On friday the car will have a nice motorway journey so It'll be a better test for the car.

Will get back to you afterwards.

Cheers, Simon

Post by **Vario Si** » 08 Jun 2005 05:29 pm

Where did your figures come from by the way?

The ones off the VOC website (340-360 Press Release - Tech Specs)

14.22:1 - 3.86:1 (with final drive reduction of: 4.51)

Mine's a 1989 340 DL, did these figures change from mk1/2?

Simon

Post by **5lab** » 08 Jun 2005 05:43 pm

doubt it (yours is a mk3 thou

)

Post by **Vario Si** » 08 Jun 2005 06:02 pm

Doh, okay... ... mk1/2/3 then? :p

Post by **5lab** » 08 Jun 2005 06:14 pm

dont think so.

i tried working out the difference between the best ratio on a cvt and the best on a manual, but couldnt...

btw, did you know the autos should have better grip than any other 300? the autobox acts as a lsd

Post by **wjp01908** » 08 Jun 2005 06:46 pm

I got my figures from the owners manual that came with the car - these, I imagine are the ratios of the entire drive train. It`s an 89 model

Will

Post by **petefarrell360** » 08 Jun 2005 10:40 pm

Vario Si wrote:How many of the few CVT drivers here have a rev counter fitted I wonder!

Well, I've seen a G reg, 1989 340 GL Variomatic, that looks as though it came from the factory with a rev gauge, and then the clock in the centre console panel! It also has electric mirrors, windows and heated seats. I believe it also has power steering, but I'm unsure of when this was fitted.
Pete

Post by **Vario Si** » 13 Jun 2005 04:37 pm

Okay, after the weekend and a few motorway journeys I have some new figures...

30 mph 2700 rpm
40 mph 3100 rpm
60 mph 4000 rpm
72 mph 4400 rpm

Post by **SteveP** » 13 Jun 2005 05:09 pm

Ouch.. the 70mph engine speed cant help fuel economy

Post by **Vario Si** » 13 Jun 2005 05:35 pm

Yup... and till two weeks ago I had no idea how many miles I was doing!

I wonder if anything is wrong with it, or if it is meant to be precisely like that

Post by **5lab** » 13 Jun 2005 05:43 pm

i think that is about right - does it remain at that if you back right off the throttle at 70?

i seem to remember that the varios were renound for poor fuel consumption, which is part of the reason the press hated them.. its probably not *much* different to a 340 4speed though.