Golf/Jetta 3 transaxles

Kirk and Eric,

Thanks for dangling the question on Vortex.
I have gone through Etka and Bentley and too many website compilations of gearboxes and years. There are 9 trans codes (Etka)that could have come in an A3. I have found the following:

3.67, 3.45, 1.94, 1.29, 0.91, 0.75

ATH
8/92 - 12/93 Golf, 8/92 - 10/92 Jetta
CHD
8/92 - 12/95 Golf, 8/92 - 7/95 Jetta
DFP
12/95 - 7/96 Golf, 12/95 - 7/96 Jetta


3.67, 3.45, 1.94, 1.29, 0.97, 0.80

AMC
8/92 - 12/93 Golf, 8/92 - 10/92 Jetta
CHE
8/92 - 10/95 Golf, 8/94 - 7/93 Jetta
DFQ
8/95 - 7/96 Golf, 8/95 - 7/96 Jetta


3.67, 3.45, 1.94, 1.37, 1.03, 0.85

APW
8/92 - 12/93 Golf, 8/92 - 10/92 Jetta
CHB
8/92 - 11/95 Golf, 8/93 - 7/95 Jetta
DFN
8/95 - 7/96 Golf

Note that the years/models come from Etka and a good list created by [email protected].

I have checked with VW dealership techs and parts people asking "how do I know what trans came in what model"? There answer has always been "read the code on the tranny". This seems unreasonable. We either need the MVMA sheets (or their equivalent) for all of the years the A3 was made, or some equivalent authoritative source. I suggest we look for the brochures that were put out by VW during '93-'98 model years and see what differences there were for the different trim levels. Anyone know a friendly VW literature collector?

BTW I have started stripping a '95 Sport, CHE code box.

Should we start an A3UG?

Have Fun Kids!

Dave Z

[This message has been edited by Dave Zaslow (edited December 02, 2003).]
 
I have web publishing and hosting if we want to start a dedicated discussion outside of this resource, or if anyone has resources that they want put up. Chances are that this venue will work OK however, unless someone really thinks it's worth the time to do otherwise...

K
 
Where on Vortex are you guys chatting? I'd like to keep up to date.

If you move to somewhere besides here, please let me know. You just can't predict what class I might end up in next...
 
> I would tend to think that it would be
> safer to propose that alternate
> TRANSMISSIONS be allowed, rather than
> alternate gearsets or 3rd gear pairs.

As a former Comp Board member and former Chairman of the IT Advisory Committee, I agree. Updates and backdates are supposed to be done as assemblies, not individual parts. Treat the alternate transmission proposal as if it was a very specific update/backdate request and it might get more favorable treatment.

Bob...
 
>>> Should we start an A3UG?

I think it would benefit those who are going to get an A3 down the road to continue discussions here. However if you really think you need a new forum elsewhere may I suggest:
http://www.volkswagenracer.com/Forums/

These forums are lying dormant until another website is finished. You can post whatever you like and you can request new catagories be added to suit your needs.


------------------
Webmaster - www.ImprovedTouring.com
it_sig.gif
 
Bill,

I bow to your wisdom. This forum is just fine.

Eric,

I think alternate transmissions would be given the hairy eyeball by the comp board. They did get a lot of flack on the classification itself. If all of the Golfs are on the same spec line, and we can find the models they came with, they would be defacto legal. There must be a souce of info somewhere....

Dave Z
 
Dave,

I agree on all counts. I think that your brochure idea is the next good lead, but I haven't even found a single one yet. I'm considering posting a WTB ad on VWVortex.

At this stage, I now realize that it's probably not the right time to submit this to the Comp Board. When we hit the track next year, I, for one, will consider the GCR-listed gearbox (1.21/.97/.81), the Bentley-listed gearbox (1.29/.97/.81) and probably even the ETKA-listed gearbox (1.37/1.03/.85) as assemblies that should survive a protest in the presence of the respective documentation.

IMHO, any additions or deletions from that list should await discovery of additional highly-reliable information.
 
Originally posted by Dave Zaslow:
Bill,

I bow to your wisdom. This forum is just fine.
Click to expand...

For what it's worth... it definately makes it easier for your ITAC/CB/BoD representitives to keep up on the issues when all the different makes and models are included on the same website... Kind of like "one-stop-snooping"...
wink.gif




------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
240_OR_041203_thumb.jpg
 
Originally posted by Eric Parham:
At this stage, I now realize that it's probably not the right time to submit this to the Comp Board.
Click to expand...
There is wisdom in your words. The Comp Board sometimes likes to see how new classifications or reclassifications play out before making changes. Unfortunately, it forces competitors to struggle along for a year or two while the data accumulates, but it's just part of the process. Let's see how many A3 Golfs hit the track before we start asking for things.

Bob...
 
The short version of the problem however is that by using an OEM gearbox from another year car on the same spec line, an entrant might fall afoul of the ratio requirement from the ITCS.

This presumes that all of the MkIII Golfs do end up on listed as the "same car," following typical practice...

K
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
The short version of the problem however is that by using an OEM gearbox from another year car on the same spec line, an entrant might fall afoul of the ratio requirement from the ITCS.
Click to expand...

Kirk et.al.,

If all the cars are listed on the same spec line, as presumed above, then all the available ratios would have to be listed in the appropriate spec line box. I'll have to double-check this, but my understanding of the update/backdate rule is that, if the cars are listed on the same spec line, interchange of assemblies is allowed between years.

In the scenario you mention, if the years for the Golf III are all bunched together on the same spec line, then interchange between them should be legal...

See the spec line for the ITA BMW 325e/es, the ITA Buick Skyhawk V-6, or the ITA Mazda RX-3/RX-3SP as examples of how I understand the spec line would have to read...

If the documentation exists to show that the years in question came to the US with a number of different ratios, then you would have enough information to get them all listed on the spec line as I understand the process...

If that's wrong, feel free to tell me so!
wink.gif


------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg


[This message has been edited by Banzai240 (edited December 05, 2003).]
 
That's exactly the way I see it, D. but I can just as easily picture someone thinking that Golf III entrants are trying to do something sneaky if a request goes in specifically requesting that "alternate" gear ratios be listed.

It seems clear that it's an E&O issue - since the specs that have been there since the car was listed in A are incomplete but I may not be trusting enough of the system (surprise, huh?) to believe that the request won't raise some red flags, regardless of what documentation is submitted. (I'm kind of picturing a variation on "the weight is correct as listed" or a bad case of tablis permanensis setting in.)

How about this getting attached to the ITAC review process - already underway? - of the proposal that other year Golf IIIs be added to the ITB spec line?

K
 
Originally posted by Knestis:
How about this getting attached to the ITAC review process - already underway? - of the proposal that other year Golf IIIs be added to the ITB spec line?

K
Click to expand...

If you want to send me the documentation that lists the appropriate models, years, and ratios, I'd be happy to see that it gets processed...

[email protected]



------------------
Darin E. Jordan
SCCA #273080, OR/NW Regions
Auburn, WA
ITS '97 240SX
DJ_AV1.jpg
 
Finally - I have a CHE 06095. I did some gear charts using Gear Crasher (shareware from www.davesport.com) and the APW/CHB/DFN gearset looks to be the best, assuming that (a) it is OEM for US Golfs, and (B) it can be located.

K
 
Hey Gang, It's been a while since I've chimed in here. After my auto-gymnastics routine in turn three at the first MARRS race this year, getting my car back to full prep was a little more of a challenge than I was up for at the time. I'm now seriously thinking about joining the A# in ITB ranks and wanted to know a current status on the 94 and newer cars. I watched the 12 Hr documentary on SPEED this weekend and I'm very much in the mood to prepare for 2004. I "took the rest of the year off" from road racing and did several autocroses. I was running a MINI Cooper in H Stock, as I now work for a MINI dealer..... this will make a fun IT CAR.. little slow for SSC, but with some camber adjustments and suspensions tweaks... fun car! If anyone can give me an update it'd be great.... Im going to call Denver, uh Topeka, but sometimes you can't get a reply or a voice to talk to. JOE
 
Hey Joe,

Nice to see you posting here again! I looked for you at the Labor Day dbl. as I had the new HProd Rabbit out, but didn't see you on the entry list. Take if from personal experience, the Turn 3 shuffle is no fun!!!
eek.gif



------------------
MARRS #25 ITB Rabbit GTI (sold) | MARRS #25 HProd Rabbit
SCCA 279608
 
Originally posted by Banzai240:
If you want to send me the documentation that lists the appropriate models, years, and ratios, I'd be happy to see that it gets processed...
Click to expand...

Thanks Darin, I'll email the pertinent documentation early next month (can't get to my Bentley manual or ETKA CD until then). Once received, please LMK if you need anything else.

[This message has been edited by Eric Parham (edited December 16, 2003).]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top