Date:         Fri, 23 Jun 2000 10:16:49 -0400
Reply-To:     pokeswagon@blazenet.net
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         "(Donna Cassano)" <pokeswagon@blazenet.net>
Subject:      Re: 1.9 WBX VS 2.0 AC
Comments: To: Richard Lynch <rlynch@infosat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Richard,

I owned an '80 air-cooled for many years and now own '84 water-cooled. They're
both campers, so "handling" may be a little different, being that these are a
bit heavier.

The '84 definitely gives a smoother ride. When I first got it, I thought that I
was driving a tall Jetta by comparisson to the '80. I did have some difficulty
with getting stuck in some light mud at first. Not sure if this was the gearing
or the oversized reinforced passenger tires (215/70R14) that were on it. I have
since gotten all terrain 195/75R14's but haven't gotten them in the mud yet.
I'm still a little intimidated by the water-cooling. Just another system to
have to maintain and worry about, but it is nice not to have to scrape ice off
of the inside of the windows in the winter. : )

The '80 was a tank. Strong and sturdy. It had lower gearing I believe than the
'84, which was nice for when I was picking out camping sites up rocky hills in
the middle of nowhere. This also made it a little slower, but I could max it
out to 80mph, which was fast enough for me. We traveled cross-country and back
with only minor difficulties and lots of luck finding honest VW mechanics. I
probably will go back to an air-cooled when Pepe needs retired.

That's my experiences.
Peace - donna
'84 Westy (Pepe)


Richard Lynch wrote:

> We are considering (for various reasons) selling our 85 and buying an 80.
> Can anyone offer a driving comparison between the two?  I assume the 2.0 is
> less powerful but would like some input from people who have had (or still
> have) both.
>
> Both are standard passenger models.
>
> TIA
>
> Richard Lynch