For the elder statesmen, intellectually endowed, or anyone who has the 411 on this topic: How come (and why is it) that the water-cooled vans have apparently weaker, trouble-prone transmissions compared with the earlier air-cooled vans and late model buses? One would think that an engine that puts out at least 20% more hp and torque than its predecessor would be mated to a transmission that could handle it. I understand that the earlier transmissions from late buses and early vanagons are quite robust. My '82 Adventurewagen has never had a trans problem, and I think it has over 150k on it. All the posts to this list concerning trans problems relate to the wbx trans, not the earlier one. Can that trans be used in the later vans? Since the wbx is based on the old 1600cc Type 1 engine case, and earlier buses used that engine, would they bolt up? Are gear ratios the issue? Maybe my question is more as to why VW changed the design of the trans, and in the course of doing so, made it less robust and more prone to breaking. What gives? |
Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of
Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection
will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!
Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com
The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.
Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.