Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 12:02:04 -0800
Reply-To: "Steve C." <vanagonlover@HOTMAIL.COM>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: "Steve C." <vanagonlover@HOTMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Suburu/Golf debate
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Couldnt agree more. I just have nothing bad to say about my 88 Gl with a
1990 Legacy engine. My mechanic was amazed at how smoothly it idled.
I really feel that every long term Vanagon driver should come to terms with
the reality that his stock waterboxer is never going to be reliable or
develop the power that can turn his/her driving experience into something
that approaches normal (notable exceptions being the Lilley inspired
retrofits to the 2.1 L.)
I have owned NINE 2.1 Liter Vanagons. Almost every one has had head gasket
leaks (among other problems)
I just bought a sweet 86 Sunroof Van, with 52 K miles on a Northwest
Connecting Rod engine rebuild ( a very good outfit). I noticed a few days
ago a right head gasket leak.
My 90 Multivan JUST developed its 2nd head gasket leak at 135k miles.
My 2 cents.
steve
91 Sinky Westy for sale, 75 k miles
90 Multivan, for sale 135 k miles
86 Sunroof - keeper
88 Wolfsburg Sooby, - keeper
4 year old Chesapeake Bay Retriever - keeper (but she leaks too)
>From: "Pidcoe, Michael E." <MPidcoe@US.IMSHEALTH.COM>
>Reply-To: "Pidcoe, Michael E." <MPidcoe@US.IMSHEALTH.COM>
>To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
>Subject: Re: Suburu/Golf debate
>Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 12:53:10 -0500
>
>I went through this personal debate myself. I have been a VW nut for many
>years and deep in my heart I wished to have an all-german van. In the end
>I
>used my brain instead.
>I chose the Subaru for several reasons. Bear in mind that these are my
>opinions and I am sure that there will be many folks who disagree.
>1. The engine is what VW should have built in the first place. A fully
>balanced opposed engine that is quiet and smoooooth. Many owners have
>reported the fine experience of not knowing if their van is still running
>at
>idle. Another phenomenon is the ability to hold quiet conversations with
>passengers who are in the rear seat.
>2. The KEP kit is very nice and requires minimal modifications.
>3. I chose to have someone else to the conversion for me and I found a
>place that has done over a dozen conversions and the customers to whom I
>spoke were delighted.
>4. The inline engines are buzzy.
>5. The Subaru has more STOCK hp and torque. I knew that I could hotrod an
>inline but it was my goal to have a reliable and low-maintenance van.
>6. The support community is fantastic for these conversions. The links
>that Warren supplied will show you that.
>7. Everything fits under the lid with no cutting. The outfit doing my
>conversion uses factory hoses that make the installation look stock.
>8. The engines are inexpensive. You could buy a couple used Subaru
>engines
>for the price a single quality rebuild of a WBX.
>9. A peak at this address
>http://www.cycoactive.com/urabus/urabus_registry.html will show you just a
>few of the owners and their opinions.
>10. The KEP kit is completely CARB approved so there are no emissions
>hassles.
>There is more but I do not want to waste more bandwidth.
>I know that there are many stories of WBX engines going multiple thousands
>of miles with no problems but these are usually restricted to original
>owners with exceptional maintenance habits. Since most of us are buying
>these vans used, we do not have the luxury of immaculate maintenance. It
>is
>much easier and less expensive to find a good used '90-'94 2.2 Subaru
>engine
>than it is to rebuild an 80's WBX.
>My opinion for what its worth,
>Mike Pidcoe
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
| 
